This document is part of an archive of postings by John Ray on Australian Politics, a blog hosted by Blogspot who are in turn owned by Google. The index to the archive is available here or here. Indexes to my other blogs can be located here or here. Archives do accompany my original postings but, given the animus towards conservative writing on Google and other internet institutions, their permanence is uncertain. These alternative archives help ensure a more permanent record of what I have written
This is a backup copy of the original blog. Backups from previous months accessible here
30 June, 2024
Gas plant building boom to fuel renewable revolution, says energy grid chief
Craziness: Greenies don't like coal because it is a fossil fuel. But natural gas is a fossil fuel too! It's a theology that's beyond me. I don't agree that either are "fossil" fuels but that's what Greenies call hydrocarbons
The east coast of Australia will need 13 gigawatts of new gas fired electricity generation - the equivalent of building 26 new gas plants - within the next 25 years to back up the rollout of renewables.
The Australian Energy Market Operator’s (AEMO) finding that an extra 13 gigawatts would be needed was contained in its latest energy grid road map, released last week. It also warns that eastern Australia’s gas supply is running so low that emergency diesel fuel supplies would need to be built next to each new gas plant.
AEMO’s warning is a high stakes challenge to the Albanese government and Peter Dutton’s opposition given just one gas plant was completed in the past 10 years, with one more in development at Kurri Kurri in NSW.
With 10 months before the election, neither major party has detailed their plans to build crucial energy infrastructure or boost gas supplies.
AEMO said new gas powered capacity must be constructed between now and 2050 so the fuel source can continue to produce 5 per cent of the total energy mix in the grid. These plants will be needed in addition to a huge boost in batteries and pumped hydro.
The figure of 26 gas plants is extrapolated from AEMO’s report. Assuming that each plant can generate about 0.5 gigawatts, a total of 26 plants is needed to deliver 13 gigawatts of capacity – a tenfold increase on the current rate of construction given only gas plant to be built in the past decade.
The number of gas plants is a conservative figure, given the only plant built in the past 10 years, EnergyAustralia’s Tallawarra B gas plant, was 0.3 gigawatts.
AEMO’s Integrated System Plan found the “optimal development pathway” for the lowest-cost energy grid would be powered almost completely by renewables and backed with gas, batteries and pumped hydro.
The road map said gas would continue to play a small but crucial role. It will back up the vast bulk of renewable electricity under the Albanese government’s ambitious target to more than double the proportion of renewable electricity in the grid to 82 per cent by 2030.
Gas peaking plants can respond almost instantly when needed during periods of extreme demand or periods of low renewable generation, especially in winter when low wind and sunshine coincide with cold weather, and households switch their heaters on all at once.
However, AEMO is warning supplies of the fuel are running out – driven by dwindling reserves from Bass Strait fields, which have been the mainstay of the east coast gas market for decades.
AEMO said in March that the entire east coast gas market would be in annual deficit by 2028 unless new supplies are tapped, forecasting the supply gap to increase over time.
That is why AEMO said new gas plants should be built with onsite storage for extra diesel or hydrogen fuel to keep the turbines running if gas runs out – although it noted that hydrogen was likely to be too expensive in the coming decades.
“A typical gas generator may generate just 5 per cent of its annual potential, but will be critical when it runs. Most of that will be needed to support some winter days of low renewable energy output,” AEMO said.
A spokesperson for the Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen said the government was aiming to boost gas supply under its future gas strategy and that gas power would play a small but significant role in an energy grid dominated by renewables.
“AEMO estimates just 1.4 per cent of our 2050 demand will be met through flexible gas or hydrogen generation to support the transformation to reliable renewables that’s underway,” they said.
Former prime minister Scott Morrison’s “gas-fired recovery” policy vowed to open up new gas fields, including the Beetaloo Basin in the Northern Territory, but no new gas field was developed during that term of government.
Dutton must convince industry and voters he can reverse the record of the Morrison government, when four gigawatts of generation capacity left the grid and only one gigawatt was added.
Opposition energy spokesman Ted O’Brien has promised to release a gas policy before the election. He was contacted for comment.
Not everyone agrees that more gas is needed. Renewable and climate advocates argue that pumped hydro dams coupled with batteries can provide the storage needed to back up renewables, coupled with policies to reduce energy demand with increased energy efficiency.
“A national support program for home batteries will ease the power bill shocks in people’s homes, further stabilise the grid, and cut pollution,” the Smart Energy Council said last week.
‘No shortage’: Producers reject minister’s gas supply claim
Grattan Institute energy and climate policy expert Tony Wood said the government’s policy to encourage more renewables, known as the Capacity Investment Scheme, risked leaving the grid in a mess because gas was excluded.
Wood warned the opposition’s nuclear policy, a plan announced earlier this month to use public funds to build reactors on seven sites across the country, could leave the taxpayer on the hook for inefficient technology that private investors wouldn’t back.
“What we should be saying is we want to design a market with a reliable, low emissions mix and leave it to the market to solve the problem,” he said.
“But we seem to have got ourselves in a situation where the Labor government is arguing more for the private sector and the Coalition is arguing for the public sector investment. How weird is that?
“If the government’s going to decide what the mixture of technology is then we’re in a really bad place.”
The Albanese government approved last week Senex Energy’s long-delayed $1 billion Atlas project in Queensland’s Surat Basin gained federal environmental approval and is set to supply 60 petajoules a year from the end of 2025.
Renewables are driving coal plants out of business at a rapid rate with 90 per cent of the grid’s coal plants expected to be gone by 2035 and all of them shut by 2040. These plants currently supply 60 per cent of electricity.
************************************
Dr Nick Coatsworth makes major admission about Covid-19 pandemic
A top doctor who led Australia's response to Covid has admitted governments and health officials lost the trust and goodwill of the public over their handling of the virus.
Dr Nick Coatsworth, who was the deputy chief medical officer during the pandemic, said draconian measures to contain the virus dragged on too long and caused people to tune out.
In an interview with Body and Soul, Dr Coatsworth said Australians were on board with what was being done to promote 'public health' for the first year of containment measures.
'They were open to what we were doing,' he said.
'I think, honestly, if we'd taken the foot off the restrictions a little bit earlier in 2021, then we would've had a lot more people stick with us.
'We had an opportunity to really change the way that people think about health, but I think we lost that in 2021 - the consequence being people just mentally blocked out 2020 and 2021 entirely.'
Dr Coatsworth has previously stated 'group think' and exhaustion led to poor Covid responses in a 10-page submission to the special commission of inquiry being held into the pandemic.
He also made the stunning admission that imposing vaccine mandates was wrong, following a Queensland Supreme Court finding in February that forcing police and paramedics to take the jab or lose their jobs was 'unlawful'.
Although Dr Coatsworth said Australia had assembled a top team of medical experts to advise on managing the pandemic they lacked an ethical framework meaning the focus became too narrow.
'This allowed the creation of a "disease control at all costs" policy path dependence, which, whilst suited to the first wave, was poorly suited to the vaccine era,' he said.
Dr Coatsworth argued the restriction and testing policies adopted to constrain the first deadliest strain of Covid in 2020 lingered well past their relative benefit.
He also thought the differing approaches among states and between them and the Federal government confused the public and eroded human rights.
'I strongly encourage the inquiry to recommend amendment of the Biosecurity Act to ensure that all disease control powers are vested in the federal government during a national biosecurity emergency,' Dr Coatsworth wrote.
This means the federal government would be in control of state border closures during a pandemic.
Outside of 'biosecurity emergencies' states would retain their disease control powers.
Dr Coatsworth has previously taken particular aim at the Victorian government, under then Labor premier Dan Andrews, over its harsh Covid reactions while hosing down criticisms of Liberal Prime Minister Scott Morrison during the pandemic.
'Scott Morrison didn't issue fines to children for crimes against disease control, and Scott Morrison didn't shut down two towers full of refugee and migrant Australians,' Dr Coatsworth said.
'There were very real democratic rights that were trammelled in the course of this pandemic.'
Dr Coatsworth was referring to the July 2020 lockdown on Melbourne public housing towers in Flemington and North Melbourne, which eventually led to the Victorian government offering a $5million settlement to those affected.
After the Covid inquiry was announced in September 2023, Dr Coatsworth took aim at Mr Andrews who 'thinks that the Covid inquiry should focus on vaccines, national medical stockpile and PPE'.
'It is a word that he would prefer never enter into the historical record on our (and his) pandemic response. But it will,' he said.
'None of those are related to the core question. Proportionality,' Dr Coatsworth added.
'It is a word that he would prefer never enter into the historical record on our (and his) pandemic response. But it will.'
In his latest interview Dr Coatsworth admitted the public profile he gained from the pandemic has led to media opportunities such as being a fill-in host for Channel Nine's Today program and making a new show, Do You Want to Live Forever?.
'The opportunity arose out of the pandemic [because] people knew my face,' he said about the new documentary series focusing on how to extend lifespans.
'I love what I do in the hospital, but it’s often too late.
'Once someone’s got a chronic disease, you can’t really make a difference. You make the biggest difference if you can stop them getting the chronic disease in the first place.
'So, I figured television was the best way to get that message out and communicate how to live a healthier life.'
******************************************
Jewish groups turn on Sydney University
A rare coalition of Australia’s peak Jewish groups says it has “lost confidence” in the University of Sydney to provide for the safety of Jewish people, and that the organisations “stand ready to provide support to Jewish students and staff … who now wish to leave the university”.
The move follows the university’s controversial agreement with the Muslim students society, which defied university orders to pack up its pro-Palestine encampment protest and has been implicated with extremist organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir.
In a significant escalation of pressure on Australia’s oldest university, six Jewish organisations, including some of the most powerful in the country – the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies, the Executive Council of Australian Jewry, the Australasian Union of Jewish Students, the Zionist Federation of Australia, the Australian Academic Alliance Against Anti-Semitism, and the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council – said they were “appalled and deeply concerned” by the university’s agreement.
“Many of the protesters were from outside the university, yet they were allowed to menace the university community and disturb campus life without challenge,” their joint statement reads.
“They have now been rewarded for doing so.”
The groups said they had rejected the University of Sydney’s offer to participate in a working group to review defence and security related investments and called on others not to partake in the “sham” and “fundamentally flawed process”.
The university has pledged to grant a seat on that working group to the Sydney University Muslim Students Association under last week’s agreement. It has also promised a suite of other measures in return for an end to the encampment protest after almost two months.
Those measures include a pledge to disclose defence and security related investments and research ties and to double its expenditure to support academics under its scholars-at-risk program with a particular focus on Palestinians.
The agreement came a week after the university ordered the campers off the lawns, threatening that failure to comply with directions to leave would constitute an offence. Everyone but the Sydney University Muslim Students Association left following that order. That group defied orders and camped out another week until the agreement was struck.
They said in a statement last week that this defiance “worked in our favour across many fronts, most particularly being the catalyst for negotiations with the uni”.
The Jewish groups said the agreement would “only act as an incentive for further and more extreme disruption at the university in the future”.
“Based on our interactions to date, we have lost confidence in the capacity of the university to provide for the physical, cultural and psychosocial safety of Jewish students and staff members.
“This is not just our view. We have been made aware that several academic staff, some of them leaders in their fields and employees of long standing, have already notified the university of their decision to leave the institution. We have also been informed that a number of Jewish students are now considering shifting to other universities.
“We have also rejected the university’s offer, extended to us after an agreement had been reached behind our backs, to participate in the proposed process to review the university’s investment and research activities. “The process is in our view a sham and we will have nothing to do with it. We encourage individuals and groups of standing likewise not to engage with or lend credibility to such a fundamentally flawed process.
“We continue to explore all options to ensure the safety and wellbeing of students and staff at the University of Sydney and stand ready to provide support and assistance to Jewish students and staff at the university, as well as those who now wish to leave the university.”
The University of Sydney has repeatedly said the working group will not review the university’s research activity.
When contacted for a response to the letter, a university spokeswoman said: “These are deeply challenging times and we recognise the significant distress relating to this conflict and also the way the university has managed the encampment.
“We deliberately took time to listen and understand our community’s concerns with the intention of coming to a peaceful resolution.
“We are pleased the encampment was resolved without violence. The ending of the encampment is the first step, and we know we need to work hard to rebuild our relationships with some members of our university community.”
One Jewish student at the University of Sydney, Zac, told The Australian that he was considering transferring following the last few months of tensions on campus. He did not want his face photographed or his surname published for fear of reprisal.
“I’ve been harassed,” he said. “They had a protest. I was filming the protest just in case anything happened. I got told I wasn’t welcome here and that I had to leave – I said, I’m a student at the university and they didn’t care. And I got pictured and posted on Instagram and they called me a ‘Zio’.”
Zac said the university’s deal with protesters announced last Friday confirmed to him that the university “didn’t care about me personally”.
“I guess the squeaky wheel gets the grease. If they complain loudly enough, it doesn’t necessarily mean their opinion’s right or anything they do is right. They’re just the loudest.
“I’ve looked into it a lot, into transferring to UNSW, or UTS, or Macquarie. When you don’t feel comfortable walking around campus, and your classes are on campus, and there are people who you thought were friends who now you don’t talk to or they don’t talk to you, it sort of makes it hard to want to keep coming to uni.”
************************************************
My street library was just a family project. What happened next, well, you wouldn’t read about it
As I have spent most of my life reading, I really like this story -- JR
I’ll be honest – my motives for installing a street library outside my house were not particularly community-minded. At the time I was really into “projects”. We’d just finished transforming our swimming pool into a trout pond (yes, really), and I was looking for something new to keep my kids busy during the summer holidays. As a picture book reviewer, my bookshelves were overflowing, so a street library felt like a two-birds-one-stone solution.
I’d heard about street libraries and noticed the occasional book box on side streets – but I didn’t know much about the movement, or how they worked. I purchased a large ready-made raw timber unit from the Street Library Australia website and got to work on the fun bit – bringing it to life. We chose a deep purple paint colour called Dumbledore and adorned the doorframe with mirrors and jewels.
The website advises that it’s a good idea to give your street library a name, and Dumbledore felt perfect – a font of wisdom and knowledge, like the books that it would hold. When the paint and glue were dry, Dumbledore was glorious to behold, and once it was installed on a post behind our front fence with a bunch of books inside, I dropped a note in every letterbox on the street informing residents of the new street library. At that point I was ready to sign off – mission accomplished.
What came next was entirely unexpected. Notes and cards began to appear in our letterbox, thanking me for “adding a touch of beauty to our neighbourhood,” for initiating such a “fabulous venture,” and promising to add and swap books. The cards were mainly from strangers. We had lived in the house for six years but had never spoken to many of our neighbours.
Suddenly, we found ourselves striking up conversations with people as they browsed the library, chatting about books and offering recommendations. On days when the box was full, small piles of books would be left on our doorstep, to be squished into the shelves when there was space available.
The library took on a life of its own, and the turnover of books has never slowed. During lockdown, an elderly lady I spoke with on the street told me all her friends from the aged care home around the corner would walk to my house to find things to read. Far from just being a place to rehome kids books, Dumbledore is also stacked with adult options, from thrillers to cookbooks.
While my initial motive may not have been altruistic, as a lifelong reader, primary teacher and children’s author, I’m now so glad that we joined the growing network of street librarians. Like all libraries, our lovingly decorated installations are a wonderful way to increase literacy and provide easy access to books for members of the community who may not have other avenues. I also love the way that street libraries introduce readers to new authors and genres that they may be reluctant to try while browsing in a bookshop – I have certainly found some unexpected gems on Dumbledore’s shelves. Most importantly, this experience has shown me that, far from being a solo pursuit, reading can be a fantastic way to foster connection with others.
These days, the trout are long gone, but the street library is in full swing. A couple of weeks ago, as I headed out for a walk, a new neighbour was peering through Dumbledore’s perspex window. Her daughter-in-law was in labour, and she was killing time as she waited for a phone call announcing the birth of her twin grandchildren. We exchanged details so that I could share some recommendations of my favourite books for newborns, and a few days later she texted me a beautiful photo of the babies. I can’t wait for the time those babies are old enough to toddle up to Dumbledore and choose their own books. And I’m forever grateful for the random impulse that inspired me to introduce this little box of bookish magic to my street.
*****************************************
27 June, 2024
Anthony Albanese’s cost of giving: rise in inflation raises risk of rate hike
Like most Leftists he is living in the present only. His big spending accompanied by no rise in productivity has got to mean more inflation
Anthony Albanese’s claims that billions of dollars in cost-of-living measures are helping fight inflation are in tatters, after new figures revealed a shock jump in consumer price growth that economists say could force the Reserve Bank to deliver another rate hike as early as August.
Official data on Wednesday revealed inflation jumped to 4 per cent in the year to May, from 3.6 per cent in the month before, as the end of energy rebates drove energy bills higher, petrol prices soared, and rents continued their rapid upward march.
With inflation trending higher for three consecutive months and well above the 3.4 per cent rate last December, NAB analysts delayed their prediction for any mortgage relief by six months to May 2025 after the latest date the next federal election could be held.
Analysts from UBS and Deutsche Bank joined Judo Bank chief economist Warren Hogan to predict a 14th rate hike next month.
Despite climbing worries that cost-of-living pressures are proving harder to shift, the Prime Minister in a speech on Thursday morning will spruik his government’s record of economic management, boasting that “inflation is down” since Labor took power.
In a speech to a CEDA conference in parliament on Thursday, Mr Albanese will talk up cost-of-living measures starting from Monday – including extending $300 energy bill subsidies to every household from July, a big boost to rental assistance and broadening the stage three tax cuts to include all workers.
Mr Albanese will say the measures are part of a package that has been calibrated “so that it takes pressure off people, without putting pressure on inflation”.
“Since we came to government, just over two years ago, nearly 880,000 jobs have been created – more than half a million of them, full time jobs,” Mr Albanese will the conference.
“Inflation is down. Annual real wages growth is back. Unemployment remains at near 50-year lows. And the gender pay gap is at a record low. My colleagues and I are proud of this record.”
Sky News Political Reporter Cameron Reddin says RBA Governor Michele Bullock has got her finger “on the button” to raise rates.
Independent economist Chris Richardson criticised the decisions by federal and state governments in recent budgets to pour billions of additional dollars into the economy under the guise of cost-of-living relief that could ultimately make life harder for struggling households by keeping inflation higher for longer.
“Governments are throwing a lot of money at the symptoms of the cost-of-living crisis, but that worsens the cause of it. And the cause is too many dollars chasing too little stuff,” Mr Richardson said. “Governments have abandoned the field in the inflation fight. We are fighting the inflation fight one-handed.”
Mr Richardson said the RBA’s battle to keep the nation on the “narrow path” to taming inflation without the need for a damaging recession was now more like “threading a needle”. And as inflation threatened to prove more difficult to budge, there was increasing risk of a monetary policy “mistake” that would eventually lead to a recession as the central bank was forced to hike rates to regain control.
“I don’t think the Reserve Bank will raise rates at its August meeting, but there’s now clearly a chance that they will,” he said. “And the bigger point is not whether rates go up or not in August, it’s that mortgage relief is a very, very long way away.”
Sky News Business Editor Ross Greenwood says the monthly inflation number gives a “snapshot” of trends.
Immediately following the release of the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ consumer price report on Wednesday, traders in financial markets ramped up bets on the likelihood of a rate hike to approaching 50 per cent by September, and to 40 per cent as early as next month’s board meeting – or twice the roughly 20 per cent chance priced in for August before the release of the figures.
The ABS data showed that among the largest price rises over the past 12 months was a 5.2 per cent jump in housing costs, including a 7.4 per cent increase in rents and a 4.9 per cent rise in home-building costs – testament to both a lack of homes for lease and the shortage of workers and materials that continue to plague the construction sector.
The gradual end of government energy subsidies – to be renewed at commonwealth and state levels next financial year – explained a 6.5 per cent increase in power bills in the year to May, well up on the 4.2 per cent in April.
Confirming the intense pressures on household budgets, still high petrol prices meant fuel costs were 9.3 per cent up on a year earlier, the ABS data showed, even as pump prices eased through the month.
Betashares chief economist David Bassanese described the latest consumer price report as “a shocker”, saying it “places huge pressure on the Reserve Bank to raise interest rates in August”, although “it is still not a done deal”.
The monthly figures offer only a partial read on inflation and tend to be more volatile than the more complete quarterly figures, but the increase is well above the 3.8 per cent consensus forecast by economists leading into the release and enough to further worry an RBA board that has become more “vigilant” about the risks of inflation proving more persistent.
RBA governor Michele Bullock said last week “we need a lot to go our way” to bring inflation under control without having to hike interest rates again, while the central bank board for the first time flagged big-spending budgets may be making its job harder
Mr Hogan said there was now a 75 per cent chance of a rate hike at the RBA board’s August 5-6 meeting. He said it was now clear “the inflation trend in this country is back up, not down”.
“I just can’t see how they (the RBA board) can walk away from this and have any kind inflation-fighting credibility intact,” Mr Hogan told Sky News.
************************************************
Minister Raises AUKUS Concerns Amid University Deal With Islamist Group
A move to re-establish attempts at a judicial inquiry into antisemitism at Australian universities has exposed questions around what has been called a “major national security issue” for the nation.
Federal member for Berowra Julian Leeser addressed Australia’s parliament on June 25 as he attempted to re-introduce the Commission of Inquiry into Anti-Semitism at Australian Universities Bill 2024.
The bill revolves around concerns of anti-Semitic behaviour at Australia’s universities, many of which have been the sites of pro-Palestinian encampments across the nation.
The government did not agree to bringing the bill for debate earlier in the month.
In attempting to open the topic up to debate once more, Mr. Leeser queried the relationship between the University of Sydney and the Australian branch of Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir.
Hizb ut-Tahrir self-describes as an Islamic political party that “works globally to resume the Islamic way of life.” It has been deemed a terrorist organisation in the UK.
Mr. Leeser told Parliament about his concerns, saying the Albanese government needed to list Hizb ut-Tahrir as a terrorist organisation (pdf).
He quoted comments from the UK Minister of State for Security, Tom Tugendhat, who said, “Free speech includes neither the promotion of terrorism, not the celebration of terrorist acts.”
Mr. Tugendhat added that it was “not acceptable” to describe Hamas as Palestine’s heroes or call the Oct. 7 events a victory. “To that, I say hear, hear,” Mr. Leeser said.
The Liberal MP said Hizb ut-Tehrir opposed democracy and embraced anti-Semitism.
Yet despite this reputation, Mr. Leeser said Hizb ut-Tehrir was now playing an “oversized” role in the University of Sydney after talks that followed encampments which were organised by the group.
He noted that every other group had packed up and left when told to, except for Hizb ut-Tehrir, which refused.
“That resistance has worked in our favour across many fronts, most particularly, being the catalyst for negotiations with the uni,” the group wrote on its Instagram account.
Most disturbingly, Mr. Leeser said, was Hizb ut-Tehrir’s success in securing a promise from the university to establish a group to review its defence investments and research.
“That’s bad enough, but this is now a major national security issue at our oldest university,” he told Parliament.
“It’s an extraordinary capitulation, at a time when the AUKUS agreements require the focus and attention of our best and brightest minds Sydney university is allowing an extremist group—an organisation listed as a terrorist organisation by our oldest ally—to run the ruler over every defence agreement.”
Mr. Leeser questioned why anyone involved with AUKUS would want to work with the University of Sydney in the wake of the agreement, and accused the university of ignoring the group’s anti-Semitic actions on campus.
Hizb ut-Tehrir, which dismissed the government’s crackdown on the swastika and Nazi salute as “virtue signalling,” were the first to announce the partnership with the University of Sydney on Friday night.
“Be in no doubt, whilst the university may be enjoying its new agreement with Hizb ut-Tehrir, the university’s relationship with the Jewish community is in absolute tatters,” Mr. Leeser said, adding that Jewish employers were leaving the university, and Jewish students had been transferring away.
“In such an environment, the government cannot just sit on their hands and do nothing,” he said.
A spokesperson for the University of Sydney denied allegations that its affiliation with Hizb ut-Tahrir would compromise Australia’s security.
“We are in constant contact with the police and the safety of our community is our absolute priority at all times,” they said in a statement provided to The Epoch Times.
“If we are given cause to believe there is a risk to our community, we act immediately and proportionately.”
The spokesperson said no adverse events on campus had been reported to them in the wake of the Oct. 7 attacks on Israel by Hamas.
“The university is not itself in a position to identify organisations that may be extremist, radicalised or potentially violent,” they said.
“This identification is made by governments and police, and we are directed by them.
“We have been assured by police we would be notified about extremist, violent or radicalised behaviour that we need to be aware of.
“No concerns have been raised with us by police or other government intelligence agencies at any time since the distressing events of Oct. 7.”
The university also noted that Hizb ut-Tahrir had not been deemed a terrorist organisation by authorities in Australia, and as a consequence, members of the group were legally able to appear at rallies and events across New South Wales.
“Our priority has always been a peaceful resolution and the agreement aligns with similar offers made at leading universities from around the world, including Harvard University and the University of Melbourne,” the spokesperson said.
“Our proposal emphasises transparency around partnerships and does not include a review of our research partnerships, including those with our valued defence and security industry partners.”
The university said suggestions the working group members would have access to sensitive information were incorrect—and that the focus would be on human rights and participants would be carefully chosen to represent the university’s student, staff, and alumni communities, as well as university leadership and independent members.
************************************************
Physics students in catastrophic decline in senior high school
A catastrophic decline in the number of students studying physics in senior high school is ringing alarm bells, with one eminent scientist fearing Australia will lose the expertise it needs to be competitive as an advanced economy.
The University of Western Australia’s David Blair, who won a Prime Minister’s science prize for his role in the discovery of gravitational waves, said if school physics enrolments continued to fall at their current rate there would be no female school leavers qualified to study physics at university by 2032 and no males by 2035.
“We are on track to having no young medical physicists, no physicists to become tomorrow’s astronomers, no physicists to support the energy transition, no physicists to support the nuclear industry – not just submarines but crucial medical products – and no climate scientists,” he said.
“Hospitals employ medical physicists who are essential for producing the short-life radioactive isotopes for medical diagnoses and PET scans.
“Our mineral industry depends on a huge number of physicists.”
Data from WA, which Professor Blair said was representative of Australia as a whole, shows year 12 physics enrolments fell from 3868 in 2015 to 2436 in 2023. The number of girls studying physics fell even faster over the period. Girls made up 42 per cent of the year 12 physics cohort in 2015 but only 31 per cent by 2023.
Professor Blair and a fellow Prime Minister’s science prize winner, Susan Scott from the Australian National University, are pushing for a rethink of school science to keep children interested so more choose to study science in their senior years.
The pair are leaders of the Einstein First program which, backed by UWA, now operates in 55 schools, teaching year 3 to year 10 students modern physics topics that engage their interest, such as black holes.
Figures show that 14-year-olds are far more interested in physics after doing Einstein First. Before the course, only about a third of the girls and half the boys found physics interesting. After the course about 80 per cent of both girls and boys were interested.
A $1.5m Australian Research Council grant for the Einstein First team was announced on Friday for them to revitalise school science education and improve the training of teachers to teach modern science.
Einstein First and UWA have also just launched 12 Quantum Explorer STEM clubs, which are particularly aimed at sparking the interest of girls.
The Australian Academy of Science is also part of the push to improve science and maths education in schools, and on Tuesday launched two free online “toolboxes” for primary school teachers to help them teach these subjects.
Academy CEO Anna-Maria Arabia said that the science kit (Primary Connections) and the maths kit (reSolve) catered for teachers at whatever level of science understanding they had and helped them teach in effective ways regardless of where their students were at.
“We would love all teachers to be trained in science and maths but that is long-term,” Ms Arabia said.
The academy’s secretary for education and public awareness, Lyn Beazley, said the new resources were needed to fill a gap.
“Today’s teachers work so hard, but they are extremely time – poor, with many competing demands. This can lead to teachers preparing for what their students need to know, rather than designing how students will best learn,” Professor Beazley said.
Launching the new toolboxes at Hughes Primary School in Canberra, federal Education Minister Jason Clare said the resources were designed to take the load off teachers and engage students and help them to fall in love with science and maths.
*******************************************************
Who is Matt Kean and what is the Climate Change Authority?
He has drunk deep of the Kool-aid
The federal Labor government has appointed prominent New South Wales Liberal Matt Kean as the new chair of the Climate Change Authority.
Here’s a short explainer on Kean and the agency he will chair.
Who is Matt Kean?
Kean, 42, had been a Liberal MP in the NSW parliament until announcing his resignation last week. He gave his valedictory speech to parliament on Friday.
Kean entered politics in the 2011 landslide as the member for Hornsby, a seat in northern Sydney. His first major appointment was as minister for innovation and better regulation in 2017, a role that suited his education, including gaining a graduate diploma from the Institute of Chartered Accountants and his time at consultants PriceWaterhouseCoopers.
He found his calling and gained a higher profile after the 2019 state election when he became energy and environment minister. As head of the Liberal’s moderate faction, and being close to then-premier Gladys Berejiklian, Kean was able to implement far-reaching changes – particularly in the energy sector – that had eluded similarly inclined moderate Liberal ministers.
He secured cross-party support for an ambitious road map to drive renewables into the grid in NSW – a state that had been slow to decarbonise – and a large expansion of national parks.
Increasingly alarmed at the scale of the 2019-20 black summer bushfires, Kean spoke out against the lack of climate action including by his federal counterparts in the Morrison government. Morrison bristled in response that “most of the federal cabinet wouldn’t even know who Matt Kean was” – helping to boost Kean’s national profile.
When Berejiklian resigned following revelations the state’s corruption commission was investigating whether she had been involved in “a breach of public trust”, Kean was elevated to treasurer and deputy Liberal leader under Dominic Perrottet. After the March 2023 election ended the Coalition’s 12 years in office, Kean took a much less publicised role as shadow health minister.
Why did Kean leave politics now?
Kean had made no secret of his wider ambitions – including a potential tilt at federal politics.
He could have chosen to challenge sitting Liberal MP Paul Fletcher for pre-selection in the federal seat of Bradfield, for example, arguing his track record on tackling climate action would help counter any threat posed by an independent teal candidate.
However, Kean’s climate stance would have put him at odds with the federal opposition, not least its plans to build nuclear power plants at seven sites across Australia.
Close observers have noted Kean’s resignation as a Liberal MP came just a day before that policy was announced. It also came not long after Peter Dutton announced a federal Coalition government would ditch Australia’s 2030 emissions target under the Paris climate agreement.
“My grandparents’ generation fought for freedom in the second world war,” Kean said in his valedictory speech. “My parents’ generation saw off the threat of communism during the cold war.
“It is incumbent upon our generation to take decisive and responsible action on climate change. It is the biggest challenge that will face our society and economy in our lifetime.”
Speaking on Monday after his new role as the chair of the Climate Change Authority was announced, Kean noted he had previously asked his state’s chief scientist, Prof Hugh Durrant-Whyte, to examine nuclear’s prospects. (Durrant-Whyte reiterated the points here last week.)
Standing alongside the prime minister, Anthony Albanese, and the federal energy minister, Chris Bowen, in Canberra, Kean said nuclear energy didn’t make economic sense. “I did not want to bankrupt the state and I did not want to put those huge costs on to families.”
What is the Climate Change Authority?
The authority was set up by the Gillard Labor government in 2012 to provide independent advice on what Australia’s carbon emissions reduction targets should be.
The Abbott government sought to scrap the authority – and other emissions-reducing bodies such as the Clean Energy Finance Corporation – but was stymied by the Senate.
However, the Coalition made it clear the authority’s advice wasn’t welcomed, with one after another of the authority’s board members resigning, including former Reserve Bank governor Bernie Fraser.
Since April 2021, the authority has been chaired by Grant King, a former managing director of Origin Energy for 16 years. During that time, Origin expanded rapidly, particularly in coal seam gas for export.
King, though, has held other roles, including chairing CWP Renewables, and Kean too may take up roles in clean energy. King’s term was scheduled to run until April next year but Bowen said the current chair had sought to leave the role early.
The authority reviews Australia’s national greenhouse gas reporting and the safeguard mechanism aimed at forcing industry to cut carbon emissions over time. It can also order its own research or act on requests for analysis from the government.
Perhaps as a signal to how Kean will view his new role as authority chair, he had this to say in his valedictory speech:
“For critics who complain of an economic and financial cost of acting on climate change, I say as treasurer I saw the catastrophic cost of not acting—the cost of rebuilding infrastructure, towns, lives and livelihoods. There is no comparison.”
************************************
26 June, 2024
Assange revealed truthful, newsworthy information’: Assange lawyer says
“The prosecution of Julian Assange is unprecedented in the 100 years of the Espionage Act, it has never been used by the United States to pursue a publisher, a journalist, like Mr Assange,” Assange’s US lawyer Barry Pollack said standing next to Assange’s UK and Australian counsel, Jennifer Robinson.
“Mr Assange revealed truthful, newsworthy information, including revealing that the United States had committed war crimes,” Pollack continued.
“He has suffered tremendously in his fight for free speech, for freedom of the press, and to ensure that the American public and the world community gets truthful and important newsworthy information.
“We firmly believe that Mr Assange never should have been charged under the Espionage Act and engaged in [an] exercise that journalists engage in everyday – and we are thankful that they do.”
*********************************************
AEMO warns of immediate gas shortfall threat as cold snap, renewable lulls and outages bite
On Thursday morning, in an extraordinary step, the Australian Energy Market Operator issued a "risk or threat notice" for east coast gas supplies amid a looming shortfall of the fuel in southern states such as Victoria, New South Wales and South Australia.
The warning was sparked by a spike in gas demand following a cold spell, a lack of renewable power in recent weeks and an outage at the Longford gas plant in Victoria – the biggest source of gas in southern Australia.
Combined, the shocks to the system have led to a run on Victoria's most biggest and most important gas storage facility at Iona, about 230km south-west of Melbourne.
They have also sent the gas market skywards, with prices trading at almost $30 a gigajoule today – levels last seen during the energy crisis two years ago.
AEMO said the disruptions were of a "nature and magnitude" significant enough to threaten gas shortfalls on days of peak demand for the next three months or more.
"The likely duration of the identified risk or threat is from 19 June 2024 and is expected, on the basis of current information, to continue until no later than 30 September or as otherwise advised by AEMO," the agency said in a statement.
According to the market operator and industry observers, gas storage levels were being rapidly depleted as pressure came on to the system from all angles.
A recent run of cold weather has caused a spike in demand for gas for heating across many of the southern states.
At the same time, seasonal lulls in wind and solar output has led to a big increase in the amount of gas being burnt to produce electricity.
Meanwhile, AEMO noted, production at the Longford gas plant operated by US oil and gas giant ExxonMobil had been severely reduced because unplanned maintenance requirements.
This comes on top of the declining output from Longford, which ExxonMobil and its joint venture partner Woodside are planning to progressively shut down in the coming years as gas reserves in the Bass Strait fall away.
An Exxon spokesman said the outage at Longford was planned to allow maintenance to take place at the company's offshore facilities.
The spokesman said that work had been completed and the plant would be "resuming" its full operations over the coming days.
"Our team has worked hard to limit any impact on supplies to customers by increasing production from other offshore facilities while the restart progresses," the spokesman said.
"We expect to return to full rates by 1 July.
"As we have noted publicly for several years, having multiple supply sources across the domestic energy market is critical to ensure system reliability."
Shortfalls 'entirely predictable'
Rick Wilkinson, the chief executive of consultancy EnergyQuest, said the risk of shortfalls was worrying for gas users but ultimately predictable.
Mr Wilkinson said the security of Australia's east coast gas market had been getting worse for years as investment in new supplies dwindled.
"The lack of investment, and some would say outright hostility to gas industry investment in the southern states has left south-east Australia closer to gas supply shortfalls," Mr Wilkinson said.
"The margin for safety continues to be eroded.
"Today's gas market operator's notice of a gas system risk or threat for the southern states is the next real example of what is to come more regularly.
"We have lost the gas safety margin for reliable supply, and what we have been doing for the last five or more years has not worked to address the gas shortfalls — expected in 2028, and earlier for peak demand conditions as we are currently experiencing.
"This risk will get progressively worse as Longford gas fields deplete, and there is no investment in more gas supply, storage or other gas options such as LNG imports."
In its notice, AEMO foreshadowed it may need to take measures to prop up the supply of gas to the east coast market, where the fuel is used by millions of households and thousands of often major businesses.
Among those measures were requiring producers, pipeline operators, storage providers and other market players to take "reasonable steps" to ensure there was enough supply.
This could include producers in Queensland, where much of Australia's east coast gas supplies are turned into super-chilled liquid form and sent to North Asia on ships
*********************************************
Victoria must consider the Exxon gas plan
ROBERT GOTTLIEBSEN
Many years ago, after I first published that Exxon was prepared to spend $100m to develop Victoria’s deep water dissolved gas in Gippsland, I was at a business function when a top Australian Exxon executive quietly took me aside and said: “Robert, you got your facts wrong in that article. We planned to spend $200m not $100m.”
Exxon’s enthusiasm for the deposit extended to doing a joint venture with BlueScope Steel which operates a steel rolling mill at nearby at Western Port Bay.
A company known as Ignite, through its wholly owned subsidiary Gippsland Gas had spent some millions researching the deposit and earlier Exxon data. Exxon on examining the results, combined with Gippsland Gas to put the $200m proposal to the 2014 Victorian Coalition government.
The Premier faced with making the 2014 decision was the Liberal’s Denis Napthine but in matters like this the Premier was greatly influenced by his Deputy Premier and leader of the Nationals Peter Ryan.who was also the member for South Gippsland.
Ryan feared any development of onshore gas would frighten farmers who did not want gas development and believed (incorrectly) it would require the fracking process to extract the gas. Napthine blocked Exxon, Gippsland Gas and BlueScope.
Daniel Andrews became Premier in December 2014 and continued the ban and made it very clear to Exxon that he would attempt to stop any drilling and, if he failed Exxon would not be given a production licence.
The giant multinational has oil and gas prospects around the world and had no interest fighting an Australian state government. It backed out. And because the original ban decision had been made by the coalition of Liberals and Nationals, the Victorian Opposition was reluctant to make it a major issue.
Ten years have passed and there has been no detailed drilling.
The $200m Exxon development plan of 2014 first required wells to be drilled to determine permeability. If those wells failed then obviously Exxon would have considered walking away.
Its $200m plan involved bringing the fields to full development stage and of course proving the extent of the gas reserves.
Given the Victorian government headed by Daniel Andrews spent $42m concealing any gas reserves and was adamant they should not be developed, no one in their right mind would spend money to prove or disprove the initial estimates provided by one of the world’s greatest gas reserve estimators, MHA Petroleum Consultants, (now part of the giant Sproule group).
Those suggesting that MHA Petroleum would publish estimates of gas as part of a marketing exercise don’t understand the traditions of both MHA and Sproule.
With Bass Strait gas now running out and the Victorian government in a mess, it’s time for the Australian Energy Market Operator to step in and review the MHA calculations and the 2014 Exxon plan.
The first step in any intervention must of course be to alert the community to the looming crisis but there is no point in continuing to do that when the first obvious solution – the 2014 Exxon plan – is gathering dust in the files.
The looming gas crisis is so serious that current Victorian Premier Jacinta Allen and her deputy Ben Carroll need to combine and take personal charge.
They should review the 2014 Exxon plan and perhaps raise a small amount of money to drill a few wells – the first stage of the plan.
If the gas flows as it has in earlier wells, then it will be possible for Victoria to do a lucrative deal. It certainly needs help.
**************************************************
Feds approve gas expansion plans
Senex Energy, owned by Australian billionaire Gina Rinehart and South Korean steel maker Posco International, has been given the go-ahead for its $1 billion plan to expand its gas fields near Wandoan, about 400 kilometres north-west of Brisbane.
The company had put the project on hold in December 2022 in response to the federal government's intervention in the gas market.
However, it said the development would proceed after receiving all the major approvals needed.
"We now have the necessary investment confidence and regulatory approvals to proceed with our expansion and deliver sorely needed natural gas supply to the east coast market," said Senex Energy CEO Ian Davies.
"This announcement is especially timely given the current pressures that the east coast energy system is experiencing, particularly in southern states."
The expansion is set to produce enough electricity to power more than 2.7 million homes each year, equivalent to more than 10 per cent of the east coast's annual domestic gas requirements.
It comes after a warning from the Australian Energy Market Operator about a gas shortage across southern states.
The federal government said the decision to approve the project was lawful.
"This project will primarily contribute domestic gas supply to households and Australian manufacturing – including for glass, bricks, cement and food packaging," a spokesperson for Ms Plibersek said.
"Under Labor, we've already seen a 25 per cent increase in renewable energy in our grid. We are ticking off renewable energy projects at record rates, outstripping coal and gas projects seven to one."
Mr Davies said the expansion would begin delivering 60 petajoules of gas to the market by the end of 2025 and would create more than 900 jobs over the project's lifetime.
"The expansion will drive a significant boost in natural gas supply for Australia, demonstrating Queensland is continuing to do the heavy lifting for the east coast," he said.
The project was approved with 75 conditions, including a prohibition on the discharge of coal seam gas-produced water to surface water and a ban on clearing any koala foraging and breeding habitat.
The company has also been ordered to implement a water monitoring and management plan to watch for issues such as subsidence where land sinks.
Environmental lobby group Lock the Gate said it was concerned the project could lead to further subsidence across the region.
"The more the gas fields spread, the more problems of subsidence and groundwater loss and depletion we're going to see," said member Georgina Woods.
Ms Woods said the project's approval showed Australia continued to put off the hard decisions on transitioning the economy away from fossil fuels.
"If fossil fuels continue to expand, Australia has lost its way in its climate change action," she said.
"The job (of transitioning the economy) is very difficult, but it has to done because the consequences for Queensland from global warning will be catastrophic."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-26/senex-gas-plans-approved/104022936
************************************25 June, 2024
Julian Assange reaches plea deal to free himself
I am rather pleased to see this. He was to a degree a free speech warrior and to think of a fellow Australian in a horror American prison was very unpleasant
Julian Assange has boarded a plane out of the UK after leaving the maximum security prison he spent almost 2000 days in, as part of a US plea deal over espionage charges the WikiLeaks founder has pleaded guilty to.
Assange has spent more than a decade holed up and imprisoned in London, largely to avoid being sent to the US.
Assange is expected to plead guilty to a felony charge of conspiring to obtain and distribute classified information, according to a court document and people familiar with the matter, over the website’s publication of thousands of confidential US military records and diplomatic cables about America’s actions in Iraq and Afghanistan in the 2000s.
The plea is expected to take place on Wednesday morning in Saipan, a US territory in the western Pacific.
Assange is believed to be en route to Bangkok, from where he will head to Saipan, which is the largest of the Northern Mariana Islands and an estimated 18 hours flying time from Sydney.
He is expected to be sentenced to the 62 months he has already spent in a London prison, and be allowed to return to his native Australia after his sentencing, according to the people.
Prosecutors had been in talks with Assange to resolve the 2019 case, The Wall Street Journal reported in March, with one sticking point being Assange’s desire to never set foot in the United States.
To enter a felony plea, defendants generally have to show up in person in court.
WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange accepts US plea deal
Assange’s team had floated the possibility of pleading guilty to a misdemeanour, the Journal reported, which would mean Assange could enter the plea remotely.
The Justice Department and Assange’s legal team reached a compromise under which Assange wouldn’t have to travel to suburban Virginia, where the original case is filed, and prosecutors could still get a felony plea, the people said.
The plea deal offers a neat solution to what was becoming an increasing political headache for the US government.
Earlier this year, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said he hoped the US could find a way to conclude the case against Assange, and lawmakers there passed a motion calling for Assange to be allowed to return to his native home. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has also weighed in, saying that the British courts should not extradite Assange to the US.
In February, the United Nations special rapporteur on torture, Alice Jill Edwards, said Assange shouldn’t be extradited to the US to face trial, saying he suffered from “depressive disorder” and was at risk of being placed in solitary confinement.
“Politically he is in a much better position than he was six months ago,” says Stella Assange, Julian Assange’s wife, during an interview with the Journal last month. Stella Assange hinted that their family was willing to accept a plea deal to get him out of a British high security prison where she said he is suffering health issues and lives in a cell alone.
“As his wife and the mother of his children … I want him to be free,” she said.
Assange’s mother, Christine Ann Hawkins, hailed the “quiet diplomacy” that helped secure her son’s freedom, and said she was “grateful” his ordeal was over.
**********************************************
Actually speaking your mind? Now there’s an idea
The pitchfork brigade is coming, but Danielle Harvey doesn’t care.
Harvey, who is director of the Festival of Dangerous Ideas, says she is determined to push back against “cancel culture” by platforming “contrarians”.
“I really don’t want to live in a world that doesn’t allow people to ask questions and hear different opinions,” she told The Australian, as she prepared to unveil a line-up of speakers that includes Jews concerned about rising anti-Semitism, defenders of JK Rowling, and men speaking out about a more positive masculinity.
Harvey says she wants to bring “hard conversations” to the masses, adding: “It’s up to you whether you want to buy a ticket.”
It’s a sentiment echoed by former editor of The Age Michael Gawenda and headliner Josh Szeps – both journalists who believe many festivals have a “lack of respect for an audience’s intelligence”.
Her stance comes after anti-Israel agitators this year interrupted theatre events; annoyed audiences by jeering at Jerry Seinfeld; and targeted writers festival organisers in the hope of cancelling events by Jewish authors, among them Deborah Conway.
Big Oil protesters have thrown paint at the Mona Lisa and Stonehenge, and anti-Israel forces have caused havoc in Britain, with the Hay, Wimbledon and Edinburgh writers festivals suffering a catastrophic loss of funding.
The UK investment firm, Baillie Gifford, this year cancelled all of its sponsorship deals with literary festivals and while few organisers have been prepared to speak about the issue, the Edinburgh festival director, Jenny Niven, said there had been “intolerable” pressure on her team.
Gawenda, author of My Life As A Jew, said he was disappointed not to be invited to speak at the Sydney, Melbourne or Adelaide festivals this year. He rejects the notion that ideas can be “dangerous” saying: “Why can’t you discuss these things without people being bullied into silence? I think it’s ridiculous to call these ‘dangerous ideas’. The only thing that’s dangerous about them is that some people will want to cancel you for discussing them.”
Gawenda mourns the performance of “bravery” akin to discussing such concepts in the festival’s line up, suggesting “we’ve reached a point now where people feel unable to discuss virtually anything without feeling threatened that they will be targeted for holding this position … (it’s) a pretty pathetic point in terms of public debate that you need a festival to discuss these issues (that are) being faced every day in universities, in work, in the media. We can’t be dictated to in this way.”
Harvey laments the habit of arts festivals “blasting themselves” by being reluctant to platform “challenging ideas”, telling The Australian the contest of ideas was paramount.
“If we provoke ire from different corners of society, so be it. I think more arts festivals need to realise you’re not actually meant to be for everyone,” she says, adding: “One of the hardest things to do is to be curious these days.
“We try and make space for all sides to be represented – we look at it as less of a binary and more of people’s disciplines and ideas rather than their views; what are they experts in, tackle the same problems from multiple angles and test ideas.”
In response, FODI has invited resident “bad feminist” Roxane Gay, host of The Witch Trials of JK Rowling podcast Megan Phelps-Roper, black conservative Coleman Hughes, and Jews Don’t Count author and comedian David Baddiel.
Also invited is podcaster Szeps, who quit the ABC earlier this year, saying he wanted to be able to have “free conversations about controversial issues”.
“My whole professional mission is about having conversations that aren’t cookie cutter or predictable like I would have to do at previous jobs, particularly the public broadcaster,” he says.
“We need to find a way to have conversations without constant fear of having our lives ruined for not sticking to a script.”
He says he has experienced a “relaxation” in the shoulders since quitting his old job to charge towards an “intellectually diverse community.”
Under the theme “sanctuary”, the festival attempts to create an “alternative safe space” for attendees, where contentious ideas come to the forefront and are discussed.
US psychologist Jean Twenge will unravel the impact of smartphone access on young people, while Talking Politics podcaster David Runciman flirts with extending the vote to six-year-olds (and considers the impact it would have on democracy).
She aims for events in which “point-scoring and gotcha moments” are absent.
“We’re letting everybody say their piece, speak to their area of expertise and it’s their ideas,” she says.
The move isn’t without trepidation, since the inclusion of iconoclasts can have “serious consequences” she says.
The festival has previously hosted Satanic Verses author Salman Rushdie and anti-Putin punk band Pussy Riot.
Last year’s controversy centred around the inclusion of “the last taboo” – a conversation about intimate connections between humans and animals, wrongfully condemned as a celebration of bestiality.
“We don’t seek out controversy,” says Harvey, but “shining a light on certain topics will force people used to not having nuanced conversations into state”.
“It’s a really complex time,” she says, adding: “If you don’t get out of the news that you consume and seek out different opinions, you may be unwittingly walking towards a very, very bad path.
“We’re not here to preach. We’re here to inspire. This festival exists because people still need to make a choice to be critical and curious. To me, that’s what the sanctuary needs to be.”
The festival program also includes “Stacks of Danger” tours affording punters the chance to peek at concealed works at the State Library NSW, hidden for “various sensitivities”, and an intimate Last Supper dinner where guests – without phones – can participate in dinner party conversation with stars of the line-up.
A horror film night, curated by Talk to Me writer-director Danny Phillippou, will canvass the best psychological primal fear narratives of all time.
“We’re looking for people who are genuinely curious, have experience and expertise, whether that’s through study, lived experience – we want them to tell us their thoughts,” Harvey says.
*****************************************
The Callide disaster
In a government-owned business, nobody cares
A damning report has found organisation chaos and cost-cutting at the Queensland government’s CS Energy were major contributors to a power plant explosion that pushed up energy prices for consumers across the east coast.
The findings are contained in a draft report of forensic engineer Sean Brady, released by CS Energy on Tuesday after months of pressure from The Australian newspaper, amid a fight for control of the privately-owned half of the Callide C plant.
The release comes after Queensland Premier Steven Miles ordered a review of the operations of state-owned power provider CS Energy, and said special advisers will be appointed to the board in the wake of revelations its own decisions have been blamed for the catastrophic explosion at the Callide C power plant in 2021.
Dr Brady’s draft report found that CS Energy failed to “implement effective process safety practices that would have increased the likelihood of identifying and managing the risks” associated with installing new equipment at the plant.
The explosion was caused when Callide’s main turbine tripped, and back-up battery systems failed to alert workers that the generator was drawing - rather than delivering - power to the grid.
The turbine subsequently exploded after hydrogen used to cool the turbines caught fire. The catastrophe took out power to almost 500,000 Queensland customers, and the loss of Callid C - still to return to full capacity - has helped push up energy prices across the National Electricity Market.
Dr Brady’s draft review points to a litany of failures across CS Energy, with the failure to source an adequate battery charging system that was “fit for purpose” leading directly to the explosion.
But the forensic engineer’s review of organisational factors also pointed to major failings by the company’s management, board - and of the state government, which is CS Energy’s sole shareholder.
CS Energy has two significant structural influences. As a government-owned corporation it is obliged to meet shareholder mandates, as well as meet the annual performance indicators contained in the Statement of Corporate Intent,” the draft report says.
“In the years leading up to the incident, these mandates focused on cost savings, and performance indicators were dominated by financial and production metrics, as well as personal safety-related metrics.”
The company’s board responded by setting management metrics focused on personal injury, plant availability and financial performance - which did not include a focus on the management of process safety, the draft report says.
“Between 2017 and the incident in 2021, Callide experienced significant turnover of key roles. This turnover would make it difficult to maintain a process safety focus,” Dr Brady’s report says.
Between 2017 and the May 2021 explosion, Dr Brady says, the Callide power station had four different general managers, three different maintenance managers and five different production managers.
“CS Energy implemented a swirl of at least 6 major initiatives across the organisation which impacted sites in a short period of time prior to the incident. This would also make it difficult to focus on process safety.”
Mr Miles said on Tuesday the government will appoint special advisers to the CS Board and ordered the Queensland Treasury department to review CS Energy’s management and structure to ensure the company is “aligned to deliver on the Queensland Energy and Jobs Plan, optimise energy transition and ensure downward pressure on consumer prices, while maintaining operating and business performance”.
“The maintenance of directions date back to 2012 when Tim Nichols and the LNP were in charge,” he said.
“What we take responsibility for is what we do now and it makes sense that for the last period of time our focus was getting the generators back up and running and that will be done in the next few weeks.”
The Premier’s decision comes after The Australian revealed the draft conclusions of forensic engineer Sean Brady into the Callide C explosion included criticism that CS Energy’s purchasing decisions led to the disaster and were not “fit for purpose”.
CS Energy has previously said the explosion was ultimately caused by the failure of battery back-up systems, but – based on draft findings by Dr Brady – the federal court was told on Monday that the systems failed because a battery charger installed by CS Energy was “not fit for purpose”.
CS Energy has fought for months to keep Dr Brady’s report from public view, but findings read to the court – in a hearing aimed at slowing the sales process of the half of the generator owned by private investors – include criticism of both CS Energy and its board, and the state government mandate that helped strip the company of cash.
“The decision to replace the battery charger was made by someone not responsible for that process. In going to market CS Energy focused solely on price, with little or no technical input or oversight. The technical specifications that had been submitted for the charger did not establish or require that the battery charger could actually operate within its systems,” the court was told.
“And unsurprisingly, the product they got was not fit for purpose.”
Mr Miles on Tuesday stood by Energy Minister Mick de Brenni and said he remained the best person to lead reforms in the energy sector.
“I haven’t yet been able to read the entire technical report, but it finds that it was caused by a new battery charger, an upgrade to the battery charger, replacement of the battery charger,” he said.
“Mick De Brenni is the minister best placed to implement these strong reforms.
“He’s overseeing the recommissioning of the Callide generators that will occur, that will be finished over the next few weeks.”
***********************************************
Odd verdict: Former pilot Greg Lynn found guilty of murdering Carol Clay, not guilty of murder of Russell Hill
I felt very sorry for the couple concerned in this. A terrible way for love to end
For the past five weeks, Gregory Stuart Lynn, 57, had been facing trial after denying he was responsible for the deaths of Russell Hill, 74, and Carol Clay, 73, in the state’s remote High Country.
The couple, childhood sweethearts who had reconnected later in life, vanished a day after arriving at Bucks Camp in the Wonnangatta Valley on March 19, 2020.
Mr Lynn was taken into the court room by security shortly before 1pm on Tuesday, wearing a black suit, blue shirt and silver tie.
He remained emotionless as the jury foreperson delivered their verdict: not guilty of the murder of Russell Hill, but guilty of the murder of Carol Clay.
The group was thanked by Justice Michael Croucher and led from the room.
Mr Lynn’s son, who attended to hear the verdict, remained silent as he left the courthouse alongside one of his father’s lawyers.
Mr Hill’s family took a back exit out of the court precinct to avoid the pack of about 15 reporters and camera operators. They are expected to release a statement through Victoria Police later on Tuesday.
Mr Lynn’s barrister, Michael McGrath, and counsel assisting did not entertain any questions of appeal or reaction from the press pack. Mr McGrath marched away from the courthouse, mute and expressionless in the wake of the verdicts.
For much of the trial, Mr Lynn kept his head down and could be seen writing notes in two packed yellow manila folders titled, in block letters, “Greg Lynn court records”.
Led into court by two custody officers daily, the former Jetstar captain would smile and wave at his wife, Melanie, as she stood waving enthusiastically from the upstairs public gallery.
It was a simple defence put forward by his legal team; could the prosecution disprove his account of their deaths being accidental beyond reasonable doubt.
Taking the stand at his trial, Mr Lynn maintained he was innocent of murder but said he deserved to be punished for the efforts he took to hide his involvement.
“All I can say to their families is that I’m very sorry for your suffering,” he said.
Prosecutors, led by crown prosecutor Daniel Porceddu, had alleged the former Jetstar captain killed the pair deliberately and without lawful justification in the evening of March 20.
They were unable to outline the specific circumstances of the deaths, other than Mrs Clay was shot in the head, but argued it was likely after a dispute with Mr Hill.
After his arrest in November the following year, Mr Lynn told police Mrs Clay was accidentally killed when his shotgun discharged as the two men struggled for control.
He said Mr Hill had made a “ridiculous” accusation he was hunting too close to camp, and threatened to lie to police that Lynn had shot through camp.
Mr Lynn said he was annoyed, and made the “childish” decision to blare music from his car, where Mr Hill stole the hunter’s shotgun between 9pm and 10pm.
“I wasn’t trying to provoke a response. I just thought if he could be rude, I could be rude too,” he said.
After the accidental discharge, Mr Hill, he said, came at him with a knife screaming; “she’s dead”, and fell on the blade as the two men fought a second time.
The jury heard Mr Lynn took steps to hide he was involved, including cleaning and burning the campsite and dumping their bodies off the Union Spur track after driving throughout the night.
He then went home and attempted to move on with his life.
“My plan was to disappear and, um, for a long time I thought I had,” he said.
At trial, Mr Porceddu alleged Mr Lynn’s efforts were taken because he knew the forensic evidence would be able to prove or disprove his account.
He suggested the only reasonable explanation for the “extreme” acts was because Mr Lynn knew he had murdered the pair.
“The accused’s story is indeed a series of very unfortunate events. Like the book series of that name, it is also a complete fiction,” Mr Porceddu had argued.
Defence barrister, Dermot Dann KC, told the jury his client believed his career and home life would be ruined and that he feared he would be wrongly blamed for the deaths.
“He thought he was going to be blamed for the deaths and he was 100 per cent correct,” he said.
After his arrest in November 2021, the jury was told, Mr Lynn had answered questions from detectives over a two-day period and directed them to the location where he burnt the bodies.
“I didn’t want to have to do it. It was a horrific thing, I was sick several times,” he said.
Mr Dann said police had two and a half years to test whether his client’s account was false and were unable to prove anything he said was a lie.
He told the jury the prosecution had asked the jury to fill the gaps in their case with speculation, breaching rules by “making things up”.
“It just smacks of a prosecution case that’s just gone off the rails,” he said.
He said his client had been “overcharged” and had offered to plead guilty to a destruction of evidence charge before the trial began.
************************************
24 June, 2024
Major IVF company accused of using 'wrong sperm' to create children and failing to warn of donor's potential genetic issues
This is a real horror story. Any case of an IVF clinic using the "wrong" sperm shows unbelievable lack of care. It is particularly poignant to me because, for medical reasons, my wife and I used IVF to conceive our son, and QFG was the clinic we used
Fortunately our son is now tall, bright and good looking but the donor sperm issue does not arise in our case. But what if QFG had mixed up my sperm with someone else's? On the account below they might have. Fortunately my son has characteristics that are identifiablly from me so there is no doubt about the matter.
Hospitals normally do multiple and repeated checks to see that the right treatrment is paired with the right patient so it seems to me that the mistakes reported below are clear evidence of negligence. QFG did NOT use the orthodox heavy precautions. Instead of being defensive about the matter, QFG should be energetically trying to track down the erring staff members
Anastasia and Lexie Gunn love their three children no matter what, but the mystery of what went wrong with their conception at one of Australia's biggest fertility clinics haunts them.
"We had IVF and got the wrong sperm," Lexie said.
"It's shattered what we all believe to be true."
Their three sons were conceived through donor sperm at the Queensland Fertility Group (QFG) between 2006 and 2014.
The couple paid for the same donor to be used for each child.
But DNA testing now shows their oldest son is not biologically related to their two younger boys, who have both been diagnosed with serious health conditions.
Anastasia and Lexie discovered their two younger children were not related to their older brother.(Four Corners: Ron Foley)
"It's a catastrophic error … how could they have used the wrong sperm to make children?" Anastasia said.
A Four Corners investigation into the lucrative IVF industry has found when things go wrong, corporate giants like QFG don't always own up. There's a lack of transparency and companies aren't being held to account.
'There was no match'
When Anastasia selected a sperm donor for her family in 2006, she took great care. "I went to QFG and they had a big book with the donor profiles."
"There's an age bracket for the donor, their educational background … and the health history as well. Medical background was definitely of concern to me."
Anastasia decided on Donor 227 — a fit, healthy Caucasian male 25–30 years old.
Four years after their first son was born, Anastasia and Lexie decided to have more children.
"We contacted QFG to check that we could use the same donor," Anastasia said. "We wanted them all to have the same biological father to tie them together so that then when they have children, their children are all tied together with biological history."
The couple had two more sons, born two years apart. Both had serious health issues from birth.
"Our middle child is diagnosed with hypermobile Ehlers-Danlos syndrome," Anastasia said. "Our youngest son … has joint hypermobility syndrome also. He also has a diagnosis on the autism spectrum and ADHD."
As the diagnoses kept adding up, Anastasia and Lexie wanted to find out if other children of Donor 227 had similar problems.
They sent their sons' DNA to an ancestry website to connect with other families.
The results floored them. "I was completely perplexed," Anastasia said. "I could see that there was no match between our eldest boy and our younger two."
At first, QFG doubted the reliability of DNA results from the ancestry site. Anastasia and Lexie then had their children tested at an accredited DNA testing lab used by the Family Law Court. Those results were the same.
"[QFG] have not provided any response to that legal DNA testing whatsoever," Anastasia said. "They have offered no rationale."
QFG maintains that its records show the same donor was used for all three children.
QFG is owned by Australia's largest IVF provider, Virtus Health, which has clinics all around the country. The fertility giant was taken over by private equity firm BGH Capital in 2022 following a heated bidding war.
Embryologist and IVF Patient Advocate Lucy Lines said the big business of baby-making had changed the way corporate clinics responded to mistakes. "I suspect that possibly profits are impacting the way these things are handled," she said.
Emeritus Professor Bill Ledger, a fertility specialist who's worked for 30 years in public and private IVF clinics, said transparency was vital when errors occurred.
"If you have a clinic or clinics where mistakes keep happening, then there has to be a significant inquiry and that should be external and it should be visible and 100 per cent transparent," he said.
There is a national regulator, the Reproductive Technology Accreditation Committee (RTAC), but it isn't independent. RTAC is part of the industry-funded peak body the Fertility Society of Australia and New Zealand.
RTAC's primary role is to audit clinics against a Code of Practice and grant licences that allow IVF companies to claim millions of dollars in Medicare rebates.
"RTAC has no power to govern the corporate nature of IVF," Ms Lines said. "It looks after the scientific and the medical side of the clinics. And they're very well-respected in that space, but when it comes to the corporate decisions of the businesses, they don't have that power."
Single mum Danielle Patorniti has her own battle against QFG. She's fighting to warn other parents.
Danielle's son was conceived with donor sperm. He was diagnosed with level 3 autism spectrum disorder, the most severe form, as well as hypermobility, ADHD and apraxia of speech.
In 2019, she informed QFG of her son's medical update.
"Early intervention is so important," Danielle said. "I thought there was a process where the information was passed on [to other families]."
At the time, QFG told her there were no other reports of medical issues with the donor's offspring.
Two years later, Danielle connected with another mum who'd used the same donor to conceive her son. Nikita Taylor's child also had a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder, speech delays and ADHD.
"We started comparing them … and they were almost identical. Different severities but identical presentations," Nikita said. "That's when we started getting worried that other families needed to be contacted."
Danielle and Nikita asked QFG to share information about their sons' matching health issues with other families. But QFG determined there was no clinical requirement to notify patients.
"They pretty much told us it is just something that happens, 'autism is a neurological condition, it happens to lots of kids'. And we just continued to say 'this is just not autism, though. We are talking about apraxia of speech, we're talking about motor dyspraxia. We're talking about severe anxiety,'" Danielle said.
Late last year, they connected with a third family who used the same donor.
Maree Anderson's daughter had recently been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder as well as speech difficulties, anxiety and was being assessed for ADHD. Her four-year-old son's autism diagnosis was also pending.
"When Maree told me about her children, I literally felt sick," Danielle said. "It just felt like for those three years that we had been fighting, she'd missed out on those years."
Months after Maree informed QFG about her two children, the fertility giant finally decided other families with donor-conceived children should be informed, but only about the clinical diagnosis of autism.
"I did ask about why I wasn't told about all of this other information, and they've never specifically answered that question," Maree said.
"There's been things that have been uncovered that weren't disclosed and I think QFG are forgetting that these are people, these are children, born thanks to them, and I'll be forever grateful for that. "I don't think the duty of care ends when the baby is born."
The donor is still being used by QFG to conceive more children.
In a statement, QFG told Four Corners the donor sperm was only available to patients who had previously used the donor and wanted more children.
"Patients … are required to undertake further clinical and genetic counselling so they have all relevant information to make informed decisions as to whether to proceed."
The three mums are extremely concerned. "There is apparently someone that's pregnant, and there's three embryos that have been created sitting in a freezer ready to make another three families," Danielle said.
"It's continuing to be sold as probably gold-class Australian sperm. "I just don't understand how they can create kids with something that there's a higher chance of it turning into disability. It's just money. It's all it is."
Following further questioning by Four Corners, QFG conceded that there was still one family who used the donor who it had not informed of the diagnoses.
Anastasia and Lexie Gunn are now suing QFG in an attempt to hold the clinic to account.
The fertility giant refuses to concede it used the wrong sperm to conceive two of their children
**************************************************
Conservative activists launch pre-election attack on the Greens
The conservative activist group that torpedoed Anthony Albanese’s voice referendum will pump millions of dollars into a sole election campaign vehicle designed to drag down the Greens’ vote and expose the party’s radical policies.
The Australian can reveal that Advance, backed by 306,000 supporters and 32,000 donors, will spend $5m on phase one of a national election campaign titled “Greens Truth”, aiming to inflict “significant damage” to the left-wing party’s brand.
Armed with a post-voice war chest and new research showing voters remain disillusioned by the major political parties, Advance is launching its pre-election campaign to disrupt and halt the expanding electoral success of the Greens.
Amid rising speculation of an early election, and Peter Dutton’s Coalition making ground on the Albanese government, there is growing probability the Prime Minister could be forced into striking a deal with Adam Bandt to form minority government in a hung parliament.
With Greens preferences helping Mr Albanese claim victory after Labor secured a paltry 32.6 per cent primary vote at the 2022 election, Advance is warning voters of “catastrophic” outcomes for families if the left-wing party’s agenda is implemented.
The Greens, who have come under fire over accusations they are fanning anti-Semitism, push a range of extreme economic, defence, health, education and social policies that the major parties warn would wreck Australia’s economy and undermine national security.
Advance, initially established as a rival to left-wing activist group GetUp, has raised just over $900,000 from more than 5000 donations since soft-launching the Greens Truth campaign with supporters in May.
New donations data obtained by The Australian shows Advance continues to attract grassroots backing following its influential role in the Indigenous voice referendum campaign.
In the past 12 months, 18,492 out of 22,485 donations up to $499, were received, 3652 of $500-$4999, 329 of $5000-$24,999, 71 of $25,000-$99,999, and 31 of $100,000-$999,000.
A key driver of the anti-Greens campaign, which has been in the works since January, is the dramatic shift away from major parties and rise in protest voting.
Almost 32 per cent of Australians voted for a minor party or did not vote at the 2022 election, representing the biggest drift from the major parties in a century. Highlighting the protest vote trend, almost 258,000 people voted for the Greens in 2022 but preferenced the Liberal Party higher than Labor.
Research by Advance reveals 52 per cent of voters still believe the Greens look after the environment, water and wildlife, 26 per cent think they take action on climate, 20 per cent feel they stand for nothing, 8 per cent believe they look after the disadvantaged and 6 per cent categorise them as left-leaning, progressive and socialist.
Advance executive director Matthew Sheahan said the Greens Truth campaign would be an “all-out assault on the party that is a toxic and extreme influence on Australian politics”.
The campaign is targeted at erasing House of Representatives and Senate electoral gains made by the Greens over eight years and shining a light on extreme policies and culture, with Advance warning voters the party founded by Bob Brown is “not who they used to be”.
“Australian voters need to know that every election sees the Greens with more influence and closer to implementing their full agenda, which would be catastrophic for mums and dads, and their kids,” Mr Sheahan told The Australian.
“The Greens are not who they used to be, and there is no greater threat to Australia’s freedom, security or prosperity. This election day no reasonable Australian mum or dad should be voting Green.”
The campaign will publicise darker sides of the party, including “the lie that the Greens are a party of transparency and integrity (and the) litany of cover-ups of toxic and sexist behaviour”.
Mr Sheahan said this includes “the cover-up of assaults, accusations of bullying, claims of rape, and even MPs resigning over sex scandals”.
“The Greens have a track record of being a disgraceful and dysfunctional party that has failed its female supporters, volunteers and candidates time after time,” he said.
Advance said the Greens, who have won major concessions from the Albanese government in return for their votes, have been left unchecked for more than 40 years.
With the Greens eyeing off government seats Macnamara and Richmond at the next election, after winning Griffith off Labor and Brisbane and Ryan from the Liberals in 2022, Mr Sheahan said the left-wing party’s free ride “ends today”.
A campaign priority is exposing the Greens’ “fraudulent brand positioning as a party that is only concerned with the environment”. Advance research shows when voters think of the Greens, “they think of who they used to be – an environmental movement who fought against the Franklin Dam in the 1980s, who stood in front of old-growth forests”.
“Forty years later, this is obviously untrue and, when tested, voters start looking for an exit.”
Mr Sheahan said Advance research shows “Australians are not across some of the Greens’ more extreme policies including defunding non-government schools, implementing an inheritance tax and decriminalising hard drugs including ice and heroin”.
“Australian families have every reason to fear this agenda and its impact on not only cost of living, but the future and safety of their children.”
He said another major line of attack focused on debunking the Greens’ “outsider reputation”.
“The Greens like to perpetuate the idea that they are a protest party with no influence. The reality is much different. The Greens are already deciding what legislation passes or at least having a major say in parliaments across the country.
“Their policies are already being implemented as they hold Labor governments to ransom with their preferences all over the electoral map.”
**************************************************
Fresh warning over ‘politicised’ schools
Lowering the voting age to 16 could “politicise” schools and divide teachers and students, a leading constitutional law expert has warned.
University of Sydney professor Anne Twomey, appearing before a House of Representatives inquiry into civics education in Australia, said a push to lower the democratic franchise from 18 to 16 had some “upsides” but also contained a sweep of risks.
Chief among them, schools could become political zones, as “political parties see a new market for voters”, she said.
The professor added teachers could be swept up into politics and find themselves accused of political activism.
The inquiry, chaired by Labor Jagajaga MP Kate Thwaites, is conducting hearings into how to support greater democratic engagement and participation in an era of escalating misinformation and disinformation.
“In a time when we’re seeing challenges for democracies across the world, and a rise in mis and disinformation, it’s important that every Australian has the opportunity to be informed about and engaged in our democracy,” Ms Thwaites said when starting the inquiry.
“The committee wants to hear Australians’ experiences of civics education and what we can do better to support democratic engagement and participation.
“So many young Australians are passionate about social and political issues, but they may not have access to relevant and reliable information about democratic and electoral processes.”
Some witnesses, including youth democracy organisation Run For It, have argued the voting age should be lowered to engage youngsters in the democratic process.
“Lowering the voting age is not a groundbreaking idea – this policy has already been implemented across many countries,” the group said in its submission to the committee.
“Argentina, Ecuador and Brazil, who also have compulsory voting, have all lowered the voting age to 16.
“Other countries that have enfranchised 16 and 17-year-olds include Cuba, Nicaragua, Austria, Ecuador, Argentina, Malta, Scotland and Wales.
“These countries have seen meaningful benefits as a result of lowering the voting age, including increased political engagement from young people. In some cases, young people participated in elections at higher rates than older age groups.”
The Greens Party supports lowering the voting age, and independent Kooyong MP Monique Ryan has also expressed support for the idea.
Professor Twomey, a leading expert in constitutional law, said the move could make voting seem more important to 16 and 17-year-olds and trigger more interest in civics education.
But she also said it would be “wrong” to fine school-age teens for not voting, the current system in place for Australia’s compulsory voting laws.
She also flagged issues of “maturity and influence” and said young people were sometimes not as sophisticated as they might believe themselves to be.
“I am very embarrassed by some of the views I had at that age,” she said. “That also gives me some pause to think as well. “I really wasn’t as sophisticated as I thought I was.”
Professor Twomey recommended critical thinking courses be included in school curriculums to help youngsters defend themselves from wild conspiracy theories and slovenly thinking on the internet.
She also argued social media companies had a “responsibility” to keep discourse civil.
She said anonymity on the internet was “corrosive” and those participating in online discussion should also post their names.
“You need to do that openly, you need to do that with your name and your face,” she said.
She said social media companies should accept they were a “part of the community” and uphold civil standards on their platforms.
**********************************************
Pandemic: Government Misinformation On Australian Excess Mortality
Written by Dr Wilson Sy
The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has deviated from international standards of calculating excess deaths during the pandemic (based on 2015-19 average) by using computer
models ‘adjusted’ for factors like population growth, resulting in significantly lower statistics
The ABS approach, questioned by the Australian Senate inquiry, effectively reduces excess deaths to merely COVID-19 fatalities.
Both the Australian Government and ABS have conflated scientific theory with statistical data. Unlike scientific research bodies, the ABS’s role is in national statistics collection and publication.
Despite this, the ABS has proposed a hypothesis that its model assumptions adequately explain Australian excess deaths as attributable solely to COVID-19. Hypothetical estimates have been published as data.
The disclosure of excess death data should initiate rigorous scientific inquiries into their underlying causes, rather than conclude them. By endorsing ABS’s interpretations, the Government will risk misleading the public into believing that Australian excess deaths require no further investigation.
I formally addressed these concerns in an individual submission to the Senate Committee on excess mortality, highlighting the Government’s inadequate scientific approach to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although my submission was censored, its content is reproduced below.
My main concern is the lack of scientific rigour in the Australian response to the COVID pandemic, in which misguided government policy has caused high excess mortality.
Flawed COVID Data
The health policy response to COVID in Australia has been marred by reliance on selective and biased research, leading to misinformation. Official COVID data, upon which much of this research is based, has been shown to be flawed and unreliable due to inadequate scientific rigor in data collection processes [1].
In the realm of formal logic, it’s well understood that a false premise can be used to validate any arbitrary conclusion. This concept, epitomized by Bertrand Russell’s famous quip which demonstrated that from the false statement “1=0,” one could deduce absurdities like he was the Pope.
This fallacy is commonly summarized as “garbage in, garbage out.” During the COVID crisis, Australian authorities have relied on flawed data to draw conclusions, resulting in numerous erroneous assertions.
A critical flaw in much of published research is the failure to cross-validate official COVID data against independent sources. Despite the availability of alternate datasets often aligning more closely with common sense and broader empirical observations, these were systematically disregarded. Such selective acceptance of evidence, without rigorous scrutiny or falsification, undermines the integrity of scientific inquiry.
Cherry-Picking Evidence
The practice of cherry-picking evidence by purported “experts” lacks scientific validity. In genuine scientific practice, the collective body of evidence, not the opinions of select individuals, guides conclusions. Without proper evaluation, the Australian government has dismissed contrary evidence of elevated excess deaths during the pandemic, which is antithetical to sound scientific methodology.
Through flawed research methodologies, the Australian government has misled both itself and the public, asserting that elevated excess deaths can be solely attributed to COVID-related fatalities. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has further exacerbated this issue by manipulating raw data through complex modelling, resulting in significantly diminished excess death statistics [2]. Such manipulations obscure the true extent of excess mortality and hinder meaningful investigations into its causes.
Comparisons with pre-pandemic all-cause mortality benchmark (2015-19 average) reveal a stark increase in excess deaths during and after the COVID outbreak, far exceeding benchmark figures. This high excess deaths suggest a systemic failure in accurately recording COVID-related deaths, which fall short of being able to account for Australian excess deaths.
Unreliable COVID Deaths
Contrary to official narratives, substantial evidence challenges the assertion that COVID alone is responsible for excess mortality. Instances such as the spike in deaths in England in April 2020, coinciding with the widespread misuse of Midazolam and opioids in elderly care, underscore the errors in attributing deaths to COVID [3]. Similarly, evidence from Australia suggests that a significant portion of reported COVID deaths may actually be misclassified cases of influenza and pneumonia [4].
While COVID may indeed contribute to excess mortality, the rush to attribute all excess deaths to the virus overlooks other potential causes, including systemic issues within healthcare systems and inappropriate medical interventions. The correlation between rising excess deaths and the rollout of mass vaccination campaigns warrants thorough investigation, particularly considering the possibility of adverse effects associated with vaccination.
A different approach is needed, not relying on flawed official COVID data, to address the issue of Australian excess deaths in the pandemic.
Granger Causality
Granger causality analysis, named after a 2003 Nobel Laureat, offers a methodological framework [5] for examining causal relationships between variables, such as COVID vaccination and excess mortality. By analysing independent time series data, it’s possible to establish temporal associations and assess the likelihood of causality. Granger causality hinges on the principle that a cause must precede its effect, and that the causal variable should consistently lead the outcome variable by a fixed period with high correlation.
Our Granger causality analysis reveals a significant relationship between Australian COVID vaccination and subsequent excess deaths, with a lag time of five months or 21 weeks and an accuracy rate of approximately 70 percent. In our initial study [4], we shifted the COVID vaccination data forward by five months or 21 weeks and observed a strong and consistent correlation with excess deaths, as depicted in Figure 1.
Notably, the vaccination data, extending until May 2023, which also provides an out-of-sample prediction of future excess deaths.
Conclusion
Due to flawed official COVID data, Australian governments and the public have been misled by research based on that unreliable data. The numbers of COVID deaths are inaccurate, probably exaggerated, but regardless, the numbers fall well short of being able to explain excess deaths.
Australian excess deaths may have several causes, but we have shown by Granger causality that COVID vaccination explains about 70 percent of Australian excess deaths. The issue extends beyond my individual submission.
The government’s practice of collecting data to support its policies raises concerns about potential conflicts of interest, particularly regarding accountability.
Australia requires a data integrity commission to rectify official data inaccuracies.
https://principia-scientific.com/government-misinformation-on-australian-excess-mortality/
************************************23 June, 2024
Mark Bouris slams outrageous real estate rules preventing young Australians from making their first step into the property market
There's no stupidity like government stupidity
Two infuriating rules are preventing young Aussies from gaining a foothold on the property ladder, according to finance guru Mark Bouris.
The Wizard Home Loans founder has identified two 'unfair' rules preventing young people from buying their first home.
The first relates to the First Home Owner Grant (FHOG), a scheme that offers $10,000 to eligible people buying their first property valued at $600,000 or less.
'Did you know that the First Home Owner Grant only applies to apartments with a floor area greater than 50 square metres?,' Bouris wrote in an article for Yahoo Finance.
'So young people who are looking to buy a one-bedroom or studio apartment won't be eligible for the FHOG.'
The businessman also pointed out that it was far harder to secure a loan for a property smaller than 50 square metres.
'Why should someone looking to buy a mansion have a better shot at getting a loan than someone who wants to buy a studio apartment?,' he asked.
'It’s not fair.'
Bouris then took aim at the 'absurdity' of charging people $300 to view a property's strata report to check for any defects or nasty surprises.
'It's like going to buy a car and the car dealership charging you $300 just to see the car's service history. You'd tell the dealer he’s dreaming,' Bouris wrote.
The founder of Yellow Brick Road mortgage brokers pointed out that if you were to view and properly assess 20 different apartments it would cost you $6,000 just to access their strata reports.
'This is the absurdity of the property market in this country. It's why so many young people are giving up,' he wrote.
'And it's why we need change. So let's stop charging first-home buyers to see a strata report. Let's allow the First Home Owners Grant to apply to properties with a floor area of under 50 square metres.
'It's common sense. It can be done with a flick of a pen.'
It comes at a time when Australian house prices are set to hit record highs as a combined mix of population growth, construction blockages and borrowing power heat up the market.
Perth, Adelaide, Sydney and Brisbane are expected to lead the pack on house prices in the 2025 financial year, setting fresh records alongside Queensland's Sunshine Coast and Gold Coast, real estate portal Domain says.
By the end of the 2025 financial year, median house prices would exceed $850,000 in Perth and $1.7million in Sydney, and hit $984,000 in Adelaide and $999,000 in Brisbane, the property marketplace predicts.
Domain research and economics chief Nicola Powell said population growth, construction challenges and borrowing power would be to blame for the expected price growth in Australia's market.
'We have seen an increase in single-person households and a decrease in household size in general, both amplifying housing demand, further compounded by migration,' Dr Powell said.
'Home building has also struggled to keep up with population growth due to the scarcity of land, weak building approvals, and high construction costs, exacerbating the existing structural undersupply.'
Stage three tax cuts on July 1 would mean more money hitting Australian households, lifting borrowing capacity across the country, Dr Powell said.
For some, that would mean upping their budgets, while for others, it could mean more borrowing capacity and a push into the market, she said.
'All three factors will play a role in further driving up Australia's home prices,' Dr Powell added.
**********************************************
Fury at Sydney University’s ‘capitulation’ to protesters
The University of Sydney’s concessions to some anti-Israel protesters for closing their campus encampment peacefully have been met with fury from Jewish groups and the federal opposition.
Australia’s oldest university on Friday night announced it had struck an agreement with the last of the Gaza war encampment protesters, the Sydney University Muslim Students Association.
The agreement would see the students end their near-two months-long protest in return for a suite of measures, including a seat at a working group to review the university’s defence and security investments.
The Muslim Students Association earlier on Friday said their defiance of university orders to vacate had “worked in our favour across many fronts, most particularly being the catalyst for the negotiations with the uni”.
The social media post was made in conjunction with stand4palestineaus, which was recently implicated with extremist organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir in a report in the Nine newspapers.
NSW Jewish Board of Deputies president David Ossip lashed the management of the university and accused it of “thoroughly deceptive and misleading” engagement with the Jewish community.
“This is nothing short of a scandal. [Vice-chancellor] Mark Scott, his offsider Darren Goodsir, Chancellor Belinda Hutchinson and the University of Sydney have hideously capitulated and done a deal with a group dominated by Hizb ut-Tahrir – an organisation proscribed as a terrorist organisation in much of the world including the UK,” Mr Ossip told The Australian.
“In a sign of how futile this appeasement is, Hizb ut-Tahrir have already announced that they are planning future activities to put pressure on the university and have not ruled out a further encampment,” he said.
Sydney University’s administration has responded that “our campuses must be welcoming and safe for all our community, including our Jewish and Muslim students … our focus from the beginning has been to de-escalate tensions – not fuel them”
“The university’s engagement with the Jewish community has been thoroughly deceptive and insulting,” Mr Ossip said.
“Despite assurances to the Jewish community that any offer to the encampment was off the table and that the university would be pursuing alternate options to clear the encampment, the university instead reopened negotiations with a group dominated by Hizb ut-Tahrir.
“When we found out about these negotiations on Wednesday and formally requested immediate crisis talks, Mark Scott ignored this request and has still not picked up the phone to us.
“Instead the university negotiated with only one side, reached an agreement with a group dominated by Hizb ut-Tahrir, sought to bury the story on a Friday night (the Jewish Shabbat) and allowed the radical protesters to first announce the deal.
“No amount of mealy mouthed, pro-forma spin from the university should be allowed to distract from the utter shame of the university’s behaviour or the pathetic terms they have agreed to.
“This deal is not just about ‘transparency’ as the university claims. It goes beyond the terms agreed by any other institution and effectively gives Hizb ut-Tahrir influence over the university’s research and investment activities.
“Be in no doubt – whilst the university may be enjoying its new collaboration with Hizb ut-Tahrir, the university’s relationship with the Jewish community is in absolute tatters.”
Opposition Liberal education spokeswoman Sarah Henderson said the “capitulation to activists, including people linked to the extremist group Hizb ut-Tahrir, is untenable”.
“The government must step in and overturn all such agreements, particularly those struck with groups which are listed terrorist organisations in some other countries,” Ms Henderson said.
“How can students and staff be safe on a university campus when vice-chancellors are bargaining with extremists?”
Liberal federal member for Berowra and prominent Jewish MP Julian Leeser accused Professor Scott of having “ceded control to radical extremist groups” and he repeated calls for a judicial inquiry into campus anti-Semitism.
“Why, when there is clear evidence that extremist groups like Hizb ut-Tahrir are infiltrating our universities, has the Albanese government refused to take action,” Mr Leeser said.
“Instead of demonstrating leadership and providing a safe and cohesive learning environment, the University of Sydney’s vice-chancellor Mark Scott has ceded control to radical extremist groups.
“Sydney University’s actions are setting a terrible example for the next generation that Jewish students and staff don’t count and that if you intimidate people enough you can get whatever you want.
“The Albanese government proves every day how weak they are in combating anti-Semitism.
“It is time Labor took campus anti-Semitism seriously and supported my bill for a judicial inquiry into anti-Semitism in Australian universities.”
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-CEO Alex Ryvchin lashed the agreement with the “anti-Israel fanatics”.
“This dismal decision by the university shows that unlawful conduct, intimidation and extremism are effective tactics against weak leadership,” he told The Australian.
“Today, there will be celebrations among those who have turned one of our finest institutions into an eyesore and created no-go areas on the campus.
“Meanwhile, Jewish students and staff will feel that once again their basic rights and equality mean less than the outrageous demands of anti-Israel fanatics,” Mr Ryvchin said.
The deal, announced by the Muslim Students Association and confirmed by the university on Friday evening, would see the university disclosing details of defence and security-related research and investments.
The University of Sydney will also double its expenditure over the next three years to support academics under its scholars-at-risk program, with a particular focus on Palestinians, the SUMSA president said.
Most significantly, the university committed to set up a working group to review its defence investments and research disclosures, and granted protesters a seat at the table.
The deal is similar to the offer the university made weeks ago that sparked backlash from Jewish leaders and calls for vice-chancellor Mark Scott to resign.
When contacted for comment, a University of Sydney spokeswoman said: “Nothing is more important to us than the safety of our community. Our campuses must be welcoming and safe for all our community, including our Jewish and Muslim students.”
“We understand there is deep trauma on both sides of this conflict and a wide range of views exist. Our focus from the beginning has been to de-escalate tensions – not fuel them. It is worth acknowledging we have not seen the violence that we have seen on other campuses during these challenging times.
“Our priority has always been a peaceful resolution and we are pleased our proposal has been accepted,” the University spokeswoman said.
“Our position aligns with similar offers made at leading universities from around the world including Harvard University and the University of Melbourne.
**********************************************
Congratulations to Dutton on climate change retreat
Opposition leader, Peter Dutton, deserves an elephant stamp for calling out the impossibility of Australia reaching its 2030 emissions target set by the Labor government. The Coalition has now effectively disowned the target.
Recall here that the Coalition had been shooting for an emissions-reduction cut of between 26 and 28 per cent by 2030 from a base of 2005. The then prime minister, Scott Morrison, declared that this would be achieved in a canter. He wasn’t wrong on that score, because by the end of 2023, a cut of 29 per cent had been achieved.
But as they say, the last mile is always the hardest and so the 43 per cent emissions reduction set by the Albanese government is looking like a tough climb to the top of Everest in unfavourable weather conditions.
But this fact never deterred Albo and the hapless B1, Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen, from racing the new higher target into legislation and formally advising the UN climate bureaucrats in charge of the Paris Agreement racket of this more ambitious goal.
Mind you, the fact that the target is legislated doesn’t really make much difference nor does our refreshed statement of intent made to the UN – let’s not forget here that the Paris climate agreement is not legally binding.
Most signatories to Paris haven’t bothered to legislate their targets and have no intention of doing so. The UK, much to its shame, is different in that regard. Theresa May, a true climate believer if there ever was, insisted on this as well as committing the Tories to net zero.
She even conferred ridiculous powers on the Climate Change Committee, appointing extremist chairs who bully the Poms to change their evil climate ways – don’t eat meat, install expensive and ineffective heat pumps, use ‘active transport’ (walk, cycle or scooter) rather than drive the car, don’t even think about getting on a plane, etc, etc. Is it really any surprise that the Tories are about to get a drubbing, Boris and Rishi having never walked away from this rubbish?
But I digress. Let me get back to Australia. Dutts’ decision to decline the 43 per cent target is a mixture of informed realism and courageous politics. Needless to say, the progressive press is aghast, claiming that the announcement puts paid to the Liberals’ chances of winning back the Teal seats, although we shall see.
The rent-seeking business community with interests in green things is complaining bitterly. Evidently, they need certainty which is simply code for more subsidies. A lower target or no target at all will undermine their case for even more moolah from taxpayers and long-suffering consumers.
One of the advantages that Dutts has over Albo is that Dutts can count. Albo’s strong suit is wishful thinking and dreaming up rhyming cliches. The fact is that a 43 per cent target requires losing around 100 million tonnes of CO2-equivalent in six years in the context of a rapidly rising population. It boils down to the maths: where will those tonnes come from?
Sadly – OK, not that sadly – for B1, the renewable energy experiment has not been going entirely to plan, like Japan’s second world war effort. Of course, if you throw subsidies at something, you will get more of it. But there have been some significant impediments to renewable energy (RE)investment in recent times – escalating costs, worker shortages, local resistance to RE developments (God bless our country cousins) and inadequate transmission.
As a consequence, the amount of RE added to the grid has been a fraction of what is required to meet another B1 target – 82 per cent RE in the grid by 2030. It’s only around 40 per cent now. There is a long way to go.
Going by the polls, voter opinion is on the side of the Coalition on this issue. A rising majority think that affordable and reliable electricity is the most important consideration with a small and declining proportion taking the view that hitting the emissions target should prevail. Even those on board with the green energy idea either don’t want to pay anything extra or $100 more per year at most. It looks as though peak climate has been reached and we are now on the sunlit downhill.
Albo and B1 could easily be tempted to look beyond the electricity grid to achieve the unachievable target. Laughably, there was a view at some stage that 90 per cent of all car sales by 2030 would be EVs. Given recent developments in the EV market here and overseas, it would seem extremely optimistic to predict that half of all car sales in Australia will be EVs by the end of the decade.
Let’s face it, the wheels are really falling off the EV market in the US – pardon the pun. General Motors, which was given great licks of taxpayer money to convert to EV production and ditch its highly profitable and popular lines of internal combustion vehicles, is walking back at an incredible pace. The company built an EV truck expecting to sell 150,000 in the first year; it sold 27,000.
There are so many hairs on EVs as convenient family or work vehicles, including the incredibly high cost of insurance and the absence of a second-hand market. Add in the difficulty of accessing fast charging and range anxiety, and the real surprise is that so many EVs have been sold.
But note here that most EVs are sold to companies attracted by the substantial tax concessions, not to private buyers. The only ones surprised by these developments are the true-believing green activists – and B1.
The Albanese government might have a crack at pushing for the closure of some of the big emitters – aluminium smelters, alumina refineries, steel works – but the politics of this are not great. Attacking the farming community also has its downsides – just take a look at what has been happening in Europe with farmers revolting.
The bottom line is that Australia’s current emissions target already looks like a bust and most people who follow these things know this.
As Speccie readers appreciate, a political leader who stands for nothing is never well-placed to roll an incumbent government. Claims of superior managerial competence simply do not cut it if the proposed platforms are essentially the same as the government’s. (Take note, David Crisafulli, hapless opposition leader of the LNP in Queensland. It was a Bill Shorten moment – ‘I don’t know what’s in Labor’s budget but we will support it.’)
I say hats off to Dutts: he has taken a stand on the 2030 target. Next stop: ditch the folly of net zero by 2050.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/hats-off-to-dutton/
**********************************************Who are the "moderates"
I refer to those who self-describe themselves as ‘moderates’.
The word no doubt is emotively attractive to users and delivers a frisson of approval and virtue-signalling self-worth, maybe even a tingle down the spine. But it is essentially an empty concept. You need to fill it with specific content before deciding if you approve or disapprove of the political positions of the person or political faction spouting it. So take former prime minister Morrison. His faction grouping notwithstanding, the man as PM purported to govern as a ‘moderate’.
But what did that look like when it came to specific content?
Well, Team Morrison & co. signed us up to the impoverishing net zero without signalling it before the election; they oversaw the biggest inroads on our civil liberties in the country’s history, all while never once finding it in themselves to criticise Dan Andrew’s outright thuggish and brutally heavy-handed response in Victoria (and if the honours system wasn’t broken beforehand it sure is after giving a gong to Chairman Andrews); they blew out the budget with massive spending and high taxes that created huge asset inflation and transferred big time wealth from the young to the old and from the poor to the rich and in a way that would make an ardent left-winger proud; they made appointments to the Australian Human Rights Commission, e-safety Commissioner post, the High Court, cultural bodies, and more, that Labor and on occasion the Greens could have made, with barely a single conservative amongst them; they oversaw a ballooning in the size of government and a surging in government spending as a percentage of GDP; they made huge payments to an activist Barrier Reef group over lunch while not lifting a finger to help Peter Ridd (who was correct down the line, just to be clear); and Mr Morrison made various disparaging but in fact vacuous and uninformed comments about the value of free speech while it was Liberal governments that gave us the first iterations of a number of woeful free-speech restricting Bills, including the absolutely outrageous Acma Bill.
That is what ‘moderate’ delivers as far as the Morrison and indeed Turnbull governments were concerned. (And cards on the table, I have slowly come to believe that in the ‘worst Liberal PM ever’ stakes, Mr Morrison certainly ties Mr Turnbull for top spot and may in fact take the gold medal in his own right.)
Yet incredibly, astoundingly even, the state Liberal parties, who all crawl over broken glass barefooted to describe themselves as ‘moderates’, are worse than their federal counterparts. The best of a woeful lot is Mr Crisafulli in Queensland. Yet he signed up to the recent Labor budget-spending orgy; he commits to not a single conservative fighting position bar some tough talk on youth crime; he won’t repeal the state bill of rights that Labor brought in without running on an election to bring it in; he won’t cut the grossly bloated public service; at best it’s a Tony Blair social democrat offering on the now tired refrain ‘well, at least we’re not Labor’.
The other state Liberal party iterations are worse. John Pesutto in Victoria in my view disgraced himself with his treatment of Moira Deeming and the rest of the party’s offerings are to the left of what Tony Blair would offer. WA? Do I need to say anything about the dynamic duo there? New South Wales is worse than Queensland. In all of these states the Liberal offerings are devoid of any actual classical liberal or conservative content.
Hence the general point that I am reiterating, that labels on their own can be empty, and void of content. Ignore all attempts by politicians to cloak themselves under the banner of ‘we are moderates’ and look at the actual offerings. The reverse of this applies as well, of course. The labels ‘far right’ and ‘hard right’ are now widely used by the mainstream media and even by some Liberal MPs at times to describe a set of policies that includes:
1) the entire Tony Abbott agenda,
2) believing that biological sex is real and imposes a mind-independent reality on the world that trumps subjective druthers and preferences,
3) being against the lockdowns and vaccine mandates (being against now proven to be the right position as it happens),
4) having grave doubts about virtue-signalling net-zero policies that will impoverish Australia while China and India build new coal-fired power stations weekly and we make zero difference to global temperatures (because, you know, we aren’t a moral beacon that other countries will copy as we travel back to the Stone Age),
5) wanting to control immigration and insisting GDP is largely irrelevant as it is GDP per person that matters
The list goes on. Voicing any and all of those can get you labelled ‘far right’ and ‘hard right’ by the legacy media. Voicing some of them has earned the ire of the Liberal-appointed eSafety Commissioner and increased her desire to censor such views. And all the five such positions, without an exception, would have been endorsed by John F. Kennedy. That is the specific content of what today gets one labelled ‘far right’.
Such labels are empty and without content. Ignore the trendy lefties who deal in such platitudes and, in a smug, self-satisfied, self-righteous way, shun debate in favour of cancellation.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/silly-labels-and-meaningless-monikers/
************************************20 June, 2024
Deformed pets, three-eyed fish and even Lara Bingle in a bikini: Anthony Albanese's anti-nuclear power campaign is an insult to Aussie voters
It's taken less than 24 hours for the childish scare campaign around Peter Dutton's nuclear energy policy to flood social media.
I'm not talking about posts by the average user. Federal and state Labor leaders and the union movement quickly began posting improbable and downright ridiculous ways to try and undermine nuclear power.
Deformed pets, references to The Simpsons, toxic spills causing three-eyed fish and images suggesting the sites might be located near iconic natural wonders such as Victoria's Twelve Apostles were just some of the immature games being played by parliamentarians.
I did say yesterday that the mother of all scare campaigns would soon start but I didn't think it would be quite this pathetic.
It isn't as though there aren't serious problems with Dutton's announcement - I'll come to those shortly.
Victoria's new premier Jacinta Allan, no less, posted mocked up images of three-eyed cartoon fish leaping out of the water in Gippsland, writing: 'The Liberal Party want a toxic and expensive nuclear reactor in Gippsland.'
Anthony Albanese's contribution wasn't much better: 'Instead of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves, this is Peter Dutton and the seven nuclear reactors'.
I wonder how long it took the PM's taxpayer funded team of 11 media advisers to come up with that one. Or did Albo proudly think it up all on his own?
Seizing upon The Simpsons theme, Victorian federal MP Josh Burns tweeted images of nuclear reactors with the Liberal Party logo on them, writing 'under Peter Dutton Australians will glow green'.
Clever stuff.
At 62 years of age Labor MP for the Victorian seat of Corangamite, Libby Cocker, wasn't too mature to take a similar dig, days before Dutton's announcement.
The federal Victorian MP riffed off the 'where the bloody hell are you' tourism campaign of yesteryear spearheaded by Lara Bingle.
Cocker, who was a school teacher before entering politics, tweeted a mock up of a bikini-clad Bingle standing in front of the 12 Apostles on the Victorian coastline with three nuclear reactors billowing smoke behind her.
The Australian Manufacturing Workers Union shared an image of a Chernobyl-style dystopia
The Australian union movements official X page posted an image of a deformed something or another, it was hard to tell, above the headline 'this will be your family dog'.
Scare campaigns are rarely rooted in accuracy, and that is a bipartisan problem. But they are rarely this childish in nature.
It will be interesting to see if these callow MPs and vested interests continue to act this way, or sharpen up their attacks in the weeks and months ahead.
History tells us that scare campaigns work, especially against big bold policy ideas raised by Oppositions. But do they work when they are this low brow?
As mentioned earlier on, if anyone wants to seriously critique Dutton's policy there is plenty to dig into without having to resort to juvenile antics.
For example, Dutton says he plans to use existing coal fired power sites and the government will pay for and own the operations. But most of the private owners of these sites have already ruled out relinquishing them to a Coalition government, and they weren't consulted before the policy was announced.
Most of the sites Dutton has announced are in states that have legislatively banned nuclear power, and a number of these Premiers have already ruled out changing that.
The policy hasn't been costed, much less modelled to ascertain what taxpayers might be up for if or when construction was to begin.
We don't even know who the Coalition engaged to produce this policy. Is it rooted in any scholarly research beyond a superficial thought bubble announcement?
We're also still in the dark about which types of nuclear reactors the Opposition is proposing to build: the new smaller modules or the more established larger varieties used in other parts of the world? It is a pretty basic choice not to be included in a major policy announcement.
So yes, there are serious questions for serious people to raise requiring serious answers before Team Dutton can expect Australians to get behind his proposal.
Unfortunately the Labor government and its union mates seem largely incapable of reaching high and properly challenging the policy announcement.
Instead they choose to play in the sandpit on social media.
No wonder the public has such a dim view of the political class.
*********************************************
Why these Victorian Country Fire Authority volunteer firefighters have vowed to let blazes burn around new renewable power plants and transmission lines
People don't like being ignored by the elites. The "Voice" referendum showed the gap between the elites and most others
Volunteer firefighters in Victoria's central north are so opposed to renewable power plants and transmission lines in their area they will let fires burn around them rather than tackle the blazes.
Captains from five brigades wrote to the Country Fire Authority (CFA) and the state government to say they are not prepared to fight fires near or involving infrastructure such as the Victoria to New South Wales Interconnector (VNI West).
VNI West is a planned transmission line that would run for hundreds of kilometres through Victorian farmland, leading to angry protests from farmers who say they do not want it on their land.
The line is planned for 'over the top of dry land farming area, where we have a six month fire danger period,' Gre Gre Village CFA Brigade captain Peter Knights told Daily Mail Australia.
'It gets very dry and hot and we have fairly significant fire events, and it places a barrier to us being able to attack or fight any running grass fires because we can't move under the transmission lines because of the smoke being conductive.
'And it runs the risk of what we call a flash over, where the electricity at a high voltage will arch to the ground, and if you're underneath it, it will kill you.'
Mr Knights and his fellow firefighters also object to the VNI West due to the economic value of the land it is planned to run across.
'They're placing this transmission line and also placing a renewable energy zone over the top of some of the best grain growing and livestock producing country,' he said.
'That renewable energy zone shouldn't be over productive farmland.'
As well as volunteers from CFA Brigades in Gre Gre Village, Traynors Lagoon, Gooroc, Callawadda and Wallaloo East, the group claimed it had also 'received commitments from a further 19 impacted brigades'.
In a statement, the group said it is also 'looking to add the support of many more either in joining our proposed action or taking their own variation of action'.
'We see the imposition of all this infrastructure and our requirement to then protect that asset that's been imposed on us, (that it) will divide our communities,' Mr Knights said.
He denied that the group is driven by an anti-renewables agenda, saying VNI West is being put 'through the wrong area and it's imposing extra risk'.
'There's no political alignment with this group, but there will be political persuasions or thoughts within the individual members.
'We're not saying that we're pro-nuclear or pro-coal, but we're certainly saying renewables in the wrong spot is a bad idea and it's really been imposed on us without proper consultation.'
Mr Knights said, however, that using renewable energy is 'only a short term solution. We're putting wind turbines up which have a 25 year life ... what's after that?'
He denied that the group is funded by any fossil fuel backers.
'We're five very small fire brigades of locals and our budget is all self-funded, because it's not costing us much to put a hand up and say we're not turning out.'
The aim of the group is to get 'at least a genuine discussion around what's expected of volunteers and the impact on communities where these things are placed'.
Mr Knights said their campaign is also about ensuring the areas where the VNI West is proposed to go through are protected and can attract people to live there in future.
'You're looking to perpetuate your area as a good place to be and it's pretty hard if no one wants to live there because there's a tick, tick, tick of a wind tower over your head, or it's just a totally different place to be than what it's been,' he said.
CFA's deputy chief officer Brett Boatman said they are working with 'members on issues around fighting fires near transmission lines and renewable energy resources such as solar farms and battery energy storage solutions'.
'The concerns from our CFA members has been heard and we are working with them to ensure the right information is out there,' Mr Boatman told Daily Mail Australia.
'CFA acknowledges the concerns of the community and respects our members' rights to engage in matters relevant to their local communities.'
**************************************************
Labor steps in to break up 'dysfunctional' CFMEU
One of Australia's largest unions could soon split after the federal government waded into a stoush between the AFL and the union's leaders.
A proposed demerger bill would allow the manufacturing division of the Construction, Forestry and Maritime Employees Union (CFMEU) to split from the broader organisation if supported by a vote.
This comes as the union's Victorian secretary John Setka piles pressure on the AFL to fire its chief umpire.
The 59-year-old has criticised the AFL for hiring Stephen McBurney, the former head of the now-defunct industrial watchdog the Australian Building and Construction Commission.
Mr Setka, who stands down later this year, threatened to delay work on AFL construction sites if the sport failed to give in to his demands and sack Mr McBurney.
"The status quo is dysfunctional and cannot continue," he said.
"We will provide the opportunity for members of the manufacturing division to vote on their future.
"The members in the manufacturing division include workers in largely feminised industries like textiles - and it's not hard to see why those members might want to leave," Mr Burke said.
Independent Senator Jacqui Lambie has previously called for textile, footwear and clothing workers to be able to hold a secret ballot to vote to leave the CFMEU, saying they deserved "freedom" from Mr Setka.
The CFMEU Manufacturing Division national secretary Michael O'Connor welcomed the opportunity.
"The government is doing the right thing, they have listened to us and are respecting the good judgment of our members," he said.
"We thank Senator Lambie and Minister Burke who are backing us in to give our members an opportunity for a brighter future outside of the CFMEU and a more respected and active role in the labour movement, free from the shackles of the dysfunctional CFMEU."
But the union's national body said the federal government should not be intervening in determining union coverage, "which poses a huge risk of leaving workers worse off".
"Using legislation to decide on union coverage would set an incredibly dangerous precedent a future anti-worker government could use to trample on workers' rights," said CFMEU national secretary Zach Smith.
"The government needs to scrap this plan and show it respects the very clear rules around union amalgamations that have been backed in by the Federal Court."
Mr Setka has been involved in a string of workplace controversies and a public breakdown of his marriage to Emma Walters in his decade at the helm of the Victoria and Tasmania CFMEU.
The union boss was expelled from the Labor Party in 2019 over accusations he told colleagues that anti-family violence campaigner Rosie Batty's advocacy had led to men having fewer rights.
He has rejected the allegations.
Mr Smith said Mr Setka would leave the CFMEU with an "enormous legacy" of making members' lives better and had recently delivered a 21 per cent pay rise for construction workers in Victoria.
Mining union members of the CFMEU voted to split from the union in 2023.
https://au.news.yahoo.com/dysfunctional-cfmeu-faces-split-afl-224941004.html
******************************************************Victoria Police gives job of hunting down anti-Semitic vandals to local cops
Victoria Police is still treating a spate of anti-Semitic attacks on electorate offices throughout Melbourne as individual investigations led by local cops, as raids escalate, with vandals setting fire to the inner seaside St Kilda shopfront of Jewish MP Josh Burns.
Six vandals attacked the Labor MP’s electorate office around 3.20am on Wednesday, lighting two fires, smashing windows, spraying red paint and daubing the slogan “Zionism is fascism” on Mr Burns’s photo.
Despite pro-Palestinian vandals attacking up to a dozen federal and state electorate offices in the wake of the October 7 terror attacks on Israel, Victoria Police confirmed it was yet to call in or establish a dedicated taskforce to lead the investigation.
Asked by The Australian whether it could confirm how many attacks on electorate offices were being investigated, how many arrests and charges had been laid and whether calling in a specialist taskforce was being considered, Victoria Police said: “These incidents are investigated by local crime investigation units; we do not have overall stats.”
Asked specifically about May’s vandalism of former opposition leader Bill Shorten’s office in Moonee Ponds, Victoria Police said: “There’s no update on this incident; the investigation remains ongoing.”
Mr Burns, the Labor MP for the heavily Jewish electorate of Macnamara, has described the attack as dangerous. Police have confirmed the vandals set fire to two telecommunications pits and the facade of the electorate office.
“It was clearly politically motivated by having the graffiti on the outside of the office. This was really ugly behaviour. It was dangerous and it put residents’ lives and livelihoods at risk,” Mr Burns said.
“I want to remind people what the office actually is and what it is there to do. My staff are there to look after their community; to provide access to government and government services, whether it be the NDIS, whether it be immigration, visa issues, Centrelink, whatever it is, my team are here to help.
“And at the moment … they can’t be in the office, it’s not safe in the office, it’s still a crime scene. And it’s a reflection of eight months of my team turning up to work and being abused and being screamed at, and I’ve got really good people working for me … who have no role in a conflict on the other side of the world.
“And their place of work has been smashed in by really dangerous idiots. It’s a reflection of the sort of conduct of political debate right now. We’re in Australia … We’re in multicultural Melbourne. This isn’t respectful right now.
“This is a dangerous escalation of people trying to bring a conflict on the other side of the world to our streets, and it needs … to stop, because it’s dangerous.”
Since October 7, there has been a string of anti-Semitic attacks on electorate offices with windows smashed and shopfronts sprayed with red paint, leaving taxpayers facing a repair bill of hundreds of thousands of dollars. Labor MPs Peter Khalil and Daniel Mulino and the offices of Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles and Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus have also been damaged by vandals.
Anthony Albanese has been locked out of his Sydney electorate office for most of this year because of pro-Palestinian protests.
Australian Federal Police told a Senate estimates committee hearing this month that 725 threats against MPs had been reported so far this financial year, compared with 279 in 2020-21.
Jewish former Liberal treasurer Josh Frydenberg has called on the nation’s political leaders and law enforcement to do more to protect the community
“The attack on Josh Burns’s office was despicable and dangerous and one that requires more than words of condemnation,” he told The Australian.
“We need more action from our political leaders and law enforcement to protect the community. Our leaders must step up and wrest control back from the mob, a mob that has had free rein since October 7 to act in a violent, hateful, un-Australian manner.
“It is after all not just the Jewish community that is under attack, it’s Australia’s social cohesion that is under attack and the very values that underpin it.
“This is Australia’s fight and it’s a fight we must win.”
The Prime Minister called the attack on Mr Burns’s office an “escalation” of previous acts.
“We’ve got to dial this down,” he told the ABC. “The people who were responsible for this attack should face the full force of the law; it is very distressing for Josh and for his staff.”
Jewish community leader Dvir Abramovich described the attack on Mr Burns’s office as “another sickening and evil act of anti-Semitic vandalism”.
************************************
19 June, 2024
False rape accuser prosecuted
A rarity in Australia. Wise of Garside to start filming the incident when it started going wrong. It took that to overcome the evil "Believe the woman" assumption. Police arrested him purely on the word of the woman, with no further investigation. The police concerned should be prosecuted too. Garside could well sue the State of NSW for lost earnings etc
Harry Garside has reflected on his domestic violence court case ordeal, revealing that boxing helped provide clarity during that turbulent spell.
Garside, 26, was arrested by NSW Police in dramatic scenes at Sydney Airport as he returned home with his father after shooting the reality TV show I'm A Celebrity...Get Me Out Of Here! in South Africa earlier this year.
Police dropped the charges against the 26-year-old in a Sydney court after his legal team produced video evidence they said showed his ex-girlfriend, Ashley Ruscoe, was the alleged aggressor during an incident on March 1.
Garside had steadfastly maintained his innocence throughout the ordeal, but admitted it was a testing time.
Ms Ruscoe, 35, was arrested at her Bellevue Hill home in July and charged with assaulting and intimidating her former partner, Mr Garside.
Months later, Ruscoe - who works as a boxing coach and wellness guru - was subsequently charged with two counts of intentionally distributing intimate images without consent.
********************************************************
Origin Energy warns costs and public support are inhibitors to nuclear
Needless controversy from Dutton
The Coalition’s nuclear strategy will have to overcome high costs and community acceptance if it is to play a part of the country’s future National Electricity Market, Origin Energy chief executive Frank Calabria has warned.
The comments underscore the significant challenges that the Coalition will need to overcome if it to implement its signature energy policy, which is says will reduce the toll of the transition net zero by 2050 on households and businesses.
Mr Calabria said the industry is agnostic to technologies underpinning the country’s electricity market, but said nuclear has some sizeable hurdles, and it does not offer an immediate solution.
“There’s obviously also the public debate that’s going to go on about the acceptance of nuclear, and we would have to watch that as well. We’re not in control of that,” said Mr Calabria.
“The experience today around the world if you’re building a new one, it’s very expensive, but there are now new modular technology around the technologies that are being certainly development and research and that’s going to be something that continues, and we all look at that with interest.”
Opposition leader Peter Dutton has flagged seven potential sites, including AGL Energy’s Liddell Power Station in NSW and Loy Yang in Victoria and EnergyAustralia’s Mount Piper Power Station in NSW. The Coalition has also earmarked Western Australia’s Collie Power Station and South Australia’s Northern facility and Callide and Tarong in Queensland.
Australia’s energy industry has been careful to comment on the proposal amid concern of alienating a potential future government, but AGL Energy has rebuked the suggestion.
The most directly impacted companies did not immediately respond to the proposal, but AGL’s chief executive Damien Nicks In March said nuclear was not viable.
“There is no viable schedule for the regulation or development of nuclear energy in Australia, and the cost, build time and public opinion are all prohibitive,” Mr Nicks said.
“AGL’s ambition to add 12GW of new renewable and firming generation by 2035 does not include nuclear energy. Policy certainty is important for companies like AGL and ongoing debate on the matter runs the risk of unnecessarily complicating the long-term investment decisions necessary for the energy transition.”
While AGL has vowed to push ahead with its renewable energy strategy, Australia faces a looming shortfall.
The Australian Energy Market Operator estimates that the country’s coal power station fleet is likely to have been retired within 15 years, a fact acknowledged by Mr Calabria.
“We’ve got coal plants that are coming to very long into their lives, so we can talk about years, but they’re not going to be there,” Mr Calabria said.
“For decades, we are going to have a coal transition, but that’s all around timing. And so therefore, what we’re doing is, therefore having to make the investments and navigate that as a country to achieve what’s the best blend of technologies that does that?”
While Australia’s energy industry has been considered, Treasurer Jim Chalmers slammed the Opposition’s energy policy as the “dumbest policy ever put forward by a major political party” and accused the Coalition of “ideological stupidity”.
He said the Albanese government’s policy “couldn’t be more different to the economic madness, which is being peddled by our opponents today”.
“We are expecting to hear a bit more about the Coalition’s nuclear road to nowhere.
“With Australia’s advantages and opportunities, nothing could be more economically irrational, or fiscally irresponsible. Nuclear takes longer. It costs more, and it would waste Australia’s unique combination of geological, geographical, geopolitical and media illogical advantages.
“It might be the dumbest policy ever put forward by a major political party. It is the worst combination of economic and ideological stupidity.”
Energy now shapes as a defining theme of the election due by May 2025, with a diametrically opposed strategies threatening to create more policy uncertainty.
Mr Calabria said there was “certainly more” certainty today than five years ago as to the government’s position on renewable energy but said clarity was needed on the federal Labor’s centrepiece Capacity Investment Scheme.
“There’s certainly more in terms of where they want those renewable zones to be constructed and where they will be built,” he said. “And there’s more certainty in our role now … as you approach timing, and we’ve just committed for a gigawatt of batteries to be installed on our existing sites, and we see those have matured as being part of a solution.
“I think there are still some things that need to happen in terms of timing on transmission, timing on when those builds will occur. And probably the capacity investment scheme is the key one where they’ve announced that scheme, but we’re just waiting. More details need to be developed.”
****************************************************
Bring back watchdog to halt union’s thuggery
The events involving the CFMEU campaign against the AFL because of a personal vendetta against its head of umpiring, Stephen McBurney, the former head of the Australian Building and Construction Commission, are exactly why our sector needs an industry-specific workplace relations regulator.
The wider community, along with the Prime Minister and other senior ministers, are now witness to exactly the type of tactics and thuggery that have flourished in many parts of the building and construction industry for decades, and that continues to worsen.
It is sickening to see how so many are powerless as a very public display of bullying and threats plays out against an individual who is just doing their job.
This conduct is designed to send a clear message: “It’s our way, or the highway. You play by our rules, not the rule of law, and if you want to betray us, you’re going to pay a price.”
For our members who run building sites, expletive-laden abuse, intimidation and threats of retribution are nothing new.
And the irony of the latest campaign by Victorian CFMEU construction secretary John Setka isn’t lost on them, with one company I spoke with recently saying: “Welcome to our world, Prime Minister.”
This echoes much of the recent feedback and messages I’ve received, and underpins the frustration growing in building and construction businesses.
The industry never understood why the government abolished the ABCC when there was so much clear evidence that it needed to stay.
There have been four royal commissions, hundreds of court judgments, and dozens of other reports and independent inquires that forensically examined the unlawful and illegal conduct of building unions. They all reached the same conclusion – there are problems unique to building and construction, and therefore there is a need for an industry-specific workplace regulator or specific rules for the industry.
The evidence is compelling, with our research showing building unions are responsible for about 90 per cent of all breaches of workplace laws governing freedom of association, right of entry and anti-coercion provisions.
This is almost 20 times more than all other unions combined, and building unions are 48 times more likely to break right-of-entry rules than any other union.
Courts and judges are just as frustrated as our members, with a litany of publicly available judgments criticising the CFMEU as “bringing the union movement into disrepute” and for being “the most recidivist corporate offender in Australian history”.
But despite this, the government abolished the ABCC to appease one of its largest political donors. In doing so, it turned a blind eye to the thuggery, abuse and the need for an effective body with strong powers to uphold the rule of law on building sites. And now it’s coming back, stronger than ever, with building unions so emboldened they are willing to have a fight with our Prime Minister and the AFL.
Perhaps now the government will understand the frustrations felt by employers and small businesses about changes to workplace laws since it came to power.
Small subbies and tradies don’t understand why the government passed changes that increase financial penalties for them while giving unions even more rights at the same time they abolished the only regulator that protected them.
We have heard some argue that the Fair Work Ombudsman will be responsible for protecting construction workplaces from this behaviour, but we are yet to see a single case taken up. As builders now tell me: “There is nowhere for us to go.”
It’s not just tradies who pay the price, it’s the public servants, including female inspectors, who are intimidated from carrying out their job, and it’s taxpayers who have to pay more for projects and time delays in the middle of a housing crisis.
If the government is serious about ensuring workplace laws are strong and effective, it must immediately take steps to deal with the bullying and intimidation the CFMEU deploys.
Welcome to our world, Prime Minister. As our members say: If you don’t stop it now, it will only get worse.
**************************************************
Pope Francis bans traditional Mass at Melbourne’s St Patrick’s
This is a disgraceful fiat by a "progressive" Pope. The Tridentine mass is one of the few growth areas for the church, as well as being comforting to older Catholics
In a move that has shocked and upset hundreds of Catholics in Melbourne, the Vatican has banned the traditional Latin Mass from the city’s St Patrick’s Cathedral.
The final traditional Mass will be offered on Wednesday, June 19, at 5.30pm. By essentially ordering traditional Catholics to get out of their own cathedral, the ban is stirring up tensions and divisions.
On Wednesday evening Mass, which has been a regular feature of cathedral worship for 13 years, drew a crowd of more than 150, mainly young people, including city workers not aligned with traditional parishes.
Veronica Sidhu, who attended the Mass, said it was solemn, uplifting and sad because worshippers knew it was coming it an end, as well as devotional, with “heavenly’’ choir singing.
“There was a mix of people – city workers and tradies _ including a dad who went to Communion with one toddler on his shoulders and was holding another by the hand,’’ she said. “Has Pope Francis or Archbishop Comensoli ever attended a Mass like it?’’
Ms Sidhu said that after years of contributing energy and resources to the church in Melbourne she felt “appalled’’ to be excluded from her own Cathedral.
The priest who said that Mass, Father Shawn Murphy, 34, who was ordained a year ago, told The Australian: “The Cathedral is the mother church of the Archdiocese and like a mother should be welcoming to all her children.’’
Father Murphy, the Assistant priest of the St John Henry Newman old rite parish in Caulfield North in Melbourne where he leads the young adults’ group, said members of the group were distressed, shocked and disbelieving about the decision.
“What is so tragic is that unlike previous oppressions of the Mass and the faithful, in England under the Tudors, during the French Revolution and in prison camps of the Soviet Union and China, this oppression is coming from within the church,’’ Fr Murphy said.
It was a blow against Christian and Western cultural heritage and causing confusion, especially among the young, he said. St Patrick’s Cathedral had been built for the traditional Mass in the late 19th century, he said.
The ban was imposed by Archbishop Peter Comensoli, who had no choice, following a direction from the Vatican’s Dicastery for Divine Worship.
It is the next step in a campaign by Pope Francis to crush the traditional rite, which evolved through the early centuries of the church and was largely unchanged for about 1500 years until the mid-1960s. It was phased out following the second Vatican Council, replaced by the more prosaic novus ordo (New Mass), usually said in the vernacular.
The traditional Mass was given fresh impetus by Saint John Paul II in the 1980s and by Pope Benedict in 2007, who affirmed the right of all priests to say Mass using the traditional rite (now known as the “extraordinary form”), without the permission of bishops. Benedict’s letter also clarified the fact that the Traditional rite was never abrogated.
While those changes were initially expected to accommodate older Catholics who remember the pre-1969 Latin Mass, the growth in attendance stunned church leaders as young families and 20-something and 30-somethings discovered the Old Mass and stayed. Along with Pentecostalism, it is one of the main growth areas of Christianity around the world, with new societies of priests established in the US and Europe to train priests in the Old Rite.
Francis overturned his predecessors’ initiatives three years ago, in a document ironically entitled Traditionis Custodes (Custodians of Tradition), which crushed centuries of tradition.
Cardinal George Pell, an adherent of the New Mass, who respected the principle of choice and inclusivity for Catholics who preferred the Old Mass, predicted that Traditionis Custodes “would not outlive the current pontificate’’.
In June 1992, an auxiliary bishop in Melbourne, the then Bishop Pell celebrated the first Solemn Pontifical Mass (an extraordinary form High Mass said by a bishop) in St Patrick’s Cathedral in Melbourne, or in any Australian cathedral, since 1969.
Ms Sidhu said the latest decision from the Vatican was divisive, denied Catholics choice, and had an element of coercion – trying to force worshippers to attend the New Mass against their will.
Traditionis Custodes stipulates that the traditional Mass is “not to take place any longer’’ in normal parishes. But bishops around Australia, including Archbishop Comensoli, have used their authority and discretion in implementing it, with a view to the pastoral needs of growing numbers of worshippers, especially the young and converts, who were drawn to the transcendence and gravitas of the Old Rite.
The Wednesday evening Cathedral Mass survived, until Archbishop Comensoli sought further guidance from the Vatican.
In a letter to Archbishop Comensoli, Archbishop Vittorio Viola, Secretary of the Dicastery for Worship, said it was not “appropriate for the antecedent liturgy to be celebrated in the place that should serve as an example for the liturgical life of the entire diocese’’.
Father Glen Tattersall, Parish Priest of Newman parish in Caulfield in Melbourne, said the weekly traditional Latin Mass began at St Patrick’s in 2011, granted in response to a petition by Catholic laity. “I had the privilege of celebrating the majority of those Masses over the following years,’’ Fr Tattersall said. “There was a pause during Covid, but we returned after the lockdowns.
“This Mass was loved by many. It was fitting that the rite of Mass for which the Cathedral was built was returned to it, and had an honoured place in the life of the Archdiocese of Melbourne.
“It was also a particular demonstration of the communion of Catholics attached to this form of the Mass, with the Archbishop of Melbourne. The Mass was celebrated peacefully up to now with the blessing of the former and current Archbishops.
“I can personally attest to the many graces, including those of conversion, that have been granted through this Mass. It has borne only good fruit. But now, we learn that the Holy See has directed that the Mass be discontinued – causing widespread sadness and distress.
“In fact, the historical form of Mass is a constituent part of tradition and cannot be lawfully suppressed or forbidden. But in this Pontificate neither orthodox doctrine nor the law of the Church counts for anything.
“Everything is about power, and those in power in Rome insist that this Mass must stop. Archbishop Comensoli has been treated by the Holy See not as a Successor of the Apostles – which he is as Archbishop – but as the flunky of a remote and heartless bureaucracy. It seems that Pope Francis has suppressed Vatican II as well as the old Mass!’’
************************************
18 June, 2024
Unjustifiable damage to Australia: Elite universities lash caps on student arrivals
This is typical Leftist stupidity: Introducing a new stupid policy to correct a previous stupid policy.
After Tony Abbott wiped out the "boat people" trade, Australia is one of the few Western countries to have complete control over its immigrant arrivals. Yet the Albanese government has presided over a huge influx of LEGAL immigration. Every Tomaso, Ricardo and Arroldo seems to get a visa just for asking. And that has led to all sorts of problems -- a housing shortage in particular.
So Albanese knows he has goofed and now badly wants to cut immigration back. But instead of doing the hard yards and looking in detail at why so many people have been allowed in he has just seized on just one large category of immigrants and cut them back.
But that category is exactly the wrong one. Educaton is one of Australia' biggest exports, accounting for a huge flow of money comng into Australia, mostly from China. So he is going to cut THAT back. Insane. He is going to cut by far the most beneficial group of immigrants into Australia. It takes a Leftist!
I don't suppose he would instead implement a complete stop on arrivals from the Middle-East. Middle-Eastern parasites = good; Hard-working Chinese = bad, no doubt
Elite universities have attacked the government’s plan to cap international students as an “unjustifiable risk to the nation” and warn tens of thousands of enrolments for next year are in limbo.
The Group of Eight – which includes the University of Sydney, Melbourne University and the University of NSW – has accused the federal government of creating a lasting legacy of political interference in the $48 billion higher education export market.
Top universities have warned that curbing international students would create multimillion-dollar holes in their finances.
In a submission to the government’s draft framework, the universities opposed the international student cap for public universities and TAFEs and instead proposed growth targets for individual institutions.
They criticised the government for introducing a bill into parliament, describing the move as a breach of good faith during the consultation process.
“The central ‘command-and-control’ approach to international education ... represents an unjustifiable risk to the nation,” the submission said.
“There is no evidence the approach will work – and significant evidence that it will fail.
The submission said the plan could not be implemented by the proposed 2025 date and would cause “significant financial damage” to the higher education sector and the Australian economy.
“It is founded on a false conflation of international students and Australia’s housing crisis. And it will leave a long-term legacy of political interference in a $48 billion export industry.”
The comments mark a significant escalation in the rhetoric of the influential group, signifying deep concern within the universities, which are highly reliant on international students to prop up teaching and research.
The eight universities control more than a quarter of the country’s lucrative international education market.
The government in May announced it would cap international student numbers as a key mechanism to halve migration by 260,000, in what was a dramatic intensification of its efforts to stem an influx of foreign students.
Enrolments in the sector were steadily increasing year-on-year before the COVID pandemic. Student numbers plummeted after border closures but quickly rebounded after the Morrison government introduced cheaper visas and better working rights to help stem workforce shortages.
At Sydney University, the largest educator of foreign students in the country, 46 per cent of its cohort comes from overseas, and it relies heavily on the Chinese market. Among its postgraduate degrees, most students are from overseas.
In 2023, it made more than $1.4 billion from foreign students and was the only NSW university to report a surplus.
At the University of Melbourne, 45 per cent of its students were from overseas in 2023, up from 41 per cent the previous year.
Education Minister Jason Clare said the government intended to set limits for every university, higher education and vocational education provider that educates international students.
“This is a really important national asset, and we need to ensure it maintains its social licence,” he said. “We are consulting the international education sector to make sure we get the design and implementation of these critical reforms right, with implementation to begin in 2025.”
Group of Eight chief executive Vicki Thomson said the group was happy to discuss managed growth across the whole sector with the government.
“It’s a very easy political hit to just say cut student numbers as part of a broader migration strategy,” she said.
“What the government has failed to do is address to us why would you go so hard on our universities when all of the evidence points to the absolutely devastating effect this will have.”
Thomson said should the caps be implemented, the 2025 start date would be unworkable given the long lead times in the recruitment of international students.
************************************************
Dire warning childcare centres are indoctrinating your kids and turning them into 'activists' after woke change to curriculum
A think tank has warned toddlers could be indoctrinated into activism and identity politics due to the federal government's new childcare teaching curriculum.
The Institute of Public Affairs has sounded the alarm claiming many parents would be unaware of the ideology being promoted in the Early Years Learning Framework.
Analysis by the conservative think tank found diversity, inclusion and equity is mentioned 149 times, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders and reconciliation is mentioned 96 times, and mother, father or parent is not mentioned at all.
Dr Bella d'Abrera, who is director of the Foundations of Western Civilisation program at IPA, said parents should be concerned.
'These centres should be where children play in sandpits, draw with crayons and have afternoon naps, not be inducted into the cults of social justice, identity politics and sustainability by activist educators,' she said.
'Parents should be very concerned that the federal government supports young children being exposed to very adult themes such as gender, sexuality, race, culture and the environment, years before it is appropriate.'
The federal government's childcare regulator, the Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority, oversees applying the Early Years Learning Framework, which is titled 'Belonging, Being and Becoming'.
The regulator suggests children perform a daily Acknowledgement of Country and that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander flags are displayed in childcare centres.
Learning materials recommended by the regulator include ideas that children should be 'understanding and exploring gender' and that 'colonial understandings' should be 'disrupted'.
'Similar to the National Curriculum, Australia's early learning framework begins the process of indoctrination by introducing infants and toddlers to radical gender and social justice theory, rather than allowing children to simply be children,' Dr d'Abrera said.
'As Australia's education system has shifted away from the acquisition of knowledge towards activism and social justice, results have continued to slide compared to other nations.
'By focusing on division rather than age-appropriate, fact-based education, we are setting another generation up for failure.'
A childcare insider told the Herald Sun there was no backlash within the sector to the framework and individual centres had room to apply the principles as they see fit.
'Some services in inner Melbourne will have a very different interpretation of what is needed compared to those in regional communities,' the insider said.
The Belonging, Being and Becoming framework, introduced in 2009, was updated in 2023 and made compulsory for 2024.
A spokesman for the federal Department of Education said approved learning frameworks had 'always included respect for diversity and the ongoing learning and the sharing of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures'.
*******************************************
A price to pay for climate change fantasy
Peter Dutton and Ted O’Brien haven’t reignited the climate wars, as Anthony Albanese and Chris Bowen claim. The climate wars never went away and they are being waged all over the world. It’s just that almost everything you hear about climate policy in the official and semi-official discussion in Australia is basically misleading, if not outright wrong.
Let’s take a step back and look at the big picture.
The Kyoto Protocol was adopted, in the serene and beguiling Japanese city of that name, in 1997, 27 years ago. Kyoto itself built on the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change. So for more than three decades the world has been decarbonising, right?
We’ve had many solemn moments and announcements, especially the 2015 Paris Agreement. Dutton says he would abandon Australia’s 2030 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent, but he’s committed to honouring the Paris pledge to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. He wants to do it in part by building nuclear energy.
In truth Australia, whether led by Albanese or Dutton, is a very, very minor player in all this, being responsible for a tick over 1 per cent of global emissions. Every Labor leader since Kyoto, and quite a few Liberal leaders, has told us the world is decarbonising. Deputy Prime Minister Richard Marles, early in the life of the Albanese government, caused a ripple of concern by rejoicing in the fact that coal was being phased out globally.
So after three decades of decarbonising, how is the world going in phasing out fossil fuels, to wit, gas, oil and coal?
Let’s start with gas. Everyone except the Greens understands that gas is, at the very least, a critical transition technology.
Much of the reduction in the carbon intensity of economies – that is, the amount of greenhouse gases emitted per unit of production – has come from substituting gas for coal and oil.
Nonetheless, after 30 years of relentless decarbonisation, you’d expect a pretty severe drop in gas use. Actually, according to the International Energy Agency, consumption of natural gas is at or just near its record high. The rate of growth of demand has slowed but demand is still growing.
Well, that’s a bit of a surprise. What about oil, that must be well down, with fuel efficiency standards, the global campaign for electric vehicles, the decline of oil in power generation?
Guess what. Last year, according to the US government’s Energy Information Administration, world use of oil was at a record high, higher than the peak before the Covid pandemic, at more than 100 million barrels a day. Not only that, the US under pro-green Joe Biden produced more crude oil, more than 13 million barrels a day, than any country has ever done.
Oil production dipped in the global financial crisis of 2008 and again during Covid. But it’s now roaring ahead, stronger than ever.
But surely the US constantly lectures everyone else about climate change, the dangers of fossil fuels etc. How is that consistent with record crude oil production? Bear that thought in mind, for it’s a clue to the wider reality.
OK, so we’ve struck out in looking for global reductions in gas and oil, but obviously coal use must be well down. I have myself caused something near pandemonium by suggesting on the ABC’s Q+A and on Insiders that coal has a future as well as a past. It was as though a leading atheist had infiltrated the Spanish Inquisition. So now I must face the truth about coal. Surely its use has declined?
But what do you know? According to the IEA: “Global coal consumption reached an all-time high in 2022, and the world is heading towards a new record in 2023.”
Advanced economies such as the US and the EU are using less coal but, says the IEA, “the growth in China and India, as well as Indonesia, Vietnam and The Philippines, will more than offset these decreases on a global level”. And the price of coal, at $US140 a tonne, is very healthy.
That’s a good thing because our top three export earners are coal, iron ore and gas. We couldn’t afford any fancy green measures, or Medicare, or the National Disability Insurance Scheme, or anything else, without the minerals industry.
According to the IEA, fossil fuels make up about 80 per cent of global energy, just a tick under their level 10 years ago.
So how has the world been reducing its greenhouse gas emissions for so long, with these fossil fuels all reaching record production and consumption levels? Well, actually, the world hasn’t been reducing its greenhouse gas emissions.
Oops again. Another surprise. According to the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, greenhouse gas levels are rising again, and reached record levels last year. The IEA’s own figures, and studies from Stanford and other universities, confirm this.
None of the foregoing bears on the question of what should be happening. But our debates ought to start with reality. What is happening in the world is more or less the opposite of what the government and the climate change propaganda agencies tell us is happening.
How often have you heard any of the facts above in the Australian climate debate? The debate is overwhelmingly dominated by people who are so committed to the idea of Australia taking radical action that they insist on pretending radical action is being taken globally.
The developed countries are reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but the developed countries are no longer the big story. China is the biggest greenhouse gas emitter by far. It accounts for more than 29 per cent of global emissions, more than the US and EU put together. The top 10 emitters are: China, the US, India, Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Japan, Iran, Mexico and Saudi Arabia. Of those only two, the US and Japan, are rich, developed countries. Almost none of the others has binding targets or any commitment to when their emissions will even peak.
Indonesia is a fascinating case. Like China, it has a goal of net zero by 2060. It has nearly 280 million people and is still a poor country. It has more than 250 operational coal-fired power plants. It has an international deal to retire some of them early. Well, that seems to be progress, you might argue.
Except that it also has an out clause that says plants that have already been approved, or “captive” plants that don’t feed directly into the grid but only power an industrial park or a specific project, or are concerned with National Strategic Projects, can go ahead. There are 40 plants under construction and more in pre-approval.
Recently, Indonesia has had huge success expanding its nickel production. In 2020, Jakarta banned the export of unrefined nickel. Like Australia, it has a lot of nickel. It didn’t want to dig it up and ship it overseas. It wanted refining and processing to take place within Indonesia.
This move defied every tenet of orthodox economics and was almost universally criticised by international commentators (including me). Yet as so often, reality doesn’t conform to the textbook.
Indonesia’s move worked. It attracted Chinese partners who also bought the product. Low-grade nickel is used to make steel. High-class nickel is used for very sexy products like lithium-ion batteries. A bit like Eliza Doolittle in My Fair Lady, low-class nickel can be transformed into high-class nickel with enough money. There are industrial processes that will do the trick but they require enormous amounts of power. So Indonesia’s Chinese collaborators built a swag of coal-fired power stations to provide the power to work the magic on the nickel.
In 2017, Indonesia produced 385,000 tonnes of nickel. Last year it produced 1.8 million tonnes. It’s murdering the Australian competition. The Albanese government talks a lot about Australia’s position with rare earths, of which we have a lot in the ground, and how we’re going to become a renewable energy superpower.
By the way, almost every country in the world plans to be a renewable energy superpower (surely now one of the iconic cliches of our time), suggesting many, many of them will be sorely disappointed.
The Indonesian policy has succeeded magnificently from its point of view. Indonesia’s President, Joko Widodo, has genuine environmental ambitions. But he’s also determined to develop his nation. Similarly, anyone with even the vaguest familiarity with Indonesian politics will know just how entrenched and powerful are coalmining and energy interests. Indonesia pays its population fuel subsidies – the exact opposite of a carbon tax – and has typically subsidised coal energy.
But the deeper pattern and perversity of the industrial politics of renewable energy revealed in the Indonesian nickel example occurs more broadly across Asia, especially in China. The production and sale of wind turbines is dominated by China. To make them so cheaply, China typically uses cheap coal-fired power. Coal power is still mostly the cheapest power in the world despite what the Albanese government tells you (more on that below).
So the true carbon cost of even renewable energy ought to take into account the role of coal-fired power in making the renewable energy products. In any event, here’s the paradox of energy politics: to become a renewable energy superpower, you need lots and lots of cheap coal-fired power.
China, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, The Philippines and in due course the poorer nations of Asia, and beyond that lots of African nations, are extremely unlikely to compromise their national development by embracing vastly more expensive and unreliable renewable energy over coal, gas and the like.
Two factors allow some modern, wealthy, industrial nations to run low emissions levels. One is a natural topography that lends itself to hydro-electric power. Hydro power is the only genuinely cost-competitive renewable energy and still the most important renewable energy. The other is already having a lot nuclear power.
None of this, as I say, is to argue what Australian policy should be. But the realities sketched here almost never figure in the Australian debate. How come?
Let me nominate one international factor and one specifically Australian factor.
Accompanying this article is a graph from the IEA showing the rise of the use of gas, oil and coal, measured in exajoules (one joule, a measure of energy, to the power of 18; that is to say, lots of joules, one joule being the equivalent of 107 ergs). The left side of the graph’s curve, up to the peak in 2022, which has been maintained in 2023, describes things that have already happened. That part of the graph is indisputable fact.
The right side of the graph shows a steep decline in the use of coal, oil and gas. But that’s purely speculative. That’s more or less taking an end point of declared policy, the Paris targets, and plotting a line that gets there. But that’s the future, and government predictions of the future have never been reliable. Indeed the Climate Tracker website describes Argentina, South Korea, Russia, Turkey, Canada, Mexico and Indonesia as “critically insufficient” in meeting their greenhouse gas reduction targets, and Australia, China, Brazil, the EU and Britain as “highly insufficient”.
The point about the graph is that huge amounts of climate literature are presented this way. The average reporter, the average citizen, tends to see such graphs as one entity and unconsciously gives the authority of the left-hand side of the graph, which represents factual history, to the right-hand side of the graph, which represents Nostradamus-like prophecy.
Within Australia, governments do this kind of thing very deliberately and with shockingly good effect. I’ve been following the national defence budget pretty closely for some decades. I’ve never seen a defence budget projection, or capability projection, actually come true if it concerns any period of the future longer than about six months. And defence is an area where the Australian government entirely controls what it spends. Australian governments can’t even predict what they themselves are going to do more than five minutes hence.
Yet somehow we are supposed to believe government agencies can forecast exactly what’s going to happen in energy and climate years and years, even decades, ahead. Gimme a break.
Thus the Albanese government has got great mileage from a Climate Change and Energy Department projection that Australia will reach a 42 per cent reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2030, just 1 per cent shy of our target of 43 per cent. Apparently the government now can predict the course of the Ukraine war, the effects of a possible Donald Trump victory in America, greenhouse gas emissions caused perhaps by a sudden spike in migration to Australia, and all the other manifold variables. You think?
Predicting we’ll be just 1 per cent short is a sweet touch. Just try a little harder, Australia! Yet a UN committee examining the issue doesn’t think even one G20 country will meet its target. The government is miles behind in the rollout of renewables. Electric vehicle sales are a small fraction of the forecast sales. But still we are, according to the magic forecast, just 1 per cent off target.
This is the problem, though. Almost every piece of information in this area is designed to produce a political effect. Disinterested information is at a premium.
When like is genuinely compared with like, coal is cheaper than renewables. Because with renewables you have to take account of the fact that most of the time they don’t operate so you need vast extra capacity, sometimes there are wind droughts and long cloudy periods so you need vast back-up systems of gas or coal or something else, the transmission infrastructure is enormous and the costs huge, and after 25 years or so you’ve got to throw away all the renewable stuff and replace it.
Almost everywhere that introduces vast renewable energy, apart from hydro, sees big electricity price rises. It might be that we still want to make the change because of our commitment to lowering our greenhouse gas emissions. But we need to recognise the cost, otherwise there will certainly be a backlash and the policy may well be reversed in time.
On the other hand, perhaps we should have some other conversations as well. Almost everyone wants to make some contribution to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. But given that whatever we do will have no discernible impact on the global environment, we should think pretty carefully about the cost. Especially given that it’s not happening globally.
Switching to renewables will make us poorer. They say the key policy dilemma for China is: will it grow rich before it grows poor?
For us the question is: do we want to grow richer before we grow poorer? And how poor do we really want to be?
************************************
Brisbane unaffordable for student accommodation as shortage bites
Feds have the tap wide open on immigrant arrivals while the States and local councils do their best to prevent them from having anywhere to live! You couldn't make it up
Student housing providers have labelled the increased tax charges for Brisbane projects as “diabolic idiocy” in the midst of the housing crisis, with thousands of beds now at risk.
Queensland state government increases to foreign land tax and changes to Brisbane City Council rate structures are expected to add 24 per cent to operating costs, or about $180 a year, to each of the capital’s 16,000 beds.
Industry experts say the state is now the second-worst in Australia to invest in student housing, only after Victoria, due to the percentage of operational expenditure that goes to state and council taxes.
Chief executive of leading provider Scape, Anouk Darling, said the changes were beyond a discussion of fair and unfair.
“It’s a case of diabolic idiocy,” she said. “We have major headlines screaming, ‘housing crisis’ and purpose-built student accommodation is a legitimate asset class removing pressure from the residential for rent market, responding to the federal government’s ambitions of increasing supply. Yet Queensland Government have thrown one roadblock after another. They are categorically disincentivising development.”
The federal government announced in April that universities would face caps on their international student numbers unless they could demonstrate a new supply of purpose-built student accommodation. Australia’s biggest universities provide just one in five foreign students with guaranteed housing, despite taking in $9bn a year in tuition fees. A recent report found they took up 4 per cent of residential rentals in local government areas close to universities.
Last week, the Queensland Government increased the foreign investors’ tax from 2 per cent to 3 per cent to help cover the cost of first-home buyer transfer duty concessions. It also raised the additional stamp duty surcharge for foreign buyers to 8 per cent.
Brisbane City Council unveiled a new rates category for student accommodation owners on Wednesday, designed to better align the asset class with other types of residential housing operators. All Australian student accommodation providers rely on international backing to deliver projects.
Property Council executive director of the Student Accommodation Council Torie Brown said governments were acting in opposition to moves by the federal government to deliver more housing supply.
“At a time when this asset class has been recognised by the federal government as critical to the international education sector, it is frustrating to see unilateral decisions made that harm the viability and pipeline of this asset class in Queensland.”
“More broadly, this shows the challenge facing the federal government in stimulating supply – most of the significant blockages lie with the states and local government.”
“One PBSA owner will see an increase in their land tax surcharge and council rates bill of a combined 34 per cent. It all adds up,” she said.
Brisbane City Council’s civic cabinet chair for finance councillor Fiona Cunningham said businesses should pay their fair share like every other ratepayer. She said owners had been paying as little as $88 per dwelling a year in rates compared to $1171 for equivalent apartment owners.
“Council rates are a significantly lower impost than the land tax and foreign ownership surcharges, and other taxes imposed by state and federal governments,” Ms Cunningham said.
“Student accommodation providers should be looking to George St and Canberra to lower their tax burden, not a local council seeking the bare minimum contribution to public assets and services.”
****************************************************
17 June, 2024
Inside the push to scrap NSW’s ‘no body, no parole’ laws
This is a stupid and evil law that could well keep innocent people in prison. Finding the body is important in securng a conviction but after that is of sentimental importance only. A discretionary 10% cut in the parole period after a conviction would be a much better way of encouraging disclosure
On September 20, 2022, just weeks after Chris Dawson was convicted of murdering his wife Lynette following a trial that gripped the country, then-NSW premier Dominic Perrottet announced a tightening of the state’s parole laws.
Convicted killers who “wilfully and deliberately” refused to reveal the whereabouts of their victims’ remains would be ineligible for release on parole, Perrottet said. The changes, referred to as “Lyn’s law”, were rushed through parliament and passed on October 13.
Dawson’s appeal against his conviction for the 1982 killing of Lynette Joy Simms was dismissed last week by NSW’s top criminal appeal court. He was sentenced in December 2022 to a maximum of 24 years in prison with a non-parole period of 18 years.
A year was added to his non-parole period last year, after he was convicted of unlawful sexual activity with a then-pupil in 1980.
Dawson is first eligible for release in August 2041, aged 93, but Lyn’s law will keep him behind bars until he is 98, unless he co-operates with authorities about the location of her remains.
Lynette’s family and the couple’s elder daughter have pleaded with Dawson to allow them to “bring her home”, and the “no body, no parole” laws are backed by advocates for victims of crime.
But the changes may have no practical application to Dawson at all.
NSW Supreme Court Ian Harrison acknowledged in his sentencing decision that Dawson, now 75, would “not live to reach the end of his non-parole period” or would be “seriously disabled well before then even if he does”.
It is the potential application of the laws to other prisoners that has raised alarm bells.
Folbigg, Chamberlain-Creighton unite
This month, the women at the centre of two of Australia’s biggest miscarriages of justice, Lindy Chamberlain-Creighton and Kathleen Folbigg, joined a coalition of high-profile lawyers fighting for the “no body, no parole” laws to be overturned.
In an open letter, organised by the Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative (BOHII) at RMIT University and delivered to Attorney-General Michael Daley, more than 100 signatories including Folbigg and Chamberlain-Creighton called for the laws to be scrapped due to their “disastrous” consequences for wrongfully convicted prisoners.
Lawyer Rhanee Rego, who acted for Folbigg in the inquiry that led last year to her acquittal over the deaths of her four young children after 20 years in prison, said the laws “should be repealed”.
“Wrongfully convicted people cannot help locate a body if they have not committed the crime,” Rego said.
“Importantly, the same legislation enacted in 2017 in Queensland is not having the desired effect. The legislation does not appear to increase the instances of offenders assisting to locate bodies.”
In the first case to test the new laws, Keli Lane, who was convicted in 2010 of the murder of her infant daughter, Tegan, was denied parole last month after serving her minimum sentence of 13 years and 5 months.
Tegan’s body has never been found and Lane maintains she gave the baby to her daughter’s father, who has never come forward. BOHII has called for an urgent review of her case. The 49-year-old is set to remain behind bars until her 18-year sentence expires in December 2028.
Judge in Lane case speaks out
Anthony Whealy, KC, a former judge of the NSW Supreme Court and Court of Appeal, presided over Lane’s jury trial and is a signatory to the open letter.
“The general proposition is this: hard cases make bad law, and [these laws] … stemmed essentially from the Chris Dawson trial,” Whealy said.
“One can understand that that was a traumatic trial, and it was certainly so for [Lynette Simms’ family], very much so, and so the government rushes to make a law without thinking of the consequences.”
Whealy noted that “it was always possible under the existing law for the parole body to take into account the fact that somebody was refusing to cooperate indicating where a victim’s body might be found”.
‘The impact of that [parole] door slamming shut, the emotional, psychological damage that would do to someone, [is profound].’
“The fact that they can’t tell you where the body is should be merely a discretionary factor and not a mandatory exclusion from parole,” he said. “We should go back to what the law was originally.”
Judges imposing murder sentences “will have very carefully given a sentence which embodies the principal period during which someone must be in jail and the period where it’s reasonable for them to be released on parole”, Whealy said.
“That would have taken into account the fact that they were refusing to admit that they were guilty … and had [not] demonstrated any remorse.”
During his second reading speech, the then-corrections minister Geoff Lee said the “no body, no parole” bill “recognises the pain and ongoing suffering experienced by victims’ families and friends who have not only lost a loved one but are unable to locate their remains and put them to rest”.
But Whealy said that in Lane’s case “the person whose grief and distress would need to be recognised was Keli Lane herself”, in the absence of Tegan’s biological father, and it was “absolutely ludicrous to say that this law should be applied to her”.
Professor Michele Ruyters, director of the Bridge of Hope Innocence Initiative, said: “If the purpose of the legislation is to provide closure to victims’ families, and if that’s not possible because the families are not lobbying for this outcome, or there is no family, as in Keli’s case, then the only purpose of these laws is to punish.”
“That’s not the job of the [State] Parole Board,” Ruyters said.
In Lane’s case, she had been taking steps preparatory to release and then “all of a sudden that door is shut and then she’s back into the mainstream prison”, Ruyters said.
“From a human rights aspect, the impact of that door slamming shut, the emotional, psychological damage that would do to someone, [is profound].”
The government response
A NSW government spokesperson did not respond directly to the open letter but said the laws require an offender to “cooperate to locate the remains of the victim, not that the victim’s remains are actually found.”
“If the offender cooperates satisfactorily, they could be granted parole. If the offender does not cooperate, they will not be granted parole.”
Parole “rewards good behaviour”, the spokesperson said, and the laws were designed to “incentivise offenders to disclose the location of a victim’s remains, to provide closure to the victim’s family.”
***************************************************
These duplicitous modern Greens are Nazis in sheep’s clothing
FRANCIS GALBALLY
In my opinion there appears to be alarming similarities between Adam Bandt’s Greens and Hitler’s National Socialist Workers’ Party of the 1920s and 1930s. Both leaders are ideologues and demagogues. They are anti-Semitic in their rhetoric and this encourages in many a belief that the Jews are the cause of things wrong with society.
Bandt encourages the chant “from the river to the sea”. What does that mean other than the annihilation of the Jewish state and its people? But not just that, he seems through his rhetoric to want more. He encourages and attends pro-Palestinian demonstrations that are anti-Semitic and aimed at intimidating Australia’s Jews as they at least try to go about their ordinary lives whether as university students, workers or business people. Bandt supports gatherings that seem to me frighteningly similar to those pre-Nuremberg rallies in Munich in the 1920s. His rhetoric and actions appear to encourage the anti-Semitic demonstrations at parliament and on our city streets. This was Hitler at his most effective, and Bandt seems to have borrowed his playbook.
Bandt’s rant a few days ago has all the hallmarks of a Nazi rally. He accuses the major parties of “slandering this movement”. He calls on the Israeli ambassador to be expelled. He calls on sanctions against Israeli. He says “enough of the hand-wringing tweets, enough of the words that always come with conditions attached … they are being ignored by an extreme war cabinet that is hellbent on continuing this invasion”. And, like 1930s Munich, police had to move in to quell the violent protesters and use pepper spray (in Munich it was batons).
Bandt doesn’t mention how the Gaza war started, and appears to have no empathy for the abducted Israelis and the rape and killing of women and children. Bandt is a frightening demagogue; he distorts the truth, which suits a political agenda.
Bandt’s support of activists locking politicians out of their electoral offices bears the hallmarks of a potential dictator slowly cutting away at democracy.
Like Hitler, Bandt uses propaganda, discontent and fearmongering to gain support. He finds support among anti-Semites and uses climate action and anti-capitalist rhetoric to feed his supporters. Bandt would massively raise taxes and drive business from Australia. His rhetoric on tax and anti-business plays to his supporter base, much as Hitler did. And, like Hitler, he gets support from some individuals and businesses.
I do not criticise those who truly support the original Greens’ stand: protection of the environment and action to mitigate climate change.
But the Greens are now a party controlled by a rabblerouser who could destroy our way of life.
**************************************************
Queensland Labor shelves reforms to stop faith-based schools discriminating against gay teachers
A rather mournful report from the Guardian below
The Queensland government will renege on its promise to pass new anti-discrimination laws before the October state election – a move advocates say will leave women fleeing domestic violence, people with disabilities and members the LGBTQ+ community at risk.
Guardian Australia revealed on Monday that the state government was considering watering down reforms proposed by a review of the 33-year-old act.
State cabinet has approved a new plan that involves passing some measures – the parts that are a priority of the union movement – which mimic the federal “respect at work” bill, including placing a positive duty on workplaces to prevent discrimination or harassment.
It remains unclear whether other elements of the proposed reforms will be included in the new bill – due to be tabled on Friday – and which will be shelved until after the election.
The most controversial recommendation – to scrap the so-called “genuine occupational requirement” clause that has enabled faith-based schools to discriminate against teachers based on their sexuality, pregnancy, relationship status and gender identity – will not be passed during this term of government.
Other measures also likely to be delayed include proposals to scrap exemptions that allow accommodation providers to lawfully discriminate against sex workers; employers to discriminate against gender diverse or trans people when working with children; and IVF providers to discriminate against people on the basis of sexuality.
In a statement, the attorney general, Yvette D’ath, said the government remained committed to all of the reforms but that further work was needed to ensure new laws aligned with the federal approach to a March report by the Australian Law Reform Commission calling for the removal of exemptions for religious schools.
“This is a complex issue and many in the community have differing opinions,” D’ath said. “We need to make sure we get these legislative reforms right.”
Advocacy groups said this week they are concerned that a delay until after the election – with Labor well behind in published opinion polls – would put unfinished reforms at risk.
Alastair Lawrie, the director of policy and advocacy at the Public Interest Advocacy Centre, said there was “no justification” for Queensland to stall on the basis of the ALRC report.
“Indeed, the stance of the commonwealth government, which is currently refusing to introduce its own legislation without bipartisan support that is unlikely to be forthcoming, places more rather than less pressure on the Queensland government to act,” Lawrie said.
“The current ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ approach under the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act does not work and does not protect the rights of workers who should be employed on the basis of their skills and experience, not their sexual orientation or gender identity.”
Matilda Alexander from Queensland Advocacy for Inclusion said splitting the reforms would create a “chaotic and siloed” series of protections.
“It’s incredibly frustrating to hear that the Anti-Discrimination Act changes will not be going ahead,” Alexander said.
“Queenslanders have said conclusively what we think respect at work looks like in Queensland. We need the government to listen.
“And what we have comprehensively and completely told them is a respectful workplace in Queensland is one where all forms of discrimination are unlawful.
“We understand that the commitment was to repeal and replace the Anti Discrimination Act, which is now more than 30 years old. It’s outdated. It’s not fit for purpose. It can’t be tinkered with, it needs to be repealed [and] these changes need to happen now.”
Nadia Bromley, the chief executive of the Women’s Legal Service Queensland, said the reforms included measures to protect women experiencing domestic and family violence from discrimination.
“A woman who was fired for being the victim of domestic and family violence cannot sue for discrimination in Queensland,” she said. “They can also be denied access to housing by a landlord afraid of having their rental accommodation damaged.
“The bill’s been 33 years in the making already. It’s a really disappointing decision.”
Labor sources have said the government was “not up for a fight” with religious groups who had criticised draft legislation as “a betrayal of all faith communities in Queensland”.
The government needs to table the new bill by Friday for it to pass the parliament before the election.
*********************************************************
EU climate knaves and follies
Only a week ago, Energy Minister Chris Bowen was telling anyone who would listen about the marvels of Germany’s energy policy. Since turning off its last nuclear power plant in April 2023, Mr Bowen claimed that Germany had experienced ‘record renewables output, energy price falls and a material drop in emissions’. The next election in Australia would be a ‘referendum on nuclear power’ Mr Bowen claimed.
Never mind the next election in Australia, the results of the European Parliamentary election this week have been a de facto referendum on Germany, and Europe’s, energy policies that Bowen would do well to heed.
The Social Democratic party (SPD) of German Chancellor Olaf Scholz suffered an ignominious defeat winning less than 14 per cent of the vote, down from almost 16 per cent, its worst result in a national poll since 1949. Humiliatingly, it only came third in the overall tally behind the main opposition party, the conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) which won almost 24 per cent of the vote, up more than one percentage point, and behind the much demonised Alternative for Germany (AfD) which increased its vote by almost 5 per cent compared with the last election. As SPD leader Lars Klingbeil put it, ‘There is no way to sugarcoat it. I think it is crystal clear that things have to change.’
But if the European parliamentary elections were devastating for Germany’s SPD, roughly the equivalent of the Australian Labor party, they were even worse for its ‘traffic light’ coalition partner, the Greens, which was incontestably the biggest loser, falling almost 9 percentage points to less than 12 per cent. This will no doubt come as a shock to Mr Bowen but it’s hardly surprising when you look at the appalling policies that the Greens tried to implement. Their Building Energy Act sought to mandate that all new heating systems use at least 65 per cent renewable energy which amounted to it effectively forcing people to install heat pumps that would have inflicted punishingly high costs on owners of older buildings. The law is deeply unpopular as is the plan to ban CO2-emitting cars.
One of the most damning aspects of the Green nightmare in Germany is that having campaigned to lower the voting age to 16, their vote crashed to only 10 per cent with those aged 16 to 24 years old, and their partner, the SPD, got a paltry 9 per cent. Instead, 17 per cent of these youths voted for the conservative Christian Democrats/Christian Social Union and another 17 per cent voted for the Alternative for Germany.
As the most populous country in the EU, the results in Germany had a big impact on the overall outcome in the European Parliament but in any event the same trend could be seen in France, Italy and Belgium.
In France, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally got more than 31 per cent of the vote, the first French party to do so since 1984. Macron’s Renaissance party got just over 15 per cent of the vote down from 22 per cent in 2019. The French Greens – the Ecologists – got a tad over 5 per cent, a steep fall from over 13 per cent in 2019 and more than 16 per cent in 2009.
Overall in the European Parliament it looks like the Greens will be pushed from fourth place into sixth place with only 53 seats out of 720. The only green shoot, so to speak, was Denmark where the Greens gained one seat and in the Netherlands where a Green-Left party is the largest Dutch party in the EU parliament with eight seats but where Geert Wilders Freedom Party went from one seat to six and the Farmer-Citizen party also got two seats.
What explains this collapse in the vote for Green parties and for climate-loving left-liberals is that Europe is suffering what it calls a greenlash to its Green New Deal. For months, farmers have been protesting EU climate policies that are driving them out of business. Yet the least palatable proposals of the EU’s delusional 2030 goal of cutting greenhouse gases by 55 per cent from 1990 levels look highly unlikely to be implemented. A carbon market for heating and transport fuels that is meant to be launched in 2027 would further exacerbate the cost-of-living crisis, and all new cars are meant to be emissions-free by 2035. But even that is not enough for the climate commissars who earlier this year called for a more ambitious goal for 2040 of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 90 per cent relative to emission levels in 1990. That would require almost doubling the level of investment from the 863 billion euros per annum spent in the decade to 2020 to 1.5 trillion euros per annum. Good luck with raising the capital to splurge on such profoundly unproductive investments.
You know that climate policies have lost their appeal when even the most ardent of activists, such as Greta Thunberg, was wrapping herself in a keffiyeh last Friday to protest the war in Gaza in Berlin rather than ‘climate injustice’ per se. Bizarrely, the protesters managed to conflate Israel’s war against Hamas with a ‘Kick Big Polluters Out’ rally that called for oil and gas companies to be held accountable for enabling genocide in Gaza, systemic violence, and fuelling the climate crisis. In a strange way that they didn’t intend their protest almost made sense. After all, who is a bigger exporter of gas than Qatar, which bankrolls Hamas, the terrorists that are calling for a Jewish genocide? As William Blake wrote in his Proverbs of Hell, ‘If the fool would persist in his folly he would become wise’, although perhaps more apposite when considering the EU’s climate policies is Blake’s proverb that ‘Folly is the cloke of knavery’. What does Mr Bowen make of all this? Very little it seems. Under Labor, Australia is set to follow in Europe’s foolish footsteps while the knaves laugh all the way to the bank.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/eu-climate-knaves-and-follies/
************************************16 June, 2024
Australia's narcissist government
When narcissists get something wrong they aways blame other people, never themselves. Leftists have many narcissist traits. See:
https://www.simplypsychology.org/narcissist-accountability.html
andhttp://jonjayray.com/leftism3.html
So the events described below are vivid evidence of how narcissistic Leftists can beEveryone knows the story of the boy stealing apples in the orchard. When confronted by the farmer, he simply holds the apples behind his back and declares, ‘Who? Me?’
Our current prime minister fits the description of that boy very well. But his colleagues are doing an impressive impersonation as well. As Chris Kenny would say, their theme song should be ‘Not Responsible’. The rule of thumb is never cop anything on the chin; rather blame someone or something else, preferably the previous Coalition government.
You really have to laugh. In the last election campaign, Albo made much of the fact that the buck would stop with him when in government. ‘If I become prime minister, I’ll accept responsibility each and every day, not always seek to blame others.’ Yeah, right.
It’s been a wild ride. I’m tempted to award a prize for the best alternative to the dog ate my homework. ‘I’ve been travelling in the car’ is a strong contender. This was the excuse pathetically given by the Prime Minister for not commenting on the arrival of an illegal vessel to our shores. I guess because he doesn’t have a mobile phone or a phalanx of minders keeping him up to date.
And then there was this clanger: ‘This is not my proposal, but the Australian people’s proposal’, thereby diverting blame for the thumping No vote he received in the Voice referendum.
To confirm that he is still in top ‘boy in the orchard’ form, Albo recently declared that, ‘I don’t comment on court proceedings overseas to which Australia is not a party.’ This was in reference to the absurd proposal of the dubious International Criminal Court to issue a warrant for the arrest of Benjamin Netanyahu, Prime Minister of Israel, for war crimes.
Barely drawing breath, Albanese then started banging on about the overseas court proceedings involving Julian Assange. I guess he never actually promised to be consistent but that should surely be a sine qua non for any head of government.
Given that the leader sets the tone for the rest of the team, it’s hardly surprising that other team members would follow his lead in blaming anyone or anything other than themselves. Heaven forbid that they should actually take responsibility for their own actions.
How many times have we heard Home Affairs Minister, Clare O’Neil, blame the ten years of neglect by the Coalition government for her inept handling of her portfolio? (B1 also frequently uses the ten years of neglect line.) Gosh, she even had to commission an ‘independent’ review or two to criticise the handling of aspects of the migration program by the Coalition government, so we would be convinced. Of course, she had no idea what those reviews would conclude, no idea at all.
Her offsider, the hapless Andrew Giles, has developed one skill during his time in the outer ministry – attempting to throw his department under the bus for the multiple errors that he’s made. You know the sort of thing: the department didn’t tell me; the department failed to keep me informed; the department misled me.
As for the howler about drones tracking the movements of released asylum seekers, if he had thought this through, he would have quickly realised that it was an absurd proposition. But it probably sounded like solid precautionary action by one of the weakest ministers in living memory. That’ll show them a thing or two, he doubtless thought.
The fact that drones were not being used for this purpose was surely an acute embarrassment, even for a man of the left whose real aim in entering parliament was to usher in a gentle and compassionate treatment for asylum seekers, even ones who had committed heinous crimes. (Not their fault, you must understand.)
But here’s the thing: throwing your department under the bus carries real risks. The bureaucrats will always know more than the minister and they don’t appreciate their hard work – pause here for laughter – being disparaged. There are plenty of examples littering the annals of political history where the careers of ministers have been ruined by revengeful Sir Humphreys.
Giles is also wont to blame Peter Dutton for his current problems. Dutton as home affairs minister simply didn’t cancel enough visas, evidently, even though he cancelled many hundreds of them.
One example of Dutton’s strength in this portfolio was his refusal to allow the father of celebrated Richmond footballer, Dusty Martin, to enter the country from New Zealand. Mr Martin had a criminal record as long as the Nile and Dutts would simply not be moved to allow him to enter the country, even to watch his son play a Grand Final.
And even ScoMo, who was as weak as water on most issues when he was prime minister, was not having a bar of the New Zealand government’s plea to keep Kiwi criminals in Australia if they had a strong association with our country. It was only when Albo came to office and the compliant Giles, who is a strong factional mate of the PM, sloppily drafted Ministerial Direction 99 to appease fellow lefty-luvvie, Jacinda Ardern.
And then we come to Billy Boy, Bill Shorten, Minister for the NDIS. He has been around the corridors of Parliament House for some time and so he knows all the excuses. The recent information about the massive rorting of the NDIS and the infiltration of criminal groups has led Shorten to blame this entirely on the Coalition.
Well, he’s only had the job for two years. Who could expect him to have achieved anything substantial in that short time? (Speccie readers, perhaps.) The fact that Shorten emotionally rejected the Coalition’s sensible suggestions to stop some of the rot within the NDIS – independent assessment, benchmarking plans – is quietly forgotten.
Then comes the news that Services Australia engaged the services of a speechwriter for the minister costing the taxpayer a cool $620,000 for a two-year contract. Given that newspapers pay one dollar per word (or less or nothing at all), this sum was simply outrageous. We were also informed that all those zingers – yep, most of us missed them – in the minister’s speeches were his own work. Obviously, zingers would have been extra.
But Billy Boy was not taking any responsibility for this outrage. It was Services Australia’s fault. He didn’t have anything do with negotiating the contract and he was unaware of the sum of money involved. Who? Me?
It’s a very long time since a minister resigned in response to an acknowledged mistake. Ian McLachlan, who is an old-school gentleman, resigned in 1998 as defence minister when he inappropriately received some information.
To be sure, there have been ministers sacked or demoted since that time, but the idea of a senior member of the government falling on their sword because of a serious error now looks like a remote possibility. The most incompetent ministers will now grab any lifesavers floating by in order to retain the perks of office – and these days, these perks are substantial. Another case of following the money.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/ive-been-travelling-in-the-car/
******************************************************Act now on reckless power, says union buster Chris Corrigan
We have a building union so drunk with power that it thinks it can run football -- and threatens a football organization if it does not obey
Australia’s original union buster Chris Corrigan has called for “reckless” union power to be curtailed by the competition watchdog before further damage is done to the economy.
Mr Corrigan, who led a bitter battle with the Maritime Union of Australia in the late ’90s that shook up industrial relations on the waterfront, told The Australian from his home in Switzerland that the power of unions was unique in Australia because of their control over the ALP, referencing Bob Menzies’ “faceless men” accusation of the 1960s.
He said CFMEU boss John Setka’s threat of a work-to-rule on AFL projects including the Hobart stadium underscored the need for additional powers for the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission to rein in unions.
The CFMEU threatened the football organisation over its appointment of Stephen McBurney as head of umpiring, due to his previous role as a union watchdog.
“It’s the most lopsided situation,” said the former chair of logistics giant Qube Holdings.
“Even the smallest companies are subject to ACCC surveillance but massive unions can do what they want.
“If a power company threatened to cut electricity to the AFL in the way (the CFMEU has issued threats against building sites), they would be sanctioned and not allowed to do it. This is not just about unions amassing power but using that power.”
Mr Corrigan said a handful of powerful unions had been targeting essential industries for decades and hurting productivity.
“Every Australian will be feeling the impact of this through inflationary pressure that is subsiding in other countries but not in Australia,” he said.
“Union power in Australia is unique around the world because of the structure of the ALP which makes the party beholden to unions. I am old enough to remember Bob Menzies talking about the faceless men of the ALP.”
Mr Corrigan said he had been calling for the ACCC to be given powers over unions since the 1990s. “They need the mandate to do it,” he said.
Meanwhile, the TWU’s demand for Virgin Australia’s owner Bain Capital to explain why it was considering an architect of the unlawful Qantas outsourcing as Virgin CEO has failed to attract the support of other unions, and has been condemned by Coalition transport spokeswoman Bridget McKenzie.
The revelation former Qantas chief operating officer Paul Jones was one of two short-listed candidates for the top job at Virgin was considered “alarming” by the TWU, which wrote to Bain Capital seeking more information.
Senator McKenzie said it was concerning to see unions had become more militant and emboldened under the Albanese government, “to the detriment of Australian businesses”.
“We cannot return to the dark days of union-controlled domestic airlines with stifled competition and strongarmed investors that ultimately led to the duopoly that still exists in the skies of Australia,” Senator McKenzie said.
“The TWU is practising mission creep here. Public comments go beyond its remit as a representative body for transport workers, in seeking to influence the investment decisions of businesses trying to run profitable, sustainable and safe airlines.”
Other aviation unions were reluctant to support the TWU, declining to comment publicly. However, it is understood that privately other unions believed the TWU was overstepping the mark given its relatively low levels of membership at Virgin.
About 25 per cent of pilots are TWU members with the majority of the remainder part of the Australian Federation of Air Pilots.
The Australian Services Union, Flight Attendants Association and AFAP would not comment on the TWU’s demand.
Australian Licensed Aircraft Engineers Association federal secretary Steve Purvinas said they would work with whomever Bain Capital appointed as CEO.
**************************************************
Australian nuclear expert Rob Parker 'cancelled' after single tweet
A nuclear scientist who claims he was axed from presenting to hundreds of guests after a single, critical tweet from renewables advocate and investor Simon Holmes a Court highlights the fraught debate around Australia's energy future.
Rob Parker, who holds masters degrees in nuclear science and civil engineering, has also been a member of Engineers Australia for 30 years. He was due to present 'How to avoid an energy blunder Down Under' to more than 400 guests at an Engineers Australia webinar last Wednesday.
'The talk had been planned and signed off on months before,' Mr Parker told Daily Mail Australia.
'Emails from head office all the way to the Newcastle office - where the talk was to be hosted. All the approvals, everything was done.'
But 24 hours before he was due to speak, the Teal's number one financial backer Mr Holmes a Court posted on X: 'Seriously @EngAustralia? You're hosting an anti-renewables event for @NukeForClimate? i would have thought your body was dedicated to improving understand [sic], not muddying the waters!'
Just minutes after the tweet went live Engineers Australia responded on X: 'Thanks Simon. This event has been pulled. This does not meet our guidelines and we are investigating how it was scheduled.'
That tweet was quickly deleted by Engineers Australia after Mr Homes a Court deleted his original tweet upon learning that the event was cancelled. Engineering Australia then sent an email to the guests registered for the event stating 'this event was cancelled due to the speaker being unwell'.
Mr Parker told Daily Mail Australia it was entirely untrue that he was sick and he never suggested to Engineers Australia that he was. He only found out he was banned from the event he'd been invited to speak at via social media.
'They cancelled it on X before even bothering to contact me. I was all ready to go. This was a knee jerk reaction to Simon Holmes a Court winding them up on X.'
Mr Holmes a Court rejected Mr Parker's claim saying: 'The event was cancelled before my tweet. The reporting on this issue is false.'
Mr Parker says the misleading and false excuse given by Engineers Australia for banning him - claiming that he was sick - is a breach of their own code of ethics which calls for integrity amongst members.
'They don't even live up to their own standards', he said.
********************************************************
Major apology millions of Australians deserve
We are owed an apology for Covid vaccine mandates.
Mounting evidence shows the vaccines were rushed, less effective than you’d expect of a jab, and, in some cases, dangerous.
The whole premise of mandates was to protect the community. But these vaccines didn’t stop contraction or transmission of Covid – so what exactly were we protecting?
Sure, it may reduce your likelihood of catching Covid. But that should be, and should always have been, your decision.
If you were jabbed then what did it matter whether the person at the table next to you in the pub wasn’t? You’d taken your own precautions. It’s up to others to wear the consequences of their own decisions.
There are plenty of treatments that can help prevent and reduce the severity of myriad other diseases but the government does not force you to take them to participate in society.
Even former deputy chief medical officer Nick Coatsworth now admits he hasn’t had a Covid vaccine for two years.
If one of the most high-profile doctors in the country won’t do it, why would the rest of us?
And most of us haven’t. By May last year, nearly 17 million Australian adults had not had a booster in the past six months.
The sky has not fallen.
News.com.au’s Frank Chung recently detailed the death of 34-year-old Katie Lees less than two weeks after receiving the AstraZeneca Covid jab from vaccine-induced thrombosis with thrombocytopenia syndrome.
She had severe clotting in the brain and became unconscious, being put on life support. The plug was eventually pulled and she died.
At 34, her risk of death from Covid was minimal but in order to go about normal life, thanks to government-imposed rules, she – like the rest of us – had to be vaccinated.
Where there is risk of death or serious side-effects for a medical treatment there is no justification for force or coercion.
But that is what happened and no one has apologised.
AstraZeneca was pulled from Australia last year and its manufacturer discontinued it worldwide last month, saying demand had dropped because of the availablity of newer vaccines.
It followed an admission in a UK court that the vaccine could be deadly.
When the US Food and Drug Administration approved the Pfizer vaccine for use in December 2020 – long before it was largely rolled out in Australia – it admitted there was no “evidence that the vaccine prevents transmission of SARS-CoV-2 from person to person”.
The federal government set up a $77 million compensation scheme for Covid vaccine injuries in December 2021 in a clear admission of the possible dangers.
About $7 million worth of WorkCover claims have been paid to vaccine-injured people in Victoria who were required to be jabbed by their workplaces.
The last regular report of Covid vaccine safety by the Therapeutic Goods Administration, in November last year, showed 139,654 known adverse reactions.
And Dutch researchers have now sounded the alarm about a possible link between Covid vaccines and excess deaths.
The academics, in a paper published in BMJ Public Health this month, wrote that excess mortality following the introduction of Covid vaccines was “unprecedented and raises serious concerns”, that data on deaths linked to the vaccines was murky and “simultaneous onset of excess mortality and Covid-19 vaccination in Germany provides a safety signal warranting further investigation”.
Excess deaths in Australia were 6.1 per cent higher than expected for the first eight months of 2023 and 14.1 per cent higher than expected in the same period the year prior.
So when will the apology for mandates be forthcoming?
************************************
13 June, 2024
Was footballer Jarryd Hayne the victim of a false rape accusation?
This matter is even more problematical than it at first appears. The obvious problem is that he was released on technical grounds -- on the grounds that his most recent trial was not properly conducted. He was NOT exonerated. He was NOT found to be innocent. Bully for his lawyers, I suppose.
So in theory he could be tried on the same matters for a fourth time. That is unlikely to happen as he has already spent enough time in jail to satisfy most of the penalty that a new guilty verdict would bring
The problem that is not being highlighted, however, is the really big one. He could well be the victim of a false rape allegation. There have been several instances in the past when women have been found to be false accusers. Britain at one stage not long ago locked up some of the false accusers.
There appears to be no doubt that he had been promised sex when he arrived at the woman's place but what happened after that is in dispute. The woman claims he forced himself on her until she bled. Messages that she sent to friends after the event, however suggest that she had not told the full story. And that would make her open to have given false testimony, which would make HER the guilty party
So why would she lie? It's pretty clear. Hayne told the taxi driver he would only be a few minutes, showing that what he wanted and expected was a "quickie". But she could well have been dissatisfied with that. She was clearly heavily "into" him and expected a more prolonged and affectionate interaction. So her cry of rape could well be revenge for not getting what she expected from him.
But the truly obnoxious part of the whole affair is that the messages casting doubt on her story were NOT shown to the jury nor were Hayne's lawyers allowed to question her about them. Why on earth would that be? I suspect that it was part of another determination to enforce the feminist "believe the woman" doctrine. I suspect that Hayne has been much maligned. I suspect that he was at most guilty of bad manners
Former rugby league star Jarryd Hayne has walked out of prison after his sexual assault convictions were quashed on appeal.
Mr Hayne left a correctional facility in Sydney's west just before 5pm on Wednesday after being granted his release on bail.
The 36-year-old was found guilty in May last year of sexually assaulting a woman at her Newcastle home on the night of the 2018 NRL grand final.
It was the third time he had been tried over the incident and the second time he was found guilty.
His first trial ended in a hung jury, he was convicted after the second but then won an appeal, and the third trial resulted in this now-quashed conviction.
The NSW Court of Criminal Appeal was split 2-1 over the decision.
Justice Stephen Rothman said the appeal succeeded on two grounds: one concerning the trial judge's decision not allow further cross-examination of the complainant and another concerning a direction to the jury about how to treat allegations the woman had lied.
"The outcome is that the appeal from each conviction is allowed … and the court will quash the two convictions in order that there be a new trial," he said.
"Whether there in fact is a new trial is a matter for the Director of the Public Prosecutions."
Mr Hayne, who has been in prison at a minimum-security jail at Lidcombe in Sydney's west since last year, has been granted bail, which was not opposed by the prosecution.
It was granted on a number of conditions, including that Mr Hayne pay a $20,000 surety and not attempt to contact the complainant or enter the Newcastle local government area.
The Director of Public Prosecutions said it would consider the Court of Criminal Appeal's ruling before deciding whether Mr Hayne should face a fourth trial.
In his written judgment, Justice Rothman noted: "In the current circumstances, it is unlikely that a new trial will occur before the expiry of the non-parole period and most of that period has already been served" and suggested there is "good reason for there not to be a fourth trial."
Mr Hayne, who appeared via videolink from prison, gave little reaction upon hearing the news his convictions would be quashed.
His lawyer Lauren MacDougall said Mr Hayne was "really, really looking forward to getting home to his family".
Hayne's lawyer argued the interaction was 'entirely consensual'
During the trial the jury heard the woman had contacted Mr Hayne via Instagram a little less than two weeks before their first in-person meeting and the messages progressed to a "sexualised" nature.
It heard he arrived at the woman's home, having negotiated a $550 taxi fare back to Sydney, and told the driver to wait outside.
The court heard Mr Hayne tried to kiss the woman, at one point grabbing her by the face, with "forceful" actions despite her telling him to stop.
The jurors were told Mr Hayne's charges were in relation to two forms of sexual activity — oral and digital penetration — and the complainant had said "no" and "stop".
It allegedly lasted for about 30 seconds, and stopped when the complainant's genitals started to bleed.
During the trial Mr Hayne's barrister, Margaret Cunneen SC, said the activity was "entirely consensual" and he "didn't mean to cause her any harm at all".
Mr Hayne's lawyers argued in the appeal that messages deleted from the woman's phone showed that she was consenting and should lead to his acquittal.
The complainant was said to have told the friend Mr Hayne "went down on her", but made no reference to her injury and blood, or to the sexual activity having been forced.
Mr Hayne's lawyers argued that the judge should have allowed them to further cross-examine the woman about why she had failed to disclose the messages to police around the time of the sexual assault.
They argued the issue was central to assessing the witness's credibility.
'The jury were deprived of evidence'
In the judgment Justice Rothman wrote that the cross examination should have been allowed as "it was for the jury to determine whether to believe the complainant" and that "demeanour would have played a significant role".
Justice Deborah Sweeney concurred writing: "The jury were deprived of evidence which had significance for their assessment of the honesty of the complainant."
"By not permitting counsel to cross-examine the complainant on those topics and then telling the jury that in considering the submission that the complainant had lied about matters including deletions from her phone, they should consider whether that was "fairly put", this created an unfairness in the accused's trial".
"The combined effect of those circumstances was to cause a miscarriage of justice in the trial."
Mr Hayne was sentenced in May 2023 to four years and nine months in prison, with a non-parole period of three years.
With time already served, he was eligible for parole from May next year.
Mr Hayne's first trial ended in a hung jury.
He was convicted after the second, but then won an appeal before being tried for a third time.
********************************************
Peter Dutton puts carbon emissions target on Labor’s back
Peter Dutton will go to the next election opposing Labor’s 43 per cent carbon emissions reduction target by 2030 but keeping to zero emissions by 2050, opting for a radically different energy policy to Anthony Albanese that prioritises more gas in the short term and nuclear in the long term.
The Opposition Leader declared there was “no sense in signing up to targets you don’t have any prospect of achieving” and promised the Coalition in government would not “destroy” agriculture, manufacturing and investment nor create sovereign risk with trading partners by agreeing to unachievable climate change targets.
Mr Dutton said he would take a different gas policy from Labor to the next election to ensure a successful shorter-term transition to renewable power and clarified that nuclear power, which would not be delivered until the 2040s, would be aimed at achieving the net-zero target by mid-century.
In an interview with The Weekend Australian to mark his second year as leader of the Liberal Party, Mr Dutton said: “They (Labor) just have no hope of achieving the targets and there’s no sense signing up to targets you don’t have any prospect of achieving.
“We’re not going to destroy agriculture. We’re not going to stifle investment. We’re already seeing investment being withdrawn. We’re not going to create sovereign risk with our export partners, as Labor is doing with Japan and Korea.”
Mr Dutton said there had “never been any doubt in my mind that gas is absolutely essential”.
“And without it, there’ll be catastrophic failure in the energy market over the next decade,” he said. “You can’t have the Prime Minister saying we aren’t going to have coal, we aren’t going to have gas and were not going to have nuclear power and we are going to keep the lights on – that’s just fantasy. We now have a debate about energy which I think we can win.”
Mr Dutton said the next election, due by May next year, would come down to basic issues of economic management, national security and law and order.
He said the Prime Minister had failed to lead by example and come out more strongly against those promoting hate and anti-Semitism in society.
If a firmer stand had been taken “we would have seen arrests and we would have seen the ability for people to protest peacefully, but not with the incitement and the rage that we’ve seen in the university campus demonstrations”, he said.
“Nobody’s been arrested for hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage to the offices of members of parliament,” Mr Dutton said.
“I think the (police) commissioners take their lead from the premiers and from the police ministers and from the Prime Minister.
“I think there has been an approach of just keeping the peace, not taking sides because this is just another Middle East thing. Whereas I think the approach should have been to enforce the rule of law without fear or favour.”
On taxation, Mr Dutton indicated that the Coalition’s policy, which would not alter Labor’s tax cuts schedule that comes in on July 1, would be limited by funds available in the budget.
But he elevated economic reform across the federation as a longer-term aspiration that he would champion as prime minister, saying it was critical to reduce red tape and drive down costs for businesses.
“I think there’s a very compelling argument for the federation debate to be re-enlivened,” Mr Dutton said.
“I think we should be talking more about how we can eliminate efficiencies and waste within a three layers of government model.
“That is a debate that we would willingly join if the Prime Minister were to have any appetite.
“And in government it’s a debate that I want to start. Because we are over-governed (and) over-regulated.”
Mr Dutton said he believed the Coalition’s “superior ability to manage the economy, given that cost of living is so relevant and important to Australians” would appeal to all voters, including those living in more affluent seats held by the seven teal independents – once blue-ribbon Liberal electorates – as well as outer-suburban areas.
He said his two years as Opposition Leader, including his part in the defeat of the Indigenous voice referendum last October, had given people the chance to “reconsider” him as a leader and not accept the way Labor had painted him as an angry and negative person.
“My judgment is that people want a leader with strength and with a positive outlook and vision for our country, which we’re in the process of outlining,” Mr Dutton said.
The Prime Minister will ramp up his attack on the Coalition's nuclear energy plan, calling it a wasteful "rabbit… hole". Albanese will be using his speech at the Sky News- Australian Economic Outlook lunch on Friday to continue to prosecute the case against the Coalition’s nuclear energy push. He will More
“People have allowed themselves to reconsider who they thought me to be or who Labor had framed me as.
“I think what Labor says is at odds with who people see me to after being able to watch me in a different role for the last two years and dealing with the breadth of issues starting with the voice and other economic and security issues.”
On immigration, Mr Dutton reaffirmed his commitment to cutting the record intake and encouraging skilled workers.
*************************************************
‘Multibillion-dollar failure’: Aussie doctors rip into Covid response
A top doctor has ripped into Australia’s handling of the Covid pandemic, accusing the government of spreading “misinformation” and putting people at risk.
Dr Kerryn Phelps accused the government of fuelling mistrust of health authorities while overselling the “safety and efficacy” of vaccines, and ignoring those suffering serious adverse events from the jabs.
Dr Phelps, who first went public in late 2022 about the “devastating” vaccine injury both she and her wife had suffered after a Pfizer jab, said while there was “a lot that our public health agencies got right during this pandemic”, significant mistakes were made.
The former MP for Wentworth and Deputy Lord Mayor of Sydney, and past president of the Australian Medical Association (AMA), is one of dozens of doctors and medical professionals who made public submissions to the federal government’s Covid-19 Response Inquiry.
Dr Phelps slammed “confusing misinformation” spread by authorities early on.
This included claims that Covid was not airborne, there was “no need for masks”, children did not spread the disease and that “herd immunity” could be reached.
All of this turned out to be false.
She said the consequence of the “let it rip” decision in late 2021 led to a “massive number of infections and excess Covid-related deaths estimated by actuaries to be 20,000 in 2022”.
“Political decisions were made, and public health advice was provided based on this misinformation, fuelling mistrust in subsequent advice emanating from those sources,” she said.
Regarding the vaccine rollout, Dr Phelps said “doctors and the public were assured that the vaccines would reduce the risk of severe disease, hospitalisations and death from the virus” and the “information being disseminated emphasised their claimed ‘safety and efficacy’”.
“Of course, early in the rollout of the vaccines, little was known about the potential range of adverse effects of the vaccine,” she said.
“In the urgency to vaccinate as many people as possible as quickly as possible, patients who had suffered significant vaccine injury were encouraged or mandated to have subsequent doses with inadequate evidence for the potential damage this might do to someone who had already suffered an adverse reaction to the vaccine.
“It was extremely difficult for patients who had been affected to obtain a medical exemption.”
Another consequence of this lack of information about adverse events “was that many patients report that they were not believed, or their doctors initially did not recognise the diagnosis or did not have treatment protocols in place”.
“This meant that patients had to take matters into their own hands and set up advocacy groups such as Coverse to share experiences and provide much needed support,” she said.
“It also became evident that these were not sterilising vaccines, and that while they were reported to provide some protection against severe disease and long Covid, they would not stop infection or transmission or the development of long Covid.”
For future pandemics, Dr Phelps called for a “return to the precautionary principle and the fundamentals of public health and disease prevention” and a “comprehensive plan for research and development of treatments”, including sterilising vaccines.
Among the recommendations in her submission were for greater access to high-quality N95 masks with associated mandates in healthcare facilities, a “concerted and sustained effort” to reduce Covid transmission in schools, a return to isolation for infected individuals during the infectious period with appropriate financial support, and expansion of hybrid work and education.
She also called for research into the underlying mechanisms of vaccine injury, better follow-up of adverse events reported to the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) and identification of barriers to reporting such reactions, as well as better information for GPs and a review of the Covid-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme.
In a separate submission to the inquiry, Kooyong MP Dr Monique Ryan was strongly critical of the “extent and severity” of Morrison government’s “failures” during Covid.
In her submission she cited “lack of preparedness” for a global pandemic, inadequate quarantine and testing, delays in procurement and rollout of vaccines and failure to “combat widespread public misinformation” about the jabs.
But the Teal MP also said the government had failed to “adequately address community concerns regarding side-effects of vaccinations”, which she said were “not well communicated to the general public” contributing to “mistrust of the system”.
“Constituents also reported unreasonable delays and rejection of claims by the Covid-19 Vaccine Claims Scheme,” Dr Ryan said.
A number of submissions also highlighted human rights concerns around Covid measures.
The Queensland Human Rights Commission (QHRC) said it had received more than 1500 complaints, the majority related to border closures, hotel quarantine, and mandatory mask and vaccination requirements.
“Rights raised in relation to these complaints included recognition and equality before the law, the right not to be subject to medical treatment without consent, privacy and reputation, humane treatment when deprived of liberty, and freedom of movement,” it said.
Queensland GP Dr Melissa McCann, who is leading a vaccine injury class action against the federal government, said in her submission it was “difficult to know” whether the key Covid response measures “could have been managed any worse”.
“The Covid-19 vaccinations have been perhaps the most egregious health response measure in recorded history,” she said.
“The success of a vaccination campaign is not measured by the percentage of population who were convinced to be vaccinated, despite this being reported by various official sources as evidence of a successful program.
“A successful vaccination campaign ought to result in the majority of vaccinated persons not becoming infected with the disease the vaccines were designed to protect against.
“A successful campaign would result in reduced number of cases and reduced transmission of disease throughout a population following the vaccination campaign.
“It ought to result in small numbers of adverse events after vaccination and such events comparable with traditional vaccines. It ought to result in an overall reduction in severe disease, deaths caused by the disease and reduction in overall excess mortality across a population.”
By all of these measures, the Covid vaccination campaign “has been a complete failure despite the multibillion-dollar investment”, she argued.
**************************************************
Lefty Anthony Albanese facilitates union power growth
Anthony Albanese is facilitating aggressive tactics from under-pressure trade union leaders battling to keep their movement relevant as membership plummets in the face of technological advancements and evolving work patterns.
Seven months after Albanese’s election win, the Australian Bureau of Statistics released data showing the proportion of employees with trade union memberships had fallen from 41.1 per cent to 12.5 per cent since Bill Kelty ran the ACTU in 1992.
Labor’s sweeping industrial relations changes have emboldened ACTU secretary Sally McManus, the organisation’s president Michele O’Neil and other powerful union leaders to exert their influence more overtly as they scramble to keep pace with the fast-moving advent of automation, artificial intelligence and robotics.
The intersection between the Labor federal government and unions runs deep in Albanese’s cabinet.
If ministers had to recuse themselves over conflicts of interest with unions, the Prime Minister would be running the government virtually on his own.
Richard Marles, Penny Wong, Tony Burke, Katy Gallagher, Don Farrell, Amanda Rishworth, Ed Husic, Chris Bowen, Mark Butler, Bill Shorten and Brendan O’Connor worked for unions before entering politics.
Labor MPs list union memberships – aligning with the faction that blessed their political careers – under a section on the parliamentary register of interests that states “membership of any organisation where a conflict of interest with a member’s public duties could foreseeably arise or be seen to arise”.
In recent speeches to private sector crowds, Albanese has declared he was “pro-worker and pro-business”.
But when the Left-faction powerbroker spoke at the ACTU Congress in Adelaide last week, he paid homage to Labor’s union comrades who will fund the party’s re-election campaign and volunteer at booths on polling day.
“The mighty trade union movement has given us strength and inspiration,” Albanese said.
“In the trade union movement, you stand up for working people, each and every day – and you never stand still.
“You are always looking to the future, to the next challenge – and the next opportunity.
“That’s what our government’s vision for a Future Made in Australia is all about.”
McManus, ACTU secretary since 2017 and no friend of John Setka, is a formidable, ruthless and intelligent operator striving to keep the union movement relevant in the digital age.
Industrial relations policy wins for unions since the 2022 election include same job, same pay, the abolishment of the Coalition’s Australian Building and Construction Commission, multi-employer bargaining, “Closing Loopholes in labour hire” and progress on the Right to Disconnect.
Business chiefs and industry leaders – who expected the ACTU to flex its muscle under Labor – are increasingly concerned about the far-reaching influence of union leaders across government and the rise in direct challenges to corporate culture and management.
************************************
12 June, 2024
Katie told her father she was going to get the Covid vaccine. He had no idea it would be their last conversation ever
The issue here is that no young people needed to get the vaccine. It was only the elderly who were at serious risk of dying. And even oldies were often not seriously affected. I am 80 but cruised through it all with two RAT tests showing negative.
So all the vaccination pressure on young people was evil. It just added real risks to them with no benefit
The devastated family of a fit and healthy young actor who died a fortnight after taking a Covid vaccine have called out the callous 'indifference' of society and government to her death.
Katie Lees, 34, took the first dose of the AstraZeneca vaccine in July 2021, driven by her desire to 'do her bit' to help bring lockdown to an end.
But just 13 days later her family were forced to make the harrowing decision to turn off her life support.
Ms Lees, an actor and comedian who lived in Sydney's inner-west, had suffered a severe vaccine-induced blood clot in her brain.
'The last time I ever spoke to her on the morning of July 22 (and) she said, "I’m getting my AstraZeneca this afternoon." She said to me how proud she was for doing it,' Katie's father, Ian, told news.com.au.
'It turned out that was the last time I would ever speak to her. She was actually following the government’s advice, trying to do the right thing for the sake of the community.'
Mr Lees, 66, said the hardest part about his daughter's death was that people didn't believe the vaccine had killed her and met the news with 'silence, mockery, discrediting and disbelief'.
'We’d say to people our daughter died from the AstraZeneca vaccine and they’d say, "Oh really? How do you know?",' he said.
In a public submission to the federal government’s Covid Response Inquiry, Ms Lee's parents said they were galled by the 'indifference of our society to her death'.
'Every morning, our first thought is how Katie died and the sinking feeling that we were used and discarded by our government, by AstraZeneca and by our society,' they wrote.
They added: 'Katie did not need the vaccine — she wouldn’t have died if she got Covid.
'Katie took this action, not because she was worried about getting Covid, but because she was deeply concerned about the impact of lockdowns on the life of communities and the mental health of individuals.'
The AstraZeneca vaccine was estimated to have saved millions of lives during the pandemic but it also caused rare, and sometimes fatal, blood clots.
In April, AstraZeneca admitted in a UK court that its vaccine could, in very rare instances, could lead to Thrombosis with Thrombocytopenia Syndrome, which causes people to have blood clots and a low blood platelet count.
The vaccine, which was discontinued in Australia in March 2023, was withdrawn globally last month with the manufacturer citing commercial reasons for the decision.
Of the 14 Australians acknowledged by the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) to have died from Covid vaccines, 13 were from AstraZeneca and one from Moderna.
Ms Lees developed headaches and a rash immediately after her vaccination but doctors did not think anything of it. Just over a week later on August 1 she woke up with a severe headache and started vomiting. A CT scan showed a severe clot in her brain.
'Katie slipped into deep unconsciousness around 3pm and never regained consciousness,' her parents wrote in their submission to the inquiry.
The devastated family said that they had been left 'emotionally, mentally and physically traumatised by the way Katie died, the lack of support from government and the pharmaceutical industry and the alienation we feel from the mainstream narrative in our society'.
The family who received $70,000 in compensation for Katie’s death, said they hated being branded 'anti-vaxxers'.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13512289/Katie-Lees-AstraZeneca-vaccine-died.html
**************************************************Dr Nick Coatsworth makes a stunning admission about the Covid jab
Dr Nick Coatsworth, who helped lead Australia's response to Covid-19, has revealed he will not be getting any more vaccinations for the virus.
Speaking with Ben Fordham on 2GB on Wednesday, the former public face of Australia's fight against Covid-19 made the stunning admission he is done with Covid vaccines.
'Are you still being vaccinated for Covid?' Fordham asked.
'No,' Dr Coatsworth said.
'When did you stop doing that?'
'About two years ago, I had three vaccines, and that's been enough for me.'
'Any reason why?' Fordham asked.
'Because I don't think I need any more Ben, and the science tells me that I don't,' Dr Coatsworth said.
The current advice from the Department of Health and Aged care states: 'Regular COVID-19 vaccinations (also known as boosters) are the best way to maintain your protection against severe illness, hospitalisation and death from Covid-19.
'They are especially important for anyone aged 65 years or older and people at higher risk of severe Covid-19.
'As with all vaccinations, people are encouraged to discuss the vaccine options available to them with their health practitioner.'
This is not the first controversial statement Dr Coatsworth - Australia's former deputy chief health officer - has made about the Covid vaccine.
In February this year Dr Coatsworth admitted that imposing vaccine mandates was wrong in the wake of the Queensland Supreme Court finding that forcing police and paramedics to take the jab or lose their jobs was 'unlawful'.
In his inquiry submission Dr Coatsworth said mandates should only be a 'last resort', 'time limited', and be imposed by governments not employers.
Although Dr Coatsworth noted Australia had assembled a top team of medical experts to advise on managing the pandemic, he said they lacked an ethical framework meaning the focus became too narrow.
'This allowed the creation of a 'disease control at all costs' policy path dependence, which, whilst suited to the first wave, was poorly suited to the vaccine era,' he said.
Dr Coatsworth argued the restriction and testing policies adopted to constrain the first deadliest strain of Covid in 2020 lingered well past their relative benefit, leading to nationwide workforce and testing shortages.
He also thought the differing approaches among states, and between states and the federal government, confused the public and eroded human rights.
'I strongly encourage the inquiry to recommend amendment of the Biosecurity Act to ensure that all disease control powers are vested in the federal government during a national biosecurity emergency,' Dr Coatsworth wrote.
Dr Coatsworth was appointed as one of three new deputy chief medical officers under Brendan Murphy at the start of the pandemic in March 2020.
He now works as a doctor in Canberra and is contracted to Nine-Fairfax channels and newspapers as a presenter and health expert.
He appeared on the Fordham program to spruik a new TV show he is presenting with Tracy Grimshaw, Do You Want To Live Forever?
*************************************************
The hefty new bill and boring red-tape set to hit hard-working Aussies - even though Treasurer Jim Chalmers knows it's mostly a waste of time
Thousands of Aussies are set to be hit with a steep bill and more frustrating red-tape under an Albanese government climate change plan.
Treasurer Jim Chalmers is forcing up to 8,000 small and medium-sized (SME) businesses, as well as not-for-profits, to conduct expensive and time-consuming audits to assess 'climate risks', despite his own department estimating that 95 per cent of them don't even need to do it.
The impost is part of climate change compliance legislation that Dr Chalmers put before parliament earlier this year as part of the Climate Reporting Bill.
The new laws require as many as 7,600 businesses to unnecessarily spend up to $50,000 each for audits - at a total cost of up to $380million - that serve no purpose whatsoever.
Dr Chalmer's department has already noted that 'we assume that 5 per cent of companies in this group have material climate risks that they would be compelled to disclose' - yet it still expects thousands of businesses to conduct the audits anyway.
The SME sector and accounting professionals are up in arms, demanding changes be made to the laws before the auditing process begins next year.
The new audit is happening as national economic data released last week reveals that the economy is grinding to a virtual halt (quarterly GDP growth of 0.1 per cent) with productivity improvements stalling altogether.
The accounting industry said the legislation should be amended to exclude unnecessary red tape, describing the Climate Reporting Bill as a 'several hundred million dollar ticking time bomb'.
Amir Ghandar from Chartered Accountants said the legislation is going to unnecessarily impact 'thousands of smaller and medium entities'.
The major accounting bodies - CAANZ and CPA - have teamed up to appeal to the Albanese government to fix the legislation.
It comes at a time when the accounting industry is also warning of a shortage of auditors within the profession, with the government's recent draft skilled visa recommendations failing to include auditors in Category 1 for approved entry to help plug employment gaps.
While auditors stand to financially benefit from the extra red-tape the Albanese government is introducing - because they would be the ones carrying out the unnecessary and expensive work - an industry survey conducted in April this year still found that 88 per cent do not support the new laws applying the way that they do, and 84 per cent don't think the businesses impacted will be ready to comply by the due date.
This of course could risk further compliance penalties for businesses that aren't even engaged in practices that include 'climate risks' in the first place.
Mr Ghandar described the situation as 'untenable'.
'It not only wastes limited financial resources, it also stymies critical will-to-participate,' he said.
The Opposition has pledged to look at the situation if it is elected, and make the changes necessary to reduce red tape and avoid the unnecessary financial burden on businesses and not-for-profit organisations.
**************************************************
Pay Dirt: NSW coal jobs hit new record high, export volumes also up
The Hunter's coal industry employed 14,750 people in March.
Coal mining jobs in NSW reached record numbers in March 2024, breaking the 25,000 barrier for only the second time since coal job numbers were first recorded.
The new record number of 25,505 to March is the highest number of coal jobs ever recorded by Coal Services Pty Ltd since it began tracking the number of people working in coal mining in NSW in 1998.
The figure is more than double the number first recorded in the last quarter of 1998, when there was a workforce of 10,898 coal mining workers across the state.
The latest data shows that in the Hunter - NSW's largest coal mining region - there were 14,750 coal mining jobs in March 2024.
In the Gunnedah region, the data shows that coal mining jobs remained at near-record levels, with 3116 coal mining jobs in March 2024, only a slight drop from the all-time record number of jobs set in April 2023 of 3253.
In the Western region of NSW, coal mining jobs reached an all time high with 3585 workers in coal mining compared to just over 1400 when job numbers were first recorded.
In the Southern region of NSW the number of coal mining jobs improved over the last 12 months with 3344 local coal mining workers, over a hundred more than the same time last year.
NSW Minerals Council chief executive Stephen Galilee said the increase in coal mining jobs in NSW was a sign of the ongoing importance and resilience of the coal sector.
"The record number of people working in the NSW coal mining sector shows that over the last 25 years, coal mining has become increasingly critical to regional communities and the state economy. These job numbers also highlight the need to support mining communities," he said.
"A mark of the importance of the coal mining sector to NSW is the strong ongoing demand for our high quality coal."
Coal Services figures show that coal exports to the state's major trade partners are up almost 16 per cent with thermal coal exports used in energy production up over 19 per cent.
"NSW coal mining is playing a critical role in the budget repair task being undertaken by the state government. In particular, the decision to increase coal mining royalty rates from 1 July 2024 was the single biggest revenue decision taken by the NSW government," Mr Galilee said.
"Metals mining jobs are also at near record levels with nearly 8,000 people working in the NSW metals mining sector based on the latest annual NSW Mining Industry Expenditure Survey."
*******************************************
11 June, 2024
Censored again!
Google have deleted my post here of 9th. The post included an article about vaccines originating in the mainstream media. As usual, you can access a copy of the post beyond the control of Google on either of my two backup sites: jonjayray.com or johnjayray.com
********************************************
‘There’s no safe level’: Carcinogens found in tap water across Australia
Not PFOS again! This scare is like Global Warming: No facts will dent belief in it.
The WHO study referred to was just a meta-analysis, which is very vunerable to manipulation, but even its conclusion was very weak. It found that PFOS is "possibly carcinogenic to humans". Note the "POSSIBLY". It was no basis for any action at all. It was actually an exoneration of PFOS. No matter how hard they tried, they could find no evidence against it
Tap water across parts of Sydney, Newcastle, Canberra, Victoria, Queensland and the tourist havens of Rottnest and Norfolk islands has been found to contain contaminants that US authorities now warn are likely to be carcinogenic, with “no safe level of exposure”.
Experts say widespread testing of Australia’s drinking water must be an urgent priority after the US Environmental Protection Agency’s dramatic policy shift in April found there was no safe level of perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) in drinking water and they were likely to cause cancer.
The World Health Organisation’s cancer agency has gone a step further, concluding in December that PFOA is carcinogenic to humans.
Dr Mariann Lloyd-Smith, a toxic chemicals campaigner who has served on United Nations expert committees, slammed it as a “national disgrace” that PFOA is now permitted in Australia’s tap water at 140 times the maximum level the US will allow.
This masthead has analysed publicly available data which indicates the chemicals have been found in the drinking water of up to 1.8 million Australians since 2010, including in the Sydney suburbs of North Richmond, Quakers Hill, Liverpool, Blacktown, Emu Plains and Campbelltown, along with the NSW regional centres of Newcastle, Bathurst, Wagga Wagga, Lithgow, Gundagai and Yass.
The pollutants have also been detected in tap water in Canberra, the inner Melbourne suburb of Footscray, inner-city Adelaide, the Queensland regional centres of Cairns and Gladstone, Kingborough in greater Hobart and locations across Darwin and the Northern Territory.
The most comprehensive data comes from a federally funded University of Queensland study published in 2011, which sampled 34 locations across the country.
Various water providers have carried out their own localised surveillance in recent years, which confirms the chemicals are still turning up in some of the same locations they were first found in 2011, in some instances at even higher concentrations.
However, this masthead wasn’t able to locate any further widespread studies of Australian tap water funded by Commonwealth agencies since the 2011 study.
During the past decade, the federal government has been defending class actions over its use of the chemicals in firefighting foam and denying they cause “important” health effects.
It reached the first of settlements with 11 communities collectively worth $366 million in the weeks after the Federal Court’s expert umpire concluded there was good evidence the chemicals potentially cause harmful health effects, including cancer.
***********************************************
Travellers reluctant to pay for greener flights despite desire for sustainability
Travellers are proving reluctant passengers of the airline industry’s sustainability drive with those opting to offset flights actually falling in recent years.
After exceeding 10 per cent pre Covid, Qantas was now seeing around 6 or 7 per cent of guests choosing to offset, while Webjet had noticed that customers “talk the talk” but don’t necessarily “walk the walk”.
“When we originally looked at a program around sustainability for our travellers we surveyed our quite significant database of 2 million people and circa 30 to 40 per cent said they would regularly use the offset,” said Webjet managing director John Guscic.
“But in practical application, it’s less than 10 per cent ticking the box.”
Inflationary pressures were considered a factor in the drop off recorded by Qantas according to chief sustainability officer Andrew Parker who said there was still much passion for the decarbonisation journey.
“In terms of consumers there is still a lot to do,” Mr Parker told the Australian on the sidelines of the International Air Transport Association in Dubai.
“We can’t just be asking for customers to pay for sustainable aviation fuel, pay for offsets, we want to look at a model where you have a range of options.”
Despite the cool response from customers to date, airlines remained convinced that sustainability was extremely important to travellers.
International Air Transport Association director general Willie Walsh said the idea people want to fly in an “unsustainable fashion” was simply not correct.
“All the research that we do says that people want the airline industry to address its environmental footprint and we have to,” Mr Walsh said.
“And anybody who thinks you can transition to net zero in any industry without cost is misguided or misleading people. There’s going to be a cost and there’s going to be a consumer cost.”
It has been estimated that cost could push up airfares significantly, particularly in the early stages due to low levels of sustainable aviation fuel production.
Considered the only realistic path for airlines towards net zero at this stage, SAF (Sustainable aviation fuel) production in 2024 will amount to a mere 0.53 per cent of the industry’s fuel needs, or 1.9 billion litres.
To help drive production in Australia — which was rich in feedstock but yet to make any SAF — Qantas was investing in a north Queensland-based refinery using alcohol-to-jet technology.
Mr Parker said it was unusual for airlines to become investors in the production of fuel but they felt they had to.
“We need big fuel companies producing (SAF) albeit at a price that is digestible but we want small to medium-sized producers as well so we’ve got a competitive industry,” he said.
“We think Australia can produce SAF and a lot of it, which is one of the reasons Qantas has set a target of 10 per cent SAF usage by 2030.”
At the same time, Qantas was firmly in favour of the federal government imposing a mandate of 5 per cent SAF for airlines operating within and into Australia.
Virgin Australia recognised the potential role a SAF mandate could play but warned of economic consequences, particularly for “value carriers” like themselves.
“Increases in fuel prices would likely result in airlines having to raise airfares, with value carriers being less effective at doing so due to the price sensitivity of their customer base,” said Virgin Australia’s submission to the aviation green paper.
“This has the potential to reduce or limit competition.”
In the meantime it was indisputable that the cost of air travel would climb as more countries imposed SAF mandates on airlines as high as 10 per cent by 2030.
“Some consumers felt this could be done at no cost but there is a cost associated in the same way as when oil prices go up, ticket prices go up,” said Mr Walsh.
“The idea the airlines can absorb that additional cost given the net margins of 3 per cent in the industry, it’s just not going to be possible.”
Mr Parker said it was the only way forward for an industry that was so critical to Australia.
“We don’t have a train to Singapore, so you have to maximise the opportunity to protect aviation and give it a strong future,” he said.
“You don’t want the European flight shaming to impact aviation in our part of the world so that means SAF is the majority of the answer.”
****************************************************
Renewable energy subsidies undermine our economy
Rubbishy spending reduces both the capital and income that is available for more constructive purposes
Australia has seen a 20-year downward trend in productivity. Many other nations have seen similar trends and the cause is common: burgeoning growth of government squeezing out productive investment and an unrelenting surge in regulations, especially and notably so in Australia, covering fossil fuel both in its extraction and in its domestic use.
The Productivity Commission depicts the generally downward trend in productivity since the mid-1990s, punctuated by a mini recovery that petered out about a decade ago. In 2022-23 productivity actually fell by 3.7 per cent and remains below its 2021-22 level.
Australia has greater natural wealth per head of population than anywhere else in the world. With good government focused on protecting property rights, ensuring law and order, we would have the highest living standards in the world.
The fact that we are falling short – and increasingly so – of our potential is due entirely to government. The Commonwealth, over the past few decades, has increased its share of the nation’s spending from under 20 per cent to over 26 per cent of GDP and has run up half a trillion dollars of debt. We have seen similar increases from state governments – increases that have actually been accompanied by reduced service provision as a result of many former roles having been privatised.
An additional drag on real growth is regulation – the Institute of Public Affairs reports that the number of regulatory restrictions in federal law has increased by 88 per cent since 2005. Regulations have been exacerbated by judicial activism facilitating a well-financed green anti-development movement in preventing, delaying and seriously adding to costs and to investor confidence. Impediments to coal development are seen in all states. For gas, premium anticipated returns are now required for projects. This is a corollary of the travails like the dozen years it has taken Santos to get its Narrabri through a labyrinthian regulatory approvals system and the Victorian government’s layered moratorium on gas exploration.
The dominance of mining in national investment, especially in the last 20 years, is evident, as is its collapse over the past 10 years.
Disturbingly, the age of the national capital stock has also increased over the past decade – in the case of manufacturing from 11 to 13 years; for mining from 7 to 10 years and for agriculture from 12 to 14 years. It can be of no consolation that the age of capital has not increased in the electricity, gas, and water sectors since a major component of that sector’s new capital is wind/solar electricity, which is highly subsidised and displaces far more productive coal generation, making apparent investment actual disinvestment.
Complementing the assault on mining are the progressively growing regulations that subsidise renewable energy.
These regulations commenced with an obligation that retailers ensure ‘2 per cent of additional’ electricity to be provided by renewables, comprising wind and solar that then, as now, are both high cost and unreliable. Although no longer tabulated in the budget papers, the aggregate level of subsidy can be derived from published material. This shows from just a few hundred million dollars a year, the support for renewables is now over $15 billion a year.
The latest budget announced an upgrade in this support with $22.7 billion for Labor’s ‘Future Made in Australia’ agenda, much of which the Opposition has said it will retain.
These subsidies are, unlike other government direct spending and regulatory measures, actually designed to destroy one supply source, coal, and replace it with renewables. The increase in these subsidies bells the cat in claims that renewables are the cheapest form of electricity.
The subsidies have brought about a displacement of coal generation, which now provides about 56 per cent of electricity compared with 77 per cent historically. While initially bringing downward price pressures, the subsidies, in forcing coal generators’ closure and sub-optimal operations, have resulted in the ex-generator electricity price rising from under $40 per megawatt hour in 2015 to over $100 today. In addition, the diffuse and intermittent nature of wind and solar requires massive expenditures on duplicating back-up plant, batteries and a threefold expansion of the transmission network. And governments are now subsidising coal generators to prevent them closing ‘prematurely’ and thereby threatening the entire network.
This increased cost of electricity is already driving out businesses, especially the energy-intensive industries which have been the backbone of the nation’s productivity. And Barnaby Joyce asks, ‘Name me one global manufacturer who wants to move to Australia – just one. They’re all running for the door – aluminium, steel, plastics, oil refining, manufacturing, even food processing now with Cadbury.’
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/renewable-energy-subsidies-undermine-our-economy/
*********************************************Workers call on home affairs boss to fix mismanaged border force unit
The Community and Public Sector Union has requested Home Affairs secretary Stephanie Foster intervene in the Australian Border Force’s mismanagement of the National Marine Unit.
On Monday, this masthead revealed a man who helped 39 asylum seekers reach the mainland in February was deported without charge.
The joint media investigation also revealed long-running issues with Border Force’s Cape-class patrol fleet. One vessel, the Cape York, caught on fire and was out of action at the same time as the Indonesian people smuggler’s boatload reached the West Australian shore.
National secretary of the CPSU Melissa Donnelly said the union has repeatedly raised workplace health and safety issues with the Australian Border Force which has been repeatedly ignored:
The media investigation into the Marine Unit shone a light on our union’s uphill battle with border force in our mission to make our members safe at work,” she said.
The CPSU should immediately be permitted to participate in the Marine Workplace Health and Safety Committee, which we have so far been denied access to.
I have written to the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs, requesting she step in and protect our members.
I have outlined in that letter, issues including workplace health and safety, the proliferation of outsourcing and a lack of workforce planning.
On matters of outsourcing and workplace health and safety, there is no doubt in my mind that the introduction of a profit motive into the maintenance of Cape Class vessels has compromised these vessels and the safety of the mariners aboard them.”
************************************
10 June, 2024
Indigenous musician Emma Donovan lashes out at taxi drivers refusing to take her
I take a great personal risk in writing about this but I am 80 with not much longer to live so may perhaps be excused for telling the unvarnished truth. For background note that I was a taxi driver for two years in Sydney, operating out of Kings Cross. I never once refused a fare.
I was also for some years a boarding house proprietor in Ipswich, a poor suburb of Brisbne. At times, I let rooms to Aborigines, Maori and Pasifika people and not a few people fresh out of the "big house". So I am a pretty poor candidate to be branded as a racist.
What was going on below is that urban Aborigines are often smelly and dirty and taxi drivers know that. And urban Aborigines will also often not be able to pay the fare, So the drivers have good reason not to carry an Aborigine
Is there a solution to that? There is. Unemployed Aborigines should be given their welfare payments in their home communities only, so any of them in the cities will be known as employed and hence low-risk
An Indigenous musician was left in 'tears and anger' after claiming two taxi drivers refused her fare because of the colour of her skin.
Emma Donovan, an award-winning Gumbaynggirr and Yamatji artist, flew into Perth on Friday night after launching her new CD in Melbourne.
But Ms Donovan, 43, said she was refused a ride by two drivers despite being at the front of the queue.
The singer claimed that their refusal was driven by racism, with one of the drivers saying he didn't like 'her kind'.
'I am absolutely fuming writing this in tears and anger,' Ms Donovan wrote on Facebook.
'I will be reporting these guys somehow. The whole cab line was arguing about who would take me, and no one wanted to.
'A kind fulla (sic) offered me a lift in his car and took me to Vic Park.
'I know this wasn't because of a short fare; I know this was racism at its finest.'
The singer-songwriter took pictures of the two taxi drivers' number plates and shared them with her 21,000 followers.
Many urged her to report the licence plates to the department of transport, which regulates the taxi industry in the state.
'What happened to you is completely unacceptable (obviously!) but also against regulations,' wrote one person.
'The company and the drivers will be sanctioned. Or should be.'
Her post was flooded by hundreds of comments of support and solidarity, with one person saying their 'heart is hurt for reading this'.
****************************************
The anti-windfarm 'odd couple' joining forces to fight the renewable energy projects Australia's already failing to build
Deep in coal country, a lifelong environmentalist and one-time Greens candidate is feeling the applause.
It's Thursday night at a Gladstone pub and Steven Nowakowski has won over sceptical locals.
His message is a simple one; he believes a wave of new windfarm developments threatens to smash hilltops and turn koala habitat into "industrial zones".
The green movement, he says, are in "la-la land" over windfarms, a comment that draws nods and knowing smiles from the audience.
Nowakowski won over much of the crowd at the Central Queensland community meeting.(Four Corners: Nick Wiggins)
But its only when one local suggests building a new coal-fired power station does the crowd erupt in spontaneous applause.
This is the front line of Australia's latest climate war.
Nowakowski, a nature lover who says he's been arrested fighting for forests, shares the stage with ultra-conservative federal MP Colin Boyce, a man who claims burning fossil fuels creates "plant food".
"We're an odd couple," Nowakowski admits. "I shake my head in disbelief. I cannot believe that I'm in this situation."
It's an alliance at the more extreme end of the political spectrum. But it's being replicated right across the country as vocal groups mobilise to frustrate Australia's already slow rollout of renewables.
It's estimated Australia needs to build one new wind turbine every day for the next six years to reach its 2030 emissions target. But it's a target that's proving difficult, and the next leg towards net zero by 2050 is even more challenging.
"Wind's a really important source of new electricity generation," says Simon Corbell, who's just stepped down as CEO of the Clean Energy Investor Group.
Wind, he says, is not only one of the cheapest forms of new electricity generation, but it complements solar as the wind often picks up as the sun goes down.
It's a fact that appears to hold little sway with the growing number of community groups opposed to windfarms.
At Gladstone's Grand Hotel, Nowakowski enlists a few more opponents.
He argues Queensland's streamlined approvals process will further erode koala habitat, bird sanctuaries and the states' last remaining wild places.
"We're going down the wrong path," he says. "We can't destroy biodiversity to save the planet."
But as his presentation wraps up and the acclamation grows, Nowakowski shuffles awkwardly and looks towards the carpet.
There's a hint that his anti-windfarm pitch may be providing cover for those wishing to halt action on climate change.
An audience member urges Steven to look into whether there really is a link between carbon dioxide and changes in the climate.
"I'm just saying we could be on this whole train to nowhere for no reason at all," the man says.
Nowakowski allows the comment to remain unchallenged, saying he's "not going to talk about climate change", but does later concede it is a concern.
"I've got to grapple with this every day," he says.
***************************************************
ANU student expelled after saying on ABC radio that Hamas deserves 'unconditional support'
Sources have confirmed to the ABC that the ANU believed the comments may have been construed as supporting a terrorist organisation.
The group Students and Staff Against War ANU have condemned the move, raising issues of free speech.
The Australian National University (ANU) has expelled a student over comments they made about Hamas during an interview about pro-Palestinian protests on ABC radio.
The ABC has confirmed that Beatrice Tucker was expelled by the university, with sources confirming the ANU believed their comments may have been construed as supporting a terrorist organisation.
Hamas was the militant group behind attacks against Israel on October 7, 2023.
Beatrice Tucker was interviewed on ABC Radio Canberra in late April as one of the members of a pro-Palestinian encampment that had been established on the ANU campus.
During the program, Beatrice Tucker was asked by host Ross Solly whether they wanted to send a message to Hamas for its actions on October 7.
"I actually say that Hamas deserve our unconditional support, not because I agree with their strategy," Beatrice Tucker said.
"But the situation at hand is if you have no hope, if you are sanctioned every day of your life, if you're told you're not allowed to drive down a road because somebody who is Israeli gets to have preference and you sit there for 12 hours, the reality of life in Palestine."
The ABC understands the decision to expel Beatrice Tucker was due to these comments, and not related to their involvement in the encampment or protest action.
A group that has been associated with the encampment, Students and Staff Against War ANU, condemned the ANU's decision. The group said Beatrice Tucker had been banned from entering the ANU campus and continuing their studies.
"After making these comments, Tucker was targeted by right-wing media outlets like The Australian and Zionist organisations like the Executive Council of Australian Jewry," the statement read.
"They demanded Tucker's immediate expulsion and accused Tucker of supporting 'terrorism'.
"These same organisations have called for the Palestine solidarity encampments across Australian universities to be shut down."
Group member Finnian Colwell condemned the university for taking action against students rather than meeting the demands of protesters, including that the ANU divest from companies linked to the Israeli government.
"ANU has taken an unprecedented and dangerous step in smothering free speech on campus," Mr Colwell said.
"The ANU would rather punish students for repeating what they have learnt in its international law courses, that armed resistance is a legal human right for oppressed nationalities, than divest from over $1 million invested in eight arms companies with links to Israel."
The ABC has confirmed the expulsion is one of a number of similar investigations the ANU is undertaking at the moment.
It is understood the university is concerned about public commentary supporting terrorism, as well as actions and words that could be deemed to be racist or anti-Semitic.
The ANU said in a statement it could not comment on specific disciplinary matters. "ANU is a place of respectful debate and we are proud of our long history of student political engagement," the statement read.
"All staff and students are free to express themselves and protest in line with the university's academic freedom and freedom of speech policies."
"With these rights come responsibilities."
Last week, the university ordered members of the pro-Palestinian encampment, which has been active since April, to leave the campus, citing safety concerns.
The students have since moved their encampment to a different part of the campus, which remains active.
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-06-06/anu-expels-student-over-comments-supporting-hamas/103944796
***************************************************Christianity under increasing attack from a much more intolerant and authoritarian religion: Leftism
Is the Bible hate speech? Could a Christian minister, or any ordinary person, be prosecuted for reading out sections of the New Testament?
In fact, this is almost the case in law already, as we’ll see. A slew of legal, legislative, bureaucratic and cultural trends make it likely to become a practical reality in time.
It will not only be the Bible. Countless Christian classics from almost every denomination will be liable to be, if not banned from sale, banned from public display, recital or reading aloud. The Catholic catechism, the official compendium of belief for the world’s 1.3 billion Catholics, may well have to be trafficked in brown paper envelopes under the counter.
Christianity may become like smoking, tolerated at law for a while, but ever more narrowly, with ever more restrictions, actively discouraged by punitive financial measures.
The Albanese government, like the Morrison government, has abandoned the attempt at a religious discrimination law to protect people of faith. Like the Morrison government, it won’t even present a bill for public consideration.
Both sides of politics, when in government, are paralysed by fear of having the debate about religious freedom and how that interacts with other freedoms. Surely the voice referendum demonstrated the danger of not having a big open debate before implementing fundamental change.
This political timidity indicates cowardice in the face of rising prejudice, in some cases hatred, against Christianity in the activist class, and the anti-Christian assumptions increasingly permeating the bureaucratic and institutional elites. Former Labor senator Jacinta Collins, now executive director of the National Catholic Education Commission, tells Inquirer: “In the public policy class, the political elite and the policy bureaucracy, it’s becoming more common not to see Christianity as a social good.”
Melbourne’s Catholic Archbishop, Peter Comensoli, remarks: “Step by small step, the path of living a life of faith in our country is being undermined. But there are always seeds of hope.”
A fundamental cultural change is under way here, perhaps the most destructive we’ve seen. Official Australia, more the bureaucrat/academic/media class than politicians, no longer sees Christianity as a social good. Rather, they see it now as anti-social, something to be constrained.
This is not a story about a perfidious left-wing Labor government assaulting Christian churches. Both sides of politics are flummoxed and scared by this. Neither handles it well. Anthony Albanese and at least some of his ministers are sympathetic to Christian churches. But there’s a severe limit to how far this sympathy will take them in defending Christian institutions against bureaucratic, activist and sectional effort to destroy their independence and religious integrity.
There’s a lot of legislative action, but the seething cultural dynamics suggest no prospect of lasting settlement.
The Sex Discrimination Act contains an exemption, section 38, for religious bodies. Otherwise, Catholics, Greek Orthodox, conservative Anglicans and others couldn’t have an all-male priesthood. Religious schools are allowed to preference teachers who support their core ethos. So Christian schools don’t hire gay activists. They knowingly hire plenty of gay people but they don’t want activist teachers running campaigns against the core beliefs of the school.
Almost none of them hires exclusively co-religionists. Most exhibit common sense; they want enough teachers who share the faith of the school so as to promote those beliefs. Thus, Collins says: “We (Catholic schools) have lots of teachers from diverse religious backgrounds and from none. That’s great, so long as they operate in sympathy with the ethos of the school.”
Most religious school authorities therefore want the right to “discriminate” in hiring staff and to accept and reject whatever students they choose. No Catholic or Anglican I spoke to for this story, or whom I’ve ever met in a lifetime’s involvement in Christian schools, could recall any student ever being expelled for any reason related to sexual identity.
However, non-government schools can expel a student who behaves unacceptably. It’s possible you could get a student who, at age 16 or 17, decided they hated the church their school is affiliated with and campaigned against it. If that student clothed their campaign in a protected characteristic, such as gender status or sexual identity, the school wouldn’t be able to deal with them if the exemption from the Sex Discrimination Act is removed.
It’s wrong to think of this as Christian institutions wanting to discriminate. Rather, they want the right of free association. Christians, like everyone else, should be allowed to associate with each other and form institutions that reflect their values.
Kanishka Raffel, Anglican Archbishop of Sydney, tells Inquirer: “Our (Anglican) schools have young people who identify as LGBT, and are happy and supported and not desperate to go somewhere else – nor would we want them to. We’re only asking for the same rights as political parties have.”
Raffel means that the Labor Party is not required to employ, or even admit as members, people who oppose Labor and support the Liberal Party. Increasingly Christian institutions are denied this elementary freedom.
Raffel continues: “Christianity accepts a pluriform world. The New Testament advises Christians, even if unfairly attacked, to ‘give an answer for their hope’ and to do so with ‘gentleness and respect’.
“That’s the biblical seed of contemporary pluralism. It’s religious. It’s Christian. But at one end of the spectrum there’s a totalitarian secularism that doesn’t countenance religious speech. In Australia we’ve had a confident pluralism. It’s that kind of practice which is now under attack. It (this attack) is driven by activists in thrall to the prevailing ideology of identity and sexuality, who will not countenance alternative world views.”
Raffel’s view, that this intolerance threatens pluralism, is widely shared among Christian denominations. Mark Varughese, founder of the international Kingdomcity Pentecostal church, and a member of the Australian Christian Churches executive, accuses elites of weaponising tolerance.
“The trend appears to be to almost suffocate the ability of faith-based organisations to employ according to their ethos,” Varughese says. “But you don’t have to go to any of these schools. Those who choose to go to them have a right to expect an environment which reflects their beliefs. Weaponising tolerance to erode the freedom of those who want a unique space to grow is the ultimate irony.
“This is not about hating any part of society. The faith of the gospel is based on the belief that we are all sinners and we all need a saviour. People can choose not to believe in God. Why would you be offended by the principles of a God you don’t believe exists?”
The government blames the opposition for not reaching bipartisan agreement on a religious discrimination bill. The opposition says it won’t support a bill the major faith leaders oppose, so the government should get the major faith leaders onboard, then there would be the basis for bipartisanism.
The Catholic and Anglican leaders, plus a group of other faith leaders including non-Christians, wrote to the Prime Minister and Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus, outlining in detail where they thought the draft legislation was inadequate. They argued strongly that removing the religious exemption from the Sex Discrimination Act and passing the religious freedom legislation as it was shown to them would leave Christian schools seriously worse off in their ability to run effectively.
Everybody has somebody else to blame and nothing gets done. The Christian leaders are in a tough, uncertain spot. Some of them think they must press for the best deal they can get from the Albanese government, get something resolved now. A future parliament, with Labor perhaps in minority government and dependent on the Greens, would likely use the “progressive majority” to attack the churches much more aggressively.
The counter-argument is that the churches cannot willingly accept legislation that gravely weakens their ability to run their schools and other institutions with integrity. A weak settlement now would easily be undone by a more aggressively anti-Christian parliament and the churches, having surrendered now, would be in a weaker position then.
The key is they must fight, even if they fight in a kindly way. The Scripture passage Raffel referred to occurs in the first letter of Peter, who advises Christians: “Even if you suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. Do not fear what they fear, and do not be intimidated, but in your hearts sanctify Christ as Lord. Always be ready to make your defence to anyone who demands from you an account of the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.”
Albanese has promised Christian leaders their schools won’t go backwards in their ability to operate independently. However, now it has abandoned a religious discrimination bill, the government plans to introduce hate speech legislation and insert criminal penalties for vilification or hate speech. Christian leaders find this alarming because, as I suggested at the start of this piece, modern anti-discrimination bodies, extreme LGBTI lobbies and others, now regard normal Christian teaching as hate speech
Comensoli puts the broader cultural context: “It’s death by a thousand cuts. Places of influence like the media, academia, corporations, are all signing up to agendas that see the Christian Church as the problem. We’re disappointed that a religious discrimination bill won’t go ahead. And given that, we’re concerned about the proposed vilification legislation and the very low threshold at which vilification cuts in.”
The proposed hate speech law is a needed response to the shocking, appalling outbreaks of anti-Semitic abuse that Australia, like many Western nations, has witnessed.
How then could such legislation be weaponised against Christians? This is likely because the legislation will not just protect religious and racial identities but all protected characteristics, including sex, gender status, sexual orientation and various other categories. It will introduce criminal penalties, including harsh jail terms, for offensive speech in these areas and will not override state anti-discrimination commissions and laws.
A number of states, Tasmania, Victoria and now Queensland, already have anti-discrimination laws with no or little religious exemption. But generally federal laws take precedence. They won’t do so in this case.
Now, discrimination “offences” incur mainly civil penalties. With hate law legislation they would become criminal offences. Numerous state anti-discrimination commissions have already shown an inclination to regard normal Christian teaching and passages of the Bible effectively as hate speech.
The New International Version of the Bible translates a passage from Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians thus: “Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor men who have sex with men, nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God.”
That’s isn’t a condemnation of anyone’s identity but of certain behaviours. The gospels and the letters of Paul, Peter and the others never condemn anyone’s identity. They do teach against certain behaviours and attitudes. A gay sexual orientation in traditional Christian teaching is not a moral fault, but sex outside marriage is immoral. Paul is assuredly not saying that anyone who doesn’t live up to the moral ideal is condemned to hell. But as Varughese put it, all human beings need forgiveness.
Similarly, the Catholic catechism, in explaining human sexuality, comments: “Homosexual acts are inherently disordered.” This also refers to behaviour, not identity. Is it hate speech? In Christian theology, disordered means not in accordance with the order God wants in creation. But in modern parlance disordered has a medical connotation. The catechism also says of gay people that “they must be accepted with respect, compassion and sensitivity” and there must not be discrimination against them.
No one is required to accept, or even pay any attention to, Christian teaching on this or any other matter. The question is whether Christians will be allowed to speak and teach their faith.
Michael Stead, Anglican Bishop of South Sydney, says the proposed hate speech law “has the potential to criminalise religious speech that expresses traditional understandings of human sexuality”.
Everyone is free to disagree with, lampoon, contest or ignore Christian teachings. But should it be a criminal offence for Christians and Christian institutions even to express them? This is not theoretical or far-fetched. In 2015, Catholic Archbishop of Hobart Julian Porteous was subject to 12 months of harassment and inquisition by the Tasmanian Anti-Discrimination Commission. He had published the gentlest defence of traditional marriage. The activist class encouraged people to take offence and lodge a complaint. Eventually the complaint was withdrawn, never adjudicated in Porteous’s favour.
Recently Porteous wrote another pastoral letter and circulated it to Catholic parishes and schools. It taught the positive Christian case for universal human dignity but also said, inter alia: “We are now witnessing the imposition of certain ideological positions on social and moral questions by means of legislation … This has included the attack on the biological reality of being male and female.”
Porteous argued proposed legislative changes allow “for a priest to have a complaint made against him for simply presenting Catholic teaching while preaching at a Sunday mass”. Two Tasmanian politicians threatened to make complaints to the Anti-Discrimination Commission.
I wrote and spoke in favour of a Yes vote in the same-sex marriage plebiscite because I thought it implausible for the state to enforce elements of Christian teaching for which there was no longer a consensus. Also, we’d long ago allowed gay couples to adopt kids. Therefore it seemed better for the kids if their parents had the status of a civil marriage. But in holding that view it’s not necessary to demand Christian churches abandon their teachings of 2000 years or be prosecuted if they don’t do so.
Recently the Productivity Commission argued church school building funds should lose tax deductibility. This seems a vicious assault on religious schools’ ability to build and expand. Every parent who sends a kid to a non-government school pays a massive subsidy to the state by shouldering a large part of the financial burden that the state would otherwise pay for fully.
The Productivity Commission proposal is just one more bit of evidence of how pervasively hostile to Christianity ruling elites have become. Sydney Catholic Archbishop Anthony Fisher recently delivered a brilliant speech imagining Australia in 2035, where he has to submit his weekly sermon in advance to a government censor – under a Greens-teals coalition – that determines what can be said in all religious pronouncements.
That situation prevails in some countries, just not in democracies.
As historian Tom Holland demonstrates so elegantly in Dominion, everything Western society likes about itself – welfare, human rights, equality of the sexes, concern for the poor – comes directly from the Jewish and Christian traditions. Yet we now inhabit a cultural moment in which you can scream “F..k the Jews!” and suffer no legal consequence at all. But read out the wrong bit of the New Testament …
For Australian institutional life now to become so irrationally hostile to Christianity is a mark of madness, a terrible cultural mistake. But mistakes can be corrected.
************************************
9 June, 2024
Mixed results for regional universities in international rankings
My student days are 50 years behind me so these results don't reflect on me personally for good or ill but I am still pleased to see three of the four that I went to in the top 40 worldwide.
I particularly liked my time doing my Masters at U.Syd, so I am pleased that it has kept up its high quality. It even pips most of America's "Ivies" LOL
Australian universities have boosted their international standing but regional universities have tumbled in the latest annual global rankings.
The University of Melbourne was the highest rated Australian institution taking 13th spot on the QS World University Rankings 2025, up one place.
The University of Sydney also fared well, rising to number 18 while the University of New South Wales maintained its 19th spot.
Australian National University in Canberra rose four places to 30, while Monash University in Melbourne came in at 37, up five places. The University of Queensland rounded out the top 40, up three places.
The top regional university was the University of Wollongong at number 167, down five places. It was followed by the University of Newcastle which was ranked at number 179, although it dropped five ranking spots.
Deakin University rose to 197 after ranking 233 in 2024. LaTrobe University came in at 217 rising from 242 in 2023.
The University of Canberra improved its ranking by 14 places to reach an equal 403rd position.
University of Wollongong acting vice-chancellor and president professor David Currow said the rankings reflect dedication and hard work of staff across UOW's network of campuses.
"The latest QS World University rankings underscore our ongoing commitment to excellence in research and sustainability," Professor Currow said.
"The University's remarkable performance in Research Citations is particularly noteworthy, highlighting the impactful research being conducted at UOW. These research streams address global challenges and contribute significantly to the advancing new knowledge."
************************************************
Dutton calls Greens ‘evil’ and claims Bandt ‘unfit for public office’ as tensions over Gaza war continue
Bandt IS evil. He is a Trotskyite in Green garb. He always was and still is
Tensions in parliament over a rise in antisemitism and Islamophobia sparked by the war in Gaza have spilled over into a second day with the opposition leader, Peter Dutton, calling the Greens “evil” and accusing it of playing a “central” role in protests on university campuses.
Parliament’s question time erupted on Wednesday after Anthony Albanese accused the Greens of spreading misinformation and Dutton alleged the Greens were condoning acts of violence instead of condemning them.
Albanese had condemned pro-Palestinian protests outside MPs’ offices in the months since 7 October as a bad development for democracy, with some Labor MPs claiming they and their staff had been intimidated in some instances.
The attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, later singled out Greens leader Adam Bandt and his party out on national television and made allegations against the Greens and their federal leader.
On Thursday morning, Bandt threatened Dreyfus with legal action for making “utterly unfounded statements” to the ABC and “spreading disinformation”.
Dutton continued his criticism of the progressive minority party on 2GB on Thursday, saying he thought Bandt was “unfit for public office”.
“I think that people need to have a conversation with their kids and their grandkids, with their nextdoor neighbours, just about how evil the current Greens party is – that they’re nothing about the environment. They’re all about radical causes,” Dutton said.
“And somehow Adam Bandt, who I think is unfit to be in public office, he has led a party now that is central to what we’re seeing on campuses and the distribution of hate and antisemitic messages online.”
In response Bandt said he would not be lectured about peace and non-violence “from a prime minister and opposition leader who back the invasion of Gaza”.
“What we are expressing support for is peaceful protests across the country, calling for the government to do something to bring pressure to bear on this extreme Israeli war cabinet. Because the slaughter is getting worse, children are dying because they can’t get enough to eat or drink,” Bandt said.
********************************************
"Greens" becoming hard Left antisemites
Hard antisemitism always comes from the Left. Marx despised Jews even though he was one and Hitler was an extreme socialist
Over the past decade, Daniel Coleman tried to address what he and other members of the Greens had identified as a growing problem: antisemitism within the party. He helped found the Jewish Greens Working Group in Victoria and along with the late David Zyngier, a local government councillor and respected party figure, worked to develop policies and educate party members about the ancient hatred.
In the days and weeks after Hamas’ atrocities in southern Israel, the muted response from the party’s elected officials convinced him the project had failed. The Greens had not adopted a policy on antisemitism proposed by the working group and, more distressingly, he says the party appeared to give little thought to the Jews murdered, raped and taken hostage by terrorists.
“It was brought home to me after October 7 that Jewish lives were just not a concern to the Australian Greens party,” Coleman says from his Melbourne home. “It really became untenable for me to continue as a member.
“I believe that had it been any community other than a Jewish community subject to that sort of attack, the Greens would have spoken out.”
When Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Opposition Leader Peter Dutton rose this week in federal parliament, one after the other, to condemn the Greens for seeking to exploit for political ends social divisions created by the war in Gaza, there were party politics in play. But what Albanese and Dutton said went beyond electoral calculus. The raw anger in the PM’s voice sliced through the usual cant and theatrics of question time.
Greens leader Adam Bandt described the politicians’ attacks as outrageous, saying his party had drawn a clear line between peaceful protests and any actions which escalate into violence or destruction of property. He reiterated what has become his party’s three-point mantra. “The Greens condemn antisemitism. The Greens condemn Islamophobia. And the Greens condemn the invasion of Gaza.”
Coleman believes it is an empty slogan.
The Greens’ abhorrence of the catastrophic loss of life in Gaza, eight months into a conflict that continues to frustrate the diplomatic efforts of neighbouring Arab states and the Biden administration to broker a ceasefire, is genuine and heartfelt. So far, more than 36,000 Palestinians are estimated to have been killed in Gaza and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is accused of using starvation as a war tactic.
Less than a month after October 7, Coleman was dismayed when Bandt posted promotional material for a “stand with Gaza” rally in Melbourne. In the accompanying image, Israel is wiped from the map and replaced by a “Free Palestine” taking in all of Gaza, Israel and the West Bank.
Coleman says this is contrary to Greens’ policy, which supports a two-state solution.
“They have done nothing to combat antisemitism or to acknowledge it within the party or to call out and oppose the terrorism of Hamas,” Coleman says.
“It is really all about winning elections. They are looking for votes and they want to shore up the far left as their base. If you like Hamas, your party of choice is going to be the Greens.”
The influence of this shift in the Greens is evidenced by the party’s embrace of a pro-Palestinian protest movement that, in the eight months since October 7, has progressively adopted slogans, chants, dress and symbols favoured by Hamas and other militant Palestinian organisations.
A graphic example was left outside the electoral office of Labor MP and former ACTU president Ged Kearney last Friday by keffiyeh-wrapped members of Darebin4Palestine, a protest group centred in Melbourne’s deep-Green local government area.
Amid Palestinian flags, an invitation for Kearney to “resign, genocide” and “F--- the ALP” graffiti on the walls of her office, a placard made a play on the well-known Palestinian liberation chant: “From the River to the Sea, Death to the ALP.” The placard also carried an upside down red triangle; iconography used by the Al-Qassam Brigades, the militant wing of Hamas which carried out the 7 October attacks.
The vandalism outside Kearney’s office was part of a “Day of Action Against the ALP” co-ordinated between pro-Palestinian groups and promoted by one of the Greens Victorian State MPs, Gabrielle de Vietri, to her Instagram followers.
Khalil says every citizen has the right to protest government policy but the Greens, in their determination to harvest votes from a tragic conflict and loss of innocent life in Gaza, were putting something else at risk.
“I am really concerned and this goes beyond politics. As elected representatives, we have a responsibility to unite Australians and protect our democracy and ensure community safety and cohesion. You have got a political party that has representatives in parliament who are fanning the flames of hatred and division and grievance and tearing asunder the social fabric for short-term political gain. It is not the party of Bob Brown any more. That’s for sure.”
RedBridge pollster Kos Samaras said the Greens strategy was working among young voters, with his latest survey showing that 28 per cent of voters between the age of 18 and 34 say they will vote Green at the next federal election. The flipside, he says, is that the party is losing support among older voters.
************************************************
Vaccines? Excess deaths? Any link?
Is this the first significant crack in the dam? This week, the UK Telegraph ran a story that should be extremely distressing to all Australians, and even more so to certain politicians, health bureaucrats, medical authorities and CEOs. It concerns the increasingly credible claims of the deadly potential of the Covid mRNA vaccines. ‘Covid vaccines could be partly to blame for the rise in excess deaths since the pandemic, scientists have suggested,’ said the disturbing article by science editor Sarah Knapton. ‘Researchers from The Netherlands analysed data from 47 Western countries and discovered there had been more than three million excess deaths since 2020, with the trend continuing despite the rollout of vaccines and containment measures.’ Her article was based on a paper in the respected medical journal BMJ Public Health.
Ms Knapton then went on to detail the failure of health authorities to adequately explore the well-documented rise in excess mortality rates in many countries, and included a somewhat unnerving diagram showing how risky AstraZeneca was for the under-50s compared to other causes of death, such as scuba diving, receiving a general anaesthetic, drowning in the bath and so on.
Furthermore, the researchers paper which she quoted suggested that it was ‘likely’ that lockdowns, school closures, travel restrictions, curfews and all the other ‘quarantine restrictions’ had contributed to the rise in excess deaths. To say it was not a comforting read is to put it mildly. To top it all off, the article also explained that many serious, vaccine-related, adverse ‘events’ have gone unreported.
In other words, people may have died or been injured due to coercion by governments, health authorities, the media, Big Tech and Big Business which in essence amounted to mandatory vaccination – in clear breach of international health protocols since the second world war. Call it manslaughter or malpractice or political malfeasance, it all amounts to the same thing if you lost a loved one. It seems there are parents, relatives, friends and spouses who may be grieving for the deaths of people who should never have died, who may well have not wanted to take the vaccine, and whose deaths it would appear did nothing to protect anybody else.
Who might be to blame? Will they ever be held to account? Would any of our political leaders have made different choices back then around lockdowns or labelling Covid-19 ‘the pandemic of the unvaccinated’ had they known what we now know about transmission or the efficacy and safety of vaccines? And if so, should they now apologise?
This magazine, alone among the mainstream Australian media, and indeed alone among most of the Western press, was adamantly opposed to any form of mandatory vaccination from the moment the Diamond Princess first sailed over the horizon and into the headlines. We editorialised against mandates from before the vaccines even existed, as politicians like Australia’s then prime minister Scott Morrison began insisting that vaccination when it arrived should be ‘as mandatory as is possible’. No, we said, it should not. Anything other than voluntary vaccination is and was a clear breach of the well-known concept of informed consent, we argued. We also queried from the get-go what evidence there was to support the (false) claim that the vaccines prevented transmission of the virus.
In article after article by writers such as Rebecca Weisser, Ramesh Thakur, James Allan, David Flint, David Adler, Rowan Dean, Robert Clancy, Julie Sladden, Alexandra Marshall and many others, both in this magazine and on our online Flat White, we opposed the insanity of lockdowns, the foolish futility of authoritarian social distancing, the stupidity of ubiquitous mask-wearing and the immorality of vaccine mandates. More recently, several of those same writers have explored the chilling data surrounding excess mortality.
So the UK Telegraph article will have come, perhaps, as less of a surprise to readers of The Spectator Australia than to consumers of other Australian or international media. Coincidentally or otherwise, this magazine, unlike virtually every other mainstream media outlet we can think of, does not look to lucrative advertising commissions from Big Pharma or from government to swell our coffers.
So where to from here? Will this study and report be a one-off, quickly dismissed by the usual suspects and soon forgotten? Already the claims in the article have been rejected by the ‘experts’. When Senator Ralph Babet from the United Australia party managed to get a Senate investigation up into the causes behind the rise in excess mortality data, the federal Health Department was adamant: ‘There is no credible evidence to suggest that Covid-19 vaccines have contributed to excess deaths in Australia or overseas.’
What was it Mandy Rice-Davies famously once said?
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/06/vaccines-excess-deaths-any-link/
************************************6 June, 2024
Landlords smashed with new rules, rents to soar in Victoria
It's about to become a better place to buy your your own home but a nightmare to rent in. This is ANTI-tenant legislation.
Note that no costng is given to introduce the new requirements -- but from experience I can tell that the costs will be huge -- particularly for the older buildings which are commonly let out.
Many landlords will simply not be able to afford it all and will have to sell. And given the expenses looming over the houses concerned, the buyers will not be investors. It will be be owner occupiers. So the supply of houses to live in will be increased while forcing up costs for renters competing for the reduced supply of rental hosing.
So these measures will benefit owner-occupiers while hitting tenants hard: just the opposite of the intended state of affairs. Very destructive. Tenants should indeed be the the ones squealing loudest against this Leftist insanity. Leftists are always looking for ways to do harm while seeming to do good and this one is a doozy.
There are going to be a lot more street sleepers in Melbourne if this goes through. One hopes that the new laws get knocked over in the upper house
A landlord has warned a government proposal to introduce new minimum rental standards will only “worsen” the rental crisis and cause tenants more pain as property owners pass on the blowout in costs.
Simon*, from Victoria, said the situation has gotten so bad for landlords in the state that he is looking to sell and get out of the rental game.
He believes new rental rules would cost thousands of dollars to ensure compliance and said ultimately these costs will be passed on to tenants.
“I would suggest across Victoria that rents would skyrocket. My wife and I would certainly apply a hefty increase and I have just increased the rent by $2500 for the year,” he said.
The Victorian government is proposing to introduce new minimum heating and cooling standards for rental properties.
It would include things such as installing ceiling insulation where none exists, droughtproofing with weather seals on all external doors, new electric hot water systems and three-star efficiency cooling.
The Victorian government has launched a consultation on the requirements, which would also encompass replacing broken appliances with energy efficient ones, which it said would drive down power bills for renters by more than $800 a year.
Overall, the government estimates these proposed upgrades would save renters about $567 a year off their energy bills.
Rental providers would also be required to replace hot water and heating systems with energy-efficient electric appliances when their current appliance reaches end of life.
The move is expected to save renters $215 off their power bills a year, while the lower-cost option to upgrade a hot water system would save tenants about $113 a year.
While landlords have hit out at the move, Everybody’s Home, a group campaigning to fix the housing crisis, has welcomed the move.
“Landlords are taking every opportunity they can to increase rents. There have been huge rent increases year-on-year and major increases since the pandemic. We need these reforms to be passed alongside caps to rental increases as they have in ACT – they go hand-in-hand,” Everybody’s Home spokeswoman Maiy Azize told news.com.au.
“Housing hasn’t collapsed in the ACT with these requirements. We have just got people living in homes that are of a decent standard and their rent increases are capped to 10 per cent of CPI, which is very reasonable.”
However, Simon, who owns a three-bedroom unit in the suburb of Ringwood, argued that any more costs would only worsen the situation for all.
He said he has watched costs for landlords increase from land tax to smoke detection inspections to sending out tradies for maintenance, while insurance has jumped by 30 per cent.
The business owner said he can’t “keep absorbing these costs”.
“Landlords are leaving the market in the droves. Those remaining are being forced to pass the costs onto tenants,” he said.
“I, like many others, don’t like displacing tenants or passing on rental increases. I have just received the $2200 or thereabouts insurance costs for this year and that does not even include the additional public liability insurance we have to have for inside the property.”
The business owner said landlords don’t buy property for the rental income.
“You would have be a moron to buy a property for rent – you buy in hope that maybe in five, 10, 15 or 20 years, prices have gone up substantially and you make some capital growth on it. Anyone with a brain is investing in property not to make rent – no one does it to get rich.”
The 57-year-old said he had previously had five rental properties but was grateful he had sold them declaring he would never invest in property again in Victoria given compliance costs and other expenses. He has tried twice to sell the Ringwood property already.
“I plan to sell it again to get out of the market – I have simply been waiting for the right time,” he shared.
“I would earn more money in a 5 per cent term deposit with no outgoings, no management fees, no land taxes, no compliance costs, no 8.8 per cent investor mortgage rates, stress, damage.”
He said his wife also owned a rental and after hearing about the Victorian government’s proposal for new standards said “she would give up and get out” if they were introduced by immediately putting it on the market for sale.
Simon said renters and landlords should join forces to lobby the government to bring down taxes and “horrendous costs for landlords” who are “suffering” so that these savings could be passed on to renters.
Victorian’s new rental standards would be staggered into operation from 30 October 2025.
The state government also introduced minimum renting standards in 2021, which include a requirement for landlords to provide a fixed heater.
Ms Azize said the reforms were a step forward in making sure landlords are not just investing in themselves as they are a “supplier of an essential service”.
“If they can’t provide a home to a minimum standard and they are so highly leveraged that these reforms are going to send them into tail spin or create liability issues, they do need to examine if they are able to supply an essential service to someone,” she added.
“I think landlords are not performing a public service. If they sell the home, it doesn’t dematerialise. It’s sold to another person who will be a landlord or become a home for a buyer who will live in it which we need to see more of in Australia.
“I don’t think it’s a huge disaster if people who are not equipped to supplying housing stop supply housing. It’s not a reason to have minimum standards.”
Victorian Minister for Consumer Affairs Gabrielle Williams said the proposed standards will make rental properties safer and more comfortable – giving renters peace of mind for both the winter and summer and driving down costs.
“Everyone deserves to live comfortably – these proposed standards will make rentals more energy efficient and cheaper to run – slashing their bills and making them more climate resilient,” Victorian Minister for Energy and Resources Lily D’Ambrosio added.
However, the Department of Government Services and the Department of Energy, Environment and Climate Action highlighted in documents that there would be short term pain for renters.
“The departments acknowledge that it is likely that at least some of the costs will be passed on to tenants, and that recent cost-of-living pressures and interest rate rises may limit the amount of cost increases that rental providers and rooming house operators can absorb,” said Commissioner for Better Regulation Cressida Wall.
Opposition housing affordability spokesman Evan Mulholland said investors were already fleeing the state and costs would be passed on and the people that would pay are “vulnerable renters who need to get a roof over their head”.
Consultations close in July before the new standards are determined in October.
**************************************************
Gina Rinehart steps in to help worried parents fight back against 'woke' nonsense being taught at elite girls' school
Australia's richest person Gina Rinehart is supporting parents of students at an elite all girls' school who are fighting against 'woke' gender ideology.
The billionaire has offered her encouragement after St Hilda's Anglican School for Girls in Perth introduced 'anti-Australian propaganda' that parents are concerned is being forced upon students.
Concerns came to a head after two teachers were appointed this year - one transgender and one non-binary.
Ms Rinehart, who is among four generations of her family to attend the prestigious college, starting with her mother Hope Nicholas, graduated from the Anglican school more than 50 years ago.
The mining magnate told Sky News she had met with the head of Moms of America, who are fighting the same ideologies in classrooms in the United States.
'I understand a rough estimate is that woke, anti-Australia and similar propaganda takes up approximately one-third of the school curriculums in Australia,' Ms Rinehart said.
'So yes, if you are concerned about your children and grandchildren being exposed to such things instead of facts, logic, and reason, it's time to have a Mums for Australia start and flourish here.'
Ms Rinehart told the news outlet that although it's not easy to stand up, people need to consider speaking up 'for the sake of our children and grandchildren'.
One parent said the situation at the school had become a 'clash of values' between the 'traditional' beliefs in the school community, and principal Fiona Johnston's more 'progressive' stance.
The parents also pointed to a lack of discussion and consultation between themselves and the school.
Among issues was a Pride assembly last year, and gender identity lessons which showed slides telling the students 'having a penis doesn't mean you have to perform the role of a man… Having a vulva doesn't necessarily mean you're a woman and want to use women's spaces like bathrooms'.
Another slide showed a 'Sexuality Matching Game' which used the terms 'transgender' and 'cisgender'.
It is understood a classroom was admonished after one student used the term 'Sir' instead of 'Miss' for one teacher.
Independent think tank Women's Forum Australia CEO Rachel Wong contacted the school after speaking to worried parents.
'Another teacher who identifies as non-binary… the girls are meant to refer to as Mx. These poor, young girls are terrified of being accused of bigotry for potentially misgendering,' she said.
St Hilda's Anglican School for Girls told Sky News it is proud about 'providing an inclusive and progressive' environment.
The school also noted they are an equal opportunity employer and do not judge people based on their beliefs or sexuality.
*********************************************
Australia’s Internet Regulator Drops Case Against X Over Stabbing Video
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has announced she is withdrawing Federal Court action against Elon Musk’s X Corp over the platform’s carrying footage of the stabbing of a religious leader in a Sydney church in April.
In what she called a “consolidation” of the cases brought against the social media platform, she will now rely on another case also underway—this time in the Administrative Appeals Tribunal—for a final ruling on the matter.
eSafety wanted X Corp to take down, across the entire platform, about 60 instances of footage of the alleged attack on Bishop Mar Mari Emmanuel at the Wakely church on April 15.
X complied by geo-blocking all posts on the stabbing within Australia, despite disagreeing with the ban.
However, it refused to remove the graphic videos internationally, leading the Commissioner to seek a ruling.
The Court then granted an interim injunction barring X from allowing anyone, anywhere, access to the video, but the company refused to comply.
But then, on May 13, in a major setback to eSafety’s case the Court ruled that its jurisdiction could not extend beyond Australia’s borders.
The Commissioner had, until today, continued the case, hoping to convince the court to fine the company for refusing to obey the interim injunction.
************************************************
Judge Finally Rejects Victoria Dep. Of Health Bureaucrats, Records Justifying Extreme COVID-19 Response Measures to be Released
Some of the most rigid COVID-19 response policies in the Western world occurred in Australia, in places like the state of Victoria, with its multiple lengthy lockdowns. Melbourne with three major lockdowns, had some of the toughest Covid rules in the world and the longest lockdown at least among the democratic nations.
What was behind those lockdowns? How were decisions made? What was the evidence used to justify a process that would have a profound impact on the economy, children’s education and psychology and more? Local activists have spent four years attempting to access the trove of records and documentation, yet to the Department of Health for Victoria, good government doesn’t come with transparency. Until now that is, however, as the secret documents supporting the state’s COVID-19 lockdowns will soon be released after the state lost a legal battle to maintain secrecy.
So, what happened?
Just this past week, a judge at the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal ordered the department to process freedom of information requests it had refused for the briefings provided to the Chief Health Officer, Deputy Chief Health Officer and Minister for Health relating to public health orders made in 2020, reports Chantelle Francis for News.com.
It turns out that the leadership within the Department of Health for Victoria believes it to be above any Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests for the past four years.
David Davis, a Liberal MP made multiple attempts, three in all, to access the justification for the severe lockdowns, and each and every time his effort was rejected by the Department of Health. Why? The request would substantially and unreasonably divert resources.
Davis then initiated a review process, one that’s a legal requirement to be completed within a specific period of time via the Victorian Information Commissioner yet that commissioner failed to follow the law, not reaching a decision within the statutory period.
In that case, the head of the COVID-19 response at the time, Jeroen Weimar, according to the News.com account complained meeting Mr. Davis’s combined FOI requests would take the agency about four years’ worth of work effort.
That claim was backed by Michael Cain, the department’s manager of FOI and legal compliance.
Legal Intervention
But Judge Caitlin English, Vice President of the Victorian Civil Administrative Tribunal (VCAT), ruled in a different direction. The judge was not convinced that the health department had reasonably estimated the resources required to process the requests and noted the “strong public interest” in the information.
While acknowledging responding to the FOI would take a substantial effort, Judge English declared nonetheless it was manageable for the department.
The judge’s order stated:
“The Department, bearing the onus, has not satisfied me on the evidence that the work involved in processing the request would substantially and unreasonably divert the resources of the agency from its other operations.” As a consequence, she emphasized, “I direct the agency to process Mr. Davis’s requests in accordance with the FOI Act.”
Now, this judicial ruled that over 115 briefs backing the state government’s public health orders may be released, at an average of 40 to 60 pages each.
Conclusion
Given the extreme nature of the Victoria COVID-19 response in the form of public health orders, the externalities born by the public, plus limited publicly available information as to the justification, the judge’s decision for transparency points to a significant public interest concern.
According to MP Davis, “The second wave as it surged into effect in July 2020 drove my series of freedom of information requests on 7 July, 13 July, and 17 July of the then Department of Health and Human Services for the briefings behind the decisions to impose the public health orders.”
************************************
5 June, 2024
Is the ACT chief justice a crusading reformer or a judge? Time to pick one, Lucy McCallum
This is all about rape victims. Rape is a heavily penalized crime so false rape allegations have to be rigorously tested for. But testing that can be hard on real victims.
Feminists want a way around that but there is none. Telling Leftists that some problem cannot be solved is however alien to them so they keep trying to solve it, usually by creating more and often bigger problems
It’s one thing to try to reduce delays for sexual assault trials. But when a Chief Justice says ‘there’s an intractable problem in that our overriding task and function is to ensure an accused person has a fair trial’, you had better believe it.
The intractable problem is that the ACT’s most senior judge Lucy McCallum may well have put herself on a collision course, not just with senior barristers, but potentially with the separation of powers.
Our liberal democracy is built around the clear separation of powers. The government and the legislature make the laws. Judges apply the law. Judges do not make the law and should not interpret or administer it in a way that in substance changes the law.
No wonder lawyers in the ACT are in revolt. McCallum, they say, has given the impression to many people, especially lawyers, that she can hold down two roles: that of a chief justice of the Supreme Court, and that of a law reformer.
When a judge signals that she wants changes to how sexual assault cases are conducted in such a way as to correct some “imbalance”, some lawyers in the ACT believe there is a significant risk she’s entering the political realm.
If law reform is where her passion lies, it would be far better for the criminal justice system if she joined an advocacy group, or put herself forward to parliament.
This collision course between the Chief Justice and lawyers could have profound consequences one way or the other, not just for people accused of sexual assault, and their defence lawyers. If judges, of all people, appear to step into the political arena by suggesting that a fair trial is an intractable problem, then we could all be in trouble.
A fair trial is not a problem, let alone an intractable one. A fair trial is the principle that underpins our justice system. Without it, we may as well get rid of courts – and judges – and pack an accused directly off to jail on the basis of an untested allegation.
McCallum’s other comments are equally troubling. She said that the unfortunate message for sexual assault complainant – given the presumption of innocence afforded to an accused person – is that “We are entitled to think you might be lying until you prove that you’re not.
“That’s not quite how the system works but that’s the messaging,” she said.
What garbled nonsense from the territory’s most senior judge.
Of course, a complainant does not have to prove they are telling the truth. They are not a party to a criminal action. They are a witness giving evidence, as in any other trial. It is up to a prosecution to prove that a witness claiming they were raped is telling the truth.
If McCallum is suggesting that a jury is not entitled to think that a complainant might be lying, she is on a collision course with the presumption of innocence. This fundamental principle means that the prosecution bears the burden of proof, meaning that they must prove that a complainant who alleges rape is not lying. In other words, a jury may well find that a complainant is lying.
McCallum has put lawyers, and people accused of sexual assault, in a dreadful position. When they appear in court in front of McCallum, what are they to think after her public comments? Are they to wonder whether the Chief Justice is favour of a fair trial or not? She said a fair trial was “immutable” but she also described a fair trial afforded to an accused as an intractable problem.
Does McCallum believe in the presumption of innocence? Does she understand how these fundamental principles work?
Lawyers are also troubled by the way McCallum described a judge’s duty to disallow “annoying, harassing, humiliating or repetitive” questions, without including the critical qualifier of “unduly” found in the Evidence Act. Does McCallum intend to run cross examinations in her courtroom in accordance with the Evidence Act, or rather as if subject to her own personal amendment to the Act?
Lawyers who express concerns about McCallum’s public foray face another problem. She will know they disagree with her. How will that play out in court? It may have no impact at all, but the fact that senior lawyers are asking these questions shows how inappropriate it is for McCallum to make these comments at all.
Leave it to others to explore law reform. They don’t hold a position of power over an accused, and their lawyers, in a courtroom. That’s why we have the separation of powers, to stop the abuse of power, and the perception of powers being abused.
Given her troubling and muddled comments to a local newspaper, if McCallum was misquoted, she needs to tell us. If she didn’t explain herself as best as she might have, she had better do that.
This debacle shows why judges should stick to their day job, behind the bench, overseeing trials rather than giving the impression that they would rather be law reformers.
***************************************************
Yogis to be rushed into Australia ahead of tradies under draft policy
The federal opposition and housing industry bodies have hit out at a draft policy that would see migrant yoga and martial arts instructors rushed into Australia ahead of some skilled construction workers.
Jobs and Skills Australia (JSA)? has released its draft core skills occupations list – essentially the types of workers that could be prioritised for temporary skilled visas.
?According to the draft, JSA is confident that yoga and martial arts instructors, dog handlers and jewellery designers will be included on the priority list.
While some construction workers like carpenters and electricians? are included on the provisional "on" list, others, such as plumbers, roof tilers and bricklayers are slated for further consideration.
That's despite Australia needing an extra 90,000 skilled tradespeople ?to meet the government's target of 1.2 newly built homes over the next five years.
That goal looks increasingly challenging with home approvals falling and the construction industry facing significant business pressures – which are driven in part by skilled labour shortages.
"All of the trades need to be on the definite list," Master Builders Australia chief executive Denita Wawn said.
"We can't understand why they weren't there in the first place.
"It is totally against the overwhelming evidence we have before us about our needs to house all Australians."
READ MORE: Beloved Aussie cruise brand about to disappear?
The opposition, which has pledged to drastically cut migration levels if it wins office at next year's federal election, has also hit out at the list.
"We have a housing crisis in this country because we cannot get houses built quickly enough," Nationals senator Bridget McKenzie said.
"And the dog handler, the martial arts specialists are not going to get this done."
JSA has made clear its draft list is "for consultation only" and is not its final advice to the government?.
"It does not represent the final advice that Jobs and Skills Australia will provide to government, nor is it a decision of government," it states.
JSA's final list will be provided to the government later this year before Immigration Minister Andrew Giles decides on the official core skills occupations list.?
************************************************
‘White devil’: The Indigenous protest song that has parents up in arms
Aborigines could reasonably be grateful for the way white settlement has increased their lifespan etc but the Left have taught them hate
NSW Education Minister Prue Car has intervened after a parent complained about a song calling Captain James Cook a “white devil” being played at a public primary school in Sydney’s south.
Bagi-la-m Bargan, a song by Indigenous rapper and activist Birdz, was chosen as the school bell song in the week before and during reconciliation week, an education department spokesperson confirmed.
The song, told from the perspective of an Indigenous warrior, describes Cook as “a murderer without licence” and mentions a “desire to kill any white devil [that] wanna test my will”.
An anonymous father told 2GB’s Ben Fordham on Tuesday morning he had to explain to his son that “complex things” had happened in Australia’s past after he had asked whether there was “something wrong with being white”.
The complaint prompted Car to call the radio station and tell listeners the lyrics were “pretty concerning” and the education department was investigating.
“Anything that creates any sort of division we can’t have in our schools,” she said. “Reading the lyrics and listening to it, I can understand why parents are concerned.”
A department spokesperson said no one had complained to the school directly but apologised “for the distress caused to any parents or children”.
“The song was chosen to mark Reconciliation Week and was not intended to be divisive,” they said. “The school’s leadership has been counselled about making appropriate choices for the school bell song.”
The song has been removed from the school’s playlist.
Premier Chris Minns suggested schools may need to go back to traditional bells instead of songs.
“Rap songs, in general, [are] probably not the best for NSW schools,” he said.
Birdz (real name Nathan Bird) told Apple Music in 2021 the song was told from the perspective of a Butchulla warrior “standing on Indian Head on K’gari (Fraser Island) witnessing Captain Cook sail past”.
Cook’s diary entry from May 20, 1770, makes note of the moment the Endeavour sailed past the bluff “on which a number of the natives were assembled, which occasioned my nameing [sic] it Indian Head”.
“[They] trying to warn Captain Cook: ‘You’re going the wrong way’,” Birdz said. “How would you feel, and what would you do, if you’re in that position where you know everything is going to be taken away from you? Your people and your family are under threat.”
The song’s title means “fighting boomerang” in Butchulla language.
Bird grew up in Katherine in the Northern Territory and describes himself as a proud Murri man with Badtjala, Juru, Scottish and Melanesian heritage.
He is a prominent Indigenous activist, describing his music as a “declaration of survival” and “a form of resistance against a system that is geared towards the ongoing dispossession of my people”.
His father was removed from his family in childhood and grew up in and out of institutions before being reunited with his grandmother on the Cherbourg mission as a teenager.
************************************************
COVID-19 Vaccines One Likely Factor Behind 20,000 ‘Excess Deaths’: Scientist
The COVID-19 vaccines and pandemic lockdowns are likely a “strong contributing factor” to the nearly 20,000 excess deaths in Australia from the 2020-2023 period, according to one scientist.
Martin Stewart has 14 years of experience as a biomedical researcher at academic institutions in Germany, Switzerland, the United States, and Australia.
He also worked at the Robert Langer laboratory, named after the founder of Moderna, who produced an mRNA COVID-19 vaccine during the pandemic.
On March 26, the Senate Standing Committees on Community Affairs opened its inquiry into “excess mortality”—a term that refers to the number of deaths in a country that exceed the yearly average.
According to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), excess deaths in Australia during the pandemic era reached 30,332. Of this, the total number of excess deaths deemed unrelated to COVID-19 was 19,401.
In his submission (pdf) to the Senate Committee, Mr. Stewart noted that many countries were experiencing “a high degree of excess mortality event after the worst and most deadly phases of the pandemic are over” and that these excess deaths “cannot be attributed to COVID-19 related illness.”
The “deadliest phase” was from late 2021 to early 2022 onwards, according to Mr. Stewart.
Most Australian states reached a 90 percent or more vaccination rate by December 2021, which was followed by a relaxing of restrictions in the Christmas period of 2021, and then a large-scale removal of restrictions and lockdowns in 2022.
However, 2022 and 2023 are the years when the country saw the most COVID deaths (10,301 for 2022, and 4,525 for 2023) and excess deaths not related to COVID-19 (9,644 and 8,361).
Mr. Stewart noted that the excess deaths “may be associated with long-term effects after COVID-19 (e.g. long COVID), longer term problems due to the healthcare system being inhibited from properly caring for people throughout 2020-2022, or due to government-sanctioned interventions such as lockdowns and COVID-19 vaccinations.”
“It is a complex and multi-factorial problem, however the data presented in this report strongly indicates that unproven and novel COVID-19 vaccinations are likely to be a contributing factor in excess deaths.”
The scientist added that as products such as mRNA- and viral vector-based vaccines are “newly developed and haven’t had the extensive background of human testing,” these vaccines have a high chance of “causing unforeseen problems.”
“This issue deserves a thorough and full-scale investigation,” he noted.
How Might the Vaccines Contribute To Excess Deaths?
Mr. Stewart argued that the cardiac damage caused by the mRNA vaccines could potentially be one area where COVID-19 vaccines are causing excess deaths.
He cited a 2023 study in Switzerland, led by Christian Mueller, professor of cardiology at the University of Basel, which indicated mRNA recipients experienced cardiac damage at a higher rate than untreated people.
“Among 777 participants, 40 participants exhibited elevated high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T blood concentration on day 3 and mRNA-1273 vaccine-associated myocardial injury was adjudicated in 22 participants,” Mr. Stewart noted.
“Although none developed major adverse cardiac events within 30 days, the patients who exhibited signs of cardiac damage were warned to rest and not to over-exert themselves.”
Mr. Stewart said that from now on, every COVID-19 vaccination “must be monitored with rates of illness and death compared to unvaccinated control groups for up to a year.”
“To do anything less than this is gross negligence and a lack of care for human life.”
Excess Deaths Higher in Wealthier Countries
He also urged the Australian and other developed governments to investigate why their excess death rates have been much higher than less developed countries from 2022-2024.
“What is it about our approach and interventions that have caused excess death rates of 10-30 percent in many of the highest GDP per person countries in the world?” Mr. Stewart added.
“The evidence indicates that a high rate of COVID-19 and mRNA vaccination are strong contributing factors to this trend, and thus, the issue deserves urgent investigation and intervention in order to bring excess mortality rates back down to normal, or even below normal, once again.”
Thousands Of Adverse Events, Myocarditis
The opinion was echoed by Monique O'Connor, a medical practitioner and consultant psychiatrist with over 30 years of medical experience.
In her submission (pdf) to the committee, she noted that in 2021, there were 8,422 adverse events reported to the Western Australian Vaccine Safety Surveillance (WAVSS) following COVID-19 vaccination, with 81 percent of all reports in the working age group of 18-64.
“Of particular concern ... is the high rate of adverse events in the young age groups, especially with Moderna vaccination, such as the 30-39 year age group of 383 per 100,000 doses,” she said.
“In 2021, 138 confirmed cases of myocarditis/myopericarditis following COVID-19 vaccinations were reported to WAVSS.
“A total of 365 confirmed cases of pericarditis following COVID-19 vaccinations received in 2021.”
In addition, she noted that prior to COVID-19 (2017-2021), the numbers of patients admitted to hospital was 40 to 63. Meanwhile, in 2021, 961 patients were admitted to hospital following COVID-19 vaccination.
Ms. O'Connor listed 10 factors that might have contributed to excess mortality.
This includes: management of SARS-CoV-2 illness; suicide; COVID-19 vaccine injury and death; long COVID and role of COVID-19 vaccination; elderly individuals at risk from “misclassification of post vaccine death” and poor care due to denial of family visitors; myocarditis, sudden death, and heart-related harms; pregnancy and births—especially post-vaccine; vaccine associated enhanced disease; plasmid DNA contamination of vaccines; and “frameshifting and junk mRNA.”
“The mRNA covid-19 vaccines used novel biologic therapy, a gene-based therapy, never previously licenced for human use,” she argued.
“It is recognised that there were high levels of contamination with plasmid DNA and that aberrant, unintended ‘junk proteins’ were produced through ‘frameshifting’ or misreading of the mRNA sequences or fragments,” she added.
“When introduced, it was impossible to predict whether/to what extend vaccine associated enhanced disease might occur.”
Ms. O'Connor also criticised the “politicisation of medicine,” arguing that SARS-CoV-2 infection, a highly contagious respiratory virus, “was always destined to become endemic especially since vaccination did not prevent infection or transmission the risk of infection.”
“However, pro-vaccine lobbyists used emotional blackmail to promote vaccination by impinging on our instinct to care and protect the vulnerable. Guilt and shame were used to smear those who did not agree with ‘experts’ assessment of safety.”
************************************
4 June, 2024
Terrified teachers issued with panic alarms for their homes as youth crime spirals out of control in remote Queensland community
Mornington Island is in the Gulf of Carpentaria, truly remote. Only around 1000 people live there, of whom nearly all are Aboriginal. It is amaizng that such a small community produces so much crime.
Aboriginal communities have long been rather violent but the violence has racked up under current Queensland government policies designed to avoid "criminalizing" blacks The Aboriginal young people have now realized that they can get away with almost any violent deed without police restraint and tend to show no other restraint
Terrified teachers have been given panic alarms for their homes after youth crime spiralled out of control in a remote far north Queensland community.
Twelve teachers at the Mornington Island State School - located 679km north-west of Cairns - have been issued with duress alarms and had heat sensors installed in their homes for their protection.
A teacher was reportedly hit by a student holding a cricket bat, rocks were allegedly thrown at the principal, a student allegedly 'threw a piece of timber like a spear' and homes have allegedly been broken into.
There have been 'unprecedented levels of violence' and teachers have been encouraged to sleep with the panic alarms beside their beds, one teacher told the Cairns Post.
'We have category one fences now around our houses but many of the kids can climb over them,' the teacher said.
There are 12 teachers at the school but the school has 206 students and is supposed to have 20 full-time teachers.
Eight other teaching posts have gone unfilled.
In March, a teacher said a student threatened to 'bash them with two metal poles', while a teacher complained on social media about being hit on the leg with a cricket bat.
Earlier this month, there were incidents of teachers being called 'gay c***' and 'c*** sucker'.
On May 1, Queensland's Education Minister Di Farmer said a program called Flexispaces - designed to help at-risk students - would provide $600,000 in funding to Mornington Island State School.
'FlexiSpaces are such a great tool to help schools respond to students who are experiencing challenges in a mainstream educational environment,' Ms Farmer said when she launched the $45million program, which will be spread across 34 schools.
But there are grave fears it will make no difference in Mornington Island as teachers don't even want to go there, with one new teacher lasting just 10 days at the start of the 2024 school year.
One teacher said the town lived with 'third world conditions' and has not had drinkable water for months.
'Concerns about staff safety or wellbeing at the schools (on the Flexispaces program) have not been raised with the principal this year,' an Education Department spokesperson told Daily Mail Australia.
*******************************************
This school doubled its NAPLAN high achievers. Now its techniques are spreading
Note "explicit instruction". Old ways work best
Just over a decade ago, Elise Mountford was teaching a routine year 6 maths class when she asked one of her students to solve a simple equation.
“He became so frustrated at not being able to do the task he knocked over a chair and stormed out of the room. That moment really hit home for me. This student had been at our school for years, but he didn’t feel capable and wasn’t engaged in learning,” she recalls.
Mountford was a teacher at Charlestown South Public at the time, a small public primary school in Lake Macquarie, south of Newcastle.
“The teachers knew something wasn’t working. The school was underachieving and was targeted by the department for reading support. We were putting in huge effort, we cared so much, but it wasn’t paying off,” she says. “We also had a school culture problem where students were disengaged.”
The turning point came in 2015 when Charlestown’s staff and then-principal, Colin Johnson, shifted the school to an explicit teaching model based on the instruction method used at south-east Melbourne private school Haileybury College.
Enrolments increased, and the school later became famed for achieving a dramatic turnaround in maths and reading results. In the five years to 2021, the school lifted its proportion of students in the top two NAPLAN bands from 34 to 79 per cent. Several years ago, it outperformed selective private school Sydney Grammar in year 3 writing.
“We brought in ‘warm-up’ sessions at the start of class and reviews at the end [of lessons] that checked students’ knowledge of concepts. Students became so much more engaged,” Mountford says. “We had been trapped in this cycle of needing to reteach all the time. And that disappeared.”
The change in approach was backed by research into cognitive load theory and a 2014 NSW Education Department analysis that showed students who experienced explicit teaching outperformed those who did not.
Mountford says teachers gave students clear instructions and broke down information into bite-sized chunks to avoid children quickly forgetting what they had been taught. Teachers check for understanding constantly to ensure students master a topic before moving to independent or inquiry learning, she says.
While overhauling the teaching approach, the school also surveyed parents about what they wanted in a bid to boost enrolments. “I spent mornings at the front gate, started a school band, and brought in more sport too,” Johnson says. “We changed the expectations of the community.”
Principles of a maths lesson under this teaching model:
Students review previously taught topics at the start of lessons in daily review sessions
New concepts and content are taught explicitly first
Maths topics are ordered so students gradually build understanding
Students work with teachers to master concepts before completing independent work
Lessons change and adapt according to students’ needs
Teachers regularly check for understanding during the class
Charlestown South is now among 30 public primary schools in the Newcastle, Central Coast and Hawksbury regions that have formed a grassroots group known as the Effective and Systematic Teaching Network (EAST) to share lesson plans, resources and hold professional learning sessions for teachers and school leaders.
“It started with Charlestown South, and [Central Coast school] Blue Haven Public, and over a few years we’ve started connecting with other schools that are teaching in a similar way,” Mountford says.
When the new NSW maths syllabus was released in 2022, Mountford and a group of teachers in the EAST network spent six months writing week-by-week lesson plans schools could use alongside the kindergarten to year 6 maths curriculum.
“We wanted to help other schools prepare for the new syllabus. It means teachers don’t need to create lessons from scratch each day, or make up questions the night before,” she says.
The lesson materials form a guide for teachers on each topic – such as division, volume or measurement. “They are fast-paced and interactive, but flexible too. Students are showing the teacher how they are working out problems as they go.”
Ian Short, principal at Vardys Road Public in north-west Sydney, which is part of the network, said the maths program and lesson outlines had helped ease teachers’ workload.
“Studies have been done on how much time can be saved by sharing curriculum resources. When teachers are doing it alone, the workload can be insurmountable,” Short says.
In 2022, the Grattan Institute suggested all Australian schools adopt a whole-school approach to curriculum planning, with a survey showing teachers are often planning on their own and regularly use YouTube and Facebook to source lesson ideas or materials.
Windsor South Public principal Belinda Bristol, whose school is also part of the network, says embedding daily reviews in maths and literacy lessons in all grades was key in stopping students falling behind.
“In the past, children would go away on holiday and forget everything. Now, we are making sure kids aren’t slipping through the cracks,” Bristol says.
Mountford, now deputy principal at Glendore Public in Maryland, said the EAST network’s maths lesson plans allowed teachers to be “highly responsive to students, but it’s still flexible for the teachers and takes the pressure off with preparation”.
“Once students have very deep understanding of the concepts, the teachers can then give them more opportunities for independent learning and problem-solving,” she says.
**********************************************
Great Barrier Reef Doomsday Claims Should Be Audited: Scientist
Australian geo-physicist Peter Ridd says an additional $5 million (US$3.3 million) allocated to the Great Barrier Reef in this week’s budget would be better spent on “genuine environmental problems.”
The funding was handed down as part of Labor’s 2024 federal budget on May 14.
In a statement released last month, the Great Barrier Reef Foundation said the reef had suffered through the “worst summer” on record, with cyclones, severe flooding, starfish outbreaks and mass bleaching.
The funds will help the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to engage tourism operators undertaking reef monitoring, protection, and stewardship.
The Great Barrier Reef Foundation says the full extent of mass bleaching is not known, but claims aerial surveys over 1,000 reefs showed a rate of 73 percent bleaching within the area, plus another 6 percent in the Torres Strait.
“The Reef Summer Snapshot shows the highest levels of coral bleaching were found across the southern region, where temperatures are typically cooler, and parts of the central and northern regions, where in some areas corals were exposed to record levels of heat stress,” the Foundation said in a report online.
Yet Dr. Ridd, a researcher into the Reef, believes its poor health has been greatly exaggerated.
“It is telling that in the latest doom-news about the Great Barrier Reef bleaching, they failed to mention that the Great Barrier Reef had record amounts of coral in 2022/23 despite having suffered four ‘catastrophic’ bleaching events in 2016, 17, 20, and 22,” he told The Epoch Times in an email.
“We ended up with twice as much coral than in 2012 when a couple of cyclones genuinely destroyed a lot of coral.
“How did we end up with so much coral if those last four bleaching event were so catastrophic—even the fast-growing coral takes five to 10 years to regrow.”
The coral that bounced back, he says, is the type most susceptible to water bleaching.
“That proves the last four bleaching events were exaggerated in terms of the coral death, and there is no reason to expect this latest event to be much different,” he said.
***************************************************
Proton Mail Says It Will Defy Australia’s Impending ‘Online Safety’ Law
Secure email service provider Proton Mail has added its voice to a growing number of tech companies concerned that Australia’s proposed “online safety” regulation will force firms to break encryption to expose user data to governments and potentially criminal syndicates.
Proton offers end-to-end encrypted email, virtual private network (VPN), and online data and password storage services. Its slogan is “privacy by default.”
The Australian proposal has already been heavily criticised by the Global Encryption Coalition, which comprises the Center for Democracy & Technology, Global Partners Digital, the Internet Freedom Foundation, the Internet Society, Mozilla, Access Now, and Digital Rights Watch.
Andy Yen, founder and CEO of Proton, told The Epoch Times: “With the current eSafety proposals, the Internet as we know it faces a very real threat. The proposed standards would force online services—no matter whether they are end-to-end encrypted or not—to access, collect, and read their users’ private conversations.
“These proposals could not only break encryption, but could put businesses and citizens at risk while doing little to protect people from the online harms they are intended to address.”
Australia’s eSafety Commissioner Julie Inman Grant has released the draft standard, which applies to services including “email, instant messaging, short messages services (SMS), multimedia message services (MMS) and chat, as well as services that enable people to play online games with each other and dating services.”
Other “apps and websites ... as well as online file storage services” will also be covered. Everything online, provided it’s accessible to Australians (even if there are no visitors) is captured.
While Ms. Inman Grant insists providers will not need to breach encryption to comply with the standard, the Global Encryption Coalition says it will be impossible to do so otherwise.
Proton is the first provider to openly say it will defy the standard if it’s introduced.
“Under no circumstances would we break end-to-end encryption,” Mr. Yen said. “As other jurisdictions are realising, there is no such thing as technology that can scan everyone’s online activity while also providing privacy and safety.
“There is still time to safeguard end-to-end encryption in the eSafety proposals, and we urge Commissioner Inman Grant to ensure the protection of privacy for Australian citizens. Undermining cybersecurity and encryption in the name of eSafety will only lead to the opposite result, leaving everyone but criminals more at risk.”
Proton AG is based in Switzerland, and says it is therefore subject only to Swiss law.
The legal and technical hurdles to enforcing cross-border regulations on entities that have no presence in the country imposing them have yet to be really tested.
While other tech companies have so far expressed disquiet with the proposals, many are moving to tighten encryption.
Telegram, which claims a user base of 200 million people, grew its market by being the first mass-market messaging service with end-to-end encryption, which is now the basis of its brand.
Meta attempted to win back market share for WhatsApp soon after it purchased it, by adding encryption, and has also pledged to work toward encryption and secure data storage across Facebook.
The company also announced the introduction of end-to-end encryption in Facebook Messenger, which is used by over a billion people. Online storage services such as iCloud and Google Cloud are also offering encrypted storage.
************************************
3 June, 2024
University of Sydney professor tells first year students that Hamas' mass rapes on October 7 are 'fake news' and a 'hoax'
In this case the lady is a prolific and and successful writer of fiction so it might be that her fictive imagination has run away with her.
She is of South Indian origin so an "anti-colonial" orientation may also have informed her thinking
As I am a graduate of Sydney U, I would be embarrassed if she is allowed to continue teaching there. I believe that the university is "investigating"
First-year university students have been left 'repulsed' after a professor told them mass rapes committed by Hamas during the October 7 attacks were a 'hoax' and 'fake news'.
Sujatha Fernandes, a sociology professor at the University of Sydney, told her class in April that the media had 'distorted' the war, The Australian reports.
'Western media has played the role of an ideological state apparatus by suppressing coverage of the atrocities, peddling fake news,' Professor Fernandes said.
'[The media] promoted hoaxes that Hamas beheaded babies and carried out mass rape, in order to shore up support for Israel, and distorting events.'
The United Nations (UN) has said there were 'reasonable grounds' to believe Hamas carried out mass and gang rapes on October 7.
Professor Fernandes' continued her lecture by alleging Israel had engaged in 'ethnic cleansing, collective punishment and forced starvation', the report also claims.
A number of students, who wished to remain anonymous, said they were shocked by Professor Fernandes' comments.
One said they didn't commit to four years and thousands of dollars' worth of university classes to be taught by lecturers who 'blatantly promote lies and foster an unsafe, threatening environment'.
Another student who identified themselves as Jewish said it reflected a 'rising trend of anti-Semitism' at the university.
They added that it was particularly concerning for a professor to 'deny undeniable proof of the events of October 7, which Hamas proudly filmed themselves doing'.
Daily Mail Australia has contacted Professor Fernandes and the University of Sydney for comment.
Pramila Patten, the UN's Special Representative of the Secretary-General on Sexual Violence in Conflict, said they witnessed 'scenes of unspeakable violence perpetrated with shocking brutality'.
Ms Patten said the acts committed on October 7 were 'a catalogue of the most extreme and inhumane forms of killing, torture and other horrors', including sexual violence.
Her team found 'convincing information' that sexual violence had been committed against hostages and those in captivity.
They reached the conclusion came after reviewing over 5,000 photographic images and some 50 hours of footage of the attacks.
However, part of the report also found that at least 'two allegations of sexual violence in kibbutz Be'eri - widely reported in the media - were unfounded'.
*************************************************
Australians say migration is 'too high' as the housing crisis worsens
Almost half of Australians believe there are too many migrants moving to Australia, even though the vast majority say cultural diversity is a boon for the nation.
A new poll released by the Lowy Institute on Australian attitudes revealed 48 per cent of respondents said the total number of migrants coming to Australia each year was too high.
This result was a slight increase from the last time the question was asked in 2019, and remains six percentage points lower than its 2018 peak, but still reflects an 11-point rise since 2014, months after the government launched its infamous Stop the Boats campaign.
The number of people who believed the migration intake was 'about right' has also dropped from 47 per cent in 2014 to 40 per cent in 2024.
Despite this, nine in 10 Australians still believe the nation's culturally diverse population has been positive for Australia, when multiculturalism is a product of decades of immigration, report author Ryan Neelam said.
'We find that people can hold contradictory views in their mind at the same time, but it may not be explained as a contradiction,' he said.
'People see the country's identity as being a multicultural one, but when it comes to the immigration rate it looks like they've become less open towards that.
'It is such a large, complex issue... depending on which part of the issue you ask about, people could have views that seem quite different.'
This political debate is now playing out as the nation endures a cost of living crisis, with the major parties introducing policies that link migration to economic impacts and housing issues.
*************************************************
What is the ‘energy transition’?
For Labor, it is a transition to renewables. For the Liberals, it is a transition to nuclear power and renewables.
As part of the transition, Labor wants nothing to with nuclear power; the Liberals support it. Labor dislikes coal; it is not clear what the Liberals think about coal.
Both aim to reach Net Zero greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050.
There is a much simpler and more effective transition at hand – a transition to coal, nuclear power, and natural gas, with little place for renewables and no place for Net Zero.
Underlying this approach are the following considerations:
coal, nuclear energy and natural gas are the only ways of providing baseload electricity in Australia – meaning in practice, reliable, around-the-clock, low-cost electricity
wind and solar energy cannot provide such electricity
The proposed coal-nuclear-gas transition is the centrepiece of a campaign planned by a group in the Latrobe Valley, provisionally called the Coal-Nuclear-Gas Alliance.
The alliance will focus on three key actions.
The first action is the development of a new coal plant in the Valley and the refurbishment of the Loy Yang A and B coal plants, using high-efficiency-low-emissions (HELE) technology.
Such technology is not only more efficient than current technology, but also results in a lowering of greenhouse-gas emissions from coal plants of up to 30 per cent.
Further coal capacity in Australia is vital.
It will take until at least the 2050s for nuclear power to become a significant component of overall electricity generation in Australia.
And coal will not be replaced quickly by natural gas, which is in short supply in the eastern states and, in any case, has historically been more expensive than coal or baseload electricity.
The second action is to offer the Valley as the location for Australia’s first nuclear power plant.
Should this be supported in the Valley, the political task of introducing nuclear power in Australia will be greatly facilitated.
The third action is the promotion of natural-gas development in the Valley.
This requires the reversal of the state government’s effective banning of gas exploration and production in Victoria and of the federal government’s recent interventions in the eastern states’ gas market, including the price caps introduced in late 2022.
The Latrobe Valley is probably better placed than any other region in Australia in successfully addressing Australia’s energy future.
It has enough coal for over 500 years of electricity generation.
It can offer sites for a nuclear plant close to transmission lines and with a workforce to operate such a plant. One possible site is Yallourn (the coal resource currently being mined at Yallourn will be exhausted by the mid-2030s).
In addition, Gippsland has significant untapped natural-gas resources. In the words of journalist, Robert Gottliebsen, it is one of ‘three major fields that will end the shortage of gas for domestic market’ in Australia (the other two being Narrabri in NSW and the Surat Basin in Queensland).
Tapping these resources opens the possibility of gas becoming price competitive with coal for baseload electricity and, even if this is not the case, of making a major contribution to gas use outside the electricity sector.
What are the arguments against wind and solar power?
The first is their intermittency. Theoretically, it may be possible to overcome this with battery support. However, such support would be impossibly expensive if applied to the grid as a whole, taking account of the need to allow for wind and solar droughts and the enormous battery stock required (over 5,000 times the current stock).
Second, wind and solar farms are proving to be high-cost.
For example, wind and solar farms are typically distant from the grid and thus often require substantial new transmission infrastructure. This is expensive.
In addition, they entail significant over-building – to illustrate, if a coal-fired power plant of, say, 1,000 megawatts is to be replaced by wind and solar farms, the capacity of these farms will need to be well over 3,000 megawatts because they only produce electricity for around 30 per cent of the time.
Furthermore, electrical engineers refer to costs associated with frequency control when wind and solar power are fed into the grid.
Up to the early 2000s, Australia had among the lowest electricity prices in the world, with coal being responsible for over 80 per cent of our electricity production.
Since then, the role of coal has steadily declined and retail electricity prices have increased nearly twice as fast as overall consumer prices. Australia no longer has cheap electricity by world standards.
Third, the expansion of wind and solar farms requires radical changes to Australia’s countryside. In the words of former chief scientist, Alan Finkel (who supports renewables), ‘think forests of windfarms carpeting hills and cliffs from sea to sky; think endless arrays of solar panels disappearing like a mirage into the desert’.
Protest movements are spreading around the country strongly opposing such outcomes.
For those critical of the idea of supporting coal, nuclear power, and gas, a simple question can be asked: How else do you ensure that Australia has access to reliable, low-cost electricity, a critical component of any modern economy?
The coal-nuclear-gas campaign emerging from the Latrobe Valley is at an early planning stage. To succeed, it will need to be well financed and to develop a detailed plan for mobilising support, including grass-roots support in the Valley and other parts of Victoria and political support in Melbourne and Canberra.
Last year’s referendum on The Voice exposed a large gap between grass-roots views on the issues involved and the views of those seen as opinion leaders – political parties, major corporations, universities, the media and environmental organisations.
Does a similar gap exist in the case of energy policy? And will it increase if (as is feared) electricity supplies become less stable, electricity prices keep rising and regional protests against wind the solar farms become more widespread?
If so, a shake-up in energy policy lies ahead, with the Latrobe Valley well placed to lead the way. If it can do so, other regions are likely to follow (e.g. Hunter Valley in NSW, Surat Basin in Queensland)
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/05/a-new-energy-transition-coal-nuclear-and-natural-gas/
**************************************************Canberra-led investment? That’s always a bad idea
An inability to learn from experience is a hallmark of the Left
Ed Husic’s suggestion that businesses would be more inclined to invest in Australia if we charged them less tax did not go down well with the Treasurer. We’re not privy to the words Jim Chalmers used to slap down his ministerial colleague after he floated a proposal to lower the company tax rate at a business conference last week. Suffice it to say journalists described the exchange as “terse”.
As Dennis Shanahan wrote on the weekend, the clash between Husic and Chalmers was arguably the most important development in a crowded political week. It was more than manoeuvring by a political rival or a break in cabinet solidarity. It was a challenge to Chalmers’ top-down approach to economic management and his insistence the state is best placed to direct capital flows, rather than the markets. The notion that our economic prospects might improve if business was left to its own devices is the kind of neoliberal nonsense guaranteed to raise the Treasurer’s hackles.
Husic’s proposal would have been a big story if the Press Gallery took economics as seriously as its predecessor. The merits of public policy decisions are seldom examined by journalists and commentators who are not afraid to flaunt their prejudice, as the ABC’s Laura Tingle did at the Sydney Writers Festival last week. Anthony Albanese’s government deserved credit because “they are actually trying to do policy,” she said. “Whether you think the policy is shit or not, that’s another issue.” The mainstream media’s reluctance to hold a progressive Labor government to account has allowed Albanese to abandon economic conventional wisdom of the past 40 years without so much as a raised eyebrow.
The disastrous experiments in state-run economies in Soviet states driven by mandates and five-year plans were taken as conclusive evidence command economies didn’t work. Governments in the West began to deregulate economies and were rewarded with greater prosperity.
As Johan Norberg writes in his recent book, A Capitalist Manifesto, the first two decades of the 21st century have been the best period in history for human wellbeing. He calculates that 138,000 men, women and children have emerged from poverty daily. Yet left-wing economists have not been prepared to give up the fight so easily. The declaration of a climate emergency offered a new excuse for state intervention, which the Albanese government embraced.
The Future Made in Australia policy is driven by the hubris that the government knows best. It assumes to direct private resources accordingly. The Future Made in Australia policy is what Chalmers meant when he promised in an essay in The Monthly at the start of last year “to rebuild a better capitalism”. He declared the government’s new role was to “design markets, facilitate flows of capital into priority areas, and ultimately make progress on our collective problems and purpose”.
The intellectual foundation for this radical departure from free-market principles is the work of Mariana Mazzucato, who Chalmers says is his favourite economist. Mazzucato’s book, The Entrepreneurial State, is best described as a collection of anecdotes rather than an intellectual thesis.
She calls for “moonshots” and “mission-orientated innovation”, arguing that if governments can put astronauts on the moon, they can solve the urgent challenges facing our planet. She ignores the exceptional nature of the Apollo project, which pursued a narrow military objective with virtually unlimited funding. The few industrial spin-offs from moonshot technology came at a high price.
The greatest advances in space technology today are driven by innovation in a competitive private market. Australians living outside the range of mobile phone towers know this all too well. The government-run National Broadband Network program invested $2bn, launching two conventional geostationary satellites 37,000km into space to deliver high-speed internet to remote districts. That service is now effectively redundant thanks to the arrival of Elon Musk’s Starlink.
In defiance of the long history of non-market failures and government-selected losers, the Albanese government is pressing ahead with 10-figure investments in unproven technology such as green hydrogen and quantum computing. Like the architects of the NBN, it arrogantly assumes it knows what the technology landscape will look like in a decade and that no smart-aleck private entrepreneur will come up with anything better.
Capitalism is nothing more or less than an economy not run by the political authorities. Its defining feature is the absence of control from above. Its purpose is to allocate scarce capital with alternative uses to endeavours most likely to improve the material circumstances of the people as a whole. It does so by using the rich sum of information embedded in price signals tempered by an assessment of risk. Neither of these factors plays much part in what we call government investment, which is, in fact, reallocation of private capital. Governments, as we should never forget, have no money of their own.
Husic’s proposal to ease the corporate tax burden recognises industry welfare is no substitute for economic reform designed to create the conditions where businesses and individuals can thrive. Whether our future will be built in Australia rather than China or Arizona ultimately depends on competitive taxation and cheap, reliable energy rather than the wisdom of the political class.
************************************
2 June, 2024
Laura Tingle: Who are you calling racist?
The crazy Leftist "all men are equal" dogma seems to stem from their seeing obviously unequal people around the place and wanting that to change. But nowhere in the world is inequality more invisible than in Australia. As I walk around our shopping centres I have no idea who is rich and who is poor. There are no rich men wearing top hats, spats and smoking big cigars. Inequality doesn't show so there is nothing obvious to trigger a Tingle.
Her anger certainly cannot be about her own position. Her job with the ABC is an enviable one. So I think we have to conclude she just has a weak ego. She is really praising herself as not being racist. She puts others down in the foolish belief that that pushes her up. Rather pitiable, really.
Janet Albrechtsen
It must be miserable being Laura Tingle. Or anyone else, for that matter, who sincerely believes Australia is a racist country. Tingle told a Sydney Writers Festival audience last weekend: “We are a racist country, let’s face it. We always have been and it’s very depressing.”
No decent person with means to leave would choose to remain in a racist country. It would be a dreadful thing. It’s too depressing.
Surely if Tingle truly believes the country is racist, she will want to leave and live in a less racist country.
She won’t find one. After her self-described “little rant”, many migrants contacted me. Who is she calling racist, they asked me? Me? You? People who vote differently to her? Channelling my inner Margaret Thatcher, I want names of these racists. At least something more specific than “we are a racist country”.
Tingle was “counselled” this week by her News boss. I’ve seen that at the ABC when I was on the board. No one took it seriously. Tingle doubled down in her statement on Tuesday, standing by her comments and complaining only that because of the panel format at which she spoke she was unable to provide the context and nuance. But it’s the casual labelling of the country that is troubling. Tingle felt no need to add any nuance at that public event.
If she means there are racists in Australia, she’s right. Every country has their share. But judging a whole country racist because there are racists in Australia is like saying Britain is a nation of serial killers because Jack the Ripper was born there. Tingle would be the first to cry Islamophobia if we attributed the bad behaviour of some Muslims to all of them.
Neither do you judge a country today by its behaviour yesterday. You judge a country by its current laws, policies and attitudes. As a journalist, Tingle is better placed than most to know the facts. The White Australia policy is many decades behind us. We are, and have been for at least half a century, a country of migrants. Not just any old country of migrants – one of the world’s most generous, open and welcoming homes to migrants of all backgrounds.
Tingle knows how to find the latest Australian Bureau of Statistics numbers. She will know we have terrific institutions devoted to nurturing our multicultural fabric, and laws that punish those who discriminate against people because of their race.
I feel sorry for Tingle. She must be missing a richness to this country right under her nose. Not just facts and figures about our history of migration but personal stories of the waves of people from different continents.
My family didn’t miss that richness. We became part of it. My family, working-class migrants from Denmark, arrived in the 1960s smack-bang in the middle of a hot Adelaide summer. Different culture, Chiko Rolls, foreign language. The men couldn’t understand why pubs closed on Sunday afternoon, but still they couldn’t get enough of the country. Integration, assimilation, whatever you want to call it. They did it.
And still my family loved soccer more than AFL. There was salami and pate, not Vegemite or gross curried egg in our lunch boxes, on rye bread, not prepacked white slices of Tip Top. Our clothes were more tailored and uncomfortable – no flip-flops in our home. I went to local public schools full of other migrant kids, Greek, Italian, German, Yugoslavs, and so on with surnames to match.
My family couldn’t wait to be Australian. Not Danish-Australian. Australian. No hyphens, thank you very much. We knew who we were – Australians who cherish this country, along with lashings of Danish culture.
I admit as a kid I hated it when, at the Adelaide market, my mother would ask the grocer for “sex apples”. Or “sex tomatoes”. “It’s six, Mum,” I would say. (Can you please just buy five apples or seven tomatoes, I would say to myself.) But being a child of these migrants was like winning life’s Lotto.
True, like every other country that took in migrants, some people could occasionally be thoughtless even cruel about new arrivals and our customs. Adjustment takes time. But adjust we all did. Not just superficially, either – while the first thing we might have liked about the Lebanese, the Vietnamese, Thais or Indians might have been their food, we soon appreciated the richness of migration, not to mention Hazem El Masri’s footy skills and Usman Khawaja’s batting.
Racism? Why uproot your life, your family, for a racist country? Every year we take in more migrants, and refugees too.
The migrants who contacted me this week were appalled by Tingle’s ignorance. Including my former editor, Alan Howe.
“What is really irritating about Laura Tingle’s nonsensical ‘rant’ is how she involved us all in it,” Howe wrote. “Well, I am a migrant to Australia and I love the place. I moved back to England for most of the 1980s … but couldn’t wait to come home.”
Howe, who is Rupert Murdoch’s longest serving editor, worked in New York for a while too. “I loved that too. But it is too cold to live there too long and, in any case, by then John Lennon had been killed. On my last weekend I went to Ellis Island. Have you been? It is fantastic – all the train stations and towering halls where your fate was decided by a clerk at a desk. Overwhelmingly in the positive; mostly, only seriously unwell arrivals were stopped.
“On the flight home I thought, ‘I know an even more welcoming place.’ Station Pier in Melbourne. Its role in the population of Australia is far greater than that of Ellis Island’s to America.”
Howe did some research, pulled together some ideas and the facts and then wrote to Victorian premier Jeff Kennett in 1994. “I explained to Jeff how we (in Victoria), and not just through the gold rushes, owned the story of the population of this continent. Australia’s Immigration Museum opened late in 1998. My parents were alive then and attended.” Howe sat on the board of that museum for a decade.
“Racist?” he wrote in his email to me. “We are the most welcoming nation on earth and don’t just claim that – we have the proof.
“Tingle is unaware of her environment,” he said. “She wants to get out of the house more. Get out of Sydney more.
“She should look at the list of Australian war dead in Vietnam. In 1988 I sought to interview every dead boy’s family and reached 252 of them, precisely half. Tingle was on the paper then. It was and remains The Australian’s biggest selling edition. There were Italian boys, Greeks, many Scots, plenty of Poms and Irish, a few Aboriginals and even two Russians. All died defending the interests of racist Australia? She is nuts.”
Big words such as racism should be used with great care and accuracy, or else they lose meaning. If the facts, our history, our current national policies and sentiment don’t support the claim the country is racist, what else is going on?
Are well-educated people like Tingle really saying they don’t much like people who hold different views to them?
Now we’re getting closer. When she said that Dutton was encouraging abuse towards migrants by speaking about housing challenges, perhaps Tingle was saying she’d like to stop debate about migration that doesn’t suit her politics.
Doing that would be really dumb. Migration is most popular when we, not people-smugglers or ABC political correspondents, determine how and when it happens. We need to talk about it freely and honestly. Racism was a common epithet too during the voice campaign. How often were we told that opposition could be explained only by racism? Australians saw through that. The voice failed because it was a terrible idea. A proposal giving special rights to one group based on race divided the country – by race.
I’ll tell you what’s also depressing about Tingle’s comments. The ABC doesn’t stand a chance of reflecting the true diversity of this country – as required under its charter – if senior political correspondents, let alone more junior journalists, don’t understand that diversity must include diversity of views. Instead of this ridiculous “counselling” lark, ABC management needs to fix the problem.
The vast majority of Australians are smart, not racist. So smart they can spot the know-it-alls who label us racist if we don’t agree with them.
*******************************************
Dutton: I want greener electricity (nuclear)
Peter Dutton has poked holes in the Labor government’s energy plans, saying nuclear is needed to "firm up” reliability across the board if Australia is to go renewable.
It comes as the Coalition prepares to launch its own energy policy, which will include the highly anticipated announcement of up to seven proposed nuclear sites.
“I want greener electricity. I want to make sure it's consistent so that businesses can continue to invest,” Mr Dutton said.
“I want to believe that battery power can provide the baseload but it just can't. The technology is not that advanced. Wind and solar, as we know, is intermittent. So you need to firm it up.
“And as we know at the moment, Labor governments in Victoria and NSW are extending the life of coal-fired power stations because they're worried about the lights going out. So we've got to get serious about a new energy system as we decarbonise and modernise.”
Mr Dutton continued to defend his proposed nuclear policy plan against concerns communities would not be receptive to having a site “in their own backyard”.
“Well, interestingly, when you have a look at the communities where there is a high energy IQ, that is, where they've got a coal-fired power station, the people are in favour because they understand the technology. They understand that it's zero emissions, that it is the latest generation,” he said.
“It's the same technology the government signed up for the nuclear submarine.
“So if it's safe for our sailors to be on the submarine with the nuclear reactor and for it to be tied up at Osborne in South Australia and Henderson in Western Australia, then the nonsense that the Labor Party is carrying on with at the moment, I think all falls away.”
******************************************************
E-scooter rules Melbourne: Police announce major crackdown
E-scooter riders have been warned they will no longer be given leniency after hundreds were caught riding on footpaths and without helmets.
Officers fined almost 300 riders over a two-day crackdown earlier this month in Melbourne's CBD and at major transport hubs.
Some 137 e-scooter riders were fined for failing to wear an approved helmet and 73 for riding on a footpath, which police described as 'extremely dangerous'.
One rider will face court after refusing an oral fluid test while 12 were fined for failing to obey a traffic light and three for carrying a passenger.
E-scooters can only be ridden on shared paths and roads with a speed limit up to 60km/h but any scooter capable of exceeding 25km/h is restricted to use on private properties.
Police are focusing on e-scooter rider behaviour in the CBD and built-up areas due to concerns from the community, Assistant Commissioner Glenn Weir said.
'While the majority of people do use e-scooters responsibly, unfortunately we're seeing too many riders continue to disregard the rules when it comes to e-scooters,' he said
'The time for leniency is over, the e-scooter rules under the government trial have been in effect for some time now, so there is no excuse for not knowing what you can and can't do on an e-scooter.'
Acting Inspector Michael Tsaloumas said too many collisions had been caused by riders travelling on footpaths, with some suffering serious injuries.
'Riders must adhere to the rules, including not riding on the footpath and wearing a helmet at all times ,' he said.
'Those who don't will be held to account and face significant penalties.'
E-scooters have been allowed in public since 2021 in Ballarat and 2022 in the city, with data showing riders took some eight million trips during that period to April 2024.
The Australian Medical Association has previously called for stricter rules after a Royal Melbourne Hospital study revealed 247 riders and nine pedestrians involved in collisions had been treated for injuries in 2023.
************************************************
Banning live export threatens disaster for Western Australia
Dan Ryan
Like other Australian urbanites who stomp around our capital cities in their RM Williams, my current knowledge of the bush is no doubt less than it should be.
It’s not that I can’t claim a certain farming pedigree. Patsy Durack, the pioneering pastoralist who famously drove an enormous herd of cattle across the continent to open the Kimberley, is a direct ancestor. And on the day the legendary Jackie Howe broke the daily shearing record my great uncles finished in not-too-distant 2nd and 3rd place behind him. Immediate family members remain on the land and have been wool growers for at least five generations. In recent times one of their properties in far Western Queensland even had a visit from one Scott Morrison, the first sitting Prime Minister to make the trip. I believe this event might even be commemorated by a plaque or something next to more important markers – like the current fastest cousin land speed motorcycle record.
I probably wouldn’t go too well trying to run a sheep station these days though. Or driving cattle overland. Old Jackie Howe can rest easy knowing that I’m not about to threaten his tally of fleeces any time soon. My road bike hooning times are surprisingly solid, but they still need serious work before I can hope to top the family leaderboard.
All that said, I’m still 100 per cent confident I would make better decisions about the sheep and livestock industry than the current Federal Agricultural Minister, Murray Watt and our Prime Minister, Anthony Albanese.
The federal government’s recent announcement that it will proceed to ban the live export of sheep by sea from Australia May 1, 2028, is a disastrous one and simply makes no sense. It threatens sheep farming communities in Western Australia most directly, but also casts a pall over agricultural producers across the country.
The decision has been driven by emotion not hard analysis. Certain matters desperately need to be made clear.
First, the undeniable reality is that there is a significant global demand for live sheep coming primarily from the Middle East. This is not going away any time soon. Yes, people in these markets also consume chilled processed meat, but for religious and cultural reasons they will always want live animals too. Don’t like that? Fine, take it up with Mohammad and Abraham and others in the region who have been slaughtering livestock for hundreds and thousands of years. Let me know how you get on.
Second, the supply of these live sheep will either come from Australia or from other parts of the world which take the ethical treatment of animals far less seriously than we do. Places like Somalia, Lebanon, and Romania. Shutting down our export industry will thus only accomplish two things (1) cause the destruction of livelihoods and livestock here and (2) reduce whatever ability we might have to ensure that high animal welfare standards are met elsewhere.
Third, no reasonable scientific justification has been provided by the Minister for the proposed ban. The terms of reference for the independent panel set up by the Government meant they were not even asked to consider this, just focus on how the phase-out should occur.
There is a wealth of information in the submissions made to the government from the full spectrum of farming and related organisations on this issue. But one key piece of data I think deserves greater publicity: the daily voyage mortality rate for sheep exported from Australia is currently only 0.0062 per cent. This is based on department of primary industry figures and has not been seriously contested by the government or any animal activist groups. Notably, this rate is lower than sheep being transported by truck in Australia, which no one is proposing to outlaw. It is also likely lower than the mortality rates for sheep on the land in Australia. In other words, contrary to public perception, one of the safest places for a sheep is on an Australian-regulated live export vessel.
The decision also misunderstands how integral and interconnected the live sheep trade is to other agricultural industries and regional communities. The government has sought to downplay its value and importance both for the purpose of calculating compensation and to argue it won’t be missed much. This is the public policy equivalent of a doctor wanting to cut out someone’s heart and saying that because it is a relatively small pound of flesh it should not have a big impact on the body as a whole. As the submissions make clear, if this ban goes ahead the sheep industry will be significantly smaller and the effect on regional communities will be huge. The proposed assistance package will be of little benefit. The operation will no doubt be declared a success by Drs Watt and Albanese, but the patient will die.
What about the argument that moving away from live export and focusing on processing meat is the future? Isn’t that type of thing you NatCon types want to encourage? This is simplistic in the extreme. Such facilities already exist, and current primary producers already make use of them. Implement government policies to expand and improve value-added industries, by all means, but there is no need to shut down and an existing export industry to do so. No one is suggesting, for example, we need to shut down Australia’s mining exports entirely in order to produce more processed minerals here.
Perhaps even more important than their economic consequences, decisions like this have capacity to damage the national character. They tear at the traditional bond between the city and the bush. The idea that we are all in this together. I accept some metro Australians could not care less, but it shouldn’t be underestimated that there are still plenty of us far distant city folk who do take an interest and don’t want to see regional communities needless harmed. The industry of Waltzing Matilda and Clancy of the Overflow may be overly romanticised, but it still means something to us. We don’t want to see it needlessly destroyed. Certainly not by these wild erratic policy fancies currently coming out of dingy little offices in Canberra.
https://www.spectator.com.au/2024/05/banning-live-export-threatens-disaster-for-western-australia/
************************************Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:
http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)
http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)
http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)
http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)
http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)
https://immigwatch.blogspot.com (IMMIGRATION WATCH)
https://awesternheart.blogspot.com (THE PSYCHOLOGIST)
http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs
***************************************