Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas speaking plainly to the Minister for Climate Change & Energy and Labor MP for Prospect (NSW), Chris Bowen

 

Hon Chris Bowen

Minister for Climate Change and Energy

Parliament House

CANBERRA ACT

Email:

EnergyMinisters@industry.gov.au

Chris.Bowen.MP@aph.gov.au

Dear Minister Bowen

Federal Government Climate Policy

The Grafton Loop of the Knitting Nannas Against Gas and Greed is a community group which was formed in 2012 in response to plans by the NSW Government to foist a gas mining industry on our NSW Northern Rivers region. As you may be aware, the determined campaigning of grass roots community groups, including various regional loops of Knitting Nannas, forced the abandonment of these plans. Because of our ongoing concerns about climate change and the impact it will have on future generations, the Nannas have remained active since the removal of the immediate gas threat to our region.

The Nannas are delighted that our new Federal Government has responded to community concerns about the existential threat of climate change by committing to greater emission cuts than the former government.

While this is a good first step, we are concerned that what you are doing is far short of what is actually required. As we understand it, your proposed cuts are in line with a temperature rise of 2°C not the 1.5° which is in line with the Paris goal. Scientists keep advising that much more is needed – much faster. Indeed the bushfires and floods in Australia as well as the climate-induced disasters elsewhere are making this very plain.

In addition the Nannas are extremely concerned that your Government has adopted a “business as usual” approach to the fossil fuel industry – an approach that is completely inconsistent with your apparent commitment to do better on climate change.

We are concerned that you see no problem with the opening of new coal and gas mines.

We are concerned that your colleague, Minister King, recently announced 46,758 sq km of new petroleum acreage for exploration in Commonwealth waters to the north of the country.

We are appalled that Minister King also indicated your Government’s support of the pie-in-the-sky technology of carbon capture and storage (CCS) so beloved of the fossil fuel industry by approving two permits for off-shore greenhouse gas storage areas north of WA and the NT. And there are a further three to come. We are also very concerned that taxpayer funds continue to be wasted on subsidies to CCS which are another form of “green-washing” by polluters intent on pursuing their damaging businesses.

If the fossil fuel industry had been concerned about the election of a government committed to greater climate action, they must be collectively rubbing their hands in glee, because nothing has really changed from the policies of the previous government.

As you are undoubtedly aware, more Australians than ever before are concerned about climate change and they expect more consistent and effective action from their government.

We urge you, Minister Bowen, to improve your government’s action on climate change.

Yours sincerely

Leonie Blain

On behalf of the Grafton Nannas

Cc Hon Tanya Plibersek, Minister for Environment and Water

Tweet of the Week

Former property developer, Northern NSW local government councillor & Qld mining consultant Nationals MLA for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has announced he's retiring at March 2023 state election. 🥳 Man who had to be dragged kicking & screaming towards few good decisions he ever made

— no_filter_Yamba (@no_filter_Yamba) August 24, 2022

Labor Member for Lismore Janelle Saffin took the healthy rivers & water security concerns of residents in 7 Northern NSW local government areas to the Legislative Assembly - predictably former mining consultant & Nationals Member for Clarence Chris Gulaptis spoke against her & over 10,000 petitioners

 

Petition Debate - Clarence Valley Mininghttps://t.co/tRTOm5Ro9G
On Thursday 14 October 2021, the Legislative Assembly of NSW debated the CCA No Mines petition calling on the LA to stop exploration or mining within the Clarence Valley and surrounding government area.

— ClarenceEnviroCentre💧 (@cecenviro) October 21, 2021

 

This video covers the full acceptance of petition debate concerning the "STOP CANGAI MINE" petition.

This debate was distinguished by the sheer number of misstatements of fact and untruths uttered by members of the NSW Perrottet Coalition Government.

 

Janelle Saffin goes to bat for not one but two electorates in order to put a dedicated specialist Parkinson's nurse on Northern NSW Local Health District's agenda

 

Office of the NSW Labor MLA for Lismore Janelle Saffin, media release, 2 September 2021:

CO-PATRONS: Lismore Parkinson’s Support Group Convenor Di Lymbury, right, with the group’s co-patrons Jenny Dowell OAM and Lismore MP Janelle Saffin.

LISMORE MP Janelle Saffin has welcomed confirmation that the Northern NSW Local Health District is considering establishing a specialist Parkinson’s nurse in Lismore to provide services to the Lismore and Clarence Valley communities.

Ms Saffin, who is co-patron of the Lismore Parkinson’s Support Group, from day one has strongly lobbied the Government and NSW Health to base a specialist nurse locally to meet growing demand from support group members and for other residents newly diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease.

“I have been working closely with Lismore Parkinson’s Support Group Convenor Di Lymbury and others to provide this extra level of care and support to improve the quality of life for local residents living with Parkinson’s,” Ms Saffin said.

“I lobbied NSW Health Minister Brad Hazzard and Northern NSW LHD Chief Executive Wayne Jones, and welcomed Treasurer Dominic Perrottet’s $8.6 million Budget package over four years, which includes funding to boost the number of specialist nurses statewide.”

Ms Saffin said she was encouraged by advice provided by NSW Parliamentary Secretary for Health James Griffin to Di Lymbury that Northern NSW LHD Acting Chief Executive Lynne Weir will consider using the new funding to establish a specialist Parkinson’s nurse in Lismore.

Mr Griffin told the support group that the LHD recognised the clinical benefits and improved outcomes for people with Parkinson’s disease that the existing specialist nurse position at Tweed Heads had provided.

“Ms Weir acknowledges it is difficult to access medical specialist neurology services in rural areas due to limited number of these specialists working outside the metropolitan area,” Mr Griffin wrote.

“The LHD is focused on developing support and clinical care for people with Parkinson’s through specialist clinics with geriatricians.

“The LHD also provides services, such as allied health, through the brain injury and spinal cord service, which supports people with Parkinson’s to maintain their function and independence,” Mr Griffin wrote.

Ms Saffin said she very much looked forward to the formal appointment of a specialist nurse based out of Lismore and viewed it as a major win for the Lismore Parkinson’s Support Group and the wider community.

“The sooner this happens, the better,” Ms Saffin.

Nationals MP announces $3,900 grant to help protect Clarence Valley koalas. WARNING: quotes are heavily laden with hypocrisy and political spin

 

IMAGE: The Chronicle

Former surveyor, property developer and one-time consultant to mining corporations, Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis (right), who last year fully supported his party's blackmailing of the senior partner in the NSW Coalition Government, who backed Deputy Premier John Barilaro to the hilt when he managed through political threats and intimidation to destroy the new Koala Protection SEPP and tried to destroy what little legislated protection was left to native forests on Crown and private land by - an ultimately unsuccessful - bill to amend the Local Land Services Act.

This member of the NSW Legislative Assembly who never saw a timbered block of land he didn't want to clear fell and who was rightly labelled 'Koala Killer' during the Northern Rivers fightback against the threat to koala habitat he, his party and their political donors represent, now has the hide to wave a pitifully small amount of money in front of the electorate's eyes in an attempt to paint himself as very concerned for the fate of Clarence Valley koalas.

It's enough to make one nauseous.

Clarence Valley Independent, 13 January 2021:

Clarence Valley Council has secured a $3900 grant from the NSW Government to help protect local koalas from dog attacks, Clarence Nationals MP Chris Gulaptis has announced.

“This is part of a comprehensive Government strategy to boost the local population with the help and support of local landholders who are ultimately the koalas’ best friends,’ Mr Gulaptis said.

“Preventing these injuries to koalas and other native wildlife will help the recovery of koalas and other native wildlife following the devastating 2019-20 summer bushfires.

“The smallest mouthing or bite by a dog can cause serious injury or death, and the situation is always very distressing for koalas, carers and dog owners alike,” Mr Gulaptis said.

“This funding will ensure dog owners are aware of the risk of injury their dogs can cause to koalas and other native wildlife, and prevent these injuries from happening in the first place.”......

NSW Nationals MP Chris Gulaptis boasts of his betrayal of his electorate

Clarence Valley Independent, 20 October 2020:

Koalas will have more protection but farmers and foresters won’t be saddled with unreasonable red tape following the introduction of a much improved State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) into State Parliament last Thursday (October 15), according to Clarence Nationals MP Chris Gulaptis.

“The Local Land Services Amendment Bill 2020” is a vast improvement on what was proposed initially and a win not just for the Nationals, but also for farmers, the timber industry and indeed koalas,” Mr Gulaptis said.

“I was prepared to walk away from the Government over the original Liberal Party plan, but this is a terrific compromise secured by the Nationals in NSW Government, in which rural industries are protected but property developers will be banned from disturbing koala habitat.

“As I said before, the red tape stops at the farm gate and that is how it should be,” Mr Gulaptis concluded.

This is a précis the final 16 October 2020 version of the amended NSW SEPP, State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019:

• Retains its new commencement date of 1 March 2020;

• Doesn’t apply to - (b) land dedicated under the Forestry Act 2012 as State forest or a flora reserve. An exemption also contained in the previous 3 September 2020 version of this SEPP;

• Only applies to 83 named local government areas out of a total of 128 local government areas and to - (a) in the koala management area specified in Schedule 1 opposite the local government area, or (b) if more than 1 koala management area is specified, in each of those koala management areas. Clauses also included in the previous version of this SEPP;

• Only applies to land classified as core koala habitat which is over 1 hectare in size. This applied to land in the previous version of the SEPP as well;

• Doesn’t apply to any land on which a development application has already been lodged, as was the case under the previous version of this SEPP;

• Tightens the definition of core koala habitat so that a higher level of proof is required at this clause - (a) an area of land which has been assessed by a suitably qualified and experienced person in accordance with the Guideline as being highly suitable koala habitat and where koalas are recorded as being present at the time of assessment of the land as highly suitable koala habitat;

• Made more land exempt from its provisions - (c) land on which biodiversity certification has been conferred, and is in force, under Part 8 of the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016;

• Allows larger buildings or buildings on a different part of a post-bushfire residential lot by repealing - (b) the replacement dwelling house is within the existing building footprint;

• Removes this provision protecting koala habitat identified by a particular form of mapping - (i) is not identified on the Koala Development Application Map.

It should be noted that at no time did the 3 September 2020 version of this SEPP ever apply to agricultural land broadly. The existing rules for routine farming activity and rural land clearing did not change and, if farmers had koala habitat on their land they could still apply and get approval to clear koala habitat under existing land clearing laws.

Provisions in Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020 have little or nothing to do with protecting koalas or farmers with koalas on their land - despite the Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis attempting to marry the Koala Habitation Protection SEPP and this Land Services amendment in the public's mind.

What the Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020 actually does is remove all local government areas from the protection of State Environmental Planning Policy (Koala Habitat Protection) 2019 with the exception of just five local government areas - Ballina, Coffs Harbour City, Kempsey, Lismore and Port Stephens.

The NSW Nationals wanted the bill to go forward using the Koala Habitat Protection SEPP as the excuse masking its real intent - to establish as law those clauses that (i) allow the commercial logging of native trees to continue unimpeded on private land by circumventing a government review of the private forestry system and (ii) to allow future clearing of native timber on farmland without the need for authorisation under other state legislation, including the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 .

On 20 October 2020 the NSW Parliament’s Legislation Review Committee stated in part of the impending legislation of which Gulaptis now so proudly boasts:

The [Land Services] Bill seeks to remove several requirements for land owners to obtain development consent under Parts 4 and 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the EPA Act). In doing so, the Committee notes that the Bill would remove local councils' ability to assess development applications, engage with relevant neighbour and community stakeholders, and make recommendations regarding the proposed development changes. It may thereby impact on the rights of these stakeholders to participate in such processes and be consulted about issues that may affect them…... [my yellow highlighting]

Chris Gulaptis is boasting of bad law and misrepresenting exactly what is contained in the new legislation to residents and voters in his electorate.

This former surveyor, property developer and mining operations consultant voted for the extinction of a unique species, the Australian Koala, and for virtually unconstrained land clearance which will see many more native species at threat of extinction in New South Wales. 

Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis: a portrait of political ignorance

Extract from an email sent by NSW Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis (former surveyor, property developer, local government councillor) on 20 May 2020:

Timber harvesting operations take place in around one per cent of State forests each year, which is around 0.1 per cent of forested land in NSW.

Well managed, sustainable timber harvesting operations provide the essential renewable building products our communities need to rebuild following the recent fire season, from power poles, to timber bridge and house frames.

By ensuring an ongoing wood supply, we will help maintain local jobs when they are most needed and meet the critical timber supply needed to rebuild our local communities.

Our forests have been harvested and regrown many times over the past 100 years. Importantly, they have also successfully recovered from bushfires before.

A small number of selective harvesting operations that commenced prior to the fires have continued under the strict regulations governing native forestry in NSW.

These rules require Forestry Corporation to set aside large areas of habitat in every operation they carry out. These rules have been developed by expert panels of scientists to ensure wildlife populations continue to thrive alongside sustainable timber harvesting.

However, the primary focus is on salvaging what timber can be recovered from those badly burnt parts of the forest. These are areas so severely affected by fires they are largely devoid of any habitat. Forestry Corporation is also preparing to embark on a massive re-planting program to recover this estate.

Well, how does one reply to a pottage of misleading statements about a timber industry rife with rule breaking and environmental vandalism?

Firstly the Forestry Corporation of NSW controls more than two million hectares of native and planted state forest in New South Wales and, annually it takes an est. 2.5 million m³ of sawlogs and around 2 million tonnes of pulpwood from these forests, which means it supplies an est 14% of Australia's timber product. This year to date the Forestry Corporation has harvested est. 1.21 million m³ of timber product.

Secondly, on a regular basis the timber industry racks up warnings and fines. As little as four weeks ago the NSW Environment Protection Authority announced that the Forestry Corporation had been fined $31,100 for failure to abide by conditions immposed concerning avoidance of environmentally sensitive areas and retention of habitat trees.

Thirdly, perhaps a few images will clearly show that even after severe bushfires, in the absence of chainsaws and logging trucks, trees will begin to recreate "habitat".

All photographs found at Google Images

And then there is this aspect.....

ABC News, 29 January 2020:

Research has also shown forests that are logged post-fire and then regenerated have an increased risk of burning in high-severity crown-scorching fires. 

This extra fire risk lasts for about 40 years after logging. That is, a burnt forest which is logged tomorrow will still carry an elevated fire risk in 2060. 

A global review published in 2009 showed that links between logging and elevated fire risk is a problem seen in wet types of forests worldwide. 

In 2016, an Australian study published by the Ecological Society of America found tree fern populations crashed by 94 per cent after post-fire logging..... 

Many burnt trees that look dead now will re-sprout in the next few weeks or months. This is already occurring in the burnt coastal forests of NSW. 

These recovering trees must not be logged. They are essential for the survival of animals like gliding possums — research shows that these animals are unlikely to return to forests that are logged immediately after burning for 180 years (if they can return at all). 

Heavy logging machinery will kill many of the plants that germinate in the nutrient-rich bed of ashes on the forest floor. 

Animals that have miraculously survived in burnt areas can also be killed in logging operations. 

Pioneering research from southern Australia has shown that fungi and nutrients in soils can take up to a century or even longer to recover from salvage logging. 

Mass movement of soils in areas logged post-burn can choke rivers and streams and trigger fish kills as well as kill many other kinds of animals....

The Guardian, 6 May 2020:

A group of senior Australian scientists have warned in an international journal that logging native forests makes fire more severe and is likely to have exacerbated the country’s catastrophic summer bushfires. 

In a comment piece published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution, the scientists call for a clearer discussion about how land management and forestry practices contribute to fire risk. 

The article by the scientists David Lindenmayer, Robert Kooyman, Chris Taylor, Michelle Ward and James Watson comes amid intense debate about the resumption of logging in Victoria and New South Wales in bushfire hit regions..... 

In the comment piece, the scientists say much of the conversation in the aftermath of the spring and summer bushfires had rightly focused on climate change, but the impact of land management and forestry on fire risk was often neglected in these discussions. 

They highlight this as a concern because land management policy was “well within the control of Australians” and the fires had been used by some sectors of the industry to call for increased logging in some areas. 

The paper says industry data showed that some 161m cubic metres of native forest was logged in the period from 1996 to 2018. 

“Beyond the direct and immediate impacts on biodiversity of disturbance and proximity to disturbed forest, there is compelling evidence that Australia’s historical and contemporary logging regimes have made many Australian forests more fire prone and contributed to increased fire severity and flammability,” the scientists write. 

This occurs because logging leaves debris at ground level that increases the fuel load in logged forests. It also changes forest composition and leaves these areas of forest both hotter and drier, they say. 

The article says during the bushfire season fire had spread from logged areas adjacent to old growth eucalypts and rainforests in the Gondwana world heritage reserves..... 

The Daily Examiner, 25 May 2020: 

The public was recently invited to comment on a draft code of practice – the “rule book” – for private native forestry. 

The CoP has been in place for about 15 years, with the current draft resulting from the mandatory five-yearly review. 

With the stated aim of ensuring ecologically sustainable forest management, one would expect any review to focus on that aim but unfortunately that has not been the case. 

Ecologists and conservationists have two major concerns, the first being that, while there are provisions to protect threatened flora and fauna that are known to inhabit the proposed logging areas, there is no requirement to actually look for them. 

In fact, unless there is an ­official record of a threatened species on the property, it is assumed they don’t occur there. 

The second concern is a lack of compliance monitoring and enforcement, for which there is certainly a wealth of evidence. 

Although it’s difficult to pinpoint a reason, possibly it relates to a lack of political will to take action against the industry at large. 

Perhaps it is a case of under-resourcing, poorly drafted legislation open to interpretation or all of the above but the fact remains that flouting of the code’s regulations is widespread. 

Two years ago, the Clarence Environment Centre reported one local case where a PNF ­operator broke virtually every rule in the book – literally hundreds of breaches. 

Logging on creek banks, in swamps, on rocky outcrops and on cliff edges. 

Snigging tracks were constructed on excessive slopes and across gullies, erosion control measures were inadequate, threatened species had been trampled by machinery and rubbish such as oil drums and tyres were left littering the landscape. 

The investigators spent days on site confirming the ­reported breaches and finding additional ones, yet almost two years later no action has been taken against the culprits and with the two-year statute of limitations looming, the case will likely be dropped. 

Unless operators are held to account, how can we have any faith in the supposed aim of Ecologically Sustainable Forest Management? 

John Edwards, Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition

The Nationals MP for Clarence is predictable - in the first instance he always presumes the electorate is as ignorant as he is and in the second that what his bosses want is inherently right

Well it seems the nuclear lobby has resurrected that hoary chestnut, a nuclear power plant in the Clarence Valley.

This time it is at least a 2.2 gigawatt plant requiring an extensive power grid upgrade and, cooling as a once though from the Clarence River estuary or evaporative towers with off stream storage. One possible siting of the plant is in the Grafton-Koolkhan area.

https://nuclearforclimate.com.au/nsw-regions/

The NSW National Party MP for Page.....

The Daily Examiner, 9 March 2020, p.3:

There was a need for a mature debate before any decision on nuclear energy could be made, member for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has stated. 

But he believes the concept will go nowhere without first obtaining a “social licence” for the technology. 

His comments come in response to NSW Nationals leader and Deputy Premier John Barilaro expressing his, and the Nationals’ support for a bill introduced by One Nation’s Mark Latham to overturn the state’s ban on nuclear energy and uranium mining. 

Mr Gulaptis said there needed to be a clearer picture of the current state of the science as it related to nuclear energy. 

“At the moment the community’s perception of nuclear reactors is based on Fukushima, Chernobyl and Homer Simpson working at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant,” he said. 

“Quite frankly, that’s all I understand about the technology. “I don’t know where we are with nuclear technology — I’m just like the rest of the community, and I need to know more before I can make more of a call.” 
Mr Gulaptis said scientists needed to lead a mature debate based on evidence and not fearmongering so the community could make an informed decision. 

“Whenever the question about the possibility of using nuclear energy comes up, it is always shut down by a minority, and I believe that minority is fearmongers who are just pushing that Chernobyl model down our throats,” he said. 

“Now if that’s where the technology is still at, then I certainly don’t want it. “But I believe that they have advanced significantly, just like all other technology has — people are walking around with this year’s latest iPhone in their pocket, they’re not carrying the bricks of 20 years ago......

Members of the Clarence Valley Community.....

The Daily Examiner, 10 March 2020, p.5:

The success of the recent fight against coal seam gas has reinforced the message to politicians that large scale developments such as nuclear power required a social license according to the Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition. 

Secretary of the group Leonie Blain said it was wise of Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis to realise there would need to be considerable discussion about any nuclear proposal. 

“It is interesting that Mr Gulaptis claims that the closing down of any debate about nuclear power in the past is the result of fearmongering by a minority,” she said. “I would like to know what evidence he has for this belief.” 

Ms Blain said the fact that Grafton was one of the possible sites for a nuclear power station meant there would be interest in the issue. 

“There would be considerable local interest in any debate on whether a nuclear power station should be built and where it would be located,” she said.....

Murdoch-News Corp doing a little editorial lobbying on behalf of the nuclear industry.....

The Daily Examiner, 10 March 2020, p. 11: 

It's true, we need to be able to talk openly and rationally about nuclear energy in Australia. 

Nationally, it must be considered as a low carbon emissions energy source, and a viable replacement for the phase out of coal reliance. 

In NSW, where nuclear energy and uranium mining is currently banned, it must be considered as an alternative industry for regional areas vulnerable to a future of agriculture yields being marginalised by increased desertification. 

Locally, our future depends on thinking differently and accepting new industries to boost our economy, job prospects and population growth. 

Nuclear for Climate Science [*] earmarked Grafton as one of 12 possible sites for a nuclear power station in the future. 

The Nationals’ endorsement of a call from One Nation’s Mark Latham to overturn the NSW ban has put nuclear squarely back on the agenda.....

NOTE:

[*] The correct name for this 'group' is Nuclear for Climate Australia. It has a post office box postal address in Berrima, but does not appear to be incorporated under its trademarked name or have an ABN number. It principally functions as a website.
The individual who seems to organise its social media presence is its founder Rob Parker, who coincidentally is also Vice President of the Australian Nuclear Association. It has one known associate Barrie Hill, who appears to be Managing Director of SMR Nuclear Technology Pty Ltd. 
Nuclear for Climate Australia lobbys to overturn the Australian nuclear power ban and for the adoption of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs), which are alleged to have the same unresolved cost and safety concerns associated with larger plants and there is no consenus in the industry concerning SMRs.
Nuclear for Climate Australia has been riding the 2019-20 bushfire crisis on Twitter as a vehicle to push for nuclear power in this country.

Another perspective.....

The Climate Council, 23 January 2019:

What is a nuclear power station? 

Nuclear power stations run on uranium. When the nucleus of a uranium molecule is split inside a reactor, heat is produced. This process is called nuclear fission. The heat produced from this process is used to create steam from water. The steam drives a turbine that powers a generator. The generator creates electricity. 

Unlike coal and gas, no greenhouse gas pollution is created in the operation of the nuclear reactor. However, all other steps involved in producing nuclear power (from mining, to construction, decommissioning and waste management) result in greenhouse gas pollution. 

But nuclear energy is not “renewable”. Uranium is a finite resource just like coal or gas.... 

Nuclear power stations also present significant community, health, environmental, and cost risks associated with potential impacts from extreme weather events and natural disasters, such as occurred in Fukushima, Japan in 2011. Nuclear power stations leave a long-term and prohibitively expensive legacy of site remediation, fuel reprocessing and radioactive waste storage. 

Australia is one of the sunniest and windiest countries in the world, with enough renewable energy resources to power our country 500 times over. When compared with low risk, clean, reliable and affordable renewable energy and storage technology in Australia, nuclear power makes no sense.

Nuclear power stations are extremely expensive to build. For example, the Hinkley nuclear power station under construction in the UK will cost 20 billion pounds (AU$36 billion). Nuclear cannot compete on a cost basis with wind and solar, which are the cheapest forms of new generation. The cost of energy from the Hinkley Power station is significantly higher than large-scale solar, wind and offshore wind energy in the UK....