The structure was approved by the MIL Board of Directors in April following a comprehensive review and consultation process.
It received support from shareholders who participated in the consultation, but some shareholders now want it reviewed.
The changes followed ongoing calls by shareholders for changes to the fee structure, as they did not believe the previous system around Delivery Entitlements was still fit for purpose.
MIL advised shareholders during its consultation that 80 per cent would be better off or no worse off under the new structure.
At a shareholder meeting earlier this month, organised by a new group calling itself the ‘Concerned Shareholders Group’, concerns were raised about the company’s new pricing and water management strategy.
There were calls for greater transparency, improved consultation and an independent review of changes.
They questioned the board’s decision to replace fixed delivery entitlement fees with higher variable water delivery charges and to alter the management of efficiency water.
Concerns were also raised about limited access to financial modelling and what some described as inadequate communication from the board, although MIL chair Phil Snowden defended the changes and the way it was communicated saying extensive consultation had occurred and detailed information remains available to shareholders.
In the days that followed the meeting, CSG launched the petition.
It asks shareholders to support an immediate pause on the current fees and prices, request full disclosure of the key financial modelling and assumptions, and calls for a cooperative review process with the Murray Irrigation Board before the new framework becomes embedded.
It has set up a website which it says would provide shareholders with supporting documents and background material.
Extensive information on the fee structure and associated changes has been on the MIL website throughout its consultation and decision-making process.
CSG spokesperson Marty Robertson stressed the group’s objective was not confrontation, but “accountability and constructive engagement”.
“This is about getting the facts on the table before decisions become locked in,” Mr Robertson said.
“Shareholders are not asking for conflict. We want to work cooperatively with the Murray Irrigation Board, but we believe the current fees and prices should be paused immediately while shareholders are given a proper opportunity to understand, test and respond to the proposed changes.
“Water is more than an accounting entry. It underpins farm businesses, local jobs, service industries and the future of our towns.
“That is why shareholders deserve a clear, evidence-based explanation before major policy changes become embedded and difficult to unwind.”
The petition is at www.MILCSG.com.au.
Full details on MIL’s framework are available at https://www.murrayirrigation.com.au/fee-structure-review-2026.
10°C