Matter of Public Importance

Water

Senate · Monday 14 September 2026

Official Hansard for this day (APH) · Read this debate on OpenAustralia

At a glance

The Senate debated a motion calling for federal intervention to prevent the privatisation of Australian water supplies, specifically targeting reports of Victorian Labor's Project Nerva. Greens and crossbench members argued that selling public assets leads to higher costs and service degradation, citing international examples. The Labor senator responded that water ownership is a state matter and denied any intention to sell Melbourne Water, while highlighting federal regulations on data centre water usage. The debate concluded with the motion not being passed.

Outcome

The motion was not passed.

Summary in reported speech - not a transcript. AI-generated, so check the official record before quoting.

How the debate unfolded

Opened the debate

Larissa Waters (QLD) (Australian Greens) Greens

Waters argued that the federal government must intervene to stop the potential sale of Melbourne Water, citing secret cabinet documents regarding Project Nerva. Waters contended that historical privatisation by major parties has resulted in higher prices, job losses, and reduced service quality for essential services. Waters pointed to the failure of water privatisation in England and Wales, noting significant price rises and infrastructure neglect. Waters also linked the issue to the environmental impact of new AI data centres, which consume large amounts of water and electricity.

Government response

Michelle Ananda-Rajah (Minister for Industry and Science) ALP VIC

Ananda-Rajah stated that water infrastructure ownership is a state responsibility and denied any intention by the Victorian government to sell Melbourne Water. Ananda-Rajah shifted focus to the federal government's management of data centre growth, outlining five expectations for operators including sustainable water usage. Ananda-Rajah highlighted that data centres in New South Wales currently use one per cent of water, projected to rise to 25 per cent in Sydney within a decade. Ananda-Rajah emphasised the need for operators to use recycled water and contribute to local skills and innovation.

Malcolm Roberts (QLD) (Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party) One Nation support

Roberts supported the motion, arguing that critical infrastructure should remain under government control to prevent price gouging. Roberts cited the re-nationalisation of water assets in South Australia and Western Australia as evidence that private management was more costly and less effective. Roberts suggested that competitive federalism, where states compete for residents, provides sufficient accountability without privatisation. Roberts warned that private monopolies on essential services lead to profit maximisation at the expense of consumers.
Steph Hodgins-May (VIC) (Australian Greens) Greens support

Hodgins-May criticised the Victorian Labor government for examining the privatisation of Melbourne Water through Project Nerva. Hodgins-May argued that privatisation prioritises shareholder profits over public health and infrastructure maintenance, referencing failures in the United Kingdom. Hodgins-May called for the federal government to intervene and ensure clean water remains a public service. Hodgins-May accused Labor of treating public assets as commodities to be sold for short-term financial gain.
Ralph Babet (VIC) (United Australia Party) UAP support

Babet argued that Melbourne Water is a natural monopoly and should not be sold to private or foreign entities. Babet contended that selling essential infrastructure creates long-term vulnerabilities and surrenders national sovereignty for short-term revenue. Babet distinguished between competitive markets and essential services, stating that citizens cannot choose alternative water providers. Babet warned that privatisation leaves future generations with debt and degraded assets.
David Shoebridge (NSW) (Australian Greens) Greens support

Shoebridge supported the motion, alleging that Victorian Labor had hired consultants including EY, KPMG, and Clayton Utz to explore privatisation options under Project Nerva. Shoebridge claimed these firms were engaged to navigate constitutional prohibitions on selling water assets. Shoebridge criticised the current Victorian Premier for previously supporting the proposal in cabinet before denying it publicly. Shoebridge characterised the move as part of a broader pattern of major parties selling public assets.

Votes during this debate

Division 14: Water Not passed 16–24

Opened by

Larissa Waters (QLD) (Australian Greens)

Greens

Speeches

6 speeches, 4 other contributors

Topics

Environment & Water

Debate Waste Management and Recycling: Plastic Packaging Take Note Debate, 15 Sep 2026 · Shared topic: Environment & Water
Debate Avian Influenza Take Note Debate, 19 Aug 2026 · Shared topic: Environment & Water
Question Time House Question Time 17 Aug 2026 · Shared topic: Environment & Water
Question Time Senate Question Time 13 Aug 2026 · Shared topic: Environment & Water

About Senate debates

The Senate debates bills, motions, matters of public importance and the answers given in Question Time. Senators from all parties and the crossbench take part, and a minister or the minister representing them usually replies for the government. Summaries are in reported speech, not transcripts; always check the official record before quoting.