2026 Basin Plan Review

In February 2026 the MDBA released the Murray Darling Basin Plan Review Discussion Paper. This is the fifth paper informing the review. This includes:

• 2025 Basin Plan Evaluation report which provides an assessment of Basin Plan implementation and was informed by the Sustainable Rivers Audit, providing a snapshot of the Basin’s health
• 2025 Murray–Darling Basin Outlook report which describes what the Basin may look like by 2050 under a range of climate futures. This is was informed by the 2025 Sustainable Yields report, which outlines potential impacts of climate change on Basin water resources

The discussion paper indicates that after more than a decade, there are still challenges to achieving Basin Plan outcomes. Through the Basin Plan Review the MDBA are looking at whether change is needed to make the Basin Plan work as efficiently and effectively as possible. They are looking for options to make the Basin Plan more outcomes focused. 

• Build on successes, evaluate what’s working and identify where change is needed to manage water more efficiently
• Look at the evidence and latest science to inform how to respond to a changing climate, including hotter, drier weather and more extreme droughts
• Listen to communities on the issues, options and priorities to inform the next decade of Basin water management.

The Challenge

The Basin Plan review will result in recommendations to Basin governments on how the Plan should adapt.
The change for GVIA members is to consider mechanisms or options put forward by the MDBA. The primary question we will be asking how can the new basin plan deliver better environmental outcomes while respecting water entitlement. The new basin plan must

• Address known barriers to improve environmental outcomes
• Optimise the existing Government investment in water and infrastructure
• Minimise regulatory change for communities and industries

Better outcomes from existing Environmental Water

The new Basin Plan should focus on delivering better outcomes from existing $13B water investment through a prioritised and adaptive plan of Basin management. This will require a shift in thinking with community partnerships at the centre. This should incorporate:

• Government investment in strategic, collaborative, direct-action projects that aim to address known barriers to environmental outcomes (which water alone cannot achieve).
  • Including carp management, targeted riparian management, or fish passageways.
• Community supported constraints management projects that enable enhanced environmental outcomes with the existing environmental water

There is no need for additional water, the new plan needs to ensure that the environmental outcomes from existing water are enhanced, and that critical human needs are more secure though a more comprehensive look at solutions, including infrastructure (storage dams, weirs, pipelines, tanks), secondary supply sources, water recycling or desalination. This will require partnerships with local councils, who are primarily responsible for town water supply.
The new direction must:

• Acknowledge that Climate change is factored into existing water sharing arrangements. Primarily through states’ water sharing policies, water allocations, and the in setting of extraction limits.

Managing for climate change is not about ensuring a set of benchmark environmental outcomes in the Basin continue to be achieved. All users must share risks and opportunities.
When referring to ‘plausible climate futures’, this must include both wetter and drier periods, as well as acknowledge the uncertainty in projections.

Rule changes are not the solution

Strategy must move from changing rules in sharing plans to integrated land and water management. It is time to stop asking the same people to be the solution and make this a broader community commitment.

Community and Agriculture

The Basin Plan has had significant, and observable, impacts on communities, especially where there is a high dependence on irrigated agriculture.
Socio-economics must be prioritised to inform decision making on future steps for Basin Plan water management.

• The socio-economic impact of environmental water recovery in the Gwydir was significant. Water reforms trigger ripple effects across communities. Less water for farming means fewer jobs, lower local spending, smaller schools, reduced services, and declining community participation, the ‘multiplier effect’.
• The Northern Review identified that not only were there substantial reductions in population and employment but that there were notable declines in the Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas (SEIFA). Moree alone saw the following declines.