The National Water Initiative (NWI) is an important framework established in 2004 to promote water management and implement water property rights across Australia.
Part of the Albanese government’s five-point plan for water prior to the 2022 election was to review and revise the NWI.
Now, at the 11th hour, the government is pushing states to rewrite it before the next election, but in their haste have drafted principles that no-one can explain how they would work in practice.
This new and deeply flawed draft National Water Agreement (NWA) is unworkable in practice and should be scrapped.
Initially the NWI was designed to address challenges such as water scarcity, lack of water property rights, competing demands, metering, and trading.
Importantly, the NWI aimed to facilitate collaboration between federal, state and local governments.
It laid out a set of principles that were clear in the objective to be achieved and were a practical guide for states to develop water policy and for river operators to manage the system.
By comparison, the draft NWA is full of sentiments and slogans that are impossible to explain and impractical to implement.
The vague goals, combined with a lack of meaningful engagement with key stakeholders, make this agreement feel like yet another exercise in bureaucratic jargon.
Farmers are among the most impacted by drought and water scarcity, and without proper water management, their livelihoods and communities will suffer.
Yet the draft NWA principles don’t prioritise communities’ needs at a time when they can’t afford more restrictions, especially without practical alternatives like water recycling or improved infrastructure.
We need real-world solutions.
Without a concrete strategy, how can we hope to secure our water future in the face of rising uncertainty?
The focus of First Nations water rights in the NWA is considerable yet there has been very little consultation outside a small select group.
As a result, people are questioning why and how these rights will be implemented and who benefits from them.
State governments, traditionally responsible for managing water resources, are also unsure of the specifics.
The NSW Water Minister says there “needs to be adequate time to work through those (the NWA) principles” – of which there are more than 300.
If states are still unclear about the actual implications and how the principles will be implemented, then we have a major problem.
What we do know is if the states are forced to sign up to the principles without fully understanding their implications, we run the risk of paving the way for activists to call in the lawyers.
If the government truly aims to secure Australia’s water future, it must listen to all stakeholders or risk adopting a plan of grand ambitions unable to deliver tangible outcomes.