The real letter Mike Rann should write to Kevin Rudd

Grumpy Middle Aged Man says:

08:05am | 11/01/10

“Media” Mike Rann, has always been a joke!  The sooner this union backed embarrassment is kicked out of office the better.  He was allegedly assaulted by the husband of a staffer he was allegedly having an affair with and unlike anyone with any testicular fortitude he’s denied everything, even refusing to undertake a lie detector test about it, something he’s demanded of people in the past.
You can’t have it both ways for ever Mr Rann.  The only reasons he’s stayed in office as long as he has are that the unions support him and that the liberal opposition seem to be plagued with in fighting, all of which seems to be supported by the media here in Adelaide.
Roll on the election and let’s all remember Media Mike saying that he did not have sex with that woman before we decide who we trust in the future.

Nat Wilson says:

06:34am | 11/01/10

It is possible to farm without irrigation in low rainfall areas (eg P.C. 2823), we do. We’ve been there for years and are doing fine. And K.Rudd, I’d like him better if he stayed put, none of this flying around the world every 3 weeks. Try Australian politics for a change, U.N. fanboyism can be so tiring. It reminds me of those family Christmas movies “I don’t want a fighter, I just want my daddy.”

Wombat says:

01:03pm | 10/01/10

Max Power: That’s fair enough. I certainly did my fair share of screaming when Howard was in. All governments should be held accountable, even the wonderful Rudd-Gillard one.
As John a Neve has said a couple of times on The Punch, we all tend to line up on one side or the other. Those of Rudd’s supporters who want and expect more of him tend not to want to say so in front of ‘the enemy’.
As for TChong, there has been a lot of talk about him being a Labor stooge/mole/troll and a lot of other things. If anyone should be paying TChong it’s The Punch. I get a real kick out of his comments. I think he must have a Phd in s**t-stirring (probably paid for with taxpayer money by this socialist government).
I think it’s important to remember that we live in a country where the next government will, barring a miracle, be either Labor or Liberal. Our choice at the next election will be between two parties and two sets of policies.
Politicians breaking their promises, or being slow to keep them, is annoying enough. But what I find even more annoying is when people like Simon, who is well paid by the taxpayer, uses this forum to make proposals that are not, and I suspect never will be, genuine policies of his party. We will never have the option of voting for these policies and Simon knows it. He deliberately gives people the illusion that his party has the answer when in fact they don’t and never did.
The good thing about these arguments is that it increases pressure on governments and oppositions to develop policies that will deal with such problems as the water crisis. Unfortunately, getting politicians to act quickly, effectively and without self-interest will never be easy.

persephone says:

12:23pm | 10/01/10

Max
firstly, Rudd promised to end the blame game in relation to health. I’m not sure he did in relation to water.
Secondly, the quarrels are between state and state, not state and federal, with federal seen as the ‘court of appeal’.
One state wants to break with the agreement it made with the other states and the feds.
Arguably, the M-D was destroyed as a river system a long time ago. It wasn’t the fault of any government (although the systems in place didn’t help) but of a prolonged, unpredicted and (on the information available at the time) unpredictable drought.

Max Power says:

09:26am | 10/01/10

Wombat: The majority of my comments are aimed at people like Chong who seem to think that Rudd is not to blame for any of his broken promises and failures, but Howard is.
I fully understand the Murray-Darling problem goes back further. My problem is that Rudd promised to end the blame game, yet here we are with states bickering with the federal govt over who gets the most water from the Murray-Darling, despite the fact the system is dying. This water system is too important to be used as a pawn in state-federal govt bickering and greed. The state/federal govts should look at other sources of water as it is clear none of them have the capacity to manage the murray-darling without destroying it.

persephone says:

05:23pm | 09/01/10

Hekler, to fix problems you need to understand them. And some problems have been with us for years because they can’t be fixed. If you don’t accept that, you don’t live in the real world.

Alas, governments do, and they have to operate within its confines.

Glen, get back to PB. We miss you.

Grumbles: the study stresses that previous studies (at least two) came to the same conclusions.  They compare like with like: the amount of water deliverable by the pipe priced against the same amount from desal. There’s also a comparison of operational costs, too.

Of course construction costs should be built in. If it costs less to build a desal plant to do the same job as a pipeline, there is no point building the pipeline. The desal plant would, in fact, be a far more secure source of water - it doesn’t always rain, not even in the north, whereas there’s always sea water.

I gave you one of several references, all freely available on the web. Try googling ‘Bradfield scheme’.

This makes interesting reading:

http://fw.farmonline.com.au/news/nationalrural/agribusiness-and-general/general/bradfield-water-scheme-dream-lives-on/1525396.aspx?storypage=1

(I’m being very nice: it contains some arguments against what I have been saying, but, as I said before, if governments continually dismiss what seems like a good idea, there are good reasons. In this case, the idea has been around for over eighty years).

Wombat says:

02:46pm | 09/01/10

I am not sure why my posts aren’t getting through. I really do try to be polite.
Max Power: We were talking about the Murray River. Perhaps I should have specified that I was referring to Rudd’s achievement in getting the water sharing deal through. Turning this into another anti-Rudd rant won’t solve the water crisis.
As a couple of people have pointed out, this problem has been around for a long time. Rudd has been in for 2 years. And I will say it again: Howard did nothing for 12 years. His acolyte is now running the Liberal Party and will likely follow similar policies.
This is relevant. We are talking about the recent past and the incompetent fools who fiddled while the Murray dried up.
Abbott has told his team to get out there and oppose. That’s what Simon is doing. I would be very interested to hear what the rest of his party (in particular the NSW branch) have to say about his ideas.

Grumbles says:

02:00pm | 09/01/10

persephone, the study which you refer to was a sustainability report, that erroneously set the cost of water at the cost of construction and operation not just operation. No where on the web can i find a figure for desal that includes these costs. Wiki (and i hate quoting wiki so advise if this is incorrect) puts the operational energy of desal at 180 GWh/year compared to the operational energy cost of the pipeline of 250 GWh/year (approx) but the output is 1/6th of that of the pipeline. There are many ways to work around the set up cost of the pipeline and 20 billion dollars (about 1/3 of recent stimulus) would create a lot of employment as well as solving a problem that has existed since settlement. No one said it would be easy or cheap, but once its done, its done. 200 years from now, not one of us will be here but the pipeline will still be there pumping water across the state supplying our ever growing population.

Hekler says:

12:14pm | 09/01/10

Hello - intelligence - are you out there? Who cares who did, who didn’t, when, where, how, why? FIX the BLOODY PROBLEM!!!!!

Glen says:

11:27am | 09/01/10

T.Chong: you really do have a problem understanding what has been written.  Sad really, if you were not so determined to be thick you might have something worth saying.  Although you do serve your political enemies well by demonstrating the low level of intellectual rigour to which the left side of politics has has sunk.

Wombat says:

09:27am | 09/01/10

Max Power: We were talking about the Murray River. Perhaps I should have specified that I was referring to Rudd’s achievement in getting the water sharing deal through. Turning this into another anti-Rudd rant won’t solve the water crisis.
As a couple of people have pointed out, this problem has been around for a long time. Rudd has been in for 2 years. And I will say it again: Howard did nothing for 12 years. His acolyte is now running the Liberal Party and will most likely follow similar do-nothing policies.
This is relevant. We are talking about the recent past and the incompetent fools who fiddled while the Murray dried up.
The mad monk has told his team to get out there and oppose. That’s what Simon is doing. I would be very interested to hear what the rest of his party (in particular the NSW branch) have to say about his ideas.

John A Neve says:

09:02am | 09/01/10

Peresphone @ 0913hrs,

My comments weren’t limited to the Murray Darling issue, just go back over past days, weeks or months. The comments are basically the same.

The overall view by most, if not all bloggers, is that our past and present governments are s**t.

So I ask again, what are we going to do about it?

persephone says:

08:13am | 09/01/10

John A Neve

I don’t know whether it’s necessarily a matter of governments being no good. I would tend to think they all did the best they could at the time.

Give them all credit: the States & Feds got together in a bipartisan way to come up with the Murray Darling commission and set the cap. It was recognised then that water was over allocated. Most governments (again, of all political persuasions) took action to meet their obligations under the cap.

In normal circumstances, we’d be a long way down the road to solving the M-D basin’s problems by now.

What happened was an unprecedented drought. One that was almost Australia wide,  and was prolonged beyond any previous experience or prediction.

Even if the states had met the cap (and meeting the cap was seen by everybody as all that was necessary for the ongoing health of the system) this would have devastated the system.

So, yes, there were structural problems, of long standing, but governments were making efforts to correct these. If there had not been a totally unprecedented and unpredicted drought, many of the problems in the system would have been solved by now.

Governments can only act on the information they have. Yes, we’re suffering the consequences of decisions made fifty to one hundred years ago, but those decisions were made on the best advice available at the time. (I will throw in a bit of anti Howardism here: he had advice to act and he ignored it).

At some stage, we as an electorate have to accept that there isn’t always someone to blame, and it isn’t always whoever happens to be in government at the time.

John A Neve says:

07:47am | 09/01/10

There we go people, reading the above blogs, we know this government is no good. We also know the previous government was no better. So what are you all going to do about it?

Will the Red Knights and White Knights line up to renew the fight tomorrow, or will we get some suggestions to improve our parliamentary system?

persephone says:

07:46am | 09/01/10

Grumbles:
a study into the Kimberley pipeline concept was undertaken in 2004:

http://www.watercorporation.com.au/_files/publicationsregister/12/Kimberley_Pipeline_Project_Review.pdf

It found the cost of the pipeline to be $11 billion with operating costs per year of $105 million - several times greater than desal.

Apparently, studies were also completed in 1990 and 2002 which came to much the same conclusions.

A similar study, looking at bringing water from Northern Queensland to south east Queensland (so a much smaller distance than you propose) came up with costs of $14 billion, which would quadruple the water costs for residents.

Again, desal came up much cheaper, as did recycling and other options.

The Kimberley pipeline works out at about 5 million a k, so if we look at a pipeline from (say) the Burdekin Dam to Bourke, the one most often proposed (which would then be directed through existing pipelines and waterways to the Murray), we’re looking at probably 9 billion dollars.

So, in total, for both pipes you propose, $20 billion.

Very expensive water. Desal is cheaper and much more reliable. Use of desal plants to water Adelaide and similar Murray-dependant communities would mean a lot more water for the environment.

Make no mistake, however: the use of the state of the Murray lakes in SA is a figleaf for ‘we want to ease restrictions in Adelaide’. The people of SA and Adelaide are not going to accept far more expensive water and let cheaper stuff flow through to the sea. They’re going to take as much from the Murray as they can get, and keep demanding that the upriver States send them more.

The lesson (apart from ‘google is your friend’) - if there’s a blindingly obvious solution to a problem, and no government has ever adopted it, there’s always good reasons.

cats says:

08:05pm | 08/01/10

lol i love Team America

Max Power says:

07:00pm | 08/01/10

Wombat: What has Rudd achieved in two years? Apart from putting Australia in record debt in record time and breaking the following promises;
Natiional Broadband network funded with the aid of the private sector.
Send the Navy and RAAF to monitor and collect evidence for a legal challenge against Japan about whaling.
Reduce carbon emissions by 20% by 2020
Implement the reccommendations on ADF Superannuation for fairer indexing.
Put downward pressure on the cost of living.
Wouldn’t adjust the cut off for private health rebates.
Federal take over of the health system after 18 months if states failed to meet performance objectives.
End the blame game.
Transparency in govt.
The only election promise he has kept is say sorry to the aboriginies.
What the previous govt has to do with Rudd’s failure to keep his election promises is beyond me. Here in a democracy, we judge the govt on their actions, not the actions on the govt before them. It is hard to judge Rudd on his actions because in terms of meaningful actions he has performed none.  Rudd sprouted he was looking to the future with his 2020 summitt and his long term goals, but it seems the ALP and it’s hacks can do nothing but look to the past in an effort to justify and hide the ALP’s failures at all levels of govt. I thought Rudd won the election and was governing Australia, but you could be easily confused into thinking Howard did, as all the ALP and it’s hacks want to do is talk about Howard and the previous govt. Get over it, Rudd won the election and it his governing that matters now. So far we hear Rudd promise the world and deliver nothing and the ALP and it’s hacks blame his failings on the previous govt. A good leader has integrity, honesty, leads by example and takes responsibility for their own actions and the actions of those underneath them. Then we have Rudd, a man devoid of all the characterisitcs of a good leader.

Greg says:

06:50pm | 08/01/10

@ T.Chong

Tonight I would like to present you with the award for “ALP Fanboy of the Year”.

please rejoice you truly deserve it. Don’t worry about the rest of us having a good old laugh at your expense. Nobody, and I mean nobody can distort history or facts better than you. Did you learn that from your crap, little left wing workshop called Resistance. Why don’t you head on over there now so you can discuss your brand of BS with other like minded BS artists.

I hear them calling you: “fanboy, fanboy, fanboy, fanboy”

Roberto says:

06:33pm | 08/01/10

South Australia have over allocated , and should not be rewarded for this. They have 2 pipes sucking water from the Murray , and Adelaide is not even in the MDB!

Grumbles says:

05:41pm | 08/01/10

persephone you must have missed the invention of…. the water pump. There are 100’s of possible ways to do it many using very little ongoing power. Here in WA we have a perfect small scale example going to Kalgoorlie. How do you think the water gets to your kitchen (hint: it doesnt run downhill)?

Currently we are building very power intensive Desal plants instead, do some reading, the ongoing power cost of pumping the water is much smaller than the cost of desal. They also have relatively low capacities. The pipes would allow us to also store more fresh water and output far more fresh water south than the desal plants.

I’m not totally familiar with Northern QLD but in the Kimberlys, when the Fitzroy is in peak flow, (2 -3 months each year) the equivalent of the contents of the Sydney harbour flow into the ocean every nine minutes.

Jason says:

05:20pm | 08/01/10

This morning on the ABC morning program and in today’s Daily Telegraph 2 seperate individuals used the trem ‘spineless’ in association with Peter Garrett. In last Sunday’s Sunday Telegraph the were at least 3 articles highlighting Rudd’s ineffectiveness as a PM. And where is Rudd since Copenhagen? It is funny how time and time again we see Labor leaders whether at State or Federal level talk a good talk (the buck stops with me…...........yeah right) but always fail to deliver. Achieving excellent political leadership is the same as in any sector, you need to have someone who knows how to do the job.

persephone says:

04:45pm | 08/01/10

Grumbles

that’s cos a school kid thinks that it’s all downhill from there.

Adults know differently.

Jeff, spot on. Under the Murray Darling agreement, each state has an allocation of water. There is no obligation, of any kind, for them to give some of that water to another state.

Surely, if anyone should be changing the status quo here it is SA. They can’t rely on water coming down the Murray any more, and need to get over the idea that the other states are hiding it under the bed or something. The water isn’t there.

The recent flood waters are miniscule in comparison with the amount of water needed. You could let every drop of it flow past all those towns in NSW who have been desperate for water for years, past all those farmers who are going out of business because they can’t water their crops, and let it all get to SA - and it wouldn’t solve the problem.

Diamantina Dick says:

03:13pm | 08/01/10

persephone’s posts normally generate a similar response to our fellow puncher T Chong but this time he makes quite a sensible point. Essentially the problem has been long in the making and will be long in the solving.

It probably says something that when commenting on an article lampooning current Rudd/Rann Govenments, the best that someone has to offer is to state the bleeding obvious. This self evident fact should have been apparent to those who supported and continued to support the Rudd/Rann Govenments when they promised to do more than their predecessors.

In other words “I was conned, but I didn’t think I wouldn’t be, so it’s OK”

Stop making excuses guys and start asking for results, you deserve better.

Max Power says:

03:10pm | 08/01/10

I don’t care who is or isn’t to blame. But the typical labor defence of ” the previous govt” has worn thin. I don’t don’t give a hoot what the previous govt’s did or didn’t do. Labor are in power, they promised to fix it and have done nothing. Perhaps the states should look to finding alternative supplies of water instead of destroying an important water system like the murray-darling. It is clear none of the states have any responsible plan of action to ensure the survival of the murray-darling, and are content to squabble over the dregs of what is left of the murray-darling, created by their greed and incompetence.

Persephone: Unless you have used the “previous govt” defence, my comment is not aimed at you, but at people like chong, who seems to believe that the answer to any scrutiny of the Rudd govt must be defended with ” the previous govt” comparrison.

BULMKT says:

02:53pm | 08/01/10

RE Aitch B @ 311pm

Yeah it was a crack up.
The speech at the end of the movie is funny too.

Here are few more.
There are others but I’ll let others watch them on youtube

Team America World Police Intro
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ce8CgJRkr_I

Team America F.A.G
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=chp2u2ln8_E

Team america world police {greatest speech}
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8pAaT4unZc

I wonder how many prudes will have a go at me for this???

Soultrader says:

02:51pm | 08/01/10

@ Jeff from Meroo
Sorry I live downstream.
Sorry I am Australian first, instead of being South Aussie first.
No wonder we are in the poo with a stupid State v State attitude like yours. The Murray Darling system belongs to all Australians. The Federal Government needs to run the country for the good of the country and not just the Eastern bloody seaboard.

Wombat says:

02:42pm | 08/01/10

Max Power says: “Labor and its hacks only defence is comparing the current Kevin Rudd led ALP Govt to the previous John Howard led Coalition govt…”
Just what needs to be defended against, Max? Has Simon proposed anything useful? Perhaps he will solve the water crisis by writing a lot more funny letters.
Persephone actually explained the situation in detail, with only a couple of quick references to Howard’s failures.
But I prefer to continually refer to Howard’s failures. As far as I am aware, the Liberal Party’s magic rain machine is still not working. Rudd has achieved more in 2 years than The Rodent did in 12.
Simon’s only attempts at constructive advice are:
1. Make NSW release more water. Who’s going to explain that one to the NSW farmers who are relying on that water?
2.Force NSW and Victorian governments to spend money more quickly on water saving projects. I would prefer that they spend taxpayer money carefully.
3.Renegotiate the deal. The easiest argument for a senator to make is to constantly demand renegotiation in order to give his state a better deal. Is this actually Liberal Party policy?
If this is the best that Simon can manage then it’s not surprising that he is reduced to writing funny letters.

Jeff from Meroo says:

02:20pm | 08/01/10

You all are missing the point.  The water is in NSW and belongs to NSW and now SA are crying to Kev because the constitution says they can’t have it.  My question is: How much water did SA, who has had water flowing down the Murray since day dot (it ain’t dry yet), give NSW when the lakes dried up?  I reckon NSW should allow the same amout to cross the boarder so that the SA gov’t can continue to over allocate water permits (which the SA gov’t doesn’t mind charging millions for) to thier farmers.  That sounds fair to me.

Seriously, if your downstream neighbour asked you to not fill up your dam and instead let it flow down into his dam because despite the fact that he has had water in his dam forever and your dam has been empty for the past 5 years, he wants more so he can continue to collect money from those that visit his water park…  would you say yes?

Grumbles says:

02:18pm | 08/01/10

Australians unite, both governments have let us down. There is plenty of water in our tropics where the summer wet season drops the sky on Northern QLD and the Kimberleys. A school child could show you how to run 2 pipes from the top to the bottow and then 1 across the countries south. This way we could distribute the fresh water we are otherwise letting spew into the ocean and become salty again.

Yes, it will cost billions of dollars, and yes greenies, we will change the climate by doing this. Don’t listen to the media, Humans have the engineering and intelligence to change our environment for the better, by spreading the water around.

We would have water for all forever. We can reduce flooding and drought at the same time. We can increase crop yeilds and arible land. We can increase rainfall in southern Australia, and we could pump some much needed H2O into the murray darling and make it lush wet and beautiful again.

Climate change we can actually believe in. Please Kevin, or Tony or whoever it happens to be, take a risk and be remembered forever, as the Man (or woman) who changed the Australian climate forever and saved us all.

Aitch B says:

02:11pm | 08/01/10

@BULMKT:

I think I actually wet myself laughing during the sex scene!!

And the jeep chase through the desert was pretty funny too…...

axle says:

02:03pm | 08/01/10

Politics seems like a Catholic school debating team. Don’t expect any action, it’s all about words. They’re more concerned with polls than

persephone says:

01:55pm | 08/01/10

Max

the problem will only be fixed, by whoever is in power, by prolonged rainfall.

So it might never be fixed, because we may never again get the rainfall we need.

So noone can solve it, no matter what their political persuasion.

Rudd can’t make it rain, neither could Howard, neither can Rann.

I don’t see why saying this makes me any kind of hack. I’ve indicated that this problem is the result of over a century of mismanagement, and can’t be sheeted home to any one government.

If there’s something wrong with my statements, say what they are.

Calling people ‘hacks’ simply suggests you’ve got nothing else.

BULMKT says:

01:54pm | 08/01/10

“Hans, you’re breaking my balls here, Hans, you’re breaking my balls!” Classic line.

Article aside (what’s it about anyway?), how funny was Team America.
If you haven’t seen it, do yourself a favour and watch it. Its piss funny.

Watch this: I’m So Ronery by Kim Jong - Team America. It’s F’n hilarious
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xh_9QhRzJEs

Peter says:

01:35pm | 08/01/10

T.Chong - you seem obsessed with what was happening before 2007, can you please enlighten us all to what the Labor Party were doing for the 11 years prior to 2007? No credible Leader and no credible policies, just floating around out there in the wilderness, yes thats right for 11 years.

Max Power says:

01:29pm | 08/01/10

Labor and its hacks only defence is comparing the current Kevin Rudd led ALP Govt to the previous John Howard led Coalition govt. By doing this, the Labor party and its hacks are saying that Kevin Rudd and the ALP are no better then the previous govt. They are saying that there is no difference between the two. Such a hyprocitical defence, pitty it really just reeks of desperation, after all the ALP is in a postion to fix the problems, but instead of taking responsibility for their actions, they try and pass the buck, despite the promise to end the blame game.

persephone says:

01:15pm | 08/01/10

Intelligent observers know that problems don’t happen overnight but have a history. In order to understand problems and solve them effectively, you need to know what the history is.

Moggy, thanks for your valuable contribution to this thread. I’m sure we all are better for it.

BTW,  this exact issue - the Menindee lakes receiving flood water, which was not released - came up in 2008 as well. This demonstrates the extent of the problem - despite major floods in 2008 and this year, the Lakes have stilled not reached the point where NSW will release the water.

The amount of water the lakes hold is relatively small, in the scheme of things - even if every drop of the floodwaters was released to flow down to SA, they would make no noticeable difference.

So NSW still isn’t receiving enough water, and thus hasn’t enough to spare for SA.

We still haven’t had enough rain.

And I apologise if I gave the impression that any one government was to blame or blameless. It’s a complex problem, which has been in the making for many many years (at least 150).

Noone is going to solve it overnight.

soultrader says:

12:58pm | 08/01/10

@ persephone - Labor Crone - Be fair to Media Mike - you have got to be joking - he has been sitting on his fat ass for 7 years - did not even look at storm water retention - now is embarking on a mad spending spree - in KRuddee’s great footsteps and shadow - because of 1 thing - an election - Take your time to look at all Media Mike’s long term promises - if only we vote these hacks back in 3 or 4 more times.
Uncle Kevin07 is now into his 3rd year and is yet to settle on his menu on his Presidential Jet.
It does not matter who is in charge, somebody has to take charge and fix the bloody thing.

Moggy says:

12:40pm | 08/01/10

@ persephone: No dear we don’t think Rudd is superman. Rudd thinks he’s superman. He really thinks that if does Sweet F.A we won’t notice because he’s so dazzling & kind to old ladies & little children & the rest of the world remember his name & if he stays out of the country we won’t get sick of him & after-all he runs every department & makes every decision in his government, so he must superman. Or an egotistical power freak!!

laurie says:

12:27pm | 08/01/10

Its an issue of leadership. Governments seem to be stuck on the status quo.  Lets not upset any punters by doing something even though we promised to do something. This issue is the fault of the Bracks Government. States like their power bases and control. The captains will go down with the ship eventually on the strength of “see if anyone notices that we havent done anything.” Our governments are pathetic.

Jason says:

12:17pm | 08/01/10

The apparent, ongoing approach of ALP supporters to continually live in the past is probably why this nation has no future under Kevin Rudd.  Howard’s team made some big mistakes, so have all previous governments - the point is Rudd is making them _now_, and all factions in Australian politics and media should be prepared to critically analyse the government(s) of the day.  It’s not a matter of whats in the news - Rudd’s inability to govern is starting to seriously affect all our lives.  Diverting attention to previous governments is just mindless and really gets no respect from intelligent observers.

persephone says:

12:13pm | 08/01/10

The reason NSW, QLD and SA were so keen to sign up to the Howard government’s back of an envelope water plan was that Howard offered those states more than they had invested, so there was a clear profit for them.

Victoria, on the other hand, had invested heavily over various governments over decades in water infrastructure. The money offered by Howard wouldn’t have covered the costs of this infrastructure, let alone the value of the water involved.

Howard himself indicated in his speech announcing the plan that Victoria was the good guy when it came to water, and that QLD, NSW & SA were the ones his package was designed to pull into line.

The reason that so much money was offered to these states and not to Victoria was quite simply that those states needed the most work done to get them up to standard.

So Victoria was going to be punished, through loss of infrastructure and loss of water, for the neglect of other states.

Under these circumstances, they would have been recklessly foolish to sign up.

SA needed to invest money in alternative water sources decades ago. Relying on a river system which was becoming increasingly strained was a recipe for disaster.

To be fair to Rann, he inherited the problem and is now doing the best he can with the hand he has been dealt.

And if people think Rudd can fix in two years a problem which goes back over one hundred and fifty, they really do think he is Superman.

luke says:

12:01pm | 08/01/10

Australian governments state and federal along our river system are all ALP governments, all Australian citizens and yet they can’t agree to save an Australian river system. Yet these same politicians expect 180 countries to agree on battling climate change. The river crisis affecting Australia(unsustainable irrigation) shows that money before environment rules. The Rudd government wants to double our existing population, without improving our water storage would be irreponsible. It is time for a major national water infrastructure building programme to rival the man made panama canal in south america.

Wombat says:

11:52am | 08/01/10

This is the best that an Australian Senator can manage? You are not in high school now, Simon. You won’t get back into government by writing funny letters.
The one achievement of the Howard government mentioned in the article was the budgeting of $400 million for work on Menindee Lakes. Howard budgeted for a lot of things that never happened. It worked really well. Boosted his miserable surplus and allowed him to make the same non-core promises at the next election. Promising to do something is hardly an achievement, particularly in Howard’s case.
Apparently Howard could do nothing for 12 years because he was hamstrung by state Labor governments. How convenient for the greatest do-nothing PM since Menzies. Rudd has been in for 2 years, and it is true that he hasn’t yet fixed all of the problems of the nation. He has a lot of problems to fix. Howard was in for 12 very long years, after all.
Yes, it is possible that Rudd and Gillard could alter the existing agreement that they forged between the states. Believe it or not, one of their biggest problems is in dealing with incompetent and self-serving state Labor governments. And you can expect to hear a lot of screaming if anyone tries to alter the agreement, because that water that Simon wants has to come from somewhere. As TChong has pointed out, the Liberal Party’s magic rain machine didn’t work.

Rob Smith says:

11:33am | 08/01/10

Dear Mike,
Thanks for your letter asking for water.
Firstly, I appreciate you have an election in the next 70 days, but I also have one later this year and there are a lot more voters in NSW and Qld than there are in SA.
Sorry to hear about your recent dramas at home and the water hassles caused by something called the sun (which shines out of you know where).
If ever you’re in Canberra or Sydney please feel free to talk to one of my staff.
Yours insincerely,
Kevin Rudd

T.Chong says:

11:19am | 08/01/10

H of SA the name calling at this site is pretty funny.
All that nastiness waiting to be unleashed.
Trolling LOL!!!! Farmer Spencers story brought out some bewtys.
OK Right Punchers, youve convinced me the world was perfect prior to 2007.
Pity the electorate didnt agree with yous ,aint going to happen next time either.

Margaret Gray says:

11:17am | 08/01/10

“...T Chong makes a cheeky comment and straight away the staff from Mr. Birmingham’s office get on and blast him….”

Hardly,

Nobody knows how to dog-whistle better than “T. Chong”.

Argue with facts…then we might listen.

H of SA says:

10:52am | 08/01/10

You gotta like it, T Chong makes a cheeky comment and straight away the staff from Mr. Birmingham’s office get on and blast him. Very transparent.

Moggy says:

10:51am | 08/01/10

I’d word it more like this: “Hey MiKe Rann…..why don’t you just build a friggin’ great pipeline like they did in Victoria that goes all the way to to NSW & steal the friggin’ water…...out of the Murray River…..nobody will care because you’re all labor mates…..& stuff the poor bloody farmers losing land when you build it….& just think…you can do what the clever clogs labor party did in Victoria to appease the morons who objected & put half a dozen outlets for the CFA to pinch water when there’s a fire. After-all, half a dozen outlets for the CFA is a HUGE help to them…..& the plebs in South Australia will think you’re the return of the Messiah…...(sorry Kevin).....just like they swallowed it in Victoria.

Marie says:

10:34am | 08/01/10

T. Chong. Your fishing are’nt you. Cheeky !!

Cuthbert says:

10:32am | 08/01/10

@ Shane

Isn’t that the entire point of the article? The states have historically been (understandably) incredibly reluctant to cede any of their powers to the Commonwealth as its a slippery slope to irrelevancy once they do.

But this was meant to be the Rudd Era of “unprecedented co-operation with the states” and the end of the “blame game” as it stood between the States and the Commonwealth. That Labor controlled both the Federal and the State Governments involved in this spat, coupled with Kevin’s messianic skills in diplomacy and negotiation, meant that the Labor mates would sort it out amongst themselves without the need to go to a referendum overriding ss51 and 100 of the Constitution. Kevin has saved the Murray-Darling Basin!

Unfortunately, like most (all?) of what Rudd says, it was spin. Hes now being called on it and not before time.

Aitch B says:

10:16am | 08/01/10

@Shane: So what does that say about the other state governments that had agreed to do it prior to Victoria knocking it back? They must have been of the opinion that there was sufficient protection for them in the proposed scheme.

Macon Paine says:

10:13am | 08/01/10

T.Chong says:07:47am | 08/01/10

Simon: list just a few of the strategies the Libs implemented to save the Murray-Darling, between 1996 to 2007.
Of course we know that Labor and the unions caused the drought, just to harm the farmers, thats accepted.
Why didnt the LNP assist irrigators? The drought has been around before the change of govt, so why was nothing done for so many years?

People the more I read of T. Chong, the more I suspect that she/he is a troll,
and is simply trying to get a rise out of people with varying degrees of success. It seems as if T. Chong takes personal offence to any valid and/or constructive criticism of any Labour goverment at any point in history for some reason.
T. Chong why do you take such offense to articles that may be critical of the Labour party? 
Cmon thepunch.com.au, give T.Chong a chance to write her/his own scathing riposte about how the vast right wing conspiracy which no doubt exists (in T. Chong’s mind), is out to get the Labour party and how it’s just not fair to hold Kevin Rudd to his word at any time for any reason ever because it’s all the LNP’s fault.

Bruce says:

10:11am | 08/01/10

Aitch B. You are spot on. Also, there was a great deal of game playing going on by the states, as all states involved were Labor states so they made sure it was going to fail , albeit they gave their support knowing that Victoria would pull out of the deal therefore neutralising the plan. “You could not have Labor states co-operating with a Liberal federal government with an upcoming election”, could we !!

N says:

10:11am | 08/01/10

Its quite entertaining that even with state and federal labour governments they still can’t play ball on this issue. Pretty typical grandstanding though, sign an agreement that means next to nothing in order to appease the masses. I have to wonder if the $400 million set aside to fix Menindee was squandered on the stimulus vote buying scheme. You see Mr Rudd, Margret Thatcher put it best; the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples money to spend.

Anthony says:

10:10am | 08/01/10

Hawke and Keating with their front benches were great leaders these labour clowns are quite embarrassing. What do most of us do when we get a letter from a politician?-bin it!

Russel Clarkson says:

10:05am | 08/01/10

I have worked in the agriculture and wine industry all my life. I have seen promises made and broken from all sides of politics. Howard did nothing for the farmers and was only active on the issue when he realised he was going to loose the election. At least the States are trying to resolve the matter and the new Federal government is more proactive than the last and cares for not justt the farmers but their families.

Shane From Melbourne says:

09:42am | 08/01/10

@ Aitch, why would the Victorian Government or any state government waive or cede their rights to the Commonwealth? Most of the time they have done so, they have been screwed over. Remember once those rights have been waived or ceded, they are gone forever. If the state doesn’t like the outcome, then that’s tough luck. As a state I would be very cautious about waiving or ceding any right.

Steve Smith says:

09:10am | 08/01/10

@iansand: exactly!! It’s a shame so many people believe otherwise.

iansand says:

09:02am | 08/01/10

The bad news is that, contrary to the beliefs of many people, whichever party is in government has no effect on the climate.

Andrew Goff says:

09:02am | 08/01/10

Yet another reason to abolish the states.

Aitch B says:

08:59am | 08/01/10

Exactly, Shane.

T.Chong: The States have the power to waive that right should they choose to do so. However, the Senate does not have the power to override the constitution…. a change to that requires a referendum. The Victorian Labor government at the time refused to waive it’s right at the time so blame them for inaction, not the previous government, who’s $10 billion plan was blocked by your Labor mates.

Your blind faith in Rudd, his government and the Labor movement in general is clouding your mind, mate!

Shane From Melbourne says:

08:41am | 08/01/10

Strange how a liberal senator, supposedly a representative of the state advocates a federal solution abrogating section 100 of the constitution:
“100. 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 a clear cut matter of states’ rights to me.

jamie says:

08:32am | 08/01/10

T Chong,

the Murray Darling Commission spent most of the time beating their collective heads against the wall due to state labor governments being deliberately uncooperative with the federal liberal government.

This has absolutely nothing to do with a now long gone Howard government. Rudd said he will fix it. Again, he lied.

soultrader says:

08:26am | 08/01/10

T Chong has obviously got the tongue stuck in the cheek once too often. TC - you can’t say anything seriously anymore? If you studied your history, you would soon discover who has the power to change things and who has not. But you don’t obviously care about that, TC, do you?
Why can’t everbody just face the fact that Australia has screwed up a major river system and does not know how to fix it - let alone take the first step to fix it. The bloody self seeking, blood-sucking, parasite State Governments of both sides of politics, of this country are to blame, wholly and solely. Vote those leeches out. But who will replace them you ask? Just another sorry bunch of greedy, power hungry, dictators.

Missy says:

08:12am | 08/01/10

T.Chong - This issue is about the current Government not the previous Government as you always want to go back to.

John A Neve says:

08:11am | 08/01/10

And so the tribes renew their fight!
It’s all reminiscent of the 100 year war, without armour, how do we tell the White Knights from the Red knights?

Laura says:

08:10am | 08/01/10

T, Chong -The Howard Governmnet were thrown out of office over 2 years ago! Kevin told us he could do all of these wonderful things, so he was voted in. Rudd said he would end the blame game. But all he and his ministers and yourself can do is talk about the Howard Government, time to move on and stop the blame game like you said Mr Rudd. You have had more than 2 years now, you can’t keep bringing up the Howard Government to deflect away from your incompetency.

Max Power says:

07:56am | 08/01/10

Who cares what the libs did or didn’t do when they were in power. They tried to take over the murray-darling, but the water greedy Labor states refused to co-operate. The question is what is the current Labor Federal govt going to do about it. Coming up to three years in power and Rudd has done nothing to save the murray-darling, actually he has done nothing at all in that time, but talk and travel. I love how the Labor and Union hacks are so quick to drag up the past in effort to justify the current Labor govt’s lack of action on everything, despite promising decisive leadership. So get over what the libs did or didn’t do, it no longer matters, they aren’t in power, all that matters now is what the current Labor Govt does, and we the people of Australia have a right to know what the current govt plans to do to save the murray-darling. So basically, whenever the Labor Govt or it’s Labor/Union hacks attack the opposition to defend the current govt, it does nothing but prove the current govt has failed and has no idea how to solve the problem. The current govt and it’s hacks motto: When wrong, if we don’t have a clue or we have failed, attack the opposition to distract the public from the real issue. I honestly thought the govt was elected to run the country and this govt promised decisive action on whole range of issues, yet it seems this govt is incapable of governing. Coming into the last year of their term, they are still blaming the opposition for their failures (despite promising to end the blame game), still failing to take responsibility for their own actions and lack of action, and still using the “what did the coalition do”  as an excuse and defence for their own policy failures, broken promises and general lack of the promised decisive action and leadership. The Labor party are in power, not the opposition, so all that matters is what the Labor Party plan to do to fix the mess their state Labor govt mates have created.

T.Chong says:

07:52am | 08/01/10

So Punchers all you can do is list FAILED LNP policies.
Did the LNP actually implement anything that worked?
The drought was in prior to 2005 Chuck.
What was wrong with Turnbulls 10million dollar rain machine?
That would have fixed everything.
Margret: state govts manage water, but the Libs with senate majority could have over ridden that and done something, but I guess that wasnt one of Nick Minchins or Howards No. 1 priorities.

Margaret Gray says:

07:19am | 08/01/10

@T.Chong

“...why was nothing done for so many years?...”

No surprise you didn’t even know who the responsible entity was.

State governments managed water within their borders and MIke Rann and Labor have been screwing South Australians on it for almost a decade.

Do try and keep up.

Charles says:

07:09am | 08/01/10

T Chong is obviously not a student of history and also appears to have some short term memory problems.

The Howard government initiated the Saving the Murray Fund in the early 2000’s and also for the last 3 years prior to the election in 2007 was actually trying to effect a Commonwealth takeover of states rights to the Murray, but was effectively blocked by the Bracks government.

There was no real issue in the Murray until the 2005 drought, when over-allocation by the states finally proved too much for it, and it has subsequently never been able to recover, despite more normal rainfall patterns since that time.

The Kevin Rudd so-called “historic commonwealth take-over” announced in 2008 with the full complicity of Mike Rann, was subject to criticism at the time that the states had been allowed to keep their existing water allocation plans.  This meant that states like VIC coulod actually continue with their existing policies up until 2019. 

Mike Rann brushed this off at the time, but upon reflection his stance is looking decidedly blinkered and obtuse, a problem he apparently shares with T Chong.

Diamantina Dick says:

07:09am | 08/01/10

T. Chong, Australia elected the Rudd Labor Government to end the blame game and solve this problem because they promised to do so. The likes of you who continue to try to deflect criticism for their failure to deliver on policy by calling into account the record of the previous Government are wasting your time. The LNP are no longer in power, the verdict on their record has already been made.

T.Chong says:

06:47am | 08/01/10

Simon: list just a few of the strategies the Libs implemented to save the Murray-Darling, between 1996 to 2007.
Of course we know that Labor and the unions caused the drought, just to harm the farmers, thats accepted.
Why didnt the LNP assist irrigators? The drought has been around before the change of govt, so why was nothing done for so many years?