What we have here is 'failure to disclose'.

Water is more expensive because state and federal governments are overpopulating Australia, especially the east coast property markets, to boost their own personal power profiles and market shares for a few rotten to the core CEOs who deem our country their playground. Government spinbull doctors are cleverly 'omitting disclosure' of this truth in their abject push to blame their constituents for water shortages.

Cut immigration and water prices will fall as demand reduces. Prices for water will tumble. The notion we have to pay more for basic necessities so an elite minority can live better is tantamount to slavery. We have had enough of this TurnBULL or SPINBULL, as I call it!

On a similar vein, the FABRICATION that Sydney has to be the New York of the Pacific for OUR benefit needs to be nutted. If the elite minority who want this will pay all the excess water costs 100%, including desal plants then they can have their New York-Sydney. othewise F-OFF!

That includes this Iemma and his bloody city wide wi-fi BS that benefits domestic & international business and immigrants at the cost of NSW taxpayers. Unless Iemma puts wi-fi all over NSW for the people wo are PAYING for it then he can find himself another job because his employer is not Packer and Co, his employer is the people of NSW.

Wake up NSW! You are being shafted bigtime. Keep voting the major parties around so they are denied pre-eminent domain over our lives.
Liberal for 2007 and labour back in 2010. After a while they'll start to wake up that WE run this country.

A comment posted in response to Kevin Cox's article "What price recycled water?" of 16 March 2006 by hyetal has proven indirectly useful in shedding some light on this question of the adequacy of the price for water, in that hyetal gave a link to his/her home page. http://www.goldcoastwatercrisis.info/ It seems to provide photographic and other evidence of spin. Specifically, http://www.goldcoastwatercrisis.info/gpage1html.html indicates the intention to construct significant mains pipelines for Gold Coast supply augmentation from Wivenhoe dam.

Great discrepancy seems to exist between the quantities of water supposedly available for the Gold Coast (currently under level 2 restrictions with Hinze dam full) from Wivenhoe, with the apparent unwillingness to make water available to Toowoomba (currently under level 5 restrictions) from Wivenhoe.
http://www.goldcoastwatercrisis.info/gpage10html.html refers.

It would seem the potential of Wivenhoe as a cash cow to the State government far outweighs that government's perception of duty to make reasonable supplies available where it is really needed, and where that water is collected in a catchment near Toowoomba.

Rather than water being underpriced, could it be that its supply is seen as a government facilitated opportunity to first create artificial shortage for at least some users (like the people of Toowoomba), and then bunt the price up for supply to an essentially guaranteed captive market? Is this the business model that Malcolm Turnbull wishes to see Australia-wide for water supply? http://www.goldcoastwatercrisis.info/gpage5html.html

Hyetal's link dealing with attempts to introduce recycled water into the Hinze dam seems to indicate that the present price for municipal reticulated water is relatively attractive by comparison with what might be received for recycled water as such. Here is hyetal's link on this. http://www.goldcoastwatercrisis.info/gpage8html.html Under a so-called privatized water supply regime, the 'smart' operator gets ALL the cheapest water (the sewerage effluent), processes it as cheaply as possible, then sells it ALL back at the highest prices. Money, for short!

Why dont you guys stop talking about "government" as if it is the saviour? Can anyone point to government doing the right thing in allocations, controls, assistance etc that is not politically expeditious or disguised distributed costs?

Why instead dont you share why water, as an essential commodity, should be exempted from the operation of the market like everything else? What is so special about water, in contrast to all other inputs, that should render it outside the market and hence unfairly allocated.

Instead of your diatribes about government, need, unfairness, essential etc, talk about inclusion as an essential commodity that therefore cannot be allocated by geography, history etc but by its value. A value that is passed on like the GST to the end user.

Yes there will be the vociferous losers and quiet winners. Yes there will be some increased costs (to be passed on and by SOME), there will also be gains (that will not be shouted around).

RemGlobalCorp

""Yes there will be an overwhelming number of the vociferous losers and a handful of quiet winners. ""

And THAT IS NOT DEMOCRACY and WILL NOT BE TOLERATED in AUSTRALIA.

When the majority are railroaded by corrupt politicians into paying for the water of people who have not arrived yet, amidst a chronic shortage in a desert land, you have Neo-Feudalism. Add rotten CEOs scooping up all the profts from this iniquity as living standards rise in dollar terms but FALL in REAL terms (social stress, gridlock, lousy services etc) and you have the beginnings of FASCISM.

Morris Iemma's recent 'state plan' is a roadmap to this neo-FASCISM and NSW Labour must be tossed out in the March 2007 elections. They have been around too long and have forgotten that is is the PEOPLE of NSW whom they must serve rather than a few staggeringly wealthy CEOs at whose feet they so overtly grovel, as seen in shonky policies from Botany Bay Euro-developments to desal and every kind of human money-funnel that can make their masters richer.

NSW has had enough!

Mark My words!

PS 'The Castle' is on Ch9 tonight. Watch it!

Well said Kaep.

Governments and the media continually champion the great benefits and huge wealth resultant from population growth, and obviously community support for population growth must be around 100% as all major political parties seem to share the enthusiasm. But how is it then that with being so fabulously wealthy as a result of a bsllooning population, Australians suddenly are being told that there is not enough public money to build the infrastructure to cope?

I agree that the calls for private funding amount to no more than an undemocratic scam on Australian citizens for the benefit of private interests that will compulsorily extract huge profits for services and resources that would otherwise be cheap and plentiful if Australia's population were not manipulated.

"You know Steel, I can think of much better uses for Queensland water, than to let it run down the Darling, just to provide you with steam boat holidays"
This would bring money to communities on the river system. Rather than them making money off wasting the outrageously almost-free water as they currently do with high-consumption crops, they could make some off tourism and restore a once beautiful river system as well as engage in historical restorations and cultural events.