Just minding my own business - GO AWAY!

Nocturnal Tawny Frogmouth pretending he's part of a Coastal Banksia 

Wilsons Headland, Yuragir National Park
Clarence Coast NSW

Photo taken by Greg Clancy, Ecologist

The LNP jury's still out on Mal Brough

Mal Brough was the Liberal National Party's Queensland sweetheart in the lead-up to the September 2013 federal election and had his preselection locked in by 29 July 2012.....

But in January 2016 with the next federal election less than ten months away it's another story altogether.....

Change your company name, sling the Liberal Party a few thousand, switch tax havens, and you're off and running to receive government contracts valued in the billions

Watching multinational corporations harvest Australia is oddly fascinating. 

Take this example........

Since swimming into public view during the Howard Government years when it made political donations to the Queensland & Victorian divisions of the Liberal Party of Australia totaling $10,000 (2000-01), multinational corporation Accenture Plc (formerly Anderson Consulting) has won government contracts valued at an est.$2.27 billion to date.

Accenture Plc listed on the New York Stock Exchange around 2001 and as a prime contractor in September 2006 quit its £175M UK National Health Service contracts because of cost-overruns and delays in its delivery of the IT programme. Repays just £63M to drop these contracts.

Sometime between 2002 and 2007 two staffers of two former Liberal ministers in the Howard Government appear to found employment with Accenture.

Accenture switched tax havens in 2009 – going from being based in Bermuda to being headquartered in Ireland. None of its principal executives are believed to be based in Ireland, living instead in the USA or Europe.

Also in 2009 it was reported that Accenture's Australian Taxation Office (ATO) contracts were worth an est. $580 million.

According to its own website Accenture is a global management consulting, technology services and outsourcing company, with more than 305,000 people serving clients in more than 120 countries. Combining unparalleled experience, comprehensive capabilities across all industries and business functions, and extensive research on the world’s most successful companies, Accenture collaborates with clients to help them become high-performance businesses and governments. The company generated net revenues of US$30.0 billion for the fiscal year ended Aug. 31, 2014.

This was an increase of 5 percent in both U.S. dollars and local currency compared with the previous fiscal year and, gross margin (gross profit as a percentage of net revenues) for 2013-14  was 32.3 percent.

In 2013-14 the Asia Pacific region (including Australia) produced net revenues for this multinational corporation of $3.89 billion.

In Australia according to the 2013-14 Report of Entity Tax Information ACCENTURE AUSTRALIA HOLDINGS PTY LTD had:

Total Income: $1.40 billion

Taxable Income: $170.42 million

Tax Paid: $50.50 million.

So an est. 3.60% of its total Australian income went in taxation in 2013-14 or an est. 29.63% of what it calculated was its local taxable income.

With no apparent sense of irony in November 2013 Accenture made a submission to the National Commission of Audit which concluded with this in the document’s executive summary:

In order to maintain a vibrant level of economic growth to provide rising living standards for its citizens, Australia must restrain the growth of public sector expenditure within the limits of its capacity to fund it.

Citizens want growing public services, but will not tolerate a growth in taxation above the rate of economic growth.

The gap between aspirations and willingness to pay has been recently filled by large and unsustainable levels of borrowing which has left a record level of Commonwealth debt.

In order to deal with this problem in the short term, adjustments to expenditure and revenue will be essential.

In the medium term, however, the government will need to adjust its forms of service delivery in order to maintain and enhance them without cost over runs.

This can be achieved by changing the style of management, the uses of technology and the structure of the public sector to mirror the efficiencies that are widespread in the private sector.

On July 7 2014 Fortune magazine listed Accenture Plc as one of the Top American corporate tax avoiders.

In November 2015 the ATO confirmed Ramez Katf, managing director of products for Accenture A/NZ will take over as ATO Chief Information Officer (IT) in 2016.

In 2015-16 the ATO commences a short-term arrangement with Accenture to use their Philippines Delivery Centre to increase its IT capability in application development for new policy implementation.

Japanese whalers active again in Antarctic waters

Snapshot, Google Earth image of Antarctica, 14 December 2015

Sea Shepherd Australia, Monday 18 January 2016:

Sea Shepherd’s Flagship, the Steve Irwin, has departed Fremantle, Western Australia for the Southern Ocean. The ship’s departure marks the official commencement of the organization’s 12th Southern Ocean Defense Campaign, Operation Icefish 2015-16.

Led by returning Captain, Siddharth Chakravarty, Sea Shepherd will once again defend the pristine waters of Antarctica from poachers, with the aim to shutdown illegal activities in what is the world’s last great wilderness.

Sea Shepherd will employ direct-action techniques to fill a law enforcement void that continues to be exploited by the Japanese whale poaching fleet and the two remaining illegal toothfish vessels, Viking and Kunlun (Taishan), which continue to threaten the survival of the fragile and wild Antarctic ecosystem.

“The Steve Irwin will be the only proactive enforcement presence in Antarctica once again this year. The shadowlands of Antarctica are under threat and we are the only form of protection to the marine wildlife in these unregulated regions. Other than offering direct and immediate protection to the oceans, we intend to investigate and document the illegalities and work with law-enforcement agencies, once again, to aid and close out existing investigations worldwide,” said Captain Chakravarty.

As Captain Chakravarty and the crew of the Steve Irwin depart for the Southern Ocean, Sea Shepherd has called on the governments who are responsible for upholding the laws that protect the Southern Ocean to intervene against these poaching operations.

“Sea Shepherd should not be left to defend Antarctica alone,” said Captain Alex Cornelissen, CEO of Sea Shepherd Global. “For the last 13 years our ships and crews have shone an international spotlight on both the illegal whaling and more recently on the illegal toothfish operations. Now it’s time for governments to step-up and take serious action to address the issue of poaching in the Southern Ocean.”

Managing Director of Sea Shepherd Australia, Jeff Hansen, said, “Sea Shepherd needs reinforcements. 76.9% of Australians want the Australian government to send a vessel to oppose the Japanese whale poaching fleet. Australia has been commended for taking Japan to the ICJ, but now the government needs to take responsibility for enforcement by sending a ship to oppose the whale poachers.”

Antarctic Minke whale

Up to 333 minke whales will be killed by Japanese whalers hunting in the Southern Ocean in 2016. The whaling fleet set sail for Antarctica on 1 December 2015.

Excerpt from Joint statement on whaling and safety at sea released on 12 January 2016 by the Governments of Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, and the United States:

Our Governments remain resolutely opposed to commercial whaling, in particular in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary established by the International Whaling Commission. We do not believe that Japan has sufficiently demonstrated that it has given due regard to the guidance found in the 2014 International Court of Justice judgment on ensuring that lethal research whaling is consistent with the obligations under the International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling. On December 7, 2015, our Governments joined 29 other nations to protest Japan’s decision. We urged Japan to respect the International Whaling Commission’s procedures and the advice of its Expert Review Panel and Scientific Committee. The science is clear: all information necessary for management and conservation of whales can be obtained through non-lethal methods.

We note that the final NEWREP-A research plan, circulated to the Scientific Committee members on November 27, 2015, has not proceeded through the International Whaling Commission’s processes, set out in Resolution 2014-5, which requests that proponents allow the IWC to consider the Scientific Committee’s review of special permit proposals prior to their commencement.

Australia, the Netherlands, New Zealand and the United States are committed to improving the conservation status of whales worldwide, maintaining the International Whaling Commission's global moratorium on commercial whaling, and implementing meaningful reform of the International Whaling Commission.

Clarence Valley Council in residents & ratepayers' bad books

It's a local government election year in the Clarence Valley (unless the NSW Boundaries Commission decides otherwise) and locals are getting restless as Saturday 10 September is marked in red on many a fridge calendar.

A vague suspicion is developing that a whole lot of payback may be going down at polling booths across the valley on that date.

Clarence Valley Independent, 14 January 2016:

Forum campaigns against CVC's 'secrecy'
Story By: Geoff Helisma

Convenor of The Clarence Forum lodges a petition with Clarence Valley Council last week. It asks the council to reveal where and how it spends its $580,000 advertising budget. Pic: Judy Myers

Online Facebook group, The Clarence Forum, has lodged a 147-signature petition demanding Clarence Valley Council (CVC) to 'Stop The Secrecy, Tell Us The Truth [and] Tell us the amounts paid to The Independent, DEX, 2GF and related radio from CVC's advertising budget".
The group started the online petition in July 2015, following an operational decision by the council to withdraw its weekly block advertising from this newspaper, as part of the its review of services to meet the requirements of the state government's Fit for the Future initiative.
The council's advertising budget for 2015/16 is $580,000 – the council's statutory financial reports show advertising costs for 2013/14 were $512,000, $520,000 in 2012/13 and $466,000 in 2011/12.
The Clarence Forum's convenor, John Hagger, said he had been unsuccessful in gaining a breakdown of where or how the council spends its advertising budget.
Mr Hagger made a written request to CVC for the information in June 2015.
A council officer responded to the request on June 11, 2015, stating, in part, that work had "started to compile the information but it will take some time to complete … I would envisage having a formal response to you by the end of next week".
Subsequent to this, Mr Hagger was advised on the telephone by the council's corporate director, Ashley Lindsay, that the information would not be released.
In a letter accompanying the petition, which has been sent to the general manager, each of the councillors and Local Government Minister Paul Toole, Mr Hagger writes: "No reason has Ever been given for the refusal to release the report and the information it contains."
Mr Lindsay is on annual leave until February 1.
Mr Hagger said that it was "incumbent on the council to reveal the expenditure details in line with the public interest test outlined in the NSW GIPA Act"……

Read the rest of the article here.

ABC News, 14 January 2016:

There are concerns of an asbestos risk at a new Clarence Valley Council depot in South Grafton.

It was a former sewage treatment plant and a dump for fill where, for decades, the Clarence Valley Council workers took broken water mains made of asbestos-bonded concrete.

With the council planning to build its new depot on the land, there are concerns about whether the asbestos poses a public health risk.

Asbestos was a wonder-product at the time much of the Clarence Valley's water mains network was installed.

As with the vast majority of local government areas, public assets in many cases are riddled with it.

Over the past three decades, as pipes have ruptured and been replaced, some ended up in landfill at the site of the former Sewage Treatment Plant in Tyson Street in South Grafton.

The council has earmarked that site, which is adjacent to the South Grafton High School, for the $13.5 million depot for works and civil engineering staff.

The convenor of the online group Clarence Forum, John Hagger, said the asbestos poses a public health risk.

"[It's not safe], no," Mr Hagger said.

"According to Safecover NSW, council has advised that it's friable, that's the most dangerous form."

The Director of Works and Civil, Troy Anderson, said the council is developing a remediation plan along with a development application to construct a depot, and that as suspicious material is uncovered it will be disposed of securely.

Letter to the Editor, Clarence ValleyIndependent, January 2016:

Iluka 162-lot massive subdivision

Ed,
There are many questions about this subdivision.
Is it really honest for the Council to say they have already doubled the statutory exhibition period of 14 days (D/E 5/1/16) when the council rooms at both Maclean and Grafton were closed until the 3rd January, effectively reducing the length of time to read over 400 pages in 11 days. Why was the DA not available on the council website or even in Iluka?
Thanks to community pressure the DA is now available at the Iluka Library which is open Monday, Wednesday and Friday. Thanks to even more community pressure and media attention the submission date to comment has been extended to 4pm on the 12th February. Still not enough time to read, research and prepare a submission or even comment on the DA. We must have informed community scrutiny and enough time to do it.
Many people in Iluka are questioning the timing of the DA release on Christmas eve and the fact that large signs on the Iluka Road advertised this development on Christmas eve 2013. The signs were subsequently removed. How is this possible or even legal before a DA has even been approved?
Journalist Tim Howard’s story states The Stevens Group acknowledges some environmental issues within this site. Quite an understatement by the developer considering it is not just ‘opposite a golf course’ but adjacent to one of the last remnants of littoral rain forest in NSW and also a corridor between two national parks.
Large numbers of bird watchers, scientists and photographers frequent Iluka in the off season for the very reason that Iluka is unique and still home to more than 200 species of birds alone. Do we really want to spoil this quiet, beautiful, unique place by increasing the population by up to 500 along with god knows how many more cars, cats and dogs.
If the community do want an increase in population this is the perfect opportunity for a developer to have a state of the art, sustainable, environmentally friendly development with stringent safeguards for native flora and fauna and larger house sites. The site has been identified as an environmentally sensitive area being in or within 100 metres of an area identified as a wetland of international significance or world heritage area – after all it is this environment we have now that is so attractive to visitors.
Any resident wishing to comment directly to the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel can do so on line as well as a submission to Clarence Valley Council. Exercise your right and have a go.

Annie Dorrian

Iluka

Note: Clarence Valley Council has extended the submission deadline until 4pm 12 February 2016.

Letter to the Editor in The Daily Examiner, 7 January 2016:

Fair’s fair

Senior Clarence Valley Council officer, Mr Des Schroeder, is reported (5 Jan) as saying that the exhibition period for the proposed 162 lot development at Iluka has been doubled from 14 days to 28 days, but that Council has to "be fair" to the community and the developer when considering a further extension.

Reacting to a reported 400 page document, available at two places in 28 days spread over the Christmas period can in no way be considered fair to the community.  

Council would know that many who have valid concerns and interest in this proposal will not even be aware of it prior to the closing date for submissions on 22 January, let alone make a considered submission.

If Council does have a genuine concern for its residents and their views, it will extend the submission period to a reasonable time - at least another 30 days, but preferably more - and make copies available to all interested persons who request one.

Council ought to justify its action in releasing such a proposal on Christmas Eve.  It makes one wonder how Council weighs up "fairness" for its community.

Peter Morgan

Brooms Head

The Daily Examiner, 5 January 2016:

A DECADE-long project to develop a 162-lot residential subdivision in Iluka could be approved early this year.

The owners of a 19ha parcel of land in Hickey St, the Birrigan Gargle Aboriginal Land Council, and Central Coast developers, the Stevens Group, have submitted a development application for the project, which went on public exhibition on Christmas Eve.

The project is to establish the subdivision opposite the Iluka Golf Course. The development will include 10 streets and three parks designed to retain natural vegetation as well as items of indigenous culture.

The report from the Stevens Group acknowledges some environmental issues with the site.

Between 1958 and 1978 sand mining in the region resulted in minor contamination of the site. The report also mention traces of asbestos and a rubber tyre dump. It proposes to dispose of these contaminants in line with the State guidelines for removing hazardous waste.

One Iluka resident, Tony Belton, has questioned the timing of the exhibition of the DA.

He said it was not good for the Clarence Valley Council to advertise the most significant development in Iluka in decades the day before Christmas.

"People are on holidays and celebrating with their family and friends this festive period," he said.

"This very large 162-lot subdivision needs careful consideration and comment from the community."

Mr Belton called the exhibition period to be extended beyond its January 22 closing date for submissions.

"Surely this submission period needs to be extended by at least another 30 days so any one interested has time to read this 400-page development application and be given a chance to comment on it if they wish," he said......

The Daily Examiner, 31 December 2015:

IF YOU want to take a seat at Iluka's first market of the year, you might have to bring your own.

All four table and chair sets under the shelter and barbecue area at Ken Leeson Oval were unbolted and removed by the council on Christmas Eve.

Iluka Woombah Rotary Club president Graeme Lynn said council staff phoned him about youths misbehaving at the undercover area the day before the community-funded infrastructure was removed, as two of the table/chair sets were funded by the Rotary club. The other two were supplied by the Iluka Fishing Club.

Mr Lynn said he was told it would only be a temporary removal, to which he replied it was the worst time of year to take them out.

This Sunday's market is expected to be the biggest yet.

"They're always full and now there's nothing there, just a big blank space," he said.

"They picked the worst time of the year to do this - the whole town is at capacity and residents and tourists have got nowhere around here to sit. Parents like sitting there to watch their kids on the skate park too."

Troy Anderson, the council's director for works and civil, said constant vandalism at the shelter meant council staff had to service the area over and above normal levels, and something had to give.

He said the timing was considered and noted the markets were only one day.

"It's a catch-22 situation, because there's no good time to take them out at all," Mr Anderson said.

"The removal has two purposes; firstly it is a trial to see whether it will have an impact on ongoing anti-social behaviour, and the second part is maintenance."

If the tables were re-installed at all, Mr Anderson said it would likely happen after school resumed......

Comment sent to North Coast Voices concerning the long proposed Yamba By-pass, 7 October 2015:

Seems the only component of it that's left on the drawing board (or it that the 'chopping block'?) is from Golding Street through to the existing eastern component that serves the business park, with West Yamba the excuse for its construction. With a modicum of common sense all funds would be directed to the intersections along Yamba Road at Treelands Drive, Carrs Drive and Shores Drive.

The departure of the ever-ready overly gung ho pro develop deputy gen manager  ....seems to have allowed a bit of logic to break through.

The Daily Examiner, 6 October 2015:

RISING anger over what he describes as a 50% rate hike has prompted a Clarence Valley businessman to lobby for an investigation into the Clarence Valley Council.

Former Maclean Chamber of Commerce president John Riggall has in recent days been distributing leaflets around the region calling for the probe.

The leaflet is headlined Stop the 50% increase of CVC rates.

Mr Riggall wants residents to contact the NSW Local Government Minister Paul Toole asking him to order an independent investigation into the council's operations…..

Mr Riggall's leaflet contains a list of figures of financial issues from that council has experienced in recent years, issues he claims have damaged confidence in the council.

They include:

 A $1 million cost overrun for the Townsend depot.

 $190,000 consultants' fees for McLachlan Park over three years.

 $450,000 staff salary figures left off a report to a council meeting.

 $10 million clerical error in the figures for the Grafton depot rationalisation project……

Global warming and King Coal? Oh yes, we knew alright!

From Page 4 of The Braidwood Dispatch and Mining Journal on 17 July 1912:

http://trove.nla.gov.au/ndp/del/article/100645214

Seventy-nine thousand women in Australia will not be amused by Malcolm Bligh Turnbull's latest version of the paid parental leave scheme

Women falling pregnant or due to give birth after 30 June 2016 are not going to be amused when they realize exactly how much harder their lives might become under the Federal Coalition Government.

Especially when they realize that Prime Minister Malcolm Bligh Turnbull was a successful barrister who inherited an est. $2 million in the same year his first child was born and, would have little to no understanding of the predicament in which he is placing many low-income families.

Set out below are excerpts from a recent analysis of Turnbull's latest version of the paid parental leave scheme.

University of Sydney Business School,  Women and Work Research Group, January 2016, Prof. Marian Baird & Dr. Andreea Constantin, Analysis Of The Impact Of The Government’s Myefo Cuts To Paid Parental Leave, excerpts:

The current paid parental leave (PPL) scheme commenced operation in January 2011, after the Productivity Commission recommended a system that combined government and employer leave. In making their recommendations, the Productivity Commission highlighted the importance of new parents attaining 26 weeks or more post-natal paid leave - a period considered important for health and welfare reasons for both a baby and new mother.

The current PPL system provides 18 weeks government pay at the minimum wage, to be used in combination with any leave in employment agreements or policies. It was specifically designed to enable more women to reach 26 weeks or more of paid parental leave by adding their employer paid leave on top of the 18 weeks of government provided pay.

Under the proposed cuts to this system announced in the Mid-year Economic and Financial Outlook (MYEFO), a new parent’s access to government provided PPL support would be cut where the new parent has also secured any employer provided leave, thus reducing the overall period of paid time at home that parents can access.

Approximately 160,000 families accessed PPL last year, and approximately 50 per cent of women receive some employer PPL. As 99% of those who currently access paid parental leave are women, we can then expect approximately 79,000 women would be adversely affected by this proposed cut.

Further, the analysis of impacts on different workers outlined below shows that, among others, we can expect that nurses, teachers, ambulance service workers and retail workers will be hit hard by the proposed changes. Under the government’s proposed cuts, the families modelled in the below scenarios would be left with just 7 – 13 weeks of living costs covered by the Government system. That’s less than half of the 26 weeks experts recommend.

The financial loss suffered by these families would range from $3,942 to $10,512. Given this modelling and based on what we know about how women in Australia use paid parental leave, we expect the changes will:

* prevent more women from spending critical time at home with their newborn baby;

* lead to financial duress;

* reduce the number of women able to afford to stay at home for 26 weeks and thus adversely impact on the health and welfare outcomes of new babies and mothers; and

* increase demand for childcare for the very young, in a system that is already struggling to keep up with demand.

As a result of the cuts to their income which will occur if these changes to the Paid Parental Leave system are introduced, we can also anticipate negative flow on impacts for new families and the communities in which they live.

Under the proposed changes announced - unexpectedly and without consultation - in the Mid-year Economic and Financial Outlook (MYEFO), for eligible workers whose children are born or adopted on or after 1 July 2016, the number of weeks of PPL entitlements paid under the Commonwealth Paid Parental Leave model will be cut where a parent also receives employer provided paid leave.

The number of weeks of any paid leave provided by the employer will be deducted from the Government’s 18 weeks.

The main difference between this new proposed cut, and the cut previously proposed by Treasurer Joe Hockey and former Prime Minister Abbott, is that this new proposed cut is calculated on the basis of weeks of government paid parental leave (capped to 18 weeks of income), rather than the dollar amount of income received (capped to the equivalent of 18 weeks income at the national minimum wage).

Under the government’s proposed changes to the PPL model, the eligibility rule for a break in work will also be changed - from 8 to 12 weeks, allowing some women who are currently ineligible for paid parental leave because they have breaks in work longer than 8 weeks, to access the government parental leave pay, for example jockeys. The proposed changes will also affect income assessed for Family Tax Benefits, potentially further reducing the family income. According to MYEFO, the Government plans to save $105 million over 4 years in Family Tax Benefits, or just over $26 million per year. Thus somewhere between 4,000 to 6,000 families are likely to have their benefits reduced.

The first Scenario models the expected impact of the government’s proposed changes on the situation of a retail worker. She works as a cashier for Woolworths and is expecting her first child.

The second Scenario models the impact of the government’s changes on a part-time teacher who works 3 days a week.

The third Scenario models the impact of the government’s proposed changes on a mother working full-time as an ambulance service worker in Queensland. She lives with her partner, their 5 year old daughter and their newborn baby.

The fourth Scenario models the impact of the government’s proposed cuts on a mother who works part-time (3 eight-hour shifts a week) as a nurse. She lives with her partner and their newborn in Victoria.

Conclusion

The Federal Government’s proposed changes will result in fewer weeks of paid parental leave for women who receive some PPL from their employer. The more weeks of paid parental leave a new mother receives from their employer, the less they will receive from the government.

The outcome is regressive and the analysis shows it will have a negative impact on lower paid women. Women who are in normal, but low paid jobs or part-time work with slight benefits from employers will lose government financial support, and therefore their ability to afford to spend time with their newborns in these critical first months will be compromised.

These scenarios show that the loss to women in these critical jobs ranges from 6 weeks to 16 weeks of income and amounts to a range of $3,942 and $10,512. This represents a significant loss of resources to the primary carer and their family during this key time when they will already be financially under-pressure.

A reduction in available paid parental leave can be expected to increase the costs and time pressures on women, and this in turn may be expected to force more women to return to work earlier than desired and to seek childcare for their babies in a system that is already failing to meet demand amongst infants.

As a result of the cuts to their income which will occur if these changes to the Paid Parental Leave model are introduced, we can also anticipate negative flow on impacts for new families and the communities in which they live.