(We) can do better

Brisbane's local ABC radio station 612 disregarded its own listeners' expressed dissatisfaction with both the major parties when, during the 2009 Queensland state elections, it refused any air time to local independent candidates. Instead, virtually all the available time was given over to candidates from the governing Labor Party or the Opposition Liberal National Party, who even according to the ABC's own listeners, provided little useful information.

See also: ABC's response in "ABC dismisses complaint claiming privatisation not 'newsworthy' in 2009 Queensland elections" of 10 Jun 09, "Courier Mail, ABC back Department of Main Roads land grab" of 29 Mar 09, "Why the Brisbane Mayoral elections should not have been 'boring'" of 23 Mar 08, "Courier Mail provides 'boring', yet unbalanced, coverage of Brisbane City Council elections" of 17 Mar 09.

See also: ABC's response in "ABC dismisses complaint claiming privatisation not 'newsworthy' in 2009 Queensland elections" of 10 Jun 09, "Courier Mail, ABC back Department of Main Roads land grab" of 29 Mar 09, "Why the Brisbane Mayoral elections should not have been 'boring'" of 23 Mar 08, "Courier Mail provides 'boring', yet unbalanced, coverage of Brisbane City Council elections" of 17 Mar 09.

#PopulationElectionIssue" id="PopulationElectionIssue">Population-growth-driven chaos observed by ABC, but ignored as election issue

On Friday 20 March 2009, the last day of the hectically brief Queensland state election campaign, a listener phoned Brisbane ABC radio 612 to say:

"It would be a lot better if the Queensland Government would stop inviting people to come to Queensland."

The following morning, on the day of the actual elections, Tony Eastley, ABC radio's national AM program presenter, reported:

"... Transport is increasingly a problem because of the huge population that's coming to south-east Queensland. Thousands and thousands of people arrive each week in south-east Queensland to take up employment, searching for something new in their lives, and the infrastructure in those places has really struggled to keep pace.

"When we were down there the other day there's always road work going on, there's always something happening, and I think people just genuinely get frustrated. Anyone listening to this program who lives in a city knows that there's an ongoing battle between what you want and what you get in cities as far as infrastructure goes."_#main-fn1">1

The fact that the Queensland Government had deliberately encouraged the population growth that had needlessly resulted in the "ongoing battle between what you want and what you get," as Tony Eastley had put it, and fully intended to continue doing so_#main-fn2">2, should have been a hot issue in the election campaign.

However, the Queensland Opposition is every bit as committed to the reckless encouragement of population growth as the Government,_#main-fn3">3 although this has not prevented it from taking cheap political shots at the Government for the problem of traffic congestion mentioned by Eastley and other problems that simply would not exist but for past population growth.

The Queensland Greens, on paper, stood opposed to population growth, but said nothing about it during the election campaign._#main-fn4">4

So that only left myself, and possibly a few other independents, who were prepared to speak out against population growth. None were approached by the ABC as far as I could tell. Even though I had sent a lot of material on population growth, the ABC ignored the issue or ignored me.

This meant that the majority of Queenslanders opposed to population growth, were kept ignorant by the ABC of how to express those views at the ballot box.

#InformationNeeded" id="InformationNeeded">Voters' wishes for information on alternatives to the two major parties ignored

During the elections there was abundant evidence of voter dissatisfaction with both the ruling Labor Party and the Opposition Liberal National Party. Population would have been one of many factors.

On 6 March, the Courier Mail newspaper's Galaxy Poll showed that 56% of voters did not believe that the Labor Government deserved to be re-elected. 57% of voters did not believe the Opposition Liberal National Party (LNP) deserved to win. Immediately prior to the date of the elections, two weeks later, on Friday 20 March, the same poll showed that attitudes had barely changed. 57% of voters believed that the LNP did not deserve to win and 57% believed that Labor did not deserve to win.

These poll results were confirmed throughout the election campaign by many listeners' calls to the ABC's local Brisbane Radio station 612.

One listener objected to the LNP because they supported Uranium mining, but he said he didn't like the Labor party either. Another said she would be voting for the LNP, but not because she liked the LNP, only because she saw it is preferable to Labor. Still another stated, "None of them are any good."

One listener stated that he wanted to vote for a good independent and explicitly asked that more information be provided.

The fact that most of their listeners had expressed dissatisfaction with the major parties did not deter the ABC from devoting nearly all the available election coverage to those same major parties -- usually state government ministers and shadow ministers -- and to almost no-one else.

Of what was said on air by the major party spokespersons, one listener complained, "they come on and waffle on and on." That they had indeed waffled on, and that the ABC had wasted its listeners' time was further confirmed immediately after the elections.

On the Monday 23 March, at least two listeners phoned in to say that the ABC had provided them with insufficient policy detail about the major party candidates. One of them stated that she consequently voted for Anna Bligh only on the basis of her having been depicted well in a personal light in interview with her husband (referred to also below).

#DisdainForIndependents" id="DisdainForIndependents">Open ABC disdain for independent candidates

It was incumbent on the taxpayer-funded ABC to encourage any independent candidate who overcame Anna Bligh's engineered time constraints and had information ready for the voting public despite often limited campaign budgets. Instead, one ABC presenter effectively ridiculed an independent candidate before her audiences on one occasion, when, on Friday 20 March, the day before the elections, a morning presenter_#main-fn5">5 told listeners of an independent candidate who had only managed to release his policy statement the previous day. Then she remarked:

"They're leaving their pitch until a little late, aren't they?"

No useful information was given to the audience about that candidate.

#RequestsIgnored" id="RequestsIgnored">Requests for air time ignored

In fact, one candidate, namely me, had provided the ABC with plenty of information, and in plenty of time, but the ABC presenter neglected to tell her audience this.

I was not given air-time and the information I made available was not used, in spite of its clear relevance to concerns expressed by ABC listeners during the election campaign.

Although I presented it to the ABC through e-mails, media releases, text messages, telephone calls and even a printed brochure, delivered to the studio on Saturday, one week before the elections, no information was passed on to the public. Nor did the ABC give me any opportunity to put that information to voters myself. If any other candidate also campaigned actively for those policies, they certainly got no exposure either.

The total return on all my efforts was only two tiny instances of exposure (see, also, below):

• When I phoned in around 8.00am on Monday 9 March, I was able to introduce myself as an independent candidate for Mount Coot-tha and then announce a 'meet the candidates' night for my electorate scheduled for Monday 16 March;
• After the 10:00am news Friday 13 March, Madonna King put to Andrew Fraser a question on my behalf: Would he commit himself to not privatising any more Government owned assets? His response to that question, which I considered unsatisfactory, was accepted without further pursuit.

#SpuriousJustifications" id="SpuriousJustifications">Spurious justifications for refusal of air time

On the two occasions I spoke to ABC staff to request more time, they protested that I had had more than a fair amount of coverage. They argued that they could not allocate air-time to every independent candidate.

However it was Anna Bligh's decision_#main-fn6">6, and not mine to hold an early election of less than four weeks duration.

So, far from compensating the electorate for Anna Bligh's own decision, the ABC lavished her and other Labor candidates with air-time. At the same time the ABC seemed to go out of its way to ensure no Greens or independents like me, might challenge her policies with substantially new or different ones.

The ABC even found time to broadcast an interview with Anna Bligh's husband Greg Withers, who, unsurprisingly, depicted Anna Bligh sympathetically, but gave no useful policy information._#main-fn7">7

Thus the ABC, the nation's public, tax-paid broadcaster, utterly failed to disseminate vital information to taxpayers on the core business of government - a state election. It did not just fail; it seemed to present an obstacle to a real election choice.

Much of the little time scheduled for election coverage was often taken up with other stories of little practical relevance to ordinary voters. For instance, one session discussed an article by Murdoch journalist, Glen Milne, in the Australian,_#main-fn8">8 which advocated that Brisbane Lord Mayor Campbell Newman join the campaign on Lawrence Springborg's side. Whilst the article may have held interest for LNP strategists, it is clear that these sorts of programming decisions prevented many of the ABC's listeners from being able to arrive at informed decisions when they voted.

Why didn't the ABC schedule enough time to interview all the candidates? In fact, that is the policy of the ABC's local Adelaide Radio Station. On 22 Mar 09 the following was posted to a forum discussion:

"Here in South Australia, we enjoy the award winning ABC 891 Adelaide who make a feature of giving all the independents adequate time to present their policies and issues.

"Listeners obviously appreciate being fully informed, a fact which seems to have gone over the heads of ABC 612."_#main-fn9">9

If it could be done in Adelaide, then why not also in Brisbane?

#MyApproaches" id="MyApproaches">Madonna King refuses to hold Labor Government to account for public asset fire sale ...

As part of my efforts to obtain air time on the ABC, I sent a number of ABC presenters, including Madonna King, copies of an e-mail concerning privatisation, which I had sent to Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser (see #appendix3">Appendix 3).

The e-mail pointed out that a large number of publicly owned assets had been privatised since the Labor Party won government in 1998, but that those privatisations had not been put to the Queensland public at election times, nor had the public been consulted in any other way. I concluded the letter as follows:

"If the public had been consulted, none of these privatisations would have occurred and the Queensland public would have been spared the harm caused to them.

"I therefore ask that you give, to the Queensland public, a categorical assurance that you will not privatise any more assets during the coming Parliamentary term.

"If you are not prepared to give such an assurance, then privatisation is an issue at stake in these elections and should be openly discussed.

"Accordingly, I would ask that, as a candidate opposed to privatisation, you justify your stance before the Queensland public in a debate_{#main-fn10">10} with me.

On the following day, Friday 13 March, when I heard that Andrew Fraser was to be interviewed by Madonna King, I created the text message which follows as fast as I could and sent it off as the interview was proceeding:

"James Sinnamon, Independent for Mount Coot-tha asks: Why weren't Qld public consulted about privatisation of Brisbane, Mackay Cairns airports, Energex, etc?"

It turned out that Madonna King had already decided to put a question to Andrew Fraser on my behalf as James Sinnamon, an Independent candidate for Mount Coot-tha. She asked him:_{#main-fn11">11} would he commit himself to not privatising further Government-owned assets?

Andrew Fraser responded by telling listeners that he had already sent me a letter in response to my question.

In fact, no posted letter ever arrived and I only received an e-mail later that day, which means that it could not have been sent at the time Andrew Fraser claimed. The e-mail actually arrived three and a half weeks after I had first e-mailed my question to Andrew Fraser._{#main-fn12">12}

Any impression audiences may have received that Andrew Fraser was in this case responsive to the concerns of his detractors, would have been misleading, in fact.

Mr Fraser then claimed that the Government had no plans to privatise more assets and that he was ideologically opposed to privatisation.

Nothing further was asked by Madonna King concerning privatisation.

None of the many other facts contained in my e-mail, my text message, or my web site, were put to Andrew Fraser. The fact that he neither made the firm commitment I was seeking, nor agreed to defend his stance in a public debate, was not pointed out to the audience. The interviewer did not confront him with the general failure in the previous election to consult the public about the privatisations which had followed, including Mr Fraser's own enactment of airport privatisations. Nor did she put to him that the public overwhelmingly opposes privatisation.

To my knowledge, that was the only time during the whole election campaign, that I am aware of, that the ABC ever raised the issue of privatisation with the Labor Government, although the ABC's listeners did raise it themselves on a few occasions.

After I received the promised letter from Andrew Fraser, I found its contents differed significantly from his account on the ABC. At one point the letter stated:

"We will only ever agree to such sales where there are demonstrable benefits to the Queensland community."

This was clearly different to Fraser's stated claim that he had "no plans to privatise" and it obviously fell even further short of the assurance I had been seeking.

At the end, his letter stated:

"We ... will not pursue an ideologically driven agenda of privatisation."_{#main-fn13">13}

Again different to Mr Fraser's claim that he was "ideologically opposed to privatisation".

I believe that I was entitled to air time on the ABC, to rectify that misinformation.

However, my subsequent e-mailed requests for more time were also ignored.(see Appendices #appendix8">8 and #appendix9">9)

My e-mail to Andrew Fraser and Anna Bligh (see #appendix6">Appendix 6 ), CC'd to Kellie Riordan and Madonna King, pointing out Mr Fraser's self-contradiction and re-affirming my challenge to debate him on privatisation, was also ignored by all recipients.

#ElectricityShambles" id="ElectricityShambles">... but proves capable of asking hard questions when she chooses to

In contrast to her lightweight handling of Andrew Fraser on privatisation, the following week, on Wednesday 18 March, Madonna King showed that she could, when she applied herself, nail politicians down with their own words.

A listener called in to ask if Anna Bligh was prepared to apologise to electricity consumers for promising them that electricity charges would not go up as a result of privatisation of Energex - the retail arm of the state's electricity service, when, in fact, they had faced massive hikes, with the caller's own annual electricity having risen by $450.

Anna Bligh did not apologise. Instead, she claimed that she merely promised that no-one would have been any worse off than they otherwise would have been (which, if it had been made at the time, would have been regarded as the meaningless guarantee that it was). She attributed much of the increases to the need to build more electricity infrastructure (which would have been unnecessary if she had not encouraged #PopulationElectionIssue">population growth, although she neglected to mention this).

Madonna King confronted Bligh with the question:

"Are you absolutely sure that you didn't say that it would be cheaper?"

Anna Bligh responded:

"I didn't say that."

The next day, Anna Bligh's words from Hansard of 28 Sep 2005 and which had been looked up by a researcher from the LNP were quoted by Madonna King:

"Most importantly, it does not matter where you live, nobody--not one Queenslander--will be worse off under the government's proposal."

So, whilst no evidence that Anna Bligh had explicitly told the Queensland public that electricity prices would be cheaper was found, her guarantee that nobody would be worse off had been unconditional and it would have appeared that Queensland consumers were, after all, entitled to the apology that had been asked of Anna Bligh.

Over the following days, the ABC rightly reminded its listeners of this.

If Madonna King could have held Anna Bligh to account on that one issue, then why not on others, and why not also with Andrew Fraser on the issue of privatisation, when she had all the information provided by me at her finger tips?

The fact, that the link to the question put to Andrew Fraser about privatisation the previous week, which should have been blindingly obvious, was not pointed out to the ABC's audience, contributes to the impression that these rare examples where politicians are asked truly hard questions are part of a token, rather than systematic approach.

#GoalPostsShifted" id="GoalPostsShifted">The ABC shifts the goal posts

On the morning of Monday 16 March, I received a mobile phone voice message from Kellie Riordan, the ABC Radio's news director. The message advised me once again that they could not give me any more time than I had already been given. However, if I sent them anything that could be considered newsworthy, I might stand a chance.

I sent an e-mail back (see #appendix9">Appendix 9) restating that I believed that I was entitled to time, anyway, in the circumstances, but that I would do my best to provide material that was newsworthy.

The following day, I sent a media release "Andrew Fraser's three different responses to a question on privatisation" (see #appendix10">Appendix 10) to Kellie Riordan and other ABC staff, but they still did not report it and they still failed to give me air time.

During the rest of that last week before the election I sent to the ABC's Brisbane radio station:

• On Wednesday, an e-mail to Madonna King asking for air time in response to listeners' expressed dissatisfaction with major party candidates (see #appendix11">Appendix 11);
• On Thursday, an e-mail asking that they publicise a survey sent to all candidates I could reach and the responses to which had been published on my web site (see #appendix12">Appendix 12).
• On Thursday, a text message sent at the time Lawrence Springborg was being interviewed: "Could u ask Mr Springborg if he would agree to respond to my survey at candobetter.org/qldelections/survey ? James Sinnamon ind 4 mt coot-tha"
• On Thursday, an e-mail to Lawrence Springborg challenging him to defend the pro-privatisation view that he had espoused in an interview in a public debate (see #appendix13">Appendix 13), which was CC'd to the ABC;
• On Friday, a media release about my challenge to debate Lawrence Springborg (see #appendix14">Appendix 14);

All of these communications were ignored. None were used in any news broadcasts as far as I am aware and no air time was given to me as a result.

#SurveyIgnored" id="SurveyIgnored">Survey ignored

The survey mentioned above was to inform voters of candidates' attitudes towards the issue of privatisation and population growth, mentioned previously, as well as:

• Premier Bligh's plans to triple Queensland's already record levels of coal exports by 2030 entailing the destruction of agricultural land and nature refuges;
• the construction of a second massive Chinese-owned aluminium smelter in addition to the existing smelter at Gladstone;
• making access to affordable housing and water a human right; and
• a government sponsored full-employment program.

The list was not comprehensive, but, nevertheless covered a good many more important issues that I believe the Queensland public had a right to be informed about before they voted.

Evidently, the ABC did not agree.

I had set it it up to make it as easy as possible for any voter to quickly work out where each candidate standing in his electorate stood on each of these issues. I included a table with an entry for each candidate in each electorate. Where a candidate would not have been able to simply provide a 'yes', 'no' or 'undecided' to any of the questions, a further column included a link to another page containing comments.

By the morning of 19 March I had received responses to the survey from some of the Greens and Independents and had published them. Although not one major party candidate had answered and although the ground covered by the survey was far from complete it was a start and provided an opportunity for voters to gain more vital knowledge of the candidates' policies. Had other politicians been encouraged to respond to the questionnaire and had its existence been made known, it would have filled a major deficit in electoral policy information.

As I have said above, I sent an e-mail (see #appendix12">Appendix 12) to Madonna King and other presenters on Thursday 19 April, advising her of the survey. I also asked that the ABC use its influence to prevail upon the major parties to respond and, on the following day, a text message was sent whilst Lawrence Springborg was being interviewed.

Even the fact that on Thursday morning the ABC's own listeners had, yet again, expressed their dissatisfaction with the major parties and had asked for information on alternative candidates, as I pointed out in the e-mail, failed to galvanise our public broadcaster.

#DaveZwolenski" id="DaveZwolenski">Dave Zwolenski's campaign material also not good enough for the ABC

Dave Zwolenksi stood as an independent candidate in the same electorate in which I stood. He campaigned on the more limited, but, nevertheless, important platform of total truthfulness and openness in our politicians. During the campaign he produce some polished and original material included a media release, posters and a YouTube video.

In the YouTube video, he appeared in a succession of scenes in the Mount Coot-tha electorate, each progressively closer to the Queensland Parliament, itself not far outside the electorate. In each successive scene, he takes off more and more clothes. In the final scene, he removes his pants and stands stark naked, although with an electronic equivalent of a figleaf in from of him, in front of the Queensland Parliament as a metaphor for the openness for which he was campaigning.

This campaign was also totally ignored by the ABC as well as by nearly all of the rest of newsmedia._{#main-fn14">14}

The only conclusion I can draw from this is that the ABC never seriously intended giving substantial air time to me or any other independent candidate. Had they had the courtesy to say so at the outset, then I could have used the time I had spent trying to get air time on the public broadcaster more productively elsewhere.

#VotersRightsDenied" id="VotersRightsDenied">ABC's election coverage denies voters the right to hold elected representatives to account

Democracy was famously defined by US President Abraham Lincoln during his address following the Battle of Gettysburg in 1863 as "government of the people by the people for the people."

In Australia, in the early 21st century, democracy has been effectively redefined by the mass media to mean something far more limited. It has come to mean no more than the right of the electorate to decide, every three or four years, which of the two major parties, promoted by Australia's corporate elite, may make the sweeping decisions they claim via the mainstream media to be in the electorate's best interests.

In the intervening period between elections, voters have practically no right to influence what the elected government can and cannot do.

Even during the elections only a small subset of policy areas is ever discussed. In the 2004 federal elections, as examples, Prime Minister John Howard made no mention of his plans to savagely attack the wages and conditions of ordinary workers with his so-called "Work Choices" legislation, and discussion of his plans to fully privatise Telstra was almost completely avoided. In the 2009 Queensland state elections, the issues covered were mostly limited to fiscal management, health, road transport (but not public transport), water, and power supply and only within very restricted parameters.

In effect, this means that the public are usually left with very little to choose from between the major parties when they reach the polling booth and are largely ignorant of candidates, like me, who question the status quo.

This practically guarantees that politicians who have poorly served their constituents will continue to be re-elected or, at worst, only be replaced occasionally by one from the other major party who is unlikely to be any better. New candidates stand hardly any chance of being heard, let alone winning.

This is how the ABC has itself largely brought about the circumstances of which its own listeners complain, that is, about how they are ruled by governments that 57% don't believe deserve to rule.

In the past, the ABC in Queensland was rightly viewed as a fierce and independent critic of the state government, particularly during the Bjelke-Petersen years. However this is no longer the case. The ABC is no longer part of the solution. It has become part of the problem.

#appendix1" id="appendix1">Appendix 1: E-mail of Fri 6 Mar 09 to Kellie Riordan requesting air time

Subject: Air time on ABC 612 for independent candidate for Mount Coot-tha?

Dear Kellie Riordan/Anna Reynolds,

Could you tell me what my prospects are to have air time on the ABC in these coming two weeks?

I am essentially available at any time.

Whilst I am slow off the mark, you will find some information about my campaign at http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha http://candobetter.org/QldElections.

There's more about me on my home page, included below.

Throughout the years I have been interviewed on radio, mostly on the issue of privatisation of Telstra(1). I also stood as candidate for Lord Mayor and was interviewed once last year in the studio at Lissner Street.

If you know of anyone else you think may be interested, please let me know. Also, please feel welcome to pass on my contact details to such people.

Best regards,

James Sinnamon
Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
james -dot- sinnamon |AT| gmail -dot- com
0412 319669
http://candobetter.org/james

1. Some information (although now largely dated) can be found at http://citizensagainstsellingtelstra.com.

#appendix2" id="appendix2">Appendix 2: E-mail of Tue 10 Mar 09 to Madonna King requesting air time

Subject: Please give more air time to discuss election issues of substance

CC'd to Kellie Riordan, Richard Fidler and Spencer Howson.

Dear Madonna King,

I believe that yesterday's discussion on whether or not Lord Mayor Campbell Newman should enter the Queensland election campaign could have been better spent discussing issues of substance at stake in the elections.

In my view far too much air time and newspaper column inches has been given in recent years to topics which, whilst of interest to members of the LNP and Labor Parties, hold far less interest to members of the broader public.

I am an independent candidate contesting the seat of Mount Coot-tha. I am standing, in part to raise, before the broader public, issues of critical importance which I believe are at stake in this election, but which are not being adequately covered by the newsmedia.

These include:

* Privatisation, of which my electoral opponent Treasurer Andrew Fraser has been principle architect.

* The run away housing unaffordability crisis, which is literally impoverishing many Brisbane people, including even well-paid professionals (such as a surveyor who lives near me who had to cancel his annual flight back to Europe because of recent rent increases).

* The destruction of businesses in Inner city Brisbane also due to excessive rental increases. Only the weekend before last week the Baboa Art Gallery, which had operated on Latrobe Terrace Paddington for only two and a half years had to close its doors because its rent had doubled in that time. On Monday last week I walked by to see the interior of the Gallery, carefully constructed by its operator Joan Winter only two an a half years earlier already destroyed by workmen in preparation for the next tenant.

Since early 2008, virtually a whole retail community further down Latrobe Street closer to Given Terrace has been similarly wiped out by rent increases, actively encouraged by local real estate agents.

I could not recognise a single business that had been there when I wrote and talked of it during the Brisbane City Council elections as Lord Mayoral candidate (See "Rent gouging threatens Brisbane inner city retail community" at http://candobetter.org/node/360).

* Population Growth, which is the principle driver of all our social, environmental and economic problems (including housing unaffordability).

* The despoliation of Queensland's natural habitat (see "Coal mine threatens Queensland Nature Refuge" at http://candobetter.org/node/1129) and the rest of the world by Queensland's mining industry. (see "Why I am contesting the Queensland state elections as an independent").

* etc., etc, etc.

I think if you or other ABC presenters can find the time to interview me about these issues and others I have raised in my article "Why I am contesting the Queensland state elections as an independent" at:

http://candobetter.org/node/1121
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

... your listeners will be very grateful.

yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
http://candobetter.org/james

#appendix3" id="appendix3">Appendix 3: E-mail of Thu 12 Mar 09 to Premier Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser

Subject: Independent candidate seeks assurance from Government against any further privatisations

CC'd to: Madonna King, Kellie Riordan, Spencer Howson, Annie Guest, Lawrence Springborg and others.

Dear Premier Anna Bligh and Treasurer Andrew Fraser,

In the letter I sent to both of you on 17 February, before the elections were called I asked for "your firm assurance that if you do intend to privatise any (publicly owned) 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 at referenda."

I have still not received that simple assurance.

I ask this because I believe that, in a democracy, the public should be consulted by their elected representatives about all questions that will affect their lives, particularly decisions the (claimed) need for which can be easily foreseen.

However, as you are both surely well aware, the Queensland public has never been consulted about any of the numerous privatisations that have occurred since your Government came to power, starting with the full privatisation of the already partially privatised State Government Insurance Office (SGIO - now called SunCorp) in 1998 against a specific election promise made by former Premier Peter Beattie.

Had the Government retained ownership, or at least partial ownership, then at least one insurance company could have been directed by your government not to have resorted to the unconscionable business practices that have been described on the Madonna King radio show over the last two days.

Other privatisations, which have been imposed on the Queensland public since
then include:

* The remaining government stake in Brisbane airport in 2009

* Cairns Airport in 2009

* Mackay Airport in 2008

* The Qld Government's stake in the Emu Downs wind farm in Western Australia in 2008;

* The Enertex (not be confused with Energex) gas business 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

* TAB in 1999

I believe all have been detrimental to the public interest and some, including the privatisations of Energex, Ergon, the Dalrymple Bay coal loader and the SGIO, as discussed above, have been indisputably disastrous.

If the public had been consulted, none of these privatisations would have occurred and the Queensland public would have been spared the harm caused to them.

I therefore ask that you give, to the Queensland public, a categorical assurance that you will not privatise any more assets during the coming Parliamentary term.

If you are not prepared to give such an assurance, then privatisation is an issue at stake in these elections and should be openly discussed.

Accordingly, I would ask that, as a candidate opposed to privatisation, that you justify your stance before the Queensland public in a debate with me.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix4" id="appendix4">Appendix 4: E-mail of Thu 12 Mar 09 requesting air time

Subject: The prospects of air time discuss privatisation, population growth, climate-changing coal exports, etc.

Dear Kellie,

I tried to phone today to find out whether or not I was likely to get air time on ABC 612 in the coming days.

I believe that the issues I want to raise are of immense interest to the Queensland public.

It seems to have been implied that because I was heard once on the radio at Breakfast show I should not be heard again before the elections.

If that is what has been decided, then I think that that would be a mistaken decision, that is, unless you are giving air time to other candidates, who are raising the same issues which I am trying to raise (see below) -- which I would welcome.

Whatever, I want to see all the candidates are properly scrutinised by ABC journalists on all the questions I have raised so that at least ABC audience will properly informed of the choices before them at these elections.

I trust that you will do what you can to bring this about.

So, could you phone me on [...] to discuss this?

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix5" id="appendix5">Appendix 5: E-mail of Fri 13 Mar 09 to Kellie Riordan

Subject:Re: The prospects of air time discuss privatisation, population growth, climate-changing coal exports, etc

Date: 13/03/09 02:02 pm
CC'd to: Madonna King

Dear Kellie,

Further to yesterday's e-mail, I would still like to know whether or not it will be possible to have air time on Brisbane local radio in the coming days.

I appreciate that Madonna King put my question to Andrew Fraser this morning, but it seems to me that she left him off the hook far too easily.

His response that he had no plans to privatise electricity and that he was ideologically against privatisation should have been easily anticipated by anyone familiar with this issue.

Points I had made in my correspondences which could have been used but were not put. Even a text message I sent to Madonna King could have been easily use to follow up but was not. That text message was:

"James Sinnamon, Independent for Mount Coot-tha asks: Why weren't Qld public consulted about Brisbane, Mackay Cairns airports, Energex, etc?"

Consequently, our politicians, who should be being held properly to account in this period are getting off far too lightly making the current elections a pale imitation of true democracy.

I suggest once again, you give time to candidates like myself to candidates who are raising the issues of real concern.

Another candidate you should get in contact with is Robert Huston, Greens candidate for Mount Ommaney who wrote a short article which I posted on my web site.

"Qld Greens: 'competitive' market a calamity for electricity consumers" at http://candobetter.org/node/1139

He can be reached at mount.ommaney[AT]qld.greens.org.au 0428 XXX XXX

I am sure he would be happy to speak to you.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

#appendix6" id="appendix6">Appendix 6: E-mail of Fri 13 Mar 09 to Andrew Fraser

Subject: Categorical assurance against privatisation has not been given by Andrew Fraser

Date: 13/03/09 04:45 pm

CC'd to: Madonna King, Kellie Riordan and others

(Subject was: Response)

Dear Andrew Fraser,

The letter I have received from you is not the categorical assurance against privatisation that I was seeking from you.

Furthermore, it significantly contradicts what I recall that you told Brisbane listeners on Madonna King's Breakfast show this morning.

This morning, according to my recollection, you said that there were no plans to privatise any more of Queensland's assets and that you were ideologically opposed to privatisation.

In contrast, your letter states:

"The Queensland Government's record on the Sale of Government. We will only ever agree to such sales where there are demonstrable benefits to the Queensland community."

Further along, in marked contrast to my recollection of your statement that you were ideologically opposed to privatisation, the letter merely states, "We have not and will not pursue an ideologically driven agenda of privatisation."

So can you please make clear to me whether you are ideologically opposed to privatisation or just merely not ideologically in favour of privatisation?

Either way this doesn't provide the categorical assurance I was seeking.

I therefore repeat my challenge to you, and to other candidates, who appear to favour privatisation during the next term of Parliament, including, it would seem, the opposition leader Lawrence Springborg, that you publicly debate the issue of privatisation with a candidate opposed to privatisation, such as myself.

I will also be asking all candidates for categorical assurances that they will oppose privatisation during the course of the next Parliament. I trust that the ABC, the Courier Mail and other newsmedia will make the responses known to electors so that they can be fully informed when they cast their votes.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix7" id="appendix7">Appendix 7: E-mail of Mon 16 Mar 09 to Kellie Riordan advising that anti-privatisation Greens candidate Robert Huston would like air time

Subject: Robert Huston, Greens Candidate for Mount Ommaney confirms that he would like air time

Date: 16/03/09 12:21 am

CC'd to Madonna King.

Hi James,

I would be happy to talk to local radio about the disaster of electricity supply management.

Regards

Robert Huston BVSc. BEnv.Sc. MPhil.
Greens candidate for Mt Ommaney
...

#appendix8" id="appendix8">Appendix 8: E-mail of Mon 16 Mar 09 to Madonna King requesting air time to counter Andrew Fraser's misleading statements of Friday

Subject: URGENT: request air time to correct misleading statements by Andrew Fraser broadcast on Friday

Date: 16/03/09 08:51 am

CC'd to: Kellie Riordan and others

Dear Madonna King,

Further to my e-mail on Friday, I request that I be given air time on your program to correct the misleading and incomplete response, given by Andrew Fraser, the sitting member for Mount Coot-tha in response to my question.

That question which attempted to establish whether or not Queenslanders can expect even more of their assets to be privatised in the next term of Parliament. How Andrew Fraser's answer misled your audience was explained in an e-mail, sent to Andrew Fraser (included also below), which was cc'd to you:

"Furthermore, (the letter) significantly contradicts what I recall that you told Brisbane listeners on Madonna King's Breakfast show this morning.

"This morning, according to my recollection, you said that there were no plans to privatise any more of Queensland's assets and that you were ideologically opposed to privatisation.

In contrast, your letter states:

"'The Queensland Government's record on the Sale of Government. We will only ever agree to such sales where there are demonstrable benefits to the Queensland community.'

"Further along, in marked contrast to my recollection of your statement that you were ideologically opposed to privatisation, the letter merely states, 'We have not and will not pursue an ideologically driven agenda of privatisation.'"

I believe that your audience is entitled to have this misinformation corrected.

This is all the more urgent as I am a candidate who represents the overwhelming opposition of electors both in Mount Coot-tha and the rest of Queensland to privatisation. That popular rejection of privatisation has been repeatedly defied, in practice, by both the Labor Government, in particular, the Treasurer Andrew Fraser and the LNP opposition, which, in Government, has conducted its own privatisations and, in Opposition, has voted for all the Government's privatisation bills, should be treated as a serious election issue.

I am the only candidate in Mount Coot-tha, and one of very few across the state, who has attempted to give this critical issue the prominence it deserves.

I am happy to be interviewed on my own or together with Andrew Fraser.

In my view, to not agree to my request for air time in these circumstances would amount to withholding to Brisbane electors, information about a vital issue at stake in these elections.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
...
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

(Subject was: Response)

Dear Andrew Fraser,

The letter I have received from you is not the categorical assurance against privatisation that I was seeking from you.

(See #appendix6">Appendix 6 for the rest of this included e-mail.)

#appendix9" id="appendix9">Appendix 9: E-mail of Mon 16 Mar 09 to Kellie Riordan in response to voice message

Subject: Robert Huston, Greens Candidate for Mount Ommaney confirms that he would like air time

CC'd to: Madonna King

Dear Kellie,

Sorry I missed your call just now. I will try to keep the phone closer to me from now on, but a return number would also be helpful.

I don't think your response addressed my concerns, so my request for air time still stands. I have shown that Andrew Fraser misled your program's listeners and did not fully answered my question, so on that grounds alone I believe I am entitled to air time.

If there is insufficient time to allow such misinformation to be corrected and to force candidates to adequately answer questions of electors and other candidates, let alone for views, which enjoy overwhelming public support such as opposition to privatisation to be put, then this election is a farce and the ABC should be telling that to its listeners.

However, as I wrote before, the ABC programmers could help by focusing more on substantive issues rather than pondering whether or not it would be a good idea for Campbell Newman to help Lawrence Springborg.

I would also suggest that whilst the story about Anna Bligh's husband Greg Withers was not altogether without interest, given the time constraints, of which you complain, that should have been left until after the election.

I will, as you suggest, send news items, but you must appreciate that it is more difficult with few resources and not enough time.

Thank you for your attention.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
...
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix10" id="appendix10">Appendix 10: Media release on privatisation sent to Kellie Riordan and others

Andrew Fraser's three different responses to a question on privatisation
Media release of 17 Mar 09

Queensland voters, who overwhelmingly oppose privatisation, have a right to know which candidates can be relied upon to block any further sell-offs of public assets, said James Sinnamon, independent candidate for the Brisbane inner-north-west seat of Mount Coot-tha.

"The privatisation of the Cairns, Mackay and Brisbane airports, the Golden Casket, Energex and Ergon during the last term of Parliament, demonstrate that privatisation was an issue at stake in the 2006 state elections," said the independent candidate, "yet where were the electors told of this?"

(For the rest of the media release, see "Andrew Fraser's three different responses to a question on privatisation" of 17 Mar 09.)

#appendix11" id="appendix11">Appendix 11: E-mail of Wed 18 Mar 09 to Madonna King asking for air time in response to listeners' dissatisfaction with major party candidates

Subject: If listeners are dissatsifed with major parties, why aren't others given air time on your program?

Date: 18/03/09 11:39 am

CC'd to: Kellie Riordan, Richard Fidler

Dear Madonna King,

As you have just heard from your own listeners, a lot of electors are extremely dissatisfied with what both major parties have to offer.

So, why are candidates, who stand for something different and, on many issues,such as privatisation and population growth, actually represent the majority view, getting so little air time on your program, and on the ABC in general?

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
...
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix12" id="appendix12">Appendix 12: E-mail of Thu 19 Mar 09 to Brisbane ABC local radio staff asking that survey be publicised in response to listeners requests for more information

Subject: Please advise listeners of my online survey sent to all candidates

Dear Madonna King, Richard Fidler, Kellie Riordan, Annie Guest et al,

I have heard a number of listeners saying to Madonna King on her program that they are dissatisfied with the major parties and that they want more information about policies.

Could you please advise your listeners that they can find answers to much of the information they seek printed in results to a survey on my web site.

Late last night and this morning I sent out survey questions concerning privatisation, population growth, the environment and full employment to every candidate I was able to e-mail. That survey is included below.

As I write, I am receiving responses. I am publishing the results at:

http://candobetter.org/QldElections/survey

I am also publishing any more detailed comments I have received.

Could you please advise your listeners of this survey and do you think you could use your good influence to prevail upon candidates from the major parties to respond to my survey?

So far, none have responded.

Thank you.

Yours sincerely,

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
...
http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix13" id="appendix13">Appendix 13: E-mail of Thu 19 Mar 09 challenging Lawrence Springborg to debate privatisation

Subject: URGENT: Please justify your pro-privatisation stance in a public debate

Date: 19/03/09 02:37 pm

CC'd to: Madonna King, Kellie Riordan, Richard Fidler, Annie Guest and others.

Dear Lawrence Springborg,

If you intend to privatise any more of public assets I believe you have an obligation to satisfy Queensland voters that this is justified.

To date this has never happened and all privatisations have been overwhelmingly opposed by public opinion.

All privatisations, without exception, have been public policy disasters and any further privatisations undertaken by a further LNP Government or a future Labor Government are almost certain to be no different.

I therefore challenge you or any other LNP candidate to justify in a public debate before the election your refusal to rule out any more privatisations, or, else commit yourself to not doing so until you have obtained the specific consent of the Queensland public.

My past challenge to Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser (or any other Labor candidate) to publicly debate their pro-privatisation stances also still stands.

yours sincerely

James Sinnamon

Pro-democracy independent
candidate for Mount Coot-tha
...http://candobetter.org/james
http://candobetter.org/QldElections
http://candobetter.org/QldElections/MountCoot-tha

#appendix14" id="appendix14">Appendix 14: Media release of 19 Mar 09 challenging Lawrence Springborg to debate privatisation

Subject: Media Release: Lawrence Springborg out of step with the public on privatisation

Date: 19/03/09 06:44 pm

CC'd to Madonna King, Richard Fidler, Kellie Riordan, Annie Guest and others

Lawrence Springborg out of step with the public on privatisation

James Sinnamon, independent for Mount Coot-tha
Media Release, Thur 19 Mar 09

During an interview on Brisbane ABC local radio's Madonna King show, today, Lawrence Springborg told listeners that he has 'no objection' to the further sell-off of publicly-owned assets.

However, Mr Sinnamon pointed out that only the day before, Mr Springborg's Liberal National Party had rightly taken Premier Anna Bligh to task for misleading electricity consumers by promising that no electricity consumer would be worse off as a consequence of the privatisation of Energex.

(For the rest of the media release, see "Media release: Lawrence Springborg out of step with the public on privatisation" of 20 Mar 09)

#footnotes" id="footnotes">Footnotes

#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ "AM's Tony Eastley live from Brisbane on polling day" in ABC radio's AM archive of 21 Mar 09.

#main-fn2" id="main-fn2">2. #main-fn2-txt">↑ In "Have your say" in the Village Green section of the Courier Mail of 21 March, Lavinia Wood also commented on Premier Anna Bligh's deliberate encouragement of population growth when she commented on the draft South East Queensland Regional Plan 2009-2031:

"No one but the developers thinks that bringing an additional 1.3 million people into a region that is already under stress is a good idea. Yet the South East Queensland Regional Plan is driving this agenda, touting a target of 4.4 million by 2031."

See, also "Exposing Queensland Government population growth duplicity" of 1 Apr 09.

#main-fn3" id="main-fn3">3. #main-fn3-txt">↑ See, also, my letter to Lawrence Springborg within the article "Lawrence Springborg responds to Brisbane Save The Mary River Questionnaire" of 10 Mar 09.

#main-fn4" id="main-fn4">4. #main-fn4-txt">↑ During the 2007 Federal elections, Greens Queensland Senate candidate Larissa Waters, who also stood in 2009, as a Greens candidate in Mount Coot-tha, in which I stood, advised me that the Greens had judged that raising the issue of population growth could make the difference that could cost her the Senate seat. As it turned out, Larissa Waters did not win a Senate seat anyway. This raises two questions:

1. Why is opposition to population growth judged by the Greens to be an electoral liability? and
2. Even, if it is, then when is a good time for the Greens to begin educating the public in order that opposition to population growth eventually does not become an electoral liability?

In regard to the first point, all opinion polls show that population growth and immigration are unpopular, so why the Greens apparently believe that a stance against population growth would harm them is not obvious. In regard to the second point, the Queensland Greens are noted for doing very little outside election campaign periods, so, if they are reluctant to raise the issue at election time, then when do they ever intend to educate the Queensland public about their opposition to population growth.

#main-fn5" id="main-fn5">5. #main-fn5-txt">↑ I can't recall whether the presenter was Madonna King, the mid-morning presenter or Kellie Higgins-Devine who, for that week, replaced Spencer Howson as the early morning presenter. However, it was definitely one of the two.

#main-fn6" id="main-fn6">6. #main-fn6-txt">↑ Anna Bligh's stated reason, that early election speculation was destabilising our economy, seemed disingenuous. If that had truly been her concern, she needed only to reaffirm her March 2008 promise to serve her full term. Instead, she remained silent whilst early election speculation was fueled by the Courier Mail from at least November of the previous year. (See also "Courier Mail misreports water recycling to demand early election" of 5 Jan 09.) So, by by her own logic, Premier Anna Bligh had allowed needless harm to be caused to Queensland's economy for at least two and a half months.

When she did call the election on the morning of Monday 23 February, water from devastating floods was receding in the north of Queensland, which still faced threats of further cyclones. Both these factors made it harder for many candidates to campaign and harder for some to vote.

The very night on which she called elections, TV stations began broadcasting Labor Party election advertising in slots which had to have been booked well in advance.

#main-fn7" id="main-fn7">7. #main-fn7-txt">↑ The ABC also sought to interview Opposition Leader Lawrence Springborg's wife, but she declined.

#main-fn8" id="main-fn8">8. #main-fn8-txt">↑ "Springborg's hope lies with can-do Campbell" by Glen Milne in the Australian of 9 Mar 09.

In any case, Milne's prediction that Newman's intervention would help Lawrence Springborg badly misfired. Newman turned out to be considerably less popular than Milne believed him to be and his association with the LNP's campaign appears to have turned Brisbane voters against the LNP. As one ABC listener pointed out on the morning of Monday 23 March:

"When I saw (Campbell Newman's) photo in an advertisement with Lawrence Springborg, I knew it was 'all over Red Rover.'"

In the 2008 Brisbane City Council elections in which I stood against him for Lord Mayor of Brisbane, Campbell Newman earnestly promised not to increase rates beyond the rate of inflation. He broke that promise only weeks later and imposed savage rate hikes on high rise dwellers. For this and a number of other reasons he now appears to be widely disliked in Brisbane. On the night of the elections he headed towards the Brisbane tally room in order to share the limelight with the Lawrence Springborg, whom he assumed would win. However, before he reached the tally room, he learnt that voters had turned against the LNP and he ordered his driver to turn around.

#main-fn9" id="main-fn9">9. #main-fn9-txt">↑ Forum discussion #comment-231829">"My election night" on johnquiggin.com on 22 Mar 09.

#main-fn10" id="main-fn10">10. #main-fn10-txt">↑ Whilst some may judge a relatively unknown independent candidate to have been audacious in challenging the state's leading politicians to publicly debate privatisation, no other candidate had done so and no journalist, as far as I am aware, had confronted the Government over this issue. So as far as I am aware, this was the only attempt to hold our Government leaders for having sold off publicly owned assets without the consent of the owners of those assets.

#main-fn11" id="main-fn11">11. #main-fn11-txt">↑ This has already been mentioned in my article "What was achieved by my election campaign?" of 22 Mar 09.

#main-fn12" id="main-fn12">12. #main-fn12-txt">↑ See Open letter to Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser asking that any planned privatisations be put to the public at forthcoming elections of 17 Feb 09.

#main-fn13" id="main-fn13">13. #main-fn13-txt">↑ This has been covered in the article "Andrew Fraser's three different responses to a question on privatisation" of 17 Mar 09.

#main-fn14" id="main-fn14">14. #main-fn14-txt">↑ The only substantial coverage that either Dave Zwolenski or I received during the course of the campaign, was from the University of Queensland-based community radio station, 4ZZZ. Dave was interviewed twice by 4ZZZ, whilst I was interviewed once for 5 minutes.

Chart of alert levels from World Health Organisation (WHO) http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/phase/en/index.html This page also contains details of what the chart symbolises and is useful to understanding the situation.

Full Statement by WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan, 29 April 2009, Swine influenza

Original source is http://www.who.int/mediacentre/news/statements/2009/h1n1_20090429/en/index.html

Ladies and gentlemen,

"Based on assessment of all available information, and following several expert consultations, I have decided to raise the current level of influenza pandemic alert from phase 4 to phase 5. Influenza pandemics must be taken seriously precisely because of their capacity to spread rapidly to every country in the world."

Related links

Watch the video [wmv, 7min 13 sec]

Listen to the audio [mp3 57 Mb]

Swine influenza - full coverage

Current WHO phase of pandemic alert

International Health Regulations (IHR)

On the positive side, the world is better prepared for an influenza pandemic than at any time in history.

Preparedness measures undertaken because of the threat from H5N1 avian influenza were an investment, and we are now benefitting from this investment.

For the first time in history, we can track the evolution of a pandemic in real-time.

I thank countries who are making the results of their investigations publicly available. This helps us understand the disease.

I am impressed by the work being done by affected countries as they deal with the current outbreaks.

I also want to thank the governments of the USA and Canada for their support to WHO, and to Mexico.

Let me remind you. New diseases are, by definition, poorly understood. Influenza viruses are notorious for their rapid mutation and unpredictable behaviour.

WHO and health authorities in affected countries will not have all the answers immediately, but we will get them.

WHO will be tracking the pandemic at the epidemiological, clinical, and virological levels.

The results of these ongoing assessments will be issued as public health advice, and made publicly available.

All countries should immediately activate their pandemic preparedness plans.

All countries should immediately activate their pandemic preparedness plans. Countries should remain on high alert for unusual outbreaks of influenza-like illness and severe pneumonia.

At this stage, effective and essential measures include heightened surveillance, early detection and treatment of cases, and infection control in all health facilities.

This change to a higher phase of alert is a signal to governments, to ministries of health and other ministries, to the pharmaceutical industry and the business community that certain actions should now be undertaken with increased urgency, and at an accelerated pace.

I have reached out to donor countries, to UNITAID, to the GAVI Alliance, the World Bank and others to mobilize resources.

I have reached out to companies manufacturing antiviral drugs to assess capacity and all options for ramping up production.

I have also reached out to influenza vaccine manufacturers that can contribute to the production of a pandemic vaccine.

The biggest question, right now, is this: how severe will the pandemic be, especially now at the start?

It is possible that the full clinical spectrum of this disease goes from mild illness to severe disease. We need to continue to monitor the evolution of the situation to get the specific information and data we need to answer this question.

From past experience, we also know that influenza may cause mild disease in affluent countries, but more severe disease, with higher mortality, in developing countries.

No matter what the situation is, the international community should treat this as a window of opportunity to ramp up preparedness and response.

Above all, this is an opportunity for global solidarity as we look for responses and solutions that benefit all countries, all of humanity. After all, it really is all of humanity that is under threat during a pandemic.

As I have said, we do not have all the answers right now, but we will get them.

Thank you.

From a nice suburban garden ....

I am sorry to interfere with world affairs, which have no repercussion outside the English speaking community (or maybe just a little disturbance for the few Italians who have been alerted, count them on the fingers of ONE hand !)

I am referring to the interview of Sir David Attenborough by the witty Camilla Long, which appeared on the News review of the Culture International of the Sunday Times (19/4 /2009). It has been a big surprise for me to hear the complete unabridged views of our great naturalist , which have delighted my spirits with his nature documentaries.

When Sir David Attenborough was promoted Patron of the Optimum Population Trust (OPT), we all have a reason to rejoice.
He has been quoted as saying:

“there are three times as many people in the world as when I started making television programmes 56 years ago. It is frightening. . We are seeing the consequences in terms of ecology, atmospheric pollution and in terms of space and food production.”

He may say obvious things that nobody in his right mind can deny, - yet oddly, increasingly, most dare not speak - but then, it’s ok, because it comes from the mouth of one of the most respected and famous personalities worldwide, and that counts, for sure.

To have Sir David Attenborough as a spokesperson for the “thorny” (his own words) problem of overpopulation is a great idea, because he is a decent, intelligent, not extremist, all virtues that make him and his views non-threatening, acceptable and almost mainstream. Maybe a bit too much…

Attenborough comes from educated, middle class, English traditional background. He may be labelled as DWM (Dead White Male), but for the fact that he is still, well, alive. He sees life through a retrospective mirror, stuck bang in his childhood: “…idyllic, a time in the Thirties when you could just get on your bicycle and be out in the country in half an hour…”

Today, he implies, the artificial world in which our children are immersed is so far removed from that love-affair with the natural world, and the real tragedy lies in the fact that society as a whole is not aware of the abnormality of the situation, to which we have been adapting so fast and so well. It is the parable of the boiled frog. It has changed the way we live, the way we think, we dream, we make love. The way we see nature, which has become the “environment”, has become profane and banal.

Now, I do not think that nature, in the good old days, was not raped, plundered, ignored but for the things she could provide. The good old days are obviously frozen by a sort of foggy and misericordious memory, which gives us the illusion that there was a Golden Age, and that we have actually belonged to it. For some lucky individuals, like an English curious boy born into a privileged environment, of course, it was. But around him, if he tried to look up from the wildlife and see the human life, the occasions for relaxing and seeing nature were of necessity nil.

Anyway, in later life, Attenborough had more than a chance to see slums and poverty, and, though used to look with complete moral indifference, required by the scientific approach, at the brutal fight for survival of the non-human species, he couldn’t stand the scene of that equivalent horror that is human life. It was life that in a deep sense belonged to him. If he now finds culture to be more determining than evolution, he finds human behaviour morally intolerable although he is well aware that for nature it is quite normal.

Finally the refusal of procreation is an act of charity, a teleological mission, to stop the horror of the futility of millions of wretched existences.

I understand this feeling, I, too, am a white woman, the type of personality described with some humour by another white man, a certain Brendan O’Neill (see www.spiked-online.com, Wednesday 1 April 2009, Brendan O’Neill Mixing with Malthusians):

“spiked editor Brendan O’Neill ventured into a pit of population-controllers, and found himself holding his nose. Looking around the lecture hall of the Royal Statistical Society (A fitting venue for a conference that reduced everything to statistics), I was struck by the make-up of the audience: white-haired demographers; ladies-who-normally-lunch-but-who-today-were-discussing-the-coming apocalypse; comparatively young but equally posh Soil Association supporters.”

Etcetera etcetera.

I am not resentful of irony, it is healthy to look at oneself from somebody else’s perspective, but O’Neill misses the point. As I found out with some dismay, Sir David doesn’t agree to the credo of the OPT. The OPT propaganda hasn’t told the real story, as revealed in toto by the Sunday Time interview. At one moment, the interviewer asks more pertinent (or shall we say “impertinent”) questions. She wants to know, for example, what is the ideal figure for the human inhabitant’s of earth? Sir David is not sure, as I am not sure either, and I would like to challenge anybody to swear that he/she knows for sure. So far, so reasonable.

After a while Sir David stumbles on a rather big and unavoidable obstacle- or shall we say, he falls into an equally big hole ?
But let’s hear it from the lips of the Great Old White Man.

Distracted by the vision of a blue butterfly he slips unaided into a declaration on immigration:

“We have to keep our borders open it’s a worldwide problem… you want a free movement of people round the world because it’ the only way to stop wars …”

I won’t go on, out of embarrassment, but you are familiar with the refrain.

It is clear that the same ethically correct reasons that drove him to deny, in the name of an enlightened Western culture of which he is a brilliant example, the destructive life and death carousel, drives him to extend the liberty. that he himself enjoys to far away strangers.

Though these are noble views, they are dangerous in more than one way and smell of complacency and wishful thinking, They ignore the consequences which will be felt for generations to come, and ruin forever that earthly childhood Paradise which he nostalgically endorses while enabling its destruction.

The first summit of the Rudd Labor Government was the 'Australia 2020 Summit' held in Canberra on 19th and 20th April 2008, just five months in from Labor's federal election win. It was intended as a positive open engagement by the new government with selected intellectuals "to help shape a long term strategy for the nation’s future."

A critical issue of the Summit was that of the impact of population on Australia. But this was watered down by being lumped under the Summit's discussion category entitled: 'Population, sustainability, climate change, water and the future of our cities'

The session was co-chaired by Roger Beale AO and Senator the Honourable Penny Wong; neither holding academic qualifications or having employment experience in population studies or the social sciences. Roger Beale an history/law/economics graduate with experience as a federal bureaucrat in the Department of Environment and Heritage. Wong a graduate of Arts/Law with labour union experience and a background in forest policy.

Thus arguably, neither convenor appropriately qualified in population studies nor the social sciences to informly chair such a pivotal national topic as population and immigraton policy. The Summit was all about 2020, so by assumedly its purpose was to offer intellectual insight fronm communty leaders about what Australia's population and immigraton policy ought to prioritise for the next twelve years - Rudd optimistic of three 4 year terms.

The Summit session specific to 'POPULATION AND CITIES' must have been quite short, given just two days for this specific forum to discuss population amongst the broad and complex issues of sustainability, climate change, water and the future of our cities'. It always smelled of a token talkfest.

The final report from this Summit specific to 'POPULATION AND CITIES' identified the following 'AMBITIONS' for Australia to aspire to by 2020:

AMBITION 1: (same as Ambition 3)
-----------------------------------------
"Cities will be sustainable and offer all residents access to employment, education, transport and affordable housing. They will be prosperous, diverse, creative and connected."

AMBITION 2: As population increased, consumption will decrease
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Australia will have a sustainable population and consumption policy: while the population grows, net consumption should decrease. "

AMBITION 3: Social equity
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Australian cities will be among the most sustainable in the world underpinned by the principles of social equity. This will mean:

- opportunity for all in terms of jobs, education and affordable housing prosperity, creativity and diversity

- cities are net contributors to energy and water supply

- all homes and buildings are carbon neutral

- all people in major cities are living less than 800 metres from access to mass transit public transport

- clear performance goals and targets for sustainability

- the population is fully educated in relation to sustainability."

It all sounds wonderful, but pessimism aside, what are the key ideas emmanating from the new government's selected intellectuals? [Was the selection criteria ever made publicly transparent?]

The main 'IDEAS' relevant to population policy were:

3.16 "There should be a national agenda to plan for cities and population through establishment of a planning commission type organisation that sets goals and targets for cities. It is important that there be a re engagement by the national government in planning for cities and examining the potential role of the Council of Australian Governments and federal funding to drive change across jurisdictions.

3.17 Transport and infrastructure: to redirect federal funding from roads to public transport—passenger and freight. There should be a focus on driving compact and efficient transit oriented developments across all Australian cities as a means of supporting population growth at the same time as not increasing our ecological footprint.

3.18 A national building and sustainability system which creates an emissions reduction program for all new and existing buildings. The system would use measurable, reportable, verifiable methods. This would enable Australia to be a world leader, provide global leadership, and support innovation. This was seen as a breakthrough idea.

3.19 Education: develop a national school-level strategy that includes a broad public awareness program on how to be sustainable. Need to work with business to create incentives and achieve a fundamental shift in people’s thinking and behaviour.

So what progress has there been on each of these ideas and where can the public find out?

Two years hence, the reality of population in Australia's most populous and migrant popular city, Sydney, is described by Urban Affairs Reporter in the Sydney Morning Herald in the article 'Growing suburbs running on empty' (24-Apr-09) page 5 as follows:

"THE Sydney suburbs experiencing the state's largest population growth are among the worst for public transport and employment infrastructure, planning experts say, and the result is likely to be rising unemployment and increased social problems.

Australian Bureau of Statistics figures released yesterday show that the populations of the Blacktown, Baulkham Hills, Parramatta and Liverpool local government areas grew by nearly 16,000 people in the 12 months to June last year, accounting for about 20 per cent of the population growth in NSW.

The areas were characterised by high rates of childbirth and a steady flow of migrants, but according to the NSW president of the Planning Institute of Australia, Julie Bindon, they will struggle to cope with the extra growth because of a dearth of transport infrastructure.

"Those areas are among the worst affected by the State Government's decision to shelve the north-west and south-west rail links, and the Parramatta to Epping line," Ms Bindon said. The Rees Government's own submission for funding under the Infrastructure Australia Fund predicts that large sections of major traffic arteries such as the M2 and M5 will be over capacity by 2016, while some roads, such as the M2, are already at breaking point.

"A spokesman for the Transport Minister, David Campbell, said yesterday that the Government was committed to delivering transport solutions to western Sydney, including 143 new buses.

"The Planning Minister, Kristina Keneally, said the region would also be well catered to in terms of employment infrastructure, thanks to employment hubs in the north-west suburb of Riverstone and Oran Park town centre in the south-west.
But the director of the University of Western Sydney's Urban Research Centre, Phillip O'Neill, described these hubs as "ad hoc and badly lacking in supporting infrastructure", predicting that unemployment in the region would rise significantly during the recession.

"Firms will only locate in western Sydney when there is a high level of amenity and different kinds of employment spaces [such as] business and high-tech IT parks, and that has simply not been planned for," Professor O'Neill said.

"It's a simple equation - there are areas of Sydney such as the south-west corridor that have high population growth, no infrastructure and amenity and no transport infrastructure. If these issues aren't addressed then there will be a rise and intensity of social problems such as higher crime rates, health problems [and] household distress and increased rates of family break-up."
[SOURCE: http://www.smh.com.au/national/growing-suburbs-running-on-empty-20090423-agu5.html]

So despite the hype of Rudd's popularist summit promises, the population pressures of Rudd's mass immigraton policy are defaulting to a neglectful under-resourced migrant underclass across a sprawling western Sydney. Many metropolises like Sydney have shown that government immigration policies that encourage high intake volumes over short time frames and that neglect necessary resourcing, infrastructure, services lead to migrant communities forming ethnic enclaves.

In about ten years time, with these factors blantantly evident, are we set to see Sydney's west descend into Rudd Enclaves? The social problems are already emerging.

After much delay (didn't they realise it rains here????) the Development Application for the planned car rally in the Tweed and Kyogle areas in September this year seems likely to be submitted to the councils in the next week (unless further delayed by acts of God or Brian).

When contacted, Tweed Shire indicated the DA would be available for public comment for a minimum of 14 days.

I have rung all Councillors and the Director of Planning to push for a 28 day consultation period. Those I have spoken to are supportive of this suggestion. I encourage everyone to do the same. This highly contentious development will have very detailed attachments to it in the form of an Environmental Impact Statement and an Economic Impact Statement. The local community deserves the right to have adequate time to conside the detail of the proposals, especially when the organisers have had 6 months and the benefit of the Tweed Shire Council General Manager on their Board of Directors.

What you can do:
- Contact Tweed and Kyogle councils to express your concern and opposition to the planned rally. If you don't live locally make sure you point out that if the rally goes ahead it will impact on your travel decisions.
- If you live locally, contact your local council and councillors to demand a 28 day consultation period for the rally DA.
- Continue to contact state and commonwealth environment and tourism ministers pointing out the inconsistency of the rally in this location.

For more info contact:
Tweed - No Rally Group: Email no.rally @ yahoo.com ph:0438 357 452
Kyogle - Krater: Email: krater @ aussiemail.com.au ph: 0435 080 025 snailmail: P.O. Box 423, Kyogle, NSW, 2474
Web: sites.google.com/site/kyoglespeak/world-rally-championships-in-kyogle

VicForests' neo-colonial practice of logging old growth East Gippsland forests, justifies such culling by claiming compliance with Australia's wood production Standard AS 4708-2007. But this standard is Mein Kampf for ecological genocide of East Gippsland Forests.

Have a read: www.forestrystandard.org.au/files/Standards/4708.pdf

Under this official Australian Standard that sees only the wood for the trees, it includes two criteria that serve to deliver propaganda spin respect for forest ecology. One must recognise these criteria accompanying Criterion 4—Forest management shall maintain the productive capacity of forests. Need I say more?

A tombstone of the once impenetrable
forest. A Mountain Ash stump near a
road in Balnook, Gippsland. Note the
notches cut in the trunk for standing
planks to cut the tree down by axe!

Forestry Propaganda Criterion 3 for instance, requires forest management to 'protect and maintain the biological diversity of forests'. Wonderful wholesome, noble and holistic rumblings about this one - but gullibles wake! VicForests Mein Kampf hides the chainsaw-speak in the detail:

* 'Small-scale clearing is permitted up to a limit of 40 hectares on a single forest management unit'. 'Conservation of threatened (including vulnerable, rare or endangered) species and ecological communities requires the forest manager to minimise adverse impacts by ensuring he/she takes into account of known information and relevant specialist advice'. (Makes Fiji look like a democracy!)

Forestry Propaganda Criterion 5 requires forest management to maintain forest ecosystem health and vitality, yet is so vague as to allow forest 'practices' only to ensure that damage stays "within tolerable levels". Does this mean one tree per hectare can be left standing or may be two? This forestry standard also permits 'forest managers' to ":use fire and other disturbance regimes to maintain and enhance forest ecosystem health where appropriate to the forest type or scale."

Whoops! The wind picked up and the forest is gone; still we complied with AS 4708-2007!

VicForests motto reads: "Victorian Timber: beautiful, natural, functional" [SOURCE: www.vicforests.com.au]
..in lay terms this means kill beautiful natural specimens - they make the finest woodchips for A4 photocopy paper.

Notes on the 1918 Flu Pandemic and relationship to Swine Flu

Influenza A virus was first isolated by RE Shope* in 1931 from swine and by W. Smith, et al.**, in 1933 from humans, approximately 15 years after the 1918 “Spanish” flu world pandemic. Recently, RNA sequences of the 1918 virus have been studied by researchers at the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology (AFIP) in Maryland, which had stored specimens of 70 human autopsy cases of the 1918 flu pandemic.* In addition, influenza RNA was extracted from a preserved bird from the 1915-1918 era stored at the Smithsonian Institution. The work done confirms that the 1918 virus was an H1N1 virus and was closely related to swine and human H1N1 viruses that Swope isolated in the 1930s. However, both 1930 human and swine viruses were genetically distinct from the 1918-era archived wild bird virus from the Smithsonian. Hence, the researchers hypothesize that the virus causing the 1918 pandemic was unlikely transmitted directly from birds to humans or pigs. Rather, they think that the H1N1 pandemic virus likely circulated among swine and/or humans for some period, undergoing drift, before leading to widespread illness in 1918. Source:http://www.semp.us/publications/biot_reader.php?BiotID=162

video on World Health Global Influenza Surveillance Network

The Threat of Pandemic influenza
Are We Ready? (Free scientific lectures (2005) to download)

(Quote about Obama's Mexican visit was from Thomas Black, "Mexico’s Calderon Declares Emergency Amid Swine Flu Outbreak" at Bloomberg.com)

Photo Source: http://www.vaccineinformation.org/photos/flu_afp001a.jpg

Swine Influenza - Statement by WHO Director-General, Dr Margaret Chan 25 April 2009

In response to cases of swine influenza A(H1N1), reported in Mexico and the United States of America, the Director-General convened a meeting of the Emergency Committee to assess the situation and advise her on appropriate responses.

The establishment of the Committee, which is composed of international experts in a variety of disciplines, is in compliance with the International Health Regulations (2005).

The first meeting of the Emergency Committee was held on Saturday 25 April 2009.

After reviewing available data on the current situation, Committee members identified a number of gaps in knowledge about the clinical features, epidemiology, and virology of reported cases and the appropriate responses.

The Committee advised that answers to several specific questions were needed to facilitate its work.

The Committee nevertheless agreed that the current situation constitutes a public health emergency of international concern.

Based on this advice, the Director-General has determined that the current events constitute a public health emergency of international concern, under the Regulations.

Concerning public health measures, in line with the Regulations the Director-General is recommending, on the advice of the Committee, that all countries intensify surveillance for unusual outbreaks of influenza-like illness and severe pneumonia.

The Committee further agreed that more information is needed before a decision could be made concerning the appropriateness of the current phase 3.

Candobetter Editor's comment: The above quote from the committee about more information being needed means that the Stage 3 alert is current until further information either upgrades or downgrades it.

Current WHO phase of pandemic alert

Source: http://www.who.int/csr/disease/avian_influenza/phase/en/index.html
Current WHO phase of pandemic alert and current phase of alert in the WHO global influenza preparedness plan

Experts at WHO and elsewhere believe that the world is now closer to another influenza pandemic than at any time since 1968, when the last of the previous century's three pandemics occurred. WHO uses a series of six phases of pandemic alert as a system for informing the world of the seriousness of the threat and of the need to launch progressively more intense preparedness activities.

The designation of phases, including decisions on when to move from one phase to another, is made by the Director-General of WHO.

Each phase of alert coincides with a series of recommended activities to be undertaken by WHO, the international community, governments, and industry. Changes from one phase to another are triggered by several factors, which include the epidemiological behaviour of the disease and the characteristics of circulating viruses.

The world is presently in phase 3: a new influenza virus subtype is causing disease in humans, but is not yet spreading efficiently and sustainably among humans.

6 minute video on WHO "Global alert, global response"

I have to pinch myself to realise this is 2009 and not 1959.

This photo just in from the old growth forests of Brown Mountain in East Gippsland - home of remnant giant Australian natives dating up to 600 years old. This photo shows the Brown Mountain Massacre yesterday (22 April 2009) of these magnificent giants by VicForests on its celebrated World Forestry Day.

In 2006, the then Premier, Steve Bracks, made a promise to “protect all significant stands of old growth currently available for logging” (hollow words by a man of renouned indecision). The immense trees that have sheltered and raised hundreds of generations of owls and gliding possums are now being hacked down by VicForests." [SOURCE: The Potoroo Review, Issue 196]

VicForests' leadership inspiration, Warren Hodgson, must feel pround leaving such a legacy of heritage denial to future Gippslanders, Victorian and Australians. "Warren Hodgson has been involved in policy development at the highest level of the Victorian public sector and has previously led the Victorian Government efforts on Public Private Partnerships. He has a background in the manufacturing industry in New Zealand and in the provision of contract services to public and private sectors throughout the Asia-Pacific region."

VicForests (from its website) present its vision and values as:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Our vision:
"To be a leader in a sustainable Victorian timber industry."

Our purpose:
"To build a responsible business that generates the best community value from the commercial management of Victoria's State forests."

Our values:
"Accountable - VicForests is accountable to the Victorian Government. Its actions and those of its employees must be consistent with relevant Government policy and priorities."

Committed - "VicForests is committed to the fulfilment of its purpose and the achievement of its vision for the Victorian timber industry."

Safe - "VicForests and its staff will manage safe workplaces for all staff and contractors, and are committed to continuous improvement in safety systems and outcomes, in accordance with its Occupational Health and Safety Policy."

Customer focussed - "VicForests will be responsive to its customers' requirements and seek customer satisfaction, in accordance with its commercial nature."

Ethical - "VicForests will operate in an ethical and environmentally responsible manner in all its undertakings to ensure the integrity and sustainability of the native forest timber industry in Victoria."

Innovative - "VicForests seeks to be innovative and adaptable in its organisational, business and forestry management operations."

Open - "VicForests will manage the commercial harvesting and sale of timber in a framework of openness and transparency."

Professional - "VicForests and its staff will operate in a professional manner in all undertakings to ensure the best possible outcomes for the organisation, its customers, the Victorian timber industry and its stakeholders."

Sustainable - "VicForests will pursue the highest standards for forest management practices through the continued development of its Sustainable Forest Management System and by ensuring its triple bottom line performance against the requirements of Victoria's Sustainability Charter for State forests."

[SOURCE: http://www.vicforests.com.au/vision-purpose-and-values.htm]

I have to pinch myself to realise this is 2009 and not 1959.

Brown Mountain - destruction complete! of 24 Apr 09.

© 2008 Friends of the Earth Kuranda
Check: http://foekuranda.org/info/modules/myalbum/photo.php?lid=31&cid=9

World Forestry Day is another annual celebration of some cause that in this case captures 21st March each year. The concept sounds noble on the DSE site: "World Forestry Day has been celebrated around the world for 30 years to remind communities of the importance of forests and the many benefits which we gain from them. The concept of having a World Forestry Day originated at the 23rd General Assembly of the European Confederation of Agriculture in 1971."

Hang on a second! A "Confederation of Agriculture" here suggests a different set of values than a ecological respect for forests. But I let the Victorian Government's Dept of Sustainability and Environment (DSE) site continue:

"Forests provide many valuable things for the whole community. These include fresh water from forested catchments, a safe home for our flora and fauna, timber for our homes, furniture and paper, beautiful scenery and rugged environments for those who enjoy the outdoors, pollen and nectar for honey production, and archaeological and historical sites."

"Today, Victoria has an area of approximately 22.7 million hectares. About 40% is public land, meaning that it is owned by the State and managed by the government. There are about 4.8 million hectares of publicly owned native forest which is divided into the following categories: National parks and reserves - 1.7 million hectares, State forest - 3.1 million hectares."

"Less than one third of Victoria’s state forests are available for timber harvesting and these forests produce more than two million cubic metres of wood products which return about $50 million in revenue to the State."

Ah Ha! So it's all about revenue FROM our native forests, not a about being FOR our native forests! So why not just rename this greenwashing 'World Forestry Day' what it really is: a celebration of logging - and rename it 'World Logging Day'?

DSE on its site suggests: 'What can I do on World Forestry Day?"
..well children (it targets school children):
"Celebrate World Forestry Day by visiting your local forests and learning more about the many contributions they make to our well-being. For further information and ideas, see our Forest Education Information." This link then takes the children directly to the 'For Schools;' section of its website which sends a key mesage to students that 'forests have many different uses and values." A second link takes children direct to the hardcore logging site of the Department of Primary Industries".
[SOURCE: http://www.dse.vic.gov.au/DSE/nrenfor.nsf/childdocs/-8E773CD126CA22704A256AA40000EDEE-034EBCC6B1670D984A256AA40011A9F8?open]

Forests should be celebrated in their natural state, not by their exploitative revenue potential. Pity that we are now celebrating these in islands and outside the mainstream media. The contrasting ‘Earth Hour’ hype of late seems so token, yet attracts such mainstream publicity and has even Peter Garrett as its cheerleader! But beyond people thinking about turning off lights, Earth Hour pales in addressing irreversible planet damage compared with any day that recognizes the value of global forests.

Recognising natural undisturbed forests and the ‘green carbon’ benefits they contribute to a healthy global future is more important than token politics. As advocated by Professor Brendan Mackey in an article in EEG’s The Potoroo Review (current Spring/Summer 2008-09 edition, p9), “estimates that around 9.3 billion tones of carbon can be stored in the 14.5 million hectares of eucalypt forest in southeast Australia IF THEY ARE LEFT UNDISTURBED.”

While one supports the celebration of native forests in their natural place, the drawback of World Forestry Day is that the forestry industry has corrupted the word ‘forestry’ into a vernacular meaning of ‘exploitation value’. If one types in ‘World Forestry Day’ to Google (global), one gets the following disturbing presences:

Hit 1: DSE (say no more)
http://www.dse. vic.gov.au/ DSE/nrenfor. nsf/childdocs/ -8E773CD126CA227 04A256AA40000EDE E-034EBCC6B1670D 984A256AA40011A9 F8?open

Hit 2: NSW Department of Primary Industries | Forests (a chainsaw endorsed site)
http://www.forest. nsw.gov.au/ publication/ forest_facts/ celebrating_ trees_forests/ default.asp

Hit 3: Global Education, but linked to DSE (after scrolling down the page)
http://www.forest. nsw.gov.au/ publication/ forest_facts/ celebrating_ trees_forests/ default.asp

Hit 4: Better Health Victoria (another Victorian government website again)
http://www.betterhealth.vic. gov.au/bhcv2/ bhcevent. nsf/pages/ DF43C04B6CC6D19E CA257250007C8F46 ?opendocument

So Australian state governments’ greenwashing has set up prime presence. But also NAFI ( Australia ’s Association of Forestry Industries) http://www.nafi. com.au/news/ view.php3? id=1730

So the motives for World Forestry Day seem nothing more than pro-logging.

The term ‘Existence value’ deserves to be further explored and promulgated, so we can develop a greater non-utilitarian value of our natural and now rare forests. Our precious forest exists for their own sake, the forest ecosystems they support and of which we have so little comprehension of their global existence value and scarcity.

We have taken the promo video put on You Tube by the rally organisers and turned it into a more realistic rendition of what the rally really means for the Tweed Valley.

The reworked video is on You Tube. The link is www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_O1ekQNX6I

Update: The video has been removed by YouTube because the organisers of the World Rally races have claimed that it breaches their copyright. If it does breach copyright, they, nevertheless, could hardly complain that the removed video provides a less accurate depiction of how the rally will turn out than their own. - JS, 23 Apr 09.

The quality of the video is not great but thank You Tube for that. We have a DVD version and an mp4 version that will be used at the Tweed Shire Council meeting today. I am still trying to get a better version onto You Tube.

What you can do:

1. Watch the video on You Tube, leave a comment and rate the video
2. Attend the Tweed Shire Council meetings held on 26th May and especially 16 June (when the rally DA should be considered).
2. When the DA is lodged (approx. end April) make sure you make an objection.
3. Attend the planned protest march which will be held either on 26th May and/or 16 June to coincide with the Council meeting.
4. Get involved in the protest through No Rally Group [Tel: 0438 357 452 or (Email) no.rally[AT]yahoo.com]. Next meeting is at Uki on Sat 2 May at 12noon.
5. Sign our petitions to Tweed Shire Council and NSW Legislature (available at Caldera Environment Centre).

See also: Raceway through the Rainforest. Paradise lost! of 19 Apr 09.

http://www.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/
Preliminary directions hearing on 20 April 2009. Public hearings commence 11 May.
Call for submissions. General submissions close on 18 May 2009.

http://www.royalcommission.vic.gov.au/

"Submissions

Input from Victorian communities will be critical to the Royal Commission's task to fully investigate the causes, circumstances, planning and responses to the bushfires from late January to February 2009.

Submissions are one of the main ways that individuals and organisations can contribute to the Royal Commission.
Call for submissions
The 2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission is calling for written submissions from any interested individuals or organisations. All submissions should relate to the terms of reference of the Royal Commission.

General submissions close at 4.00pm, Monday 18 May 2009.

Further submissions around specific areas of interest of the Royal Commission may be invited at a later date.

Important information for all submitters

* All submissions will be treated as public documents unless agreed otherwise by the Royal Commission. This means that in all but exceptional cases, submissions will be published on the Royal Commission’s web site. They may also be cited in reports or materials published by the Royal Commission.
* The name and town or suburb of each submitter will be identified as part of every published submission. Other contact details will be removed before publishing.
* Should you wish to make a confidential submission, you are requested to contact the Royal Commission in advance of lodging your submission at [email protected] or on 1800 243 650 to notify us of your request.
* Anonymous submissions will not be accepted.
* The Royal Commission will not publish submissions if it believes that the submission material is or could be defamatory.

Making a submission
Submissions can be made electronically (via this web site) or via post.
(Where possible, the Commission would appreciate submissions in electronic format.)

Supporting materials, such as photos and footage, are welcome if they are considered relevant to the Royal Commission’s Terms of Reference. Materials can be lodged as part of electronic or postal submissions. NB. We request that submitters do not send any original materials.

Download the Making a Submission fact sheet to find out more.

Electronic Submissions
Use the Make a Submission form to lodge your submission electronically.

Postal Submissions
Postal submissions must include a coversheet and should be sent to:

Submissions
2009 Victorian Bushfires Royal Commission
GPO Box 4358
Melbourne VIC 3001
Australia

Need assistance in preparing your submission?
The Bushfire Legal Help service, a coalition of legal assistance providers, is offering free information and advice to those affected by the Victorian bushfires about ways to contribute to the Royal Commission.

For further information, visit www.bushfirelegalhelp.org.au or call 1800 113 432.

(Photograph, "Rêve Générale" by Francis Ronsin, taken during the demonstration of 29 January in Paris.)

France is currently going through an acute social and political crisis. And an economic crisis too, it is said, like everywhere else. For me, however, this is only the consequence of the first two kinds of crisis.

Towards a Modern France

Until the end of the 20th century the French still enjoyed public services of a standard equaled almost nowhere else in the world. Education: free government school from the age of 3 years right up to baccalaureat [university entrance examinations]; free and compulsory from 6 to 16 years of age. Almost free university courses. A health system which guaranteed access to care: public heath insurance, hospitals and pharmacies for even the poorest people. The trains ran fast (TGV) and arrived in one piece on time. Mail was delivered in 24 hours no matter where it came from or where it went. The postman came by my place up to three times a day (in Paris). Many unemployed people suffered – especially the youngest ones – as did people with salaries that were too low even then – but they were still protected from absolute poverty.

Revolting inequalities and injustices persisted and many of us protested. At the same time, however, it seemed natural to benefit from basic social welfare. Yes, it was beginning to erode, but it was not fundamentally in question.

France had always been careful to preserve independence with regard to the United States. For this reason the impact of the US world capitalism project and ultraliberal ideology wave was delayed here. The progress of ultraliberal ideas accelerated with the collapse of the Soviet Union and with the decline of the French Communist Party which followed. Up until 1980 the Communist party had received more than 20% of votes; in the last elections it only received 3%. Rid of this ally/competitor, the other big political party of the Left – the Socialist Party – followed the example of European Social Democrats and labour parties by coming to believe that freedom and prosperity of private enterprise were the basis of general well-being and that the only real form of democracy was the one defended – which meant imposed – by the Western block under the natural direction of the United States.

Their mainstream media being either government controlled, or having fallen largely into the hands of the big finance groups, the French were subjected to intensive propaganda. This propaganda caricatured the country as divided between creators of wealth: financiers, industrialists, heads of enterprise, dynamic executives … and “dependents”, “protected”, “parasites”, who took advantage of the system and created an unbearable load on the nation’s useful people. To enable French enterprise to become competitive at the highest world level a vast construction-site of radical reforms was indispensable.

Public services dismantled

The people responsible for France’s anaemia having been clearly identified : public servants, lazy people, too numerous and too well paid, unemployed people, more interested in accumulating benefits and payments than in looking for work, people with real and imaginary illnesses, carelessly overspending on treatment reimbursed by the state, old people, of which the proportion relative to the total population constantly increases because of demography, whose pensions are too heavy a burden now and will be an impossible one in the future, and illegal immigrants … Their evil deeds had to be stopped!

Since the President of the Republic, Jaques Chirac, was deemed not capable of urgently taking the necessary drastic measures, the Right found a replacement for him, who would hit quickly and hard. In 2007 Nicolas Sarkosy was elected, having promised to bring the ruinous social policies to an end. Effectively, he announced and immediately put to work, two series of ‘reforms’ the Right wanted, but which his predecessors had never dared to apply with such vigor.

A ‘package’ of fiscal measures allowed companies and the richest people to significantly reduce their taxes. In the same spirit, a number of high salaries – including his own – were strongly increased.

Simultaneously, other ‘reforms’ aimed to reduce the budget deficit and growth in public debt by going into battle against the perpetrators of the above-mentioned ‘abuses’.

Since laws protected public servants from being sacked, only one new public servant would be employed for every two that retired. Hospitals were already too under-staffed to function properly. A number will close to accommodate the programmed reduction in public servant numbers. Medical expenses are less and less well-reimbursed by [public] medical insurance. The number of years of saving required to qualify for full retirement benefits regularly goes up, just when enterprises want to get rid of workers more than fifty years old. The future for tomorrow’s retirees is very dark. The whole school system, from kindergarten to university, is being reorganized to adapt to a reduction in the number of teachers. A series of other decisions go in the same direction, in the direction of Margaret Thatcher or George Bush-type politics.

Is this leading to a major confrontation ?

The Right and most of the mainstream media applauded the president’s acts as he undertook a class war without hesitation or scrupule, indispensable for turning France into a modern nation. The political opposition, paralysed by internal quarrels of a Socialist Party widely affected by liberalist ideas itself, was incapable of proposing a radically different direction. Meanwhile, the most affected sectors protested, to the point of going on strike and demonstrating (public servants, high school students…) but always in an isolated manner. This changed after the global financial crisis and – perhaps – with the election of Obama.

Reacting to the global crisis, the government, which had claimed to be constrained to considerably reduce the social advantages and public services the French benefited from, immediately found billions of Euros to give or to lend to banks and to industrial enterprises, especially in the automobile sector. These same sectors stated themselves obliged to make many of their workers partly or fully redundant, all the while continuing to make considerable profits and to pay large sums out to their shareholders and directors. Anger and anxiety about the future spread widely, permitting the unions – united for once – to initiate a vast protest movement, culminating, the first time, on 29 January with a general strike and big demonstrations in all big cities (2.5 million demonstrators, including 300,000 in Paris.)

Forced to react, Nicolas Sarkosy appeared on three television stations to say that he understood how anxious the French were and would take this into account. He refused, however, to change his politics, despite the need to do so today, to combat the crisis, and tomorrow, to help re-launch the economy. His politics are those that the United States (his model) massively condemned at the last elections.

New demonstrations on the 19th of March were attended by even greater numbers.

Since then numerous universities have gone on strike. Guadaloupe and Martinique have also gone on general and indefinite strike.

In the face of a president whose only response to criticism is contemptuous and insulting, some people have begun to dream of a movement like the 1968 clashes. This is what the many demonstrators of 29 January 2009 were expressing with stickers on their jackets bearing words in the spirit of 1968: “Grève Générale” -- General Strike -- translated into “Rêve Générale” --General Dream.

The unions continue to follow due process and negotiate, they have scheduled their next demonstration of strength for the first of May – a symbolic day - but also a holiday. In the mean time, workers, condemned to lose their jobs, are developing more radical battle strategies: notably the detention in their workplaces of upper echelon executives to make them more respectful of workers’ rights. At the same time, some people are even making another historic comparison - with 1789 – the beginning of the great French Revolution, which swept away an equally powerful and contemptuous aristocracy, and established a Republic styled on democracy and equality.

(Translated by Sheila Newman)

Francis Ronsin was Professor, Department of Contemporary History, at the Université de Bourgogne (Dijon). He has published several books and numerous articles that focus on the relationship between political struggles and private life: La Grève des ventres - Propagande néo-malthusienne et baisse de la natalité en France 19ème-20ème siècles (Aubier, Paris, 1980); Le Contrat sentimental - Débats sur le mariage, l'amour, le divorce, de l'Ancien Régime à la Restauration (Aubier, Paris, 1990) ; Les Divorciaires - Affrontements politiques et conceptions du mariage dans la France du XIXème siècle. (Aubier, Paris, 1992); Le Sexe apprivoisé -Jeanne Humbert et la lutte pour le contrôle des naissances (La Découverte, Paris, 1990) ; and La population de la France de 1789 à nos jours. Données démographiques et affrontements idéologiques (Le Seuil, Paris, 1997); La Guerre et l’oseille (Syllepse, Paris, 2003). He is also the principal organizer of the international research seminar Socialism and Sexuality.

Rights of partial or full reproduction of this article are forbidden without permission from Francis Ronsin.

Chronology of a conflict

By Alvinox73

Translated from the French version on his you-tube website at www.youtube.com/user/alvinox73:

Relay of information about the actions of Caterpillar workers fighting sackings and its capitalist management.!!! 733 employees threatened in France to please Caterpillar’s shareholders !

Work more, consume more, destroy more, kill more or stop everything ?

Anger already exacerbated by three months of partial unemployment (with a loss of 30 per cent of revenue), the reaction was swift in coming and the workers have been relaying each other to maintain continuous rallies outside the two factory sites.

- 23 February 400 workers meet outside the Grenoble town hall.

- 26 February nearly 500 workers meet around burning tires and are soon joined by a hundred students and casuals.

- 27 February, factory stoppage. Striking picketers hold out the entire day, which finishes with the arrival of the police…

- 2 March, call for a strike and a new factory picket with an improvised canteen manned by supportive students and casuals.

Negotiations at a standstill. Management even dares to blackmail the people in line to lose their jobs (they say they will forget the ‘excesses’ if you accept their miserable redundancy bonuses nicely).

- 18 March, the workers decide to occupy the building. Following this first occupation, and the arrival of the police, the City nominates a mediator to advance negotiations.

- 19 March there is a national inter-union demonstration. After the demonstration of 19 March and at the General Assembly on “the convergence of struggles” which took place at the Labour Exchange [Bourse du travail], a collection of basic foodstuffs is organized to support the workers engaged in conflict.

- 23 March, 6 a.m. rally outside the Grenoble site.

- 25 March general meeting of Echirolles Caterpillar workers, plus industrial action in the town.

- 26 March between 300 and 400 workers set off at 9.30 a.m. wearing headbands inscribed “We will make them pay for their crisis”. Pickets at crossroads, railway stations, and light rail, accompany the entire demonstration .

- 27 March, rally outside the Enterprise Committee (CE) building. [CE : Comité d'Entreprise]
Actions carried out in town, meeting with Michel Destot [Left-wing parliamentary member representing Isere Department where Grenoble is]. An action at the Metro.

- 29 March, Caterpillar management refuses to recommence negotiations on the pretext of the presence of labourers on site.

Result:
31 March the workers arrived in a very upset state and decided to keep their management close by their sides (5 upper management) as long as was necessary to obtain satisfaction. The police took position around the Caterpillar site. Of the 5 executives, 4 remain on the Grenoble site.

- April 1st the executives are set free and the Director pays for 3 days strike.

- April 2, President Sarkozy promises to ‘save the site’.

- 7 April, DDTE picketed. [DDTE: Direction Départementale du Travail, et de l'Emploi - Departmental Management of Work and Employment] The two Caterpillar sites are evacuated. Redundancies fall from 733 to 600.

- 8 April, Caterpillar workers don’t want to meet with Sarkozy. Operation ‘Free Turnpike’ by Caterpillar workers.

- 9 April, support from subcontractor CMI which closes on 12 May and is sacking 48 people.

- 14 April, general meeting of Caterpillar workers in the Echirolle function room. The Caterpillar workers want to maintain pressure on management until the conclusion of negotiations.

- 15 April, Echirolles Grenoble Caterpillar site picketed.

- 16 April workers stop the CE and DDTE representatives from going in or out. Tension mounts at Echirolles, where police have been deployed outside the factory. 19 people are subpoenaed to appear before the High Court [TGI – trubunal de grande instance] for “impeding the freedom to work”.

Outside the High Court 16 April

- 17 and 18 April, occupation of Echirolles Caterpillar site.

The sackings are inflating the ranks of those who no longer have anything! The same people who produced riches for years for their boss are being thrown away like used tissues!

We have a juggernaut coming our way - and we are not happy! Council never asked us how we felt when they were first approached by Repco Rally Australia. We ratepayers are just expected to keep paying rates, keep quiet and put up with whatever is thrown our way. Treated like mushrooms, you might say.

We like the quiet life which is why we chose to retire here, after living in the city all our lives. A beautiful drive along the ridge with beautiful views. It is Scenic Drive No. 3 (of 10) presented by Kyogle Council for tourists to enjoy and promotes "the Gateway to the Rainforests". In future it will be "the Raceway through the Rainforests".

With many people living on this road, some right beside the road, it is totally unsuitable. The rally route will run right through our front yard, as our property spans both sides of the road. We are talking lifestyle blocks here.

We are told to expect helicopters hovering overhead (at least 5 beaming to 50 million viewers worldwide), cameras everywhere invading our privacy. Our gates are locked. We are confined to wherever we happen to be when they take over our road. Should an accident happen they propose to fly us out for medical treatment!! Will that include flying the vet in should we have a cow having problems calving? The wildlife will have to wait until the racing is over too if they happen to venture onto the road. We have an almost blind koala near us, one of many living on Sargents Road, who will be terrified by the noise and dust and general commotion going on.

Where do you go when that time comes in your life when you have the time to appreciate this beautiful country? Well you won't want to come here.

Particularly in September when the rally is proposed to come. Thousands of people (19-35 years is the target age) descending on the area. Those with money to spend will be staying over on the Tweed coast, or up at the Gold Coast. Those less cashed up with head to the tent city in Kyogle. The businesses likely to benefit in this small, economically challenged, town - apart from our small number of accommodation providers, are the Bowling and Golf Clubs, the two pubs and the cafes.

From discussions with neighbours and people in Kyogle, it's obvious the majority don't realise the impact this is going to have, nor do they realise this event returns every 2nd year for another 6 times. There is a large elderly population in the town who could be traumatised by the sheer numbers hanging around. The people in this community are split by this event, which is what Repco Rally Australia like (divided we fall).

Did Events NSW realise when they put upwards of $5m of NSW taxpayers money towards this event, just what they were doing?

Those people who wait and wait for treatment in hospitals might be interested to know where the NSW tax $s are being spent. Hospitals in this region too are suffering, with one of the highest 'baby boomer' populations in Australia.

Shouldn't tax $s be spent on services that are needed, not investing in an event, where cars race around country residential roads, creating mayhem, destroying gravel roads in the area. Who knows how long it will take to make them trafficable again. The rally comes to Kyogle, ruins the roads and departs. Thank you very much!

Not even the rally people are putting money into the Kyogle area. They are all staying at Salt, on the coast. Even the rally cars are being serviced etc. at Kingscliff (taking over the public foreshores to do so). I could go on and on.

So, Where do you go when that time comes in your life when you have the time to appreciate this beautiful country? !! Well, you may not want to come here.

See also: Kyogle residents fight World Rally motor race of 7 Mar 09, Kingscliff residents fight to save seaside park from being used as World Rally pits area of 12 Apr 09, World Rally races threaten endangered Koalas in bio-diverse Kyogle shire of 16 Apr 09.

Who: Greens NSW MP John Kaye Organised by: Power to the People

What: Public Meeting

When: 2pm, Saturday April 18

Where: Tom Mann Theatre, 136 Chalmers St, Surry Hills

A public meeting will be held on Saturday to discuss Premier Nathan Rees' expanding privatisation agenda for NSW. The government's privatisation plans for NSW prisons, ferries, electricity and the sale of other public assets are on the agenda for the meeting.

Greens NSW MP John Kaye who is one of five speakers who will address the meeting said, "The people of NSW have already spoken about electricity privatisation. They want their utilities to remain in public ownership.

"There is very little difference between what Michael Costa was proposing in 2008 and Joe Tripodi's plan today.

"Both will result in the private sector controlling the generators and retailers and deciding the working conditions for employees of the electricity industry," Dr Kaye said.

For more information: John Kaye 0407 195 455

Event Organiser: Colin Drane 0419 698396

John Kaye
Greens member of the NSW Parliament
phone: (02) 9230 2668
fax: (02) 9230 2586
mobile: 0407 195 455
email: john.kaye [ AT ] parliament.nsw.gov.au
web: www.johnkaye.org.au

See also: All in the family of 9 Apr 09 on johnquiggin.com, Robertson ends jail privatisation ban of 9 Apr 09 in the SMH, articles about the threatened privatisation of NSW's electricity.

In Canada, as well as in Australia, the Government has kept open the immigration floodgate in the midst of the recession. One supposed justification is that this is all necessary so that their economy can be ready to take off when the recession ends. In reality, this is a self-serving lie to allow the profits that the Canadian growth lobby gains at the expense of their fellow Canadians, the environment, and the Third World, to continue.

Original article by Dan Murray published on Immigration Watch Canada on 11 Apr 09.

As hundreds of thousands of Canadians lose their jobs, immigration advocates have desperately grasped to find new arguments to make for maintaining high immigration. The latest is that Canada should continue its high levels so that our economy can be ready to take off when the recession ends. Of all the absurd immigration statements that have ever been made, this one has to take top prize.

To explain why, let's ask one basic question: If we continue to allow around 250,000 immigrants to enter Canada every year, what are these 250,000 new arrivals going to do when they get here?

Since October, 2008, around 400,000 Canadians have lost their jobs. Canada now has around 1.5 million unemployed. The outlook is not good for many others.

If, as most would expect, the new immigrants try to find jobs, but the number of jobs continues to decrease, it is inevitable that these new people are going to compete with our own unemployed for the few jobs that exist. And, incredible as it may sound, some employers will be required by federal Employment Equity law to hire them, particularly if they are visible minorities. That means that Canadian-born will not even be considered for many jobs.

But what about the new arrivals who can't find any employment? Well, the obvious answer is that these people will have to be supported by social assistance. What sense does this make? Is this the Brave New World (otherwise known in the Metro Toronto area as "DIVERCITY") that many Metro Toronto politicians think of as an achievement?

What happens if the recession goes on for a few years? Does that mean Canadian-born face even greater competition for employment? How long will it take to pay off the bills accumulated by subsidizing people Canada never needed in the first place? Furthermore, instead of making Canada prepared for the recovery, won't the bills really slow down the arrival of any recovery? And what will happen to our unemployed when the recovery comes? Will they be further ignored so that attention can be paid to satisfying the needs and recognizing the credentials of a new immigration tsunami?

It seems that Canada has come to a crossroads. It is time to start a series of cross-country town hall meetings. Let's arrange to have all the politicians and immigration advocates, who want to maintain high immigration, meet our unemployed in those halls. Let's close the doors. The immigration advocates, who have insulated themselves from the unemployed, can have a brief time to tell the unemployed why high immigration must continue.

Then, the unemployed can tell them what they think. Most Canadians would say that the result won't be pretty for the high immigration advocates. But most would say that this kind of a result is long overdue.

Original article by Dan Murray published on Immigration Watch Canada on 11 Apr 09.

ACT Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment, Dr Maxine Cooper, is ACT's inaugural full-time Commissioner in the role, yet what relevant environmental qualifications and experience does the incumbent have, or indeed lack, to be officially condemning another local indigenous popluation of Australia's iconic marsupials, our kangaroos, to slaughter for pet food?
The Environment Commissioner's own website lists her formal qualifications in the areas of Environmental Planning, Environmental Design and Environmental Science. All these 'environmentally' friendly prefixes sound impressive, until one realises that each of these areas of academic study are not fauna focused, but indeed all about human-centric utilisation of the natural environment for the benefit of humans. That is, these qualifications are all about maximising the convenience of the environment for humans. A wolf in charge of the kangaroos?

Such qualifications offer no insight into the survival and habitat needs of Australian wildlife. "According to ACT's inaugural Environment Commissioner, kangaroos at Belconnen were a threat to certain vulnerable and endangered species of fauna and flora on the site. Where's the bloody independent zoological evidence, who would attest to this view under the test of peer scrutiny?

Now if our roo-shooting redneck commissioner had a more relevant Bachelor of Science in Zoology from say the University of Melbourne, she may be of a contrary mindest, less aligned to human planning needs and monetary gains more empathetic to ecological needs of nativa fauna. The introductory paragraph for the University of Melbourne it Honours degree in Zoology online instills the followng focus:

"How animals live and why they live that way are questions addressed by zoologists. Most of the Australian fauna are poorly understood or not even formally named, yet informed management and resource use of Australia's flora, fauna and habitats depend upon zoological knowledge. We need to catalogue what species exist and how they survive in their natural environments. This requires knowledge of their physiology, breeding and reproductive systems, ecology, evolution and behaviour."
[SOURCE: http://www.unimelb.edu.au/HB/areas/SZOOL.html]

Maxine Cooper, where are your qualifications in zoology and in the conservation and Australian wildlife to entitle you to officially condemn thousands of Australia's iconic kangaroos to slaughter for cat an dog food?

Can you guarantee the Australian public that none of these kangaroos is to be minced for cat and dog food?

The standard setting for the job prerequisites for the ACT's Environment Commissioner are woeful and clearly not in the best interests of the target subject - our natural wildlife. What were they thinking by employing a planner in environmental management?

Kathryn Kermode, who lives on the route of the World Rally Championship races planned for Kyogle and Tweed Shires, planned for September and every second year until at least 2019, shows how the races further compound the threats faced by the endangered Koala from rampant overdevelopment elsewhere in northern NSW and across the border in Queensland. This letter was sent to the Tweed Echo newspaper.

Unbearable Bad Taste

Millions of Koalas were killed for their thick grey fur back in the old days of the late 1800s and early 1900s and in fact, in one month alone in 1927, 800,000 Koalas lost their lives to fuel the North American fur trade. We have come a long way as a Nation in recognising the barbarity of these now outlawed practices but can we do more to protect our harmless and iconic Koala? In 2009 the Koala is on the Threatened Species List, listed as vulnerable to extinction in NSW so why is the State Government so keen to sponsor Repco Rally Australia's, World Rally Championship (WRC) which plans to race rally cars through a Koala corridor and well known Koala Habitat? It makes me wonder what century we live in as Politicians from Parliament right down to the Local Kyogle Shire Council are endorsing a dinosaur car race that wants to secure the region for staging the Rally every second year for another 10 years! Can you imagine facing your children in 2019 and trying to explain that when you had the chance to say enough, you let it pass by? And can you also imagine your children explaining to their children how back in the old days, in 2009, Local Government was so ignorant they didn't evolve a Koala Management Plan and that's why the only Koalas you see today are in a zoo. Councils that border Green Zones and National and World Heritage Parks should have lots of Environmental Plans in place to protect these unique parts of Australia for future generations. I know that Kyogle Council, the tiny and cash strapped Shire who will be processing Repco Rally Australia's humongous Development Application does not even have an Events Policy in place to guide their decision making.

The WRC is scheduled to run for several days finishing, ironically, on September 7, National Threatened Species Day. Perhaps even more ironically, these dates coincide with the Koala breeding season, a time when this animal is most at risk from death and injury on roads. I don't believe the WRC organisers can guarantee that Koalas, their habitat and feed trees will not be harmed during the sporting event, despite any stringent safety conditions that may be imposed upon them. It's not rocket science to realise that when a car is travelling at speeds of up to 200 kilometres per hour, no living creature would have a fighting chance, should anything go wrong.

Those of us who live beside the Koalas of Sargents Road in the Kyogle Shire know they spend hours in the trees on the verge of that road. We are baffled that Council has not considered the Koala's relaxed proximity as special, as a drawcard even for an altogether different kind of Tourism, perhaps a more sustainable, slow and low impact tourist attraction like Koala Watching! It's a clear majority of residents along this road who don't want to host the Rally, not this year and definitely not every second year until 2019. Already though we are paying a high price for our opposition. In the greater community, the Rally has become insidiously divisive and is exacting its toll upon those who feel obliged to fight this Goliath like oppressor.

Let's face it, car rallying has limited appeal, it's not something many of us are remotely interested in especially when you consider that we have all chosen quiet and tranquil parts of the country to build our homes in. We have obviously chosen peace, quiet and privacy and all of these things will be confounded by the World Rally Championship when it blows into town. Our skies will be swarming with dozens and dozens of helicopters hovering at low level, perhaps even as many as 60 plus, a number recorded at one of the World Rally's Irish stages. Our country roads will be filled with motor sports enthusiasts, pumped on the adrenalin of watching crashes and near misses and cars lurching sideways around tight corners.

But who is really paying for this bit of pointless entertainment? You are, taxpayers, whether you like it or not. And we, the residents of the Wollumbin Caldera of Australia's Green Cauldron are paying with our rights. Our right to say no appears not to belong to us and we are being told to stand by mute while the jewel of the rainforest is stolen from us. One day we will all realize that our Threatened Species, our Biodiverse Hot Spots, our dramatic National landscapes are our most prized possessions, our Nation's Jewels, and the likes of the Kings of the Motor Sports Industry are our Nation's Jewel thieves. Repco Rally Australia's, World Rally Championship cannot showcase our region's Rainforests while simultaneously polluting our clean environment with heavy emissions. Repco Rally Australia's, WRC is in essence, a threat to all rainforests, all Biodiverse green belts and definitely all Koala habitat. I believe the writing is on the wall for elite Motor Sports. Sponsors of the industry are obviously finding more and more reasons to pull out of the costly competitions and attempts by Rally organisers to meet Environmental guidelines are looking increasingly oxymoronic, to put it nicely.

No, those who want to run car rallies should find themselves 340 km of road through Radiata Pine Forests and Plantations, not Biodiverse hotspots, Koala corridors and residential properties. If anyone can be accused of trying to ruin the party, it's Repco Rally Australia and not the brave locals standing up to them.

See also: "Development project threatens second largest Koala Colony in Tweed Shire" of 21 Feb 09, "Kyogle residents fight World Rally motor race" of 7 Mar 09.

Original illustration from http://www.cycleoflife.ca/kids/education.htm

Mark O'Connor writes, "Bjorn Lomborg's arguments seem to be growing sillier and more desperate. Here he responds to Lomborg's statements on the concept of the "ecological footprint" in The Australian 15 April 2009.

Lomborg writes,"The message has been received loud and clear. We are using up too much of the planet's area. But wait a minute. How can we do that? How can we actually use more area than there is on Earth?"

O'Connor: He seems not to understand how we can over-use the Earth, e.g. by harvesting fish or timber at unsustainable rates.

Lomborg writes, "Obviously, any measure that tries to aggregate many different aspects of human behaviour will have to simplify the inputs; the ecological footprint is no different."

[O'Connor: That is true, but is not the explanation of how humanity can be said to be currently using more than one Earth's worth of resources.]

Lomborg writes, "For example, when we talk about American lifestyles needing five planets", [i.e. if everyone today was living at an American lifestyle -- a hypothetical but telling calculation] "we assume that technology is frozen," [O'Connor: Another muddle. Current use is current use, and can't be changed by hypothesizing future improvements in technology. If the statement refers to current rate of use of resources, it is correct.]

Quote from Lomborg continues: "whereas it is likely that worldwide land-use productivity will increase dramatically."

[O'Connor: Rubbish. Agricultural productivity is not in fact rising, and will probably drop heavily as oil and hence fertilisers become much more expensive. This is Colin Clark's old fallacy -- refuted on p. 149 of Overloading Australia )

Lomborg writes, "Likewise, organic farming leaves a larger footprint than its conventional cousin." [O'Connor: "Likewise" has no logical meaning here. There is little organic (= fertiliser-free) farming left, since even third world farmers now use fertilisers heavily. Hence no great savings in acreage to be made there.]
Lomborg continues, "Yet, despite such shortcomings, it is clear that areas we use for roads cannot be used for growing food and that areas we use to build our houses take away from forests."

[O'Connor: Now he's changing the subject, sounding reasonable as he concedes something undeniable but irrelevant.]

Lomborg writes, "This part of the ecological footprint is a convenient measure of our literal footprint on Earth."

[O'Connor: Rubbish. Ecological footprint refers to acreage of fertile land needed to produce a human's wants. Land for houses and roads would be a small part of that per capita allotment, not the only "convenient measure of our literal footprint on Earth", as he disingenuously claims.]

Lomborg: "Here",

[O'Connor: i.e. on roads and in houses??? -- but if so the continuation of the sentence makes no sense]

Lomborg: "we live far inside the available area, using about 60per cent of the world's available space"

[O'Connor: Not true if speaking of ecological footprint. Conversely 60% is far too high a figure if he is speaking only of land used for roads and houses. Either Lomborg is totally confused by now, or he hopes his reader is.] ,

Lomborg continues, "and this proportion is likely to drop, because the rate at which the world's population is increasing is now slowing, while technological progress continues."

[O'Connor: Rubbish again. A slow-down in the rate of population growth does not mean a reduction in population; and there is no sign of a reduction in our per capita demands, while technology often increases both the range of products sought and the efficiency with which the environment is destroyed.]

Lomborg: "So no ecological collapse here."

[O'Connor: Even if there were a potentially valid argument here, no such sweeping conclusion could be made from such a back-of-the-envelope calculation. Indeed it's not even that, since no figures (or evidence) have been cited.]

Lomborg writes, "There is just one factor that keeps increasing: our carbon emissions."

[O'Connor: Rubbish again. Australia's detailed State of the Environment reports establish that almost all major environmental indicators are in decline, not just CO2 emissions. The same can be shown for most countries that monitor the issues.]

O'Connor concludes, "The same muddle-headedness runs through the entire article. Lomborg reminds me of a concussed boxer who can no longer see his opponent but hopes that if he stays in the ring and keeps swinging he may be thought competitive."

Thumbnail Illustration of Princess Alia with Shamekh al shaqab from original at
http://www.straightegyptians.com/international/mideastchamp05/0005x.jpg

"Each year in the Middle East Kingdom of Jordan imports more than a million live cattle a year and sheep from Australia. Animal activists have been campaigning against the practice, arguing that the sheep are ill treated both during the arduous journey and once they arrive. One Australian activist has managed to enlist the support of Princess Alia of Jordan in her quest for animal welfare." 7.30 Report | Wed, 15 Apr 2009 19:39:00 +1000 | Duration 7m 13s ABC video report.

It seems ironic and perhaps a sign of what is to come, that, just as Jordan is cleaning up its act, Australia seems to be going backwards with the ACT's poorly justified attempts to institute frequent mass-slaughter of kangaroos in areas coveted by developers and attempts to expand the roo-meat industry.

[Small teaser-photo cropped & collage from two of paddlers and dredge © Yanni]

Len Warfe & other Blue Wedge protesters cropped from original photo ©Tanya Fry

In 2008 Blue Wedges [the community group defending Port Phillip Bay against drastic restructuring through dredging] joined Somali pirates, Peruvian raiders and Gulf terrorists on the US Office of Naval Intelligence's international threat list, as a credible threat to international shipping [1]. Clearly whoever arranged that “Intelligence” listing (presumably someone in government and close to senior police) needs to go and take a cold shower.

Mark Adams on beach: © Yanni

Court dismisses charges against the protesters

Paddlers outside court cropped from photo by Patsy Crotty. L to R: Tanya Fry, Marc Godfrey, Lawyer Michael Morehead, Neale Adams, Mark Adams.

Last month (30th March 2009) in the Frankston Magistrate’s court rational thought prevailed, when Magistrate Rod Crisp dismissed charges against six protestors, who last year paddled out to meet the [dredge] Queen of the Netherlands. Magistrate Crisp described the protest as a peaceful gesture of a “pantomime” nature, and said in a civilised democracy such actions should attract minimal penalties.

The paddlers went to meet the Queen because there was no other way left to show opposition to the deeply unpopular channel deepening project.

Sore losers, Big Government and Big Business gang up against Victoria's people and ecology

After exhaustive public hearings, in 2005 an Independent Panel recommended the project should not proceed. Stunned business supporters quickly embarked on a campaign to re-instate the project, with the Bracks government ordering a “Supplementary” EES. Unsurprisingly, in 2007 the S-EES recommended the project should proceed in the presence of the same risks and at considerably more cost than in 2005,.

Despite an inflated economic case, numerous risks, a manipulated assessment process, and overwhelming public opposition (over 60,000 people signed two petitions, numerous well attended rallies and public meetings, an estimated 10,000 letters sent to the Brumby government), the project was back on the books, and is now underway. Big government and big business had ganged up on Victoria’s people and ecology.

Your $1b+ buys 6 sq.km unofficial toxic dump, bigger tides, risk to shipping, underwater avalanche

Thanks to Mr. Brumby we now have a 6 sq. km unregulated and unlicensed toxic dump underway in the Bay (which could not happen on land), extensive rockfall at the Entrance, increased risk to shipping, and increased tide heights. The $1 billion+ debacle continues whilst trade and consumption levels fall dramatically world wide. To achieve return on investment, PoMC requires a quadrupling of trade through the port by 2035, but already they are well off target, with volumes dropping dramatically in recent months. It will be years, if ever, before such growth might in theory be achieved. And where’s the evidence that recovery will follow the same trajectory we were on before the great “global financial crisis”? Hopefully, any recovery will be driven by something other than cramming more low cost items from the sweat shops of Asia into our already over stuffed homes.

PoMC, a state owned corporation, enjoying the status and protection afforded an Essential Service, with no significant competition from any other port in the state, is now splurging $millions to advertise itself. Why? Mr. Brumby has invested in yet another project well past its use-by date before it has even been completed. Channel deepening, like De-Sal and the North South pipeline has been about Mr. Brumby refusing to back down. It is certainly not about good government.

Democracy in trouble

Cropped from original photo © Yanni
It seems that we can no longer trust elected government to act on our behalf. Otherwise, how did a law abiding group like Blue Wedges end up on the same terror suspect list as Somali pirates and Gulf terrorists? In my view, it’s time for referenda to be conducted on all major social and infrastructure issues. At least then, the democratic principle of majority rule would prevail. Trusting one another is surely better than relying on a handful of politicians who, from one election to the next, are not answerable to a single one of their constituents and are not legally bound to uphold a single one of their elections promises.

Not terrorists

Paddlers with sign cropped from original by © Yanni
Our fellow travellers, the paddlers, aren’t terrorists. They are courageous people who stood up for the Bay against an undemocratic government. History will show it's the people who had the courage to stand up against Mr. Brumby who are the real heroes.

[1] ‘Pirates of the Bay’ The Age 28th January 2008

Also published on Online Opinion on 21 Apr 09.

As the G20 summit of world leaders tries to resolve the economic crisis, where are we really heading? Many key issues are being ignored in the rush to "restore growth" at any price.

Back in May 2008 seven former European heads of state, five former finance ministers and two former presidents of the European Commission wrote a prophetic open letter to the EU Commission. They warned that the global financial system risked systemic collapse. The financial world, they argued, "has accumulated a massive amount of 'fictitious capital' with very little improvement for humanity."

Among the measures they proposed, was a world conference to reconsider the current international financial system. "When everything is for sale, social cohesion melts and the system breaks down." Were Gordon Brown and other world leaders asleep?

At the centre of UK economic policy for 12 years, Brown is forced to wake up to the biggest economic crisis we face and first claims the UK is particularly well placed to ride the storm. As we hit the grim reality, he tries to tell the world he can lead us back to prosperity. If he succeeds in this manoeuvring it will be an unworthy triumph of spin.

The British public is weary of endless calls for 'change'

Lost in a maze of targets, controls and sticking plaster policies, Brown first promised a weary electorate to "let the work of change begin." "Change in our NHS, change in our schools." The British public is weary of endless calls for 'change'. His speeches are mindless, recycled clichés devoid of real ideas.

Despite well-documented criticisms of his 'stealth taxes' and warnings by the International Monetary Fund that the UK tax burden is the highest in 20 years, Brown pointed to his 'prudent' grasp of the economy and relatively low unemployment -- now rising rapidly. As we now realise, much of the feel good factor in the UK economy was not down to underlying strength, but more to do with property price inflation fuelling spending and Britain's record £1.3 trillion debt mountain.

In truth, Brown breaks much of what he touches. The think tank Civitas concluded "that big spending promises on health and education have been tested to destruction and have not produced the expected improvements." Like most politicians, Brown does little more than kick the usual political footballs and repackaged promises on education, health and crime, where ever-more money is spent with little effect.

Now he is spending public money big-time, like a gambler trying to recoup his losses. After promising billions of taxpayers' money to bail out greedy money markets and watching the pound plummet, Gordon Brown and his crew have thrown savers overboard in a last ditch attempt to float the sinking British economy.

Zero interest rates and printing money to fuel inflation lie ahead and still we have high lending rates. Many fat-cat bankers will be laughing all the way to their offshore bank accounts. The public is given no say. Unlike the US Congress, where are the big debates in Parliament and on TV as the Government hoses billions around to little avail? With weasel words of 'fiscal stimulus' and 'bank restructuring', he increases the medicine of debt and bailouts to restore the financial web that got us into this mess. Instead of bailing out failed banks and toxic debts, where is the strategic thinking to build a genuinely sustainable economy in a sustainable environment?

#EuroMiscalculation" id="EuroMiscalculation">Euro miscalculation

After fudging for years over his 'five economic tests' on whether Britain should join the euro, sterling's collapse after the Bank of England slashed interest rates to half a per cent in a matter of weeks, will make it more difficult to persuade lenders to invest in the pound and they will demand high returns - adding to the UK's debt burden. The merits of saving investment have also been ditched.

Britain's gloomy economic vision and the plummeting pound is hitting businesses, devastating pensions for British retirees in Europe and squeezing holiday makers into deeper debt. The UK is no longer a big exporting economy like Germany so claims this will be good for exports are overstated. We are a major importing economy and the weak pound is already inflating prices. How will markets now judge the City of London's financial competence, when it is a key part of the UK economy?

The Treasury Select Committee now discovers that the taxpayers' bail out is potentially liable for billions more in bank debts and assets based on foreign lending, subject to exchange rate risks and a weak pound. We are back to the instability and speculation of the '90's and may bitterly regret not joining the strong and stable Euro Gordon Brown and George Osbourne disdain.

#RichesToRags" id="RichesToRags">Riches to rags on oil and gas

Oil imports paid in dollars and rising long-term global demand will see bills for UK consumers rise further. Britain's North Sea oil reserves are running down rapidly and we will be reliant on more expensive oil and gas imports. A study for the Department of Business Enterprise: UK Continental Shelf Oil and Gas Production and the UK Economy, predicts that in five years the UK could run up a cumulative deficit in oil and gas imports of over $500 billion.

#PensionsAndPFI" id="PensionsAndPFI">Pensions and PFI

Brown also embraced the costly Private Finance Initiative (PFI), off-loading debts from Treasury balance sheets to look prudent, but in reality, storing up a huge burden on taxpayers for years ahead. Now, the PFI sector is rattling the begging bowl, claiming a 40 per cent, £4 billion shortfall in funding. A double whammy on the taxpayer. The respected Institute for Fiscal Studies estimated that creative accounting by the Treasury already conceals a £500 billion public service liability for PFI schemes, Network Rail debts and public sector pensions.

Much of the blame for Britain's pensions crisis also rests with Gordon Brown for his tax raid on pensions in 1997, according to former Treasury adviser Dr Ros Altman, costing pension schemes an estimated £5 billion a year. Now we are told his 'quantitative easing' or printing money will further hit pension funds. Why doesn't Brown help hard-pressed pensioners now reeling under near zero interest rates on any savings by removing this tax on pension funds?

#BillionsToTrillions" id="BillionsToTrillions">Billions to trillions

As the economic crisis unfolds, we need to ask whether throwing trillions into the marketplace will do more harm than good? Governments around the world have already pumped in around $10 trillion into banks. This should have solved the toxic sub-prime mortgage problem, but the underlying problem is the financial 'debts and bets' market amounting to $500 trillion, when the annual GDP of the whole planet is around $50 trillion. Where has all the money gone? We need to think radically about how to ditch this impossible financial burden. Bankers need to do more than say sorry as they walk away with knighthoods and obscene rewards for failure.

Now the bubble has burst, instead of the casino deregulation popularised by the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, we need to get back to real financial values and quality investment. It is one thing trying to keep people in their only home, but the taxpayer should not be bailing out the buy-to-let property market. Nor are many sound businesses about to collapse. We need to rethink and rebuild.

As Brown spends billions he hasn't got "to restore growth," in a world of finite resources that are depleting rapidly, Green parties should be welcoming this warning for the endless "growth is good" mindset that will wreck our planet.

After years of crazy price inflation, house prices are beginning to drop to more affordable levels.

After years of crazy price inflation, house prices are beginning to drop to more affordable levels. A modest reduction in market capitalisation would be a buffer on the free-spending leverage and investment that creates so much unnecessary growth - in speculative empty office blocks, hedge funds and a shopping binge economy.

Journalist Paul Mason points out the fragile interdependence of the globalised economy, where 10 countries can be involved in the supply chain to produce a single disk drive manufactured in Thailand.

In a few years, the markets will face another major trauma when they realise that once plentiful oil supplies are running down rapidly and the 'globalised' economy this has supported will have to rethink completely. Major investment in a 'Green New Deal' to help us adjust to post oil realities would be a start.

A crack down on money laundering and tax avoidance by the super rich using tax-free enclaves, needs more than talk about "naming and shaming" countries that are not transparent in their banking practices. We have long known of this problem, yet with a bundle of tax havens under UK jurisdiction, socialist Gordon Brown for years looked the other way.

Where is the choice and fresh thinking from our leaders, locked in a world of 'me too' politics? The electorate deserves more than bailing out bankrupt politicians and bankers.

Belconnen May 2008

In May 2008 a total of 514 healthy kangaroos were exterminated on the former Belconnen Naval Transmission Station by the Department of Defence.

RSPCA-ACT chief Michael Linke insisted that the kangaroos were ‘starving’ even though eye-witness accounts and photographic evidence showed no starving kangaroos. They do after all, eat dry wild grasses, and have been doing so for the last 40 million years.

According to Dr Maxine Cooper, Environment Commissioner, the kangaroos at Belconnen were a threat to certain vulnerable and endangered species of fauna and flora on the site (Ginninderra Peppercress, Striped Legless Lizard and Golden Sun Moth), even though the EPBC Act lists threats other than kangaroos (such as weeds, feral animals, domestic dogs and cats, land clearing, agriculture, slashing, inappropriate burning, livestock, rabbits, rock removal and vehicles).

Yet cows were grazing in the adjacent paddock, apparently not a threat to the species listed (as if moths and lizards recognise fences!).

So if both excuses of starvation and threat to endangered species were untrue, what was the real reason for the Belconnen massacre last May?

#Housing Scandal" id="Housing Scandal">Housing Scandal

In The Canberra Times dated 18th March, 2008 an article titled Roo Cull Land Contaminated raised the issue of soil contamination in relation to part of Belconnen being released by Defence for housing. Soil remediation would be necessary.

Then again on 27th September, 2008 The Canberra Times printed another article, by Rosslyn Beeby, titled Revealed: Toxic Waste Dump which showed serious lead, heavy metals, asbestos, carcinogenic dioxin and PCB contamination in the soil and groundwater, even down to Lake Ginninderra.

The scandal was that ACT government wanted to build housing on contaminated land. As if remediation could possibly clean it up!

Defence has been aware of the problem since 1985. A 1991 report by Snowy Mountains Engineering Corp. called for a scientific assessment of the potential for pollutants to build up in native wildlife or people with frequent access to the site. The reports warn that

''no information is to be given out regarding the nature of the potential contaminants on the site''

for public information at community consultations and ministerial briefings about the clean-up.

The ACT has previously denied it plans to develop the land for low-cost housing. But ACT Planning Authority documents obtained by The Canberra Times indicate the Government has at some stage considered the site in plans to expand the suburb of Lawson.

The Defence reports recommend excavating 6000 cubic metres in some areas, to a depth of at least 6m from a former rubbish dump at the site, as well as removing 900 sq/m of topsoil from grassland where federally- protected plant and insect species occur. Just where are they going to put this toxic soil?

Local groundwater is contaminated by polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), toxins that accumulate in the environment and have been linked to cancer, liver damage and immune and reproductive disorders. Petroleum hydrocarbons are leaking into soils and groundwater from disused underground fuel tanks that still ''contain product'' in several areas. Does Defence think that local residents won’t connect the dots?

The land was assessed by Defence contractors for use as low-density housing and recreational. A Queanbeyan Wildcare spokesperson said that

if Defence had approved the proposal to move the kangaroos instead of killing them, health checks on the kangaroos would have revealed pollutants. In the past, blind sheep have been found grazing at Belconnen.

#The Majura Connection" id="The Majura Connection">The Majura Connection

A starving Majura kangaroo family,
busy 'degrading' their grasslands

There is a shortage of land in Canberra to develop housing and commercial estates. Developers are leaning on Defence to release more land, as at Belconnen. Could Majura be next? And is Majura Training Area contaminated too? We do know that the 514 contaminated Belconnen kangaroos were buried at Majura in a large pit. I can't help but wonder if Defence could be moving the toxic Belconnen soil to Majura.

The Hon. Mike Kelly, Secretary for Defence is gearing up to kill aproximately 6,000 kangaroos on Majura Training Area, which is 8,000 acres.

Nobody really knows how many kangaroos there are but the estimate is less than two kangaroos per acre (hardly excessive) yet Kelly claims that the kangaroos are starving and degrading the rare grasslands.

Where is the scientific evidence of starvation or degradation of grasses? There isn’t any, as with Belconnen.

Across the fence, a hobby sheep farm illustrates accepted ACT land management practices. This land is now a dust bowl (see picture next).

Yet the kangaroos at Majura are blamed for degrading rare grasslands. Which looks like it could support life and threatened grassland? Certainly not the clapped- out sheep farm.

Furthermore, according to locals, there is a plague of rabbits at Majura. Why is Defence more worried about kangaroos than rabbits who do far more damage to grasslands?

How ironic that our national icon is blamed for damage to the environment actually created by humans, especially when you consider that kangaroos benefit the land in many ways. They eat dry grass that livestock won’t eat, grass that ignites easily in bush fires. By eating native grasses (that livestock don’t eat) they regenerate the grasses, helping many other species to survive. Their long claws aerate the soil allowing soil ecosystems to thrive, whereas livestock compact the soil and cause deserts. The more kangaroos, the healthier the ecosystem!

#Other Reasons?" id="Other Reasons?">Other Reasons?

The D.O.D. plans to turn Majura into an internationally-significant night manoeuvres firing range. But they could never justify killing thousands of protected native animals to upgrade their night training.

While high-tech night responsive equipment may be sensitive to night ground movement from kangaroos, they could use ultrasonic devices such as Roo Guard (endorsed by the Qld. Grain Growers’ Association) to keep them away from those areas and create corridors to surrounding acres with water and proper fencing.

Why does the government protect special interests (i.e. developers) but make no effort to protect native Australian land or animals? Kangaroos are not the problem. Human activity and livestock grazing are.

The government may not care about kangaroos, but many people around the world do. As people learn about what is becoming known as Australia's Dirty Secret, they're not only outraged, but are choosing not to visit Australia and spend their tourism dollars.

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

Please write to:-

The Hon Kevin Rudd MP
Prime Minister, Parliament House
CANBERRA, ACT, 2600
www.pm.gov.au/contact/index.cfm

Martin Ferguson, Minister for Tourism
Parliament House, Suite M1 23
Parliament House, Canberra ACT 2600
www.alp.org.au/people/vic/ferguson_martin.php

Visit:
www.australiansocietyforkangaroos.com
www.stopkangarookilling.org

See also: "Majura demonstration in Canberra" on www.canadianvoiceforanimals.org, "Another Slaughter of kangaroos planned" of 14 Apr 09 on Quaker Concern for Animals web site.

The UN position in 1992 on conserving native forests of the world:

"At the 1992 United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) the forest issue was among the most controversial, polarizing developing and developed countries. In Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, intense negotiations among governments at UNCED resulted in the Non-legally Binding Authoritative Statement of Principles for a Global Consensus on the Management, Conservation and Sustainable Development of all Types of Forests, also known as the “Forest Principles”, as well as Chapter 11 of Agenda 21: Combating Deforestation."

The latest UN position:

"Following nearly 3 years of intense negotiations, starting from UNFF5 and culminating at UNFF7, the Non-Legally Binding Instrument on All types of Forests was adopted on 28 April 2007. The Instrument was adopted by the UN General Assembly (Resolution 62/98) on 17 December 2007.

The purpose of this instrument is:

(a) To strengthen political commitment and action at all levels to implement effectively sustainable management of all types of forests and to achieve the shared global objectives on forests;

(b) To enhance the contribution of forests to the achievement of the internationally agreed development goals, including the Millennium Development Goals, in particular with respect to poverty eradication and environmental sustainability;

(c) To provide a framework for national action and international cooperation."

=========================================================

REPORT OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONFERENCE ON ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT
(Rio de Janeiro, 3-14 June 1992)

Annex III

[NON-LEGALLY BINDING AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLES FOR A GLOBAL CONSENSUS ON THE MANAGEMENT, CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT OF ALL TYPES OF FORESTS]

PREAMBLE

(a) The subject of forests is related to the entire range of environmental and development issues and opportunities, including the right to socio-economic development on a sustainable basis.

(b) The guiding objective of these principles is to contribute to the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests and to provide or their multiple and complementary functions and uses.

(c) Forestry issues and opportunities should be examined in a holistic and balanced manner within the overall context of environment and development, taking into consideration the multiple functions and uses of forests, including traditional uses, and the likely economic and social stress when these uses are constrained or restricted, as well as the potential for development that sustainable forest management can offer.

(d) These principles reflect a first global consensus on forests. In committing themselves to the prompt implementation of these principles, countries also decide to keep them under assessment for their adequacy with regard to further international cooperation on forest issues.

(e) These principles should apply to all types of forests, both natural and planted, in all geographical regions and climatic zones, including austral, boreal, subtemperate, temperate, subtropical and tropical.

(f) All types of forests embody complex and unique ecological processes which are the basis for their present and potential capacity to provide resources to satisfy human needs as well as environmental values, and as such their sound management and conservation is of concern to the Governments of the countries to which they belong and are of value to local communities and to the environment as a whole.

(g) Forests are essential to economic development and the maintenance of all forms of life.

(h) Recognizing that the responsibility for forest management, conservation and sustainable development is in many States allocated among federal/national, state/provincial and local levels of government, each State, in accordance with its constitution and/or national legislation, should pursue these principles at the appropriate level of government.

PRINCIPLES/ELEMENTS

1. (a) States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own resources pursuant to their own environmental policies and have the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national jurisdiction.

(b) The agreed full incremental cost of achieving benefits associated with forest conservation and sustainable development requires increased international cooperation and should be equitably shared by the international community.

2. (a) States have the sovereign and inalienable right to utilize, manage and develop their forests in accordance with their development needs and level of socio-economic development and on the basis of national policies consistent with sustainable development and legislation, including the conversion of such areas for other uses within the overall socio-economic development plan and based on rational land-use policies.

(b) Forest resources and forest lands should be sustainably managed to meet the social, economic, ecological, cultural and spiritual needs of present and future generations. These needs are for forest products and services, such as wood and wood products, water, food, fodder, medicine, fuel, shelter, employment, recreation, habitats for wildlife, landscape diversity, carbon sinks and reservoirs, and for other forest products. Appropriate measures should be taken to protect forests against harmful effects of pollution, including air-borne pollution, fires, pests and diseases, in order to maintain their full multiple value.

(c) The provision of timely, reliable and accurate information on forests and forest ecosystems is essential for public understanding and informed decision-making and should be ensured.

(d) Governments should promote and provide opportunities for the participation of interested parties, including local communities and indigenous people, industries, labour, non-governmental organizations and individuals, forest dwellers and women, in the development, implementation and planning of national forest policies.

3. (a) National policies and strategies should provide a framework for increased efforts, including the development and strengthening of institutions and programmes for the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests and forest lands.

(b) International institutional arrangements, building on those organizations and mechanisms already in existence, as appropriate, should facilitate international cooperation in the field of forests.

(c) All aspects of environmental protection and social and economic development as they relate to forests and forest lands should be integrated and comprehensive.

4. The vital role of all types of forests in maintaining the ecological processes and balance at the local, national, regional and global levels through, inter alia, their role in protecting fragile ecosystems, watersheds and freshwater resources and as rich storehouses of biodiversity and biological resources and sources of genetic material for biotechnology products, as well as photosynthesis, should be recognized.

5. (a) National forest policies should recognize and duly support the identity, culture and the rights of indigenous people, their communities and other communities and forest dwellers. Appropriate conditions should be promoted for these groups to enable them to have an economic stake in forest use, perform economic activities, and achieve and maintain cultural identity and social organization, as well as adequate levels of livelihood and well-being, through, inter alia, those land tenure arrangements which serve as incentives for the sustainable management of forests.

(b) The full participation of women in all aspects of the management, conservation and sustainable development of forests should be actively promoted.

6. (a) All types of forests play an important role in meeting energy requirements through the provision of a renewable source of bio-energy, particularly in developing countries, and the demands for fuelwood for household and industrial needs should be met through sustainable forest management, afforestation and reforestation. To this end, the potential contribution of plantations of both indigenous and introduced species for the provision of both fuel and industrial wood should be recognized.

(b) National policies and programmes should take into account the relationship, where it exists, between the conservation, management and sustainable development of forests and all aspects related to the production, consumption, recycling and/or final disposal of forest products.

(c) Decisions taken on the management, conservation and sustainable development of forest resources should benefit, to the extent practicable, from a comprehensive assessment of economic and non-economic values of forest goods and services and of the environmental costs and benefits. The development and improvement of methodologies for such evaluations should be promoted.

(d) The role of planted forests and permanent agricultural crops as sustainable and environmentally sound sources of renewable energy and industrial raw material should be recognized, enhanced and promoted. Their contribution to the maintenance of ecological processes, to offsetting pressure on primary/old-growth forest and to providing regional employment and development with the adequate involvement of local inhabitants should be recognized and enhanced.

(e) Natural forests also constitute a source of goods and services, and their conservation, sustainable management and use should be promoted.

7. (a) Efforts should be made to promote a supportive international economic climate conducive to sustained and environmentally sound development of forests in all countries, which include, inter alia, the promotion of sustainable patterns of production and consumption, the eradication of poverty and the promotion of food security.

(b) Specific financial resources should be provided to developing countries with significant forest areas which establish programmes for the conservation of forests including protected natural forest areas. These resources should be directed notably to economic sectors which would stimulate economic and social substitution activities.

8. (a) Efforts should be undertaken towards the greening of the world.
All countries, notably developed countries, should take positive and transparent action towards reforestation, afforestation and forest conservation, as appropriate.

(b) Efforts to maintain and increase forest cover and forest productivity should be undertaken in ecologically, economically and socially sound ways through the rehabilitation, reforestation and re-establishment of trees and forests on unproductive, degraded and deforested lands, as well as through the management of existing forest resources.

(c) The implementation of national policies and programmes aimed at forest management, conservation and sustainable development, particularly in developing countries, should be supported by international financial and technical cooperation, including through the private sector, where appropriate.

(d) Sustainable forest management and use should be carried out in accordance with national development policies and priorities and on the basis of environmentally sound national guidelines. In the formulation of such guidelines, account should be taken, as appropriate and if applicable, of relevant internationally agreed methodologies and criteria.

(e) Forest management should be integrated with management of adjacent areas so as to maintain ecological balance and sustainable productivity.

(f) National policies and/or legislation aimed at management, conservation and sustainable development of forests should include the protection of ecologically viable representative or unique examples of forests, including primary/old-growth forests, cultural, spiritual, historical, religious and other unique and valued forests of national importance.

(g) Access to biological resources, including genetic material, shall be with due regard to the sovereign rights of the countries where the forests are located and to the sharing on mutually agreed terms of technology and profits from biotechnology products that are derived from these resources.

(h) National policies should ensure that environmental impact assessments should be carried out where actions are likely to have significant adverse impacts on important forest resources, and where such actions are subject to a decision of a competent national authority.

9. (a) The efforts of developing countries to strengthen the management, conservation and sustainable development of their forest resources should be supported by the international community, taking into account the importance of redressing external indebtedness, particularly where aggravated by the net transfer of resources to developed countries, as well as the problem of achieving at least the replacement value of forests through improved market access for forest products, especially processed products. In this respect, special attention should also be given to the countries undergoing the process of transition to market economies.

(b) The problems that hinder efforts to attain the conservation and sustainable use of forest resources and that stem from the lack of alternative options available to local communities, in particular the urban poor and poor rural populations who are economically and socially dependent on forests and forest resources, should be addressed by Governments and the international community.

(c) National policy formulation with respect to all types of forests should take account of the pressures and demands imposed on forest ecosystems and resources from influencing factors outside the forest sector, and intersectoral means of dealing with these pressures and demands should be sought.

10. New and additional financial resources should be provided to developing countries to enable them to sustainably manage, conserve and develop their forest resources, including through afforestation, reforestation and combating deforestation and forest and land degradation.

11. In order to enable, in particular, developing countries to enhance their endogenous capacity and to better manage, conserve and develop their forest resources, the access to and transfer of environmentally sound technologies and corresponding know-how on favourable terms, including on concessional and preferential terms, as mutually agreed, in accordance with the relevant provisions of Agenda 21, should be promoted, facilitated and financed, as appropriate.

12. (a) Scientific research, forest inventories and assessments carried out by national institutions which take into account, where relevant, biological, physical, social and economic variables, as well as technological development and its application in the field of sustainable forest management, conservation and development, should be strengthened through effective modalities, including international cooperation. In this context, attention should also be given to research and development of sustainably harvested non-wood products.

(b) National and, where appropriate, regional and international institutional capabilities in education, training, science, technology, economics, anthropology and social aspects of forests and forest management are essential to the conservation and sustainable development of forests and should be strengthened.

(c) International exchange of information on the results of forest and forest management research and development should be enhanced and broadened, as appropriate, making full use of education and training institutions, including those in the private sector.

(d) Appropriate indigenous capacity and local knowledge regarding the conservation and sustainable development of forests should, through institutional and financial support and in collaboration with the people in the local communities concerned, be recognized, respected, recorded, developed and, as appropriate, introduced in the implementation of programmes. Benefits arising from the utilization of indigenous knowledge should therefore be equitably shared with such people.

13. (a) Trade in forest products should be based on non-discriminatory and multilaterally agreed rules and procedures consistent with international trade law and practices. In this context, open and free international trade in forest products should be facilitated.

(b) Reduction or removal of tariff barriers and impediments to the provision of better market access and better prices for higher value-added forest products and their local processing should be encouraged to enable producer countries to better conserve and manage their renewable forest resources.

(c) Incorporation of environmental costs and benefits into market forces and mechanisms, in order to achieve forest conservation and sustainable development, should be encouraged both domestically and internationally.

(d) Forest conservation and sustainable development policies should be integrated with economic, trade and other relevant policies.

(e) Fiscal, trade, industrial, transportation and other policies and practices that may lead to forest degradation should be avoided. Adequate policies, aimed at management, conservation and sustainable development of forests, including, where appropriate, incentives, should be encouraged.

14. Unilateral measures, incompatible with international obligations or agreements, to restrict and/or ban international trade in timber or other forest products should be removed or avoided, in order to attain long-term sustainable forest management.

15. Pollutants, particularly air-borne pollutants, including those responsible for acidic deposition, that are harmful to the health of forest ecosystems at the local, national, regional and global levels should be controlled.

END OF DOCUMENT

Letter to Caroline Batty, Manager, Population Policy Unit, Department of Trade and Economic Development (DTED) in South Australia

Thursday 9th April, 2009

Dear Ms Batty,

In light of the following points:
(a) that over two-thirds of our overall water use is in food production, and
(b) the Murray-Darling Basin is receiving its lowest inflows in 117 years of record-keeping, and
(c) the irrigation water supply to most of the Food Bowl has collapsed, and
(d) Adelaide's proposed $1.3 billion desalination plant will provide part of the water needed for households but only a tiny fraction of the water that would be needed for food production; and
(e) continuing predictions from the top climate scientists in the country and the world that droughts are likely to get worse; and
(f) the recent rises in fertiliser costs to farmers; and
(g) the widely-accepted fact that crude oil production has reach a "ceiling" worldwide and is likely to decline in the coming years due to lack of investment,

I am very interested to know how the Population Advisory Group intends to meet its stated goal to "support the achievement of South Australia’s Strategic Plan targets to grow the South Australian population"?

Does the Group intend to come clean with the State Government and the public about the fact that our country is set to soon become a net food importer if we continue to increase our population? Does the Group intend to come clean with the public about the fact that, as well as absolute reductions in fuel and energy use (due to declining oil production and increasingly strict emissions targets), there will need to be a steep and ongoing reduction in per-capita consumption in order to "make room" (both metaphorically and literally) for all of the additional people?

Of course, there are food choices that could greatly reduce our land- and water-footprint, enabling us to accommodate more people. For instance, countries like Bangladesh manage to keep their population very high and their footprint very low through a highly successful culture of abject poverty. Does the Group have a similar vision for South Australia? Has the South Australian population been consulted to find out if they desire a lifestyle and diet similar to that of a typical Bangladeshi?

Below is a recent letter to my local MP and councillors on these issues. I expect it (and this) to be the first of many such letters.

Yours sincerely,

Dr James Ward
Ph.D., B.Eng.(Civil) (Hons), B.App.Sc.(Env. Mgt)

Postdoctoral Research Fellow
School of Chemistry, Physics & Earth Sciences
Flinders University

Letter to member of Parliament about democratic and other concerns re population policy in South Australia

TO:
The Hon. Mark Goldsworthy MP, Member for Kavel

CC:
The Hon. Isobel Redmond MP, Member for Heysen
The Hon. Jamie Briggs MP, Member for Mayo
Mayor Ann Ferguson, DC Mt Barker
Cr Lindsay Campbell, DC Mt Barker
Cr Jason Kuchel, DC Mt Barker
Cr Kathy Brazher-Delaine, DC Mt Barker
Cr Lyn Stokes, DC Mt Barker

5th April, 2009

Dear Mr Goldsworthy,

I am writing to express my gratitude for your taking the issue of population growth to Parliament [See also at end of this article], and to add my voice of disgust at the current Labor government's deliberate assault on Mount Barker, Nairne and Littlehampton (as well as other areas targeted for unnecessary growth).

My wife and I moved into the old township of Nairne in mid-2007. As first-home buyers, in part we were forced to move here by unaffordable house prices elsewhere, but the truth is that we both cherish the country lifestyle - we have some chickens, ducks, vegetables and fruit trees, happy relationships with neighbours and the local shopkeepers who know us by name. However, in the State Government's relentless pursuit of population growth, they apparently wish to abolish all desirable
aspects of this country lifestyle, in favour of short-term economic rewards (read: profits to property developers). To quote the State Treasurer, Kevin Foley, "the population is rising, and that's a damn good outcome." As with most people, I violently disagree.

Very scary numbers (like 400,000) are already being touted for this area. If that nightmare came true, we might as well all be living in one big, filthy city covering the whole of the Hills, with no culture of place whatsoever. As the Member representing citizens from this happy and attractive part of the world, I ask that you fight this proposed development with all of your power. I understand that your party may also have been pro-development in the past, but let us not forget the
Liberals' true heritage as a conservative party. If there ever was a time when we needed conservative thinkers, it is now in the face of the reigning Government's reckless push for a population explosion.

Of course, as conservative thinking people we must bear in mind that it is impossible for the proposed experiment in population growth to be successful. Like a population of bacteria on a Petri dish, the human population cannot increase forever. I direct you to the Ronald Wright's small book "A Short History of Progress"; the book contains numerous
sobering examples we would do well to learn from before embarking on this doomed quest for more growth. Another excellent book, only just released, is "Overloading Australia" by Mark O'Connor and Bill Lines, which provides the irrefutable case against further population growth in this country.

As you know, in the case of the modern industrialised global economy, we have now reached an upper limit to global oil production. The International Energy Agency has finally endorsed the reality of Peak Oil, predicting a global energy supply crunch. Right on cue, last year we witnessed the first collapse of some of America's "suburbia" - it doesn't take a genius to connect the dots: as fuel prices skyrocketed, the car-dependent suburban lifestyle became rapidly unsupportable, the
collapse of vulnerable mortgages ensued as people were no longer able to meet their financial obligations, and this generated what we now call the Global Financial Crisis. This is discouraging further investment in oil production, so it is fair to say we have begun the bumpy descent.

We would be well-advised to compare the example of the failed suburban experiment in America to the State Government's proposed experiment in endless growth in the Adelaide Hills. The magnitude of the proposed growth betrays a total disregard for the limitations on the world's fuel and energy supply that all intelligent and informed people now accept as real and extremely serious. As global fuel supplies contract further, the existing suburbs will be hit hard as they were in the US, let alone any proposed new car-dependent suburbs in semi-rural Adelaide Hills.

For brevity I will not go into water scarcity in detail (this tends to receive more media coverage in any case). Suffice to say that increasing the population increases the demand for domestic water supply, but more significantly it increases the demand for irrigated crops and pasture. Not only are we experiencing water restrictions at home, but the area under irrigated land is in decline due to limits to water abstractions in the Murray Darling Basin. To increase the population now would force
us onto tighter water restrictions in our homes (we've already said goodbye to green lawns, long showers, and children playing under sprinklers), but it would also generate higher food prices due to the water-scarce farming situation.

I must state that I am not opposed to development, as long as all future development is negotiated to be within certain very reasonable requirements. As a starting point, the bare minimum requirements are that all new developments must be:
- Commuter-independent, through a strong local job market (i.e. Mt Barker CBD), and - Car-independent through full provision of public transport and safe cycling facilities, and

- Energy-independent through suburb-scale renewable power generation, and
- Water-independent through stormwater and wastewater recycling, and
- Food-independent through local (including suburban) production, and
- Within prescribed, and unchangeable, limits such that biodiversity and aesthetics are maintained forever

These are completely reasonable obligations in the face of widely accepted global (and national) shortages in water, energy, fuel and food, and ongoing biodiversity loss. If property developers and governments are happy to work together to meet these obligations, then as a citizen I am happy for such developments to take place. However, if the vision they have for our future is one in which we are all crammed in like sardines with only the distant memory of what it was like to be able to afford fuel, or water-intensive products like beef and milk, and only a distant memory of such amenities as cars, fountains, swimming pools, air conditioners or warm baths, then let us encourage them to move to India or China and ask the residents there if they are happy - please don't let the Rann Government force such conditions on us here. The people simply do not want the growth, and any effort to hide this fact is grossly undemocratic.

I trust that you will take this on board and continue campaigning for the abolition of the State Strategic Plan's population target. You are not alone!

Yours sincerely,

Dr James Ward
Ph.D., B.Eng.(Civil) (Hons), B.App.Sc.(Env. Mgt)

Postdoctoral Research Fellow
School of Chemistry, Physics & Earth Sciences
Flinders University

Here is the document where Mark Goldsworthy questions the rate of growth in South Australia from

WILL THE PLAN FOR GREATER ADELAIDE BE THAT GREAT FOR HILLS RESIDENTS? Email this page Back

Friday, January 09, 2009

Mark Goldsworthy MP, Member for Kavel, announced today that he will undertake extensive community consultation within the local community as a result of the Rann Labor Government’s plans to allow the urban sprawl to continue in the Hills as part of their Plan for Greater Adelaide.

Mr Goldsworthy said whilst the State Government would be conducting their own consultation, they have a poor track record as has been experienced recently with their Country Health Plan and the water resources issues for the Mount Lofty Ranges.

“The Rann Government claims they consult with the community, yet the community feel the Government makes the decision and then tells them what is to occur, all in the spin of consultation”, said Mr Goldsworthy.

Mr Goldsworthy will contact residents and businesses in Mount Barker, Nairne and Littlehampton to gather their comments about the proposed expansion of housing in the district. He wants to know what people think about increased population, increased traffic, and increased demand on already stretched services such as schools, health and police.

Mr Goldsworthy’s consultation will include those service providers, being schools, health, police and others.

Mr Goldsworthy said the comments he has already received are that the services are now at or near capacity and it doesn’t appear the Government is doing much to meet the current demand. If the Government hasn’t been able to address current community expectations, what commitments will they give to provide improved services and infrastructure in line with their plans to reach the 2 million population target in the State? To give an example, car parking at the new Park and Ride in Mt Barker was at capacity virtually from day one, with bus services also full to capacity. The second freeway interchange is continually ignored by the State Labor Government and there are other examples.

“Some people tell me that housing development in the Hills is at a point where we should consolidate our current position and that it is at the limit, with now being the time to stop and properly assess the situation.”

“I understand the concerns already put forward by academics and the SA Farmers’ Federation, for example, the continued growth of residential development into prime agricultural and horticultural land”, said Mr Goldsworthy.

“I support economic development and sustainable growth, in a manner that is not detrimental to other important factors that impact on our community such as social and environmental effects. Some of my concerns are the fast rate in which the Rann Government is acting to expand the housing development, the impact on infrastructure and services, the loss of agriculture to the Hills, and the destruction of the Hills environment.”

“I undertake to ensure the local community is properly consulted about what they want to take place in their area. My community survey will go out in the coming two months to residents in Mt Barker, Nairne and Littlehampton who are most affected by the developments, however, anyone is welcome to contact me at any time to inform me of their views”, Mr Goldsworthy said.

“I intend to compare the results of my consultation with that of the Government’s, to hold them to account and to ensure that the wishes of the local community are heard loud and clear” Mark Goldsworthy said.

CONTACT INFORMATION:

Address: 20 Main Street, Lobethal SA 5241

Email: kavel[AT]parliament.sa.gov.au
Web: www.markgoldsworthy.com.au

Through a FOI report obtained from the Department of Climate Change and Environment, it is clear that the calculation of kangaroo numbers in kangaroo management zones as they pertain to the FATE program in Mudgee, Molong, Hunter and Central West NSW is a total sham.

On page 2 of the report it says:-

"In order to set harvest quotas with the intention of ensuring sustainability, it is necessary to have reasonably accurate and precise estimates of the sizes of kangaroo populations proposed to be harvested.”

However, on examining the report closer, it is patently clear that no such accurate estimate has been obtained. How can such a killing plan be sustainable or viable and how can cruelty to animals be avoided when the data collection method used is a simple point-in-time head-count using short-run helicopter surveillance with human observation which takes no account of the following important factors:-

1. age or size (young at-foot joeys and very old would be unviable for the kangaroo industry)
2. physical condition
3. gender (which seriously impacts 'sustainability')
4. the changing characteristics over time of the land (water, grass, shelter etc.) on which the kangaroos reside
5. how kangaroos move across the landscape throughout the day and the seasons in response to many factors (wind, heat, cold, feeding time, resting time, breeding time, fires, water supply, human presence, predator presence etc).

Assuming that a single head count at a single point in time in a number of set locations will accurately account for any of these variables and therefore how kangaroos spread across the available landscape at other points in time is a indeed junk 'science'.

Therefore, conclusions from this analysis about kangaroo ‘abundance’, density or any increase or decline in numbers over time are completely useless. Obviously shooters will target the largest kangaroos leaving a surplus of orphaned young who may not be able to survive without their mothers and have no idea how to survive in a mob without male guidance. In such cases young males often try to mate with immature females or females not in oestrus.

There is a very high probability that the figures are overblown due to not allowing for the above important factors and contributes to the myth that kangaroos are in 'plague proportions' and need to be 'culled' by the kangaroo industry before they become too much of a 'pest' to farmers. The public is already brainwashed to believe that there are 'milllions out there' when in fact kangaroos are on track to extinction (see report by Australian Society for Kangaroos at http://www.stopkangarookilling.org ).

The report accepts very high levels of coefficient variation (obviously determined by the cost of helicopter hire and the size of the zone studied). The coefficient of variation for the Central Tablelands, is more than 30% (95% confidence interval) suggesting that in the Central Tablelands the estimated kangaroo numbers are somewhere between 210,100 and 860,000 - a difference of 650,000! How can the kangaroo industry expect a sustainable yield when estimated numbers are so inaccurate?

Finally, since the whole point of the FATE program is to help farmers by removing 'pest' kangaroos and reward them financially, why would areas where kangaroos are not a problem be surveyed? Shouldn't they be excluding land that is not cultivated? Why should the remaining uncultivated land be accepted as an area in which humans could consider the kangaroo a ‘problem’?

In the Upper Hunter zone, 43% of the total zone land area is cultivated, meaning that on 57% of the land kangaroos are not a problem so therefore no killing should be necessary. Additionally, they should only be surveying cultivated sections of land in the analysis, which would obviously diminish density numbers considerably.

Due to all the above, it is impossible for conclusions about past trends in kangaroo numbers nor future trends to be made from the report either towards ‘abundance’ or ‘quasi extinction’.

On the issue of animal cruelty, the myth that a single gunshot to the head of a healthy kangaroo is humane needs to be rejected. Even in the unlikely possibility that a kangaroo shooter will be 100% accurate every single time, what actually happens in practice is more than enough to remind us that kangaroo shooting is inherently cruel.

When its mother is ‘humanely’ shot, the orphaned ‘pouched’ joey is ripped from its mother’s pouch, decapitated, stomped on, or swung repeatedly against the nearest hard object until its head is crushed and its fragile limbs fractured. The ‘at-heel’ offspring of the dead mother is deprived of its mother’s company, milk, warmth and protection and forced to flee and fend for itself against predators such as foxes, marauding dogs and even pythons.

Not all shot kangaroos die instantly. Some flee, in great panic, and die a lingering and excruciatingly painful death which could take months. Some have part of their face blown off which leads to gangrene or starvation from being unable to eat. Pain, exertion and anxiety create physiological and biochemical changes in metabolism leading to lactic acidosis and muscle damage, including to the heart muscle, the release of myoglobin, renal failure, tissue hypoxia, paralysis, and progressive damage to the liver, adrenal gland, brain and lymphatic system. No fair-minded human with an ounce of compassion could possibly believe there is anything ‘humane’ in any of this killing.

In conclusion, the data and analysis of kangaroo numbers that the DECC relies on to implement commercial kangaroo killing programs in zones around the State are so flawed as to be totally useless in determining SUSTAINABILITY, industry VIABILITY and animal CRUELTY and should be halted immediately before irreversible damage to kangaroo populations occurs.

Additionally, a more scientific appreciation of the dynamics and value of the kangaroo in the landscape and ecosystems needs to be incorporated into management of kangaroos away from the archaic pest model which has never been scientifically proven and is strictly anecdotal.

Please write to:

The Hon Ms Carmel Tebbutt MP
Minister for Climate Change and the Environment
Level 30
Governor Macquarie Tower,
1 Farrer Place,
SYDNEY NSW 2000
(p) (02) 9228 4866
(f) (02) 9228 4855
(e) dp.office[AT]tebbutt.minister.nsw.gov.au

by Ellen Brown

Originally published on Global Research

Contents: #MonetaryBreakthrough">Lincoln's Monetary Breakthrough, #SuccessfulTradition">Building on a Successful Tradition, #InflationQuestion">The Perennial Inflation Question, #Wake-upCall">A Wake-up Call, #Notes">Notes

Dear President Obama:

The world was transfixed on that remarkable day in January when, to poetry, song, and dance, you gazed upon Abraham Lincoln's likeness at the Lincoln Memorial and searched for wisdom to navigate these difficult times. Indeed, you have so many things in common with that venerable President that one might imagine you were his reincarnation in different dress. You are both thin and wiry, brilliant speakers, appearing on the national stage at pivotal times. Fertile imaginations could envision you coming back triumphantly as one of those slaves you freed, to prove once and for all the proposition that all men are created equal and can achieve great things if given a fighting chance. But as Wordsworth said, our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting; and if that is true, you may have forgotten a more subtle form of slavery from which Lincoln freed his countrymen, even if you were there at the time. You may have forgotten it because it has been omitted from the history books, leaving Americans ill-equipped to interpret the lessons of our own past. This letter is therefore meant to remind you.

We are now met on another battlefield of that same economic war that visited Lincoln and the Founding Fathers before him. President Obama, the fate of our economy and the nation itself may depend on how well you understand Lincoln's monetary breakthrough, the most far-reaching "economic stimulus plan" ever implemented by a U.S. President. You can solve our economic crisis quickly and permanently, by implementing the same economic solution that allowed Lincoln to win the Civil War and thus save the Union from foreign economic masters.

#MonetaryBreakthrough" id="MonetaryBreakthrough">Lincoln's Monetary Breakthrough

The bankers had Lincoln's government over a barrel, just as Wall Street has Congress in its vice-like grip today. The North needed money to fund a war, and the bankers were willing to lend it only under circumstances that amounted to extortion, involving staggering interest rates of 24 to 36 percent. Lincoln saw that this would bankrupt the North and asked a trusted colleague to research the matter and find a solution. In what may be the best piece of advice ever given to a sitting President, Colonel Dick Taylor of Illinois reported back that the Union had the power under the Constitution to solve its financing problem by printing its money as a sovereign government. Taylor said:

"Just get Congress to pass a bill authorizing the printing of full legal tender treasury notes . . . and pay your soldiers with them and go ahead and win your war with them also. If you make them full legal tender . . . they will have the full sanction of the government and be just as good as any money; as Congress is given that express right by the Constitution."

The Greenbacks actually were just as good as the bankers' banknotes. Both were created on a printing press, but the banknotes had the veneer of legitimacy because they were "backed" by gold. The catch was that this backing was based on "fractional reserves," meaning the bankers held only a small fraction of the gold necessary to support all the loans represented by their banknotes. The "fractional reserve" ruse is still used today to create the impression that bankers are lending something other than mere debt created with accounting entries on their books._#main-fn1">1

Lincoln took Col. Taylor's advice and funded the war by printing paper notes backed by the credit of the government. These legal-tender U.S. Notes or "Greenbacks" represented receipts for labor and goods delivered to the United States. They were paid to soldiers and suppliers and were tradeable for goods and services of a value equivalent to their service to the community. The Greenbacks aided the Union not only in winning the war but in funding a period of unprecedented economic expansion. Lincoln's government created the greatest industrial giant the world had yet seen. The steel industry was launched, a continental railroad system was created, a new era of farm machinery and cheap tools was promoted, free higher education was established, government support was provided to all branches of science, the Bureau of Mines was organized, and labor productivity was increased by 50 to 75 percent. The Greenback was not the only currency used to fund these achievements; but they could not have been accomplished without it, and they could not have been accomplished on money borrowed at the usurious rates the bankers were attempting to extort from the North.

Lincoln succeeded in restoring the government's power to issue the national currency, but his revolutionary monetary policy was opposed by powerful forces. The threat to established interests was captured in an editorial of unknown authorship, said to have been published in The London Times in 1865:

If that mischievous financial policy which had its origin in the North American Republic during the late war in that country, should become indurated down to a fixture, then that Government will furnish its own money without cost. It will pay off its debts and be without debt. It will become prosperous beyond precedent in the history of the civilized governments of the world. The brains and wealth of all countries will go to North America. That government must be destroyed or it will destroy every monarchy on the globe."

Lincoln was assassinated in 1865. According to historian W. Cleon Skousen:

"Right after the Civil War there was considerable talk about reviving Lincoln's brief experiment with the Constitutional monetary system. Had not the European money-trust intervened, it would have no doubt become an established institution."

The institution that became established instead was the Federal Reserve, a privately-owned central bank given the power in 1913 to print Federal Reserve Notes (or dollar bills) and lend them to the government. The government was submerged in a debt that has grown exponentially since, until it is now an unrepayable $11 trillion. For nearly a century, Lincoln's statue at the Lincoln Memorial has gazed out pensively across the reflecting pool toward the Federal Reserve building, as if pondering what the bankers had wrought since his death and how to remedy it.

#SuccessfulTradition" id="SuccessfulTradition">Building on a Successful Tradition

Lincoln did not invent government-issued paper money. Rather, he restored a brilliant innovation of the American colonists. According to Benjamin Franklin, it was the colonists' home-grown paper "scrip" that was responsible for the remarkable abundance in the colonies at a time when England was suffering from the ravages of the Industrial Revolution. Like with Lincoln's Greenbacks, this prosperity posed a threat to the control of the British Crown and the emerging network of private British banks, prompting the King to ban the colonists' paper money and require the payment of taxes in gold. According to Franklin and several other historians of the period, it was these onerous demands by the Crown, and the corresponding collapse of the colonists' paper money supply, that actually sparked the Revolutionary War._#main-fn2">2

The colonists won the war but ultimately lost the money power to a private banking cartel, one that issued another form of paper money called "banknotes." Today the bankers' debt-based money has come to dominate most of the economies of the world; but there are a number of historical examples of the successful funding of economic development in other countries simply with government-issued credit. In Australia and New Zealand in the 1930s, the Depression conditions suffered elsewhere were avoided by drawing on a national credit card issued by publicly-owned central banks. The governments of the island states of Guernsey and Jersey created thriving economies that carried no federal debt, just by issuing their own debt-free public currencies. China has also funded impressive internal development through a system of state-owned banks.

Here in the United States, the state of North Dakota has a wholly state-owned bank that creates credit on its books just as private banks do. This credit is used to serve the needs of the community, and the interest on loans is returned to the government. Not coincidentally, North Dakota has a $1.2 billion budget surplus at a time when 46 of 50 states are insolvent, ...

Here in the United States, the state of North Dakota has a wholly state-owned bank that creates credit on its books just as private banks do. This credit is used to serve the needs of the community, and the interest on loans is returned to the government. Not coincidentally, North Dakota has a $1.2 billion budget surplus at a time when 46 of 50 states are insolvent, an impressive achievement for a state of isolated farmers battling challenging weather._#main-fn3">3 The North Dakota prototype could be copied not only in every U.S. state but at the federal level.

#InflationQuestion" id="InflationQuestion">The Perennial Inflation Question

The objection invariably raised to government-issued currency or credit is that it would create dangerous hyperinflation. However, in none of these models has that proven to be true. Price inflation results either when the supply of money goes up but the supply of goods doesn't, or when speculators devalue currencies by massive short selling, as in those cases of Latin American hyperinflation when printing-press money was used to pay off foreign debt. When new money is used to produce new goods and services, price inflation does not result because supply and demand rise together. Prices did increase during the American Civil War, but this was attributed to the scarcity of goods common in wartime rather than to the Greenback itself. War produces weapons rather than consumer goods.

Today, with trillions of dollars being committed for bailouts and stimulus plans, another objection to Lincoln's solution is likely to be, "The U.S. government is already printing its own money -- and lots of it." This, however, is a misconception. What the government prints are bonds -- its I.O.U.s or debt. If the government did print dollars, instead of borrowing them from a privately-owned central bank that prints them, Uncle Sam would not have an eleven trillion dollar millstone hanging around his neck. As Thomas Edison astutely observed:

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill. The element that makes the bond good, makes the bill good, also. The difference between the bond and the bill is that the bond lets money brokers collect twice the amount of the bond and an additional 20%, whereas the currency pays nobody but those who contribute directly in some useful way.
It is absurd to say that our country can issue $30 million in bonds and not $30 million in currency. Both are promises to pay, but one promise fattens the usurers and the other helps the people."

#Wake-upCall" id="Wake-upCall">A Wake-up Call

Henry Ford observed at about the same time:

"It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning."

Today we the people are starting to understand our banking and monetary system, and we are shocked, dismayed, and furious at what we are discovering. The wizard behind the curtain turns out to be a small group of men pulling levers and dials, creating an illusory money scheme that, behind all the talk and bravado, is mere smoke and mirrors. These levers are controlled by a privately-owned, unaccountable central bank called the Federal Reserve, which has recently dispensed billions if not trillions in funds to its banker cronies, without revealing where these monies are going even under Congressional inquiry or in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. As Chris Powell pointed out recently in conjunction with an FOIA request brought by Bloomberg News, which the Fed declined to comply with:

"Any government that can disburse $2 trillion secretly, without any accountability, is not a democratic government. It is government of, by, and, for the bankers."_#main-fn4">4

There was a time when private central bankers were the heavyweights in control, able to run their ultra-secret agenda with impunity; but that era is coming to an end. The bankers are scrambling, trying to patch up their crumbling creations with schemes, bailouts and sleight of hand. That effort, however, must ultimately prove futile. As investment adviser Rolfe Winkler said in a recent article:

"The great Ponzi scheme that is the Western World's economy has grown so big there's simply no 'fixing' it. Flushing more debt through the system would be like giving Madoff a few billion to tide him over. Or like adding another floor to the Tower of Babel. To what end? The collapse is already here. The question is: How much do we want it to hurt? Using the public's purse to finance 'confidence' in a system that is already kaput may delay the Day of Reckoning, sure, but at the cost of multiplying our losses. Perhaps fantastically."_#main-fn5">5

The bankers are on the run, feverishly trying to use the collapse of the current system to steer us toward an "Amero"-style North American currency, or a one-world private banking system and privately-issued global currency that they and only they control. We the people will not accept those solutions, however, no matter how bad things get. We demand real solutions that empower us, not further enslave us.

Abraham Lincoln had such a solution. President Obama, you can finally bring his monetary solution to fruition. Manifest the vision of Lincoln, Jefferson, Madison and Franklin, and we the people will make sure you are placed in the pantheon of our greatest leaders and are revered for all time. America's greatest days can still be ahead of us; but for this to happen, we need to expose and root out the deceptive banking scheme that would enslave us to a future of debt and increasing homelessness in this great country our forefathers founded. The time has come for democracy to rise superior to a private banking cartel and take back the power to create money once again. Such a transformation would represent the most epochal and empowering shift that humanity has ever seen. As you recently said:

"This country has never responded to a crisis by sitting on the sidelines and hoping for the best. Throughout our history we have met every great challenge with bold action and big ideas."

Your words are a timely reminder of our long legacy of action and bold solutions in the face of adversity. Can we do this? Yes we can.

For more information, see the writings of a variety of money reformers including David Korten, Richard Cook, Stephen Zarlenga, Michael Hudson and this author; articles collected at www.webofdebt.com/articles and www.GlobalResearch.ca; the documentary videos "The Money Masters" and "Money as Debt;" and proposed legislation by Congressman Dennis Kucinich to nationalize the Fed, and by Congressman Ron Paul to audit it (HR 1027).

#Notes" id="Notes">Notes:

Contents: Lincoln's Monetary Breakthrough, #SuccessfulTradition">Building on a Successful Tradition, #InflationQuestion">The Perennial Inflation Question, #Wake-upCall">A Wake-up Call, #Notes">Notes

#main-fn1" id="main-fn1">1. #main-fn1-txt">↑ See Ellen Brown, "Borrowing from Peter to Pay Paul: The Wall Street Ponzi Scheme Called Fractional Reserve Banking," www.webofdebt.com/articles (December 29, 2008).

#main-fn2" id="main-fn2">2. #main-fn2-txt">↑ Congressman Charles Binderup in a 1941 speech, "How America Created Its Own Money in 1750: How Benjamin Franklin Made New England Prosperous." Binderup quotes historian John Twells on this point.

#main-fn3" id="main-fn3">3. #main-fn3-txt">↑ E. Brown, "Turning the Tables on Wall Street: North Dakota Shows Cash-starved States How They Can Create Their Own Credit," www.webofdebt.com/articles (March 11, 2009).

#main-fn4" id="main-fn4">4. #main-fn4-txt">↑ Chris Powell, "Fed Refuses to Disclose Recipients of $2 Trillion," GATA (December 12, 2008).

#main-fn5" id="main-fn5">5. #main-fn5-txt">↑ Rolfe Winkler, "More Debt Won't Rescue the Great American Ponzi," Option Armageddon (March 9, 2009).

Special thanks to CC for his invaluable help with this article.

Ellen Brown developed her research skills as an attorney practicing civil litigation in Los Angeles. In Web of Debt, her latest book, she turns those skills to an analysis of the Federal Reserve and "the money trust." She shows how this private cartel has usurped the power to create money from the people themselves, and how we the people can get it back. Her earlier books focused on the pharmaceutical cartel that gets its power from "the money trust." Her eleven books include Forbidden Medicine, Nature's Pharmacy (co-authored with Dr. Lynne Walker), and The Key to Ultimate Health (co-authored with Dr. Richard Hansen). Her websites are www.webofdebt.com and www.ellenbrown.com.

Ellen Brown is a frequent contributor to Global Research. Global Research Articles by Ellen Brown

To become a Member of Global Research.

The CRG grants permission to cross-post original Global Research articles on community
internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified. The source and the author's copyright must be displayed. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: crgeditor [ AT ] yahoo.com

© Copyright Ellen Brown, webofdebt.com, 2009

The url address of the original article is: www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13118

See also below: Local Resident decribes how World Rally will disrupt lives of quite coastal community.

Kingscliff residents outraged at plans to use Jack Baylis Park in Marine Parade Kingscliff as the "pits area" for the planned Repco Rally Australia in September have come out fighting.

They have organised a meeting in the park at 11am on Saturday 18 April to brief residents on the damaging takeover of the park planned for a month or more.

Local resident Max Hopper, OAM, who was Chief Commissioner at Bass Coast Shire Council from 1994 to 1999 said "It is inappropriate and totally unacceptable to take a popular foreshore park as the service centre for rally cars."

"If that is allowed Kingscliff residents can expect that our beach front park will be the centre for wild parties with many revelers sleeping in the park and the dunes."

"There is no way that Council will be able to enforce its rules on alcohol consumption, open fires and protection of vegetation on the dunes."

According to information provided by Council, the organizers of the rally plan to use a large part of the park on the foreshore at Marine Parade Kingscliff to service the competing rally cars. Sections of the park will be fenced off and the grass removed to allow installation of a 'temporary' gravel surface. Some trees may have to be removed to allow access by the rally cars.

Repco Rally Australia is one round of the World Rally Championships held each year. It is planned to hold the Australian leg each alternate year for ten years with an option to extend for a further ten years. In the alternate years it is planned to run the event in New Zealand.

Kingscliff Ratepayers and Progress Association want the car maintenance area to be somewhere else, preferably not in a residential area.

In other parts of the world locals are no more impressed than Kingscliff residents.

In Cyprus, for example, trees were felled across the rally route and an official was kidnapped by protesters. In other parts of Europe hay bales have been placed across the roads to block the rally cars.

The event was run in Western Australia until 2006 when the Government there refused to pay Rally expenses, because the economic benefits promised by Rally promoters failed to happen.

What you can do: attend the planned protest meeting at Jack Baylis Park on Marine Parade at 11am on Sat 18 April. Phone 0438 357 452 for more information.

#disruption" id="disruption">Local Resident decribes how World Rally will disrupt lives of quite coastal community

Max Hopper said big events usually drive off usual customers from local businesses and then mobile vans and caterers cream off spending by visitors.

Mr Hopper also expressed concern that elderly residents would be placed at risk because of the traffic restrictions that were planned for the duration of the rally.

"The rally cars will be traveling back and forth from the park to the race area several times a day causing traffic chaos" he said.

"We have been told by Mike Rayner from Tweed Council that Marine Parade will be reduced to one lane in one direction during the rally and totally closed for several hours each day of the actual racing."

"Many elderly residents require daily home visits for health care and home help" he said.

"How will the carers be able to get to the residents with the disruption of the local traffic system?" he asked.

Residents are also worried about the impact on local wildlife. Mr Hopper said "The Tweed is home to 100 vulnerable species of wildlife and 23 endangered species."

"They will be placed at greater risk as a result of this rally" he said. "The timing of the rally coincides with their breeding season."

"Many residents moved to this area because of the 'green' image it projects" he said "and they are not happy about secret deals by the state government and the local council to host an event that is just the opposite of that image."

Mr Hopper invited all concerned local residents to attend the planned protest meeting at Jack Baylis Park on Marine Parade at 11am on Saturday 18 April. In case of wet weather please come the Community Hall. For further information ring 0438 357 452