❓ A member of parliament questions the Minister for Water regarding delays in implementing the National Water Initiative, restrictions on agricultural development, and lack of consultation on new water licenses and fees. The Minister deflects by criticizing the previous government's handling of water legislation.
AnsweredQoN 832Legislative Assembly
QuestionView source ↗
NATIONAL WATER INITIATIVE
I draw to the minister’s attention the commitments made by the state of Western Australia to the commonwealth government with regard to the National Water Initiative. (1) Why, after a year, has the minister failed to introduce any National Water Initiative enabling legislation to this house, and when does he intend to do so? (2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS
I draw to the minister’s attention the commitments made by the state of Western Australia to the commonwealth government with regard to the National Water Initiative. (1) Why, after a year, has the minister failed to introduce any National Water Initiative enabling legislation to this house, and when does he intend to do so? (2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS
AnswerView source ↗
I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(1) Why, after a year, has the minister failed to introduce any National Water Initiative enabling legislation to this house, and when does he intend to do so? (2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(1) Why, after a year, has the minister failed to introduce any National Water Initiative enabling legislation to this house, and when does he intend to do so? (2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(2) Why is the Department of Water stopping agricultural development in the Pemberton-Manjimup region by refusing to issue approvals to construct dams and insisting that proponents access water through water trading, even though the National Water Initiative enabling legislation is not in place to allow this to happen and the department is clearly acting beyond its legal capacity by refusing to issue the construction approvals? (3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(3) Why has the minister broken his promise and given his proposal for new licences and fees to the Economic Regulation Authority without consulting affected south west growers? Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
Dr G.G. JACOBS replied: I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
I thank the member for Cockburn for the question. (1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
(1)-(3) It is very interesting that when it came to the National Water Initiative and those people opposite were on this side in government, they introduced a bill called the water resources management bill, which was the subject of two disallowance motions. One of the major deficiencies in that process was the very issue that the member for Cockburn is talking about—lack of consultation. There was a misunderstanding that landowners and their turkey nest dams were going to be taxed. The whole process ended up an absolute shemozzle. We are not going to be part of that; we are going to deal with that part of the legislation properly and comprehensively, and with good consultation. The member for Cockburn talked about trading. I will shortly introduce into this house the Busselton-Dunsborough water bill. We have a 1904 act that does not allow water trading across a jurisdictional boundary between Busselton and Dunsborough. There was a 1904 act that those opposite had eight years to do something about, and what did they do? The member for Cockburn has the temerity to talk about what we have not done in legislation, when those opposite had the opportunity to bring Western Australia’s water legislation into the twenty-first century.
Explore WA Government Data
Search the full archive in the free dashboard, or query programmatically via API.
Explore more
Government Gazette
Appointments, regulatory notices, planning changes.
Hansard
Debates, questions, speeches and sentiment.
Tabled Papers
Reports and documents tabled in Parliament.
Committees
Committee profiles and recent reports.
Regulations
Subsidiary legislation with filters and summaries.
Bills
Proposed laws and parliamentary progress.
Acts
Current WA legislation and summaries.
Explanatory Memoranda
Bills with EMs (text/PDF) available.
Members
MP profiles, party breakdown and rankings.
Pollie Rankings
Data-driven rankings across 19 categories.
Amendment Chains
Track how schemes and regulations evolve over time.