,
26 tweets,
7 min read
Read on Twitter
Basin Royal Commission findings:
- Report recommended overhaul of Murray-Darling Basin Plan
- Reallocate water from irrigation to environment
- Report ignored "catastrophic" effects of climate change
- MDBA failed to remove water from irrigators
abc.net.au/news/2019-01-3…
- Report recommended overhaul of Murray-Darling Basin Plan
- Reallocate water from irrigation to environment
- Report ignored "catastrophic" effects of climate change
- MDBA failed to remove water from irrigators
abc.net.au/news/2019-01-3…
"When explaining the process for approving business cases for water infrastructure projects, designed to help return more water to the river, the Commissioner also accused the MDBA of being secretive.
"The reasons given for this secrecy have no substance.""
"The reasons given for this secrecy have no substance.""
"Public funding has been unwisely cut." 
MDBA and CSIRO criticised for being too secretive.
The poor health of the river system is having a terrible effect on the people who live on or near it.
Following the science is a requirement which has not been "consistently obeyed".
Large parts of the MDBA's Basin Plan were put together in secret, which many leaders in the area of water management saying they were excluded from the process.
It's so, so important to be able to scrutinise any given process. This has apparently not been happening here.
It's so, so important to be able to scrutinise any given process. This has apparently not been happening here.
MDBA has not been updating its data or modelling as we get new information, as it should have been.
Report makes note of it ignoring the effects of climate change.
Report makes note of it ignoring the effects of climate change.
Setting of the ESLT was "a major failure of process". Report critcises the Commonwealth Government in power at the time and the MDBA, saying Water Act was not followed
ESLT - Environmentally sustainable level of take - The upper limit of the amount we can remove from the river.
ESLT - Environmentally sustainable level of take - The upper limit of the amount we can remove from the river.
Ripping into everyone who said we shouldn't follow SDLs (sustainable diversion limits)
Some people, who wanted to get around them, claimed they were out of date
Some people, who wanted to get around them, claimed they were out of date
Had to run around last night and this morning, back to reading the overview.
Officials did not use the best available science when setting ESLTs or SDL and have not disclosed how they selected the levels they did
Officials did not use the best available science when setting ESLTs or SDL and have not disclosed how they selected the levels they did
There is absolutely nothing wrong with questioning a plan. In fact, it should be encouraged to ensure the plan we end up with is robust.
Saying things are not to be questioned is an immediate red flag
Saying things are not to be questioned is an immediate red flag
Report outlines concerns that the comments by the Senator in my previous tweet makes people think it's okay to ignore missteps with implementing the plan
SDLs do not match up with ESLTs.
It's not clear exactly why the SDL levels have been set at what they are
It's not clear exactly why the SDL levels have been set at what they are
Yep. Some politicians have outright stated that they're looking out for the irrigators.
Which completely ignores the fact that taking too much will harm them (and others) in the long run when the water runs out
Which completely ignores the fact that taking too much will harm them (and others) in the long run when the water runs out
NSW Regional Water Minister Niall Blair eviscerated for his comments on the Menindee lakes and the fish kills
The solution is not to dictate which crops we can and can't grow within the Basin
People complaining about agricultural job losses from reduced water intake don't seem too concerned about job losses from other areas
Water thieves should forfeit their water rights
MDBA accounts for droughts, but not climate change. It relies on historical information when making its plans, ignoring that they will be changing
In all ecological plans, we need to take the effects of climate change into account. This was stressed throughout my undergrad
In all ecological plans, we need to take the effects of climate change into account. This was stressed throughout my undergrad
Ignoring climate change goes against specific instructions in the Water Act and the Basin Plan
There's a long section on page 37 where a local describes what he would do if he were head of the commission, which is great
Final remarks in the overview.
So regarding the Basin Plan:
- Did not take climate change into account
- Amount of scientific evidence used is unclear
- MDBA was secretive and the Commissioner believes did not consult as widely as it could
- SDLs do not relate to ESLTs, which seem to be arbitrary
- Did not take climate change into account
- Amount of scientific evidence used is unclear
- MDBA was secretive and the Commissioner believes did not consult as widely as it could
- SDLs do not relate to ESLTs, which seem to be arbitrary
It all just seems like a gigantic mess.
ESLTs need to be hard targets. Set the target, and people can work to them. We cannot bend on them; if the river collapses, so does the ecosystem and everyone that depends on it.
The government needs to be tough on this matter.
ESLTs need to be hard targets. Set the target, and people can work to them. We cannot bend on them; if the river collapses, so does the ecosystem and everyone that depends on it.
The government needs to be tough on this matter.
