Lugwig, you might like to be a little more informed about Toowoomba Mayors.

Mr Clive Berghofer served as an alderman on Toowoomba City Council from 1973 to 1982 and was Mayor from 1982 till he resigned in 1992.
Mr Ross Miller was Mayor from 1993 to 1996.
Mr Tony Bourke was Mayor from 1997 to 2000.
Ms Di Thorley has been Mayor since the year 2000

Just in case you can't add up it is 14 years since Mr Clive Berghofer was mayor. You might also like to know that if it had not been for the good management and future planning of previous councils, particularly when Mr Berghofer was a member of the council from 1973 - 1992, Toowoomba would have run dry long ago.

Ok, Everyone has voted here that Clive Berghoffer influenced the vote.
So, right now, today if we had a nationawide vote all Australians would vote to drink filtered effluent.
It is quite obvious that 62 percent of Australians would do that.
I bet that even 10 percent would do to the toilet and drink it straight out of the toilet bowl.
Is there anyone who thinks it would be more than 10 percent?

Alex, in my post I excluded Toowoomba as a desalination prospect.
What I realy want to know is, the difference, if any, in the process of osmosis of sea water, & waste water.
I have run a small desal plant, on a resort island, which does not make me an expert. However, it appears to me that the process is the same, regardless of feed water used.
This would indicate the same cost for either process.
I am still hoping that someone who does know, will advise us.
Are you surprised I don't trust government department statements on the subject?

How long could you last in the urbs without water?

4 days or more? What then?

What kind of anarchy would ensure with the total loss of water?

I think these are the critical questions not being answered.

The 'Big Question' is not why John Howard insisted Toowoomba vote on the issue of waste water recycling but what should happen when water reaches a critical level of depletion.

Another vote? I don't think so. This is matter for state emergency powers and security.

The questions surrounding what to do to prevent acts of terrorism on our existing water stocks have not yet surfaced.

Ahhh! glenwriter! you say that 25 per cent recycled drinking water is not safe, because people would drink 100 per cent otherwise.

I do not mean to insult you personally, rather this comment is the dumbest thing I have ever heard. There is a massive weight of scientific evidence in favour of the recycling, and all there is against it is a scare campaign based around the 'yuck' factor.

You can point out as many science mistakes as you want. Yes, thalidomide was terrible, and yes, science has done bad things. But does that mean we just turn our back and ignore what scientific evidence we have? Because ultimately its all we have.

The reason why people aren't drinking 100 per cent recycled water is that they couldn't even be convinced to drink 25 per cent recycled drinking water. You've pointed out the prime example of a catch 22 - Toowoomba was the first place in Australia to consider it.

You say, don't drink 25 per cent, no ones drinking 100 per cent. So how can they say drink 100 per cent, when no one will drink 25 per cent?

Recycled water.. good grief. The water in dams has fish and cattle crap all through it. Even the water in rainwater tanks goes through whatever crap is on the roof. All water is recycled, there's only so much out there. you can't just make more.

The reason for having 25 per cent, was a publicity thing. It was about pumping perfectly safe drecycled rinking water back into the dam, which does not have drinkable quality - so it would be refined again, and hopefully the public would be able to accept that. Much of it was being wasted through evaporation, but that was the price they were paying for PR. I guess it wasn't high enough.

Rainier,
Once upon a time "The government" and "the people" were the same thing.
In fact President Abraham Lincoln said it was the same thing and it became a definition of what democractic government was. Governmen by the people.
That is no longer so. It is government by the politicians over the people.
You can not say "our" water stocks.
It is the government's water stocks.
When the government runs out of water the people of course will try toi stop themselves from dying of thirst.
The only way would for them to attack the government and trhe government to stop the people from getting the sparse trickles of water left on the botom of the dams.