I am keenly concerned about sensible water policy for this region, and do all I can to support anyone who takes an interest in the topic, but the central proposition in Steve’s article is inaccurate to the point of being absurd.
I was the inaugural Committee for Greater Shepparton chair from 2013, and Rob Priestly was my deputy throughout my three-year term. From day one, water policy has been central to the advocacy work of the committee.
In 2016, we helped establish a policy think tank, the ‘GMID Water Leadership Forum’, a dedicated lobby group to focus solely on water policy issues.
I continue to co-chair that forum.
Both Rob Priestly and Sam Birrell have been long-term members of that influential group, contributing to the development of balanced and sensible water policy and advocacy.
I have personally been in the room when both Rob and Sam have actively pushed back on the worst elements of the basin plan with prime ministers, premiers, state and federal water ministers and their opposition shadows.
I have met with literally dozens of interest groups, environmental groups, industry bodies and water experts, in the company of Rob and Sam.
The record will show that this work commenced well before Steve even moved back to the region.
If Steve Brooks is surprised that Rob and Sam have listed water issues as major priorities, then he hasn’t been watching or listening very carefully at all.
Steve has an inconvenient truth to face: the water policy he articulates locally does not align with Liberal Party policy.
In June 2021, when Damian Drum and a small group of Nationals tried to introduce amendments to the Water Act that would have seen the end of the 450GL upwater and buybacks, the Liberal leadership gagged the debate.
Simon Birmingham (Liberal, South Australia), said in Parliament: “... we will deliver the plan in full, and on time”. Sound familiar?
That’s the same line used by federal Labor, and it is code for buybacks.
It is worth noting that not even Nationals Water Minister Keith Pitt supported the amendments, even though they were the policy of his own party.
The truth is that as a junior member of a Coalition government (should they be returned), Steve’s voice in a party room debate would be ignored, and his vote taken for granted.
The current government has had since 2013 to make meaningful changes to the basin plan, but almost nothing has changed. What on earth would make anyone think that re-electing it and expecting a different result is a good idea?
In a closely balanced parliament, an independent has the chance to exercise policy leverage that a junior party member could only dream of.
If water policy really is so close to Steve’s heart, maybe he shouldn’t have joined the Liberals.
— David McKenzie is a former Committee for Greater Shepparton chair and one of the founders of the GMID Water Leadership Forum.
25°C