Proposed Basin Plan consultation report

Issues relating to broader proposed Basin Plan content

While a significant proportion of submissions received specifically addressed the provisions of the proposed Basin Plan chapters and schedules, many others raised issues that cut across the content of the proposed Basin Plan. These are discussed below.

Aboriginal values and uses and other related matters

103.Issue

Submissions raised concerns about the negative impact on Aboriginal culture and wellbeing directly resulting from the over-allocation of water licences and floodplain harvesting.

Other submissions included strong support for improved environmental conditions within the Basin.

Response

The MDBA agrees that it is imperative Aboriginal people participate in water resource planning and management and that their values, aspirations and views about the impacts of various decisions are fully considered. The investment in cultural flows research will assist Aboriginal people to demonstrate to MDBA and governments how, in a practical way, cultural water objectives could be delivered to satisfy water-dependent cultural purposes. Aboriginal participation in the development of water resource plans and environmental water planning, as prescribed in the Basin Plan will assist in addressing these concerns.

MDBA notes that improved environmental conditions in the Basin as a result of the Basin Plan will contribute to cultural values, uses and obligations. The agreed Murray-Lower Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations (MLDRIN) and Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations (NBAN) definition of cultural flows specifically supports improved environmental outcomes related to values, uses and cultural obligations.

Relevant sections of the proposed Basin Plan relating to Aboriginal input to water resource plans and environmental planning and delivery have been strengthened.

The MLDRIN and NBAN agreed definition of cultural flows has been included in schedule 1 of the proposed Basin Plan.

Cultural knowledge has been incorporated into principle 7 in chapter 12, to help determine the effectiveness of the Basin Plan.
104.Issue

Submissions wanted cultural flows better and more strongly explained and expressed in all chapters of the Basin Plan. A specific cultural-flows entitlement / allocation to be managed by Aboriginal people was suggested. Submissions called for an allocation of Aboriginal water and the establishment of an Aboriginal water holder to manage this water.

Response

The MDBA agrees that the proposed Basin Plan could be strengthened in relation to the articulation of cultural flows. The cultural flows research program can allow for cultural flows to be further taken into account in future water planning, including the Basin Plan reviews.

The MDBA is recommending that governments consider making specific allocations of environmental water available for cultural water purposes. Such allocations could be studied as part of a cultural flows research program.

The definition of cultural flows agreed by Murray-Lower Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations (MLDRIN) and Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations (NBAN) has been included in schedule 1 of the proposed Basin Plan.

105.Issue

Submitters objected to having Aboriginal stakeholders rights aligned with environmental outcomes when no other stakeholders were required to do so.

Response

MDBA agrees that the Basin Plan should not require Aboriginal rights to align with environmental outcomes.

Chapter 7 of the proposed Basin Plan has been amended to remove restrictive provisions.

The text, ‘where these align with or enhance environmental outcomes’ has been removed.

106.Issue

Submitters concerned for the protection of Aboriginal heritage sites would like the Basin Plan to include a requirement that water resource plans include a reference to federal and state heritage legislation in water resource plans.

Response

MDBA agrees with the point set out in these submissions and has amended the proposed Basin Plan accordingly.

Each jurisdiction has its own heritage protection legislation which needs to be considered during all water and other natural resource management implementation programs. The planning documents prepared under the Basin Plan will be required to abide by state heritage legislation.

The provisions of part 14 of chapter 9 have been revised to include a requirement that a water resource plan must be prepared having regard to the views of relevant Aboriginal organisations with respect to registered Aboriginal heritage.

107.Issue

It was submitted that the current MDBA approach to consultation with Aboriginal people was not sufficiently comprehensive. Submissions expressed concern regarding the basis of consultation with Traditional Owners in the Basin through the Murray-Lower Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations (MLDRIN) and Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations (NBAN). It was submitted that Aboriginal representation on MDBA water management committees was not sufficient and an Aboriginal role in all decisions related to water management was requested.

Response

MDBA is committed to consulting with MLDRIN and NBAN on accreditation of water resource plans and the establishment of other committees to be established for the implementation of the Basin Plan. The proposed Basin Plan also requires consultation with relevant Aboriginal representatives within each water resource plan area in preparing water resource plans. The primacy of Traditional Owners is recognised but the proposed Basin Plan does not restrict the consultation requirements for preparation of water resource plans to Traditional Owners; the consultation requirement includes MLDRIN and NBAN, but is not restricted to them.

MDBA has undertaken extensive consultation with individuals and non-Traditional Owner groups throughout the development of the proposed Basin Plan and during the formal 20 week consultation process.

Murray-Lower Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations (MLDRIN) and Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations (NBAN) will be consulted regarding the most appropriate Aboriginal involvement in the formation of any MDBA committees arising from the Basin Plan.

Chapters 7 and 9 of the proposed Basin Plan have been amended to address this issue.

Part 14 of chapter 9 has been amended to clarify the roles on relevant Aboriginal organisations, including MLDRIN and NBAN where appropriate, in consultation on the development of water resource plans and has also been amended to incorporate reference to Aboriginal heritage and to be clearer in relation to having regard to the views of relevant Aboriginal organisations.

Sections 7.15 (4)(e), 7.29 (3)(g) and 7.35(b)(iv) of the proposed Basin Plan have been amended to read: having regard to indigenous values and uses.

108.Issue

Submissions sought funding to resource Aboriginal engagement in water planning and management.

Response

MDBA agrees that Aboriginal people, as with all local communities, need to be included closely in the implementation of the Basin Plan and water resource plans.

Funding, however, is not an issue that can be addressed in the Basin Plan.

MDBA and the states currently contribute substantial funding to Aboriginal organisations through the Murray-Lower Darling Rivers Indigenous Nations (MLDRIN), Northern Basin Aboriginal Nations (NBAN), Use and Occupancy Mapping and the Cultural Flows Research program.

109.Issue

Submissions called for MDBA to recognise the sovereign rights of Aboriginal peoples. This recognition would include sovereignty, dominion and ultimate title over water within the Murray–Darling Basin. Full Aboriginal management of all environmental water was proposed.

Response

Land and water titles are a matter for state and territory governments. This is not an issue within the remit of the MDBA.

110.Issue

Submitters sought clarification on the intent to restore environments subject to past and ongoing destruction, such as degradation of wetlands and infrastructure interfering with natural flows.

Response

MDBA agrees that complementary natural resource management is critical to restoring water-dependent ecosystems within the Basin. Local complementary natural resource management activities and management of infrastructure are primarily the responsibility of the state-based natural resource management and water agencies. The local management of environmental water will be subject to water resource plans and local EWPs that will be managed primarily by state agencies which will require Aboriginal input. The proposed Basin Plan requires Aboriginal input to EWPs and water resource plans.

MDBA is contributing funding to the national cultural flows program. This will assist Aboriginal people, MDBA, the CEWH, state governments and other holders of environmental water in undertaking environmental water planning and management.

111.Issue

Submissions expressed concern that the proposed Basin Plan contained no specific water resource plan objectives or outcomes for Aboriginal values and uses.

Response

Water resource plans are required to identify Aboriginal values, uses and objectives as stated in part 14 of chapter 9 of the proposed Basin Plan. They must also identify strategies to achieve these objectives. These will vary across the Basin. The proposed Basin Plan does not prescribe or limit the meaning of the phrase ‘indigenous values and uses’.

Information contained in the many submissions MDBA received from Aboriginal people will be important to Australian Government and states water resource planning. Consultation with Aboriginal people during the development of water resource plans will assist in further developing objectives and outcomes reflecting Aboriginal values and uses.

112.Issue

Submissions from Aboriginal stakeholders referred to the importance of fishing as a cultural practice and for food sources, noting declines in river health leading to loss of fish.

Response

MDBA agrees that the Basin Plan should aim to improve fish habitat. Fish health has been included in determining the ESLT. MDBA expects improvements to fish populations as a result of the improved environmental flows under the Basin Plan.

Aboriginal input will be important in the planning and management of environmental water to achieve a range of environmental outcomes including fish stocks.

113.Issue

Submissions suggested that changes to water allocations would impact negatively on Aboriginal communities in terms of job losses and other economic change. It was submitted that Aboriginal people would not leave areas due to water cuts, but would suffer from demographic changes and social impacts. Submissions expressed a view that their well-being has been eroded in line with environmental degradation, but that they had gained nothing through the diversion of water for consumptive purposes.

Response

Results from the socioeconomic analysis of the proposed Basin Plan indicate that impacts on the regional economies, household consumption and employment will be relatively small and spread across the Basin. In those regions of the Basin where the impacts are likely to be relatively more pronounced, the economic implications of a reduction in water entitlements may be largely offset by the Australian Government’s investment in infrastructure improvements. A more-detailed assessment of the potential effects from the proposed Basin Plan on those local government areas likely to be most sensitive to a reduction in the SDLs similarly indicates relatively small impacts on employment within those areas. Through a gradual transition to the Basin Plan over the period 2012 to 2019, MDBA anticipates all communities will have sufficient time to adjust to the Plan. The scale of change required to implement the plan—approximately a 1% reduction in agricultural output per year to 2019—is expected to be more than offset by productivity growth in agriculture.

114.Issue

It was submitted that trading of water entitlements with regard to NSW cultural water licences was discriminatory because the NSW cultural water licences were non-tradable whereas other classes of licences could generally be traded or transferred.

Response

This matter relates to the terms under which these NSW licences are granted and is a NSW government matter. It is beyond the remit of the Basin Plan.

115.Issue

Submissions said the proposed Basin Plan did not take into account the possible existence of native title rights to water.

Response

The proposed Basin Plan establishes SDLs and the associated water-management regime for the Murray-Darling Basin. It does not address water ownership and does not impact on any entitlements arising from the Native Title Act 1993 (Cwlth). The proposed Basin Plan states (9.53 (1)(a)) that water resource plans must be prepared having regard to the views of relevant Aboriginal organisations with respect to native title rights, native title claims and Aboriginal Land Use Agreements provided for by the Native Title Act.

116.Issue

Submissions said that extraction of coal-seam gas would impact on Aboriginal water-dependent sites, use and values.

Response

The Basin Plan has the role of setting a sustainable limit on the consumptive use of Basin water resources – not determining how this water is used.

State governments are responsible for approval and regulation of mining activities. The volume of water used by mining, including coal seam gas mining, will need to be within the limits specified by the Basin Plan. This includes any leakage from groundwater resources caused by mining activities.

117.Issue

Submissions argued that lack of access to river frontage and wetlands was a major issue preventing Aboriginal people from fishing and undertaking other cultural activities.

Response

This is matter for state and territory governments to consider. This is outside the remit of the MDBA.

Examples identified through the submission process will be collated and referred to appropriate state agencies.