News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 Finance 
 Feds fast track $650m in water buybacks 

Feds fast track $650m in water buybacks

29 Nov, 2009 03:00 AM
THE Federal Government has called forward $650 million in funding to finance an increase in water buybacks.

The Government introduced appropriation legislation to parliament last week calling for more money from forward estimates for its water for the future and home insulation programs.

The Opposition supported the move owing to long-held conventions against blocking supply, but there was significant disapproval voiced in the Lower House from rural MPs, particularly in relation to the Government's water buyback approach.

The Government called for the $650 million from budgets next year and the year after to finance the buybacks and make up for water not sold due to a moratorium on sales in NSW.

Nationals MP for the northern NSW electorate of Parkes, Mark Coulton, slammed the buyback as "one of the most ill-conceived and sinister schemes ever administered by this government".

"There are, of course, plenty of willing sellers. Rural Australia is in a pretty tight position at the moment," Mr Coulton said.

"Cash-strapped farmers are selling their water entitlements to make ends meet. It is certainly not something of their choosing and it is certainly not something they would do with a long-term view…it is something which they have had no choice in."

Mr Coulton criticised the Government for bringing forward funding for water buybacks and not water infrastructure spending.

He said the very day the money was called for in parliament, the Lachlan River in Western NSW ceased to flow.

Opposition spokesman for Agriculture, John Cobb, said the bill was "a further nail in the coffin of regional communities" and would entrench "a Rudd-made drought in basin communities".

"If the Rudd Government continues to buy the lifeblood of regional communities without increasing the productive capacity, without investing in the system, be it the transfer system or the on-farm system, there will not be two million people left in the Murray-Darling Basin," Mr Cobb said.

Minister for Water, Penny Wong, said the Government had bought 600 gigalitres of water as at October 30 this year.

"That’s come at a cost to taxpayers of close to a billion dollars," she said.

"This is a difficult problem and one we are working to remedy, but it certainly can’t be fixed overnight and it certainly can’t be fixed by assuming we are simply not going to allow any extraction whatsoever from the River Murray."

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size


comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
The whole MDB debate seems myopically focused on an overly simplistic “buy back water ” approach, whereas the only real long term answer to the regeneration of the MDB eco-system is getting the soil surface covered on a massive scale. The Basin covers 14% of Australia's land area and receives an average annual rainfall of 530,617,787 megalitres (ML). Of this, 94% evaporates or transpires, 2% drains into the ground, and the other 4% becomes run-off. This means that 497,289,723 ML evaporates each and every year. If we spent $650 million encouraging farmers to produce and sustain covered soil, and so reduce evaporation following rain events, how much difference could this make? Could we reduce the rate of evaporation/transpiration by just 1% - almost 5000 GL each and every year. The Wentworth Group has called for flows of 300-400GL to prevent irreversible damage to the Coorong and Lower Lakes. Reducing evaporation by even just 1% is more than 10 times this amount. The health of the Coorong and Lower Lakes is inextricably linked to the degree of bare soil thousands of kilometers north. Until the Government realises this, things are not looking good for the MDB.
Posted by soil carbon, 30/11/2009 5:21:35 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
27 November, 2009
25 November, 2009
POLL
Q: How has the deregulation of export wheat marketing affected your farm's profits this harvest?

Increased profits
(22.1%)

Decreased profits
(56.2%)

No change
(21.7%)

Total Votes: 258
Poll Date: 23 November, 2009

Most popular articles




The Land







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...