The Windsor Inquiry into the Murray-Darling Basin shows a government weakening on a key election promise.
THERE IS growing concern from environment groups across three states that the Gillard government's election commitment to return the Murray-Darling River system to health could literally be going to water.
Recent worrying signs have included the resignation of leading scientists in protest at a lack of scientific rigour in preparation of a new draft plan; the Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) floating a new compromise of only returning 2,800 billion litres (GL) of water to the rivers system; and now a parliamentary report by Tony Windsor calling for water buybacks to be suspended with more handouts to irrigators.
The Windsor Inquiry report has suggested an immediate halt to the Commonwealth's voluntary water buyback program. This is despite a mountain of evidence that voluntary water buybacks are the best way to return water to rivers. The Productivity Commission has stated that water buybacks are the most efficient and cost-effective method of returning water back to rivers, with most economists, conservationists, scientists and many landholders also in favour.
Time and again government commissioned reports and studies have shown the effectiveness of voluntary water buybacks. Many people have forgotten it was the Howard government, with then water Minister Malcolm Turnbull that introduced water buybacks from willing sellers following years of resistance from big irrigation and the Nationals in 2005.
Clearly reform in the Murray-Darling Basin is an issue of national importance. The Rudd government committed to it, as did the Howard government before it. The Gillard government gave a 2010 election promise to "buy as much water as necessary from willing sellers to restore the Murray River to health". Of course, since then the MDBA botched the release of its original guide to the draft Plan, resulting in the big irrigation lobby running an effective scare campaign.
However, the Australian government should now be more concerned about delivering policy in the national interest than worrying about a small group of vested interests burning copies of the guide to the Plan in the street.
Windsor's report also calls for a greater focus on on-farm irrigation efficiency programs and off-farm infrastructure works. The problem is the Murray River has already been engineered to within an inch of its life with hundreds of dams, weirs and channels all adding to the decline of the river, its fish and red gum floodplains. Further engineering will not return the river to health, but will cost taxpayers billions of dollars. There are some good infrastructure projects out there that will save water, deliver a range of environmental outcomes and save money, but they are few and far between.
The Living Murray Initiative of the mid 2000s, an initial attempt to recover water for key wetlands along the Murray River is testament to the failure of infrastructure and non-buyback methods. Most of the 'water' recovered in Victoria and New South Wales is virtual water that is not actually delivered unless there's an exceptionally wet year.
As for on-farm efficiencies (or growing more stuff with less water) this is widely supported. But it must be recognised that there was 10 years of funding for efficient irrigation during the Howard years. Most of the low hanging fruit, or cost effective options have already been adopted by irrigators. Billions of dollars were spent, largely in Liberal/National rural electorates, with no identifiable environmental outcomes.
To wring more savings out of farmers will again cost billions and often many times more than simply purchasing the water. According to figures presented to Senate Estimates hearings last week, water saved through water infrastructure efficiency measures costs an extraordinary ten times as much as water bought on the open market.
The Gillard government has already flagged up to $6 billion on infrastructure programs to save water, with $3 billion for buying water. Many have argued for the figures to be reversed to accelerate returning the Murray-Darling rivers to health and to achieve cost effectiveness of public funds.
Regrettably the Windsor Inquiry appears to have been overly influenced by the scare campaign by big irrigation interests wrongly predicting annihilation.
In fact, more water has been permanently sold out of irrigation regions in northern Victoria in recent years than ever before, and the region continues to prosper.
Indefinitely delaying voluntary buybacks of water would seriously undermine water reform in the Murray-Darling Basin. It would be like keeping a patient on life-support rather than actually curing the illness. As Environment and Water Minister Tony Burke has pointed out "delay is the enemy of water reform".
Delay could also be the enemy of the Gillard government if it fails to deliver on its 2010 election promise to return the Rivers of the Murray Darling to health.