web analytics
≡ Menu

 Murray MP Helen Dalton wants a water register!

05.03.20. A register of exactly who owns Australia’s water rights is vital, just as vital as water is to the prosperity of all Australians. As it stands right now it is all but impossible for anyone outside the system to do that. Foreign countries, companies and various holdings can and do control the price of our water. The worst, however, is that politicians with ownership do not have to declare them on their pecuniary interests declaration. Murray MP Helen Dalton has declared hers. If any politicians hold these rights that can manipulate the costs of water flow to producers ever higher, in secrecy, surely it’s a conflict of interest bordering on a form of treason? It’s no wonder that an anonymous National’s member tried to stop Ms Dalton’s bill. Helen says she wants a new parliamentary bill to create “some transparency with water ownership” within the water market at a federal and state level. She is trying to introduce a new bill to parliament that would see politicians forced to declare their water ownership and publish information on the water holdings of corporations. “We want to know who owns our water,” Ms Dalton told Sky News host Peta Credlin.
Ms Dalton said the new bill would shed light on “not only politicians declaring their water interests, but also foreign companies, even foreign governments, traders (and) even celebrities”. “We have got water registers out there but it is very, very difficult to search, you search by a number rather than a name … so you could be there looking for a needle in a haystack for ages,” she said. “So this offers a more searchable database”.

{ 14 comments… add one }
  • DT 05/03/2020, 6:38 am

    Companies have a share register, gun licences etc are registered, so why are water licences not registered?

  • Pensioner Pete 05/03/2020, 6:46 am

    David Littleproud, where are you?

    This water situation is more evidence of the sellout of the rural sector by the National Party. No wonder One Nation, Shooters, Fishers and Farmers Party and the Katter Party are growing rapidly in popularity in what was once claimed as ‘National Party’ territory

    • DT 05/03/2020, 9:01 am

      PP please type into the search engine …

      water licences australia

      I just did and once again the Federal Government is copping all the blame but State governments issue water licences.

      Well they also control the rivers and dams in each state.

      The confusion I believe is the joint agreements and organisations that Federal and State governments are represented on like Murray-Darling Basin, and that took years of negotiations between the Howard Government and the States to achieve. From memory the Federal Government offered $500 million to finance the plan that States also contribute into.

      But as always the UN Agenda 30 is dictating. It was signed by the Keating Labor Government around 1990, and they lost power in 1996.

      • DT 05/03/2020, 9:15 am

        Water Act 2007

        Basin Plan

        I, Tony Burke, Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities, acting under subparagraph 44(3)(b)(i) of the Water Act 2007, hereby adopt this Basin Plan, being the Basin Plan given to me by the Murray‑Darling Basin Authority under subparagraph 44(2)(c)(ii) of that Act.

        Tony Burke

        Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities

        Dated 22 November 2012

      • DT 05/03/2020, 9:22 am

        A new approach to water management
        The Water Act 2007

        In 2007, Prime Minister John Howard announced a $10 billion plan to improve water efficiency and to address over allocation of water for rural Australia. He declared, ‘for this plan to work, there must be clear recognition by all — especially by state and territory governments — that the old way of managing the Basin has reached its use by date’.

        The response of the Australian Government in 2007 was the passing of the Water Act 2007 (Cwlth), with bi-partisan support in the Australian Parliament. As a requirement of the Water Act, the Murray–Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) was setup and required to develop the Basin Plan, with the primary objective of limiting how much water could be used by industries and communities in the Basin.

        The Basin Plan (2012)

        In 2012, there was widespread agreement across government that a plan was needed to manage our water carefully and protect the Basin for future generations. The Basin Plan was developed to manage the Basin as a whole connected system.

        The aim of the Basin Plan is to bring the Basin back to a healthier and sustainable level, while continuing to support farming and other industries for the benefit of the Australian community.

        At its heart, the Basin Plan sets the amount of water that can be taken from the Basin each year, while leaving enough for our rivers, lakes and wetlands and the plants and animals that depend on them.

        The development of the Plan required several years of research and analysis to understand how much water could be taken from the Basin for consumptive use, without compromising our rivers, lakes and wetlands and the animals and plants that depend on them.

        The science behind the Plan was independently reviewed by Australian and international scientists.

        The Plan also took into account a wide range of social and economic information. It became apparent that the reduction in water availability for human use would have an impact on communities, businesses and industries in the Basin. Analysis of the social and economic effects was conducted by the MDBA and other commissioned experts, to help achieve the best balance between water users, communities and the environment. So a plan was developed, in consultation with Basin communities, to manage the Basin as a whole connected system.

        The Commonwealth Minister responsible for water adopted the Basin Plan on 22 November 2012 and on 29 November 2012 it received bipartisan support in Parliament.

        The aim of the Basin Plan is to bring the Basin back to a healthier and sustainable level, while continuing to support farming and other industries for the benefit of the Australian community. It is complementary to other water management arrangements, including natural resource management and other Commonwealth and state government policies.


      • Pensioner Pete 05/03/2020, 11:59 am

        DT: I am quite well aware of who is responsible for what within the three tiers of government thank you.

        I am also well aware the supposed leaders of our nation failing to possess the necessary skills to meaningfully negotiate with the states to achieve outcomes necessary for the nation to build essential infrastructure, particularly that of dams and associated water supply infrastructure for the rural and regional sectors.

        The point is, David Littleproud has failed miserably in negotiations with the states on matters of real importance, consequently, he has lost a huge number of votes in his electorate whilst the National Party both state and federal are on the nose politically out here.

        When folk I talk to tell me straight out their MP is as useless as tits on a boar pig and will be voting One Nation in particular with some planning to vote for Shooters, Fishers and Farmers or the Katter Party, I am sure, this represents the level of dissatisfaction of rural Queensland in particular.

        This dissatisfaction will rise to the surface come the Queensland state elections in October this year, particularly so when the last elections, both federal and state, One Nation ran second to the Nationals in both the electorates of Gregory and Maranoa.

        The level of dissatisfaction will be again displayed come the next federal elections, for out here, we have had an absolute gutful of incompetent and indifferent governance, and those who were elected in the belief they would put the rural sector first and foremost, are most certainly in for a very, very rude awakening come election time.

        There is absolutely nothing preventing ScoMo and his band in walking away from the UN agreements, nothing at all, one only need cast their eyes to Donald Trump to see how it is done.

      • DT 05/03/2020, 1:30 pm

        PP the situation extends back to circa 1990 when Keating Labor signed UN Agenda 30.

        As I have shown since that time Federal legislation has been passed and State legislation covering the Agenda items implementation.

        To blame the present Federal Government and suggest that they wind back the clock is pointless because it is a tangled web of red and green tape now, to unravel it would require cooperation on both sides in both Houses of Parliament, Federal and State governments. New legislation.

        For example, the UK Government has been stopped from proceeding with a new runway at Heathrow Airport because of UK legislation flowing from the Paris Agreement by activists lodging complaints to the High Court, I think that is the UK Privy Council.

        Similar opposition activists are here of course and they oppose mines, gas extraction, dams, power stations etc., opposing State approvals, but it also links to UN Paris Agreement, Agenda 30 and so on.

        I have no idea how to stop the rot but I know that it is deeply rooted now, over 50 years of treaties and enactment since Whitlam Labor signed the UN Lima Agreement (Protocol) in 1975 to get rid of manufacturing here.

        Agenda 21 now 30 since circa 1990 and I understand that the NSW Carr Labor Government was one of the first on board. They created the first UN Agenda National Parks on State lands and blocked new dams planned, and locked up everything in them from exploitation.

        The UN has arranged for branches of various of their organisations to be established here, and doing the work of government departments, UN HCR – Human Rights & Equal Opportunities Commission and Tribunal for example.

        Much as you and I and many others are angry about this we are stuck in the wicked web. And so are the politicians who know it and also hate it.

  • Fedup 05/03/2020, 8:19 am

    Please don’t tell me some of our politicians are corrupt…..I am shocked, shocked I tells ya.

  • DT 05/03/2020, 9:55 am

    There are State Water Registers.

    Makes sense as water and water supplies are State controlled powers;


    But we need a licence reference number to obtain names.

    • Disgruntled 05/03/2020, 12:55 pm

      Hey DT, the link you give is NSW based and I believe there are three states involved in the M.D. system where most of the issues seem to be and in fact the system covers four states.
      Really all must be included as well as full detail of licence conditions to be effective.
      In fact all water licences in the whole of Australia should be on a register so that we can clearly see who is doing what with Australian water. And then maybe try to work out who is doing who and why to try to understand the built in complexities of the whole sorry saga.

      Lets be serious, this register should have been in place long before Yesterday if the grubs administering the whole show were doing the job that they should have been doing and the lack of it only shows incompetence or dare I say it, may be fraudulent self interest for either them or their cohorts.

      • DT 05/03/2020, 1:15 pm

        Dis, just type into search

        water licences australia

        And all of the State websites will appear

      • Disgruntled 05/03/2020, 9:17 pm

        Hey D T ,your comment at 1:15 pm is a little hard to understand as to where you are coming from.
        Are you really saying that the Dalton woman is too silly to look up the information. I don’t think so. The links you gave don’t do it!!! Something is upsetting her and a whole lot of water users and I do think I have a little understanding of what it is. I would think that a lack of a water ownership register would be high on the list and the ever increasing so called “environmental” flows would be high on the list also, these are only two of the ills of the MD Basin. I do support these flows but only up to a point and that point has been exceeded long ago.
        Give this some thought. Prior to built storages there was NO bloody water for the environment when there was a drought, then it missed out. But hey when the rains came it regenerated quite quickly and everything quickly came back to normal. Nowadays with all the fluffy thoughted would be experts controlling the water the environment seems to get it all. This is so bloody stupid. People and productive use NO LONGER COUNT!!!!
        D T, I have had just a little experience with both regulated and unregulated water use, having farmed all my life on a flood plain of a major stream in my area and I have experienced most things both good and bad. Prior to an irrigation storage turning up some way upstream of us, we had to make do the best we could, even owning and using quite extensively a water drilling plant. When the dam was built I ended up with an almost 1000 meg. allocation {or licence if you want to call it that}. By the way, dam empty, no water but still pay for the allocation and hey that is normal!, or that is what we are told.
        I was also on the W.A.M.P. panel for the whole of the Burnett catchment and had to attend many meetings all over the catchment. I learnt a lot and came to understand a lot, too much to explain here. What I’m saying is I have had considerable experience in the “water” industry and I do believe that a very clear ownership register is needed to even start the healing process. Also the environmental flow rules and requirements need a major looking at as well as a change from what is now happening.

        Blimey there have been instances where the foolish boffins have made big releases even when the river is in flood, for no other reason than that it was in the rules they were to work by with no common sense evident anywhere!!! How bloody stupid is that!!! The only achievement was a lower storage level and more flood damage downstream.

        It is a complex issue. You cannot please all the people all the time but some of the core issues need to be worked on and soon!! Otherwise we could see a civil uprising, but the problem would be, who gets cleaned out first, and at the end of the day fixing the plan would be simpler!!!

  • Penguinite 05/03/2020, 12:01 pm

    H2O not Co2. Bumper sticker!!!!

  • Pensioner Pete 05/03/2020, 6:37 pm

    The Australian Constitution, s 100: Quote:-

    100. Nor abridge right to use water

    The Commonwealth shall not, by any law or regulation of trade or commerce, abridge the right of a State or of the residents therein to the reasonable use of the waters of rivers for conservation or irrigation.

    Seems there is a breach of our constitution happening, given the Constitution overrules any State laws also.

Leave a Comment