For a deeper understanding of these topics, consider attending the Water Law Symposium, where Claire Miller, CEO, NSW Irrigators' Council shares her expertise.
The Restoring Our Rivers Act 2023 brings significant reforms to river restoration efforts. Can you discuss some of the key objectives of the Act and how they aim to improve river health in the Murray-Darling Basin?
The Act’s key objective is to recover another 450 billion litres (GL) of water above the Murray-Darling Basin Plan’s base target of 2750 GL. The ALP made this commitment to South Australia in 2012 in return for its support for the Basin Plan. The Restoring our Rivers Act facilitates this promise by allowing buybacks from farmers for the first time towards the 450 GL (these were previously excluded), and removing socioeconomic impact limits. The Government says with no consistent recovery in waterbird populations and native fish still declining, another 450 GL is required to enhance environmental outcomes across the Basin.
One of the concerns raised with river restoration programs is the impact of buyback tender approaches. Could you elaborate on how this might distort the market and why this would be problematic in the context of the Restoring Our Rivers Act?
Water recovery of more than 3000 GL for the environment since 2000 has reduced the total volume of water available to support irrigated crops in the Basin by about a third. This has had flow-on impacts on small town incomes, jobs, population, and health, education and recreation services.
Murray-Darling Basin Authority analysis attributed the loss of 3261 FTE jobs lost across 40 southern Basin communities from 2001 to 2016 to water recovery for the environment.
This government water recovery has also distorted the water market by exacerbating water scarcity. ABARES estimated water recovery had driven annual allocation prices up an average additional $72/ML. ABARES also said water recovery meant allocation prices would be $200/ML in three out of five years, but the recovery of another 450 GL would drive allocation prices above $200/ML in eight out of 10 years. Most farmers cannot afford to pay allocation prices this high, this often, and stay in business.
With the legal action being taken against some SDLAM 605 projects, what are the potential consequences for farmers, local communities, and the environment if the deadlines for river restoration are missed?
There is an emerging trend to challenge SDLAM 605 GL projects on environmental grounds. These projects have extremely tight deadlines to be assessed, funded and completed under the Restoring Our Rivers Act 2023. If they are not completed in time, then the Australian Government may return to the water market to buy even more water to make up the shortfalls in water recovery targets. Added delays while legal cases play out before the courts all but guarantees these projects will not make their deadlines.
The deadlines under the Restoring Our Rivers Act are crucial for meeting environmental goals. How are these timelines being enforced, and what challenges exist in ensuring compliance from all stakeholders involved?
The Basin Plan’s fundamental objective is to set sustainable diversion limits (SDLs). Since these came into force in 2019, water use in all Basin river valleys has been consistently below the SDLs, as reported annually by the MDBA in its registers of take. With more than 3000 GL already recovered under the Basin Plan and earlier reforms, the deadlines for remaining water recovery in the Recovering our Rivers Act are not actually crucial for meeting environmental goals. Environmental degradation across the Basin has been decades in the making, and sustained, Basin-wide improvement will take decades to be achieved. Also, the Act’s simplistic reliance on the ‘’just add more water’’ approach will not deliver the desired environmental objectives. The task at hand is far more complex. The Basin Plan and earlier reforms have reduced annual average diversions for agriculture, towns/cities and industry to only about 28% of total annual average inflows to the Basin, well within global sustainability guidelines presented to the MDBA at its 2022 River Reflections conference. This additional water for the environment is delivering significant localised gains in ecological health, but at a Basin-wide scale, native fish populations are still declining and waterbird populations are stagnant. More water recovery will not fix these trends. Rather, investment is desperately needed to address their actual degradation drivers, such as invasive and feral species on land and water, lack of fishways, bank erosion and cold water pollution.
In your view, what improvements or changes could be made to the river restoration process to ensure more efficient, equitable outcomes for both the environment and local agricultural communities in the Basin?
Additional water recovery from the consumptive pool for irrigated agriculture is not necessary at this stage of Basin water reforms. It will have exponential socio-economic impacts on farmers and irrigation-dependent communities but do little to achieve the Basin-wide step-change in ecological health-- including rebounding native flora and fauna abundance and diversity, and improved water quality – that we should expect from this $13 billion investment. Instead of spending billions of dollars more on unnecessary additional water recovery, this money would deliver a greater, more enduring bang for the buck for the environment if spent on addressing the degradation drivers described above, such as invasive and feral species and lack of fishways.
Disclaimer: The statements, analyses, opinions and conclusions in Legalwise Insights are those of the respective authors and not of Legalwise Seminars Pty Ltd which acts only in the capacity as editorial co- ordinator of the content in Legalwise Insights. No part of any article can be regarded as legal or financial advice. Although all care has been taken in the preparation of all articles, readers must not alter their position or refrain from doing so in reliance on any information contained therein. Neither the respective authors nor Legalwise Seminars Pty Ltd accept or undertake any duty of care relating to any part of Legalwise Insights
Liability limited by a scheme approved under the Professional Standards Legislation
|
Claire Miller is the CEO of the NSW Irrigators' Council, representing over 12,000 irrigators, and Director at Claire Miller Consulting, specialising in water, climate, energy, and agricultural policy. With 35+ years of experience as a journalist, ministerial adviser, and industry strategist, she excels in navigating complex policy landscapes. Claire also serves on the East Gippsland Catchment Management Authority board, is a Graduate of the Australian Institute of Company Directors, and holds a Master’s in Environmental Studies from Melbourne University. |
