Page 2025 - Week 06 - Tuesday, 4 June 2019
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video
to remove from ACT surface water or groundwater systems. It is important to note that the ACT’s sustainable diversion limits are 42.7 gigalitres for surface water and 3.16 gigalitres for groundwater. As it stands the ACT currently uses approximately half of that limit and is looking towards minimising water usage, maintaining a similar usage level even as our city grows.
I am assured that the government is bringing these changes as a standalone bill rather than as part of an omnibus bill to maximise transparency. I take the opportunity to briefly discuss the disallowable instruments introduced by the minister regarding water resources environmental flow guidelines.
When trawling through these determinations, the scrutiny of bills committee discovered that there may have been a number of drafting notes left in the determinations as presented. That these were obviously drafting notes intended for internal consideration within the directorate was apparent. The water available from areas determination included errors such as aggregating the amounts of groundwater and surface water that can be taken from an area. This is contrary to the requirement in the act that the minister determine each of these amounts individually. I do not bring this up to embarrass the minister but to stress the fact that the need for attention to detail, to dotting the i’s and crossing the t’s, is fundamental to getting things approved. I hope more attention to detail will be paid to the territory’s water management plan to ensure it gets approval from the commonwealth.
With the assurance that the ACT has done what is necessary to ensure that the water resources plan covers all the components necessary to ensure it receives commonwealth approval, the Canberra Liberals are happy to support this bill.
MR RATTENBURY (Kurrajong) (10.54): The ACT Greens support this bill. It makes two minor technical amendments to the Water Resources Act. The first identifies that various water determinations, such as the environmental flow guidelines, form the framework for water resource planning in the territory. That is a simple amendment that really just improves the clarity of the act. We do not believe that it changes anything in a significant way.
The second amendment relates to sustainable diversion limits. The ACT has obligations under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan requiring it to comply with sustainable diversion limits for water use in its watercourses. The intent, of course, is to ensure that appropriate flows reach the Murray-Darling Basin to help return it to health and ensure water is used sustainably. The amendment in this bill does not set the specific volume of water allowed from the ACT’s water management areas; rather, it says that the amount must not be more than the sustainable diversion limit. That recognises that the sustainable diversion limit can change in response to conditions, so the amendment allows that flexibility. This amendment itself is perfectly fine. The more important thing is whether appropriate diversion limits are set, and whether governments and other stakeholders undertake sustainable water management practices across a whole range of areas.
Water is a critical resource. It is essential to maintaining our natural environment, as well as supporting the growing of food and the provision of drinking water. The
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . . Video