On Friday July 27 in the morning, it was announced that the Victorian Farmers' Federation had begun negotiating directly with the Commonwealth to try and resolve the deadlock the Murray-Darling basin agreement is in.

That very same afternoon, Steve Bracks the Premier and John Thwaites the water minister both announced their resignation.

In my view, this is not a coincidence. I do not believe that Bracks has resigned to become a better father. I think that the Victorian labor government would not have survived the VFF closing a deal on their own; nor could it remain on its uncollaborative stance; nor could it suddently back up and sign Howard's agreement.

Best to go before the water issue gobbled them alive.

This may be far fetched; the future will tell (i.e. what will be Brumby's position?)

But, but, but -

- that which is corporatised can then be sold, as we saw here in Victoria, especially during the Kennett era.

Surely there are better, superior, newer and more enlightened ways of organising a public commodity for the common good. Therefore why go down that path at all.

We are all on a pathway that leads to an unknown territory. We can't afford to use antiquarian ideas as a panacea for a brand new problem. Einstein pointed out that to use the same techiques that created a problem - in order to try and fix it - is lunacy squared.

Scientists should be in charge of this one, not merchant bankers, lawyers, corporations, or their political pimps.

I’m not sure that Bracks ever “asserted the interests of his farmers” as Labor hopeful George Williams says. The last news after the Howard decision to bypass Victoria was that Victorian farmers were eagerly awaiting Federal Government action and looking forward to water security that Bracks would never have offered with his pig-headed attitude.

You wouldn’t need many fingers to count the number of Victorian farmers who supported Bracks or any other Labor politician in this matter on any other

chris, i find it a continual source of amusement that you think any special interest group will work for the common good. scientists are no different.

i do note the 'political pimps' with approval. now if you could just take that last step, to democracy...

Howards move on water is cynical and opportunistic - even the Qland Nationals have the same reservations about the plan as does (did) Bracks.

Howards performance when the VIcs turned their backs on thelast draft gives truth the mans thought processes - he got very petulant indeed - telling all who cared to listen Bracks had had 5 months to come to the party - it seemed self evident that if Howawrd did not get his own way he would attempt a constitutional trump -

negotiation/consultation was tokenistic - not dissimilar to Bracks' approach to the De Sal plant in Wonthaggi.

Managing the MD basin will do little to preserve our water - When we have water we dont know what to do with it any way -

we are in in the driest continent on earth and can shamefully lay claim to being, on a per capita basis, the third highest consumers of water after the USA and Canada - till we learn to value what we've got most of the measures proposed are window dressing - .

I agree with the view that scientists should be in charge of the Murray Darling Basin. They would need a clear charter to optimise sustainabile health of the river system and some ground rules in place to ensure that all science based decisions take place with transparency, are ethical and follow due consultation with stakeholders. It's worth trying a new approach.

The MD has been disasterously *managed* by state politicians and their ministerial minders, serving narrow sectional interests for decades.

Our Australian constitution helped to get us into this mess, thanks to the hands off approach by successive federal governments. It's been the sad failure of federalism that National Standards are never even on the radar when states manage infrastructure from rail to energy to water ... just about anything they touch turns to salt.

With a modicum of imagination, the federal government can assume more than ample power to do the job. Establishing or amending an international treaty with a suitable international partner, such as a reciepient of our endangered migratory birds, should not be too difficult to find. It's ironic and poetic justice that the most vulnerable bird species could help restore to health the nation's life giving arteries for all dependent species.