Dr MARJORIE O'NEILL (Coogee) (15:54:48): I contribute to debate on the Water Supply (Critical Needs) Bill 2019. I take a moment to commend the member for Cessnock for his contribution to the bill and for his advocacy for people across regional New South Wales. It is clear, in speaking to the member for Cessnock, that he understands that the drought affects not only the land, but also the people who work the land and all people who call regional and rural New South Wales home. I note that the Opposition, led by the member for Cessnock, has tabled three amendments to the bill, all of which I support and one of which I will speak on in detail.
On a number of occasions I have stood up in this place and spoken about water. I made it clear in my inaugural speech that my electorate of Coogee cares about rural New South Wales. We know where our food comes from. There was public outrage in my community when, during the election campaign, the Premier chose to stand on Coogee Beach to announce $2.5 million for a stormwater drain while there was a mass fish kill in Menindee. The community of Coogee was outraged by that because while we want our stormwater problem fixed, we also understand the priorities of the State and where help should be directed first. No image was more jarring than the Premier standing on Coogee Beach, looking to help solve a problem in my community caused by too much rain, while millions of fish were dying because of a lack of water.
While the Government blamed the drought for the fish kill, numerous reports link such disasters to human impact, river mismanagement and policy failure. That is why it is so important to ensure that this bill and the associated works that will follow are well managed by well‑resourced departments and that the elected Government is held to account for the process and the results. The second amendment proposed by the Opposition seeks to do just that. It seeks to ensure the Government is held to account for the execution of the works that this bill allows for. The bill is extremely time sensitive and the people of New South Wales already have been waiting far too long for action from their Government, and rightly so.
We must now act as quickly as possible. In times of haste, we must ensure we do not make errors, and cause unexpected and untold damage to our already drought‑ravaged environment. The bill facilitates speed of action and, in the same breath, looks to remove responsibility from the Government for any mistakes or unintended impacts—like we saw with the mismanagement of the Murray‑Darling Basin and the fish kills in Menindee. It is fair to expect that much of the work on the projects listed in the bill will be executed by third-party contractors that have the workforce and bandwidth to act quickly. That again will distance the Government from the flow‑on effects of the work being done and will create a dangerous gap in accountability.
Clause 6 (17) of the bill prevents claims for compensation. Labor sees that clause as a removal of the onus of responsibility from the Government. If those opposite, who have been elected by the people of New South Wales, remove responsibility from themselves, who owns the responsibility? Is it the intention that no‑one owns the responsibility for managing these projects? In that case, those with the most resources and clout in regional communities will benefit the most: Big irrigators that know The Nationals well and will, in turn, support their re‑election. Meanwhile, as usual, it is the smaller irrigators, the townspeople, the wider bush communities and the environment that will suffer. If the bill goes through unamended, those people will have no avenue for compensation. For the proper execution of government works, those elected must bear the responsibility to ensure the works are performed well, rather than shirking that responsibility.
I note that the member for Dubbo spoke earlier in this debate. He resented the member for Summer Hill speaking about the drought, because she represents an inner‑city electorate. To the member for Dubbo I will repeat what I said in my inaugural speech: I am lucky to have spent a significant part of my time on my family's farm in the bush at Bannister, New South Wales—not too far from Crookwell. I have done the fencing and planted trees, and I have mustered, tagged and castrated cattle. I speak on this bill today and on water management week after week after week because I made a commitment that I would always listen and respond as best I can to the needs of rural New South Wales.
I agree that there is a critical need for water in our regions, and we must facilitate the delivery of water supplies to towns and locations to meet critical human water needs. I am perplexed, though, why it has taken the Government so long to act. In 2011 the Government created Infrastructure NSW, with none other than former Liberal Premier Nick Greiner as its first chair. In its 2012 and 2014 reports to the Government, Infrastructure NSW supported the construction of new dams and mass water storage facilities. The Government has been in power for more than eight years. For eight long years the Government has been blaming Labor for its own inaction. For years, the Government has watched the slowly growing drought consume more and more of the State.
Despite further projections of dry weather, the Government has simply been hoping for rain so it would not need to spend money on critical infrastructure such as that contained in the bill. A wise rugby coach once said to me, "Hope is not a strategy." He was right then, and he is right when it comes to this. Hope is not a strategy, and the Government needs a plan now for how to impact water levels today. Our State is in drought now and we need immediate solutions. While Labor welcomes the building of dams, the reality is that their benefits will not be felt for years and years to come. We require the Government to start taking a proactive approach to managing the drought and to install solutions that will be of benefit today. It needs to install policies now so that people in electorates such as mine can do their bit.
I do not need to repeat in detail what I have said time and again, but I will because you simply are not hearing it. Statewide water tank rebate schemes, a washing machine rebate scheme, smart shower head programs and a proper marketing campaign are things the Government could allocate money towards today to have an immediate impact on water usage. The electorate of Coogee is currently sitting at 170 per cent above the average rainfall. We actually get rain. Do you understand that? People in electorates such as mine want to do their bit. They are using potable water to water their gardens.
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER: Order! I ask the member for Coogee to address her comments through the Chair.
Dr MARJORIE O'NEILL: The electorate of Coogee gets significantly more rain than most electorates across this State. We want to do our bit to carry the burden of this drought. We are currently using drinking water to water our gardens. A statewide water tank rebate scheme would be beneficial, so that electorates such as mine that actually get rain can capture it.
Mr John Barilaro: So what are you saying? Are you saying the regions do not do that?
Dr MARJORIE O'NEILL: I am saying it should be statewide. I understand that your IQ is a little low. I hope that the Government accepts the Opposition's amendments.
