Article - Feud for thought: Feds must run Murray

Sunday Mail - 17 January 2010

ON Thursday, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott announced that, if elected, the Coalition would call on the states to cede their control over the Murray-Darling river system to the Federal Government. He also announced if this failed the Coalition would hold a referendum seeking the power for the Federal Government to finally take control of the rivers. After 110 years of destructive state versus-state infighting, the Coalition is offering decisive, practical action to resolve the problems plaguing the management of the Murray Darling basin.

This is not a new issue. I called for a referendum on a federal takeover of the Murray in 2001. However, it is much older than that. It goes right back to the Federation debates in the 1890s. South Australia and other states came very close to giving power over the Murray Darling Basin to the Federal Government but were defeated in their efforts by the activities of George Reid, then Premier of NSW and later to become Australia's fourth PM.

In the 1890s, it was the navigation of the waterways that was at issue in the convention debates. Today, the economic and ecological importance of the Murray Darling Basin is undisputed, yet it remains in the hands of the states that bicker and fail to achieve consensus. As a consequence, the River Murray is slowly dying and the people of Adelaide and those along the Murray who rely on it for water suffer as a result. Just this week we witnessed an argument between SA and NSW over floodwaters. Premier Mike Rann wrote a letter begging for the release of extra floodwater in NSW.

Originally the amount was reported as 170 gigalitres, but now at risk of looking like failing to deliver so close to the state election, no Government minister will confirm the exact amount they have requested.

I won't need to leave you in suspense, because the NSW Water Resources Minister. Phil Costa. announced it would be less than 100 gigalitres and added: “”As important as the Lower Lakes system is, we've got our own families and communities to look after.””

So now there is a clear choice on the Murray at the next federal election. The Coalition has placed an ultimatum on the table, and if the states don't voluntarily cede their powers then the people of Australia will decide who is best placed to act in the national interest when managing the Murray Darling. Labor, on the other hand, promised before the last election to do what John Howard was thwarted from achieving by the Victorian Government. That was to get all the Labor states to agree to hand over control of the Murray.

After the election we witnessed the Prime Minister and Premiers emerging from discussions, smiling for cameras, gushing about a “”historic new agreement”” that would usher in a “”new age of co-operation”” over the Murray.

But the truth emerged that the agreement was a dud, with the states retaining their powers over water allocation and the “”historic”” agreement entrenching the old wrangling over the river. So, knowing this, what does the SA Government, which has the most to gain out of a federal takeover of the Murray, think of the Coalition's plans?

SA Environment Minister Jay Weatherill said bizarrely on Friday a federal takeover would “”not be in SA's interests””. He obviously prefers the current arrangement where the SA Government needs to take the Victorian Government to the High Court to resolve a dispute.

Similarly the Federal Water Minister, Senator Penny Wong, has slammed the federal takeover while conceding the existing system isn't ideal but “”these were the cards we were dealt when we came to Government””.

The Senator said a referendum in 2013 would further delay action, clearly forgetting that her own solution for the Murray-Darling won't take full effect until the year 2019.

What is pretty clear to South Australians is the existing deal is not working. Kevin Rudd promised before the last election he could resolve the disputes between the Labor states and reach an agreement. This has failed. No deal on the Murray will ever work unless we can resolve the problem plaguing its management since Federation. The water must be managed in the national interest.

Christopher Pyne is federal member for Sturt and Opposition spokesman on education, apprenticeships and training