There is untold pain from the worst drought in living memory. It's affecting farmers, their suppliers and consumers alike.
It's great to see the Fed Govt come-up with some more funds to help-out but so many of us have been through this before and know that while their hearts are in the right place, it doesn't really solve a lot. And I guess that's where the hard thinking has to begin.
Bob Hawke and Paul Keating deregulated the car, textile and footwear manufacturing industries and the economists are praising them for the economic boom we're now experiencing. However, the flip-side is that involved a lot of pain for the people who were working in those industries - A lot of them lost their jobs.
Just like this latest farmer aid pack, that Government came-up with pay-outs to ease their pain but they still had a lot of personal and family pain that money can't heal. (And I don't think these people were offered anything like the "..up to $150,000", stated in this farm offer! hmmm.. and the devil will be in the detail here, I bet).
With rural water running-out, the ice-caps are now past the point of no return (i.e. they can't freeze again in our lifetime), etc etc is it time to make some hard decisions? e.g. Rather than giving money to irrigators, do we have to severely ration water from water-gulping farming? i.e. Should we only allow as much water as a livestock farm can take from a flowing stream to keep stock watered? I think we have to make these hard decisions. Without putting a finer point on it, do we need to bite the bullet and prevent cotton & rice etc farming and leave such farming to those places in the World that can handle it 'naturally' while we try to work-out how to keep our stock alive without? Government money isn't going to solve the big questions, is it (?)
What do you think? (Please leave a comment below).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
A pertinent letter re. water usage. Yes, the climate is a cow but we all have role to play.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/business/virtual-water-is-a-reality-check/2007/09/25/1190486309833.html
and this one's got some interesting facts too:
Uphill flow
TO DESALINATE 150 gigalitres of salt water and pump 150 million tonnes of fresh water from Wonthaggi to the Cardinia Reservoir is going to require a 300-megawatt base-load power plant. That's equivalent to using all of Australia's current wind farms.
To pump this water to Ballarat, Bendigo, Traralgon and Geelong would require wind turbines over an area equivalent to metropolitan Melbourne.
Our existing nine reservoirs work mostly by gravity. That's why water in Melbourne is cheap.
Now I know John Brumby and Ted Baillieu seem to be ignorant of year 11 physics (and by implication cast aspersions on Melbourne Grammar's ability to teach physics). You would think their engineers would have advised them about the foolishness of the proposition of a desalination plant to supply drinking water for Melbourne.
But perhaps the proposed financier went to Melbourne Grammar and physics is irrelevant.
Geoff Croker, Ashwood
Farm welfare "12 times other payments"
Thursday, 27 September 2007
A drought policy expert says farming families are now receiving welfare support at 12 times the rate of other welfare recipients in the community.
Australian National University (ANU) researcher Dr Linda Bottrill says she is mystified by the rationale for the latest government drought welfare assistance which allows a doubling of the allowable off-farm income to $20,000 before the welfare payment is decreased.
"I don't understand the rationale for allowing them to earn an additional $20,000 a year and then receive a full welfare payment on top of that," Dr Bottrill told ABC Radio.
"If the welfare payment is intended to be that, it seems to me that it is only reasonable that it is offered to farmers on welfare at the same rate that it's offered to others in the community.
"The issue that they are farmers and not others members of the community shouldn't be relevant when we're talking about meeting day-to-day welfare needs.
"Their farm businesses are being catered for through other Exceptional Circumstances programs."
Dr Bottrill speculated that part of the reason for the change was that most of the community's welfare policy was developed in one government department but, when it comes to farm welfare policy, it was developed in another government department.
Minister for Agriculture, Peter McGauran, said off-farm income was now being linked to the farm business itself due to the length and severity of the drought.
"After all, these farm businesses are earning no income themselves yet they've got costs such as fixed water charges, local government rates or lease payments on machinery of the like," he said.
"That is the connection, and by allowing those with off-farm income entitlement to income support we can provide security for the families' basic needs."
SOURCE: AAP
Post a Comment