Workers in New South Wales (NSW) have protested against the federal government’s water buyback plan in the Murray-Darling Basin, fearing for their livelihoods and potential a rise in food prices.
The Senate is reviewing the Water Amendment (Recovering Our Rivers) Bill 2023. The proposed changes aim to include more projects, like water buybacks, to achieve the Basin Plan’s target of an extra 450 gigalitres (GL) of environmental water.
However, on Nov. 21, local agriculture workers in Leeton, Griffith, and Deniliquin demanded the government look at other options to improve river health without destroying jobs and communities.
“NO more water buybacks from farmers—there is a better way,” they said.
Griffith Mayor Doug Curran said the community was furious about the possibility of further buybacks, as farming economies rely heavily on water for crop growth.
Mr. Curran said Griffith farmers need water to grow one-third of Australia’s citrus, for 75 percent of New South Wales (NSW) wine production, and to process about 2.5 million chickens weekly.
He told 2GB radio that decreased food production from water buybacks could force people out of a job.
He added if jobs and crops are affected, the cost of groceries will likely increase and grocers would need to rely on imported goods.
“Once we rely on imports, we will get lower quality food, and it will cost us more, and when there are adverse conditions in other countries, we won’t be able to get that produce at all,” he said.
He said losing food security could significantly impact the nation’s “destiny.”
“Once that infrastructure is gone, once those businesses that have grown around that are gone, not only do we lose employment, but we lose that food security, and we lose, I believe, the future of Australia in years to come for our children and grandchildren,” he said.
He urged the senators to carefully weigh the long-term consequences of water buybacks.
NFF President Urges Government to Heed Farmers’ Concerns
Meanwhile, the National Farmers Federation (NFF) highlighted that taking an additional 450 GL from farmers will cause water prices to rise too often, forcing many farmers out of business.“People in these towns are furious, and they have every right to be. The government is tearing up the deal it struck with them, and nobody has fronted up to talk to them about it,” NFF president David Jochinke said.
Further, he said the government’s tunnel vision on buybacks meant it overlooked smarter ways to achieve a healthy river.
The Productivity Commission also recently backed the suggestion the government had tunnel visioned on the scheme.
The Commission warned that if the government fails to consider industry and community in its water recovery plan, it may seem like its only focus is meeting a numerical target without ensuring positive environmental results.
Shifting Focus: Exploring Improved Delivery Methods
However, the Commission also pointed to some good news.“For the most part, the conversation is no longer about whether or not there should be a Basin Plan, but rather whether there are better ways to deliver the Plan,” a spokesperson said (pdf).
The Murray Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) noted that nobody has suggested getting rid of the plan so far.
In a recent address to the National and Rural Press Club, MDBA chief executive Andrew McConville said, “Everyone shares a passion for the health of our rivers, and importantly, no one I have come across wants to do away with the Plan. Hand on heart, literally no one has said ... throw it out.”
Further, irrigator advocates pointed to what the Basin Plan has achieved to date.
The National Irrigators’ Council said the Plan has been vital in balancing the needs of communities, the environment, and the productive sector.
“It hasn’t always got it right, but it has achieved a great deal since its inception. Ensuring balance is needed to keep our rivers and communities healthy and thriving.”
‘Now is The Time to Act:’ Water Minister Says
Meanwhile, Environment and Water Minister Tanya Plibersek argued the government had spoken to farmers about community health before the Plan’s amendment began.“We’ve worked with states and territories, with farmers and irrigators, with scientists and experts, with environmentalists, and with First Nations groups. We have discussed these matters in good faith and at considerable length,” Ms. Plibersek said. “Now is the time to act.”
She added the bill offered more time, options, money, and accountability.
“It delivers more water for the environment, more certainty for farmers and industry, more financial support for affected communities, more protection for native plants and animals, and more hope for Australia’s most important river system,” she said.
She explained how the plan would lead to more certainty for farmers.
“We'll be able to invest in on-farm water infrastructure, land and water purchases ... where it’s sensible to do so. We will be able to count recovery above bridging the gap targets towards the 450-gigalitre target. We will be able to purchase water from willing sellers where it’s needed to deliver the plan,” she said.
“The first of these changes is altering the rules around the 450 gigalitres of environmental water.”
