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
Farmers call out misinformation on Basin Bill
Farming groups have come together in Canberra today to call out the misinformation peddled in Parliament this week regarding the Government’s rewrite of the Murray Darling Basin Plan. National Farmers’ Federation...
World-first research suggests natural capital impacts farm performance
Australian research project, Farming for the Future releases preliminary findings In a study of global significance and at a scale never previously undertaken, Phase 2 of the Farming for the Future research program has...
Water Bill a recipe for hurt, division and higher food prices
Farmers are warning that a bill introduced today by Water Minister Tanya Plibersek would obliterate consensus on the Basin Plan and give the Government unchecked power to shut down irrigation farms in Australia’s...
Add comment