Bills Digest no. 32,
2016–17
PDF version [607KB]
Bill McCormick and Sophie Power
Science, Technology, Environment and Resources Section
7 November 2016
Contents
Purpose of the Bill
Background
The Water Act and the Basin Plan
Sustainable diversion limits
SDL adjustment mechanism
Committee consideration
Senate Selection of Bills Committee
Senate Standing Committee for the
Scrutiny of Bills
Policy position of non-government
parties/independents
Position of major interest groups
Financial implications
Statement of Compatibility with Human
Rights
Parliamentary Joint Committee on
Human Rights
Key issues and provisions
Key provisions relating to the SDL
adjustment mechanism
Proposed amendments
Second notification of measures
Additional efficiency measures
Timing of the MDBA’s determination
Other provisions
Date introduced: 15
September 2016
House: Senate
Portfolio: Agriculture
and Water Resources
Commencement: The
day after Royal Assent.
Links: The links to the Bill,
its Explanatory Memorandum and second reading speech can be found on the
Bill’s home page, or through the Australian
Parliament website.
When Bills have been passed and have received Royal Assent,
they become Acts, which can be found at the Federal Register of Legislation
website.
All hyperlinks in this Bills Digest are correct as
at November 2016.
Purpose of
the Bill
The purpose of the Water Legislation Amendment
(Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2016 (the Bill) is to amend procedures
in the Basin Plan
2012 (the Basin Plan) for adjusting sustainable diversion limits (SDL) for
water in the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB). In particular, the Bill will:
- provide
an additional opportunity for Basin states to develop and notify the Murray-Darling
Basin Authority (MDBA) of new supply and efficiency measure projects up to 30
June 2017 (rather than 30 June 2016) and
- provide
for the MDBA to make a single determination relating to proposed SDL adjustments
after 30 June 2017 but no later than 15 December 2017 (rather than
‘as soon as practicable’ after 30 June 2016).
Background
The Murray and Darling Rivers are the world’s 15th longest
river system and the Murray-Darling Basin (MDB) covers 14 per cent of
Australia.[1]
However, because they are long and slow flowing rivers and have a high
evaporation rate, they carry one of the world’s smallest volumes of water for their
size. Agricultural production of the
MDB is estimated to be $13 billion annually, of which a third is produced using
irrigation.[2]
The basin is home to over two million people. In 2011, ‘dryland and irrigated
agriculture represent[ed] 84 per cent of Basin land use, 32 per cent of
businesses and 11 per cent of jobs’.[3]
The MDB contains around 60,000 square kilometres of
floodplain and 30,000 wetlands, including 16 listed under the Ramsar
Convention on Wetlands of International Importance[4]
and there are at least 95 threatened species dependent on
basin ecosystems.[5]
Water quality throughout the MDB declined through the 20th
century as a result of increased salinisation (caused by salt stored in soils
and/or groundwater being mobilised by extra water provided by human activities
such as irrigation or land clearing) and more nutrients in the water from
increased use of fertilisers and soil erosion. The Salinity and Drainage
Strategy was agreed to by the Basin states and the Commonwealth in 1988 for
the co‑ordinated management of salinity in the River Murray and land
salinisation and waterlogging in the MDB.[6]
The decline in river health was further exacerbated when water
diversions across the MDB increased substantially during the 1980s and early
1990s, raising concerns that these diversions were exceeding sustainable
levels. To combat this, the MDB Ministerial Council introduced a ‘cap’ on
diversions of water from the MDB at the 1993/94 level of development, effective
from 1 July 1997.[7]
From the late 1990s, efforts were being made by the Basin
states to recover water entitlements in order to return water to the rivers for
environmental flows.
In 2002, the Commonwealth, New South Wales (NSW) and
Victorian governments agreed to provide $375 million over ten years to
fund works to recover 212 Gigalitres (GL) and 70 GL in environmental flows
respectively to the Snowy River and the Murray River.[8]
In 2003 the MDB Ministerial Council decided that, as the
first stage of the Living
Murray initiative, 500 GL of environmental water would be acquired to put
towards achieving significant environmental benefits for six key ecological
assets: Barmah-Millewa Forest; Gunbower and Perricoota-Koondrook Forests; the
Hattah Lakes; Chowilla Floodplain (including Lindsay-Wallpolla-Mulcra Islands);
the Murray Mouth, Coorong and Lower Lakes; and the River Murray channel.[9]
The combination of the Millennium Drought[10]
and the lack of progress with previous initiatives led then Prime Minister John
Howard to propose a $10 billion National Plan for Water Security in
2007. He said that the current trajectory of water use and management was not
sustainable. To deal with this, he proposed to ask the relevant state and
territory leaders to refer their powers over the MDB to the Commonwealth.[11]
Under the Plan, the Commonwealth would provide $5.9 billion to modernise
irrigation infrastructure both on and off‑farm to save water and increase
efficiency of water use. In addition, the Commonwealth would invest up to $3
billion to address over‑allocation in the MDB through buying back water
entitlements and assisting irrigators to exit unviable or inefficient parts of
irrigation schemes.[12]
The Water
Act and the Basin Plan
Victoria and the Commonwealth could not reach agreement to
transfer relevant powers. As a result, then Prime Minister Howard decided to
introduce the Water Bill 2007 into Parliament to establish a new governance
regime over the MDB using only Commonwealth constitutional powers.[13]
The Water Act 2007
(Cth) established the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) with responsibility
for developing a Basin Plan. One of the key elements of the Basin Plan was to
include sustainable diversion limits (SDLs) on the quantities of surface water
and ground water that can be taken from the Basin's water resources.
The Water Act was amended in 2008 to
reflect the eventual agreement by the Basin states (that is, NSW, Victoria,
South Australia and Queensland) to refer relevant constitutional powers to the
Commonwealth.[14]
These amendments followed the Memorandum of Understanding on Murray
Darling Basin Reform,[15]
signed by the Commonwealth, the ACT, NSW, Queensland, South Australia and
Victoria in March 2008 and the Intergovernmental
Agreement on Murray Darling Basin Reform[16]
in July 2008.
The Basin Plan was adopted
in November 2012 after significant consultation with communities, stakeholders,
interest groups and governments from November 2011 until May 2012.[17]
The Basin Plan is a legislative instrument made under the Water Act.[18]
Sustainable
diversion limits
As noted above, one of the key elements of the Water
Act and Basin Plan is the requirement to establish long‑term average
sustainable diversion limits (SDLs) to the quantities of surface water and ground
water that can be taken from the Basin's water resources for consumptive use.[19]
The SDLs are intended to reflect an environmentally sustainable level of water
use (or ‘take’) of both surface water and groundwater for each catchment and
aquifer in the MBD, as well as for the Basin as a whole.[20]
Essentially SDLs are a cap[21]
on consumptive water use in the MDB and ‘will commence in 2019, by which point
they will be incorporated in state water resource plans’.[22]
The Basin Plan set a long-term average surface water SDL
of 10,873 GL per year (GL/y) for urban, industrial and agricultural use in the
MDB to be achieved by 2019. This is a reduction of 2,750 GL/y from the June
2009 Baseline Diversion Limit (BDL) for the MDB.[23]
The amount of water that can be diverted in
each catchment, as set by the state water resource plans, must not
exceed the SDL set in the Basin Plan. The
recovery of surface water entitlements to achieve much of this reduction has
already occurred through investment in infrastructure efficiency and by
securing water entitlements (‘buybacks’) for environmental use.[24]
In response to concerns about the ‘potential adverse
social and economic impacts on irrigation
dependent communities that may arise from water purchases’, then Leader of the Opposition,
Tony Abbott stated in 2012 that ‘if elected, the Coalition will amend the Water
Recovery Strategy to apply a cap on buybacks of 1,500 GL’.[25]
The Water
Recovery Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin was then published in
June 2014 and confirmed that there would be a 1,500 GL limit or ‘cap’ on
surface water buybacks.[26]
In September 2015, the Basin Plan was amended to place a 1,500 GL limit on
water purchases by the Commonwealth.[27]
The Department of the Environment expressed confidence that ‘the Commonwealth
will be able to fully bridge the gap without engaging the 1,500 gigalitre
limit’.[28]
As of 30 September 2016, a total of 1,996.1 GL had been
recovered, leaving 753.9 GL needed to reach the 2,750 GL Basin Plan recovery
total. Of this total, 1,165.6 GL has been purchased.[29]
SDL
adjustment mechanism
In response to comments from the Basin states, the Water
Act was amended in 2012 to insert a SDL adjustment mechanism.[30]
The process for this mechanism is set out in sections 23A and 23B of the Water
Act and Chapter 7 of the Basin Plan. In short, the SDL adjustment mechanism
permits the Water Minister, on the advice of the MDBA, to adjust the SDL up or
down by up to five per cent (544 GL) as long as environmental and socio-economic
outcomes are not compromised.[31]
The adjustments are made in response to environmental works and measures
(efficiency, supply and constraints measures) proposed by the Basin states. The
SDL adjustment mechanism also requires the MDBA to develop a ‘constraints
management strategy’ to ease or remove constraints.[32]
Depending on what proposals are taken forward, the SDL adjustment mechanism
could potentially change the benefits and costs associated with implementing
the Basin Plan.[33]
The SDL adjustment measures that are being considered are:
- efficiency
measures—that is, measures to improve the efficiency of water delivery and
irrigation systems and return additional water for the environment.[34]
These include, for example, reducing evaporation losses at suitable water
storages
- supply
measures— that is, measures which enable less environmental water to be used to
achieve 'equivalent environmental outcomes'. These include building or
improving river or water management structures so that environmental water can
be delivered directly to places that need it more or those which can achieve
the best outcomes; or through streamlining some river operations or management
rules[35]
- constraints
measures—that is, measures that ease or remove structures or rules that
constrain the delivery of environmental water to allow water managers more
flexibility in releasing and moving water through the river system. Constraints
include features such as crossings, bridges or low lying private land, or river
practices and rules, which can restrict when and how much water can be
delivered from water storages.[36]
Under the SDL adjustment mechanism, the
current 2,750 GL Basin Plan water recovery target can be reduced by supply
measures or increased by efficiency measures. A 2012 fact sheet[37] released by the then Department of Sustainability, Environment, Water,
Population and Communities indicates that the water recovery could vary between
2,100 GL and 3,200 GL. Some Basin state governments consider that there are
enough ‘supply measures’ to reduce water recovery by as much as 650 GL (thus
reducing the target to 2,100 GL). At the same time, it can be increased
by up to 450 GL to 3,200 GL through ‘efficiency measures’.[38]
According to the Department of Agriculture and Water
Resources:
All Basin governments are participating in the
SDL adjustment work program and have prepared individual and joint proposals
for supply and constraints measure projects. The Australian Government is
continuing to consult with Basin states and industry to finalise efficiency
measure programmes.[39]
In April 2016 the MDB Ministerial Council
agreed to a package of SDL adjustment proposals (efficiency, supply
and constraints measures).[40]
These projects are expected to be completed over the next eight years. The MDBA
noted that its modelling of 15 of the 37 nominated supply measures have an
estimated ‘SDL offset’ of 370 GL.[41]
In 2015 the independent SDL
adjustment stocktake report, commissioned by the MDB Ministerial
Council, estimated the supply contribution (including constraints measures) for
projects proposed under the SDL adjustment provisions of the Basin Plan to be
approximately 500 GL.[42]
However, the report also found that there is considerable risk that the aim of
achieving 450GL through the efficiency measures program will not be met.[43]
Under the SDL adjustment mechanism, states
will have until 2019 to incorporate any adjustments to SDLs in their water
resource plans. All SDL adjustment projects will need to be completed by 2024.
At this time, MDBA will review the projects to reconcile the anticipated
outcomes with the achieved outcomes and make any final SDL adjustments.[44]
In
April this year, the MDB Ministerial Council ‘requested that the
Commonwealth amend the Basin Plan to provide for a second SDL adjustment step
by 30 June 2017. This would allow for a second tranche of projects to be
developed to further improve the outcomes of the Basin Plan’.[45]
Committee
consideration
Senate
Selection of Bills Committee
On 13 October 2016, the Senate Selection of Bills Committee decided
not to refer the Bill to a committee for inquiry.[46]
Senate
Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills
The Senate Standing Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills had
no comments on the Bill.[47]
Policy
position of non-government parties/independents
At the time of writing, non-government parties and
independents do not appear to have commented on the Bill.
Position of
major interest groups
The Explanatory Memorandum indicates:
All Basin jurisdictions (Queensland, New South
Wales, the Australian Capital Territory, Victoria and South Australia), key
industry groups, environmental organisations and Basin Indigenous group have
been consulted on the details of the Bill.[48]
The National Irrigators Council Chair, Gavin McMahon, has
reportedly welcomed the MDB Ministerial Council’s decision to request an
amendment to the Basin Plan as a ‘sensible decision’ that would
allow further time for a second round of projects to be developed, to maximise
all supply contributions under the SDL adjustment mechanism.[49]
National Farmers’ Federation Water Taskforce
Chair, Les Gordon, reportedly said ‘the projects allowed for a significant
reduction in the amount of water recovery required to achieve Basin Plan
outcomes which was good news for both the environment and communities’.[50]
Cotton Australia General Manager, Michael
Murray, is reported as saying that ‘agreements reached at last week’s meeting
meant all governments must now commit to the full delivery of the 650 GL in SDL
offset projects’.[51]
However, Australian Conservation Foundation
Healthy Ecosystems Program Manager, Jonathan La Nauze, reportedly said the relevant
MBD Ministerial Council meeting delivered mixed results for the Basin Plan.
While there was a 500 GL increase for irrigators, he felt it was a lopsided
agreement because ministers had decided to delay incorporating an extra 450 GLs
of environmental water into diversion limits until as late as 2024, meaning the
health of rivers, fish and waterbirds was less certain.[52]
Financial
implications
The Explanatory Memorandum states that there is no
financial impact associated with the Bill.[53]
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
As required under Part 3 of the Human Rights
(Parliamentary Scrutiny) Act 2011 (Cth), the Government has assessed the
Bill’s compatibility with the human rights and freedoms recognised or declared
in the international instruments listed in section 3 of that Act. The
Government considers that the Bill is compatible.[54]
Parliamentary
Joint Committee on Human Rights
The Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights had no comment
on the Bill.[55]
Key issues
and provisions
The Bill proposes to amend Chapter 7 of the Basin Plan
which sets out procedures for the operation of the SDL adjustment mechanism.
Key
provisions relating to the SDL adjustment mechanism
As noted earlier in this Digest, the SDL adjustment
mechanism was inserted into the Water Act in 2012 and permits the
Minister, on the advice of the MDBA, to adjust the SDL up or down by up to five
per cent (544 GL) as long as environmental and socio-economic outcomes are not
compromised.[56]
Section 23A of the Water Act provides that the Basin
Plan may provide for the MDBA to propose an adjustment to the SDL against the
criteria in the Plan. Section 23B sets out the process the MDBA is required to
follow when proposing an adjustment, which includes the preparation of an amendment
to the Basin Plan. Under subsection 23B(6) of the Water Act, the Minister
must decide whether to adopt the MDBA’s proposed amendment. If the Minister does
adopt it, the Basin Plan amendment must be tabled in both Houses of Parliament
and is a legislative instrument subject to disallowance.[57]
Chapter 7 of the Basin Plan sets out detailed criteria and
procedures for the operation of the SDL adjustment mechanism as envisaged by
section 23A of the Water Act. In particular, Part 2 of Chapter 7 sets
out certain timeframes for the processes associated with the mechanism.
Currently, the key timeframes are:
- the
Basin Officials Committee[58]
may notify the MDBA of supply or efficiency measures to be taken into account
in proposing SDL adjustments by 30 June 2016[59]
- after
receiving a notification from the Basin Officials Committee, the MDBA must
determine the amount of SDL adjustments resulting from the proposed measures and
then propose SDL adjustments under section 23A of the Water Act ‘as soon
as practicable’ after 30 June 2016[60]
- after
30 June 2016, but on or before 31 December 2023, a Basin state or the
Commonwealth may notify the MDBA of one or more additional efficiency measures.[61]
These additional efficiency measures are considered by the MDBA in making
reconciliation adjustments in 2024 (see below)
- the
agreed measures are required to be implemented by 2024.[62]
There is also an opportunity for the MDBA to make ‘reconciliation adjustments’
in 2024 in certain circumstances.[63]
Proposed
amendments
The Bill proposes to amend Chapter 7 of the Basin Plan to alter
the process and extend certain timeframes relating to the SDL adjustment
mechanism. In particular, the proposed amendments would:
- allow
the Basin Officials Committee to notify the MDBA of a second set of proposed supply
and efficiency measures by 30 June 2017
- postpone
the date after which additional efficiency measures can be notified from 30
June 2016 to 30 June 2017 and
- extend
the timeframe for the MDBA to start the process for considering proposing adjustments
to long-term SDLs to after 30 June 2017 (rather than 30 June 2016), while at
the same imposing a deadline of 15 December 2017 for the MDBA to present
its determination of proposed SDL adjustments to the Minister.
Second notification of measures
Section 7.12 of the Basin Plan provides that the Basin
Officials Committee may, by 30 June 2016, notify the MDBA of one or more supply
measures or efficiency measures that, in the view of the Basin Officials
Committee, should be taken into account in proposing SDL adjustments.
This notification occurred on 5 May 2016:
On 5 May 2016, Basin Governments reached a major Basin Plan
milestone by formally notifying the Murray-Darling Basin Authority of 36 supply
and efficiency measures for consideration under the sustainable diversion limit
adjustment mechanism ... The Authority is now modelling the effect of these
supply measures to determine how they will affect the sustainable diversion
limits.[64]
However, the Minister’s second reading speech also indicates:
While the notification of this package of measures was a
significant step, Basin governments think more can be done, and this Bill will
enable us to provide for that.[65]
Item 7 of Schedule 1 of the Bill inserts a proposed
subsection 7.12(1A) in the Basin Plan to allow for the Basin Officials
Committee to provide a second notification to the MDBA. In particular, the new
subsection would provide that the Basin Officials Committee may, after 30
June 2016, but on or before 30 June 2017, notify the MDBA of supply measures or
efficiency measures that, in the Committee’s view, should be taken into
account. As the Explanatory Memorandum states:
A second notification would provide an additional opportunity
for Basin jurisdictions to develop and notify new projects up to 30 June 2017 to
augment the first package of measures notified on 5 May 2016.[66]
A recent review
of the Water Act, conducted in 2014, concluded that ‘the settings
governing the operation of the sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism
are appropriate and consistent with the Act’s objectives’.[67]
However, as noted earlier in this Digest, since that review, the Murray‑Darling
Basin Ministerial Council has requested an amendment to the SDL adjustment
mechanism and this amendment gives effect to that request.[68]
As noted earlier in this Digest, the Basin states have
until 2019 to incorporate any adjustments in their water resource plans, and SDL
adjustment projects do not need to be completed until 2024. As such, it seems
that an opportunity for Basin jurisdictions to propose a second package of
measures, to be finalised by June 2017, is unlikely to impinge greatly on the
timeframes for these next stages in the implementation of the Basin Plan.
Additional efficiency measures
Under subsection 7.12(2) of the Basin Plan, a Basin state or
the Commonwealth may also notify the MDBA of one or more additional efficiency
measures to be taken into account in proposing reconciliation adjustments in
2024. These notifications can occur after 30 June 2016, but on or before 31
December 2023.
Item 9 of Schedule 2 proposes to amend subsection
7.12(2) to change the date after which these additional efficiency measures may
be notified from 30 June 2016 to 30 June 2017. As the Explanatory Memorandum
notes, this amendment is essentially consequential to the amendment in item
7 outlined above, which allows the notification of extra efficiency
measures by 30 June 2017 to be incorporated in the initial SDL adjustment.[69]
Timing of the MDBA’s determination
Section 7.10 of the Basin Plan currently provides that,
after receiving a notification from the Basin Officials Committee, the MDBA
must propose SDL adjustments ‘as soon as practicable’ after 30 June 2016. Item
4 of Schedule 1 of the Bill would amend this section by providing that the
MDBA must propose SDL adjustments ‘as soon as practicable after 30 June 2017’
but not later than 15 December 2017. This amendment would have a number of
effects.
First, it would extend the time for the MDBA’s process to
determine and propose SDL adjustments by one year (from 30 June 2016 to 30 June
2017). This is in a sense a retrospective amendment, given that the time for
considering proposed SDL adjustments began on 1 July this year.
The proposed amendment also means that the MDBA need only
make a single determination relating to the SDL adjustment, taking into account
both the first and second notifications received from the Basin Officials
Committee. According to the Explanatory Memorandum:
A single determination is administratively and legislatively
simpler than two separate determinations which would require two separate
public consultation processes and the tabling of two separate amendments in
Parliament.[70]
In addition, this proposed amendment provides, for the
first time, a deadline (of 15 December 2017) by which the MDBA must present its
determination of proposed adjustments to the Minister. According to the Explanatory
Memorandum:
This deadline would ensure a timely adjustment and provide
certainty for processes which depend on the outcome of the adjustment
mechanism. Key dependent processes include the development of water resource
plans incorporating the adjusted SDLs by Basin States and the achievement of
the Commonwealth water recovery objectives.[71]
Other provisions
Other provisions of the Bill are either consequential
(that is, a result of the above amendments) or minor drafting corrections that
have no substantive effect.
[1]. K
Molloy, ‘The Murray-Darling Basin Plan: cooperation in transboundary water
management’, in Free
flow: reaching water security through cooperation, UNESCO publishing,
Paris, 2013, pp. 77–80.
[2]. Ibid.
[3]. Murray-Darling-Basin
Authority (MDBA), Socio-economic
analysis and the draft Basin Plan, ‘Part A – overview and analysis’,
MDBA, Canberra, November 2011.
[4]. Convention
on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat
done in Ramsar, Iran, on 2 February 1971, [1975] ATS 48 (entered into force for
Australia and generally on 21 December 1975).
[5]. Molloy,
‘The Murray-Darling Basin Plan’, op. cit., pp. 77–80.
[6]. Murray-Darling
Basin Commission, Salinity
and drainage strategy: ten years on, 1999, Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra,
1999.
[7]. Murray-Darling
Basin Commission, Murray-Darling
Basin cap on diversions: water year 1997-98: striking the balance,
Murray-Darling Basin Commission, Canberra, December 1998.
[8]. Commonwealth
of Australia, State of New South Wales and State of Victoria, Snowy
Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed, document no. NWEWG 21, 3 June 2002:
see clause 11.1 which requires NSW and Victoria to pay $150 million each and
the Commonwealth to pay $75 million.
[9]. MDBA,
‘The
living Murray program’, MDBA website.
[10]. For
further information about the Millennium Drought, see, for example, Bureau of
Meteorology (BoM), ‘Recent
rainfall, drought and southern Australia’s long-term rainfall decline’, BoM
website, April 2015.
[11]. J
Howard (Prime Minister), Address
to the National Press Club, Great Hall, Parliament House, transcript,
25 January 2007.
[12]. Australian
Government, A
National Plan for Water Security, 25 January 2007, pp. 7 and 11.
[13]. A
Martin, P Pyburne and B McCormick, Water
Bill 2007, Bills digest, 30, 2007–08, Parliamentary Library, Canberra,
14 August 2007.
[14]. Water Amendment Act
2008 (Cth). The ACT, as a territory, did not need to refer
Constitutional power.
[15]. Council
of Australian Governments (COAG), Communique,
‘Attachment A: Murray-Darling Basin reform: memorandum of understanding’, COAG
meeting, Adelaide, 26 March 2008.
[16]. COAG, Agreement on Murray-Darling Basin Reform,
COAG, 3 July 2008.
[17]. MDBA,
‘History
behind the plan’,
MDBA website.
[18]. Water
Act, section 33. Note section 20 of the Water Act sets out the
purpose of the Basin Plan.
[19]. MDBA,
‘Sustainable
diversion limits’, MDBA website; see also Water Act, subsection
22(1), item 6.
[20]. Ibid.
[21]. Prior
to the development of SDLs, there was a limit on the amount of surface water
taken for consumptive use called a ‘cap’ which was set based on historic use
rather than what was sustainable.
[22]. MDBA,
‘Sustainable diversion limits’, op. cit.
[23]. MDBA,
‘What’s in the
Basin Plan’, MDBA website. Note that the BDL includes 823 GL/y of water
that had already been recovered for the environment, through the Living Murray
initiative, Water for Rivers Program and state water sharing plans and which is
not part of the 2,750 GL reduction: MDBA, Regulation
Impact Statement: Basin Plan.
[24]. Department
of the Environment, Water
recovery strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin, Commonwealth of
Australia, [Canberra], June 2014, p. 5.
[25]. T
Abbott (Leader of the Opposition), ‘Letter
to A Gregson (Chief Executive Officer of the NSW Irrigators’ Council)’, NSW Irrigator’s
Council website, 29 November 2012; see also Department of the Environment, Water
recovery strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin, op. cit., p. 18.
[26]. Department
of the Environment, Water Recovery Strategy for the Murray-Darling Basin,
op. cit., p. 18.
[27]. G
Hunt (Minister for the Environment) and B Baldwin (Parliamentary Secretary to
the Minister for the Environment), Coalition delivers election commitment with 1500GL water buyback cap, joint
media release, 14 September 2015.
[28]. Department
of the Environment, Supplementary
submission, no. 24,
to the Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications Legislation,
Inquiry into the Water Amendment Bill 2015, 2015, p. 2.
[29]. Department
of Agriculture and Water Resources (DAWR), ‘Progress towards meeting environmental needs under the Basin Plan’, DAWR website, last reviewed 21 September 2016.
[30]. The
Water Act was amended by the Water
Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Act 2012.
[31]. Department
of Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities (DSEWPC), Sustainable
diversion limit (SDL) adjustment mechanism, fact sheet, Department of
the Environment and Energy (DEE), 2012.
[32]. Basin
Plan, section 7.08.
[33]. MDBA,
Regulation Impact Statement: Basin Plan, op. cit., p. 71.
[34]. MDBA,
‘Surface
water: sustainable diversion limit (SDL) adjustment mechanism’, MDBA
website.
[35]. Ibid.
[36]. MDBA,
‘Managing
constraints’, MDBA website.
[37]. DSEWPC,
Sustainable diversion limit (SDL) adjustment mechanism, op. cit.
[38]. Ibid.
[39]. DAWR,
‘Sustainable
diversion limit adjustment mechanism’, DAWR website, last reviewed 27
October 2016.
[40]. Murray-Darling
Basin Ministerial Council, Package
of supply, constraints and efficiency measures agreed by the Murray-Darling
Basin Ministerial Council on 22 April 2016, MDBA, [Canberra], 2016; see
also MDBA, Water
ministers agree Basin Plan package, media release, 22 April 2016.
[41]. Ibid.
[42]. W
Martin and G Turner, SDL
adjustment stocktake report, MDBA, [Canberra], August 2015, p. 1.
[43]. Ibid.,
p. 2.
[44]. MDBA,
‘Surface
water: sustainable diversion limit (SDL) adjustment mechanism’, MDBA
website.
[45]. MDBA,
Water ministers agree Basin Plan package, op. cit.
[46]. Senate
Standing Committee for Selection of Bills, Report,
7, 2016, The Senate, Canberra, 13 October 2016, p. 4.
[47]. Standing
Committee for the Scrutiny of Bills, Index
of Bills considered by the committee, 2016, The Senate, Canberra, 12
October 2016, p. 7.
[48]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Water Legislation Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit
Adjustment) Bill 2016, p. 3.
[49]. C
Bettles, ‘Ministers
strike “sensible decision” on Basin Plan’, The Land, (online
edition), 24 April 2016.
[50]. Ibid.
[51]. Ibid.
[52]. Ibid.
[53]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Water Legislation Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit
Adjustment) Bill 2016, op. cit., p. 3.
[54]. The
Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights can be found at pages 4–5 of the
Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill.
[55]. Parliamentary
Joint Committee on Human Rights, Human
rights scrutiny report, Report, 2, 2016, Canberra, 11 October 2016, p.
100.
[56]. DSEWPC,
Sustainable diversion limit (SDL) adjustment mechanism, op. cit.
[57]. Water
Act, subsection 23B(6) and section 33.
[58]. The
Basin Officials Committee comprises an official from each of the Basin states
(Commonwealth, New South Wales, Victoria, South Australia, Queensland and the
Australian Capital Territory): see further section 18A of the Water Act
and Part IV of the Murray-Darling Basin Agreement as set out in Schedule 1 of
the Water Act. The Committee’s functions are set out in section 201 of
the Water Act and include to facilitate cooperation and coordination
between the Commonwealth, the Basin states and the MDBA in managing the Basin
water resources.
[59]. Basin
Plan, subsection 7.12(1). As noted earlier in this Digest, on 22 April 2016 the
Murray-Darling Basin Ministerial Council agreed to a package of supply,
efficiency and constraint measures under the SDL adjustment mechanism and
officials formally notified the Murray-Darling Basin Authority of the agreed
adjustment measures on 5 May 2016: DAWR, ‘Sustainable diversion limit
adjustment mechanism’, op. cit.
[60]. Basin
Plan, section 7.10.
[61]. Basin
Plan, subsection 7.12(2).
[62]. Basin
Plan, paragraph 7.12(3)(a) and subsection 7.12(6).
[63]. Basin
Plan, section 7.11.
[64]. A
Ruston, ‘Second
reading speech: Water Legislation Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit
Adjustment) Bill 2016’, Senate, Debates, 15 September 2016, p.
1027.
[65]. Ibid.
[66]. Explanatory
Memorandum, Water Legislation Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit
Adjustment) Bill 2016, op. cit., p. 2.
[67]. E
Moran, P Anderson, G McMahon and S Morton, Report
of the independent review of the Water Act 2007, Australian Government,
Canberra, November 2014, p. 23.
[68]. This
request was made on 22 April 2016: Explanatory Memorandum, Water Legislation
Amendment (Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2016, op. cit., pp. 2
and 8.
[69]. Ibid.,
p. 8.
[70]. Ibid.,
p. 7.
[71]. Ibid.,
p. 7.
For copyright reasons some linked items are only available to members of Parliament.
© Commonwealth of Australia
Creative Commons
With the exception of the Commonwealth Coat of Arms, and to the extent that copyright subsists in a third party, this publication, its logo and front page design are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Australia licence.
In essence, you are free to copy and communicate this work in its current form for all non-commercial purposes, as long as you attribute the work to the author and abide by the other licence terms. The work cannot be adapted or modified in any way. Content from this publication should be attributed in the following way: Author(s), Title of publication, Series Name and No, Publisher, Date.
To the extent that copyright subsists in third party quotes it remains with the original owner and permission may be required to reuse the material.
Inquiries regarding the licence and any use of the publication are welcome to webmanager@aph.gov.au.
Disclaimer: Bills Digests are prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament. They are produced under time and resource constraints and aim to be available in time for debate in the Chambers. The views expressed in Bills Digests do not reflect an official position of the Australian Parliamentary Library, nor do they constitute professional legal opinion. Bills Digests reflect the relevant legislation as introduced and do not canvass subsequent amendments or developments. Other sources should be consulted to determine the official status of the Bill.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian. Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients may contact the author or the Library‘s Central Enquiry Point for referral.