Senator RUSTON (South Australia—Deputy Government Whip in the Senate and Assistant Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources) (15:15): Can I just say that I think that the NBN is a fantastic infrastructure project and I think that the majority of Australians think that it is a great project. What I find extraordinarily disappointing in the questions that were asked today and in the contribution that we just heard from Senator Singh is that, for some strange and wondrous reason, despite the fact that the Labor Party when they were in government were the architects of the original idea of the NBN, they are now in the process of trying to tear it down. I would have thought that two years on from the change of government, with the rollout of the NBN starting to accelerate—we are starting to see some real results out there, with over a million people able to get access to the NBN, with the first satellite going up last week, which covers an area that is very close to my heart: the rural and regional areas of Australia—they would actually be starting to look at some of the more positive aspects of it and they would be starting to prosecute the best and most cost-effective way of delivering the NBN into the future. But, no, no, no; they are still sitting here two years after this government was elected and they are still trying to defend a legacy of the previous Minister for Communications; they are still here trying to defend the indefensible. It is very disappointing because, as I said, I am a great supporter of the NBN. I know that many people who live in South Australia are looking forward to being able to get access to the NBN—and yet it seems that all the opposition want to do here is to drag down what I think is a fabulous infrastructure project. The issue on which those opposite were questioning today was in relation to a letter sent by the shareholder ministers to the nbn co asking them if they would undertake a comparison of the different technologies that are proposed for the NBN. As we know, when the coalition came into government, it was realised that there was a shortfall in the budget and something needed to be done about making sure that the NBN was affordable and could be delivered on time. For those opposite to stand here today and to make comments like 'cooked up', 'fictitious costs', 'politically motivated', 'counterfactual', 'distorted'—where are the facts? Where is the evidence to substantiate these comments? It is absolutely outrageous. Senator Kim Carr: That is what the letter says. Read the letter. Senator RUSTON: I would suggest that Senator Carr, who is happily interjecting, because he does not seem to be able to make any other contribution apart from interjections, would have been standing here and criticising the government if they had not undertaken a comparison. I am sure he would have been asking, 'How on earth does the government actually know that the most cost-effective method of delivering the NBN isn't fibre-to-the-premise?' if we had not undertaken an investigation or an analysis of that particular model. So we need to stop being hypocritical and we need to stop carrying on prosecuting something that is dead and buried now. Let's get on with looking at what is going to be positive for Australians into the future. As I said, I can see this is a great project. I congratulate Senator Conroy for coming up with the idea of the NBN. Just because we do not necessarily agree about how some of the delivery has taken place, and we may still disagree on the methods and the mix of technologies that are about to be rolled out, that does not mean that we do not all think this is a fabulous project. I would ask those opposite to step back from their political carry-on and let all of us work together to deliver this fantastic project for Australia. I want to briefly make a comment in relation to another question that was asked, in relation to water buybacks. I am really disappointed at the level of scaremongering that is going on in the context of water about where the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder sits, who has primary carriage of the water, what is my delegated responsibility in the water space et cetera. All we are doing by carrying on like this is causing great concern, upset and uncertainty for the irrigators and the communities that live in the Murray-Darling Basin. So I would ask those opposite to please consider, before you start carrying on with this kind of behaviour, the people who are most likely to be affected by it. I draw to your attention a press release by the National Irrigators' Council, who made the comment that they are 'sick and tired of being used as political pawns as politicians try to whip up fear to wedge each other for electoral gain in marginal Adelaide seats'. Both Minister Joyce and I live in the Murray-Darling Basin. This is a first. This should be a good thing. I think we are in a better position than before to know what is possibly in the best interests of not just the basin but the basin communities. I am very much looking forward to working with Minister Joyce to deliver good environmental, economic and social outcomes for the entire Murray-Darling Basin.