The long-overdue review?
Now nearly 15 years into the processes inscribed into the Basin Plan, initially introduced in 2012, a review seems both timely and necessary.
THE Murray-Darling Basin Plan has been an increasingly popular topic of discussion across recent editions of the Pioneer, as consultation is undertaken, and anticipation builds, ahead of its first review, set to be undertaken this year.
Now nearly 15 years into the processes inscribed into the Basin Plan, initially introduced in 2012, a review seems both timely and necessary. However, even in these early stages leading to the review, we are seeing a clear division between two camps at opposite ends of the water resource picture.
Those sides of perspective revolve around either maximising the potential benefits for Murray-Darling Basin environmental sustainability, and the need to ensure the system remains productive to meet the needs of an ever-growing Australian society.
And that’s just coming from within our local sphere. At bigger picture levels, this same division is seen between the State Government and Liberal opposition, and then – even higher up – between the South Australian, Victorian, and New South Wales governments, all seeking to come out on top in negotiations for water availability and recovery targets.
Hearing a diverse range of experiences and requirements regarding the Basin Plan in its current form is therefore crucial to ensuring South Australia’s water needs, and those of the Riverland, are among the main priorities in the next iteration of major legislation.
In last week’s edition we saw quite the reasonably measured breakdown of the validity within both sides of the argument, provided by well-known senior local irrigation industry figure Rosalie Auricht.
In her dissection of the current Murray-Darling Basin Plan landscape, Rosalie points out that the political challenges surrounding the sharing of water resources are likely to become even more complex with the rise in momentum behind One Nation.
Speaking from the other side of the debate, a letter from a long-time Riverland West citrus grower – inside today’s edition – reflects the frustrations of the more industry-minded who feel maintaining the consumptive pool is paramount to the survivability of Riverland communities.
It is therefore clear, while it is possible to contribute a submission, that as many voices as possible from the Riverland’s irrigation sector are needed for the Basin Plan review to result in a system that is equitable, and sustainable in the long term, for all involved.
We don’t want to see South Australia asked to forfeit further allocations from the Murray-Darling Basin system simply because irrigators in other states had more vocal arguments.
