As the first of three Murray-Darling Basin Plan water buybacks tenders planned over the next 18 months begin today, questions are being asked about the Federal Government's strategy and how it is affecting the water market.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
or signup to continue reading
Federal Water Minister Tanya Plibersek had promised that buybacks would be staged to avoid market and community disruption, but this next round of tenders is already contradicting that.
NSW Irrigators' Council CEO Claire Miller said the Government was instead cramming three tenders in the southern Murray-Darling Basin into a single year in a smash and grab raid designed to cause maximum market disruption and community damage.
The first 'targeted' tender started this week and is seeking up to 70 gigalitres.
The second seeking sales of large portfolios of more than 20GL each will get going in the first quarter of 2025.
The third, open to everyone, will get underway in the second quarter of 2025.
"We know buybacks are already inflating the water market. The NSW Water Register shows the Government is paying more than 30 per cent above the market for NSW Murray entitlements under its Bridging the Gap tender from last year," Ms Miller said.
"In the Namoi valley, it is paying almost double the market rate for supplementary water licences.
"God knows where the price will be in a year's time after the government crams in not only these three tenders towards the 450GL, but also enters the market separately for its $100 million Aboriginal Water Entitlements Program.
"For the last few years, only around 60GL of entitlements have been traded commercially in the southern Basin, so these buybacks mean the Government will totally capture the water market.
"That's anti-competitive in anyone's terms - so where is the ACCC?"
Not the only tool in the toolbox
Ms Miller said the federal water minister misled Parliament in September last year when she said buybacks were not the only tool in the toolbox, and no community would be left behind.
"The minister has declared the social and economic impacts have been considered before approving these buybacks," she said.
"Considered maybe, but clearly ignored when ABARES said past and planned water recovery wipes $602 million to $914 million every year from what the farmgate value of irrigated agriculture would otherwise be.
"We know water buybacks hurt regional communities because it has quite literally played out before our eyes.
"Any form of water recovery must be done in a way that does not have negative social or economic impacts on regional communities.
"We know there are ways to deliver environmental outcomes that do not require water buybacks but the Government refuses to act.
"Buybacks are an expensive, lazy and unnecessary form of water recovery while European carp infest our water ways, erosion and cold water pollution take their toll and plans for fishways and water- saving infrastructure upgrades collect dust on politicians' desks."
