Friday, 16 March 2018
With a royal commission having found that all major religions house and protect paedophiles we still find Liberal Party MPs seeking to extend the influence of priests & ministers in the Australian school system in 2018
The
Sydney Morning Herald,
9 March 2018:
Dozens of federal
Liberal MPs have reportedly signed a petition calling for a 25 per cent funding
increase for the controversial National Schools Chaplaincy Program.
Whether the
budget can afford the funding increase or whether the money would be better spent
elsewhere are interesting issues. The bigger legal issue is that the way the
chaplains program operates is illegal…….
The High Court has
struck down the chaplains program as illegal twice already. In 2012, the High
Court ruled the program illegal because the federal government was paying for
the chaplains program without any legislation authorising the spending. To
overcome the High Court decision, federal Parliament quickly passed legislation
to authorise the spending.
The chaplains program
again was struck down again in 2014. Federal Parliament can only pass
legislation dealing with certain subject matters. The High Court ruled that
school chaplains do not fall within any of those.
To get around its own
lack of power to run the chaplains program, the federal government now grants
money to the states for them to run it. Lots of federal government programs
operate this way with the states running programs on behalf of the federal
government using federal money.
Getting a job as a
chaplain requires a person to be recognised as qualified for the role
"through formal ordination, commissioning, recognised religious
qualifications or endorsement by a recognised or accepted religious
institution". In other words, a person has to be religious and endorsed by
a religious group in order to get a job as a chaplain. Atheists need not apply.
Individual schools pick
which religion they want their chaplain to be a member of and then recruit a
person from that religion for the job.
But it makes no
practical sense to require a chaplain to have a particular religion. Chaplains
are strictly prohibited from religious proselytising, although there are
sometimes reports of chaplains breaking the rules. The High Court even
commented that despite the religious sounding job title, the actual work
chaplains do has nothing much to do with religion. Justice Dyson Heydon wrote
that the work of chaplains "could have been done by persons who met a
religious test. It could equally have been done by persons who did not".
In other words, there is
no genuine occupational requirement for a chaplain to be a member of any
particular religion or to be religious at all. The federal government has
simply decided that it wants all chaplains to be religious.
Requiring a chaplain to
be a member of a particular religion is inconsistent with the nature of public
schools……
Requiring a chaplain to
be a member of a particular religion is also illegal. Each state has
anti-discrimination or equal opportunity legislation making it illegal to
discriminate against a person on the ground of religion in employment
decisions. These anti-discrimination rules apply to public schools and their
hiring decisions.
Public schools cannot
advertise a teacher’s job and require that only Hindus are eligible to apply.
Public schools cannot advertise a cleaner’s job and require that only Baptists
are eligible to apply. The reason is because that would be discrimination on
the ground of religion in employment.
It’s exactly the same
with chaplains. Requiring a chaplain to be a member of a particular religion is
religious discrimination and completely illegal for public schools…..
The state
anti-discrimination commissions should do something about public schools
breaching religious discrimination laws. If they don’t, someone will eventually
go to court and the school chaplains program will probably be ruled illegal for
the third, and hopefully final, time.
Thursday, 15 March 2018
Let's talk about excess franking credits and why they have been money for jam for the last 17 years
This is what
the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) states about imputation:
Dividends paid to
shareholders by Australian resident companies are taxed under a system known as
imputation. This is where the tax the company pays is imputed, or attributed,
to the shareholders. The tax paid by the company is allocated to shareholders
as franking credits attached to the dividends they receive.
If you receive franking
credits on your dividends, you need to let us know your:
* franked amount
* franking credit.
If you are an Australian
resident, we will use this information to:
* reduce your tax
liability from all forms of income (not just dividends) and from your taxable
net capital gain
* refund any excess
franking to you after any of your income tax and Medicare levy liabilities have
been met.
You are eligible for a
refund of excess franking credits if all of the following apply:
* You receive franked
dividends, on or after 1 July 2000, either directly or through a
trust or partnership.
* Your basic tax liability
is less than your franking credits after taking into account any other tax
offsets you are entitled to.
* You meet our
anti-avoidance rules, which are designed to ensure everyone pays their fair
share of tax.
If you have received a
dividend that has Australian franking credits attached from a New Zealand
franking company, you may be eligible to claim the Australian sourced franking
credits.
The policy of
giving cash back for unused franking credits was introduced in 2000 by then
Howard Government treasurer Peter
Costello and for the last 17 years it has been systematically rorted by superannuation
funds, private corporations, trusts and individuals - to the point where Treasury
pays out an est. $6 billion per annum under this scheme.
With one individual whopaid no income tax reportedly received millions claiming cash for unused franking credits and the average unused credits cash back payment for people in the top 1% of self-managed super funds being est. $83,000 a year.
With one individual whopaid no income tax reportedly received millions claiming cash for unused franking credits and the average unused credits cash back payment for people in the top 1% of self-managed super funds being est. $83,000 a year.
In March 2018
Federal Labor announced a policy effective
January 2019 which removes claims for franking credits
- but only in those years that the prospective claimant has no income tax
liability payable.
So ending
taxpayer-subsidised money for jam for around est. 9 per cent of the population who were receiving cash refunds for tax they had never paid .
Turnbull,
Morrison & Co then came out fighting – accusing Opposition Leader Bill Shorten of robbing low income self-funded retirees
and aged pensioners.
At that
point, somewhat predictably, embarrassment for the Turnbull Government began…..
What Treasurer and Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison considered low income retirees was elucidated.
Turnbull & Co were accused of telling political lies.
What Treasurer and Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison considered low income retirees was elucidated.
The Australian, 14 March 2018:
A retired couple living
in a $2m house, with $3.2m in super, are classified as ‘‘low income’’. They
have no income tax liability. They could also have an investment property and
still wouldn’t have a tax liability because of the bizarre “senior and pensioners’
tax offset”, which lifts their effective tax-free threshold to about $58,000.
Turnbull & Co were accused of telling political lies.
The
Guardian, 14
March 2018:
You won’t have missed
the foghorn blast from the Turnbull government and its media amplifiers that
has accompanied Labor’s latest
bold foray on tax policy.
Scott Morrison has
declared Labor is stealing
tax refunds from pensioners and low-income retirees, and Malcolm
Turnbull says Bill Shorten “is going after the savings of your parents and
their friends and their contemporaries”.
So how do these
terrifying-sounding claims stack up?
Let’s bring in the
respected economist Saul Eslake, who has no political dog in this race. Eslake
is blunt. He says the government’s posturing is “misleading in the same way
that most of what Scott Morrison said
about Labor’s policy on negative gearing was misleading”.
To understand precisely
what is misleading – the first thing to know is when we are talking about
Australian retirees having low incomes, often what that means is people have
low taxable incomes.
Income from
superannuation funds is tax free once people turn 60. Eslake says the decision
to make income from super tax free is “top of my list of the dumbest tax policy
decisions of the last 25 years”.
It means people with
substantial assets, and big super balances – millionaires in fact – are in a
position to report low taxable income, and in fact structure their affairs to
ensure they have low taxable income.
They were also quite rightly accused of knowing that dividend imputation à la Costello is an expensive rort.
The
Sydney Morning Herald,
13 March 2018:
Treasury considered
dividend imputation reform in the lead up to Treasurer Scott Morrison's last
budget, creating a dossier entitled "Tax Policy - Dividend
Imputation" more than a year before Labor announced it would target the
tax refunds of more than one million Australians on Tuesday.
The confidential file
itemised in a list required to be disclosed by departments as part of freedom
of information requirements was opened by Treasury in the first-half of last
year.
Fairfax Media
understands Treasury has been examining withholding dividend cheques from
non-taxpaying shareholders ahead of this year's May budget.
Investigating potential
savings needed to fund budget initiatives such as personal income tax cuts is
normal practice in the pre-budget period.
Mr Morrison said on
Tuesday the "government has never entertained" changes to the way it
gives cash back to shareholders in response to a policy he described as a
"cruel blow for retirees and pensioners," but his predecessor
Joe Hockey first asked how dividend imputation could be improved - not replaced
- three
years ago.
A white discussion paper
on tax reform commissioned by Mr Hockey and completed by Treasury in 2015
found "there are some revenue concerns with the refundability of
imputation credits," indicating the department was receiving lower tax
revenues than it expected.
"It provides a
greater incentive for shareholders of closely held companies to delay
distributions until a time when individual owners are subject to a relatively
low tax rate, to receive a refund of tax paid by the company."
The
list published by Treasury shows the department's work on dividend
imputation policy continued after Mr Morrison became Treasurer in 2016…..
Labor, which has not
released Parliamentary Budget Office costings of its policy, said it planned on
cancelling an average cash refund of $5000 on share dividends from 8 per cent
of taxpayers, including 200,000 voters who self-manage their own super funds
and 1 per cent of full pensioners..….
"Rethink: Better tax, better Australia" discussion paper information here and submissions here.
Image found on Twitter
"Rethink: Better tax, better Australia" discussion paper information here and submissions here.
Labels:
rorts,
shares,
taxation,
Turnbull Government
Wednesday, 14 March 2018
Does the Catholic Church's great paedophile protection racket continue unabated?
AUSTRALIA
Brisbane
Times, 10
March 2018:
The Catholic Church has
failed to fully accept the horrific impact of child sexual abuse and its own
role in a tragedy of “epic proportions”, a member of the royal commission has
said.
In a surprisingly frank
speech, Robert Fitzgerald - one of the six commissioners that oversaw the
recently completed, five year inquiry - has slammed the church’s approach to
abuse survivors, and its failure to tackle practices that contributed to the
scourge of abuse and the secrecy around it.
Speaking at a Catholic
Social Services Conference in Melbourne late last month, Mr Fitzgerald
highlighted the ‘’disease’’ of ‘clericalism’ - the belief that the church’s
male-only clergy are mystical beings, accountable to the Pope and to God, not
to civil society or church laity.
Mr Fitzgerald, a
practising Catholic, described the leadership of the church as
"arrogant’’:
"A church that
placed its own reputation above the interests of those victims and survivors
and did so knowingly and willingly in a way that would cause further harm to
those victims.’’
The final report of the
Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, delivered
last December, made 400 recommendations to secular and religious institutions.
But already the Catholic
church has rejected any changes to celibacy or to the seal of confession.
Archbishop Denis Hart
said even if a priest admitted to acts of child abuse during confession, the
seal was ‘’inviolable’’. Instead he would encourage the abuser to admit
their crimes outside confession.
Mr Fitzgerald, in his
speech, described a church divided between those that accepted the evidence of
abuse and the need for reform - including a greater role for women - and those
conservative Catholics who were "yet to fully understand what has just
occurred’’.
He said the church was
the only institution he’d ever known to have the answers to such major problems
"but refuse in fact to look to those answers, look to those solutions’’.
The scale of abuse
recorded by the royal commission across all institutions, secular and
religious, was immense, affecting countless, tens of thousands of abused children,
most of whom were now adults.
But such abuse was
particularly prevalent in Catholic institutions. Nearly 62 per cent of all
people who notified the royal commission of abuse in a religious setting were
abused in a Catholic institution……
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
The Catholic church is lobbying against a Georgia state proposal to give people additional years to sue pedophiles and their organizations, calling it "extraordinarily unfair”: https://t.co/yhIrBgkYEE— Daniel Dale (@ddale8) March 10, 2018
The legislation, dubbed
the “Hidden Predator Act,” extends the statute of limitations for victims from
age 23 to 38, and creates other avenues for adults to sue long after that age.
It passed 170-0 on the floor of the House of Representatives, despite what
those close to the process say was quiet lobbying by the church, the Boy Scouts
and other entities that would face increased exposure to liability….
The bill’s chief author,
Rep. Jason Spencer, R-Woodbine, had accused them of working behind the scenes. He blames
them for amendments that reduced the exposure of organizations, but he had no
evidence of their efforts beyond word of mouth until Friday morning. He shared
an email with the AJC from the office of the senator whose committee will
determine the bill’s fate.
Sen. Jesse Stone,
R-Waynesboro, chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. His assistant forwarded
Spencer an email from Perry McGuire, a lobbyist for the Catholic Church.
McGuire’s amendments would strike the extension of the statute of limitations
and make it even more difficult than it is now to sue organizations.
“If they adopt that
language from Perry McGuire as a substitute bill, then Georgia will continue to
be a predator-friendly state,” Spencer said. It shows “that the Catholic Church
is continuing to cover up wickedness.”
Archbishop announces
opposition to Georgia HB 605
ATLANTA—Archbishop
Wilton D. Gregory has released the following letter in response to HB 605, a
bill that is under consideration in the current session of the Georgia General
Assembly.
My dear brothers and
sisters in Christ,
When I am called to
stand before our Heavenly Father to make a full and final accounting of my
priestly life and ministry, I will first humbly ask His Mercy for all the times
I’ve fallen short in my service to Him and to His people. If I’m asked what I
did to bring people to Him, I’ll recall the countless Sacraments I’ve
celebrated with so many of you, the faith-filled social interactions we have
shared, the remarkable opportunities to teach and to lead and to be present
during moments of incredible joy and incalculable sorrow.
And when He asks me that
for which I am most thankful in my service to His Church, it will have been my
work in restoring trust to His people, assuring safe environments in Catholic
settings that serve as examples to the wider community, and helping to bring
about healing and hope to those in our faith family who have been sexually
abused by members of our Catholic clergy – work I still wish more than anything
on earth had never been necessary, work that we can never call complete.
In our Archdiocese of
Atlanta, the Office
of Child and Youth Protection helps us carry on our Promise to Protect and Pledge to Heal by creating and
maintaining safe environments and walking alongside survivors of sexual abuse
on their journey to healing. The efforts of this office, along with all
dioceses in the United States, are audited on a yearly basis by an independent firm who
verifies compliance with the Charter for the Protection of Children and Young People.
Our Victim Assistance director ministers to those who have
suffered abuse without question, no matter when or where the abuse took place.
Our Office of Safe
Environment ensures compliance of all individuals working with
children, youth, and vulnerable individuals by offering comprehensive abuse
prevention training and background checks. We continue to operate a 24-hour
hotline (888-437-0764) for anyone, Catholic or not, who has been abused by a
member of the clergy, a man or woman religious, or a lay associate. I am
pleased to say our child and youth protection program is among the most robust
anywhere – within the Catholic Church or outside it – and our audit record for
the past two decades speaks for itself.
With that commitment to
safety and healing in mind, I write to inform you of an extraordinarily unfair
bill currently pending in our state legislature. If passed, House Bill 605
could drastically damage our ability to carry out the mission of our Catholic
Church in the state of Georgia because of the following:
HB 605 would allow
lawsuits against churches, private schools, businesses and non-profit
organizations for actions asserted to have occurred many decades ago,
potentially as far back as the 1940s, and the accused are very often deceased.
Recognizing that these lawsuits can be very difficult if not impossible to defend, and risking grave injustice, the vast majority of states simply do not permit them.
Recognizing that these lawsuits can be very difficult if not impossible to defend, and risking grave injustice, the vast majority of states simply do not permit them.
HB 605 discriminates
between the Church and the state. All governmental agencies – park districts,
public school districts, care facilities, and so forth – are inexplicably
immune from the potential devastating effects of these lawsuits. Churches,
religious and private schools, non-profits and businesses are affected.
We have always fully
supported criminal prosecution of and lawsuits against any individual abuser of
children, no matter how long ago the abuse is alleged to have occurred.
Additionally, for the past two decades the Catholic Church in Georgia has had
what may be the strongest safe environment program, non-profit or otherwise, in
the state. Our Church and our schools have strict zero tolerance policies
regarding sexual abuse of any vulnerable person. HB 605 does not protect
anyone. Rather, innocent people and the organizations to which they belong will
be radically impacted based on allegations against individuals who may no
longer even be alive and cannot speak for themselves.
In short, HB 605
represents a policy that is bad for the citizens of Georgia. As your
Archbishop, I implore you to contact your state senator and other elected
officials to let them know you join me and over one million of your fellow
Catholics in opposition to HB 605. Here is a link that will help
you locate the state senator in your district.
Sincerely yours in
Christ,
Archbishop Wilton D.
Gregory
Archdiocese of Atlanta
BRITAIN
BRITAIN
The Catholic Church and
British local authorities have been accused of using a legal loophole to avoid
paying compensation to victims of child sex abuse.
The Criminal Injuries
Compensation Scheme, a government agency, has denied some children financial
settlements because it said the victims had “consented” to the abuse, a
group of charities has warned.
Lawyers representing
victims have warned that this line of defence is becoming increasingly common…….
“No child ever gives their ‘consent’ to being
abused, and the increased use of this line of defence, although still quite
rare, is worrying,” said Anne Longfield, the Children’s Commissioner for
England. "I have contacted the Ministry of Justice previously and again
recently about this issue and the Government should look urgently at what can
be done to tackle it.”
The Sunday Telegraph reported that it had seen
documents regarding two cases where the defence was used. A claimant who was
raped at the age of 15 was told by lawyers representing the Catholic
Archdiocese of Southwark that his abuse "actually occurred in the context
of a consensual relationship (albeit one the claimant in retrospect now appears
to regret)".
The victim said "I
was below the legal
age of consent anyway and there's a grooming element to that kind of
situation. It was totally disregarded and it made me feel really small."
The case was finally settled, with the Catholic
Church paying out £80,000.
IRELAND
IRELAND
The
Guardian, 7
March 2018:
Soca is angry about a
deal between the Catholic church and the Irish government in 2002 that resulted
in the taxpayer footing most of the bill for compensating those abused in religious
institutions.
The deal resulted in the
church having to pay out €128m of a €1.3bn compensation bill.
Last year, Ireland’s
comptroller and auditor general found that only €85m had been paid out of
church funds. On top of its criticism of the deal, Soca said the church should
at least be forced to pay out in full the agreed €128m.
BACKGROUND
Newcastle
Herald, 11
January 2018:
The Royal Commission
into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse accepted Mr Tapsell’s
evidence that for 15 centuries before 1917 church law required child sex
offender priests to be stripped of their status as priests and handed over to
civil authorities for punishment.
It accepted Mr Tapsell’s
evidence that Pope Pius XI in 1922 imposed the first blanket secrecy
provisions over Catholic Church child sex cases which stopped reporting to
civil authorities; they were expanded by Pope John XXIII in 1962 and Pope Paul
VI in 1974, who told bishops there was no room for the exercise of conscience
on the matter, and reinforced by the now sainted Pope John Paul II in 1983.
In September, 2014 Pope
Francis rejected requests by two United Nations’ human rights committees to
abolish the church’s secrecy provisions.
Labels:
child sexual abuse,
religion
Tuesday, 13 March 2018
FAIR GO 101: It's Time To Change The Rules
Big business groups are already out attacking out our #ChangeTheRules campaign.— Australian Unions (@unionsaustralia) March 11, 2018
RT if you think workers need more secure jobs and a wage rise. #auspol pic.twitter.com/NPNIwAku86
Only a handful of NSW landowners to face court over Murray-Darling Basin water theft allegations?
ABC News, 8 March 2018:
The NSW Government will
prosecute several people over alleged water theft on the Barwon-Darling, eight
months after Four Corners investigated the issue.
WaterNSW has named the
people it is taking to the Land and Environment Court over alleged breaches of
water management rules.
They are prominent
irrigator Peter Harris and his wife Jane Harris, who own a major cotton farm
near Brewarrina in the state's north-west and were named in the Four
Corners story.
The couple have been
accused of taking water when the flow conditions did not permit it, and
breaching licence and approval conditions.
Three members of another
prominent family are also facing charges: cotton grower Anthony Barlow from
Mungindi near Moree and Frederick and Margaret Barlow.
The Barlows have been
accused of pumping during an embargo and pumping while metering equipment was
not working.
WaterNSW gave false
figures: Ombudsman
WaterNSW announced the
prosecutions an hour before the NSW Ombudsman released a scathing report saying
the agency had given the Government incorrect figures on its enforcement
actions.
The state's ombudsman,
Michael Barnes, found WaterNSW gave incorrect figures when it provided
statistics that showed there had been a significant increase in enforcements
between July 2016 and November 2017.
"The information
provided to us indicated that the updated statistical information from WaterNSW
that we'd published was significantly incorrect," he said.
"There had, in
fact, been no referrals for prosecutions and no penalty infringement notices
issued in the relevant period."
Mr Barnes said he
initiated a separate investigation after his office received complaints about
the figures, and he found WaterNSW had inflated the statistics.
"As part of our
investigation, we confirmed with Revenue NSW that no penalty infringement
notices were issued by WaterNSW in the relevant period," he said.
The ombudsman said he
raised the issue with WaterNSW, which has admitted to the mistake and
apologised.
Mr Barnes also said he
believed the error was unintentional.
The agency's CEO, David
Harris, said staff have now manually reviewed all actions taken.
"Some of the detail
WaterNSW provided was incorrect and, although it was revised, it is not
acceptable and we are acting to ensure it does not happen again," he said……
NSW
Ombudsman, Correcting the record: Investigation
into water compliance and enforcement 2007-17: A special report to Parliament
under sections 26 and 31 of the Ombudsman Act 1974, 8 March 2018, Amended enforcement outcome
statistics:
Monday, 12 March 2018
Employer groups put pressure on Turnbull Government to stifle union mergers
In 2017 members
of the Construction, Forestry, Mining
and Energy Union (CFMEU), The
Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) and the Textile, Clothing and Footwear Union of Australia (TCFUA) considered
a proposal to amalgamate into one union or alternatively to amalgamate only the
CFMEU and the MUA.
The ballot
was conducted by the Australian
Electoral Commission (AEC) and results declared on 28 November 2017. There appears to have been no irregularities affecting the ballot outcome.
The Fair Work Commission handed down a
decision giving effect to the CFMEU and MUA amalgamation on 27 March
2018.
Employer
groups Australian Mines and Metals
Association (AMMA) and Master
Builders Australia (MBA) are now appealing the Commission’s decision.
The Australian, 9 March 2018, p.2.
Employers have taken
legal action to try to overturn the Fair Work Commission decision approving
the merger of the construction and maritime unions.
The Australian Mines and
Metals Association and Master Builders Australia yesterday appealed the
decision to a commission full bench.
The employers are also
seeking a stay of the decision, which, if granted, would mean the merger would
not proceed from its scheduled date of March 27.
The AMMA and MBA say the
commission decision contained errors of laws and should not have approved the
amalgamation.
Maritime Union of
Australia national secretary Paddy Crumlin said the unions would vigorously
oppose the appeal and defend the rights of workers to have freedom of
association.
“Our members have
overwhelmingly supported this amalgamation (with the CFMEU) and it should be up
to them to decide whether they merge,” he said.
Former employment
minister Eric Abetz welcomed the appeal, saying the government should
intervene in the proceedings in support of the employer application. He said
the government should move urgently to pass laws subjecting union mergers to a
public interest test.
Workplace Relations
Minister Craig Laundy said the government would resume talks with Senate
crossbenchers in a bid to win support for the bill, which has yet to be put to
a vote.
AMMA is lobbying for an
amendment to the bill designed to have the public interest test take affect
before March 27 but Mr Laundy declined to express a view on the proposed
amendment.
The
Australian, 8
March 2018:
Employers have accused
the Turnbull government of being missing in action after the Coalition failed
to pass laws subjecting union mergers to a public interest test.
Workplace Relations
Minister Craig Laundy said today the government would resume talks with Senate
crossbenchers in a bid to win support for the bill, which has yet to be put to
a Senate vote.
“The Ensuring Integrity Bill remains a priority
for the Government, but because of Labor’s opposition we need the support of
the crossbench,’’ he said.
“Despite what has been
said in recent days, the Government simply didn’t have the numbers to pass the
Bill. I am reaching out to the crossbench to see if that has changed.
Labels:
AEC,
court,
Fair Work Commission,
lobby groups,
Turnbull Government,
unions
Is there really a full moon permanently hovering over The Australian or are headlines like this just for the clickbait?
This was the
headline to the error-ridden article below, “Chilling fact is most climate
change theories are wrong”.
Once again
there is a deliberate misunderstanding about the term “climate change” actually means and what it leads to.
It was Maurice
Newmann at his
mad hatter finest.
The Australian, 8 March 2018:
Recent research suggests
a mini ice age may be a greater threat to the planet
You have to hand it to
Peter Hannam, TheSydney Morning Herald’s climate change alarmist-in-chief, for
his report last month, “ ‘Really extreme’ global weather event leaves
scientists aghast”.
Hannam is often the canary
in the coalmine (er, wind farm) when there is a sense that public belief in man-made
global warming is flagging. With Europe in the grip of a much colder winter
than predicted and with the abnormal chill spreading even to Africa, he did
his best to hold the line.
Earlier this year,
Climate Council councillor Will Steffen also climbed on board — for The Sydney
Morning Herald of course. Extreme cold in Britain, Switzerland and Japan, a
record-breaking cold snap in Canada and the US and an expansion of the East
Antarctic ice sheet coincided with a Bureau of Meteorology tweet (later retracted)
that January 7 had set a heat record for the Sydney Basin. Steffen told us
these seemingly unrelated events were in fact linked. “Climate disruption”
explained both. Whether fire or ice, we’re to blame. No ifs, no buts.
Now a warming Arctic
provides the perfect opportunity for Hannam to divert attention from the latest
deep freeze……
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)