The inter-governmental agreement to save the Snowy River is on the verge of collapsing after the NSW government revealed it will unilaterally alter the Snowy Hydro Corporation’s Snowy water licence, in defiance of the Commonwealth and Victoria.
NSW has already infuriated the Victorians over its unilateral, and two-year late, review of the first five years of the licence, which forms the basis of efforts to direct more water down the Snowy as agreed between the Commonwealth, NSW and Victoria in 2000, at a cost of $425 million.
Victorian water minister Tim Holding had been pressing NSW to amend the Snowy water licence to address enable the Commonwealth, Victoria and NSW to work together to address the long-running problem of Snowy Hydro’s removal of water from the Mowamba River as part of a “repayment” for Mowamba flows allowed down the Snowy in the early years of the operation of the agreement. The diversion of water from the Mowamba continues to deprive the Snowy of high-quality, naturally variable flows. An extensive study in 2008 revealed the Snowy was continuing to suffer serious degradation.
At the end of March, the NSW Water Commissioner told the Snowy River Alliance that the NSW government was going to vary the licence, ignoring the Mowamba issue but increasing flows for human consumption purposes into the Murrumbidgee from Tantangara Dam, by May 1.
NSW is not permitted to unilaterally alter the Snowy water licence. Variations to the licence require amendments to the Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed, which must be agreed between the jurisdictions. Then-NSW water minister Phil Koperberg wrote to his then-federal and Victorian counterparts Malcolm Turnbull and Tim Holding in August 2007 about the licence review, promising consultation before any amendments.
Koperberg told Turnbull and Holding “when agreement is reached on any amendments necessary, the Snowy Water Inquiry Outcomes Implementation Deed and Snowy water licence will be amended concurrently. Since the provisions of the Snowy water licence, in respect of the environmental flows, must not be inconsistent with the provisions of the SWIOID, I will seek your approval to amend the SWIOID prior to any proposed licence change resulting from the review.”
Holding refused to make a submission to the NSW licence variation process because NSW had never responded to his previous proposal, made as part of the licence review process, about governments working together to address the Mowamba debacle.
The Commonwealth separately specifically raised this in its own submission to the licence variation process.
During the review process, the Victorian Government submitted a proposed variation to the Licence that aimed to minimise the impediments imposed by the Licence so that governments could make decisions on the Mowamba Aqueduct, following appropriate investigation, without triggering possible compensation issues. The Minister for Climate Change and Water, the Hon. Senator Penny Wong, has written to the NSW Minister for Water, the Hon. Phillip Costa MP, on two occasions supporting further consideration of the Licence variation proposed by the Victorian Government.
On the basis of the recommendation of the Review to investigate the management of the Mowamba Aqueduct, it seems pertinent that the variation proposed by the Victorian Government be considered within this current process. As part of its consideration I suggest that the NSW Office of Water discuss this issue with the Australian and Victorian Governments. In the event that the NSW Office of Water decides not to accept Victoria’s proposed Licence variation, I suggest that it publishes the reasons for not so doing.
Despite this, NSW has continued to ignore Wong and Holding’s calls for consideration of a Mowamba variation. Its own proposed licence variation does not address the Mowamba issue, despite it being a key reason for continuing degradation of the Snowy.
The NSW government has a long history of bloody-mindedness on the Snowy, refusing to do any more than the absolute bare minimum it is legally required to do — which is not much.
Crikey is committed to hosting lively discussions. Help us keep the conversation useful, interesting and welcoming. We aim to publish comments quickly in the interest of promoting robust conversation, but we’re a small team and we deploy filters to protect against legal risk. Occasionally your comment may be held up while we review, but we’re working as fast as we can to keep the conversation rolling.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please subscribe to leave a comment.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please login to leave a comment.