News 
 National Rural News 
 Agribusiness and General 
 Political 
 Abbott vows Murray-Darling takeover 

Abbott vows Murray-Darling takeover

15 Jan, 2010 08:32 AM
OPPOSITION Leader Tony Abbott has started his election-year pitch as an environmentalist by threatening a referendum to take control of the Murray-Darling basin and proposing a 15,000-strong ''green army'' to tackle land degradation.

Putting aside the vexed issue of climate until the Coalition has forged its policy, Mr Abbott admitted the environment would be a vote-changer, but said the debate should be ''much more than an argument over climate change''.

''The political left shouldn't be seen as 'owning' the environment,'' he said. ''And I am determined to challenge any assumption that it does.

''Conservative political parties and the conservationist movement both want to preserve what's best in our heritage,'' he told the Sydney Institute in his initial policy speech as leader.

Mr Abbott, a self-described ''practical environmentalist'', said he had always been a conservationist and, in a pitch for green preferences, said it was ''high time that the green movement re-thought its habitual preference for Labor, because actual environmental improvements are more likely to come from conservative governments (that get things done) than from Labor ones (that have a tendency to lock up land without maintaining it)''.

Mr Abbott nominated Australia's biggest environmental problem as ''reconciling the human, economic and environmental demands on the Murray-Darling basin'', a situation bedevilled by the fact ''that no one is really in charge''.

A future Coalition government - like the Howard government - would invite the states to refer their powers to Canberra, he said.

If by mid-2012, the states still refused, the Coalition would seek power in a referendum held with the 2013 election.

Mr Abbott said Australia was losing the battle against environmental degradation - there was not a sufficient labour force to deal with weeds, feral animals and infrastructure needs.

He would talk with green groups about a Coalition government setting up a 15,000-strong ''standing green army'' or ''land army'' of short-term trainees, plus regular workers, able to work on ''large-scale environmental remediation needs''. It would be Australia's ''first deployment of large numbers of people on behalf of the environment,'' he said.

At an average cost per place of $50,000 a year, a 15,000-strong corps would be expensive ($750 million), but the Coalition would announce savings and revenue measures to fund it, he said.

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong said Mr Abbott's ideas were ''ineffective, uncosted, unfunded policies that will do nothing to address climate change''.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
CO2 doesn't drive the climate http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.5246/pub_deta il.asp
Posted by alph, 15/01/2010 2:26:18 PM
If Federal Governments in conjunction with the State Governments continue to remove property rights, making more and more land non viable for agriculture, thus ensuring the farmer can't fund preservation, weed and feral animal control, the general community will need to reach deeply into their pockets to pay for the work. It's only fair if they get the community benefit of stealing farmers property rights.
Posted by John Michelmore, 15/01/2010 5:07:23 PM
I have never voted for the coalition. If they take this to the next election I will for the first time.
Posted by fridgimus, 17/01/2010 9:44:34 PM
There goes the new dawn.
Posted by Ted O'Brien, 18/01/2010 6:52:59 AM
Does make sense - it is about more than one issue re the environment as it is all intertwined - not just salinity, water quality or whatever the buzz issue may be. But can we trust a budgie smuggler - now claiming he is an environmentalist - another vote grabber it seems to me.
Posted by You're joking, 18/01/2010 8:44:52 AM
Oh dear, yet another knee-jerk Liberal on a mission from Captain Planet. Funding for 15,000 planet salvationists will find its way into the budget of the local green saboteurs. They will spend half an hour each day pulling a few weeds and the rest of it helping the departmental jack-booters persecute farmers. And does anyone seriously believe they will focus on the real issues? Like thinning excess forest and woodland thickenning (yes cutting down trees)? Or doing a serious cull of the 'roo herd during drought? Or bitumening all unpaved council roads within 100m of a creek crossing to reduce the hideous volume of roadbase clogging our waterholes? And does anyone seriously believe that the boofheads so employed would get to 20% of the best practice productivity demonstrated by most farmers? Nope, not a chance. This is nothing but Whitlamesque rock painting in green drag.
Posted by Ian Mott, 18/01/2010 10:21:12 AM
So, fridgimus, you think a Canberra-base centralist government will look after your interests better than your state government does? Lots of luck, mate!
Posted by Bushie Bill, 18/01/2010 10:41:29 AM
I hope he tries to get control and the referendum will go the way of 78% of all referendums and we will vote it down. Then maybe something sensible will result and our constitution will prove something more than political toilet paper. Im sick of these pollies wiping themselves with my rights
Posted by Farmer rob, 18/01/2010 11:48:02 AM
How about some money towards the rural degradation. We must halt the green cancer in this brown country. It spreads from the cities and slowly strangles the surrounding countryside. Today I see feral deer in addition to goats, pigs, wild dogs, wombats and countless roos during my trips for work and play. Heaps of blackberries, serrated tussock, woody weeds and too many noxioius ones to count as I drive past greenie conversation areas. Tony Abbot you have lost my vote. Split the coalition please Barnaby and let us get some power to match the greens or we will be killed by the green city cancer in the bush. We are very sick at the moment from this disease and it seems Peter Spencer is still a voice crying in the wilderness when it comes to the ignorance of city voter power.
Posted by Common Cents, 19/01/2010 8:35:30 AM

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Related Coverage
ARTICLES
MULTIMEDIA
14 January, 2010
13 January, 2010
14 January, 2010
POLL
Q: Does the 'catastrophic' fire warning unnecessarily inflate bushfire danger?

Yes - it is over used and its meaning diluted
(61.8%)

No - it truthfully represents danger and should not be ignored
(28.3%)

I don't know what it really means
(9.9%)

Total Votes: 212
Poll Date: 13 January, 2010

Most popular articles




North Queensland Register







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Classifieds

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2012. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...