When weird sits in the Senate

There are only four One Nation politicians in the Australian Senate and two have recently displayed their political weirdness by putting pen to paper…….

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 November 2016:

Embattled One Nation senator Rod Culleton has been referred to Queensland police amid allegations he may have attempted to pervert the course of justice or even threatened a judicial officer.  

Queensland Attorney-General Yvette D'Ath said on Tuesday she had asked police to investigate a letter allegedly sent by Senator Culleton to a Cairns magistrate asking for a matter before the court to be adjourned.

On November 15, Senator Culleton wrote to the Cairns Courthouse about a complaint from a person who he said was facing imprisonment. The letter foreshadowed a motion in the Senate to recall unnamed judges for "proven misbehaviour".

The letter noted Senator Culleton and others were watching with interest the conduct of all Australian judicial officers after he claimed to discover an error relating to the status of the High Court.…..

Senator Rodney Culleton letter by FairfaxPolitics on Scribd

Lismore Echo, 21 November 2016:

ONE Nation Senator Malcolm Roberts has been personally rebuked by a senior NASA official over claims the space-agency had manipulated data. 

Mr Roberts' claims NASA had removed climate data from the 1940s in order to mask global warming in the Arctic were at the centre of the stoush. 

"You appear to hold a number of misconceptions which I am happy to clarify at this time," NASA official Gavin Schmidt told Senator Roberts in letters and emails obtained by Fairfax Media.

"The claim that GISS has 'removed the 1940s warmth' in the Arctic is not correct."

Dr Schmidt went on to explain why NASA had undertaken a process in which temperature figures were altered. 

"Homogenization of the raw temperature records is a necessary task to ensure that non-climatic influences in the analysis are minimised as much as possible," Dr Scmidt wrote.  

"These adjustments (for station moves, instrumentation changes, urban heat island effects etc.) are estimated via comparisons with neighboring stations and using relevant metadata. If we were not to adjust for these effects, we would be rightly criticized for using uncorrected data."

A spokesman for Senator Roberts said the letter was only received this weekend and would be "reviewed."

The Canberra Times

"You appear to hold a number of misconceptions which I am happy to clarify at this time," Dr Schmidt told Senator Roberts in letters and emails obtained by Fairfax Media. "The claim that GISS has 'removed the 1940s warmth' in the Arctic is not correct."

Dr Schmidt noted in his letter dated November 18 that the data was freely available on its website.

"We are certainly gratified by the attention Australia pays to our analysis, but in case you have remaining questions, I urge you to perform your own analyses."

The claim that NASA tampered with decades-old Arctic data is a favourite conspiracy theory among global warming sceptics who argue the current run-up in temperatures – especially at the North Pole – is nothing exceptional, and so action to address climate change is unnecessary.

In his letter to NASA dated November 14, Senator Roberts explained his interest in the agency's temperature calculations, saying they had "influenced" the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's warnings on global warming that in turn had informed Australian government policy. 

Senator Roberts, a former coalmining manager, rejects the idea climate change is related to carbon-dioxide levels and last week attacked the CSIRO's climate science…….

Senator Malcolm Roberts during a recent press conference, attacking CSIRO. 
Photo: Andrew Meares

"In Australia, we have considerable concern about temperature adjustments made by NASA over many years," Senator Roberts wrote, including charts from Icelandic stations at Vestmannaeyjar and Teigarhorn.

"In dropping the temperatures for the early period, the [Arctic] warmth for the 1930s and 1940s appears to have been removed," he said. "What is your specific reason for doing this?"

In an email, Truasti Jonsoon, senior meteorologist with a specialty in historical climatology at the Icelandic Meteorological Office, told Senator Roberts that the temperature "adjustments" are "quite sound".

The original data was not from NASA but the Smithsonian publication "World weather records", he said.

"During this early period there was a large daytime bias in the temperature data from Iceland as presented in this publication," which accounted for much of the "discrepancy" at Teigarhorn and less so at Vestmannaeyjar, Mr Jonsoon said. 

For the latter station, it was relocated in October 1921 to a higher elevation. "Comparative measurements at both sites have shown that the later location is about 0.7 degrees Celsius colder than the former – this relocation has to be 'adjusted' for," he said.

"I assure you that these adjustments are absolutely necessary and well founded although the finer details of the resulting series shown in your letter differ slightly from my own version," he told Senator Roberts.

Dr Schmidt said the Arctic was "not so much" the target of data critics.

"But the insistence that the data must've been inappropriately adjusted [is what the sceptics say] all the time," he told Fairfax Media. "[It's] pretty much the definition of denial." 

Dr Schmidt said he was not surprised that the query about Arctic temperatures was coming from Australia.

"I'm aware of who Malcolm Roberts is, and the only surprise is that he is in fact a senator," he said. 

Facebook, 21 November 2016:

Malcolm Roberts - QLD Senate - One Nation

21 November 2016 

I just made the following speech to the Senate.

Matter of Public Importance

I rise, as a servant to the people of Queensland and Australia. I am very proud to represent my home state and stand up for everyday Australians who had to endure years of green guilt.

The debate on this Matter of Public Importance is in the context of the statements made by The Honourable, The Senator, George Brandis QC, earlier today during question time when he stated, “At the heart of our national interest is our alliance with the United States”.

Mr President I say to my fellow Queenslanders, that this historic debate in this chamber marks the beginning of a Western Spring.
Today begins the process by which we expose the truth of the green-guilt-elites, those that sit in this chamber and others who stand over Australians as if they are our Lords and Barons at birth, as if the red of this chamber was infused in their blood as a right.
The world of the elites, came crashing down when Donald J Trump was elected. They knew it last Wednesday, and that night they collectedly wet their beds.

Mr Trump has previously called the alleged human-caused climate change catastrophe a “hoax”, and has thus vowed to “cancel” the USA’s participation in the Paris Agreement as well as ending Obama’s ‘war on coal’ by removing a number of climate policies and significantly ‘down-sizing’ the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

One Nation applauds President-Elect Trump’s highly moral and courageous position.

Yet many in this parliament still want to recklessly ‘plow ahead’ with ‘economy-killing’ climate policies such as ratifying the Clayton’s Paris Agreement, in stark contrast to the plans of President-Elect Trump.

If the Honourable Prime Minister would like to reconsider his Government’s stance, then my office team is in a strong position to assist given both: the presence of our team economic policy adviser (and former Trump campaign economic policy adviser) Darren Brady Nelson; and our growing relationships with senior members of the Trump presidential team like Myron Ebell (who will reportedly lead the EPA) and David Malpass (who is under consideration to lead the Treasury).

We need to use every resource at our disposal if we are to extricate ourselves from reprehensible accords such as the Paris Agreement.
It is important at this juncture to highlight the Paris Agreement, like all Australian federal, state and local climate policies over the past few decades, was not subject to a proper and independent cost benefit analysis for the benefit of the Australian people. A Paris Agreement CBA is long overdue, and preferably by the highly credible Productivity Commission (PC).

Any such CBA will need to include at least two scenarios: one based on the evidence-lite pseudo-science of the climate ‘alarmists’ (eg CSIRO, BoM, UN, etc) along with the related calls for massive government control; plus one based on the evidence-heavy science of the climate ‘realists’.

The National Interest Analysis (NIA) for the Paris Agreement states that: “The Office of Best Practice Regulation [OBPR] confirms that a Regulation Impact Statement [RIS] is not required for the ratification of the [Paris] Agreement.” This is outrageous given that the website of the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT) says: “Treaties which affect business or restrict competition are also required to be tabled with a RIS.” A RIS often includes cost benefit analysis, as it should.

My recent submission to DFAT on the Paris Agreement emphasised the crucial need for cost benefit analysis. One of the reasons was that CBA most explicitly recognises that human wants are infinite and natural resources are finite. Decisions have to be made between alternative government actions that compete for such resources. There are always choices to be made … even if the choice is to ‘do nothing’.

It is also important I draw the Senate’s attention to the wealth of experienced people President-Elect Trump has gathered around him to dismantle the elites running the global climate agenda.
The potential future head of the EPA Myron Ebell is currently the Director of the Center for Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI). Sometimes called a climate ‘denier-in-chief’, he has called for abolition of the EPA and wants to scrap the Paris Agreement, a deal Trump has vowed to withdraw from.

The potential future head of Treasury, David Malpass, is currently the founder and president of Encima Global, an economic research and consulting firm based in New York City. He served as Deputy Assistant Treasury Secretary under President Ronald Reagan and Deputy Assistant Secretary of State under President George W. Bush.

As may be recalled Pauline Hanson’s One Nation took to the last federal election a comprehensive environment policy. To quote from it;
“Climate change has and will continue to be used as a political agenda by politicians and self interest groups or individuals for their own gain. We cannot allow scare mongering by people such as Tim Flannery, who make outlandish statements and are not held accountable. Climate change should not be about making money for a lot of people and giving scientists money. Lets know the facts and scientific evidence to make a well informed decision as to how best to look after our environment.

Our solution is comprehensive because core problems cannot be solved by adhoc, one-off party politics. That failed Liberal-Labor-National-approach, combined with Greens grandstanding, is causing Australia’s deterioration. To tap into Australia’s wealth and to share it with all Australians we need to get to the root causes, the core problems and address them comprehensively. We need to involve people across Australia in developing solutions to restore Australia’s productive heartland and wealth for the benefit of all.
Instead of so-called 'alternative energies' that are really 'alternatives to energy', we will work to reduce energy prices, and bring back dependability and reliability through environmentally responsible, energies. Low cost energy enables efficiency and productivity that generate wealth to protect the environment.”

For the pleasure of the Senate, I highlight the following summaries provided on the environment policies of the Trump Administration.
President-Elect Trump, who has called the alleged human-caused climate change catastrophe a “hoax’, vowed to “cancel” the United States’ participation in the Paris Agreement.

Mr Trump also has committed to scrapping the Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration’s signature effort to reduce production of carbon dioxide.

Mr Trump has said he will review and possibly reverse the EPA’s determination carbon dioxide is a pollutant endangering public and environmental health. Reversing the endangerment finding would end the legal justification for a range of climate regulations. In the process, it also would end radical environmental activists’, who are supported by American billionaires such as George Soros, ability to use the courts to impose climate policies on an unwilling public whose elected representatives have repeatedly rejected climate policies.

Before the election, Mr Trump said he would reverse Obama administration rules imposing undue burdens on businesses. In particular, Mr Trump said he would cut the EPA’s budget dramatically, virtually reducing it to an advisory agency, and review all EPA regulations, eliminating many of them because: “Over-regulation presents one of the greatest barriers to entry into markets and one of the greatest costs to businesses that are trying to stay competitive.”

Mr Trump says he wants to open up more federal lands to oil and gas drilling and eliminate regulations that have contributed to the decline of the coal industry.

I put it directly to the chamber Mr President, many here joined the congo line behind President Obama when his policies suited them and said we had to follow our ally’s lead. As Senator Brandis said this morning our most important strategic alliance is the United States. If it was good enough for some here to use the US when it suited them, then it is good enough now for us to follow the Trump administration.

Australia’s prosperity, and the prosperity of the world, is now reliant on our country withdrawing from the great global warming swindle. Future generations will judge us poorly if we don’t take action now to stop our de-industrialisation.

Australia was once a great manufacturer, our agricultural out-put was second to none, and budgets were once balanced. The self-serving elites tell us that for those who have missed the economic opportunities of their brave new world, ‘well all you need is more education about how great life is’.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation Party says to those forgotten Australians, ‘we are here for you, and we have your back’. We will fight for our greatness to return.

Australian #CensusFail 2016 reports by both the Senate and Cybersecurity Special Advisor have been released

Following #CensusFail 2016 Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull ordered a review of events by Cybersecurity Special Advisor, Alastair MacGibbon.

In what the media is characterising as an excoriating report, a mirror was held up to the Australian Bureau of Statistics – sadly one that it is unlikely to avail itself of given its current leadership.

DPM&C, Office of the Cybersecurity Special Advisor, Review of the Events Surrounding the 2016 eCensus (October 2016):

Not just communications, but engagement…

In most respects, the ABS had a well formed and prepared communications strategy and awareness raising campaign; but it was focussed on the wrong things. The communications problem they needed to address was not a low level of awareness of the Census, but rather, the introduction of a ‘digital first’ approach and the associated barriers to participation – concerns over security and

privacy.

The ABS failed to adapt its media and communications in response to the public relations storm that built up in the weeks prior to the Census regarding privacy and security in both mainstream and social media. Instead, ABS rigidly stuck to its plans, forgoing crucial opportunities to influence and drive the conversation around the Census. Processes for approval of campaigns, and changes to them, may need to be changed to promote agility.

On Census night, the ABS severely underutilised social media as a communications tool to keep the public up to date and informed of the incident. The ABS’s lack of timely and transparent

communications lost it trust because it opened the door to speculation. The continued slow updates and virtual absence from the media meant that ABS struggled to win back the trust of the public in the following days. Ministers must also be supported with clear and accurate advice, and senior executives must be equipped to understand and talk about cyber security as a matter of business

risk……

Reacting to public sentiment

…..The ABS announced public consultation regarding privacy via a media release issued on its website, with a submission period of only four weeks – 11 November to 2 December 2015 (just before Christmas).

The ABS received only three public submissions. Not only should this low response rate have indicated to the ABS that its public engagement on the key issue of privacy was inadequate, it also left a huge vacuum with regard to capturing public concerns. So the ABS missed an opportunity to identify how to evolve its communication plans developed following qualitative research in 2014 to address more up to date concerns.

As a result, the ABS was ill-equipped to manage the impact changes in the Census would have on a small but important segment of the population and their willingness to complete the eCensus online.

In January 2016, seven months out from the Census, the first articles raising concerns about privacy and security of data appeared in the media. More substantial rumblings began in March, with two main themes emerging:

• That the Census was intrusive and no longer anonymous

• The Census was vulnerable to hackers.

The ABS prides itself on the constant measuring of public sentiment and awareness using traditional survey techniques (see Figure 4, page 53). The Review concludes that these surveys contributed to a false sense of security and failure – still at time of writing – to grasp the significance and power of social media groundswells.

Major shifts in public statements regarding the security of the Census began the week prior to Census night, culminating in Senator Nick Xenophon and several other parliamentarians issuing warnings about security and privacy concerns and apparent implementation problems leading to a ‘debacle.’

Prior to the closure of the eCensus form, over 11,000 individual mentions (social and mainstream media) were published voicing concerns about the privacy and security of the eCensus. The closure of the eCensus resulted in 17,730 privacy related mentions, far outweighing mentions (1,200 total) of the technical issues experienced – i.e. what happened (see Figure 4).

This coverage created overwhelming ‘noise’ making it difficult for the ABS to remain on message.

The ABS’s planned communications were being drowned out. But rather than trying to adapt its approach to limit the impact the reporting had on the public sentiment toward the Census, the ABS stuck to planned messaging ignoring the public relations storm brewing around them.

The failings of the ABS to address issues of concern in the media extend to its use of social media. Analysis conducted on ABS Twitter and Facebook accounts shows that at no point did the ABS significantly change its planned posting schedule or content as a result of critical media reporting (shown in Figure 5, page 54) and of considerable online chatter around privacy (Figure 4). The ABS did change its social media advertising as well as engage posters directly on social media. But this was not enough.

The ABS’s virtual absence from the privacy and security debate is reflected in its social media crisis escalation matrix – the process designed to monitor, escalate  and handle social conversations. The matrix had two main flaws:

1. The ABS’s ‘qualifiers’ (thresholds that had to be met to raise concern) were too high. A ‘red level scenario,’ the highest categorisation for negative conversation, was enacted only if someone had 10,000 plus followers or a post had over 30 engagements.

2. The ABS’s response/action for a ‘red scenario’ was to hold all social media communications.

The ABS’s social media strategy was too restrictive and didn’t allow enough flexibility to respond to changing trends in media and social media. As a result, the ABS missed crucial opportunities to inform the conversation around privacy and security and the benefits of the digital first approach.

When public discourse was rising on the issues, the ABS should have been on the front foot addressing these concerns. Key spokespeople should have been conducting interviews, issuing media releases and engaging on social media to drive the conversation and shape the debate.

While the ABS did eventually start engaging in the mainstream media, it was too little, too late. And on the whole the ABS steadfastly stuck to its communications plans, allowing the media, and subsequently the public, to take the lead role. The ABS failed to insert itself in the conversation and underutilised mainstream and social media as a vehicle to shape the debate around the benefits of a digital first approach.

Recommendations for the Australian Bureau of Statistics

• The ABS should engage an independent security consultant for a wide-ranging examination of all aspects of their information collection and storage relating to Census data – from web application through to infrastructure and policies and procedures.

• The ABS should ensure future significant changes to personal information handling practices are subject to an independently-conducted privacy impact assessment and are supported by broad ranging consultation.

•  The ABS should adopt a privacy management plan to enhance its capability to identify and manage new privacy issues.

• The ABS should assess and enhance existing ABS privacy training for staff.

• The ABS should develop a specific strategy to remove the current state of vendor lock-in.

• The ABS should strengthen its approach to outsourced ICT supplier performance management to ensure greater oversight and accountability.

• The ABS should draw upon the lessons it takes from the Census experience to help to guide and to advocate for the cultural change path it is following.

• The ABS’s decision in August to assemble an independent panel to provide assurance and transparency of Census quality is supported and the resulting report should be made public.

•The ABS should implement a targeted communication strategy to address public perceptions about Census data quality.

The ABS should report monthly to their Minister outlining progress against the above recommendations

Also following #CensusFail the Australian Senate Standing Committees on Economics conducted an inquiry into the preparation, administration and management of the 2016 Census by the Australian Bureau of Statistics.

Its final report 2016 Census: issues of trust made these recommendations:

Recommendation 1

4.81 The committee recommends that all future Privacy Impact Assessments

relating to the census, are conducted externally with the final report published on

the ABS website 12 months in advance of the census to which it relates.

4.82 Following the release of a PIA recommending changes to future censuses,

consultation across the Australian community should be undertaken by the ABS

with the outcomes clearly documented on the ABS website no less than six

months before a future census.

Recommendation 2

4.83 The committee recommends that the ABS update its internal guidelines to

make clear that consultation requires active engagement with the nongovernment

and private sector.

Recommendation 3

5.46 The committee recommends that the ABS publicly commit to reporting

any breach of census related data to the Office of the Australian Information

Commissioner within one week of becoming aware of the breach.

Recommendation 4

6.89 The committee recommends that the Australian Government commit the

necessary funding for the 2021 census in the 2017–18 Budget.

Recommendation 5

6.90 The committee recommends that the ABS conduct open tendering

processes for future census solutions requiring the participation of the private

sector.

Recommendation 6

6.91 The committee recommends that the ABS give greater attention to

intellectual property provisions in contracts that include licensing and royalty

arrangements.

Recommendation 7

6.92 The committee recommends that the 2021 eCensus application be subject

to an Information Security Registered Assessors Program Assessment.

Recommendation 8

6.93 The committee recommends that the ABS take a more proactive role in

validating the resilience of the eCensus application for the 2021 census.

Recommendation 9

6.94 The committee recommends that the Department of Finance review its

ICT Investment Approval Process to ensure that projects such as the

2016 Census are covered by the cabinet two-pass process.

Recommendation 10

6.95 The committee recommends that the Australian Government provide

portfolio stability for the ABS.

Recommendation 11

6.96 The committee recommends responsible ministers seek six-monthly

briefings on the progress of census preparations. These briefings should cover

issues including, but not limited to, cyber security, system redundancy,

procurement processes and the capacity of the ABS to manage risks associated

with the census.

Recommendation 12

6.106 The committee recommends that the ABS consider establishing a

dedicated telephone assistance line for people who require special assistance in

completing the census.

Recommendation 13

7.28 The committee recommends that the maximum value of fines and any

other penalties relating to the census be explicitly stated.

Recommendation 14

7.29 The committee recommends that the Australian Bureau of Statistics

develop a clear communications strategy outlining the outcomes for

non-compliance with the census, including resolution processes and the value of

possible penalties.

Recommendation 15

7.57 The committee recommends that the Australian Government provide

sufficient funding for the ABS to undertake its legislated functions to a continued

high standard.

Recommendation 16

7.58 The committee recommends that the responsible minister act as a matter

of urgency to assist the ABS in filling senior positions left vacant for greater than

6 months.

The Japanese whale killers have set sail for the Southern Ocean once more

The Japan Times, 18 November 2016:

KITAKYUSHU – Japanese vessels left Friday to conduct what Tokyo calls “research whaling” in the Antarctic Ocean through March.

Japan is planning to hunt 333 Antarctic minke whales in its second whaling expedition in the Antarctic Ocean since an international court ruled against the practice in 2014, the Fisheries Agency said.

Responding to the International Court of Justice ruling, Japan submitted to the International Whaling Commission a new whaling plan to cut catches of minke whales by two-thirds to 333.

In fiscal 2014 through March 2015, the country only conducted visual surveys but resumed whaling based on the new plan the following year.

Nonprofit organization Sea Shepherd Australia has expressed its intention to block Japan’s whaling, and the agency is planning to monitor the group’s activities from one of its patrol ships.

Two whaling vessels — the 724-ton Yushin Maru and 747-ton Yushin Maru No. 2 — left the port in Shimonoseki, Yamaguchi Prefecture, on Friday morning. They will soon join two other whaling ships and the 8,145-ton mother ship Nisshin Maru to form a fleet with 185 crew members in total.

YUSHIN MARU NO.2

MO: 9278040

MMSI: 432364000

Call Sign: JPPV

Flag: Japan [JP]

AIS Vessel Type: Fishing

Gross Tonnage: 747

Deadweight: 732 t

Length Overall x Breadth Extreme: 69.61m × 10.8m

Year Built: 2002

Status: Active

FACTORY SHIP NISSHIN MARU

MO: 8705292

MMSI: 431683000

Call Sign: JJCJ

Flag: Japan [JP]

AIS Vessel Type: Fishing

Gross Tonnage: 8145

Deadweight: 5555 t

Length Overall x Breadth Extreme: 129.58m × 19.4m

Year Built: 1987

Status: Active

YUSHIN MARU

IMO: 9197181

MMSI: 431439000

Call Sign: JLZS

Flag: Japan [JP]

AIS Vessel Type: Fishing

Gross Tonnage: 720

Deadweight: 642 t

Length Overall x Breadth Extreme: 69.61m × 10.4m

Year Built: 1998

Status: Active

Just because it is beautiful........(18)

Damien and Yilpi Marks  |  Seven Sisters

Jap 012558  |  acrylic on linen  |  180 x 60 cm

Japingka Aboriginal Art 2016

Headline of the Month

Turnbull's all the way with Donald J – what could possibly go wrong?

[Katharine Murphy, The Guardian, 18 November 2016]

WHITE RIBBON DAY: in 2016 the number of domestic violence-related homicides in New South Wales has risen by almost half

Destroy the Joint, 22 November 2016

ABC News, 22 November 2016:

The number of domestic violence-related homicides in New South Wales has risen by almost half, prompting police to call on the community to report suspected cases of family abuse.

There have been 32 homicides related to domestic violence across NSW so far this year, compared with 23 homicides at the same time last year.

Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione said that represents a 40 per cent increase in domestic violence incidents that results in death.

"These are more than just statistics, these are people's lives," Mr Scipione said.

"These are people who are dying in our streets and we need to make sure

Mr Scipione added that, in some cases, community members were aware of a history of violence in a home but had reservations about contacting police.

NSW Police attend about 145,000 incidents of domestic violence every year across NSW, or about 400 call-outs every day.

About 60 per cent of those victims have had no previous contact with police……

Labor MP for Lindsay Emma Husar, 23 November 2016:

In my first speech in this place I said 29 out of my 36 years of life had been affected by domestic violence. I am a survivor of family violence, and it has taken me a long time to overcome the trauma of that to be where I am today.

I know there are a lot of women out there who suffer in silence. Today I stand in solidarity with survivors, with those women afraid to speak, and I will use my story, told in this place to advocate for the change we need.

I will use the eve of white ribbon day as an opportunity to shine a light into the darkest corner of my own life. The first 13 years of my life was marred with physical domestic violence, committed towards my mother, at the hands of my always drunk-when-abusive Father.

My Dad was the son of a World War Two German soldier who committed many acts of violence against his wife and against his seven children. My father had been raised in a house where violence was the accepted norm and at a time when society said these were private matters.

Whilst the blows that landed on my mother during my childhood didn’t land on me physically – they may as well have. The trauma inflicted was the same. I recall it vividly and in great detail.

Each episode of this violence over my 13-years was different but the aftermath was always the same: Dad would apologise, promise to be different, and that would work for just a short time.

One evening, at the end of another round of abuse, Dad launched the family dinner of that evening at the wall. The stain remained on that wall for a very long time – the stain in my heart would linger much longer. Mum then bundled my sister and I into the family car and fled.

We would go to the refuges in our community, until, after so many years and so many incidents, my father knew the locations and we were not safe there anymore. We then shifted to staying in hotels, which were located above pubs where the people below were loud and sometimes their noise would spill into the streets, waking me and reminding me that I wasn’t in my own bed, in my own home. 

I was in a foreign place, because I was not safe in my home.

One night, when Mum was hurrying to get my sister and I out. Dad had removed and smashed the distributor cap from the car rendering it useless and us trapped. The Police fetched us this time.

I still remember sitting in the Police station well into the early hours of the morning and the officers in Penrith police giving us pink milk while we waited. The police did their best.

Again, after this event my Mum returned home.

We know why women return time and time again even when their lives are massively disrupted along with their children’s’, and I hope that the blame that was launched at my Mum during the 90’s for not leaving, is no longer part of the “solution” around domestic violence – and I hope the questions of ‘why doesn’t she just leave’ quit being asked.

Eventually, though, the courage rises up, services step up and women stand up. Finally leaving. But not before one last terrible incident.

There were 13-police cars the last time physical violence affected my childhood. But this was the end of the physical violence, once and for all. Whilst the physical part ceased other abuse around finance and control ramped up.

Sadly, the wheel of domestic violence continues to affect my life as a grown woman, with children of my own. The last 16-years of my life have been and continue to be affected by domestic and family violence.

In the limited time I have left, I would like to thank Opposition Leader Bill Shorten for his continued support of my current situation, his understanding, and the support he provides to me. I would also like to thank my caucus colleagues and staff who know my story, who don’t judge me and continue to provide support. 

I would like to acknowledge the Penrith Women’s Health Service who have been providing services to my community for 30-years, including to my Mum then, and to my family now.

Sometimes in my experience I have found that, mostly, victims don’t talk about domestic violence because other people don’t talk about domestic violence.

For many years I was embarrassed and ashamed. I know that I shouldn’t be but I am.

I hope that today, I have lent my voice, my story, and my passion for advocating change, to the choir of the white ribbon movement who call on us to stand up, speak out and act. [Transcript @randlight]

The fate of Australia's dugongs and sea turtles

The fate of Australia’s dugongs and sea turtles due to declining numbers, loss of habitat, pollution, unmonitored legal hunting and illegal poaching is once more being debated in the media.

Tropic Now, 14 November 2016:

Traditional hunting advocates say the practise represents a small component of the issues facing sea turtles and dugongs.

Pic: David Reid

Indigenous Affairs Minister Nigel Scullion has defended traditional hunting at a graduation ceremony for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander rangers in Cairns.

Native title laws allow traditional owners to hunt endangered turtles and dugongs.

Wildlife identity Bob Irwin has recently called for a moratorium on current practices but Mr Scullion says hunting isn’t the problem.

“There is evidence to demonstrate it is sustainable and there is no evidence to demonstrate it isn’t,” he says.

“Yes, there are some threats to dugongs and turtles. But none of them come from the ocean, they all come from the land and they’re all associated with degradation of habitat.”

Indigenous ranger Mick Hale runs a turtle hospital, Yuku-Baja-Muliku, with his wife, Larissa, at Archer Point more than 300 kilometres north of Cairns.

“We started about six years ago,” Mr Hale says. “It came about around the time Cyclone Larry and Cyclone Yasi decimated our seagrass beds.

“We noticed a lot of sick turtles around [with no food], so instead of letting them die we started a turtle hospital.

Traditional hunting can be sustainable, Mr Hale says.

“The biggest challenge for us is getting the public to understand that traditional hunting is the smallest percentage of mortality for turtles and dugongs,” he says.

“We’ve got environmental impacts, habitat destruction, global climate change.

“These are all massive contributors to the demise of turtle and dugong populations.”

The Hales are currently caring for three turtles - two green sea turtles and a hawksbill.

“We just do it because it’s what we do,” Ms Hale says. “We look after country and after people so that we do have a sustainable future.”

Injinoo ranger Cristo Lifu says rescuing five olive ridley sea turtles from ghost nets with fellow Cape York rangers recently was a powerful experience.

“They were stranded and stuck in a net,” Mr Lifu says.

“We rescued them but it was lucky we were there. Because if not, they would have been dead in another two or three days.

“It’s just about caring for country. Our elders looked after country before us and it’s our time now to take over.”……

The Australian, 11 November 2016:

…three federal ministers commit to talk to indigenous rangers and the Queensland state government to spearhead moves that could see more “no take’’ zones introduced in a bid to stop the vulnerable ­species being poached and traded, as revealed in The Australian last month…..

The North Australian Indig­en­ous Land and Sea Management Alliance says commerc­ia­l­isation claims have been found to be “unsubstantiated”, while envir­onmental groups point out that dugongs and turtles face far greater threats than hunting, including loss of habitat, marine debris and coastal development.

The Cairns Post, 9 August 2016:

AN indigenous leader claims a moratorium on dug­ong and turtle hunting will not work and will only push poachers further underground.

The Coalition is preparing draft legislation to provide stronger protection for the marine creatures from over-exploitation by traditional owner groups.

Leichhardt MP Warren Entsch has said he is not happy with some elements of the draft legislation and wants a blanket moratorium on the traditional take of the species.

Girringun Aboriginal Corporation chief executive Phil Rist said his group’s TUMRA (Traditional Use of Marine Resource Agreement) had ens­ured populations of turtles and dugongs along the Cassowary Coast remained sustainable for 10 years.

He said imposing a moratorium on hunting of the animals would push illegal hunting and exploitation further underground.

“TUMRAs around turtles and dugongs are the way to go,” he said.

“These are instruments for us – ourselves – to better manage our take of turtle and dug­ong on a sustainable level.

“These agreements are end­orsed by the State and Federal governments, and we have proven that they work and they work really well.”

Cairns Turtle Rehabilitation Centre co-ordinator Jennie Gilbert supported a moratorium on turtle hunting, saying the animals definitely needed more protection in Far Northern waters.

“They have got enough threats in their lives without hunting,” she said. “We know that there’s illegal hunting and poaching going on out there.

“The numbers of green sea turtles in Far North Queensland still haven’t recovered from the mass stranding event of 2012, due to a lack of feeding grounds.”

BACKGROUND

ABC News, 27 September 2014:

The Federal Government is warning anyone involved in the illegal trade of dugong and turtle meat that they will be caught.

The Government has allocated $5 million to a dugong and turtle protection plan that involves the Australian Federal Police (AFP), Customs and Border Protection, and the Australian Crime Commission.

Environment Minister Greg Hunt said the Crime Commission has been given $2 million to investigate the illegal trade.

Traditional owners have given their backing to the Government's protection plan.

"They know that their good name is being used by poachers," Mr Hunt said.

"We are determined to end the illegal trafficking in dugong and turtle meat and to protect these majestic creatures."

Under the Native Title Act of 1993, Indigenous people with native title rights can hunt marine turtles and dugong for personal, domestic or non-commercial communal needs, and "in exercise and enjoyment of their native title rights and interests".

Dugong and turtle poaching has been identified as a problem in the Northern Territory and Queensland, where the animals are hunted and the meat sold illegally.

National Indigenous radio broadcaster Seith Fourmile said non-Indigenous people were also involved in the illegal trade.

"They are involved with the trading, with selling it, passing it down - some of the turtle meat has gone as far south as Sydney and Melbourne," he said. 

Australian Government Dugong and Turtle Protection Plan 2014-2017:

To enhance the protection of our iconic marine turtles and dugong in Far North Queensland and the Torres Strait, the Australian Government has committed $5.3 million over three years for delivery of a Dugong and Turtle Protection Plan under the Reef 2050 Plan and Reef Trust. The plan addresses threatening processes that impact on the long-term recovery and survival of these protected migratory species. Information about the Reef 2050 Plan and Reef Trust is available at www.environment.gov.au/marine/gbr/reef-trust

The Dugong and Turtle Protection Plan includes the following seven core elements:

       1.    $2 million for a Specialised Indigenous Ranger Programme for strengthened  enforcement and compliance and marine conservation in Queensland and the Torres Strait
The programme is being delivered by the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet. More information is available at www.indigenous.gov.au/news-and-media/announcements/minister-scullion-2-million-strengthen-compliance-powers-indigenous

       2.    $2 million for an Australian Crime Commission investigation into the illegal poaching, transportation and trade of turtle and dugong meat in the Great Barrier Reef and Torres Strait
A fact sheet about the investigation by the commission’s Wildlife and Environmental Crime Team is available at
https://www.crimecommission.gov.au/sites/default/files/ Wildlife%20%26%20Environmental%20Crime%20Team%20FACTSHEET%20281114.pdf(link is external)

      3.    $700 000 for marine debris clean-up initiatives
Information about the Great Barrier Reef marine debris clean-up initiative is available at www.environment.gov.au/minister/hunt/2014/mr20141113a.html

     4.    $600 000 to support the Cairns and Fitzroy Island Turtle Rehabilitation Centre
The Reef Trust will support the work of the centre to rehabilitate sick and injured turtles and return them to the marine environment.
Information about the Cairns and Fitzroy Turtle Rehabilitation Centre is available at www.saveourseaturtles.com.au/about-ctrc.html(link is external) and www.fitzroyisland.com/newsroom/meet-patients-cairns-turtle-rehabilitation-centre(link is external)

      5.    Working with Indigenous leaders to provide for traditional use and reef protection
The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority is working with Traditional Owners to develop Traditional Use of Marine Resources Agreements to provide for traditional use and deliver reef protection. This may also include voluntary no take agreements.
Information about the agreements is available at www.gbrmpa.gov.au/our-partners/traditional-owners/traditional-use-of-marine-resources-agreements(link is external)

      6.    Federal legislation tripling the penalties for poaching and illegal transportation of turtle and dugong meat
The Environment Legislation Amendment Act 2015 amends various sections of the EPBC Act and the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act 1975 (Marine Park Act) to provide additional protection for turtles and dugong. The amendments triple the maximum penalties for various criminal offences related to the killing, injuring, taking, trading, keeping or moving of turtles and dugong under the EPBC Act and for criminal offences and civil penalty provisions which apply to the taking of, or injury to, turtles and dugong where they are a protected species under the Marine Park Act.
The tripling of maximum penalties does not impact on the rights of Native Title holders under the Native Title Act 1993 to hunt turtle and dugong for personal, domestic or non-commercial communal needs.
Information about the legislation is available at www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Bills_Legislation/ Bills_Search_Results/Result?bId=r5128

      7.    A national approach to dugong and turtle management
Refers to the nationally co-ordinated management of turtle and dugong in Australia. This includes the development of EPBC Act policy documents and guidelines such as updating the Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles of Australia 2003, Marine Turtle Referral Guidelines and policy guidelines for dugong and seagrass habitats.