A new year brings old threats to the Clarence River estuary and communities along its banks

Preoccupied with major fire activity since September 2019, it was easy to miss this renewal of cruise industry pressure.....

On 4 October 2019 cruisepassenger.com.au published an article titled 
"FIVE SECRET AUSSIE PORTS YOU’LL BE SOON BE SAILING TO".

This is an extract from that article which will be of considerable interest to communities with environmental, cultural and economic concerns about cruise ships seeking entry into the Clarence River.

"Mayor Cr. Jim Simmons says “We can see a lot of economic benefits for the area…but so far we have had some community angst around the idea and that stems from our experience with large ships in the past. Our concerns are purely environmental concerns, but if that’s all covered, then the community may be very positive.

“Many years ago we had the big timber ships and large vessels coming into the sugar mill – but so far we haven’t had large passenger cruise ships,” Cr. Simmons added.

“If the ships are moored offshore, with passengers tendered in on smaller boats and all of the measures are put in place to protect the ocean environment then this would be something great for Yamba.”

The Clarence Valley mayor has obviously drunk the cruise industry Kool-Aid, if he seriously believes that cruise ships will make any significant contribution to the economies of Yamba, Iluka or Maclean.

There is enough evidence to the contrary coming from cities and towns around the world that have become cruise destinations. Specifically the fact that cruise lines inflate projections of the spending capacity of their passengers which are rarely realised, as a matter of company policy tend to poorly pay local tourism operators for services, charge local businesses a fee for inclusion in ship brochures, seek significant concessions on port fees and cruise ship activity generally tends to depress land-based tourism over time. [See https://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com/2017/11/it-is-being-suggested-to-lower-clarence.html]

As for his suggestion of mooring offshore - there is no sheltered coastline near the mouth of the Clarence River to make disembarking or boarding a cruise ship reliably risk free for passengers.

While characterising community concerns as being "purely environmental", this is a simplistic explanation given a significant Yaegl cultural/spiritual site held under Native Title lies across the entrance to the Clarence River. 

Dirrangun reef showing as a lighter blue crescent in the ocean adjacent to the breakwater walls

The hidden costs for rural & regional older Australians when accessing Home Care packages

There are a number of people in the Clarence Valley who are hesitant to apply for Home Care packages - often because the houshold budget maths just don't add up when it comes to what is now essentially privatised and very expensive assistance for older people in their own home.

Here is yet another example......

The Daily Examiner, 21 October 2019, p.3:

Clarence Community Transport CEO Warwick Foster said there were misconceptions surrounding how government funding works with Commonwealth Home Support, NDIS and Home Care Package clients.

“People don’t have the correct information about how the system actually works, and that’s understandable because it’s a confusing system,” he said.

Mr Foster said Clarence Community Transport was primarily a home support program, designed to provide subsidised transport to eligible clients.

“When it comes to clients who transition to a Home Care Package, regardless of the level, then they technically become ineligible to access Commonwealth Home Support Programme services,” he said.

“I think where the problem comes in is that there’s not enough education for the clients about what it means when they accept a Home Care Package.

“Unfortunately clients who had been using community transport to get to appointments go from paying one fee then having to pay another fee because we’re no longer able to provide subsidised transport. That’s why it’s such a shock.

“Three days a week we transport clients to Brisbane and the Gold Coast, and to get them up and back for a subsidised client is $80, but that fee goes up to $780 once someone accesses a Home Care Package.

“We get notified by the government, who tell us when a client is in receipt of a Home Care Package, that they’re no longer eligible for CHSP services.”.....

“We’re a not-for-profit but that doesn’t mean we’re here to provide free transport.

“We are required under our contracts to recoup some costs of the transport service from our clients.”

Land clearing law in New South Wales

Environmental Defenders Office NSW (EDO), 17 July 2019:

It’s been almost two years since the NSW Government introduced a new scheme for regulating land clearing and biodiversity in NSW. While the business of tree clearing has continued apace under self-assessed codes and a new Vegetation SEPP, fundamentally important parts of the scheme are still missing. This EDO NSW series of legal updates looks at how the laws are being implemented and the regulatory gaps that are putting our wildlife and healthy sustainable landscapes at risk.

Our first update looked at clearing in rural areas and outlined the fundamentally important parts of the scheme that are still missing even while tree clearing has continued apace under self-assessed codes. The second update looks at elements of the new scheme that are missing or lack clarity for tree clearing in urban areas and e-zones. This third update looks at compliance and enforcement of new clearing laws.

Read the third update here.

Successive NSW Governments have believed that construction risks are best managed by builders - how wrong they were

This was the position of the NSW Liberal-Nationals O’Farrell Government in May 2013 after reviewing changes made to state building regulations and certification:

As the Government’s April 2013 White Paper – “A New Planning System for NSW” points out, building regulation and certification are a significant part of the NSW planning system.

The general outcomes that regulation and certification seek to secure are two-fold. First, a level of building performance consistent with the needs of an advanced society in terms of health, safety, amenity and sustainability and second, compliance consistent with planning expectations as defined by the planning system.

The current system of certification has evolved from the introduction of private certifiers in 1998, enabled by amendments to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A) and Regulations. Following the 2002 Campbell Inquiry into the quality of buildings, administrative changes were put in place within the then Department of Urban Affairs and Planning for regulatory oversight of certifiers and in 2005 the Building Professionals Act established the Building Professionals Board (BPB), which took over this function.

Subsequently, there have been numerous legislative amendments and changes to regulations relating to certification. These have been essentially accretive and so the legislative framework has become unnecessarily complex and in some cases no longer relevant. With the establishment of a new planning system, the opportunity presents to take a fresh look at arrangements which have essentially developed as flow-ons from the last major reforms dating back to the 1979 commencement of the EP&A. Accordingly, the well established principles of developing regulatory systems that are efficient in an economic sense, as well as effective having regard to ease of administration, achievement of desired outcomes and minimizing the compliance burden, should now be applied……

It follows that improvements to building regulation must have regard to regulatory impacts such as cost and effective administration and ensure that certifier resources can cope with a higher level of activity.

However, regardless of the effectiveness of improvements that can be made to regulation, building construction risks are best managed by the builder and outcomes for consumers will depend on the clarity with which the roles and accountabilities of all the participants in the process are specified in statutes and regulations. [my yellow highlighting]

By 2013 private building certifiers were estimated as issuing at least 50 per cent of all building approvals, according the NSW Dept. of Planning & Industry.

In 2019 the wheels fell off this particular ill-advised policy change, with reports of private certifiers acting like cowboys and forced evacuations of defective, dangerously unstable multi-story apartment buildings.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 July 2019:

It gives me no pleasure, watching the looming disaster that is the NSW construction industry, to say we told you so  ("Toxic secret kept from unit owners", July 20-21).

In the early 2000s, along with my local government colleagues, we begged the NSW Government not to deregulate the supervision of building construction and give it over to private certifiers paid by the developers.

We warned it was putting the "fox in charge of the hen house" and would result in poor quality buildings that failed to comply.

Decades later successive state governments have ignored thousands of complaints from the community and numerous private certifiers declaring themselves bankrupt to avoid liability.

The industry is failing the consumer with all the benefits flowing to developers. The only real solution it to put government back in charge of regulation of the building construction process and that can only be done efficiently by a local authority. - Genia McCaffery, former president Local Government NSW

The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 July 2019:

Professional indemnity insurance premiums have skyrocketed following the discovery of severe defects at a string of apartment buildings in NSW and Victoria's flammable cladding problems, and other types of building insurance products are expected to follow.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme continues a bumbling problem-filled roll out during which its clients suffer

Newcastle Herald Sun, 31 May 2019:

AT least 3000 NDIS recipients from regional NSW and Victoria will have to find new care providers after mutual company Australian Unity decided to cut back on disability services to concentrate on aged care in Sydney.

Australian Unity confirmed the decision after concerns were raised with the Newcastle Herald by the Public Service Association.

It did not dispute an assertion by PSA regional organiser Paul James that the decision was a consequence of the financial pressures facing NDIS providers.

The decision comes just three years after Australian Unity bought the NSW Government's Home Care agency in February 2016, picking up 4000 former government employees and 50,000 aged care and disability clients.

Australian Unity said it would "work closely" with the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) to ensure NDIS participants found "another service provider of their choice".

It said 57,000 clients on aged care packages would not be affected. 

It did not expect the NDIS decision to cause job losses but Mr James questioned how this could be.

"Even if they say the majority of their clients are unaffected, there's still 3000 people in regional areas who will have to find new providers," Mr James said.

"The NDIS was originally supposed to be helping people with disabilities into work, but instead it's become an opportunity for the states to ditch their responsibilities for disability services."

Australian Unity said the decision to "scale down" its NDIS services came after a review of its "Home and Disability Services" business - as it renamed the former Home Care agency.

According to the Dept. of Human Services (recently renamed Services Australia) In NSW as of 31 March 2019:

101,963 people have a NDIS service;

4,219 initial plans have been approved; and

34,397 people will be receiving services for the first time.

While according to the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), 12 April 2019:

There are now 250,000 participants nationwide;

Almost one in three of these participants are receiving disability supports and services for the first time; and

Costs to NDIS clients for individual service delivery have risen between 10.9 per cent and 20.4 per cent from 1 July.

This price rise will include a minimum rise of almost $11 per hour for therapists, and up to a 15.4% price increase to the base limit for attendant care and community participation and appears to be driven by the demands of service providers.

The number of NDIS participants is set to rise to 460,000 at full roll-out in 2020.

…delays in the rollout of NDIS plans, the bureaucratic maze that even the most capable of carers or people with disability struggle to get through, and the difficulties that people with plans have in accessing services that are not there have resulted in long wait times and crisis intervention is virtually non-existent.

Due to the demand for home care packages, for most people, the expected wait time for approved packages is:

www.myagedcare.gov.au

The expected wait time for the level of interim package you agree to receive (while waiting for your approved level to be assigned) is:

www.myagedcare.gov.au

In May 2018 the Commonwealth Ombudsman investigated the National Disability Insurance Agency (NDIA) handling the annual reviews of those already receiving service under a NDIS plan after around one-third of all complaints he received about the scheme related to review issues.

The conclusions drawn was that the NDIS scheme was administratively under-resourced for the rollout task, however there were a number of areas where NDIA could improve its administration of participant-initiated reviews. Otherwise the review process would remain unwieldy, unapproachable and the driver of substantial complaint volumes.

If you are in New South Wales and have a complaint about a support or service you have received under the NDIS, you can contact the NDIS Quality and Safeguards Commission.

Memo to NSW Minister for Regional Transport and Roads Paul Toole & NSW Minister for Transport and Roads Andrew Constance: Pull you fingers out and fix this!

Sportsman's Creek Bridge (1910) sited close to where the creek meets the Clarence River
Image: GeoLink

The Daily Examiner, 6 May 2019, p.1:

As he stood on the now dismantled Sportsmans Creek Bridge approaches, Lawrence Museum and Historical Society president Rob Forbes held a series of letters that appalled him.

For the past two years, based on a positive relationship with Roads and Maritime Services, the society had made plans to reconstruct a full section of the bridge, preserving its memory at the museum.

Now, with a change in management, that agreement made has seemingly vanished, with RMS offering a ‘take it or leave it’ approach to what will be preserved.

“I’m appalled to think that a small local historical society trying to save one of the most historic and important structures in Lawrence has to record every single conversation made with every single person we talked to so we don’t get shafted,” Mr Forbes said.

Mr Forbes said for the first stages of planning, the rapport with RMS could not have been better, with RMS employees regularly visiting the museum to see what could be done.

“They couldn’t do enough for us,” he said. “They even organised a license from the EPA so we could take some of the building that was removed for the bridge which had lead paint.

“It carried over when we wanted a section of the bridge. I stood in the museum with the representative and we looked at the model so we were talking about the exact same thing.”

Originally it was agreed two complete ends of one span (both sides of the structure) could be reassembled to create a good representation of the bridge.

“The engineer at the meeting said we could have two complete ends of one span and ‘probably’ also a large amount of the other bridge timbers ‘if we wanted it’,” Mr Forbes said.

After the bridge was demolished recently, and with a change in management at RMS, these verbal agreements made months earlier were disregarded, according to Mr Forbes.

“An email was received stating we could now have only two ends of one truss (one side of the structure only) and 150 square metres of decking – and that this was non-negotiable,” he said.

“We’ve even had emails saying if we had a problem with the quality of the timber they’ll sell the whole lot to salvage... and we feel pressured to sign the new agreement or it’ll best lost forever.

“There was no agreement, but when they said yes for two years, as far as I’m concerned the deal was done.”

A spokesman said RMS had worked with the Lawrence community, including the museum and historical society, throughout the Sportsmans Creek Bridge project.

“Roads and Maritime has provided a replica of the bridge to the society to commemorate this historic structure, along with an agreement to supply timbers from the old bridge for re-use as a commemorative structure,” the spokesman said.

“The agreement includes providing 150sqm of bridge decking timbers to be used as a floor to support the old Ashby ferry, two ends of one truss (each end of one single truss) and supports for display purposes only and transport of the timber and truss to the museum.

“This agreement has not changed and Roads and Maritime will continue to work with the historical society to commemorate the old Sportsmans Creek timber truss bridge.”

The Lawrence Historical Society urges people to show support for the cause by either contacting Mr Forbes on 0412 715 805, or leaving comments on their Facebook page.

NSW Office of Environment and Heritage is being dissolved. More truthful version – the regions are being scr$wed over to allow Berejiklian Government’s mates a freer hand to develop coastal NSW to death

The Sydney Morning Herald, 2 April2019:

A government spokeswoman said the restructuring would enable the administration "to better serve the people of NSW".

"For the first time, we have a combined Energy and Environment portfolio and this new structure will ensure the government can take a holistic approach to this issue," she told the Herald. "The functions currently performed by OEH will continue.”

Among staff, though, the worry was that the oversight separately developed and funded for years would now be subsumed in the expanded Planning cluster, with job losses one consequence.

Rob Stokes, a former environment minister, returns as Planning Minister as part of the government's post-election reshuffle. Matt Kean will be the new Energy and Environment minister….

One senior staffer told the Herald OEH had often provided a dissenting view to Planning, such as when new housing projects in the Sydney Basin threatened the dwindling natural reserves. Remaining koala corridors, for instance, were among the habitats at risk.

Work that had previously been conducted by inhouse OEH experts was already being diverted to external consultants - a process staff worry will accelerate with the bureaucratic overhaul now under way.

"There has already been a strong shift away from the environment having its own voice already," the staffer said.

Penny Sharpe, acting Labor leader and environment spokeswoman, said NSW had now become the only state in Australia without an environment department.

"One of the first acts of the Premer - after talking a lot about the environment during the election - is to abolish the Office of Environment," Ms Sharpe said.

"This is a terrible outcome for the environment of NSW and it's a betrayal for [voters]," she said.  "We know it was a very important, top-order issue for many, many people."

The environmental problems facing the state include more than 1000 plant and animal species threatened with extinction, an 800 per cent increase in land-clearing during the past three years, and waterways "that are in crisis", Ms Sharpe said.

Domestic Violence is still on the rise in Clarence Valley, NSW

NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research (BOCSAR), October 2008 to September 2018, Assault - domestic violence related, Clarence Valley Local Government Area

Statistically significant Upward trend over the 120 month period. The average annual percentage change was: 4.6%

Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Service NSW Inc. (WDVCAS NSW), media release, excerpt, 19 June 2019:

'We care about women who have experienced domestic and family violence and their access to justice. Our work saves lives every day,’ says Renata Field, Director of WDVCAS NSW, the peak body representing the Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Services. ‘One of the Premier’s Priorities notes that “Domestic Violence has no place in our society”, yet the 2018 NSW budget has given us no additional funding to support the more than 43,000 women we work with each year.’

Domestic violence services are vastly underfunded in NSW compared to other Australian jurisdictions[1]. WDVCAS services have experienced a 104% increase in clients in the last 5 years, with only a 18.5% funding increase. The NSW Domestic Violence Death Review Team Annual Report of 2017 highlights the need for additional supports for women attending court.

BOCSAR statistics show an increase in DV related assaults and an increase in the number of domestic violence protection orders issued in NSW (ADVOs). With community concern about the issue at an all-time high following high level publicity from the #metoo movement, the death of women and children in our communities and the 2015 Australian of the year, Rosie Batty, the NSW government should be leading the way to fund specialist domestic violence services such as the Women’s Domestic Violence Court Advocacy Services. 

Hard right ideology has so blinded the Morrison & Berejiklian Coalition Governments that water sustainability is at risk in yet another part of New South Wales in 2019

This particular coal mining project below has a long history and each step of the way Liberal and National politicians at state and federal level have supported the interests of foreign-owned mining corporations over those of local communities and ignored the need for intergenerational equity.

The O'Farrell & Baird Coalition Governments went to bat for the coal mining industry in New South Wales in 2014 after Wyong Coal Pty Ltd neglected to gain consent from a landowner, the Darkinjung traditional owners:

Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council v  Wyong Coal  Pty Ltd [2014] NSWLEC 3, 4 April 2014:

Wyong Coal  are not, however, the owners of the land the subject of the DA. Rather, the DA partially covers land owned by the applicant, the Darkinjung Local Aboriginal Land Council ("Darkinjung"). Moreover, the DA partially covers land over which a land rights claim has been made by Darkinjung under the Aboriginal Land Rights Act 1983…..

The proposed development is State Significant Development under Section 89C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act) as it is 'development for the purposes of coal mining', as specified in the State Environmental Planning Policy (State and Regional Development) 2011. The Minister for Planning and Infrastructure is the consent authority for the project. However, the Planning Assessment Commission (PAC) will determine the application under delegation. In addition to approval under NSW legislation, the project is also a controlled action requiring assessment and approval under the Commonwealth's Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. The Commonwealth will undertake a separate assessment and determination under its legislation.

The Berejilian Coalition Government in 2018 carried the flag for an amended Wyong Coal development application which bypassed the need for Darkinjung LALC consent:

Environmental Defender’s Office NSW, November 2018:

Wyong Coal Pty Ltd, which trades as Wyong Areas Joint Coal Venture, and Kores Australia Pty Limited, are co respondents. KORES Australia Pty Ltd, a fully-owned subsidiary of Korea Resource Corporation, is the majority shareholder of Wyong Coal Pty Ltd.

The case is being fought on four main grounds: climate change, flooding impacts, compensatory water and risks to water supply for farmers in the region.

Wallarah 2 involves construction and operation of an underground coal mine over the next 28 years, until 2046. It would extract five million tonnes of thermal coal a year. The total greenhouse gas emissions over the life of the mine will be 264+ million tonnes of CO2.

In approving the Project, the PAC chose not to take into account emissions which come from the burning of coal mined at Wallarah 2. Our client argues that the law wasn’t followed with respect to climate change impacts. The key ground with respect to greenhouse gas emissions is that the PAC failed to consider an assessment of downstream emissions from the project. Under the EP&A Act, the PAC was required to consider the public interest. ACA argues that in 2018, considering the public interest for projects such as coal mines mandates the consideration of principles of ecologically sustainable development, particularly intergenerational equity and the precautionary principle.

In addition, our client argues that the PAC unlawfully failed to consider the risks of the flood impacts and the potential loss of water occasioned by the mining project.  

The Project, located within the Central Coast water catchment, would have significant impacts on the Central Coast water supply and residents in the surrounding areas. 

It would permanently alter the landscape, causing flooding events that will only increase over time as the impacts of climate change are realised. The PAC approval proposes dealing with these devastating flooding events by first requiring the mine to try mitigation measures like putting people’s houses on stilts, relocating homes or building levees. If those measures don’t work, then the mine would be required to pay the owners of the properties for the harm. Our client says this simply is not a lawful way to mitigate harm from flooding. There is no evidence that the mitigation measures will work or that compensation is an effective way to remedy harm caused by flooding.

The mine is also likely to impact upon the Central Coast water supply and access to water for farmers in the surrounding region.  The mine proposes to construct a pipeline to deliver compensatory water to the Central Coast Council and provide emergency and long-term compensatory water supplies to farmers if they lose access to water on their properties. If compensatory water cannot be provided, the mine can agree to buy those farmers out. The approval does not cover how the pipeline and the compensatory water is to be provided. ACA argues that the mitigation measures proposed by the PAC in the conditions of approval are not lawful, primarily because they go beyond the power of the PAC to deal with environmental impacts of the Project.

The Morrison Coalition Government by the hand of Minister for the Environment, Liberal MP for Durack and former mining industry lawyer Melissa Price, gave the stamp of approval on 18 January 2018:

This is the second time in the space of days NSW residents have learned that Liberal-Nationals politicians have allowed a new coal mine to progress towards operational capability in New South Wales.

Both of these new coal mines Shenhua Watermark and Wallarah 2 represent threats to regional water security.

Australian Water Wars 2019: how NSW rivers were running on 22 January

The news cycle is such that even the dire straits the Murray Darling Basin finds itself in, with regard to environmental, cultural and township water flow security, is already fading into the background.

If we let it do so then it will be business as usual for the Federal, Queensland, New South Wales, Victorian and South Australian governments and, it is business as usual which is causing an ecological crisis in Basin waterways.

This is a snapshot of an interactive map supplied by NSW Water showing river flows on Tuesday 22 January 2019.

Every red marker against a river or section of river indicates that at that point the flow was less than 20 per cent of the natural flow.

You will note that even the coastal rivers of Northern NSW are running at less than 20 per cent of their natural flow.

Along the length of the Darling/Barka River many points like Brewarrina, Bourke and Wilcannia recorded zero natural flow passing on 22 January.

This was also a day when land surface temperatures were still uncomfortably high, with parts of the Murray-Darling Basin predicted to reach temperatures of 42-45+ Celsius.

Remind your local MP that they still need to stand up and be counted when it comes to legislating measures to mitigate climate change and need to be persistent in demanding their political parties bite the bullet on water management reform.

Ecological Disaster in Murray-Darling River Systems January 2019: Trump-lite Scott Morrison blames Labor and the drought

@michaeldaleyMP, 13 January 2019

In March 2012 it was the O’Farrell Liberal-Nationals Coalition Government who received the above Memorandum on the Water Sharing Plan for the Barwon-Darling Unregulated and Alluvial Water Sources which covered both the Barwon-Darling unregulated river water source and the Upper Darling Alluvial groundwater source.

This NSW water sharing plan was clearly prefaced on creating a market for the sale of water rights and the needs of commercial irrigators and the mining industry:

2.0 Purpose of the plan (at Page 3)

2.1 Why are water sharing plans being prepared? Expansion of water extraction across NSW in the 20th century has placed most valleys at or close to the limit of sustainable water extraction. This has seen increasing competition between water users (towns, farmers, industries and irrigators) for access to water. This has also placed pressure on the health and biological diversity of our rivers and aquifers.

Plans provide a legal basis for sharing water between the environment and consumptive purposes. Under the Water Management Act 2000, the sharing of water must protect the water source and its dependent ecosystems and must protect basic landholder rights. Sharing or extraction of water under any other right must not prejudice these rights. Therefore, sharing water to licensed water users is effectively the next priority for water sharing. Among licensed water users, priority is given to water utilities and licensed domestic and stock use, ahead of commercial purposes such as irrigation and other industries.

Plans also recognise the economic benefits that commercial users such as irrigation and industry can bring to a region. Upon commencement, access licences held under the Water Act 1912 (WA 1912) are converted to access licences under the Water Management Act 2000 and land and water rights are separated. This facilitates the trade of access licences and can encourage more efficient use of water resources. It also allows new industries to develop as water can move to its highest value use.

In conjunction with the Water Management Act 2000, plans also set rules so that commercial users can also continue to operate productively. In general, commercial licences under the Water Management Act 2000 are granted in perpetuity, providing greater commercial security of water access entitlements. Plans also define the access rules for commercial users for ten years providing all users with greater certainty regarding sharing arrangements.

The warning in the Memorandum was ignored by the O’Farrell. Baird and Berejiklian Coalition Governments and, by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority when it drained 2,000 gigalitres of water from the Menindee lakes in 2017.

Obviously fearing the electorate will remember: a) that when the Abbott Coalition Government came to power it handed even more power over water resources back to the states & abolished the independent National Water Commission¹ and b) then recall the rampant abuse of water resources under then Deputy PM and Nationals MP for New England as Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources Barnaby Joyce as well as multiple allegation of water theft; Prime Minister and Liberal  MP for Cook Scott Morrison sought to wrongly blame first Federal Labor and then the drought for the ecological devastation which is occurring in the NSW section of the Murray-Darling river systems.

ABC News, 14 January 2019:

 The State Government is bracing for another mass fish kill in the Darling River this week, with soaring temperatures forecast in western NSW.

The mercury is expected to reach up to 46 degrees Celsius in the town of Menindee, where up to 1 million native species were killed in an algal bloom over the New Year.

The Bureau of Meteorology said a heatwave, caused by hot air being blown from Central Australia, would persist until Saturday and could break temperature records around Broken Hill.

Primary Industries Minister Niall Blair said state and local governments would work with the community to manage the possibility of another ecological disaster.

"Well we know that we've got high temperatures right across the state and a lot of poor water quality situations particularly brought on by the extended drought so unfortunately we are expecting that we may see more fish killed," Mr Blair said.

The warning comes as contractors prepare to clear the 40-kilometre stretch of the Darling River of dead fish before their rotting carcasses compound the situation.

Federal Agriculture Minister David Littleproud will convene a meeting of State and Federal environmental and water stakeholders working under the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

Mr Littleproud proposed using $5 million for a native fish recovery strategy and will seek agreement for the money to come from Murray-Darling Basin funds.

"The reality is we're in a serious drought and the only silver bullet is rain," he said.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison refuted a report released by NSW Labor at the weekend claiming the Liberal Government ignored warnings about low water levels.

"I'm concerned today that some might want to play politics," he said.

"There were reports done by scientists under Labor's contribution to that plan back in 2012, the plan has been operating in accordance with that advice and so we need to just keep on working on the issue."

Mr Morrison said the fish kill was because of the drought.

"It's a devastating ecological event, particularly for those all throughout that region the sheer visual image of this is terribly upsetting," he said.

However, that is disputed by many people in Menindee, who argue poor water management has compounded the mass kill. [my yellow highlighting]

Morrison in blaming everyone but successive Federal (since September 2013) and NSW (since March 2011) Coalition governments forgets that Australian voters can read and, as late as June 2018 the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office as part of the NSW Interagency Working Group for Better Managing Environmental Water offered advice on the Barwon-Darling which both the current Australian Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources, Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Drought Preparation and Response & Liberal MP for Maranoa David Littleproud and current NSW Minister for Primary Industries, Minister for Regional Water & Nationals MLC Niall Blair appear to have ignored until it was too late.

Footnote

1. One of the last things the National Water Commission (NWC) did before then Liberal Prime Minister Tony Abbott abolished it was to inform the Abbott Coalition Government that:

"Ten years on from the signing of the NWI, water reform in Australia is at a cross roads. Many reform gains are now taken for granted and the multi-party support that has been a hallmark of this historic agreement is at risk of breaking down.

Given the substantial government investments and hard-won progress so far, and the valuable but challenging gains yet to be realised, it is critical that there is no backsliding from reform principles.

Strong leadership is essential to realise the full benefits of water reform and to embed proven NWI principles into the decision making of all Australian governments."

NWC also wrote to the prime miniser warning of the perils which lay ahead it governments didn't learn from past mistakes.