Victoria

Protectors of Public Lands. When governments fail democracy, you need organisations like this one. Please consider joining to save your state from developers, more debt and worse.

Victoria's urban growth boundary extension and demise of green wedges.

Julianne Bell, of Protectors of Public Lands writes:

Here is some information which you might have already seen on the Urban Growth Boundary Extension.

This will involve requisitioning 50,000 hectares for residential development and new roads with extraordinary implications for environmental damage and destruction of wildlife, loss of western grasslands, increase greenhouse gas emissions, loss of arable farm land, destruction of green wedges, compulsory acquisition of land, increased tax burdens and the go-for-growth-at any-costs philosophy. Also the erosion of our democracy when the elected State Government bypasses Parliament and local councils over planning and environment issues.

Why you should make yet another submission

We urge you to make a submission to the Growth Areas Authority. We should not have to do this but sometimes it is worthwhile.e.g. the Eddington Review on the East West Link through inner Melbourne and prime parkland. There were over 2,300 submissions mostly opposing the road tunnels/freeways and advocating public transport funding. (The Government was stunned at the response) Note that the EW Link was dropped from Victorian Transport Plan.

The "public information sessions" are drop in times to get information. I rang 1800 090 789 for information and hope to be sent a DVD with the information. Google Department of Planning and Community Development, Growth Areas Authority or Urban Growth Boundary.

The Government is seeking public feedback on the following proposals:

* Melbourne's revised Urban Growth Boundary and land designated for development.
* An alignment for the Regional Rail Link (west of Werribee to Deer Park).
* An alignment for the Outer Metropolitan Ring / E6 Transport Corridor.
* The boundaries and management of proposed grassland reserves in Melbourne's west.

Public feedback is also sought on the findings set out in the Strategic Impact Assessment Report for Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

According to instructions there are three ways you can provide your submission:

* Make your submission online (http://www.vic.gov.au/planningmelbourne); or
* Send your submission by post to the Growth Areas Authority, at PO BOX 1166, Carlton, Victoria 3053
* Hand deliver your submission to the Growth Areas Authority at Level 6, 35 Spring Street, Melbourne, Victoria 3000

Submissions close at 5:00 pm on Friday, 17 July 2009.

All submissions will be considered by the Victorian Government before it makes any decisions. (!)

Candobetter Editor: Protectors of Public Lands needs more active hands on deck. Please consider joining, because only through organisations like this, can Victorians organise to combat the evil Victorian Government's abject railroading of our taxes to supplement the style of living to which the Growth Lobby developers have become accustomed, at the expense of nature itself.

The Age, June 25th

Planning Minister Justin Madden should consult the people of Victoria if he wants a planning strategy with the needs of individuals and Victorian families at its heart. He would discover that a bulging Melbourne population is not in the interests of Victorian families at all, and adding to our urban obesity without considering what the people want is actually snobbery on his part! Why isn’t there a debate?

With 2000 new people entering Victoria each week, "sustainability" has become a throw-away word with no meaning, and “affordability” is something that most families are struggling with!

A burgeoning population will not bring "economic benefits" to the average person. Most people know that the contrary is true. As natural resources become increasingly scarce, they also become more expensive. Land and housing prices have soared, and water prices are set to sky-rocket.

We already have had the fatalities due to people choosing to live in more open outer suburbs, close to Kinglake National Park! Most people don't want to live in sterile and car-dependant outer suburban housing estates, and high density living is not "family friendly". Our parks and reserves are under threat from human impacts and fires due to the urban sprawl, and people seeking more open spaces.

Fertile farming lands closer to Melbourne are being consumed for housing, and vulnerable wildlife and biodiversity habitat will be become more threatened. Our connection with Nature will further diminish, and so will our ecological life-support system!

Adding more people to Victoria will not solve one problem , and the growth will continue to destroy our biodiversity and remaining wildlife habitat. Population growth with not stop at 5 million but will keep blowing-out to 6, 7...10 million!

Marvellous Melbourne, one of the most "liveable places in the world", under our Brumby's Melbourne@5Million plan, is under threat! Justin Madden’s accusations of “cultural snobbery” are because he wants to grow Melbourne boundaries, and our suburbs, as resources for land developers and the building industry, guaranteed Labor supporters!

"Dave the Developer" at the Restore Residents' Rights protest rally, June 10, Photo: Progress Leader

Development Assessment Committees' Legislation Stopped In Upper House

Ed. The following story is adapted from the MRRA Macedon Ranges' Residents Association site: It describes a really important battle in the ongoing war for democracy in Victoria which will probably be reported on in other articles at candobetter.

Where to from here?

'Where to from here' depends on whether government finds a way around needing parliament's consent to change the law

The day after the "Restore Residents Rights" rally at parliament house on June 10, which was attended by 600 [1] people, Victoria's upper house rejected changes to the Planning and Environment Act that would have introduced Development Assessment Committees [DACs] to the State.

Initially proposed for a limited number of metropolitan areas, the government's aim is to have this system of decision-making apply more broadly. The DAC system takes planning powers off Councils and hands them to majority government-appointed committees which then make planning decisions in Council's place, while Councils and community carry the financial costs of having DACs make the decisions for them.

Lack of transparency key concern for democracy

Key concerns with DACs include a lack of clarity about accountability and transparency mechanisms, the breach of fundamental democratic principles and the community's right to know, and the potential for planning decisions to be driven by party politics, and implementing specific development agendas without any obvious ability by the community to express their views to the decision-makers.

In their present proposed form, DACs are vulnerable to being 'stacked' politically, while cutting off Councils and communities from decisions that affect them. Another concern is the inadequacy of the current planning system to produce outcomes that the community, as opposed to the developer, wants.

DAC Ideology

The whole DACs ideology captures and builds on a belief held at governmental level that all it takes to make a "good" planning decision is some 'tick boxes' and for applicants and decision-makers to settle it between themselves - no such thing as "no", just "whatever it takes". You get to know about it when it happens. So much for community ownership of decisions that affect the community! And they wonder why we are all getting peed off!

As "Dave The Developer" said at the RRR rally, this a fantastic government - when us developers go in with 12 storeys in a 5 storey area, all they say is, is 12 enough?!!

Chris Gaffney played the part of Dave the Developer and put on a great comedy act. The whole show was the idea of the Darebin Appropriate Development Association and they had working bees to make the little houses and garden that were knocked over by the Bobcat. In the photo you see the splendid high rise blocks called Brumby Towers and Villa de Maddening that rose in their place.

[1] A reestimation based on the known number of people carrying balloons (300) plus the number of people not carrying balloons, puts the total around 600 people, which is huge for the sprawling, socially disorganised and transport-disconnected city of Melbourne, where, although population is growing, democracy and communication are shrinking.

Report on the Victorian Transport Infrastructure Conference
11-12th May 2009 @ the Melbourne Convention Exhibition Centre
by Catherine Manning
President, Southern Victoria Community Action Group Inc.

Foreword: A huge thank you to all of the groups and individuals who contributed to the cost of a ticket so that our community could be represented at this conference. As expected, the conference failed to provide any new information about the implementation of the Victorian Transport Plan (VTP) and seemed to have left some who'd paid up to $1655- for a ticket deeply disappointed. (One participant told me he was so stressed about what he was going to report back to his boss, as he'd convinced him it was worth spending the money to go and 'do business'.) However, I believe it was well worth SVCAG being there, as I was able to publicly question several ministers and bureaucrats on behalf of all of our groups, and made it known that we were concerned at the 'exclusivity' of the event that was publicised as a 'high level forum for discussion and debate'. To download a copy of / or view the VTP please go to www.transport.vic.gov.au

Disclaimer: I have compiled this report from my notes taken at the conference. I cannot guarantee the accuracy of the information, only to say this is purely an honest account of how I saw the event, but others may have seen it differently. I have tried to dot point as much as I can, and have added some questions that I asked (and some I didn’t !).

Day1

MC: Rob Gell opened the event .
Rob Gell thanked the sponsors/supporters: Project Link, Theiss, DLA Phillips Fox, Vibropile, Brifen, Coffey Rail, Leighton, Dial Before You Dig, GTA Consultants, Engineers Australia, and of course the State Govt - Dept. of Transport.

9am

Jim Betts - Secretary, Department of Transport Victoria

After explaining his disappointment at his title of ‘secretary' which made it sound as though he should just be ‘taking minutes’, Jim convinced us that he is really a very important person. He then proceeded to give a quick explanation of the VTP...

• Melbourne @ 5million and the Victorian Transport Plan were produced together and will be updated every 3-4 years to adjust figures ie. population growth, etc.
• would like to work with industry to spread the freight task
• Into the future 2030 - more freight 'immune to economic issues’
• Vision for a 24hr operation, mass transit orbital system, significant expansion in port rail as per Eddington Report.
• 'We're planning for Hastings at the moment'
• Mentioned the 'Freight Futures' document (more on that later)
• Channel Deepening (plug for)

It was then opened up to the floor for questions. Rob Gell asked about four questions on interstate rail, emissions reduction and fuel efficiency.
(I didn’t hear a substantial answer, other than 'we're working on it' or words to that effect.)

Tim Holding as Minister for Finance, Victoria

• restated that the State Budget saw an $8b investment in 09/10 infrastructure for transport, schools, etc..
• Victoria the best place in the country, best workers... Wants to be the 'best placed in the country' - jobs jobs jobs... in transport - freight & logistics.
• VTP is the plan, the vision, the context to tell the community where to go with infrastructure projects...
• Sustainability is at the heart of this plan…sustainability…sustainability..
• mentioned Peninsula Link, Epping Line (rail upgrade), Lynbrook (road)

Question Time:

Catherine Manning Southern Victorian Community Action Group (SVCAG): Minister, I notice you say 'sustainable and sustainability' a lot, what is your definition of sustainable when it comes to this Transport Plan? How can more and more growth, less local manufacturing, a massive increase in freight imports, more port development i.e. Hastings, and the associated truck movements, be anything but unsustainable?

Tim Holding: ‘freight needs the best possible infrastructure to be sustainable’, etc., etc. Said something to the effect that now we all expect higher quality living, we have to develop Hastings so we can provide it. (Incredibly, he then went on for another ten minutes without answering my question….)

Halvard Dalheim - Director, State Strategy, Planning Policy Branch

1. Green Spaces. Spoke about Melb @5million, 1.8 additional people by 2036. 600,000 dwellings in the next 20 years. How are we placed to deal with growth? Govt response was to release its 'transport policies'.
2. Challenges - Shaping Victoria, linking regional Victoria, Sustainable Growth, unblocking congestion, responding to climate change.
3. Unique Collaboration - benefits/new approaches/relationships/new opportunities - VicRoads/DOI (now DOT)/DSE. Urban Growth Boundaries - new issues raised and discussed...loves collaboration...(group hug with DSE/VicRoads/DOT)
4. Managing Melbourne's Growth
5. Scale of Growth .. (up, up and up..). How do we accommodate this growth?

6. Components of Growth - international migration levels never seen before...address future labour force. Long term drivers - migration. Health infrastructure needed - maternity wards.

7. Trends of Growth Maps - bridge the Yarra/Maribyrnong
8. Affordability and Growth - affordable living, housing, etc.
9. Shaping Melbourne's Growth - The growth equation: 316,000 established areas. 284,000 growth areas. 134,000 new growth areas. Shift new growth areas North and West. Expand growth areas and high density living in Melbourne.
10. Urban Form and Growth. Block sizes.
11. Accessible Jobs. Can't keep building roads and tunnels to handle our transport issues. So now we have 'land use and transport planning' so we can influence potential behavior patterns.
12. Disadvantaged with Jobs
13. Mode of Travel and Jobs - cars cars cars.
14. Proximity of Jobs
15. A Sustainable City Form. 'Polycentric' Multiple major centres - jobs close to home. Box Hill, Broadmeadows,Dandenong, Footscray, Frankston, Ringwood.
16. Inner Core - housing.
17. Tram Network
18. Conversions - housing
19. New Opportunities
20. Infill - across metro area
21. Residential Initiatives - lot densities. 'Local intelligence' looking at City of Moreland.
22. Melbourne's Newest Sustainable Communities - rail links, smartbus, Northern Suburbs.
23. Delivery - 'Transport plan.....shaping Victoria....jobs...jobs...jobs.'

Ray Kinnear - Dep Director Strategic Policy and Planning, Public Transport Division

• Growth rate exceeding current growth forecasts across all models
• More people on public transport: Why?Fuel costs, Global Financial Crisis, 20% environmental concerns
• Operating railway - creating a metro
• Local Bus Networks
• Offer early bird schemes to encourage travel before peak.
• Rail infrastructure projects underway...New track Laverton, Clifton Hill Rail Project..etc...$18b over next 2 years
• $10b sought from Building Aust Fund
• Regional Rail Link - Western part of Melb - sharing tracks/bottlenecks. Build new line west of Werribee on Geelong Line. Able to run v-line trains - no longer on suburban line.
• Build a second tunnel- Dynon area across to Parkville-Domain.
• South East capacity problem. Metro tunnel to Caulfield - all lines independent.
• Waiting for Govt Funding
• 70 new trains 50 new trams, maintenance facilities, light rail, more stops.

Question from Cameron of Coffee Projects: How long do you anticipate that growth to continue?
Answer from Ray Kinnear: planning on continuing at 8%p.a.

Jonathon Metcalfe - Exec Chair Connex

• challenging times
• Pollution 'we've talked about that'
• PPP's - more from the VTP about what's being delivered....
• more PR pitch about keeping customers happy and 'managing dissatisfaction'.
Question: What about level crossings?
Answer from JM: Where there's a business case.

(mass exodus - about 15 people left the auditorium at this point)....

Question unposed: When you say ‘pollution – we’ve talked about that’, when exactly did we talk about it? I’ve been awake the whole time…did I miss something?
Question unposed: Shouldn’t we refer to climate change as a problem, not a ‘challenge’? I know it’s very ‘Chopra-esque’ to say ‘challenge’, but doesn’t that make it sound like a fun run or math’s quiz, not the serious environmental issue that it is? It may be challenging to find solutions, but if we’re to be really honest, wouldn’t you say that climate change is really a big ‘issue’ or ‘problem

Brad Vann - Partner, Clayton UTZ

• Cost $60b to replace all of Victoria's level crossings - how to deal with this in Global Financial Crisis?
• Impact of credit crunch - lack of liquidity - banks retreating from long tenure and complex lending
• Cost of funding PPP's - as liquidity in markets decreases, lending margins increase....
• Feast or Famine: sales pitch for PPP's - alternatives: Govt underwrite financing bids (potential conflict of interest) - unsyndicated portions of debt taken up by govt entity until full syndication possible - shorter concession periods - shorter term financing.
• Market disruption risk
• Govt takes back some risk - ie. Hospital infrastructure project - decrease payments from the private sector if not bringing in the $$$.
• Unbundle the project
• Peninsula Link 'economic infrastructure' - No toll, therefore needs $$$. then Govt repay private sector. Govt looking at this way.
• Super Funds - Institutional Funds. Govt guarantee to lift the quality of the project and attract investment thru super funds etc. In turn, super and industry funds invest to keep their members in work.
• Regulatory changes - at the moment there is better returns for people to invest overseas.
• Develop by Govt then sell to private sector [Comment by editor: This is privatization in advance]
• Ask Industry Fund Managers, if we meet operational parameters of the project, will you agree to support it?
At this point just before lunch, the MD of Theiss got up and said 'we need accelerated spend up on transport infrastructure'. However, I didn’t notice anyone jump up and wave their wallet around.

Lunch: Met a few of interesting people. Am beginning to think I'm not going so mad after all. Some of these people do seem to get it too, and aren't as excited about all aspects of the VTP as I thought they would be.... Almost managed to attract a few new members (LOL).

Panel ‘Discussion’

Darren Bilsborough – Director of Sustainability, Parsons Brinckerhoff
Rob Turk – Associate, ARUP
Sean Murphy – GM Infrastructure & Environment, Worley Parsons
Glenn Hedges – Environmental Manager/Project Services, Thiess

Refreshingly, Darren Bilsborough spoke of the ‘elephant in the room – climate change’
• the VTP failed to adequately address climate change, health impacts, peak oil or our aging population.

Rob Turk

• minimising environmental impacts by collecting run off from freeways (used Frankston Bypass as an example) to provide solutions to other issues ie. Water.
• offset planting, ‘integrated resource management’, using road corridors as IT corridors (i.e. Broadband network infr.) and ‘smart energy zones’.
• the formation of the ‘Australian Green Infrastructure Council’, formed in 2007 by various industry reps, applying for state govt funding to try to create a ‘green star’ national rating scheme for business/developers.

Lots of talk about ‘fast tracking’

• geopolymer concrete / fly ash – being used as a better alternative to concrete. 80% less emissions.
• Waste vegetable matter for ‘sandwich panels’ – reinforced skins.
• Glass work – discharge from desalination plants to replace timbers, beams, concrete, etc.

Glenn Hedges repeated much of what had already been said, plus
• A ‘promo’ for Theiss providing indigenous communities with training & jobs to build a construction workforce
• More about the Green Inf. Council and Theiss’ efforts to replace lightweight truck bodies instead of stainless steel. Auto timing switches on mobile lighting banks, and more use of diesel

Questions for panel:

Rob Gell asked: Why geopolymer concrete wasn’t used for the construction of citilink and eastlink when the government had been consulted extensively on its benefits?
Answer:…..don’t know.

Questions from Catherine Manning: What payoff will there be for developers fastracking development to seek endorsement from Aust Green Inf Council, and will it have any real effect?
Answer: No real effect as yet, but it will be a ‘feel good’ exercise. There will be no legally binding contracts

Question from Catherine Manning: Doesn’t this just provide a vehicle for developers to appear green without being green when there are no real ‘green’ guidelines for development (apart from what comes out of the EES – EPBC Act). Where we have Work Cover and legal guidelines for other things, why aren’t there laws for developers to abide by when it comes to environmental/health impacts, etc.?
Answer: inadequate policy.

Question unposed: Do you think the Global Financial Crisis is being used as justification to fast track development so that even less community consultation can be justified?

Dr Lewis Gomes and Peter Zahnleiter (Brisbane Roads and Tunnel Experience)

• Spoke of the project delivery (if you really want me to document this, let me know, but it was about as exciting to me as watching grass grow).
• Their airport link averaged $56million per kilometer.

Peter Bentley – CEO Connect East

We then heard yet another promotion and back patting exercise about Eastlink. $3.8b for 39klm of toll way. Heard about Mullum Mullum Valley, the untolled Ringwood and Dandenong Bypasses, 88 bridges, 17 interchanges and 2 tunnels.

• 270,000 trips during the toll free period
• 135,000 once tolls introduced.
• Community consultation…’no one can ever say there was a lack of dialogue on this project’. Local community forum settled community matters
• Thanks to EPA ‘s communication between groups, there were ‘no public appeals when Connect East got works approval for the tunnel/ventilation project.
• 60 wetlands established / 3.5million shrubs and trees planted

Wrap up of day 1: So much of today sounded like repetitious, back patting, spin. There was nothing learned that wasn’t already in the VTP book. I got the sense by the end of the day that many of us hoped that tomorrow would provide far more substance, and we looked forward to ‘doing business’ and having that ‘high level debate’……

Media presence

*I contacted the conference organisers beforehand to enquire about media access to the event. I was told there was none. However, Jason Dowling from The Age was there on the first day. On Day 2 Jillian Verhardt from Radio Port Phillip was permitted to attend (I didn’t see any other media at all).

DAY 2.

Good morning Rob.

The Hon. Tim Pallas, Minister for Roads and Ports, Victoria, Steve Bracks Advisor 1999.

• The VTP will connect communities, build economies..etc…enhance livability, enhance amenity….etc…etc..

Apparently famous for his PowerPoint prowess, Mr Pallas lived up to his reputation and provided a lovely slide show….

10 Challenges facing infrastructure.

1. Congestion: $20.4b p.a. cost of congestion by 2020
($2.6b p.a. cost of congestion now)
‘Victoria is Australia’s Freight and Logistics hub’ – more talk about VTP Projects.

2. Port Capacity: 2035 - 8million containers annually.

Expand Swanston Dock – berth extensions
Webb dock for container handling
Transport plan for Hastings
Relocate market
Move Sth Dynon Rail terminal to Donnybrook
75% of channel deepening done – physical works due to be completed by
end of August.

3. Transport Linkages: Seymour Wodonga – Standard Guage Rail
4. Road Toll: duplicated roads safer than unduplicated
5. Freight Mode Share: more freight onto rail

Retain status as manufacturing state
90% of freight travels on road
Rail freight subsidies/freight access charges to encourage larger off-peak
use of port.

6. Intermodal Capacity: Container volumes not yet at a stage where rail is viable.
Until then encourage larger road transport to get freight around.
30m / 28m b-doubles and b-triples: tried and proven.
‘the public are accepting of b-doubles sharing the road’

7. Airport Capacity: Melbourne Airport Strategy

See Draft Airport Master plan 2008

8.

Infrastructure Funding: imbalance – requirement of state to raise revenue, failure of states to deliver. Money taken from road fines/tolls etc. goes back in to building/infrastructure.

Availability of PPP’s – i.e. Peninsula Link

9. Residential Amenity: Freight Futures

Truck action plan: new off ramps Westgate Fwy at Hyde St will remove 1.2 million trucks a year. Sunshine/Dempster/Paramount Rd – trucks will divert around Seddon using tunnels and new routes.

10. Port of Hastings: Bolte’s vision – lots of talk about ‘vision’

Question: Jason Dowling (Age News) asked about the funding of the Peninsula Link, state gov. has allocated $350m but nothing in the Fed. Budget.
Answer: Tim Pallas said he was confident they would receive the Fed. funding and said it was not unusual for items to be funded after any given main budget.

Question: 30mt. super B trucks, are they suitable for our roads?
Answer: Length is an issue, so they will only be trialed on certain routes, monitored by gps system to ensure they stick to nominated roads. See map.

Question: Catherine Manning – Considering all roads in the VTP lead to Hastings, is it not a bit dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket prior to any environmental assessment or EES? There are other ports around Victoria that could service our needs. What is ‘Plan B’ if Hastings proves to be an unviable location for major port development?

Answer:Tim Pallas: There is no plan B. Hastings is it. The EES just tells us what we need to watch out for, not whether or not we can do something. Minister Pallas assured the audience they would secure the necessary environmental approvals/considerations. Geelong has limitations. The EES is not a yes or no process. Hastings will happen.

Justin Madden – Minister for Planning

Again spoke of VTP and Melb @ 5million. Spoke about:
• Fast tracked approvals for infrastructure developments / collaboration
• Housing – growth growth growth….
• 325,000 will live in provincial areas by 2026
• Something about extra help for councils to measure households within their municipalities
• Online planning systems / ‘modernising’ planning and environment act
• Finally, we need to consult communities

Questions:

A man from Moonee Ponds: Why hasn’t growth been considered around Geelong etc.,…?
Answer: Again, hard to decipher, but something about ‘social issues as population reaches 3+million’, and ‘hamlets, villages and hinterland…’

Question: Jason Dowling of The Age asked if the Minister would sack his staffer after recent revelations re Brimbank Council.
Answer: No
Jason them commented cities over 3M seem to consistently present increased crime and other social problems.
Further reply from Minister, that our City is Attractive, especially housing as it is cheaper than Sydney. House and land packages here are around $60k less.

When does the population growth & infrastructure expansion come to an end?

Q. Catherine Manning: Considering your PowerPoint showed massive growth on Melbourne’s outskirts, are you concerned about the impact of all this growth on our food bowl, particularly the Koo Wee Rup Swamp/Gippsland regions? When does the growth come to an end?
A. (the following is a summary of what I understood of his lengthy response):
The south/east is almost at capacity and they are planning to move more people out to the West where there are larger tracts of land to be built upon (I then asked ‘so why develop Hastings???’ to which he said ‘Minister of Ports answered that’ – oh did he??? Well, just because it was ‘Bolte’s dream’ isn’t a good enough answer to me!). He said the rezoning of the 6 areas identified on the far edges would be done so in an environmentally sensitive manner. The North and West were definitely the only places to develop. He then went on to say that he welcomed my questions and was assuming my next would be about the EES process after Minister Pallas’ comments (well, actually I was planning on letting him off the hook on that one as I thought I might be removed from the gallery if I asked another question!!!) He spoke about the EES as something the community feels contains a ‘do nothing’ option. He said they (govt.) were more sophisticated now and complexities have to be managed. However, he did mention that although it ‘sounds like a done deal’ (my words), he would still have to seek federal approvals (EPBC Act).

Terry Garwood – Exec Director, Freight Logistics and Marine, DOT, Victoria

• More talk about more people, more freight, more, more, more. Planning, building managing freight network.
• Victoria is home to most efficient element of road industry: B Doubles – larger b-doubles under consideration to be trialed on certain roads.
• Freight task to double from now to 2030 ‘efficiency/capacity/sustainability
• Private sector moves freight on shared networks: trucks/cars, air freight/passenger, recreational boating/shipping.
• Government owns ports ( the ones in the VTP)
• ‘Planning and protecting’, ‘building and maintaining’, ‘managing and regulating’….( lots of buzzwords!)
• National rail that bypasses all major cities (now you’re talkin’!)
• International terminal at fresh market
• Truck Action Plan: building the network, freight charge during the day – encourage night road use
• Port of Melbourne’s charter to change to expand its role outside the port gate, giving them more power beyond the fence line of their current site.
• New policy document: Port Futures – tweaking the PLUTS
• This document will take Hastings and the UGB’s into consideration.
• There are no plans to introduce b-triples onto our Victorian road network, just longer b-doubles.

Question: Would Rail-Share suffer with the introduction of larger trucks?
Answer: Yes. Intra rail is port related. Interstate Rail non port related. National by passes all Capitol Cities. eg. Donnybrook Terminal. Metro rail freight is currently zero.

Question: Rob Gell: were green-house gas emissions part of the over all decision making process, especially trucks?
Answer: Aviation was quoted as 1.5% emissions, shipping 1.5% emissions. (Maybe he meant shipping and Transport, but that needs to be looked at.)

Rob said if Darwin was the Sea/Container terminal, how about train to the rest of the nation?
Further A. Melb. to Sydney Rail attracts barely 5% all freight movements. Funds are likely to be directed to increase rail and they are in close contact with Fed. Gov.

Question Unposed: Have the social impacts been considered or ‘costed in’ of the hundreds and thousands of ‘Daddies’ out there encouraged to drive their trucks only at night?

Stephen Bradford – CEO, Port of Melbourne Corporation

After a few figures relating to the Global Financial Crisis’s impact on freight movements, Stephen Bradford got stuck right in to the community for daring to suggest that things might not go so well to plan as expected. Here’s a rundown:

TEU’s (containers) Motor Vehicles
Dec. down 5.2% down 28.7%
Jan down 16% down 33.8%
Feb down 7.6% down 35.9%
Mar down 7.6% down 38.7%

TEU’s down 1.5% to Mar 09
Cars down 15.9% to Mar 09
Dry Bulk down 1.8% to Mar09

Long Beach down 30%
Seattle down 24%
Tacoma down 15%
Oakland down 16%
Los Angeles down 17%

(anyone wanna buy a transport plan???)

• 8 million TEU by 2035
• 60% container vessels are draught constrained, need ‘a hole in the sand’ – dredging.
• $12million EES
• Headlines cut and pasted on PowerPoint of ‘Negative Headlines’

He then went on to show news footage of ‘community reaction’, including the ‘Battle Zone’ story with Jo Hall, a Blue Wedges Rally, protesters and the exclusion zone, Federal Court story….etc..

• EES – after 130 recommendations from initial panel, rebuilt the team, performed the highest environmental studies, project liaison group, ‘subsequently we then had the SEES peer review by experts not on the original panel as selected by the state government’.
• Successfully dredged with no environmental impacts
• On schedule and within budget
• Port corporation took the option to be vigilant and open
• EMP is very rigorous

Followed by the ‘Big Tick’ video of the Queen of the Netherlands
• Took on an advertising campaign
• Showed the media ad
• More justification of media campaign
• Looking at Hastings and other ports
• By the way, loves the little penguins – lots of monitoring of the little cuties.

Question: What benefit to the environmental outcome of spending the $120M second/further EES re Bay Dredging.
Answer: He said it was worth it, they learned more about sea-grasses, penguins and turbidity. He also commented that the second 'team' convened to carry out the 'further' EES were almost an entirely new crew.

Question: CEO RACV Negus asked about increased container volumes on roads.
Answer: Negus was directed to the presentation by the previous speaker and he had answered all that. Negus only attended for the Bradford presentation and left the conference shortly after.

Question: Was Mr. Bradford concerned about increased severity of storms, King Tides etc. adding to an increase water level in the bay.
Answer: No.

Question unposed: When you say the port corporation ‘took the option’ to be vigilant and open, what was the other ‘option’?

The Hon. Jacinta Allen, Minister for Regional and Rural Development

More of what seemed like a ‘press release’ from the VTP.

Question Jillian Verhardt (Radio 3RPP): Despite a recent massive upgrade there is great congestion at times at the Tulla/Calder merge. Bendigo and towns such as Gisborne had been touted as ‘commuter satellites’ for those seeking affordable regional housing yet wishing to remain working in Metro yet get home at a reasonable hour. Asked about the Melbourne City to Tullamarine light rail in terms of alleviating serious congestion, and stated that the airport had been doubled in capacity around 5 years ago, and the management were out there last year stating another doubling would be required to keep up with increased aviation activity.

Answer: Dismissed the question as it was in her opinion a metro issue, yet the highway, Calder and Tullamarine Freeway are heavily used already. As other road issues around the freeways are ‘addressed’, it is assumed that will ease congestion.

Panel ‘Discussion’

Tim Ryan – GM, ARTC
Helen Newell – Director, Corporate Dev. & Government Relations, Asciano
Andy McNicol – Coffee Rail

Tim Ryan

• Nth/Sth rail corridor: Melb/Bris/Syd – 16m gross tonnes to 28/35m 2015
• East/West: Melb/Syd/Perth – 80% market share - focus to sustain operation – not much growth in it.
• Include customers, deliver what the market wants, location of terminals to take long trains, commercial opportunities in regional areas.
• Trucks have access to good road networks, makes it difficult to compete for $$$ for rail infrastructure.
• 1.8klm trains Syd/WA 1.5klm trains Bris

Helen Newell

• Engage with stakeholders
• Freight transport through inner urban areas an issue
• Need proper debate to find the best place for development (she’s speaking my language!) Hastings provides ‘many challenges’.
• Containers from Tasmania
• Asciano prefer development out west (i.e. Geelong).
• National freight rail system only way to justify freight on rail.
• Rail freight under 500klm cannot compete with trucks.
• Asciano position: move freight to west out of Dynan precinct to allow double stacking of Rail

Andy McNicol

• Literally arrived in Melbourne from Scotland 4 days ago.
• Was impressed by the ministers and audience being so embracing of the VTP and mentioned that there was much more ‘debate’ about such matters overseas.

Questions/Discussion:

Catherine Manning: Andy, you say that you are impressed that the Ministers and audience at this conference seem to be ‘embracing’ of the VTP. That may be because this is a ‘target audience’. The exorbitant cost of a ticket to this event prevents many community groups from attending (I am here representing a number of groups across Victoria). Further, when Tim Pallas said earlier that ‘the community had accepted b-doubles on the roads’, I beg to disagree. I don’t believe we’ve ‘accepted them’ at all, what choice did we have? They just arrived, and I can tell you that amongst the greater community there is huge support for a National Rail System that would reduce the number of trucks on the road, removes the parochialism and assesses the best place for port development.

To Helen Newell, if the cost to society of health impacts and safety issues were assessed and added to the cost of trucking freight, would that not bring the margin closer and make rail more competitive?

Helen Newell's response was that we’d be pleased to hear that the Federal Government are looking at this very issue and are about to release a document that she couldn’t elaborate on as yet, but that we would find it very encouraging. She went on to say that health issues and safety of trucks is being considered - Asciano stated it would help if trains were priced more economically, using all the columns. When they did their study, using all aspects, including safety, congestion etc. it produced a compelling argument showing trains can reduce road stressors currently present around centres.

(With this in mind, I wonder if we should hold off on the whole VTP until we can ‘collaborate’ with everyone for the best possible outcome for our freight needs! So far, the budget looks like it has done that for us, and I didn’t see anyone pulling dollar bills out of their pockets at this conference….)

More q & a for the panel:

Q. Freight via large trucks (all) around Port of Melbourne has a curfew to avoid commuter peak times and maybe residential considerations.

Is Infrastructure worth the cost to solve? Sydney has 4 hr curfew morning and evening re rail movements (noise and road closure/s?) where trucks are not limited there making it hard for rail to compete.

A. Asciano talked about doubling the track to Wodonga/Albury and said the Melb. to Bris. rail system was a major impediment.
Sydney was a rail bottleneck, in terms of getting freight through, especially sharing tracks with commuters as above.

Q. Wyndham Planner? The West is preferred location for rail terminal in a highly built up area.

A. The North-South and East - West must be connectable. The Sunshine triangle is part of this. North or West, both need corridors as a location. Donnybrook is 'looking good'.

Q Rail Lubrication from an expert in reducing friction, wear and tear etc. Apparently Aust. is using ineffective product and this adds to maintenance both trains and tracks.

A. This Q was dismissed immediately by the 3rd member of the 'panel', he explained he had heard of superior products but was sticking with existing suppliers and technology.

Q. Regional Hubs, who might be the operators? Terminals, rail, have their own economies of scale.

A. Financially, Rail always struggles. Multiple users is an answer and other business is required other than simply 'lifting' containers.
Single box rail transport does not pay.

Footnote - US does not allow double B's. Their policy is if the freight is that big, it must go by rail.

Parsons Brinkerhoff

• Freight and Congestion have risen sharply. Though, traffic volumes appear to have leveled off. Public Transport is steady and has experienced strong growth. Of the $38B, how best to use.

• Plan beyond today’s needs, we are simply catching up with a back-log not actually creating future capacity. Look at least 30yrs ahead.

• Current government plans will barely provide for the next 10 yrs.

• EIS is the opportunity for Community to improve the environment.

• Land use is predicator for location of transport.

• The presenter used Boston as the model to demonstrate how transport planning can work, for both commuters and road users.

• Development on roads are best, in their opinion, near major intersections.

Over and out.

Catherine Manning
Southern Victoria Community Action Group Inc.
P.O. Box 707,
Pakenham 3810
www.svcag.org
svcag[AT]ozemail.com.au

Community members of a small green wedge, rural-residential township south east of Melbourne have won their fight to relocate industrial infrastructure for the Wonthaggi Desalination Project to a more suitable location, away from residences and their local primary school.

Unfortunately Wonthaggi itself has lost its battle against the actual desal plant.

Last November as the Environmental Effects Statement (EES) panel hearing began, Cardinia resident Catherine Manning stumbled across plans for a massive Booster Pump Station and possible chemical dosing facility. Horrified, she pulled together a petition and thorough presentation of the impacts to the local community.

Her submission to the EES hearing prompted the panel to personally visit the site. Their visit resulted in their recommending relocation of the Booster Pump Station. This was one of the panel's forty two final recommendations made to Planning Minister Justin Madden.

However, to Ms Manning's dismay, that recommendation was rejected by Minister Madden.

"I had followed what I was told was 'proper process' and felt vindicated when the panel wholeheartedly agreed with our community's concerns, but was alarmed that the Minister had missed the point of our submission and rejected that recommendation', Ms Manning said. 'I felt that the process was flawed and undemocratic, and that as a small community, we were being ignored and our concerns overlooked.'

Delegation to Parliament House

Not to be deterred, Ms Manning contacted Eastern Region Upper House MP Johan Scheffer. She requested a meeting with Minister Madden's office and the head of the desalination project Peter Sammut, to outline her concerns. Local primary school principal Allan Armstrong, and adjoining landholder Udyta Clark helped form the delegation to Parliament House.

'Having not been consulted properly in the first place, then feeling let down by the process, this final result is a real victory for us and an example of what can be achieved by ordinary people determined to seek an appropriate outcome,' said Ms Manning.

Source: Media Release from residents of Cardinia township. Thu, 11 Jun 2009
Contact: Catherine Manning by contacting us at candobetter.org

Australians receive little useful coverage in the mainstream media about new laws which are constantly being brought in to privilege overpopulation and overdevelopment in various states. Candobetter tries to publish information to fill this gap. The Bill discussed below, if passed, will make Victorians slaves to developers. They will not be able to influence most of what happens in their state and they will be punished if they try to stop developments by other means.

The comments below were on a debate (in an ALP-dominated parliament) was on the second reading of a motion by Mr Batchelor, The Minister for Community Development, for the Victorian Planning Legislation Amendment Bill 2009.
Labor Ministers who spoke in support of this bill were Mr Brooks of Bundoora, Victoria and Ms D’Ambrosio, of Mill Park, Victoria.

Mr Clark of Box Hill and Mr David Morris (in the Liberal Opposition) spoke against it. Here is Mr Clark's speech. We present Mr David Morris's speech in the next article, to be published shortly, "New Vic Planning Legislation Bill "a blatant, naked grab for power"

Criticism in Parliament of the Victorian Planning Legislation Amendment Bill

Mr CLARK (Box Hill) —

The Planning Legislation Amendment Bill has five main purposes. It makes amendments to the Planning and Environment Act 1987 so that any area of Victoria may be deemed to be a growth area, it creates a regime for the establishment and operation of new development assessment committees (DACs), it increases penalties in the Heritage Act 1995, it amends the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Trust Act 1996 to remove the limitation requiring that the trust only operate within the city of Port Phillip and the city of Melbourne, and it amends the Docklands Act 1991 to allow VicUrban to continue its involvement in projects in the Docklands development beyond 31 December 2005. The last of these purposes is effectively a tidy-up amendment, because VicUrban is already continuing its involvement in such projects.

I would be interested to hear the government’s reasons for removing the limitations on the Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Trust so it can operate beyond the city of Port Phillip and the city of Melbourne. The increased penalties in the Heritage Act continue policy initiatives started in previous legislation.

The bill proposes to give the Governor in Council the power to declare as a growth area any part of Victoria that the Governor in Council sees fit

The two main provisions of the bill are the first ones I referred to. The bill proposes to give the Governor in Council the power to declare as a growth area any part of Victoria that the Governor in Council sees fit, and the bill contains extensive mechanisms for the constitution and operation of development assessment committees.

The government has announced that the initial development assessment committee areas will be the activity areas of Camberwell, Doncaster, Geelong, Preston and Coburg, but they can go much further than that. They can basically be extended as the government sees fit.

Once created, the new DACs will act in lieu of the responsible authority for all developments within their deemed operational areas, as determined by the ministerial order. The order will specify the class of development to which it applies and the areas it covers.

Each DAC will consist of five members. Three, including the chair, will be appointed by the Minister for Planning, and two will be nominated by the relevant municipal council from a group of five persons who are councillors or members of staff of that council.

There are provisions in the bill relating to the disclosure of membership of the DAC, provisions relating to conflicts of interest and disclosure of those conflicts, and provisions empowering removal of DAC members in certain circumstances. The bill specifies that the DAC will have the powers of the responsible authority in relation to the matters it considers. The decisions it makes will be treated as the decisions of the responsible authority. The relevant municipal council is required to provide documents, information and assistance to the DAC and to reimburse all reasonable costs and expenses incurred by a DAC other than the remuneration of the three members nominated by the minister. Once a decision is made by the DAC, it is treated as if it were effectively the decision of the council itself. For example, it is liable to be appealed at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT). This is the scheme of the bill. In putting forward the bill the government has said it is partnering with local government in seeking to improve the operation of the planning system.

I have to say that I have been struggling to think of an initiative announced in the planning sphere, or indeed in any other sphere of government, that is as stupid as the provision contained in this bill in terms of achieving the objectives for which it is said to be put forward.

There has certainly been other legislation that has been more damaging to the community than this, but in terms of its sheer illogicality, this bill is hard to beat.

The argument in favour of this legislation effectively says — and perhaps I will put some words in the government’s mouth — the current planning system is not working properly. There are long delays and interminable arguments.

Bill won't help create jobs

The government may claim councils cannot make timely decisions and that this is inhibiting the capacity to get on with developments and create jobs and prosperity for the state. Taking that argument as a given, this bill does absolutely nothing effective to overcome the bulk of the problems that exist in the system on that account. It simply creates a new decision-making body, the DAC, to make a decision in lieu of the councillors of the municipality sitting around the table in the council chamber.

Every other element of the process remains as it is.

Problems with the adequacy of zoning, planning scheme definitions, flawed criteria for deciding about the issue of planning permits and local government planning departments that are short staffed or where staff are slow, lacking in ability, pedantic or unaccountable — or any of the other accusations that are made from time to time — continue. Exactly the same group of council officers will be servicing the DAC as are currently servicing the councillors.

Beyond the point of a decision being made, if people object to a decision, they can appeal to VCAT against the decision of the DAC, just as they can appeal to VCAT against the decision of the council. The potential for this measure to overcome perceived problems in the planning system is extraordinarily limited. Those who hold out hope that once the DAC makes a decision the development can proceed ignore the fact that if there is strong resident opposition to a proposed planning initiative, that decision can go off to VCAT just as it can in the case of a council decision. If we assume the council would have rejected an application and the DAC would approve it, nonetheless the residents who were opposed to that application could still take it to VCAT. Any potential improvement to remedy the current problems of the planning system is extraordinarily limited. I fear those who were hoping to get great benefit out of this scheme, if it is enacted and implemented, will be sorely disappointed.

But that is only half of the problem with this bill.

The even greater half of the problem is the extraordinary price at which it comes in terms of intrusion on local communities, the diminution of the capacity of local communities to have a say in their own destiny, and the undermining of the role of local government councillors. The government appears to be treating local government councillors with disdain and disregard.

The government has the nerve to call this bill a partnership with local government, whereas in fact it will take away the existing responsibilities of local government to make decisions on planning permits and offers councils only two places out of five at the table of development assessment committees. The government is doing that on an extraordinarily limited and constrained basis.

To start off with, because councillors will have only two places out of five they will always be at risk of being outvoted. The second-reading speech claims that there is going to be an independent chair, but when members look at the bill they will see there is nothing of the sort — the chair is to be appointed by the minister as are the two other non-council nominees.

The local community representatives can be either councillors or members of staff. I think it will be highly likely that councillors will find it virtually impossible to become involved with a DAC. If they do, they are certainly going to be under extraordinary constraints.

There are confidentiality provisions governing members of DACs. The councillors who take part in them are almost certainly frequently, if not always, going to find themselves outvoted. They are then likely going to come under attack from the local community.

DAC Confidentiality provisions stop councillors talking to their communities

They will be trying to defend themselves with one arm tied behind their backs, because they will not be able to cite confidential information in their defence. They will be in a no-win situation.

Councillors squeezed out of planning process, leaving only government officers

If this scheme ends up being enacted, I would not be at all surprised if councillors say, ‘We are not going to take part in this at all. We are not going to be tarred with this brush. We’ll send some council officers along to make the decisions’. Councillors are effectively being squeezed out of the process altogether.

No reason required for overriding public policy

A further concerning aspect is that the DACs are not only being created in defined areas where the government has demonstrated there is some overriding public policy reason as to why in particular cases and in particularly sensitive or important parts of Victoria a DAC should be established.

Crocodilian policies

The DACs can be set up anywhere the government chooses. It reminds me of Churchill’s metaphor of people hoping the crocodile will eat them last while the crocodile goes around gobbling up one at a time. The Brumby government crocodile has designated a handful of local communities to gobble up in the first instance, and it will soon be chomping its way further through other communities.

A bil to destroy any democratic resistance to any development

It will not only do so in activity centres. The government has talked about its policy of imposing high density development along tram corridors. If the government runs into local community opposition to that proposal, next we will find that it has constituted a DAC to take responsibility, for example, for the entire strip of properties along the tram 109 route. Thus that entire strip, running from the city of Yarra through Boroondara to Box Hill, could also be pulled out of the hands of the local community.

The government is seeking an extraordinarily broad grant of discretionary power from this Parliament.

Exactly the same point applies in relation to the power it seeks through this bill to designate growth areas. It is not as if, for example, the government has a schedule in the bill and is seeking to designate areas in the schedule as growth areas; it wants the power to declare any part of the state to be a growth area. It could designate 1 hectare in Mildura, 100 hectares in Sale or a former commercial site in Camberwell to be a growth area, and all the rules relating to growth areas would then apply.

What would also apply is the obligation on people who develop land in any of those areas to pay the growth areas infrastructure contribution. This is a new burden on the people — a new tax being introduced for the first time in Victoria in 2009–10.

The government has claimed that there are going to be no new taxes, but if one looks at the budget papers made available to the house earlier today, one sees that for the first time in 2009–10 something in the order of $84.7 million is going to be collected from growth areas. The budget papers are a bit confusing as to exactly what this is going to consist of, and there is an inconsistency between budget paper 4 and budget paper 3.

Flat tax of $95,000 per ha on land owners whose land is rezoned from rural whether they asked for rezone or not

Budget paper 4 talks simply about a growth areas infrastructure contribution, estimated to be $85 million in 2009–10 — it explains that land brought into an urban growth boundary in future will be liable to a levy of $95 000 per hectare. In budget paper 3, under ‘Revenue initiatives’, at page 369, this figure is split into two figures, which designate a growth areas development fund and a growth areas infrastructure contribution, one of $42.3 million and the other of $42.4 million. This seems, although the budget papers do not make this clear, to reflect the fact that some of the money in the growth areas infrastructure contribution will in turn be assigned to a growth areas development fund — at least that is my assessment. If government members can confirm or vary that, I look forward to hearing what they can tell us.

[T]his bill will enable the government, without any further recourse to the Parliament, to declare an area to be a growth area. Following on from that will be the liability of citizens to pay this increased levy.

Be that as it may, this bill will enable the government, without any further recourse to the Parliament, to declare an area to be a growth area. Following on from that will be the liability of citizens to pay this increased levy. I would have thought that was getting pretty close to violating longstanding constitutional principles about the need for taxation or similar imposts to be authorised by Parliament rather than be imposed by the government through open-ended delegated legislation.

However, regardless of the constitutional principles, it arms the Brumby government with yet another way of grabbing revenue out of the community without proper debate and without proper authorisation by this Parliament.

This legislation seems to be completely at odds with the promises and claims that the Bracks and Brumby governments have made and the Labor Party made when in opposition about planning and their support for local communities. The former planning minister, John Thwaites, made out that he was going to be the champion of local communities and would restore authority, which he claimed had been taken away by the previous government, to local communities. But instead of restoring authority or allowing local communities to have a legitimate say, the government is taking that ‘say’ away from local communities at just about every step of the way. The bill before the house is a particularly gross example of that.

As I said, this bill is not going to be of any significant benefit in creating jobs and speeding up the development process. It operates at only that one particular point in the continuum at which an initial decision is made by a responsible authority.

It also may well not be of much help to small and medium-sized developers if the government is going to exercise its power primarily at the instigation of larger developers who come to it and persuade it to act in any particular case.

The fundamental opposition to this is twofold. On the one hand it does nothing to fix the serious problems which the Bracks and Brumby governments have allowed to evolve and fester within our planning system. It does nothing to overcome unreasonable delays; it does nothing to provide certainty to residents or those seeking to develop properties. It puts one more complicating element, in particular instances, on an existing convoluted structure that is not working properly.

Yet on the other hand it dramatically derogates from any potential for local communities to have a say through their local representatives. It is treating local government and local councillors with contempt, asking them to be part of a process through a DAC in which they have only two votes out of five — three votes are appointed by the minister against them — and to try to defend their position with one arm tied behind their backs.
The bill, whichever way you look at it, is badly flawed.

It attacks principles of democracy, of devolution and decentralisation. It attacks principles of accountability to Parliament by government for revenue raising. It is bad in all of those respects, and it is opposed by the coalition.

Source: “Planning Legislation Amendment Bill, (Second Reading), Members Statements, Assembly, Hansard, Tuesday, 5, May, 2009 pp. 1103-1115

Article written by Catherine Manning

I am not a prude, but my children have a right to childhood

I am not a prude. (I know, it's a shame that women have to clarify that point before commenting on pornography, but just before you grab your keyboard to type a response, I am not opposed to adults accessing legal pornography.) What I am opposed to, is children being exposed to pornographic images in milk bars, service stations and newsagents.

We have a great local store. The vendor takes the time to serve the children of our community one by one as they choose their lollies the 'old fashioned way', and as if they're making the biggest decision they'll ever make in their lives. My kids look forward to their once a week treat, and I enjoy helping to foster what I think will one day be a positive childhood memory.
However, last week as I stood waiting for an order with my four year old son, I noticed at children's eye level two magazines with almost naked, unnaturally busty, spread legged, pubeless 'women', faces with parted glossy lips wantonly staring out as they pull down their knickers, just beside the icecream freezer right in front of us. With headlines such as 'Fit to F*#K', World's Oldest Porn Star', 'Keep on F*#king','Porn star goes down on chopper pilot's chopper', etc., there wasn't much left to the imagination. (hey, if you're freaking out reading this, imagine how I felt with my child in tow.)

Does the right to make money cancel out my children's rights?

I spoke with the storekeeper about this, and although he understood my concerns, his job was to make money. In fact, he informed me that many of his clients, the truckies passing through who park out the front of our primary school, actually think he should stock more of the 'hardcore stuff'. (gee, that's comforting I say as I push my stomach back down from the back of my throat....). Apparently, according to the storekeeper, less offensive magazines such as Ralph and FMH do come covered, but these two, which have progressively become more explicit, have escaped the same censorship. Therefore, the storekeeper (and anyone else) can have these magazines sitting anywhere in their shop and as in our case, right between the lollies and icecreams about half a metre from the floor. (Have an icecream kids, and would you like porn with that?)

Our children are victims of pornography

Our children are victims of pornography. They are being exposed to images of a sexual nature long before they can comprehend their meaning, but these images make an impression. It tells boys what to expect of girls and tells girls how they should act. We have a society full of girls and young women with eating disorders and serious body image problems, and a fast growing cosmetic surgery industry (which cashes in unashamedly on those with body image issues). We have what seems like an 'epidemic' of paedophilia, with more and more men accessing sexual images of children. The news is full of stories about footballers physically and sexually assaulting women, yet society still allows our kids to be brainwashed with pornographic images at an early age.

I'd like to know that when my kids go in to the local store for a bag of lollies or some milk, that they are safe and not exposed to things they shouldn't and wouldn't see at home. Sadly, I've come to learn it's something I shouldn't 'expect', but surely it's not too much to ask.

About the author:

This article is by Catherine Manning, President of the Southern Victorian Community Action Group Inc, and the newly formed Cardinia Township Association, and an ordinary parent/citizen concerned about the future for our children, in this case, the impacts of inappropriate exposure to pornography.

Ed. This article is adapted (with insertion of headings) from the introduction at www.savethepines.net This reserve is located at the top of the Mornington Peninsula, which extends south of Melbourne like a boot. Until Jeff Kennet became Premier of Victoria, this area was zoned rural. With his arrival it was rezoned into 'Greater Melbourne' and thus became targeted for continuous urbanisation. There is a video of the freeway route & landscape at the bottom of this article.

Brumby to bulldoze tollway through Pines

Premier Brumby has announced his intention to bulldoze the Peninsula Link Freeway through the centre of Frankston’s 220 hectare Pines Flora and Fauna Reserve. He pre-empted the “Independent” Panel report reviewing the South and Eastern Integrated Transport Authority’s Environment Effect Statement thus wasting $5m of taxpayers money and thousands of hours of submitters time.

This land was recommended by Victorian bureaucrats in 1993 for reservation as a National Park. They also recommended that Vicroads remove the road reservation.

Vital for wildlife corridor to save Peninsula species

This is the closest place to Melbourne where the endangered Southern Brown Bandicoot and other endangered species survive in the wild. It’s also the closest place in Melbourne’s South and South East where Swamp Wallabies, Echidnas, Koalas and other iconic Australian species roam freely.

The Department of Environment and Sustainability said “The potential impact of the proposed bypass may cause the local extinction of this species.” This advice was repeated to the EES Panel by many experts including the Government’s ecological consultant.

In 1995, the Minister for Conservation (Mark Birrel) advised Parliament that “This is the most botanically significant reserve in south-eastern Melbourne.”

214 Regionally significant flora

Parks Victoria advise that two hundred and eighteen flora species recorded in the Reserve are considered to be regionally significant within the Gippsland Plain Bioregion. Land abutting the Reserve’s edge was the last place the Frankston Spider Orchid was found in the Peninsula’s north. It numbers now fewer than 40 plants in the wild.

Alternatives not being considered

There are alternatives. If fly-over’s could be built over Burke, Toorak and Tooronga Roads, then so to can Cranbourne road be overpassed and the delays alleviated.

Mark Birrel’s statement followed 20 years of public controversy regarding successive proposals to subdivide and quarry this land. The issue first came to media prominence in 1975 when a group of residents hoisted the Eureka flag and claimed the land for Frankston residents.

The time has come to reclaim this land.

The time has come to reclaim this land.

But there is more.

Most precious reserves sacrificed to unnecessary urban expansion

The 20 odd kilometer swath cut into the landscape from Carrum Downs will destroy an extraordinarily rare patch of herb rich grassy wetland. DSE says it can’t be replaced. The road will plough through 60% of the Belvedere Reserve in Seaford, the Pobblebonk/Willow Reserve and the Wittenberg Reserves in Langwarrin, destroy a pristine remnant at the heritage listed Westerfield property and bisect precious farmland the length of the Moorooduc Plain.

Help us save this priceless landscape and species that are our Australian heritage.

The www.savethepines.net asks readers to "Please contact your local member and Federal Minister Garrett to voice your opposition."

Details of Shepparton inquiry even are below the italicised editorial. The comments preceding the details of the Senate Inquiry in Shepparton are my response to AWPC's Maryland Wilson's questioning of my supporting irrigators. Comments and independent reports of this event will be most welcome. Submit to "contact" at top left margin of this site or reply in the comments function at the bottom of this article.

What is the link between Foodbowl Unlimited, the North South Pipeline and the Senate Inquiry on the 14th?

There is a link between the "Foodbowl unlimited project" and the North South Pipeline because the savings proposed to be made from Goulburn River water are supposed to be made through claimed increased efficiency of the Foodbowl unlimited project. It is sad that supporters of the Plug the Pipe project probably benefited from an earlier democracy-destroying and land and water alienating project, which was the Wimmera-Malley pipeline. Australian farmers should stand together against big agribusiness, but it is so easy for government to divide and conquer over regional interests and water. Irrigators, who settle land more densely than drylands farmers, carry more electoral clout than dryland farmers, and have used this to their advantage and the disadvantage of dryland farmers in the past - not necessarily all of them knowingly. Now big agribusiness is playing the irrigators at their own game, because big agribusiness has the government in its pocket - literally - in this public-private venture called the Foodbowl Unlimited project.

Unfortunately, if we do not support the incumbent irrigators, my fear is that we will lose all control of this section of the Murray Darling to corporate interests.

For those of you who are interested in the politics of big-water and corporatised government, it is instructive to look through electoral system glasses at the way the State and Federal governments during Howard's era, manipulated the irrigators and the public over the then proposed privatisation of the Snowy River Hydro Scheme. At the time the Victorian ALP and the Federal Liberal Party were vying for electoral popularity among irrigators. The Hydro Privatisation scheme was unpopular everywhere because privatisation is unpopular, but it was especially unpopular with irrigators because of the likelihood that their allocations would be up for grabs and become more expensive. Howard, whilst he pushed for the privatisation of the Snowy Hydro, was deeply unpopular with them. The Bracks Victorian government struggled with itself over exploiting the situation for popularity with irrigators and giving in to its ideological committment to selling off Victoria's assets. But they had little to lose if they were on the same side as the Federal government in this instance, because the voters would have no choice at all. So eventually Bracks gave in and joined the Howard Government support for privatising the Snowy Hydro scheme. That was when Howard did one of his most breathtaking political acrobat tricks. Suddenly he dropped the privatisation scheme, leaving the Victorian Government looking like the only snake in the grass. Well they haven't lost their privatisation agenda, even though Mr H has departed the halls of government.

The Senate inquiry into the Water Amendment (Saving the Murray and Goulburn Rivers) Bill 2008

Plug The Pipe Gathering of Supporters

In Shepparton at Country Comfort Motel (opposite Skate Park beside Shepparton dry Lake) on Tuesday April 14th

Plug The Pipe Submission at Starts at 11.15 am

Seating available for 50-75 people (People are advised to be seated early 10:30am onwards)

BBQ Available afterwards in Park opposite ( Gold coin Donation)

Plug The Pipe has been scheduled to appear before the Committee from 11.15 am to 12.00 noon on Thursday 14 April 2009 at the Country Comfort Hotel, 481 Wyndham Street, Shepparton Vic.

Northern Victoria Irrigators Inc will also be appearing before the Senate at 10:30am

Please make the effort to be there and support our Plug the Pipe Irrigators who will be making our presentation.It would be ideal to have a crowd there in attendance by 10.30am

Radiocarbon-testing has confirmed that a giant rare old-growth Eucalyptus regnans located in its natural forest habitat on East Gippsland's Brown Mountain has been chainsawed by VicForests, despite it being scientifically confirmed to be at least 500 years old.

No regard has been made for the existence value of a Victorian 500 year old natural asset, nor the habitat requirements for the typical arboreal animals and forest owls dependent on this old growth habitat tree or its associative forest dependent habitat. Under State-sanction, ignorant VicForest butchers have plundered, ransacked and run.

Manager, Victorian Department of Sustainability and Environment, Orbost, Steve DeVoogd, has been formally advised that this chainsawing of rare old growth forest is an offence committed under the section 46(1) of the Sustainable Forests (Timber) Act 2004. The action is also a breach of Code of Forest Practices (CFP).

VicForests Chairman, Warren Hodgson, Board members Monica Gould, Jim Houghton, Fiona McNabb, Bob Smith, Susan Walpole, and Chief Executive Officer David Pollard should all be sacked forthwith. VicForests token 'vision' 'purpose' and 'values' which profess motherhood notions of 'sustainable', 'environmentally responsible' and 'ethical' are but Mugabean. This 500 year old tree epitomises the reality of Brumby's 'Sustainability Charter for State forests.

Botanist Steve Mueck has worked for the Victorian Department of Natural Resources and Environment and is now a consultant in the private sector. He says radiocarbon dating of eucalypts is unusual and the result in this case is significant.

"Current forest managements practices are looking at harvesting on rotation times in the vicinity of 80 to 120 years with the perception that that's a particularly long period of time," he said.

"Now it is, I suppose, in the context of a human lifetime, but it is a very, very short period of time in comparison to the age in which many of the components that live in these forests can in fact get to in a natural system."

Back in the 1860s timber workers and naturalists emerged from the forests with stories of massive trees towering to immense heights and as wide as houses. Government botanist Ferdinand von Mueller recounted the existence of a tree as high as the Egyptian Pyramids at 480 ft (144m) and another fallen tree in the Dandenong Ranges over 400 ft (120m). A giant was sighted in the Otways with a girth of 64 ft (19m).

VicForests senseless decapitation of one of the last Victorian giants is a harbinger of extinction to Victoria's old growth forests. It's like grabbing an old ANZAC from the march past and slitting his throat.

Brumby downsizes democracy upsizes development

About a month ago Brumby gave Madden new call-in powers with the excuse that development was held up because of people - you know - citizens, voters - and democratic local councils. So under the excuse of "getting the economy going" Madden was given these extra powers.

Irresponsible authority

The very next week he intervened in the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) over a bike track through Willesmere Park in Kew. Now that is really good for job creation!!!

Then last week he declared himself the Responsible Authority for 2 days and approved a development in South Yarra, where the developer was going against the approved plans and the council stopped it. So the developer went to Madden complaining and Madden approved it.

Developers Run to Mama Madden

The developers can now run to Mama Madden and she will wave a magic wand and make democracy disappear. It is rumoured that that Madden sees councils as getting in his way, basically.

Citizens appeal to omsbudsman

Today candobetter received information that Stonnington Council are appealing to the Ombudsman about the arbitrary call-in by Madden when the developers went knocking on his door.

The Ministers action will now be tested and the result will have bearing on all our futures.
If the Omsbudsman cannot stand up to the government on this issue of democracy then it is really time for a review of all our laws.

Remember solidarity?

Let all the people in all the states stand together in solidarity against the developers' overweaning demands, remembering that is was the growth lobby's demand for population growth to create demand for housing and the finance sector's exploitation of this undemocratic, unstable and anti-social market through sub-primes and various unreasonable fees and hidden cuts, that brought, not just Australia, but the world into the current depression.

Victoria's dinosaur economy - big projects, big debts, big talk

Mr Madden is acting for a dinosaur economy that is completely unsustainable and contributing frighteningly to overpopulation, greenhouse gas emissions and reduction in biodiversity and freedom for citizens. He should be made an example of for other arrogant state ministers to heed and reform before we lose even more of our natural ammenity and quality of life for nothing more than inflation to line the pockets of parasitic developers and their finance jockeys.

Recsei says high density causes more problems, fixes none

Dr Tony Recsei, President of SOS Sydney has written to the SM Herald about the fact that there is no high density city in the world not suffering from the problems that high density is supposed to prevent. He states that local research shows when you have high density you get increased traffic congestion, longer travel times, more energy per person used, no saving of water, increased housing costs and housing choice reduced. This retrofitting high density onto areas designed for low density does not save on infrastructure costs, it just overloads infrastructure and is much more expensive to fix than putting in new infrastructure in new areas.

Like humans, ducks form long-term bonds with their mates

Department of Sustainability (DSE) Victoria's dismal record on wildlife protection reaches new lows

The Department of Sustainability in Victoria seems to be a friend to the trigger-happy as regards kangaroos and seems not to care at all about possums. It shows no interest in promoting wildlife corridors and has pushed against local feeling to make Devilbend into a hunting and fishing and horseriding area, instead of a desperately needed sanctuary for the threatened animals on the Mornington Peninsula (a beautiful rural area redesignated for intensive development). Given the Department's failure to honour its obligations to Victorians to protect wildlife, it is surprising that it bothered to recommend a year's amnesty for ducks.

Hunting Advisory Committee trumps limp-wristed DSE on ducks

But, that's not the whole story. We learn that there is another force out there, besides the property developers, running wildlife into the ground in Victoria.

Minister Jennings was reported in the Age 5-2-09 to have said the Department of Sustainability and Environment had recommended the season be cancelled for a third straight year, but contradictory advice came from the Government's Hunting Advisory Committee, which backed allowing a season with few restrictions.

Waterbird numbers in Eastern Australia fell 80%+ in past 2 decades

So, lead bullets will again be hailed on defenseless ducks this year by people who call what they do a sport. This, despite waterbird numbers in Eastern Australia falling by over 80% in the past two decades and advice from the Department to cancel the season.

The cruelty is ignored.

Vote in two polls on this issue

The Age website –
Vote No if you do not agree with the decision to have a duck season in Victoria -
http://www.theage.com.au/polls/national/form.html

The 3AW website -
Vote Yes if you would like to see a ban on duck shooting. (scroll down and it is on your right on the website) http://www.3aw.com.au/

More information

For more information you may contact the Victorian Hunting Advisory Committee (HAC) 2/8 Nicholson St, East Melbourne VIC 3002, (03) 9637 9815,
(03) 9637 8451; zachary.powell[AT]dse.vic.gov.au

If you know nothing about the 'industry' of wildlife shooting in Victoria, this draft submission gives a lot of information: http://www.veac.vic.gov.au/riverredgum/rrgfsubmissions/1824.pdf , including on the government's pro-hunting policies.
The arguments which say hunting brings a few jobs to rural Victoria are easily countered by the amount of jobs brought by tourism of a less violent kind.

If we were not such a huge and damaging population, if the wildlife were not so horribly stressed by our day to day impact, hunting might be defensible in some lights. In the current situation where nature is trampled, burnt, mobbed and built over, the excuses seem pathetic.

Today, Wednesday, 4 February, 2009, a media release from the Victorian government, entitled, "Brumby acts on jobs", came out with the worst possible news.

Brumby (the Premier of Victoria, Australia) has announced he is fast tracking development - supposedly for the sake of the economy.

Mr Madden given dangerous powers

Instead of the infrastructure that should be worked on and which would employ lots of people, he is fast tracking building. He is giving the Minister for Planning, Mr Madden, the power to call in anything he wants to.

What this is doing is pouring our tax payers money into the developers pockets. Some of developers are on the skids financially and now our hard-earned money is going to be poured into their parasitically acquired debts.

An unhealthy obsession

Brumby is obsessed about building and so prepared to be a dictator and wipe out our remaining democratic rights.

Read the press release below and make a big bloody fuss.

Write to the media and get on to the morning radio shows if you think that will make a difference. Write to Brumby, but please also send copies to people all over the country, and to astridnova[AT]bigpond.com so candobetter can know about them. See the https://marvellousmelbourne.org/ for contact details for the so-called authorities and mainstream media.

The media release also included a lot about building public housing, which would not be necessary if the private development lobby had not been allowed to push the price of housing up by forcing population growth on Victoria.

Yesterday the demonstrators wanted a return of democracy - this is another nail in the coffin of democracy.

What will you do when your back is to the wall?

See the original government propaganda below

"Media release From the Premier of Victoria
Wednesday, 4 February, 2009
BRUMBY ACTS ON JOBS

“In these tougher global times, our Government is taking action to create jobs now and lock in Victoria’s future,” Mr Brumby said.

“Under changes I am foreshadowing today, our Government will identify key projects to fast-track; the Planning Minister can call them in; and we will get the work and the jobs flowing much more quickly.”

Joined at the start of works by Grocon CEO Daniel Grollo, Housing Minister Richard Wynne, Planning Minister Justin Madden and the Member for Melbourne Bronwyn Pike, Mr Brumby said the planning reforms were a result of the Jobs and Economic Roundtable he hosted last week with key banking and development representatives.

Key reforms to speed up investment and jobs will centre on the State Government undertaking a rolling audit of pending projects and identifying significant projects that will deliver economic and employment benefits while meeting the Government’s planning policy objectives.

Once projects are identified, the Minister for Planning will consider whether to take a range of actions, including;

· Calling in significant projects that generate jobs, environmental or social benefits held up at VCAT, such as a Southbank project for 224 apartments representing $75 million and 2700 direct and indirect jobs;

· Removing roadblocks that may be holding up good development projects such as placing on exhibition a planning scheme amendment to break the impasse holding up a $50 million shopping centre in Waurn Ponds with 1800 direct and indirect jobs;

· Calling in complex planning permit applications from councils that are gridlocked such as the Northcote Bowl redevelopment of 96 apartments worth $37 million creating 1300 direct and indirect jobs; and

· Identifying projects early and work with councils and proponents to achieve quicker approval such as the Pakenham retail, office, community and residential development worth $100 million and 1500 jobs, Chirnside Park golf course residential subdivision worth $300 million and 1500 jobs.

“Our Government owes it to all Victorians to do everything we can to create more jobs as quickly as possible and that is precisely what our reforms to planning will achieve,” he said.

“There are currently 1876 pending planning applications before VCAT, worth $1.3 billion. We want to work in partnership with VCAT to see how much of that potential investment and jobs can be unlocked by fast-tracking significant projects.”

The Minister for Planning, Justin Madden, said he was prepared to take appropriate action on significant development projects on a case-by-case basis, provided they complied with the State Government’s planning framework.

“To ensure this happens, our Government will provide clear guidance and ensure that well designed projects will be approved in a reasonable time. I can also give an assurance that decisions will be transparent and community views will continue to be sought,” Mr Madden said.

Further reforms to planning announced last year are in progress with legislation creating Development Assessment Committees being introduced this parliamentary session. These will help to promote appropriate development around Central Activities Districts."

Buggar the Central Activities Districts. Victorians don't want them or need them. Redistribute land and wealth from the developers and stop population and economic growth. Time to grow up and clean up our rotten government and its retinue of parasitic planners, builders, banks and developers.

High in the fork of the balding cypress tree, in a record heat wave on January 30th at 3.00pm Melbourne daylight saving time, the female possum was invisible to the people below sheltering from the sun in its sparse shade.

The temperature was officially 43 degrees , but in Catani Gardens, St. Kilda, it beat down fiercely on the little brush tail possum at well over 50 degrees. It scorched her fur, quickly penetrated it, blistered her skin beneath and dangerously heated the core of her body. She had slept in the early hours of that day but awoke in distress as the sun rose higher, pounding her mercilessly . Almost against her own will, she descended the branches, and the trunk of her tree reaching the hot ground below. She entered a strange daytime world which she had never seen before.
At first everything looked white .
She could not see in the intense light as, being a creature of the night, her eyes were adapted to darkness . She was disoriented with the strange world she saw and her own heat exhaustion.

Desperately she sought relief.

She looked across an expanse of dead crackling lawn and lines of palm trees (one of whose crown she once lived in) that had been made inaccessible with wide steel bands around the trunks. Around the sea edge edge of this domain were thin interrupted stands of heroic but struggling mirror bush.

There was no cool place in Catani Gardens.

No water relieved the overwhelming burning heat. The occasional splashes and drops from 3 drinking fountains (miles away from her, on a small possum scale) dried immediately as they fell on the burning bricks of the guttering below .

The little possum could find no relief from the intolerable heat. Groups of people laughed and chatted or lay on their beach towels in the shade of every cypress tree.
She could not go there. She must not be seen.

Humans had even staked out most of the pathetic alcoves in the mirror bush where ring tail possums have been seen occasionally at night.

The little possum had no choice. She lay down in the few inches of shade- too little for any human to shelter in -at the base of a palm tree.

She curled herself around the curve of the trunk so as not to be noticed by passing humans or dogs and waited for the end.

It came quickly.

See also: "Victorian Government shows no mercy for fauna and flora in Melbourne's heatwave" of 30 Jan 09.

Andrew Bolt, who works for the right-wing Murdoch-owned Melbourne Herald Sun newspaper, has political views, which, in many, ways conform well to those of his employer. He is anti-union. He supports US foreign policy including the so-called "war on terror" and he illogically holds environmentalists responsible for many of our problems. However, in contrast to the stridently pro-population-growth pro-high-immigration stance of his employer, he rightly condemns the ongoing idiocy of the policies of the federal and state governments to encourage population growth when, during the heat wave of the previous days, the infrastructure of Melbourne failed abysmally to meet the needs of Melbourne's current residents. By speaking the truth about population growth and immigration he may well be serving the public far better than many of his 'politically correct' detractors who still won't openly question population growth.

Andrew Bolt's article "Melbourne is wrecked and full" of 30 Jan 09 put the finger squarely on numbers and especially immigration numbers, in a robustly rhetorical way that will connect and generate emotion with readership. Without emotion the reader has little basis for memory let alone action.

Most writers fail to address the former. Those few who do most often fail at the latter.

Bolt has made indulgent and stupid statements about rivers and dams, as much to bash the Government as to exert his sense of macho human dominance over all things natural:

"Victoria is now paying the price for being too green, blind and thick to build basic stuff for a population we let grow far too fast."

"So incompetent are our politicians - so blinded by green ideology - that they even managed, in this vast continent, to run out of land for housing."

"It would break your heart to see where this lot scattered your money instead. On releases of precious drinking water into our rivers for 'environmental flows'. ..."

Nonetheless he has made numbers and immigration the primary focus overall:

"But now consider this: at the rate we're being growing lately, Victoria will add at least another 1.5 million to its population over the next 20 years.

"In fact, it could well be more. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd last year cranked up our immigration intake to a record high - more than 330,000 a year, if you include workers on temporary visas. And that's not yet counting new births.

"A year ago, even before Rudd opened our door even wider, the Australian Bureau of Statistics noted Australia's population was now growing by 1.6 per cent a year, which means that if we don't stop this madness, there will be half as many of us again by 2050.

"And, of course, most of these new people will be trying to squeeze into our cities. Like Melbourne.

"Imagine Melbourne growing 50 per cent bigger in your children's lifetime, if not your own. That's 50 per cent more people, cars, houses, gardens, air-conditioners and train travellers. Everywhere where's there's two, imagine three by 2050.

"Forget the social stresses of simply getting on with so many more immigrants, or of trying even to find a little elbow room.

"Consider this more basic problem: how on earth are we going to give all our new neighbours power, water, roads, land and trains when we don't have enough for the people here already?"

If, within that overall view, the case for rivers and against dams can be well-argued then the numbers have to be reduced even more.

Bolt is promoting an important but nearly invisible debate placing the core matter at its apex. I dislike the man but give credit where it is due and take opportunity where it arises. It's worth responding to re-inforce the importance and point of primacy within Bolt's position. Argue the natural resource issues secondarily as a function of social security. As an utterly vital input to society, water resource exploitation must afford soundly generous buffers for direct supply (water consumption) and ecological services (fisheries, biodiversity in general). The more security wanted the less people fit into the equation. We can fill the landscape horizon to horizon with a thickening clot of citizens, but supplies of water, energy, etc become russian roulette on any given day. How lucky does everyone feel? Can we have a vote on it perhaps?

Bolt even stabs the desalination fraud in the heart when he cites its energy demand in context to the energy supply that wasn't even available to meet existing demand. So we can have desalinated water but not on really hot days? How good is that? The real point here is the inherent incapacity of this or any Govt. to assure reliable provision of increasingly complex and expensive supply systems. The public need to realise this incapacity and be rightly afraid of it.

Treasury Gardens when well-watered
At the same time as I received a report on Bob Brown's speech on endangered species at Brown Mountain Forest, I also heard really disturbing... awful... news of time spent in the adjacent Treasury Gardens on Wednesday, when temperatures were well over forty degrees.

These gardens are known for their fountains and ponds and large shady trees. Captain Cook's cottage was imported from England and now resides here.

Apparently birds were going around with their beaks open, their wings extended, parched and distressed because there was NO WATER in any of the fountains and ponds there.

I thought that the Parks and Gardens had some kind of water recycling program, to mitigate the awful damage that the governments forced population program is doing to our water reserves.

Apparently not.

The person reporting this to me was so appalled that she emptied her make-up purse and filled it with water from the taps in the Ladies' toilets and placed it on the ground for the animals.

If the commodification of water has come to the pass where we will allow all the animals and possibly the trees in our parks to die; if our governments are going to show this degree of callousness, they must be pursued to the wall.

The following action was reported to me: A representative of Melbourne City Council was rung yesterday and told of the situation. It is reported that "he sounded genuinely sorry about the birds and agreed that drinking fountains with receptacles for overflow water for birds and humans was a good idea and will initiate it."

He said, however, that it obviously can't be straight away but he said it sounded as though it should be done.

He was asked if he could get something rigged up as an interim measure for birds during this terrible heat and he said he would look into it.

Mind you, he also said that he was about to go on vacation.

He also agreed that there should be lot more water fountains all around the city.

Note: prompt action by this person will be greatly appreciated, but who is responsible for this situation arising?

There have also been reports that animals are falling into the new plastic lined waterways that the Victorian government has allowed to be constructed. They cannot climb out on the slippery plastic, and drown. It is hard for me to imagine a dialogue with public servants and politicians so far removed from the reality of natural hydraulics that they would actually deprive the earth of water. What destructive buffoons rule this State.

Yesterday I rescued a bird from a bathtub full of water and lilies in my garden. She had gone in and become too wet to get out. I placed some plastic netting in the bath, where it formed a good bird-platform. I put her on the platform and she sat there until her wings dried off. I had also placed bowls of water around the garden and on the garage roof, with rocks in them that birds and other creatures could sit on or climb out of the water on.

If people do not take these measures for wildlife, not only will the wildlife suffer, but they will become extinct even more rapidly.

Please be kind and responsible to our fellow creatures, even if the Victorian government is barbaric in this regard.

See also: "A Place to die" of 31 Jan 09, comment The last of our urban wild life of 22 Jan 2011.

photos of Bob Brown by Jill Quirk

Vic Government not doing its job for Brown Mountain

Today Bob Brown decried the situation on Brown Mountain, where amateurs are having to do work which is the responsibility of the government, in discovering and documenting endangered wildlife at Brown Mountain.

Brumby Government doing bidding of big end of town

He said that the Brumby Government is failing the people of Victoria by doing the bidding of the big end of town, and not what is in the best interests of most Victorians.

Brown answers questions on population policy for Australia

Towards the end of his press conference, Bob was asked a few questions about population policy and numbers in Australia.

He pointed out very emphatically that the Greens are the only political party with an environmentally based population policy, and that a population policy is needed for Australia.

He fielded questions about humanitarian aspects of immigration and refugees knowledgeably and honestly, pointing out that business migration was the larger component of the immigration program, and that people with money are more welcomed by the government than refugees.

He was asked how many people he feels that Australia can support. His response was to throw the question back at the interviewer.

He illustrated the combined impact of population numbers and lifestyle on our environment by saying that if living standards were to be at Australian levels, we would need four earths - and we do not have four - we only have one.

Brown appeared comfortable and confident with this topic.

Who is liable for the damage done to our society by despotically created 'Authorities'?

In its statement of its values, the representatives of this new horror, the 'Growth Area Authority' state that "we" act "with honesty and openess, are publicly accountable for our actions and are respected for our high quality advice, expertise and impartial decision making."

It is as if the 'value statement' were capable of actually changing the reality. Statements, however, are only words. How can any of us hold the authority to its words? We know that those words will be minced up to suit the values of the authority; not to protect our values.

The Board contains no ecologists, wildlife activists, nurses or doctors, local agriculturalists or permaculturalists, ethicists, civilly concerned social scientists or community activists. It only represents big business.

This board will act to enforce growthism

The problem is that this board can only act in one direction - for overpopulation and inflation linked to scarcity of all resources and against Victorians' human rights for self-government and to maintain a democratic society.

The 'Authority' talks of its 'vision and values', which include 'promoting employment opportunities' and 'foster[ing] the development of communities'. We are going to hear a lot more about 'jobs' because this is the 'carrot' which will be used to cover up the protests against the sticks which such an authority must condone.

"Fostering" community

We will hear more about 'fostering community' too. That won't change the fact that every new development destroys and fragments communities and that local governments have been dismantled and government planning departments have been all but contracted holus-bolus out to corporations of developers, to satisfy Kennett's, Bracks's and now Brumby's growth addiction. This is how our system of democracy has been destroyed by growth. 'Fostering community' will boil down to building new suburbs, importing new people, and sidelining the real communities.

Folks, we are being herded by people who think that they are better than the rest of us because they have managed to seize power from us and call themselves our government. But for nearly two decades now, liberal and labor have had increasingly similar policies and have refused to give the voting public details of differences in policies. Articles at Propaganda Watch, show how the mainstream press and even the ABC have supported this decline in democracy.

Hollow, faulty financial system overwhelms democracy

When it gets down to it, the Victorian government is not governing for voters; it is acting for, financing or defending and supporting developers - financers and builders of new suburbs and infrastructure. Bankers, engineers, construction corporations, acting through the medium of planners - who have recently exploded in numbers, like economics grads and 'financial advisors'. These corporations have made their wealth from high immigration driving up the cost of land and creating an infrastructure boom. This is the system which has brought the Western world to its knees and our government, like the US government, is now a captive of that system.

We must break through. We need to talk about what is happening and reach a consensus to resist this malignant force.

No-one willingly gave the Victorian government this power to hand over our taxes and power to development and finance corporations; they have taken it.

The faces of authority

The following people are the public face of this 'Authority' - the 'Board'. They are in the development business. They are not in the business of government or democracy; they will function to minimise any remaining vestigial opportunities for citizens of Victoria to stand up against the bulldozer of development which is destroying our democracy, our safety and our quality of life.

Their names are public property, listed at the Growth Area Authority site.

Chaired by Chris Banks AM, other board members are Felix Blatt, Frank King, Di Fleming, Ann Keddie and Ian Munro.

The Board reports to the Minister for Planning under the Planning and Environment (Growth Areas Authority) Act 2006.
- Chris Banks AM Chairman.
Chris Banks AM brings a developer's perspective after many years in the housing industry as Chief Executive Officer at Delfin and AV Jennings.

Felix Blatt is the Chief Advisor Project Management for Rio Tinto and has extensive experience managing greenfield engineering projects.

Frank King.
As a former Deputy Secretary of the Department of Treasury and Finance, Frank King is a member of the audit committees for the Departments of Treasury and Finance, Sustainability and Environment and Justice.

Ann Keddie.
With extensive experience within the industry, Ann Keddie is a Director of Ann Keddie Architects. She is also a sessional member of VCAT and a member of the Priority Development Panel and Planning Panels Victoria.

Di Fleming.
Di Fleming is a former Victorian Telstra Businesswoman of the Year, associate professor in Digital Design at RMIT University and director of lab.3000. She steered lab.3000's evolution to become the state's first Centre of Excellence in Digital Design.

Ian Munro.
Ian Munro PSM, is a consultant for the Department of Innovation, Industry and Regional Development (DIIRD) after formerly holding the position of Deputy Secretary and CEO, Invest Assist for DIIRD.

Source: http://heykidscomics.com/

The big question

Are these people liable for the impact of their decisions to promote infrastructure for population growth? If not, who is?

Story by Jill Redwood

The immense trees that have sheltered and raised hundreds of generations of owls and gliding possums are now being hacked down by VicForests. The understorey of tree ferns and waratahs, twining silkpod and musk daisy bush are being crushed into the mud by 40 tonne bulldozers.

Victoria’s Brumby government is allowing their logging department to destroy these ancient treasures - home to threatened species like the Powerful and Sooty Owls, the Long-footed Potoroo and the secretive Spot-tailed Quoll.

This is the forest that was promised for protection in 2006 by the State Labor Government. So why is it being destroyed now? … (click here) read on …

Flawed maps and broken promises

In 2006, the then premier, Steve Bracks, made a promise to “protect all significant stands of old growth currently available for logging”. This, with several other areas called icon forests amounted to about 41,000 ha. However, he also promised there would be no impact on the logging industry - an impossible undertaking.

A few days before the 2006 election, the Environment Minister’s office (then John Thwaites) did a quick and dirty job of throwing the old growth maps together -. It was so badly mapped it included cow paddocks, logged forest and burnt regeneration. In the two years since this promise was given, hundreds of hectares of Old Growth Forest have been logged while conservation groups tried to engage a stubborn government to reassess the maps. Cow paddocks were safely protected, but magnificent old growth was crashing to the ground.

Fiction writers employed while old growth falls.

Post election, the Labor government engaged a couple of logging industry supporters to write a report on how the industry in East Gippsland would manage if these forests were protected. Pete Steedman was an old ALP head-kicking hack and Graham Gooding was the former head of the Victorian Association of Forest Industries. The result was a great piece of fiction and spin that only the logging industry can create. For instance, despite the fact that the declining logging industry provides less than 2% of the region’s employment, their document claimed it was 50% or more. Fearful of a union backlash, the government did nothing - no reassessment of maps, no protection, no tourist walks, no pay-outs; just more clearfelling of old growth forests.

The year 2500 is a long time to wait for these big trees to regrow again.

Old Growth Walk for visitors

The maps also left out the very area that was promised for the visitors’ walk. In the 2006 policy document Victoria’s National Parks and Biodiversity, Mr Bracks stated he would “Invest $1.3 million to create … the Great Short Walks of East Gippsland”. This was to include the “Old Growth Walk - Goongerah” (Goongerah is the nearest small town to Brown Mountain).

In the late 1990s, a member of EEG discovered this magnificent stand of forest and called it the Valley of the Giants. Since then hundreds of visitors have experienced these grand trees, which have names like Almo, Lofty, Uncle George, Steadfast and Big Foot. The track was tagged and has become a well known but unofficial walk that is easy to access on a gentle slope and with the Brown Mountain Creek rainforest running through the centre. We have taken two parties of government officials in there in order to negotiate this area becoming formally recognised as a walk. Now half of it has been hacked down.

VicForests rides roughshod over government policy

VicForests was created in August 2004 to ensure logging public forests was a profitable business. It has never made a profit since then despite millions in govt handouts. The unruly band of old-school loggers within VicForests could see that Brown Mountain might be protected before they could get to it’s real estate, so in early 2007, they planned for last stands of unprotected old growth to wiped out.

EEG duly sent our formal objection to VicForests, as part of the sham called ‘public consultation’. VicForests’ duly told us that it was all perfectly legal and to bugger off. They later told the Minister’s office they didn’t know this coupe was contentious or a planned walk!

In late October 2008, VicForests sent the loggers in to start wiping these carbon, water and wildlife rich forests off the face of the planet. Not to mention our old growth walk. Not only that but they had to gall to name the coupe “The Walk” in full knowledge of what they were doing; another example of the goading, fibbing, cowboy nature of this organisation.

These trees would have been mature when Shakespeare was writing his plays. The tree ferns that shelter beneath them could be twice as old. The forests have survived hundreds of years of storms, snow, drought and the occasional fire. They are now being obliterated from the landscape in 4 weeks by a team of 5 men - as part of an “approved logging operation”. Work for five blokes for four weeks. Gone forever.

The great irony is that in 1995, when John Brumby was in opposition, he made a very stirring speech at a forest rally in Melbourne.

"... that's what we'll do when we're in government
- no more export woodchipping,
an industry in the future based
on plantations and the proper protection
of our high conservation value forests." (John Brumby 1995)

See the link below, for the video footage of his powerful words.

http://www.engagemedia.org/Members/pvmedia/videos/brumby-for-web.mov/view?searchterm=brumby

Who is the government afraid of?

Is this government so easily cowered by a bunch of ruthless welfare recipients that run VicForests? Or is it the weedy might of the loggers union that scares them?

Please - write letters to Gavin Jennings and John Brumby expressing your outrage. Enough old growth forest has been destroyed and converted to pulpwood farms in East Gippsland over the past 40 years. Far too much of the little that remains has been lost since their 2006 promise to protect our old growth.

The logging of this most significant stand of old growth on Brown Mountain is the ultimate statement of contempt for the public’s deep concern and love for our ancient native forests.

Hon John Brumby
Premier of Victoria
1 Treasury Place
Melbourne, Vic 3002
john.brumby[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au

Hon Gavin Jennings
Minister for Environment,
Level 22
50 Lonsdale St
Melbourne, Vic 3002
Gavin.Jennings[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au

Media release from the Victorian National Parks Association, The Wilderness Society Victoria Inc., Environment East Gippsland Inc. and The Australian Conservation Society

Victorian Government logs last significant stands of old-growth forests

The Brumby government continues to stall on delivering a stated election commitment to protect old-growth forests as bulldozers and chainsaws move in to the irreplaceable "Valley of the Giants" forest in East Gippsland, conservation groups said today.

Matt Ruchel, Executive Director of the Victorian National Parks Association said the ALP committed in 2006 to protect the last remaining stands of old-growth forests in East Gippsland, but that commitment had remained unfulfilled as areas such as this were now being logged.

"Premier Brumby must move logging contractors and machinery out of this area immediately and ban any further logging in these areas until new National Park boundaries are delivered. These forests have been identified by scientists and community alike as being of immense environmental significance," he said.

"Some of the best examples of old-growth forest are on Brown Mountain, found to the west of the Errinundra National Park, and conservation groups have been working with the government since 2006 in identifying this area for protection."

Lindsay Hesketh, Australian Conservation Foundation spokesperson, said since 2006 VicForests had logged hundreds of hectares of precious old-growth forests, contrary to the government's commitment.

"Long-standing negotiations with the government to deliver the 2006 old-growth promise are severely compromised by this logging," he said.

Jill Redwood, Co-ordinator of Environment East Gippsland said the forests consisted of hundreds of massive tress that had been mapped, named and measured for a walking track, presenting a prime tourism opportunity for East Gippsland's economy.

"Most Victorians would be horrified to know these unique and endangered areas are being clear felled for Japanese woodchips with a very small allocation going to local sawmills," she said.

Luke Chamberlain, Forest Campaigner for The Wilderness Society said recently released science from the Australian National University showed Australia's eucalypt forests store far more carbon than was previously thought.

"The logging of these forests on Brown Mountain will make a major contribution to Australia's green house gas emissions," he said.

"Forests must be at the forefront of the Brumby and Rudd governments' climate change agenda. Protecting Australia's native forests will help make the deep emissions cuts necessary to halt climate change."

Brown Mountain has been actively fought for since 1989 when 300 people were arrested trying to save these National Estate listed forests from being destroyed.

Media contact: Sacha Myers on 0417 017 844 or Luke Chamberlain 0424 098 729

See also: NSW and Victorian Governments accused of having colluded to start controversial logging operations at exacly the same time in "Forest protests limited" in the Bega District News of 28 Oct 08. Some excerpts follow:

"The two states have timed highly controversial logging operations to start at exactly the same time," according to the convener of the forest activist group Chipstop, Harriett Swift.

"We learned on Friday that the long awaited logging of Bermagui State Forest would start yesterday within hours of hearing that bulldozers were moving onto Brown Mountain in East Gippsland," Ms Swift said.

The Bermagui logging has been the subject of pro-active preparations by the NSW Police who have threatened a zero tolerance approach to protesters.

Brown Mountain is part of the Snowy catchment and much prized by conservationists for its "valley of giants".

"Forestry agencies clearly intend that the simultaneous logging operations will ensure that skilled activists from one state may not be available to assist colleagues in the other," Ms Swift said.

"It may be no coincidence that these logging operations come hard on the heels of widely reported attacks on conservationists attempting to save Tasmanian forests last week. "NSW and Victorian forestry agencies may also expect these attacks to have drawn some activists away from this region," she said.

Ms Swift said it was a pity that NSW and Victoria couldn't manage that level of co-operation on useful activities such as saving the Murray River.

Appendix: letter from Julianne Bell of Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.

Dear Protectors of Public Lands Victoria inc. members and friends,

The Wilderness Society (WS) has reported that Brown Mountain (old growth forest in East Gippsland) is being logged right now - the bulldozers moved in last week. It is reported that  negotiations with the Premier's Office over last weekend failed and VicForests and the logging contractors have been allowed to stay.

The WS reported that Premier Brumby's office's response was "since VicForests have moved the contractors in, there is nothing they can do".  This shows  - in our view - absolute contempt for the current process to protect old growth forests in East Gippsland (a 2006 election promise).

Brown Mountain needs your help.  Please email your family, friends and networks and ask them to contact the Premier's Office. No use ringing the Office as his staff's instructions are : email the Office on premier[AT]dpc.vic.gov.au  or john.brumby[AT]parliament.gov.au .  Copy to Environment and Climate Change Minister Gavin Jennings on gavin.jennings[AT]parliament.vic.gov.au

You may wish to see the GECO website for photos of the forests that are being logged and updates on actions out there - at www.geco.org.au/2008/protests08.htm#brownmt.html.

In your calls and emails, you are asked to express your opposition at the logging of old growth forests in contravention of the ALP's commitment to protect old growth forests in East Gippsland.  Demand that the logging contractors be removed from this contentious coupe immediately, and that the area be included for protection when the government (finally) delivers on it's 2006 election promise to protect 40,000 ha of old-growth and iconic forests in East Gippsland. Brown Mountain forms the headwaters of the Bonang River.  It contains giant old growth trees which have been identified and mapped as part of a community supported "Valley of the Giants" walking track.  Many people will have walked parts of Brown Mountain and know these trees.

If the government wishes to claim it is delivering a 5,000 ha link between the Snowy and Errinundra National Parks, then the inclusion of Brown Mountain as part of this link is vital

.

This area contains 3 highly contentious coupes (840-502-0015, 840-502-0019, 840-502-0020) that were only added to the logging schedule in July 2007.  Logging of these coupes would clearly contravene the government's commitment to protecting the last stands of old-growth forests in Victoria. Coupe 840-502-0020 is the one currently being logged.

 

When you write mention forests as critical carbon stores and soaks, biodiversity store houses, water makers (Snowy catchment) and huge tourism potential. A grand irony is that the Parliament of Victoria's Environment and Natural Resources Committee is currently enquiring into Melbourne's Future Water Supply.  Protectors of Public Lands Victoria has made a submission opposing the logging of water catchments and we are waiting to see if we will be given a hearing.

We hope you can help us, even by sending one email to the Premier.

I have attached a joint media release from the Wilderness Society, the Australian Conservation Foundation, Victorian National Parks Association and Environment East Gippsland.  (I tried to remove logos as they take up a file space but it didnt work!).

Regards,

Julianne Bell Secretary Protectors of Public Lands Victoria Inc.
PO Box 197
Parkville 3052

Royal Park Protection Group Inc.

Media release, 24 October 2008

Opposition to proposals in Sir Rod Eddington's Transport Review to construct road tunnels through inner Melbourne and elevated roadways through the western suburbs has been steadily mounting over the past three months. On Sunday next community groups from across Melbourne, who have joined forces as the Coalition of Transport Action Groups (CTAG), will rally at 12 noon under the clocks at Flinders Street Railway Station to demand "sustainable public transport – no new road tunnels or freeways". The anger growing in Collingwood and Clifton Hill plus West Parkville over the possible compulsory acquisition of whole streets of house for tunnel construction has spread to Sunshine and Footscray where it is feared that up to 1,000 houses will be lost if elevated roadways are built. The Royal Park Protection Group has been at the forefront of opposition to the extension of the Eastern Freeway for many years fearing, not just the loss of residential amenity and increased traffic congestion, but the destruction of Royal Park itself with open cut and cover methods of construction. Not only precious open parkland would be lost but these gigantic engineering works would destroy the wetlands, an important source of water for Melbourne, obliterate State sports grounds for 5 to 10 years, impact on the operation of the State Netball and Hockey Centre and badly affect the Melbourne Zoo.

Julianne Bell Convenor of the Royal Park Protection Group commented: "We have obediently attended the so called public consultations - the State Government's Transport Forums, had representatives attend the Premier's Transport Summit and Freight Forum and met with the Minister for Roads. We - together with many inner Melbourne groups - have been vocal in expressing our opposition to the proposed construction of new tunnels and freeways and in expressing our concerns over the failure of the State Government to invest in public transport and rail freight projects. Everyday there is evidence in the news that the public transport system is in a state of collapse. But has the Brumby Government been listening? We think not. Now the PM's Infrastructure Australia Committee will be considering funding these super-size projects. It is hoped that committee members will heed expert opinion which counsels against backing further mega road projects. These include Professor Ross Garneau, Climate Change expert, and Professor Peter Newman of Murdoch University and Infrastructure Australia Committee member, who says that Sir Rod Eddington's proposed $9 billion east-west tunnel should not be built and that it does not provide enough economic benefit to be justified."

The Coalition of Transport Action Groups, including the Royal Park Protection Group, will rally at 12 noon for a 12:15 pm start on Sunday 26 October 2008 under the Clocks at Flinders Street Railway Station, corner of Flinders and Swanston Streets Melbourne. (Note that we are not encouraging people to disrobe as happened at the Pensioners' and Taxi Drivers' Rallies at this location.)

Media contacts: Julianne Bell (Royal Park Protection Group) on 98184114 and 0408022408 & Freda Watkin (Yarra Campaign against the Tunnel) on 0403526342

See also: www.royalparkprotect.org.au, VCAT "Community Forum highlights problems fixes none" of 17 Oct 08.

(Illustration: Statue of King Midas who turned water to gold and nearly died of thirst, but later became a worshipper of Pan and nature.)

By Chris Harrison, BAppSc, GDC, October 2008

(This article was also published in Weekly Times Now. See also: Transcript of interview with Maude Barlow, Canadian water rights activist on Background Briefing) of 12 Oct 08.

Two months ago when Premier Brumby told a COAG meeting that there is very little water in the Murray Darling Basin he was stating the obvious. At the time he was justifying Victoria’s apparent reluctance to aid South Australia and provide more water for the Coorong.

This year for the first time in the state’s history the urban population of Melbourne will consume more water than is allocated to the farmlands of Goulburn irrigators. Water availability in the Goulburn Valley is at an all time record low.

The Government knows full well the acute shortage of water in the Murray Darling Basin but is still proceeding with the construction of the North South pipeline. This project has deservedly been widely condemned by grass roots populations, scientists, environmentalists, think tanks and the leaders of every non-labor political party.

The Victorian Government maintains the North South Pipeline is a vital component of Victoria’s emerging water grid. The use of the term “water grid” to describe the pipeline is a misnomer. The pipeline is a one way street. Water can flow in only one direction - from the Murray Darling Basin to Melbourne.

However, the term water grid is valid in the sense that the pipeline allows for the development of privatized water markets in the non-agricultural sector. The pipeline allows investors to purchase water in the Eildon Dam and sell it to Melbourne via the North South Pipeline, to Geelong via the Geelong interconnector and to Bendigo and Ballarat via the Goldfields Superpipe. This network of pipelines gives over 4 million people access to water from Eildon. This population base is expected to double over the next forty years.

The North South Pipeline is strategically important to the Government’s plans to allow urban populations to source their own water, in turn divesting them of a core governmental responsibility. If in the future your town needs water you will be told to go into the market and buy it. The Government will claim they have built the infrastructure to enable you to do this.

The failure to understand some basic principles of water has led the Victorian Government to drive the development of the water grid. This policy will place the state’s urban, environmental and agricultural sectors in competition and at risk.

The neo rationalist economic mantra of water must move to its highest value use has been a monumental failure. The idealism of this mantra has been replaced by the reality, water moves to the place where it can achieve the most financial and political leverage. The Goldfields Super Pipe has already shown us some of these failings, but first some definitions are in order.

When permanent water is traded, the buyer is only purchasing the right to use a specific volume of water on an annual basis. If the dams are empty the buyer has purchased air space in a dam or virtual water. When the dams are full the buyer will receive 100% of the quantity of water purchased, this is real water. The allocation percentage therefore relates directly to how full the dam is and at best it is 100% of what was purchased and at worst no water at all. High security water nearly always delivers 100% of the water purchased and conversely low security water hardly ever delivers the volume purchased. Victorian agriculture uses mainly high security water although there is real evidence that this is no longer the case with the onset of climate change. Over the last 100 years the Eildon dam has not delivered 100% allocation to irrigators on just five occasions, four of these occasions have been in the last six years. The Victorian water grid is based on water sourced from the Eildon dam. The latest connection is the Goldfields Superpipe supplying the rural cities of Bendigo and Ballarat.

The Goldfields Superpipe and associated infrastructure was built at a cost of more than $280 million but it remains essentially dry because the water purchased by water authorities has the same security as in the agricultural sector. The 9% allocation means that of the 20 billion litres of water purchased by Ballarat and Bendigo, less than 2 billion litres of water will be for use this year.

The Goldfields Superpipe experience represents a historic and fundamental change for urban authorities. For the first time urban water security is linked with rural water supply. Urban populations are suffering the same fate as irrigators and the environment.

The Victorian Government is creating water markets forcing rural and urban populations to compete for water. The outcome of this competition will be determined by the relative political and financial strength of each sector. Last year the temporary price of water hit a record high of $1,200 per ML when Adelaide entered the market. The market dramatically fell to just $400 per ML weeks after Adelaide and horticulturalists stopped buying. There was no doubt about the effect of competition.

The problem that we are all facing is that high security water has been very much less secure over the last twelve years. The editor of the Bendigo Weekly has suggested Bendigo purchase more water than is needed to improve the City’s water security. The futility of this approach parallels Penny Wong’s experience. The Federal Government has just spent $50 million for a cited 28 billion litres; just enough to fill several swimming pools of water was available to contribute to the Murray Darling Basin.

Ballarat and Bendigo are looking for 38 billion litres of water from the Superpipe. With water allocations from the Goulburn standing at 9% they will need to purchase 420 billion litres of water entitlement to receive their objective of 38 billion litres of water.

Of course in wetter times when less water is needed, hoarded “virtual” water materializes into “real” water. Perhaps this could be sold through the water market offsetting costs to urban water authorities and possibly government coffers. The temptation urban water authorities have to over secure supply will effectively lock away vast amounts of water from both irrigators and the environment.

The Goldfields Superpipe experience is a blue print for the North South Pipeline and Melbourne. Both the NS pipeline and the Goldfields Superpipe will be tied to irrigation water availability. With Bendigo its allocation percentage is the same as irrigators. With Melbourne, its allocation is tied to water savings generated from the irrigation areas. As Planning Minister Madden said two months ago if it is dry, the North South Pipeline may not have any water. Conditions have worsened since the Minister made that statement however, small amounts of water will only be available to North South pipeline in dry years regardless.

The coalition’s flip flop on using the North South Pipeline is somewhat academic as the Eildon Dam is predicted to take at least 7 years to recover should normal rainfall return. Sufficient water from savings generated by irrigation infrastructure modernization will not be achieved under the scenarios experienced for the past five years. Again the government is misleading the public by quoting amounts of virtual water or the amount of possible savings that can be generated when it is wet. The CSIRO predicts water availability to become scarcer in future and so Melbourne will be forced into the market and that will be to the detriment of urban communities, irrigators and the Murray Darling Basin.

The Victorian Government has failed to understand that cities along with irrigators and the environment need real water, not virtual water. The recent spat between Premier Brumby and Premier Rann, where South Australia was accused of doing little for the Murray River serves to illustrate this point well. Premier Brumby meritoriously claimed Victoria has contributed 120 billion litres to the Murray annually while South Australia has contributed nothing. When MDB CEO Wendy Craik was asked how much of this 120 billion litres was available for the Murray this year at last weeks Senate Committee hearing into the Coorong and lower lakes, she said “none”. The conditions have been so dry that the water only existed as virtual water. The reality is not a cup full of water of the annual 120 billion litres amount has ever been contributed to the Murray.

There you have it, the context is breathtaking.

Bendigo and Ballarat has 20 billion litres of virtual water for the Goldfields Superpipe, but less than 2 billion litres that they can actually drink. Bendigo is expected to harden its stage 4 water restrictions within weeks.

The Murray River has 120 billion litres of virtual water already surrendered from foodbowl irrigation districts (in the 80/20 deal) annually but not a glass full of real water has ever entered the system.

Victorian foodbowl irrigators have over 1,700 billion litres of virtual water but less than 180 billion litres that can actually be used to produce food.

Melbourne’s storages are at 34.5%, 611 billion litres of real water equivalent to nearly 1 ½ years usage, and yet Melbourne wishes to extract 75 billion litres of real water from irrigators and the environment through the North South Pipeline.

Premier Brumby’s promise of ‘NEW WATER’ for all is like the emperors new clothes, just not there.

Those who can’t see the Premiers new clothes are angry and their numbers are growing.

VCAT Planning Consultative Forums

The Planning and Environment List of the Victorian and Civil Administrative Tribunal (VCAT) has advertised "a series of consultative forums with stakeholder groups during 2008" to include Council planning officers, Referral authorities, Lawyers, planners and other consultants who regularly appear at the Tribunal, peak body organisations, and Community planning groups."

The purpose has been given as providing "a forum for users of the Tribunal to raise issues regarding its processes and procedures"; to give "the Tribunal an opportunity to explain any recent changes to its practices within the organisation"; to "encourage discussion about matters of common interest to users generally or specific stakeholder groups, and suggest potential improvements"; and to "Consider the establishment of a small rotating users group that would meet periodically with the Tribunal."

Consultative forums will be held at the Victorian Civil & Administrative Tribunal, Room 2.1,
Level 2, 55 King Street, Melbourne from 4.30pm to 6.00pm on these dates:
17 March 2008 Council planning officers
7 April 2008 Lawyers, consultants, peak bodies
26 May 2008 Referral authorities
7 July 2008 Council planning officers
28 July 2008 Lawyers, consultants, peak bodies
13 October 2008 Community groups
Three combined regional consultative forums will be held for council officers, referral
authorities and local consultants as follows:
28 April 2008 Shepparton
16 June 2008 Gippsland
11 August 2008 Ballarat
“Operation Jaguar”, initiated in 2003, introduced a series of reforms to the operation of the
Planning and Environment List, including the establishment of Friday Practice Day hearings.

The Tribunal claims that it "maintains a process of continuous improvement with respect to its operations" and to be "keen to gather feedback on these reforms from users of the system and on its performance generally, as well as identify further areas of improvement."
The consultative forum will be open to anyone from relevant stakeholder groups provided
they pre-register with the Tribunal. People who are interested in attending should register
their interest by completing a registration form and returning it via post or fax.

For more information contact Lauren Gardiner
Email: Lauren.gardiner[AT]justice.vic.gov.au Telephone: 03 9628 9992 Fax: 03 9628 9891

30 September 2008 Attention: Ms Kathryn Mitchell Planning Panels Victoria – Victorian Desalination Project Level 1 8 Nicholson Street East Melbourne, Vic 3002 Dear Madam Desalination Project - Public Inquiry This submission is on behalf of Your Water Your Say Action Group Incorporated (YWYS). As a result of the inability of the State and Federal Governments to make a decision as to whether they will pursue YWYS for court costs, which will determine in effect whether or not YWYS is to wind up, we are presently in an operational ‘holding pattern’. Consequently, we are prevented from making a meaningful submission to this important inquiry. The State Government announced on June 19th 2007 that this desalination plant “will be built” on the Bass Coast. Since that time they have espoused claims of “consulting” with the community and listening to their concerns. The State Government claims it supports the community to fully participate in the [Environment Effects Statement] EES process but their failure to make a decision on the issue of court costs has meant that YWYS is effectively excluded from the very process they encourage us to engage in. For the benefit of the Inquiry on June 13th 2008 Justice Heerey awarded costs to the Federal and State Governments a result of the action - Your Water Your Say v Minister for the Environment, Heritage and the Arts & Anor; Federal Court Proceeding VID188/2008. Since that time the State Government has been unable to decide what their course of action will be on the pursuit of costs against YWYS front. Since its inception in 1978 the EES process was intended to inform decision makers to enable them to make decisions in full knowledge of the environmental consequences of a particular project. Given our present holding pattern constraints we would like to but cannot present to you a substantive submission on the fundamental flaw in the Victorian Desalination Project process, that the Government has declared at the outset that the plant “will be built” without any environmental studies having been completed. In the result, the State Government has therefore turned the EES process on its head and undermined the value and integrity of the EES process itself. The process has been manipulated to achieve a pre-determined outcome and would highlight the following community concerns: • The process deliberately excludes community involvement. Thirty working days for a community to evaluate 1600 pages of technical information is an impossible task. • No financial support has been made available to the community to gain expert assistance in this process. • The objectives of the Panel fail to allow a rigorous analysis as most are framed to “avoid or minimise to the extent practicable.” • Land has been compulsorily acquired and the project has commenced before the Panel has even met thus pre-empting the Panel process. • There is no provision for peer review of the “consultant” reports. • Discussion of more cost effective or environmentally sustainable solutions are excluded from the Inquiry. • Discussion of alternative sites is excluded from the Inquiry. The Federal and State Governments are aware that YWYS is unlikely to be in a position to pay its significant legal costs and hence their apparent inability to make a decision on this front can only be interpreted as an attempt to further avoid community scrutiny of this project. YWYS urges the Panel to restore the EES process to its correct sequence and ensure there is a thorough and independent examination of all the environmental consequences of this project. YWYS further urges the Panel to exercise their discretion and expand the scope of the inquiry to fully explore two critical issues that have been deliberately excluded from the review - alternative water augmentation options for Melbourne and potential alternative sites for the plant outside the Wonthaggi-Kilcunda area. We urge the Panel to restore some degree of faith in the EES process. Yours sincerely Andrea Bolch President Your Water Your Say Action Group Incorporated. C/O Kilcunda Post Office Kilcunda 3995 abolch[AT]austarnet.com.au PH: 0400 065 253

A report in Melbourne's "The Age" newspaper August 25th 2008 tells how Mr Ted Baillieu the rather affable, reasonable sounding leader of the Opposition in Victoria howled down members from his Sandringham branch of his party who voiced a concern about Melbourne's massive population growth - about 1,500 people per week The Age quotes Mr. Baillieu as saying to a meeting of 700 . "Be very careful when you discuss these things. Don't allow anyone to say we are opposed to population growth, or that we are going to point fingers at migration. If we put out the stop sign then we are sending the wrong messages, and this economy will suffer long-term." He went on to say that Melbourne's problems with train services and the lack of water resources was due to lack of planning by the current state government. of greater Melbourne." (Melbourne's dams are are at a lower level than were this time last year despite recent rain and of course we have about 60,000 more people!)

According to The Age - the amended resolution, that council "recognises a deteriorating quality of life inherent in the ongoing increase in the population" was then passed. Mr Baillieu accused the Premier of poor planning and scapegoating immigrants after Mr Brumby this month warned of the stresses on services caused by Melbourne's high rate of population growth.

The following letter by me was published in The Age on the 26th August:

It's about people, not politics, Mr Baillieu

HOW disappointing to read the Victorian Opposition Leader, Ted Baillieu's, reaction to sensible policy proposals from the Sandringham branch of the Liberal Party and also to a recent responsible warning from Premier John Brumby regarding the high rate of Victoria's population growth ("Blame it on Labor, not migration: Baillieu", The Age, 25/8). Mr Baillieu seems to carry a child-like belief that correct planning can cope with any level of population growth.

Just as some sanity is emerging in his own party and from our Labor Premier, the Liberal leader panics and silences his party members, who are pointing out that the emperor has no clothes - we cannot keep growing at this rate and maintain our quality of life. It seems Ted scolded the naughty children and silenced their well-founded concerns.

In fact, Victoria's population cannot keep growing at any rate and be compatible with long-term survival - but I was not at the Liberal Party meeting and I'm not sure if anyone pointed this out.

See also: Blame it on Labor, not migration: Baillieu by Paul Austin in the Melbourne Age of 25 Aug 08, City of 8 million 'unliveable' by Cameron Houston and Royce Millar in the Age of 5 Sep 08

Speaking about the "Future Melbourne" draft plan, Australian environmentalist and author of forthcoming book, Overloading Australia,(1) Mark O'Connor, said today that deteriorating circumstances caused by rampant growth are being presented as virtues.

He gave as an example the fact that the "Future Melbourne" draft plan sets a target to by 2020 reduce per capita drinking water use by 40% per resident ... compared to 2000 levels.

He said that this really means: "Expect 40% less water by 2020, citizen, so that newcomers and expanding industries can have more."

The 'Future Melbourne' draft plan, recently released by the City of Melbourne, sets 'targets' to by 2020 reduce per capita drinking water use by 40% per resident and 50% per worker compared to 2000 levels.

The draft plan also targets reductions in greenhouse gas emissions of 35% per resident and 59% per worker in the city by 2020.

Everything points to a worsening situation in Victoria and Australia. We know that greenhouse gases have continued to rise, in Victoria, nationally and per capita. As David Spratt and Philip Sutton write in Climate Code Red Scribe, Melbourne, 2008, (p.96),

"Because Australian emissions are five times the global average, and the world population will be half as large again by 2050, these scenarios require Australian per capita emissions to be cut by at least 95 per cent by 2050 - a proposition currently rejected by Australia's Rudd government."

We might add that Australia's population is on course to be half as large again by 2050. This is a trend which should be arrested, if we want to reduce total carbon gas emissions in Australia.

There is, unfortunately, nothing here to inform us about the impact on the total national output of greenhouse gases of growing Australia and Victoria's population. The total output is disguised by the constant growth in population, which makes a mockery of per capita measurements because population growth in a worsening economy can drive per capita emissions down whilst driving total emissions up.

Fairness is not being pursued. The gap between rich and poor is widening. On present trends we can also expect an Australian dystopia, with a minority of very well-off continuing to consume profligately, whilst ordinary Australians live in poverty and without any functioning democracy.

You can read more about the so-called "Future Melbourne" plan here. And you can contribute to the plan with comments here.

(1)Mark O'Connor and William Lines, Overloaded Australia is soon to go to press. The piercing analysis above is characteristic of Mark's writing. He was Australia's Olympic Poet at the Sydney Olympics and author of the very popular This Tired brown land Overloading Australia is written in partnership with another Australian environmentalist, Bill Lines, author of the very famous The Taming of the savage land

It's 40 years since Rod Quantock first graced the stage and The Herald (remember the Herald) said ...
"Quantock is an amiable buffoon." An incisive wit, as well, the once ubiquitous bedroom-dwelling Captain Snooze, grown up now, pops up in surprising places, defending the undefended and attacking the indefensible. How could a comedien not get involved in Victorian politics?

Rod's new show is called, "First Man Standing".

'First Man Standing'
Playing:
Wed to Sat, 6 Aug to 6 Sept, 8:00pm
Trades Hall, Carlton
Tickets: $20 - $35
Bookings: comedyattrades.com.au or 03 9659 5699 or at the door. (Rod recommends 'at the door')

Original article from Macedon Ranges Residents' Association (www.mrra.asn.au)

(16/7/08 - SG) How do we know if our politicians, councillors or decisions have been bought? The short answer is, we don't.

We need look no further than New South Wales and the Wollongong scandal for confirmation that money can buy governments and decisions, particularly planning decisions. Yet NSW has an Independent Commission Against Corruption [ICAC], something we don't have in Victoria.

So how bad is it in Victoria, where accountability in any form no longer seems to kick up as one of the State's strong points?

In the past week, 3 articles have appeared in the Age newspaper - shocking and revealing stuff. Written by veteran journos Royce Millar and Kenneth Davidson, the articles snap the spotlight onto Victoria's lack of an ICAC, lack of accountability, and shifting views on and stubborn political denial that there's a problem when it comes to who is paying who in politics. From these articles, it seems Victoria's Premier sees political donations not as potentially corrupting influences but just part of a healthy democracy. Like kissing babies, perhaps?

You can access the Age articles by clicking the following links:

• In a healthy democracy, influence cannot be bought, Royce Millar, The Age, 7/7/08 at
  http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/in-a-healthy-democracy-influence-cannot-be-bought-20080710-3d4i.html
• Money is the root of all Political evil, Kenneth Davidson, The Age, 10/7/08 at
  http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/money-is-the-root-of-all-political-evil-20080709-3cji.html
• A Little Bit of Give and Take, Royce Millar, The Age 16/7/08 at
  http://www.theage.com.au/national/a-little-bit-of-give-and-take-20080710-3d51.html

MRRA Says:

In the first article, Millar takes the discussion to the next logical step, and raises the issue of political donations and sponsorship in local government. And what a good discussion it is.

Anyone who thinks buying influence doesn't happen in local government should think again. It's bad enough if it's happening at Federal and State levels, but in those arenas there is more scrutiny and access so potentially more public pressure, and more chance of being caught.

In comparison, it can go almost unseen and undetected at local government level. A nod, a wink, a quiet word; rarely anything as crude as a brown paper bag or a pair of white shoes. Delivering 'favours for mates' can be something as subtle as promising to vote for what another Councillor wants if they'll vote for you this time, overlooking a conflict of interest, or orchestrating noisy albeit minority support for pet projects. These are just some of the ways private agendas can be delivered.

Millar raises an interesting point: while Councillors have to declare donations received during an election campaign, they don't have to declare them until well after the election. Their sponsors remain anonymous when you go to vote. It's all a secret, until they start to vote.

MRRA finds it a very relevant subject, given the recent invention of Macedon Ranges Residents' Secretariat Limited, a company representing development interests, possibly even political party interests, that seems intent on trying to confuse the Macedon Ranges' community into thinking it's us, MRRA Inc - i.e. a 'good guy' acting in the interests of the wider community - to the point of even pinching most of our name! Flattering, but...

MRRA estimates that to date, MRRS Ltd may have spent something in the order of well over $10,000 launching itself and its agenda (the latest effort being a survey sent to all households in the Shire, replete with reply paid envelopes - who could afford that!!!). Not to mention the individual numbering on each "ballot paper" (survey form) which must have cost a fortune to print. But wait, there's more! No, not a free set of knives, but MRRS Ltd is even giving away an expensive free meal - and free transport to and from home - to tempt residents into playing its game. And the feeling in our water is that neither the 'spend' nor the 'big sell' is over yet...

What could be worth that type of investment by business, development and real estate interests? And who exactly are all those interests? What do they want? Will all be revealed anytime soon?

Which leads us to the next question. Is the long-term objective of MRRS Ltd to get people elected onto council who will do what MRRS Ltd wants? Is that why MRRS Ltd says on its survey form, "MRRS offers assistance to potential candidates prior to elections and post elections, when elected..."? [our emphasis]

And how does MRRS Ltd's invitation to residents to become members work? MRRS Ltd has already publicly stated its recruitment will be through hand-picked secondment of like-minded people by its directors. In any event, don't you usually have to buy shares to be a 'member' of a company? MRRS Ltd is a public company, so do residents need a stock broker to become a 'member'?

Crickey, it's all too convoluted and complicated for us, but then MRRA is just a grass-roots community group used to its members joining up normally - they make a written application and pay an annual fee.

The grubby world of buying political influence is one where decisions are consistently made to serve self- and vested interests. Merit and 'public good' doesn't come into it. Is there really that much at stake? You betcha. There's big, big money in buying governments and influence (look no further than Wollongong, for example), and in stacking Councils with 'like-minded' mates to ensure favourable outcomes. Under the right conditions, it can spread like an aggressive cancer. Does Macedon Ranges have the disease?