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
NFF Submissions: 2026 Murray-Darling Basin Plan Review Discussion Paper and The Menindee Lakes Review
At this stage of implementation, the central issue for the Review is no longer whether additional volumes of water can be recovered through voluntary water purchase, but whether further recovery is justified given the...
Chrissy KerinProductivity Commission Review into National Water Reform 2026
Significant challenges continue to undermine town water security, particularly in regional and remote areas of the Murray-Darling Basin. In these regions, regulatory and funding constraints have repeatedly impeded...
National Statement on First Nations in Agriculture, Fisheries, and Forestry
While the draft National Statement acknowledges challenges relating to “complexities of communal land tenure, land rights, and limited access to collateral”, the draft National Statement does not attempt to engage...
Add comment