BOTH sides of politics are blaming farmers for perceived damage to the reef in a bid to win over metropolitan votes. While Queensland Labor is being blamed for spending taxpayer money to demonise farmers through the Reef 2050 Water Quality program, the attacks are being funding by the LNP at the Federal level. Both parties and both governments should hang their heads in shame for the way they are treating farmers and I call on them both to withdraw taxpayer funding from the program and use it to support industries that keep taxpayers employed.

These political parties can’t just place all the blame on farmers without considering the impact our urban population has on water quality. I would go up the Pioneer River, where the fresh is, and drink water out of the river any day but I don’t think the Premier (Annastacia Palaszczuk) would do the same in the Brisbane River any time soon.

The Pioneer River is surrounded by sugar cane farms from top to bottom but Mackay still has the second best drinking water in the world.  For the Reef 2050 funds to be spent on demonising farmers and driving them out of business instead of actually making a difference on the reef is a travesty. The LNP in Queensland likes to pretend they are the friend of the farmers but they never let on that their Federal counterparts are funding this lunacy.

I wrote to the Prime Minister about this issue and asked for taxpayer funds to be withdrawn from the program. The Prime Minister, in his reply, pointed out some of the positive support being offered to farmers to voluntarily change their practices, but he doesn’t’ mention what happens with the millions of dollars in untied funding gifted to the water quality program. The truth is the whole program, including the disastrous measures being implemented by the State, are funded by both the major parties.

 

KickStart – Reef 2050

James Cook University is the guaranteed loser in their appeal against the Federal Circuit Court’s decision that Dr Peter Ridd was unlawfully dismissed. Even if JCU were to win their case, currently before the Federal Court, they will have defended the promotion of junk science.

Dr Ridd exposed the faulty reef science that underpins climate change claims and much of the political attack on our farmers. If our farmers are sent to the wall on the back of junk science and JCU has played a role in that, then North Queenslanders will would have to seriously question the value of the university and anything that comes out of it.

Win or lose the appeal, the university has declared its hand. It would rather back junk science that supports its own ideology than back the truth. That’s about as far as you can get from science and it’s not the sort of enterprise taxpayers should be funding.

One outcome of the appeal would see truth, science, farmers, and JCU’s reputation on the losing side. The other outcome would see JCU’s reputation on the losing side. Launching an appeal seems like a baffling decision because JCU will end up a loser either way. When you’re looking at a taxpayer-funded organisation, you have to wonder what value there is in wasting more money on further destruction of reputation.