Best description of Tony Abbott MHR so far?

The Ultimate Whinging Pom

{Aerchies Archives 9^th June 2012}

Tell Yahoo! Japan to stop advertising whale meat

NRDC Save Bio Gems June 6, 2012:

Do you care about whales? Do you ever use the internet giant Yahoo!? Then you should know that Yahoo! Japan is selling whale and dolphin products on its website, including meat from endangered species.

Although Yahoo! has banned the sale of whale products on all its other sites, its Japanese subsidiary – Yahoo! Japan – continues to sell whale products. That means Yahoo! – through its 34% interest in Yahoo! Japan – profits from the illegal slaughter of whales.

According to a report just issued by the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), in March 2012 Yahoo! Japan offered 249 whale products for sale – including sashimi, bacon, and canned whale meat.

The International Whaling Commission has banned commercial whaling since 1986. Yet Japan continues to kill whales under the guise of “scientific research” – even within the boundaries of the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary established by the IWC in 1994 to protect whales.

Each year, Japan issues itself “scientific research” quotas to kill some 1,000 minke, fin, sperm, Bryde’s and sei whales in the Antarctic and North Pacific oceans. Many of these whales were hunted nearly to extinction and are only now rebounding from centuries of overhunting.

By selling whale products, Yahoo! Japan is helping Japan’s efforts to evade international law and kill whales for commercial gain.

Join NRDC, EIA and the Humane Society in urging Yahoo! Japan to stop the sale of all whale products.

Earlier this year, Amazon’s Japanese website was found to be selling whale products. In response to public outrage, Amazon swiftly announced a ban on all such sales.

Now is the time for Yahoo! to follow Amazon’s lead. Click here and tell Yahoo! to use its influence over Yahoo! Japan to permanently ban the sale of all whale products on Yahoo! Japan's website.

The whales need our help!

O'Farrell Government confirms Carbon Price Modelling correct according to the Member for Page

 

NSW Government confirms the carbon price modelling is correct

Page MP Janelle Saffin has shown Opposition Leader Tony Abbott to be at odds with his State colleagues in NSW about the impact of the carbon price on the cost of living.

“I asked the Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency and Minister for Industry and Innovation Greg Combet, in Parliament last week about the measures that the Federal Government is putting into place to help families, pensioners and communities with the effect of the carbon price,” said Ms. Saffin.

“The carbon price is designed to bring the level of polluting gasses down over time which will benefit generations for years to come,”

“It’s a complex scheme as it’s about restructuring the economy and I want to see that it has as little impact as possible on people.”

The Minister responded to the question from the Page MP by asserting that Mr Abbott’s claims that the price impact of the carbon price will be “unimaginable” were extremely deceitful.

“I note that in Page, the NSW Government said the carbon price impact on Ballina Shire Council will be $61,799. But what it failed to point out to locals is that this represents an increase of just 0.4 per cent of the council’s total rates income,” said Ms Saffin.

Mr Combet, in answering the question from Ms Saffin, advised that the NSW Local Government Minister recently issued a press release showing council rates will rise 0.4% as a result of the carbon price.

“For the average household, Deputy Speaker,  this is 6 cents a week,”

“The NSW Government, has actually confirmed the Treasury forecasts, .

“To help households, this Labor Government is providing tax cuts, increases in family payments, pensions and other benefits.

“All up, an extra $10.10 per week on average will be delivered through the Government’s Household Assistance Package.” said Mr. Combet.

In Page, more than 33,000 pensioners will receive extra $338 extra per year if they are single and an extra $510 per year for couples; more than 12,700 people will receive increase in family assistance payments and; 43,000 taxpayers will receive a tax cut.

Ms Saffin said the Federal Government’s household assistance package should be welcomed by people living in Page.

“Most families feel the pressure of modern costs of living but Mr Abbott’s negative scare mongering won’t do anything to help households cope with these pressures,”

“In contrast, the government’s payments will put extra cash into household budgets to provide real relief and help with cost of living pressures.” said Ms Saffin.

Wednesday 6 June, 2012   Media contact:  Matt Dunne 0417 287 456

Tony Abbott & political posters 'n' placards

 

The Finnigan's Home of The BISONs on 1^st June 2012:

Tony Abbott is Upset Over this in Tanya Pilbersek's Electoral Office

But he is happy with this

North Carolina attempts to make a law turning back the sea

From NewsObserver on 28 May 2012 – a story of systematic attempt by North Carolina government to deny the extent of potential climate change effects:

Several local governments on the coast have passed resolutions against sea-level rise policies.

When the General Assembly convened this month, Republican legislators went further.

They circulated a bill that authorizes only the coastal commission to calculate how fast the sea is rising. It said the calculations must be based only on historic trends – leaving out the accelerated rise that climate scientists widely expect this century if warming increases and glaciers melt.

Excerpt from AN ACT TO STUDY AND MODIFY CERTAIN COASTAL MANAGEMENT POLICIES BILL 2011:

(e) The Division of Coastal Management shall be the only State agency authorized to develop rates of sea-level rise and shall do so only at the request of the Commission. These rates shall only be determined using historical data, and these data shall be limited to the time period following the year 1900.

Rates of sea-level rise may be extrapolated linearly to estimate future rates of rise but shall not include scenarios of accelerated rates of sea-level rise.

Rates of  sea-level rise shall not be one rate for the entire coast but, rather, the Division shall consider separately oceanfront and estuarine shorelines.

For oceanfront shorelines, the Division shall use no fewer than the four regions defined in the April 2011 report entitled "North Carolina Beach and Inlet Management Plan" published by the Department of Environment and Natural Resources.

The oceanfront regions are: Region 1 (Brunswick County), Region 2 (NewHanover, Pender, and Onslow Counties and a portion of Carteret County), Region 3 (a portion  of Carteret County and Hyde County), and Region 4 (Dare and Currituck Counties).

For estuarine shorelines, the Division shall consider no fewer than two separate regions defined as  those north of Cape Lookout and those south of Cape Lookout.

(f) Any State agency, board, commission, institution, or other public entity thereof and  any county, municipality, or other local public body that develops a policy addressing sea-level rise that includes a rate of sea-level rise shall use only the rates of sea-level rise developed by the Division of Coastal Management as approved by the Commission. If the Commission has not approved a sea-level rise rate, then the sea-level rise policy shall not use a rate of sea-level  rise.

Scott Steel, closet marsupial, accidental blogger, poll analyst - seer

Yet another who foresaw the wreckage Abbott & Co would make of the political process in Australia.

In Crikey on 8 September 2010:

With two country independents backing Gillard, the Labor party will now pass the only threshold needed in Australia to form government – a majority on the floor of House. There is no other test, there is no other requisite, there is no other qualification needed to control the Treasury benches.

But this constitutional reality will not stop some. Indeed, it merely marks the beginning of what will become a long festival of delusion, conspiracy and outright lies – where its hysteria will only be surpassed by its grubby bitterness and its commercial exploitation.

With so many having invested so much in the defeat of the Labor government – including the leadership of what was once the national broadsheet of this country – to be denied victory by political inches, leaving a fragile incumbent holding the most delicate of majorities and being reliant on a handful of cross-benchers representing ideologically discordant electorates, creates a result that will not be respected.

What we will witness over the next 18 months or more is a Great Unhinging –an orgy of hysterics that will far surpass the duplicity, dishonesty – let alone the complete arsehattery – that substituted for public debate on matters of government during the previous 12 months.

The goalposts of what constitutes government legitimacy will be moved from the constitutional to the convenient, from the reality of the parliamentary majority to concocted nostrums about mandates to govern.

Every policy and utterance the government or the Independents make will be creatively analysed, deliberately distorted and whose fabricated consequences will be shouted from the rooftops. This will not be an exercise in political analysis, but an infection of pathological political syphilis. It will not just be a campaign against the government, but one rolling, frenzied campaign after another, where each new contrived outrage will assume a greater level of mania than the last.

The Independents will be targeted in a way they are probably not prepared for – they will be demeaned, ridiculed and treated with contempt, where their honourable characters will be distorted into debased caricatures. The character assassination will be ferocious and their connection to their electorates will be serially brought into question, particularly from a group of ostensibly inner urban media elites whose acquaintance with New England and Lyne extends no further than peering down from 30,000 feet as they fly between capital cities.

But it won’t just be the usual suspects here. There will be an angry that we haven’t seen for a long time, from a group of disgruntled political zealots.

The Liberal and National parties have a profoundly successful ability at attracting a disproportional quantity of the most embittered, politically pungent elements of Australian society as supporters – a dark, angry, belligerent underbelly that believes the only acceptable outcome of any political contest is the one they believe in…..

A factual perspective to the school funding debate

Letter writer Phil Francis points out some salient facts in the education funding debate in today's Daily Examiner.

Heavy lifters

Why did the comprehensive Gonski review call for changes to the way schools are funded? Because public schools are there for all - they do the 'heavy lifting' by catering for disadvantaged children.

Consider these facts . . .
Public school/Private school enrolments are in the ratio 66:34. The equivalent ratio for 'At Risk students' is 79:21; for ESL New Arrivals Program: 91:9; for Students with Disabilities and Special Needs: 80:20; for Indigenous Students: 86:14; The proportion of students enrolled in remote public schools is 1.8% compared to 0.8% in private schools; for very remote schools 1.2% compared to 0.3%. These figures delve to the heart of where funding should be directed.

Public schools have a legal and moral responsibility to be open to all students; private schools don't and aren't.

Phill Francis, Wooloweyah