BARNABY JOYCE 7.30 INTERVIEW

The National Party has been accused by Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey of freelancing its views, but Nationals Senator Barnaby Joyce turns his criticism on Treasurer Wayne Swan's handling of the foreign purchase of the country's largest cotton producer, Cubbie Station.

Transcript

LEIGH SALES, PRESENTER: While Labor deals with its rift with the Greens, the Coalition's trying to manage a rift of its own over foreign investment.

High-profile Senator Barnaby Joyce and other National Party colleagues are furious about plans to sell Cubbie Station in Queensland to a Chinese company and they've been pretty vocal publicly.

But that goes against Coalition policy, which firmly backs foreign investment in Australia.

The Opposition Leader has reiterated his support for the policy, but it's the Shadow Treasurer Joe Hockey who's had to pull his National Party colleagues into line, accusing them of "freelancing" with views that don't represent the Coalition's position.

Earlier today, Senator Joyce joined me from Tamworth.

Senator Joyce, are you freelancing with your views on the sale of Cubbie Station rather than speaking for the Coalition?

BARNABY JOYCE, NATIONALS SENATE LEADER: I think it's very important that we understand at this point in time, Leigh, that there's been no transparency in this deal. On a Friday night, basically, Mr Swan put out a decision for which he's given really no explanation about. Even between now and then the closest we've got, Leigh, to an explanation is his Twitter account. Now, we are talking about the largest property in Australia in value. The largest irrigation property in Australia. The largest water licence in Australia in an area that is so sensitive in the Murray-Darling Basin. We're talking about an excess of 10 per cent of our nation's cotton crop.

LEIGH SALES: I'll ask you that question again. Are you freelancing with your views on the sale of Cubbie Station and not speaking for the Coalition?

BARNABY JOYCE: No, I'm not, and I'll answer it directly too. We're talking about the largest water licence, Leigh, and I am the Shadow Minister for Water. We're talking about a very important issue in regional development and this is an area that's absolutely epitomises regional development, Dirranbandi and what we can do for it. We're talking about an issue in Queensland - and I'm senator for Queensland - and we're talking about an issue that is in my backyard, so, no, I'm not.

LEIGH SALES: But both Tony Abbott and Joe Hockey have said that they support the decisions of the Foreign Investment Review Board, so that puts your stated views here at odds with them.

BARNABY JOYCE: Well I'd like to see exactly more details on what the discussions are in the Foreign Investment Review Board because they're confidential papers. Now, the only person who's seen them is Mr Swan and Mr Swan hasn't given Australia any confidence whatsoever in regards to his decision. In fact it's so pathetic the closest we can get to Mr Swan is his Twitter account.

LEIGH SALES: Do you accept that your views are at odds with Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey?

BARNABY JOYCE: I accept that everybody wants something in the national interest. Everybody has said that's in the national interest, and it's quite obvious that Mr Swan has given us no confidence whatsoever that his diligence over this would show that it's in the national interest.

LEIGH SALES: I think we're conducting a different interview here because I'm asking what's going on with Mr Abbott and Mr Hockey and you're talking about Mr Swan. Do you accept Mr Hockey's assertion that frontbenchers like you and Warren Truss have an obligation to support Coalition policy which is pro-foreign investment?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well we haven't been back to Parliament since this decision was made, as you know, Leigh; there's been no cabinet meeting at this point in time and, you know, I think in light of what Mr Swan did and the fact that he put the decision out to sell Australia's largest property, that could actually be broken up.

LEIGH SALES: Have you spoken to Mr Abbott or Mr Hockey in the past 24 hours about this?

BARNABY JOYCE: Yes.

LEIGH SALES: And what was said?

BARNABY JOYCE: That's none of your business.

LEIGH SALES: You don't think that the viewers of this program, the people who vote for you, would like to know what was discussed?

BARNABY JOYCE: No, well because that is a private discussion between myself and somebody else and I'm not - I would not disclose their confidence, and to be honest, people like to have private conversations kept private.

LEIGH SALES: How far are you prepared to go in your opposition to this? Are you prepared to lose your shadow cabinet spot?

BARNABY JOYCE: Leigh, all that's basically a question for the future. I'd never - what I know, Leigh, is that people have an expectation that decisions that are crucial to their nation are properly debated and properly ventilated and that's - you can't look at someone in the face when they ask you a straight question about what's exactly involved with this process say, "Well, you know, I'm going to say nothing because it'll protect my personal position."

LEIGH SALES: Sure, but are you prepared to lose that personal position over it?

BARNABY JOYCE: Leigh, this is - once more, we're taking the debate on an issue about Barnaby Joyce. I couldn't give a toss about my own personal position. This is about the sale of our nation's biggest property, biggest water licence, and also with the Murray-Darling Basin plan at foot, what on Earth do we do? If Cubbie Station doesn't deliver any water back to the environment for environmental purposes, where will that water come from, Leigh?

LEIGH SALES: What do you fear will happen if Cubbie Station is owned by foreigners rather than Australians?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well, I've got no problems with foreign investment, and in fact we've got lots of other properties in our district, Leigh, which are owned by the Chinese, owned by other people and good luck to them. I've fully supported it and you've never heard boo about me over this. The issue with this one, Leigh, it is the biggest property. It has a large stake in a crucial market, in our second biggest export market after wheat, I think, cotton. It's more than 10 per cent of that market. It is the crucial player, the biggest player in our water market, the biggest player in our water market. It is the biggest representation in value of an agricultural asset in our nation. This is exceptional.

LEIGH SALES: But what do you think the Chinese owners would do that isn't in Australia's national interest?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well, Leigh, the question is - they've got conditions on it already, so they've already - they've obviously got concerns already. And so if they've got conditions which shows they've got concerns, then it's not something - a parochial point of view of mine.

LEIGH SALES: But what you're saying is that you don't trust the Chinese owners to run Cubbie Station. Why?

BARNABY JOYCE: Well it's not a case of trusting them or not, it's a case of proper investigation and diligence to explore that fact and we haven't had it. It is the largest farm, Leigh, and where is the proper diligence? I mean, I and you and everybody else deserves a better process of diligence than having to talk to Mr Swan over Twitter to try and find out exactly what's going on with this.

LEIGH SALES: But your Coalition colleagues aren't bothered by this. They have confidence in the Foreign Investment Review Board.

BARNABY JOYCE: Well, Leigh, I have got to, because it's in my backyard, probably have a real focus on this and that's because it is directly in my area. I mean, we're all - we're completely aware of this property. And I don't think that if you even asked Mr Swan to drive to this property he'd be able to find it without a guide. But it's more important than a decision that you just bundle out on a Friday night. Why didn't we have a 90-day review period, as he could have brought in, Leigh? Why didn't he do that? Why is he trying to hide from us exactly what's involved with this?

LEIGH SALES: Barnaby Joyce, thanks for talking with us.

DISCUSSION REGARDING CUBBIE STATION

Peter Gilmour
Swann: Dont sell Cubbie Station and our country's future
13 hours ago · 
My god what is happening to our country, the Liberal Party have just put out a press release announcing that they support all the foreign ownership laws the way they are, bloody Tony Abbott, I don't like him, I don't care what John Howard or anyone else reckons of him.
Cubbie Station has a water entitlement of 4

60 gigalitres per year, the Murray Darling Basin plan calls for in the order of 2,750 gigalitres per year of which nearly 1,000 gigalitres is "new water" eg water not already recovered, now it doesn't take rocket science to work out that all or some of Cubbie's water would help us out immensely in returning water to our environment.
Of these fools let this pass through parliament we need to protest loudly and in huge nembers.
Like ·
Swann: Dont sell Cubbie Station and our country's future likes this.

Swann: Dont sell Cubbie Station and our country's future
Thanks Peter. You've really put the water issue into perspective. Unfortunately, it's the same old story - money over reason, greed over common sense. Agreed, we need to protest loudly, as Government forget they serve we, the people. These days, we the people are only ever listened to if we scream and kick. We need to tell Government we need the Murray Darlin Basin for our sustainable futures - as their short sightedness obviously cannot comprehend this basic logic...

Environmental plan for MDB is NIC's priority

AS the Murray-Darling Basin Plan faces potential legal challenges unless consensus is reached in coming weeks, the National Irrigators Council (NIC) has reiterated its main priority is to ensure the Plan contains an adjustment method that clearly identifies any water savings made from environmental measures to help reduce the overall SDLs target.

NIC chairman Gavin McMahon says his Council also wants to ensure the billions of dollars in funding, which underpins the Commonwealth’s water reforms, can be directed towards projects that provide good environmental outcomes for rivers and communities.

But he said the Basin Plan still lacked an environmental watering plan and relied on “faith” rather than sound water management principles.

He said an environmental watering plan would help determine where environmental water was coming from and is being directed to, what environmental outcomes would be achieved and if those goals are being met through timely and effective water use.

“What we’re saying to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder, which is the largest water holder in the system, is; what’s your plan for the next year?” he said.

“As irrigators we’re required to provide our plans on a yearly basis so that everyone has a good understanding of what our plan is and there’s transparency.”

Mr McMahon said one of the Plan’s biggest weaknesses was its inability to successfully monitor the success or otherwise, of any environmental watering.

He said more certainty was also needed around water apportionment to easily identify exactly which valleys the SDLs would be taken from and finite volumes for each valley.

Communities like the southern Basin face losing about 1000GLs under the current arrangements which would devastate agricultural production by up to 50 percent in places like the Murrumbidgee and impact severely on the ongoing survival of those economies.

Mr McMahon said knowing that information would give those communities the capacity to plan for the future with greater certainty.

“If you asked communities up and down the Basin, and the businesses that operate within those communities, how things will look for them in 2019 when the Plan’s due to start, they won’t know,” he said.

“They don’t know what the actual volume of water will be that will come out of their communities or how it will be acquired.

“There’s nothing in the Plan which clearly says, if a certain area of the Basin or that community is affected, ‘this is what we’re going to do to help you’ or is it just bad luck for them.

“Taking water from those communities not only affects farmers and agricultural production but also other businesses, house prices and schedules for shire rates so they can function properly by knowing what money they have coming in from year to year.

“These are the indirect consequences of water leaving these communities but we’ve not seen anything that says, ‘this is what we’ll do for you’.”

Mr McMahon said Water Minister Tony Burke has been accessible and engaging while conducting his consultation role with an open door policy.

“Many people have seen the Minister and he’s also visited many areas and engaged with people and spoken to nearly everyone during this process,” he said.

“That’s given him a really good understanding of the issues.

“But at the end of the day, we’d like to see an outcome that’s well negotiated and well-balanced and doesn’t destroy Basin communities which would be well appreciated by many people.”

Mr McMahon’s parting comment was a reminder of the economic contribution made to the nation, from rural communities and businesses throughout the complex and iconic, river system.

He said irrigated agriculture played a major role in contributing to the GDP of each State within the river system and the overall national economy.

“It needs to be borne in mind that irrigators do help to drive those economies in a big way,” he said.

“What we’d like to say is, if you take water away from those communities you also impact on economic generation and prosperity.

“Mining will come and go and that may take 50 years but these communities are always going to be key economic drivers for the nation.

“They create employment in and out of the Basin and generate export income for the nation.

“Our work creates food and other produce which in turn creates job and money that goes around the whole economy but that often gets forgotten during this whole debate.”

LETTER TO TONY ABBOTT

The Honourable Tony Abbott
Leader of the Opposition
Level 2, 17 Sydney Rd
MANLY
NSW 2095

Dear Mr Abbott

RE: SALE OF CUBBIE STATION

I wish to convey my thorough disgust at your agreeing with the sale of Cubbie Station.
It suggests to me that you have a lack of willingness to fight for rural Australia and the Murray Darling Basin, you have certainly been very quiet throughout the whole consultation process.

What we have with Cubbie Station as a once in a lifetime opportunity to return a significant amount of water to the environment.
It’s water allocation is 460 gigalitres, enough to fill Sydney Harbour or irrigate the north western NSW irrigation system.
How can you be so narrow minded to let this wonderful opportunity pass?
I question whether you will be much different to our current government if you get in.
The more stupid decisions you make like this make your chances of being elected a bigger if as time goes on.

I implore you to revise your decision regarding Cubbie Station.

Yours Faithfully,

Peter Gilmour.

DISCUSSION REGARDING THE BASIN

THIS IS A DISCUSSION FROM THE FACEBOOK PAGE I HAVE SUPPLIED THE LINK TO, LOTS OF COMMON SENSE HERE

Jim Manning
What I find frustrating is that this whole thing is not just aout the Murray Darling - this is about water Security of a rapidly 

growing Nation. The solution is there but will require courage to take on Snowy Mountain Project size solutions - we simply have to look at ways of capturing more water and working out away of directing to all possibilities both side of the Great Divide. We all continue to be narrow minded and unimaginative about solutions.
Unlike · · Unfollow Post · August 14 at 6:09pm near Adelaide, South Australia
You like this.

Peter Gilmour Well said Jim, try getting the MDBA to see that is like trying to pull teeth from a camel
August 14 at 7:22pm · Like

Allan Maurice Taylor The environmentalists (Greens etc) want to preserve everything the way it is now. The environment has top priority over the people who live in the Basin. The best objective I believe is to maximize the prosperity of the people who live and...
See More
August 15 at 4:31pm · Unlike · 2

Jim Manning I believe the situation can be managed but not while the politicians and bureaucrats are suffering chronic myopia
17 minutes ago · Like

Allan Maurice Taylor You are always going to get drought conditions in the MDBasin, in a cyclical manner.. maybe 6 years out of 10, with 2 normal and 1 flood flow years, on average over 100 years. The problem is to store enough water to cover the drought years, which means more dams and bores. There are various ways to tackle the problem, but an optimum solution seems prevented by busybodies of the Conservation Movement who want to preserve the world exactly as it is today from their previleged desk-bound city positions , happily promoting an eco-religion few people believe, least of all farmers of the MDBasin. I am beginning to wonder whether the idea of a national MDBasin plan is a good idea after all, after the farmers burning the first report..a well deserved response. Is this the right direction? Lets bring de Bono thinking to play on the problem. Conservationists are not fans of lateral thinking, or any forms of logic. What if I say that the rainfall that falls on a property is free to the property owner and is God's gift to humanity, and he can do what he likes with it. Expanding this idea to the States... rainfall in Queensland is its concern, ditto NSW, ditto VIC and ditto SA. No squabbling allowed between States. If this was law, then all this bunkum generated by SA Premier Weatherall would not exist. SA government would have to review their MISMANAGEMENT OF THE Lower Lakes system and stop all this bunkum about wanting more environmental flows to keep the ocean mouth of the river open, which is a crazy idea (healthy river) promoted by the Greens and Conservationalists. More on this later TGIF time for vino and tapas. Allano

Murray Darling Basin people who live in the basin

Cubbie Station now in Wayne's world

Treasurer Wayne Swan has approved the sale of Cubbie Station, to a quasi-state owned enterprise.

Shandong Ruyi, which would take 80 per cent ownership of Cubbie, was formed as a Chinese state-owned entity in 1972. In 1997, the Chinese Communist party appointed Qui Yafu to be the chairman and the president of Shandong Ruyi and in 2001 it was nominally privatised but Yufu became its biggest shareholder. State-owned entities are both a major shareholder and owners of subsidiaries of the company. The big issue is that, under this deal, a company with clear connections to another nation's government will own Australia's biggest farm by value, biggest water licence - with enough water to fill Sydney Harbour - and our largest irrigation farm.

The purchase would introduce more complexity to the Murray-Darling plan under which water will be demanded from the Lower Balonne. People are rightly asking: if Cubbie has not been asked to give water back to the environment, will that mean a massive economic burden on the small businesses and real estate prices in the upstream town of St George, or the downstream environmental requirements?

Swan could have imposed conditions to sell water but he settled for a condition that they abide by local laws and regulations. They laud as something marvellous something that should be obvious.

The fact that the Treasurer has put conditions on it means that he has concerns. The problem is his conditions mean very little and he hasn't revealed his logic.

Cubbie Station could be bought and split up into smaller properties. Cubbie Station is not one property at one location. There is a farm that is part of the government-constructed irrigation scheme at St George. It is over 120 kilometres from the Cubbie homestead. Even further away is another Cubbie property called the Anchorage.

At Cubbie Station itself the 18,210 hectares of irrigation could be broken into three lots. As the shadow water minister, I realise and have grown up with all the complexities of water. There are the immense sensitivities between upstream and downstream users, there are the immense sensitivities that lie between the states, there are sensitivities over who is extracting what and whether someone is extracting too much and there are sensitivities between the environment and agriculture. Now on top of that we will include diplomatic issues to make it even more complicated.

When you are involved in any debate, people will try to impugn your character by dragging in a caustic inference towards you. In this one it is xenophobia. The Chinese have interests in other farms in my area and I couldn't give a toss about it. Good luck to them but this is something entirely different.

Cubbie Station wins the bet on Australia's largest irrigation properties and it is certainly one of our more contentious. And this transaction is not going to help settle that contention one little bit.

Foreign investment and foreign ownership should not be confused. You go on to an undeveloped block and develop it for Australia - that is something good for the nation. You go onto an already developed block - and that is just a transfer of ownership. If there is one thing the Australian people hate it is when you stare straight at them and when you are asked whether it is an issue, you lie and you make polite excuses to protect your career path.

Unfortunately, I had no ability to determine the timing of the FIRB approval decision. Swan announced the decision late on a Friday evening when he easily could have announced a 90-day extension to give time for public debate. I must say I was stunned by the silence of Penny Wong, Jay Weatherill and the Greens who in the past have railed against the evils of upstream water users but now on the sale of our biggest water licence their silence is deafening.

It's also come to light in the Weekly Times that there are question marks about the process conducted by the receiver in regards to due process with alternate bids. With one interested party claiming that it was the most un- Australian bidding process he has ever seen. The Australian also reported that an Australian investor walked away from the deal because they couldn't be sure of the ultimate ownership of Shandong Ruyi.

Ultimately the decision of foreign investment resides with the Treasurer and whatever happens next, Wayne Swan is responsible.

Barnaby Joyce is the Nationals' Senate leader and the opposition spokesman on regional development, local government and water.

Read more: http://www.canberratimes.com.au/opinion/cubbie-station-now-in-waynes-world-20120905-25eh1.html#ixzz25m5QEQPU

VIC NATIONALS RE MDB PLAN

Press Releases Victoria working constructively on Murray Darling Basin Plan Thursday, September 06, 2012 The Victorian Coalition Government will not agree to a Murray Darling Basin Plan that is not in the best interests of Victoria and does not deliver a balanced outcome for the environment, the socio-economic issues and a balance between the states, Minister for Water, Peter Walsh, told Parliament.  Responding to a question from The Nationals Member for Murray Valley, Tim McCurdy, Minister Walsh said Victoria had engaged constructively in the Basin Plan debate. But, we have put the Murray Darling Basin Authority and the Commonwealth Water Minister, Tony Burke, on notice that the Authority needs to take account of the ministerial consensus document of July 9 and the consensus document of August 27, when putting those issues into a future plan, he said. Minister Walsh said Victoria’s key concern is lack of an adjustment mechanism for sustainable diversion limit offsets and the benchmark modeling that underpins that. The Victorian Government is firmly of the view that you can achieve 650 gigalitres of environmental offsets by environmental works and measures and you can achieve good outcomes for the lower lakes with 2100 gigalitres of held entitlements. Another key issue is the apportionment of water recovered between the basin states, the Minister said. We firmly believe that should be apportioned on a historical-use percentage basis. South Australia expects all the outcomes but will not make a fair contribution to a future basin plan. It is interesting the South Australian Premier, Jay Weatherill, will spend $2 million of his taxpayers money on an advertising campaign pushing Victorians to support the South Australian view, but will not engage in a proper process to achieve a good outcome and make a contribution from South Australia. Mr Walsh said the Government also had major concerns about constraints management. From a constraints management point of view this is a very simple argument: to get the water down the river without flooding private land. The Murray Darling Basin Authority has not yet done the work to determine if it can get the water down the river without flooding private property and leaving a Victorian water authority or a Victorian government open to litigation  because people have been deliberately flooded out through the environmental water manager’s use of environmental water, he said. From Victoria’s point of view, we want to work constructively to get a basin plan. If a basin plan cannot be achieved, the sun will come out, the world will not end. We will revert to managing the basin, as has been done for decades, in a constructive way. The states will work with the Commonwealth, rather than Canberra taking a dictatorial attitude that does not take account of the states’ interests. The key message is that we are working in the best interests of our economy, the communities of northern Victoria and the irrigation sector that underpins their economies, Mr Walsh concluded.

OPINION BY BARNABY JOYCE ON CUBBIE STATION

Please find below an opinion piece written by Senator Joyce published in The Weekly Times 5 September 2012

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2012/09/05/534151_opinion-news.html


Don’t sell the farm

A great epiphany came to me recently when I spoke at the Australian Grains Industry Conference in Melbourne. There, I heard a speaker say that Australian farmers had a great future, as service providers on large corporate farms.

That's right; you too can be swinging on the end of a spanner rather than owning the farm. It's such a relief. I looked at this person and saw that he didn't understand what makes so many blokes tick.

They want a nation which provides them with the opportunity to have some of the most fundamental connections to what we are, the soil. This feeling probably doesn't fit into any economic theorems but it is vastly more real than any of them.

It is the essence of what is the national interest, giving the citizens of the nation the greatest expression of attachment to the wealth of the nation, through ownership.

Now, at 5.14 pm on Friday evening an email lobbed into my blackberry from the Treasurer, Wayne Swan. While people were refining their footy tips for the last round of the season, Wayne thought it was the best chance to explain to the Australian people why he had agreed to the overseas sale of the nation's largest farm in value, largest irrigation farm in Australia by area, largest water licence in volume, largest producer of cotton in our nation and with enough water to fill Sydney Harbour.

It would be nice if the Treasurer was available to answer some of the questions that many have bombarded me with since. But he has not held one press conference on his decision, nor done one media interview. Instead, he has sent a few tweets.

Here are just a few questions to get Wayne started.

If it is in the national interest to sell our biggest farm to overseas interests, what exactly would not be in the national interest? Why was it not OK to sell the Australian Stock Exchange to the Singaporese, the Treasurer blocked that sale last year, but it is OK to sell our biggest farm by value? After all, as important as the ASX is, we can always build another stock exchange, but God isn't making any more black soil, nor is the government issuing any more water licences.

Why is it very difficult for foreigners to buy residential homes but it is perfectly OK to buy the nation's biggest farm? Indeed, the FIRB has never said no to the foreign purchase of an Australian farm, their analysis is hardly quantum physics.

Who owns the Chinese company that is buying Cubbie, Shandong Ruyi? The Parliamentary Library cannot find who its shareholders are but the Australian people deserve to know.

Why has the Treasurer designed conditions so weak that they are barely worth writing down? The Treasurer said that Shandong must comply with local laws. Was an alternative up for negotiation?

There are so many commentators out there that support the sale as if they are across the details when they are not. There is a reason for that; the Treasurer hasn't released the details so how could they be across it.

The sale of Cubbie is not in our national interest because it compromises our sovereignty, limits our flexibility and makes a mockery of our democracy.

Cubbie is the biggest private water licence holder in the country. That means that when we want to enforce water use limits and when we develop a plan for the Murray-Darling, we don't just have to consider complex commercial, social and environmental problems, we add diplomatic ones into the mix as well.

It's hard enough negotiating a Basin Plan between four Australian states, we don't need to add another nation's government as well.

What disgusts me the most in all of this is the cowardice on display by the Treasurer in not explaining why he has made his decision.

In the last month Wayne Swan has told us all about his love for Bruce Springsteen, but he has spent more time explaining that adolescent crush than he has explaining the serious decision to sell our nation's biggest farm.

This is an insult to our democracy; this plays us all as fools.

It's the people of Australia though who are the ultimate masters of our elected politicians. It is not too late to stop this sale. If you are as worked up as me on this issue, call your local member and call the Treasurer, and take a stand to say that it is not OK for a decision of this magnitude to be hidden from public view and debate.


Barnaby Joyce is the Nationals’ Senate leader and the opposition spokesman on regional development, local government and water. 

CUBBIE STATION

CUBBIE STATIONS WATER ENTITLEMENTS

HAVE A READ OF THIS, CUBBIE IS LICENCED IS FOR 460,000 MEGALITRES PER YEAR, THAT IS 460 GIGALITRES, ON AN AVERAGE YEAR THEY STILL USE 200 GIGALITRES, NOW IT DOESN'T TAKE ROCKET SCIENCE TO WORK OUT THAT 460 GIGALITRES IS A VERY LARGE PERCENTAGE THAT TONY BURKE AND THE MDBA ARE CALLING FOR, SO WE DON'T WANT ALL THE WATER BUT 20% WOULD BE REALLY GOOD.
CUBBIE'S WATER ENTITLEMENTS ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF ALL THE ENTITLEMENTS OF ALL DOWNSTREAM IRRIGATORS IN NORTH-WESTERN NSW
Cubbie Station, located near Dirranbandi, Australia, is the largest privately owned (Cubbie Group) irrigation property in the southern hemisphere.
The station was created by amalgamating 12 floodplain properties to give Cubbie a total of 51 water licences.[1] Its huge water storage dams stretch for more than 28 km along the Culgoa River, part of the Murray-Darling system. In an average year the Station uses 200,000 megaliters of water, in a good year as much as 500,000 megalitres
The water is used to supply 130 km² of irrigated cotton and other crops including wheat, which brings in about $50 million a year.[2]
The station is licenced to take 460,000 megalitres.[1] It is the equivalent of all irrigation entitlements downstream in north-western NSW.[3] The property has the capacity to grow 200 km² of cotton. In 2006, the dams on the property were filled to 1% capacity allowing for only 2 km² of cotton planting.[1] The station is often derided for its large water usage requirements in a time of extreme drought in Australia and damage to the Murray Darling river system [4]
The previous Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull did not rule out its acquisition by the government.[5][6]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubbie_Station

CUBBIE STATION

I am going to write about Cubbie Station again, because it is a diabolically bad decision to sell it to overseas investors.
It would be just like this Labor Government that next year after the sale has gone through that they strip a large volume of water off it anyway and we well know they are very capable of doing that.
Don't you reckon that would annoy the chinese somewhat, you bet it would and our economy would really suffer if this occurs.
Tony Burke and the MDBA had a golden opportunity to correct one of the big mistakes made by earlier governments, for that is what happened at Cubbie was, it needs rectifying and now is the perfect opportunity.
To the investors looking to buy Cubbie, be very very careful and remember that you are growing crops in our outback, it gets really hot and uses a lot of water, I heard that it wasn't profitable out there to irrigate once diesel got to $1.20 per litre, so maybe the chinese plan on building their own power station.
My god I have been harping on about the need for vision, commitment and common sense, at the moment I only see it coming from Barnaby Joyce and the National Party.
WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY HERE TO REALLY MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO AUSTRALIA'S ENVIRONMENT, WE MUST SIEZE THIS OPPORTUNITY, LET'S KEEP FIGHTING

Following are the contact details for 2 companies involved in the proposed purchase;
Shandong Ruyi (80%) Email: sry@shandongruyi.com Website: http://www.shandongruyi.com/
Lempriere (20%) Email: wool@lempriere.com.au Website: http://www.lempriere.com.au/

BARNABY JOYCE INTERVIEW 5TH SEPT 2012

What Barnaby touched on tonight is the water entitlements that Cubbie holds, surely with infrastructure upgrades at Cubbie Station their could be a great whack of water returned to the environment.
Cubbie is a clear case of far too many water entitlements being allocated in the first place and they paid bugger all for them.
Cubbie Station could be the shining light in the modernisation of our agricultural powerhouse, the Murray Darling Basin.

Following are some comments from followers:
we need more transparancy and we need more regulations for people buying big parcels of land.

We need a better system, our democracy is being trashed from all sides Go Barnaby

I wish Abbott would be a little more succinct with his comments regarding matters of national interest.He seems to be ducking and weaving on a few issues these days.He is a better man than that I hope.
He is losing a few people from my personal observation.He ain't no John Howard that's for sure.

NO PLAN BETTER THAN A BAD PLAN

Hello once again from sunny Cobram on the majestic murray river.

I was travelling yesterday with some of my family and admiring the vibrant colours of our wonderful countryside. Plenty of green grass, cattle and sheep and enormous canola crops and it got me to thinking, this countryside would look nothing like this without one main thing, water, our area around Cobram was sheep and cropping country before the emergence of irrigation, just look at it now, thousands of acres of highly intensive agriculture eg fruit growing, dairying, olives plus all the other types of agricultural endeavours.

Cobram High School is 50 years old this year and I am involved in organising a reunion, so that means our High School started in 1962, not long after the irrigation schemes were established in our district, so with the benefit of irrigation Cobram and its sister town Barooga have gone from being villages on the Murray River to being a quite sizeable business hub, the 2 towns have a population of 6,500 and our “shopping population” is 13,000, that is why we now have major department stores in our town.

The majority of this is because of that marvellous invention, irrigation.

This story is repeated many many times right across the Murray Darling Basin.

We can thank our forefathers for having the vision, determination and commitment to establish the agricultural powerhouse the Murray Darling Basin is today.

We are now getting snippets of information about where the Murray Darling Basin plan is up to and some expert reckoned that the plan will go through pretty much as is, mate that is not going to happen, because if the opposition and states crumble now there will be an enormous protest, we will be looking for scalps.

I will only touch on Cubbie Station, the decision to let it be sold to overseas investors shows a total lack of vision and very little understanding about what the issues are in the Basin and rural Australia.

NO PLAN IS FAR BETTER THAN THE PLAN CURRENTLY IN FRONT OF TONY BURKE

Keep well and all the best,

Peter Gilmour

BASIN PLAN - MINISTERIAL COMMENTS

http://www.mgcc-nsw.org/
MURRAY GROUP OF CONCERNED COMMUNITIES
Murray-Darling Basin Plan – Ministerial Council Comments
The Murray-Darling Ministerial Council (MinCo) provided their last formal feedback directly to the Federal Minister on M

onday, 27 August. The Minister has stated his willingness to continue to work with the state ministers to try to reach further agreement.
Documents provided to the Minister are:
1. Views of the Councils as a whole;
2. NSW and Victoria;
3. NSW;
4. Queensland;
5. South Australia;
The Murray Group of Concerned Communities review is focussed on the comments provided by the southern jurisdictions with regard to the interests of the southern connected Basin.
Consensus Comments
The MinCo consensus document reports an acceptance of an adjustable, plus or minus 5% of SDL, recovery target of 2,750GL per year.
The MinCo has again stated that the downstream recovery target should be apportioned and has requested the MDBA continue to work with the states to finalise a methodology.
The MinCo have requested clarification that at least 600GL of that recovery target is to be gained through existing committed Commonwealth investments in more efficient irrigation infrastructure. That is the amount assumed by SEWPaC to be recovered through the Water for the Future programs and funding including On-Farm and PIIOP programs, although this is not spelt out in the document.
The MinCo report outlines a salt export objective of a discharge of 2million tonnes of salt out the Murray Mouth each year calculated annually averaged over the preceding three years.
This discharge was previously a ‘target’ in the Draft Basin Plan and became an ‘objective’ in the altered Basin Plan but was an objective for each water accounting period. The three year rolling average allows more flexibility in the system.
MinCo also requests that the Water Resource Plan requirements clearly state that State water quality management plans are not required to specify measures to be undertaken to contribute to the achievement of the salt export objective. This indicates that the objective is not mandatory and is for monitoring and management purposes.
MinCo has expressed concern that the Water Trade Rules may present obstacles to water shepherding arrangements. They are calling for the Basin Plan to allow shepherding where there is no detriment to other entitlement holders.
MinCo again raised issues around jurisdictional implementation, mainly concerning funding and continued work with the states.
They have asked that the MDBA continue to work with the states to refine groundwater issue.

NSW and Victoria
NSW and Victoria have presented a joint position paper to highlight areas of importance to both states.
Key to their position that third party interests are protected and they have asked for it to be stipulated in the Basin Plan that there be no compulsory aquisition of land or easements which is an important criteria (to date there has only been protection from compulsory aquisition of water).
NSW and Victoria request that the Basin Plan be amended to show the values of the shared reduction targets in the southern basin are apportioned at the State level based on the proportion of surface water diversions with urban water use included in recognition that all extractions impact on river health.
According to their calculations the 971GL southern basin shared recovery target would be shared between states as follows:
• Victoria 425GL (43.8%)
• NSW 458GL (47.2%)
• SA 83GL (8.5%)
• ACT 5GL (0.5%)
If NSW distributes its share of the recovery target pro-rata of baseline diversions, the NSW Murray’s water recovery targets are:
• In stream target 262GL
• Shared recovery target 187GL
• TOTAL recovery 449GL
This figure is for the whole of the NSW Murray of which Murray Irrigation represents around 71%.
These figures are the total recovery figures from the 2009 baseline. According to the Commonwealth Environmental Water Holder website over 200GL has already been recovered through purchase and efficiency programs in the NSW Murray. That does not include transfers through the On Farm Irrigation Efficiency Program Round Two or the Private Irrigation Efficiency Program (PIIOP) if it is finalised. Combined these programs will transfer about 48GL.
Using these conservative estimates, the remaining recovery for the NSW Murray is around 187GL long term average annual yeild. The roll out of the On Farm Program Round Three would contribute to that amount.
Victoria and NSW believe that up to 650GL of offsets will be achieved through environmental works and measures and changes to river operating rules and procedures. They believe this offset should apply to the 2,750GL in the first instance. This would eeffectively cap entitlement recovery to 2,100GL.
The two states believe any shortfall in achieving 2,750GL should be met only through strategic purchase (eg. Nimmie Caira) or infrastructure programs undertaken in agreement with the jurisdictions.
They also believe that supply measure savings (before take) can be realised through assessing the “full benefit of Living Murray works and measures” and looking at alternative options for the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth. They specifically mention reconnection of the South East Drainage Scheme and changed operation of the Barrages.
They highlight that for water recovery for efficiency measures (after take) to be effective over the 2,750GL target, constraints need to be addressed and therefore no further recovery should take place until this is done. They make the point that any decision to remove or adress constraints constraints must only be taken with full consideration of third party impacts and stipulate no compulsory land and easement aquisition.
For these reasons, they are of the view that the proposed adjustment mechanism be applied so that supply offsets leading to a downward movement in the recovery target be assessed in the first instance (2016) and any adjustment upward only be applied once the “gap” has been achieved if excess water is gained through efficiency programs funded by the Commonwealth and constraints have been addressed (where practical).
NSW and Victoria want further clarification to ensure the Basin Salinity Management Strategy remains the key salinity management protocol and want it clear in the Basin Plan that the operation of salinity targets in Chapter 8 are not mandatory and have no third party impacts.
They have asked that the Environmental Watering Plan (developed with regard to State Watering Plans) include a delivery plan that addresses third party impacts. They acknowledge that environmental watering activities to date have led to negative third party impacts and they want this issue addressed in the watering plan.
The joint position paper raises the issue of the MDBA changing the benchmark model run to ensure it will be capable of underpinning the adjustment process. NSW and Victoria agree with the principle of refining the benchmark model to sit can be replicated to evaluate possible future adjustments; however, they demand that agreed policies and principles are implemented to ensure the benchmark is representative and a governance framework for its operation be developed.
The key remaining issue for NSW is the groundwater SDLs which they believe the MDBA have set too high in the western saline groundwater regions.
South Australia
Despite signing off on the whole of Council views, South Australia is reserving their final position until they are in receipt of the modelling of a recovery of 3,200GL with key constraints removed. In their individual comments they believe only a recovery target higher than 2,750GL will meet environmental outcomes and the requirements of the Water Act 2007.
They ask the MDBA to adopt a water recovery target greater than 2,750GL. They also believe that the “gap” must be met through purchase or infrastructure and other projects – no mention of environmental works and measures.
South Australia argues that the definition of supply and efficiency measures are inadequate and propose that water recovery through trade or transfer should also be considered to allow the adjustment mechanism to increase water recovery. They argue that the initial benchmark model must be higher to achieve environmental outcomes.
South Australia supports the three year rolling average calculation for the salt export objective but is also asking for key targets for the Coorong, Lower Lakes and Murray Mouth to be included such as minimum water level in the Lower Lakes and a salinity target for the southern Coorong of less than 100g/L.
South Australia also asks that the Basin Plan objectives be amended to “give priority consideration to key environmental concerns before optimising social, economic and environmental outcomes”
South Australia wants the constraints management strategy to be linked to the achievement of objectives and outcomes and a requirement for the MDBA to report annually on progress with implementing actions and measures to relax or remove constraints.

Walsh calls for consensus

SWAN HILL GUARDIAN

VICTORIAN Water Minister Peter Walsh said the proposed basin plan
should be abolished if the Murray-Darling Basin Authority (MDBA) is 
unable to deliver a plan which the basin ministers support.

At a local level, Mr Walsh said for the plan to proceed the MDBA would
need to take on board issues which were previously outlined in the joint 
ministers communiqué, noting little had been done to address issues 
relating to the apportionment of water recovery and sustainable diversion 
limit adjustment mechanisms.
He said unless a consensus could be reached between all parties, the 
focus should turn towards the shared management of the basin to achieve 
outcomes.

"The MDBA's lack of a suitable response to some sections of this year's
July 9consensus communiqué is incredibly frustrating and disappointing," 
Mr Walsh said.

"There are many issues that require further discussion from ministers as
the MDBA has not taken these earlier comments into account."

He said further to the consensus document, Victoria and New South Wales
had also provided Mr Burke with an agreed notice. Mr Walsh said basin 
ministers and staff from the Basin Officials Committee would continue to 
work on the finer details of the plan in a bid to reach a consensus in the 
coming weeks.

"Victoria and New South Wales are in agreement in asking for a
sustainable diversion limit adjustment mechanism to apply in the final basin 
plan to stop irrigation water being stripped from rural communities and food 
and fibre producers, and to achieve better environmental outcomes," 
Mr Walsh said.

"Victoria and New South Wales also do not support the Commonwealth
entering the water market with further buyback tenders unless it is aligned 
with irrigation upgrades."