Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Pipeline pipe dreams

By Ian Mott - posted Monday, 17 July 2006


Peter Beattie has never governed for all Queenslanders. He is little more than the lord mayor of "Greater Brisbane". Where is the decentralisation policy in his plans for the state? He has just imposed his "Blueprint for the Bush" on the regions with minimal consultation and even less consideration of regional stakeholders' views. But effective decentralisation is still waiting by the phone.

And we must ask, are regional Queenslanders comfortable with the notion that they are merely caretakers of resources, not owners; in effect, minding the shop until the metropolitan power decides to take the resources from them? Only recently Mr Beattie passed legislation that effectively precludes any sort of development, let alone construction of dams and irrigation works, on the so-called "wild rivers" of the north.

They have also endured almost two decades of Labor homilies about dams for irrigation purposes being unsustainable. Farmers have had their existing water allocations reduced to ensure adequate "environmental flows" in rivers all over the state. Yet, the moment an urban water need is seen looming there are dam works implemented everywhere.

Advertisement

And let there be no doubt, every one of the dam wall augmentation projects that are now on the agenda in South East Queensland will involve a substantial diminution of these, once pre-eminent and absolutely “non-negotiable” environmental flow allocations.

Regional Queenslanders have solid grounds for concluding that there are two standards of acceptable environmental outcomes, one for the city and one for the bush. They have solid grounds for concluding that there are two standards applying to the justification of capital outlays by the state, one for the city and one for the bush. And they have solid grounds for concluding that there are two standards of acceptable socio-economic outcome for ordinary men and women, one for the city and one for the bush.

On one hand, no stone is left unturned to satisfy an urban desire that could be easily satisfied with a backyard water tank. While on the other hand, farmers can be deprived of their very rights and livelihood for the sake of supposedly critical environmental needs that are entirely discretionary in the city.

The momentum is building all over the bush to pitch it all back onto the urban community with the words, "if we must put up with two standards of governance then lets stop mucking about and formalise the situation with two separate states". And you can have as much daylight saving as you little hearts desire.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

20 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Ian Mott is a third generation native forest owner, miller and regenerator from the Byron hinterland. For more information on the "New Farm States" campaign contact Ian Mott at talbank@bigpond.com.au. Discover more Bon Motts here.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Ian Mott

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 20 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy