SIX councils in northern Victoria have launched a new campaign aiming to stop the Water Amendment (Restoring Our Rivers) Bill 2023 from becoming law.
Create a free account to read this article
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The bill aims to adjust the management plan for the Murray-Darling Basin and extend the deadline on delivery of 450 gigalitres of water back to the environment out to December 31, 2027.
The delivery of water was initially planned for June 2024.
The Murray River Group of Councils (MRGC), which consist of the Mildura, Swan HIll, Campaspe, Gannawarra, Loddon and Moira councils, launched the campaign called #PushbackBuybacks earlier this month.
MRGC chair and Campaspe mayor, Rob Amos, said the legislation changes would put livelihoods and communities at risk, and add to cost-of-living pressures on Australian households.
"Extensive research and our collective experience tell us that water buybacks have dire socio-economic consequences," Mr Amos said.
"Last time, they caused the loss of 1600 jobs, the closure of a milk factory and increased farming risk across our region.
"Our communities are only just getting back on their feet after the pandemic, fires and floods.
"The reintroduction of water buybacks would seal the fate of our vulnerable agricultural industries and further decimate our fragile regional communities."
The campaign has also launched a petition and are urging local residents to write to ministers and crossbenchers about the law changes.
The group outlined support for environmental outcomes through the Basin Plan, but called for better alternatives to buybacks, like efficacy projects at Hattah Lakes and Gunbower Forest.
They also argue previous water buybacks increased the cost of water for irrigators, pushing up input costs, including labour and shared infrastructure.
"If the bill goes through, there will be more pressure on the weekly shopping bill of Australian families," Cr Amos said.
"The domino effect of reduced water and rising input costs are less dairy and meat production, and less availability of fresh fruit and vegetables.
"This, in turn, drives up the price of fresh produce and packaged food products at the checkout."
The group also claim flow on impacts of those buybacks were $500 million of lost productivity across the Goulburn Murray Irrigation District (GMID) each year, and 50 per cent less water used in the GMID in recent years.
The campaign comes off the back of a senate inquiry submissions from the Murray Regional Strategy Group, which outlined Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource Economics and Sciences data that said water buybacks had already driven up prices to more than $200 a megalitre in three out of 10 years.
Meanwhile, federal agriculture minister Murray Watt told guests at last week's Rural Press Club of Victoria breakfast he recognised it was a very crucial issue for the Victorian farming sector.
"I have regular discussions with the water minister, Tanya Plibersek, about this, and the need to make sure the solutions we come up with respect the needs of the agriculture sector." Mr Watt said.
"We obviously went to the election committing to implementing the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in full, the reality is its been difficult to see much process on that, in the last 10 years.
"I do think it is important we do deliver that plan, not just so we can tick off an election commitment, but because of the needs of the agriculture sector as a whole, long term."
Mr Watt said the government needed to take action to preserve the Basin.
But he said he felt what had been "a little bit lost in the debate" was that delivery of the plan would be based entirely on water buybacks.
"Commentary gives the impression we are focussed only on buybacks, as the only solution, and I can assure you that is absolutely not the case." Mr Watt said.
The government was also looking at water efficiency and infrastructure projects.
"We are absolutely committed to delivering the plan but we are also committed to doing so in economically efficient, but socially beneficial, ways instead," he said.
"What that also means is when we do come around to undertaking buybacks, and they are voluntary and there has to be a willing seller, what we want to do is do that in a way that minimises the impact on particular regions, crops and industries," he said.
'Where there is a negative impact, we will provide structural relief."
Sign up here to Good Fruit and Vegetables weekly newsletter for all the latest horticulture news each Thursday...
