The Concerned Waterways Alliance has made a submission to the second round of consultation on the draft National Water Agreement principles.
The submission can be accessed at https://concernedwaterwaysalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/CWA-submission-to-NWI-Draft-Principles-Final-with-contact.pdf or read below.
Our conclusion reads:
the CWA strongly advocates for the reinstatement of a National Water Commission (NWC) as a critical component for effective governance, oversight, and accountability in Australia's water reform efforts. The removal of the NWC and the lack of clear implementation timelines in the current draft of the National Water Agreement signal a concerning reduction in the momentum for necessary reform. Furthermore, the dilution of direct language and the decreased emphasis on key issues such as overallocation weaken the capacity of the agreement to address the complex challenges facing Australia’s water systems.
The CWA urges that stronger, more prescriptive language be reintroduced to the agreement to ensure its utility for water advocates, communities, and managers. Clear standards for issues such as co-produced water, contamination, and industrial wastewater discharge must be implemented, with an independent national environmental agency and the NWC providing much-needed oversight.
Without these governance structures and a commitment to comprehensive and precautionary water management, the agreement risks falling short of addressing the increasingly severe water-related challenges posed by climate change, overallocation, and industrial impacts. The CWA emphasises that sustainable water management is not only critical for the health of Australia’s waterways but also for the resilience of its ecosystems and communities.
What is deeply unsettling is the apparent lack of support for the reinstatement of a National Water Commission (NWC) by the various state water ministers as indicated by the withdrawal of the relevant Schedule from the draft. Until it was disbanded by the Abbott government, the NWC was highly regarded by the states, regulators, irrigators and environmentalists. It was instrumental in maintaining momentum for water reform in Australia and while the Productivity Commission attempted to pick up parts of the NWC's role after it was removed, it made it clear:
"As demonstrated in the years following 2004, robust governance arrangements were a central driver of
progress, including by ensuring that governments remained focused on delivering their commitments and
guiding reform. Those drivers have been missing for much of the past decade following the Australian
Government’s decision in 2013 to disband the ministerial council responsible for water and to subsequently
abolish the National Water Commission (NWC, the body responsible for, amongst other things, accrediting
and publicly assessing progress against jurisdictional NWI implementation plans) in 2015."
Productivity Commission National Water Reform 2024 Inquiry report page 57
Rather than supporting an independent body like the NWC, the Productivity Commission now favors establishing a National Water Reform Commission. This commission would consist of a committee of senior officials from the Australian Government and each state and territory government, acting on behalf of ministers, "with the ability to elevate issues requiring ministerial leadership." However, it’s difficult to envision this commission providing the same level of frank and fearless advice that the original NWC offered across all jurisdictions.
In its submission, the CWA also addressed the removal of prescriptive language from the principles in the draft agreement. Disappointingly this softening of language has become increasingly common in many sectors of government in recent years. For example, "overallocated" appeared 25 times in the original agreement but only twice in the new draft. This is in face of quickly diminishing flows into southern Victorian waterways due to climate change as demonstrated by the Long Term Water Assessment. The CWA emphasized that "direct and unambiguous language is vital for ensuring that the intent of actions is properly translated into meaningful outcomes."
Finally, according to a progress report on the National Water Agreement consultation from DCCEEW titled Delivering a new National Water Agreement - What we’ve heard about objectives and outcomes only 15 out of 184 submissions were from Victoria, and just 19 were from environmental groups nationwide. There is obviously substantial pressure coming from the irrigation sector to pull the teeth from any agreement as illustrated by a media release from the National Irrigators Council urging states "to say, 'no way' to the NWA". At the moment that looks like is may well be succeeding which make the efforts of groups like the Concerned Waterway Alliance to encourage better outcomes vital.
The CWA submission to the Objective and Outcomes of the NWI can be found here: