Will Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull explain to voters why it has only been Mal Brough who has stood aside from his ministerial position during this Australian Federal Police investigation?

Liberal-National Party MP for Longman Wyatt Roy has been federal Assistant Minister for Innovation since 21 September 2015.

It has been alleged that he is a parliamentarian who sometime in 2012 (along with Mal Brough) requested a member of the Speaker’s staff, James Ashby, to make a copy of sections of then Independent MP for Fisher and Speaker of the House of Representatives Peter Slipper’s official diary for a political purpose.

In 2013 Peter Slipper lost his seat and Mal Brough was elected to federal parliament as the Member for Fisher.

In September 2015 Mal Brough (along with Liberal MP for Stuart and now Minister for Industry, Innovation and Science  Christopher Pyne & Wyatt Roy) supported the sacking of Tony Abbott as prime minister and the installation of Malcolm Turnbull in his place

In December 2015 it was reported that Wyatt Roy was under investigation in relation to longstanding allegations against Special Minister of State and Minister for Defence Materiel and Science Mal Brough and, on 1 February 2016 it was further reported that he (along with Christopher Pyne) is 'assisting police with inquiries’ in relation to associated allegations.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull needs to explain to voters why it has only been Mal Brough who has stood aside from his ministerial positions during this Australian Federal Police investigation.

Because as it now stands it can be suspected that it is purely the prime minister’s naked self-interest which is protecting Roy and Pyne from temporary demotion until the police investigation resolves the matter one way or another, as he can ill-afford to alienate more of those parliamentary supporters who gained him his present high office.

Did Clarence Valley Council attempt to pull the wool over Iluka residents' eyes?

Recently I received a ‘phone call from an Iluka resident which began along the lines of: I met you once at the bus stop in Maclean and I wonder if you know…

What this very concerned person from the opposite side of the Clarence River then told me was that Clarence Valley Council chose to advertise an approx. 19ha 162 lot low density residential subdivision with 10 new roads within Lot 99 in DP 823635 Hickey Street, Iluka on 24 December 2015 – Christmas Eve – and also to start a 28 day exhibition period from Boxing Day, 26 December. [Clarence Valley Council, block_ad_
December_24_26.pdf]

From my experience, local government only acts in this manner if both it and the developer of record do not want informed community scrutiny of a ‘favoured’ development application (DA).

The development application SUB2015/0034 submitted by NSW central coast development company Stevens Holdings Pty Ltd (trading as Stevens Group) was first lodged with Clarence Valley Council on 11 December 2015 and then referred to the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel by council administration on or about 18 December 2015.

The owner of the land in question is Birrigan Gargle Local Aboriginal Land Council.

Clarence Valley Council states of this DA:

Clarence Valley Council is the consent authority and the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel has the function of determining the application. Any submissions made will be provided to the Joint Regional Planning Panel and may be viewed by other people with an interest in the application. The development application and documents accompanying the application are on exhibition and may be inspected at Council’s customer service centres*. Submissions close 4pm, January 22, 2016.

Any person may make a written submission to Council during the exhibition period concerning the development application. If you have any submissions you wish to make regarding any proposed development please do so in writing, addressed to the General Manager, during the exhibition period. Where a submission is an objection to a proposed development the submission must set out the grounds for the objection.

It does not say that any resident wishing to make comment directly to the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel on the subject of this proposed development can do so online here.

The state-appointed panellists for the Joint Regional Planning Panel are: Garry West (Chair), Pamela Westing and John Griffin, with Bruce Clarke as an alternate.

When considering development proposals within the Clarence Valley they are joined by Mayor Richie Williamson, Deputy Mayor Craig Howe, with Cr. Andrew Baker as the alternate.

The timing of the DA advertising is not the only concern. Although SUB2015/0034 is clearly on public exhibition, there are currently no details on the council website’s “On exhibition” page.

Interested residents have to physically attend either the Maclean or Grafton council chambers if they want information on this DA. This initially created a dilemma for concerned residents and ratepayers as Maclean and Grafton council chambers were closed between 24 December 2015 and 3 January 2016.

This of course effectively reduced the length of time that DA documents could be researched in preparation for a submission by 11 days.

By 6 January media attention and pressure from individual community members saw council administration extend the exhibition period to 4pm on 12 February 2016 and place a copy of the DA exhibition documents in Iluka township. However, it remains a matter of concern that council administration thought the original truncated exhibition period was acceptable.

I have no doubt that the owners of the land are willing to be transparent in their actions concerning this proposed subdivision, however when a large development company is also involved in a land release it is wise for any community to be wary.

Readers may recall that in 2014 the Stevens Group sought to remove approval conditions on a NSW south coast development before building commenced and, in the same year, the managing director and owner was called to appear before the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption’s Operation Spicer investigation concerning alleged unlawful political donations.

So this parcel of land deserves a closer look.

Firstly Clarence Valley Council is on record as stating to The Daily Examiner in January 2012:

Clarence Valley Council development services manager Clem Rhoden said the parcel of land at lot 99 Hickey St was opposite Iluka Golf Club and encompassed an area of approximately 194,031sq m.

Secondly, this lot (bounded by Hickey Street, Elizabeth Street and Iluka Road) is covered by what appears to be relatively dense tree cover:

Aerial Snapshot of Hickey Street Iluka NSW, Google Earth, 4 January 2016

Snapshot of section of the southern boundary of Lot 99 Hickey Street, Iluka NSW

To prepare the land for 162 residential lots this block will have to be extensively cleared and, it is possible that this clearing may entail the destruction of coastal cypress:

Coastal Cypress Pine Forest is apparently restricted to the NSW North Coast bioregion.

Thirdly, the existing tree cover may possibly be koala habitat. Koalas are of course listed as vulnerable under federal law.

Council itself admits that:

calls are still frequent from Clarence Valley WIRES who reported six calls regarding injuries in 2009, suggesting there may still be a residual population surviving in the Iluka area or frequenting the area from the adjoining Bunjalung National Park. It is therefore important to reduce further clearing and protect and rehabilitate those areas that are remaining. Particular focus should be given to restoring fragmented areas of koala habitat, lands within identified habitat linkages and koala habitat buffers, and lands adjacent to contiguous blocks of existing koala habitat (McAlpine et al. 2007). [Comprehensive Koala Plan of Management for the Ashby, Woombah & Iluka localities in the Clarence Valley LGA, undated]; and

A further 260 koala food trees (approximately) were inspected for evidence of koala activity during eight transect searches within the Iluka study area….

field observations and anecdotal observations confirm the presence of what appears to be a highly dispersed but small population cell at Iluka…

Since 2002 there have been at least 51 koala records between the Iluka township and Shark Bay that have been contributed to the NSW Wildlife Atlas, while additional koala observations were provided to us and Council officers by residents and National Parks staff. These records create an Extent of Occurrence (EoO) of approximately 1,028ha (Figure 4).  [Biolink Ecological Consultants, Koala Habitat Assessment Ashby, Woombah and Iluka: Report to Clarence Valley Council January 2012]

When comparing this Biolink koala map below with the Google Earth map above it is clear that the possibility exists that koalas may still travel across and perhaps feed in Lot 99 Hickey Street, Iluka.

On 20 January 2012 The Daily Examiner on Page 5 of that issue reported that:

AFTER spotting a mother koala and its baby on 19ha of Birrigan Gargle land that could be cleared, Clarence Environmental Centre secretary John Edwards said bulldozing and developing the wildlife corridor would amount to environmental suicide.

While surveying the area two months ago, Mr Edwards said he spotted two endangered species, the mother koala and baby and a coastal pine community.

Image of koala female with infant on Lot 99 Hickey Street, Iluka. Supplied by Iluka resident. Date unknown.

Fourthly, mineral sand mining for heavy minerals rutile, zircon, monazite and ilmenite occurred in the wider Iluka area and old mineral sand mining sites can sometimes emit low levels of radiation incompatible with full-time occupation of a site [Guidance for Licensing of Mineral-sand Mining that Generates Radioactive Residues, June 2009 & Naturally-Occurring Radioactive Material (NORM) in Australia: Issues for Discussion, August 2005]. There has been some suggestion in the online comments section of a local newspaper and a later article that at least part of the existing tree cover is regrowth on an old mineral sand mining site.

Finally there is the rather mundane but very important matter of how the soil would be stabilized after large-scale clearing and before construction is finished, if that will impact on adjacent land and where the storm water from roofs, gardens and road surfaces will be directed.

Then there is this disturbing online advertisement which appears to have been on various real estate websites since at least September 2015 and boldly anticipates approval by both the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel and Clarence Valley Council:

Is any or all of this what Council is trying to hide from Clarence Valley residents and ratepayers by sneakily activating the clock on this DA over the Christmas holidays?

Or is there something more?

With these questions in mind I went to look at the exhibition documents:

Snapshot taken from Report on PCA & Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation: Iluka Subdivision

The site is roughly trapezoidal in shape and is bounded by: Iluka Golf Club to the north; Iluka Road and the Iluka Nature Reserve to the east; Undeveloped land to the south, west and north west; and Existing residential development to the south west.

[Cardno Geotech Solutions, August 2015, Report on PCA & Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation: Iluka Subdivision, p.1]

Having now sighted the Report on PCA & Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation: Iluka Subdivision and Statement of Environmental Effects: 162 Lot Residential Subdivision Lot 99, DP 823635 Hickey Street, Iluka, prepared for Stevens Holdings Pty Ltd/ Shellharbour Unit Trust (click on link to access documents), it is clear that this parcel of land is partially low-lying, gently undulating back-dunes, potentially prone to localised flooding in sections and, was covered by Mineral Lease 7 (held by L. Foyster) a mineral sand mining lease active between 1958-1978. It is likely that the subject site was sand mined sometime between 1966 and 1978 [Keystone Ecological, 2015, Statement of Environmental Effects, Summary].

Vegetation is generally thick semi-mature to mature native trees and coastal scrub across the site and, includes an unspecified number of Eucalyptus tereticornis Forest Red Gums, Eucalyptus propinqua Small-fruited Grey Gum and Corymbia intermedia Pink Bloodwood - all koala food trees, with the first two species being preferred by these animals.

It is also clear that 16.71 ha of koala habitat is to be removed to make way for 162 houses and an estimated 400-500 new residents living on the outskirts of Iluka township.

The Phascolarctos cinereus Koala observed on site was walking along the ground – not foraging in the trees or moving through the canopy – and moving from south to north [ibid, p.32].

Apart from koala habitat existing on the land evidence was found on site of coastal emu which is listed as endangered under state law:

Snapshot taken from Keystone Ecological, Statement of Environmental Effects:

162 Lot Residential Subdivision Lot 99, DP 823635 Hickey Street, Iluka, October 2015

Image of coastal emu outside the boundary of the 135 hectare Iluka Nature Reserve.

Supplied by Iluka resident. Date unknown.

As for the three internal parks listed on the DA plan – the first is 1.76 hectares, the second is 1 hectare but only 50 metres wide for its entire length, while the third (to protect an Aboriginal scar tree) is only 0.075 of a hectare and wedged in the middle a row of houses. This brings the total internal reserve land to a fragmented 2.83 hectares.

What is not yet clear is how much additional infrastructure and services will be required or how much in developer contributions Clarence Valley Council is expecting to receive and if this will cover all additional infrastructure and services outlays.

The bottom line with regard to Lot 99 Hickey Street, Iluka is that it is a demonstrably ecologically sensitive parcel of land admitted as being “identified as an ‘environmentally sensitive area’ being in, or within 100 metres of an area identified as a wetland of international significance or a world heritage area and complying development may not be carried out on part of this land” [Cardno Geotech Solutions, August 2015, Report on PCA & Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation: Iluka Subdivision, p.5] and, even though Clarence Valley Council has zoned the lot R2 Low Density Residential, the size of the built footprint of this development is not appropriate for the location and the plan provides ineffective native flora and fauna safeguards.

If the developer, the landowner and council administration genuinely wish to see this lot developed in a sustainable manner then they should all revisit what they are progressing so enthusiastically at present and, as a bare minimum, reconfigure the plan to significantly reduce the number of lots and provide genuine wildlife corridors which would continue to allow vulnerable koalas, endangered coastal emus and other wildlife much the same access to Iluka Nature Reserve and the national park that native animals use today.

UPDATE

Coastal cypress pine community on Lot 99 Hickey Street, Iluka (and adjacent lots) represented by blue flags.

Image supplied.

 It is important to note that even small patches that have been disturbed in the past by clearing, or fire are still considered to be important remnants of Coastal Cypress Pine Forest and meet the criteria of being an EEC. [NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change, Coastal Cypress Pine Forest in the NSWNorth Coast Bioregion, 2009]

Australian Press Council finds The Daily Telegraph not fair and balanced in its 2012 reporting dismissal of case against Slipper

Australian Press Council:

Adjudication No. 1573: Margo Kingston/The Daily Telegraph (February 2014)  

Document Type: Complaints

Outcome: Adjudications

Date: 27 Feb 2014

The Press Council has considered a complaint about an article in The Daily Telegraph on 13 December 2012, headed “Court rejects Slipper case”. The article reported a Federal Court decision on the previous day to dismiss as an abuse of process a legal action for sexual harassment brought against Peter Slipper MP by James Ashby. It appeared on page 17 of the newspaper and on the publication’s website.

Margo Kingston complained that the report of the dismissal on page 17 did not give it sufficient prominence in light of the newspaper’s very prominent and detailed coverage earlier in the year of Mr Ashby’s commencement of the legal proceedings and his allegations against Mr Slipper. The “exclusive” report on 21 April 2012 about commencement of the proceedings and Mr Ashby’s allegations had occupied all news space on pages 1 and 2 and most of page 3. On the next day, Mr Slipper had stood aside as Speaker.

The Daily Telegraph said page 17 was a prominent page and the top half had comprised the report on the dismissal, a photograph of Mr Ashby and an article on another aspect of the proceedings. It had also published reports about the matter on its website on the previous afternoon and in the next few days had published related reports online and opinion pieces in print. The story also was covered widely in other media outlets.

The newspaper said placement on page 17 was partly because of an unusually high number of other important articles on that day. The greater length and prominence of the coverage in April was due to the topic having much greater political significance as Mr Slipper was then the Speaker and his acceptance of that position had crucially influenced the balance of votes in the House of Representatives. It was also partly because the April story was an “exclusive”.

The Council agrees that the political significance and “newsworthiness” of an event are obviously relevant to the length and prominence with which it is reported. By the time of the dismissal of the proceedings, the political situation had changed considerably, especially because Mr Slipper had stood aside and then, in October, resigned as Speaker. Also, several unrelated news stories (especially the funeral of a police officer) clearly merited prominent coverage in the issue of 13 December.

The Council’s relevant Principle states: “Publications should take reasonable steps to ensure reports are accurate, fair and balanced”. The Principle does not necessarily require complete, or almost complete, fairness or balance. But a combination of factors meant that avoiding serious unfairness or imbalance was of special importance in this particular case.  

First, the commencement of legal proceedings was a story the newspaper had “broken” in April, describing the allegations as “amongst the most serious ever raised” in Australian political history and “potentially deadly”.

Second, the allegations, and progress of the proceedings, were reported prominently on many occasions in ensuing months, often in the first few pages of The Daily Telegraph.

Third, dismissal of the proceedings raised important questions about Mr Slipper’s decision to stand aside as Speaker, which in the words of the newspaper happened “after The Daily Telegraph revealed allegations of sexual harassment and Cabcharge misuse - [which] means the government loses a precious vote in parliament”.

Fourth, readers of a daily newspaper of this kind can reasonably expect to be informed by it of such a key development as the dismissal of these proceedings as an abuse of process for political reasons, especially when it had previously given the matter great prominence.

In the circumstances of this case, it is not reasonable to assume that readers who saw the very prominent coverage across pages 1-3 of the 21 April edition were likely to see the very much less prominent report of the dismissal on page 17 of an edition eight months later or see the report on its website. It also is not reasonable to regard the newspaper’s obligations of fairness and balance as having been met by the story being widely covered in other media outlets.

The Council upholds the complaint due to the very stark difference between the detail, tone and prominence of the newspaper’s initial coverage on 21 April and of its report on 13 December of the dismissal. The later report did not need to match the prominence and detail of the earlier report by, for example, being of similar length and on the same pages. But in the circumstances of this case the degree of difference was so great as to constitute a clear breach of the Council’s Principle concerning fairness and balance.

It is not the Council’s role to say precisely how this unfairness or imbalance should have been avoided. There were clearly a number of possibilities between which the publication could choose.

Additional note (not required for publication by the newspaper):
The newspaper said that the prospect of an appeal by Mr Ashby influenced its decision not to give the issue more extensive treatment. The Council notes, however, that it is common and accepted practice to report court decisions, sometimes in great detail, even though they may be subject to an appeal.

The newspaper also quoted from an Advisory Guideline of the Council on bias. The words which it quoted relate to bias and fairness in publishing different political opinions, but this adjudication relates to fairness and balance in the reporting of facts.

Relevant Council Principles (not required for publication by the newspaper):
This adjudication applies part of General Principle 1: “Publications should take reasonable steps to ensure reports are accurate, fair and balanced.”

The Daily Telegraph’s hissy fit ‘editorial’ on Page 59 of its 27 February 2014 issue:

@margokingston1

The 2013 Australian Federal Election may be over but the circus will continue.......

Palmer United Party Leader Clive Palmer's electoral status may still be in doubt but Mal Brough has been confirmed as elected to the Australian Parliament, so there is now a little extra sting in the tail of this court case.

Sunshine Coast Daily 5 September 2013:

CLIVE Palmer has issued a Supreme Court writ seeking more than $800,000 in damages from Fisher LNP candidate Mal Brough.

The billionaire Palmer United Party candidate for Fairfax alleges Mr Brough made statements to the Press which effectively claimed he had lied to Australian voters and that he had done so for his political gain and that of his fledgling party.

In a statement of claim issued in the Supreme Court this morning Mr Palmer stood by his own statements that Mr Brough approached him last year to fund the James Ashby sexual harassment suit against sitting Member for Fisher Peter Slipper who is standing as an independent against Mr Brough.

Mr Palmer's legal team yesterday emailed Mr Brough asking him if he had solicitors on whom the writ could be served. The email said if no response had been received by 11am today it would be taken that Mr Brough wanted the writ served personally on himself.

The writ seeks $355,500 in general compensatory damages and a further $450,000 in aggravated compensatory damages and costs.

Clive Palmer continues to claim Liberal-National Party candidate Mal Brough asked for money to destroy Peter Slipper's reputation

Brisbane Times 22 August 2013:

Billionaire businessman Clive Palmer has claimed LNP candidate Mal Brough asked him for money to fund a campaign to destroy Peter Slipper’s reputation.

Mr Palmer dropped the bombshell on Thursday, more than a year after the alleged meeting at Palmer’s Coolum Resort on Queensland’s Sunshine Coast in April 2012.

Mr Brough, who is standing as LNP candidate for Mr Slipper’s seat of Fisher, has been approached for comment.

‘‘Mal Brough said it was important the Liberal Party should win the seat of Fisher,’’ Mr Palmer alleged.

‘‘He said to me, ‘we need to destroy Peter Slipper’.

‘‘He said he had all the evidence that would put Slipper way for a long time.

‘‘He then outlined to me a case he had that would destroy his integrity and what the community thought about Mr Slipper.’’

The mining magnate alleged Mr Brough asked him to fund a sexual harassment lawsuit James Ashby would bring against his former employer, Mr Slipper.

Mr Palmer also alleged Mr Brough asked him to employ a woman who would play an integral role in the former House of Representatives speaker’s downfall.

He said Mr Brough did not outline the woman’s role……

Mal Brough defiant - I'd do it all again

The Courier Mail 20 July 2013:

Article 1. 

Mal Brough says he has no case to answer over the Ashbygate affair and said he would act the same if he had his time over again.

The LNP candidate for the seat of Fisher yesterday spoke to the Daily about the saga in what he said would be his final interview on the subject.

Mr Brough was implicated in the affair which led to current Fisher MP Peter Slipper resigning as Speaker of the House of Representatives after former staffer James Ashby brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against Mr Slipper.

Federal Court judge Steven Rares dismissed the case as an "abuse of process" and politically motivated. He was damning of Mr Brough in his comments….

Article 2. 

Mal Brough's role in the failed James Ashby sexual harassment case against Peter Slipper continues to raise questions about whether the LNP should ever have endorsed him.

It also puts in question Tony Abbott's judgment - and his wisdom and truthfulness in saying Mr Bough had always been upfront about the whole affair.

The issue is not likely to go away…..

If we are to believe the version of events, as determined by the court, and your initial lies about your involvement in it, this scandal goes to the heart of your character - and whether your are worthy of being elected as the man to replace Mr Slipper.

Mr Brough argues he only wanted to help Mr Ashby after he came to him with claims of sexual harassment.

It is interesting to note that similar approaches to Sunshine Coast MP Mark McArdle, Julie Bishop and Christopher Pyne came to nothing.

Perhaps they had better judgment.

Or was the work delegated to Brough as an opportunity to put Slipper - his arch enemy - out of action?.....

Background:

North Coast Voices 14 December 2012:

Justice Rares findings concerning Mal Brough in his Ashby v Commonwealth of Australia and Peter Slipper judgment of 12 December 2012:

135 Mr Ashby asserted to Mr Harmer that his justification for his disloyalty as an employee in providing copies of Mr Slipper’s 2009 and 2010 diaries was that he wished to place the material in the public domain. That was, his assertion went, because he “believed that the conduct was morally and legally wrong and he felt aggrieved that he had been placed in the situation of becoming, as he understood it, exposed to (and potentially implicated in) what he regarded as the wrongful conduct of a public official”: [116] above. The words I have emphasised were ambiguous. If they referred to Mr Slipper’s conduct on the days covered by the 2009 and 2010 diary entries he surreptitiously sent to Mr Brough and Mr Lewis, there is no evidence to support Mr Ashby’s description or that he had any knowledge of particular conduct of Mr Slipper that was morally or legally wrong prior to him or Ms Doane sending the diary extracts to Mr Brough and Mr Lewis.

136 …..Rather, Mr Ashby’s and Ms Doane’s conduct at that point indicated that he and she were anxious to supply information to Mr Brough and Mr Lewis so that they could use it to assemble an attack on Mr Slipper, if they could find sufficient material to do so, using the diary entries and other evidence…..
138 I am also satisfied that Mr Ashby and Ms Doane by about 29 March 2012 were in a combination with Mr Brough to cause Mr Slipper as much political and public damage as they could inflict on him….

141 Mr Brough was unlikely to have been offering to assist Ms Doane and Mr Ashby in seeing Mr Russell QC for advice or looking for new careers out of pure altruism. Realistically, his preparedness to act for them was created and fed by their willingness to act against Mr Slipper’s interests and assisting Mr Brough’s and the LNP’s interests in destabilising Mr Slipper’s position as Speaker and damaging him in the eyes of his electorate…..

142…. Certainly, the nature of the allegations that Mr Brough, Ms Doane and Mr Ashby had provided Mr Lewis in about late March and early April 2012 would have suggested to a political journalist that there would now be more than one news story about Mr Slipper to pursue….

146 Mr Ashby and Mr Lewis had planned that articles about Mr Slipper’s use of travel entitlements would be published shortly before these proceedings were filed. They both knew that Mr Lewis would be able to publish further articles on the subject matter as soon as it was filed in Court in the originating application. Ms Doane and Mr Brough had also discussed the timing and sequence of publication of stories by Mr Lewis. So much is clear from Mr Ashby’s texts to Mr Nagle of 10 April 2012, Glen of 11 April 2012 and Ms Doane’s email to Mr Brough of 10 April 2012: see [82], [90], [86]. The planning reveals that Mr Ashby calculated how he would attack, and use the press to attack, Mr Slipper.

147 Mr Ashby had planned with Mr Lewis, and probably separately with Ms Doane and Mr Brough, the sequence of publications so as to raise the more serious allegations in the originating process, after the stories of 16 April 2012 appeared. The timing of those 16 April stories was linked to when the originating application would be filed. Once Mr Ashby began seeing Harmers and went into “lock down”, Mr Brough and Mr Lewis became anxious to know when the proceedings would be ready to be filed. Hence their strenuous attempts to contact Mr Ashby once he began to act on Mr McClellan’s advice to filter media contact through him. Mr Ashby had emphasised in his text to Mr Lewis on 10 April 2012 that “We need to act fast mate”. And Mr Brough told Ms Doane on learning that, eventually, Mr McClellan would meet Mr Lewis “Everything will be fine”: [94]. 

196 Having read all of the text messages on Mr Ashby’s mobile phone, as Mr Ashby’s senior counsel invited me to do, as well as the other evidence, I have reached the firm conclusion that Mr Ashby’s predominant purpose for bringing these proceedings was to pursue a political attack against Mr Slipper and not to vindicate any legal claim he may have for which the right to bring proceedings exists. Mr Ashby began planning that attack at least by the beginning of February 2012. As Mr Ashby and Ms Doane agreed in their texts of 30 March 2012 what they were doing “will tip the govt to Mal’s [Brough] and the LNP’s advantage”: [66]. It may be a coincidence that Mr Ashby suggested to Mr Slipper the idea of becoming Speaker just as Mr Brough began to move towards challenging Mr Slipper for LNP pre-selection for his seat and Mr Ashby ended up in an alliance in late March 2012 with Mr Brough to bring down Mr Slipper after he became Speaker….

The Ashby-Slipper-Harmer matters still wending their way through the Australian judicial system

Excerpt from bouefbloginon 14 June 2013

As Ashby v Slipper - NSD22/2013 and Harmer v Slipper - NSD31/2013 wend their way through the judicial system, placing yet more submissions before the Federal Court, J at bouefbloginon adds another perspective.

Full list of court documents available online here.

One more reason that Clarence Valley Council should replace that missing section of the Yamba Road Cycleway sooner rather than later

 

Letter to the Editor, The Daily Examiner 17 May 2013:

 

Money spinner

Earlier this month, a group of cycling friends travelled from Queensland's Sunshine Coast to the Clarence. This was our third visit in less than five years and again Maclean was the base.
The Lower Clarence is a delightful area to cycle and among our wonderful experiences, starting on day one, was the ferry ride from Yamba to lunch at Iluka before returning to Maclean via Ashby and Harwood (pub).
Day two we were on a back road near Tucabia when a car pulled up. Out jumped a local lass amazed to see such a group and proceeded to take our photos. Lunch was at the Ulmarra pub.
Day three we were invited to ride in the Woodford Island fun ride organised by Maclean Rotary. Day four was an early morning sprint out to Brooms Head before our departure.
Everyone was again taken by the beauty of the region and appreciated the consideration given by motorists on roads that were not always cyclist friendly.
Our group of about 30 would have put about $15,000 into the local economy for our stay.
Cycling is a massive growth area driven by baby boomer retirees. With money well spent on improving cycling facilities in the Clarence (eg paths/lanes Maclean to Yamba; sealing road between Ashby, Tullymorgan and Lawrence; and road markings to make motorists aware of cyclists) there would be a huge financial boost to the area.

RON GOOCH

Peregian Beach

 

Lower Clarence residents need to boil their water due to E. coli contamination

Mayor: Richie Williamson General Manager: Scott Greensill                                                                   16 May 2013 BOIL WATER NOTICE – Lower Clarence water supply areas Regular monitoring for E. coli bacteria in the Lower Clarence water supply system is conducted by Clarence Valley Council. Recent monitoring has shown E. coli to be present in the Lower Clarence water supply system. As a precaution you are advised that water for consumption should be brought to a rolling boil. Water should then be allowed to cool and stored in a clean container with a lid and refrigerated. This boil water notice applies to consumers in the Lower Clarence including the following areas: Maclean, Brooms Head, Yamba, Harwood, Ashby, Iluka, and areas in between these towns Cooled boiled or bottled water should be used for drinking, cooking, washing raw foods (such as seafood or salads), making ice, and cleaning teeth. Dishes should be washed in hot soapy water or in a dishwasher. Children should take bottled or cooled boiled water to school. Precautions should be taken until further notice.  You will be advised when the boil water notice is lifted. E. coli itself is generally not harmful but its presence in drinking water indicates that the water may be contaminated with organisms that may cause disease. The NSW Department of Health advises that special care is advisable for certain consumers at this time, these include people with severely weakened immune systems (the immunosuppressed), individuals receiving dialysis treatment, and aged individuals. Please contact your doctor or local Public Health Unit (02 6620 7585) for more information. Council, in conjunction with the NSW Department of Health is investigating the problem and is carrying out rectification works including cleaning reservoirs, flushing of mains, supplementary chlorine dosing, and additional surveillance.  Residents may notice elevated chlorine levels in the water supply. If you require further information please contact Council’s Customer Service staff on 6643 0200. Schools: For Precautions for Schools and Child Care Centres during Boil Water Alerts refer to NSW Department of Health website:  Release ends. Authorised by: Scott Greensill, General Manager 02 6643 0212 For further information contact: Rob Donges  Deputy General Manager

Clarence Valley Council Locked Bag 23 Grafton, NSW, 2460 Australia

What will the Australian Press Council do about this?

The Daily Telegraph's blatantly false Page One headline of 18 March 2013

Mr Denmore ‏@MrDenmore

Oh, the author of The Tele's carbon collapse fiction is our friend Steve Lewis, he of Ozcar and Ashby fame.

Mr Denmore ‏@MrDenmore

The Tele's source for the 'carbon collapse' are unnamed 'experts'. Odd as the share market is at a 4-year high and business confidence is up

Yesterday morning I happened on these two tweets and this snapshot on Twitter. Given New Limited's involvement in the current hysteria surrounding the Federal Government's response to the 2011 and 2012 independent media reviews, I went to that day's issue of The Daily Telegraph and this is what I found. The Daily Telegraph's Steve Lewis and Phil Jacob are asserting that: New data from the corporate regulator reveals insolvencies have hit a record high over the past 12 months, led by widespread failures in manufacturing and construction, which accounted for almost one-fifth of collapses. The Australian Securities & Investments Commission reports there were 10,632 company collapses for the 12 months to March 1 - averaging 886 a month - with the number of firms being placed in administration more than 12 per cent higher than during the global financial crisis. While the high Australian dollar is seen as the main factor behind manufacturing closures, experts say the carbon tax is adding to increasing cost burdens for many firms struggling to stay afloat. The first problem with this statement is that it is plain wrong. The "10,632" figure does not come from a twelve month period ending on 1 March this year - this total is for the 2012 calendar year. A clue for these two journalists might have been found in the fact that the data set was released on 18 February 2013. What The Daily Telegraph journalists also do not say is that in the total figure quoted almost half of these external administration/insolvencies occurred before the introduction of the 'cabon tax' and, that prior to the tax, in February-March 2012 there were 2,137 insolvencies which made this the highest combined figure for two consecutive months in a data set which begins in 1996. As for the more than one business is going the wall every hour in Australia found in text in the snapshot above - I suggest that The Daily Telegraph invest in new batteries for the office calculator as that Page One assertion is wrong on so many levels. So what else in that Lewis-Jacob article is open to question? Well, let me start with Grain Products Australia the country’s only manufacturer of caramel and dextrin and one of only two wheat starch and gluten manufacturers. A company in liquidation since 11 March this year and one the journalists try hard to mold into a carbon tax victim. Over six months before the introduction of the carbon price, this company went into voluntary administration citing the high cost of wheat and what were then solely state electricity charges. That leaves Penrice Soda Holdings the only Australian soda ash manufacturer. It was quoted by the Lewis-Jacob team as saying that the reason it was ceasing local raw material quarrying and importing its soda ash was that the carbon tax was effectively the straw that broke the camel's back. However, a little basic fact checking would have shown that last February it told its shareholders and the Australian Stock Exchange that the factory closure was reflecting deteriorating demand conditions in soda ash and quarry material markets as well as impacts from a high Australian dollar. There was not one word about the carbon tax. Finally, the biggest whopper these two journalists told about the business sector in 2012 which is this line; with the number of firms being placed in administration more than 12 per cent higher than during the global financial crisis. The Global Financial Crisis began in 2007-08 and did not lose momentum until 2009-10. Even the most mathematically challenged News Limited employee would realise that the business external administration/insolvency totals for those years far exceed the 2012 total which The Daily Telegraph is currently treating as an end of days event. So what will the Australian Press Council do about a newspaper which so distorts the facts and journalists whom I'm told now know that they have based their 10,632 company collapses on a dodgy premise? Why its twenty-three members will pretend that they never saw or heard of this article - unless a member of the public makes a formal complaint. UPDATE: The Leader of the Opposition makes the mistake of relying on the Lewis-Jacob article during the House of Representatives Question Time on 18 March 2013. A reliance the Minister for Industry and Innovation and Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency, Greg Combet, notes during that same Question Time: ...over the last couple of days the Leader of the Opposition, the New South Wales government and the Daily Telegraph have been misleading the public yet again about the impact of carbon pricing. Yesterday it was a false claim about electricity prices in New South Wales. Today the Daily Telegraph is back with ridiculous claims about economic catastrophe, repeated here today in the very first question by the Leader of the Opposition—there seems to be some commonality of approach that we are witnessing. The Telegraph story today takes the misuse of statistics, hysterical headlines and distortion of facts to levels that would have done Pravda proud during the height of the Cold War.