On Q & A of 6 July 2015, ex-jillaroo, Louisa Vaupel, asked the panel's opinion on a proposed sale to a foreign state of the Glengyle, a huge cattle station near Lake Eyre in South Australia, owned by Kidman & Co. Vaupel said she was worried about food security, that she believed that Australian farming needed foreign investment, but was concerned that foreign state-owned enterprises might buy it. We followed the story up and located a photographer called Rod Moffatt, who is trying to have this huge area with many striking natural features conserved for a Lake Eyre Superbasin Park. He made the short youtube video inside this article for Q & A. They did not air it but we are, plus his well-written argument for the superbasin park.
You can read the Q & A panel responses in the appendix. They are all over the place on foreign ownership. Green Larissa Waters did state that the Greens were against selling Australian land, food producing land in particular, in this age of food insecurity, given the changing climate, to state owned outfits. However they are not against foreign investment. Vrasidas Karalis's response mixed foreign investment up with multiculturalism, openness and globalism - all of which he felt we 'must' have for fear of becoming 'inward looking economies because essentially they are self consuming passions'. It seemed that almost everyone was unable to question globalism. Amazingly the legendary right wing owner of the Sydney Institute, Greg Sheridan, was better on this and several other questions than anyone else.
Rod Moffatt's proposal for Glengyle becoming part of a Lake Eyre Basin Super Park
Lake Eyre Basin Super Park
Open letter to all Australian politicians:
Imminent Sale of S.Kidman & Co Ltd Pastoral Leases in Lake Eyre BasinI am writing to you, seeking your urgent support to halt the planned sale of the S. Kidman & Co Ltd pastoral leases located in the Lake Eyre Basin and the Channel Country - where cattle grazing activities are conducted on land that contains natural values of international conservation significance - worthy of World Heritage listing.
I propose the Commonwealth (with the assistance and cooperation of the relevant State Governments), acquires these Kidman pastoral assets to form Australia’s largest sub-contiguous national park.
On Wednesday 10th June 2015, Ernst & Young (Adelaide) released an Information Memorandum pertaining to the proposed sale of Australia’s largest private landholder, S. Kidman & Co, which has pastoral interests spanning more than 10 cattle stations, and covering more than 100,000 square kilometres, across South Australia, Queensland, Northern Territory and Western Australia.
Over 80 percent (80,529 square kilometres) of the Kidman portfolio comprises pastoral leases situated in the arid desert rangelands of the Lake Eyre Basin of northern South Australia, and the Channel Country of southwestern Queensland and northeastern South Australia - including Anna Creek, Innamincka, Macumba, Durham Downs, Naryilco, Durrie, Morney Plains and Glengyle Stations.
Collectively these cattle grazing holdings constitute nearly 1% of Australia's landmass and occupy a significant footprint over the fragile, arid, and environmentally significant Lake Eyre Basin and Simpson-Strzelecki Dunefields bioregions.
Introduced hoofed animals, such as cattle, and inappropriate grazing management are among the most significant causes of chronic modification of arid and semi-arid land in the Lake Eyre Basin and the Channel Country, and one of the greatest contributors to the increased desertification of these regions.
With the effects of climate change (anthropogenic or otherwise) becoming much more apparent across Australia, it is likely the continued pressure of cattle grazing on arid land pastoral leases in and around the Lake Eyre Basin and the Channel Country will accelerate wind erosion of the soil resource and increase the frequency and intensity of dust storms along the eastern seaboard.
The total cost of the 23 September 2009 ‘Red Dawn Event’ dust storm (just to the NSW economy), was estimated by the CSIRO to have been in the order of $299 million (Tozer & Leys, 2012).
The sale of the Kidman pastoral empire marks the end of the colonial pastoral era, and provides an opportunity for contemporary Australian Government to redress a significant historical environmental mistake.
By acquiring, and extinguishing the leases over a considerable tract of the internationally significant Lake Eyre Basin and Channel Country landscape, and converting the land to an iconic national park...this fragile, arid desert landscape (including its extensive surface aquatic drainage systems) can be preserved and protected for posterity.
Such decisive action by our nation will send a potent and unequivocal message to the world that Australia is proactive in mitigating the anthropogenic impact on its natural environment and is genuinely committed to addressing the conservation of the biodiversity of this continent...and, most importantly...the elephant in the room, climate change.
Ordinary Australians crave visionary bipartisan leadership from strategic politicians, who possess intestinal fortitude and conviction, and your success in persuading your colleagues to support and facilitate the creation of the Lake Eyre Basin - Channel Country national park will be a totemic achievement for you personally...and a victory for our nation.
It is in the national interest that this land be preserved for the people and, with your assistance, history can be made.
On behalf of all sensible Australians, passionate about preserving our environment, I implore you to act.
Rod Moffatt
PO Box 588
Bribie Island QLD 4507
Ph:0417 995 485
APPENDIX- Q & A Question about Foreign Farm Ownership
Monday, 6 July 2015 Greece, Gags & Grazing Land
Panellists: Vrasidas Karalis, Professor of Modern Greek; Richard Marles, Shadow Minister for Immigration and Border Protection; Larissa Waters, Queensland Greens Senator; Trisha Jha, Centre for Independent Studies; and Greg Sheridan, Foreign Affairs Editor, The Australian.
Excerpt
TONY JONES: Okay, all right. Okay, all right. Yes, all right. So we’ve got to go to another question I'm told. It is from Louisa Vaupel.
FOREIGN FARM OWNERSHIP00:48:59
LOUISA VAUPEL: Yeah, my question was originally for Barnaby Joyce, Minister For Agriculture. I think it’s a shame he is not here to answer it but I will put it to the panel because I think we urgently need to talk about the future of Australia's food security and agriculture. I worked as a jillaroo for two mustering seasons on Glengyle station in western Queensland, which is a property of Kidman & Co and Kidman is one of Australia's largest beef producers. It's got 100,000 square kilometres. That's three quarters of the size of England, almost 2% of the land mass of the Australian continent, and for the first time ever, this farmland is up for sale for just $325 million. Interested bidders include State owned enterprises from the US, South America, Indonesia and China. And my question is should foreign State owned enterprises be allowed to buy up Australian farmland?
TONY JONES: Trisha, we will start with you.
TRISHA JHA: My view is that I'm basically in favour of foreign investment. My understanding, although I don't understand agriculture very well, is that the sector is in dire need of fresh capital. I'm open to suggestions that it may be very much contrary to the national interest, particularly in terms of national security to basically refuse an offer for a foreign state owned enterprise to invest in agricultural property in Australia but so far I haven't heard that case being made and so I am inclined to perhaps not share your concerns.
TONY JONES: Larissa Waters, should foreign state owned enterprises be allowed to buy up Australian farmland?
LARISSA WATERS: Well, thank you, Louisa, for your question and well done on working the land as a young woman. It would be nice to see more young women following in your footsteps. This is a vexed issue because, with the white paper being released today, foreign ownership is a key issue and the Foreign Investment Review Board have quite a high threshold for when they review what's considered in the national interest when there is a proposal for purchase by a foreign entity. When it comes to state owned enterprises, it’s a bit of a different kettle of fish and the Greens believe that we should not be selling Australian land, food producing land in particular, in this age of food insecurity, given the changing climate, to state owned outfits. So lower the FIRB threshold for foreign investment, yes, and apply that national interest test but I think, for state owned entities, the sale of food producing land look, food security is going to become increasingly problematic as the climate continues to change, which is why it’s such a shame that that agricultural White Paper released just earlier today, the fact that it's got five paragraphs on climate change towards the end of the book, what a tragic missed opportunity. It’s going to change the face of agriculture.
TONY JONES: Well, Barnaby Joyce is not here to make this point but no doubt he would, that there are elements of climate change action right through the entire report. That’s his argument.
LARISSA WATERS: Well, I wish that were the case. Certainly I’ve not seen any evidence of that. The other issue I want to raise in relation to food security is the fact that coal seam gas and coal mines can currently go onto our best food producing land and landholders don't have the right to say no. They don’t have the right to safeguard their aquifers. And I think that's a real shame and I’ve had legislation in the Senate to try to rectify that with no support so far.
TONY JONES: We’re going to stick with the actual question that was asked here and I’ll go to Greg Sheridan to hear from him.
GREG SHERIDAN: Look, this is a difficult question full of contradictory impulses. I am very uneasy about state owned enterprises buying agricultural land. The Prime Minister once said we don't believe in socialism when it is an Australian Government owning Australian enterprises, why would we want foreign governments to own Australian enterprises. On the other hand and there is also a big danger in convincing foreign governments that, in order to trade with us, they need to own our assets, whereas it’s much better if they just buy the things that we produce in a good market. On the other hand, we’ve kind of buggered ourselves up pretty badly in this country. We’ve made our cost structures terrible. We’ve put massive disincentives in the way of domestic investment and, you know, a system finds a way of coping with that. One way the system copes with our terrible insane cost structures is by sort of subleasing enterprise to foreign entities. We went through, in the resources boom, a period where we kind of became Saudi Australia. We paid ourselves more than we were really earning and we didn't like to do dirty, difficult, dangerous and demanding work and I think we need to get back to developing our own agricultural land. But I'm very uneasy about state owned enterprises owning Australian land.
TONY JONES: Vrasidas, what do you think?
VRASIDAS KARALIS: May I say that I agree with what's said because but we live in a period of globalisation and what we need from government is to regulate these markets, especially for state owned and want to buy something in Australia but, at the same time, I believe that we have to open up this economy because we can't have inward looking economies because essentially they are self consuming passions at the end and it is not enough anymore to feed a population as diverse as the Australian one simply with what is produced here. We are a consumer society, we have so many needs from all over the world, we have so many communities from all over the world, so multiculturalism becomes something very important in the whole mixture here but I think what we need is a government who will be able to regulate this market instead of regulating the secrecy about the refugees and have to pay more attention in this regulation of the market instead of looking to impose more sort of secretive legislation on these cases.
TONY JONES: And you’ve slipped off the topic and I’ll go to Richard Marles to get back onto it.
RICHARD MARLES: Look, agriculture represents one of the enormous opportunities for the Australian economy going forward. Being a food bowl for the growth of the middle class in Asia, particularly in China, is going to be a huge source of production and employment in Australia going forward but to make that happen, we are going to need foreign investment. Some of that is going to come from state owned enterprises. Now, at the moment, if you are a state owned enterprise, you need to go through the Foreign Investment Review Board. Invariably you get approval for that. I think that's appropriate. But, you know, for us to go out there and be trying to put more restrictions on foreign investment in Australia, I think, is a huge mistake. It is actually going to stifle the growth of what is one of the most important production parts of our economy going forward and, can I say, this Government has been completely hopeless when it comes to its regime around foreign investment. Rather than encouraging it, it has been discouraging, which is remarkable from what is meant to be a conservative government and it flies in the face of what's our economic opportunity in the future.
TONY JONES: Okay. Well, it’s been a great discussion. We are just about to run out of time. Our last question is on politics from Xanthi Kouvatas.
Comments
Vivienne Ortega
Fri, 2015-07-10 08:35
Permalink
A huge, dirty coal mine from being developed in the heart of Aus
nimby
Fri, 2015-07-10 08:43
Permalink
What's wrong with sovereignty?
Sheila Newman
Fri, 2015-07-10 23:53
Permalink
Where are we without sovereignty?
Dennis K
Sat, 2015-07-11 15:57
Permalink
One World Order
Anonymous (not verified)
Wed, 2015-07-15 12:38
Permalink
Native Australian Award - National Wattle Day
Australia First Party
National Wattle Day
1st September 2015
Nominations for the Native Australian Award
"THE ORDER OF THE WATTLE BLOSSOM"
are invited from Fairdinkum Australians
GENERAL CRITERIA.
Persons nominated should have displayed a commitment to Australia's cultural heritage, our national values, our native soil, or any other suitable aspect that has contributed to the advancement of our European derived civilisation.
Nominations may be either Native Australians, members of the Australoid Races, or any assimilable [1] immigrant who has particularly exhibited having taken up the Australian Spirit.
Please forward particulars, including the following information to the address below before 25th August 2015.
Name and address of nomination; suggested award citation.
Include your own name and address.
In keeping with past tradition, up to five awards can be granted.
AUSTRALIA FIRST PARTY
Identity - Freedom - Independence
www.australiafirstparty.net email: [email protected]
P.O. Box 223 Croydon 3136 National Contact Line 02 8587 0014
I've fought it through the world since then, I wrote for her, I fought for her,
And seen the best and worst, And when at last I lie,
But always in the lands of men Then who, to wear the wattle, has
I held Australia first. A better right than I? Henry Lawson
AUSTRALIA FIRST PARTY - Reclaiming Australia for Australians
[1]
candobetter.net editor: We were inclined to commented out the term 'assimilable' before the word 'immigrant' in this press release because its meaning was not clear and could be deemed offensive because it implies that certain immigrants are not assimilable, although it leaves the reader to infer who, why or how. We are a website that focuses on numbers in the population debate, not ethnicities or 'race'. However we also encourage political alternatives and appreciate the idea of a National Wattle Day award. We do not like censoring although we do comment out anything that seems to be contrary to the law. Please comment if you have an alternative view on this matter.
Dennis K
Thu, 2015-07-16 23:07
Permalink
Numbers alone is not sufficient
Vivienne Ortega
Fri, 2015-07-17 15:25
Permalink
Multiculturalism fraying at the edges
Sheila Newman
Fri, 2015-07-17 16:17
Permalink
Multiculturalism and population growth
Dennis K
Fri, 2015-07-17 21:52
Permalink
Multiculturalism and population policy
Mark Allen (not verified)
Mon, 2015-07-20 23:57
Permalink
Response to Multiculturalism fraying at the edges
Geoffrey Taylor
Tue, 2015-07-21 05:45
Permalink
Where multiculturalism has worked, but on a smaller scale
The secular state of Syria is an example of a country where multi-culturalism has worked. This country which has been unjustly demonised by the lying Australian mass media which also sings the praises of high immigration and multiculturalism in Australia.
Within Syria, as well as the three branches of Islam – the Sunnis , the Shiites, the Sunnis and the Alawites of which President al-Assad is a member, there also Christians and a small Judaic community. Other ethnic groups in Syria include Kurds and Armenians – the latter having suffered terribly in neighbouring Turkey, particularly during the Armenian genocide which began in 1915 in the time of the former Ottoman Empire.
In addition, Syria has given refuge to 1,300,000 Iraqis, who fled as a result of the illegal wars and sanctions in which Australia has participated since 1990, 543,400 Palestinians and 5,200 Somalis.
But even Syria would have trouble coping with the vast waves of immigration coming from so many ethnic backgrounds from so many countries that have been imposed on Australia since 1983 when Paul Keating imposed globalisation upon Australia.
Sheila Newman
Wed, 2015-07-22 22:00
Permalink
Different system in Syria, not multiculturalism
In response to Geoffrey Taylor's comment, Where multiculturalism has worked, but on a smaller scale", I wish I had time to write what I know and think about the Syria-Australia multiculturalism comparison, but I don't. What I would say is that Syria was a functioning sophisticated several-tribe system before the Ottoman Empire, under which those tribes in their territories became millets; i.e. retained their distinct cultures and territories. Due to later French colonisation it retained systemic aspects of French law (as well as some Sharia law) which probably have helped it hold together as its population exploded from 2,368,000 in 1937 to more than 22million in 2012, due to urbanisation and immigration (mainly refugees) from neighboring countries. Unlike the Australian system, the French system accords housing, health treatment and education as citizens' rights and emphasises secularity over sectarianship; it is anti-communitarian but pro-citizen. I would need to study Syria more (and hope to do so) but this is the hypothesis that I would start by testing.
The civil war is the product of external forces of colonialism in a region with huge energy resources, of which the disappearance of Palestine is one casualty. It seems likely that Israel and her protectors are keen to break up Syria because of Syria's acceptance of so many displaced Palestinians, who have then continued to fight for their homeland from Syria. It says something for the system in Syria that the Syrian Government has thus far managed to retain majority loyalty in the face of such concerted international interference plus the continuous influxes of refugees. Also remarkable that the Al Assad Government continues to urge refugees to remain in Syria and appears to provide for them.
DennisK (not verified)
Tue, 2015-07-21 10:05
Permalink
Syria had those cultures
Anonymous (not verified)
Tue, 2015-07-21 13:22
Permalink
Multiculturalism has its limits
Mark Allen (not verified)
Tue, 2015-07-21 18:21
Permalink
In response to "Multiculturalism has its limits"
Dennis K
Tue, 2015-07-21 21:36
Permalink
What is Australian
John Bentley (not verified)
Wed, 2015-07-22 09:57
Permalink
WE still love to call Australia home
DennisK (not verified)
Wed, 2015-07-22 14:46
Permalink
What about in Europe?
Sheila Newman
Tue, 2015-08-04 23:31
Permalink
Culture grows from the earth as we all do
I will stick my oar in here to say that I don't believe that you can import and export 'cultures'. You might be able to import and export 'symbols' of cultures - i.e. bits of the whole that are identifyable with it, but you would need to import the biophysical environment that created and nurtured that culture. Ways of life are built from the ground up as clans, tribes and peoples adapt to their local conditions. We are all Australians and we should, as others have suggested, learn to live here and respect our environment by not overpopulating or otherwise abusing it. Obviously we are very far from this aim.
Without history no-one can have a handle on where they came from and where they are now. Ancestor worship is a fine old tradition that makes you aware of your territory and the acts and qualities of your forbears. It situates you in time and place like nothing else - except when you are in a new place. As well as acknowledging the traditional Aboriginal owners of Australia, we need to give respect to the generations that preceded us in Australia from the time of the convicts, for they actually came head to head with this land and forged a real society - the one we have today with all its faults (which included replacing something that lasted for around 40-60,000 years and which must have been incredible). At time of Federation there was more communication between Australians than there is now because the mass media had not taken over the public messaging stick. Our population was still small enough for it to be able to agree on a constitution at Federation.
It is true that our society was crafted at the expense of the first Australians - the Aborigines - but the society we are perpetuating through immigration is the society that began then.
Multiculturalist ideology is predicated largely on the idea that Federation agreed to a White Australia Policy because of a racialism peculiar to Australians. This is part of the burial of history from the Australians of today because the White Australia Policy was largely an Anti-Slavery policy and an Anti-Slave Labour policy. Many of the First Settlers were convicts, Irish, Scottish, Welsh and English, transported to this continent because they committed crimes of poverty in Britain, which was a land overpopulated by landless labour. It was the descendents of those convicts who fought for a different and fairer system than Britain’s. They came up with the 8 hour day and they came up with a policy to exclude people from countries where slave labour prevailed and these people were mostly non-Europeans in British and other colonies. Australians had crafted industrial laws at Federation to protect themselves from similar exploitation and the White Australia policy was supposed to prevent slave labour from being imported to undermine those laws.
It would be erroneous to pretend that by acknowledging the traditional Aboriginal owners of Australia we are somehow reforming and repairing the ongoing damage we are doing at industrial pace and that by dishonoring as racists and irrelevant those who dispossessed the aborigines, we are giving the land back to the Aborigines. As Dennis K says, if we who were born here are not real Australians, then neither are the immigrants. That seems to leave us all in the hands of the corporations and transnational elites, which is, I suspect, the Plan.
Some of us might choose to identify with a global, internationalist culture - and on candobetter.net there is some of that since we participate actively with politically engaged people on the other side of the world. However, when it comes to living in a place and acting within a polity, and being constrained by the laws of the land, and participating in planning for a decent quality of life where you live, then there is need for a realistically based local culture.
admin
Wed, 2015-07-22 21:15
Permalink
Abbott's neo-liberalism a greater threat than multiculturalism
Subject was: Response to 'What Is An Australian' by Mark Allen - Ed
My definition of an Australian is someone who resides in Australia. Nothing more nothing less. I was born overseas and I see no particular place as my homeland but I do hold a deep connection to places here in Australia and in Europe. I see the earth as my home in all of its cultural and environmental diversity. Here in Australia, the greatest threat to our precious environment and heritage comes from the neo-liberal brigade currently captained by Tony Abbott, not from multiculturalism.
Add comment