The NFF’s 5 March 2015 submission outlines that while farmers are not the direct recipients of the regulations imposed by the Water Act 2007 (the Act), they inevitably bear the ultimate cost of those regulations. Referring to its previous submission to the recent review of the Act, NFF notes that a comprehensive evaluation of the costs and benefits is required, not just an exercise in identifying and removing duplication. NFF underlines their support for the views of IIOs, and for their request through their peak organisation National Irrigators’ Council to have a more formal role in the inter-agency process. NFF suggests that detailed engagement with the IIOs would provide the best avenue for the interagency working group to best understand the concerns of the irrigation sector.
You may also like
Review of the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) Scheme Deed and Guidelines
The National Farmers’ Federation (NFF) has welcomed the review of the Pacific Australia Labour Mobility (PALM) Scheme Deed and Guidelines as a chance to reduce red tape and make the scheme work better for farmers and...
Stacey DavidsonClimate Change Authority Issues Paper: 2025 Annual Progress Report
Progress against Australia’s legislated 2030 target is on-track, with current projections from the Commonwealth Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment, and Water (DCCEEW) indicating a 42.6-42.7% decrease...
Chrissy KerinThird Independent Review of the Water for the Environment Special Account
It remains unclear whether recent and proposed Commonwealth water purchases are being financed through WESA or via the undisclosed Federal Budget allocation. If the latter is correct, then remaining WESA funds should be...
Add comment