At the Meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in Hobart Australia it was unanimously agreed to create Ross Sea marine protected area

Ross Sea as seen from a satellite sensor (the SeaWiFS sensor). Data are used courtesy of NASA, USA

Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, media release, 28 October 2016:

CCAMLR to create world's largest Marine Protected Area

The world's experts on Antarctic marine conservation have agreed to establish a marine protected area (MPA) in Antarctica's Ross Sea.

This week at the Meeting of the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) in Hobart, Australia, all Member countries have agreed to a joint USA/New Zealand proposal to establish a 1.55 million km2area of the Ross Sea with special protection from human activities.

This new MPA, to come into force in December 2017, will limit, or entirely prohibit, certain activities in order to meet specific conservation, habitat protection, ecosystem monitoring and fisheries management objectives. Seventy-two percent of the MPA will be a 'no-take' zone, which forbids all fishing, while other sections will permit some harvesting of fish and krill for scientific research.

CCAMLR Executive Secretary, Andrew Wright, is excited by this achievement and acknowledges that the decision has been several years in the making.

"This has been an incredibly complex negotiation which has required a number of Member countries bringing their hopes and concerns to the table at six annual CCAMLR meetings as well as at intersessional workshops.

"A number of details regarding the MPA are yet to be finalised but the establishment of the protected zone is in no doubt and we are incredibly proud to have reached this point," said Mr Wright.

CCAMLR's Scientific Committee first endorsed the scientific basis for proposals for the Ross Sea region put forward by the USA and New Zealand in 2011. It invited the Commission to consider the proposals and provide guidance on how they could be progressed. Each year from 2012 to 2015 the proposal was refined in terms of the scientific data to support the proposal as well as the specific details such as exact location of the boundaries of the MPA. Details of implementation of the MPA will be negotiated through the development of a specific monitoring and assessment plan. The delegations of New Zealand and the USA will facilitate this process.

This year's decision to establish a Ross Sea MPA follows CCAMLR's establishment, in 2009, of the world’s first high-seas MPA, the South Orkney Islands southern shelf MPA, a region covering 94 000 km2 in the south Atlantic.

"This decision represents an almost unprecedented level of international cooperation regarding a large marine ecosystem comprising important benthic and pelagic habitats," said Mr Wright.

"It has been well worth the wait because there is now agreement among all Members that this is the right thing to do and they will all work towards the MPA's successful implementation," he said.

MPAs aim to provide protection to marine species, biodiversity, habitat, foraging and nursery areas, as well as to preserve historical and cultural sites. MPAs can assist in rebuilding fish stocks, supporting ecosystem processes, monitoring ecosystem change and sustaining biological diversity.

Areas closed to fishing, or in which fishing activities are restricted, can be used by scientists to compare with areas that are open to fishing. This enables scientists to research the relative impacts of fishing and other changes, such as those arising from climate change. This can help our understanding of the range of variables affecting the overall status and health of marine ecosystems.

ABC News, 28 October 2016:

A hard-won agreement to establish the first large-scale marine park in international waters south of Australia has been described as a "turning point" for conservation, however an expiry date of 35 years concerns the World Wildlife Fund (WWF).

Today, the Convention on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) meeting in Hobart announced agreement had been reached between the member nations over the establishment of the Ross Sea Marine Protected Area, which will cover more than one and a half million square kilometres in Antarctica.

The agreement follows years of wrangling and failure to reach consensus, with Russia proving to be a stumbling block.

The area, which has been described as "the size of France, Germany and Spain combined", is revered for its biodiversity.

"Today's agreement is a turning point for the protection of Antarctica and the Southern Ocean," Chris Johnson, WWF Australia Ocean Science Manager, said.

"It is home to one third of the world's Adélie penguins, one quarter of all emperor penguins, one third of all Antarctic petrels, and over half of all South Pacific Weddell seals."

Mr Johnson said while the announcement was "good news", the expiration of the zone after 35 years was a cause for concern…..

Quote of the Week

At the after play drinks one player in the opposition was heard to say, “That bloody Turnbull must have been born with two dicks. He couldn’t be that stupid playing with one.” [John Lord writing in The AIM Network, 4 November 2016]

Only days until American's go to the polls in the 2016 U.S. Presidential election and eyes turned towards Russia again

This was Democratic candidate, Hillary Clinton, on the campaign trail via Twitter 7 days out from polling day:

It's time for Trump to answer serious questions about his ties to Russia. https://t.co/D8oSmyVAR4 pic.twitter.com/07dRyEmPjX

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) October 31, 2016

This is the person who appears to have registered trump1.contact-client.com which is the server alleged to have possible links with the Russian-based Alfa Bank co-founded
by billionaire Mikhail Fridman:

Whois details for trump1.contact-client.com:

Website Title	Cendyn/ONE | Data Intelligence™ for Hotels and Resorts
Server Type	Server
Response Code	200
SEO Score	91%
Terms	193 (Unique: 133, Linked: 82)
Images	4 (Alt tags missing: 4)
Links	56   (Internal: 44, Outbound: 8)

Whois Record ( last updated on 2016-11-01 )

Domain Name: CONTACT-CLIENT.COM
Registry Domain ID: 123709352_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Update Date: 2011-07-18T04:28:07Z
Creation Date: 2004-06-29T14:41:05Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2021-06-28T14:41:05Z
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.4806242505
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: Not Available From Registry
Registrant Name: Charles Deyo
Registrant Organization:
Registrant Street: 1515 N. Federal Hwy
Registrant City: Boca Raton
Registrant State/Province: Florida
Registrant Postal Code: 33432
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone:
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax:
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: nocontactsfound@ecureserver.net
Registry Admin ID: Not Available From Registry
Admin Name: Charles Deyo
Admin Organization:
Admin Street: 1515 N. Federal Hwy
Admin City: Boca Raton
Admin State/Province: Florida
Admin Postal Code: 33432
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: 561-555-3143
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax:
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: 
Registry Tech ID: Not Available From Registry
Tech Name: Charles Deyo
Tech Organization:
Tech Street: 1515 N. Federal Hwy
Tech City: Boca Raton
Tech State/Province: Florida
Tech Postal Code: 33432
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: 561-555-3143
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax:
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: emcmullin@cendyn.com
Name Server: NS3.CDCSERVICES.COM
Name Server: NS2.CDCSERVICES.COM
Name Server: NS1.CDCSERVICES.COM

In 2007 Cendyn, an interactive marketing company focused on the hospitality industry, was selected.....as the Trump Organization’s exclusive interactive marketing agency. 

Alfa Bank has issued a denial:

01 November 2016

Alfa Bank says no connection between Alfa Bank and Trump and any suggestion to the contrary is false —

Earlier today in the US, Slate published an article titled - Was a Trump Server Communicating With Russia? Alfa Bank wishes to make clear that there is no connection between Alfa Bank and Donald Trump, the Trump campaign, or the Trump organization. Any suggestion to the contrary by this article is false.

Alfa Bank hired Mandiant, one of the world's foremost US cyber security experts, to investigate and it has found nothing to support the allegations. Mandiant found no substantive contact, email or financial link between Alfa Bank and the Trump Campaign or Organization during its investigation. Mandiant have conducted a deep dive and investigated Alfa Bank's IT systems both remotely and on the ground in Moscow and there was no evidence of notable contact between the alerted domain and Alfa Bank.

Neither Alfa Bank nor its principals, including Mikhail Fridman and Petr Aven, have or have had any contact with Mr. Trump or his organizations. Fridman and Aven have never met Mr. Trump nor have they or Alfa Bank had any business dealings with him. Neither Alfa Bank nor its officers have sent Mr. Trump or his organisation any emails, information or money. Alfa Bank does not have and has never had any special or exclusive internet connection with Mr. Trump or his entities. The assertion of a special or private link is patently false.

Mandiant has made clear to Alfa Bank that the information reporters gave us – given to them by an anonymous cyber group - is inconclusive and does not suggest an exclusive internet connection between Alfa Bank and Trump.

Mandiant's working hypothesis is that the activity the reporters' sources allege was caused by email marketing/spam campaign by a marketing server, which triggered security software. This activity may indeed have been initiated by someone for the purpose of discrediting parties to this traffic.

Commenting on these allegations Mandiant said Mandiant, a FireEye company, has been retained by Alfa Bank to investigate information given to them by various media. The information that has been presented is a list of dates, times, IP Addresses and Domain Names. The list appears to be a scanned copy of a printed log. There is no information which indicates where the list has come from. The list contains approx. 2800 look ups of a Domain Name over a period of 90 days. The information presented is inconclusive and is not evidence of substantive contact or a direct email or financial link between Alfa Bank and the Trump Campaign or Organization. The list presented does not contain enough information to show that there has been any actual activity opposed to simple DNS look ups, which can come from a variety of sources including anti-spam and other security software.

As part of the ongoing investigation, Alfa Bank has opened its IT systems to Mandiant, which has investigated both remotely and on the ground in Moscow. We are continuing our investigation. Nothing we have or have found alters our view as described above that there isn't evidence of substantive contact or a direct email or financial link between Alfa Bank and the Trump Campaign or Organization.

Founded in 1990, Alfa-Bank is one of the largest private banks in Russia, which offers a wide range of products and operates in all sectors of the financial market, including interbank, corporate and retail lending, deposits, payment and account services, foreign exchange operations, cash handling services, investment banking, and trade finance, as well as other ancillary services to corporate and retail customers.

According to its IFRS Consolidated Financial Statements as of 31 December 2015, the Alfa Banking Group, which comprises Joint Stock Company Alfa-Bank as well as its subsidiary financial companies, had total assets of $31.5 bn, gross loans of $21.7 bn, and total equity of $4.3 bn. Net profit after tax for 2015 amounted to $480 mln.

As of December 31, 2015 the Alfa Banking Group serves around 255,000 corporate customers and 13.6 mln individuals (including 1.9 mln individual customers of PJSC «Baltiyskiy Bank»), while the branch network consists of 745 offices across Russia and abroad, including a subsidiary bank in the Netherlands and financial subsidiaries in the United Kingdom and Cyprus.

However, apart from this unsubstantiated allegation, Donald Trump does appear to have longstanding ties with Russia according to The Washington Post on 27 July 2016:

6. On Wednesday morning, CBS's Norah O'Donnell asked Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort if Trump had "financial relationships with any Russian oligarchs." Manafort replied, "That's what he said, that's what I said. That's obviously what our position is."

7. The problem is that Donald Trump has in the past had obvious economic interests in Russia. The Washington Post outlined them in June.

8. A quote in that piece from Trump's son, Donald Trump Jr. — who is also an executive with Trump's business — makes clear how the company in 2008 sought business from wealthy Russians. "In terms of high-end product influx into the U.S., Russians make up a pretty disproportionate cross-section of a lot of our assets," he said at a conference that year, according to news reports. "We see a lot of money pouring in from Russia."

9. The year prior, Trump said in a deposition that "Russia is one of the hottest places in the world for investment," and that he planned to "be in Moscow at some point."

10. Donald Jr. also described what it took to do business in the country. "Russia is just a different world," he reportedly said. "Though the legal structure is in place for what we have today, and even 99 percent is covered, that 1 percent not covered could be 100 percent covered over there because it is a question of who knows who, whose brother is paying off who, etc."

11. Our article also delineated a number of other known Trump business links to Russia, including:

* A 1987 trip to Moscow, then still part of the Soviet Union, to find a site for a luxury hotel.

* A 1996 effort to build a condominium complex in the country.

* A 2005 push to convert an old pencil factory into another Trump Tower.

* The 2008 sale of a mansion in Palm Beach to Russian oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev.

* Partnering with Aras Agalarov, the "Trump of Russia," on a project in Moscow in 2013 that didn't come to fruition.

* Hosting the Miss Universe pageant in Moscow in 2013, when he still owned it, earning a cut of the money spent to lure it there — including some from Agalarov.

12. Part of the problem for Trump is that he seems to be unusually friendly with Putin.

Donald J. Trump 

✔@realDonaldTrump

Do you think Putin will be going to The Miss Universe Pageant in November in Moscow - if so, will he become my new best friend?

1:17 PM - 19 Jun 2013

13. As columnist Marcus Hawkins noted on Twitter, Trump has backed away from past assertions that he has a close relationship with Putin.

14. During a Republican debate in November, Trump said that "I got to know him very well because we were both on "60 Minutes," we were stablemates, and we did very well that night."

15. In an interview with a local station in Miami on Tuesday, Trump changed his story, as Hawkins notes. "I have nothing to do with Russia, nothing to do, I never met Putin, I have nothing to do with Russia whatsoever," he said. Asked if he had any outstanding loans from Russian banks or investors, Trump replied, "Absolutely not. It's ridiculous." It was advantageous in November to seem close to Putin; it is disadvantageous to be seen that way now.

Update: In 2014, Trump said he met Putin and that he spoke "directly and indirectly" with him.

16. Let's loop back to Trump's tweet about how he has "ZERO investments in Russia." He prefaced it with "for the record."

17. There are actual records that could prove his point, as Chris Cillizza pointed out on Tuesday: his tax records.

18. Trump has continually refused to release his tax records, saying that it's because some of them are being audited. A former IRS commissioner we spoke with said that this 1) wasn't prohibitive and that Trump could release the returns that are under audit if he wanted to and 2) he could easily release the older ones that aren't under audit. (Trump says he won't.)

19. Trump has used the lure of someday releasing his tax records as a way of deferring other questions. In May, he told ABC's George Stephanopoulos that he would reveal how much he paid in taxes only when he released his returns.

20. When Mitt Romney was under pressure to release his taxes in 2012, we'll note, Trump bragged about how he wouldn't hesitate to turn his own over. "I actually think that it's a great thing when you can show that you've been successful, and that you've made a lot of money, that you've employed a lot of people," he said. "I actually think that it's a positive."

21. On CBS on Wednesday, Manafort seemed to largely close the door on the records ever being released. "Mr. Trump has said that his taxes are under audit and he will not be releasing them," Manafort said.

Update: During a press conference a few hours later, Trump reverted to his old argument that he would release his taxes once the audit was done.

22. The burden of proof is on those like Will who claim that Trump may have financial links to interests in Russia — a burden that would be very hard to meet without the release of Trump's tax records or other documents detailing the income that Trump has reported.

23. From a political standpoint, that works to Trump's disadvantage, allowing his opponents to raise questions about something that can only be answered concretely by releasing documents he'd like to keep private…..

AP News, 3 November 2016:

Trump has been contradictory when describing his relationship with Putin. He told ABC in July that he had "no relationship with" with the Russian leader and had no recollection of ever meeting him. But several times in prior years, he'd stated the opposite.

"I do have a relationship with him," Trump said in one 2013 interview in Moscow.

The ABC interview in which Trump said he'd "never met" Putin directly contradicted a 2015 interview Trump did with talk-radio host Michael Savage.

Asked point-blank by Savage whether he'd ever met Putin, Trump responded: "Yes. One time, yes. Long time ago."

Throughout the campaign, Trump has repeatedly tapped top advisers with close ties to Russia. Among them: former campaign chair Paul Manafort.

Trump brought on Manafort in March. Manafort, a longtime Republican operative who'd spent recent years advising a pro-Russian Ukrainian political party before its ouster over alleged corruption, and his deputy Rick Gates took over functional control of managing the Trump campaign in June.

In August, The New York Times reported that a hand-written ledger of cash payments made by Ukraine's ousted government listed Manafort as being paid $12.7 million. Ukrainian prosecutors said the payments detailed in the ledger were an effort to obscure bribes.

A few days later, The Associated Press reported that Manafort and Gates had orchestrated a secret Ukrainian lobbying campaign in Washington. Participants said the men had sought to obscure the true backer of the work — Ukraine's pro-Russian ruling party — by routing lobbying funds through a nonprofit front group.

Manafort and Gates denied having been involved in the lobbying. But emails obtained by the AP explicitly showed Gates giving orders to the lobbyists.

Manafort departed the campaign the following day.

Perhaps a more telling concern about the fitness for office of Donald J Trump is the court case alleging rape of a 13 year-old girl which next comes before the court in December 2016.

Amended Complaint Filed 9/30/2016 by LawNewz on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/326057027/Amended-Complaint-Filed-9-30-2016
https://www.scribd.com/document/326770514/Judge-Status-Conference-Order-Jane-Doe-V-Trump

Political Tweet of the Week

Pauline Hanson One Nation Party Team tweet

Facebook allows real estate agents to place online advertisements with undisclosed racial exclusions

ProPublica, 28 October 2016:

Imagine if, during the Jim Crow era, a newspaper offered advertisers the option of placing ads only in copies that went to white readers.

That’s basically what Facebook is doing nowadays.

The ubiquitous social network not only allows advertisers to target users by their interests or background, it also gives advertisers the ability to exclude specific groups it calls “Ethnic Affinities.” Ads that exclude people based on race, gender and other sensitive factors are prohibited by federal law in housing and employment.

Here is a screenshot of a housing ad that we purchased from Facebook’s self-service advertising portal:

The ad we purchased was targeted to Facebook members who were house hunting and excluded anyone with an “affinity” for African-American, Asian-American or Hispanic people. (Here’s the ad itself.)

When we showed Facebook’s racial exclusion options to a prominent civil rights lawyer John Relman, he gasped and said, “This is horrifying. This is massively illegal. This is about as blatant a violation of the federal Fair Housing Act as one can find.”

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 makes it illegal "to make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed, or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the sale or rental of a dwelling that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin.” Violators can face tens of thousands of dollars in fines.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 also prohibits the “printing or publication of notices or advertisements indicating prohibited preference, limitation, specification or discrimination” in employment recruitment.

Facebook’s business model is based on allowing advertisers to target specific groups — or, apparently to exclude specific groups — using huge reams of personal data the company has collected about its users. Facebook’s microtargeting is particularly helpful for advertisers looking to reach niche audiences, such as swing-state voters concerned about climate change. ProPublica recently offered a tool allowing users to see how Facebook is categorizing them. We found nearly 50,000 unique categories in which Facebook places its users.

Facebook says its policies prohibit advertisers from using the targeting options for discrimination, harassment, disparagement or predatory advertising practices.

“We take a strong stand against advertisers misusing our platform: Our policies prohibit using our targeting options to discriminate, and they require compliance with the law,” said Steve Satterfield, privacy and public policy manager at Facebook. “We take prompt enforcement action when we determine that ads violate our policies."

Satterfield said it’s important for advertisers to have the ability to both include and exclude groups as they test how their marketing performs. For instance, he said, an advertiser “might run one campaign in English that excludes the Hispanic affinity group to see how well the campaign performs against running that ad campaign in Spanish. This is a common practice in the industry.”

He said Facebook began offering the “Ethnic Affinity” categories within the past two years as part of a “multicultural advertising” effort.

Satterfield added that the “Ethnic Affinity” is not the same as race — which Facebook does not ask its members about. Facebook assigns members an “Ethnic Affinity” based on pages and posts they have liked or engaged with on Facebook.

When we asked why “Ethnic Affinity” was included in the “Demographics” category of its ad-targeting tool if it’s not a representation of demographics, Facebook responded that it plans to move “Ethnic Affinity” to another section.

Facebook declined to answer questions about why our housing ad excluding minority groups was approved 15 minutes after we placed the order.

By comparison, consider the advertising controls that the New York Times has put in place to prevent discriminatory housing ads. After the newspaper was successfully sued under the Fair Housing Act in 1989, it agreed to review ads for potentially discriminatory content before accepting them for publication.

Australia and New Zealand successful in gaining IWC review of process by which 'scientific' slaughter of Antarctic whales is allowed to continue

Antarctic Minke whale

On 28 October 2016 the International Whaling Commission (IWC) considered a draft resolution by Australia and New Zealand seeking to improve the review process for whaling under special permit. 

Special permits being the mechanism used by the Government of Japan to continue its annual slaughter of whales in the Southern Ocean for the commercial benefit of a domestic niche market for whale meat for human consumption and for the Japanese pet food industry.

The resolution was passed.

IWC, 27 October 2016:

Governments on all sides of the scientific whaling debate highlighted the positive and constructive spirit of negotiations on a Resolution on Improving the Review Process for Whaling under Special Permit, but ultimately agreement could not be reached and the Resolution was put to a vote which adopted the Resolution with 34 yes votes, 17 no votes and 10 abstentions.  Amongst the measures included is the establishment of a new Commission Working Group to consider Scientific Committee reports and recommendations on this issue.

Excerpt from the final version of Resolution 2016-2 - Resolution on Improving the Review Process for Whaling under Special Permit:

“Now, therefore the Commission:

1. Agrees to establish a Standing Working Group (“the Working Group”), in accordance with Article III.4 of the Convention. The Working Group will be appointed by the Bureau on the basis of nominations from Contracting Governments, to consider the reports and recommendations of the Scientific Committee with respect to all new, ongoing and completed special permit programmes and report to the Commission, in accordance with the Terms of Reference contained in the Appendix to this resolution.

2. Agrees that the discussion of special permit programmes be afforded sufficient priority and time allocation to allow for adequate review at both Commission and Scientific Committee meetings;

3. In order to facilitate the Commission’s timely and meaningful consideration of new, ongoing and completed special permit programmes, Requests Contracting Governments to submit proposals for new special permit programmes, and review documentation for ongoing and completed special permit programmes, at least six months before the Scientific Committee meeting held in the same year as a Commission meeting (see the indicative process set out in paragraph 9 of the Appendix);

4. In order to facilitate the Scientific Committee’s review of new, ongoing and completed special permit programmes, Requests Contracting Governments to provide members of the Scientific Committee unrestricted and continuing access to all data collected under special permit programmes that are:

a. used in the development of new programmes; or

b. included in ongoing or final programme reviews. Data made available in accordance with this request shall be used only for the purposes of evaluation and review of special permit programmes.

5. Instructs the Scientific Committee to inform the Commission as to whether Scientific Committee members had unrestricted and continuing access to data collected under special permit programmes, and analyses thereof;

6. Further instructs the Scientific Committee to provide its evaluation of proposals to the Commission in the same year as a Commission meeting (regardless of when the Scientific Committee’s review commences), and to make necessary revisions to its procedures for reviewing special permit programmes, including Annex P, to incorporate the expectation that Contracting Governments will schedule any special permit programmes in accordance with the process outlined in paragraph 3;

7. Agrees that the Commission will consider the reports of the Scientific Committee and of the Working Group at the first Commission meeting after the Scientific Committee has reviewed the new, ongoing or completed special permit programme in question and, taking into account those reports, the Commission will: a. form its own view regarding:

i. whether the review process has adequately followed the instructions set out in Annex P and any additional instructions provided by the Commission ;

ii. whether the elements of a proposed special permit programme, or the results reported from an ongoing or completed special permit programme, have been adequately demonstrated to meet the criteria set out in the relevant terms of reference in Annex P, and any additional criteria elaborated by the Commission; and

iii. any other relevant aspect of the new, ongoing or completed special permit programme and review in question;

b. provide any recommendations or advice it considers appropriate to the responsible Contracting Government regarding any aspect of the new, ongoing or completed special permit programme, including affirming or modifying any proposed recommendations or advice proposed by the Scientific Committee.

c. provide any direction it considers appropriate to the Scientific Committee.

d. make public a summary of the Commission’s conclusions in this respect, by way of publication on the Commission’s website, within 7 days of the end of the Commission meeting.”

Background

The Sydney Morning Herald, 24 March 2016: 

Tokyo: Japan's whaling fleet returned on Thursday from its Antarctic hunt after a year-long suspension with a take of more than 300 whales, including pregnant females.

The International Court of Justice ruled in 2014 that Japan's whaling in the Southern Ocean should stop, prompting it to call off its hunt that season, although it said at the time it intended to resume later.

Japan then amended its plan for the next season to cut the number of minke whales it aimed to take by two-thirds from previous hunts.

Its fleet set out in December despite international criticism, including from important ally the United States.

The final ships of the four-vessel whaling fleet returned to Shimonoseki in southwestern Japan on Thursday, having achieved the goal of 333 minke whales, the Fisheries Agency said.

Of these, 103 were males and 230 were females, with 90 per cent of the mature females pregnant.

Australian Electoral Commission asks 18,343 voters to please explain.....

The Sydney Morning Herald, 19 October 2016:

More than 18,000 people have been asked to explain why they apparently voted more than once at the federal election.

Despite heavy fines and the risk of jail time for multiple voting, two people were marked off the electoral roll 11 times on July 2. 

A further two people had their names marked off five times, while four others had four marks and 51 people had three marks.

Australian Electoral Commissioner Tom Rogers told a Senate estimates hearing on Tuesday night 18,343 people have been asked to explain why their name was checked off more than once, with many expected to be in error.

The Commonwealth Electoral Act allows for fines of $10,800 or up to a year in jail for people convicted of multiple votes. Anyone found to have impersonated someone else at the ballot box faces up to six months in jail or a fine of $1800.

Before this year's election the AEC wrote to more than 4600 people with a prior history of apparent multiple voting to remind them of the law.

Mr Rogers said individuals who had two or more marks next to their name at the past two elections were sent warning letters.

"We wrote to a select group of people we thought may be at risk of not understanding their obligations under the Electoral Act," he said.

"We've never done that before.

"That was an attempt to demonstrate the seriousness with which we treat this particular issue." 

AEC officials will assess how many recipients of the letters are among those recorded as having their name marked off more than once.