A GROUP that represents councils along the Murray River border says the passing of last week’s Restoring our Rivers Murray-Darling Basin Plan amendment Bill was a “bittersweet outcome” for basin communities.
Murray River Group of Councils acting chair Cr Tony Marwood, of Campaspe Council, said although water buybacks remained and the cap on buybacks had been removed, there were some concessions for communities.
“For instance, the inclusion of water-leasing options for water recovery by the Commonwealth will give irrigation farmers more flexibility in deciding what best suits their operational needs and personal circumstances,” Cr Marwood said.
Farmers will have the choice of whether to sell their water entitlement (buybacks), lease water to the Commonwealth, or sell their entitlement and lease it back from the Commonwealth (leasebacks).
“While these leasing options will give farmers some choice, we believe that any water recovery efforts should be focused on the northern basin in the first instance,” Cr Marwood said.
“The basin plan 2020 evaluation assessment of outcomes found hydrology and ecology to be stable or improved in the southern basin but had declined in the northern basin due to a drying climate and lack of held environmental water.
“So, we urge the Commonwealth to concentrate on lifting the health status of the environment in the northern basin as the first priority.”
As part of its #PushbackBuybacks campaign, MRGC fought to retain the socioeconomic impact test, which the original Bill had removed. The updated Bill makes provision for a socioeconomic factor.
“The Bill’s passing with an amendment that requires the government to conduct socioeconomic impact assessments of any water-purchase program and that these must be reported on annually, aligns with our position,” Cr Marwood said.
“However, it is critical that the socioeconomic impact assessment process is thorough and robust, including consulting with stakeholders, to enable a comprehensive evaluation of any water-purchase program and detailed reporting to the public.
“Moving forward, if water buybacks do occur across the basin, we hope that there is genuine and deep engagement between the Australian Government and basin communities on compensatory adjustment packages, and that local councils are an integral part of this process as we know our communities best.
“We also urge the government to ensure that any compensation happens in a timely manner and that the process does not pit one community against another.
“In the meantime, we will continue to strongly advocate on behalf of our communities to facilitate their long-term social vibrancy and economic prosperity.”
Water saving projects on the table
FEDERAL Water Minister Tanya Plibersek says she doesn’t prefer water buybacks to infrastructure to meet the Murray-Darling Basin Plan targets.
“One of the things that Restoring our Rivers does is give an additional two years for infrastructure projects to be delivered which will save water and reduce the need for buybacks,” she recently told the ABC’s 7.30 program.
“We’ve also said to the states and territories that if they’ve got additional projects they want to bring forward, we are happy to consider them. What I am saying … yes, we will support water-saving and water-efficiency projects. We will support off-farm efficiency projects.”
Ms Plibersek said the Bill provided more time to deliver on the plan “as it is now”.
“More money to make sure that we’ve got money for additional projects that are water savings projects, more money for structural adjustment should it be necessary.
“We’re also delivering more accountability to make sure that the plan is actually delivered and, of course, more options.
“We want to do on-farm efficiency measures, off-farm efficiency measures, land and water purchases. All options are on the table.
“What’s not optional is delivering the plan.”
