ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010
Mr CHANDLER: That is all I have.
Mr CHAIRMAN: Member for Nelson?
Mr WOOD: No, I am right.
Mr CHAIRMAN: That concludes questions to Output 3.2, Flood Forecasting.
Output 3.3 – Water Resources
Mr CHAIRMAN: We will now move onto Output 3.3, Water Resources.
Mr CHANDLER: Can you please advise why landowners in the Katherine area have taken court
action in regard to water allocations in that area?
Mr HAMPTON: Happy to take that question, member for Brennan. In terms of our water management
issues, it is a very serious issue for us for the Northern Territory and the government. What I can say
is, in our rivers, our water sources, I do not want to see what happened down south with the Murray
River and the Darling River systems, where it has been completely overused. One of the main things I
am looking at doing through the National Water Initiatives is rolling out water management plans
across the Northern Territory.
As you may be aware, we do have the Katherine Water Management Plan we already have in place.
Regarding the legal action, as that is before the courts, I am not prepared to talk about that.
Mr WOOD: Can you actually state what the action is? From whom it is?
Mr HAMPTON: I can say that people are certainly entitled to test their positions legally …
Mr CHANDLER: Test the water.
Mr HAMPTON: Test the water, so to speak, member for Brennan. I am happy for Diana Leeder to
talk, if she can, a bit more about that.
Ms LEEDER: I cannot talk about the detail of the appeals, but they were appeals against the licence
allocations, which is a perfectly normal situation whenever a water allocation plan is introduced across
Australia, particularly to areas where there is full, or almost full, allocation. People test those
decisions.
Mr CHANDLER: No, I am happy with that. I suppose, in this case, you need to appreciate from this
chair, I do not see what happens at the different levels within a department. But, there are some
things that come up from time to time, particularly in the relation to the Mataranka water area plan.
One of the questions I have been asked was why was there a different methodology applied to
developing the water plan in Katherine and the Mataranka area? It seems to be a different
methodology that was applied to measuring water; how the water was measured; over what period of
time. I am just interested why we would not have a pretty standard methodology wherever the water
is?
Mr HAMPTON: I can say the water allocation plans are developed specifically for each water
resource. The ones you have just mentioned, obviously, have different water resources and different
scientific things about it. So, these plans are developed with the best science available, and in full
consultation with the community to discuss and decide on what water resources management plan
should be applied according to that water resource.
There are currently four water planning processes under way. We have the Western Davenport
Ranges, the Mataranka/Tindal process, Oolloo/dolostone process, as well as the Tiwi Islands.
ESTIMATES COMMITTEE PROCEEDINGS – 17 JUNE 2010
Regarding your question, it depends on the water resource.
Mr WOOD: And the Howard East bore field.
Ms LEEDER: Member for Brennan, I think the issue between Mataranka and Katherine is simply an
issue of the available knowledge, and the available records and different processes. That way, the
methodology for water allocation planning is a fairly straightforward methodology, but it draws on the
available knowledge, and it errs on the side of caution in favour of the environment.
Mr HAMPTON: And in terms of what the member for Nelson said, he is right. It is expected that
planning processes will also commence for the Great Artesian Basin Water Management Plan there,
Howard East Aquifer, and Berry Springs this year.
Mr CHANDLER: I suppose that one of the particular questions is that, I think we all must agree that
the old records are perhaps more inaccurate that they flaw when they were first taken. Why are we
going back so far in certain areas but not in other areas?
Ms LEEDER: Member for Brennan, I think that some of these issues about how scientific information
is used or gathered can always be the subject of subjective interpretation, and there is a lot more to
the process of interpreting information and developing the models. The more information that is
available, the more secure the model is likely to be, because it takes over a longer period of time. I
know that the issue of the records used for Katherine and for Mataranka is a locally vexed issue, but
nevertheless, the department planners are working through systematically to make sure that the best
knowledge is applied to the outcome from that.
Mr CHANDLER: Okay. The last question I have on the subject is the same question I had last year,
and we are now another year down the track, and we still have got a particular property down there
that has not had a licence approved, knocked back, and I believe that this has been in play for close
on five years now. I mean, I would hate to be a taxi driver waiting on a licence to get a job if you have
got to wait five years. Why has this process taken so long?
Mr HAMPTON: Which process are you talking about, which water allocation?
Mr CHANDLER: To approve or not approve a water allocation licence.
Mr HAMPTON: The one in Katherine or Mataranka?
Mr CHANDLER: In Mataranka.
Mr HAMPTON: Mataranka. I will ask Diana Leeder to talk on that.
Ms LEEDER: Member for Brennan, there were a couple of issue related to that, as came up in the
question last year. One of them was related to the fact that, prior to some amendments to the Water
Act, an application for licence could be pending, and the particular properties in question had
requested that their licence applications be pending be held. Advice was provided to the department
that either those applications should be withdrawn or processed, and so discussion was entered into
with the applicants to determine which process they wished to go through. Once they determined that
they, which was post this time last year, that they wished for their applications to be processed, then
there is a normal due process time, in terms of advertising, seeking submissions, taking into
consideration particular aspects of that, indicating the intention to make a decision, and seeking
response to that. That process is almost complete now, I think, tomorrow is the close of one part of
that process, after which it will be finalised.
Mr CHANDLER: Okay. No more questions.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |