In response to some of the comments above, I wish to point out that this article is about pricing water to provide incentives for investment.

As a separate issue, it is clearly vital that there is significant investment from government in publicly owned projects, and that there is significant reinvestment in infrastructure using revenues from water.

The problem with this water crisis is that farmers don't want to adapt to a changing climate. They want to maintain their place in a remote dry land and still get first class access to water. That is simply unrealistic and expensive for the government who has to subsidise their stubbornness.

Another problem is high water consuming crops. It is not practical and extremely inefficient management of water resources. If you had one glass of water, you would not put a sponge in it? That is the effect of those crops on Australia's finite water supply.

Thirdly people also have a stubborn opposition to drinking recycled water. It's probably in every major city in the world, but Australians are so parochial and ignorant they act all indignant at the suggestion, like idiots living in the stone age.

The environmental costs are already apparent. Rather than all of us being able to travel these rivers and enjoy some form steam boat tourism with deep rivers like in the old days, the water has all but vanished so it looks like a water drain. People just have to face up to the REALITY that water is very scarce in Australia and you can't plunder the land to the extent you can in other parts of the world. And if that means we have to import food (or God forbid....cotton [/sarcasm]), then that's the reality. Other countries like Japan have to import a lot of resources. It's a fact of life and Australia has to adapt to it's limitations. These farmers have to start migrating out of country areas.

For goodness sake you rednecks opposed to the pricing of water. Think of the pricing of water like the GST - there is NO real cost until the end user. The cost is TRANSFERRED. The world has gone to GST (or VAT) as it makes for accountability, transparency and is fairer.
So then too pricing water. It is being UNFAIRLY allocated by any measure with the legacy of history and political influence allocating more of it to some quarters than to others.
Pricing water promotes visibility and fairer allocation. The cost of its introduction, like the GST, miniscule compared to the benefits.

Those opposed to pricing of water, are like those opposing the GST. It is a passed on cost and tiny as a percentage of the value added to cotton, sugar etc (though of course the losers will scream).

It's a shame it took Malcolm Turnball to show some leadership after so long without anyone else in power lifting a finger. Hopefully this will be implemented in the right way..

Three years ago severe water restrictions were placed on the residents of Canberra and surounding districts.

So good were the affected people in this region at conserving water that the water supplier, ACTEW/AGL sought an increase in the price of water because their margin was down - significantly.

The people of the region are now rightly skeptical about seriously conserving water.

I was taught never to mention religion, politics or sex in polite conversation. In 2006 in rural areas one doesn't mention water in polite conversation. Farmers are smarting under their reduced water allocations and increased usage water fees. I heard one bloke moan that he had to pay $46,000 for his water rights and this year his water volume was reduced to nil. I was told that would be for about 3 rice holdings. So he has a big investment in laser levelled fields, irrigation input channels and waste water drains, as well as machinery like tractors, harvestors etc

If we have less water then obviously land is going to be taken out of farm production. Do we want to leave the land as overgrown weedy desert or should it be rehabilitated back to some form of ground cover suitable to the environment.

Does Australia want to let the market decide what land remains under agriculture and what we produce or should there be some government direction?

I think that government should provide some direction. It was government action that put the Murrumbidgee and Murray Darling irrigation areas in southern NSW in place and it will take cooperation between the states to ensure that Cubby Station doesn't use all of the Darling water flow.

I foresee that Turnbull's market determine's scheme would allow high value crops to be grown under irrigation while all our food is imported from New Zealand, Tasmania and China at a time when we face massive increase in transportation costs as we pass peak oil.