“It is abundantly clear that non-strategic buybacks are a very blunt and damaging instrument,” Mrs Dalton said.

“They have the potential to negatively impact many communities in the Murray electorate.”

Mrs Dalton said this message had been loud and clear from representative organisations across the region.

“While both state and federal governments have declared they won’t use buybacks beyond 1500 gigalitres, they are strangely reluctant to enshrine this pre election promise in legislation,” she said.

Ms Dalton said a sensible measure would be to put a state moratorium on buybacks until there was a thorough understanding of the long-term socioeconomic impacts.

“Senator Madigan is asking for a full inquiry into socioeconomic impacts of the MDBP and obviously the impacts of non-strategic buybacks should be part of that inquiry,” she said.

“I have also noted with some concern that whenever important questions are asked about issues such as buybacks, federal and NSW state politicians and department representatives are very good at pointing their fingers at each other.”

Mrs Dalton said she was disappointed that both state and federal representatives were shifting blame, rather than sensibly addressing the issue. “One of the major reasons I have put my hand up in the upcoming state election is because our public servants are suffering from some type of ‘selective deafness' syndrome about important issues such as buybacks,” she said.

Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment Bob Baldwin and Murray Darling Basin Authority chairman Neil Andrew visited Griffith last week.

Mr Baldwin said he was asked about capping the buyback.

“I have said that I have issued strict instructions to the department that there is to be no more purchase beyond the 1500 gigalitre mark,” Mr Baldwin said.

“People have asked for that to go into legislation and that will be considered as part of a program going forward.

“I’ve also said to people, if you have specific examples where there are errors and flaws in the plan then raise them with me and we will have a look at them,” Mr Baldwin said.

He also denied reports he missed meetings with communities and that farmers had walked off the land due to the plan. “I’ve not heard of one case where a farmer has walked off the land because of the plan,” Mr Baldwin said.

“I’ve seen examples of people that have sold their water rights and taken the economic benefit for doing that.

“I’ve seen examples where people have walked off the land because a market for a certain product has collapsed.”

Water was the main focus of a forum in Griffith last week.