With the global financial crisis, and consequent economic uncertainty within Australia, should it be an imperative that any taxpayer dollars be spent on improving production and efficiency? The neccessity to retain agricultural jobs in our rural areas (and cities) surely cannot be as easily dismissed as it has been previously. Our "eminent" scientists and economists have long been pushing buy-backs of irrigation entitlements as being the sensible approach seeing that agriculture is such a small part of GDP and all.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/10/15/2391858.htm?section=business

I think all future spending should be prioritised toward creating water savings which will bring new jobs, retain current jobs and create further wealth for our country. Shelving water licences in the current climate should even have our economists scratching their heads (as if they aren't already).

I'm with you there Rojo. Thousands of country prople have invested their lives in the towns growing in the irrigation areas. These whole towns depend on the farms, not just the farmers. Many ordinary workers, small business people, & even public servants, will see their economic wellbeing destroyed as these towns become ghost towns.

Buying the water allocation may give the farmer a chance of a new start, but its the towns people who will be left with their lives destroyed. This is not a new phenomenon of course. Country people often pay the price when there are some city votes, or academic grants to be bought.

Most of these areas have developed due to the quality of the soil in the areas, unlike the sand dunes the water will be wasted on, in the south.

I believe it is absolutely immoral to destroy these towns, & industries, just to supply fresh water to a man made water-ski lake in South Australia.

South Australia has beem swimming in other people's water for far too long. It's about time they started to pay for their own water developements.

Err. both incorrect. Buy backs are the only solution to over allocation, and it seems to have escaped you that the Murray system is grossly over allocated. As a first step massive buy backs need to occur. Infrastructure upgrades should happen only after you have addressed over allocation, otherwise you spend good money after bad. Try telling some irrigation communities who haven't had an allocation for 6 years that infrastructure is good, when there is no water. Buy back helps socially, is cheaper economically as you get water closer to market value and delivers water to the stressed river system once it becomes available.

Not doing this you give a death by a thousand cuts approach to allowing rural communities disintegrate over a number of years

"Try telling some irrigation communities who haven't had an allocation for 6 years that infrastructure is good"

yes, that makes tax payer buy-backs seem much more sensible. If there haven't been any allocations for that period what exactly is the govt buying?

I'm sure it is cheaper economically in the short term, and probably has been viewed in that light until recently. Unemployment was not an issue only a few weeks ago, nor were the billions allocated to strip jobs from rural areas.

You say the system is grossly overallocated, yet no-one has had an general security allocation on the Murray for three years, until yesterday(2%). That being the case how has "overallocation" done anything. The lower lakes were full 2 years ago, in fact artificially full at 0.8m above sea level. If we look at this simple pattern the conclusion could well be that when irrigators have water, the environment has water.

Infrastructure doesn't have to be more storage, it can be earthworks to seperate the menindee lakes to reduce evaporation, piping of leaky channels, installation of drip irrigation on sandy soils, employing/training people with expertise in efficient irrigation practices. The point is that this creates jobs and frees water for the river, more importantly the water remaining is used to its potential.
To my mind there isn't much point buying say half of the entitlements only to have the remainder not being used to it's full potential. Much better to have every drop used well, the savings becoming available to the environment.

ps. forgot to include this in initial post, scientists call for more water at community expense: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24369986-601,00.html

As a christian I know that the answer is in the word of God
" Jesus " . He can supply all our needs . When I looked up the word ALL in the dictionary guess what ! it's meaning is all . SIN separates us from God . The only unforgivable sin is rejecting or not trusting God the Holy Spirit . If you close the door on him he leaves like the gentle person he is and never troubles you again . Your choice not his . If you have never believed or incountered the Holy Spirit All you have to do is get fairdinkum and call on the name of JESUS. The way I do it is I go and sit under a tree with a bottle of water, a bible , a pen and paper and I tell him I am not shifting until I hear from him and as he is a loving father he is always ready to talk with his children . My main prodlem is it has taken me 65 years to get to a place of total dependance on him . In third world countrys we see much more of the miricles because of lack of material things . Which has to do with needs . Chinese christians are always surprised how much we acomplish apart from God . Evolution has griped the mind of most Australians and they reject the truth . You don't get water in the rivers without rain ,you can throw as much money as you like at the rivers BUT without rain you still have no more water . I am not advocating mismanagment of Gods Precious resorces that he has provided for our benefit , I am just saying give Honour where it belongs , with the creator Jesus for he said "if you see me you see the father" " the Father and I are one". Remember your life is in your hands not mine .

and to Richie's post I would add 2 Chronicles 7:14

"If my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways...
THEN will I hear from heaven, and heal their land"

Repeating a previous statement.

WORST drought in living memory.
RUDD wants to open our immigration doors for a further 3 million people.

Does that sound like good stewardship of the planet God gave us?

rojo,
Richie is right. For infrastructure to be valuable FIRST you need enough water to service those who want it i.e. demand exceeds supply. Answer: reduce demand THEN deliver the rest more efficiently (infrastructure).

If you have a requirement (for example) for 1 trillion mega litres but supply is 1 million no matter how efficiently you distribute it isn't enough. There will be irrigators who will go broke, starve, suicide etc. Therefore buying their water allocation gives the small farmer a chance to relocate or diversify ( hydroponics?). The other alternative is great infrastructure and no one to ustilize it.

Like it or not some properties aren't viable in today's circumstances, for a number of reasons.

What isn't addressed because of (misplaced) slavish adherance to Capitalist dogma national planning is negated or avoided.
By that I mean we as a country need to nationally plan what industries(incl.) crops we need to regard as essential for the nation and fund or nurture accordingly. I wonder if it isn't national suicide to allow the global Corporate Capitalism to dictate to nations (us) what suits them to grow. Keep in mind CC has it's own agenda which is counter to national interests. The truth is a level playing field never and never will exist.

One thing is clear with 6.5 Billion and increasing who need feeding, we need to be growing more food. It makes no sense for us to not be able to feed our selves at the cost of 'market manipulation' for consumer products.

Recent events prove in my mind we need to trade on a world basis but be self sufficient in all areas...including primary production. I am not neither extreme but the answer is controlled or directed capitalism.

examinator, no arguments, no water no savings. We can either but back entitlements now with no water, and put nothing back into the river, but decimate rural communities that are currently being held together with the belief that things are going to turn around. Or we can get prepared for that turn around by getting things in place to save water. In this scenario jobs are retained, if not created, in rural areas with supplies etc coming from our rural/urban businesses.

It's not rocket science, we can let most of the water run down the river and use the rest with the system as it is. Less jobs, less production and still have irrigation water losses from leaky channels and the like.
With the govt looking to breathe life into the economy my thoughts would be spending the money on jobs, and future production, rather than buying water assets that are no longer assets, but a net cost to taxpayers.

*Rudd wants to open us up to another 3 million people*

Then Rudd should be opening ag schools and getting his buddies at elders Landmark etc to teach these people farming along with the Minister of imagration and State Ministers.

Pluss bringing in the skilled labour to reopen plants and export.

As far as A Minister for water Australia needs an Aussie three time generation.

Even the old Nationals wouldnt get it this wrong.
Jenny Wrong has got it wong.

BTW has anybody heard the rumour the UK company buying the water has connections with China?

I wonder if Jenny has any inside information. Then again I suppose not considering she said she had no idea the company buying the water were from the UK.

Hard to beleve they wouldhave Australias best interests first isnt it.
Funny that would have thought the Minister of Water might have made it her business to know 'whom' was purchasing our water.

Wow pretty good Country this place they call Australia- You can buy the soul of the country and nobody bothers to turn up at any meetings from this new Australian Government.

Oh thats of course if you not an Aussie farmer or a Australian living in the bush.

Oh well who knows perhaps Jenny will arrange for us the buy our drinking water down the track from China or UK.

Like our milk! Gee I hope they dont try recyle it first.

Where`s Kenny when you need him. Heard he was in China the off to the ME.

Maybe there is more in this Kenny world of Loos than meets the eye.

Could he be really working for the Minister of Water.
As they say SH happens!

http://qcl.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/political/wong-abandons-towns-in-water-buyback/1339072.aspx?src=enews