Water industry leaders are confounded by an apparent contradiction in the Federal Government’s move to target the Victorian Murray irrigation district for the first water buybacks for the Murray-Darling system.
The stakeholders have referred to the federal water department’s own documents, which say the buybacks would not start with intensive irrigation districts but would start with river diverters.
The Victorian Murray district includes Moira, Campaspe and Ganawarra shires.
The joint chair of the Goulburn Murray Irrigation District Water Leadership Group, Suzanna Sheed, met with a senior adviser to Federal Water MInister Tanya Plibersek on Wednesday, July 3 in Canberra.
She left the meeting with a clear impression that irrigation districts would not be targeted.
The leadership group believes Ms Plibersek would have had a report on socio-economic impacts of the buybacks, but she has not produced it.
“Our communities deserve to know the full extent of how these measures will affect our lives and our futures,” Ms Sheed said.
“The government’s plan appears to disregard the profound socio-economic impacts that these buybacks will have on our communities.
“The removal of water from the Murray Valley, particularly in such a high-density irrigation network, will undermine the viability of local farming operations, lead to job losses, and erode the social fabric of our towns and cities.
“The targeting of the River Murray region, especially in Victoria, represents a disproportionate burden on our state in the pursuit of water recovery goals.
“The Federal Government's own trading strategy, released at the same time the tender was announced, says that the tender will “seek to exclude areas with high concentration of network customers” but the buyback target areas include Murray gravity system irrigators in northern Victoria.“
Ms Sheed questioned the logic or rationale for this contradiction.
“Why are the Victorian Murray systems being treated differently to the NSW Murray systems?
“Again, the Federal Government is silent when any scrutiny of this flawed strategy arises.
“They simply don’t engage in any meaningful way with the people that this misplaced policy will affect. It is nothing short of disgraceful.
“We call upon the Federal Government to immediately release the socio-economic assessment it claims to have conducted.
“This analysis, which is a statutory requirement, has not been made available to date.
“The lack of transparency raises serious concerns about whether the full implications of the buybacks on our communities have been adequately considered.”
The Murray Valley’s communities rely heavily on a balanced and sustainable water supply for their livelihoods and wellbeing, Ms Sheed said.
“The proposed water buybacks stray from the government's previously stated intentions to protect high-density irrigation networks and also disproportionately impact Victoria.
“We urge the Federal Government to reconsider its approach and engage in meaningful consultation with affected communities.”
Victorian Water Minister Harriet Shing expressed her deep disappointment to see the Commonwealth’s announcement of a 70 Gl open tender water purchase program.
“I am calling on the Commonwealth to provide Victoria and the community with the information that was considered before this program was approved,” Ms Shing said.
“At the basin Ministerial Council, I raised the serious concerns that Victorian communities have about the one-off allocation of $300 million to be split between all basin states where buybacks occur.
“This funding won’t go anywhere close to assisting communities with the long-term transition and the loss of jobs and economic activity in affected communities with these buybacks, and it won’t provide the certainty that basin communities deserve.
“The Victorian Government released a prospectus earlier this year which has been designed with, for and by Victorian basin communities and I confirmed I will continue to advocate for our communities as the Commonwealth implements its legislative changes.
“Victoria’s work and advocacy continues to be informed by the work and direction of the prospectus and our communities’ lived experience.”