Doing his best for the people

Geoff Adams put some questions to Mr Priestly in a conversation about water policy last week.

Raised on dairy farms until he was 16, Rob Priestly grew up in the Undera and Invergordon districts. He studied business at university, majoring in international trade, and worked in the grain industry in the domestic and export sectors.

After his parents bought a retail dry cleaners with a small commercial laundry, he and his brother Phil saw opportunity for expansion and put their energies into developing it into a business now employing hundreds of people. The Gouge business is now owned by Mr Priestly and his brother, with the shareholding including chief executive officer John Calleja.

In recent years Rob Priestly has been part of the Goulburn-Murray Water Leadership Forum and a member of Committee for Greater Shepparton which has lobbied for water reform, as well as a councillor with City of Greater Shepparton.

Asked about how people will understand his policy platforms when he doesn’t belong to an established party, Mr Priestly said ultimately he was responsible to the electorate and could not blame anyone but himself if he didn’t perform.

“I have built my business and my reputation in this community based on my conduct over 25 years,” Mr Priestly said.

“I am only answerable to this community. I can’t say: I can’t get the party to support it.

“I can only say I am here to represent the interests of the community. I am going to do that in an unflinching way that ensures that every time I vote, I vote on behalf of the people here, not on a policy directed by someone somewhere else.

“If you look at the recent track record (for the electorate), the model has been: ‘be loyal to the party and the party will reward you’.

“Well, I think this electorate has been incredibly loyal — and on the most important economic issues, the electorate has been let down.

“The coalition has been in government for nine years and the Murray-Darling Basin has been a ticking time bomb for the community.

“There is a great risk to us under the current legislation. The Coalition Government has failed to disarm that ticking time-bomb for this community.

“Despite talking about it, nothing has changed and the philosophy remains `on time, and in full’ — and I don’t believe that is possible without damaging our economy, our community.

“It is quite plausible we are staring down the barrel of a Labor government and they have left everything intact for a really nasty impact on our community if Labor government chooses to take a strong water recovery approach.

“It should have been dealt with by now.”

Mr Priestly said the water minister’s own department had acknowledged that the state’s water saving projects would not generate the 605 Gl required by 2024.

“That water must be recovered and the current approach is not to talk about how that will be done,” he said.

“I want to see an open conversation about the need to review the plan.

“I“d like to see a change to focus on the outcomes rather than number targets.

“We have so much more data and information about management of the system, but we are locked into a series of numbers that are not necessarily related to the best environmental outcomes.”

Mr Priestly wants to see a review of the operation of the basin so that environmental assets across the system are weighted more equally.

“We have a huge focus on the lower lakes as an environmental asset, often to the detriment of systems like the Goulburn and Murray,” he said.

Mr Priestly is against water buy-backs, wants to see recognition of positive environmental outcomes from within irrigation systems (on private land) and would like to see greater water market transparency.

He sees inter-valley trade causing significant damage to environmental assets through transfers of water from one valley to another.

“That approach is supported by poor economic policy because the system does not cost losses.”

On the Barmah Choke, he questions the value of putting a pipeline or channel around a world heritage listed area in order to improve irrigation opportunities for almond farms.

And the 450 Gl?

“If there is a failure in water policy by this current government it is the failure to legislate the socio-economic test for the 450 Gl.

“These guys could have dealt with it, and they haven’t.

“The test that exists in legislation has allowed for all the buy-backs that have occurred to this date. It only is an agreement between the states that has changed.

“What’s to stop government going back and implementing buy-backs again?”

Mr Priestly said he was supported by about 250 volunteers from differing walks of life but was reluctant to name them. His wife and brother are key oganisational supporters.

Can he achieve anything when established parties try to sideline independents?

“I think we have plenty of examples of good, quality people standing up and leading on the issues that a majority of Australians want to see legislated and which the major parties are not delivering,” he said.

“Anti-corruption is right at the top of the list.”