The Productivity Commission report “Market Mechanisms for Recovering Water in the Murray Darling Basin”  was released Wednesday (March 31st)  highlights the Government’s complete failure to implement policy diligently.        It doesn’t matter if you are a South Australian relying on the Murray for water, a farmer relying on the Basin for your livelihood or just someone who appreciates the beauty and diversity of one of the greatest environmental assets in this country, we all have a stake in managing this resource right. Some pertinent points from this report follow:

• The Productivity Commission report demonstrates that the Rudd Government is managing it wrong
• The Rudd Government is resorting to costly and wasteful ways of saving water. The Commission notes that the “low-hanging fruit” of water-saving has been picked, and future programs are likely to be less cost-effective. Improved land management practices are also being ignored as a possibly cheaper way of saving water
• The Rudd Government is setting limits on water use without appropriately considering the benefits of irrigation. The Commission notes that “more water for the environment means less for irrigating crops or for domestic uses.”
• The Rudd Government is creating of climate of confusion. Farmers do not know when they may be entitled to compensation. How can they invest in water saving technologies in this environment?
•   The Rudd Government is ignoring the impacts on local communities. The Commission has flagged that some of the money allocated to water saving projects could be “clawed-back” to meet other objectives. It notes that investment in irrigation infrastructure is not the only way of achieving regional development. At times, investment in other forms of economic and social infrastructure may be more appropriate
•  The Coalition will seek to design a more balanced approach to creating a more sustainable Murray Darling Basin. Its plan will provide jobs in regional areas, guarantee food security for all Australians and protect the environment. Current policy ignore such a triple-bottom line approach