Planning in the Murray-Darling Basin to expand social and economic assessments

Announced today, the Murray-Darling Basin Authority will commission a wide-ranging study to look at the social and economic consequences of its plan to reduce water allocations within the river system. This new inquiry reflects the perception of widespread community anger since the Authority's recommendations that water allocations should be reduced by up to 37% in some sub-catchments were announced, with farmers and other industry groups concerned about the impact of the plan on the viability of many regional towns.

img_2193front The ABC reports that the Authority will take another look at planned basin cuts, announcing a new study will look at how the proposed reductions to entitlements would affect local communities, including the financial implications and the mental health of residents. It notes that the Commonwealth Government has agreed to set up a parliamentary inquiry of its own into the social consequences of cuts to water allocations.

Elsewhere, the ABC reports that while irrigators welcome this second inquiry into how Murray-Darling communities will be affected by proposed cuts to water entitlements, there's scepticism over its timing. The Sydney Morning Herald also reports that farmers and the federal opposition have criticised the Murray-Darling Basin Authority for not acting earlier to analyse the likely social and economic impacts of its planned water management reforms.

Michelle Grattan reports in the Age that the announced inquiry is a bid to calm the regional fury, and reflects the comments of Authority chairman Michael Taylor, who said that over the past few days the Authority had ''heard loud and clear'' regional communities' calls for further, updated research on the local community effects of its plans.

Grattan also comments that the ALP is treading lightly in its involvement in the Basin Plan, aware of the consequences of the mining tax backlash and "super-sensitive to the political heat" over water. Grattan does make the important observation that has been largely missing from the media analysis to date:

There is a one big difference between the two issues: the government announced its mining tax decision without consultation. This time the Authority hasn't even reached the stage of a draft plan - it has put out a guide to the draft, and started a consultative process.

sa lake albert in sept 2008frontpage Darren Gray's article in The Age traces the impacts of the deep cuts to water entitlements in the Murray Valley on the dairy industry of northern Victoria with a 47-year-old farmer worried that it could lead to more pain for the industry, as well as the towns, industries and businesses it supports. Farmer Ian Cobbledick is quoted in the article:

How could such a plan have ever been allowed to be developed without taking into consideration the social and economic impacts that such a plan would bring about? It's just madness.

The thing that is massively lacking in this plan is the due consideration that should be given to the communities that rely upon irrigation as the lifeblood of their regions.

Mark Davis in the Sydney Morning Herald also reports that the social and economic impact of water cuts in the Murray-Darling river system will go back under the microscope. Lauren Wilson at the Australian has discovered the ABARE report on the impacts of proposed cuts which reveals, in her words, the hit list of 88 towns with most to lose from the plan.

Andrew Marshall from Stock and Land suggests that the plan to buy-back vast quantities of agricultural water from 'willing sellers' may not 'hold water', given that many irrigators are highly reluctant to sell their precious resource. Meanwhile, Murray River councils in Victoria are holding community meetings about the proposal by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority to cut water allocations, independant of the Authority's town-hall forums.

David Nason and Mark Schliebs, also from the Australian, interview South Australian irrigators who they say are reeling from new modelling that points to cuts of 46 per cent in water allocations. They refer to modelling from the National Farmers Federation. The NFF is predicting more severe water cuts in South Australia than those forecast in the MDBA guide once the methods employed by the state to implement the proposed cuts are taken into account. For example, those reductions will need to provide allocations for town water supply and for stock and domestic use. According to NFF president David Crombie:

We could be looking at cuts in the Murray that would leave farmers with roughly half the water they need to produce crops.

sa etc oct 2009 006front Crikey maintains its excellent coverage of the Basin Plan, with Benard Keane following up from last week's article on the need for the MDBA to maintain its indepedence of the Federal Government with a review of the latest Essential Report survey. The survey found that:

In the wake of the controversy over the preparation of the Murray-Darling Basin Authority's Basin Plan, voters also identified water and rivers as the most important environmental problem facing Australia - far higher than climate change. A touch over 50% nominated water supply and 38% the health of rivers and waterways, compared to 30% who nominated climate change. The best-supported option for addressing over-allocation on the Murray-Darling is purchasing water voluntarily (36%), with 17% support leaving existing allocations in place and compulsorily acquiring water.