Ensuring our food and water security

Instead of investing in storm water capture and retrofitting every home for some potable water capture and usage, government is intent on connecting Australians to “the water grid” which is at its core a privatisation and profit agenda.

By virtue of the privatisation of natural resources and utilities obsession, governments have directly placed Australians at risk of not only higher food, water and energy prices, but indeed, created a water and food security crisis that will become increasingly evident over the summer months.

The two-pronged approach to tackling climate change and major allied issues begins now and must be effected by collaboration between the major political players at all levels of government with industry support as far as possible. The Government is bound by duty of care and national interest first to put in place the policy settings which must include: pre 2012 Mandatory Renewable Energy Targets of at least 15 per cent and concurrent reduction in emissions targets as well as energy efficiency measures. The post 2012 rhetoric will not deliver water, food and energy security for Australia. The long-term 2050 vision is inappropriate considering the scale of the emerging crisis. The signing of Kyoto is the second major step and signal that Australia has the capacity for leadership and means good business on climate change.

The second aspect of dealing with problems associated climate change is as stated, a comprehensive and rigorous plan for the ongoing public ownership and management of Australia's water resources in the first instance, sharing those resources between food and domestic needs first and foremost, with reasonable provision for environmental water to protect and sustain vital catchments, rivers, wetlands and estuaries in their own right that also provide a “safety net” for human habitation and agriculture.

The fight to stop the sale of Snowy Hydro essentially centred on the sound awareness of the need for public ownership and management of our water resources. The continuing competition by Snowy Hydro to use this water for high end energy sales directly puts at risk our agricultural sector along with towns reliant on water from the Snowy Scheme, not to mention the rivers.

No business model that uses the primary resource - in this case publicly owned water - could be built or survive on a “no cost” basis, which is exactly how Snowy Hydro makes money, taking and using our water for nothing. In order to establish the hierarchy of water needs, the first and essential “bite the bullet” action that the three shareholder governments must take is to charge Snowy Hydro for leasing water for energy generation. Economists can calculate the real cost of using that water: it costs $1,000 per megalitre on the open water trading market, then the rent and diversion costs of the water (compensation to rivers and communities for lost water, associated business) must be factored in for each kilowatt of energy generated through the Snowy Hydro turbines.

The effective policy settings to address climate change include a significantly higher Mandatory Renewable Energy Target (MRET) and the immediate capping of emissions through legislation and a corresponding emissions permit system.

We as a nation will have to consider population density and the real sustainable population levels based not on market expectations but on available water yield in the context of a drying continent as a result of climate change.