Liam,

You de man!

Can't we find a soft Liberal seat somewhere and shoehorn YOU into Federal Parliament. I think you would be far more representative of the Australian Populace than MT.

Howard's immigrating 100,000 people a year, and their cars, into Sydney is unsustainable on every social index including water availability. The only winners are monopoly businesses and thuggish politicians. That makes MT's article nothing but a pissante sideshow designed to deflect from the REALITY of this unsustainable Federal push. A push I might add that is a typical Howard 'divide and conquer tactic' designed to secure Australia's future prosperity and easy rule by buggering Sydney and NSW.

One solution is to require all sittings of Parliament to rotate around the Capital cities on a weekly basis. If these 'out of touchers' get to feel the heat from the real people they are fantasizing about, they may just start to make some decisions on behalf of the Australian people and NOT on behalf of 'immigrants in their own image' who haven't even got here yet.

Spot on Leigh and Wildcat.

And therein lies the great contradiction in Malcolm Turnbull’s expression; some realisation that the water problem has been largely caused by rapid growth and a failure to keep supply with a healthy safety margin up to an ever-growing demand. And yet he is one the main pro-growth advocates in his government, which is entrenched in the continuous growth paradigm.

He needs to think very carefully about this.

I suggest that the only sensible course of action would be for him to advocate limits to growth, which is surely an essential element to overcoming our water (and other resource) woes.

Jacqueline, a stable population can be very easily achieved in Australia, by reducing immigration to net zero or a bit lower (which would still allow for an intake of 30 000 or more per annum), along with a celebration of our low fertility rate of about 1.8 instead of attempts to raise it such as the ridiculous baby bonus. We do not need laws that limit us to two kids in Australia.

With these measures, our population would continue to grow for another three or four decades and reach a level about four million higher than at present. But I can live with that, just as long as there is a limit in sight that is firmly entrenched within a new paradigm of sustainability.

Our economy and much more importantly our quality of life do not depend on continuous growth. Just the opposite is true.

Turnbull, please run for Premier. New South Wales needs you.

I am bemused with the negative personal criticisms posted about Turnbull. At least he has the guts to ask the 'water' question and suggest some solutions to the water crises in the Eastern seaboard. How about some positive suggestions instead what looks like envious personal attacks on a successful indivdual who has succeeded in the business world and now trying to make a contribution to the nation's policies to improve our living standards.

Greg said, "your 13,500L tank will fill on the first major downpour and thereafter it will overflow at the same rate as a 5KL tank". But the 13,500L tank will have an extra 8,500L to last an extra 12 days. It can wait 19 days for the next shower while the 5,000L tank will be empty in 7 days.

Only 20mm of rain on the average 250m2 roof fills a 5,000L tank while the 13,500L tank captures 54mm. Even in normal dry months a 5,000L tank will still overflow, with the owners buying mains water they don't need.

The dry months for Logan City are June (53.8mm), July (38.6mm), August (48.6mm), September (45.8mm), October (55.2mm). Most of this falls in 2-3 days with small falls over the rest of the month.

This is why our modelling settled on the 13,500L tank as optimising cost, minimising overflow and maximising capture. See "Which Tank? at www.ianmott.blogspot.com

A 13.5KL tank need not be "too big" nor too difficult to connect all downpipes too. The trick is to mount small 100L drums high on the wall at each downpipe to capture storm surges and then join these to the main tank with normal poly pipe. As long as the small drums are higher than the main tank they will allow the poly pipe to go to ground and hug the house line with minimal visual impact and then rise to the main tank intake. Linked 5,000 and 9,000 litre tanks can capture the same volume.

And a 13,500L tank can just as easily switch over to mains water to ensure continuity of supply. But with a 5,000L tank you will still have to buy 180kl of mains water a year at whatever outrageous prices are charged in future. Those with a 13,500L tank will only need to buy 33kl of mains water and their water bills will be well protected from price increases for the next 30 years.

"I am bemused with negative personal criticisms posted about Adolph Hitler. At least he had the guts to ask the 'Poland' question and suggest some solutions to the standard of living crisis in Germany."

Hmmm!

Not every attack on the policies of a successful individual are based on envy. Additionally the preeminent suggestion to handle, in particular Sydney's water crisis, is to cease property development and thus immigration into the Sydney basin. Malcolm will not consider that option because he clearly has ulterior motives that stem from 'out of touch' Howard immigrationopoly policies. There are complex socio economic issues involved here and for someone to blithely accept Malcolm's water policies along with their iniquitous hidden focused immigration agendas is every bit as negligent as supporting Adolph Hitler before the advent of World War II. Those policies clearly profit a few at the expense of the many. Something in common with Hitler's Euro policies. Additionally the Federal government continually ignores falling standards of living in Sydney caused by focused immigration by averaging Sydney in with rising National standards. That in itself is a lie and a bad reflection on the honesty of John Howard and all his ministers including MT.

Barnaby Joyce asked the question "Would we use our new immigration laws on Mary Joseph and Jesus if they turned up on our shore?"

I ask the question "Would we NOT vote out of office any individual who would by immigration or any other means mount an invasion on the right to quiet enjoyment of the populace of Sydney and make the citizens of NSW pay for it through higher prices for every service including water as an also ran?"