Quote of the Week

work is the best form of welfare

Australian Federal Social Services Minister Kevin Andrews, speaking about Abbott Government’s 

intention to tighten eligibility/reduce payment rate for the Disability Support Pension,  

ABC News, 23 Dec 2013]

Will NSW Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione risk another heavy handed political move against Northern Rivers anti-coal seam gas protestors in 2014?

Local landowners & others prepare for the arrival of Metasco at its Rosella-1 well site in early 2014

In 2013 Magistrate David Heilpern publicly took NSW Police to task over charges laid against coal seam gas protestors at Metgasco Limited’s Glenugie site.

Does NSW Police Commissioner Scipione want the world to see more media coverage similar to this because he was persuaded to do the bidding of a coal seam gas exploration company which to date has produced not a cent in profit for its investors or the State of New South Wales and is never likely to?

The Northern Star 6 November 2013

"In this case I find myself asking what could possibly be the reason for continuing on with such an innocuous charge in these circumstances? Why else would police risk cost orders against them, drive a prosecutor up from Sydney to run the matters, arrange police witnesses to travel from Sydney, all for an innocuous minor traffic matter. "It is in that context that the realistic suspicion of political interference arises," he said.....

Metgasco Limited is a mining exploration company which after fourteen years still has no social contract with local communities on the NSW North Coast, a spotty safety record and an unhappy shareholder base.

Clarence Valley Council management's 2013 missteps follow it into the new year

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner, 30 December 2013, Page 12:

Ranger out of range

It seems the position left vacant when the senior ranger was wrongfully dismissed by Clarence Valley Council is to be filled, but the position will now be based in Grafton instead of Maclean. It seems an odd decision given that the work load for the rangers is centred in the Lower Clarence and very much focuses on holidaymakers and tourists attracted to the Coast. There are a lot of questions begging answers from the council, but it seems even our elected councillors are being stonewalled. So who does the ratepayer go to for a response? "The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable." (James Madison.)

John Catesby

Maclean

John Catesby is not letting go as he pens another letter (below) concerning Clarence Valley Council management’s expensive back down before the NSW Industrial Relations Commission in Smith v Clarence Valley Council, which was settled out of court presumably before any evidence was presented or argument heard.

Before that day at Murwillumbah Court House had ended rumour was circulating in legal circles that Smith was to be reinstated as a council employee.

This would mean that Clarence Valley Council will now be employing two persons in a similar salary range – with one new person to undertake senior ranger duties and the other to possibly twiddle his thumbs all day on full pay.

The Lies Abbott Tells - Part Eight

The first day of the new year saw Tony Abbott at it again - turning the truth on its head.

THE LIE

Prime Minister's New Year Message 1 January 2014:

I will also start the conversation about a constitutional referendum to recognise the first Australians. This would complete our Constitution rather than change it.   

THE TRUTH    

Despite the mainstream media being encouraged to take a position that Abbott is 'reviving' the push for recognition and reporting that the Government has promised to put forward a draft amendment by September but has not set a timeframe for a referendum, the Prime Minister actually has no choice but to begin this so-called conversation in 2014.

Gillard Government legislation, the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples Recognition Act 2013 (assented to on 27 March 2013 and administered by Prime Minister and Cabinet), requires the Abbott Government to review constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples, consider proposals for constitutional change and identify those proposals most likely to obtain the support of the Australian people - commencing this process no later than 26 March 2014 and completing it no later than September 2014.

Sections 4 and 5 of the Act:

4  Review of support for a referendum to amend the Constitution

             (1)  The Minister must cause a review to commence within 12 months after the commencement of this Act.

             (2)  Those undertaking the review must:

                     (a)  consider the readiness of the Australian public to support a referendum to amend the Constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and

                     (b)  consider proposals for constitutional change to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples taking into account the work of:

                              (i)  the Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and

                             (ii)  Reconciliation Australia; and

                     (c)  identify which of those proposals would be most likely to obtain the support of the Australian people; and

                     (d)  consider the levels of support for amending the Constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples amongst:

                              (i)  Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples; and

                             (ii)  the wider Australian public; and

                            (iii)  the Governments of the States and Territories; and

                     (e)  give the Minister a written report of the review at least 6 months prior to the day this Act ceases to have effect.

             (3)  The Minister must cause a copy of the report of the review to be tabled in each House of the Parliament within 15 sitting days of that House after the day the report is given to the Minister.

5  Sunset provision

                   This Act ceases to have effect at the end of 2 years after its commencement.

Note:          The 2 year sunset period in this section will provide Parliament and the Australian people with a date by which to consider further the readiness of Australians to approve a referendum to amend the Constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

                                                                                             
Background

The Expert Panel on Constitutional Recognition of Indigenous Australians Final Report was informed by over 3,000 submissions from organisations, groups and individuals.

The following are its principal recommendations:

First NSW King Tide Of 2014 Today: what does the shoreline of your coastal town or village look like?

Coffs Creek, Coffs Harbour at a 2.1 metre tide level

Witness King Tides asks coastal communities around Australia to head out and snap pics of the coast when king tides hit. These photos capture what our communities may look like in the future, as global sea levels rise. Together, these images build a picture of the threat posed by sea level rise across Australia and help track the future impact of climate change. [http://www.witnesskingtides.org/]

Update

The 2 January tide causes mild flooding Holbeach Avenue in Tempe. Photo: Nick Moir

ABC NEWS: South Arm Highway in Tasmania

Boathouse cafe at Elizabeth Bay, Sydney NSW

McCready's Creek, Slade Point, Queensland

Call to update existing privacy and human rights law to reflect modern surveillance technologies and techniques

In June 2013 the Australian Government stated its intention to join the Open Government Partnership (OGP).

On 17 December 2013 a letter signed by more than 100 organisations and individuals was sent to all OGP governments regarding the transparency of global mass surveillance.

One has to wonder if the Abbott Government intends to join the OGP on schedule in April 2014, given that this organisation was established to provide an international platform for domestic reformers committed to making their governments more open, accountable, and responsive to citizens and Australian security organizations are implicated in the concerns set out in the following letter:

17 December 2013

To the Co-Chairs of the Open Government Partnership

Hon. Kuntoro Mangkusubroto 

Hon. Alejandra Lagunes 

Ms. Suneeta Kaimal 

Mr. Rakesh Rajani 

 

Cc: Jourdan Hussein, Ania Calderón Mariscal; OGP Steering Committee members; OGP members   

Statement of Concern on Disproportionate Surveillance 

We, the undersigned civil society organisations, affirm our deep commitment to the goals of the Open Government Partnership,which in its declaration endorsed "more transparent,accountable,responsive effective government," founded on the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. 

We join other civil society organisations, human rights groups, academics and ordinary citizens in expressing our grave concern over allegations that governments around the world, including many OGP members, have been routinely intercepting and retaining the private communications of entire populations, in secret, without particularised warrants and with little or no meaningful oversight. Such practices allegedly include the routine exchange of "foreign" surveillance data, bypassing domestic laws that restrict governments' ability to spy on their own citizens. 

These practices erode the checks and balances on which accountability depends, and have a deeply chilling effect on freedom of expression, information and association, without which the ideals of open government have no meaning. 

As Brazil's President, DilmaRousseff, recently said at the United Nations, "In the absence of the right to privacy, there can be no true freedom of expression and opinion, and therefore no effective democracy." Activities that restrict the right to privacy, including communications surveillance, can only be justified when they are prescribed by law, are necessary to achieve a legitimate aim, and are proportionate to the aim pursued.

Without firm legislative and judicial checks on the surveillance powers of the executive branch, and robust protections for the media and public interest whistleblowers, as outlined in the Tshwane Principles, abuses can and will occur.  We call on all governments, and specifically OGP members, to: 

* recognise the need to update understandings of existing privacy and human rights law to reflect modern surveillance technologies and techniques.

* commit in their OGP Action Plans to complete by October 2014 a review of national laws, with the aim of defining reforms needed to regulate necessary, legitimate and proportional State involvement in communications surveillance; to guarantee freedom of the press; and to protect whistleblowers who lawfully reveal abuses of state power.

* commit in their OGP Action Plans to transparency on the mechanisms for surveillance, on exports of surveillance technologies, aid directed towards implementation of surveillance technologies, and agreements to share citizen data among states.

SIGNED:

International and regional organisations

1. ACCESS Info Europe 2. Africa Freedom of Information Centre 3. Alianza Regional por la Libre Expresión e Información 4. ARTICLE 19, Global Campaign for Free Expression 5. Centre for Law and Democracy 6. Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative (CHRI) 7. CIVICUS World Alliance for Citizen Participation 8. Global Integrity 9. Global Network Initiative 10. HIVOS 11. Oxfam International 12. Privacy International 13. World Wide Web Foundation National organisations 1. Access to Information Programme, Bulgaria 2. Acción Ciudadana, Guatemala 3. Active Citizen, Ireland 4. Africa Center for Open Governance, Kenya 5. AktionFreiheitstatt Angst e.V. (Freedom Not Fear), Germany 6. Anti-Corruption Trust of Southern Africa, South Africa 7. Association EPAS, Romania 8. Asociación para una Sociedad Más Justa, Honduras 9. Bolo Bhi, Pakistan 10. Brazilian Society for Knowledge Management (SBGC) 11. Center for Effective Government, USA 12. Center for Independent Journalism, Romania 13. Center for Peace Studies, Croatia 14. Center for Public Interest Advocacy, Bosnia Herzegovina 15. Centro Internacional para Investigaciones en Derechos Humanos, Guatemala 16. Centro for Public Integrity, Mozambique 17. Centrum Cyfrowe Projekt, Poland 18. Charity & Security Network, USA 19. Civil Society Legislative Advocacy Centre (CISLAC), Nigeria 20. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), USA 21. Citizens United to Promote Peace & Democracy in Liberia 22. Corruption Watch, UK 23. DATA, Uruguay 24. Defending Dissent Foundation, USA 25. Democracy Watch, Canada 26. Digital Courage, Germany 27. Digital Rights Foundation, Pakistan 28. Diritto Di Sapere, Italy 29. e-Governance Academy, Estonia 30. East European Development Institute, Poland 31. Economic Research Center, Azerbaijan 32. Federal Accountability Initiative For Reform, Canada 33. Foundation Open Society (FOSM), Macedonia 34. Foundation for Science and Liberal Arts Domus Dorpatensis, Estonia 35. Freedom of Information Center, Armenia 36. Freedom of Information Forum, Austria (FOIAustria) 37. Freedom of Information Foundation, Russia 38. Fundar, Center for Research and Analysis, Mexico 39. GESOC, Mexico 40. Global Human Rights Communications, India 41. GodlyGlobal.org, Switzerland 42. GONG, Croatia 43. Hong Kong In-Media, Hong Kong 44. Hungarian Civil Liberties Union 45. Independent Journalism Center, Moldova 46. INESC, Brazil 47. Initiative für Netzfreiheit, Austria 48. Institute for Democracy 'Societas Civilis'-Skopje (IDSCS), Macedonia 49. Institute for Development of Freedom of Information, Georgia 50. Instituto Mexicano para la Competitividad A.C., Mexico 51. International Records Management Trust, UK 52. Integrity Action, UK 53. IT for Change, India 54. Iuridicum Remedium, Czech Republic 55. Media Rights Agenda, Nigeria 56. Mazdoor Kisan Shakti Sangathan (Association for the Empowerment of Workers and Peasants), India 57. NATO Watch, UK 58. Obong Denis Udo-Inyang Foundation, Nigeria 59. OneWorld – Platform for Southeast Europe (OWPSEE), Europe 60. openDemocracy.net, UK 61. Open Democracy Advice Centre, South Africa 62. Open Australia Foundation 63. Open Government Institute, Moldova 64. Open Ministry, Finland 65. Open the Government.org, USA 66. Open Knowledge Finland 67. Open Knowledge Foundation, UK 68. Open Knowledge Foundation Ireland 69. Open Rights Group, UK 70. Paradigm Initiative, Nigeria 71. Paraguayan Association of Information Technology Law, Paraguay 72. Philippines Internet Freedom Alliance 73. Privacy and Access Council of Canada — Conseil du Canada de l'Accès et la vie Privée 74. PRO Media, Macedonia 75. PROETICA PERU 76. Programa Estudiantil Juventud Siglo XXI, Mexico 77. Project on Government Oversight, USA 78. Public Concern at Work, UK 79. Public Virtue Institute, Indonesia 80. Publish What You Pay Indonesia 81. Request Initiative, UK 82. Sahkar Social Welfare Association, Pakistan 83. Samuelson-Glushko Canadian Internet Policy & Public Interest Clinic (CIPPIC), University of Ottawa 84. Shaaub for Democracy Culture Foundation, Iraq 85. Social Research and Development Center, Yemen 86. Soros Foundation Romania, Romania 87. Stati Generali dell'Innovazione, Italy 88. TEDIC, Paraguay 89. Transparencia por Colombia 90. Transparency International Armenia 91. Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina 92. Transparency International Indonesia 93. Transparency International Ireland 94. Transparency International Macedonia 95. Transparency International Mongolia 96. Transparency International Switzerland 97. Unwanted Witness, Uganda 98. Water Governance Institute (WGI), Uganda 99. Whistleblowers Network, Germany 100. Youth Advocate Program International, Inc, USA 101. Zenu Network, Cameroon

Individuals

1. Aruna Roy, Founder, MKSS India and member of India's National Advisory Council 2. Tim Berners-Lee 3. Vinod Rai, Former Comptroller and Auditor General, India 4. Rebecca MacKinnon 5. Satbir Singh, Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative and Co- Chair, South Asian Right to Information Advocates Network 6. David Eaves 7. Dissanayake Dasanayaka 8. Dwight E. Hines, Ph.D 9. Ernesto Bellisario 10. Nikhil Dey 11. Petru Botnaru 12. Shankar Singh 13. Sowmya Kidambi 14. TH Schee 15. Jacques Le Roux 16. Andrei Sambra 17. Christophe Dupriez 18. Sanjana Hattotuwa 19. Morgan Marquis-Boire 20. Bouziane Zaid 21. Pehr Mårtens 22. Matthew Landauer 23. Simon Ontoyin 24. Yinglee Tseng 25. Sonigitu Ekpe 26. Frank van Harmelen 27. Phil Coates 28. Josefina Aguilar 29. Juned Sonido 30. Fatima Cambronero 31. Jonathan Hipkiss 32. Lucie Perrault 33. Bouziane Zaid 34. Per Martens 35. Simon Ontoyin 36. Morgan Marquis-Boire 37. Leila Nachawati 38. Gbenga Sesan 39. Mohamed El Gohary 40. D.M. Dissanayake 41. Sana Saleem 42. Renata Avila Pinto 43. Carolina Rossini 44. Phil Longhurst 45. Mark Townsend 46. Badouin Schombe 47. Sarah Copeland 48. Jelena Heštera 49. Brian Leekley 50. Katrin Verclas 51. Ian David 52. Judyth Mermelstein 53. Anna Myers 54. Knut Gotfredsen 55. Daniele Pitrolo 56. Nick Herbert 57. Eliana Quiroz 58. Ion Ghergheata 59. Mark Hughes 60. Elena Tudor 61. Thomas C. Ellington 62. Susan Ariel Aaronson, Ph.D. 63. Peter Gunther 64. Mark Charles Rosenzweig 65. Panthea Lee 66. Douglas Redding 67. Mark Wilhelmi 68. C. Worth 69. Sriram Sharma 70. Ben Huser 71. Zach Ross 72. Albo P Fossa 73. Ian Tolfrey 74. Jay Campbell 75. Beth Alexander 76. Crisman Richards 77. Jorge Luis Sierra 78. Linda Strasberg 79. Mawaki Chango, Ph.D. 80. Giang Dang 81. Nica Dumlau 82. Walter Keim 83. Tur-Od Lkhagvajav 84. Dr. Mridula Ghosh 85. Anthony Barnett 86. Christian Heise 87. Eduardo Vergara Lope de la Garza 88. Neide De Sordi