I contribute to debate on the Water Management Amendment (Transfer of Water) Bill 2023. The bill seeks to tackle a very important issue. However, regretfully, I cannot support the bill in its current form. I acknowledge the long interest and expertise of the member for Murray in water issues and her passionate advocacy for her community in this place. We would be hard-pressed to find as vocal a local member of Parliament as the member for Murray when it comes to the effects of water buybacks on regional New South Wales. I am conscious that she brought the bill to the House out of genuine concern for her community and for regional New South Wales water security. It has been a long week and we are at the end of the year. I have only been in the Parliament for a short time but when I reflect on the bill, I am reminded of the expertise members bring to a whole range of issues, whether they are from the inner city, Western Sydney, or rural and regional electorates. Whether it is health, education, environment or social justice, there is a breadth of knowledge, skills and expertise in the Parliament, and the member for Murray has expertise on regional New South Wales and water.
The Murray-Darling Basin produces around half of Australia's irrigated agricultural production and is home to about 2.3 million people, which roughly equates to one-tenth the population of Australia. The basin supports a plethora of unique ecosystems, including 120 species of water bird, 50 species of native fish and 16 internationally significant wetlands. Despite the variable cycles of drought and flood, the overall low rainfall and high evaporation rates mean that water that those people and ecosystems depend on is more often than not in short supply. Australia is a harsh land and can sometimes, as it is now, veer from one extreme to the next, from La Niña to El Niño, and we are seeing that at the moment. Government policies have long encouraged an agricultural economy around the basin. It has kept the nation fed and going and has kept the economy going for close to two centuries.
The Murray-Darling Basin now accounts for 62 per cent of the water used for irrigation in Australia. However, as irrigation has developed, we have seen adverse effects on some of the important and unique ecosystems around the basin. There are intense forms of agriculture, and unfortunately they have had a detrimental effect on the ecosystem. That includes species decline, wetlands dying, salinity and poor water quality. We have seen what happens when the water does not flow, including mass fish killings. Seeing those images is heart‑wrenching. The images of the Murray-Darling Basin during the last drought are seared into my memory. It is a catastrophic event, and I can only imagine how regional communities feel when they have to deal with the consequences of that. With another dry spell on the way, the New South Wales Government is committed to ensuring that we are not complacent and are committed to doing everything we can to prevent it from happening again.
The Murray‑Darling Basin Plan seeks to implement more sustainable water use to restore those ecosystems while continuing to support our farmers and irrigators in the basin. The New South Wales Government supports the implementation of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in full. Under this Government, there is no uncertainty about our position. I note that when those opposite were in government, that was not the case and they could not figure out if they were for or against the plan. John Barilaro was telling people that he wanted to rip it up and walk away, while Premier Gladys Berejiklian was telling those same people that she was committed to the plan. That points to the deep division in the Opposition, which we saw this week. If media reports are to be believed, there were deep divisions in regard to Racing NSW. I was glad to see them finally get on board and find a position after several party meetings. How refreshing it is to have a government that knows its position on the Murray-Darling Basin Plan. Make no mistake, the National Party's constant undermining of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan is why we are in the position we are in today. The Barilaros of the world have derailed the plan, like so many other things. To get back on track, New South Wales has a lot to do.
The bill of the member for Murray seeks to amend the Water Management Act 2000. The bill would restrict the transfer of water access licences to either the Commonwealth or the State unless certain conditions are met. It would do this by requiring the Minister for Water not register a transfer without an assessment first being undertaken to demonstrate that said transfer would cause either a neutral or positive socio-economic impact. It would then require the Minister to publish a report on those assessments. The Government is concerned that the passage of this bill would significantly slow down, or even stall, New South Wales water users who wish to sell their water access licences on a voluntary basis. For many in our regional areas, the option of selling their water licences can help unlock other investment opportunities. The Government wishes not to see those legitimate water trading practices hindered by new layers of bureaucracy and lengthy assessment processes. Like any market, it is important that the water market is fluid—pun intended—and not stalled by unnecessary bureaucracy and red tape.
Delays caused by changes proposed in the bill would have an effect in not just the southern basin in the electorate of the member for Murray; the effects would occur statewide in both coastal and metropolitan areas. The Government is also concerned that the restrictions of trade on water access licence holders will open a Pandora's box of legal and constitutional issues. For example, the bill does not designate who is responsible for carrying out socio-economic and environmental assessments, and no time frames for assessment are prescribed. Significant development applications or proposals that need to be assessed by an agency can sometimes be left waiting for years. On water specifically, in my part of the world a number of developments have been held up because of a need for the SES to undertake a flood evacuation study. Additional layers of bureaucracy and required assessments with no time frames can have a significantly detrimental impact.
The bill's relationship with Federal water policy raises the potential for a long, arduous and costly dispute with the Commonwealth, including constitutional litigation. I am happy to take on the Federal Government when necessary, and I have done that in this sitting fortnight regarding infrastructure, particularly the M7 and the M12. In fact, I also gave a private member's statement last night in relation to more immigration and the need for the Federal Government to do to help people fleeing Israel and Palestine. However, the New South Wales Government is not willing to take a risk when it comes to the bill.
I understand that the member for Murray's interest in this issue is borne out of genuine concern for the community, and Government members acknowledge and share those concerns. However, we believe that the passage of the bill would further complicate the existing labyrinth of water management in New South Wales. As I previously stated, the Government's position is that it supports the full implementation of the Murray‑Darling Basin Plan. It is one of the most significant environmental projects in the State's history. The Government wants to see the plan deliver the most positive outcomes, as intended for our environment, while supporting regional communities and industries throughout the process. [Extension of time]
The Government wants to see the extraction of water within the sustainable diversion limits, all 20 of our water resource plans accredited by the Commonwealth, our sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism projects delivered, a contribution towards the target 450 gigalitres of additional environmental water, and the implementation of our toolkit measure projects in the northern basin. However, Government members are realistic. We know that all of these projects cannot be delivered by the 30 June 2024 deadline, which is why the New South Wales Government has been seeking more time to deliver projects and has asked for more flexibility to maximise water recovery efforts to allow for the best environmental outcomes.
The State Government has been clear that it does not support water buybacks. Regional communities have made it clear that buybacks leave them worse off. Government members have significant concerns about the negative social and economic impacts associated with water buybacks and have pushed the Australian Government to provide substantial structural support to affected communities, like those the member for Murray represents. My good friend the Minister for Water, the Hon. Rose Jackson, MLC, was clear when she said:
We want to see the Australian Government prioritise investment in recovering water through other ways. We have been proactive in scoping these options and putting them in front of the Commonwealth for consideration.
I know the Minister is very passionate about water. She has been out to my electorate to help with some issues in relation to water, specifically Sydney Water. I commend her for her work both in Sydney and across the State. The State Government is prioritising constructive and robust conversations with the Federal Government and other basin States. Only when we come to the table can we deliver results. The member for Murray can be assured that, with the advent of a new government this year, we are taking a seat at the table and unapologetically advocating for communities like hers.
Our regional communities deserve strong leadership from the State Government on this issue, not division, like we had from the previous Government. I know the Minister for Water is providing that strong leadership. The Government is looking at innovative ways to implement the Basin Plan. Whilst it is opposed to water buybacks, the Government maintains its support for the delivery of 450 gigalitres of additional environmental water, as I mentioned previously. The Government is open to finding innovative ways to contribute towards that target that do not undermine regional communities, farmers or irrigators.
The Government and the Minister for Water are engaging stakeholders to craft and put forward proposals to the Federal Government. New South Wales is dedicating itself to prioritising investment in infrastructure projects that recover water for the environment and deliver good basin outcomes. Projects like off-farm water efficiency projects, which enable water users to upgrade their infrastructure, are an example of that. In conclusion, I reassure the member for Murray that the State Government shares her concerns for basin communities. While we cannot support the bill in its current form, I know the Government remains committed to engaging with her and her constituents to draft innovative ways to meet our contributions to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan while supporting farmers and irrigators. New South Wales under this Labor Government will continue to strongly advocate for farmers, irrigators and other water users to minimise the social and economic impacts of water buybacks on communities and on the water market.
