Australian Federal Election 2016: Nationals MP Kevin Hogan and suicide numbers in his electorate

Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) Summary of Findings 2014:

Among those aged 15 to 44, the leading causes of death were Intentional self-harm (suicide), Accidental poisonings (including drug overdoses) and Land transport accidents.

In 2014 the NSW suicide rate for males between the ages of 15-24 years was 14.1 and for females in the same age grouping the suicide rate was 5.4.

Excerpt from North Coast Voices post, 8 December 2014:

By 2013 New South Wales had a suicide rate of 9.1 per 100,000 people for 2009-2013.

In 2012-13 hospitalisation of young people aged between 15 and 24 years for intentional self-harm was significantly higher than the state average in Ballina, Byron, Clarence Valley and Coffs Harbour local government areas and, on par with the state average in Kyogle, Lismore, Tweed and Richmond Valley local government areas.

Excerpt from ABS media release, 31 March 2015:

Suicide was once again the leading cause of death for Australian's aged 15 to 44. Suicide accounted for 2,520 deaths in 2013 at a standardised death rate of 10.7 per 100,000 people. The median age at death for suicides is lower than for many other causes at 44.5 years of age. As a result, suicide accounted for over 85,000 years of life lost making it the leading cause of premature death in Australia. [my red bolding]

This was  Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan as reported by The Daily Examiner on 19 June 2015:

DESPITE a small number of dedicated youth mental health services in the Clarence Valley, the message from the Federal Government and experts is the region does not require one of the proposed 15 new headspace sites.

Member for Page Kevin Hogan told The Daily Examiner representatives from youth mental health service headspace had been in consultations with Health Minister Sussan Ley, with the Federal Government agreeing to further funding.

"The Federal Government has funded the establishment of new headspace sites to take total number of sites up to 100," Mr Hogan said.

But it is unlikely the Clarence Valley will be the recipient of one of the new headspace sites with Mr Hogan explaining we already had adequate services on the ground.

The Daily Examiner, 12 August 2015:

"The Clarence Valley needs more mental youth services and I will be campaigning for such," Mr Hogan said.

This is the situation in the Clarence Valley section of Hogan’s electorate in March 2016, as reported by ABC News:

Eleven youth suicides in 12 months have prompted a series of crisis meetings in the northern New South Wales city of Grafton.

The deaths have all occurred in the Clarence Valley region and include a 17-year-old girl in the past fortnight.

Meeting organiser Janita Cooper, a mother of three boys, said the Clarence Valley was a tight-knit community where everyone knew someone effected by suicide.

"The youth situation is out of control; it's like a rollercoaster ride," Ms Cooper said.

"The children grieve for one person and a few weeks later, it's another child."

The community's first meeting was held on Monday night with 150 people in attendance.

A working party was formed to campaign for more mental health services in Grafton, including a headspace centre, and another meeting was planned for the end of March.

A search of Hansard reveals that Kevin Hogan has never risen to his feet in the House of Representatives to plead for increased mental health services in the Clarence Valley.

In August 2015 when he was telling valley communities that he would be campaigning for more mental health services for youth, the only things he mentioned to his fellow MPs in the House were the Clarence Valley Business Excellence Awards (and what a great night he had in Yamba) and the Clarence Valley’s share of road funding.

Nor can I find any mention to date in the media that Kevin Hogan has personally been in contact with either state or federal health ministers in relation to this very serious health issue.

Apart from attempting to take some credit for the Northern NSW 2015-2018 Mental Health Integration Plan, which flows from the NSW Government strategic mental health plan, the current Federal Nationals Member for Page has done the bare minimum to date with regard to mental health services in his electorate.

A reader bites back at Northern Star editorial style

The Northern Star, 23 February 2016:

Good with the bad

Good editorial David (NS 18/2), Your unwavering support for Kevin Hogan is touching. You may have some work to do convincing readers that you don't mind what political persuasion a politician is. But you do deserve credit for publishing letters criticising Kevin Hogan and the Nationals.

The Nationals are a strong force in this area, although I often wonder why because

they promise much and deliver little. I`ve lived in this area nearly 30 years so I`m

almost a local, in that time the Nationals have had an almost exclusive hold on these Northern Rivers seats, only with short disruptions when Labor`s Harry Woods and Neville Newell were elected in Page and Richmond.

When Justine Elliott and Janelle Saffin were elected in 2004 and 2007 all hell broke

loose, suddenly major infrastructure projects that were ignored for years by the

Nationals were being built.

Don Page lobbied the Howard Government long and hard for the Ballina and Alstonville bypasses, his National Party mate Ian Causley repeatedly failed to secure any funding. Safe seats; why bother, (not anymore).

When Janelle Saffin was elected these two projects were immediately funded and

built.

Kevin Hogan also made the good people from the Ballina Marine Rescue Tower wait  for over two years in inadequate facilities just so he could roll out the pork barrel closer to an election.

So David, if you think such disrespectful and cynical behaviour is OK and Kevin Hogan is on a roll, fine. If not how about some balance in your editorials and comment on issues where Kevin and his government are letting the local area down.

Keith Duncan

Pimlico

Australian Federal Election 2016: oh dear, Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan is at it again

In February this year Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan fronted the Grafton Chamber of Commerce and delivered a large pork pie regarding thresholds for foreign investment in Australian agricultural land and businesses.

He was at it again this month with a public assurance concerning foreign workers made to ABC News on 9 March which also picked up the daily double by repeating that misinformation about investment thresholds:

A National Party MP is hoping local jobs will not be lost as a result of a Chinese buy-out of north coast NSW macadamia farms.

Four properties covering 380 hectares at Dunoon near Lismore, and formerly run by US-based Hancock Farms, have been bought by a Chinese group known as "Discovery".

The member for Page Kevin Hogan said he was aware of rumours of a sale.

Mr Hogan said a Free Trade Agreement with China did not mean the door was now open to foreign workers.

"It's a well-known fact within the free trade agreements that we do with any country, not just China, because let's not just make this a China thing, that any company and there's been companies that have owned Australian assets for 200 years and with every free trade agreement the work has to be offered to Australians first," Mr Hogan said.

Kevin Hogan said any foreign investment greater than $15 million had to be approved by the Foreign Investment Review Board, and he was waiting on information on whether the macadamia sale was vetted.

"We made an election commitment to lower it from the ridiculous amount of $ 250 million when it used to be triggered to look at a purchase if it was in the national interest, we have lowered that from 250 to 15 [million dollars] so if this entity has triggered over $15 million it would have absolutely gone before the Foreign Investment Review Board," Mr Hogan said. [my red bolding]

Now voters in the Page electorate are far from silly and many would have wondered what free trade agreement Mr. Hogan had been reading to boldly state that “with every free trade agreement the work has to be offered to Australians first”.

The Dept. of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s own copy of ARTICLE 10.4: GRANT OF TEMPORARY ENTRY of the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement clearly states:

3. In respect of the specific commitments on temporary entry in this Chapter, unless otherwise specified in Annex 10-A, neither Party shall:

(a) impose or maintain any limitations on the total number of visas to be granted to natural persons of the other Party; or

(b) require labour market testing, economic needs testing or other procedures of similar effect as a condition for temporary entry.

So this free trade agreement allows an unlimited number of temporary work visas for Chinese nationals (and in some cases their spouses) in many employment categories and, there is no test to see if the employment positions in Chinese-owned businesses within this country that they are taking up – for a period up to 4 years - could be filled by suitably qualified Australian workers.

One has to wonder if Kevin Hogan reads beyond the regular ‘talking points’ distributed to MPs by his party.

What Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan did not tell the Grafton Chamber of Commerce's February breakfast meeting when he was asked about foreign ownership of land and overseas workers

This was the incumbent Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan as reported in The Daily Examiner on 22 February 2016:

A member of the chamber executive, Mark Butler, asked Mr Hogan what the government was doing to combat countries like China buying up large tracts of Australian land and the prospect of those owners employing Australian workers……

Mr Hogan said the government, led by the Nationals, was fighting foreign ownership.

This included setting a minimum property sale of $15 million before the sale was brought to the Foreign Investment Review Board.

Mr Hogan said the limit in 2013 had been $250 million.

"Even then I think that's ($15 million) too high, but at least it's cumulative so, if they buy an $8 million and a $7 million property, they appear on the board's radar," he said.

What he didn’t tell this collection of potential voters in the forthcoming federal election is that investors from free trade agreement countries such as Chilean, Chinese (once the trade agreement comes into effect), Japanese, New Zealand, South Korean and United States investors are not automatically held to that $15 million threshold.

Yes, the $15 million threshold for purchase of agricultural land is cumulative for investors from China, Japan, Korea, but the agribusiness threshold for China, Japan, and Korea is $55 million, based on the value of the consideration for the acquisition and the total value of other interests held by the foreign person [with associates] in the entity. While the agribusiness threshold for Chile, New Zealand and United States is $1,094 million.

Other foreign investors can purchase agribusinesses up to a $55 million threshold, based on the value of the consideration for the acquisition and the total value of other interests held by the foreign person [with associates] in the entity.

For investors from non-free trade agreement countries Singapore and Thailand, where agricultural land is to be used wholly and exclusively for a primary production business the threshold is $50 million (otherwise the land is not agricultural land).

In addition, Foreign persons (including foreign government investors) are able to apply for an exemption certificate to cover a program of acquisitions of interests in agricultural land.

Exemption certificates for agricultural land would generally be considered where:

* the total proposed value of acquisitions over a three year period does not exceed $100 million (or if acquiring for use for an activity other than agriculture, $30 million). This includes acquisitions made individually or under an exemption certificate;

* the regions or localities where the agricultural land in which interests are to be acquired are defined clearly.

[Australian Government, Foreign Investment Review Board, Monetary thresholds, 2016]

Potentially this means a private investor from China or a Chinese corporation can buy farm lands valued at up to a cumulative $100 million over three years before appearing on the Turnbull Government's own political radar. 

All of the aforementioned provisions leaving plenty of wriggle room for investment in agricultural land and businesses and definitely not what Kevin Hogan was spinning the good folk of Grafton last month.

UPDATE

Kevin Hogan continues to demonstrate that he either doesn’t understand his government’s own rules concerning foreign ownership or he is deliberately misleading his electorate.

ABC News, 9 March 2016:

A National Party MP is hoping local jobs will not be lost as a result of a Chinese buy-out of north coast NSW macadamia farms.

Four properties covering 380 hectares at Dunoon near Lismore, and formerly run by US-based Hancock Farms, have been bought by a Chinese group known as "Discovery".

The member for Page Kevin Hogan said he was aware of rumours of a sale.

Mr Hogan said a Free Trade Agreement with China did not mean the door was now open to foreign workers.

"It's a well-known fact within the free trade agreements that we do with any country, not just China, because let's not just make this a China thing, that any company and there's been companies that have owned Australian assets for 200 years and with every free trade agreement the work has to be offered to Australians first," Mr Hogan said.

Kevin Hogan said any foreign investment greater than $15 million had to be approved by the Foreign Investment Review Board, and he was waiting on information on whether the macadamia sale was vetted.

"We made an election commitment to lower it from the ridiculous amount of $ 250 million when it used to be triggered to look at a purchase if it was in the national interest, we have lowered that from 250 to 15 [million dollars] so if this entity has triggered over $15 million it would have absolutely gone before the Foreign Investment Review Board," Mr Hogan said.

How will Minister for Agriculture and Water Resources Barnaby Joyce & Nationals MP Kevin Hogan handle local opposition to Turnbull Government's move to lower penalty rates?

Electorates in Northern New South Wales, such as Page and New England have an long-established tourism component in their local economies.

Both full-time, part-time and casual retail and hospitality workers play a big part in the tourism industry in these rural and regional areas, so it is interesting to note that local opposition to the Turnbull Government’s less than subtle move against weekend penalty rates in the retail and hospitality sectors is obviously on the radar of local voters.

The Australia Institute:

Polling in key Liberal and National Party seats shows strong opposition to reducing Sunday penalty rates for retail workers, according to new ReachTEL polling commissioned by The Australia Institute.

Polling conducted across the electorates of Page, New England, Warringah and Dickson on 17th December shows that between 65% and 79% of people in these electorates want Sunday penalty rates in the retail industry kept the same or increased.

“The research underscores the political difficulty any Government faces if they allow Sunday penalty rates to be cut,” said Ben Oquist, Executive Director of The Australia Institute.

“Furthermore the consequences for lowering Sunday penalty rates for the macro economy need to be considered. Lowering the take-home pay for many low paid employees, who are more likely to spend most of their income, could lower the amount of spending in the economy with negative flow on effects for economic growth and employment,” said Mr Oquist.

Page MP Kevin Hogan initially called these local concerns a beat up.

However, with media reporting the possibility that Page and Richmond workers losing a minimum est. $12.2 million and $11.8 million in total income respectively, this was perhaps not the wisest choice of words to use in an election year.

Given that in his own electorate 74.6 percent of all those of all those surveyed and 56 per cent of those Nationals supporters surveyed wanted penalty rates to increase or stay the same, attempting to brush aside valid concern in this way looks foolhardy to say the least.

Hogan appears to have realised this by 29 December and changed his tune when speaking to a Daily Examiner journalist: "I'm very cognisant that penalty rates are very important to many people who don't earn a lot of money….For a lot of people any extra benefit they get is very important to them. I'm yet to be sold there is an economic benefit in cutting penalty rates."

A statement that only the gullible would accept at face value, as his parliamentary voting record shows that he has never once voted against Abbott or Turnbull government legislation or spoken up strongly in the House of Representatives against their policies.

The Minister Agriculture and Water Resources, Barnaby Joyce, takes a different tack by saying that any changes to workplace laws including penalty rates would be taken to an election.  

With 70.7 percent of all those of all those surveyed and 56.9 per cent of those Nationals supporters surveyed wanting penalty rates to increase or stay the same, he will have to work hard to convince his own electorate that reducing these rates is not going to hit the New England economy hard.

Across rural New South Wales a partial abolition of penalty rates in the retail and hospitality sectors would result in workers losing between $118.9 million p.a. and $220.0 million p.a. with a  loss in disposable income of between $53.8 million p.a. and $106.2 million p.a. to local economies, according to research conducted by The McKell Institute.

And we wonder how Tony Abbott gets away with it?

For those among us still wondering how Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott manages to convince Coalition backbenchers to toe the line with regard to his punitive policies, here is the answer – by and large they are stupid.

Take Kevin Hogan the Nationals MP for a large federal electorate on the NSW North Coast, who on the morning of 15 January 2015 was quoted in The Daily Examiner:

Member for Page Kevin Hogan said the policy would not affect Clarence Valley residents because, in the majority of cases, doctors in the region saw patients for over 10 minutes.

"I don't support the city-based corporate six-minute medicine model of healthcare where doctors churn through 10 patients every hour as a policy," Mr Hogan said.

The policy to reduce the Medicare refund by $20.10 for GP visits under 10 minutes duration would not affect Clarence Valley residents?

The estimated resident population of the Clarence Valley is in excess of 51,000 persons.

Research done at the Family Medicine Research Centre in conjunction with the Sydney School of Public Health, University of Sydney reviewed data from BEACH (a continuous national study of GP activity) and reported in June 2014 that between 1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013 only 10% of GP visits were timed as 6 minutes or less while a total of 12% were less than 10 minutes duration1.

So if every person visited the doctor only once a year it is likely that an estimated 6,120 visits to local doctors in the Clarence Valley would have been short consultations – leaving non-concessional patient(s) around $33-$38 out-of-pocket on each of these visits.

Across the entire Page electorate those GP consultations affected would have numbered over 15,994. More if one considers that Australians go to the doctor on average between 3.73 to 3.78 times a year and in NSW the figure is probably slightly higher.

Even leaving aside concessional patients within those 15,994 plus visits, that’s possibly in excess of $200,000 extra per annum that people in the electorate would have been paying from 19 January 2015 - before national outrage forced a government backdown on 15 January.

This backdown didn’t include the planned $5 across the board Medicare rebate cut for all visits to the local doctor from 1 July 2015.

This measure will see in excess of $765,000 come out of combined local pockets each year for GP visits within the Page electorate. Across the Northern Rivers region it will total an est $4.7 million per annum.

The Member for Page is clearly wrong in his assumptions.

Of course the Clarence Valley is affected by the Abbott Government’s attempts to dismantle Medicare and the health care universal safety net. His entire electorate will suffer.

Given the the last national census revealed that the Clarence Valley continues to have a higher proportion of households with incomes below $600 per week (33.8%) than New South Wales (21.7%) or Australia (21.1%) it is possible that this area will be affected more than most.

Kevin Hogan has obviously taken the Prime Minister’s word as gospel and not bothered to do any independent research himself, which given the prime minister’s track record, makes the Member for Page a very stupid politician.

1. Australia-wide in 2013-14 only 8 doctors referred to the Professional Services Review by the Department of Human Services (DHS) were the subject of "inappropriate practice" findings. In that financial year no referrals to DHS for suspected fraud were recorded.

Are voters in Page getting value for money out of Nationals MP Kevin Hogan?

THE 2013 Federal Election finally wraps up in Page today with the official confirmation of the Nationals' Kevin Hogan as the member for the next three years.

Mr Hogan will be confirmed as the seat's new federal member at noon in the Australian Electoral Commission office in Grafton. [The Daily Examiner, 25 September 2013]

Pomp and ceremony will trump daily politics in Canberra today as MPs of the 44th Parliament are sworn in and officially presented to the Governor-General. [ABC News, 12 November 2013]

Federal Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan's initial parliamentary entitlements claim covers his official first forty-nine days in the House of Representatives.

Not content to wait on the formal declaration of the Page electorate poll on 25 September or that official swearing-in on 12 November, Mr. Hogan began to rack up charges against Australian taxpayers beginning on 11 September 2013 with fuel for his car.

By 31 December his entitlement total came to $104,651.47.

Including $7,701.89 airfare/COMCAR costs for a family member/s.

Click on image to enlarge

Hopefully sometime between now and the next federal election he will start demonstrating value for the money being spent on him.

The NSW Nationals have been whispering about it for quite a while, but this is the first time I have seen it in print

Former Labor MP Janelle Saffin is considering taking on the sitting Nationals MP Kevin Hogan for the federal seat of Page at the next general election.

Snapshot from The Northern Star 29 June 2014

Hat tip to Clarrie Rivers for supplying this.

Did Hogan really say that?!

Letter to the editor in The Daily Examiner on 8 July 2014:

Kevin's tongue slips

Kevin Hogan's slip of the tongue must be highlighted so that all electors in the Page electorate can now realise his comments on local radio on Wednesday morning appertaining to what he does for the electorate were "nothing" and laughed as he repeated "I don't mind doing nothing."

A typical National's answer as they don't have to do anything to be re-elected.

Charles John Lincoln

Gulmarrad

Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan misled his own electorate

The Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Anthony Albanese, has asserted that this statement by Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan on Page One of The Daily Examiner on 28 March 2014 was deliberately misleading:

Mr Hogan said the government's $1.75 billion five-year funding extension of the Roads to Recovery program was at risk of being blocked in the Senate.

"If Labor and the Greens vote against the legislation in the Senate, the program will terminate," he said.

"Given Labor and the Greens' position on this bill our local councils of Ballina, Clarence Valley, Kyogle, Lismore and Richmond Valley stand to lose a total of more than $17.8 million this financial year.

"Across New South Wales, local roads will lose more than a staggering $480 million if Labor doesn't get out of the way."

What Kevin Hogan neglected to say was that, although the Road to Recovery Program funding was not scheduled to extend beyond 30 June 2014, the Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill 2014 passed by the House of Representatives on 24 March 2014 will put in place new funding conditions for the Program and that funding allocations to councils for the 2014-15 financial year will be determined after that.

Nor did Mr.Hogan apparently bother to inform local journalists that the bill had been in the Senate since 25 March when consideration was adjourned until 13 May 2014.

At which time it apparently fell off the Abbott Government agenda.

The bill was scheduled for Senate debate on 23 June 2014, however this did not occur.

One could suspect that Prime Minister Abbott decided to defer the matter until after the new minor party senators took their seats in the Upper House on the 7th of this month.

UPDATE: The Land Transport Infrastructure Amendment Bill was scheduled as government business (second reading—adjourned debate) in the Senate on 8 July 2014 – except that didn’t occur either according to Hansard.

Kevin Hogan was dog whistling in his statement quoted by The Daily Examiner. The Abbott Government clearly does not regard the Roads to Recovery funding to be in jeopardy.

Although, under Abbott’s cost-cutting regimen I’m not sure that regional councils will be pleased with the level of funding they are offered next financial year, as I suspect that the government of which Kevin Hogan is a part may seek to reduce future regional roads funding.

BACKGROUND

What the Federal Dept. of Infrastructure and Regional Development stated about this bill and future funding on 3 June 2014:

The objective of Roads to Recovery is to contribute to the Infrastructure Investment Programme through supporting maintenance of the nation’s local road infrastructure asset, which facilitates greater access for Australians and improved safety, economic and social outcomes.

From 2014-15 to 2018-19 the Government will provide $2.1 billion ($350 million in 2014-15) under the Roads to Recovery programme, to be distributed to Australia's local councils, state and territory Governments responsible for local roads in the unincorporated areas (where there are no councils) and the Indian Ocean Territories.

The Bill to amend the Nation Building Program (National Land Transport) Act 2009 (the Act) to provide for this extension is currently before Parliament. Following the amendment of the Act, the Government will determine new council allocations and new funding conditions for the Programme.

Excerpt from the 6 July 2014 media release from Shadow Minister for Infrastructure and Transport, Anthony Albanese:

Nationals’ MP for Page Kevin Hogan has been caught out deliberately misleading his own community with invented claims about imaginary threats to the $1.75 billion Roads to Recovery program.

Late in March Mr Hogan told the Clarence Valley Daily Examiner that if Labor did not back the Abbott Government’s new Land Transport Infrastructure Bill, the Roads to Recovery program and its grants to councils for road works, would end on June 30. 

“The program will terminate,’’ Mr Hogan said, claiming this could cost councils in his electorate more than $17 million.

As Labor said at the time, Mr Hogan’s claims were wrong. June 30 came and went last week with no end to the Roads to Recovery program, which the previous Labor Government funded fully in our 2013 Budget…..

Quote of the Week

Before the last election, Hogan made a specific commitment not to support Federal environment powers being handed back to the states and threatened to “cross the floor” on CSG. However, last week in federal parliament that commitment lay in tatters, and Kevin Hogan voted for the bill which has gutted the water trigger on CSG mining.  He had his one big chance to cross the floor, and he blew it. [Michael McNamara, spokesperson with Gasfield Free Northern Rivers, in Echo NetDaily, 19 June 2014]

Abbott Government dismantles legislated "water trigger" protecting Australian communities from the rapacious demands of the mining industry and Nats MP Kevin Hogan fails to cross the floor as promised

First the Abbott Government dismantles the legislated “water trigger” protecting Australian communities from the rapacious demands of the mining industry and, then straight after this was voted through the Lower House it throws in an ineffectual last minute amendment of its amendments.

Federal Nationals MP for Page Kevin Hogan on the subject of amendments to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bilateral Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014 as reported in The Northern Star 17 June 2014:

PAGE MP Kevin Hogan says he has strengthened laws protecting groundwater from coal seam gas drilling with two amendments added to Federal legislation last night.

The legislation makes changes to the former Labor Government's "water trigger" bill, which required all gas drilling operations in Australia to prove they would not harm the water table before being approved by the Federal Environment Minister.

The new legislation transfers authority for the "water trigger" bill from the Federal Government to the state.

By peeling back the need for both tiers of approval, the coalition government hopes to "simplify" the approvals process for business by getting rid of duplication and creating faster decisions.

Mr Hogan said his two amendments would strengthen the national environmental law and help protect Australia's water resources.

The first amendment would mean all state governments and territories would have to seek independent scientific advice when assessing projects for the water trigger.

The advice would come from the Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development (IESC).

The second amendment would give the Federal Government power to request advice from the independent committee, including to what extent a state or territory had considered the scientific advice.

The Federal Environmental Minister would be able to overrule the approval if not satisfied with the process…..

The Abbott Government further amendments (to the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bilateral Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014) introduced by Mr. Hogan can be found in the Hansard record for 16 June 2014 at Pages 103-105.

The Federal Labor Member for Richmond Justine Elliot responding to Kevin Hogan on the floor of the House of Representatives on 16 June 2014 – Hansard Pages 105-106 :

Mrs ELLIOT (Richmond) (20:20): I too support the amendments moved by the member for Page, but can I point out to him it is too little too late. There is no point putting a bandaid on a gaping wound, and that is what you are proposing to do today. The fact is that you and your party are huge supporters of coal seam gas mining on the North Coast of New South Wales, and this does nothing to allay the fears of people in your community and in my community and the extent of concerns about unconventional gas mining. In fact, just last weekend at the National Party conference, which I am sure the member for Page was at, he would have heard the Leader of the Nationals and the Deputy Premier slag off at people that were protesting at Bentley. That is what you and your party think of people who oppose coal seam gas mining. The fact is that you are a member of a party that proactively pushes coal seam gas mining right across the North coast of New South Wales. There are changes being made to water down the water trigger. What we put in place when we were in government was a very important initiative to protect water resources throughout the country. The actions we took

in extending the water trigger were very important to people in my electorate and indeed to people in your electorate, member for Page. What you voted for tonight took that away. You took away the provisions in terms of looking at water and coal seam gas mining. This bandaid does not repair that at all. In fact, it does nothing—it

makes it worse. Tonight you have voted to hand all of those environmental powers to state governments or—God forbid—some councils. You made reference to Bentley. We all know that Bentley is in Richmond Valley shire. We know that the National Party mayor of Richmond Valley Council is full-on keen for coal seam gas mining. What you voted for tonight means either your pro-CSG National Party state government or your pro-CSG Richmond Valley Council is going to give a big tick to coal seam gas mining at Bentley. So keep in mind what you voted for, and disregard the bandaid amendments that you have put forward. If you want to talk about Bentley, we know that the decision on an exploration licence is going to be made by 25 June. That is pretty close in terms of the decision making and the impacts there. We saw thousands of people at

Bentley come out to protest the exploration licence there and we are going to see thousands again. So I think that you need to be true to your constituents who are very worried about the exploration licence at Bentley and what that means.

These amendments are not actually going to secure anything. You have taken away so much by voting for this bill tonight. By voting to actually delegate approval responsibilities to the states and the councils as well, you have taken away the capacity for national oversight across a whole range of very important issues. Your attempt to put a bandaid response in this legislation is not going to have any effect at all in stopping harmful coal seam gas mining or in having any oversight of it. We have to look at all of those particular factors within the context of this bill. You cannot vote for something and then pretend that the couple of minor, little amendments that you have moved mean that somehow it is not that bad. Well, it is that bad. It is that bad because you have effectively voted to hand over approval powers to a state government who, quite frankly, we know are environmental vandals. The New South Wales state government are environmental vandals; everyone knows that. It is a real concern in terms of their actions, from allowing shooting in national parks right across to their pro coal seam gas mining agenda. Their vandalism is very widespread. It includes some of their rezoning and not protecting koala habitats. There are

a huge array of issues on which the state government has failed the people of New South Wales. I think that in our area and in others they will be held to account come the state election next March. The member for Page has tonight voted to say, 'Yes, you're environmental vandals but we'll give this power to you or we'll give it to the councils.' Now, most councils just do not have the resources to be able to deal with issues such as this. They just do not have the staff, the scientists, the bureaucrats and the encompassing framework that the federal government has to look at all of these particular ramifications effectively. So it is irresponsible to hand it to them as well. Potentially, as I said, we could see some councils making decisions in relation to coal

seam gas mining or even uranium mining. For goodness sake, how irresponsible is that? The member for Page can stand here tonight and move as many amendments as he likes. The fact is that what he voted for is absolutely destructive. Your constituents—and I know what they want because they are my constituents too—want you to stop unconventional gas mining and any unconventional mining on the North Coast, but you and your party continue to pursue it. We saw your leader at the conference on the weekend denigrate and ridicule those of us who stood against it. The fact is the National Party are pro coal seam gas mining and you confirmed it by voting for this bill tonight.

Federal Greens MP for Melbourne Adam Bandt responding in the House of Representatives on the same day – Hansard Pages 106-107:

Mr BANDT (Melbourne) (20:30): This is a piece of choreographed theatre of which Andrew Lloyd Webber would be proud. This is astounding. The government has come in and said the existing national protections that apply at the federal level against things like coal seam gas mining are about to be taken away once and for all. Instead, under the legislation, we are going to allow state or even local governments to approve projects that would normally be assessed against federal standards. Then, in a rearguard action—because the government knows that the community is breathing down its neck about coal seam gas—it comes in and says: 'I'll tell you

what we'll do. We won't keep those high levels of protections—we're still going to remove them all, but we'll just add in one little one that takes you about a third of the way to where we were before. 'When you consider this amendment together with the legislation that we are about to pass, what it will mean is this: yes, a state minister has to obtain advice, but it is now going to be the case that that very same state minister gets to determine whether those conditions have been met. It might even be a local government that gets to determine it, and that might even be the case where the state government is the one conducting the proposal—the proponent. In other words, under this amendment and the legislation, when you read the two together, a state

government can come along and say: 'We are the proponent for this coal seam gas project, and we are going to determine whether it meets federal standards, and the only obligation on us now is to go and seek some advice. Well, we sought it and we're going to approve it, and there's nothing you can do.' If you are really concerned about protecting the community against the adverse impacts of coal seam gas, then

you would keep the existing legislation and the water trigger that is embodied in it. These amendments, as choreographed as they are, make a bad piece of legislation slightly better, and so they will be supported. But anyone who really cared about protecting the water table and protecting the community from the impact of coal

seam gas would be voting against this piece of legislation in the first place. I think everyone knows that these amendments would not be here, were it not for the wide cross-section of Australians from all walks of life who are coming out and saying, 'Hang on, this government we voted for is not representing us when it comes to protecting our farmland and is not representing us when it comes to protecting us against the adverse impact of coal seam gas.' This is a choreographed attempt to hold at bay some of that support, but I can tell you, Mr Deputy Speaker,

the communities right across this country, who are campaigning to protect their land and their water against the impacts of coal seam gas and unconventional gas, know that this is not good enough and they know that the only reason that this is happening is they are out there day after day fighting to protect their land and their water. The

Greens will continue to stand with them and continue to condemn this coalition government for voting to strip away federal protections, including the water trigger, and hand over to state and local governments the power to determine whether coal seam gas and unconventional gas mining can go ahead.

Lock The Gate media release:

 

Nationals gut water trigger: Hogan abandons promise to cross the floor

Posted by Georgina Woods  on June 19, 2014

The Federal National Party has walked away from its commitments to protect the national water trigger on Coal Seam Gas (CSG) mining, and voted last week to allow it to be handed back to the states.

The Federal National member for Page, Kevin Hogan, had promised to cross the floor on the CSG issue if necessary, but instead last week turned his back on iron-clad commitments made to his electorate.

"Last week in Parliament, the National Party voted to allow the Federal water trigger to be handed back to the states, rendering it completely meaningless" said Phil Laird, National Co-ordinator for Lock the Gate Alliance.

"This trigger was introduced because of the severe risks to water supplies posed by CSG and the abject failures of the states to properly assess or protect important, nationally significant water sources.

“Self interested state governments can’t be trusted to properly regulate nationally important water resources that cross state boundaries such as the Murray Darling Basin or the Great Artesian Basin.

"Voting this trigger down is a huge betrayal of farming communities and our environment.  LNP figures who vowed publicly that the water trigger would not be touched if they were elected, should now hang their heads in shame" he said.

"Despite iron-clad guarantees to his electorate, last week Kevin Hogan voted to allow the Federal water trigger to be handed back to the states" said Michael McNamara, spokesperson with Gasfield Free Northern Rivers.

"Before the last election, Hogan made a specific commitment not to support Federal environment powers being handed back to the states and threatened to 'cross the floor' on CSG. 

"However, last week in Federal Parliament that commitment lay in tatters, and Kevin Hogan voted for the Bill which has gutted the water trigger on CSG mining.  He had his one big chance to 'cross the floor', and he blew it.

"Kevin Hogan staked his candidacy for the seat of Page on the CSG issue, and the people of the electorate deserve to know they have been abandoned. If this new Bill passes the Senate, Federal decisions on CSG water impacts will effectively be history" he said.

Background

Commitments on the Water Trigger before the 2013 Federal Election.

In a candidates survey before the election last year, Kevin Hogan was asked:

"If elected to office, will you pledge to promote the following policies within your party and in public, and to vote to implement them via new or amended Federal laws:

1.    Retention of current Federal environment powers, ruling out devolving them to the states and opposing any fast-tracking of coal or gas developments?"

His answer:  'Yes'.  Full response from Kevin Hogan available on request.

During a tour with Kevin Hogan of the Page electorate in the lead-up to the Federal election last year, Joe Hockey stated that "Our policy is to continue the CSG policies that are in place, it's no different......Would we water down the water trigger amendment, I don't think so".

Northern Star, August 30 2013

Video footage of Kevin Hogan assuring 700 Lismore residents earlier this year that he had gained a guarantee from the National Party not to reverse the water trigger is available on request.

The Bill Passed Last Week

The Bill which passed the lower house of Federal Parliament last week is titled the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Bilateral Agreement Implementation) Bill 2014. 

As a result of Schedule 3, Part 1 of the Bill, state governments will take back sole decision-making power relating to water impacts for CSG and coal where a 'bilateral agreement' is in place.  Draft bilateral agreements have already been developed for NSW and Queensland.  The water trigger will still exist on paper, but it will be rendered completely meaningless.

Kevin Hogan, where are you?

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner, 31 May2014:

Country let down

"TRUST me, fisherman," the crocodile said. The fisherman did. The fisherman died.

"Trust us, Australia," Tony Abbott, Joe Hockey and their rich pals said. Australia did.

And Australia got a budget of shameful unfairness causing distress and suffering to the unemployed, the elderly, the sick, the students, families, the environment and scientific research.

This electorate is strongly affected.

Kevin Hogan, where are you?

Barbara Fahey

Grafton