17 January 2012 in Media
To listen to the audio of this interview, please click here.
WARRICK LONG:
The Member for Mayo, the Liberal Party’s Jamie Briggs joins us now. Good afternoon and welcome to the Country Hour.
JAMIE BRIGGS:
It is a great pleasure.
LONG:
You represent those at the very end of the river system, like those who we were speaking to yesterday. Should you be trying to get a better deal for the environment for these people?
BRIGGS:
Well, what we should be trying to do is get the best deal for the Murray Darling Basin. The group which you spoke to yesterday have had an involvement in this for some time and I respect that. I think it is a little disingenuous to suggest that they are unsure about the position I have taken. Firstly they haven’t approached me, the only approach we have had is through the media, on seeking their claims to be verified. The second thing is, I have written to every constituent about this issue in December, during the last month, and I am not sure whether any other Federal MP has done the same thing.
LONG:
So what did you say in your letter?
BRIGGS:
What I said in that letter is that for a hundred and twenty years, South Australia has demanded rightfully that we have the Murray Darling Basin managed by a federal independent group of people that take away the partisan parochial politics out of this issue, which has bedevilled the basin. Now I am not going to be part of, sort of, another political campaign trying to go back to fight these fights yet again. I understand that is what Ruth Trigg and some of those people down in that part of the Lower Lakes wish to do, but I don’t think that will get us a result.
To suggest that the plan that has been released by the Basin Authority is making the irrigators upstream unhappy is to completely close your eyes to the reaction we have seen in recent days. It hasn’t and in fact they are fighting very hard in those parts against any plan and my view is that if we again go back to the old days of partisan parochial state based politics on this issue, or the environment VS the economy, as Ruth was talking about yesterday, we will end up with exactly the same situation as we did two years ago, when the system was at the point of collapse. What we want is a result from what was announced in January 2007, by the then Prime Minister John Howard, five years ago now, that we have a national independent authority, who comes up with a plan for the future management of the Murray Darling Basin, based on the best science available, while considering the economic impact of that plan.
LONG:
And of course it will be seven years until the plan will be enacted.
BRIGGS:
Right.
LONG:
But, are you in an interesting position, especially given where you are in the basin as well as the political party that you belong to, because I noticed on Twitter yesterday there were already groups trying to send you some tweets, about, they will give, put more pressure on Sussan Ley, Sophie Mirabella and Sharman Stone, who are Liberal Party members further upstream, than what you are getting from your groups up here. So is it tough being in the Liberal Party in discussions on the Murray Darling Basin Plan?
BRIGGS:
Well look, there is no doubt that there is diverse interests across the basin and there always has been and it gets back to the point I was making. If you take position here, without, of a purely parochial position on this issue, we won’t get any result. That is what has happened for a hundred and twenty years, that has been the failure of the system. Now we can go back and have arguments about the economy VS the environment, over-population and whatever else you like, but the fact is, the situation we are at now is that there is a plan that has been released, the Liberal Party’s policy as we took to the last election was to support a plan for the Murray Darling Basin, delivered by an independent authority, based on the best available science, with consideration to the economy and the local region. I think that Craig Knowles has done a reasonable job of delivering a draft of that. I think that there are areas where we could seek improvement and in fact I will be submitting that to the Murray Darling Basin during this consultation period, where there are areas where there can be some improvement. I am not going to second guess the science, I think that has been the problem for a hundred and twenty years. Politicians sitting in smoke filled rooms doing deals on what is, ultimately, the best outcome for their states rather than what is the best outcome for the Murray Darling Basin.
LONG:
So as it stands your position is pass the plan as is, with a few minor recommendations that you will send to the Authority.
BRIGGS:
Well look no, my position is simply to support the process as was laid out by John Howard in 2007.
LONG:
You said that… but in terms of this plan?
BRIGGS:
Well look I am not going to make a judgement on the plan, it is not my position to make a judgement on it.
LONG:
You ultimately have to vote on it?
BRIGGS:
No, no, we have to vote on the process, ultimately. Not necessarily, Federal Parliament doesn’t necessarily have to vote…
LONG:
Well the Greens have well and truly flagged that they will be pushing for a vote in the House.
BRIGGS:
Well, I think that just shows how irresponsible and out of touch the Greens are. See it is all very well to be a protest party, but ultimately, if you want a result, if you want to get something for the basin, for the improvement for the future. I mean, we saw two years ago how bad this situation can get. You know, I am not going to be part of a situation where we try and undermine this plan, because this is the opportunity…
LONG:
I am not trying to undermine the plan, I am just trying to find out which way you are going to vote or how you feel about this basin plan at the moment? So this 2750 GL with the science behind it, saying how the water will be distributed and where it will come from. What do you think about that at the moment, as it stands?
BRIGGS:
Well, I think the process is taking its steps along, as the law, as the Water Act outlines and I support that and I will continue to support that. And I don’t support going back to the beginning again. So you know, this was what we argued for in 2007, an independent authority to make these judgements. Sure there will be issues where we could get a better deal for certain parts and I think the consideration about South Australian irrigators and what they have contributed, probably needs to have another look. But ultimately, I want to see an outcome from this process, because that is what will bring improvements to the basin. I mean there is a simple point here, even with the delay and even with, if you accept the argument that the science is imperfect, surely having 2750 GL back in the system is an improvement on where we are today.
LONG:
Well, Jamie Briggs, that is all the time we have for you today. But, thank you very much for joining us on the Country Hour.
BRIGGS:
My pleasure.
LONG:
That’s the Federal Member for Mayo, Jamie Briggs, from the Liberal Party, talking about his thoughts on the Murray Darling Basin Plan.