coal

Attempts by a Queensland coal mining company to import foreign labour has been condemned by the Mining & Energy Union.Sojitz Blue has applied to import coal mineworkers from overseas whilst simultaneously offering current workers substandard work contracts and delaying negotiations for an enterprise agreement.The company operates the Gregory Crinum and Meteor Down South (MDS) coal mines near Emerald in Queensland and employs 350 workers.

Expansion at Abbot Point coal terminal can proceed following the Environment Minister's approval of the dredging project. There are some "strict" conditions on when and how much can be dredged. There is "protection" for flora and fauna.

Three million tonnes of dredge spoil will be dumped offshore. He has also approved of the LNG facility on Curtis Island. This is supposed to reignite our resource industries. Conservation groups are angry that Mr Greg Hunt has approved these developments

.

Community campaigns against the expansion of Abbot Point

Mainstream media reports about Abbot Point

Update, 24 Sep 2013 : The Sydney Morning Herald reports, "Mr Moylan was committed to the Supreme Court and will be appearing there on November 1."
See also: Hunter Valley food bowl plan faces urban development pressures of 1 Oct 2013, stopcsgsydney.org.au (last updated, 25 Aug); Stop CSG! Illawarra (last updated, 15 Sep). Paul Craig Roberts mentions the threat to underground water supplies as a result of fracking in the US in The Real Crisis Is Not The Government Shutdown of 2 Oct 2013.

In January this year, Jonathan Moylan sent a press release on ANZ letterhead to the ASX stating that the bank will withdraw financial support from Whitehaven’s Maules Creek open cut coal mine on ethical grounds. The case has now gone to the Supreme Court and Jonathan is facing up to 10 years jail and more than $700,000 in fines under s1041E of the Corporations Act. Jonathan's supporters feel that this is the exercise of might against right and point to ASIC's failure to prosecute big offenders in corporate crime. Anglophone law and industrial policy have a long history of persecuting democratic activism and have made it much harder for local people to organise against power than under the Roman Law (Napoleonic) system in continental Europe. This needs to change.

You can contribute to a fighting fund here: http://www.standwithjono.org/donate//www.standwithjono.org/donate

Context to ASIC prosecution of Jonathan Moylan

This case against Jonathan Moylan is the first time an individual has been prosecuted under s1041E of the Corporations Act.

ASIC is currently subject to a Senate Inquiry investigating its inaction in relation to prosecuting major corporate white-collar crime.

Last week, former Gunns chairman John Gay, who was prosecuted by ASIC for insider trading, received a $50,000 fine for an offence which carries a maximum penalty of $220,000 or 5 years’ jail. While ASIC praised the result, the Shareholders Association slammed the fine as “too lenient”, saying Gay “clearly profited at the expense of shareholders”, and that “where a director has pleaded guilty to insider trading we would have thought that there would have been the potential for a jail term...”.

Moylan acted on a matter of principle for no personal gain. The impact of Moylan’s action on shareholders has been exaggerated and should be seen in context. An investor who held $10,000 in Whitehaven shares and sold at the low point on the day of Moylan's action you would have lost $881 (shares fell from $3.52 to a low of $3.21 before recovering). Had the investor not acted and held their shares, at today's share price of $2.01 the investment would be worth just $5710.41, a drop of some 43%.

Cumulative Environmental Impacts

The mines will clear the largest remnant of bushland left on the Liverpool Plains, Leard State Forest, which is part of a national biodiversity hotspot.

The mines will impact on habitat for up to 396 plant and animal species and as many as 23 threatened species.

It is estimated that the mines will lead to a 5-7m drop in the water table and up to 18,000 tonnes of dust being dropped on surrounding farms each year.

Total greenhouse gas emissions from the coal produced will, when burnt, exceed 60 Mt/yr of CO2 equivalent - a total greenhouse impact greater than that of 165 individual nations, including Sweden, Hungary and Finland.

This is the context in which the Maules Ck coal mine was the subject of a media release by Jonathan Moylan which has now led to his prosecution by ASIC.

On the ABC News radio this morning (9 Sept 2012) we heard that private coal companies are demanding compensation for carbon trading costs from the Victorian Government and apparently this is being taken seriously!

All the brown coal stations in Victoria belonged to the State electricity Commission of Victoria until 1994 when they were privatised by Jeff Kennett.
Now the current government is saying that it may have to compensate brown coal producers for their not being able to use it because it is too polluting and will be too costly under the carbon trading system.

Do we require further proof of how corrupt and unproductive privatisation is?
What gives when a government not only sells off our assets but then somehow agrees to retain liability for business risks?

You would have thought that the private corporations would have assumed responsibility for the debt.
They have profited from the privatisation over the years and are now crying poor and demanding compensation!
How about making the parliamentarians who agreed to selling off these assets personally financially responsible for any such compensation?

We've known of the dangers of coal since the 18th century. Our leaders should be held responsible for getting us into this mess.

Six months ago an Indian energy corporation, Lanco Infratech, bought an Australian coalmine for $750 million dollars. Although, at the time, it agreed to lower-prices for customers, now it is telling the West Australian government that it will stop supplying electricity to West Australians by September unless Australian customers pay double. Six months ago Indian energy corporation, Lanco Infratech, bought an Australian coalminefor $750 million dollars. Although, at the time, it agreed to lower-prices for customers, now it is telling the West Australian government that it will stop supplying electricity to West Australians by September unless Australian customers pay double.

In 2006: the "Western Australia Domestic Gas Reservation Policy" aimed to safeguard LNG fuel supplies for Australians:

"The equivalent of 15 per cent of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) production from export gas projects will now be required to be reserved for domestic use as a condition of access to WA land for the location of processing facilities."

So a mere 15% of Western Australia's liquefied natural gas, which according to a report (PDF, 223K, linked to from here) of the DomGas Alliance, "Western Australia’s natural gas resources, could be fully depleted within 30 years," is to be reserved for domestic use and the remaining 85% allowed to be sent overseas.

As inadequate as the 2006 provisions to protect LNG will become in the face of increasingly savage oil and gas depletion, they are better than our policies of digging up and exporting coal as fast as possible, leaving absolutely nothing in reserve.

West Australian electricity supplies under threat from foreign ownership

Six months ago Indian energy corporation, Lanco Infratech, bought an Australian coalmine from Ric Stowe for $750 million dollars. Although, at the time, it agreed to lower-prices, now it is telling the West Australian government that it will stop supplying electricity to West Australians by September unless Australian customers pay double.

The Bluewaters power station (also owned by Ric Stowe) is itself in the process of being sold to two Japanese companies, Sumitomo and Kansai Electric.

The West Australian Premier, Colin Barnett, has been accused by the opposition state development spokesperson, Mark McGowan, of failing to safeguard West Australia's power supply by not having put in place a 'coal reservation policy' similar to the one already in place for West Australia's natural gas industry.

A chief executive of the holding company for Bluewaters, Griffin Group, Mr Ashcroft, is quoted by the Financial Review as saying,

"What is unfolding here is that our Collie coal will be more and more targeted for export with domestic supplies becoming a second priortiy and only at increasing prices."

Why is West Australian Liberal Premier Colin Barnett resisting these perfectly reasonable demands that he act responsibly and reserve that minimal amount of coal for the needs of Western Australians?

Source: "Barnett rejects call to set aside coal," The Australian Financial Review, Monday 20 June 2011

Don't mention the war

There is something politically incorrect about mentioning past wars because they are almost always a source of embarassment for current governments and the pseudo-sophisticated classes that would rather we all pretended that we were being governed for our own good. Take WW2, where about 40,000 Australians and even more Japanese lost their lives fighting each other on behalf of governments which claimed to be ordering this in the name of their homes and families.

How do Australians who lost their spouses, children and parents in WW2 defending Australia's security and resources deal with the bizarre fact that today's governments are signing our agricultural land, our mineral wealth, and our built infrastructure over in peace time in exchange for a bit of cash up front? Indeed, how does any Australian? Concerns are entirely justified. In ten years time when fuel prices are reaching beyond the wages of many households, the amounts paid today by the purchasers of these energy sources will seem paltry and ephemeral.

Surely it was obvious to our current leaders that our control over these increasingly scarce resources could not be guaranteed by mere sales contracts and polite agreements?

The problems now arising with Indian coal could be the beginning of the end. Are they a sign that members of our governments are just going to surrender, in exchange for cash, the bulk of our scarcest resources to any cashed-up foreign corporation that can then search the world for the most cashed-up market, leaving Australians high and dry?

The economic policy of globalism relies in part on the notion that the intertwining of interests and ownership globally will make countries too interdependent to engage in war. The problem is that globalism makes no provision to protect the rights of citizens and individuals to self-government locally and to maintaining control of essential services and resources locally. It doesn't prevent wars either. They are going on all over the place - in the name of peace and democracy - ironically .

Food security also ignored by our cash-mad 'leaders' this week

And just this week the Senate Economics Committee rejected calls by independent and Greens senators to create a special legislative national interest test for purchases of agricultural land above a certain threshold and to require the Treasurer to publish applications of interest in Australian farms online. The proposed laws were intended to protect Australia's food supply and to reveal the true owners of the nation's farming businesses. The reason for concern is that significant portions of Australian farming land are now being acquired by foreign nations with interests which could become conflictual to those of Australians. The Senate Economics Committee appeared to evade its responsibility, and really to condemn our economy, providing as their excuse for rejecting the legislative proposals the idea that Australia needs to sell off equity in order to create industry and jobs for Australians. They settled for an audit.

Source:http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/agric_ctte/food_production/report/c02.htm Chapter 2 of Food production in Australia - Final report, Parliament of Australia, Senate Select Committee on Agriculture and Related Industries, 23 August 2010:

"Foreign ownership

2.47 Finally, the committee briefly explored the prospect of foreign ownership of Australian agricultural land, particularly the existing regulatory approach to major foreign land acquisitions.

2.48 The Foreign Investment Review Board (FIRB) informed the committee that investment in agricultural land by foreign investors is generally exempt from the requirement to notify the government in accordance with the Foreign Acquisitions and Takeovers Act 1975. Only if the acquisition exceeds 15 per cent of a business or corporation whose Australian interests are valued above $231 million, or where the investment is made by a foreign government or their agency, is it subject to scrutiny from the Australian Government to establish whether any national interest concerns are raised.[47]

2.49 The committee notes that incremental purchases exceeding the threshold amount in aggregate are not required to be disclosed. The committee also notes that in some countries the distinction between foreign governments and companies is not necessarily straightforward.

Committee view

2.50 Land available for agriculture is declining across the globe as expanding populations inhabit fertile land that could otherwise be devoted to food production. Although this problem is not as severe in Australia as it is in countries with a smaller land mass, urban encroachment is nonetheless affecting the capacity of Australian producers to grow food in the areas in which it is demanded, which in turn affects its quality and affordability. Competition for fertile land from mining and biofuels also threatens to reduce Australia's productive capacity.

2.51 The committee recognises that it is difficult for governments to dictate to landowners the purpose for which their land must be used, particularly when agricultural production may not presently be the most profitable possible use. However, Australian governments need to give serious consideration to mechanisms for protecting our most fertile agricultural land from alternative uses in the interests of our long term productive capacity and food security.

2.52 The committee also notes the marginal viability of agricultural production and the difficulty for potential young farmers to enter the sector, due to high land prices which combine to leave agricultural production vulnerable to structures that are less desirable than traditional family farming. Corporate farming models have the advantage of attracting extra capital to agriculture, though there are questions about the availability of labour and long term stewardship of the land. More significantly, though, Australia risks foreign companies, many with close ties to their home governments, purchasing substantial strategic interests in Australian land without needing to be vetted for national interest concerns. Australia needs to be careful that Australia's productive capacity is not undermined by foreign interests producing food on Australian land that is not intended for trade, but for direct supply to countries that have not managed their own food security needs.

Recommendation 1

2.53 The committee recommends an audit be undertaken to establish the extent of foreign ownership of commercial agricultural and pastoral land, and ownership of water, in Australia, with particular emphasis on ownership by sovereign and part-sovereign-owned companies."

Originally published on the Queensland Greens web site on 10 Feb 09.

10 February 2010 - The Queensland Greens have today called for federal intervention to address the climate change impacts of the coal epidemic in central Queensland.

"The Greens want a climate trigger to be added to Australia's national environment laws so the federal government can step in to assess the full climate impacts of coal proposals, including Clive Palmer's China First and Gina Hancock's Alpha and Kevin's Corner coal mines in the Galilee Basin," said environmental lawyer and Greens lead Senate candidate for Queensland, Larissa Waters.
Greens candidates Larissa Waters, Jenny Stirling and Jonathon Dykyj are visiting Bowen to hear community opposition to the coal mines, coal rail corridors, coal port expansions and local heavy industry area, and will attend a briefing on Galilee Basin coal projects where mining magnate Clive Palmer is also expected.

"The region's communities, the Reef, tourism, agriculture, grazing industries and development of alternative industries are being sacrificed for coal royalties, corporate profits and exports of more carbon pollution to China and Japan," said Ms Waters.

"The proposed coal mines in the Galilee Basin are massive and will turn Queensland into the world's biggest coal exporter right when the latest science is calling for urgent reductions in greenhouse gas emissions," said Ms Waters.

"Premier Bligh is ignoring the revenue and thousands of jobs dependent on a healthy Great Barrier Reef and is failing to drive the creation of thousands of clean energy jobs which could be powering Queensland and protecting the climate," said Ms Waters.

"Hancock's Kevin's Corner and Alpha Coal Mine will forever mark the exact point at which Rudd capitulated to the coal lobby, squandering the mandate he was given to deal with climate change and betraying future generations of Australians" said Jenny Stirling, Greens third Senate candidate.

In addition to coal projects, the state government is dumping the worst polluting industries such as aluminium and nickel refineries with smelters, chlor-alkali plant, ammonium nitrate plant, coke and gas fired power plants right on to Bowen residents in a ‘state development area' which demotes the community's legal rights to oppose the development.

"The federal government needs to step in and conduct an assessment of the cumulative impact of heavy industry and resource extraction on the community and the environment in the region," said Ms Waters.

Candidate for Dawson Jonathon Dykyj said: "We are here to challenge the short-sighted and inappropriate development of this region and to put forward sustainable alternatives which are economically and environmentally sound for this wonderful part of Queensland."

The Greens want to see the region's economy based on clean energy industries and associated manufacturing, sustainable agriculture, tourism, and improved public health, education and services for the aging population and young families.

For comment:
Larissa Waters - Greens lead Senate candidate for Queensland - larissa.waters [ AT ] qld.greens.org.au

Background on planned Bowen development blitz

• Massive 16,500 ha Bowen State Development Area to house some of the world's worst polluting industries such as aluminium and nickel refineries with smelters, chlor-alkali plant, ammonium nitrate plant, coke and gas fired power plants.
• Abbott Point Port expansion to export 110 Mtpa of coal together with a Multi Cargo Facility will require 580 ha dredging and reclamation in World Heritage Great Barrier Reef waters. Coal exports are projected to increase from the present 25Mtpa export upwards to 230 Mtpa with the Palmer/Hancock coal mines.
• Both of the above sited next to the nationally significant Caley (Keela) Valley Wetlands which meet RAMSAR status and are home to over 20,000 wetland and migratory birds and 200 species.
  490km rail corridors will be 100m wide from Galilee Basin (Palmer's China First) to Abbott Point, cutting through the township of Collinsville, stock routes, prime agricultural and grazing lands and ecosystems.
• Land clearing for the mines, railways, pipelines and coal stockpiles will affect thousands of hectares of vegetation and biodiversity habitat.

See also: "Clive Palmer, Queensland Government announce $69 Billion Coal project" in the Sunday Mail of 7 Feb 10.

Friends of Felton Media release

11th January 2010

Queensland Government cannot allow Felton to be held hostage by mining company

Ambre Energy executives visited Felton just before Christmas and revealed the following information about their proposed so-called Felton Clean Coal Project:

• They have not yet secured a supply of water for the project (16,000 megalitres per year at full scale).

• They have no plans for Carbon Capture and Storage, even though their own figures show the project would produce 3 tonnes of CO2 per 1 tonne of fuel.

• They may not proceed with plans to produce di-methyl ether (DME)_#main-fn1">1, as there is little demand for it in Australia.

• The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project may not be released this year.

Friends of Felton spokesman Rob McCreath said, "This is a clearly an unviable project, which would have disastrous consequences for agriculture, the environment, and the community at large."

"Two years have passed since Ambre Energy first announced their plans for the Felton Valley. Local residents are virtual hostages, their lives and plans are in limbo." Mr McCreath said. "The efficiency of the district's cropping and horticultural industries is being reduced by the threat of the mine" he added.

Friends of Felton calls on the Queensland Government to intervene immediately to reject the Ambre Energy proposal, which is clearly not in the public interest.

Media contact: Rob McCreath 0409014219

Friends of Felton Inc.
c/o The Secretary, 2110 Karara Rd, Felton 4358
www.fof.org.au

See also: "Felton farmers left in the dark" in the Toowoomba Chronicle of 12 Jan 10, "Farmers 'held hostage by mining plans'" in the Sydney Morning Herald of 11 Jan 10, "Agriculture v Mining - Friends of the Felton Valley and the Haystack Plain" on Brisbane ABC radio's Evenings with Steve Austin of 4 Jun 09, including audio files of debate (10 Mb) between John Cotter, the President of Agforce and the Chief Executive of Queensland Resources, Michael Roche and interview (10Mb) with Rob McCreath of Friends of Felton, "Farmers occupy Qld Premier's office to save Darling Downs from coal mining" of 2 Nov 08, "Rural town threatened by open cut coal-mine: Acland, Queensland" of 10 Jan 10, Friends of Felton web site at www.fof.org.au and blog site at www.friendsoffelton.blogspot.com.

Footnotes

#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ Di-methyl Ether (DME) can be used a substitute for diesel as a fuel for motor vehicles. After world oil production inevitably peaks and begins its inexorable decline, it seems likely that we will look to the large scale production of DME as one alternative to petroleum. How we balance the needs of our industrial society with the needs of the natural environment and our need to produce food in areas such as the Felton Valley will be a difficult, if not altogether impossible problem to solve. It is urgent that we pre-empt this by planning to end Australia's unending economic growth and, instead, achieve a steady state economy within the limits of our natural environment as soon as possible.

Originally published as "Community must ask who bears the cost of progress" by Dr Mark Copland of the in the Tooowoomba Chronicle of 5 Jan 10 (URL of article unkown).

This story first appeared, along with the koala photograph, in the Toowoomba Chronicle on 5 January 2010.
Story written by Dr Mark Copland

Acland - a town on death row

Late last year I took a short drive and visited the town of Acland. It was a haunting visit. Like a town on death row -- or a community on life support -- except they've already started ripping the drips and sensors from the veins before the patient is even dead. The Acland story is like the Australian movie "The Castle" -- except this one doesn't have a happy ending. It left me full of uncomfortable questions -- with far too few answers.

As people we are good at opening things. We bring in the politicians, the brass bands, the plaques and all enjoy a very civilized morning tea as we bask in the warm glow of progress. One of the many questions sitting with me as I left Acland was, "How do you close a town?" How do you honour the memories, the lives lived, the countless hours of voluntary community building given by loving citizens? It's a bit embarrassing and so we mumble something about progress once again and then just move on.

Environmental Impact Statement farce

In this process, mining companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on expert consultants who create very large documents telling us why the mine must go ahead. There is barely even the illusion of independence. The average citizen with no resources is given a few weeks to respond. The question is not will the mine go ahead -- but how can the mine go ahead?

I met one of the last men standing in Acland. Glen Beutel. Glen isn't ready to move on. And I don't blame him. Us Aussies love the glorious defeat -- Gallipoli, Ned Kelly etc. And Glen is in this tradition. By staying - he is shining a light on the farce that passes as the Environmental Impact Statement process. In this process, mining companies spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on expert consultants who create very large documents telling us why the mine must go ahead. There is barely even the illusion of independence. The average citizen with no resources is given a few weeks to respond. The question is not will the mine go ahead -- but how can the mine go ahead? The key word for the proponent is mitigation - how to respond to government regulations and possible community complaints. And the company gets its money's worth. If you read one of these things you would almost believe that the local environment will be enhanced with an open cut coal mine, which if all goes to plan will eventually engulf the town that once was Acland.

Koalas in Acland

I met somebody else on the road to Acland. The guy in the picture above. Last Summer our hearts went out to image of the koala burnt in the Victorian bushfires. In 1995 furry friends like this one helped to bring down the Goss government as proposed roads in South East Queensland were believed to be destroying koala habitat. And while there are even fresh water tortoises that call Acland home -- there won't be a Mary Valley Turtle to bring a halt to things a la Traveston Dam. I wonder if finding this bloke and his friends a new home is part of the planned expansion of the Acland mine. No doubt the plan will be buried somewhere in the Environmental Impact Statement.

Acland like Pandora in Avatar - Who pays for 'progress'?

A few nights ago I sat with my 3D glasses on watching the blockbuster movie Avatar. The plot is thin -- but familiar -- a colonizing power wishes to remove some Indigenous people to rip a precious mineral out of the ground. It's Hollywood where the good guys win and the baddie gets his just desserts. All the while I was watching it I had Glen Beutel and my Koala friend sitting somewhere on my shoulder. One of the serious questions that Avatar leaves the viewer with -- "Is it always necessary and right to take things out of the ground, and use them -- just because they are there?" I am sure when the Acland mine was first proposed there was never any mention of closing down a town. For me the sadness is not just the passing of the town -- but the way that it has been done. As a region we must ask the question, "What price progress -- and who will bear the cost?"

See also: Also from the Toowoomba Chronicle: "Our region could be one big hole" of 16 Nov 09 by Madeleine Logan, "Removal trucks spell last rites for Acland" of 10 Oct 09 by Madeleine Logan, "Coal mine nightmare" of 12 Nov 09 by Madeleine Logan, "Facebook keeps residents on line" of 9 Nov 09 by Madeleine Logan, "Friends take heart from senators' visit" of 30 Sep 09 by Roseanne Schefe, "Jones labels Acland's decline as 'sickening'" of 30 Jan 09 by Madeleine Logan about Sydney radio personality Alan Jones' feelings about the threatened destruction of his home town, "$200m mine deal sparks water war" of 16 Nov 07 by Sue Searle, "Acland producing the cleanest coal" of 22 Mar 07 by Greg Berghofer, "Couple join exodus as Acland 'closes down'" of 2 Mar 06 by Sarah Vogler; Web site of the New Hope coal company: www.newhopecoal.com.au (including environmental impact statements, newsletters and assorted other pro-coal-mining propaganda); Friends of Felton web sites: www.fof.org.au, www.friendsoffelton.blogspot.com.

What you can do

Sign e-petition calling for resignation of Queensland Government. For futher information, please read "Why Queenslanders must demand new state elections" of 8 Jan 10.

I am standing for Parliament because I believe Queenslanders need an alternative to the blind alley into which either of the major parties, both committed to promoting the interests of wealthy corporations above all else, will lead us. The direction in which we are now headed, under Labor, is towards, social, ecological and economic ruin and a change of Government to the alternative of the Liberal National Party will not change that.

The only way that this can change is if for all the Labor and Liberal National Party corporate glove puppets to be removed from office and for them to be replaced with people who are prepared to stand up for their communities against powerful vested interests.

All over Queensland the rights of small communities, which are trying to preserve their way of life, their livelihoods and their local environment, are being trampled by the Bligh Labor Government.

The plan to dam the Mary Valley, cynically chosen because the Labor Government judged the local community, which overwhelmingly votes Liberal National Party, as politically expendable,_#main-fn1">1 is only one of the more visible examples. The Labor Party has meted out similar treatment to many other Queensland communities, where local interests have stood in the way of developer profits, mining companies or tollway construction corporations. Indeed, the forced local Government amalgamations of 2007 were enacted by former Premier Beattie and the sitting member for Mount Coot-tha, Andrew Fraser, the then local Government Minister, in response to lobbying by the Property Council of Australia (PCA). Smaller local governments, like the former Noosa Shire Council, were more accountable to local communities than distant larger councils can be, hence smaller local governments posed obstacles to PCA plans.

As an elected representative, I would stand up for all local communities. I would move quickly to support the de-amalgamation of councils, where communities so desire_#main-fn2">2 and I will move to repeal the Community Integrated Planning Act. That act is a bureaucratic nightmare and undemocratically deprived local communities of any veto over development proposals.

I intend to raise the issues below, which, as far as I know, are not adequately addressed by any of the political parties:

• #privatisation">Privatisation
• #PopulationGrowth">Population growth
• #HousingAffordability">Housing
• #coal">Queensland's climate-changing coal export industry

#privatisation" id="privatisation">End privatisation - stop the liquidation of Queensland

The privatisation of Queensland's Mackay and Cairns airports has barely been reported, let alone discussed in the newsmedia. The very recently concluded sale of the Port of Brisbane's stake in Brisbane, included in the same privatisation bill, has not even been reported outside the Hansard Parliamentary Reports. The stated reason for these sales was to raise funds to build hospitals._#main-fn3">3

Other recent privatisations include:

• The Qld Government's stake in the Emu Downs wind farm in Western Australia_#main-fn4">4 in 2008;
• The Enertex (not be confused with Energex) gas business_#main-fn5">5 in 2008;
• The Golden Casket state lottery agency in 2007;
• Ergon Gas in 2006;
• Energex, the retail arm of Queensland's electricity generation utility in 2006;
• the Dalrymple Bay coal loader in 2001
• The Totalisator Agency Board (TAB) in 1999
• the State Government Insurance Office_#main-fn7">7 (the SGIO - now known as Suncorp) in 1998

In addition, much of Queensland's road and transport infrastructure is effectively privatised through Public Private Partnerships (PPPs). No doubt many de-facto privatisations have also occurred under the guise of out-sourcing. One such example was the disastrous out-sourcing of the TAFE's IT services to Unisys by the Borbidge National Party Government in 1997._#main-fn8">8 Common land is sold off at every possible opportunity to developers or other private concerns, behind the backs of local communities, or even in the face of their strong objections.

The stated reason for the sale of the airports was to raise funds to build hospitals, whilst the stated reason for the sales of Enertex and the stake in Emu Downs wind farm was "to provide for a Climate Change funding stream". Energex and Ergon were sold to raise the necessary funds to build the Traveston Dam. If that dam proceeds, it will destroy the rural community of the Mary Valley and may well cause the extinction of the the Mary River Cod (Maccullochella peelii mariensis ), the Mary River Turtle (Elusor macrurus) and the Queensland Lungfish (Neoceratodus forsteri).

Clearly, if it is necessary for our Government to keep on selling off infrastructure in order to build other necessary infrastructure, or to meet recurring expenditure, then the Government and the State Treasurer, Andrew Fraser, are not doing their job properly.

Even if it were possible to establish that the ongoing liquidation of Queensland is necessary, the matter should at least be discussed openly with the Queensland public, who are, after all, the rightful owners of these assets.

That is why, on 17 February, before the elections were hurriedly called, I wrote this open letter to both Treasurer Andrew Fraser and Premier Anna Bligh:

"(I) seek your firm assurance that if you do intend to privatise any of these assets that you state your intention to do so to the public before the forthcoming elections, or, alternatively, that you will put any planned privatisations to the public as referenda."

I was particularly concerned that plans might be afoot to privatise our water infrastructure and Queensland Rail. If such plans are in the pipeline, then the Queensland public, who according to all recent public opinion polls, oppose privatisation, have every right to be consulted, if not at the election underway, then in referenda.

So far I have received no response from either the Premier or the Treasurer.

I will be putting a similar question to Opposition leader, Lawrence Springborg. I will try to ask every other candidate as well in the little time remaining before the election, and I will publish their responses on this web site.

#PopulationGrowth" id="PopulationGrowth">End Queensland Government encouragement of population growth

According to Australian Bureau of Statics (ABS) data, Queensland's population doubled from approximatlely 2 million in 1974 to 4 million in 2005 (31 years later). Between December 2005 and June 2008 another 278,000 or almost 7% were added to Queensland's population as a result of unprecedented interstate immigration largely driven by record high international immigration into NSW and Victoria. If the average rate of the two and a half years to June 2008 continues, the population will double to 8 million by 2031 -- a rate even greater than that which Beattie told Queenslanders in December 2005 to expect (see below). And that is not taking into account the increases in the rate of immigration announced by the Federal Immigration Minister Chris Evans in May 2008._#main-fn9">9

That the population increases have been detrimental, not beneficial, to existing Queensland residents should not come as a surprise. Traffic is ever more congested. Trains and buses are so crowded that many passengers have found themselves left at bus stops and stations during peak hours. Queensland residents are being made to pay ever increasing charges to build new water, electricity and transport infrastructure to cope with the influx of people. Public hospital waiting lists have blown out to the point where many just don't bother. Instead, people, having no alternative, take on board the enormous costs of treatment by private hospitals.

On 4 March 2009 the Courier Mail, in the story "Private fix for surgery", reported that Premier Anna Bligh had acknowledged growth in Queensland's population numbers had caused our public hospital system's failure to cope._{#main-fn10">10}

Premier Anna Bligh, for her part has been most disingenuous, as both she and her predecessor Peter Beattie, have actively sought to bring about the population growth that Bligh now chooses to blame for the problems her Government faces. Both of them have played the Queensland public for fools over the question of population growth.

In April 2007, in the midst of the water crisis, Premier Anna Bligh dismissed any suggestion that Queensland should attempt to restrict population growth claiming that it "would have a very serious impact on the construction industry that a lot people rely on for jobs."_{#main-fn11">11}

5 Dec 2008 - the "Smart State" invites yet more
interstate migrants to join its intolerable hospital
waiting lists and add to traffic congestion, bus
rage and housing hyperinflation.

On 8 December 2008, in anticipation of the birth of 4 millionth Queenslander, the Beattie government placed the pictured full page advertisement in the then broadsheet Courier Mail newspaper. The purpose of this advertisement was to present Queensland's population growth up to that point as inherently good and to promote more of the same.

The body of this breathtakingly irresponsible piece of propaganda, paid for by Queensland taxpayers, bears repeating in full:

"If you are visiting or thinking of a move to Queensland, you'll already know we are the nation's engine room. Our population growth is only rivalled by our economic and employment growth. We now account for 19.5% of Australia's population.

"Tomorrow's milestone and our economic success reflect that Queensland is the place to invest, work and play.

"Our economic growth rate is envied, our taxes are competitive and we have a cherished lifestyle.

"More than ever, people are investing in Queensland and moving their businesses and family here. You should join us! (my emphasis.)

"Please contact us today and we will let you know what the Smart state can do for you.

"Queensland's population reached 1 million in 1938, 2 million in 1974 and three million in 1992. We are projected to reach 5 million in 2022 and 6 million in 2040.

"We are projected to overtake Victoria as the second biggest state population wise, in 2044, with our share of of Australia's population increasing to 24% over the next 50 years.

"To keep building our Smart State, we need to foster and support our people's innovation, knowledge and skills. We need to keep Queensland growing and build on the opportunities, energy, vitality we're renowned for - we're doing just that.

"To all Queenslanders, I encourage you to warmly welcome our new arrivals."

The advertisement was signed "Peter Beattie MP Premier and Treasurer". At the foot of the page were the words, "Queensland the Smart State."

What Beattie neglected to mention was that the new arrivals would increase demand for scarce housing, which had already driven so many existing Queenslanders out of the housing market, or even the rental market. What he also neglected to mention was that the prospective newcomers' additional demand for water would be used by him as an excuse to try and destroy the Mary Valley rural community and threaten with extinction various endangered species there.

Water crisis created by Australian and State Governments

The following year, at a public forum on water, I asked Premier Peter Beattie to acknowledge that the water crisis had been made worse by population growth. I asked him if he was prepared on that basis to come out and state clearly that further population growth was not in the interests of Queensland and, moreover, if he would therefore desist from encouraging more population growth?

Peter Beattie initially thanked me for asking such a "good question". He then claimed (contrary to his words in the above-cited advertisement) that he wished so many people would not come to Queensland! However, by the time he had finished his very long winded response, he had managed to turn that wish around almost 180 degrees. He now said that Queensland needed more skilled people. (Presumably he did not mean 'skilled' people like myself, whose computer skills and degree had been deemed no longer current by recruitment agencies and implicitly by the Queensland Government since it was seeking new computer people rather than to retrain or help those many unemployed IT professionals already there.) He explained that skilled immigrants were now needed to cope with the problems caused by previous population growth. Finishing on this, he failed to provide a clear answer to my question, and of course, the microphone had moved on and the debate was over._{#main-fn12">12}

The Queensland Government, as we all know, has continued to aggressively promote population growth.

It is truly difficult to understand why any political leader would seek to so deliberately harm the overall wellbeing of the society they have pledged, as elected parliamentary representatives, to look after, but that is what they have done.

The reason, as explained in another article "How the Growth Lobby threatens Australia's future", is that the Government's policies serve the interests of a small powerful minority which profits from population growth whilst the rest of the community pays with a declining standard of living, quality of life and democratic input.

Throughout 2008, rental increases got further out of control. By early 2009 even well-paid professionals were having difficulty meeting rental rises caused by the demands of apparently insatiably greedy landlords. Starting in early 2008, an established retail community in Latrobe Street Paddington was driven out by continuously increasing rents. In March 2009, unable to afford rent, which had doubled in the two and a half years since she opened her business, Joan Winter was forced to close the Baboa Gallery.

#HousingAffordability" id="HousingAffordability">Demand action against homelessness and housing unaffordability

Instead of applying token band-aid measures, the Queensland Government must urgently take decisive action to help those it has left so much in the lurch in recent years.

First and foremost, it must immediately desist with its encouragement of population growth.

If anything is to be learnt from recent years, it is that we cannot rely on the inequitable and grossly inefficient private sector, if we are to ever achieve affordable quality housing for all Queenslanders. to meet our housing needs, we must re-establish the Queensland Housing Commission as a provider of quality affordable housing as it was when I grew up in Brisbane in the 1960's and 1970's. Whilst such a policy may cost us in the short term, in the longer term it should prove vastly cheaper than the current out-of-control private housing market.

Where people choose to own their own dwelling and not rent from the Housing Commission, state taxes must heavily discriminate in favour of them and against those who already own their own dwellings. The eventual goal of this policy would be to ensure that no-one owns more than home whilst others are deprived of owning any.

In the meantime action must be taken to protect private tenants from unreasonable landlords. Tribunals with special powers to protect tenants and to reverse the excessive rent rises that have been imposed upon many renters in recent years need to be set up. Certainly, where no demonstrable economic hardship will be caused to landlords, rents should be immediately reduced back to the levels of 2005.

#coal" id="coal">Labor's coal exports - a crime against this and future generations of humanity

When, nearly seven decades ago, our society was threatened with invasion by Japan our country pulled together as one in order to defeat that threat. It has been calculated that we devoted 30% of our economic output towards that war.

Today, in stark contrast, whenever a suggestion is made that some sacrifices are necessary to defeat the far greater threat of global warming, that suggestion is dismissed, if not denounced hysterically. In March 2007, Rupert Murdoch's Courier Mail pilloried Greens leader Bob Brown as wanting to destroy Queenslanders' jobs for proposing that our coal export industry be scaled back over time. Thus began and ended any debate on this question in the mainstream Queensland newsmedia.

Since then, the Queensland Government has continued adding to the coming climatic holocaust by embarking on a program to massively increase coal exports. Last year, Premier Anna Bligh announced plans to triple Queensland's coal exports by 2030._{#main-fn13">13}

Much of Queensland's own agricultural farmland and native flora and fauna face despoliation at the hands of the mining industry. Examples include the 8000 hectare Bimblebox nature reserve in central-west Queensland, which lies over a massive planned open cut coal mine, the Felton Valley, described as South East Queensland's salad bowl, just south west of Toowoomba and, outside of Queensland, Caroona on the Liverpool plains of News South Wales.

If elected, I will act to reduce our coal extraction industry, regardless of whether or not the current recession ends soon. We must decrease our dependence upon the income derived from coal. Also, we must use whatever influence we have with the Chinese Government to encourage it to reduce the dependence of its upon such massive imports from Australian coal and other raw materials.

This means that Queensland will have to face a future in which we can no longer depend upon royalties from mining exports to balance our state budgets and a good many mining jobs will no longer be there. Alternative, less environmentally destructive jobs for displaced miners will have to be found, but no-one should be under any illusion that these jobs can be as lucrative as many mining jobs have been. Instead, a good many more of us are going to have to find ways to create wealth, by growing it, by harvesting it from the seas, or by making it with our own hands, as our forefathers and foremothers before us have.

This is the price all of us, and, most of all, those who have gained the most from the ransacking of our global ecology up to now, must be prepared to pay, if children are to have a decent future, or, indeed, any future at all.

If that concept is difficult for today's political and industrial leaders to grasp, I am sure it would not have been so difficult for our forefathers, fighting in the jungles of New Guinea.

#VoteNotWasted" id="VoteNotWasted">Why a vote for me is not be a wasted vote

Realistically, I know I stand almost no chance of unseating the sitting member, Andrew Fraser, in this election. This is not because I don't believe that I would be less capable of representing the electors, but because I cannot hope to be able to reach a sufficient number or Mount Coot-tha residents in the limited time available with my very limited resources.

Nevertheless, this should not mean that your vote for me need be a wasted vote. Your vote for me will help to let the major party candidates know, even if choose to direct your preference toward one or the other, that you are dissatisfied with the way they have represented your interests in Parliament. They will then know that they can only continue to do the same at their peril.

I urge you to also make full use of the optional preferential voting system. Be wary of any candidates who tell you to 'just vote one'. A choice between a poor candidate on the one hand and an even worse candidate on the other can still be a very important choice. For my part I won't hold back from letting you know how I think you should order your preferences, but that is a choice that you must ultimately decide for yourself.

#LaborVoters" id="LaborVoters">To intending Labor voters:

Many of the policies I stand for were Labor Party policies: opposition to privatisation, more public sector spending, support for collective bargaining rights for workers, etc. I believe that your best chance of having Labor again promote the good policies that it once stood for is for you to give your primary vote to me.

#GreensVoters" id="GreensVoters">To intending Green voters:

Given the appalling misgovernment of both the major parties that I have witnessed at the statewide and local level, in the four and a half years since I moved back to Brisbane, the Greens should have had little difficulty increasing their electoral support, yet in all this time the Greens have essentially stood still and the 2009 elections promise to be little different.

The Greens have recently attracted sitting Labor member, Ronan Lee to their ranks. However his re-election on the basis of his primary vote alone is not assured. If preferences from those Labor voters who follow the advice of the official Labor Party "how to vote" cards prove necessary to secure Ronan Lee's re-election, then how independent from the Labor Party can he truly be expected to be?

Will a price have to be paid by the Queensland Greens? Or has the price been paid, in part, already?

The Greens' literature, in particular the brochure (pictured) for Mount Coot-tha Greens candidate Larissa Waters distributed last weekend confirms some of my concerns about the Greens.

The Greens' folded double-sided A2
brochure for Mount Coot-tha electors
- a wasted opportunity.

Some parts of the brochure do show promise. It rightly promises to end the property resumptions for the building of the Hale Street Bridge and Northern Link tunnel white elephants and it decries the "rampant urban growth, poor public transport, and crowded public transport". Taken overall, the brochure disappoints, however, especially given the potential use that could have been made of its massive folded double-sided A2 size.

Reading this brochure, one could be forgiven for not realising the scale of the world's ecological crisis, to which Queensland's own state Labor Government has contributed more than its fair share.

No specific mention of Queensland's greatest ecological crime, that is, its record level of climate-changing coal exports, is to be found. Little is to be found about many of the issues I have raised in this document: the outrage of the anti-democratic forced local government amalgamations enacted by Mount Coot-tha's sitting member who was Minister for local government at the time, and the almost innumerable other instances of the Queensland government trampling upon the rights of local communities.

Nothing is said of the scandalous ongoing sell-off of public assets.

Whilst a small part of the brochure rightly argues for the protection of some of Queensland's natural wilderness areas, it gives the reader only the barest clue of the terrible scale of environmental vandalism being inflicted upon this state by the Bligh Government.

Above all, the brochure neglects to specifically mention the population growth encouraged by the Queensland Government, as mentioned above. This population growth is the principle driver of the "rampant urban growth" of which it rightly complains. The brochure further neglects to point out that population growth, in combination with an almost complete lack of any worthwhile town planning or effective decentralisation on the part of the Queensland government, has made necessary massive expenditure on transport infrastructure, whether it be the most inappropriate public roads, tollway roads, toll bridges or toll tunnels or the more appropriate public transport.

Instead of raising the alarm about the environmental calamity that threatens us all, and expressing the sense of outrage that many of us feel at Anna Bligh's gross misgovernment of this state, the brochure appears to convey an impression that all will be fixed, even as Queensland's population continues to climb, by the spending of a bit more money on public transport, rainwater tanks, free solar panels to pensioners, and the creation of 7,600 'green collar' jobs entailed in the construction of two new Solar Power stations.

In reality, even the full achievement of all of the Greens' campaign promises would only be scratching the surface of the serious problems we face. Indeed one Green policy, mentioned on the brochure, that is, its support for water recycling -- rightly rejected by the Toowoomba community at a referendum in 2006 -- would only make matters worse.

I was a member of the Greens party back in 2003. I joined it, whilst working in Canberra, hoping to help stop the threatened invasion of Iraq. I have a great deal of admiration and respect for many of the Greens Parliamentary representatives, as well as many rank and file Greens. Nevertheless, the Greens campaign literature, as discussed above, further confirms my impression the Queensland Greens, overall, lack the vision necessary to make their organisation a truly effective force for good in Queensland politics.

If you are a Greens supporter, but agree with my concerns about the Greens, then I believe your best chance to make the Greens lift their game is to give your primary vote to me or to other independent candidates who stand for similar policies and then to give your second preference to the Greens. (In fact, that is how I intend to vote myself.) Of course, I also urge you to take full advantage of the preferential voting system and to consider careful whether any worthwhile differences between the two major parties exist and, if so, order your preferences accordingly.

#LNPvoters" id="LNPvoters">To intending Liberal National Party voters:

Throughout my voting life my own preference has been against the major conservative political parties. Whilst that hasn't changed fundamentally in 2009, I, nevertheless, find myself in strong agreement with a number of the policies of the Liberal National Party against those of the ruling Labor Party. These include its policy to offer Queensland communities which so desire an opportunity to de-amalgamate their local governments, its opposition to the Traveston Dam, and its opposition to coal mining in the Felton Valley.

I understand why many in Queensland, appalled by the incompetence and the autocratic governing style of the ruling Labor party, would see its replacement by a Liberal National Party Government as a solution to Queensland's ills.

However, it is apparent to me that on on many critical issues the Liberal National Party (LNP) is no different to the Labor Party and on some questions it is worse.

The LNP, together with the Labor Government has supported the population growth which, as raised above, has caused much of Queensland's serious social, environmental, economic and fiscal problems. Both have supported the ongoing fire-sales of publicly owned assets and both appear to be committed primarily to the private motor vehicle as the answer to our transport needs. Above all, both are recipients of massive donations from private corporations, especially property developers. For these reasons, in the longer term, a Liberal National state government cannot be expected, any more than the Labor Government, to put the interests of ordinary Queenslanders above the needs of their corporate benefactors.

Recently, Lawrence Springborg gave a hint that he may be planning to sell off more publicly owned assets when he announced that he would set up a fund to new Queensland Fund "to manage the proceeds of any sell-offs"._{#main-fn14">14}

Of course, the Queensland Labor Party's own record and the appalling record of the neighbouring NSW Labor Government on privatisation offers no guarantee against further privatisations. By attempting to privatise NSW's electricity generators, the NSW Labor Government went against the wishes of at least 79% of the NSW public and against an overwhelming vote against privatisation at the state Labor Party conference in May 2008 and against commitments not to privatise made prior to the 2007 elections.

Laurence Springborg's plans to 'save' $1billion by not replacing staff as they leave the public sector could add significantly to unemployment in the midst of our current recession. As Queensland Public Sector Union (QPSU) president Alex Scott, who met with Lawrence Springborg, pointed out:

"What he said is he's confirmed every permanent public servant won't get sacked as a result of the change of Government, but every time someone retires or resigns they won't be replaced so that means there'll be a cut of 12,000 jobs next year.

"That means that there'll be 12,000 more unemployed Queenslanders that could have been working in the public sector."_{#main-fn15">15}

Whilst on some environmental questions the Liberal National Party is better than Labor on others they are worse. An example of the latter is the Opposition's support for the environmentally atrocious shale oil project, which the Bligh Government blocked after facing a massive community protest campaign. Another is its support for Uranium mining, which the Labor Government still rightly opposes.

So the election of a Liberal National Party Government may still actually make matters worse, and not better in the longer term.

Nevertheless, if you are resolved to vote for the LNP, but want something better of an LNP government than we are likely to get based upon past experience, please still consider giving your primary vote to me.

#WhatYouCanDo" id="WhatYouCanDo">What you can do

Above all, inform yourself and others about the issues I have raised in this article and discuss them with.

If you would like to help me in any way in this campaign, for example by handing out leaflets on the streets or by giving a few to friends please get in touch, through our contact form or by phoning 0412 319669.

Please visit our website, make comments, or, if you have a story, which you believe may be of interest to other electors, contribute an article.

Make links back to our site from your own web site, if you have one, on public forums or in e-mails.

Footnotes

#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ "Cate Molloy: Traveston chosen because 'the people in the valley were all Nationals'" of 6 Feb 07

#main-fn2" id="main-fn2">2. #main-fn2-txt">↑ On this one issue, at least, I am almost in complete agreement with Opposition leader Lawrence Springborg. See also "Springborg's de-amalgamation plan" in the Government News of 4 Sep 08.

#main-fn3" id="main-fn3">3. #main-fn3-txt">↑ Tabling of Air Assets (Restructuring and Disposal) Bill on 26 August 2008 at www.parliament.qld.gov.au/view/legislativeassembly/tableOffice/documents/HALnks/080826/AirportAssets.pdf.

#main-fn4" id="main-fn4">4. #main-fn4-txt">↑ ibid.

#main-fn5" id="main-fn5">5. #main-fn5-txt">↑ ibid.

#main-fn7" id="main-fn7">7. #main-fn7-txt">↑ The SGIO had been partially privatised by the Borbidge Liberal and National Party coalition government. During the 1998 election campaign, Labor Opposition leader Peter Beattie, promised to retain half government-ownership of the SGIO, but broke that promise upon winning government.

#main-fn8" id="main-fn8">8. #main-fn8-txt">↑ This personally affected me. From 1996 until 1998, worked for the Warwick TAFE college to build a community Internet Service Provider, Flexi Net. After the TAFE IT services were outsourced to Unisys, a sham inquiry was conducted into Flexi Net by a Unisys consultant. Submissions from the local community overwhelmingly in support of TAFE's ISP were ignored and a recommendation to sell the ISP to a local consortium, the Warwick Business Association, was made. I worked for the new consortium. In August 1998, barely three months after he succeeded in transferring the ISP to its new physical location in the Warwick Town Hall, I was sacked, without receiving a written reference, by Peter Darton, the appointed technical manager of the ISP and Garry Hansford the business manager. Peter Darton now owns Warwick Computer Service.

In 2001, a previous employee worked of the Southern Queensland Institute of TAFE (SQIT), advised me that people high in the management of SQIT, which encompassed the Warwick TAFE college, wanted to expand Flexi Net to other Southern Queensland TAFE colleges. The source said that this plan was initially defeated by politics within SQIT and never saw the light because of Unisys. If Flexi Net had expanded, SQIT, with its large existing internal computer network, could well have been the ISP for rural southern Queensland. Instead, Flexi Net has long since been on-sold to Ipswich City Council's HaleNet, which was bought out by a Victorian ISP.

#main-fn9" id="main-fn9">9. #main-fn9-txt">↑ See quarterly summaries as pdf documents on "Australian Demographic Statistics" page on Qld Government web site at www.oesr.qld.gov.au/queensland-by-theme/demography/briefs/aust-demographic-stats/index.shtml and Australian Historical Population Statistics, 2008 and "Australian Historical Population Statistics" downloadable for the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

#main-fn10" id="main-fn10">10. #main-fn10-txt">↑ "Private fix for surgery" (unable to find URL) in the Courier Mail of 4 Mar 09. The words in this report were, "Ms. Bligh dismissed suggestions the move was a concession the current public system could not cope, saying demand had had surged because of population growth". The story reported Anna Bligh's election promise for the state Government to use private hospitals to provide 20,000 hospital patients with elective surgery over the next three years.

#main-fn11" id="main-fn11">11. #main-fn11q-txt">↑Qld govt rejects population cap in the Age of 22 April 07. Also cited in "How to end the Queensland economy's addiction to population growth?" of 26 Apr 09.

#main-fn12" id="main-fn12">12. #main-fn12-txt">↑This incident was written of in "Overloading Australia" (2008), p91 by Mark O'Connor and William Lines. (RRP AU$20)

#main-fn13" id="main-fn13">13. #main-fn13-txt">↑"Output of coal to triple by 2030" by Gabrielle Dunlevy in the Courier Mail of 10 July 08, "Qld coal production to triple" also by Gabrielle Dunlevy in the Age of 9 Jul 08, A report "Qld coal exports to double to 370m tonnes by 2030" in the Australian of 9 Jul 08 reported, as the title suggests, that Anna Bligh intended 'only' to double, rather than triple coal exports by 2030. Whatever her actual plans, the consequences of such increases in Queensland's already record rate of coal extraction and export hardly bear thinking about. See also "Anna Bligh pushes coal as Kevin Rudd faces the consequences" in the Australian 16 Jul 08

#main-fn14" id="main-fn14">14. #main-fn14-txt">↑ "Lawrence Springborg announces $1bn in expenditure cuts" in the Australian of 3 Mar 09.

#main-fn15" id="main-fn15">15. #main-fn15-txt">↑ "Springborg to unveil election pledge funding" on the ABC news of 3 Mar 09.

Media release : Friday 31st October 2008

Location : Anna Bligh's office, West End, Brisbane

Farmers occupy Qld Premier's office to save Darling Downs from coal mining

The Friends of Felton group today sat on the floor in the Premier's office to demand the Government introduce legislation to protect prime farmland from mining. The peaceful protest involved around 25 people_#main-fn1">1.

Spokesman Rob McCreath said "The mining boom is out of control. Areas such as Felton, Jimbour, and Warra are the jewels in the crown of rural Queensland. The Premier must act now to protect our food bowl from destruction."

The group set up a mock lunch table on the pavement outside the office, with a plate of coal for the Premier's lunch, and a glass of polluted water.

The protesters shared their own picnic lunch with onlookers – a picnic made from fresh Darling Downs ingredients.

Media contact: Rob McCreath 0409 014219

www.friendsoffelton.blogspot.com

Postscript: The Courier Mail of the next day, Saturday 1 November 2008 completely failed to report protest in spite of this media release having been sent some time before 1:03PM. The business section included more stories about the claimed prosperity that coal mining will bring to the Darling Downs:

• "No-brainer for QGC to a accept BG bid" about a takeover bid for the Queensland Gas (Company(?)) by the British BG Group; and
• "All aboard for ... boom times in Cinchilla". The latter briefly acknowledges concerns of farmers about the extraction of Coal Seam Gas (CSG) but fails to mention the protest.

Appendix: The case against Coal Mining In Felton Valley

This has been adapted from a PDF leaflet from Friends Of Felton

The Development

Stage 1: A three year demonstration project involving the mining of 750,000 t/yr of coal and its processing into Di-methyl ether (DME), an alternative fuel, and gas for a power station.

Stage 2: Massive expansion of the mine to 12.8 million tonnes/yr._#main-fn2">2 Expansion of power station and petrochemical plant.

The mine's anticipated output of 12.8 million tonnes/yr would be greater than any existing Queensland coal mine!!

This is TWICE the size of the new Acland mine, near Oakey.

Key arguments against the development

• Destruction of an area of renowned natural beauty, encompassing areas of remnant vegetation, home to several officially recognised vulnerable and endangered species.
• Loss and degradation of prime agricultural land.
• CO₂ emissions. The production of DME releases huge quantities of CO2. The developer has vague plans for the capture of this CO2, transport using a leak-prone disused oil pipeline, and storage underground in exhausted oil fields. This process is unproven and insecure. The capacity of the nominated oil field to cope with the volume of CO2 produced is doubtful.
• Drainage and contamination of underground aquifers, the lifeblood of our community.
• Pollution of Hodgson Creek, in the headwaters of the Murray- Darling river system.
• Increased flooding of upstream and surrounding farmland as a result of levee banks around mine and infrastructure.

The Friends of Felton are committed to opposing a coal mine at Felton for the following reasons:

1. WRONG PLACE: Felton is a closely settled, sustain- able farming community located only 30 kilometres from Toowoomba – this special place should not be sacrificed for a coal mine and petro-chemical processing plant. A coal washing plant would be built next to Hodgson Creek, in the headwaters of the Murray-Darling, using salty water piped in from the Dalby gas fields – a recipe for disaster.
2. TOO BIG: At full production the mine would take out 12.8 million tonnes of coal a year. This would make it one of the biggest coal mines in Queensland and the negative impact on the environment, the community and the region would be significant and unacceptable.
3. WRONG PRODUCT: The proponents plan to convert the coal into di-methyl ether (or DME) which could be used as a substitute for diesel. Production of DME on-site would turn Felton into Australia's biggest single point source of pollution – similar to what has happened following development of a coal to oil industry in South Africa resulting in pollution which is visible from space. Moreover the conversion process is highly inefficient: at least 40% of the energy in coal would be wasted in the production of DME.
4. WRONG RESPONSE TO DWINDLING FUEL SUPPLIES: At first glance, converting plentiful coal into scarce oil looks smart. But a lasting solution does not lie in trying to maintain oil production through innovation. The world can undo its vulnerability to shrinking oil supplies by consuming less. Oil efficiency will extend the life of known energy supplies by hundreds of years, ample time to develop renewable alternatives. Oil frugality is a shared responsibility and must start here and now.
5. GLOBAL WARMING: CO2 emissions from this project will be significant. Coal miners want to make coal 'clean' by capturing and storing the carbon dioxide emitted when it is processed in leak-proof underground reservoirs. But the technology is a long way off. In fact commercial-scale CO2 sequestration is unlikely before 2030.

HOWEVER the mine will only go ahead if the government grants it an operating licence. If you agree with the position adopted by Friends of Felton please add your support by whatever means possible. The decision makers already know that not all mining proposals are acceptable. What they still need to be convinced about is the unacceptability of the one being proposed for Felton.

How can you help?

Become an active member of

FRIENDS OF FELTON

Phone: 07 4691 0195

Email: wingfielders [ AT ] bluemaxx.com.au

visit our website www.friendsoffelton.blogspot.com

Footnotes

#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ The media release stated 20. I counted 25 protestors including myself - JS

#main-fn2" id="main-fn2">2. #main-fn2-txt">↑ Originally it was to have a capacity of 24 million tonnes/yr of 4 times the capacity of the new mine at Acland, but it was scaled back to 12.8 million tonnes/yr. They were to use water drained from acquifers to wash the coal, but they have since claimed that they can do without the use of water. Friends of Felton are skeptical that this will last.

See also: www.friendsoffelton.blogspot.com, YouTube broadcast of (Oct 2008(?)) "Coal Mines To Replace Farms in Australia", "Darling Downs community fights farmland for mine move" in Sunday Mail of 1 Nov 08 (Friday's protest not reported), "Coal vs cropping fight widens" in Stock and Land of 15 Oct 08, "Lone stand as coalminers poised to bulldoze Acland" in the Courier Mail of 18 Oct 08, "Darling Downs farmers vow to resist coal miners" in the Courier Mail of 5 Oct 08, "Qld farmers take on coal industry" in the Green Left Weekly of 25 Oct 08.

Carbon Sequestration bill up for consideration

According to the Australian Greens, Rudd Government legislation setting up a regulatory framework for carbon capture and storage, vaunted as a 'world first', fails to deal with the biggest regulatory issue the industry faces. They state that, if carbon dioxide leaks, who will carry liability will become a problem without a solution in the legislation proposed.

Australian Greens Senator Christine Milne has made additional comments to the Senate Inquiry Report into the Bill tabled today. It sets out the Greens position that the taxpayer must not be saddled with the risk while coal companies walk away with the profits.

Senator Milne said "Who will carry the liability if and when stored carbon leaks? The Government apparently thinks this question doesn't need to be answered, but it is quite obvious that that approach would leave everybody - supporters and opponents of goesequestration alike - in limbo."

She said that Prime Minister Rudd would have to be prepared for some tough questions on liability. In her opinion, the world would not be coming to Australia for advice about carbon sequestration if it squibs on the biggest question.

"The Greens will work hard to ensure that the coal multinationals do not get away with privatising their massive profits and socialising their risk with geosequestration."

Companies should post bond to cover future liability

Senator Milne stated that "My additional comments to this report set out a proposal under which companies seeking to bury carbon dioxide would post a bond to cover their future liability in case the climate-changing gas leaks after the company moves on."

She said, "That would be a reasonable and responsible approach to take, ensuring that those seeking to make profits also carry the risk.

"While the Coalition predictably wants the taxpayer to carry the can for coal corporations, the Government, inexplicably, thinks it is OK to leave the liability question unanswered. I am committed to working with the Government on amendments to make sure ordinary Australians don't end up hurt by the short-sighted greed of the coal sector."

Australia should be a global solar hub

The senator said that a sensible plan for the future would see Australia pitched as a global solar hub, taking advantage of our world's best solar scientists. There should be a forward-thinking strategy to help coal communities move into a green-collar future.

"Instead, Mr Rudd is deepening Australia's economic vulnerability by locking us into a risky, unproven technofix that is already being leapfrogged by the truly clean renewable energy and energy efficiency alternatives."

(A technofix is a technical solution for a systemic problem which may or may not work and therefore should not be relied upon.)

Source: Greens Press release, Canberra, Tuesday, 23 September 2008
Contact: Tim Hollo on 0437 587 562

The Greens invite people to "Come join the conversation at GreensBlog "

Waratah Coals proposal for a massive mine, railway and Shoalwater Bay Coal port could be given the red light if Environment Minister Peter Garrett uses his existing powers and declares it clearly unacceptable under the provisions of the EPBC act (Section 74 B)

Outraged environmental groups, regional residents and the Australian Greens have all called on the minister to act to protect Queensland's beautiful Shoalwater Bay from the environmentally damaging project to avoid a long and expensive EIS process.

Shoalwater Protection Society spokesman Steve Bishopric said, "There is massive condemnation throughout Australia and locally to this ludicrous proposal. It is unprecedented that one project can trigger 6 out of 7 assessment criteria under the act (only lacking the nuclear component) and it is clearly unacceptable. People need to act immediately as time is almost out for this stage of proceedings. It is critical that those concerned contact the minister to voice their requests for him to declare the proposal unacceptable."

The 1994 Commonwealth Commission of Inquiry into Shoalwater Bay stated the values of this area and risks posed by enviromentally damaging developments in this pristine wilderness.

Specifically it stated:

The area's terrestrial and marine environments represent large and relatively undisturbed habitat areas for significant floral and faunal assemblages, including populations of rare and threatened species. The estuarine and marine sections of the Area contribute to important regional commercial fisheries. The area has a high level of Biodiversity and contains the catchment of the fresh water supply of the Capricorn Coast.

The geomorphological attributes of the eastern dunefields of the Area and the Clinton Lowland contribute significantly to the values of the area and to the Area's National Estate values.

The Area is the largest coastal area with high wilderness values on the East Coast of Australia south of Cooktown and, as such, is regionally and nationally very significant.

The whole of the Area's marine environment is included on the World Heritage list and on the Register of the National Estate; and the majority of it is included in the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.

People do have the right indeed an obligation to advise the minister of what they want for Australia. They should use his contact form on line at www.petergarrett.com.au/8.aspx
Or phone him on 02 62777640 or Fax 02 62736101.

Further information
Steve Bishopric
Spokesman, Shoalwater Protection Society
E-Mail info [AT] shoalwaterbay org
www.shoalwaterbay.org

This was originally #comment-213744">posted to a discussion concerning the article Garnaut draft report released by John Quiggin. I posted it in response to another #comment-213713">post:

This whole we are only 1% of the problem, however ill defined is missing another point… and that point is …

We are far more than 1% of internationally traded coal.

If we so choose, we have leverage.

But do we choose the thirty pieces of silver or do we choose salvation… a habitable planet?

#comment-213713">SP, you have raised an extremely important question which has been, surprisingly, dodged by many avowed environmentalists. I wasn't even able to get clear statement from former Democrats Senator Andrew Bartlett on this question. (See #comment-473317">discussion in response to Larvateus Prodeo article Will “the great immigration debate” take place? of 21 May 08.)

Any serious plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must include a winding back of the rate of extraction and export of coal. We should certainly not be contemplating increases in the rate of exports and building infrastructure in order to facilitate that increase.

On 12 February 2007 last year when Greens Senator Bob Brown advocated that we plan to wind back our coal exports, he was savagely denounced by the Courier Mail and I assume the rest of the Murdoch newsmedia. The front page headline shrieked some like "This man wants to destroy 50,000 jobs!" beneath a photo of Bob Brown. Inside the story Kill coal off, says Bob was only slightly less hysterical. The effect of this, of course, was to preclude any calm discussion of this issue amongst the wider community. This is only one of almost countless illustrations of why the Murdoch Press is part of the problem and not part of the solution. They helped get us into the mess we are now in by denying the evidence of global warming for decades, the reckless encouragement of population growth both in Australia and abroad (at least, indirectly, by its support of President George W Bush who as cut funding to family planning aid to the Third World) and they certainly won't be helping to get us out of the mess.

If we are sincere about cutting GHG emissions both here and in the rest of the World we have to plan to reduce our exports of coal. Carbon dioxide sequestration is clearly useless for all practical purposes, as the technology, and a systems to police it, even if they work, cannot possibly take effect for decades after which it will be too late, so this should not be held as an excuse not to reduce our exports. We should certainly not be contemplating increases in the rate of exports and building infrastructure in order to facilitate that increase (a barrow which the Murdoch media never loses an opportunity to push these days). Some links, which may be of interest include: www.risingtide.org.au, candobetter.org/about#coalcandobetter.org/NoMoreCoalExports.

Appendix: More on the stance of the Murdoch newsmedia on the Garnaut Report

Garnaut wisdom behind the detail, the Weekend Australian editorial of 5 Jul 08. Supports Garnaut recommendations but argues that trading scheme should start in 2010 and not 2012. Remains "optimistic that given the chance, the free market will find the technological solutions required to combat climate change". Nevertheless, it believes that Australia should not act alone. Nothing said about Australia's escalating rate of the extraction and export of coal and other minerals and no reference made to the relentless campaign by The Australian to have more infrastructure built to facilitate their export. No reference is made to its support for population growth through record high immigration which is the principle driver of Australia's increases in GHG emissions. See Workers welcome editorial of 16 May 08.

Time to get climate change right Courier Mail editorial of 5 Jul 08. Also supports Garnaut Report in principle, like The Australian's editorial, but argues that the commencement date be delayed to 2012. Correctly acknowledges, in part, the problems of carbon dioxide geo-sequestration, but uses this to advocates that nuclear power be used instead. The adoption of nuclear power in Australia is a barrow that the Murdoch Press that the Murdoch media has decided to push very hard recently. Also, there is an implicit acknowledgement that Australia's coal industry is adding to the problem:

The flip side of these warnings is the possibility that a high carbon price and a steep reduction trajectory could cause dramatic dislocation in regions dependent on trade-exposed, emission-intensive industries such as coal mining and aluminium production.

Clearly nuclear power can only possibly solve the problem for coal mining by replacing coal as a source of energy, but it remains to be seen if the Courier Mail will back away from its earlier strident support of Australia's coal mining industry.

We must act now on climate change: Ross Garnaut in The Australian of 5 Jul 08, and Climate fight will cost us all In the Courier Mail of 5 Jul 08