NSW Upper House group brings down floodplain harvesting plan

A COALITION of NSW Upper House MPs claimed victory as floodplain harvesting regulations proposed by the NSW Government were voted down on Thursday.

Member for Murray Helen Dalton — whose Shooters, Fishers and Farmers party was divided on the issue — said the disallowance of the regulations was a “fantastic win for our river system and downstream communities”.

Independent MP Justin Field, who moved to disallow the regulations, said while regulation of floodplain harvesting was badly needed, “there was never a blank cheque that said the government could come, dump (the regulations) on the table and say ‘take it or leave it’”.

“It is absurd that a relatively small group of landholders — less than 1000 — who would ultimately hold these licences would try to hold to ransom this industry in the river communities when it is acknowledged that take has grown above cap and the limits laid out in the basin plan,” he said.

One Nation NSW leader Mark Latham, who voted in favour of the regulations, said the disallowance motion was “anti-farmer and anti-common sense”.

Labor MP Penny Sharpe said the regulations were “not good enough” and the government had not done enough to listen to concerns raised by experts and communities.

“Yes, there are jobs in irrigation,” she said. “They’re incredibly important.

“But all across NSW, the jobs are in smaller communities in towns, they’re in tourism, they’re in education, they’re in health, they’re in human services. They’re in arts, they’re in creative pursuits. They’re in racing, and they’re in cultural jobs.

“In most of those smaller towns that are dying as a result of over-allocation of our precious water resource.”

National Party MP Sarah Mitchell said the government had reviewed the regulations with a number of experts.

But the ecologists and river system experts named by Ms Mitchell – Professor Richard Kingsford, Dr Celine Steinfeld, Dr Eytan Rocheta and Dr Emma Carmody – later released a statement rebutting her claims.

“The statements gave the impression that we received extensive information that is not in the public domain,” the statement said.

“That is factually incorrect.’

The information they were provided with “reinforced our concerns” that the models developed “were not fit for purpose,” the statement said.

“The models do not simulate water flowing from the floodplains back into the river, and as such are not capable of evaluating environmental impacts and downstream outcomes of the licensing framework.

“We remain concerned that the modelling is incapable of properly assessing environmental and downstream impacts of the licensing framework.

“We also remain extremely concerned about the ongoing existence of unauthorised structures on floodplains in particular structures built on critical floodways.”

Mr Field said basic rules to designate when floodplain water could be taken into storage need to be settled before the practice could be licensed and formalised.

“I don’t want to be talking about this in another 20 years,” he said. “Our communities can’t handle it. Our rivers can’t handle it.”

Labor shadow water minister Clayton Barr said he was hopeful there was a way forward, “but we have to find it together, at a table with all of the stakeholders, and a willingness to find the best outcome for the vast majority, in a lawful framework.

“I am absolutely committed to making sure that floodplain harvesting becomes metered, measured, regulated and licensed.

“But we can only do this under a model, a set of regulations, that will guarantee that floodplain harvesting is … lawful and sustainable.

“Following the law, in NSW legislation, requires certainty for environment and certainty for each community to have fair and equitable access to any water that can be spared by the environment.

“The Murray-Darling Basin Plan also has this same expectation of environmental prioritisation.

“The regulations gazetted last week have no such legal compliance, despite the ongoing negotiations while the regulations were on public display.”