Monday, November 28, 2011 » 06:07pm
The long-awaited Murray-Darling Basin draft plan has been unveiled, only to stir up more criticism from both farmers and green groups.
And its one resolve - to deliver an extra 2750 billion litres to the vital river system each year - has been savaged for being either too high - by irrigators - or too low - by conservationists.
The Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) released its long-awaited draft plan on Monday to a chorus of condemnation and by the end of the day at least one threat of a High Court challenge.
It also released late figures showing that up to 1600 jobs are at risk if the basin plan goes ahead, although farmers say the impact could be much higher.
Irrigators insist the plan will fail communities by stripping jobs and flooding rural properties, lead to an increase in food prices and leave local economies on the brink.
NSW Irrigators Council chief Andrew Gregson said the draft was a 'political outcome' devoid of serious detail.
'It avoids saying who wears the pain immediately,' he told reporters in Canberra.
'It's a smoke and mirrors strategy.'
He questioned the science behind the authority's numbers, noting it had failed to set an environmental watering plan, which is meant to say where the water returns end up.
According to the draft, 2750 gigalitres (gl) will be returned to the nation's food bowl each year - billions less than the 3000 to 4000gl originally set through last year's guide - and which will be enforced by 2019.
With savings already made, only another 1468gl needs to be sourced but the authority doesn't say from where.
States have only been told they must share the burden, particularly the southern basin states.
Irrigators warn that means uncertainty for communities and are concerned about an apparent lack of detail about the socio-economic impact, specifically statistics on job or agricultural production losses.
The draft plan only noted that the economic cost would be small, although water-intensive industries such as rice and cotton growers would be the most vulnerable.
However, an additional MDBA report, released at least 10 hours after the draft and after authority boss Craig Knowles finished his main press conference, said there might be job losses of up to 1600 to 2019.
It also estimated the basin's gross regional product at $78.2 billion in 2018/19 with the basin plan - $1.1 billion less than it would be without one. Production was worth $63.8 billion in 2010/11.
Farmers queried whether that data was considered in the draft, given how late it was finalised.
But Mr Knowles insisted to media ahead of those figures that the impact on jobs and production would depend on how the basin plan was administered and whether the focus was on infrastructure spending or buybacks.
Water Minister Tony Burke maintained the draft plan met all three environmental, social and economic objectives.
But Australian Conservation Foundation ecosystems manager Paul Sinclair said the draft failed everyone, including irrigation communities, because 2750gl would not be enough to flush the salt out of the Murray mouth.
'There's no future and no jobs on a dead river,' he said.
But Mr Burke said if the amount were any higher the basin would not be able to handle the extra water.
Meanwhile, the states are also unhappy with the draft, with South Australia, which wants at least 4000gl returned to the river, leaving its options open to launch a legal challenge, while Queensland, NSW and Victoria are all claiming to be hard done by.
The draft now goes through a 20-week consultation period before the federal government presents its final legislation to the parliament in the latter half of 2012.
Mr Knowles said he was open to change and the draft was not a fait accompli.
'There are a lot of people who've got a lot of certainty about what the right answer is here ... but in the end, managing a natural landscape has to contemplate almost daily if not hourly change,' he said.
'We need to stop having the tug of war, stop pulling against each other and work together.'
Source:http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Environment/2011/11/28/Farmers_greens_attack_Murray_plan_690461.html
And its one resolve - to deliver an extra 2750 billion litres to the vital river system each year - has been savaged for being either too high - by irrigators - or too low - by conservationists.
The Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) released its long-awaited draft plan on Monday to a chorus of condemnation and by the end of the day at least one threat of a High Court challenge.
It also released late figures showing that up to 1600 jobs are at risk if the basin plan goes ahead, although farmers say the impact could be much higher.
Irrigators insist the plan will fail communities by stripping jobs and flooding rural properties, lead to an increase in food prices and leave local economies on the brink.
NSW Irrigators Council chief Andrew Gregson said the draft was a 'political outcome' devoid of serious detail.
'It avoids saying who wears the pain immediately,' he told reporters in Canberra.
'It's a smoke and mirrors strategy.'
He questioned the science behind the authority's numbers, noting it had failed to set an environmental watering plan, which is meant to say where the water returns end up.
According to the draft, 2750 gigalitres (gl) will be returned to the nation's food bowl each year - billions less than the 3000 to 4000gl originally set through last year's guide - and which will be enforced by 2019.
With savings already made, only another 1468gl needs to be sourced but the authority doesn't say from where.
States have only been told they must share the burden, particularly the southern basin states.
Irrigators warn that means uncertainty for communities and are concerned about an apparent lack of detail about the socio-economic impact, specifically statistics on job or agricultural production losses.
The draft plan only noted that the economic cost would be small, although water-intensive industries such as rice and cotton growers would be the most vulnerable.
However, an additional MDBA report, released at least 10 hours after the draft and after authority boss Craig Knowles finished his main press conference, said there might be job losses of up to 1600 to 2019.
It also estimated the basin's gross regional product at $78.2 billion in 2018/19 with the basin plan - $1.1 billion less than it would be without one. Production was worth $63.8 billion in 2010/11.
Farmers queried whether that data was considered in the draft, given how late it was finalised.
But Mr Knowles insisted to media ahead of those figures that the impact on jobs and production would depend on how the basin plan was administered and whether the focus was on infrastructure spending or buybacks.
Water Minister Tony Burke maintained the draft plan met all three environmental, social and economic objectives.
But Australian Conservation Foundation ecosystems manager Paul Sinclair said the draft failed everyone, including irrigation communities, because 2750gl would not be enough to flush the salt out of the Murray mouth.
'There's no future and no jobs on a dead river,' he said.
But Mr Burke said if the amount were any higher the basin would not be able to handle the extra water.
Meanwhile, the states are also unhappy with the draft, with South Australia, which wants at least 4000gl returned to the river, leaving its options open to launch a legal challenge, while Queensland, NSW and Victoria are all claiming to be hard done by.
The draft now goes through a 20-week consultation period before the federal government presents its final legislation to the parliament in the latter half of 2012.
Mr Knowles said he was open to change and the draft was not a fait accompli.
'There are a lot of people who've got a lot of certainty about what the right answer is here ... but in the end, managing a natural landscape has to contemplate almost daily if not hourly change,' he said.
'We need to stop having the tug of war, stop pulling against each other and work together.'
Source:http://bigpondnews.com/articles/Environment/2011/11/28/Farmers_greens_attack_Murray_plan_690461.html
No comments:
Post a Comment