Extract from The Guardian
Water minister Keith Pitt says decision to rule out farm buybacks is not in contradiction of the basin plan and will not be legislated.
Last modified on Fri 4 Sep 2020 15.28 AEST
Environmental groups and scientists have warned that ending buybacks of water in the Murray-Darling basin will be a disaster for the river and will deprive the government of its most effective way of retrieving water.
The federal water minister, Keith Pitt, said the government planned to formally end buybacks and would instead rely on water efficiency projects as the way to retrieve the last 700 gigalitres of water needed to meet the plan’s targets for reclaiming water for the environment.
Pitt told the ABC the decision to rule out farm buybacks was not in contradiction of the Murray-Darling basin plan and would not be legislated.
“We will be focused on other options in terms of water recovery, we’ll be focused on practical outcomes in terms of river health,” he said. “We are committed to the plan.”
The government will also announce a new funding package for farm communities, in response to findings in the Sefton report that the plan was impacting on river communities. The funding will support communities disadvantaged by the plan to create jobs.
It comes after the government cut the targets for retrieving for the environment in the northern basin by 18% in 2018 and as a new report by the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists showed that up to 20% of water in the river system appeared to be missing.
The government’s own economic research agency, Abares, said this week that water buybacks were a less expensive way of retrieving water for the environment.
The plan is now aiming to recover a total of 2,075 GL/year plus 450 GL/year of efficiency measures by 2024.
As of this week, 1,230 gigalitres have been recovered from farmers through buybacks, 700 gigalitres has been recovered from infrastructure projects and 255 gigalitres from on-farm upgrades.
In 2015, the Coalition government capped the amount of water to be bought back. It has stopped holding open tenders to buy back water and has instead only bought water from willing sellers who approach them. But this approach proved contentious because of concerns the government had paid too much, played favourites and still harmed communities by withdrawing water from agriculture.
A spokesman for the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, Prof Jamie Pittock, described the move as “a really foolish policy.”
He said the Wentworth Group’s latest work had shown that since 2012 the amount of water in the system actually observed was 20% less than the water on paper.
“It also lets the states off the hook in that they can’t use that policy arm [the threat of more buybacks] to ensure the states deliver on their promises of sustainable diversion limit projects,” Pittock said.
These projects, which aim to return water to the environment through infrastructure upgrades that reduce evaporation or make more efficient use of water have been proposed by the basin states as the way of delivering a further 605GL of water for the environment.
But there are doubts about whether they can achieve those savings. Two of the largest, the Yanko creek project and the Menindee Lakes project, received scathing assessments by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, yet were still included as contributing to water savings.
The previous minister, David Littleproud, said he would be prepared to return to buybacks if the states did not deliver on the projects.
The Environmental Defenders Office special counsel, Emma Carmody, said: “Legal obligations under the Water Act and basin plan remain unchanged.
“If an insufficient volume of water is returned to our rivers to meet these obligations in a changing climate, then the alternative route – further reducing seasonal water allocations to farmers – will be necessary. It’s therefore unsurprising that many of our clients on the land have described the latter as a ‘death by a thousand cuts’ scenario for their communities.”
The focus on efficiency projects could potentially add to the pressure on water entitlement prices.
The Abares report, released this week, looked at the drivers of water prices and again concluded that buybacks were a significantly cheaper way of retrieving water for the environment, than efficiency projects.
It also noted that while both tended to increase the price of water, on-farm efficiency projects had more impact because famers increased their water use by 23% as a result of the government investment. Because their returns went up per ML of water, they were prepared to buy more water, adding to the price pressure.
“This ‘rebound effect’ means that on-farm efficiency projects increase allocation prices more than buybacks,” they said.
The minister also announced that the MDBA, which has supervised the competing priorities of irrigators, communities and the environment since 2008, will lose its powers to check compliance with the river management plan to an independent regulator.
This was recommended by Productivity Commission and other reviews to ensure that compliance with the plan is given a greater focus.
The powers will be added to those of the inspector general of Murray-Darling basin water resources, a post currently held by former Australian federal police commissioner Mick Keelty.
Pitt, in a speech to the Farm Writers’ Association, said he expected this change to “end the perceptions that the MDBA is structured in a way that it could mark its own homework”.
Carmody supported the move, which mirrors changes in NSW.
“It’s good water governance practice to have independent regulators overseeing compliance and enforcement,” she said.
However, Keelty remains only the interim inspector because NSW and Victoria have been resisting approving the formal establishment of his office. This raises the question of whether the office could be compromised when dealing with state failures to abide by the plan.
The Greens warned the water minister’s announcement meant the Murray-Darling river would never get the water it needed to survive.
The Greens’ water and environment spokeswoman, Sarah Hanson-Young, said: “Today’s announcement that the Murray-Darling basin plan will be delayed, not deliver the water needed to save the river and water buybacks will be banned is terrible news.
“This is a huge blow to the environment and hangs South Australia out to dry.
“For seven years, the Liberal-National government has let corporate irrigators run amok with water at the expense of from river communities, small family farms and the environment.
“Spending public money on bogus efficiency and infrastructure projects defies science and isn’t going to put enough water back into the system.
She called for a royal commission into water management.
The NSW deputy premier, John Barilaro, said calls by NSW to scrap impractical measures under the plan have been heard, but more work still needs to be done.
“The commonwealth government has come through with a pragmatic proposal to remove the threat of destructive water buy backs,” he said.
“Regional communities have lost confidence in the Murray Darling Basin Authority to deliver a plan that restores water to the environment without the wholesale destruction of basin communities.
“We made it clear that NSW would not contribute to the 450GL of additional water for the environment, and we still need clarity from the commonwealth as to where they will attain this.”
No comments:
Post a Comment