(We) can do better

On Saturday 4 November 2017 Saudi Prince Mohammed bin Salman placed “30 of Saudi Arabia’s most senior figures, among them blood relatives of senior rulers,” as five-star prisoners at the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton, “accused of corruption”. [1] A year later most, possibly more, remained locked up and shaken down.[2] Many of them were billionaires. This must be the only country that locks up billionaires, especially if they are relatives of the ruler. The ‘corruption’ charge may be true, but it also serves as an excuse to control the activities of rivals to the throne and their supporters. Although such practices are not unknown in elites outside Islam,[3] this it is very traditional in the Ottoman Empire sense. Before the 16th century Ottoman rulers used to execute all their rivals. When Suleiman came to power in 1520 he commuted this to simply locking princes up in a big harem, where, “they were kept in a perpetual state of preadulthood, denied the right to marry or to father children by concubines.”

I quote from some of a fascinating history of such practices in the Ottoman Empire – part of a much larger multi-author anthropology book on palace women [and men] all over the world. The quotes below come from Leslie P. Prince, “Beyond Harem Walls, Ottoman Royal Women and the Exercise of Power,” in Anne Walthall, (Ed.), Servants of the dynasty, Palace women in world history, University of California Press, 2008, p.85-86)

Harems were not confined to women; they were private spaces in households and sometimes men were kept there.

“The system of succession that prevailed in that period [before Suleiman’s accession in 1520] – all princes were considered eligible for the throne and the heir was the one who could eliminate all other claimants – inevitably rendered them rival foci of political factions. Each prince was accompanied to his provincial post by his mother, who was expected to support her son’s efforts to win the throne. The practice of fratricide (whereby, in the interests of security, a new sultan executed his defeated brothers and their sons) meant that both a prince and his mother had as their highest priority his political survival. Only a mother of a victorious prince would return to the imperial capital, as queen mother to the new sultan. The fate of a royal wife or concubine thus depended almost entirely on that of her son. [...]

[In the 16th century, with the accession of Suleiman in 1520] The last support in the edifice of dynastic decentralization – the princely governorate – was dismantled by Suleiman’s son and grandson. With the demise of their political role, princes became faceless individuals, strictly confined to the palace; there they were kept in a perpetual state of preadulthood, denied the right to marry or to father children by concubines. By the end of the sixteenth century, no members of the royal family except the sultan left the capital. Indeed, the only members of the family to leave the palace residence were married princesses. As a consequence, the imperial harem expanded greatly in size as it absorbed the suites of mothers and sons and acquired the requisite administrative structure."

NOTES

[1] Phrasing and documentation of this incident from Martin Chulov, “How Saudi elite became five-star prisoners at the Riyadh Ritz-Carlton,” 7 November 2017, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/nov/06/how-saudi-elite-became-five-star-prisoners-at-the-riyadh-ritz-carlton
[2] https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/a-year-after-the-ritz-carlton-roundup-saudi-elites-remain-jailed-by-the-crown-prince/2018/11/05/32077a5c-e066-11e8-b759-3d88a5ce9e19_story.html?utm_term=.6b3dd97cff44 and https://www.tatler.com/article/ritz-carlton-in-riyadh-arrests-saudi-princes
[3] One is reminded of Trump vs Hillary, "Lock her up!" and we are also seeing a bit of this by anti-Trump aspirants in the Mueller Russia probe in Washington at the moment. Anyone studying the history of ruling classes understands the utter corruption of power, with rulers knocking off their rivals all through history, although not usually ALL their relatives, then proceeding to substitute slaves and immigrants.

In November 2018 The Australian Population Research Institute (TAPRI) published an analysis of the higher education overseas student industry. It was framed around the remarkable growth in the share of commencing overseas university students to all commencing students over the years 2012 to 2016. This share increased from 21.8 per cent in 2012 to 26.7 per cent in 2016.

Bob Birrell and Katharine Betts
(This post is republished from John Menadue’s site, Pearls and Irritations, 27 December 2018.)

In November 2018 we published an analysis of the higher education overseas student industry. It was framed around the remarkable growth in the share of commencing overseas university students to all commencing students over the years 2012 to 2016. This share increased from 21.8 per cent in 2012 to 26.7 per cent in 2016.

Since publication, higher education statistics for 2017 have been released. They show  that the share of commencing overseas students to all commencing students have increased to 28.9 per cent. In the case of the Group of 8 (Go8) universities, by 2017 this share had reached well over 40 per cent in the University of Sydney, ANU, and the University of NSW (Table 1).

The following brief summary indicates why such extreme reliance on overseas students should be of concern. We then explore another issue, not canvassed in the November report. This is the implications of the rapid growth in overseas student commencements for access to higher education on the part of domestic students.

This a highly topical matter because in December 2017 the Coalition government announced that it would henceforth cap the level of domestic higher education enrolments. Since that time, Australia’s universities, including the Go8, have mounted an offensive against this decision on the grounds that it limits opportunities for domestic students. Yet the enrolment data examined below indicates that, at least since 2012, the Go8 have effectively enforced just such a cap on domestic enrolments.

A summary of the November report’s findings
The November report argued that the overseas student industry was in a precarious state because of its increased reliance on overseas student enrolments. The share of overseas commencing students to all commencing students at Australia’s universities increased from 21.8 per cent in 2012 to 26.7 per cent in 2016.

We concluded that the tail was wagging the dog. That is, such was our universities’ reliance on overseas students, that most were prioritising the health of the overseas student industry over the educational needs of domestic students. In the case of research, the universities’ focus was primarily on basic research. This is because it is this that is relevant to their aspiration to achieve a place in the top 100 institutions in the global university ratings systems. As documented in the November report, research of this kind is the most likely to be accepted by the top international journals that drive the ratings system. Research focused on local priorities wouldn’t make the cut.

Australia’s overseas student industry is split into two distinctive markets. The first includes most of the Go8 universities, where overseas students were charged some $40,000 a year, mainly for courses at the undergraduate and post-graduate-by-coursework level in business and commerce. Most of the students are Chinese. Indeed, between 2012 and 2016, the total increase in overseas student commencers at Go8 universities was 13,738 . Of these 12,198 were Chinese.

Students’ (or parents’) willingness to pay for such high priced courses can be attributed to the fact that they deliver credentials from a university rated in the international top 100. (This includes almost all of the Go8.) Qualifications from these universities appear to be highly regarded in the Chinese labour market. Relatively few of these Chinese students stay on in Australia after completing their studies.

This enrolment pattern helps explain the universities’ focus on basic research. In order to maintain enrolments from China, they have to promote such research because it scores best on the metrics used by the international ratings systems.

The second market is composed of almost all the other universities. The number of overseas students enrolling in these universities also increased significantly between 2012 and 2016 (though at a slower rate than occurred in the Go8). However the countries of origin were primarily located in the Indian subcontinent. Most of these students were attracted to Australian universities because of the access their enrolment gave them to the Australian labour market and thus to the potential of a permanent residence visa.

We concluded that the overseas student industry was in a precarious state. In the case of the Go8, overseas enrolments were vulnerable on three points.

First is the risk of reputational damage on account of the poor quality of the education overseas students are receiving. In the business and commerce faculties at the Go8, where Chinese students often constitute the majority, such courses have had to be made less demanding so that the many Chinese students with relatively limited English language skills can cope with their requirements. Then there is the risk from geopolitical tensions that threatened Chinese enrolments. And finally there is the risk of competition from other countries.

For the other universities the main issue is current changes in the rules governing overseas-student access to the Australian labour market and to long-term employment contracts. This means that their chances of obtaining a permanent residence visa are contracting. As a consequence we argued that these changes would diminish the attraction of enrolling for higher education at a non-Go8 Australian university.

Table 1: Per cent share of commencing onshore* overseas students to all onshore commencing students, Go8 universities and all Australian higher education institutions, 2012, 2016 and 2017

Source: Department of Education and Training, Higher Education Statistics, Table 1.10, Commencing Students by State, Higher Education Provider, Citizenship and Residence Status.
* The term onshore is used to distinguish overseas students being educated in Australia from those in Australian campuses set up overseas. The latter are not included in these figures.

Higher education opportunities
Australia’s universities repeatedly assure the Australian public that increased enrolments of overseas students are not damaging the prospects of domestic students aspiring to a university education. Rather, they state that the two sets of enrolments are independent of each other; opportunities for locals are not being crowded out.

How could this be? Well, according to a 2014 policy document from the Go8, international students actually ‘directly facilitate domestic participation in higher education’. This is achieved, the document claims, because revenue from overseas student fees contributes to the costs of domestic education. It asserts that international student fees ‘subside each domestic student by around $1,600’.

This might seem plausible given that domestic enrolments have increased since the removal of enrolment caps for domestic students in 2009. Over the years 2012 to 2017 (years in which overseas enrolments expanded rapidly) the number of commencing domestic students at Australia’s universities increased from 370,314 to 416,371.

The result is that a very high share of the cohort of university age are currently enrolled as higher education students. In fact, university competition for potential domestic students is such that some universities have seen a drop in their domestic enrolments over the past couple of years. Concern that this enrolment scramble had gone too far (and was costing the Commonwealth government too much in funding) prompted the Coalition government in December 2017 to announce that it would re-impose enrolment caps in 2018 (caps which Labor promises to withdraw should it win government in 2019).

The universities have responded to these caps by insisting throughout 2018 that they amount to a reduction in opportunities for domestic students. According to Margaret Gardiner, Vice Chancellor at Monash University, the cap acts as a funding freeze which ‘will limit the share of highly-skilled well-paid jobs in our economy that can be done by qualified Australians in the decades ahead’. Or, in the words of the newly appointed (in June 2018) Chief Executive  of Universities Australia, the reinstating of caps puts an end to the ‘unearthing and unleashing’ of talent that has occurred since the caps were removed, starting in 2009.

If expansion of overseas student enrolment was helping to create opportunities to increase domestic enrolments you would expect that more domestic students would be gaining places in Go8 universities. Over the period 2012 to 2017, when there were no caps on the number of domestic students that any university could enrol, domestic student commencements at Go8 universities barely moved. They were 87,939 in 2012 and 87,930 in 2017. By contrast, over these same years the number of overseas student commencements at the Go8 increased from 30,320 to 56,363. (The data are drawn from Higher Education Statistics releases, various years.)

Given that there were no caps in place, the Go8 could have taken more domestic students over these years. Many more thousands of these students would have jumped at the opportunity to attend a Go8 university. They were precluded from entry by the high ATAR  entry thresholds imposed by Go8 universities. Such is the Go8 universities’ prestige that they attract the best domestic performers in secondary school exams. Like the overseas students, domestic students know that a credential from a Go8 university gives them a competitive advantage in the labour market (in this case within Australia).

The stabilisation of domestic enrolments was not because the Go8 lacked the capacity to increase their student load. They did have the capacity, but all of it has been taken up by increased enrolments from overseas students.

Clearly, the Go8 universities preferred to enrol overseas students. In effect, the benefits of the allegedly superior education that these universities offer went to overseas students rather than to local students. This was not because overseas students had superior potential to take advantage of what the Go8 offers. The contrary is the case. The Go8 do not preference high performing overseas students. There are minimal entry barriers to their enrolment other than the ability to pay the huge fees required.

Conclusion
Australia’s universities, especially the Go8, are caught in a vicious circle as their reliance on overseas student revenue deepens. This reliance means that they cannot prioritise teaching which benefits the vocational needs of their domestic students, to expand enrolment opportunities for domestic students or to focus on research activities relevant to Australian industry or the well being of Australian citizens.

Report authors
Bob Birrell (mobile 0413 021 126) is the Head of the Australian Population Research Institute (TAPRI), an independent, non-profit research organisation. Katharine Betts is deputy head.
This paper is based on two TAPRI research reports:
Australia’s higher education overseas student industry revisited, December 2018  and Australia’s higher education overseas student industry: in a precarious state, November 2018.

The Syrian Kurds have asked Syria to help them because Turkey is threatening them. President Erdogan treats them as an extension of the Kurds in Turkey who want independence from Turkey. During the main part of the war in Syria (which seems to be tailing off now) the Kurds fought the Takfiri rebels. The United States, which supplied a lot of the so-called rebels including ISIS (indirectly at least) at times appeared to support Kurdish independence, using them as a lever against the Syrian Government. The Kurds had been offered control of their own department by the Syrian Government, but not actual independent state status. The US rewarded a Kurdish independence movement against Syria, although it is not clear that all Kurds in Syria really wanted this. The region also contains substantial minorities of Arabs and others whom a separate Kurdish state might not have suited. Until Russia intervened in the war (at the invitation of the Syrian Government) it looked like the United States backed terrorists were going to tear the country apart. The UN and NATO and its allies, including Australia, all supported this with a policy of removing President Assad and splitting Syria into many little states. The western public and corporate media provided propaganda to support this. Western readers were given no critical comparison with the prior destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, states destroyed by the same kind of tactics. YouTube gave great comfort to these lies when it suddenly removed all of the Syrian Presidency's interviews, claiming some breach of advertising. [Suddenly some of them are back, as the wind is changing.] Since the insurgency began in 2011, Turkey provided a covert base for terrorists to attack Syria from. After Russia intervened with the invitation of Syria, the US, which was an illegal and unwelcome presence in Syria, tried to get Turkey to support it. As it was also promoting the idea of the Kurds having an independent state, Turkey's support could never be relied on. Turkey could always align itself with the Russians, although, in the end, it seemed to prefer to be independent and it has its own ambitions to dominate the region. By outing the murder of the journalist, Kashoggi, in the Saudi Embassy in Turkey, Turkey has made itself look a bit respectable, but it is not inconceivable that Erdogan is supporting the ruling elite in Saudi Arabia against the Crown Prince, for strategic purposes. No-one really knows. Whilst Turkey is not a Wahabist state, Erdogan is a leader in the Muslim Brotherhood, which wants to establish a new Muslim caliphate in the Middle East and much of Europe. Syria is a multi-religion state which includes many Christians and it does not support a Muslim caliphate. This editorial is by Sheila Newman and James Sinnamon, candobetter editors. We have republished the following report on the state of the war in Syria from RT.

Syrian Army ‘raises flag’ in country’s Kurdish province for 1st time since start of civil war

Republishing from RT at https://www.rt.com/news/447572-syrian-forces-enter-manbij/.
Published time: 28 Dec, 2018 09:23 Edited time: 28 Dec, 2018 15:32

The Kurdish YPG militia on Friday called on Damascus to secure Manbij, located close to the border with Turkey. Ankara earlier said it plans to conduct an “anti-terrorist operation” around the city, with the YPG being the target.

In response, Damascus said its troops were already in the north and raised the flag in the “area of Manbij.” In a statement from the general staff broadcast by the Syrian media, the top brass said their army was determined to “crush terrorism and defeat all invaders and occupiers” as well as to provide security for all Syrian citizens.

Also on rt.com
Kurdish YPG calls on Syrian government to protect Manbij from Turkish attack

Just how far-reaching the Syrian deployment is and if it’s taking place at all is yet to be confirmed by other sources, as is the Syrian Army troops’ arrival in the city proper.

Skeptical over the statement from Damascus, Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan called the “flag-raising” a “psychological action.” He, however, acknowledged that there would be no need for the Turkish Army op in Manbij if the Kurds pull out of the city.

A Turkish-backed Syrian rebel rides on a truck with a mounted weapon at Manbij countryside, Syria December 28, 2018. © REUTERS/Khalil Ashawi

Meanwhile, Turkey-backed militants opposed to both the government and the Kurds said they were moving fighters towards Manbij and were prepared to start an operation there, if necessary.

Also on rt.com
Erdogan: Reports of Damascus taking control of Manbij, Kurdish-held town bordering Turkey is ‘psyop’

Damascus is trying to assert full control over Syrian territory, a goal that remains elusive despite significant progress over the year. Among the contested zones are the province of Idlib, some Kurdish-controlled areas and a region on the border with Jordan, where a US military outpost is located.

The Kurds and the central government have remained mostly neutral towards each other over the years of the conflict and occasionally allied against jihadist groups. The Manbij maneuver does not make them immediate allies, but with Kurds de facto asking protection from the Syrian government, Damascus now seems in a stronger position to negotiate the degree of autonomy the Kurds would have after the political transition in the country. They currently control large swaths of territory east of Euphrates River, which is rich in oil, and crude revenues would be crucial for Syria’s post-war reconstruction.

Also on rt.com
Arab states are making nice with Assad’s Syria. Will the West follow suit?

Manbij became the focus of tense war of words earlier this month, after Erdogan said he was prepared to order a new “anti-terrorist operation” targeting the Kurds. He said the move was necessary because the US failed to make the YPG remove their fighters from the area, despite promises to do so.

The US, a key ally of the Kurds for the past several years, has meanwhile decided to withdraw its troops from Kurd-controlled areas in Syria, including Manbij. The withdrawal promises to be a game-changer for Kurds, who relied on American backing for protection against Turkey, but it is also yet to happen.

Ankara has amassed a fighting force near its southern border over the past few weeks but stopped short of launching the promised offensive. Turkey sees all Kurdish militias as an extension of its domestic Kurdish insurgency and attacked them repeatedly in both Syria and Iraq.

Also on rt.com
Moscow welcomes Syrian Army entry to Manbij, will ‘synchronize expectations’ with Ankara

The situation is to be discussed on Saturday by top Turkish and Russian officials at a meeting in Moscow. Russia, a backer of Damascus in its fight against jihadist groups, said the deployment in Manbij may be a good sign that stabilization of Syria is progressing. But a spokesman for the Kremlin indicated that the outcome would depend on how the talks in Moscow unfold.

The discovery of a new fish at a famous WA fossil site is in such good condition that it provides an exciting fresh glimpse into the evolution of species from 380 million years ago. The new fish - named Pickeringius acanthophorus (honouring the late Museums Victoria fossil collection manager David Pickering) - lived in the Late Devonian Period. Its beautifully preserved fossil skeleton was discovered by Flinders University’s Professor John Long at the Gogo Formation, in the Kimberleys of Western Australia. This has become a world famous fossil site, containing superb 3-dimensional preservations of entire fishes in limestone nodules, and has so far yielded more than 50 species.

Pickeringius, about the size of a sardine, was one of the earliest ray-finned fishes – a lineage that accounts for more than 98% of all living fish. There are about 30,000 ray-finned fish species alive today, but in the Devonian period, they were greatly outnumbered by other fish groups, with fewer than 30 species described worldwide.

The new find is especially significant because the braincase of this fish is exquisitely preserved. Devonian ray-finned fishes have mostly been found squashed flat, so the new discovery will enable CT scans of its skull at ANU, allowing palaeontologists to digitally render its endocast, and provide important information on early fish brain evolution. Only two previous Devonian ray-fins (Mimipiscis, from The Gogo Formation, and Raynerius, found in France) have had their brains subject to this level of detail.

The Pickeringius is distinctive for having enormous spiracular openings on the top of its head, though these present a mystery to palaeontologists. Most ray-finned fishes of this period had minute spiracles, and these are now vestigial or lost in most modern forms. The only living ray-finned fishes with well-developed spiracles are African bichirs, which use them to breathe air at the surface. Alternatively, modern rays (which are not ray-finned fishes) use their spiracles to breath while they are on the seabed (with their mouths and gills pressed under their body).

The fish is also excessively prickly, hence the name acanthophorus (which means spine bearer). The top of its skull is covered in little conical denticles. The underside of the pectoral girdle and the belly scales also covered in sharp denticles. Each of the fin-rays has rows of pointy barbs, giving the fins a serrated appearance. Even the bony spines leading to the tail fin (basal fulcra) have rows laterally projecting spikes, meaning that even its spikes have spikes.

The paper, A New Actinopterygian from the late Devonian Gogo Formation, Western Australia, by Dr Brian Choo, Jing Lu, Sam Giles, Kate Trinajstic and Professor John A Long, has been published by Papers in Palaeontology. (doi/epdf/10.1002) It can be read online here: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/spp2.1243?shared_access_token=A_FKIuAwpUE8FHttQsCxyk4keas67K9QMdWULTWMo8Paz3_Fs79HomKiypL_30Plhd0SCFxG3zFN4ceNKkbChkSPtLMIp5j2PywttSVRn1G51BwiVarAaHrbu1DIqAt_PK9f2_dm81wCWlYSsco6jg%3D%3D

Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel's stubborn endorsement of the UN Global Migration Pact has brought his government to its knees and caused massive demonstrations against the Pact in Belgium. Charles Michel now governs with a minority, because the center-right Flemish N-VA has walked out over the PM's move to have Belgium support a UN migration pact. The Prime Minister is now trying to govern with assorted and reshuffled Liberals and Christian Democrats. The upcoming Migration Pact has divided international alliances: Austria, Hungary, the US, Israel, Australia and several other states rejecting the accord. [1]Belgium's migration minister, Theo Francken, commented on Thursday, "It's way too pro-migration. It doesn't have the nuance that it needs to have to also comfort European citizens." He said that, although it was not legally binding, it was also not without legal risks. He said that wide interpretation of human rights laws in EU courts were "tying the hands of migration policy-makers." [2]

The Belgian government has split apart after Prime Minister Charles Michel ignored the objections of his ruling coalition’s biggest party and insisted he would sign the UN migration pact.

The Flemish nationalist New Flemish Alliance (N-VA) party quit the government following crisis talks over the weekend, prompting Michel to announce he would travel to Marrakesh to sign the controversial compact representing a minority government.

Stepping down as interior minister on Sunday, the N-VA’s Jan Jambon told local media “I think that, formally speaking, we are stepping down. We said that if the coalition goes to Marrakesh, it will be without us.”

The patriotic party had previously produced a list of 30 objections to signing the so-called Global Compact on Safe and Orderly Migration including a lack of differentiation between illegal and legal flows, and questions over whether the agreement, which declares mass immigration to be “inevitable, desirable and necessary”, could have a chilling effect on objective journalism.

Vice Prime Minister Alexander De Croo rebuffed the N-VA for branding the parties set to sign Belgium up to the UN document as a ‘Marrakesh coalition’, asserting that ministers will continue to have “firm but humane” migration policies because “no one in this government wants to pursue open [borders]”. [3]

Le Pen, Bannon speak against UN Global Compact in Brussels

On 8 December Marine Le Pen (National Rally Party) and former White House Chief Strategist Steve Bannon participated in a meeting against the UN Global Compact for Migration in Brussels on Saturday. "There is no leader of any political movement in Europe, the United States or Latin America that doesn't agree. We are talking about a great human tragedy in Sub-Saharan Africa, in Central America," Bannon stated. Le Pen urged French President Emmanuel Macron not to sign the compact, saying "the French president's immigrationism is so irrepressible that he forgets his constitutional duties." The non-legally binding Global Compact for Migration which covers international migration in all aspects was concluded in July and is expected to be adopted by UN member states in December. [4]

REFERENCES

[1] https://www.rt.com/newsline/445988-belgian-pm-left-minority/

[2] https://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/nation-world/article222706780.html

[3] https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/10/belgian-government-un-migration-pact/

[4] Ruptly, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fQWUfBMs6S4

We like to blame politicians for the lack of action on climate change. But how prepared are people to really pay the price of change? We like to imagine that all politicians need to do is cleverly tax carbon and magically renewable energies will arise to take their place. The situation in France shows the fault in this thinking. Renewables cannot possibly replace fossil fuel - not on the scale needed to avert environmental disaster. Someone must pay the price - and it is the poor who get hurt most.

In France an attempt to raise diesel and fuel prices has resulted in mass riots, led in large part by people from rural communities who were most affected by the rises and had fewer alternatives. We have the same sort of phenomenon in Australia - wealthier Australians get solar panels (with subsidies) leaving renters and poorer people picking up the tab for the electricity distribution system.

The truth is our system is soaked in oil. Any attempt to reduce the flow will be catastrophic, financially, socially and in even more fundamental ways i.e. famine. Our food production system is particularly dependent on oil - you cannot run tractors, combine harvesters and trucks (especially refrigerated ones) on batteries - even if you could, you need massive generation capacity to charge these - which is not going to happen, and certainly not in time. Thus if we attempt to tax fuel in a way that has impact people will start to go hungry - the ones on the margins first, then increasingly more.

So what do we need to do? We need to fundamentally, radically and actively decouple our societies from the fossil fuel system. Modern industrialism will not survive the transition, so relying on high-tech solutions is a mistake - these technologies will not be able to be produced or maintained on the necessary scale given the changes required to avert ecological disaster.

How do we decouple from the fossil-fuel system? With massive sacrifices from everyone. Lets not kid ourselves - these changes will have more impact, and require more effort, than both world wars. Also, if we do not actively take charge, change will be forced on us by circumstance, and that will be even less pleasant. Thus WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER - and all must be prepared to make great sacrifices.

What is to be done? We need to divide up all the large farms in Australia's non-arid regions (which is about 2%-3% of the land mass - and shrinking with housing expansion and climate change) and create smaller Permaculture farms of around 10 acres - with families, or small groups of friends, running these farms. It has been shown that Permaculture can be done with zero fossil fuels. Masanoba Fukuoka ran his large farm for over 16 years using only hand tools and buying no chemicals or fertilizers. Also the American Professor Russell Smith demonstrated with his book 'Tree Crops: A Permanent Agriculture' how small diversified farms could produce higher quantities of calories than large farms (see the graphic above) The trouble is it can take 10 years or more to establish such a farm - thus we need a massive system of support to enable this (eg. to grow and distribute trees and plants) and to feed people until the Permaculture farms are producing excess. Thus we need to carefully move from the industrial farms that are feeding us now so as to gradually shift that land to Permaculture production whilst feeding the whole population. This will require people giving up things to support the transition - and most of all it will require us to work together, be selfless and not hold grudges when things do not go our way - as they surely will not sometimes. We all need to develop super-hero levels of self denial and perseverance (but unfortunately without the super recognition that comic book heroes get).

Will it work? Many studies have shown that small farms out-produce large farms. This was demonstrated by Nobel economist Amartya Sen and also acknowledged by the U.N which has been trying to encourage smaller farms around the world (but meeting resistance as you can read about here).

What is the promise? I suspect that the benefits of a Permaculture future for Australia (and the world) will be healthier and happier people with better relationships as we engage in animal and land husbandry, craft and local-industrial production - not to mention a future for our planet and our children.

But WE must do it, WE must call for it - WE must support our leaders in achieving this - we cannot sit back and expect them to fix this alone - especially if none of us is prepared to go without.

So who is up for being a super-hero? Who wants to give all to save the world?

What to do now?

Help spread the word! We are looking to start a political campaign called "A Permaculture Future" to promote Permaculture as the viable alternative to our current fossil-fuel based system. Please respond in the comments or contact Permaculture Victoria if you are interested.

Inside is an English translation of the French Yellow Vests' manifesto https://www.sott.net/article/402396-What-do-the-protesters-in-France-want-Check-out-the-official-Yellow-Vest-manifesto

Economy/Work

A constitutional cap on taxes - at 25%
Increase of 40% in the basic pension and social welfare
Increase hiring in public sector to re-establish public services
Massive construction projects to house 5 million homeless, and severe penalties for mayors/prefectures that leave people on the streets
Break up the 'too-big-to-fail' banks, re-separate regular banking from investment banking
Cancel debts accrued through usurious rates of interest

Politics

Constitutional amendments to protect the people's interests, including binding referenda
The barring of lobby groups and vested interests from political decision-making
Frexit: Leave the EU to regain our economic, monetary and political sovereignty (In other words, respect the 2005 referendum result, when France voted against the EU Constitution Treaty, which was then renamed the Lisbon Treaty, and the French people ignored)
Clampdown on tax evasion by the ultra-rich
The immediate cessation of privatization, and the re-nationalization of public goods like motorways, airports, rail, etc
Remove all ideology from the ministry of education, ending all destructive education techniques
Quadruple the budget for law and order and put time-limits on judicial procedures. Make access to the justice system available for all
Break up media monopolies and end their interference in politics. Make media accessible to citizens and guarantee a plurality of opinions. End editorial propaganda
Guarantee citizens' liberty by including in the constitution a complete prohibition on state interference in their decisions concerning education, health and family matters

Health/Environment

No more 'planned obsolescence' - Mandate guarantee from producers that their products will last 10 years, and that spare parts will be available during that period
Ban plastic bottles and other polluting packaging
Weaken the influence of big pharma on health in general and hospitals in particular
Ban on GMO crops, carcinogenic pesticides, endocrine disruptors and monocrops
Reindustrialize France (thereby reducing imports and thus pollution)

Foreign Affairs

End France's participation in foreign wars of aggression, and exit from NATO
Cease pillaging and interfering - politically and militarily - in 'Francafrique', which keeps Africa poor. Immediately repatriate all French soldiers. Establish relations with African states on an equal peer-to-peer basis
Prevent migratory flows that cannot be accommodated or integrated, given the profound civilizational crisis we are experiencing
Scrupulously respect international law and the treaties we have signed

Pauline Hanson, the leader of One Nation, an Australian political party, says the Sentinel Island tribe that killed US missionary John Allen Chau with bows and arrows, should be praised for their immigration policies. Good to see one politician in Australia has respect for non-agricultural peoples. Inside find most of an article reporting this from https://www.rt.com/news/444962-australia-hanson-tribe-missionary/

In a discovery that could one day help breast cancer patients, Dr Adam Walker from Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA) and UNSW Sydney has found a potential treatment for ‘chemobrain’, a condition that affects up to 60 per cent of women after receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.[i]

The study published today in PLOS-ONE and funded by the National Breast Cancer Foundation (NBCF) has the potential to transform cancer treatment research and eradicate the negative side-effects of cancer and chemotherapy.

Dr Walker says that up until now, scientists believed that chemotherapy was the only cause of cancer-associated cognitive impairment such as memory, learning and concentration difficulties, commonly dubbed as ‘chemobrain’.

“However, studies have observed cognitive impairment in cancer patients prior to treatment,” says Dr Walker.

“This suggests the cancer alone may be sufficient to induce cognitive impairment, but the mechanisms through which this occurs are unknown.”

In his study using animal models, Dr Walker targeted tumour-to-brain communication and found that breast cancer cells released inflammatory markers that cause inflammation in the brain.

He found that a low dose of anti-inflammatories completely blocked breast cancer cells from causing memory loss without affecting other aspects of the disease.

“This suggests that the tumour itself can actually hijack the brain via inflammation to cause cognitive impairment, but that we can use anti-inflammatories to block this process.

“Interventions to treat cancer-induced cognitive impairment have so far focused on behavioural therapies such as brain training, which don’t tap into the biological processes of tumour-to-brain communication,” says Dr Walker.

“This is the first study to show that we can potentially disrupt that communication using anti-inflammatory agents such as aspirin to reduce the inflammation that causes cognitive impairment.”

CEO of NeuRA Professor Peter Schofield said this innovative new research has the potential to transform how cancer patients view and manage their treatment.

“This work represents a new frontier for neuroscience in cancer research.”

“Our ultimate goal is to eradicate the negative side effects of cancer treatment, so that quality versus quantity of life decisions no longer need to be made.”

“Chemobrain has long been an issue for breast cancer patients who have been treated with chemotherapy,” says Dr Chris Pettigrew, NBCF Director of Research Investment.

“This new development is a big win for research and for the 68,824 Australians living with breast cancer.”[ii]

The next phase of Dr Walker’s work is to look at how anti-inflammatories might block other aspects of ‘chemobrain’ such as learning and concentration difficulties, followed by clinical trials.

“We think anti-inflammatory drugs could be a potentially cheap and safe intervention to prevent and treat chemobrain, but we need to learn more about who should take them and when during the cancer journey,” says Dr Walker.

NOTES

Neuroscientist discovers potential treatment for ‘chemobrain’

EMBARGOED:
6am AEDT Friday, 7 December 2018

In a discovery that could one day help breast cancer patients, Dr Adam Walker from Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA) and UNSW Sydney has found a potential treatment for ‘chemobrain’, a condition that affects up to 60 per cent of women after receiving chemotherapy for breast cancer.[i]

The study published today in PLOS-ONE and funded by the National Breast Cancer Foundation (NBCF) has the potential to transform cancer treatment research and eradicate the negative side-effects of cancer and chemotherapy.

Dr Walker says that up until now, scientists believed that chemotherapy was the only cause of cancer-associated cognitive impairment such as memory, learning and concentration difficulties, commonly dubbed as ‘chemobrain’.

“However, studies have observed cognitive impairment in cancer patients prior to treatment,” says Dr Walker.

“This suggests the cancer alone may be sufficient to induce cognitive impairment, but the mechanisms through which this occurs are unknown.”

In his study using animal models, Dr Walker targeted tumour-to-brain communication and found that breast cancer cells released inflammatory markers that cause inflammation in the brain.

He found that a low dose of anti-inflammatories completely blocked breast cancer cells from causing memory loss without affecting other aspects of the disease.

“This suggests that the tumour itself can actually hijack the brain via inflammation to cause cognitive impairment, but that we can use anti-inflammatories to block this process.

“Interventions to treat cancer-induced cognitive impairment have so far focused on behavioural therapies such as brain training, which don’t tap into the biological processes of tumour-to-brain communication,” says Dr Walker.

“This is the first study to show that we can potentially disrupt that communication using anti-inflammatory agents such as aspirin to reduce the inflammation that causes cognitive impairment.”

CEO of NeuRA Professor Peter Schofield said this innovative new research has the potential to transform how cancer patients view and manage their treatment.

“This work represents a new frontier for neuroscience in cancer research.”

“Our ultimate goal is to eradicate the negative side effects of cancer treatment, so that quality versus quantity of life decisions no longer need to be made.”

“Chemobrain has long been an issue for breast cancer patients who have been treated with chemotherapy,” says Dr Chris Pettigrew, NBCF Director of Research Investment.

“This new development is a big win for research and for the 68,824 Australians living with breast cancer.”[ii]

The next phase of Dr Walker’s work is to look at how anti-inflammatories might block other aspects of ‘chemobrain’ such as learning and concentration difficulties, followed by clinical trials.

“We think anti-inflammatory drugs could be a potentially cheap and safe intervention to prevent and treat chemobrain, but we need to learn more about who should take them and when during the cancer journey,” says Dr Walker.

For more information or media enquiries contact:

Rachel Zarb, NeuRA
M: +61(0)405944755
E: [email protected]

Sophie Cooley, NBCF
M: +61(0)417421683
E: [email protected]

Download digital assets: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1kAISTWsihAiDUBLedND45-XeR3IHKnDp

Included:

· Chemobrain case study

· Infographic

· Video content

CV overview:
Dr Adam Walker completed his PhD in psychology at the University of Newcastle in 2011. He spent a year at the University of Illinois as a postdoctoral researcher in the lab of integrative immunophysiology, followed by three years in Houston, Texas as a postdoctoral researcher at the MD Anderson Cancer Center. He returned to Australia in 2015 and joined Monash University as a National Breast Cancer Foundation research fellow, investigating the mechanisms underlying cognitive and psychiatric side-effects of cancer and its treatment.

NeuRA overview:
Neuroscience Research Australia (NeuRA) is an independent, not-for-profit research institute based in Sydney, Australia. As a leader in brain and nervous system research, our goal is to prevent, treat and cure brain and nervous system diseases, disorders and injuries through medical research.

NBCF overview:
The National Breast Cancer Foundation (NBCF) is Australia’s leading national body funding game-changing breast cancer research with money raised entirely by the Australian public.

We receive no government funding. What we do, would not be possible without the support and generosity of people and organisations like YOU. Our mission is simple: stop deaths from breast cancer. How? By identifying, funding and championing world-class research - research that will help us detect tumours earlier, improve treatment outcomes, and ultimately – save lives.

[i] National Cancer Institute: https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/research/understanding-chemobrain

[ii] Cancer Australia: https://breast-cancer.canceraustralia.gov.au/statistics

In China's 'smart cities' there are video cameras spying everywhere. Paul Joseph Watson points out how tech giants in the West are bringing the same kind of thing to internet media platforms, from which you may be banned if you stray outside the prescribed norms.

"Media resistance has always been one of the big problems," says Sandra Kanck, who came from a family where there were seven children and she learned early that one wage did not go as far for seven as it might for fewer. From 1994-2009 Sandra served as an Australian Democrats’ Member of the upper house of the South Australian Parliament. Her ‘maiden’ speech in parliament was – predictably for those who know her – about population. For more than nine years Sandra Kanck has been either President or Vice-President of SPA, mostly the former, including reluctantly juggling the role of Acting Treasurer for three months during one of her stints as President.

University of Sydney suspended professor Dr. Tim Anderson from his position as a senior lecturer after he had worked for this university for more than 20 years because of his criticisms of war propaganda against Syria, Iraq and Palestine. Dr.Tim Anderson is the author of the excellent book, "The Dirty War on Syria". This action by Provost Garton is an infringement on academic freedom and on Dr Anderson's human right and freedom of speech. His offence to the establishment is to inform, educate and organise for the end of wars, in which Australia is complicit.

While the ostensible reason for this extreme and totally illegitimate expulsion is because of Tim’s advocacy for Palestinian equality, it’s hard not to see it as motivated mainly by his advocacy for Syria, and as an attempt to suppress the “pro-Assad” point of view.

Perhaps I’m drawing a long bow, but it also seems no coincidence that this week, after barely a mention of Syria since mid-October, suddenly we heard the tired old story of the Caesar photos and the need to somehow get Assad to trial – or rather to be prosecuted for war crimes, as there is no-one suggesting that he didn’t commit them.
Which just means we need to redouble our efforts in support of both Palestine and Syria, as Israel ramps up its military aggression and propaganda on both fronts.

The current atmosphere in Australia is highly anti-Russian and anti-Syrian, while at the same time absolutely nothing is discussed that would offer any perspective; there is only one setting – Assad brutal dictator killing his own people, and Putin the calculating and misleading leader of a pariah state that “carelessly” poisons people it doesn’t like. If a news story doesn’t fit this pattern it’s either forgotten or adjusted to suit.

Incidentally I find it interesting that the graphic under dispute refers to Israel’s 2014 war on Gaza, rather than the most recent attack, or the six months of target practice on the Gaza border by the IOF. I should also say that the point being made is one I always find the most disingenuous claim of Israel and its allies – that Hamas’ rockets are “indiscriminate” – as if it is that which makes them criminal. By comparison the IDF’s precision strikes that intentionally target and obliterate families, TV stations, water pumping stations, schools and ambulances, are “legitimate responses”.

Sustainable Australia Party's Southern Metropolitan region Upper House candidate Clifford Hayes appears to be elected to the Victorian Upper House, according to various media reports. For those of you reeling at the thought of a Labor Government, second time round, with the bit between its teeth on immigration, land-clearing and the scent of developer money in its nostrils, this news of a win by SAP, may give some hope. We need more SAPs in government, as fast as possible.

How the preferences worked

A quick look at the flow of preferences for Clifford Hayes Southern Metro Region so far is revealing. (Congratulations Cliff!)

A weight of 15,000 votes (from 148,000 ballot papers) actually comes from the overflow of successful Labor and Liberal candidates. This amounts to 35% of Cliff's vote count and is due solely to the way the two Major's preferenced him - not micros. Just saying this as it might help counter any complaints there might be about preferencing.

The difference in 'votes' vs 'ballot papers' in the above counts is of course because overflow ballot papers are reduced in weight each time they have already served to elect someone. Here reduced 90% in weight on average by the time Cliff got them.

Looking at the Group Tickets: Labour preferences for SAParty started at 12th of 45 candidates, Liberal at 22 of 45. ( Greens had us at 14 of 45). These are all pretty good for us. Anyone using above the line voting for these majors dictated their preferences would go according to these Major's tickets (not SAParty's of course).

The runner up here is the Greens. Cliff is ahead of the Greens by 4,000 votes. or some 8%. (No Green was elected in this Region)

Clifford Hayes speaking on developers and planners June 2017, when people tried to avert Labor dictatorship on planning

Some quotes from Clifford Hayes' speech: "We residents must have a say. The whole process has been corrupted." "It's a problem of culture: developers and planners sing from the same songbook. More housing, more consolidation, more appartments, more units, more highrise - all on existing infrastructure. And this forces the price of land and existing housing up. Bad news for our kids, bad news for our suburbs, bad news for us. Good news for investors, good for speculators, dramatic profits to be made. So this pressure makes property speculation and property development a government protected industry. And it's backed up by planners, VCAT, the government, the department: The whole problem has been left to market forces to sort out. This is great for people who see housing as a way for people to make profits, but for a community it's bad news. We lose all the things we value. As communities we need to get things right. Housing should be for families, not just for investors."

Who really understands the inner workings of our “modern vibrant” economy - that finely tuned mechanism that gives everyone a fair go and preserves our way of life? Turns out it’s more like one of those classic Bruce Petty cartoons with machines with lots of levers and belching fumes at the hapless operator.

I was recently surprised to happen upon a lecture given by a real life economist who managed to make the swirling mess make sense – and nothing is at it seems. I’ll try to explain- if you are prepared to accept the opinions of someone like me, who you don’t know and will probably never meet – but hey we do that every day when we swallow the opinions of News Corporation and Fairfax media empires, don’t we?

With charm and enthusiasm, Flinders University Professor of Economics Philip Lawn comprehensively dismantles all the old chestnuts used to justify government’s obsession with debt and deficit, their absolute belief in continued growth, and their lust for scaring the pants off everyone about pesky older people, dole bludgers, and I would add lately Middle Eastern death cults and those who dare ask questions on Q&A.

In explaining government spending, Prof. Lawn refers mainly to pensions, so, for the purposes of this article, which gives my summary of what Prof. Lawn is saying in the videos below, I’ll also refer mainly to pensions, although his explanations hold true for all forms of government spending.

Here's the gist of it:
There is no budget emergency. The Australian Federal government cannot go broke. Our taxes aren’t used to fund pensions, and government has access to as much $AUD as it likes, whenever it likes.

The Federal government has access to a bottomless pit of $AUD to finance the aged pension or indeed any of its spending. Although we are encouraged to believe that pensions, Medicare, hospital and school spending is bleeding us taxpayers dry, this is not true. We aren’t paying our taxes so that we can help fund our aged and disabled pensioner incomes, or build hospitals and schools. The truth is that taxes are levied on the private sector and working population to enable the government and other purchasers to spend in a manner that is not undesirably inflationary. Taxes are just a lever, used to quell inflation.
 
Prof. Lawn on Currency Issuing Central Governments and some macroeconomic facts:

Macroeconomic Facts

The Federal Government is a Currency Issuing Central Government (CICG) and is the monopoly owner and issuer of $AUD– which is a Fiat currency.

As a CICG, the Federal government does NOT have to tax, borrow or sell assets to finance its spending. Barring obstruction from a hostile Parliament, it has access to as much $AUD as it likes, whenever it likes.

You, I, State and Local governments, banks, businesses, are users of the $AUD. We do not have unlimited access to $AUD, and thus face day to day budget constraint. The Federal government does not. Its circumstances are not like that of a household, bank, businesses etc.

A deficit does not reduce government’s capacity to spend, nor does a surplus increase its capacity to spend. It taxes and sells government securities/bonds (described falsely as government borrowing) for specific purposes but NEVER to finance its spending.

A CICG NEEDS to destroy enough private sector spending power to nullify the inflationary effect of its own spending, so taxes are used to destroy private sector spending power.

Central banks – in our case the Reserve bank- sell government securities/bonds when a CICG operates a deficit in order to control interest rates.

So, CICGs spend first, then tax to the level required to nullify the inflationary effect of their own spending. Then, if required, government will sell government securities to maintain a targeted interest rate.

But- Can’t banks create $ out of nothing? ......Yes, but the money they create (financial asset) is always matched by a financial liability. However, when the Federal government creates $AUD for spending purposes it creates a financial asset but no offsetting financial liability.

Thus, the Federal government is the ONLY creator of net financial assets, which are needed for the private sector, in aggregate, to ‘net save’.

The important issues are:

- Will the real assets exist in the future for retirees (pension/super) to purchase?
- Will the basic G&S, health services, nursing homes, etc. be available for retirees to purchase with their income cheques?

And, as the population ages, and the working population shrinks, the nation’s ability to provide these real assets depends on:

- The productivity of the working population (economy’s sustainable productive capacity), and
- What proportion of the real stuff produced is made available in the form of real stuff needed and desired by retirees.

So you may be wondering, wouldn’t the Federal government’s exploitation of the bottomless pit lead to hyper-inflation a la Zimbabwe? (Called Demand–Pull inflation)

No it won’t........ well only if there is no competent management, because:

- Demand Pull Inflation occurs if net spending of the Federal government pushes Total (public and private sector) spending beyond the economy’s productive capacity (full employment level of GDP)
- If total spending is LESS than the productive capacity of the economy, there is no hyper- inflation, but there is unemployment. As has been the situation in Australia for the last 40 years!
- Ideally we want total spending to exactly equal productive capacity – full employment and minimal inflation, and there is NO REASON why the Federal government cannot manage its spending to ensure this is the case. It faces no financial constraints in doing so

This explains why the huge budget deficits of the US Federal government in 2008-2011 weren’t inflationary. Total spending in the US was still well short of the productive capacity of the economy, as proven by the official unemployment rate in the US at the time being 9-10%.

So in summary:

- A Currency Issuing Central Government can always net spend to a level that ensures total spending equals the full employment level of GDP
- It should never spend beyond this level as this would be inflationary. ....Only a fool would recommend this!
- If, once ensuring total spending equals the full employment level of GDP a CICG operates a budget deficit, so be it. It has access to the bottomless pit of $AUD. It can run deficits forever.
- Taxes paid by the working population do not finance the pension bill
- Taxes paid by working population are required merely to quell the inflationary effect of retirees spending and government spending.
- Federal government spending, including provision of the pension, is financed by creating new money and spending it into existence.
- The Federal government prevents this from being inflationary, and destabilising the economy by reducing the spending power of the working population by taxing it (i.e. it destroys some existing money)

What’s more, it is a furphy that if we get more people onto superannuation, they won’t be a drain on the poor old taxpayer, because:

- Taxes do not finance the pension. Pensions are financed by the Federal government creating new money.
- In order for retirees to spend in a way that is not inflationary, ‘spending room’ must be made available for them, by the Federal government taxing the working population. The working population still has to be taxed even if all retirees were financed by superannuation.
- If the switch to superannuation provides a higher fortnightly spending cheque for retirees, meaning they can purchase more Goods and Services, more spending room must be made available to prevent their spending becoming inflationary. .......
- Resulting in the Federal government having to tax working population more!

Are there other solutions?

- The Federal government could reduce its own spending – meaning fewer public goods and infrastructure – which Lawn believes we are witnessing now
- Increase the productivity of working population, negating the need for the Federal government to create more spending room, and negates the need to increase the tax impost on working population. By increasing productive capacity of working population:
- A smaller working population can produce same/more G&S for all citizens
- Overcomes the concerns about an ageing population
- Overcomes the need to increase tax impost on working population
- May even provide more G&S for retirees to purchase and enable the AFG to increase the pension  without having to increase taxes

What really matters is if there are enough real Goods & Services for retirees to purchase with their pension/super cheques. If not, retirees will be forced to compete in the market place with the working population for G&S – which will cause inflation.

Undesirable solutions include increasing tax on the working population or reducing government spending on provision of public goods. The desirable, sustainable, sensible, ethical, call it what you like, outcome is to increase the sustainable productive capacity of the economy (i.e. increase productivity of working population), thus ensuring a smaller working population can provide the real G&S to meet the desires and needs of everyone. Ah yes, I remember when we were told that one day we’d be able to enjoy shorter working weeks and retire younger!

That sounds good, so how do we increase the sustainable productive capacity of the economy? Well, we maintain our Natural capital; improve critical infrastructure - much of which has ‘public good’ characteristics so should be supplied by government; make technological advances –which requires R&D spending; and sustain the workforce - which requires spending on education, training, preventative health etc. This is starting to look like what most people want government to do isn’t it?

So, what is undermining our ability to achieve these things?

- High population growth rate
- Increased rate of resource use and waste generation caused by growth in real GDP
- Inadequate government spending on critical infrastructure, inadequate government spending on R&D, inadequate government spending on education, training, health etc.

Hey, Lawn has just described the government ideology – mind you there’s no resistance from Mr. Short One and his limp opposition. Both sides- the Laborials as Bob Brown once called them- are promoting population growth, promoting GDP growth (even though it no longer increases per capita well being) and cutting government spending!

Indeed, our high population growth rate means a larger proportion of economic activity must be dedicated to expanding infrastructure, equipment, skills etc. Each 1% growth per annum, requires 7-10% of GDP; however government infrastructure spending has been approx. 1.85% GDP per 1% growth per annum...... No wonder we can’t get a seat on the train!

And, how are we travelling at present?

- Labour productivity increasing at a low rate compared with pre GFC years (peaked around 1998-2002 – see Chart 3 Grattan Institute Report ‘Australia’s Productivity Challenge’ Page 14 here)
- Population growth and resources throughput growth is reducing the Natural capital that provides the natural resources needed in future
- The desire for GDP growth isn’t making us better off (GDP vs. GPI Genuine Progress Indicator)
- There is already inadequate spending on R&D, education, health
- Critical infrastructure has been run down due to inadequate government spending on public goods

The Federal government could run a balanced economy if only it wanted to – it just doesn’t want to. Instead it seems hell bent on stripping us down to our underpants and reducing our standard of living and quality of life. With indecent obsession, government is doing almost everything to undermine the ability of a future Australia to cater for the very challenging future we face, and is trying to repair an unbroken and unbreakable budget.

I just can’t get my head around the morals of these people with their hands on the levers of control. There is no budget emergency and the only black hole in Canberra is the bottomless pit of $AUD. We are being encouraged to begrudge spending on essential government services and those in need, misled that our taxes are funding that spending and to top that off a good dose of suspicion and fear towards our fellow citizens. Whoever is managing this climate of fear and suspicion has the morals of an alley cat.

If you’d prefer to hear Professor Lawn direct, without being filtered through my brain, I highly recommend his YouTube (Parts 1&2) which are embedded in this article. The URLs are: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-j-cqKQb1Ho and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=et5Kt1NVwlQ

Jenny Warfe
July 2017

Dear 7.30.
The statements being made by politicians and commentators re the size and growth of the population/immigration intake are (deliberately) ignorant, seriously uninformed or deliberately politically biased. And the coverage of this issue by your program and ABC journalists more generally also lack quality research, lack of 'joining the dots', failure to question unfounded claims by the above and, in some cases, unquestioned acceptance and repeat of demonstrably untrue statements.
Please consider the following demonstrable facts and follow the inevitable conclusion.

Infrastructure, including, schools, hospitals, police stations, utilities for water and electricity, roads etc. do not last forever. It's estimated that across the broad sweep of all infrastructure, infrastructure has a life of ~50 years. Thus 2% of the total capital value of all infrastructure must be spent every year just to maintain but not to improve infrastructure for the existing population.

Recently, largely due to high immigration intakes, our population has been growing at 1.6% pa. Not long ago the rate was as high as 2%. But at 1.6% this means that 3.6% of the total capital value of all infrastructure must be spent each and every year just to maintain the level of service; that is an 80% increase in the cost of infrastructure just to maintain the same level of service.

This cost is not only ignored when it is claimed that high immigration is economically beneficial, the error is massively compounded and used to mislead by the way in which GDP is used as the criterion of economic benefit. The additional cost of the required 80% increase in infrastructure is added to GDP not subtracted. This is a function of the way GDP is calculated. It adds together all the dollars spent on goods and services whether the 'goods' are 'goods' or 'bads'. This money spent on expanding infrastructure cannot be spent on other things to improve real welfare for the existing population. Everyone seems to agree that the infrastructure required by the deliberately expanded population (through the Federal Government's immigration policy) should be built before the new intake arrives. Witness the very loud and universal applause on your QandA program when this point was made. Thus the burden falls on the existing population one way or another. If the infrastructure is not built before the new intake arrives, existing citizens suffer a decline in service, if it is built before the new intake arrives it is the existing citizens who pick up the cost. This is consistent with several Productivity Commission reports that it is not the existing population that benefits but the migrants.

Nor does the dishonesty over claimed economic benefits of high immigration stop there. As populations increase and cities expand most ordinary citizens bear increased costs: car maintenance, travel distances, petrol etc. These are real costs borne by these citizens but they add, yes add to GDP. It is this failure of GDP to measure, but to be used by many, including ABC journalists, to be a surrogate measure of quality of life that is used to mislead.

Another related matter poorly presented by the ABC. The Premier of S.A. is calling for an increase in migration to South Australia, again claiming economic benefit, yet at the same time hospital services have broken down badly: ambulances are banking up at emergency departments (ramping) and nurses and doctors are bitterly complaining about inadequate facilities to serve their patients. There are 4,794 public hospital beds in South Australia. If our population is to grow by 1.6% per year we would need an additional 77 beds this year and an exponentially increasing number in following years as populations became larger. Against this 77 extra beds the Marshall Government has pointed with some pride at reopening 20 beds in the old Repat Hospital. The hospital problem is clearly related to the issue of high population growth rate but journalists are not making the connection.

This is not in any way to blame migrants for these problems. It is the Federal Government that is responsible for the migration program, not the migrants. Nor is the above any reflection on the composition, religious background, sex or sexual orientation of migrants. This is simply about numbers and the failure of most media including the ABC and your program to do some simple maths and join the dots.
Yours sincerely,
John Coulter

The discovery of a dead 31ft sperm whale with 6kgs of plastic in its stomach off the coast of Indonesia is further indication of the grave future our oceans and aquatic wildlife face as a result of marine plastic pollution. (Boomerang Alliance director Jeff Angel.)

Plastic items found inside the deceased mammal included '115 coffee cups, four plastic bottles, 25 plastic bags and two flip-flops'.

It's not the first death attributed to plastic waste - and it won't be the last. But the quantity of plastic items point to a terrifying 'new normal' confronting our marine environment.

'The sad demise of a sperm whale is another warning about plastic pollution of the oceans,' Boomerang Alliance director Jeff Angel said today.

'No doubt there are many other whales and marine life we don't see dying in the oceans from plastic. We now know we have a serious problem and must act with strong responses from government, business and the community to end this pollution.'

Please see attached pdf call for submissions to kayaking at Frankston Nature Conservation Reserve. "[...] I nor the friends received this directly. It was forwarded to me from the equally outraged Frankston Environmental Friends Network. The Regulations specific for the reserve which were put in place by the Minister for the Environment in 2015 were revoked on 1 February 2018, making the reserve a free-for-all. All of the protection work for the reserve, fought for many years has been ignored and overridden by the Andrews Labor Government. Accordingly, Paul Edbrooke will find his place last on my ballot paper," writes Frankston Councillor, Quinn McCormack.

Quinn McCormack writes: "Please put in a submission against this proposal. I suggest sending not only a submission to Parks Victoria but also to the Minster for the Environment, Shadow Minister for the Environment, and to the reserve email address so that it doesn't get lost in the Parks Victoria system. Due date is is December 1.

The claim is that the community was consulted in December 2017 - I was not consulted and I am not aware of a single member of the reserve friends group being consulted. There WAS NO COMMUNITY CONSULTATION. It seems that it was a selective survey of a handful of recreational interest groups and mates.

Relevant email addresses:

[email protected]
lily.d'[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]

In a nutshell, the proposal to introduce kayaking is inconsistent with the reserve status as a Nature Conservation Reserve, inconsistent with the full community consultation undertaken over more than 10 years, damaging to flora, damaging to fauna, damaging to water quality and downright dangerous.

- Frankston Nature Conservation Reserve specific Regulations, which were in place until 1 February 2018 expressly excluded activities such as kayaking and cycling. Why would any decent management authority create a management plan which is directly contradictory to enacted Regulations?

Toxic deepwater danger in old mine shaft 20m deep - No ranger present either

- There was no assessment as to the quality nor impact to the flora and fauna condition at the reserve before making changes to access arrangements and determining future appropriate activities.

- Kayaking will ultimately result in a rare high quality freshwater body (previously potable water) becoming contaminated, and eventually having toxic algal blooms as the water body is too deep to turn over.

- Public safety has not been assessed - no ranger is present and the water body is 20metres deep, having been constructed as a reservoir from an old mine site. A water body of this magnitude is rare in an urban setting and planning should consider it in this context.

Ecological impact

- Kayaking will have a detrimental impact to two endangered vegetation communities - Submerged Aquatic Herbland and Aquatic sedgeland, endangered and vulnerable in the Gippsland Plains Bioregion respectively.

- FFG Act listed species - Musk Duck, Blue-billed Duck, and Freckled Duck - use the water body.

- Additional species at risk locally such as the Snake-necked turtle and frog species which inhabit the reserve, such as the nationally threatened Growling Grass Frog.

- There was no consultation with key stakeholders (such as the Friends group for the reserve) nor with the broader community about potential future activities at the reserve."

[Candobetter.net Editor: The points put forward by Councillor Quinn were rearranged by the editor.]

Ami Horowitz journeys to Mexico to find out the real reason why there is a caravan of migrants on its way to the United States’ border with its southern neighbor. The caravan is being orchestrated and logistically supplied like a military operation by some very wealthy people and the UN. This looks like an invasion, organised by members of the US power elite, under a thin pretense of humanitarian aid. Some interesting comments under the video, including about how Venezuelans are crossing the border to Brazil to escape famine, but there is no sign of the UN or other AID programs there.

Ex Labor leader, Mark Latham, recently joined Pauline Hanson's One Nation Party and will be running for the NSW legislative council at the next state election. Here is his 8-Point Plan to "save Sydney “suffocating” from overpopulation and overdevelopment."

Latham's 8-Point Plan

1. Our immigration program must be framed in the interest of the people who live here now. This is especially true of policies impacting on an over-crowded, increasingly dysfunctional city like Sydney.

2. Permanent immigration numbers should be slashed, bringing them closer to their 20th Century average of 70,000 per annum (down from 190,000 currently). Temporary visas must also be cut back.

3. NSW should not take any more special refugee intakes, given the mismanagement of Syrian refugee settlement by the Baird Government.

4. Sydney’s planning laws must be overhauled to make the city more efficient and sustainable. An urban containment strategy is needed. For existing suburbs, One Nation supports development and density restrictions in under-serviced, over-crowded LGAs. The Government should publish a comprehensive report identifying these suburbs (most likely, most of the city).

5. The release of greenfields residential land also needs to be limited to prevent further urban sprawl. Priority should be given to the development of employment land in Sydney to reduce commuter-travelling times, especially in the city’s outer suburbs.

6. The Greater Sydney Commission should be disbanded (at an annual cost saving of $18 million) as it has become a mouthpiece for Big Australia immigration and unlimited population growth in Sydney. Political appointments and unrealistic planning strategies have dominated the Commission’s work.

7. The Greater Sydney Commission’s excessive housing and population growth targets should also be abandoned. NSW Planning should be given the task of containing the city’s growth to reasonable lifestyle, infrastructure and environmental limits. Local Councils, as the level of government closest to the people, also have a critical role to play in limiting densities and development in line with local infrastructure/service capacity. One Nation respects this vital local government urban planning role.

8. The State Government should scale back the responsibilities of the so-called Western Sydney Aerotropolis to focus on employment creation in the immediate vicinity of the new Badgerys Creek Airport, rather than land acquisition and development for residential purposes. In the fair treatment of existing property rights, affected landowners should be bought out at enhanced (rezoned) land values, rather than current unimproved rates.

BRAG has always tried to remain unaligned politically but the plans the Andrews’ Government has for centralizing planning, if re-elected, require us to take a stand. The plans are being developed in secret by Labor to ensure that massive changes can be rammed through, if re-elected, to push at least 70% of new medium to high density housing into the middle suburbs of Melbourne. What this means is that you can expect multi-storey blocks of flats in your local street and neither you nor your council will be able to do a thing about it. You will have no right to be advised, object or appeal and the first indication will be when construction commences.

And these flats won’t be just two or three story, they could be up to seven or eight storeys or even more. No more mandatory heights, no real restriction on how many dwellings per block, as Planning Minister, Richard Wynne, has told the Public Accounts and Estimates Committee that, under the changes, 10 or more dwellings could be built on a single block. Previously the maximum per block was only two dwellings per block. No more backyards or gardens and lots of concrete.

On the other hand, the Coalition has announced at our Restore Residents’ Rights Rally on the steps of Parliament, that, if elected it will restore the Neighbourhood Residential Zone and General Residential Zone protections introduced under the former Coalition Government recently torn up by Labor. In addition we have established that the Coalition will review VCAT’s practice of acting as another “Responsible Authority” and overturning over 80% of council properly arrived at decisions. We attach a copy of David Davis’ presentation at the Rally which confirms the Coalition’s position and we also have confirmation in writing from David Davis (Shadow Minister for Planning).

BRAG is raising this issue because Labor’s plans for intense densification of our suburban residential areas will drastically change the way we live.

You can do something about this at the coming election if you don’t want to live in an overcrowded neighbourhood.

BRAG

www.brag.asn.au

Dave Davis, (Lib) Shadow Minister for Planning committments to restore protections to residential zones

Shadow Minister for Planning,
The Hon David Davis Mp
Speech to the Restore Residents' Rights Rally
Front steps of Parliament House
8 June 2017

I am very pleased to be here today, determined to support people right across Melbourne- There are many of my colleagues here as well who are determined to see that the liveability of Melbourne is protected and enhanced.

lnterjection (lndistinct).

Well, we did do some very significant things. We put in neighbourhood residential zones and protections on general residential zones. What I would say is this: We are at serious risk at the moment. The Plan Melbourne Refresh that came in in recent weeks and VC110, the planning amendment that accompanied it, strips away many of the protections that were put in place, the protections of neighbourhood residential zones and general residential zones.

General residential zones go from 9 metres to 11 metres, neighbourhood residential zones go from 8 metres to 9 metres and the cap of two residences per property has now been removed completely,
removed completely. And Richard Wynne admitted under pressure at PAEC, the public accounts committee, the other day that 10 or more can now be crammed onto one of those neighbourhood
residential blocks.

I make a commitment today, that if we are elected in 2018, we will restore the residential zones those protections.

A key aspect of where this (Andrews Labor) government is heading is public land and they are on a mission seize public land across the state and to develop it with massive, massive The people at Markham Estate know exactly what I am saying. Everyone supports, in the case of Markham, everyone supports the replacement of old public housing stock with new publlc housing stock. But no-body imagined for a second that massive towers would be built on that site. No-one imagined for a second that the density would be taken in that way. lt is a sell off of public land and as the FOI that was achieved by Graham watt makes clear, it was about achieving - their words {Labor), not mine - "super profits", "super profits".

Well let me just say very clearly the (Labor) government, through its new Development Victoria body, a merger of Major Projects with Places Victoria and that has got a remit to develop public land right across the state. We sought to put in protections for the community to say that those developments had to be approved by councils, that councils must support them' That was defeated in the upper house, but that protection now not there means that the new Development Victoria
body is going fast and wide across the state to find public land parcels that they can put intense development on.

The other point I want to make is the lnfrastructure Victoria document the 30 year plan does not have the support behind it that is required. And that document aims at one single thing. lts first and
primary objective fo1 Melbourne for the next 30 years is densification. Well I say that is the wrong objective for Melbourne. lt's about liveability. lt's about quality of life. lt's about a decent and fair Melbourne, not a Melbourne where densification is the objective of the whole State Government.

So I say to density Dan (Andrews): No, we actually want a fairer system. We actually want to protect land. We want to see more open space and we want to protect vegetation. Today, there are trees being cut down on St Kilda Road - the loss of the hundreds of trees along the Skyrail corridor - just ripped out. No Environmental Effects Statement. No process' Torn away' Never to be replaced in any realistic way. And that loss of vegetation that is occurring through our suburbs has got to be protected.

On the peninsula, it is very clear the Government is seeking to ignore the Peninsula specific planning protections that were put in place in 2014, that try to treat the Mornington Peninsula as a distinct and unique zone that needs its own protections. The GRZ changes down there will see the proliferation of three storey buildings right across the Peninsula as of right. And that is where we are heading and I think it is wrong and I think it is a terrible risk for Melbourne.

So we need to protect Melbourne. We need to have more involvement for our regional cities which want to play a bigger role and want to have a better outcome there. I say to the Planning Backlash people here today and to those from groups all across the city and beyond, we are prepared to work and make sure that we have a better city, a more liveable city and we will restore the neighbourhood protection zone protections that were put in place and restore them to protect those areas of Melbourne that need it and right across and beyond.

There have been many news headlines about an article in the Lancet, "Population and fertility by age and sex for 195 countries and territories, 1950–2017: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017."

The news reports on this paper are hyperbolic - quite unwarranted. Why have they picked up on this article, which contributes less than others to the Lancet's special issue on "global burden of disease"? Just an excuse to trot out the 'birth dearth' scaremongering stories, I guess.

The paper itself presents no more than a methodological tweek on how global population data are collated. It's relation to "global burden of disease" is just to ask "how do we calculate the denominator?"
The only real news (which I gleaned from a table, not commented on in the paper) is that Global Population in 2017 was probably even bigger than UN's last estimate, by maybe 90 million! [1] Yet all that gets reported is concern about too few births!

So why not a headline like "There are 90 million more people on Earth than previously thought"?

No, they have to pick up on the entirely un-newsworthy fact that nearly half the world's countries have 'below replacement' birth rates. The problem is, many of the others are far more above replacement than the low-fertility countries are below it.

Even then they misreport it.

Science Daily

Science Daily says, "Ninety-one nations are not producing enough children to maintain their current populations." This is almost certainly incorrect. If you've got a relatively young age profile, then at replacement rate fertility you're still producing many more babies than needed to maintain the current population. The population will grow by momentum (filling up the age cohorts) before levelling off. So this is a factually incorrect statement.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/11/181108205327.htm

BBC

BBC headline is, "Remarkable' decline in fertility rates".
What the data in that paper makes clear is that the uncertainty around global fertility rate means that we can't say for sure whether fertility has declined at all over the past decade. Why do they keep referring to the decline of 40 years ago, and pretend it's 'remarkable', without showing the slightest concern for that decline stalling more recently?
https://www.bbc.com/news/health-46118103#

UK's Channel 4

UK's Channel 4 says "There has been a dramatic global decline in the number of children being born, researchers have revealed." Well, these researchers revealed nothing, but one of their charts showed (as the UN data had done before them) that the past 5 years have recorded the highest number of births in Earth's history. So even the "remarkable decline in fertility rates" has not translated into a decline in number of births, dramatic or otherwise, due to the vast increase in number of mothers.

Don't you just love the media?

NOTES

In the pdf file, it's the second table, starting on p 2025, which is the population table. Top line, right hand side - global population 7,640,466,000 (give or take 250 million). UN's 2017 World Population Prospects lists it as 7,550,262,000. That's 90 million less.

Out of interest, past UN estimates for the year 2017 are (in thousands):

2017: 7550262

2015: 7515284

2012: 7484325

2010: 7435809

Unfortunately the Lancet publication presents multi-page tables with the caption at the bottom, and insufficient labelling of the column headings to actually know what the data in the table represent until you've scrolled down to the caption.

A no whip rule would place all jockeys on equal terms in their efforts to win races, whilst avoiding suffering to the horses.

A horse's reaction to a whip has been compared glibly to their reaction to a fly landing on their coat: "When a fly lands on a horse, it flinches," we are told. Thus we are supposed to infer that when a horse flinches under the whip, they are not experiencing any more pain than they would with the landing of a tiny insect. But this is a false analogy with the effect on a horse that is being whipped or flogged for the purpose of making it go faster. Furthermore, some horses reject whips being used and at times jack up and refuse to run.

The “fly episode” landing on a horse has little effect at all. It annoys the horse and the horse flinches, BUT the whip certainly inflicts a certain amount of pain/suffering.

The “experts” tell us that jockeys carry the whip for safety reasons, but according to 'research' that doesn’t stack up either. We have witnessed many jockeys not having to use the whip at all.

At times riders are charged and fined for “overuse of the whip” - but exactly what does this mean?

If the stewards in their own minds OR within the rules of racing come to the conclusion that any horse in any race has been subjected to “overuse" or that a rule has been broken, then, in the opinion of the community, it means only one thing: that a rider has inflicted pain/suffering to the horse under their control to make it go faster!!

If there is an alleged act of cruelty, this offence must be prosecuted by the independent authority (RSPCA OR DEPI) with the power to lay charges under the Prevention of Cruelty To Animals Act (POCTA). Naturally there should first be an investigation, but not by Racing Victoria Limited (RVL) or the stewards. That would be too much like Dracula in charge of the blood bank!

In my opinion, RSPCA OR DEPI must investigate any alleged infringements by any organisation when it comes to an allegation of cruelty to any creature, great or small, irrespective whether or not there is an Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) in place. Some think that MOU really means, 'You don’t investigate any cruelty on our turf. Stay away. We will do our own investigating.' RSPCA have a MOU with GRV and HRV. We think it is a cop out and that's the reason why we don’t hear anymore live baiting happening. Animal Cruelty Hotline Australia has lodged a complaint about the whipping of horses in the Melbourne Cup to the RSPCA.

Several riders were fined for “overuse” of the whip at Melbourne Cup recently, including the rider of the cup winner. The fines were for petty amounts.

If whipping had occurred in a carpark outside of the racecourse, there would have been hell to pay and charges would certainly be laid.

Overuse of any contraption is virtually an allegation of cruelty when investigated and should be treated as such.

Show jumpers do not use whips at all and their safety is always in contention. Harness racing has abolished, or is about to abolish, whips.

I do not in any way favour regulating the whip, making rules about how the whip should be used or how much. The stewards favour rules like, “If you hit the horse more than x amount of times we will fine you."

But, with rules like that, there will always be times when riders will overstep the mark, knowing that they only risk a small fine. That is why we favor a 'no whip rule'.

We at Animal Cruelty Hotline deplore the use of any artificial contraptions: whips/spurs/prods etc that always involve pain or suffering in order to ramp up the performance of any animal.

In essence the 'no whip rule' is recommended as mandatory in racing to alleviate any suffering of animals. A no whip rule would place all jockeys on equal terms in their efforts to win races and, if jockeys were still of the belief that they were in need of a safety blanket, then it’s back to jockey school for them to relearn how to use “hands and heels.”

Barrie Tapp
Animal Cruelty Hotline 1800751770 free call to report animal cruelty/abuse

Dr Dimity Williams will speak at the Protectors of Public Lands Victoria (PPLVic) on 17th November 2018. Dr Dimity Williams is a medical doctor who is fascinated by the relationship between our health and nature, especially how time in nature nourishes the well-being of children. Dimity has been working in general practice for over 20 years and is the Biodiversity Convenor of Doctors for the Environment Australia. She is a co-founder of the Kids in Nature Network and Nature Play week, initiatives that promote the value of giving children the time and space to be in nature.

Protectors of Public Lands, Victoria Inc.

Annual General Meeting

Flemington Community Centre , 25 Mt. Alexander Road, Flemington 3031

Saturday November 17th 2018 at 2.00pm

With Guest speaker, Dr Dimity Williams

All are welcome to come and hear Dr. Williams will speak on

"Why nature-rich open space is so good for our health”

Dr Dimity Williams is a medical doctor who is fascinated by the relationship between our health and nature, especially how time in nature nourishes the well-being of children. Dimity has been working in general practice for over 20 years and is the Biodiversity Convenor of Doctors for the Environment Australia. She is a co-founder of the Kids in Nature Network and Nature Play week, initiatives that promote the value of giving children the time and space to be in nature. 

Time will be allowed for brief reports of local issues and the meeting will be followed by afternoon tea. We look forward to seeing you there!

Contact: Jill Quirk 0409742927

The National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program (NDPRP) today expressed dismay at the failure of the Victorian Labor government to put its own apex predator conservation policy into practice.

The Victorian Labor government recently committed to:
 
“recognise and protect the ecological function of existing dingo populations within Victorian ecosystems as part of biodiversity programs and management initiatives”
 
and to maintain:
 
“…, existing native apex predators in natural ecosystems and, investigate the potential functional role of reintroduced native apex predators in north-west Victoria”.
 
 

“Although the Victorian Labor government has recently refined and extended its policy commitment to protect dingo populations and their crucial ecological role, the government has failed at the very first significant test of that commitment,” NDPRP spokesperson Arthur Gorrie said.
 
“In September 2018, the Victorian government had the opportunity to correct the serious deficiencies of earlier dingo protection measures put in place after the listing of the dingo as a threatened species in 2010. The expiry of these measures provided the Minister for the Environment, the Hon Lily D’Ambrosio, with an opportunity to rectify these deficiencies.
 
“Many areas of Victoria where the dingo was unprotected at the time of the dingo threatened species listing, under the pretext of protecting farm stock from dingo predation, have in practice proven unnecessary, as in north western Victoria where there is very little sheep farming, with negligible stock losses. Yet, lethal dingo control in this part of the state was sanctioned with significant numbers of dingoes killed annually. Also, the very narrow genetic definition of the dingo used by the Victorian government means that many high conservation value dingo hybrids continued to be governed as vermin in Victoria by Agriculture authorities rather than as wildlife by biodiversity authorities.
 
“In July 2018, an extensive list of pre-eminent Australian environmental scientists jointly wrote to the Victorian government, urging it not to renew the dingo un-protection arrangements, along with the Humane Society International and other conservation organisations. The current arrangements were deemed to be unnecessary, ultimately ineffective and environmentally harmful. The government’s attention was also drawn to the need to afford protection to dingo hybrids. The experts especially drew attention to the need to cease lethal control of dingoes and ecologically functional hybrids in north western Victoria. Yet, this high level advice simply fell on deaf ears.
 
“At this point, there is a serious credibility gap between policy and conservation practice for the Victorian government in the area of apex predator conservation. The government now needs to explain why it ignored such high level advice and its own recent policy pronouncements on this key biodiversity issue..
 
“Why has the Victorian government failed to act, particularly in relation to north western Victoria, where the case for stock protection is so weak and where the opportunity for apex predator conservation and its biodiversity benefits so compelling?
 
“The NDPRP considers that the answer lies in part with a back room power sharing deal between Biodiversity and Agriculture bureaucracies, which hands a disproportionate degree of authority over dingo governance to Agriculture officials. The NDPRP considers that, rather than try to claw back control over this important area of biodiversity governance, Biodiversity bureaucracies appear more concerned with keeping face with the department of Agriculture. As a result, it appears that the Minister for the Environment remains inadequately briefed on the issue, including the need for Biodiversity to regain control over the governance of dingo hybrids.  The NDPRP understands that the Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Lily D’Ambrosio, is yet to receive a designated, comprehensive briefing on the apex predator issue and that Biodiversity officers have no intention to provide such a briefing in the foreseeable future.
 
“In light of recent progressive Victorian Labor government policy pronouncements on the apex predator issue, the NDPRP considers that any failure to adequately brief the Minister is unacceptable. In effect, it appears that the Minister for the Environment has been rendered incapable of performing her responsibilities on this environmental issue.
 
“The NDPRP urges the Victorian Minister for the Environment, the Hon. Lily D’Ambrosio, to seek the best external expert scientific advice on how to put her government’s progressive apex predator policy into practice. The recent renewal of the dingo un-protection arrangements, unchanged, for a further 5 years must be revisited by the Minister. To date, departmental advice appears to have been deficient. Important questions remain: was the Environment Minister even informed by her department of the collective appeal of Australia’s pre-eminent environmental scientists and peak environmental organisations for reform around the dingo un-protection issue?

 
National Dingo Preservation and Recovery Program Inc.

This program from Press tv Iran is interesting and useful in bringing us up to date. Iranians know a thing or two about oil production and the oil market. The issues of peak demand and peak production are very hard to estimate and no-one here pretends to have the answers, but a number of factors are canvassed, including US President Trump. As usual, however, in such programs, population growth and economic growth are skirted around. Similarly, increasing efficiency among OECD countries is taken as a given, and increasing consumption among 'developing' countries is also taken as a given. The elephant in the room is, of course, when does peak demand meet peak production.

The global demand for oil is predicted to be rising at least for the few coming decades.

The projection stems from several factors. One of the major reasons is the expectation of a drastic rise in the number of vehicles on the roads.

Economic Divide caught up with Dr. Ali Shams Ardekani to discuss the future demand of oil. He should know a thing or two about the oil industry. He serves as the President of the Iran Business For Future.

He is the current head of the energy commission for the Ministry of Oil, Planning and Development and the Ministry of Industry and Mining in Iran. People across the world are getting more and more mobile. They are expected to use more cars for transportation and also trucks for transiting consumer goods as fast as possible.

Moreland Council rezones residential land as parkland for residents, but they have to pay dearly to get the land back off the development-mad state government. Still this is something that local councils should all be doing and they should collectively be placing pressure on the State Government to sell the land at non-market prices, or gift it. For some time the requirement that developers set aside parkland for each development has been commuted to paying into a fund so that council can reissue land as parkland more cheaply. Who knows where this money goes?

Cr. John Kavanagh of North West Ward, Moreland, writes that he is "thrilled to inform you that we have successful in purchasing the entire parcel of Outlook Drive land!!!"

"The section of the land that is currently zoned residential will be rezoned so that this land will be open space for ever!" He writes that he "called a Special Council Meeting last week where we resolved to increase our offer – this land has not come cheap!"

"I know that ‘success has many fathers and failure is an orphan’ and so many will claim success in this. I tell you as clearly as I can that the success is because of the efforts of [...] elected Councillors, our CEO (Nerina Di Lorenzo), Kelvin Thomson, Kaye Oddie, Peter Khalil and you the community more generally."

Wrong for State Government to gouge local ratepayers for this land

"As thrilled as I am," he writes, "I still think it is wrong that such a large sum of ratepayers money had to be used to buy land from another level of government. This has not been gifted in any way."

"Today was an important day as the Victorian Government went into ‘caretaker’ mode at 6 p.m. so this had to be completed prior to that or it would have waited till after the election. Council made it clear that if the deal was not done today it would be a key election issue."

The latest film clip by Dr Liz Allen via the ABC explains why we apparently shouldn't be worrying about Australia's population size, because the real issue is in fact social inequality. But what Dr Allen is doing here is creating a false dichotomy. In doing so she is attempting to channel all discussion on what is actually a highly nuanced issue into one where those involved are forced to pick a side.

In reality we can play a major role in reducing inequality at a global level by providing universal access to education, family planning and healthcare. That is, of course, what many people who care about the issue of population, advocate for, because this is the most effective and least coercive way to enable populations to stabilise over time.

In Australia rapid population growth is compounding social inequality, as it is a catalyst for urban sprawl and the over-priced, poor standard high-density development that is springing up across our conurbations. This has the impact of both gentrifying and slumifying communities at the same time and, in turn, it has the knock-on effect of pushing people on lower incomes out to the increased social isolation of the urban fringe.

Life on the urban fringe has huge ramifications in terms of social inequality and this translates into increased reliance on driving, a lack of walkability, a lack of access to non-human nature and major difficulties in services and infrastructure keeping up with demand.

The environmental impact of urban sprawl is also significant and as the sprawl increases, so does our average per capita carbon footprint (and this challenges another false dichotomy).

As we are experiencing a climate emergency, anything that adds to the problem of climate change will have huge ramifications for those who are living in poverty because they will be the first in the firing line.

The environmental impact that medium to long-term rapid population growth is having, and will continue to have, is significant, especially at a time when we need to be tackling this emergency head on. This is why the education and empowerment of women (and men), as well as access to family planning, plays such a major role in climate expert, Paul Hawken's seminal book, 'Project Drawdown'.

Therefore, continuing to rapidly grow Australia's population to suit our GDP driven ponzi economic system makes no environmental or social sense, especially in face of the enormous challenges that the world is facing.

Dr Allen also perpetuates the myth that we must grow in order to counteract an ageing population. This has been disproved so many times and much has been written on this topic. For any population to stabilise, it is inevitable that there will eventually be a larger than normal cohort of older people (for a while). This is not something that we need to be scared of. Delaying the ageing population issue by a few generations will only exacerbate the challenge further down the track.

While we need to seize the opportunity to allow our domestic population to start to stabilise, an effective way of tackling population growth at a global level is through a system of mutual aid, where we share knowledge and expertise with as many different cultures as possible.

This mutual aid will not only help to provide access to education and medical services where they are needed, it will also help countries such as Australia to lower their per-capita emissions through learning resilient methods of land management and climate specific architecture.

Of course migration wouldn't have to end but it would be driven by a different paradigm; one that understands that we need to work to non coercively stabilise populations both at a global and at a local level in tandem with a much greater emphasis on retrofitting our existing built stock.

In short, the time has come to have an ongoing discussion about population; one that understands that it is complex and that it intersects with a whole range of hugely significant issues.

Mark Allen is an ex town planner and is the cofounder of Population Permaculture & Planning and Holistic Activism & Behaviour Change.

Senior law lecturer at UNSW, Bassina Farbenblum says, "Our study confirms that Australia has a large, silent underclass of underpaid migrant workers,” commenting on a report entitled, "Migrant Worker Justice Initiative." The authors do not question the impact on Australians of this corrupt industrial and academic underbelly, but observe complacently, that if Australia is to "position itself as the destination of choice for international students and backpackers, reforms must be urgently implemented to prevent wage theft and enable migrant workers to report and recover unpaid wages." This report would benefit from wider and more historical context: When most wages in Australia were regulated by state awards, and strong unions defended Federal awards, there was very little illegal labour, hence little motivation to import cheap labour. It was easy to enforce written awards that covered entire industries and occupations, and were regulated by dedicated entities. This changed when Kennett abolished Victorian State Awards in 1993, setting the scene for Howard's Workchoices, and going on to widen the use of the corporations clause in the Australian constitution, which exempted corporations from many employer obligations. (See /node/4612.) The privatised for-profit university system gave up on real research in favour of importing students like cash-cows, to pay large fees and rent university owned apartments. Many of these students had to work any conditions in order to survive and pay their fees, fearing that if they failed to retain student status, they would be deported. A win-win situation for exploiters all round, as it drove down wages for everyone. In fact, if 'reforms' were successfully implemented to prevent wage theft from migrant workers' we would soon see a huge reduction in the numbers of migrant workers. It's all slave labour under other names. (Candobetter.net Editor.)

An overwhelming number of international students and backpackers in Australia are suffering wage theft in silence, a landmark study by UNSW Sydney and UTS has found.

Fewer than one in 10 migrant workers took action to recover unpaid wages even though most know they are being underpaid, according to the report Wage Theft in Silence.

“Our study confirms that Australia has a large, silent underclass of underpaid migrant workers,” said senior law lecturer at UNSW, Bassina Farbenblum. “The scale of unclaimed wages is likely well over a billion dollars.”

The report draws on the first large-scale national survey of temporary migrant workers, with 4322 respondents from 107 countries working across all Australian states and territories. It is authored by Farbenblum and Laurie Berg, a senior law lecturer at the University of Technology Sydney (UTS).

Migrant workers comprise up to 11% of the Australian labour market. The authors’ previous report found most international students and backpackers are underpaid, with one in three earning about half the legal minimum wage.

The new report paints a bleak picture for the few who try to recover their unpaid wages. The study reported that for every 100 underpaid migrant workers, only three went to the Fair Work Ombudsman. Of those, well over half recovered nothing.

The authors conclude that for most migrant workers it is neither possible nor rational to try to claim their unpaid wages through the forums that currently exist.

“The system is broken,” said Laurie Berg. “It is rational for most migrant workers to stay silent. The effort and risks of taking action aren’t worth it, given the slim chance they’ll get their wages back.”

“There is a culture of impunity for wage theft in Australia. Unscrupulous employers continue to exploit migrant workers because they know they won’t complain,” said Bassina Farbenblum.

The study dispels the popular assumption that few migrant workers would consider coming forward. In fact, though few had actually taken action, a majority (54%) were open to trying to claim unpaid wages. The study identified the key barriers that prevented them from coming forward.

“The findings are deeply troubling but give cause for optimism, because they reveal a path forward,” said Laurie Berg. “The study indicates that some of the most significant barriers to wage recovery can be practically addressed.”

The most cited barriers were not knowing what to do and concerns about the amount of effort involved. However, more than a quarter said they would not speak up because of fears of losing their visa.

Migrant workers’ reluctance to come forward was not explained by poor English or foreign culture. In fact, Asian migrants were most willing to come forward.

The report concludes that if processes and support services are improved, and immigration safeguards strengthened, more migrant workers would report and seek redress for wage theft in the future.

The authors observe that if Australia is to position itself as the destination of choice for international students and backpackers, reforms must be urgently implemented to prevent wage theft and enable migrant workers to report and recover unpaid wages.

They urge the government, the education sector and business to act swiftly to implement the report’s recommendations.

The report is available at the Migrant Worker Justice Initiative (www.mwji.org). For further information on a new initiative by the education sector to address wage theft see https://www.mwji.org/international-students-in-australia.

About the survey:

· Anonymous, online survey of 4,322 people who worked in Australia on a temporary visa

· Available in 12 languages as well as English

· 2,392 respondents were international students; 1,705 were enrolled at a university and 523 at a vocational or English-language college

· 1,440 respondents were backpackers (Working Holiday Makers).

This is exciting and heartwarming footage to counter the general plague of kangaroo hating. Police rush into the surf to rescue a small kangaroo, who is later visited in its cell by Animalia staff, who are currently taking care of him elsewhere.

Rosebud police were on hand at Safety Beach on Saturday afternoon to give a lost kangaroo a second chance. They responded to numerous calls that a kangaroo was in the water just off Marine Drive about 5pm yesterday.

The kangaroo had made it back to the beach upon their arrival and had been covered in a blanket by a member of the public. Police were monitoring it but it decided to turn around and hop back into the surf.

It began to swim but got into difficulty in the swell and breaking waves and went under water a couple of times.

A Sergeant and a Senior Sergeant noticed the animal in distress and immediately jumped into the water.

They managed to carry the kangaroo, which was unconscious, to a grassed area where they successfully resuscitated it.

The roo was wrapped in blankets and taken to Rosebud Police Station where it was assessed by Animalia Wildlife Shelter and taken to receive treatment. The roo is currently being cared for but is said to be lucky to be alive given the amount of salt water he inhaled.

Please follow Animalia to keep updated about his recovery.

Thanks to the quick thinking actions of the public and the police officers this fella didnt lose his life.

If you would like to support Animalia so they can continue to rescue and rehabilitate wildlife you can attend their fundraising night: https://www.facebook.com/events/1698923100230514/

Or donate here: https://www.facebook.com/donate/314782549111876/