Not impressed by the arguments made for shark netting the NSW Far North Coast

The following article was one of the more balanced media reports on shark attacks on the NSW North Coast since the fatality at Ballina in 2015.

A fatality which brought shark attack deaths in the region to seven in thirty-four years – that is, an average of one fatality every 4.85 years.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 October 2016:

The Baird government's decision to drop its opposition to shark nets for the state's northern beaches ignored recommendations of one of its own departments and the scientific consensus, experts say.

Another shark bite last week – the sixth since the start of 2015 for the Ballina-Byron area alone – was the last straw for Premier Mike Baird. On Wednesday, he explained his backflip, saying it was time to "prioritise human life over everything".

Only one fatality has been recorded in the state's 51 netted beaches since their introduction in Sydney in 1937, back in 1951. There have, though, been 33 so-called unprovoked attacks some serious ones.

"We need some sort of protection," said Richard Beckers, owner of Ballina Surf shop and a supporter of the nets.

Mr Beckers said he had cancelled $100,000 in orders after two incidents in as many weeks. Sales of body and surf boards have dived about 90 per cent as surfers head to beaches considered safer elsewhere….

Until last week, Mr Baird – himself a keen surfer – had resisted calls for the nets. Instead, he heeded advice from scientists who argue there is little evidence nets alone make beaches safer while killing thousands of marine creatures over the years.

The policy reversal "is a political decision – it's not based on data," said Culum Brown, an associate professor at Macquarie University. "The costs are well known and there's little to nothing in terms of benefits."

Existing nets are typically 150 metres long and about six metres deep, allowing plenty of space for sharks to get around, over or under them.

A parliamentary inquiry earlier this year recommended the Department of Primary Industries "move toward replacement of current shark meshing with more ecologically sustainable technologies".

Colin Simpfendorfer, director of the Centre for Sustainable Tropical Fisheries and Aquaculture at James Cook University, said great white sharks have been protected for two decades in a bid to reverse their population's steep decline.

"The whole point [of nets] is that they catch sharks," Professor Simpfendorfer said. "You are looking to reduce the abundance of sharks where people want to swim."

The 189 sea creatures caught in the existing nets in 2014-15 included 44 target sharks – whites, tigers and bulls – as well as harmless shark species, dolphins and turtles. Of these, 116 died before they could be released, government data shows.

Over the past century, the national annual deaths from sharks is 1.3 people on average, rising to two people during the past five years, according to Taronga Zoo's shark file. Australians make an estimated 100 million visits to the beach a year.

By contrast, five people died from dogs in 2013, with 44 killed by falling out of bed, the Australian Bureau of Statistics said.

"You're more likely to get killed by bees or by horses than by sharks," Professor Brown said.

Of course the NSW Coalition Government, and particularly Premier Mike Baird furiously chasing electoral popularity in the face of falling poll numbers, is not inclined to step back from the recent back flip on shark netting.

Readers can make up their own minds about whether trying to lay shark netting on the NSW Far North Coast in the face of an increasingly warm and fast Australian Eastern Current and frequently gale-driven coastal seas is going to work.

The Baird Government's $16 million attempt earlier this year to install shark netting at Lighthouse Beach, Ballina and Seven Mile Beach, Lennox Head failed miserably due to predictable rough conditions, large swells and sand movement along the coast.

Below are excerpts from Changing patterns of shark attacks in Australian waters (2011) by John G. West Coordinator, Australian Shark Attack File, Taronga Conservation Society Australia.

ABSTRACT. Although infrequent, shark attacks attract a high level of public and media interest, and often have serious consequences for those attacked.

Data from the Australian Shark Attack File were examined to determine trends in unprovoked shark attacks since 1900, particularly over the past two decades.

The way people use the ocean has changed over time. The rise in Australian shark attacks, from an average of 6.5 incidents per year in 1990–2000, to 15 incidents per year over the past decade, coincides with an increasing human population, more people visiting beaches, a rise in the popularity of water-based fitness and recreational activities and people accessing previously isolated coastal areas.

There is no evidence of increasing shark numbers that would influence the rise of attacks in Australian waters. The risk of a fatality from shark attack in Australia remains low, with an average of 1.1 fatalities year1 over the past 20 years.

The increase in shark attacks over the past two decades is consistent with international statistics of shark attacks increasing annually because of the greater numbers of people in the water.

RESULTS

Over the 218 years for which records were available, there have been 592 recorded unprovoked incidents in Australian waters, comprising 178 fatalities, 322 injuries and 92 incidents where no injury occurred.

Most of these attacks have occurred since 1900, with 540 recorded unprovoked attacks, including 153 fatalities, 302 injuries and 85 incidents where no injury occurred.

Attacks have occurred around most of the Australian coast, most frequently on the more densely populated eastern coast and near major cities (Fig. 1).

In the first half of the 20th century, there was an increase in the number of recorded shark attacks, culminating in a peak in the 1930s when there were 74 incidents (Fig. 2).

The number of attacks then dropped, to stabilise ,35 incidents per decade from the 1940s to the 1970s. Since 1980, the number of reported attacks has increased to 121 incidents in the past decade (Fig. 2).

There had been a decrease in the average annual fatality rate, which had fallen from a peak of 3.4 year1 in the 1930s, to an average of 1.1 year1 for the past two decades.

The number of fatal attacks relative to the number of total attacks per decade has also decreased over this period, from 45% in the 1930s to 10% in the past decade. These declining chances of a shark attack resulting in fatality are also reported elsewhere in the world (Woolgar et al. 2001; Burgess 2009).

In the 20-year period of the 1930s and 1940s, the fatality ratio was 1:2.4 incidents. In the past 20 years, the fatality ratio has been 1:8.5 incidents.

Comparison of attacks per capita indicated that the number of incidents was highest in the 1930s, at 10 attacks per million people per decade, decreasing to an average of 3.3 attacks per million people per decade until the 1990s.

The past two decades have exhibited an increase in attacks, up to 3.5 attacks per million people per decade (1990–1999) and 5.4 attacks per million people per decade 2000–2009 (Fig. 3).

In the 20 years since 1990, there have been 186 reported incidents, including 22 fatalities (Table 1).

This represents a 16% increase in reported attacks during 1990–1999 and a 25% increase over the past 10 years (Fig. 3).

The majority of attacks occurred in New South Wales (NSW) with 73 incidents (39%), then Queensland with 43 incidents (23%), Western Australia (WA) with 35 incidents (19%), South Australia with 20 incidents (11%), Victoria with 12 incidents (6%), Tasmania with two incidents (1.5%) and Northern Territory with one incident (0.5%)

CONCLUSION

Patterns of attack have changed substantially over time as a result of the changing population and human behaviour.

If human activity related to water-based activities and the use of beaches, harbours and rivers continues to change, we can expect to see further changes in the patterns, distribution, frequency and types of attacks in the future.

Encounters with sharks, although a rare event, will continue to occur if humans continue to enter the ocean professionally or for recreational pursuit.

It is important to keep the risk of a shark attack in perspective. On average, 87 people drown at Australian beaches each year (SLSA 2010), yet there have been, on average, only 1.1 fatalities per year from shark attack over the past two decades.

It is clear that the risk of being bitten or dying from an unprovoked shark attack in Australia remains extremely low.

According to Taronga Conservation Society there have been 216 recorded unprovoked shark attacks in New South Wales in the last 100 years of which 48 were fatal. 

UPDATE

The unintended impacts of shark mesh was on show on Saturday, with a juvenile humpback whale becoming entangled in a net near Coolangatta on the Gold Coast. The calf's mother helped keep the animal near the surface long enough for a patrol to arrive and cut the whale free. [The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 October 2016]

in 1951, New South Wales recorded its worst year of shark encounters at netted beaches, with three separate incidents, including the fatality of local surf ski champion Frank Olkulich (21) who was fatality bitten at a Newcastle Beach called Merewether while treading water……In the 23 years, since September 1992, there has been 21 unwanted shark encounters at netted beaches in NSW; almost one per year*. This doesn’t include the death of a 15-year old boy who drowned after being caught in a shark net at Shoal Bay in March 2007.[3] It does however include the shark incident on 12 February 2009 at Bondi Beach when Glen Orgias (33) lost his left hand after being bitten by a 2.5m white shark while surfing and the severe bite that Andrew Lindop (15) received by a suspected 2.6m white shark at Avalon Beach on 1 March 2009……In January 2012, surfer Glen Folkard was severely bitten by a bull shark at Redhead Beach, north of Sydney. This incident is still waiting a review by DPI, New South Wales, and, along with another two unwanted shark encounters at meshed beaches, was meant to be part of the programme’s 5-year review in September 2014. At the time of this article, this review has still not been finalised. [Sea Shepherd, 5 August 2015]

Tony Watch (4)

Former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott slowly inching his way towards political center stage......

Using the one step forward, two steps back method of advancing. 

The Sydney Morning Herald, 5 October 2016:

Tony Abbott's world tour arrived at the Tory conference in Birmingham where he is appearing at an event hosted by the conservative magazine The Spectator to talk about the opportunities about Brexit. Never mind he opposed Brexit in an opinion piece forThe Times – much to the dismay of his supposed natural base of hard-right Leave supporters – but now he is  "quietly thrilled" with the result because that was then, this is now, he's a politician and on we go. 

I've learned that Abbott has been privately telling Tories he thinks he has a reasonable chance of making a come back to the PM's job. What's more, in every conversation I've had with Liberals, they are no longer ruling out the prospect, saying with Malcolm Turnbull's continued dismal performance, anything is possible. Now hopes does not a leadership change make, but this does put one thing to rest: Tony Abbott's claim that his leadership is "dead, buried and cremated" is more "Lazarus with the triple bypass." [My report/Fairfax]

Business Insider, 5 October 2016:

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has claimed London-based Fairfax Media journalist Latika Bourke is “making things up” in a report that he told right-wing allies in the UK that he thinks he has a “good chance” of returning as PM.

While the Coalition backbencher did not respond to Bourke when asked about the claim before publication, he used Twitter to subsequently deny it, saying: “As for unsourced, unattributed, unprofessional reports, the journalist in question is yet again making things up.”

Express UK, 5 October 2016:

Speaking at a fringe event at the conference on Tuesday, the former Liberal Party leader said his proposed deal needs to have "full recognition of each country's credentials and standards".

He added: "There should be an entirely seamless economic relationship based on free entry of goods, mutual recognition of services and standards, and easy entry of qualified people.

"If a motor car, say, could be registered in the UK, it should be registrable in Australia; if a trade qualification, say, was recognised in Australia, it should be recognised here."

He said the deal should include free travel between the UK and the Commonwealth country.

Financial Review, 11 October 2016:

Former prime minister Tony Abbott has blamed the NSW Liberal Party for almost losing this year's federal election and challenged his successor, Malcolm Turnbull, to back the conservative wing's attempt to overhaul the state division.

Mr Abbott challenged Mr Turnbull in person on Tuesday morning to support greater democracy in their home division, a shift that centrist Liberals fear will lead to the selection of more conservative political candidates, and shift the balance of power in the division, which is controlled by moderates.

"This is going to require leadership from the top," Mr Abbott told The Australian Financial Review. "The problems of the NSW party are quite extensive and one member, one vote is not a panacea but a first step to revitalising the party in NSW."

Demonstrating that he intends to remain a prominent figure within the party, Mr Abbott used a meeting of federal Liberal MPs to argue for "democratisation" of the NSW party and asked Mr Turnbull to respond, sources said.

A source said Mr Abbott and Defence Minister Marise Payne, a leading NSW moderate, traded pointed comments during the discussion, which is part of a campaign by Mr Abbott and other conservative Liberals in NSW, including Assistant Minister for Cities Angus Taylor, to introduce grassroots votes for all state and federal candidates in NSW and the party's executive committee.

Mr Turnbull gave a positive but non-conclusive response, the source said, which was followed by a complaint from Defence Industry Minister Christopher Pyne that federal Liberal MPs should not have to discuss the party internal matters of one state.

The Guardian, 11 October 2016:

The former prime minister told Guardian Australia he was “dismayed” by the leaks after Tuesday’s regular party room meeting in Canberra. “It’s a cancer on our polity – this culture of leaking.”

“The fact that people readily leak pejorative stuff to damage colleagues is pretty dishonourable I think,” Abbott said on Tuesday afternoon.

“Leaks are poisoning our political culture.”

Shortly after Tuesday’s regular party room gathering of Liberal MPs, reports surfaced, including in Guardian Australia, that Abbott had been slapped down by the defence industry minister, Christopher Pyne, for raising a proposal to democratise Liberal party preselection procedures in New South Wales.

Pyne rebuked Abbott on Tuesday after he exchanged cross words with Liberal backbencher MP Julian Leeser about plebiscites in NSW preselections.

According to party room sources, Abbott had declared angrily that Leeser “did not believe in democracy for Liberal party members” before Pyne expressed an objection to Abbott bringing state organisational matters into the federal party room.

Abbott later told Guardian Australia it was “absolutely appropriate” for issues within the NSW division to be ventilated in Canberra because the Coalition had “almost lost the [federal] election in NSW”.

He remarked that it was “just crackers” to say state organisational issues could not be considered during party room meetings in Canberra given organisational issues in electorates and in various states were considered all the time.

“This line that it shouldn’t be raised in the party room is self-serving at best,” Abbott said – returning the rebuke to Pyne.

The Australian, 12 October 2016:

Tony Abbott has received cheers and applause from across the chamber as he asked his first question in parliament since returning to the backbench.

The former prime minister, who was ousted by Malcolm Turnbull in September last year, rose on Wednesday during question time to ask Trade Minister Steven Ciobo how the Singapore-Australia free trade agreement is supporting jobs and growth.

"Nice to be popular, Mr Speaker," a grinning Mr Abbott said, to ironic cheers from Labor and more supportive cries from the government benches.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 12 October 2016:

He looked as relieved as a schoolkid who's been excluded from the cool bunch for months...and out of the blue, someone offers to share sandwiches at lunch, or maybe a smoke behind the shelter shed.

"C'mon down," Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull motioned to ex-prime minister Tony Abbott. Abbott's grin could very nearly have split the air. He rolled into an "aw shucks" shuffle as he made his way down from the loneliness of the backbench.

The prime minister of Singapore, Lee Hsien Loong, was visiting the Parliament. Lee and Abbott shook hands and Abbott patted Lee on the shoulder, Turnbull overseeing it all, before the little official party moved on. 

The Sydney Morning Herald, 13 October 2016:

"The point that I want to make is that the vast majority of Trump supporters are not deplorables, they really aren't," he said.

"They are decent people who want to see change inside their country and that's fair enough."

Democratic presidential Hillary Clinton was forced to apologise for attacking half of Mr Trump's supporters as belonging in a "basket of deplorables" who were "racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, Islamophobic".

Labor leader Bill Shorten has launched an unprecedented attack on Mr Trump in recent months saying the Republican nominee is "entirely unsuitable" to lead the United States and describing his views, including his threat to ban Muslim immigration, as "barking mad."

But Mr Abbott defended Mr Trump's policies, which include building a wall between Mexico and the United States to repel migrants, as reasonable.

"Many of the Trump positions are reasonable enough," he said.

He warned that if Mr Trump loses the November election, hundreds of millions of American voters would still support his views.

Describing himself as an "admirer" of America, Mr Abbott said it was in the international community's interests to have a "great and strong" America because the world would be worse off without Washington's leadership.

"America is the one country in the world with the strength and goodwill to be a relatively acceptable arbiter of all the problem the world faces."

Mr Abbott's defence of Mr Trump will be interpreted by his colleagues as another attempt to reach out to far-right voters who abandoned the Liberal party at the last election following the installation of the moderate Malcolm Turnbull as prime minister, and a further sign he is jockeying to be returned to the leadership.

An upcoming meeting of the NSW division of the Liberal party will be closely watched with sources saying a showdown on party democratisation will be seen as an opportunity for Mr Abbott to showcase his strength amongst the so-called "base" or party membership.

Mr Abbott is pushing for NSW members to be allowed to preselect their parliamentary candidates, which would strengthen the hand of the conservative membership.

But his motion has been scheduled 11th on the agenda.

Mr Abbott said he would speak to party officials about making his motion a priority for discussion at the October 22 meeting.

"I'd like to assume that's there's no malice or manipulation here, I'd like to assume that it's just inadvertence."

New Labor Senator for Victoria Kimberly Kitching - who is she?

This is newly appointed Senator for Victoria Kimberly Kitching in her own words on 23 August 2014:

“I speak 4 languages. I have tertiary qualifications, including a law degree.

I have been admitted as a Solicitor to the Supreme Court of Queensland. 

I have been elected as a Councillor of the City of Melbourne, a Corporation that at that time had a budget of approximately $300 million.

I have worked as a Senior Advisor to the Minister for Industry and Trade, Major Projects and Information and Communications Technology; and as a Senior Advisor to the Treasurer of Victoria who with the Premier and other members of the Expenditure Review Committee sets (at that time) a $45 billion State Budget (FY09- 10).

I have been employed in private enterprise: I was an employee at LookSmart, a technology company that went on to list on the NASDAQ, and was involved in the first tranche of its capital raising; I have also been employed at Drake International, the largest privately owned human resources company globally and was responsible for their Government and Corporate Relations, and for strategic human resources advice for clients.

I have been a Director on several boards, and have been a Vice President and Trustee of the Victorian Branch of the Australian Labor Party.

In late 2012 I was studying for the entrance exam to participate in the Victorian Bar Readers' Course.”

A fairly impressive resume.

The problem for the federal Labor Party is those words are taken from the first of two witness statements tendered to the Abbott Government’s notorious  Royal Commission into Trade Union Governance and Corruption in which Kitching was giving evidence concerning her time as General Manager in the equally notorious Victoria No.1 Branch of the Health Services Union. [See here and here]

Her husband past president of Melbourne University Student Union and former political blogger, Andrew Landeryou, is not necessarily seen by all as an asset to her new career in the Senate – having been associated with the health union's past power struggles and then arrested in St. Kilda at 2.40am on the morning of the July 2016 federal election for allegedly vandalising Greens and Liberal polling material at multiple polling stations from Elwood to Port Melbourne, and allegedly driving at volunteers who tried to stop them.

Already a couple of media commentators are characterising Opposition Leader Bill Shorten’s endorsement of Kimberly Kitching as either “courageous” or “brave” – either way it is not meant as a compliment to Mr. Shorten’s judgment.

* Image found at @kimbakit

Quote of the Week

"Although I'd hoped he could have risen to the occasion, it's clear [he ] is unwilling or unable to demonstrate even the most basic level of discipline, character and judgement necessary to lead our great nation. He is unsound, uninformed, unhinged and unfit to be president of the United States and I am withdrawing my support for him." [Former Minnesota Governor and member of the Republican Party Tim Pawlenty on the subject of Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, Washington Examiner, 8 October 2016]

NSW Parliament Upper House sends U.S. presidential candidate Donald J. Trump a message - you're a 'a revolting slug' unfit for public office

Notice of Motion published in NSW LEGISLATIVE COUNCIL NOTICE PAPER No. 79 for Thursday, 13 October 2016:

The House agreed to the motion at 10:04am on 13 October 2016 and it was duly recorded in NSW Hansard.

It was passed without objection or need for formal vote.

Even after all these years is male bias still affecting women's chances of surviving heart disease?

It has been known for many years that there are differences in how symptoms of heart disease present in male and female patients, yet it appears that this knowledge is still not translating into better health management practices when assessing and treating women with cardiovascular disease and heart failure.

Excerpts from Australian Catholic University, Mary MacKillop Institute for Health Research, Hidden Hearts: Cardiovascular Risk and Disease in Australian Women, September 2016:

* Executive summary/Key findings

In the absence of a true appreciation of the burden and impact of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among Australian women, coupled with a lack of consistent, Australia-wide data, we compiled this report. Using the best available information, we reveal a number of key figures that should concern all Australians:

The five most common forms of CVD are highly prevalent in Australian women aged 35 years and over with 410,000, 177,000 and 162,000 affected by coronary artery disease (CAD), the form of heart failure (HF) most commonly linked to CAD and atrial fibrillation (AF), respectively.

An additional minimum of 90,000 and 30,000 women are hospitalised due to stroke and peripheral artery disease (PAD), each year. In 2016, 21,000, 14,000, 19,000, 12,000 and 3,000 Australian women will have suffered their first hospital admissions with CAD, HF, AF, stroke and PAD, respectively – see Figure 1.

Tragically, approximately 3,400 Australian women each year will suffer a sudden and fatal cardiac event without ever reaching hospital. Every year, these five conditions provoke a minimum of 260,000 (CAD), 73,000 (HF), 122,000 (AF), 90,000 (stroke) and 30,000 (PAD) hospital admissions among Australian women – see Figure 1.

Even with hospital treatment all forms of CVD are deadly and disabling with one in nine (2,200) women admitted for the first time with CAD dead within 28-days, and more than one third admitted for the first time with HF or stroke dead within 12 months.

The annual estimated cost of hospital care for the most common forms of CVD among Australian women alone is more than $3 billion. Within an ageing population in whom levels of most risk factors are at historically high levels, the burden of CVD among Australian women is set to increase for the foreseeable future.

There is still much to be learned in best preventing and treating CVD in Australian women; particularly in vulnerable individuals/communities.

*

* It is well recognised that the natural history and profile of women with CVD are typically different from their male counterparts.

Current management guidelines reflect a male bias due to the poor representation of women in clinical trials of new therapies.

Women are more likely to display dose-related adverse drug events from CVD pharmacotherapies due to smaller body size, higher body fat, different

metabolism and more kidney dysfunction.

Disparity also exists in cardiac rehabilitation with women failing to attend more often than men in addition to clinicians tending to refer men more frequently.

* Evidence-based management for most forms of CVD are based on clinical trials that have a higher proportion of younger men and/or less complex cases.

* CVD disproportionately affects the Indigenous peoples of Australian and in particular Indigenous women who develop and die from CVD at a much younger age.

* CVD represents an enormous health issue for Australian women. It requires a dedicated response, from the community to governments to minimise already high rates of highly preventable cardiovascular events.

Women living in the Northern Rivers region should note that in 2010-2011, the leading cause of death in the Northern NSW Local Health District  was circulatory disease (which includes cardiovascular disease), which was significantly higher than for all NSW - 193/100,000 compared to 167/100,000 according to the December 2015 health fact sheet produced by the NSW North Coast Public Health Unit.

Australian Attorney-General & Liberal Party Senator George Brandis vs independent Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth Justin Gleeson: who has the most to hide?

The marked difference in degree of redaction in copies of the same official letter, submitted by both Australian Attorney-General & Liberal Party Senator  George Brandis and Solicitor-General of the Commonwealth Justin Gleeson to the Senate Inquiry into the Nature and scope of the consultations prior to the making of the Legal Services Amendment (Solicitor-General Opinions) Direction 2016, raises a strong suspicion that Brandis is attempting to massage the truth and has something to hide……

Australian Attorney-General George Brandis v Solicitor-General Justin Gleeson - SIDE by SIDE by clarencegirl on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/327282899/Australian-Attorney-General-George-Brandis-v-Solicitor-General-Justin-Gleeson-SIDE-by-SIDE

 BACKGROUND

See: http://northcoastvoices.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/australias-two-most-senior-legal.html

Australians continue to increase data consumption in 2016

Australian Government Dept. of Communications and the Arts, media release, 7 October 2016:

Australian Internet activity statistics – June 2016

The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) has released the Internet Activity, Australia, June 2016 (cat no 8153.0).

This release presents key indicators on the use of the internet by business, government, and households, as collected from the Internet Activity Survey conducted in respect of the three months ended 30 June 2016. 

Fast facts include (year-on-year represents June 2016 compared to June 2015):

Internet subscriber numbers pushed past 13 million, with a year-on-year increase of 4 per cent to 13.3 million

While there was an almost 130 per cent year-on-year increase in the number of fibre based subscriptions, subscription numbers across other access types remained relatively stable both year-on-year and from the quarter ended December 2015.

Data downloaded via mobile handsets continues to grow rapidly, with a 34 per cent increase from the December quarter and a 69 per cent increase year-on-year.

Data consumption continues to grow, with 2.1 million terabytes downloaded in the three months ended 30 June 2016. There was 51 per cent growth for total data downloaded year-on-year.

See the ABS website for detailed data on the release: 8153.0 - Internet Activity.

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/mf/8153.0/

Multinational gas and petroleum giant BP withdraws from offshore exploration in the Great Australian Bight - for now.

Multinational gas and petroleum giant BP plc (British Petroleum) operating as BP Developments Australia Pty Ltd (BP), in its capacity as operator of the proposed Great Australian Bight (GAB) Exploration Drilling Program has announced that:

We have looked long and hard at our exploration plans for the Great Australian Bight but, in the current external environment, we will only pursue frontier exploration opportunities if they are competitive and aligned to our strategic goals. After extensive and careful consideration, this has proven not to be the case for our project to explore in the Bight.

Concerned citizens and environmental groups can see this as a win – even if business economics and the risk profile for mega storm in the Great Australian Bight may have had a much to do with this decision as the strength of community opposition.

However, it should be noted that BP does not appear to be abandoning its offshore petroleum exploration leases in the GAB which don’t expire until 2020* and, this multinational is not the only oil and gas corporation with exploration licenses in the area - Santos, Chevron and Murphy Australia Oil received exploration permits in 2013-2015 which are current until 2020-2021, Karoon Gas has a permit current until 2022, joining a Bight Petroleum Pty Ltd presence there not due to end until 2020-21.

Petroleum exploration leases current in GAB in 2016

Nor has the National Offshore Petroleum Safety and Environmental Management Authority (NOPSEMA) indicated that it is averse to further mining exploration being undertaken in the Great Australian Bight.

* BP had guaranteed to undertake exploration worth about $605 million and drill four exploration wells in 2016-17 and under a “Good Standing Agreement” entered into with the federal government it is reportedly liable for that amount unless it commits to a new project within Australia or its Norwegian joint venture partner StatOil decides to exercise an option to proceed with the GAB exploration program.

Turnbull Government fails at full marriage equality

Set out below are certain proposed clauses in the same-sex marriage amendments to the Commonwealth Marriage Act 1961, as previously amended by the Howard Coalition Government in 2004.

As can plainly be seen this bill does not seek to establish full marriage equality, in that it allows widespread discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender citizens seeking to legally marry in this country.

Should this bill eventually be submitted to the Australian Parliament, the Turnbull Coalition Government proposes the establishment of a Joint Select Committee to review and report on the Exposure Draft.

Excerpt from the Marriage Amendment (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill 201X (Exposure Draft) released by Attorney-General George Brandis on 10 October 2016:

"47 Ministers of religion may refuse to solemnise marriages

Refusing to solemnise a marriage despite this Part

(1) A minister of religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite  anything in this Part.

(2) In particular, nothing in this Part prevents a minister of religion from:

(a) making it a condition of solemnising a marriage that:

(i) notice of the intended marriage is given to the minister earlier than this Act requires; or

(ii) additional requirements to those provided by this Act are complied with; and

(b) refusing to solemnise the marriage if the condition is not observed.

Refusing to solemnise a marriage that is not the union of a man and a woman

(3) A minister of religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite any law (including this Part) if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) any of the following applies:

(i) the refusal conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion of the minister’s religious body or religious organisation;

(ii) the refusal is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion;

(iii) the minister’s conscientious or religious beliefs do not allow the minister to solemnise the marriage.

Grounds for refusal not limited by this section

(4) This section does not limit the grounds on which a minister of 16 religion may refuse to solemnise a marriage.

6 Before section 48

Insert:

47A Marriage celebrants may refuse to solemnise marriages

(1) A marriage celebrant (not being a minister of religion) may refuse to solemnise a marriage despite any law (including this Part) if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) the marriage celebrant’s conscientious or religious beliefs do not allow the marriage celebrant to solemnise the marriage.

Grounds for refusal not limited by this section

(2) This section does not limit the grounds on which a marriage celebrant (not being a minister of religion) may refuse to solemnise a marriage.

47B Religious bodies and organisations may refuse to make facilities available or provide goods or services

(1) A religious body or a religious organisation may, despite any law (including this Part), refuse to make a facility available, or to provide goods or services, for the purposes of the solemnisation of  a marriage, or for purposes reasonably incidental to the solemnisation of a marriage, if:

(a) the refusal is because the marriage is not the union of a man and a woman; and

(b) the refusal:

(i) conforms to the doctrines, tenets or beliefs of the religion of the religious body or religious organisation; or

(ii) is necessary to avoid injury to the religious susceptibilities of adherents of that religion.

(2) Subsection (1) applies to facilities made available, and goods and services provided, whether for payment or not.

(3) This section does not limit the grounds on which a religious body or a religious organisation may refuse to make a facility available, or to provide goods or services, for the purposes of the solemnisation of a marriage, or for purposes reasonably incidental to the solemnisation of a marriage."

It is noted that under this bill it appears as though discrimination may be practiced against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender citizens seeking to legally marry, as a matter of conscience alone. Therefore a minister of religion whose own peak religious governing body accepts same-sex marriage may still practice discrimination himself/herself and, a civil marriage celebrant does not have to hold religious beliefs in order to discriminate.

This appears to run counter to international human rights law which does not support discrimination based on a general exemption for conscience. As an example see Article 18 Clause 3 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights ratified by Australia on 13 August 1980.

It should be further noted that neither the amendment bill nor the Marriage Act itself appear to contain a legal definition of the term "religious organisation".

For the purposes of any newly amended marriage act, is a religious organisation a not-for-profit institution for the advancement and promotion of religious purposes, such as churches, convents, faith-based schools or bible colleges, or is it capable of a broader definition?

Will any bigot or homophobe be able to prominently display a religious icon in their place of business and thereby gain a right to deny goods and services to same-sex couples seeking to organise a wedding?

The road to parliamentary approval of the unfair Marriage Amendment (Same-Sex Marriage) Bill became a little more difficult to traverse yesterday......

ABC News, 11 October 2016:

A meeting at Parliament House this morning saw Labor MPs and senators vote unanimously to block the bill establishing the plebiscite.

"The experts have unequivocally explained to Labor that the plebiscite would cause harm to gay and lesbian people — particularly, but not exclusively, young people," Mr Shorten said.

"Having met these families, having listened to their stories, I could not in good conscience recommend to the Labor Party that we support the plebiscite about marriage equality.

"The Labor Party, therefore, will in Parliament oppose Malcolm Turnbull's expensive, divisive plebiscite."

The Greens and a number of balance-of-power Senate crossbenchers have also pledged to block the enabling legislation, meaning it will not pass Parliament.

The compulsory Australia-wide ballot on whether to allow same-sex couples to marry was set to happen in February next year.

The Opposition criticised the plebiscite for months and its decision today was widely expected.

Labor is expected to keep pressing for a free vote in Parliament on whether to legalise same-sex marriage.

But a number of senior Government ministers have made it clear that will not happen.

Note: The results of the proposed precuser national plebiscite will be non-binding on MPs and senators and a number of government members have stated that they will not vote for same-sex marriage under any circumstances.