What's in a Word?

I’m just back home from five wonderful days at the Adelaide Test and a day visiting the western side of Lake Alexandrina, the GoolwaChannel ,Milang, Hindmarsh Island and the so called Murray Mouth. (I prefer to call it the Lake Alexandrina Mouth with, as explorer Sturt said, the Murray Mouth being the entrance to Lake Alexandrina with everything below that being an estuary-click to see photos). I was fortunate to have as my guide one of the very best informed people in the area, in the form of Ken Jury, a qualified marine ecologist who has made a lifetime study of the Lower Lakes, Coorong etc. and has a strong interest in the Murray Darling Basin.

Suffice to say it was a wonderful Test Match accompanied by some tremendous hospitality from my South Australian Cricket Association (and wool industry) friends.

To summarise my day at the Lower Lakes, I can only say I come home greatly enthused by the beauty of the area, enthused by the history and its preservation, and the wonderful water body; yet aghast at the waste of fresh water when it is so obvious that even better environmental outcomes could be achieved with the judicial use of healthy, oxygenated seawater with a concomitant reduction on the demand for upstream fresh water.

When you consider this in the context of the Murray Darling Basin Plan it is simply outrageous that the issue of better management (and upgrading) of the Barrages has not even been properly debated. It is not overstating the “final” position of the Plan to say that it has the supply of fresh water to the Lower Lakes as its prime objective.

There is absolutely no reason why the objectives for the environment and recreation, with irrigation needs and Adelaide water needs covered from upstream fresh water extractions, can’t be achieved with downstream seawater. Studies of tidal inflow movements, even when 80 gigalitres a day had been flowing to the Southern Ocean, have demonstrated the capacity, with Barrage manipulation, to use seawater to continue to hold the Lake level at the usual .75 metres above sea level and thus achieve the basic objective. Furthermore, such a return to a more estuarine situation would have the added environmental benefit of re-introducing the marine biota which contributes so much to the character of estuaries. An additional Lock would almost certainly be necessary to prevent sea water intrusion, in low flow conditions, up the main stem of the river.

Clearly the Barrages need to be “upgraded” to allow more cost effective management including the capacity to make it possible to periodically release substantial surges from the elevated Lake so as to keep the mouth to the ocean open. It will probably also be necessary to excavate much of Bird Island which has built up since the building of the Barrages in the 1930’s. I was surprised to discover that the Barrages are managed by the Murray Darling Basin Authority. I had always assumed that they were managed by the South Australians.

My ‘Australian Little Oxford Dictionary’ defines a “barrage” as “an artificial barrier in a river”. A “weir” is generally accepted to be a barrier which can be over-topped by water flows e.g Hume Weir. The term “dam” is usually used to describe a blockage in a water course to hold back water. It may be overtopped by big flows or have other means of allowing big flows to pass-pipes or spillways. In many areas the word “dam” is used to describe what is also called a “tank” (earthen) which is an excavated hole in the ground to capture water where there is no natural watercourse. The term “sea dyke” has also been used to describe the Barrages. A ‘sea dyke’ is usually used to describe a barrier to seawater intruding over land wanted for other purposes eg in low lying countries like Holland. On the Murray we also have a series of ‘locks’. These may also play the role of a dam, but always with the capacity to allow boats to get through.

So what is the right word to describe the Barrages? They were originally designed to store fresh water, principally for irrigation. A purpose since replaced by the piping of fresh water from upstream. They were built with a beautiful flexibility to change their height as desired by the lifting or adding of concrete panels (Goolwa Barrage). Their construction brought with it the secondary impact of keeping seawater out so in that sense they are ‘sea dykes’. So when one considers all that, the word “barrage” will do me.

To my mind, the two most important principles in water management to deal with Australia’s notorious climate variability are conservation (ie to conserve water from big flows) and flexibility. The Barrages with their modular construction strike me as meeting these principles perfectly, albeit the purpose of conserving water is somewhat different to the usual objective.

One further important factor that my Goolwa visit brought to mind was the huge impact that wind can have on water movement. When the south westerly winds get up, particularly at high tides, they can drive seawater into the Lakes even when there are substantial flows of fresh water coming from upstream. Providing the Barrages can be lowered and raised quickly this water can be captured to maintain the elevated level. In very low flow times it might be difficult to maintain the full .75metre elevation, but with the use of seawater at least the emergence of acid-sulfate soils could be avoided by keeping the lake bed inundated.

More Australian Politics

How's this for 'the voice of reason'-

Short-sighted see hate at every turn

Gerard Henderson

The Sydney Morning Herald, 16 October 2012

The whole story? ... Gillard presented herself as a political leader

who is attacked because of her gender. Photo: Justin McManus

According to the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, it is wrong to talk down the economy since Australia has one of the best performing economies in the Western world. Fair enough.

However, supporters of the Prime Minister such as Anne Summers have expressed delight that Gillard's speech in Parliament last Tuesday has been noted in New York and London and has had more than 1 million downloads from YouTube. Yet the message of the Prime Minister's address is that Australia is a society riven by sexism and misogyny.

Gillard presented herself as a political leader who is attacked because of her gender. More seriously, the lead attack-dog is Tony Abbott, the Leader of the Opposition and, as such, the alternative prime minister. According to the Prime Minister, she hears ''misogyny, sexism every day from this Leader of the Opposition''.

The message is clear. All that is standing between a civilised society, in which women play their proper role, and rampant woman-hating is the continuation of a Labor government. Yet such a message to overseas audiences is much more negative than talking down the Australian economy.

The facts are obvious. Women occupy senior roles in politics, business, the judiciary, medicine, law, even sections of the clergy. Labor's Gillard is Australia's first female prime minister. If the Coalition wins next year's election, the Liberal Party's deputy leader, Julie Bishop, will become the most senior female Coalition minister ever.

Certainly Gillard has experienced a degree of misogyny - especially from the likes of cartoonist Larry Pickering, who, these days, is a bit player on the edge of Australian politics. Some of this unpleasantness is documented in Summers's 2012 Human Rights and Social Justice Lecture.

The problem is that, at times, Summers goes right over the top. For example, she claims the word liar ''was not a term used against back-flipping male prime ministers''. But it was. In the early 1980s, Bob Hawke called Malcolm Fraser a liar. Summers went on to work for Hawke. In 2006, Kevin Rudd called Howard a liar. There are all too many examples.

I agree with Summers it is ''terrible'' to call the Prime Minister a liar. However, when I asked her if she had expressed such a view when Howard was called a liar, she declined to answer the question. Summers also takes offence that, on occasions, Gillard is referred to as ''she'' or ''her'' and maintains that ''previous prime ministers were accorded the basic respect of being referred to by their last names''.

This is manifestly not so. Moreover, last Thursday Gillard used the words ''he'' and ''he's'' in one sentence when referring to Abbott.

This is normal conversation.

It seems that Summers's evident sensitivity has had an impact on Gillard. Last Tuesday, the Prime Minister complained that Abbott was ''now looking at his watch because, apparently, a woman has spoken for too long''. In the 1992 US presidential campaign, George H.W. Bush was criticised for looking at his watch when debating Bill Clinton. This is not a gender specific act. Nor is being told to shut up. Nor is being called a ''piece of work''. Last year I was called a ''piece of work'' by the Sydney University academic Simon Chapman. It took me a full eight seconds to recover.

The problem with such over-readiness to take offence is that it can lead to setting impossible standards. Last Tuesday, Gillard stated Liberal parliamentary members who were present when Alan Jones made an offensive comment about her late father should have either left the room or walked up to Jones ''and said this was not acceptable''. Yet neither Wayne Swan nor Tanya Plibersek took either course of action last Wednesday when a comedian at a trade union function they attended made an indefensible reference to a senior female Coalition staffer.

Conservative female leaders such as Margaret Thatcher and Angela Merkel - and social democrats such as Hillary Clinton - have learnt to accept criticism and to dismiss abuse. Last week in Greece, for example, Merkel was confronted with banners depicting her as a Nazi. It is difficult to imagine a greater insult. But she did not take offence. Likewise Thatcher, when some radical feminists declared she was really a man.

Gillard was very popular when she became Prime Minister in June 2010. Her credibility was diminished by Abbott doing his job as Opposition Leader and by the damaging leaks against her from inside Labor. Then, after the election, the Prime Minister did the unnecessary deal with the Greens and broke her promise not to introduce a carbon tax. Her problems stem from politics, not gender.

Gillard has suffered no greater abuse than that experienced by such predecessors as Fraser, Keating and Howard. Commentators who look at contemporary Australian politics and see wall-to-wall misogyny, diminish the very real achievements of Australian women in recent decades.

Gerard Henderson is executive director of The Sydney Institute.

Australian Politics

Food for thought from the ever thoughtful John Anderson-

Crisis of political confidence: Anderson

COLIN BETTLES

13 Oct, 2012 04:00 AM

FORMER National Party Leader and Deputy Prime Minister, John Anderson, has lamented the diminished standards and lack of civility associated with public political discourse.
Mr Anderson has been out of federal politics since his retirement in 2007, but the former Howard government transport and regional development minister proved - in his Sir Earl Page Memorial Address in Sydney last week to about 100 party faithful - that he’s still capable of stirring political senses.

Mr Anderson said everyone was responsible for improving the standard of public debate and civilising informed national discourse, not just our politicians.

“The critical state of economic health among western democracies is only one manifestation of the challenge we face,” he said.

“We’re at an important inflection point on a whole range of issues from climate change policy, to immigration policy, to foreign affairs policy and families."

He also cited global food security, water security, land availability and energy policy as important issues.

“The decisions we make in the next five years will define the opportunities and prospects of our children in this very difficult environment.

“The range of potential outcomes is enormous and yet still it appears, frankly to me, that we choose to stand and gesticulate with each other on the railway tracks as the express train bears down on us.

“We need to recognise that the nature of a crisis is that it does not wait - it moves faster and further than anticipated (and) shows no mercy.

“And I believe we may be approaching such a point.

“We accuse our politicians of an absence of policy conviction and insight and there’s a popular perception that scandal and slur have become the currency of debate and the focus of our media.

“But we need to recognise clearly that the fault cannot lie solely with our representatives for indeed that matter, to be fair, with our media.

“In truth we are all responsible. All of us have our share of the blame to carry.”

Mr Anderson said “spin and spittle” have been rewarded – but we’ve neglected to act with sober responsibility in light of the challenges that we all face.

The result, he said, has been worse policy outcomes for the Australian people.

“Driven by the incentives that we ourselves have created, we make it all but impossible for our leaders to find the balance between the political theatre that we respond to and the policy substance that we need,” he said.

“And this is not sustainable on any dimension.”

Mr Anderson said the Australian public’s dissatisfaction with politics was unprecedented.

A recent poll provided “staggering” research results, with 33 per cent ranking the nation’s political leaders one or two out of 10 in their capacity to deal with the economic issues the nation must confront over the next five years.

The research results also showed that 26pc of voters are now looking to cast their vote outside of the major parties.

“It seems then that we’ve reached a tipping point,” he said.

“The Australian public is casting about for a clear voice and a clear vision – they sense that we are approaching a point of no return on a number of issues and major crossroads on many more.

“I believe there is a crisis of confidence in the cultural roots and values upon which the success of the West of our society was built.

“We need to face the fact that without values both our economic system and our political system are self-defeating.”

Mr Anderson said a better pathway was to re-engage values in public life, by first re-engaging with the nation’s cultural roots.

He highlighted the importance of history in education and lamented its decline in importance. He said there was also a need to avoid discussions driven by ideology or expediency and characterised by overly emotive, overly personal, overly simplistic arguments.

“If we can break that stalemate, by returning to a dialogue of reason, there are real opportunities to advance the national interest on a number of issues, both controversial and routine.”

“Those who publicly take a minority or unpopular position, or who open a controversial issue for discussion, can be blown away by apparently progressive intelligentsia who would prefer to shut down the discussion to avoid offense, than engage with whatever has been put on the table.

“Unfortunately, this issue has worsened, not improved with the advent of social media.
“The recent examples of 'Twitter trolling' - the mass attacks on our public figures with extreme and hateful language - demonstrate this.
“Protected by the anonymity of a computer screen, people are willing to say and do things that they would never consider were they to find themselves seated across the table from the person they are seeking to bring down.
“Nothing could be more destructive to free speech and quality debate than the fear of holding unpopular positions that is created by such practices.
“It needs to be rejected as a practice that has any place in civil dialogue, lest important truths be downed out or worse still, never spoken.”
Federal Nationals Leader Warren Truss praised Mr Anderson’s speech, saying the former leader had always brought a depth of analysis and perspective to the National’s party room which they now missed.
Mr Truss said the hung parliament had been an intense period for all participants.
He said there’d been little or no spare time for any depth of philosophical debate and discourse on important, long-term policy issues, given that all parties had been in almost permanent campaign mode since the 2010 election.
He said parliament needed to find a better way to debate broader issues more thoroughly, like health, education and land use, rather than being purely focussed on or driven by immediate policies, or the issues of the day.

Flannery of the Overflow

This is not new, but it is to me. As a "Banjo" Paterson fan it has great appeal, and I like the sentiments. I read recently of how science progresses. Scientists come up with a hypothesis, often a guess. The hypothesis is then tested against observations which either prove or disprove it. Surely, at least the extreme anthropogenic green-house hypothesis, with some of Flannery's extraordinary predictions, have failed the observation test.
Flannery of the Overflow

IPA REVIEW ARTICLE

| William York

I had written him a letter which I had, for want of better
Knowledge, sent to where I met him on the Murray, years ago,
He was boating when I knew him, so I sent the letter to him,
Just on spec, addressed as follows, ‘Flannery, of The Overflow'.

And an SMS came directed from a source quite unexpected,
(And I think it was dictated from a river bank or bar)
‘Twas the Prime Minister who wrote it, and verbatim I will quote it:
Flannery's gone all atmospheric, and I don't know where we are.'

With Australia Day flattery, visions come to me of Flannery
Gone a-driving ‘down to Canberra' where the politicians go;
With the journalists and stringers, Flannery pointing with his fingers,
draws a future of disasters none of us will live to know.

And the Greens come out to meet him, and their kindly voices greet him
While the politicians ponder an election to be won,
And he sees the vision horrid of our country turning florid,
With a baking sun, a rising sea and little being done.

Gazing up at Kirribilli, I wonder will the ‘Silly
Season' finish with a whimper or a bang
Will we all start getting warm, or is this the perfect storm,
Orchestrated by Al Gore and echoed by the noisy local gang.

It seems to me Prime Minister that there is something here quite sinister
In the push to get our economics in a great big melting pot.
With the present calls for action, you will need to find some traction
For ideas that cool the hot heads so we don't destroy our lot.

BlogLog-Bourke Visit 24th to 26th September,2012

Drove out to Bourke on Sunday/Monday. When first with Clyde I used to do it in a long half day-driving too fast, before we got flash and bought an aircraft. This time went to Mudgee on Sunday evening and got to Bourke about 2:30PM on Monday via Dunedoo, Mendooran, Gilgandra, Warren and Nyngan. My visit had three purposes:-

• to a assist with a documentary film that some of my friends from the Lower Lakes are making which may feature Toorale. 
• to attend Geoff Wise's farewell from the Shire GM position,and
• to give evidence to the NSW Legislative Council Committee which is inquiring into the gazetting and management of National Parks-again Toorale. (All recorded in Hansard)

Had a thoroughly enjoyable time. Called to see my agent friend Trevor Wilson in Warren and got an update on former Clyde stations and staff. Refueling at Nyngan, fortuitously and coincidentally ran into Ken Jury, the driving force behind the film, and the film crew. He accompanied Gail and me for the drive from Nyngan to Bourke. We hardly drew breath on what can be a long somewhat depressing drive. I was very encouraged by the line being taken with the film. On arrival in Bourke I gave the film crew a briefing on Toorale with the aid of a map and some digital photos I had put together.

Much enjoyed the farewell to Geoff and Anne Wise at Kidman Camp on Monday night. I have much admired the way Geoff and Anne have thrown themselves into the Bourke community in the five years they have been there. Geoff, a veterinarian by training, was previously a senior NSW public servant including Western Lands Commissioner. He was also a very valuable member of my Darling Matilda Way Sustainable Region Committee. He is very knowledgeable on water issues, and whilst we didn't always agree when he had to administer Government policy, we have always been friends and then also strong allies from the time he went to Bourke.

On Tuesday morning my friend John Oldfield (79) of Belalie Station flew us over Toorale with a cameraman filming out a side window in the back of the aircraft and me, wired for sound, doing a commentary on the place, particularly the McCaughey water spreading scheme. Country looks great, but I just hate the neglect and waste.

On Tuesday afternoon I did an interview for the film in the lovely garden at the Riverside Motel before giving my evidence to the Parliamentary Committee at the Bourke Bowling Club. This finished in time for me to join a Board Meeting  (by telephone) of the Tandou Board to sign off on the Annual accounts.

Drove back to Sydney via Dubbo and Merriwa on Wednesday. Called on Gail's nephew, David Dugan who runs the Joe Jones Agency at Trangie. Arrived just on "smoko" and had an enjoyable discussion on water issues with David's impressive team over a cup of coffee.
At Dubbo we had a very enjoyable lunch with old Bourke friends John and Norine Lack. Gail and Norine were school girls at Bourke together in the 1950's-Norine's father Ern Brook was the Head Buyer for Tancreds when their Bourke Abattoirs was  the most important sheep and cattle meatworks in Western NSW. 

Some relevant photos. And more.

Water Storages Full to the Brim-Weekly Times Article, 17th September,2012

AUSTRALIA'S key water storages are full to overflowing for the first time in 16 years.

River officials on the weekend declared the Murray Darling Basin storages 100 per cent full.

Storage levels increased by 108 gigalitres in the past week and is now 8555 GL, 100 per cent of capacity.

The last time it reached this level was October 1996.

Active storage has reached 100 per cent despite Lake Victoria, Hume and Dartmouth dams being slightly below full supply.

This is all because of the high surcharge level in Menindee Lakes, which are more than 110 per cent full, with the addition of extra storages.

Storage levels at Dartmouth Dam increased by 35 GL to 3687 GL (96 per cent capacity).

At Hume Reservoir, inflows averaged about 16,000 ML/day and have remained fairly steady in recent days.

Release from Hume has been reduced in order to steer the storage level towards full supply.

The rain outlook is relatively dry for catchments upstream of Hume, however if further rain is forecast over the coming weeks, the release could again be increased to create "extra airspace'' ahead of any rise in inflows that may result.

Storage in Hume Reservoir is 2934 GL (98 per cent capacity), an increase of 23 GL.

I commented:-
We continue to read in the mainstream media of the "ailing Murray Darling Basin" and measures to "save our rivers". Will the various commentators now acknowledge that in terms of water availability the MDB has never been in better shape. As the Mayor of Hay said recently "the MDB Plan is a solution looking for a problem!"

Cubbie

A switched on agricultural commentator has written the following commentary on the proposed Cubbie Station sale. I agree with it.

Editorial
The decision by the Treasurer and the Federal Government to allow a consortium from China, Japan
and Australia to jointly bid for the Cubbie Group, has prompted widespread discussion and debate.

The Foreign Investment Review Board, which advises the Government on these matters, has
obviously concluded that the national interest has not been undermined by this particular consortium’s intentions.

There will be many who agree with this conclusion, and probably an equal number that disagree.
Unfortunately, some of the debate has been tinged with xenophobia, and may have ignored
relevant facts in relation to Cubbie’s current debt dilemma, which preceded these events.

Cubbie was first developed for irrigation from grazing country around 1983. Under various forms of
ownership, it has developed 93,329 hectares comprising 22,256 ha or furrow irrigation and water
storage capacity of 538,800 megalitres, with potential to irrigate a further 11,000 ha.

Development expanded rapidly in the 1990s, when the cultivated area exceeded 40 kilometres
wide and the property and its water storages became visible from satellite imagery mapping the
area from Brisbane to Adelaide.

So successful was this development, that from its humble grazing beginnings, Cubbie was
subsequently able to harvest water, wheat, cotton, corn, chickpeas, barley, sunflower and sorghum
in huge volumes.

Dogged by a series of drought years (7-8), by 2008 Cubbie was in dire straits. In November 2008,
Suncorp and the NAB, its major lenders, engaged McGrathNicol to investigate and report on the
financial position of Cubbie, and monitor its attempts to repay its debts.

Prompted by drought-induced low production and rising debts, Cubbie was first offered publicly for
sale in August 2009, when expressions of interest were sought, and/or a capital injection. Nothing
satisfactory was forthcoming.

In October 2009, Cubbie was placed in voluntary administration (under McGrathNicol) from which
it did not emerge until July 2010 when McGrathNicol, were appointed Deed Administrators.

This meant that liquidation could be avoided and restructuring strategies and opportunities could
be pursued.

In October 2009, inter-company loans within the 11 companies in the Cubbie Group had reached
$320 million, owed mainly to Suncorp and the NAB. The administrators placed credit limits on staff
for expenditure, with a maximum limit of $20,000.

In July 2010, following significant seasonal improvements and water availability, and the banks’
decision to bankroll the 2010-11 crop, this credit limit was expanded to $100,000, which meant five
designated employees could collectively outlay up to $500,000.

At that time, Cubbie was said to have enough water to plant 21,158 ha of cotton with potential
to produce 222,100 bales worth in excess of $126 million. Although no official data is publicly
available, the total value is rumoured to have exceeded this estimate by around 10 per cent.

This background shows that Cubbie has been on financial notice, and in trouble with its lenders, for
at least four years, during which time no acceptable buyer of first or last resort was found.

Had it not been for the goodwill provided by its lenders, Cubbie would have been subject to
foreclosure by its lenders, and would be either sitting in their bad debts portfolios, or off-loaded at
a significant loss, most likely in much smaller, more financially digestible portions.

Consequently, an offer to purchase the entire entity should be welcomed, rather than condemned,
particularly given the uncertainty created by the current controversy over the Murray-Darling Basin
Plan, and its unknown impact on Cubbie’s future.

It would certainly have been preferable for the potential buyer to be of Australian origin, but with
none willing to take up equity on commercial terms, the only alternatives are a foreign buyer; a fire
sale by the two major lenders; or ongoing financial support from Suncorp and the NAB.

Given current trends in cotton prices, rising energy and other input costs, and Cubbie’s current debt
levels, the first two options are most likely the only ones still seriously in play.

What is intriguing though is this: If three consortium members, none of whom are cotton growers
or investors in cotton production, can see future potential in Cubbie (at a price), why cannot an
experienced, professional Australian-dominated cotton conglomerate see the same potential?

In all fairness, Australian companies and consortiums have had an equal opportunity to purchase
Cubbie, and have failed to get past the front gate. And it is, after all, the prerogative of the owner
to take the best price. Very few farmers have a history of accepting lower bids.

-----------------------------------------------