Tony Windsor demonstrates a dangerous parochialism in water debate

Federal Independent MP for New England Tony Windsor has apparently threatened to push for alternatives to mass water buybacks, including redirecting water into the struggling Murray according to The Australian today.

Mr Windsor said that if the Murray-Darling Basin Authority was going to use climate change as part of its justification to take 3000-4000 gigalitres of water from irrigators, it could look at diverting water into the basin from areas of higher rainfall elsewhere...........
Mr Windsor said he would conduct an objective valley-by-valley analysis of where the authority's recommended cuts to water allocation could be tolerated. He said that where the risk of a significant socio-economic fallout was high, "there may be other strategies to fixing this not identified by the authority". He said "the political process" would examine these and other issues in the coming months.
Mr Windsor said the MDBA should not allow water to be taken away from irrigators on account of climate change, because they were not responsible for the problem.

Mr. Windsor does not elaborate on where any potential water diversion would originate except to vaguely point in the direction of far north Queensland.

However, as the Clarence River began to be mentioned within days of the release of the Murray Darling Basin Authority's draft basin plan, on has to suspect that the fate of this NSW coastal river is once more being discussed by politicians and interested parties who are still unwilling or unable to understand that wrecking one catchment area to apply what is little more than a band-aid to the Murray-Darling catchment is not an environmentally or economically sustainable response.

“They can take it to Her Majesty, but it is not going to go anywhere”: Saffin on new Murray-Darling bid for Clarence River water

In The Daily Examiner front page article today on Region 6 Murray Darling Association's bid to open another investigation into damming and diverting freshwater from the Clarence River system, Labor's Janelle Saffin lays down Rudd Government policy:

Member for Page Janelle Saffin said the councils were wasting their time. She said Prime Minister Kevin Rudd had made an 'iron clad' guarantee before the 2007 election that Labor would not allow any diversion of the Clarence River.

She said she could understand the councils' desperation but diverting the Clarence was not a solution. "They should not waste their energy, their money or their time on this," she said. "They can take it to Her Majesty, but it is not going to go anywhere."

Photograph: The Daily Examiner

Investigation into Murray Darling Water Buyback scheme

The Australian Government has requested the Productivity Commission to conduct an investigation into market based alternatives to the purchasing of water entitlements from willing sellers that could be used to restore environmental flows in the Murray Darling.

The Commission will also examine the impediments to water purchasing and how these could be overcome.

The study was part of an agreement in February with Senator Nick Xenophon relating to the Government's $42 billion Nation Building Package.

The Productivity Commission will examine a range of issues such as the pace of environmental water recovery and depth of water markets, transaction and compliance costs for both applicants and governments, impacts of Government purchasing on the water market, the implications of developing water markets and limited price information and the potential to use water exchanges or other options to facilitate water purchasing.

The potential to achieve synergies between water purchase and water use efficiency programs, the capacity to purchase a mix of entitlements with different levels of security to achieve environmental needs and the requirements of Commonwealth Procurement Guidelines are also to be examined.......

An issues paper is to be released by the Commission in mid August and submissions are requested by September 18, 2009.

A draft report will be released in early November with submissions on the report due by early December. A final report will be submitted to the Government on January 24, 2010.

[Taken from Queensland Farmers Federation weekly bulletin on 31 July 2009]

Clarence River 2009 flooding brings forth those old dodgy claims

From North Coast Voices on Tuesday 26 May 2009.

When the first inklings appeared of a coming May 2009 flood event in the Clarence Valley one local warned me that such flooding would be used to raise the issue of further damming in the Clarence River catchment area.

Sure enough, yesterday climate change denialist Jennifer Marohasy opened her mouth and displayed a level of ignorance which quite frankly surprised:

It doesn’t matter what time of year you drive through this region, known as the Northern Rivers District, it is always green and the wide Clarence is always brimming with water.

Oh dear, let's ignore the fact that the Clarence River is salt from above Grafton right down to the river mouth, that it appears to brim with water because of a strong tidal influence, stay silent on the fact that there is a large dam on one of its principal freshwater tributaries and let's also conveniently forget that the Clarence Valley goes in and out of drought with the same regularity as the rest of the NSW North Coast.

I honestly don't have the patience to correct the many misconceptions on which her post is based, so I'll just refer all to the blog A Clarence Valley Protest which was created during the last big John Howard - Malcolm Turnbull push to rob the Clarence catchment of its fresh water and, which includes political responses at local, state and federal level.

Here they come again?

On the last day of 2007 it appears that the National Water Commission wants to blame everyone, but itself and its former political masters, for the continuing lack of an adequate response to long-term drought.
Unfortunately this also means that the Commission is obliquely taking aim at the NSW Northern Rivers region once more.
It seems that damming coastal rivers, such as the Clarence River or one of its tributaries, is still on the minds of both water barons and bureaucrats.

"Mr Matthews also criticised governments for failing to charge the full cost of water supply, and for implementing "policy bans" - positions taken for political reasons, such as the government stance on desalination plants, dams and other infrastructure.
"It is really important that they should all be on the table, they should go through a process of analysis, logic and evidence," he said.
"To have a policy ban at the outset is, in my view, indefensible."
See link:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22988794-643,00.html

The Rudd Government and local Labor MPs Janelle Saffin and Justine Elliot need to remember that the Clarence Valley voted them in on the back of an unequivocal assurance that a Labor federal government would not seek or endorse water diversion from the Clarence River catchment area.

Clarence River now safe from water raiders

The Howard Government was soundly defeated at the Australian federal election last night, with outgoing Prime Minister John Howard tipped to be ousted by Labor in the seat he has held since first entering parliament.
The Nationals look like going into Opposition, along with their coalition partner the Liberal Party, with a reduced number of regional and rural seats.
The NSW Northern Rivers now has two of its three elected federal representatives drawn from the Australian Labor Party which gave a firm commitment earlier this year not to dam and divert waters from the Clarence River catchment area.

To see how the local political battle played out got to North Coast Voices:
http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/

More than three thousand Clarence Valley residents petition NSW Parliament

A petition signed by more than 3,000 Clarence Valley residents was tabled in the NSW Parliament by the NSW Minister for Lands, Tony Kelly, on 8 November 2007.

The minister called on the Howard Goverment to clarify its position on damming the Clarence River before people in the Clarence Valley go to vote at the Federal Election on 24 November.

"There still remains a deep concern among residents of the Clarence Valley that the dam and diversion of water to Queensland proposed by the Federal Coalition will go ahead. That concern has been fuelled by the Coalition's ambiguous position and their continual muddying of the waters about their true position on the dam........Dam the Clarence and the fishing industry, one of the largest industrires in the region, would be decimated." [The Daily Examiner,Grafton,"Clarence no-dam petition tabled in NSW Parliament",12 November 2007,p.5]

Clarence River diversion still a hot potato in election year

Despite every indication to the contrary, the Federal Coalition continues to deny its plan to raid Clarence River catchment water.
See link:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22689001-30417,00.html

Last Wednesday Kevin Rudd challenged Messrs Howard and Turnbull on the dam issue. Mr. Turnbull's response was that his pledge not to dam the Oxley River, in another valley further north, really meant the Clarence as well. [The Daily Examiner, Grafton,"Turnbull's dam idea dumb: Rudd",2 November 2007,p.5].

I saw a copy of Mr. Turnbull's letter to the Nationals candidate for Richmond concerning the Oxley River. To put it baldly - Malcolm Turnbull lies.

Is Tenterfield trying to create a local dam in order to raid the Clarence River?

According to the Clarence Environment Centre, Tenterfield Shire Council continues its plans for a dam on the Mole River, a relatively small unregulated river with no existing water gauges and no legislated environmental flow.

After a representative of the Centre recently visited the area and spoke with Tenterfield Shire Council's General Manager, suspicions remain that this new dam proposal might be a second front in the water raiders' efforts to steal Clarence River freshwater.

No evidence could be found to justify the proposed 500 gigalitre dam capacity based on apparently moderate flows within the Mole River's approximately 200 square kilometre catchment.
To keep this dam filled and capable of passing water through to the Murray-Darling river system as intended, a second water source is likely to be required.

Tenterfield Shire Council is on record as wanting an interbasin transfer from the Clarence River catchment involving similar volumes of water to that proposed for this new dam.

See link:
http://tenterfield.yourguide.com.au/news/local/general/taking-mole-river-dam-bid-to-state-cabinet/1079066.html

What Australia' failure to come to grips with climate change is leading to

An elderly Sydney man was severely beaten and later died after a dispute over water use.

See link:
 http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22683984-1702,00.html

Turnbull plan to privatise urban-regional water authorities off the agenda until after federal election

It has been reported that the Federal Minister for Environment and Water Resources, Malcolm Turnbull, has failed to get Cabinet support for his planned $5.5 billion buy into and eventual privatisation of metropolitan and regional water authorities.
See link:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22671368-29277,00.html

It appears that the Howard Government doesn't want to rock the water boat anymore during this Federal Election campaign.
Given its track record, this push against regional water authorities in particular will reactivate if a Coalition government is re-elected.
One has to worry about the eventual fate of North Coast Water and the possible loss of local control over this Clarence Valley Council business unit.

What the Clarence Valley is fighting for (12)

[Image displayed at Google Images,26 September 2007]
The Clarence River at Maclean.

John Howard reconsiders Kyoto and turns it down, again?

John Howard and his Cabinet appear to have reconsidered their position on the Kyoto Protocol six weeks ago and, decided for party political reasons not to endorse this international agreement in the lead up to the Federal Election.
The Howard Government's short-sighted approach to climate change and national water security continues.
See link:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,23599,22657337-29277,00.html

Abetz promises what he can't deliver on Clarence River

It was reported in the media today that the Federal Minister for Fisheries and Forestry, Eric Abetz, has told the Clarence River Fishermen's Co-operative that "the Howard-Vaile Government will not - ever- build the dam" on the Clarence River [The Daily Examiner,Grafton,"Coalition, Labor rule out dam on the Clarence",22 October 2007,p.3].

Now Senator Abetz cannot offer such a guarantee into the future when John Howard has already signalled that he will not serve a full-term as Prime Minister if re-elected.

It is also passing strange that the senator would attempt to make this promise, when both Malcolm Turnbull and John Howard have verbally and in writing danced around the issue of Clarence water diversion in an effort to avoid saying the words "never ever".

John Howard's latest avoidance of a never-ever pledge occurred as recently as a fortnight ago, when he briefly visited the Clarence Valley.

In June this year Senator Abetz himself voted down a motion calling for the protection of the Clarence River.

Clarence River water diversion to SE Queensland more expensive than Traveston Crossing Dam

The recently released Traveston Crossing Dam Environmental Impact Statement cites a dam on the Clarence River diverting water into south-east Queensland at Wyaralong 2007-2056, as being $650-51 million more expensive than building a major dam on Queensland's Mary River and also more expensive than a desalination plant on the Sunshine Coast.
See link:
http://www.coordinatorgeneral.qld.gov.au/library/pdf/
Traveston_Executive_Summary_171007.pdf

From a Queensland perspective, this would cost such a Clarence diversion at an estimated $1,0340 million.
On economic grounds, it seems that Messrs. Howard and Turnbull have backed the least preferred option.

Are those water raiders at it again?

Tenterfield Shire Council supports diversion of Clarence River catchment water into north-west NSW via the western fall of the Murray Darling river system.

Last year Council declared itself ready to immediately begin construction of a dam on the Mole River. A dam on this river features as a preferred option in some schemes to divert Clarence freshwater inland.

On 18 October 2007 Tenterfield Shire Council announced that it is again going to ask government to consider a dam on the Mole River [Channel 7,News,18 October 2007].

Although this announcement doesn't specifically mention the Clarence, the annual gigalitres quoted by Council as available from such a dam are remarkably similar to volumes previously cited in relation to schemes for a Mole dam receiving water from the Clarence River catchment area.

This latest lobbying by Tenterfield Shire Council may be an attempt to create in principle support for a Mole River dam, with the expectation that the push to fill it from the Clarence River system will come later.

I note that although the unregulated flow from the upper Mole River currently dilutes arsenic contamination from a large old mine within its catchment, as late as last year iron and nickel contamination in river water was still so high that it would not be recommended for crop irrigation, stock water or human consumption.

Threat of Howard-Turnbull water raid still worries local government

"The dam diversion is still very much an issue, because I listened to the Prime Minister last week say that because the Queensland and NSW Governments didn't want to do it, it wouldn't happen. The reality is if John Howard is re-elected, he has the constitutional wear-with-all and a friendly senate until June next year, and he could make it happen," he said.
"We need the Prime Minister to come out and say 'there will never ever be a dam on the Clarence' - that's what we need."
[Clarence Valley Mayor in Clarence Valley Review,"Mayor,Green Group Skeptical",17 October 2007,p.5]

Albanese on the Howard-Turnbull water raid

"A Rudd Labor Government will scrap Mr Howard and Mr Turnbull's plan to dam the Clarence and Tweed Rivers.

In April 2007, Mr Howard strongly supported damming the Clarence, saying it "passed the pub test".

That's why he commissioned a study which Malcolm Turnbull strongly supported.

Locals have a right to be confused about and cynical about Mr Howard's motives. He will say whatever it takes to win the election.

If the Howard Government is re-elected on 24 November they will pursue their plans for the dam, either before or after John Howard retires.

Labor unequivocally opposes a dam on the Clarence River, and only a Rudd Labor Government will stop the dam." [Antony Albanese MP, joint media release with Paul Sekfy,15 October 2007]

Rumour hath it............(12)

A quiet little rumour has surfaced recently. To wit, that Malcolm Turnbull will attempt to wedge Rudd and Bligh over the proposed Traveston Crossing dam, by putting forward a NSW Northern Rivers interbasin transfer as an alternative to placing a large dam on the Mary River.
In the process hoping to garner votes from a presumably grateful southern Queensland.
Rumour has its money on such a proposal once more featuring the Clarence River catchment area.

Who uses all our water?

 

 

"The dots on this graph relate to how much we spend. These are the 1400 or so statistical local areas that make up our evidence base for thinking about water and all things in Australia. You wouldn't have to be a great and deep statistician to work out that there's a fairly linear relationship there: the more you spend, all other things being equal, the more water you use across your full consumption budget. And so the lower spenders in Australia are doing about 0.5 ML a year, the big spenders about 1 ML." [Foran,B,March 2007]

 

See link for 2007 Fenner Conference on the Environment:
 http://www.science.org.au/events/fenner2007/foran.htm