Matt Golding |
This blog is open to any who wish to comment on Australian society, the state of the environment or political shenanigans at Federal, State and Local Government level.
For the reader's consideration......
******************************************
The Saturday Paper, 7 October 2023:
John Hewson
The enduring stain of the White Australia policy
The White Australia policy stands out as probably the most significant blemish on this country’s national character and unity, as well as its global reputation, with continuing consequences today.
It has been said that latent racism, carrying echoes of White Australia, persists across the country and all walks of life. We have seen it emerge at football games and other events. Politicians have been known “to play the race card” when they believe that appealing to prejudice will afford them some political advantage.
In light of Australia’s colonial history, it should come as no surprise that race would become a dominant undercurrent in the public discourse about the upcoming referendum, with the “No” case appealing to those who believe the White Australia-era Constitution should not be amended. How else can we make sense of many of the misrepresentations and claims of opponents of the Voice to Parliament? How are we to understand John Howard’s call for people “to maintain the rage”, if not for its racial connotation?
Our Constitution was drafted by protagonists of White Australia, strongly supported by zealots such as Alfred Deakin, who became our second prime minister.
First Australians were not recognised as it was assumed they were a “dying race”. Among the first pieces of legislation passed after Federation was the Immigration Restriction Act 1901, which was initiated just nine sitting days after the Duke of York officially opened the Australian parliament. The law’s aim was essentially to ensure a predominantly British population, by restricting non-white, and particularly Asian, immigration and enabling the deportation of undesirable migrants. It is difficult to understand by what standards their desirability would have been judged, given the British settlements were primarily penal colonies.
I would hazard a guess that Pearson’s address, unlike a couple of others on this theme of the referendum, will be studied in schools in the future. It was a speech for the ages. It mattered.
Aboriginal Australians were also targeted. A range of policies was directed at so-called protection and assimilation of Aboriginal people into white society, one of which was the removal of Aboriginal children from their families and culture. By 1912, the government was working to remove all people of mixed Indigenous and non-Indigenous descent from reservations across Australia, with the goal of forced assimilation into the white community. It is not too much of a stretch to claim that these policies were designed collectively to destroy Aboriginal society.
As Barry Jones has pointed out in this publication, at the time of the arrival of the First Fleet, Australia’s Indigenous communities had well-established traditions and practices, art and mythology, spoke roughly 500 languages and dialects, and made and traded tools, weapons and goods. So much of this was lost in the ensuing violence and generations of repression and neglect that followed. Non-Indigenous Australians still have so much to learn from First Australians about land and river and water management, among other things.
The initial focus of immigration on Britain was subsequently widened to southern and eastern Europe, to the Middle East and just a few Asian countries. After World War II there was an attempt to re-emphasise the “favoured” British immigrants, with the Assisted Passage Migration, or “ten-pound Pom”, scheme. This program invited Britons to come to work in Australia to help meet the country’s postwar industrial development and infrastructure needs.
The White Australia policy was unwound in a number of steps, starting with the Holt government’s migration review in 1966, which shifted the focus of the program to migrant skills and their capacity to contribute to the country’s priorities. In 1973, the Whitlam government formally renounced the policy and shifted the focus to multiculturalism.
However, a racial dimension to immigration policy was raised again by then opposition leader John Howard in the 1980s, when he called for a slowdown in Asian immigration, and again with the arrival of Pauline Hanson on the political scene, in her maiden speech to parliament in 1996 and subsequent statements about Muslims.
These attitudes are at odds with the fact Australia has become probably the most successful and tolerant multiracial, multiethnic, multireligious society in the world – the envy of many. It is a tragedy that our nation hasn’t come to terms with its history and built on a recognition of the world’s longest continuous civilisation, with 65,000 years of history. We cannot conceive of the vastness of the opportunity that is being lost through this myopic, frightened governance. If the referendum fails, the world will see we have missed this opportunity.
For many years I have travelled widely for both business and academia, and it has always troubled me greatly that I am so often questioned about whether this country still upholds the White Australia policy. This is still a common perception, and its persistence should bother us as a nation.
In 1967, when I was a student at Sydney University, there was no significant presence of Aboriginal people. Having been taught nothing about Indigenous history in high school, my only awareness of Aboriginal issues was some knowledge of the 1965 Freedom Ride that was designed to bring to the attention of the public the extent of racial discrimination in Australia. This publicity provided something of a basis for the 1967 referendum that finally led to the counting of Aboriginal people in the census.
I would like to imagine that in 2023 our university campuses are more engaged, and that the obvious need for First Australians to be properly recognised and heard is readily embraced and understood, without being swayed by the fear and hatred propagated by many in the “No” camp.
The most disturbing point in this campaign for me has been the vilification of people such as distinguished academic Marcia Langton, who had the courage and good sense to draw attention to the racial undercurrents of the “No” campaign. It was not racist of her to point this out. She was stating facts. Yet many who criticised her had been running a fear campaign claiming that the Voice would racially divide our nation. The treatment of her was abhorrent and emphasises why the country so badly needs to come to grips with its history and acknowledge the need for proper recognition.
The recent speech of leading “Yes” campaigner Noel Pearson to the National Press Club hit the mark. He spoke eloquently about his vision for the future, a better future. He laid out what sort of country we should aspire to be.
He rejected the argument from the opposing camp that the Voice could divide Australia by race: “We’re not a separate race – we’re humans,” he said. “It’s just that we are Indigenous. And you go to some parts of the world and indigenous people are blond and blue-eyed. This is not about race. This is about us being the original peoples in the country.”
His comments contrasted sharply with those of Nyunggai Warren Mundine in the same forum the previous day, in which the “No” campaign leader described the Uluru Statement from the Heart as a “declaration of war”.
“Only love can move us now,” Pearson said. “It’s the love of home. Our Australian home is the source of this love.”
I would hazard a guess that Pearson’s address, unlike a couple of others on this theme of the referendum, will be studied in schools in the future. It was a speech for the ages. It mattered.
In an important sense, the referendum provides an opportunity to clearly move beyond our White Australia past by responding positively to the wishes of First Australians – that is, their request as to how best to be recognised, as expressed in the Uluru Statement from the Heart. Giving them an advisory Voice can also help our leadership do better than the failed attempts of the past to develop effective policies to deal with Indigenous disadvantage.
This is not about guilt but a positive expression of love and unity for our national future.
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on October 7, 2023 as "The stain of White Australia".
******************************************
ABC News, 7 October 2023:
Laura Tingle
A usual plaudit for a book is that a reader "couldn't put it down". But a plaudit for David Marr's new book, Killing for Country, which documents his family's history as professional killers of Aborigines in NSW and Queensland in the mid-1800s, is that it is one you have to keep putting down.
It's not just the brutality of the large-scale killings Marr documents that requires regular pauses, but the voices of white people discussing it — either in the most cold-blooded pragmatic terms, or in terms of horror.
The chilling fact is that, no matter what was actually known or protested about at the time, the killings didn't stop.
Marr's history documents events which were not just cases of rounding up Aboriginal people accused of crimes, or events that just happened in the early years of white settlement, but the systemic shooting and poisoning of people living on land they had been living on for thousands of years, or who may have adapted to living peaceably on stations, or even in working in towns.
It continued at least into the 1890s.
The immediate horror of the story clashes horrendously with our image of ourselves, and with the lofty ambitions of those who oversaw federation, and the writing of our Constitution, as the former chief justice of the High Court, Robert French, observed in a speech to the National Press Club this week.
Noting resonances with the current referendum debate, French quoted some of the opposition to federation and the constitution at the time, with one contributor observing that "the people aren't ready to federate; they don't know what it means; [and] their leaders and their newspapers are not brainy enough or honest enough to try to teach them what it means".
He quoted the then premier of Queensland, Samuel Griffith, observing that "there is no doubt that here, as everywhere, there will be timid men who are afraid of launching into something new; but when was ever a great thing achieved without risking something".
French observed: "The Australian spirit evoked by the 'don't know, vote no' slogan is a poor shadow of the spirit which drew up our Constitution. It invites us to a resentful, uninquiring passivity."
Linking the past with the future
The headlines from the former chief justice's speech focused on his affirmation that, in his view, the Voice posed no constitutional or legal risks.
But his speech also manages to link up, in a way which has often not successfully occurred, the past and the future embedded in the Voice debate.
"It does not require a black armband view of history to conclude that colonisation did not bring unalloyed benefits to our First Peoples," he said. "Nor does it require rocket science logic to conclude that we live today with the cross-generational effects of that collision."
Whatever your views on the idea of the Voice, it is not just the ugly racism exposed by the debate about it — which has seen Indigenous people on both sides of the debate subjected to abuse and death threats — it is the spectacular failure, hypocrisy and opportunism that has been on display on occasions among our politicians that has already marked it as another ugly chapter in our history.
The willingness of some sections of the media to perpetuate misinformation, and of other sections of the media to get lost in attempts at false balance, has made nigh on impossible a reasonably rational debate about what a permanent advisory body to the parliament and executive, whose actual remit would be defined and controlled by the parliament, might mean both symbolically and practically to Indigenous Australians.
Once again, it seems our leaders and newspapers "are not brainy enough or honest enough to try to teach Australians what it means".
And this is not because those leaders didn't know.
Conflict over how to help Indigenous people
French quotes John Howard — now a vocal campaigner against the Voice — from 2007, saying:
"I believe we must find room in our national life to formally recognise the special status of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders as the first peoples of our nation. We must recognise the distinctiveness of Indigenous identity and culture and the right of Indigenous people to preserve that heritage. The crisis of Indigenous social and cultural disintegration requires a stronger affirmation of Indigenous identity and culture as a source of dignity, self-esteem and pride."
Now, Howard says, people should vote no to "maintain the rage" against the Voice, which he says would create "a new cockpit of conflict about how to help Indigenous people".
Conflict over how to help people — if conflict was what the Voice produced — is apparently a worse outcome than possibly addressing "the crisis of Indigenous identity and culture".
Howard's self-described political love child, former prime minister Tony Abbott — who has always claimed a special interest in, and affinity for, Indigenous people — said this week that, rather than pursue the Voice, "we should end the separatism, which has bedevilled Indigenous policy for many decades now".
"Aboriginal people are fine Australians," he told ABC RN, "and they should be encouraged to integrate into the mainstream of our society."
What "integration" means is as unclear now as it was when Abbott advocated the "mainstreaming" of Indigenous services when he was prime minister.
And if there is any model that currently defines how Indigenous policy is executed at the federal level, it is the one imposed on us by Abbott as prime minister when he insisted on bringing Aboriginal affairs into the Department of Prime Minister and Cabinet — a department with no experience in service delivery.
Blocking change, no matter what the truth is
No campaigners regularly now rage about some mysterious bureaucracy which allegedly worthlessly chews up billions of dollars in wasted funding to Indigenous people.
That would be the National Indigenous Australians Agency, the body set up by the Morrison government and which morphed out of the structure set up in PM&C by Abbott.
The Coalition also appointed an Indigenous Advisory Council "to provide advice to the Government on Indigenous affairs, [focusing] on practical changes to improve the lives of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people".
The inaugural, government-appointed chair of the council — which sounds like it had a job pretty much identical to that proposed for the Voice — was another prominent No campaigner, Warren Mundine.
That the policies that many of the prominent politicians leading the No campaign are actually campaigning against come from their own side of politics, or are based on their own previous statements, and their own policy legacy, is just one more depressing aspect of what has proved a very flawed debate.
Coalition figures from Howard to Peter Dutton insist their difficulty is not with constitutional recognition but with the specific proposal for the Voice.
Robert French on Friday reflected that the very act of recognition proposed by the referendum "is the creation of the Voice".
"I do agree with John Howard that recognition in the Constitution is a strong affirmation of Indigenous identity and culture," he said.
"A stronger and practical affirmation will give content to that recognition by the creation of the constitutional voice to Parliament and the Executive Government," he said
After many months of bitter debate, his words remind us that we are back at a point where it seems that, no matter what the truth may be, we will not let it lead to any change.
Laura Tingle is 7.30's chief political correspondent.
******************************************
NOTE: Numbers represent search interest relative to the highest point on the chart for the given region and time. A value of 100 is the peak popularity for the term. A value of 50 means that the term is half as popular. A score of 0 means there was not enough data for this term.
Lighting up the dunes near Wanda Beach, Cronulla, NSW
ahead of the 14 October 2023 national referendum asking the question:
"A Proposed Law: to alter the Constitution to recognise the First Peoples of Australia by establishing an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice.
Do you approve this proposed alteration?”
via @slsandpet, X/Twitter, 24 September 2023
Some parodies just beg to be written ...others sorta demand like a terrorist 🤣 a few minutes ago it was "oh come ON you know you wanna....i deserves it!..go on i DARE ya....write me and tweet it..." so being a softie i gave in. "Workin for the man...oops i mean dole" 🙄 pic.twitter.com/7XSZgCAAuc
— Glenno and Ruben (@mad6duck) September 23, 2023
The year 2020 began with media articles discussing the possibility of the recognition of First Nations people in the Australian Constitution and also a Voice to Parliament.
This was not new. People had been reading of these issues at their breakfast tables since at least the 1990s, many without realising that Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples had been seeking long-overdue recognition, a protection of their rights and equal treatment since the 1920s. All of which had culminated in the 2017 Uluru Statement from the Heart - after which the Coalition Turnbull and Morrison federal governments repeatedly shoved the Statement into a corner of the room whenever questions were asked.
Although Advance Australia had registered as an official significant third party in February 2019 (with $2.4 million in seedmoney supplied by 16 donors).
The legal entity which underpins this organisation is Advance Aus Ltd formerly known as Freedom Aus Limited, registered in Queensland on 31 August 2018 and then moved to South Australia before landing in the ACT and now situated at Level 4, 15 Moore Street Canberra, CITY ACT 2601 since July 2023.
The original six directors have come and gone and now there are three:
LAURA JEAN BRADLEY;
MATTHEW PATRICK FRANCIS SHEAHAN - self-titled 'activist'; and
VICKI ANN DUNNE - former ACT Liberal Party MLA for Ginninderra electorate.
Advance Australia been running political issue 'talking points' and campaign advertising ever since, it wasn’t until 2021-22 when its xenophobia and prejudice began to be writ large that media coverage had increased as had awareness.
By the time 2022 came around with a firming of the political objective to hold a national referendum, it was obvious that Advance Australia had not just political backing from right-wing politicians and committed culture warriors like Tony Abbott, it had a number of financial backers with deep pockets. Pockets which appear to be financing its referendum “No” campaign against the inclusion of an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament in the Australian Constitution.
The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 September 2023, p.26:
One of the calculated myths in the campaign against the Indigenous Voice is the argument that the referendum is a contest between elite insiders and ordinary folk because the case for change is powered by the wealthy and the well-connected.
The No campaign thrives on the "outsider" status it claims for itself as a movement that speaks for those without money or power, leading a cause that challenges the establishment by mobilising voters who lack the advantages enjoyed by others.
But the No campaign has an establishment of its own, full of people with money, influence and connections as well as harbourside views. It turns out that a transport company boss and a building materials millionaire are among the donors behind Advance Australia, although their names do not show up in the disclosures at the Australian Electoral Commission.
This is important when so little is known about the peak group behind the No campaign, Advance Australia, and the activist group it has set up, Fair Australia. These groups are secretive by design, but key facts about the tactics adopted by some of their members emerged in this masthead this week about the way they coached volunteers to use fear and doubt rather than facts to defeat the Voice at the October 14 referendum. It is not suggested that any of the donors identified below endorsed the controversial tactics revealed in the news reports.
Advance is a force to be watched in federal politics. If it succeeds in halting the Voice, it could unleash its conservative activism on other fronts even when critics accuse it of peddling falsehoods…..
Some Advance donors are known because they are named in the group's annual returns to the Australian Electoral Commission, or they lodge their own returns about their donations, and some have declared their support publicly, but that is not the case with all. Some of the payments are made through private companies, so we searched company records to find out who was behind the donations. This kind of disclosure is not readily available to the ordinary voter.
So who are its donors? The transport company chief is Brett Ralph, founder and managing director of Jet Couriers and a director of the Melbourne Storm football club as well as other sporting clubs. His company, JMR Management Consultancy Services, put $75,000 into Advance last financial year. He did not reply to an email about his donations.
The Sydney millionaire is Rodney O'Neil, a member of a family that made its money in building materials with companies like Australian Blue Metal and Hymix, which was run by his brother, Colin. Companies linked to Rodney O'Neil, with names like Nedigi and Sixmilebridge and based in Double Bay, contributed $85,000 to Advance last year. He did not respond to a request for comment.
Another donor is Sam Kennard, head of storage company Kennards, who has helped Advance over several years. His company, Siesta Holdings, gave $20,000 last year and $20,000 the year before. There was no response from Kennards about this donation.
These donors join some who have already been in the headlines for their help for Advance - such as former health company chief Marcus Blackmore, who donated $20,000 last year. Blackmore is a public supporter of the No campaign. One of the best-known donors to Advance is a former fund manager, Simon Fenwick, who has backed the conservative group for years. He and his wife, Elizabeth, donated $650,000 and $350,000 before the last election. The Fenwick family trust also donated $50,000 last year. Earlier this year, Fenwick promised to match donations worth up to $250,000 to Advance to help stop the Voice….. [my yellow highlighting]
Marcus Blackmore (Liberal & National parties donor) multi-millionaire Executive Director of Blackmores Ltd - $20,000 to Advance Australia
Brazil Farming Pty Ltd, principal multi-millionaire Franklyn Roger Brazil - $34,000 to Advance Australia
Louis Denton, Chief Operating Officer Devcos International - $75,000 to Advance Australia
Rayleen Guisti, Personal Assistant to Managing Director Garnaut Private Wealth - $37,500 to Advance Australia
Gabrielle Hull - $20,000 to Advance Australia
John Francis Hull (Liberal National Party of Qld donor) Retired UK director - $45,000 Advance to Australia
J M R Management Consultancy Services Pty Ltd, Managing Director Brett Ralph - $75,000 to Advance Australia
Nedigi Pty Limited (inaugural Advance Australia Donor 2018-19), Son of property magnate Denis O'Neil, Director Rodney O’Neil - $25,000 to Advance Australia
Sixmilebridge Pty Limited (inaugural Advance Australia Donor 2018-19), (Liberal Party, Liberal National Party Qld, National Party donor) Company Secretary Rodney O’Neil - $45,000 to Advance Australia
Telowar Pty Ltd (inaugural Advance Australia Donor 2018-19), Director Rodney O’Neil - $25,000 to Advance Australia
Andrew Abercrombie (Liberal Party donor) millionaire president of the Buy Now Pay Later company Humm - $20,020 to Advance Australia
Willimbury Pty Limited,(inaugural Advance Australia Donor 2018-19), Director Colin O’Neil - $25,000 to Advance Australia
Siesta Holdings Australia Pty Ltd (Liberal Democratic Party donor) Director Sam Kennard - $30,000 to Advance Australia
Karl Morris (Liberal Party Donor) CEO Ord Minnett Ltd & Chair Bravehearts Foundation Fund - $10,000 to Advance Australia
Silver River Investment Holdings Pty Ltd (Liberal Party, Liberal Democratic Party & Drew Pavlou Democratic Alliance donor) Director Simon Fenwick, Institute of Public Affairs board member - $50,000 to Advance Australia
Ian Tristram Chairman Trisco Foods Pty Ltd - $25,000 Advance Australia
The Sydney Morning Herald, 12 September 2023, p.1:
The campaign to sink the Voice has instructed volunteers to use fear and doubt rather than facts to trump arguments used by the Yes camp.
In an online training session, the national campaigning chief for leading No activist group Advance, Chris Inglis, detailed the anti-Voice movement's core strategy of playing on voters' emotions.
Inglis instructed volunteers not to identify themselves upfront as No campaigners as they make hundreds of thousands of calls to persuadable voters, but instead to raise reports of financial compensation to Indigenous Australians if the Voice referendum were to succeed.
"When reason and emotion collide, emotion always wins. Always wins," he said as he displayed the same quote from US psychology professor Drew Westen, author of The Political Brain.
The No case is leading in several national polls ahead of the October 14 referendum. The latest RPM poll published yesterday showed support for the Indigenous Voice slumping to 43 per cent, with voter sentiment swinging against the constitution amendment in every state except Tasmania.
Inglis explained at the meeting on Monday, August 28, that the No camp's job was to make people suspicious of the Voice and its backers, while the Yes campaign continued to cite academic arguments and documents such as the Uluru Statement.
"This is the difference between facts and figures or the 'divisive Voice'," the long-time Liberal Party staffer said. "That feeling of uncertainty, of fear or doubt, that stays. That lasts for a very, very long time."
"I'm going to hammer in a lot of this emotive language."
"If you took everything that I had just said and turned it into one little thing, this is what you should write down and remember forever so you can tell your kids, tell your grandkids, tell your nephews and nieces - that people vote based on how they feel."
Advance runs the leading No campaign Fair Australia, which is aligned with the Coalition's Indigenous Australians spokeswoman, Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price.
Advance was started in 2018 as a conservative counterweight to GetUp and counts former prime minister Tony Abbott on its advisory board. It claims it has a 250,000-strong supporter base fighting "woke politicians and elitist activist groups ... taking Aussies for a ride with their radical agenda".
It is not suggested that either Price or Abbott endorses the coaching methods outlined in the training session run by Inglis.
Scripts used by Advance's 10,000-strong network of phone campaigners show how they are taught not to introduce themselves as calling from "the No campaign".
Instead, they are asked to sound as if they were concerned citizens associated with Fair Australia who "heard" the Voice will push for financial compensation for Aboriginal people. "It's been designed purely for soft voters. If we had put [No] in the opening line ... that in itself will scare people, right?" Inglis told volunteers.
"It's not from the 'No campaign'... Fair Australia's soft, it's calming."
The script states: "I've also heard that some of the people who helped design the Voice proposal are campaigning to abolish Australia Day and want to use the Voice to push for compensation and reparations through a treaty. All of these things raised a few questions in my mind and made me wonder if there was more to it all than meets the eye".
Inglis told supporters that phone canvassing - using a tool called CallHub employed by successful campaigns in Europe and the US - was integral to Advance's efforts.
If 250 people attend a phone calling session, Inglis said, they could reach 15,000 so-called "soft" voters yet to make a firm decision.
Inglis, a former ACT Liberal staffer, said in the briefing that he had worked on election campaigns for about 12 years.
His briefing outlined Advance's "three-wave plan" through Fair Australia to defeat the Voice.
The strategy was first deployed in autumn when No campaigners started raising awareness of the Voice as an issue of concern.
In the winter, the conservative activists began talking about the "Voice of division".
As referendum day looms, the Fair Australia campaign has begun discussing consequences of voting Yes and asking Australians to act by rejecting the proposal….
Read the full article online at:
Hi! My name is Boy. I'm a male bi-coloured tabby cat. Ever since I discovered that Malcolm Turnbull's dogs were allowed to blog, I have been pestering Clarencegirl to allow me a small space on North Coast Voices.
A false flag musing: I have noticed one particular voice on Facebook which is Pollyanna-positive on the subject of the Port of Yamba becoming a designated cruise ship destination. What this gentleman doesn’t disclose is that, as a principal of Middle Star Pty Ltd, he could be thought to have a potential pecuniary interest due to the fact that this corporation (which has had an office in Grafton since 2012) provides consultancy services and tourism business development services.
A religion & local government musing: On 11 October 2017 Clarence Valley Council has the Church of Jesus Christ Development Fund Inc in Sutherland Local Court No. 6 for a small claims hearing. It would appear that there may be a little issue in rendering unto Caesar. On 19 September 2017 an ordained minister of a religion (which was named by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in relation to 40 instances of historical child sexual abuse on the NSW North Coast) read the Opening Prayer at Council’s ordinary monthly meeting. Earlier in the year an ordained minister (from a church network alleged to have supported an overseas orphanage closed because of child abuse claims in 2013) read the Opening Prayer and an ordained minister (belonging to yet another church network accused of ignoring child sexual abuse in the US and racism in South Africa) read the Opening Prayer at yet another ordinary monthly meeting. Nice one councillors - you are covering yourselves with glory!
An investigative musing: Newcastle Herald, 12 August 2017: The state’s corruption watchdog has been asked to investigate the finances of the Awabakal Aboriginal Local Land Council, less than 12 months after the troubled organisation was placed into administration by the state government. The Newcastle Herald understands accounting firm PKF Lawler made the decision to refer the land council to the Independent Commission Against Corruption after discovering a number of irregularities during an audit of its financial statements. The results of the audit were recently presented to a meeting of Awabakal members. Administrator Terry Lawler did not respond when contacted by the Herald and a PKF Lawler spokesperson said it was unable to comment on the matter. Given the intricate web of company relationships that existed with at least one former board member it is not outside the realms of possibility that, if ICAC accepts this referral, then United Land Councils Limited (registered New Zealand) and United First Peoples Syndications Pty Ltd(registered Australia) might be interviewed. North Coast Voices readers will remember that on 15 August 2015 representatives of these two companied gave evidence before NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6 INQUIRY INTO CROWN LAND. This evidence included advocating for a Yamba mega port.
A Nationals musing: Word around the traps is that NSW Nats MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has been talking up the notion of cruise ships visiting the Clarence River estuary. Fair dinkum! That man can be guaranteed to run with any bad idea put to him. I'm sure one or more cruise ships moored in the main navigation channel on a regular basis for one, two or three days is something other regular river users will really welcome. *pause for appreciation of irony* The draft of the smallest of the smaller cruise vessels is 3 metres and it would only stay safely afloat in that channel. Even the Yamba-Iluka ferry has been known to get momentarily stuck in silt/sand from time to time in Yamba Bay and even a very small cruise ship wouldn't be able to safely enter and exit Iluka Bay. You can bet your bottom dollar operators of cruise lines would soon be calling for dredging at the approach to the river mouth - and you know how well that goes down with the local residents.
A local councils musing: Which Northern Rivers council is on a low-key NSW Office of Local Government watch list courtesy of feet dragging by a past general manager?
A serial pest musing: I'm sure the Clarence Valley was thrilled to find that a well-known fantasist is active once again in the wee small hours of the morning treading a well-worn path of accusations involving police, local business owners and others.
An investigative musing: Which NSW North Coast council is batting to have the longest running code of conduct complaint investigation on record?
A fun fact musing: An estimated 24,000 whales migrated along the NSW coastline in 2016 according to the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service and the migration period is getting longer.
A which bank? musing: Despite a net profit last year of $9,227 million the Commonwealth Bank still insists on paying below Centrelink deeming rates interest on money held in Pensioner Security Accounts. One local wag says he’s waiting for the first bill from the bank charging him for the privilege of keeping his pension dollars at that bank.
A Daily Examiner musing: Just when you thought this newspaper could sink no lower under News Corp management, it continues to give column space to Andrew Bolt.
A thought to ponder musing: In case of bushfire or flood - do you have an emergency evacuation plan for the family pet?
An adoption musing: Every week on the NSW North Coast a number of cats and dogs find themselves without a home. If you want to do your bit and give one bundle of joy a new family, contact Happy Paws on 0419 404 766 or your local council pound.