Forests and Koalas: why the NSW Nationals are so willing to betray communities in the Northern Rivers region

Before the disastrous 2019-2020 bushfire season the NSW North Coast region comprised 9.7 million hectares of land, with 65 per cent of it forested. Over half (3.4 million hectares) of the region’s forests were in private ownership, spread across thousands of individual holdings, according to NSW Dept. of Primary Industries (DPI).

The north coast had a diverse array of forest types and most of the tree cover was estimated to be between >20 to <30 metres and >30 to <40 metres in height across an est. 20,706 square kilometres.

This is how the Berejiklian Government saw those forests within the Northern Rivers region before the mega bushfires came through:

Extent of forest cover in north-east New South Wales

Extent of harvestable timber on private land and operating timber mills

Again, according to the DPI in March 2019; Properties with native forests that generated ‘very high’ stumpage values (based on their yield association) were mainly located between Coffs Harbour and Casino. Properties with native forests with ‘high’ stumpage values were far more widespread extending in a broad band (50-100 kilometres wide) along the full length of the north coast.

Properties in early 2019 which had a ‘Very High’ suitability for timber production were located between 50km and 100km from the coast between Grafton and the Queensland Border, with ‘High’ suitability properties occupying a broader band that extended from Coffs Harbour to the Queensland border. At its widest point, west of Casino, this band is said to extend 130 kilometres inland.

Joint EPA-Dept. of Industry Forest Science Unit predictive mapping of remaining NSW koala habitat based on sighting records, vegetation, soils and climate

"Modelling koala habitat",  NSW EPA. July 2019

It is easy to see that most of the remaining Northern Rivers koala habitat falls within those areas with operating timber mills and land on which the NSW Forestry Corporation has cast its rapacious eye.

According to the NSW Forestry Corporation around 60 per cent of the net harvest area available for timber production in the Northern Rivers region was impacted by fires during the 2019-2020 bushfire season, but this corporation appears to view a coastal strip around 100kms wide and 216kms long - containing thousands of parcels of private  land - as able post-fires to supply it with commercial timber for years to come.

The forestry industry is actively lobbying government for access to more native timber citing increased employment as one benefit. 

Despite the fact that Australia-wide the forestry industry appears to only employ around 10,700 people in a potential 2020 workforce of est. 13.5 million (ABS September 2020) and, according to industry reports; The Forestry and Logging industry has performed poorly over the past five years. Industry output is projected to decline at an annualised 1.3% over the period, with downstream demand also weakening…..

Furthermore, lower demand from log sawmilling, and declines in residential building construction have contributed to several years of revenue declines. Industry revenue is expected to decline at an annualised 1.4% over the five years through 2020-21, to $4.7 billion.

What this all means is that stressed koala communities already competing with urban expansion, increased traffic, historical and recent habitat loss, are now being threatened by the business strategy of one of the largest forestry corporations in Australia, the financial self-interest of around 32 operating timber mills within the Northern Rivers region, as well as the political self-interest of 12 National Party members who sit in the NSW Legislative Assembly and 6 National Party members sitting in the Legislative Council.

This shared self-interest in encapsulated in the bill passed by the Assembly earlier this month and still to be voted on by the Council, the Local Land Services Amendment (Miscellaneous) Bill 2020, which extinguishes state koala habitat protection policy on most NSW land and seeks to (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. 

If any North Coast Voices readers have concerns about the fate of forests and koalas on the NSW North Coast I suggest that they phone or email members of the NSW Legislative Council before Tuesday, 10 November 2020, using the link below which takes you straight to the parliamentary web page which lists the contact details for all 42 members:

https://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/members/pages/all-members.aspx?&house=lc&tab=browse

BACKGROUND

SATURDAY, 14 DECEMBER 2019

Are koalas on NSW North Coast now facing local extinction?

THURSDAY, 29 OCTOBER 2020

Want to know if your local state MP voted to drive the koala to extinction in New South Wales? Names and electorates are noted here

TUESDAY, 27 OCTOBER 2020

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

WEDNESDAY, 28 OCTOBER 2020

Will this be one of the last attempts available to communities seeking to legally curb rapacious loggers from destroying New South Wales koala habitat?

TUESDAY, 10 MARCH 2020

Losses in the 2019-20 NSW bushfires may exceed 70 per cent of the state's entire koala population

New South Wales 2020: the problem of water greed & outright theft

The Sydney Morning Herald, 21 September 2020:

The rapid growth of blueberry and other intensive farming in northern NSW has prompted a crackdown on illegal water use and sparked concerns about pollution in rivers and in the state's first marine conservation area.

The Natural Resources Access Regulator found 28 of 31 farms it inspected around the Coffs Harbour region in the first two stages of the clampdown were allegedly non-compliant with water laws.

The regulator said in the five years prior to the start of the campaign, agencies received more than 130 reports of alleged breaches in the region. "This potentially indicated a high level of non-compliance," a spokeswoman for the regulator said.

For the first two phases, the regulator ordered 13 farms to reduce the capacity of dams among 25 directions. Other actions include 20 penalty notices, with more likely after a third stage of investigations last month.

The problems stem in part from the conversion of banana farms to blueberries, raspberries and cucumbers, among other products, in the past two decades. Farms with set water licences have been subdivided, with new owners apparently adding bores, pumps and even dams on the smaller plots.

Water quality, too, has been compromised as the more intensive crops increase the use of fertilisers, pesticides and other chemicals. That's prompted the Coffs Harbour City Council to commission multiple studies by researchers from the Southern Cross University, among others.

One report found levels of nitrogen soared after rains as fertiliser from farms washed into rivers, reaching 695 times that of drier conditions.

"These [nitrogen oxide] loads were amongst the highest reported for catchments on the east coast of Australia, and similar to loads in rivers throughout China, Europe and India with strong agricultural or urban influences," the 2018 study found.

Shane White, one of the Southern Cross University researchers, said the Coffs region is prone to short, heavy rain bursts. Soils in the hilly area are typically shallow and sit on a clay base that limits the absorption of water, leading to significant run-off….

Breaches of NSW water laws have also been found in the Northern Rivers area in 2020 to date - 1 direction notice and 2 penalty notices have been issued to Clarence Valley LGA landowners, 2 direction notices to Ballina LGA landowners, 3 penalty notices to Byron Bay LGA landowners, 3 penalty notices to Lismore LGA landowners and 1 direction notice and 3 penalty notices for Tweed LGA landowners.

Cartoons of the Week

David Rowe

Cathy Wilcox

Morrison Government continues to drag its feet on national greenhouse gas emissions reduction

Renew Economy, 21 September 2020:

Morrison said, of net zero emissions:

"Well, as you know, our policy is to achieve that in the second half of this century, and I certainly will achieve that, and that’s why this week’s announcements were so important because it was about the technology we need to invest in now, which will make it a reality, particularly on the other side of 2030. The target that you’ve talked about becomes absolutely achievable. I’m interested in doing the things that make that happen. I think that is very achievable"…..

Morrison was, in fact, effectively stating that Australia would reach net zero emissions by 2100. Heck, what’s a half-century between friends?

In fact, Australia’s Paris climate agreement targets are neatly aligned with reaching net zero by 2100, whereas Labor’s old 45% by 2030 targets were aligned with net zero by 2050 (the far safer option). Unfortunately, the latest projections from the government are wildly off course, not only for net zero by 2050, but also for net zero by 2100….

If the rate of yearly emissions drops between 2020 and 2030 in Australia’s government projections continue, by my own reckoning, Australia will reach net zero emissions in the year 2300….

The Guardian, 22 September 2020:

The Morrison government’s rejection of a net zero emissions target for 2050 is at odds with the Paris agreement and more than 100 countries that have backed the goal, according to some of Australia’s most experienced climate experts..... 

countries in Paris including Australia had specifically asked the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to examine what 1.5C of heating would mean, and what needed to be done to avoid it. 

The resulting report, released in 2018, found global emissions needed to effectively be cut in half by 2030 – to be 45% below 2010 levels – and to reach net zero by 2050. It found staying within 2C heating would require net zero by 2070, but the impact of that was likely to be far worse. 

Australia chose to stick with its existing 2030 target of a 26% to 28% cut below 2005 levels and is yet to set a date to reach net zero.....

By contrast, [Erwin] Jackson said, Australia was “confusing the market”. “On the one hand, it has signed up to an international agreement that is supposed to put it on a path to net zero emissions by no later than 2050,” he said. “On the other, it keeps talking about ‘low emissions’. We’ve moved on from a conversation about low emissions. Globally, we have recognised we need to get to zero emissions.”

BACKGROUND

Australia is almost standing still when it comes to reducing its national annual greenhouse gas emissions. At the end of 19 calendar years in 2019 federal government policy has only resulted in our annual greenhouse gas emissions falling by a trifling 18.5 metric tonnes in comparison with the annual emissions at the end of the year 2000.

Estimated National Greenhouse Gas Emissions in metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent or MTCO2e over last 20 years - includes Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry:

2000 - 551 Mt CO2-e

2001 - 570 Mt CO2-e

2002 - 568 Mt CO2-e

2003 - 561 Mt CO2-e

2004 - 574 Mt CO2-e

2005 - 597 Mt CO2-e 

2006 - 610 Mt CO2-e

2007 - 606 Mt CO2-e

2008 - 590 Mt CO2-e 

2009 - 584 Mt CO2-e 

2010 - 543 Mt CO2-e

2011 - 546.3 Mt CO2-e

2012 - 551.9 Mt CO2-e (total excludes Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry)

2013 - 538.4Mt CO2-e

2014 - 535.9 Mt CO2-e 

2015 - 535.7 Mt CO2-e

2016 – 543.3 Mt CO2-e

2017 – 533.7 Mt CO2-e

2018 – 532.5 Mt CO2-e 

2019 – 532.5 Mt CO2-e (this annual total marks a difference of only -18.5 Mt CO2-e compared with the year 2000 annual total)

2020 – 528.7 Mt CO2-e (total up to 30 March)

Note:

Unadjusted figures found in Australian Government National Greenhouse Gas Inventory: Quarterly updates.and at Australian Dept. of Environment and Energy.

The estimated totals from 2000 to 2009 are from Dept. of Energy and Environment.

Patience with Australian Prime Minister Morrison and Treasurer Frydenberg’s ducking and weaving on JobKeeper support beyond September is "wearing mighty thin"

The Monthly, 8 July 2020:

Amid mounting criticism on social media that he’d again gone AWOL during a crisis, Prime Minister Scott Morrison showed his face this afternoon at a well-timed Canberra press conference, in which he killed two birds with one stone. 

As Morrison expressed his manifest sympathy for Victorians returning to lockdown, he also knocked out the broadcast of an unwelcome National Press Club speech by ABC managing director David Anderson. The PM had little to announce – an extra 6105 home-care packages for the elderly at a cost of $326 million – but he was flanked by Aged Care Minister Richard Colbeck, who mouthed all of 180 words (including “Thanks, PM”) and received no questions. The press gallery was mostly interested in the implications of Victoria’s second wave for the federal government’s recovery plans. Morrison suggested there would not be an extension of the JobKeeper program on a geographic basis – just for Victorians, say – making the point that the government would extend support for businesses or industries in need beyond September, and saying, “this is about tailoring a national program to provide support where the support is needed”. The PM also refused to be drawn on reports [$] that the personal income tax cuts slated for 2022–23 might be brought forward to stimulate the economy, saying, “That’s a matter that the treasurer and I will address in the context of the budget, not today”..... 

Millions of Australians are doing it tough. Some are surviving without any income at all, while 2.4 million people have raided [$] their super early, in withdrawals totalling $27 billion. And, with the federal budget heading for a deficit next financial year (which Westpac estimates at $240 billion), it is hard to see how the top economic priority right now is bringing forward income tax cuts that will favour the wealthy. Victoria’s return to lockdown highlights the uncertainty of the situation confronting the federal government as it prepares the July 23 economic statement. But as shadow treasurer Jim Chalmers said at a doorstop interview today, “If the banks can provide some certainty with this announcement, the Morrison Government can too – by releasing their secret report into the JobKeeper payments … We need the government to come clean.” Chalmers expressed support for the idea of bringing income tax cuts forward, saying that the Opposition would “engage with that constructively and responsibly”, adding, “Labor has been calling for that to be considered for some time. The working families of middle Australia need help now, not later.” 

It would be an understatement to say that patience with the PM and treasurer’s ducking and weaving on support beyond September is wearing mighty thin.

Has our dream run over the coronavirus pandemic has come to a sticky end?

Echo NetDaily, June 2020:

Thus Spake Mungo: ahh the Spike

Australia awoke last week to the strains of Spike Milligan’s poignant refrain, ‘I’m walking backwards to Christmas.’

It may not be all the way to Christmas, but it could be even further – well into next year, and perhaps beyond that. We don’t know and we can’t tell.

But it is sadly clear that our dream run over the coronavirus pandemic has come to a sticky end. And it has happened on both fronts, the medical and the economic. The cluster of hot spots that emerged from Victoria does not yet constitute the dreaded second wave, but it is worrying, and defies explanation.

For readers of The Australian, of course, it is all too simple: Daniel Andrews unleashed the beast by not clamping down on the Black Lives Matter protests. But hang on – there were protests in other states as well, without clusters emerging, And in any case, not one of the cases in Victoria can be traced to the demonstrations.

So perhaps the problem was that Andrews mismanaged the Cedar Bay abattoir outbreak? Or ignored communicating COVID-19 information to the ethnic communities? One way or another, we have to blame the socialist totalitarian for something.

But apart from the partisan bullshit, the fact that there are clusters at all must serve as a warning, because across other parts, around the world, COVID–19 is still raging. It is out of control in Brazil, spreading dangerously in India, working its way through the southern United States and, most disturbingly, making huge inroads in parts of China, where it was thought to have been tamed......

And for the government, the worse news is that the easing of restrictions has not just stalled, but has been reversed in some areas, notably the urgency of opening state boundaries.And despite the predictions of the optimists, we are not yet in reach of a vaccine. This is not good news.

It appears that we are reverting to the old maxim: think globally, act locally. The national cabinet was never much more national than our mish-mash federation, or the constitution that birthed it; it was a useful conceit and helped us muddle through the early emergency, but it was always gesture politics rather than reality....

And now the premiers have declared that it is every state for itself. Some are derestricting like mad, others are more cautious, playing for time. And of course Victoria has gone backwards – even toilet paper is back on the rationing list. This is serious, folks......

And it appears that the other premiers are less than sympathetic. In NSW, Gladys Berejiklian has made it clear that Victorian holidaymakers will not be welcome in her pristine domain – in fact, she has bluntly told them to bugger off.

Australia is still doing fairly well by world standards. Moody’s rating agency and the International Monetary Fund have both offered commendation, ticking us off as one of the best in a fairly miserable bunch.

But the IMF have warned that shutting down the stimulus measures designed to dampen unemployment too abruptly could lead to awful consequences – it has urged caution; a gradual easing, rather than a sudden shut off.

Morrison and Josh Frydenberg seem, reluctantly, to be getting the message. The strictly temporary JobKeeker program, scheduled to end in September, may have to be extended, at least for the most vulnerable sectors of the economy.

And some extra spending is being rolled out; the beleaguered arts are finally getting a boost, although a very minor one, and in the wake of the Qantas stand down, assistance for the airline industry is on the table.

And Morrison is hell-bent on ramping up the nation for business – whatever the consequences. ‘We can’t go “stop, go, stop, go”, we can’t flick the light on and off,’ he insisted, blithely ignoring the fact that this is precisely what he is planning to do with JobKeeker. ‘We’ve got to just keep the focus on keeping the economy open and getting people back into jobs.’ And there is absolutely no need for anxiety about the Victorian outbreak, because ‘we were expecting it.’ Perhaps he was – the rest of us were somewhat taken aback. 

But it is still all about industry and business. Individuals – casual workers in particular – are not considered essential. And of course enemies are still to be punished. The universities, and most of all the ABC, have been singled out for clobbering. Some of us are in this together more than others.

But it’s time to forget about the health crisis – so 2019-2020, We need a new narrative to turn the page into the new financial year. It’s the economy, stupid – and we do mean stupid. Back to Spike Milligan. As the Great Goon might have warbled:

‘I’ve tried walking backwards

And walking to the front

But all the people stare at me

And ask: who is that silly…’

Yes, quite so. Moving right along…

Become a supporter - donate now.

ECONOMIC STATE OF PLAY 2020: "Under these latest forecasts Australia’s economy next year would be 0.7% smaller than it was last year. That is the first time since 1983 that our economy would be smaller than it was two years earlier."

The Guardian, June 2020:

Since the virus hit there has been a belief, maybe a hope, that this was just a momentary thing. 

Sure, the fall would be sharp and deep, but the recovery would be fast coming. 

You could hear it in the talk of “snap back” from the prime minister and treasurer. 

There was almost a sense that this recession is not really a recession – because this was driven by health, not the economy. The underlying economy, this argument went, was solid (the foundations were strong!), and thus once those restrictions were dispensed with, we would be back as good as ever. 

The problem was that the foundations were not strong (productivity growth, household incomes and the domestic private sector were all flat-lining). Just because the causes of this recession were unusual does not alter the fact that all recessions bring with them massive job losses and a fall in production. 

And this recession is the worst we have seen since the Great Depression. 

This week the IMF issued a revised set of estimates for GDP growth this year and the next. And there was some good news to be had.....

In April the IMF forecast our GDP this year would fall by 6.7%; now it estimates it will “only” fall by 4.5%. 

Unfortunately though, the treasurer neglected to point out that, other than Malaysia, Australia had the biggest growth forecast downgrade for 2021. 

In April the IMF estimated our economy would “bounce” back in 2021 with 6.1% growth; now it sees just 4%. 

Overall, the IMF’s changed estimates are such that they expect our economy at the end of 2021 to be virtually the same size they were expecting it to be in April. Hardly a ringing endorsement that government policies are doing better than expected. 

What this means is we need to very quickly disabuse ourselves of the notion that the economy will “snap back” in 2021 and all will be well. 

Under these latest forecasts Australia’s economy next year would be 0.7% smaller than it was last year. That is the first time since 1983 that our economy would be smaller than it was two years earlier. 

But even that rather hides the impact. 

In October the IMF estimated that for the next five years our economy would grow by around 2.5% each year. That is pretty miserable growth, but it was largely in line with the average since the GFC. 

But now, even with these new and improved estimates for our economy, by the end of next year we are still tracking to be 5.3% below where we were expected to be. 

That is the equivalent of around $105bn less being produced – or roughly the total amount produced in a year by the entire manufacturing industry. 

That is a chasm of economic waste. 

If the economy was to keep growing at (a very strong) 4%, it would take us until 2025 to get back level with where we were expected to be before the virus. If it grows at the more realistic 3% from 2022 onwards, we will not get back on par until well into the 2030s. [my yellow highlighting]

The debate very much needs to shift from the language being used in January and February. 

Forget “fundamentals being strong” and “sensible budget management”. It was spin then; it is just embarrassingly irrelevant now. 

We are in a deep recession and the political and policy debate needs to recognise this fact.

Morrison & his hard right mates won't back down on slashing Australia Post mail services

Here is what Australia Post states it has been doing to keep letters and parcels moving during the COVID-19 pandemic.......

Eight extra freighter flights and 600 more casual staff employed to help speed up delivery, along with new and repurposed facilities.

With many retail businesses closing shopfronts in rural and regional areas due to the economic downturn leaving only their online store available to customers, Australia Post and its more than 2,000 post offices in these areas have become increasingly vital links in the supply chain.

So how did the Morrison Government respond to the increase in mail traffic?

It introduced new Australia Post regulations via Australian Postal Corporation (Performance Standards) Amendment (2020 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2020 and on the back of this decided to cut mail deliveries to every second day, stretch mail delivery times to between five and seven days, as well as abandoning priority mail.

What this means it that unless each postie can deliver two days worth of letters, small parcels and unsolicited mail during one working day, there will be a backlog of undelivered mail quietly mounting up at local mail distribution points - which would eventually blowout the time between posting and delivery to a matter of weeks.

The possibility also exists that by June next year mail delivery will be reduced even further, potentially causing delivery chaos.

Echo NetDaily, excerpt, 16 June 2020:

The Morrison Government voted eight times over two days to slash Australia Post deliveries. Yesterday Labor Leader Anthony Albanese moved to disallow the Prime Minister’s regulations which cut the frequency of postie delivery rounds, extend mail delivery times for millions of Australians and put the jobs of up to one in four posties and many others at risk.... 

The changes will affect everyone who relies on Australia Post Justine Elliot said these changes will affect everyone who relies on Australia Post. It will particularly affect the elderly in our region, who will be most disadvantaged by these cuts to mail delivery services. 

‘Many seniors are not on the internet and they instead rely on the mail for their letters, cards and bills and now, due to Government cuts, they’ll be waiting longer for important correspondence. The fact is the mail is often a lifeline for our seniors. 

‘People in our regional and rural communities still rely on the postal service more than many other types of services. Australia Post service standards are fundamental and for the benefit of all Australians. 

‘Under the Morrison Government’s plan, mail delivery across the North Coast will blow out from three business days to seven full days. These changes will slash the frequency of postie delivery rounds and put the jobs of up to one in four posties at risk. 

‘At a time of economic downturns across regional Australia, this Government is now slashing jobs and services......

One MP was particularly unimpressed.

I got really crank tonight. I just had to tell you about it. Sorry no captions - just totally in the moment!! 😡 pic.twitter.com/I0tzNBsoKj

— Ged Kearney (@gedkearney) June 16, 2020

Law Council of Australia is very concerned with some aspects of Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton's proposed amendments to the Australian Security and Intelligence Act 1975 (Cth) (ASIO Act)

"The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill 2020 will modernise ASIO's powers and, in doing so, improve ASIO's capacity to respond to these threats [by]....lowering the minimum age of a questioning subject in relation to a terrorism matter from 16 to 14...empowering the Attorney-General to issue warrants, including orally....allow non-intrusive tracking devices, such as a device placed on a vehicle, or in a person's bag, to be authorised internally...." [Minister for Home Affairs & Liberal MP for Dickson Peter Dutton in House of Representatives Hansard, 13 May 2020]

Law Council of Australia, media release, 13 May 2020:

Statement on proposed amendments to the ASIO Act by Law Council President, Pauline Wright

The Law Council of Australia is very concerned with some aspects of the proposed amendments to the Australian Security and Intelligence Act 1975 (Cth) (ASIO Act) released today in parliament.

If adopted, the amendments would redesign the Australian Security and Intelligence Organisation’s (ASIO’s) compulsory questioning warrant regime and repeal its specific detention powers.

It would also make some significant changes to ASIO’s surveillance powers, including permitting warrantless (that is, internally authorised) surveillance in relation to the use of certain tracking devices.

The Law Council welcomes the repeal of the ASIO detention regime in relation to the investigation of terrorism, which is consistent with its longstanding policy position. However, the amendments propose a re-design of the use of questioning warrants and we are concerned that there may be very limited time to scrutinise the proposed laws, which are lengthy, complex and highly intrusive on individual rights.

The proposal to reduce the age of minors who may be subject to questioning from 16 to 14 years and the conferral of powers on police to apprehend and detain persons for the purpose of bringing them in for compulsory questioning also requires detailed scrutiny by the Law Council, amongst the many other amendments.

The Law Council is concerned that the government is now rushing the Bill, despite having had over two years to develop the re-designed questioning legislation since the PJCIS tabled its report in May 2018.

Now there is a sense of urgency given that ASIO’s current questioning powers are due to sunset in 7 September, and the amendments are set to commence by or before that date.

This is not a Bill to be hurried through.

The Law Council will need to carefully scrutinise the Bill and we look forward to providing a comprehensive submission to the inquiry. 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Australian Security Intelligence Organisation Amendment Bill 2020 can be found here.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 14 May 2020:

With Federal Parliament flat out dealing with the social and economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, now is hardly the right time for a government to introduce legislation giving ASIO the power to question 14-year-old children, interfere with the rights of legal advisers, and enable the tracking of individuals without the need for a warrant..... 

Dutton's law would allow ASIO to seek a warrant so it can question young people aged 14 to 18 if they are a target of an ASIO investigation into politically motivated violence: broad criteria to say the least. 

Then there is a serious attack on the fundamental right of a person, whether they be 14 or 40, to choose their own lawyer when they are subject to investigation by ASIO. The bill allows for a prescribed authority, which is a judge or Administrative Appeals member selected by the government, to stop a person ASIO is seeking to question from contacting their lawyer if "satisfied, based on circumstances relating to the lawyer, that, if the subject is permitted to contact the lawyer, a person involved in activity prejudicial to security may be alerted that the activity is being investigated, or that a record or other thing the subject may be requested to produce might be destroyed, damaged or altered". 

This power is sweeping and allows for hearsay "evidence" to be used. All ASIO would have to do is tell the judge or AAT member that it has heard from "sources" that the lawyer requested by the detainee is a security risk. 

But even if the lawyer passes muster and sits with his or her client, the ASIO officers doing the questioning can have the lawyer removed. The explanatory memorandum of the bill says that can happen, "if the lawyer's conduct is unduly disrupting questioning. This may be the case where, for example, a lawyer repeatedly interrupts questioning (other than to make reasonable requests for clarification or a break to provide advice), in a way that prevents or hinders questions being asked or answered." So if the ASIO officers are badgering or harassing a frightened 14-year-old, or asking questions that are completely irrelevant, they have carte blanche. 

As a lawyer, one hears and reads stories about colleagues in authoritarian states where such powers are given to and used by security agencies, but one never expected it in democratic Australia....

222 economists advise that lifting COVID-19 restrictions too soon will not help the Australian economy. But will Scott Morrison listen?

The Conversation, 20 April 2020:

In recent weeks a growing chorus of Australian commentators has called for social distancing measures to be eased or radically curtailed.

Some have claimed the lives saved by the lockdowns are not worth the damage they are causing to the economy.

Others have claimed the case for easing is strengthened by the fact many of the hardest hit by COVID-19 are elderly or suffering from other conditions.

Some might expect economists, of all people, to endorse this calculus.

But as economists we categorically reject these views, and we believe they do not represent the majority of our profession.

We believe a callous indifference to life is morally objectionable, and that it would be a mistake to expect a premature loosening of restrictions to be beneficial to the economy and jobs, given the rapid rate of contagion…..

Open Letter from Australian Economists

19 April, 2020

Dear Prime Minister and Members of the National Cabinet,

The undersigned economists have witnessed and participated in the public debate about when to relax social-distancing measures in Australia. Some commentators have expressed the view there is a trade-off between the public health and economic aspects of the crisis. We, as economists, believe this is a false distinction.

We cannot have a functioning economy unless we first comprehensively address the public health crisis. The measures put in place in Australia, at the border and within the states and territories, have reduced the number of new infections. This has put Australia in an enviable position compared to other countries, and we must not squander that success.

We recognise the measures taken to date have come at a cost to economic activity and jobs, but believe these are far outweighed by the lives saved and the avoided economic damage due to an unmitigated contagion. We believe strong fiscal measures are a much better way to offset these economic costs than prematurely loosening restrictions.

As has been foreshadowed in your public remarks, our borders will need to remain under tight control for an extended period. It is vital to keep social-distancing measures in place until the number of infections is very low, our testing capacity is expanded well beyond its already comparatively high level, and widespread contact tracing is available.

A second-wave outbreak would be extremely damaging to the economy, in addition to involving tragic and unnecessary loss of life.

Sincerely,

Professor Alison Booth, Australian National University

Professor Jeff Borland, University of Melbourne

Professorial Research Fellow Lisa Cameron, Melbourne Institute, University of Melbourne

Professor Efrem Castelnuovo, University of Melbourne

Professor Deborah Cobb-Clark, University of Sydney

Assistant Professor Ashley Craig, University of Michigan

Professor Chris Edmond, University of Melbourne

Professor Nisvan Erkal, University of Melbourne

Professor John Freebairn, University of Melbourne

Professor Renée Fry-McKibbin, Australian National University

Professor Joshua Gans, University of Toronto

Professor Jacob Goeree, UNSW Business School

Professor Quentin Grafton, Australian National University

Professor Simon Grant, Australian National University

Professor Pauline Grosjean, UNSW Business School

Distinguished Professor Jane Hall, University of Technology Sydney

Assistant Professor Steven Hamilton, George Washington University

Professor Ian Harper, Melbourne Business School

Professor Richard Holden, UNSW Business School

Professor David Johnston, Monash University

Professor Flavio Menezes, University of Queensland

Professor Warwick McKibbin, Australian National University

Assistant Professor Simon Mongey, University of Chicago

Professor James Morley, University of Sydney

Professor Joseph Mullins, University of Minnesota

Professor Abigail Payne, Melbourne Institute, University of Melbourne

Professor Bruce Preston, University of Melbourne

Emeritus Professor Sue Richardson, Flinders University

Professor Stefanie Schurer, University of Sydney

Professor Kalvinder Shields, University of Melbourne

Professor John Quiggin, University of Queensland

Associate Professor Simon Quinn, Oxford University

Economic Advisor James Vickery, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

Professor Tom Wilkening, University of Melbourne

Professor Justin Wolfers, University of Michigan

Professor Yves Zenou, Monash University

Full list of signatories available on the economists open letter website.