FARMERS have told Malcolm Turnbull they are "under siege" as water buybacks and an emissions trading scheme combine with poor seasons and commodity prices to make farming tougher by the day.
While the past week's daily headlines have been dominated by boat people and the political negotiations on the emissions trading scheme, Malcolm Turnbull escaped all that to speak with farmers about one of his other major concerns – water.
On a full day trip to Albury, Berrigan and Corowa last week, Mr Turnbull got a clearer picture and more personal accounts of the major worries farmers have with the Government's water reform agenda.
Mr Turnbull told farmers of his fascination, or sometimes obsession with water, and his concern not enough is being done to develop more sustainable agriculture, underpinned by productivity, in the Government's water for the future plan.
He said the real objective with his idea of water reform was to use it more sustainably and have more sustainable and productive agriculture.
"Growing more food and fibre with less water – that's the big idea," he said.
"Water buybacks should not, as they do now, make up the majority of funding or reform focus – they should be done in a co-ordinated way in specific areas to help address outlying areas that were always going to be too hard to deal with.
"Buybacks shouldn't be a means of taking water willy nilly out of production, but as a means of supporting the big idea of producing more food and fibre using less water."
But Mr Turnbull told farmers the Rudd Government has "dropped the ball".
"Using the money only to buy back water, and buying it in such an un-coordinated way, it's as though they're on a mission to say they've bought back so many megalitres."
Mr Turnbull said this was without regard for where it's from, what catchment it's from or the impact on the environment or downstream users.
"It's as though they're trying to run up a tally," Mr Turnbull said.
His message certainly wasn't lost on farmers in the region, who have lost more than 40,000 megalitres of water from their district as a result of the water buyback scheme.
Farmers told them they felt "under siege" and lacked confidence in certainty.
But what was initially programmed as a water forum soon turned into a question and answer session on emissions trading too – an issue which has split the farm sector on how it should be dealt with and whether the Opposition should even negotiate on the proposed emissions trading legislation.
"I think there are concerns about the ETS and its impact, the Government has done a dreadful job at explaining it," Mr Turnbull told Rural Press.
"But I think there are plenty of farmers that see, with the amendments we have proposed, there would actually be some big opportunities.
"You don't have to do a lot to persuade people in the southern Murray-Darling Basin that the climate's getting drier and hotter. You might debate why that's happening…"
On the criticism of his position to negotiate with the Government and improve the scheme, Mr Turnbull said he is doing it for two reasons.
"Alternative energy costs money, so you've got to have some fund and mechanism to fund renewable energy," he said.
"Moving from cheap, emissions intensive coal-fired energy to lower emissions alternative energy is not cheap and you've got to fund that one way or another.
"The idea that you could get the benefits of that transformation without a cost is not right.
"In terms of negotiating with the government, well we do that all the time frankly.
"If we didn't, and the Government had a majority in the Senate, they wouldn't talk to us at all.
"We're using our leverage to see if we can improve the situation, and I think it makes sense to do so appropriately.
"It doesn't necessarily mean the negotiations will be productive in terms of coming up with an agreed outcome."
Email a friend