Malcolm Turnbull as an advisor and assistant and politician could embrace Millennium Development Goals and up the ante to achieve progress.

The Liberal Party of Australia could appoint Malcolm Turnbull to head up an MDG action taskforce.

MT could table a project in Parliament and move that Australia make a submission to the IMF and WB and G8 to consider a new international real-aid business proposal focussed on MDG solutions.
Such a new project could be to develop new industry and business and employment regenerating land and ocean ecosystems and environment.

The ocean is in big trouble, seagrass and fish populations are devastated. Australian and all nations worldwide need real aid resources for whole of water ecosystem management including ocean biodiversity. At present oceans are not being managed.

This planet we live on could be made to thrive instead of being devastated. Healthy environment and prosperity can be engineered, made to happen. It can be done. Ocean seafood ecosystems must be sustained.

Instead of fiscal policy to increase national wealth while destroying natural resources, economic policy could be updated to also create wealth by regenerating resources when possible. It’s already done with timber plantations but not the oceans.

These days, bays and lagoons and estuaries could be made to provide shelter for seagrass nurseries to sustain ocean PROTEIN food supply.
Shelter from nutrient polluted currents is needed to regenerate essential food web nurseries that supply food to ocean animals. Seven dead whales on Fraser Island alone during a recent 2 year period is a bit much, as is worsening malnutrition and associated death amongst seafood dependent Pacific Island people.

The UN does not yet have data and knowledge about the seriousness and generality of worldwide seafood collapse that is increasing poverty because relevant indicative information of substance is being gagged, suppressed, even edited from the Internet.

It’s fortunate there is OLO. Major media has been insisting on scientific evidence but non-one can count and measure ocean fish populations. It’s an insane situation because the real cause of ocean ecosystem damage remains unchecked and ongoing damage is compounding.

(continued)

(continued)

Our planet is one of a kind – the only one. So why destroy it. Why not make it thrive by applying real aid to develop new industry and business and employment on special projects that will regenerate once abundant and available natural food resources for island and river people.

Initial research indicates an aqueduct system could be developed to run water from the wet tropical north of Australia to upper catchment of the Darling River that runs all the way to the Coorong estuary and ocean at South Australia. The system could provide water for natural wetland along the way as well as for farmers. Presently wasted wet season rains could supply The Coorong and leave more water for the Murray Irrigation Area.

Malcolm Turnbull and water minister Barnaby Joyce could make it happen, or at least look and categorically indicate possible or not. There are numerous reasons to assess possibility. Indigenous workers and even boat people and Pacific Islands people could be employed to construct such an aqueduct system.

Google Earth indicates land elevation. The Gregory Range has about 800 metres elevation. Distance from there to upper Darling River catchment is less than from Queensland to South Australia’s Coorong and ocean. At Bourke elevation is just over 200 metres yet the Darling River flows from there all the way to sea level at the Coorong.

A water harvesting aqueduct system could be a special MDG aid project engineered to provide genuine poverty stricken neighbouring islanders and refugees with income, while also constructing whole-of-water-ecosystem management infrastructure for Australia (and other countries).

At present virtually nothing is being done with MDG’s except talk.
It’s time to up the ante as Maree Nutt has said. It’s time to ask MT about this

JF Aus,
That is called the Bradfield scheme which, by the way, I have drawn attention to in many posts here. This chap was a century ahead of time in his thinking. Our present Greenies & environmental "engineers" are a hundred years behind him which um, effectively makes them being 200 years behind in their thinking.

The Bradfield Scheme is about dams on existing rivers and canals to transport water.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bradfield_Scheme

Harvesting wet season water from high far northern catchment and then using aqueduct and big gully storage to transport the water south to upper catchment of the Darling River, is quite different to the Bradfield Scheme.

These days, funding is due for ocean rehabilitation infrastructure development including to sustain the Coorong environment and affordable food and fibre supply.

One key to availability of ocean management infrastructure development resources in this day and age is whether world ocean seafood supply should be sustained or not.

There is example of sick oceans and need for management.
When the world’s Shearwater mutton bird population arrived on the Queensland coast in 2000 from Alaska they were unable to find adequate food. Subsequently mass starvation and death of these birds occurred along coast all the way from Rockhampton Qld to South Australia and around Tasmania.
The Gladstone- Hervey Bay feeding grounds to the north and Coorong and other food web nursery estuaries southward, were already damaged and devastated and did not supply adequate food.
State border jurisdiction mean nothing biologically.
Lack of food in one area impacts on others, on seafood dependent people and animals. That's why European super-trawlers are trying to fish in Australian waters.

Cost of managing oceans could not come from the public. Quite the opposite, such infrastructure development should help stimulate pockets and purses and national economies instead of being impossible or a burden.

Think about new money, a new additional economy to also stimulate existing economies, say an International Monetary Fund economy for the purpose.

Maybe the US or China has the courage to engage in exploring and leading such development, if not Australia. But Australia has first chance because MT is reachable.

It can be done. (if not why not?)

JF Aus,
The scheme has enormous positive potential in every which way. I'll quiz Campbell Newman about his feelings about that. After all, he has a civil engineering background & should have some views on it.
It would certainly take the pressure off the coast if a million or so people would move inland. It would be great opportunity to consult hindsight & establish new & functional communities west of the range.
There would be sufficient flow of water for food production & transport & recreation.
It would & in all probability will become a win win scenario once people wake up & realise that a whole new economy is waiting to be tapped out west simply by water from the east.

Small correction there, individual.
Water from the north, instead of SO MUCH being wasted into the Gulf.

If people were to move inland it should be of their own accord and in agreement with people already inland.

Detention - come temporary contract labour camps could be set up at construction sites west of the range so refugees could earn their keep.

BHP Billiton and others should be very interested.

Premier Newman's education minister Langbroek is somewhat aware of substance of my marine ecosystem background.