http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/state-politics/pm-in-hot-water-for-attending-event-with-abbott/story-e6frgczx-1226306647509

Julia Gillard in hot water for attending event with Tony Abbott

THE NSW and Victorian water ministers have launched an attack on Julia Gillard for attending the same community event in support of the Murray River that Tony Abbott spoke at yesterday.
In a sign of the escalating political rift between the states and the commonwealth over water reform, NSW Water Minister Katrina Hodgkinson last night hit out at the Prime Minister for attending the "I love the Murray" event in Canberra hosted by South Australian newspaper The Advertiser.

Ms Gillard attended the event, held on the lawn of Parliament House, with Water Minister Tony Burke, the Opposition Leader and Coalition water spokesman Barnaby Joyce.

"Today we saw yet another example of partisan politics coming from the Gillard government," Ms Hodgkinson said. "This is Labor attempting to look after its own interests at the expense of the Murray-Darling Basin."

Victorian Water Minister Peter Walsh also slammed the Prime Minister for her attendance at the event, saying, "Julia Gillard has shown her true colours".

"The basin plan needs to be about all communities and all environments, not just about marginal Labor seats," he said.

Neither Mr Walsh nor Ms Hodgkinson would comment on Mr Abbott's attendance.

The stoush came as Mr Abbott rejected a claim he told representatives of the group, the Women of the Living Basin, he would "tear up" the Murray-Darling Basin plan if elected to government.

Helen Dalton, a farmer from the NSW irrigation stronghold of Griffith, told The Australian the Opposition Leader said he would scrap the plan at a private meeting with members of the group last month in his Canberra office.

According to Ms Dalton, Mr Abbott said: "This is a bad plan, when I gain government I will tear up this plan."

Shona Hando, who was at the meeting, also claimed Mr Abbott used the words "tear up" the plan.

Mr Abbott's office last night said: "At no stage did Mr Abbott say that an Abbott government would 'tear it up' or 'rip up' the Murray-Darling Basin plan."

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 7:41pm:

Abbott will tear up Murray Darling Plan

No big surprise there - he wants to tear up everything....

So labor are going to isolate themselves. I have a tip for your isolation. Go to an election, you will get isolated there.

NSW and Victoria think they do not need to help South Australia by returning water the Murray Darling river system and Julia Gillard is showing her true colors by attending the meeting while Tony Abbott is excused for his attendance!!!

Tony Abbott has told NSW farmers in a private meeting he will scrap the plan if he is elected but has denied the claim despite NSW farmers claiming he had made the claim to them.....Once again we see Tony Abbott making claims to one audience and then denying he said it when confronted by opposition.....Why would NSW farmers lie about what Abbott said when he thought he had people who where on his side???

People want the river system fixed and are not relying on once in a lifetime floods to neglect action that will restore the river system to some sustainability.....Once again we see Abbott the opportunist and flake who is in denial about anything that will sustain the environment for short term political gain!!!

>:( >:( >:(

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Wait till the dull norms get hold of this one. Why should the PM not attend this function. After all She is trying to develop a plan that is for the long term future of a river system for all Australians. But as usual Abbott is playing wedge politics and using the farmers who exploit the river and think because they suck the life from it that they should be the only ones to say what happens to it.

So good old Abbott will get into power, shred everything that has been achieved for the long term future and planning in the interests of all Australians then blame anyone he can as things like the Murray-Darling suffer destruction and ecological disaster when the next dry hits. But the conservative states will claim hero status with the desal plants to keep the cities wet.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 7:50pm:

So labor are going to isolate themselves. I have a tip for your isolation. Go to an election, you will get isolated there.

Nothing to say about the obvious double standards and self serving position of the NSW and Victorian water ministers and Tony Abbott's opportunistic comments to tear up everything if he is elected and return to a position of inaction and do nothing Government.....Why am I not surprised???

Anyone who is in any doubt that Tony Abbott is a flake and opportunist just has to look at how he acts when he thinks people are on his side and there are no cameras around.....It is no secret Tony Abbott thinks the environment is crap and he will only take action that buys him votes.....Making hard decisions that are in the best interests of all Australian;s is always trumped by what is best for Tony Abbott!!!

Just another example of Tony saying what the crowd du jour want him to say.

The ALP are screwed anyway, let them hang themselves. ;D ;D ;D

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 7:59pm:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 7:50pm: So labor are going to isolate themselves. I have a tip for your isolation. Go to an election, you will get isolated there. Nothing to say about the obvious double standards and self serving position of the NSW and Victorian water ministers and Tony Abbott's opportunistic comments to tear up everything if he is elected and return to a position of inaction and do nothing Government.....Why am I not surprised??? Anyone who is in any doubt that Tony Abbott is a flake and opportunist just has to look at how he acts when he thinks people are on his side and there are no cameras around.....It is no secret Tony Abbott thinks the environment is crap and he will only take action that buys him votes.....Making hard decisions that are in the best interests of all Australian;s is always trumped by what is best for Tony Abbott!!!

As Julia did when Bob Brown told her to bend over.

corporate_whitey wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 8:02pm:

The ALP are screwed anyway, let them hang themselves. ;D ;D ;D

I am so pleased you are not supporting the people of South Australia and restoring the Murray Darling to some sustainability.....It is always good to stay consistent and only worry about your own pathetic life....Well done!!!

In every debate there is always some people you are happy are on the other side!!!

:) :) :)

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 8:09pm:

corporate_whitey wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 8:02pm: The ALP are screwed anyway, let them hang themselves. ;D ;D ;D I am so pleased you are not supporting the people of South Australia and restoring the Murray Darling to some sustainability.....It is always good to stay consistent and only worry about your own pathetic life....Well done!!! In every debate there is always some people you are happy are on the other side!!! :) :) :)

Any liberal cause should be repudiated & opposed by right thinking people. 8-) 8-) 8-)

corporate_whitey wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 8:17pm:

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 8:09pm: corporate_whitey wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 8:02pm: The ALP are screwed anyway, let them hang themselves. ;D ;D ;D I am so pleased you are not supporting the people of South Australia and restoring the Murray Darling to some sustainability.....It is always good to stay consistent and only worry about your own pathetic life....Well done!!! In every debate there is always some people you are happy are on the other side!!! :) :) :) Any liberal cause should be repudiated & opposed by right thinking people. 8-) 8-) 8-)

So we should just let the Murray Darling river system degenerate to a level where it cannot be saved and will continue to decline just because it is a Labor initiative and it will mean two Liberal States having to compromise.....Gee I am happy I live in WA and do not have to rely on anything from you selfish right wing parasites!!!

>:( >:( >:(

MOTR wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 8:01pm:

Just another example of Tony saying what the crowd du jour want him to say.

Yes Abbott has a history of playing to the crowd and then denying he is a populist flake....The faithful do not even attempt to defend him anymore!!!

::) ::) ::)

Tear up the Murray Darling Plan....

Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers...

So the Advertiser, part of News Corp, organised an event concerning the Murray Darling at Parliament house. Then condemned one side of politics for turning up.

Then ignored a bigger story, Abbott is planning on destroying Adelaide, by cutting the flow of the Murray Darling when we will probably be heading back into drought in a couple of years.
Says a lot, that we already new about News Corp.

Also, Liberals caused the Murray Darling collapse during Abbott's period in the Howard Government, after being warned at the beginning of their 12 year period. The Libs ignored it completely.

Time for Lib's little bitch to come clean. Are they pro destruction of the food bowl, destruction of the water system, destruction of farms, families and the towns/cities. Will gNats ignore Liberals attack on water and agriculture, like the Nats are ignoring Libs attack via CSG.

If so, then they deserve to lose Senate seats to the Katter Party next election. Kater may be hard right, at least he is showing care on the environmental front and so for rural/regional Australia.


Dump a Nat and gain a Kat.

____ wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 3:54am:

So the Advertiser, part of News Corp, organised an event concerning the Murray Darling at Parliament house. Then condemned one side of politics for turning up. Then ignored a bigger story, Abbott is planning on destroying Adelaide, by cutting the flow of the Murray Darling when we will probably be heading back into drought in a couple of years. Says a lot, that we already new about News Corp. Also, Liberals caused the Murray Darling collapse during Abbott's period in the Howard Government, after being warned at the beginning of their 12 year period. The Libs ignored it completely. Time for Lib's little bitch to come clean. Are they pro destruction of the food bowl, destruction of the water system, destruction of farms, families and the towns/cities. Will gNats ignore Liberals attack on water and agriculture, like the Nats are ignoring Libs attack via CSG. If so, then they deserve to lose Senate seats to the Katter Party next election. Kater may be hard right, at least he is showing care on the environmental front and so for rural/regional Australia. Dump a Nat and gain a Kat.

Is the advertiser now party of the labor party. You have got it wrong again, hopeless.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 5:27am:

____ wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 3:54am: So the Advertiser, part of News Corp, organised an event concerning the Murray Darling at Parliament house. Then condemned one side of politics for turning up. Then ignored a bigger story, Abbott is planning on destroying Adelaide, by cutting the flow of the Murray Darling when we will probably be heading back into drought in a couple of years. Says a lot, that we already new about News Corp. Also, Liberals caused the Murray Darling collapse during Abbott's period in the Howard Government, after being warned at the beginning of their 12 year period. The Libs ignored it completely. Time for Lib's little bitch to come clean. Are they pro destruction of the food bowl, destruction of the water system, destruction of farms, families and the towns/cities. Will gNats ignore Liberals attack on water and agriculture, like the Nats are ignoring Libs attack via CSG. If so, then they deserve to lose Senate seats to the Katter Party next election. Kater may be hard right, at least he is showing care on the environmental front and so for rural/regional Australia. Dump a Nat and gain a Kat. Is the advertiser now party of the labor party. You have got it wrong again, hopeless.

Advertiser, a paper of News Corp

.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 6:06am:

.

Best comment you have made in weeks

____ wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 6:19am:

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 6:06am: . Best comment you have made in weeks

I am sure. That way you are not held to acoount and your party is not being noticed for what losers they are and how dangerously inept they are.

Here, have another "."

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 1:37am:

Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers...

OOOH, now there's a good idea, and we will let the perpetrators cross examine the rape victims too how about that.
The whole point here is meaningful action will require sacrifice, seems to be something the people of this country have forgotten about. Nothing is for free, nothing and if it is worth achieving it will require sacrifice. This country is really headed for very very tough times if this me first selfish mentality prevails.

progressiveslol wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 7:50pm:

So labor are going to isolate themselves. I have a tip for your isolation. Go to an election, you will get isolated there.

No, they'll get liquidated - just like Greens_Liquidated's party was in QLD. Not one seat!!!

so far the MDB plan is nothing more than a report which replaced the previous one which was dumped and was supposed to be the plan which all the states agreed on and didnt.

THERE IS NO PLAN and never has been,

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25^th, 2012 at 7:51pm:

People want the river system fixed and are not relying on once in a lifetime floods

What once in a life time floods are you talking about?

Who’s life time? Surely you don’t mean the current floods? Or last year? Last year didn’t reach 1991, which was way short of 73 and 74 which were way short of 56.

:-/

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 9:27am:

philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 7:51pm: People want the river system fixed and are not relying on once in a lifetime floods What once in a life time floods are you talking about? Who’s life time? Surely you don’t mean the current floods? Or last year? Last year didn’t reach 1991, which was way short of 73 and 74 which were way short of 56. :-/

there are a lot of people who rely far too heavily on 'memories' and theirfeore assume if they dont remember it, it didnt happen.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 7:29am:

so far the MDB plan is nothing more than a report which replaced the previous one which was dumped and was supposed to be the plan which all the states agreed on and didnt. THERE IS NO PLAN and never has been,

Whats the libs plan?

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 9:47am:

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 9:27am: philperth2010 wrote on Mar 25th, 2012 at 7:51pm: People want the river system fixed and are not relying on once in a lifetime floods What once in a life time floods are you talking about? Who’s life time? Surely you don’t mean the current floods? Or last year? Last year didn’t reach 1991, which was way short of 73 and 74 which were way short of 56. :-/ there are a lot of people who rely far too heavily on 'memories' and theirfeore assume if they dont remember it, it didnt happen.

In ‘91 about 2/3 of NSW was under water and it still didn’t reach the massive ‘56 flood level.

Last year was still about 10 feet short of ‘56.

The lower lakes situation needs to be fixed.

When Flinders mapped the coast in 1803 there was no Murray River mouth. He missed it, we are told to believe.

When Captain Sturt tried for 4 days to reach the mouth in 1830, he wrote…

“Australian rivers fall rapidly from the mountains in which they originate into a level and extremely depressed country; having weak and inconsiderable sources, and being almost wholly unaided by tributaries of any kind; they naturally fail before they reach the coast, and exhaust themselves in marshes or lakes; or reach it so weakened as to be unable to preserve clear or navigable mouths, or to remove the sand banks that the tide throws up before them.”


To suggest the river mouth stayed open in years of prolonged drought, when the main river bed was dry, is just the stuff of fantasies.

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 1:37am:

Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers...

The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had.

GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 12:55pm:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:37am: Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers... The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had.

Australian farmers have employed many new practices to ensure better water usage. From drip and micro spray irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, minimum tillage to name a few.

Boring hacks like you, that must eat dirt for nutrition, will never forward the cause for the betterment of the MDB and the people of OZ.

You are warts on the arse of progress.

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 1:48pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 12:55pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:37am: Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers... The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had. Australian farmers have employed many new practices to ensure better water usage. From drip and micro spray irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, minimum tillage to name a few. Boring hacks like you, that must eat dirt for nutrition, will never forward the cause for the betterment of the MDB and the people of OZ. You are warts on the arse of progress.

Farmers do that, which is great, but its purely profit driven. Get the most out of the avaliable water they are given.

Thats totally different than the overall regulation of the riven basin in deciding how much every farmer can be given without killing the river. 
Another issue is how much natural run-off can be captured by the farmer, and how much is allowed to enter the system for those downstream.

Abbott is once again going for the populist vote now that we are in the flood cycle and there is plenty of water around. Come the next drought we will be right back where we started from... Abbott is hoping hes long gone by then.

Abbott needs to stand up to environmentalism for Australia we have had a gut full of the idiots and the billions they cost us and the jobs. :)

Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 1:55pm:

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:48pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 12:55pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:37am: Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers... The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had. Australian farmers have employed many new practices to ensure better water usage. From drip and micro spray irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, minimum tillage to name a few. Boring hacks like you, that must eat dirt for nutrition, will never forward the cause for the betterment of the MDB and the people of OZ. You are warts on the arse of progress. Farmers do that, which is great, but its purely profit driven. Get the most out of the avaliable water they are given. Thats totally different than the overall regulation of the riven basin in deciding how much every farmer can be given without killing the river.  Another issue is how much natural run-off can be captured by the farmer, and how much is allowed to enter the system for those downstream. Abbott is once again going for the populist vote now that we are in the flood cycle and there is plenty of water around. Come the next drought we will be right back where we started from... Abbott is hoping hes long gone by then.

Profit driven, so? What’s wrong with that? What a better way to implement change? Make more money and save water. I think farmers can see the benefits both ways, even if you hacks can’t. Do you think if a business can make more money by polluting less it would be a good thing? Use less electricity, save money?

You see all you people can think about is how to divide up the water.

So how much is it? Show us all these farmers stopping the flows into the river, show us how much water is stopped. Show me how a farmer affects those down stream by what he stops on farm and how much water can be saved.

Blaa blaa hack hack hack.

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 1:48pm:

GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 12:55pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:37am: Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers... The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had. Australian farmers have employed many new practices to ensure better water usage. From drip and micro spray irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, minimum tillage to name a few. Boring hacks like you, that must eat dirt for nutrition, will never forward the cause for the betterment of the MDB and the people of OZ. You are warts on the arse of progress.

If the Murray Darling dies then nobody will be making progress, dickwit. Everyone will be too busy tearing the Government that allowed it to happen a new one.

GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 3:23pm:

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:48pm: GoddyofOz wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 12:55pm: gizmo_2655 wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:37am: Tear up the Murray Darling Plan.... Good, maybe then they can write a new one that involves the input of the people who live/work along and with the river, and work out a Plan that will actually help the rivers... The Farmers don't want to "help" the Murray. They only want to make the most of the profits they can gain from it then get out of dodge once there is nothing left to take. This is the attitude they've ALWAYS had. Australian farmers have employed many new practices to ensure better water usage. From drip and micro spray irrigation, soil moisture monitoring, minimum tillage to name a few. Boring hacks like you, that must eat dirt for nutrition, will never forward the cause for the betterment of the MDB and the people of OZ. You are warts on the arse of progress. If the Murray Darling dies then nobody will be making progress, dickwit. Everyone will be too busy tearing the Government that allowed it to happen a new one.

Oh really, such a clever arguement, and dick wit, wow.

All i did was show how farmers are already doing some good as opposed to your stupid "farmers don't want to help the river" comment.........wait.....

Oh, i see now, you feel like a dill for saying that, so you attacked me.

;)

Gotcha.

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 2:22pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:55pm: Farmers do that, which is great, but its purely profit driven. Get the most out of the avaliable water they are given. Thats totally different than the overall regulation of the riven basin in deciding how much every farmer can be given without killing the river.  Another issue is how much natural run-off can be captured by the farmer, and how much is allowed to enter the system for those downstream. Abbott is once again going for the populist vote now that we are in the flood cycle and there is plenty of water around. Come the next drought we will be right back where we started from... Abbott is hoping hes long gone by then. Profit driven, so? What’s wrong with that? What a better way to implement change? Make more money and save water. I think farmers can see the benefits both ways, even if you hacks can’t. Do you think if a business can make more money by polluting less it would be a good thing? Use less electricity, save money? You see all you people can think about is how to divide up the water. So how much is it? Show us all these farmers stopping the flows into the river, show us how much water is stopped. Show me how a farmer affects those down stream by what he stops on farm and how much water can be saved. Blaa blaa hack hack hack.

A farmer has absolutely no concern for those downstream of him, unless ulturistic in view. He doesnt save water at all, he makes his water allowance go further... grow more crop, make more money.

Thats fine, but it wont help the river system as a whole.

Pre-farming the river was a catchment for the entire basin. All the way from the great dividing range to SA.

No its only catchment (excluding flood times) is the mountains west of Albury, north and south.   From there on the water is taken from the river, and if any does come back it usually highly salty.

Very small catchment, very large usage.  Something's got to give. Because if we keep progressing further this way, the river's usefulness will get shorter and shorter as SA wont get access to its water, then western parts of NSW and Victoria.

Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 4:16pm:

FriYAY wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:55pm: Farmers do that, which is great, but its purely profit driven. Get the most out of the avaliable water they are given. Thats totally different than the overall regulation of the riven basin in deciding how much every farmer can be given without killing the river.  Another issue is how much natural run-off can be captured by the farmer, and how much is allowed to enter the system for those downstream. Abbott is once again going for the populist vote now that we are in the flood cycle and there is plenty of water around. Come the next drought we will be right back where we started from... Abbott is hoping hes long gone by then. Profit driven, so? What’s wrong with that? What a better way to implement change? Make more money and save water. I think farmers can see the benefits both ways, even if you hacks can’t. Do you think if a business can make more money by polluting less it would be a good thing? Use less electricity, save money? You see all you people can think about is how to divide up the water. So how much is it? Show us all these farmers stopping the flows into the river, show us how much water is stopped. Show me how a farmer affects those down stream by what he stops on farm and how much water can be saved. Blaa blaa hack hack hack. A farmer has absolutely no concern for those downstream of him, unless ulturistic in view. He doesnt save water at all, he makes his water allowance go further... grow more crop, make more money. Thats fine, but it wont help the river system as a whole. Pre-farming the river was a catchment for the entire basin. All the way from the great dividing range to SA. No its only catchment (excluding flood times) is the mountains west of Albury, north and south.   From there on the water is taken from the river, and if any does come back it usually highly salty. Very small catchment, very large usage.  Something's got to give. Because if we keep progressing further this way, the river's usefulness will get shorter and shorter as SA wont get access to its water, then western parts of NSW and Victoria.

Mildura council is not a 'farmer'. But during the height of the drought, the council was watering all its parkes and median strips duign the day using murray water. 'Stage 3 water restrictions' signs abounded and absolutely NO ONE took any notice. lawns were all greed and sprinklers were used during the day. It aint the famers at fault. it is places like this and a whol host of other predominantly victorian towns and communities that dont give  a stuff about anyone down stream.

For many of us down stream, the VIC floods had a very ironic feel about it.

and they still havent learned.

longweekend58 wrote on Mar 26^th, 2012 at 4:27pm:

Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 4:16pm: FriYAY wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 2:22pm: Doctor Jolly wrote on Mar 26th, 2012 at 1:55pm: Farmers do that, which is great, but its purely profit driven. Get the most out of the avaliable water they are given. Thats totally different than the overall regulation of the riven basin in deciding how much every farmer can be given without killing the river.  Another issue is how much natural run-off can be captured by the farmer, and how much is allowed to enter the system for those downstream. Abbott is once again going for the populist vote now that we are in the flood cycle and there is plenty of water around. Come the next drought we will be right back where we started from... Abbott is hoping hes long gone by then. Profit driven, so? What’s wrong with that? What a better way to implement change? Make more money and save water. I think farmers can see the benefits both ways, even if you hacks can’t. Do you think if a business can make more money by polluting less it would be a good thing? Use less electricity, save money? You see all you people can think about is how to divide up the water. So how much is it? Show us all these farmers stopping the flows into the river, show us how much water is stopped. Show me how a farmer affects those down stream by what he stops on farm and how much water can be saved. Blaa blaa hack hack hack. A farmer has absolutely no concern for those downstream of him, unless ulturistic in view. He doesnt save water at all, he makes his water allowance go further... grow more crop, make more money. Thats fine, but it wont help the river system as a whole. Pre-farming the river was a catchment for the entire basin. All the way from the great dividing range to SA. No its only catchment (excluding flood times) is the mountains west of Albury, north and south.   From there on the water is taken from the river, and if any does come back it usually highly salty. Very small catchment, very large usage.  Something's got to give. Because if we keep progressing further this way, the river's usefulness will get shorter and shorter as SA wont get access to its water, then western parts of NSW and Victoria. Mildura council is not a 'farmer'. But during the height of the drought, the council was watering all its parkes and median strips duign the day using murray water. 'Stage 3 water restrictions' signs abounded and absolutely NO ONE took any notice. lawns were all greed and sprinklers were used during the day. It aint the famers at fault. it is places like this and a whol host of other predominantly victorian towns and communities that dont give  a stuff about anyone down stream. For many of us down stream, the VIC floods had a very ironic feel about it. and they still havent learned.

Quite correct. Farmers is not the term to use, Its any water users be they farmers, residential or industry.
But farmers are the vast majority of water users.

Chinese farmers.  :P

Domestic use only accounts for around 10% of the overall water consumption it is agriculture and industry that use the vast amount of water reserves at a much cheaper rate.....Government restrict domestic users to appear as though they are doing something when in reality it has very little impact on available water supplies.....I think the survey I saw estimated 70% of water is used by industry and agriculture....Cutting domestic use by any amount will have very little impact on water storage and supply.....We are being conned!!!

>:( >:( >:(

The farmers will reap what they sow. One would think that the ever growing salinity problem in dryer farmland would give farmers some idea of how important ecological management is in agriculture but nope. They probably think the damage to the river ecosystem will just mean more water for them. Death to all water bludger forests!