There are serious gaps in water supply planning in some parts Australia that
must be addressed if water supplies are to be adequately maintained in the
face of uncertainties about future water availability and demand.

There is a variance between the quality of water planning in the different
states and territories, with significant aspects of one or both of two key
elements of water supply planning - institutional support and technical
rigour - largely absent in some states and territories.

These are key findings of a study by the Australian Academy of Technological
Sciences and Engineering (ATSE) which reviewed water supply planning by
Australia's non-metropolitan urban water utilities. The study report
provides a snapshot of the status of long-term urban water supply planning
by these water utilities.

The Urban Water study report, URBAN WATER - Review of water supply planning
for Australia's non-metropolitan urban water utilities, was launched in
Sydney on Friday 5 October by Hon Malcolm Turnbull, Minister for the
Environment and Water Resources.

The report notes that maintaining a reliable urban water supply to more than
six million residents outside of Australia's capital cities is important for
the ongoing success and livelihood of those communities. The review emerged
from concerns about the ability of water utilities in some regional urban
centres to undertake adequate planning in the context of highly variable and
changing supply and demand conditions.

The study obtained an example long-term urban water supply plan in areas
outside of capital cities in every state or territory except Tasmania, where
no formal plan was able to be located amongst the dozen utilities operating
there - although it anticipates a Tasmanian example plan in late 2007.

It notes there is no formal requirement or government financial incentive
for water utilities in South Australia, Tasmania, Western Australia and the
Northern Territory to undertake long-term urban water supply planning and
recommends greater regulatory drivers for water utilities in these states
and territories to prepare their water supply plans.

The report highlights stark contrasts in the quality and extent of water
supply planning across Australia. It questions the efficacy of water utility
institutional models operating in some states and highlights those operating
effectively to achieve water supply planning outcomes, such as in Victoria.

It notes no monitoring of progress by water utilities towards development of
their long-term water supply plans takes place in Queensland, while less
than one-third of water utilities in New South Wales had commenced
preparation of their water supply plan some two years after guidance had
been made available to them by the State government. NSW has a target of
June 2008 for completion of its long-term water supply plans.

The report says the regulatory approach adopted in Victoria to ensure
completion of water supply plans in accordance with state guidelines was
found to be more effective than the financial incentives offered in New
South Wales and Queensland.

It notes that water supply planning should be linked with energy and land
use planning decisions in an integrated manner and points out that
Australian states and territories typically do not give adequate
consideration to uncertainty in their water supply planning.

"Most notably there was no quantification of the effect of climate change in
example water supply plans  in Queensland, New South Wales,  the Northern
Territory and Tasmania," the report says. "Given recent climate conditions
and global warming trends, this oversight is of concern."

The report makes a number of recommendations related to water supply
planning in various states and territories, calls for a more uniform
approach to ensure optimum water supply planning and continuing review of
the process.