The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Water shambles > Comments

Water shambles : Comments

By Kellie Tranter, published 15/9/2010

The open trading of Australia's water supplies to overseas investors and speculators should be reviewed.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Great Article Kelly. If our water is going to be so blatently exploited why don't the extractive industries, and I refer not only to the mining industries but also the coal seam gas industry, pay for the groundwater they extract instead of being classed as "waste" or "incidental" water which they dispose of in any way they can. It is well established that this massive extraction results in the lowering of the water tables at the peril of surrounding towns and farmers. At Penny Wong's figures of $2500 per megalitre, this would give the money grubbing state government a windfall.
Posted by nomines, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 9:28:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Fantastic Article!
"What Australia urgently needs, as former diplomat Bruce Haigh has recommended on several occasions, is a national regulatory authority with teeth, answering to the Federal Parliament, that can manage, regulate and allocate water in the interests of the country as a whole."
This would definitely be a step in the right direction, though I personally would expand the authority over such a (highly beneficial) organization, further than federal government (in case they want to make a sell-off and the regulator is standing in their way).

But quite frankly the act of privatizing major water channels and bodies should be an outright crime with a prison sentence! Anything further than a well on your property is nothing more than having zero exclusive control over, and if necessary (eg for industry), an allocation of an amount of water from the grid- only the water they receive can become private property until it's flushed.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 9:57:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
why isn't there any sense of growing public awareness and uneasiness about these water profiteers?

We might wake up one day and find that what we thought was free now has a price, and it's not a competitive one, either.

Water is a basic human right and if we lose it to the 'free' market, we'll have nobody to blame but ourselves.

We'll wind up with the worst of all possible worlds.
Posted by SHRODE, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 10:48:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" ... a national regulatory authority with teeth ... answering to the Federal Parliament ...", now THERE'S a novel idea! Unfortunately such a suggestion smacks of some sort of socialism, and we most definitely won't be having any of THAT whilst we have got The Free Market to protect and grow "Australia's interests" ... going forward!
Posted by Sowat, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 3:07:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Malcolm Turnbull, is also keen to pivatize water.

The private debate usual states that by privatising public untilities leads to improved effeciencies, cost effectiveness etc.

In reality as what is happening with power and gas, that after cornering the market. Prices rise, people reduce their consumption profits decrease, and prices rise to cover the losses caused by reduced consumption.

In Victoria, the conservation of water led to an increase in prices, because water utilities were loosing money.
Posted by JamesH, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 5:03:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Not only water should be put under government control, but air, land, trees, grass, farming, mining - all production really. I mean, government can presumptively fix anything, so why waste time with individual freedom and private property? That way our society will not only be more physically productive, but fairer as well... right, Kelly?

Kelly?

The great fallacy underlying this article is "because problem, therefore government is the solution": a complete non sequitur. Somehow all the different conflicting values at play can be known and fairly reconciled by centralised command-and-control bureaucracies. They just know everything.

It doesn't matter how much this belief is disproved by theory or practice, the socialists just keep on believing it. It is a recipe for environmental disaster, as much in Australia as governmental control of water was in the USSR.

The flaw is to assume that central planning is capable of providing an alternative economic system. It isn't, and those who think it is, are simply parroting stupid Marxism that was refuted over a hundred years ago. Kelly understands that bullying and violating people does not make good policy when it comes to the Afghans, but thinks it's a wonderful idea for Australian government to do to Australians. Kelly, get this - it doesn't matter how much weaponry you can concentrate on the problem, government is still not going to be able to solve the problem of how best to allocate scarce water to all its different possible competing values. There is no reason to think Julia Gillard knows. There is no reason to think any of her delegates knows. And that's the end of the matter. The rest is just pink-battsism.
Posted by Sienna, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 5:03:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This is just letting Global Corporates reduce us even more to serfdom.It is about time we woke up.
Posted by Arjay, Wednesday, 15 September 2010 7:05:07 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think this thread has run its course- excellent points by the likes of James H and Sowat and many others beforehand, and quite frankly Sienna (who I'm quite positive is actually a kid) seems of the intellectual caliber that would still actually think (or try to pretend) that nationalization and legal regulation of non-competitive and public/business-dependent resources and utilities is an immediate jump into marxism (ignoring that most capitalist societies- including the USA, do it all the time- including now)- not to mention failing to disseminate the prior tangible points would suggest I would most likely be in for wasting my time arguing about 'what socialism is' because some people aren't old enough to tell the difference yet.

It was good while it lasted!
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 16 September 2010 9:36:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sienna, I wonder if the idea of privatizing water in a world that is rapidly using more than is available is not an ill conceived idea?
If water supply belongs to Corporations whose sole reason for being is to make profits, it is obvious that they cannot as dictated by the present corporation law ask that water is not wasted and the use is restricted to essentials. The more they sell the bigger the profits.
To sell the water overseas, which is what will happen if the rights are bought by foreign concerns is a crime against the population of Australia.
We are going to desperately need the water for food security here in Australia not produce food with it to be shipped over seas.
Added to your list of commodities that should be under Government control I would add gas. Oil will not matter because our own oil will be exhausted within five years anyway.
Governments should not have profit as their only target and there fore are able to prioritize available water, something no corporation is committed to.
I would add that Socialism now seems to be a dirty word and is denigrated by most but is going to eventually be the only way that any country has any chance of surviving. The “market rules” all philosophy is not a viable proposition for a stable civilization
Posted by sarnian, Thursday, 16 September 2010 4:43:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have emailed the government entity "Caring for our Country" asking for some assurance that Australia would not be disadvantaged by decisions concerning use of our land and water made by new owners. In essence, would they care for our country? Perhaps not. There is no mention that I could see of foreign ownership on that website.
Posted by d'Helm, Thursday, 16 September 2010 9:48:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
This latest Kafkaesque harangue from Tranter, is truly indicative someone is either telling porkies / furphies, or pursuing some hidden agenda, unbeknownst to gullible me ?
Isn't it a felony to want to sell the Opera House ? How, can anyone sell our most precious commodity ie. water, overseas or anywhere else, pray ? Another Ponzi scheme in the making, perhaps ?

It is common knowledge, the State's are responsible for the storage, distribution and pricing of that most essential element on this Planet, and without which the Human Race, and all it's creatures, flora and fauna heavily depend on for survival - will cease to exist. As part of our Constitution, the States are guardian and custodian of this finite resource - for better or for worst.

Why is KT and Bruce Haige calling for more Govt regulatory Authorities, when there already exist a multitude of Federal and State bloated Bureaucratic Authorities ie. Aust National Water Commission, with Laurie Arthur as it's Commissioner. ?

Our newly sworn-in Gillard Cabinet boasts of at least four Ministries that overlap each other, but essentially manages the Water Industry.
1. Sustainability, Environment Water Population etc. 2. Agriculture, Fisheries Forestry. 3. Energy Resources. 4.Climate change, Energy Efficiency.

In addition, all States have National Resources Management Ministers, and Departments, answerable to their Premiers.

The Queensland State Govt have spent several billions in it's showcase Water Grid infrastructure, which includes adjoining all the major Dams, and 650 klm of pipeline, from one end of the State to the border. It's not only a touch of brilliance, it will serve it's citizens well, for another decade. In conjunction with the $ 5 B Desalination Plant, and the raising of the Heinze Dam wall 12m, thus extending the catchment area fourfold. The dreaded Drought, since Colonization has been effectively mitigated. Bingo.

cont..
Posted by jacinta, Sunday, 19 September 2010 4:23:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The flagitious Brumby Govt Desalination Plant in Wonthaggi, commissioned this year, at the cost of $ 15 B will on average cost $ 570 M per year to repay the debt / borrowings, which would, with interest, take 28 years to redeem. Melbourne Water claims that the average household would owe $ 9560.00, and ratepayers will be slugged $ 370.00 a year, on top of quarterly usage rates, which incidentally now incorporates 5 layers of semiprivate consortium's and Boards, which dispense Fluoride, waste water/ recycling, Aquasure Management billing, Local Govt Councils, and the Water Board. Each takes a slice of the proverbial Gelata fruity sponge ?

Much is made of the assertion that people have " human rights " and social justice, to one thing or another. Our Constitution, doesn't even include a visceral Bill of Rights, nor can citizens hope to claim the fifth Amendment with impunity, like they do in the USA. Is the requirement to provide water or food, a basic Human right ? Put. in perspective, does the State become one's benefactor ?

The hypothesis is not only flawed. It is open to ridicule.
Posted by jacinta, Sunday, 19 September 2010 4:40:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy