THERE is no doubt the Victorian Government sees the future of urban water supplies in the rural water market, says CHRIS HARRISON
Premier John Brumby has said lifting water-trading limits would suck the water and the wealth out of irrigation districts.
Given the Food Bowl Modernisation Plan has failed to deliver enough water for the north south pipeline, Melbourne's entry into rural water markets seems assured.
It is clear the Government sees the rural water market as crucial to the future water security for urban populations.
By adding key policy and legislative changes with large-scale infrastructure pipeline projects, the Government has ensured this transfer of rural water will continue.
It is in this light that Mr Brumby's comments about the 4 per cent trading cap are incongruous with his Government's policies.
When water moves from rural markets to urban supply it fundamentally changes the equation.
Under shortage, agriculture cannot compete politically or economically for water.
The environment fares little better - witness the Federal Government's support for the north-south pipeline that takes water from the Murray Darling Basin during its worst crisis since European settlement.
The drive for urban water security will see permanent removal of water from farmers and add to the dramatic decline of irrigated agriculture.
The food bowl plan was sold under the guise of providing more water for the environment, irrigators and Melbourne - but Melbourne was always first in line.
There is no doubt the plan's water-savings targets have evaporated due to inadequate planning and drought.
Recently, a Department of Sustainability and Environment official admitted losses were lower than expected because reduced rain meant less water in the system.
The plan's key and founding principle states that every year the system runs, the same volume of savings can be made.
The reality is they cannot, which creates a whole series of dilemmas for the Government.
If irrigators sell large volumes of water to the Federal Government, water saved through the food bowl upgrade will disappear and put paid to the 75 gigalitres for Melbourne.
Failing to achieve the plan's stage-one savings will then prevent the Government obtaining funds for stage two - leaving the food bowl half modernised and in the worst of both worlds.
The calamity will continue if Melbourne Water enters the rural water market, ruining its own $300 million investment.
What else can the Government do but keep supporting the trade-restrictive 4 per cent rule?
Regardless of what happens to the 4 per cent rule, Mr Brumby's comments about protecting rural communities' economies underlines the fact that, under his watch and that of his predecessors, the Victorian food bowl has lost 400 gigalitres of water by open trade, urban transfers and DSE-brokered environmental adjustments, such as the 80-20 deal.
The irony is this loss of water is the reason why savings targets for Melbourne cannot be achieved.
There is no doubt in Victoria's near future that there will be fewer food producers and poorer rural communities.
The real shame is that much of this change is of government design and not circumstance.
- Chris Harrison is a fifth-generation farmer from Durham Ox and member of the Plug the Pipe group.
