The Lower Murray Irrigation Advisory Board says that this plan will cost the farmers dearly, and would have a large impact on the dairy industry in South Australia. While action is seen to be desperately needed, because the dairy farmers do not support it as they will be greatly affected, the article says that any action regarding this plan, is now unlikely to occur. .
The decision of economic and social policies over environmental leads me to my next point. Due to this attitude the Australian government prefers policies which ensure short-term benefits, and is not prepared to invest in plans with long-term outcomes. The government needs to be thinking of both present and future interests, but there is a tendency to simply consider the short-term (Alan Gilpin, 1980). Gilpin discusses this issue with respect to present "development" opportunities versus future "protection" responsibilities. Both economic and social objectives need to be considered in the analysis of the two opinions. It is likely that both will have almost equal social and economic effects. Despite this the short-term opinion is more often than not chosen over the long-term (Hutton, 1987). Hutton suggests that Australia has had a good record when it comes to environmental issues with short-term, low cost solutions. In regard to more long-term solutions however the government has repeatedly backed away. This is often due to poor policy planning, as long-term solutions need greater management and analysis. According to Hutton long-term policies are more likely to break down and fail, therefore governments prefer short-term. This theory is supported by Summer et al. (Summer et al., 2002) who believe that for long-term environmental solutions to be chosen, careful planning and effective management need to be implemented to ensure a positive outcome. The problem is that many governments are not prepared to spend the time that is needed to do this.