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.

The second U.S. presidential debate reached peak stupid in record time on 10 October 2016

The New York Times article of 10 October 2016 pretty much sums up the second presidential debate:

Donald Trump boiled his decadent campaign down to one message during the presidential debate on Sunday night: hatred of Hillary and Bill Clinton.

With knock-kneed Republican officeholders at last summoning the nerve to desert him, Mr. Trump went to lengths to demonize Hillary Clinton — blaming her even for his own failure to pay taxes — and to remind his hard core of supporters that he is all that stands between her and the presidency.

If he were in charge, Mr. Trump told Secretary Clinton at one point, “You’d be in jail.”

When Mrs. Clinton called Mr. Trump out for his failure to apologize to the minorities, immigrants and women he’s offended, he responded by promising vengeance. Should he win, he said, he would unleash a special prosecutor to investigate her.

Sniffing and glowering, Mr. Trump prowled behind her as Mrs. Clinton presented herself again as the only adult on stage, the only one seeking to persuade the great majority of Americans that she shares their values and aspirations. Mr. Trump, by contrast, fell back on the tricks he has learned from his years in pro wrestling and reality television, making clear how deep his cynicism goes and how little regard he has for his party, let alone the presidency…..

Fortune.com has the published the full transcript online, if readers want to expose themselves to peak stupid.

Moderators Anderson Cooper and Martha Raddatz well and truly earned their fee - with most of the nastiness and all of the pouting emanating from Donald Trump but towards the end both candidates regularly running over time.

On the basis of the Chilcot report an international law firm is attempting to sue former British prime minister Tony Blair for alleged war crimes & crimes against humanity

Despite the International Criminal Court (ICC) and at least one eminent silk reportedly ruling out the possibility of former British prime minister Tony Blair being prosecuted for war crimes and crimes against humanity, the law firm Nasser Hashem and Partners is preparing a case to be lodged in both British and international courts.

Gulf News, 5 October 2016:

Dubai: A Dubai-based lawyer has started legal action against former British prime minister Tony Blair, seeking his prosecution for committing war crimes and crimes against humanity during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Advocate Nasser Hashem and his partners in London will register the criminal case against Blair this month at the International Criminal Court and British courts for breaching human rights and committing war crimes that killed thousands of Iraqis.

Hashem and his partners in Cairo, Dubai and London decided to take legal action against the former prime minister after the publication of Chilcot's report on the Iraq war in July. Former British prime minister Gordon Brown announced an inquiry in 2009 and the inquiry's chairman Sir John Chilcot announced his findings in a public statement in July.

Speaking to Gulf News, advocate Hashem said: "Since the results of the inquiry were announced earlier this summer, my partners [in Cairo, Dubai and London] and I have decided to take Blair to court for the war crimes and crimes against humanity that were committed in Iraq. We are taking this legal procedure against Blair since he took the decision [in his capacity as the British prime minister then] to participate with the United States in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 without the permission of the UK's House of Commons. He produced unreasonable, bogus and wrong information to the House of Commons, according to Chilcot report, and based on that information, the UK participated in that war."

Hashem said Blair falsely and unfoundedly told the House of Commons that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction and biological weapons before the war was launched against Iraq.

According to the Chilcot report, Saddam Hussain did not pose an urgent threat to British interests and that the intelligence regarding weapons of mass destruction was presented with unwarranted certainty. Also, the report said UK and the US had undermined the authority of the United Nations Security Council.

"Based on all the lies and allegations that Blair produced before the members of the House of Commons, the decision to go to war alongside with the US was taken. Thousands of Iraqis were killed, injured, displaced and/or shattered. Blair committed war crimes against the people of Iraq and violated human rights. He should be taken to court for the crimes he committed," said Hashem.

A media statement issued earlier by Hashem and his partners said: "Our office in London will take all the necessary legal procedures before the British courts to prove the violations and crimes against humanity that have been committed against human rights in Iraq and breaching the human rights that was settled by International Organisation for Human Rights and to prove the oppression of Blair against Iraq, that led to the destabilisation of the Arab countries, (and) for taking wilful decision and committing grave acts." Hashem and his legal team are expected to announce further details about their legal action against Blair soon.

Nasser Hashem & Partners, media release, 25 July 2016:

Submitting the British former Prime Minister for trial

In this respect, we are ensuring the achievement of the international justice and the enforcement of law. Accordingly, we held a press conference in Cairo in order to start taking legal procedures against the former British Prime Minister "Anthony Charles Lynton Blair" before the international Criminal Court for committing War Crimes and crimes against humanity by taking this decision to participate with the United States of America in the invasion of Iraq in 2003 without the permission of the House of Commons of the United Kingdom by presenting unreasonable information to the House of Commons, According to Chilcot report in 2016 before the House of Commons of the United Kingdom.

We emphasize that our office in London will take all the necessary legal procedures before the British courts to prove the violations and crimes against humanity that have been committed against human rights in Iraq and breaching the human rights that was settled by International Organization for Human Rights, to prove the oppression of the former British prime Minister "Anthony Blair" against Iraq, that led to the destabilization of the Arab Countries for taking wilful decision and committing grave acts. We will submit all the documents which prove the conviction of the former Prime Minister "Anthony Charles Blair" specifically after his recognition of taking all responsibility of his decision

Since Egypt joined the Security Council, it has the authority to submit the case by the Security Council before the International Criminal Court. We are making investigations with the Egyptian Minister of foreign Affairs because of our dissatisfaction for violating the rights of Arab nation without any right.

It is important to mention that the United Kingdom claims for human rights and world peace, at the same time violating the respect of humanity. We consider that this is contradicting and this major evidence that led to the division of Iraqis, murdering of innocent children, displacement of families and classifying the Arab countries as a source of terrorism. Consequently, we can consider that what happened in Iraq is not an invasion but it is breaching the sovereignty of state without any right for the purpose of hidden aims and accordingly the former British Prime Mister will be convicted

Update​ 1/10/2016

Nasser Hashem & Partners is preparing all the documents regarding "Anthony Blair" Case to be submitted to the International Criminal Court and British Courts for committing war crimes against Iraqi citizens as a prelude to submitting a compensation case against United Kingdom and the United States of America for killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Citizens. We are currently preparing a team which will travel to the United Kingdom to proceed to take legal action and there will be a press conference before the flight to brief journalists on the actions that will be taken in the UK.

Can you imagine how the ANZUS Treaty and trade agreements would play out under Donald Trump and the Son of Abbott?

The mind boggles at the thought of how a grossly ineffectual Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull would even begin to protect Australia from a barking mad President Donald Trump.

However, it appears the Turnbull Government may be attempting to engage with Trump early – just in case he does turn out to be the forty-fifth president of the United States of America after the 8 November 2016 federal election.

The Daily Telegraph, 8 October 2016:

CONSERVATIVE Liberal backbencher Cory Bernardi believes Donald Trump could be the next US president.

In a surprise announcement, Senator Bernardi told Sky News in New York that Americans might do “pretty well” out of a Trump presidency.

Senator Bernardi said Trump was tapping into a well of discontent that politicians around the world would be wise to listen to.

His policies were about protecting America and standing up for people who felt dispossessed by mainstream politics.

The Australian Government has previously shied away from showing favouritism towards either party throughout the US election campaign, however Senator Bernardi is not the first politician to get involved.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop met with a key Trump adviser last Friday to discuss challenges the she thought the new Clinton or Trump administration would face, according to The Australian.

The Australian, 19 September 2016:

A top Republican strategist has reassured foreign minister Julie Bishop that Donald Trump, who has trashed a carefully negotiated 12-nation Asia-Pacific trade deal including Australia and criticised US allies’ military contributions, would value highly the US relationship with Australia.

Ms Bishop met with former Congressman Mike Rogers, Donald Trump’s national security adviser, and the Democrat’s Jake Sullivan in Washington DC on Friday, discussing some of the challenges she thought the new Clinton or Trump administration would face.

Turnbull Government staffer showing the world just what insensitive, boorish fools Australians can be when holidaying overseas

Third from the left appears to be Defence Innovation Adviser Jack Walker with his pants around his ankles
The West Australian

The Australian, 4 October 2016:

An adviser to cabinet minister Christopher Pyne has been revealed as one of nine Australians arrested for stripping down to Malaysian flag-themed underwear at the country’s Formula One grand prix.

The men, aged between 25 and 29, were reportedly intoxicated when they undressed and began to dance in front of thousands of spectators at the Sepang Inter­national Circuit in celebration at Australian Daniel Ricciardo’s race win.

Jack Walker, who is Defence Innovation Adviser in the Defence Industry Minister’s office, was among them.

Mr Pyne’s spokeswoman told The Australian: “This matter is being handled appropriately by the Australian High Commissioner. Until we have a clearer picture of the process at hand it would be unwise to comment further”.

Foreign Minister Julie Bishop’s department confirmed it was assisting the men.

“The Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade is providing consular assistance, in accordance with the Consular Services Charter, to a group of Australians who were arrested in Malaysia,” a spokeswoman said. “Due to privacy obligations, we are unable to provide further information.”

Treasurer Scott Morrison hoped the incident would encourage young Australians to respect local customs when travelling abroad.

“They are their laws, their rules. You’re on their ground, so you’ve got to comply,” Mr Morrison told Sydney radio 2GB this morning.

“It’s a timely reminder for young people when they travel overseas, know what the laws and rules are and respect them.”

Mr Walker has spent most of his professional life at Mr Pyne’s side, having joined his office in 2013. Mr Walker previously worked at PremierState, the lobbying firm chaired by Liberal factional warlord Michael Photios, and interned at Macquarie Bank.

Mr Walker has served the minister in numerous roles including as Mr Pyne’s executive assistant and as a liaison with Coalition backbenchers. He was appointed Mr Pyne’s Defence Innovation Adviser in July.

Mr Walker claims to have studied international relations at the University of Sydney, according to his resume uploaded to website LinkedIn.

“(I am) confident, hard working and always open to new experiences,” he wrote.

“I enjoy working with people and am always open to opportunities that will increase my personal development.”

The Star, a local Malaysian newspaper, quoted Sepang police chief Abdul Aziz Ali as saying the group was detained moments after the incident.

“They were under the influence of alcohol,” Assistant Commissioner Abdul Aziz said.

“Investigations revealed they bought the undies down under.”

Under Malaysian law, the offences of provocation and indecency can attract jail terms of up to two years.

The underpants were reportedly purchased from an Australian swimwear brand based in Manly, Sydney, and cost $55 each.

The company sells briefs based on the Brazilian, US, French and Japanese design, among others.

The nine men will be held for four days while police investigate claims of public indecency and disrespecting the Malaysian flag.

After all nine offenders plead guilty to a charge of public nuisance and received cautions they promptly returned home under the full gaze of the media. 

One suspects that a certain Defence Innovation adviser to Liberal MP for Sturt and Australian Minister for Defence Industry Christopher Pyne was hoping to quietly slip back into the country, with the media focused on those offenders who returned as a group through Sydney on Friday morning 7 October.

However, even after shaving off his beard he still found the media waiting as he left Perth International Airport on Friday afternoon.

Unfortunately for Walker evasion was never going to be an effective strategy as he had already been effectively skewered in The Spectator issue of 5 October 2016:

Walker isn’t a once off. He’s a part of growing culture within the Liberal ranks; the staffer brat.

The staffer brat is a twenty-something, arts degree graduate, typically moderate-leaning, Kool-Aid drinking political adviser.

With their Young Liberal membership firmly tucked in their chinos, they stroll the blue carpet of the Ministerial Wing with superficial busyness, often in the direction of free booze and networking. They flash their blue ministerial passes at Aussies to crush the spirits of junior staff who secured a rare trip to Canberra. They’ve seen the inside of the Qantas Chairman’s Lounge and they won’t let you forget it.

They greet senior ministers as close friends. They are the fly-in-fly-outs, over-promoted, under-qualified and full to brim with travel allowance to supplement their already over inflated salaries. They do not serve on the frontline, rarely accountable to voters and lean heavily on their department for support.

Their policy expertise often only extends to PVO Newshour and 140-character commentary. Their Instagram is laden with West Wing-style images of riding VIP jets, post-run selfies with the Foreign Minister and artsy pictures of the parliamentary courtyards.

The wanker filter is, unsurprisingly, always in heavy use.

And while potentially bright and occasionally competent, the electorate often proves more complex than their life experience allows.

Given Australia's love of alliterative nicknames, he now runs the risk of forever being known as Wanker Walker.

Having been invited to resign - which he did on Saturday 8 October - Jack Walker can now enjoy a few days of leisure before the Liberal Party old boys network finds him a new position where white male entitlement and boorish behaviour are considered career assets.

ACCC: "If the proposed acquisition proceeds, News will own both The Courier Mail and the local paid newspaper in nearly every city or town in Queensland"

The Australian Securities & Investment Commission’s preliminary view is that the proposed acquisition of Australian Regional Media (part of APN News and Media) by Murdoch’s News Corporation may be likely to substantially lessen competition in the supply of local news and information and/or advertising opportunities to consumers/readers/businesses in Mackay, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Bundaberg, Hervey Bay, Gympie, Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Ipswich, Warwick, Caboolture/Bribie Island, south west Brisbane, Brisbane northern bayside, Logan, southern Gold Coast in Queensland and Tweed Heads on the Far North Coast in NSW.

The matter of competition is not an issue in the Clarence Valley at the southern boundary of Far North Coast as there is only one local paid newspaper, The Daily Examiner, and News Corp’s existing substantial shareholding in APN News and Media ensures that articles from its existing media platforms already dominate much of that local paper’s column inches.

Australian Securities & Investment Commission

News release

6 October 2016

ACCC INVITES FEEDBACK ON NEWS CORPORATION’S PROPOSED ACQUISITION OF APN'S AUSTRALIAN REGIONAL MEDIA DIVISION

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission has released a Statement of Issues on the proposed acquisition of Australian Regional Media (ARM) from APN News and Media (ASX: APN) by News Corporation (ASX:NWS).

The proposed acquisition would combine the two main newspaper publishers in Queensland, adding ARM’s community and regional publications in Queensland and northern New South Wales to News’ extensive portfolio of community, regional, state, and national publications.

The ACCC is investigating the effect that this would have on competition for both readers and advertisers.

“One area of focus is the loss of competition between ARM’s paid regional newspapers and News’ The Courier Mail.

If the proposed acquisition proceeds, News will own both The Courier Mail and the local paid newspaper in nearly every city or town in Queensland.

This may result in a reduction of quality and diversity of content available to readers. Reinforcing that concern is that both News and ARM have a strong presence in online news through their websites associated with the Queensland newspapers,” ACCC Chairman Rod Sims said.

“The ACCC is seeking to understand whether the competitive tension between News and ARM is an important factor in maintaining quality and range of content, or whether the threat of readers shifting to alternatives, particularly alternative online news sites, will competitively constrain News after the acquisition.”

ARM publishes paid daily regional papers in Mackay, Rockhampton, Gladstone, Bundaberg, Hervey Bay, Gympie, Sunshine Coast, Toowoomba, Ipswich and Warwick.

The ACCC will be looking closely at these areas.

“In particular the ACCC will test how important diversity of content and opinion is to readers when assessing the extent of competition between papers,” Mr Sims said. ARM and News both also publish overlapping community papers in Caboolture/Bribie Island, south west Brisbane, Brisbane northern bayside, Logan, and Tweed Heads/southern Gold Coast.

These are mostly free papers with a strong local focus. The ACCC is seeking to assess the effect on readers and local advertisers in those areas, and to assess whether the reduction in competition is significant.

“The ACCC will be assessing the importance of diversity of local content in these competing community publications.

The ACCC is also seeking to understand whether advertising opportunities on other media platforms, such as local radio, pamphlets, and online, will constrain prices for advertising in the ARM and News community newspapers,” Mr Sims said.

The ACCC invites further submissions from industry participants in response to the Statement of Issues by 27 October 2016. The ACCC expects to announce its final decision on 1 December 2016.

Background

News is a global media company with subscription television, magazines, newspapers and publishing operations and interests.

In Australia, News publishes a number of state, regional and community newspapers as well as its national publication The Australian.

It also publishes websites associated with many of its newspapers as well as news.com.au.

APN is an ASX-listed Australian company with media, radio, publishing and digital assets in Australia, and outdoor advertising assets in Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong.

The ARM division of APN, which is proposed to be sold to News, includes a large number of mostly regional publications in Queensland and northern NSW, including 12 paid daily, 14 paid non-daily and 32 free non-daily community newspapers.

APN's radio and outdoor assets are not part of the proposed acquisition and will be retained by APN.

ACCC Statement of Issues: News Corporation – proposed acquisition of APN News & Media Limited's Australian Regional Media division