Murray River Scientists Caught Playing Politics

Full marks to Sussan Ley and other members of the House of Representatives Standing Committee on Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry for their interim report on the Murray River, handed down 10 days ago.

Their report clearly states the available evidence does not support the claim that the Murray River is dying.

The committee discovered that key research organisations have been using advice from "expert panels" rather than undertaking basic data collection.

Professor Gary Jones, head of the Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, professed to being "astounded that the committee had rejected the views of 60 independent scientists in favor of one or two consultants from vested interest groups".  Clearly the committee was interested in evidence rather than the views of many.

I am continually dismayed at the extent to which Professor Jones calls names rather than puts forward his case.  He accuses me of being a one-eyed consultant, and appeals to consensus rather than providing evidence.

Consensus is not science;  it is politics.  Science is about evidence and the parliamentary committee clearly caught the Murray River scientists playing politics.  The message is they have no evidence that the health of the river is in decline.  They have, however, for some time been talking up "impending catastrophe" based on the hypothetical.

Environmental advocates masquerading as scientists have been misleading us on the geography and health of the river system for years.

The successes of the initiatives that fixed many of the real environmental problems of the 1970s and 1980s have gone largely unreported.  Ironically, many environmentalists want only to see problems and seem unable to acknowledge success.

The advocates have become so bold over the last few years that it was probably not that difficult for the committee to find the inconsistencies between their politicking and the evidence.  What is perhaps surprising is that the urban media still refuses to do any investigative journalism and decide for themselves whether or not the evidence stacks up.  Journalists at The Age and The Australian newspapers, for example, just keep quoting the advocates who now occupy positions of power and authority.

I would like to think the situation is going to improve, but an announcement by the Minister for Environment and Heritage on 10 March does not bode well.

The Minister has appointed Professor Jones to the committee that will oversee the Australia State of the Environment Report 2006.  In the media release announcing the appointment, the Minister also stated that the report would be "our most robust and scientific measure of the environmental condition of the Australian continent".

If Professor Jones is to discharge this duty, he will need to stop playing politics and submerge himself in the evidence.

ADVERTISEMENT