Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here’s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Stormy weather, no water

By Everald Compton - posted Thursday, 16 February 2012


There is a no more thankless and unproductive task than to have a cake of a fixed or shrinking size and be given the task of dividing it among a large number of people — each of whom is after a larger slice than they are reasonably entitled to have.

Yet, this is the fate of the Murray Darling Authority which is taking a thrashing from everyone with an interest in the region — irrigators, farm service industries, small business, Greens, the five governments that are involved, and lots of others. No-one is happy, and they will remain that way until a greater water supply is permanently available — a goal which is achievable, but will cost money and political capital.

The Authority, led by Craig Knowles, a competent and experienced political operator, has done as practical a job as is possible in preparing a plan for the allocation of water and the preservation of the environment while trying to maintain the economic viability of the region, particularly as they were given a crook hand of cards from the outset.

Advertisement

No matter what they do in trying to answer the heavy volume of criticism leveled against them, a large number of people will continue to revolt. Nevertheless, the farmers of the Basin have no option but to finally face the reality that they won’t be able to do much better until there is more water in the river system.

While waiting for this to happen, farmers will have to survive with less water than they feel that they need. In facing this challenge, they will be very aware that millions of farmers worldwide produce good crops with far less water than they use.

The Greens are utterly unreasonable in wanting farmers to have even less water than the Authority currently plans to give them. While most responsible Australians want to save all the rivers in the Murray Darling Basin, as well as enhance the environment of the region, no responsible voter wants to destroy the economy of this vital part of Australia, and indeed hopes that it can be enhanced to provide more food for Australia and a world where billions have insufficient food.

The Greens should realise that they will not grow beyond their currently narrow political power base until they rejoin the real world and stop being so self-righteous about their unrealistic goals of achieving the impossible overnight.

State Governments must butt out — totally. Their negativity to the current plans, based on serving the vested interests upon whom they rely on for money and votes, is a significant part of the problem. They have no sense whatsoever of this being a national river system.

The Commonwealth should take whatever constitutional and legislative steps are needed to take full control of the water resources of the Murray Darling Basin. If a referendum is needed, let’s have it as, if States remain involved, they will destroy the Basin.

Advertisement

We, the voters of Australia, must accept that a major allocation must be made from our taxes to divert significant capital from the Budget, to give priority to the task of bringing more water into the Basin from the vast rainfall of the tropical north.

It can be done. It simply requires commitment.

Dr Bradfield, builder of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, prepared a plan to do it in the 1930s, and was ignored.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

This article was first published in Everald@Large. You can subscribe to it by sending an email to compton@everaldatlarge.com



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

11 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Everald Compton is Chairman of The Longevity Forum, a not for profit entity which is implementing The Blueprint for an Ageing Australia. He was a Founding Director of National Seniors Australia and served as its Chairman for 25 years. Subsequently , he was Chairman for three years of the Federal Government's Advisory Panel on Positive Ageing.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Everald Compton

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Photo of Everald Compton
Article Tools
Comment 11 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy