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

Water planning 101: stabilise the population

By Stephen Saunders - posted Thursday, 28 November 2024


"We have a choice about whether this growth continues". The hell we do, retort Treasury overlords.

In conclusion, the report tags rapid population-growth as a "Faustian bargain". Sacrificing voter wellbeing for "short term interests of an elite few".

Compromised water-planning

The report could have said more, about slack rural-water planning and regulation. Aggregate usage of surface, ground, and floodwater resources is poorly measured and monitored.

Advertisement

Even along MDB river plains, a significant proportion isn't metered, with casual theft and "mysterious" disappearances of huge volumes. Nonchalantly regulated floodplain "harvesting" is a persistent woe.

Rigged on to this creaking irrigation contraption is our 21st century MDB water-market. Delivering rather what you'd expect – prosperous marketeers, if not necessarily farmers and communities.

Though SPA does question, why state-local governments accept Treasury's onerous population diktats. When they're the ones who must deliver the infrastructure – and water.

I'd go further. Nearly all the key "stakeholders" are on the Treasury team.

Usually, I categorise them like this: Federal politics; federal agencies; states and cities; industry and developers; economists, planners and demographers; the media; universities and unions; think tanks and interest groups.

Among these, it's not greatly controversial, that this government's heading for nearly 1.5 million in net migration, over its three-year term. In a Big Thirsty, this ought to be highly controversial.

Advertisement

We're thrashing the 2006-19 Big Australia years. Pulverising by a factor of six, the historical average from federation to date. Doesn't seem to perplex water-planners.

Like our climate-besotted urban-planners, they've hobbled their own professionalism. Though very ingenious, they're also embedded "influencers", not always in a good way.

Check Australian Water Association website. There's no flashing light, that equitable water security is a forbidding mountain to climb, on top of steeply rising population.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. Page 4
  6. 5
  7. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

12 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

Stephen Saunders is a former APS public servant and consultant.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Stephen Saunders

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

Article Tools
Comment 12 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy