North Coast Voices, 1 March 2013 |
Showing posts with label water security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label water security. Show all posts
Wednesday 8 May 2019
The Liberal & Nationals answer to all the water policy mistakes they have made in the past. Full speed ahead to make some more!
In 2006 the
Howard Coalition Government’s then Minister for Water Malcolm Bligh Turnbull attempted an under-the-radar progression of
a proposal to dam and divert water from the Clarence River system into the
Murray Darling Basin. He was sprung and it lost his government the seat of Page
in 2007.
When Tony Abbott was prime minister he was
all gung-ho for damming east coast rivers, but was by then wary of the mood of Clarence
Valley communities.
Despite a
certain coolness on Tony Abbott’s part and Turnbull's silence once he followed Abbott as prime minister, the wannabee water raiders within the Basin have never given up on the idea of destroying the Clarence River in order
to continue lucrative water trading for profit and inappropriate levels of farm irrigation
in the Basin.
This is a mockup of what these raiders would like to see along the Clarence River.
On 30 April
2019 Scott Morrison and Co announced
the proposed creation of the National
Water Grid which in effect informs communities in the Northern Rivers region that
our wishes, being “political” because we are not their handpicked ‘experts’,
will be ignored when it comes to proposed
large-scale water diversion projects including dams if they are
re-elected on 18 May 2019.
The Daily Examiner, 4 May 2019, p.10:
“Just add water” is the
Nationals’ answer to “unleashing the potential” of regional Australia but it
would come at a cost to areas flush with the precious resource.
Deputy Prime Minister
Michael McCormack announced on Tuesday at the National Press Club that a
returned Coalition government would establish an authority, the National Water
Grid, to manage water policy and infrastructure.
“We know the key to
unlocking the potential of regional Australia is simple – just add water,” he
said.
The announcement of the
National Water Grid has sparked fears the Clarence and Nymboida rivers may be
dammed to irrigate drought-stricken areas of the country – a prospect the
Clarence Valley community has faced before.
The Nationals’ Page
MP, Kevin Hogan, said there were “no plans to dam the Clarence
River”.
“There are proposals in
other drought-affected areas of the country,” he said…..
The planned National
Water Grid would ensure water infrastructure would be based on the best
available science, “not on political agendas”, Mr McCormack said.
It would “provide the
pipeline of all established, current and future water infrastructure projects
and then identify the missing links”.
Mr McCormack said dams
were the answer to “create jobs”, “back agriculture and back farmers”.
“While we are being bold
and building big, we are often stopped at the first hurdle when it comes to
short-sighted state governments that choose politics over practicality, and
indeed science,” he said…..
Thursday 2 May 2019
The Trouble with Water: National Party conflicts of interest and the rising odour of corruption
The
Saturday Paper,
27 April 2019:
Former Australian
Federal Police commissioner Mick Keelty is examining links between political
donations and the issuing and buyback of agricultural water licences, amid
concerns that undeclared conflicts of interest could be fuelling corruption.
Keelty told The
Saturday Paper this week he is concerned about the extent of undeclared
conflicts of interest among politicians, lobby groups and businesses operating
in the water market.
“I’m interested to see
how conflicted politicians are declaring their conflicts of interest when
decisions are made about water policy,” he said.
“Where you get those
conflicts of interest and they’re not addressed, that’s ripe for corruption.”
His comments come as the
Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder confirmed to The Saturday Paper that
two contentious water licences for which the federal government paid
$79 million have returned next to no water to the environment since they
were purchased two years ago.
Keelty is conducting
inquiries in his capacity as the Northern Basin commissioner for the
Murray–Darling Basin, a position to which the federal agriculture minister,
David Littleproud, appointed him in August last year with the support of the
Labor opposition.
On the issue of water
licences, he draws a direct comparison with the management of development
applications by local government, where conflicts of interest are required to
be declared.
“We’re not seeing it in
water, and it should be there,” he said.
Keelty, who was also the
inaugural chair of the Australian Crime Commission, is not categorical about
what exposing such conflicts might reveal, though he suggests they are
widespread.
“I’m not saying it’s
corruption; I’m saying it’s conflict of interest,” he said. “But you could draw
a conclusion that if conflicts of interest aren’t transparent, it could lead to
corruption … Water is now the value of gold. If you have corruption in other
elements of society, if you have corruption in other areas of business, why
wouldn’t you have it here, when water is the same price as gold?”
“IT IS NOT AS TRANSPARENT AS I FIRST THOUGHT AND IT IS
MUDDIED BY IN-KIND DONATIONS AND THIRD-PARTY COMPANIES OR ENTITIES THAT ARE
CREATED TO OBSCURE WHO THE REAL DONORS ARE.”
Over the past decade,
Keelty has undertaken inquiries and investigations for various governments on
issues relating to integrity in government policy, especially in emergency
management.
Now turning his
attention to the struggling river system, he is aiming to improve transparency
in the management of the northern Murray–Darling Basin, which has a far worse
compliance record than the river system’s southern half.
His task is to ensure
that water gets back to the river system where it is needed and that those who
rely on this water, and should have rights for its use, are not being ripped
off, especially disenfranchised Indigenous communities and others living
downstream.
Keelty argues that
excessive numbers of water licences have been issued – sometimes on
questionable grounds – and are seriously damaging the river.
“When you look at it
strategically, there are too many licences having been allocated for the amount
of water that is available,” he told The Saturday Paper.
“Nobody is addressing
that, that I can see.”
Keelty also believes the
system is too dependent on property owners acting within the law and reporting
their own activities.
“The system relies on
honesty and integrity but if you look at the number of prosecutions and
infringement notices issued in New South Wales in the last 12 months, the
pillar of honesty doesn’t appear to be that strong,” he said.
“I can understand the
suspicion and the frustration in the southern basin states because they are
directly impacted by the efficiency of the systems in the northern basin.”
Keelty is currently
examining the Australian Electoral Commission records of political donations,
checking links between donors, decision-makers and recipients of water licences
or sales contracts.
“Clearly the National
Party is probably, I guess, a glaring example of where politicians could be
conflicted because their constituency are the very people who are using the
water and the very people who are lobbying about water policy,” he said.
But he is examining
links to other parties as well. “It’s not just the National Party. Different
governments will make decisions about water policy that presumably benefit
their state and their constituents.”
Keelty has concerns
about the system of political donations more broadly.
“It is not as
transparent as I first thought and it is muddied by in-kind donations and
third-party companies or entities that are created to obscure who the real
donors are,” he said. “I’ve found it more difficult and less transparent than
what most of us probably think it is.”
The former police chief
is also arguing for proceeds-of-crime legislation to be more clearly linked to
offences in the water market because he believes the risk of losing a farming
property would be a significant deterrent.
“Where you can prosecute
criminal charges for offending, it makes sense to have parallel action in
proceeds of crime because that will have more of an impact than perhaps some of
the civil charges that are being used to remedy the situation to date,” he
said.
Read the full article here
Saturday 27 April 2019
Tweet of the Week
I’m struggling with this.. Did @PatsKarvelas really just read out a text she received from Barnaby Joyce begging for clemency over #watergate? Is Barnaby drunk at 9:30am? #Insiders— Terry Serio (@TerrySerio) April 20, 2019
Labels:
Barnaby Joyce,
water security
Wednesday 24 April 2019
The Trouble With Water: 'ghost' water begins to haunt the Liberal-Nationals election campaign
“It is well understood and agreed that water in the Murray-Darling Basin has been overallocated and extracted at rates that are unsustainable.” [The Australia Institute, February 2018]
Eastern Australia Agriculture Pty Ltd (EAA) owns
water entitlements at two properties in the lower Balonne area of the
Condamine-Balonne region The Kia-Ora property is situated approximately 7km
south of St. George, Queensland, along the Balonne River. The Clyde property is
located 10km south-west of Dirranbandi, Queensland.
"Kia
Ora" reportedly totals 18,841 hectares and has water entitlements of 36,705 megalitres, while "Clyde" is said to total 18,743 hectares with water entitlements of 30,289 megalitres.
EAA also
appears to hold Queensland water licences which allows it to harvest overland
flows/flood waters from both properties.
Questions have arisen with regard to the sale of some of this water.......
Questions have arisen with regard to the sale of some of this water.......
The Government’s been buying up water at record prices, leading to millions of dollars flowing to offshore tax havens. But now, two of our top pollies are facing questions over just who is making a fortune off our water.@HamishNews and @MichaelWestBiz bring you this report pic.twitter.com/5UTH1NHJzR— The Project (@theprojecttv) April 18, 2019
At various times prior to entering federal parliament in September 2013 Liberal MP for Hume and Australian Minister for Energy Angus Taylor was reportedly a co-founder and director of Eastern Australia Irrigation, a director of and company secretary for Eastern Australia Agriculture and was also a paid consultant for EAA.Ever wondered how that $79M 'gift' of taxpayers money to a SE Qld irrigator was spent? Wonder no more - this is what 'ghost water' can buy the seller #AusVotes2019 pic.twitter.com/cYOE8CvqJ9— no_filter_Yamba (@no_filter_Yamba) April 16, 2019
💧Angus Taylor YESTERDAY: “has never had a direct or indirect financial interest in EAA or any assoc’d company.”— Hamish Macdonald (@hamishNews) April 19, 2019
TODAY: He was also a consultant for EAA 09/10 “on normal commercial terms”.
TONIGHT: there’s a difference between ‘an interest’ & being paid as consultant. #auspol pic.twitter.com/AwwWGznyNz
The Minister for Energy Angus Taylor, former deputy-prime minister and federal agriculture and water resources minister, the current National Party MP for New England Barnaby Joyce, and the federal Dept. of Agriculture and Water Resources have all issued statements taking issue with concerns being expressed over this particular water sale and denying any wrong doing. Both ministers have threatened legal action for defamation.
The Queensland Government denies being party to this water sale.
The Morrison Government is now facing calls for an inquiry into the Murray-Darling plan water contracts signed off by former minister Joyce.
BACKGROUND
The Queensland Government denies being party to this water sale.
The Morrison Government is now facing calls for an inquiry into the Murray-Darling plan water contracts signed off by former minister Joyce.
BACKGROUND
Ghost Water – licences for unreliable/unverifiable amounts of temporary water sold
to government for use as environmental flow water.
Overland flow is “water that runs across the land after
rainfall, either before it enters a watercourse, after it leaves a watercourse
as floodwater, or after it rises to the surface naturally from underground…..You
can take overland flow for any purpose unless there is a moratorium notice or a
water plan that limits what can be taken.” [Qld Government, Business
Queensland. January 2019]
Applications
can be made for a water licence for the capture of overland flow water.
“A
water licence is an entitlement to take water which is attached to land
therefore, unlike a water allocation, it is not an asset in its own right.
Water licences cannot normally be sold independent of land unless there are
management rules in place which allow permanent transfers (relocations) to
occur…..The relocation of a water licence enables a licensee to transfer
ownership of the entitlement, permanently moving the licence from the land to
which it is attached, to another parcel of land within the confines of the
rules. This process differs from permanent water allocation trading whereby
water allocations are traded independently of land titles and have their own
registrable title (i.e. water can be held by someone who does not own land).” [Qld Government,
Business Queensland. February
2019]
At the time of the water sales EAA has 7 harvesting licences, of which 4 were for water extraction from the Balonne and Narran rivers, 2 were for collection of overland flow waters and 1 was for irrigation water draw on the Beardmore Dam.
At the time of the water sales EAA has 7 harvesting licences, of which 4 were for water extraction from the Balonne and Narran rivers, 2 were for collection of overland flow waters and 1 was for irrigation water draw on the Beardmore Dam.
Unsolicited offer by EAA to sell overflow water at
https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22publications%2Ftabledpapers%2F59682649-2fa2-43b1-955f-ae16caecef45%22.
Austender records of three EAA water sales to the Dept. of Agriculture and Water Resources - the first by transparent open tender and the remaining to by non-transparent limited tender:
At the time of the first water sale (1,980ML at est. $2,175 per megalitre) Barnaby Joyce was an elected senator on the Opposition benchs and Labor's Tony Burke was federal water minister, at the time of the second and third sales (totalling 27,960ML at $2,745 per megalitre) Joyce was the Australian Deputy Prime Minister as well as Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources.
The first sale under the Labour Government was a result of an open competitive tender, the second and third sales were by unadvertised limited tender which excluded a competitive tender process.
NOTE: In 2008 it appears that EAA sold 10,433ML from its water storage to the Murray-Darling Basin Commission for an unknown amount.
The Australia Institute, March 2018, "That's not how you haggle....Commonwealth water purchasing in the Condamine Balonne", excerpt:
Austender records of three EAA water sales to the Dept. of Agriculture and Water Resources - the first by transparent open tender and the remaining to by non-transparent limited tender:
At the time of the first water sale (1,980ML at est. $2,175 per megalitre) Barnaby Joyce was an elected senator on the Opposition benchs and Labor's Tony Burke was federal water minister, at the time of the second and third sales (totalling 27,960ML at $2,745 per megalitre) Joyce was the Australian Deputy Prime Minister as well as Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources.
The first sale under the Labour Government was a result of an open competitive tender, the second and third sales were by unadvertised limited tender which excluded a competitive tender process.
NOTE: In 2008 it appears that EAA sold 10,433ML from its water storage to the Murray-Darling Basin Commission for an unknown amount.
The Australia Institute, March 2018, "That's not how you haggle....Commonwealth water purchasing in the Condamine Balonne", excerpt:
EAAs original asking
price was $2,200 per megalitre. DAWR displayed Pythonesque haggling skills and
paid a final price of $2,745 per megalitre. DAWR paid 25% more per megalitre
than originally requested by EAA, 139% higher than the Commonwealth had previously
paid for the same type of licence and 85% higher than the average price for a
more reliable type of water licence. The megalitre price was inflated because
it included the cost of a storage that the vendor originally offered to
transfer to the Commonwealth, but that offer was later withdrawn, without
adjusting the price. The storage was used as a justification of the sale, but
not as a condition of the sale.
The water purchased was
for Over Land Flow (OLF) licences, which cannot be traded between irrigators,
because they are attached to land. They have no legal status or any recognition
at a location other than where they were originally purchased. That is, there
appears to be no legal basis for the Commonwealth to ensure it gets to the
places it is intended to be used.
First, tax havens siphon
taxable profits away from jurisdictions like Australia. This means either
increasing the tax burden on individuals and businesses, taking on more debt,
or cutting social services.
These shenanigans are
not always illegal. But what is legal is not always moral or economically
sound. Australia’s fiscal foundations are threatened by the erosion of the tax
base by tricky tax tactics.
Aggressive tax planning
can erode public confidence in the tax system itself. After all, one reason
most of us pay the taxes we owe is that we believe we live in a society where
our fellow citizens do the same.
A fascinating new
dataset released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics helps shed light on
this problem. Across multinational firms operating in Australia, the bureau
reports their operating profit and their taxable profit. What is unique about
these data is that they are reported for firms with majority owners in
different countries. So it is possible to compare across countries, and ask the
question: which nation’s firms have the biggest gap between operating profits
and taxable profits?
For the typical
Australian firm, the gap between operating profits and taxable profits is 30
percent. The figure is pretty similar for multinationals whose owners reside in
the United States (28.4 percent), United Kingdom (26.6 percent) and Japan (28.5
percent).
But for some nations,
it’s a different story. If you’re a Bermuda-owned multinational operating in
Australia, then on average the gap between operating profit and taxable profit
is 88 percent. If you’re a British Virgin Islands owned multinational, the
reduction is 92 percent.[3]
So if you start with ten
dollars of operating profit, then Australian firms report about seven dollars
of taxable profits. The same is true for American, British and Japanese-based
multinationals – ten dollars of operating profit produces seven dollars of
taxable profit.
But for firms based in
Bermuda or the Virgin Islands, and operating in Australia, ten dollars of
operating profit produces just one dollar of taxable profit. That’s a startling
difference……..
Second, tax havens are
the hiding ground.....
Gabriel Zucman, an
economist at University of California, Berkley, estimates that around
four-fifths of money in offshore bank accounts is there in breach of other
countries’ tax laws.[4] .......
A recent study in the
journal Nature Ecology and Evolution found there are even egregious
environmental vandals there too. Following the Panama Papers, the study
found seventy percent of fishing vessels implicated in illegal, unreported and
unregulated catches had been registered in Belize, Panama, or other tax havens
at some point. [5]
Third, tax havens
increase inequality. Offshore wealth held by Australians in tax havens was
approximately 6 per cent of GDP, according to Zucman’s work in 2013. In today’s
prices, that would mean over $100 billion in assets held offshore by wealthy
Australians. [6]..........
Cayman Islands corporate tax rates appears to be zero.
During December 2016,
the Tax Office required Eastern Australia Agriculture to enter into a
Settlement Deed to reduce the interest charged by EAI on convertible notes
issued by EAA.
The interest charges
were required to be reduced from June 2011 when Taylor was still a director of
EAI. The total amount of excessive interest charges was $14 million.
This from EAA’s 2016 annual
report:
“Forgiveness of interest
expense – parent entity
“Following a review by
the Australian Taxation Office (ATO), the company entered into a Settlement
Deed with the ATO on 9 December 2016 and the parent entity agreed to reduce the
interest rate on the convertible note from 12 per cent to an average interest
rate of 7.97 per cent effective from 29 June 2011, resulting in a forgiveness
of interest expense accrued in 2016 and prior years."
The higher the interest
rate charged by the parent, the more money flows from Australia to the
Caribbean. In the parlance of the tax fraternity, this practice of charging
excessive interest rates, in order to maximise the interest payments out of
Australia to a tax haven, is called “debt-loading”.
By 2016, Angus Taylor
was no longer a director of EAI. He had stepped down from the board of the
Cayman Islands company in 2013, the year he entered Parliament. He was a
director however when the financing arrangement was established.
London Stock Exchange, EF
Realisation Company Limited (EFR) Annual
Financial Report, released 22 January 2018, excerpt:
Compulsory Redemption
Mechanism
EF Realisation monetised
various portfolio assets between February and August 2017 which, in aggregate,
comprised approximately 24% of the NAV as at 30 September 2017. The total
net proceeds raised were approximately £4.36 million, made up of £4.26 million
in realised proceeds (including £0.1 million from a corporate action involving
the Company's holding in Energy Future Holdings) and £0.1 million of investment
income (net of expenses). The Company realised its investment in Menhaden
Capital plc in February 2017 which raised £1.2 million, equal to 2.3p per
Ordinary Share. EF Realisation sold a bond holding in Integradoro de Servicios
Petroleros Oro Negro SAPI de CV ("Oro Negro") which raised
approximately £0.5m, and it
received approximately £2.5 million from Eastern Australia Irrigation Limited
which had sold certain of its water entitlements to the Australian Government
and distributed a majority of the proceeds to its shareholders, including EF
Realisation. On 4 September 2017, the Company announced its intention to
implement the Company's first capital distribution, returning £3.0 million
to Shareholders of the approximately £4.36 million in total net proceeds; the
balance of the net proceeds from asset realisations was retained for working
capital purposes…..
All the other
investments in EF Realisation are unlisted and valued by the Directors at their
estimated realisation values and, with one exception, changes in these
valuations have been small. The
exception is an upgrade to the valuation of the Company's minority shareholding
in Eastern Australia Irrigation Limited following that company's sale of water
rights to the Australian Government authorities in August 2017 and the
expectations for the amount of proceeds that can now be realised from the sale
of its farms…..
Eastern Australia
Irrigation Limited ("EAI") is an Australian based company which owns
and operates two farms in Queensland, whose main crop is cotton, along with
various water extraction rights from the Murray Darling River Basin. During the
summer of 2017, Australian Government authorities approached EAI with an offer
to acquire some of its water entitlements. EAI was able to negotiate the price for the water
entitlements to the highest level ever paid, and in August 2017 it completed
the largest ever sale of water entitlements in the Murray Darling River Basin.
EF Realisation owns 9.6% of EAI's shares and, along with other holders,
supported the sale of the water rights. EAI used the majority of the sale
proceeds to return capital to its shareholders, and passed £2.5 million to EF
Realisation. This represented a gain on that part of the EAI holding of £0.34
million or 16.0%. We comment below on the plans to dispose of EAI's farms……
EAI was in the process of selling its farms prior to the
sale of water rights. Proceeds received for the sale of water rights were
attractive compared to the offers received in the farm sale process so the farm
sale process was suspended in order to complete negotiations with the
Australian Government authorities over the sale of water rights. EAI has
now resumed the farm sale process with the intention of using sale proceeds to
repay debt and redeem its shares.
Having sold some of the water rights, the effective size of the irrigable land
that can be used for cotton farming has been reduced by approximately one-third
and it is expected that this, and the decision to sell the farms separately
rather than as a package as last summer, will make the farms attractive to a
broader range of potential buyers. Cotton prices are supported by low crop
harvests in cotton growing regions outside Australia and, at the time of
writing, local rainfall on EAI's farms has prevented a return of drought
conditions. However, until binding bids are received for the farms, the timing
for EF Realisation to redeem or sell its shareholding in EAI and the proceeds
from such a redemption or sale are uncertain.
EF Realisation carries
its remaining investment in EAI at a conservative estimate of the proceeds that
would be received assuming EAI's farms are sold and its shares are redeemed. In
particular, the implied valuation of the farms is less than the value of the
farms used to secure EAI's loan from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, a
valuation point that has been a floor for proceeds in farm sales. [my yellow highlighting]
After the September 2013 federal election Barnaby Joyce became the Minister for Agriculture and in September 2015 Water Resources was added to his ministerial portfolio.
Tuesday 19 March 2019
Knitting Nannas from across NSW took their protest to Sydney on International Women's Day
United
to Protect Our Water
101 Knitting Nannas from around NSW converged
on Parliament House in Sydney on International Women’s Day (March 8) to protest
about water mismanagement and the lack of effective government action to protect
river and groundwater health. The theme of the protest was “No Water no Life”.
The Nannas came from Loops (local Nanna
groups) in the Northern Rivers, Grafton, Coonabarabran, Dubbo, Midcoast, New
England-North West, Central Coast, Gloucester, Hunter Valley, Illawarra, and
Sydney.
The Nannas have long been very concerned
about unwanted water impacts around NSW – issues which have been raised with
elected representatives over a number of years.
· These include impacts on urban water catchments from coal mines - the Wallarah 2 mine on the Central Coast and the Hume mine in the Southern Highlands as well as the long-wall mining in the Illawarra which leads to massive water loss into mines.
· The North West of the state is also impacted by coal mines which use vast amounts of water – Whitehaven’s Maules Creek mine and the proposed Vickery mine.
· Then there’s the threat to groundwater from Santos’ gasfield in the Pilliga State Forest. This project is slated to extract 35 billion litres of groundwater – most of it in the first five years.
· But the most dramatic impact is the most recent – the Darling fish kills - the result of years of mismanagement and favouring of irrigators over the health of the river system.
· These include impacts on urban water catchments from coal mines - the Wallarah 2 mine on the Central Coast and the Hume mine in the Southern Highlands as well as the long-wall mining in the Illawarra which leads to massive water loss into mines.
· The North West of the state is also impacted by coal mines which use vast amounts of water – Whitehaven’s Maules Creek mine and the proposed Vickery mine.
· Then there’s the threat to groundwater from Santos’ gasfield in the Pilliga State Forest. This project is slated to extract 35 billion litres of groundwater – most of it in the first five years.
· But the most dramatic impact is the most recent – the Darling fish kills - the result of years of mismanagement and favouring of irrigators over the health of the river system.
The Nannas assembled in Martin Place where they donned their specially made t-shirts bearing a picture of a Nanna declaring “The Water Needs You” (in the spirit of the Lord Kitchener First World War recruiting poster) and their yellow, red and black suffragette-style sashes emblazoned with “No Water No Life”.
After a group photo under the big banner (“United to Protect Our Water”), the Nannas walked to Parliament House and ranged themselves along the fenceline. There they used their sashes to tie on to the iron railing of the fence in the manner of the suffragettes.
The brightly-dressed Nannas with their
banners and their singing and chanting attracted a great deal of attention from
pedestrians and those driving along busy Macquarie Street. A highlight of the
street performance was the powerful rendition by Nanna Purl Stockinstitch of
her poem about the death of farmer George Bender who was hounded by a CSG
company in Queensland. The Nannas hoped
that the pollies in our parliament heard and took note of the effect the
unconventional gas industry has had - and continues to have - on the lives of communities
in gasfields.
Various politicians met with the Nannas on
the footpath and were presented with their “knagging list” - the Nannas’
demands for action.
While the theme of the protest focused on the
major problems with rivers and water, the Nannas demands were much broader.
They included a call for immediate climate action, transition to 100%
renewables, a state-wide ban on gas extraction (including in the Pilliga),
proper protection of Aboriginal sacred sites and revocation of the draconian anti-protest
laws brought in by the current NSW Government.
The Knitting Nannas Against Gas and Greed are
hopeful that all of the state political parties will accept their calls for
effective action on these important matters. It should be noted that the Nannas,
who are very concerned about the protection of the land and water for future
generations, are non-party political and have a policy of annoying all
politicians equally – something we aim to continue doing!
- Leonie Blain
Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas Against
Gas & Greed
Sunday 10 March 2019
More fish kills predicted along the Darling/Barka River
The
Sydney Morning Herald,
6 March 2019:
Residents at Menindee
are bracing for a fourth mass fish kill in the Darling River in about three
months, as a new paper finds water savings in the Murray Darling Basin may be
just one-tenth the amount modelled.
The NSW Department of
Primary Industries has warned the arrival of a cold front after another
heatwave in the region this week posed a "high risk" of another bout
of widespread fish deaths.
Possibly millions of
fish, mostly bony herring but also endangered perch and Murray cod, were killed
in the three previous events. A sudden drop in dissolved oxygen levels - as
blue-green algae died and began decaying - was the prompt for the previous fish
kills.
"They're
super-stressed. It takes less [to kill the fish]," Graeme McCrabb, a
Menindee resident, said on Tuesday. "The numbers of golden and silver
perch and the cods got less [during each die-off]."
Separately, a report
published in the Australasian Journal of Water Resources by John
Williams and Quentin Grafton from the Australian National University found the
$3.5 billion spent on water-saving infrastructure - such as concrete canals -
may have saved 70 billion litres a year compared with the federal government's
estimate of more than 10 times that figure.
Professor Grafton said
their analysis showed the average cost of water recovery could be as much as
$50,000 per megalitre returned to the Murray-Darling Basin every year, or about
25 times more expensive than buying the water back from willing sellers.
The key issue is the
failure to measure and account for so-called return flows - the leakage of
water into aquifer that ceases when irrigation becomes more efficient.
"It's a travesty
for all Australians," he said. "You've spent billions of dollars and
you've not measured what you've got."….
Wednesday 27 February 2019
Thursday 21 February 2019
There isn't enough water in the Darling River system to avoid catastrophic outcomes
Australian
Academy of Science, media
release, 18 February 2019:
Scientists lay out new plan to save the Darling River
Scientists lay out new plan to save the Darling River
Scientists asked to
investigate the fish kills in the Murray-Darling River system in NSW say a
failure to act resolutely and quickly on the fundamental cause—insufficient
flows—threatens the viability of the Darling, the fish and the communities that
depend on it for their livelihoods and wellbeing.
The multidisciplinary
panel of experts, convened by the Australian Academy of Science, also found
engagement with local residents, Indigenous and non-Indigenous, has been
cursory at best, resulting in insufficient use of their knowledge about how the
system is best managed.
The scientists say their
findings point to serious deficiencies in governance and management, which
collectively have eroded the intent of the Water Act 2007 and the
framework of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan (2012).
Chair of the expert
panel, ANU Professor Craig Moritz FAA, said the sight of millions of dead fish
from the three fish kills was a wake-up call.
“To me, it was like the
coral bleaching event for the mainland,” Professor Moritz said.
“Our review of the fish
kills found there isn’t enough water in the Darling system to avoid
catastrophic outcomes. This is partly due to the ongoing drought. However,
analysis of rainfall and river flow data over decades points to excess water
extraction upstream.”
The expert panel
recommends that urgent steps can and should be taken within six months to
improve the quality of water throughout the Darling River.
“That should include the
formation of a Menindee Lakes restoration project to determine sustainable
management of the lakes system and lower Darling and Darling Anabranch,”
Professor Moritz said.
The panel also
recommends a return to the framework of the 2012 Murray Darling Basin Plan to
improve environmental outcomes.
“The best possible
scenario is water in the Darling all the way to the bottom and in most years.
We are hopeful that this could be achieved if the panel’s recommendations are
implemented,” Professor Moritz said.
Australian Academy of
Science President, Professor John Shine, said the scientific advice of the
expert panel is a synthesis of the best available knowledge.
“In undertaking this
body of work the multidisciplinary expert panel has collaborated with other
relevant experts as required and received extensive data from a number of
Federal and State agencies,” Professor Shine said.
These agencies include
the Murray-Darling Basin Authority, the Land and Water Division of the NSW
Department of Industry, the NSW Office of Environment and Heritage, the NSW
Department of Primary Industries, the Queensland Department of Natural
Resources, Mines and Energy, and the Commonwealth Environmental Water Office,
in addition to data and information provided by researchers in many related
fields. The expert panel wishes to acknowledge the cooperation of these bodies
and individuals in promptly providing data.
The expert panel also
operated closely with the Independent Panel to Assess Fish Deaths in the Lower
Darling, initiated by the Government and chaired by Professor Robert Vertessy,
including sharing data and a reciprocal review of findings.
The expert panel report
Read the report: Investigation
of the causes of mass fish kills in the Menindee Region NSW over the summer of
2018–2019
The main findings and
recommendations are in the executive summary. The report was independently
assessed by seven independent peer reviewers, including one international
reviewer.
Related media releases
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)