The controversial basin plan amendment passed its last hurdle in the Senate on Thursday, but a last-minute alteration will require the consideration of social and economic impacts on communities when decisions are made on returning Murray-Darling water to the environment.
The amendment was one of dozens agreed to as the government’s overhaul of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan passed the Senate on November 30, with support from the Greens and crossbenchers.
The $13 billion plan aimed to return 450 gigalitres of water to the environment by June 2024 but that deadline will be moved to the end of 2027.
Federal Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek said stakeholders had been consulted, but irrigators, farmers and the Coalition have rejected this claim and expressed disappointment that food production will lose more water.
A deal with Victorian independent David Van led to the insertion of a clause ensuring the responsible minister considers the “social and economic impact of the program on communities in the Murray-Darling Basin” in deciding on water purchases.
The minister would have to report on matters taken into account when making decisions.
Ms Plibersek said the government would start looking at voluntary water buybacks next year.
Mr Birrell said the Labor-Greens deal on water was the worst outcome for farmers, manufacturers and communities across the Murray-Darling Basin.
“It is a clear betrayal and the end of the bipartisan approach to water reform; it will hurt production, increase costs, impact jobs and the prosperity of basin communities,” he said.
“The Coalition fought for a strong socio-economic neutrality test to protect communities and for a cap on water buybacks, but these were rejected.
“The Greens treat productive agriculture as a vested interest group rather than recognising that farmers across the Basin produce 40 per cent of Australia’s food and fibre and their survival is in the national interest.
“At a recent showcase of produce from the Basin, Labor Water Minister Tania Plibersek told SPC she always bought Australian tinned tomatoes for her cooking; so why pass legislation that will make them more expensive and harder to grow?”
Under the deal the additional 450Gl of water for South Australia, which was always optional, becomes a core part of the plan with milestones and a timeline for recovery.
“The socio-economic impact test implemented by the Nationals in 2018 to ensure this water would only be recovered it had a neutral or positive impact on communities has been torn up,” Mr Birrell said.
In its place, is a weaker version inserted by Senator Van, a Nationals statement argued, that in approving water buybacks the minister must consider the social and economic impact of the program on communities in the Murray-Darling Basin.
“Labor removed the socio-economic neutrality test and Water Minister Tanya Plibersek has repeatedly shown she doesn’t understand and doesn’t care about the damage buybacks do to productive agriculture, industry, jobs and communities,” Mr Birrell said.
“On Wednesday I asked Minister Plibersek whether she had done economic modelling on her basin plan, and she refused to answer; instead, she displayed her total lack of understanding by suggesting that taking water out of the consumptive pool would not impact agricultural production or communities, and even suggested food prices would fall.
“The Labor-Greens deal sets the clock ticking; open tender water buybacks are coming, and they don’t care about the impact on farmers.
“I care, the Nationals care, we will keep fighting to protect communities; and we should all hold Labor and the Greens to account for the damage they do.
“We saw with the protest on Monday in Shepparton that the community is also up for the fight.
“A future Coalition government is the only way to restore equity to the Murray-Darling Basin, but I’m really worried about how much damage this shoddy Labor-Greens deal will do before then.”
– with AAP
