The body charged with the responsibility of handling federal water buybacks has been criticised over shortcomings in the way it handles sensitive information.
The audit by the Inspector General of Water Compliance found problems in four areas administered by the Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water.
The National Farmers’ Federation was scathing in its criticism of the ineffectiveness.
NFF Water Committee chair Malcolm Holm said the audit into the department confirmed concerns about the government’s ability to manage basin resources effectively.
“The audit highlights major failings in consultation and delivery, putting at risk the transparency and accountability expected in the management of Australia’s vital water resources.
“This department would struggle to run a Friday night meat tray raffle at the pub, yet it is in charge of a water buyback program worth billions.
“Minister Tanya Plibersek committed to greater accountability for her department, yet we are seeing the opposite.”
The audit examined four key areas of compliance, and this is what the NFF says the audit found:
Policy and procedural framework – partly effective
The DCCEEW’s policy framework was found to be inadequate, lacking clarity on key controls and how staff should adhere to them.
Moreover, it remains unclear whether all staff were fully informed about the revised framework before critical water announcements were made public, raising questions about the integrity of decision-making processes.
Training – partly effective
The audit found serious gaps in the training provided to staff handling market-sensitive information.
Of those directly involved in the Basin Transitional Grant announcement, 50 per cent did not attend a critical probity training session, and 85 per cent missed water compliance training altogether.
Even those who attended were not provided with adequate materials to manage sensitive information, further undermining confidence in the department’s internal compliance processes.
Information barrier arrangements – not effective
Perhaps the most alarming finding was the DCCEEW’s failure to implement effective information barriers to safeguard market-sensitive data.
No clear guidance was provided on access controls, and the department failed to revoke access from staff who no longer required it, creating an environment vulnerable to breaches of confidential information.
Managing conflicts of interest – partly effective
Conflicts of interest were poorly managed, with 18 per cent of staff in relevant business areas potentially accessing sensitive information without completing the necessary conflict declarations.
One official involved in the BTG announcement only filed their declaration after the information had been made public, a clear breach of best practice protocols.
Mr Holm highlighted these results were in stark contrast to the performance of the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, which was also reviewed as part of the audit.
“The CEWH’s performance was rated ‘largely effective’ in all four areas,” Mr Holm said.
“This highlights a clear disparity in the way these critical water resource management bodies operate.
“We call for immediate action to address these significant failings.
“Farmers and communities along the Murray-Darling Basin have already been let down with the re-introduction of buybacks.
“Now we see the basin isn’t being managed properly. This is one of Australia’s most important water resources and we need to see the highest standards of accountability and transparency in its management.
“The government must urgently rectify these issues to restore already flailing confidence in basin communities and ensure that basin resources are managed in the best interests of all stakeholders.
“This is what the minister promised, but is failing to deliver.”