Brock,
"People who drink recycled water are dumber people."

I now can't decide whether your footy show quip is an attempt at humour or if you are serious.
I had the pleasure of drinking water in Adelaide only a few months ago and compared to other cities it tastes pretty good. Yes It draws water from near the end of the Murray, but that water quality is quite good even given the drought. Salt concentrations have been falling, mainly due to salt interception schemes. The river has not stopped flowing so no problems associated with stagnation.

"Pictures of Africans queueing for water will soon be the norm for Adelaide residents"
Why would Adelaide residents want pictures of queueing Africans?

"Go to any large country property run by a local politician or lawyer and see the gallons(sorry litres.)of water being pumped onto the soil"
Yes it's called irrigation and is not confined to either occupation. Noone within reach of the Murray is going thirsty so that water is put to it's next best economic use. Bores are often used for irrigation and whilst there is drawdown in peak season the aquifer recharges in the off season. A great deal of change has occured in NSW to ensure sustainable bore yields.

Seen today.

$500 million worth of water, enough to supply 2 major cities for 12 months,is disappearing to irrigators because of faulty meters which could be replaced for $1.5 million.

With politicans and adminstrators like we have, who needs enemies?

South Australia does recycle, refine and treat sewerage water- and guess what? many of you eat it in vegetables all over the country. I can testify that struggling limp lettuce from water starved regions does not compare with South Australian lettuce grown to decadent lush crispness with the aid of the treated water. Still old tea bags and Cow dung fertiliser and bucketed rain water make for rich tasting vegetables.

There are successful instances where storm water is used to rechage aquifers. Most of these have been in conjunction with wet lands which purify the water and on the scale of single suburbs.

Governments should consider massive underground dams , a system to recharge aquifers around the country such as (not exclusively)the Great Artesian Basin from the tropics and to pipe it out to the coast when needed.

There are various systems which could be used to minimalise infrastructure and so cut costs. There would be no need for water restrictions (although we should keep a reign on water waste). Farmers could then fill dams with bore or mains water and allow once permamently running now dry creeks to flow again. Even the Murray could be flushed with surplus water. Recharge water would correct earth sinking, flush salinity in dry creeks and evaporation loss would be lowered.

Water is a resource in a class of its own.

Water is the one commodity for which we have no alternative. It is fundamental to human life.

Water is not like the other utilities, electricity, gas, telephone, mail services etc.

We can and many do get by without some or all of them. My house has no gas service, all electric. If mail were not delivered I can pick it up form a PO mail box and mnowadays I have a range of different electricity. Gas and telephone vendors competing for my custom.

No one survives without water. Dust is what Australia would be without water.

For this reason, I do not believe water should be placed into the same basket of “saleable utilities” and privatized. Water supply services should remain in public hands. However, we should consider whose “public hands”.

Certainly the actions of Queenslanders display a parochial attitude to selling off water before it gets to the Murray. I do not suggest they are right or wrong in doing this. What I do observe is the responsibility of State politicians is to the state electorates. Such a relationship guarantees parochial values and priorities for what is the MOST CRITICAL life resource.

State governments have been fiddling with water and raping metropolitan water users by exacting “special dividends” to convert water rates, paid to finance infrastructure, into general funds, used to squander on whatever takes these state politicians fancy,

Overlayed on a patchwork of water authorities is a separate veneer of bureaucracy, the Water Catchment Authorities plan and scheme to manage the same resource at the supply (dam) level.

Why?

Is this the most effective way of managing water?

Are state politicians the best to co-ordinate the most critical of national resources?

I for one think not.

Water is all too important for small minded politicians and their local bureaucrats to deal with.

Water, as the most critical of resources needs to be managed at a national level by real professionals who understand national strategy, not a bunch of parochial nonentities.