Tuesday 12 May 2015

Treasurer Joe Hockey spinning so hard he loses all memory of his own past media releases


It has become increasingly difficult to take this Australian Treasurer seriously.

He treats the economy as his political plaything.

Joe Hockey on Tuesday 4 December 2012


Joe Hockey on Tuesday 5 May 2015



Monday 11 May 2015

Campbell Newman's unwise decisions when Queensland premier continue to haunt that state


Correspondence between former Queensland police officer and former chief magistrate Chief Justice Tim Carmody, the President of the Court Of Appeal Justice Margaret McMurdo, Justice Hugh Fraser and others clearly demonstrates that an unwise political decision on the part of then Liberal National Party Premier Campbell Newman in 2014 will not be easily rectified.

Scroll to the end for the first email in the chain, dated 17 April 2015.

Correspondence between Queensland Chief Justice Tim Carmody, the President of the Court Of Appeal and other...

BACKGROUND

ABC News 9 May 2015:

Timeline of controversies surrounding Chief Justice Tim Carmody:
Nov 2013
Angered the legal profession by issuing a directive that all disputed bail applications made by alleged bikies be dealt with in one court room. That meant he would, most likely, be presiding over the controversial cases.
June 2013
Selected as chief justice despite never having sat on the Supreme Court, and after only nine months in the chief magistrate's job. Chosen over long-serving judges.
Jan 2014
Told newly appointed magistrates not to "meddle" with the controversial bikie laws.
June 2014
Bar Association President Peter Davis quits over appointment.
June 2014
Former Supreme Court judge Richard Chesterman QC and corruption fighter Tony Fitzgerald criticise appointment. Mr Sofronoff claimed Justice Carmody was too close to former Liberal National Party government. "His impartiality as between citizen and government has been called into question".
July 2014
Sworn in as Chief Justice behind closed doors, as controversy raged about his suitability for the job.
April 15, 2015
Met child protection advocate Hetty Johnston while still deliberating on whether Daniel Morcombe's accused killer should have his conviction overturned.
April 17
Court of Appeal President Margaret McMurdo raises issues of bias because of the meeting.
April 22
Justice Carmody responds that any suggestion of bias is "unsupported by precedent and utterly preposterous". Says it is "alarming" Justice McMurdo's associate investigates Ms Johnstone's comments over Cowan.
April 23
Justice McMurdo says "I cannot sit with him again on any Court".
April 29
It is revealed Justice Carmody did not read Justice McMurdo or Justice Fraser's draft judgements on Cowan appeal, despite being circulated in February.
May 7
Justice Carmody withdraws from Cowan appeal


































Queensland Council for Civil Liberties vice-president Terry O'Gorman has also weighed in, calling on the Chief Justice to resolve the dispute.
"To have a Chief Justice make so many mistakes goes back to the fundamental issue of the botched appointment," he said. 
"The Chief Justice has the problem, the Chief Justice has to solve the problem. 
"The fact is the Chief Justice said a couple of months ago that if his occupying the position of Chief Justice made the position of the Supreme Court untenable ... he would resign, the position is becoming increasing untenable. 
"There are so many problems with the ongoing occupancy by Justice Carmody of the position of Chief Justice that this stalemate has to come to an end, this crisis has to be addressed. He is the only one who can address it."
Justice Carmody enjoyed a meteoric rise under the former Liberal National Party government and was promoted from Chief Magistrate, after a nine-month stint, despite never serving on the Supreme Court.
Leaders in the judiciary, including Justice Wilson, have publicly turned on him and questioned if he was ready for the top job or had enough peer support.

Environmental vandals: the Abbott Government never learns from its mistakes




Geelong Star (Credit: ABC) 

Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) media releases tell a sad tale of lessons not learnt by the Abbott Government.

MISTAKE NO. 1 – allowing the super trawler to operate in Australian waters

Geelong Star meets AFMA requirements on arrival into Australia
Last updated 1 April 2015

Today (1 April 2015) officers from the Australian Fisheries Management Authority (AFMA) met and inspected the Geelong Star, the mid-water trawl vessel nominated by Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd in the Small Pelagic Fishery, upon its arrival into the port of Albany, Western Australia.

Officers from AFMA’s Bycatch and Compliance units conducted a detailed inspection of the vessel. AFMA Compliance officers confirmed that the Geelong Star has met AFMA’s strict conditions for fishing vessels entering Australia and that the GPS-based vessel tracking system is fully operational.

AFMA General Manger of Fisheries Operations, Mr Peter Venslovas said that the vessel passed all AFMA’s requirements for a new fishing vessel entering Australia waters.
“AFMA Compliance officers routinely conduct inspections of all fishing vessels in Commonwealth fisheries to ensure that they comply with AFMA’s strict management arrangements. Today’s inspection of the Geelong Star is just the first in what will become a regular event for this vessel when operating in the Small Pelagic Fishery” said Mr Venslovas.

Assessment by AFMA Bycatch officers confirmed the vessel’s ability to comply with AFMA’s requirements to minimise and monitor impacts on non-target species and the broader marine environment. Their inspection included a detailed assessment of the vessel’s Marine Mammal Excluder Device and the seabird bycatch mitigation devices required by AFMA.

An AFMA-approved Vessel Management Plan is required for all mid-water trawl vessels operating in the Small Pelagic Fishery and today’s inspection was a key step in AFMA’s process to finalise the necessary plan for the Geelong Star.

Vessel Management Plan conditions are in addition to, or re-inforce, AFMA’s standard operating and reporting obligations for all mid-water trawl vessels in the Small Pelagic Fishery. These detailed plans set out the individual vessel requirements to ensure fishing impacts on non-target marine wildlife and other fisheries (recreational and commercial) are minimised.

The Vessel Management Plan for the Geelong Star will be published on the AFMA website once it has been finalised. The Vessel Management Plan is subject to change by AFMA at any time in response to new information about the fishing operations or the marine environment.

MISTAKE NO. 2 – imagining that bycatch would not become a vexing issue

AFMA inspect the Geelong Star
Last updated 2 April 2015

On 1 April 2015, AFMA Compliance and Bycatch Officers inspected the Geelong Star, the mid-water trawl vessel recently nominated by Seafish Tasmania Pty Ltd in the Small Pelagic Fishery.

AFMA Compliance Officers confirmed the vessel met AFMA’s conditions for entry of fishing vessels to Australia and that AFMA’s tamper-proof, GPS-based vessel tracking system was correctly installed and fully operational.  The officers also collected detailed vessel information to assist them during future inspections to ensure compliance with AFMA’s catch limits and other management arrangements.

AFMA Bycatch Officers inspected the bycatch mitigation devices required by AFMA including the marine mammal excluder and seabird scaring devices installed on the Geelong Star’s mid-water trawl gear.  The officers also undertook an assessment of the vessel’s ability to comply with AFMA’s full suite of requirements to monitor and minimise impacts on non-target species and the broader marine environment and gave an educational presentation to the vessel’s skippers and crew advising them of the requirements.

Following AFMA’s initial inspection of the vessel, it will now work with the company, vessel crew and bycatch experts to finalise the Vessel Management Plan (VMP).  This plan will set out the detailed operational requirements that minimise the impact of fishing operations on non-target marine wildlife and other fisheries (recreational and commercial).  The conditions set out in the VMP are in addition to, or otherwise reinforce, AFMA’s standard operating and reporting conditions for all mid-water trawl vessels in the Small Pelagic Fishery.

All mid-water trawl vessels in the Small Pelagic Fishery must have an AFMA-approved VMP before commencing fishing operations.  Once finalised, AFMA will publish the VMP on our website.  Please note that the VMP is subject to change by AFMA at any time (even within a fishing trip) in response to new information about the fishing operations and/or the marine environment.

For more information read the FAQs for the Small Pelagic Fishery on the Small Pelagic Fishery page.

MISTAKE NO. 3 – Expecting a management plan to be effective re large marine animal bycatch for a factory ship expecting to catch up to 230 tonne a day in its small-fish nets with a 16,500 tonne quota limit

Geelong Star Vessel Management Plan
Last updated 22 April 2015

All mid-water trawl vessels in the Commonwealth Small Pelagic Fishery must have a vessel management plan approved by AFMA before they start fishing.  This is a legal requirement.

A vessel management plan is a comprehensive boat-specific plan to minimise the risk of interactions with protected species (e.g. seabirds, seals and dolphins). Vessel management plans contain both recommendations and mandatory measures that must be employed by the boat to ensure that all reasonable steps are taken to minimise its impact on protected species.

Vessel management plans can be updated to ensure they take into account on-the-water experience and the latest developments in techniques to reduce interactions with protected species.

The Geelong Star Vessel Management Plan was updated on 22 April 2015. View the updated Geelong Star Vessel Management Plan.

MISTAKE NO. 5 – not posting an Australian Fisheries Management Authority media release on its website alerting the Australian public to the fact that during its first fishing voyage the Seafish Tasmania and Parlevliet & Van der Plas Beheer B.V. killed four protected dolphins and two protected seals in Geelong Star’s nets

                                                                                                                                         
MISTAKE NO. 6 – not admitting that allowing this super trawler to continue to operate is a political and environmental error

Geelong Star – operational update
Last updated 2 May 2015
Statement 2 May 2015

AFMA has been advised of four further dolphin mortalities from fishing by the Geelong Star, the vessel nominated by Seafish Tasmania Ltd to fish in the Small Pelagic Fishery. The mortalities occurred in one shot during the vessel’s second trip. AFMA has also been advised of two fur seal mortalities during the vessel’s second trip.

Consistent with the requirements of all vessels fishing in Commonwealth waters, the Geelong Star must report any interaction with protected species, including marine mammals like dolphins, fur seals or Australian sea lions.

AFMA takes any marine mammal mortalities seriously. We are disappointed that these additional dolphin and seal mortalities have occurred.
AFMA understands the Geelong Star is voluntarily returning to port because of the dolphin mortalities for a full review of its marine mammal exclusion equipment. AFMA will participate in the review to determine how to minimise further marine mammal interactions. The vessel will also be inspected by AFMA officers when it arrives in port to ensure all catch documentation is in order.

MISTAKE NO. 7 – a weak response from the Federal Minister for the Environment and Liberal Member for Flinders, Greg Hunt, who did not post a ministerial media release on the subject and only made a statement on 3 May 2015 to journalists saying that he would write a letter or two


Sunday 10 May 2015

Community Housing Limited just won't take no for an answer so it's off to court again for Clarence Valley Council


Community Housing Limited is an international public benevolent institution which in 2014 had a surplus of over $11.1 million, total rental income of over $36.6 million and paid no income tax.

In Australia its combined grant and incentive income in that same year was over $17.7 million.

It has 5,600 properties under management in this country according to Managing Director Steve Bevington [Macleay Argus, 12 April 2015, Leonard's light bulb woes]

In the Coffs Harbour area the company appears to have taken possession of 180 Coffs Harbour public housing properties (a mix of one & two bedroom units) in 2011, with the state government contributing a one-off payment of around $1.5 million and the company making a contribution of around $1 million to required property upgrades.

In the Clarence Valley it has fourteen housing properties (a mix of units, townhouses and houses) in Grafton funded by federal, state and local government in the form of land contribution, discounted land sale, capital grants and National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS) as well as a loan taken out by the housing company.

In December 2014 this comfortably cashed-up company lost a NSW Land & Environment Court bid for rates exemption on its 1,368 properties in this state.

Now it is back for a second round. This time in the NSW Supreme Court, where on 20 May 2015 it will have a directions hearing (notice of appeal) in Community Housing Limited v Clarence Valley Council 2015/00014853.

A tale of old trees which matter to a small community


Some of the people who opposed the removal of landmark camphor laurel trees from McLachlan Park.

Photo from the Independent

The Daily Examiner 1 May 2015:

Majority view

Mayor Williamson and the councillors who failed to support the motion to save the trees should never be voted into office again.

They have blatantly ignored the wishes of a significant number - possibly a majority - of residents simply so the mayor can push through his plan for McLachlan Park, a plan which, according to him, will be "magnificent".

The mayor wouldn't know magnificence if he tripped over it as clearly neither he does not consider giant 100-year-old trees to fall under the definition of "magnificent".

According to figures available from the Australian Bureau of Statistics from the last national census "... the population of Maclean in 2011 was 2612, living in 1202 dwellings with an average household size of 2.25."

Let's allow for growth over the past four years, be generous and round that up to a population of 3000 for 2015.

To quote from your article (by Tim Howard) in Tuesday's edition of the Daily Examiner: "Councillor Williamson is not convinced the group of protestors [1500 signatures on a petition to save the trees] reflects the view of the whole of Maclean....."

So, Mr. Mayor, let's do the mathematics:

Population = 3000

Of that total it would be safe to assume, based on the figure of 2.25 per household, that at least a third would be of voting age, i.e. 1000 ratepayers.

Number of signatures on the petition to not destroy the camphor laurels = 1500.

One doesn't need to be a rocket scientist to see that the response to the petition certainly DOES reflect the view of the whole of Maclean.

In addition to the above, if our esteemed mayor wishes to spend ratepayers' money on the removal of noxious weeds why not follow up on information I supplied to the Invasive Species Officer in Grafton last June regarding a prickly pear infestation in Orion Drive, Yamba?

This information was passed on to the council (who handle the actual eradication) and, over a month later, they sent someone who poisoned one, ONE, of the more than dozen plants I reported. All the others are still there and thriving.

The sooner a new council is elected the better.

Bruce Kennewell
Yamba

Saturday 9 May 2015

University of Western Australia comes to its senses and boots Bjorn out the door

Bjorn Lomborg
Google Images
ABC News 8 May 2015:

The University of Western Australia has cancelled the contract for a policy centre that was to be headed up by controversial academic Bjorn Lomborg …..
In a statement, UWA Vice Chancellor Paul Johnson said the creation of the centre had attracted "mixed reactions" from staff, students and the general public.
"The scale of the strong and passionate emotional reaction was one that the university did not predict," he said…..
Mr Johnson said he had on Friday spoken to the Federal Government and Dr Lomborg, advising them of the university's decision to cancel the contract and return the money to the Government.
He last month said the Federal Government had approached the university to set up the centre.
The Federal Government funding had attracted strong criticism from the Opposition, who described it as politically motivated, something Mr Pyne strenuously denied.
UWA Academic Staff Association vice president Professor Stuart Bunt said the move was not censorship.
"This isn't about censorship at all ... Lomborg is not a climate [change] denier; he believes the scientific evidence which overwhelmingly shows that climate change is happening, he just debates the economics of how we should deal with it," Mr Bunt said.
"The difficulty is he is neither a scientist or an economist, he's a political scientist.
"Once you become attached to a university, you're given a kind of credence by that university; people would expect an adjunct professor at UWA to be working in a professional manner and that their statements would be evidence-based.
"Lomborg would be using the name of the university, to put what are largely political opinions, rather than evidence-based statements, using the university's name."
Greens Senator Rachel Siewert said UWA made the right decision.
"It was very clearly the Government's design to get someone in place that was running a different argument on climate change, to try and suggest that climate change isn't as significant an issue as it is," Senator Siewert said.
"It was bad science, and I'm pleased that UWA has realised that.
"[The Federal Government] clearly had a political agenda, and it was a mistake for the University of Western Australia to go along with it."…..

How much can a koala bear before he needs a doctor?


This koala appears to have entered accident & emergency department of a public hospital in the Western District Health Service in Victoria: