VOTERS NETWORK ACTION FORUM
Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
Barbara1

Registered:
Posts: 19
 #1 
I have just seen Business Insider featuring an article about the benefits of hemp growing- date 9 May 2019 about how Levis have found a way of making hemp feel softer like cotton and are using it to make jeans now.
I have a hemp long-sleeved top (which I just wore yesterday again) and bought it at a country market years ago up the coast. It is till like new and is very warm and comfortable indeed as well as smart - with a polka-dot pattern. 
TIME to promote hemp clothing (and even footwear etc), widely as it is available ! Just did Google search and there is plenty out there!
0
Barbara1

Registered:
Posts: 19
 #2 
Some countries have achieved AMAZING engineering feats so OUR engineers should be able to do so too!  Such as redirecting river waters to benefit inland regions.  
ALSO we should be mandating that cotton growing be CEASED and replaced with HEMP crops or nothing should be allowed.  Hemp has MULTIPLE uses besides the (much publicised drug) as there is a related much more productive strain for textiles, rope, construction material as well as other items.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #3 
I think that politicians are making too many mistakes. What do others think about us voters working on a Plan for Australia. We could just pick the topics that interest us; put our idea forward and then communicate them to politicians in an organised way. Otherwise future generations may not live the Australian dream at all. Many politicians would welcome our input.
0
Angus1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #4 
     Allowing the Chinese Govt. to buy up infrastructure like Cubie Station, etc. is in no way looking after the Australian community interest, and one has to ask - why are they (the chinese govt.) doing it ?
     But far worse tha this is the NT govt. decision to lease the Port of Darwin to the chinese govt for 99 years.
     Just hypothetically - if one huge powerful nation saw another nation with a sparsly populated land mass, what would they want to do. Just maybe they would try to buy/lease some important infrastructure that would allow detailed surveilance of this nation and its people. And then some years down the track, they may feel that they can enlarge/enhance/fortify this important infrastructure that they lease, with the long term aim of 'taking over' the sparsly populated country by stealth or even by force. And who would stop them? The USA - I think not.
     Just hypothetically mind !
 
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #5 
What do people think aboutthe fact that our government allowed Chinese interests to own Cubbie station on thew Balonne River, depleteng the water in the Darling?
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #6 
Very well said Angus. For starters, what about an absolute ban on anyone pumping water out of inland rivers and putting it into a private dam except for human consumption. Secondly what about restricting irrigation from a river unless the river flow at the pumping point is at or above a certain level (easily done by setting the inlet pipe at that level).

If we fear sea water rising and flooding low lying coastal areas and we have desalination plants why not desalinate some of the ocean water and pump it inland to help reduce the ocean rising and the inland  drying out?
0
Angus1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #7 
     It would seem that the extended drought is having one good impact - and that is ensuring our reps. actually start doing something about the murder of our inland waterways.
     Why would our agriculture departments support, encourage and then favour growing cotton in Australia ?  The driest continent on earth.  We do not have the river systems like America or even Egypt to allow the effective and continuing production of cotton. But somehow they are allowed to create huge dams to conserve water for their undertaking. And the irrigator downstream has little or no water !
     With a gigantic ego, Bob Hawke was still able to say 'sorry - I got that wrong' - so why can't our current mob be humble, and get going on fixing this problem.
     In a world that does appear to be warming faster than anyone thought it would, you don't have to be too smart to recognise that WATER will become the worlds most precious product. So we give ours to cotton farmers and let our inland waterways become muddy puddles !
     There is a small clique within the Liberal Party that wants to promote coal, coal and more coal. Yes, we still need coal for quite a few years yet, as renewables work out how to have baseload power, but why can't our reps. start actively thinking more constructivelly about new age solar, off-shore wind farms, tidal power etc. At least get on with Snowy II with more commercial urgency.
     As for harvesting the water we do receive, if pipelines from The Ord river is too hard ; or Bradfield's idea of turning waters that flow into The Gulf of Carpentaria is too hard; then why not take 1 or 2% from East Coast rivers and pump it by staging ponds over the Great Divide and let it flow to the inland rivers. A small amount from The Macleay could flow into The Gwydir : The Clarence to The Macintyre : The Manning to The Namoi : The Shoalhaven to The Lachlan. How hard could that be ? ?
     Depressing isn't it.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #8 
How about forming a voters network of "Murray Darling Monitors" to monitor and understand what the government is doing and what the river is doing at different places?
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #9 
What would you like the government to now do about this water problem?
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #10 
We have placed this matter firmly on the political agenda and voters are receiving good and informative responses ton their Votergrams. Join in and send you own Votergram on this important matter. Voters can have this fixed by fuelling political action and rating how well MPs do - each month.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #11 
inland river systems incl Murray Darling are much in election talk so our action is working. It will be important to follow this matter up after the election with feds and now with state MPs.
Let us know if you would be happy to join the taskforce looking at this. Action required continual prodding until it is taken by gov.
0
Greg

Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 175
 #12 
There is a new NSW minister to tackle the river issues. I did not see much in the federal budget about it but that does not mean much either. The budget is just a guide to what might happen under some circumstances. The best way to have the Murray Darling issues fixed is to join the Voters Network Inland Waterways task force. None of this party politics. We just want it fixed. That means government control with water taken out only when there is a sufficient height in the river to do so. Irrigation is good on rivers with plenty of water. It is stupid when it pumps the river dry. Government has been asleep at the wheel or doing some dishonest deals.
0
Pat1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 21
 #13 
More spent on building stadiums than protecting waterways because the big profit sporting conglomerates spend time and money influencing politicians. Voters can lobby through fairgo as they can influence marginal electorates. [scale] 
0
Angus1

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 15
 #14 
It would seem there are just tooooo many cooks spoiling the Murray-Darling broth. Four state Govt's. one Federal Govt., plus the authority set up to manage the water distribution, the SA Govt. Royal Commission, the irrigation groups, the large cotton growers (growing cotton in the driest continent
on earth - ? ? ), the farmers only wanting water for stock, all seem to want to have a say in the matter of water useage.
Follow the money. Funny how the only ones with enough water are the large entities, who (if 4 Corners was correct) were able to coerce the NSW State Govt. controller to be on their side.
So, what is needed ? If it is to be just one overall controller, then maybe it should be a Federal responsibility.
If that is so, then it would need to be very, very competant, because the current situation is impossible.
Australia in total receives plenty of water - more than enough. But it just flows out to sea, with no real attempt to harvest the water and channel or pipe it to where needed. Why not ?  Would a Federal body have the fortitude to progress such an idea ? Probably not. 
 
0
Margaret

Hub Leader
Registered:
Posts: 8
 #15 
Well said. I have been involved in campaign after campaign on this topic for many years, well before Cubbie and its fellow greedy water snatchers.

We were out-manoeuvred  from the beginning, watching the changing of water distribution laws and the trading off of water licences etc that has  now culminated in disaster.

Let's give votergrams a go before we give up entirely. I'm off to write my 100 words.
0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.