Meet Page's PUP

The Daily Examiner 10 June 2012:

Mr Palmer has announced Stephen Janes, who owns That New Coffee Shop at Ballina with his wife, Jennie, will stand challenge sitting member Janelle Saffin for the seat of Page at the Federal election in September……

In a statement released by the Palmer United Party, Mr Janes said he wanted to represent "people like me".

UPDATE:

Steve Janes now has a blog, on which he cheerfully admits that: I’m new to the area, don’t know many people, don’t know the issues! He also expects that the issues in Page can be learnt quickly.

One could almost feel for this somewhat clumsy novice - except for the fact that his party leader is still pursuing the possibility of commercially mining coal in that part of the Clarence River catchment where an estimated 126,000 people source their drinking water.

By standing for the Palmer United Party Janes is standing for the mining industry's continuing attempts to exploit what Northern Rivers communities have fought hard to protect - our natural environment, water security and regional economies.

Coal & Coal Seam Gas 'Water Trigger' amendment passes both Australian Houses of Parliament despite Coalition attempts to cripple it

 

On 19 June 2013 the C’wealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment Bill 2013, commonly called the Water Trigger Bill, was voted into legislation by the Australian Parliament.

 

This amendment strengthens the Commonwealth’s power to intervene in relation to water resources, but still leaves regions such as the Northern Rivers vulnerable to exploitation by the coal seam gas industry and an arrogant Coalition state government.

 

The bill as passed by both Houses.

 

Excerpt:

 

Subdivision FB — Protection of water resources from coal seam gas development and large coal mining development

24D   Requirement for approval of developments with a significant impact on water resources

             (1)  A constitutional corporation, the Commonwealth or a Commonwealth agency must not take an action if:

                     (a)  the action involves:

                              (i)  coal seam gas development; or

                              (ii)  large coal mining development; and

                     (b)  the action:

                              (i)  has or will have a significant impact on a water resource; or

                              (ii)  is likely to have a significant impact on a water resource.

Civil penalty:

                     (a)  for an individual—5,000 penalty units;

                     (b)  for a body corporate—50,000 penalty units.

             (2)  A person must not take an action if:

                     (a)  the action involves:

                              (i)  coal seam gas development; or

                              (ii)  large coal mining development; and

                     (b)  the action is taken for the purposes of trade or commerce:

                              (i)  between Australia and another country; or

                              (ii) between 2 States; or

                              (iii) between a State and Territory; or

                              (iv) between 2 Territories; and

                     (c)  the action:

                              (i)  has or will have a significant impact on a water resource; or

                              (ii) is likely to have a significant impact on a water resource.

Civil penalty:

                     (a)  for an individual—5,000 penalty units;

                     (b)  for a body corporate—50,000 penalty units.

             (3)  A person must not take an action if:

                     (a)  the action involves:

                              (i)  coal seam gas development; or

                              (ii)  large coal mining development; and

                     (b)  the action is taken in:

                              (i)  a Commonwealth area; or

                              (ii) a Territory; and

                     (c)  the action:

                              (i)  has or will have a significant impact on a water resource; or

                              (ii)  is likely to have a significant impact on a water resource.

Civil penalty:

                     (a)  for an individual—5,000 penalty units;

                     (b)  for a body corporate—50,000 penalty units.

             (4)  Subsections (1) to (3) do not apply to an action if:

                     (a)  an approval of the taking of the action by the constitutional corporation, Commonwealth, Commonwealth agency or person is in operation under Part 9 for the purposes of this section; or

                     (b)  Part 4 lets the constitutional corporation, Commonwealth, Commonwealth agency or person take the action without an approval under Part 9 for the purposes of this section; or

                     (c)  there is in force a decision of the Minister under Division 2 of Part 7 that this section is not a controlling provision for the action and, if the decision was made because the Minister believed the action would be taken in a manner specified in the notice of the decision under section 77, the action is taken in that manner; or

                     (d)  the action is an action described in subsection 160(2) (which describes actions whose authorisation is subject to a special environmental assessment process).

             (5)  A person who wishes to rely on subsection (4) in proceedings for a contravention of a civil penalty provision bears an evidential burden in relation to the matters in that subsection.

 

Liberal-Nationals Federal Coalition failed amendment seeking to hand back powers to the states, as it was put to the Senate.

 

Excerpt:

 

Schedule 1, page 9 (after line 31), after item 18, insert:

 

18A  Section 528 (at the end of the definition of coal seam gas development )

Add “, but does not include exploration, assessment or appraisal pursuant to a petroleum title granted under a law of a State or Territory.”.

[definition of coal seam gas development]

(4)           Schedule 1, page 9 (after line 31), after item 18, insert:

18B  Section 528 (at the end of the definition of large coal mining development )

Add “, but does not include exploration, assessment or appraisal pursuant to a minerals exploration licence or permit granted under a law of a State or Territory.”.

[definition of large coal mining development]

Liberal-Nationals Federal Coalition failed other amendment.

Perhaps the National Party’s federal election candidate in the Page electorate, Kevin Hogan, might like to explain how he (as a candidate who has never held political office) would stop these or similar Coalition amendments being put to the Parliament should he become a member of the House of Representatives in an Abbott-led federal government?

 

Federal Labor MP Janelle Saffin also has some concerns according to her media release on 19 June 2013:

 

Page MP Janelle Saffin said the passage of the Australian Government’s ‘water trigger’ legislation through the Senate today is an important step in the battle to protect our water from Coal Seam Gas mining in our local area. 

 

Janelle said, “The water trigger can help us stop any CSG mining going ahead in our area, but we need more action and it has to be at State level.”

 

“The power to stop CSG mining completely in our area, rests with the NSW Government, who have done nothing to protect us, and our way of life, despite promises.  We just cannot trust the Nationals to protect our communities from this harmful CSG mining.

 

“I lobbied hard on behalf of our community to get the Federal Government to use the full extent of its powers to protect our water.  The battle is however far from over with the Coalition vowing to undo the legislation, if they get an opportunity.”

 

“To add insult to injury the Federal Coalition put forward an amendment that we blocked, which was to hand back the water assessment process to the NSW Government.  This means Minister Hartcher would be in charge and he is the Minister who has been fast-tracking the expansion of CSG mining in NSW.”

 

“The Coalition made it clear in the Senate they plan to change everything should they win Government –a frightening prospect, which means we can’t trust the Nationals on CSG.

 

“One of their stated aims is to hand environmental assessment power back to the states. In New South Wales that means a Coalition State Government that has done nothing to protect our region, while declaring CSG exclusion zones around Hunter Valley horse studs and wineries.

 

“The people of Page do not want 1000 gas wells and more across the Northern Rivers.

 

“Communities across the region have given the message loud and clear- we want to keep the Northern Rivers CSG-free. We will not accept the risk to our water, farmland, environment, tourism, local economy and our way of life.

 

“It is clear the mining companies are hoping for a Coalition federal government in September, to give them the green light on CSG. I am not going to let that happen locally.

How Big BOF and his mates intend to f#ck the Northern Rivers of New South Wales

The NSW Lib-Nats Government's Draft Marine-Based Industry Policy – Far North Coast & Mid North  Coast NSW. Read it and weep.

"The policy applies from the Queensland border in the North to Tea Gardens in the South. Its main more navigable waterways include: Tweed River, Richmond River, Clarence River, Coffs Harbour and, Hastings River. Less navigable waterways include: Brunswick River, Evans River, Bellinger River, Nambucca River, Macleay River, Camden Haven River, Manning River, Wallis Lake, Port Stephens and some of the major tributaries of the more navigable waterways."

"For the purpose of this policy, a marine-based industry is “an industry
 that depends upon access to a navigable waterway”. Without limiting the generality of this definition, it is considered that the Marine-based Industry Policy - Far North Coast & Mid North Coast NSW will apply mainly to activities that include: boat building, refit and repair but may include other specialist industries such as the manufacture of wave power electricity generators, off-shore drilling platforms, off-shore aquaculture 
pens, etc"

U.S. citizen and media mogul Rupert Murdoch takes his push for Australian regime change on to Twitter

Saffin comes out fighting over upgrading the Pacific Highway

STATEMENT ON UPGRADE OF THE PACIFIC HIGHWAY

WHEN I was elected in 2007 I made a commitment to secure funds for the Pacific Highway to ensure that it would be rolled out in our region and in a timely way.

I have done what I committed to, and in this case, so has the Federal Minister responsible Anthony Albanese.

He has allocated $7.9 billion for the dual carriageway works in six years of this Federal Government.

This is an extra $6.6 billion more than that allocated by the previous Federal Coalition government, which allocated $1.3 billion over 12 years.

Some of the funding came from stimulus funds during the height of the Global Financial Crisis. It was good to get this extra money.

The Ballina Bypass was first completed as the planning had been done and that has helped the development of the Pacific Highway in our region enormously, in terms of safety and the 1800 jobs that it created.

The Devil’s Pulpit section (Tabbimoble) is being done now with $62 million in Federal funding and $15 million from New South Wales.

The same is happening there with the project creating 87 construction jobs and I met local lads who scored some of these jobs. 

The planning works for the stretch from Woolgoolga to Grafton, Woodburn, Broadwater, Wardell and Ballina have also been done.

The pre-construction works from Woolgoolga to Grafton, Woodburn, Broadwater, Wardell and Ballina are the next to be done.

I am told that the NSW Roads and Maritime Services is ready to go on with this work. 

Following my recent meetings with Minister Albanese to discuss the Pacific Highway, I understand that significant Federal dollars will soon be released for the highway.

I have asked him to come to Grafton and make an announcement on this so that the public can hear from him and me together.

Regarding the O’Farrell-Stoner Government’s reneging on the 50/50 funding agreement for the Pacific Highway upgrade, the facts are as follows:

The parameters of this long-standing agreement were set by John Howard when he was Prime Minister.

It is instructive to note that the former NSW Labor government provided a total of $2.5 billion for the highway during the Howard years, not only complying with the agreement but doing even better, to a point where it was spending

$2 for every $1 spent by the Federal Coalition.

Barry O’Farrell and Andrew Stoner repeatedly promised when in Opposition to continue this arrangement, but broke this promise after winning the 2011 March election. They said they wanted to change it to an 80/20 funding split, and of itself, that would be ok if they did not lie, but lie they did, saying it had always been 80/20.

It was a cunning ploy because due to the GFC there had been more stimulus money made available, so they took this extra windfall and said, see 80/20!

“The Coalition will declare the Pacific Highway as a road of national importance and will, on a dollar-for-dollar basis with the State governments, commit $75 million per year over a period of ten years to a special program of upgrading the highway...” – John Howard-led Coalition election policy: Transport for the Next Century, February 7, 1996.

“It was the Howard Government that set the 50/50 funding split for the Pacific Highway from 2006 and the NRMA has supported this approach since day one.” – NRMA Motoring & Services President Wendy Machin, February 27, 2012.

I mean, seriously, who are you going to believe?

I challenge my National Party opponent to deny the facts I have set out as follows, and if he does, it proves that he is either ignorant of this funding history or deceiving us.  Either way, it is not a good look for someone who aspires to represent the people of the Federal seat of Page. 

“The Pacific Highway is a State road, designed, built, owned and maintained by the NSW Government.” – Federal Nationals Member for Cowper Luke Hartsuyker, demanding that NSW Labor fund it 50/50, in 2006.

I mean, seriously, who are you going to believe here?

“Should we be elected next March, one of the first things I’ll do is sit down with Anthony Albanese and talk about spending up the project ... The Pacific Highway should be above party politics. It’s an ongoing partnership between the Federal Government and the State Government.” – NSW Liberals Leader Barry O’Farrell, The Northern Star, April 9, 2010.

“The NSW Liberals and Nationals will immediately fast-track the upgrade of the Pacific Highway if elected in March.” – NSW Nationals Leader Andrew Stoner, Media Release, February 21, 2011.

“Our plan is to make sure that the upgrade of the highway to dual carriageway will be completed by 2016.” – NSW Roads Minister Duncan Gay, The Coffs Coast Advocate, April 6, 2011.

I mean, seriously, who are you going to believe?

I am going with the facts as evidenced by third party sources such as the NRMA President and former Prime Minister John Howard.

It is clear that my National Party opponent, along with the current Nationals Leader Warren Truss, has decided to try and make this an election issue, causing unnecessary concern in the community. 

I can declare that I am not buying into their fabricated nonsense and promises to complete it by some time this decade, having gone from 2016 to now 2020; saying they will use funds from the Parramatta-Epping rail line in Sydney, which are just not there since the O’Farrell-Stoner Government decided that it did not want to do that work.

It is classic National Party tactic; say anything, muddy the debate, try to create confusion and then promise to fix it, whatever it is. 

I cannot abide this sort of tactic as too many people have lost their lives in accidents on the highway, leaving families suffering terribly, and I believe to deliberately deceive people on this issue is unconscionable.

I shall stand on my record of being straight with the electorate, of being consistent, no matter who is government and at what levels. If my own need a serve, I will give them one; securing funding for the Pacific Highway upgrade and having the work done in our area; and importantly, of not having played games with it, trying to seek political advantage as my National Party opponent now seeks to do, aided and abetted by his NSW State Coalition colleagues.

Shame on all of them, I say.

There has to be some areas which are off limits in political life and this is one of them.  I realised that I kept arguing with them and that is pointless, as once they have lied they will again.  

On the North Coast alone, the Ballina Bypass, the Glenugie Upgrade, and the Banora Point Upgrade are all done, finished.

In addition, we’ve started work on The Devil’s Pulpit Upgrade and the duplication of the section between Tintenbar and Ewingsdale, and planning works are done for the remaining stretch between Woolgoolga and Ballina.

The roll out of the upgrade is decided between the State and Federal authorities and it is done where it is most dangerous.

That is a hard call as there are so many dangerous spots, but that is how it is.  It would be great if it could roll out all at once, but it is a working highway and one which we need to upgrade section by section.

I remain committed to getting the job done. The Nationals simply cannot be believed.

Janelle Saffin MP

Federal Member for Page.

Tuesday, June 11, 2013.

Federal Labor MP Justine Elliott leads in My Daily News online poll

Something the Murdoch media will find surprising as it doesn't quite meet their predictions....

Sitting Richmond MP Justine Elliot will romp home at the September federal election if the results of a My Daily News online poll are any indication. The Labor MP attracted 67% of the 1230 votes posted by My Daily News readers, putting her comfortably ahead of her three political rivals.....Ms Elliot's lead remained consistent throughout the week-long poll conducted from June 5-12.

My Daily News 15 June 2012 article here.

Catholic Josephite Justice Office in Canberra speaks out against CSG mining

Catholic Communications, Sydney Archdiocese,
28 May 2013

Rural residences, homes and agricultural land remain at severe risk from the rapid expansion of coal seam gas (CSG) mining says Sr Jan Barnett of the Josephite Justice Office in Canberra.

A ministry of the Sisters of St Joseph, the Justice Office has been an outspoken critic of licenses being issued without consultation or sufficient scientific research into the possible adverse effects of CSG exploration and mining on the health of individuals, on livestock or on the fertile food growing land such as the Liverpool Plains.

Sr Jan says the Office is also extremely concerned there are no protections or shields in place for important water catchment and environmentally sensitive areas.

"None of these issues have been addressed in the NSW Government's amendments to the State Environmental Planning Policy," she says adding that in the Justice Office's recent detailed submission on the proposed amendments, the Sisters have called for the politicians to put the right of individuals and communities to live in a safe environment ahead of all other considerations.

In Toowoomba today, the Bishop of Toowoomba, the Most Rev Robert McGuckin issued a similar call to the Queensland Government insisting that the health and wellbeing of residents must come first.

In making the announcement this morning, the Bishop's major concern was the health and welfare of residents of Tara where adults and in particular, children are suffering multiple medical conditions which a number of residents, including their doctors, believe is the result of chemical exposure from  the CSG mining activity.

At a recent meeting of the Toowoomba Diocesan Social Justice Commission, Bishop McGuckin heard accounts from local Tara residents of physical and mental health conditions that have emerged since CSG began operating in the area. Most distressing he said, were the reports of local children, including photographs, showing them suffering from skin rashes and nose bleeds.

"Queensland Health knows about this issue but more needs to be done to allay the understandable anxieties of the people being affected," he said, describing Tara as one of the most disadvantaged communities in the Western Downs region.

"We support the recent call by the Australian Medical Association for governments to strengthen the assessment and monitoring of health impacts of CSG developments in Australia," he said.

He also urged all levels of government and the resource companies to make sure the voices of those in Tara and other affected areas be heard and their concerns taken seriously…..