Dr Fisher feels the heat....
Showing posts with label lobbyists. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lobbyists. Show all posts
Monday 6 May 2019
Climate change policy scare campaign does the rounds again
A scary
headline from 7 West Media and Kerry Stokes**….
Fossil fuel
industry analyst and economist Dr. Brian Fisher has issued another
warning about what he apparently believes is the folly of tackling climate
change……
The
Sydney Morning Herald,
2 May 2019, p.1:
Opposition Leader Bill
Shorten is facing an explosive political row over his climate change policy as
industry warns of rising costs and a new economic study predicts 167,000 fewer
jobs by 2030 under the Labor plan.
Business groups backed
the ambition to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but said they deserved more
detail given they would pay for the scheme, in a rebuke to Labor's claim it was
"impossible" to model the costs of its policy on employers and the
economy.
The new warning from
economist Brian Fisher, which is hotly disputed by Labor and countered by other
experts, marks a dramatic escalation in the political fight over the cost of
taking action on climate change compared to the cost of inaction.
Dr Fisher concluded that
the Labor emissions target would subtract at least 264 billion from gross
national product by 2030 and as much as26 4billion from gross national product by
2030 and as much a s542 billion, depending on the rules for big companies to
buy international carbon permits to meet their targets.
"Negative
consequences for real wages and employment are projected under all scenarios,
with a minimum 3 per cent reduction in real wages and 167,000 less jobs in 2030
compared to what otherwise would have occurred," he concluded.
"Labor's plan
results in a cumulative GNP loss over the period from 2021 to 2030 that is over
three times larger than that occurring under the Coalition policy. Turning to
other results, the wholesale electricity price under Labor's climate policy is
around 20 per cent higher than that resulting from the Coalition policy."
Labor has been bracing
for Dr Fisher's report after weeks of conflicting claims over the cost of its
policies.
But Australian National
University professor Warwick McKibbin cautioned against some of the claims,
telling the Herald two weeks ago that the impact of Labor's proposals would be
a "small fraction" of the economy by 2030.
Professor McKibbin
estimates the Coalition and Labor policies would subtract about 0.4 per cent
from the economy by 2030.
The cumulative value of
economic output has been broadly tipped to be about $30 trillion by 2030, which
means Dr Fisher's worst-case scenario equates to less than 2 per cent of output
over that period.
An earlier version of Dr
Fisher's modelling triggered headlines of a "carbon cut apocalypse"
in March but was questioned by other economists, who said he had assumed very
high costs for renewable energy generation and the cost of reducing emissions.
ANU professor Frank
Jotzo said in March that Dr Fisher's work had used "absurd cost
assumptions" about emissions abatement.
Dr Fisher was the
executive director of the Australian Bureau of Agricultural and Resource
Economics for many years and conducted the modelling at his firm, BAEconomics.
He said this was not commissioned or paid for by the government.
While heavily disputed,
Mr Morrison is expected to use the results to mount an escalating campaign
against Mr Shorten ahead of the May 18 poll….
However
Fisher’s original research did not appear to be using Labor’s current climate
policy to produce his ‘results’ and
his
current effort published on 1 May 2019 is still deliberately misleading.
Fisher gets
called out….
Mirage
News, 2 May
2019:
THE CLIMATE COUNCIL is
calling on Brian Fisher to come clean about his links to the fossil fuel
industry, following the release of his “independent” modelling looking at the
cost of Labor’s climate policy.
“Mr Fisher has a history
of working closely with fossil fuel industries. How can his research be
‘independent’?” asked the Climate Council’s Head of Research, Dr Martin Rice.
“Mr Fisher’s work has
been at odds with credible economic literature which shows that strong action
on climate change can be achieved at a modest price, while the costs of
inaction are substantial,” said Dr Rice.
“We should be having a
conversation about the escalating costs of climate change and the very real
economic pain Australia will suffer for failing to act,” said Dr Rice.
“Since the Coalition has
been in government, greenhouse gas emissions have gone up and up and up.
Meanwhile, Australians are on the frontline of worsening extreme weather as the
climate is changing,” he said.
“We urgently need to
reduce our greenhouse gas emissions There’s credible, independent research that
finds Australia can drive down its emissions by more than 45% with minimal
impact on the economy,” he said……
The first
report in a nutshell….
Climate
Council, 20 March
2019:
What’s the story?
Fossil fuel industry
consultant Brian Fisher has released so-called “independent” modelling looking
at the economic cost of reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but his research is
deeply flawed.
Who is Brian Fisher?
Brian Fisher is the
fossil fuel industry’s go-to consultant. The industry has paid for much of
Fisher’s so-called ‘research’.
Is the modelling
credible?
No. Fisher’s report
fails to consider the economic benefits for Australia from investing in
renewable energy and new technologies as well as failing to quantify the costs
of not acting to prevent climate change.
Several of his findings
are implausible. For example, his findings on electricity prices are contrary
to a range of detailed Australian studies showing more renewable energy means
lower wholesale electricity prices.
This is a distraction.
The Federal Government
has a poor record on climate change and is running a scare campaign to distract
from this. Since the Liberal National Party has been in government, pollution
has gone up, electricity and gas prices have gone up and extreme weather events
have worsened.
An
explanation of how economic modelling is used….
The
Guardian, 21
February 2019:
Whenever Australia
starts to have a serious conversation about addressing climate change,
headlines appear in newspapers of an economic apocalypse. This happened again
in the Australian this week based
on work by a long-standing economic modeller of climate policy, Brian
Fisher.
So, what do economic
modelling exercises tell us of the impact of reducing Australia’s contribution
to global warming, and more importantly, what do they not? Should we cower in
fear of action or embrace the inevitable change and manage the human and
economic costs of transition?
Firstly, economic
modelling results are not predictions. They are based on hypothetical future
worlds. Economists try to capture the dynamics of economic systems in their
models to understand the relative impact of different policy options. This
means they are always wrong because economists can’t predict the future.
Economic
modellers are not the crystal ball gazers we read about in fantasy books……
This does not mean the
economic models are not useful, it just means they should be used to test the
relative impact of different policy options and not be presented as predictions
of the future. They have a long history of overestimating the costs of
environmental regulations because people and markets can innovate faster than
they often expect.
Secondly, the way
economic modelling results are presented is very important. Industry groups in
particular like to attach themselves to particular results and scream that
thousands of jobs will be lost, or wages will be slashed. This is designed to
scare people into not acting on climate change by making them feel insecure in
their lives. The headlines
in the Australian did
just this.
It is also dishonest
because they also don’t clearly put the results in the context of the broader
change in the economy. (David Gruen, one of Australia’s top economic officials
gave a great speech about
this in 2008 to illustrate how long this silliness has been going on.)
To illustrate my point,
the economic impacts Fischer has projected for different emissions targets are
in the same ballpark of those projected for work commissioned
by the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade a few years ago. This work also
presented results in a similar way to the Australian. However, what is also
showed is that the economy, jobs, income, etc continued to grow regardless. We
keep getting richer and have more jobs, we just do so at a slightly slower
rate.
Thirdly, because
Australia exports a lot of coal and other emissions-intensive products to other
countries, what they do matters an awful lot to the Australian economy. As
other nations reduce emissions, demand for these products falls regardless of
what we do. It has been established for some time that a significant part of
the economic impacts of climate change on Australia comes from things we can’t
control and this is generally presented in the results (see here for
an example). While he does not report this, Brian Fisher knows this because he
spearheaded economic analysis in the 1990s that was targeted at convincing
Japan, one of our major coal markets, it would be too costly for them to reduce
emissions.
Lastly, whenever these
headlines are blasted across the papers one point is always lost: these results
don’t include the cost of climate change itself. This summer, we have again
seen a glimmer of what climate change will mean for Australia. Recent economic
analysis indicates the benefits of limiting global warming far outweigh the
cost of doing so, in one case by 70-1 (a good summary is here).
(Again, this is something Fisher has considered in the past as he once said it
would be cheaper to move people from the Pacific and put them in condos on the
Gold Coast than act on climate change.)
So, as we head into another
cycle of climate change politics in Canberra, beware the economic doomsayers
and the threats from industry groups that credible action will be a “wrecking
ball” to the economy. To be glib, no one said saving the Earth would be free.
Acting on climate change will have costs but the costs of not acting will be
far, far larger. Better that we come together and manage a fair and effective
transition than continuing to delay and pay a much, much greater bill later…..
Dr Fisher feels the heat....
Dr Fisher feels the heat....
Fisher now accuses the Morrison Government of sitting on a second report modelling cost to the mining and resources sector of climate action, which was commissioned
in the lead up to the federal election campaign and, which the Department of
Industry, Innovation and Science confirms it has received.
Fisher appears to believe that this report to which he was a contributor will buttress his claims and silence his critics.
However, to date Morrison and Co have not released this report so two possiblities exist: (i) the report's conclusions tend to support Labor climate action policy or (ii) the report's conclusions are based on such flawed assumptions that it will be easily unpicked by genuinely independent experts.
Thursday 19 April 2018
Institute of Public Affairs Limited (IPA) has a single broad focus - to infiltrate government in order to reduce workers to a powerless underclass
Given representatives of the Institute of Public Affairs Limited (IPA) turn up as guest commentators so frequently these days on television, radio and in newsprint - usually without mention of who they actually represent - perhaps it's time to update deatils of the corporate structure, finances and aims of this group.
The Institute of Public Affairs says of itself that it is: Australia's oldest and loudest free market think tank. Since 1943 the IPA has been at the forefront of public debate,promoting our values of freedom, free markets and individual liberty.
This highly partisan, conservative political pressure group thinly disguised as an independent research group-cum-think tank was registered in Melbourne Victoria in
1987 and its legal owner appears to be The Trustee For Institute Of Public Affairs Research Trust. This trust was created on 10 July 2007.
In the 1990s it appears to have merged with the the Australian Institute of Public Policy.
In the 1990s it appears to have merged with the the Australian Institute of Public Policy.
IPA became a Deductible Gift Recipient (DGR)
from 30 Mar 2006, though it is hard to make out on exactly what factual grounds it became an Approved Research Institute (ARI) with charitable status.
It guards its individual and corporate membership list closely, but does admit to 4,559 members as of 1 July 2016.
IPA's founding members as then captains of industry, wealthy graziers and conservative politicians (Charles Denton Kemp, Sir
Robert Gordon Menzies, B A
Santamaria, Sir Keith Arthur Murdoch, Sir George James Coles, Harold Gordon Darling, G.H. Grimwade, H.R. Harper, W.A. Ince, Fredrick Earnest Lampe MBE,
Sir Walter Massy-Greene, Sir Leslie James McConnan, C.N. McKay, William Edward McPherson, Sir Ian
Potter and The Hon. A.G. Warner) are reasonably well-known, as are a handful of current members.
A significant number of IPA supporters are easily identified because this pressure group published the names of around 1,261 of its supporters in 2011.
Its board and company directors are now known due to the fact that it has finally published annual reports from 2000-01 to 2016-17.
IPA states that: 86 per cent of the IPA's revenue is donated by individuals, 12 per cent is received from foundations, 1 per cent from businesses, and 1 per cent from other sources such as interest. The IPA neither seeks nor receives any funding from government. In addition to the membership fees contributed by IPA members, the IPA received 2,913 separate donations during 2016-17.
It also supplies this graph of modest through to rather generous individual and corporate donations in its 2016-17 Annual Report:
The Institute of Public Affairs updated its policy aims in 2012 as it geared up to fight against Australian Labor Party and Greens policies during the 2013 federal election campaign:
Over the years a number of
members of the IPA (past & present) have also been members of the Liberal Party (or worked for Liberal politicians), including David Kemp, Rod
Kemp, John Hyde, John Roskam, Tim
Wilson, James Patterson, Mitch Fifield, Nicholle Flint, Allan Pidgeon, Mike Nahan, Michael Kroger, Tom Switzer, Andrew Shearer, Richard Allsop, Simon Breheny, Ross Maclean, Peta Credlin and Tony Smith.
A significant number of IPA supporters are easily identified because this pressure group published the names of around 1,261 of its supporters in 2011.
Its board and company directors are now known due to the fact that it has finally published annual reports from 2000-01 to 2016-17.
IPA states that: 86 per cent of the IPA's revenue is donated by individuals, 12 per cent is received from foundations, 1 per cent from businesses, and 1 per cent from other sources such as interest. The IPA neither seeks nor receives any funding from government. In addition to the membership fees contributed by IPA members, the IPA received 2,913 separate donations during 2016-17.
It also supplies this graph of modest through to rather generous individual and corporate donations in its 2016-17 Annual Report:
The Institute of Public Affairs updated its policy aims in 2012 as it geared up to fight against Australian Labor Party and Greens policies during the 2013 federal election campaign:
1 Repeal the carbon tax,
and don’t replace it. It will be one thing to remove the burden of the
carbon tax from the Australian economy. But if it is just replaced by
another costly scheme, most of the benefits will be undone.
2 Abolish
the Department of Climate Change
3 Abolish the
Clean Energy Fund
4 Repeal
Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act
5 Abandon
Australia’s bid for a seat on the United Nations Security
Council
6 Repeal
the renewable energy target
7 Return
income taxing powers to the states
8 Abolish
the Commonwealth Grants Commission
9 Abolish the
Australian Competition and Consumer Commission
10 Withdraw
from the Kyoto Protocol
11 Introduce fee
competition to Australian universities
12 Repeal the
National Curriculum
13 Introduce
competing private secondary school curriculums
14 Abolish the
Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)
15 Eliminate laws that
require radio and television broadcasters to be ‘balanced’
16 Abolish television
spectrum licensing and devolve spectrum management to the common
law
17 End local
content requirements for Australian television stations
18 Eliminate
family tax benefits
19 Abandon the paid
parental leave scheme
20 Means-test Medicare
21 End all corporate
welfare and subsidies by closing the Department of
Industry, Innovation, Science, Research and Tertiary Education
22 Introduce
voluntary voting
23 End mandatory
disclosures on political donations
24 End media blackout in
final days of election campaigns
25 End public
funding to political parties
26 Remove
anti-dumping laws
27 Eliminate
media ownership restrictions
28 Abolish the
Foreign Investment Review Board
29 Eliminate
the National Preventative Health Agency
30 Cease
subsidising the car industry
31 Formalise a
one-in, one-out approach to regulatory reduction
32 Rule out federal
funding for 2018 Commonwealth Games
33 Deregulate
the parallel importation of books
34 End preferences for
Industry Super Funds in workplace relations laws
35 Legislate a cap
on government spending and tax as a percentage of GDP
36 Legislate a balanced
budget amendment which strictly limits the size of
budget deficits and the period the federal government can be in
deficit
37 Force government
agencies to put all of their spending online in a
searchable database
38 Repeal plain
packaging for cigarettes and rule it out for all other products,
including alcohol and fast food
39 Reintroduce
voluntary student unionism at universities
40 Introduce a voucher
scheme for secondary schools
41 Repeal the alcopops
tax
42 Introduce a special
economic zone in the north of Australia including:
a) Lower personal income tax for residents
b) Significantly expanded 457 Visa programs for workers
c) Encourage the construction of dams
a) Lower personal income tax for residents
b) Significantly expanded 457 Visa programs for workers
c) Encourage the construction of dams
43 Repeal the mining tax
44 Devolve environmental
approvals for major projects to the states
45 Introduce a single
rate of income tax with a generous tax-free threshold
46 Cut company tax to an
internationally competitive rate of 25 per cent
47 Cease funding the
Australia Network
48 Privatise Australia
Post
49 Privatise Medibank
50 Break up the ABC and
put out to tender each individual function
51 Privatise SBS
52 Reduce the size of
the public service from current levels of more than 260,000 to at least the
2001 low of 212,784
53 Repeal the Fair
Work Act
54 Allow individuals and
employers to negotiate directly terms of employment that suit them
55 Encourage independent
contracting by overturning new regulations designed to punish contractors
56 Abolish the Baby
Bonus
57 Abolish the First
Home Owners’ Grant
58 Allow the Northern
Territory to become a state
59 Halve the size of the
Coalition front bench from 32 to 16
60 Remove all remaining
tariff and non-tariff barriers to international trade
61 Slash top public
servant salaries to much lower international standards, like in the United
States
62 End all public
subsidies to sport and the arts
63 Privatise the
Australian Institute of Sport
64 End all hidden
protectionist measures, such as preferences for local manufacturers in
government tendering
65 Abolish the Office
for Film and Literature Classification
66 Rule out any
government-supported or mandated internet censorship
67 Means test tertiary
student loans
68 Allow people to opt
out of superannuation in exchange for promising to forgo any government income
support in retirement
69 Immediately halt
construction of the National Broadband Network and privatise any sections that
have already been built
70 End all government
funded Nanny State advertising
71 Reject proposals for
compulsory food and alcohol labelling
72 Privatise the CSIRO
73 Defund Harmony Day
74 Close the Office for
Youth
75 Privatise the
Snowy-Hydro Scheme
By 2014 a few
more policies made it on to the IPA list according to The AIM Network:
* “Immediately
halt construction of the National Broadband Network and privatise any sections
that have already been built”
* “Rule out the
introduction of mandatory pre-commitment for electronic gaming machines”
* “Extend the GST to
cover all goods and services”
and
* “Negotiate and sign
free trade agreements with Australia’s largest trading partners, including
China, India, Japan and South Korea”.
Liberal Party prime ministers have been working their way through IPA's policy agenda since such lists were first created.
Federal Government regulation now means there is some degree of transparency with regard to IPA finances, which like the finances of other 'charities" are subject to disclosure.
Annual Information Statement declared by The Trustee For Institute Of Public Affairs Research Trust (Charity ABN 33886902896), October 2017, excerpt:
Annual Information Statement declared by The Trustee For Institute Of Public Affairs Research Trust (Charity ABN 33886902896), October 2017, excerpt:
Labels:
lobbyists,
right wing rat bags
Wednesday 20 December 2017
One of the reasons why local government, traditional owners and communities in the Clarence Valley should be very wary of home-grown and foreign lobbyists, investment consortiums and land developers
On 15 August 2016 four representatives of United Land Councils Ltd & United First Peoples Syndications Pty Ltd gave evidence before the NSW Legislative Council General Purpose Standing Committee No. 6 INQUIRY INTO CROWN LAND.
One of the projects put forward to the Inquiry by those representatives was the industrialisation of the Clarence River estuary by way of construction of a mega freight port.
The following tale involves a number of persons or firms associated with the aforementioned companies and this mega port & rail project, including Nick Petroulias aka Michael Felson aka Nick Peterson.
The Newcastle Herald, 21 October 2017:
HE WAS brash and brilliant. A young lawyer from Melbourne who became a rising star of the public service, hand-picked to serve as assistant tax commissioner by the age of 30.
That was until a spectacular fall from grace left Nick Petroulias jailed for using his plum position to do the very thing he was tasked with stamping out: defrauding the tax office.
Since his release from prison in 2010, Mr Petroulias has kept a low profile, going by a number of aliases including Michael Felson and Nick Petersen.
He described himself as a “disabled pensioner” on bankruptcy forms in 2015, with his debts estimated at an eye-watering $104 million.
But Fairfax Media can reveal that he has been accused of working behind the scenes to dupe a wealthy Chinese property developer into the illegal purchase of $12.6 million of Aboriginal land across Newcastle.
The matter is the subject of a Supreme Court legal battle that veteran lawyers have described as one of the most extraordinary cases they have seen in their careers.
Labelled by a lawyer familiar with the case as a real-life version of “Alice in Wonderland”, its cast of characters includes an international fugitive known as Robbie Rocket, a convicted drug dealer and a dead company director who somehow continued signing agreements a year after he was cremated in a Sydney cemetery.
The existence of an international money laundering syndicate and a karaoke junket intended as a bribery attempt are among the other sensational allegations contained within thousands of pages of evidence that have been tendered to the court.
Collectively, the lands were valued at $12.6 million.
Two Awabakal board members met with Mr Zong. At the negotiating table, they introduced him to Mr Petroulias – an agent for the parties involved – and Knightsbridge North Lawyers, a firm enlisted to broker the deal.
The only catch, Mr Zong was informed, was that the portfolio of land had already been sold to another buyer a year beforehand.
But he was assured that in return for a payment, that purchaser would remove themself from the picture.
By the end of the year, things appeared to be proceeding smoothly.
Mr Zong had signed sales contracts, begun pursuing the land’s rezoning and outlaid nearly a million dollars – money he believed was a combination of a deposit and a payout for the former buyer.
But then came a shock announcement that threatened to derail the transaction: the state government had launched an investigation into the land council.
The investigation followed complaints about the land council’s governance and finances.
But Mr Zong alleges he was reassured the deal was still on a steady footing. He claims to have been told by Mr Petroulias that “there was no reason arising from the investigation that would compromise the validity of the transaction documents”.
However, damning findings from the government’s investigator resulted in the land council being placed into administration. Then, the confirmation came: the sale was off.
Mr Zong ordered the immediate repayment of his $1 million, but his demands were refused. His property development companies – Sunshine Property Investment Group and Sunshine Warners Bay – launched a civil claim for damages and to recoup the losses.
Caught in the legal crossfire was the land council, its law firm Knightsbridge, and the land’s original buyer, a mysterious company registered under the name Gows Heat.
Since it was placed into administration last year, the Awabakal land council has been under the control of Terry Lawler, a prominent Newcastle financier and philanthropist awarded an OAM in January.
Mr Lawler has recruited a high-powered legal team – including top silk Jeremy Kirk SC – to defend the land council and launch a cross-claim.
They have argued that the sales contracts Mr Zong signed were bogus and none of the proceeds found their way into the land council’s coffers.
Read the full article here.
The Newcastle Herald, 15 December 2017:
A wealthy Chinese developer appears set to withdraw a lawsuit against the Awabakal Aboriginal Local Land Council.
Tony Zong and his Sunshine Property Investment Group had alleged they were conned into a deal to purchase $12.6 million of Aboriginal land across the city.
On Thursday, the Supreme Court heard the matter – involving disgraced former assistant tax commissioner Nick Petroulias – was “painfully close” to being resolved.
It’s understood Awabakal lawyers want the land council’s costs covered as part of the settlement.
“There doesn’t seem to be terribly much at issue in the Sunshine matter now except for the terms of discontinuance,” Justice Darke said.
A separate action against Awabakal is also making its way through the courts.
Knightsbridge North Lawyers has placed a caveat over the old Newcastle Post Office while it pursues the land council for $26,743 in alleged unpaid fees.
Justice Darke indicated mediation could occur if the matter remained unresolved when the case returns to court in February.
Friday 29 September 2017
"As our land subsides and cracks open and our permanent creek is sucked dry, I can feel our patience towards the miners doing the same"
The Land, 24 September 2017:
Environmental hypocrisy
FOR the past 20 years, my husband and I have experienced first-hand the mining industry’s attitude to impacted farmers and to rehabilitation.
Now, their recent attacks on environmental charities makes my blood boil. As the unsuspecting neighbours of the Wambo underground coal mine near Singleton, our beef cattle business’ productivity has been cut almost in half.
As our land subsides and cracks open and our permanent creek is sucked dry, I can feel our patience towards the miners doing the same.
Despite decades of word-fests, reports and promises, we have seen no real action at all from the mining company to rehabilitate our land, or our creek water.
It turns out our experience is not isolated; only nine per cent of all mining land across Australia has been successfully rehabilitated. Across Australia there are massive voids filling with toxic water, poisoned or destroyed creeks and land subsiding. And the mining industry’s solution to their gaping mess: get environmental charities to clean it up!
Currently there are reforms being proposed to the Tax Deductibility Status of all sectors of charities by Federal Treasury.
The miners see this as their chance to not only duck their own responsibilities, but to also pass the buck to environmental charities. The changes promoted by the mining sector, single out environmental charities only, for them to spend half their time on physical works to clean up the toxic messes created by the mining industry.
The hypocrisy is astounding. When I saw that one organisation close to my heart, the Lock The Gate Alliance, was under attack by these reforms, I was sickened. Without them, our fight to rehabilitate our farm would have been a lot harder.
Their help with connecting us with politicians and government officials, getting our story into the media and sharing experiences of other mine-impacted people has been priceless.
Most importantly they help to keep us sane, giving us hope that one day we will break the impasse of inaction by the miners.
We earn our money, we pay taxes and we can choose to support charities that we believe are helping to create a better world.
They should be left alone to do their work without these extra burdens, designed to feather the nest of multinational mining companies.
Wambo mine, and hundreds like it across Australia, must factor the cost of properly rehabilitating land and water into their cost of doing business.
Otherwise it is a sham business model that the community is subsidising.
The proposed changes could mean Lock the Gate would have less time to help advocate for the rights of farmers to produce clean food for Australia.
Instead, they’d be forced out into our paddocks with shovels, filling in the sink holes made by the mines.
We need groups like Lock the Gate holding the mining companies to account.
I appreciate the help in getting my voice heard as a food grower. We need this to be a public debate in our cities.
If these changes go through, our support of Lock the Gate would be wasted on endless clean up jobs, while the miners continue to make profits and mighty mess, skirting any legal responsibilities for rehabilitation. And I for one find that an abomination.
Miners, clean up your own mess and leave farmers and Lock the Gate alone.
Janet Fenwick,
Bulga.
Wednesday 30 August 2017
The anti-same sex marriage lobby and below-the-radar bedfellows
There is not much transparency in the same-sex marriage debate ahead of the voluntary postal vote.
Take these websites which appear to have been purpose created in the last twelve months wth the deliberate aim of influencing voters on a specific issue…….
The Big Deal About Marriage at http://www.thebigdealaboutmarriage.com.au and It’s OK To Say NO at http://www.oktosayno.com.au.
These sites are registered by the Trustee for Antidote and Dean Millington according to Whois DOMAINTOOLS.
The Trustee for Antidote is a discretionary services management trust which has been operating since 2005 under the trading name ANTIDOTE Marketing and Dean Millington is a director.
Millington states of this company “We open new and exciting digital communication channels to prescribers, patients and pharmacy utilising proven technologies to deliver robust healthcare products and programmes”.
The company does not appear to list any individual or anti same-sex marriage lobby group amongst its predominately pharma & health services clients.
According to Antidote website and Millington amongst these clients/business partners are:
Pfizer
Sanofi
Allergan
Novartis
AstraZeneca
Menarini
Link
Fresenius Kabi
Princeton Health
Princeton Digital
Ergo Advertising
VIVA Communications
PracticeProfiles
PharmEngage
Data Jukebox
DCM Partners.
Princeton Digital
Ergo Advertising
VIVA Communications
PracticeProfiles
PharmEngage
Data Jukebox
DCM Partners.
I wonder if these companies feel comfortable being (albeit remotely) associated with two anti-gay marriage websites which produce what are essentially simplistic, irrelevant, nonsensical or downright dubious conclusions from sometimes misrepresented data and studies.
For instance Pfizer Australia states on its own website:
Pfizer Australia employs more than 1,700 scientists, chemists, doctors, marketers, machine operators and other professional colleagues. We provide opportunities in a range of fields including medical, research and development, manufacturing, health economics, marketing and sales and regulatory affairs.
Pfizer Australia is committed to the recruitment, advancement and fair treatment of individuals without discrimination based on factors such as race, disability, sex, age, ethnic or national origin, religion, citizenship, family or marital status, political beliefs, sexual preference or other factors included in the Equal Employment Opportunity Legislation. Our Pfizer Values have ensured that this statement is more than a legal obligation. It is a way of life and a business-driven philosophy.
One suspects that this large multinational corporation would perhaps prefer to hold a neutral position on the current same-sex marriage debate in this country.
Given that these linked anti-same sex marriage websites offer site visitors a booklet written by Dr Con Kafataris, a member of the Christian Democratic Party (CDP), who publicly promotes “the case for traditional and Biblical marriage” one might suspect either the doctor or the CDP financed this website.
Either way, at the time of writing this post these websites were careful to make no mention of ownership or funding details.
Friday 9 June 2017
The optics are not good when it comes to the former Australian Minister for Trade and Investment
According to former Australian Minister for Trade and Investment & former Liberal MP for Goldstein Andrew Robb he is now in the business of providing "boutique investment, trade and major projects counsel for companies and organisation's globally, with a focus on the Asia-Pacific region" through his company Andrew Robb Pty Ltd which is contactable "C/- Ellerston Capital".
The website goes on to state that; Mr Robb is currently a Board Member of the Kidman cattle enterprise and the Network Ten television station, Chair of Asialink and CNSDose, and strategic advisor to Beef Innovations Australia, as well as a range of national and international businesses.
On 13 July 2016 the Australian Financial Review added an investment bank to the list:
Former trade minister Andrew Robb has joined investment bank Moelis & Company, where he will focus on deals with China.
Robb had announced this appointment on the same day.
By 2 September 2016 Landbridge Group Co Ltd, a Chinese corporation based in Rizhao, China, had informed the world that Mr. Robb was now a senior economic consultant with the group effective two months earlier.
Readers might recall that Landbridge acquired the 99-year lease for the Port of Darwin in 2015 when Robb was still Minister for Trade and Investment.
According to The Age on 6 June 2017:
The details of the consultancy have never been disclosed by Mr Ye or Mr Robb. Neither has the fact that Mr Robb is being used to spruik a Chinese Communist Party-backed trade park as part of his consultancy agreement.
Mr Ye frames much of his business activity, including the acquisition of the Port of Darwin lease, in terms of advancing Beijing's ambitious global trade and infrastructure project "One Belt, One Road".
The port's acquisition sparked a major controversy after then US president Barack Obama complained he hadn't been forewarned. The Defence Department and ASIO have vetted and cleared Landbridge's acquisition of the port. But the director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Peter Jennings, said the port deal might benefit Beijing's long-term strategic interests, and not necessarily those of Australia.
Mr Ye publicly announced on September 2 last year that Mr Robb had been appointed as a "high-level economic consultant". At the time, Mr Robb had already been working for Mr Ye for eight weeks, and had earned $146,000, including GST but minus expenses…..
In April 2016, less than three months before his consultancy agreement began, Mr Robb visited China with an Australian delegation in his capacity as Australia's trade envoy. The delegation was lobbied by Rizhao Communist Party deputy secretary Liu Xingtai to support the trade park as part of a "Two Countries, Two Parks" proposal.
"The proposal has been fully recognised and highly affirmed by the Shandong Province Party Committee, the Provincial Government and the Department of Commerce," the Chinese government statement said.
The statement also said deputy secretary Liu had met Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and NT Chief Minister Adam Giles on April 14, 2016, and "proposed the co-operative model of Two Countries, Two Parks".
Mr Ye placed Mr Robb on his payroll 10 weeks later.
Now if memory serves me correctly on 11 February 2016 Mr. Robb announced that he would not recontest his seat and the Australian Parliament was dissolved on 9 May 2016 ahead of the federal election.
As he was on his feet in the House of Representatives on 4 May and was listed as a sitting member in the Hansard of 5 May when the Budget was delivered after which all federal politicians then returned to their electorates, one can be forgiven for assuming that he did not officially retire until 9 May 2016 when the parliament was dissolved.
Twenty-three days later on 1 July 2016 (the day before the 2016 federal election day) Andrew Robb was on the Landbridge payroll according to ABC TV Four Corners 5 May 2017 transcript:
From that date, he's be[ing] paid $73,000 a month, or $880,000 a year, plus expenses.
This of course is in addition to his parliamentary superannuation lumpsum and/or periodic payments based on Commonwealth contributions equivalent to est. 15.4% of salary/wages per the Parliamentary Superannuation Act 2004 (Robb turned 65 years of age in August 2016) and remuneration for aforementioned directorships and other consultancy positions.
On 1 July Mr. Robb would have reached the end of any period in which he was eligible to receive a percentage of his base parliamentary salary as a departing MP not standing for re-election.
This of course is in addition to his parliamentary superannuation lumpsum and/or periodic payments based on Commonwealth contributions equivalent to est. 15.4% of salary/wages per the Parliamentary Superannuation Act 2004 (Robb turned 65 years of age in August 2016) and remuneration for aforementioned directorships and other consultancy positions.
On 1 July Mr. Robb would have reached the end of any period in which he was eligible to receive a percentage of his base parliamentary salary as a departing MP not standing for re-election.
Looking at this timeline I wouldn't be surprised if the formal contract with Landbridge was not signed even earlier than 1 July, that the ink was probably still drying on this document when Robb told parliament of his intention to resign and stood down as trade and investment minister on 18 February 2016.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)