Speech - To Open the 3rd Shed a Tier Congress - 22 March 2002
[Mr Thomson's speech as follows was taken from the following webpage in the from of a press Release: http://www.alp.org.au/media/0302/ktspmdbf220302.html]
Check Against Delivery
St Augustine once famously remarked, "Give me chastity, but not yet." And in speaking to an audience which I understand supports central Government rather than States rights, and coming from a political party which has long believed in a strong role for the central Government, but which is presently in office in every State and Territory but not nationally, I am very much reminded of St Francis' words.
And at the risk of disappointing some of you, I have to say that I think the answer to the problems of the Murray Darling Basin is to be found very much in strong co-operation between Federal and State Governments, rather than in trying to remove the States from the picture.
I haven't seen the speech to be delivered following me by Chris Pyne, but I am aware of public comments by him in support of constitutional change, which would strip the States of any role in Murray Darling Basin management. As a student I did my thesis on the Referendum to outlaw the Communist Party back in 1951. On that occasion a proposal which started out with around 80% support, according to the crude opinion polling of the time, got 48% on the day and was defeated. The defeat of the most recent Referendum, to give Australians our own Head of State, shows nothing has changed. Constitutional change in the face of any significant or concerted political opposition at all is pretty much impossible.
Indeed I haven't heard anything to suggest that Chris's proposal enjoys support from anywhere else in the Government. He needs to tell us what the position of relevant players is on this matter, such as the Prime Minister, the Environment Minister and the Agriculture Minister. In the absence of support from his Party for a Referendum it simply won't get to first base, and isn't worthy of detailed attention or consideration. This is not to suggest for a moment that I am satisfied with the way the Murray Darling Basin has been managed or is being managed.
Australia's State of the Environment Report 2001, released on Tuesday, states that the increase in salinity in the Murray Darling Basin and other areas is causing water quality decline and land degradation. River water in several catchments is predicted to have salinity levels that will exceed drinking water guidelines within the next 20 years. The reasons for this decline have been intensively studied and are well known, with land clearing and excessive irrigation being prime culprits. The State of the Environment Report finds that there is still a net loss of vegetative cover, with broad-acre land clearing continuing particularly in Queensland and New South Wales. It also reported that water use has increased from 1985 to 1997 by 65% and that water extracted for irrigation during the same period has increased by 76%.
The State of the Environment Report concludes that regulation, supported by compliance mechanisms, will be needed to improve environmental quality in some areas for land and water use. It says "As yet, the commitments of the States and other authorities to regulating the water flows in the Murray Darling river system, doing away with unsustainable irrigation practices, improving estuary water quality and reducing land clearing, is far from satisfactory. A major co-ordinated effort between stakeholders will be necessary to solve these problems." It notes that the cap on water extractions from the Basin introduced in 1995 'may stop further deterioration, but will not be adequate to restore damaged river systems'.
To their credit, newspapers such as The Australian and The Adelaide Advertiser have run strong public campaigns to focus attention on the sick state of the Murray Darling Basin. This is a river system in crisis. One of the basin's major storages, the Menindee Lakes in new south Wales, is almost dry for the first time in around a decade, irrigators in New South Wales and Victoria who use Murray water are facing water restrictions, demand for water for irrigation from the Murray between Echuca and Wentworth is exceeding flow, and in South Australia the flow of the river Murray is less than the amount of water being drawn from it.
Next month, on 12 April there will be a meeting of Federal and State land, water and environment Ministers to discuss the Murray River and water allocation issues in the New South Wales river town of Corowa, a place of some significance for those with an interest in our constitutional history. It is absolutely essential that we get action out of that Meeting to start restoring the health of the Murray. The Federal and state Ministers must establish the quantity of environmental flows required for a healthy Murray Darling river system and work towards achieving them.
Now back in October 1996 former Environment Minister Senator Hill waxed lyrical about the Murray Darling Basin and the $150 million to be spent over 5 years via the Natural Heritage Trust on the Murray Darling 2001 Project. He said, "I am confident that the Murray Darling 2001 Project, complemented by the national Rivercare Initiative outside the Basin, will result in improved water quality, increased environmental flows, retention of essential habitat and improved waste management practices. It will therefore bring both environmental and economic benefits."
In fact, as borne out by numerous media reports and reinforced by the scientists who prepared the State of the Environment Report 2001, nothing of the kind has happened.
The Federal Government has displayed neither the leadership nor the sense of urgency needed to deal with these issues. To give just one example of this in March 2001 the Murray Darling Basin Ministerial Council agreed to commit $10m for a structural works program to provide passage for fish on the river Murray from the Hume dam to the sea, including $2million for modification of the barrages on the river Murray.
But answers given to Senate Estimates at the end of the year concerning this issue indicated that the structural options hadn't been finalised, costings work hasn't been done, estimates of fresh water to be saved by returning the Coorong to estuarine conditions hadn't been done, and estimates of increased fishing industry productivity hadn't been done. An unfortunate catalogue of delay and inaction.
Even more seriously, the Howard Government's National Action Plan for Salinity and Water Quality has to date been a major disappointment. This program was launched with great fanfare by the Howard Government in November 2000, promising $700m over 7 years, to be matched by State and Territory funding.
Nearly 18 months later, however, the fact is there has been hardly any activity and any money had been spent. The Victorian Government found it couldn't even get the Howard Government to agree to spend more than $15.8m of the $20million allocated this financial year to Victoria. Furthermore, the Plan itself is inadequate. It has limited scope and geographic range. We need a truly national response that covers all catchments. The Liberal Government's approach excludes catchments such as the North-East Catchment in Victoria which contributes some 38% of surface flows to the Murray River. Every year of the NHT has seen a considerable shortfall in spending resulting in a carryover of $130 million into NHT stage 2, that is to say a $130 million cut to the original 6 year commitment.
It is also the case that neither National Action Plan on Salinity and Water Quality nor the Natural Heritage Trust have involved municipalities in the planning, priority setting and implementation of these important programs, and have thus failed to draw upon valuable expertise and resources. And this at a time when salinity is already affecting almost 2.5 million hectares, with quite alarming projections that by the year 2050, 17 million hectares will be affected by salinity. Current salinity impacts cost $249 million per year in the Murray Darling Basin.
Although the Prime Minister made a pre-election promise to make NAP funding contingent on the states agreeing to ban clearing of native vegetation where it would lead to unacceptable land and water degradation, this has not happened.
We cannot go on with land clearing the way we have been. The Government must act to reverse the decline in the quality and extent of native vegetation. It must set national minimum standards for land clearing and involve the states in their implementation. Indeed it should make Commonwealth natural resource management funding contingent on the implementation of these national standards.
It is also important to be aware that the finish of Natural Heritage Trust 1, which was funded by the part-sale of Telstra, brings with it an end to the dedicated core funding to the Murray Darling Basin Commission of $35 Million. While many details of the successor program NHT 2 are still to be announced, the Government has indicated that there will no longer be dedicated Murray Darling Basin Program, and this area will have to take its chances with all the other applicants for NHT funds. This was confirmed before a Senate Estimates Committee just a couple of weeks ago. It is also of concern that the Chair of the Community Advisory Council to the Murray Darling ministerial Council, Leith Boully, has been told by the Government to re-apply for her position - she has expressed doubts that the Federal Government has either the interest or the skills to tackle the big issues of salinity and environmental flows. Unless the Federal Government is prepared to provide greater leadership, then the prospects for dealing with the Murray Darling Basin's problems are bleak.
To address environmental and regional development issues effectively, a sustained national effort is required from all sectors of the community and industry, with national leadership from the Commonwealth and co-ordinated action with the States. I believe co-operation with the states to be crucial for effective outcomes, and that the Council of Australian Governments must tackle salinity as a matter of priority. The Government identified salinity as a key third term agenda in the Governor General's speech. If it is serious, it will stop blaming the States for delays and inaction, spend the money it promised to spend under the National Action Plan, it will ensure the Council of Australian Governments takes action on salinity, and it will act on land clearing. Stopping salinity in the Murray Darling Basin will reduce the amount of salt entering the river - one entire truckload of salt crosses the South Australian border every minute - and halt the spread of dry land salinity. Chris Pyne should get the Commonwealth to take action, not take over.
I have pleasure in declaring the 3rd Shed a Tier Congress open.
Return to home page.
Go to archive page.