Citizens Electoral Council's Clarence River proposal filed under rubbish

The Daily Examiner on 22 December 2010 recounts efforts by that LaRouche-inspired, climate change denialist, fringe political party, the Citizens Electoral Council of Australia, to further their conspiracy theories and support of the water raiders:

AN IMPROMPTU visit by members of the radical, right-wing political party, The Citizens Electoral Council (CEC), to Clarence MP Steve Cansdell's office last Thursday resulted in the former boxer coming out swinging in defence of the Clarence River.

Mr Cansdell said his “fight” lasted only five minutes before the campaigners were asked to leave. He said the two women conned their way into his office under false pretences, claiming they wanted to talk about flood mitigation of the Clarence.

“They started talking about world order and conspiracy theories and I said if you don't want to talk about anything local, I'm not interested,” he said.

The women went on to ask Mr Cansdell about his views on the management proposals for the Murray Darling Basin, and whether he supported the diversion of the Clarence to revive the Murray River system.

“There is no way I would support diverting the Clarence River and if that's what you want to talk about you are wasting your time,” he told the women.....

When the CEC members visited The Daily Examiner's Grafton office, a journalist listened to their theories and filed their leaflets in the bin when they left.

What the Clarence Valley is fighting for (15)

The Mann River, a tributary of the Clarence River
Debrah Novak photograph

What the Clarence Valley is telling the new House Regional Australia Committee inquiry

Reported in The Daily Examiner on 14 December 2010:

With less than a week to go before submissions close for the inquiry into the impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan on Regional Australia, Clarence Valley environment groups are ensuring their voices are heard.

Clarence Environment Centre and Valley Watch Inc have both made submissions to the inquiry, which was set up to examine the human impact of the proposed Murray Darling Basin plan.

Of concern to both groups – as well as many others in the Clarence Valley – is the on-going call from some outside of the Valley to divert water from the Clarence River.

One Clarence Valley submission to the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Regional Australia Committee Inquiry into impacts of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan on Regional Australia talking about some of the unrealistic expectations which have been expressed this century:

When Malcolm Turnbull announced a feasibility study for the transfer of water from the Clarence to South East Queensland in early 2007, the Bourke Cobar, and South Australian Alexandrina Councils immediately launched their individual bids for a million megalitres per year, and 1.3 million megalitres respectively, to be diverted from the Clarence River.

So called facts and figures, and various methods to achieve the desired ends, were bandied about by everyone who had an opinion, regardless of their qualifications. Sydney Shock Jock, Alan Jones, led the charge for three days (that's as long as any one issue catches his attention), using the usual scientific measure of water in terms of 'Sydney Harbours' , “going to waste” out through the heads each day. One engineering firm claimed the entire transfer could be achieved by damming the river, and simply running the water downhill through a 20km tunnel with no pumping required.

What is evident in submissions received by the Committee from the Clarence Valley to date is the remarkable level of patience displayed in the face of yet another round of emotive calls by individuals and organisations in the Murray-Darling Basin to let them raid Clarence catchment fresh water and blithely ruin that coastal river system.

Bravo, Clarence Environment Centre and Valley Watch!

To date there have been only eighty-seven submissions to the Australian Parliament House of Representatives Inquiry into the impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in Regional Australia.

Ever mindful of the reported remarks of various vested interests and those of the Inquiry's Chair, the Clarence Valley community responded.

Clarence Environment Centre (CEC) made one of the earliest submissions pointing out valid reasons why the Clarence River catchment was not for the raiding.
The complete CEC 33 page submission in PDF file can be viewed and downloaded here.

Valley Watch also made a succinct formal submission which is found here.

I have to say that these submissions were part of only a handful which attempted reasoned argument supported by data. Most submissions simply registered opposition to the Murray Darling Basin Plan on the basis of emotion and supposition.

Unfortunately it would appear that at least twenty-seven of the eighty-seven submissions supported the idea of investigating interbasin water transfers and/or new dams, although only four of these made specific mention of possible water diversion from the Clarence River and/or NSW coastal rivers generally.

What was evident in the bulk of these submissions is that many of those individuals who live in the Murray-Darling Basin would apparently rather kill off that river system entirely before they will concede one litre of the water entitlements they currently possess.