| Koala habitat within Larwence village streets |
Wednesday, 10 April 2019
Valley Watch urgent message to Clarence Valley residents about saving Lawrence koala habitat
Valley Watch Inc has sent this email out…….
Hi
everyone brief history and response from Essential Energy below.
Upgrade
and change of route required due to safety (currently passing over someone's
house). Project planned then needed to change route as an underground
water main was identified in their proposed route. New route chosen and
vegetation clearing increased from two trees and trimming to approx. 28 trees
& shrubs being cleared in a known koala corridor.
Thanks
to Community who raised concerns and attended special meeting where they
presented new route that could be considered. As per email below we need
to ensure Essential Energy hear there is large community support for protecting
koala habitat.
Please
telephone and email Raelene Myers at Essential Energy.
Thanks
----- Forwarded
message -----
From: Linda redacted]
Sent: Friday, 5 April 2019, 05:06:11 pm AEDT
Subject: save Lawrence koala habitat
Hi everyone,
At the end of an
information session today in Grafton, led by Essential Energy Community Liaison
Officer Raelene Myers, the Essential Energy staff told the assembled
concerned Lawrence and wider Clarence Valley residents, after much discussion,
that they will now put the plan to relocate some poles and wires to an area
that would involve koala habitat destruction on hold,
while they examine an alternative route that would not.
The alternative route
was put forward by meeting attendees. The plan attached shows the existing
route in green, the habitat-destroying route in orange, and the
non-habitat-destroying route in red.
Raelene has undertaken
to keep updated people who let her know they want to be. Our best chance of
saving the koala habitat now is to get as many people as possible to contact her and let her know we are in favour of the non-habitat
destroying route and want to be kept updated. Her contact details are below.
Please pass this
information on to anyone you think might care.
Regards,
Linda
T: 02 6589 8810 (extn 88810) M: 0407 518 170
PO Box 5730 Port
Macquarie NSW 2444
General Enquiries:
13 23 91
UPDATE
The Daily Examiner, 10 April 2019, p.5:
Clarence Valley
councillor Greg Clancy said the the proposal would result in the removal of a
number of trees and put at risk the koala population in the area.
“We think they could
reroute the power lines a different way to reduce the number of trees that
would need to cut down,” he said. “I think it’s going to push the local
population further towards extinction"
Mr Clancy said despite
the relatively small number of trees marked for removal, the frequency with
which koalas could be found in them meant they should be saved.
“I was out there the
other day with a representative from Essential Energy and there was a koala in
one of the marked trees,” he said.
“The point is the koalas
are always in these trees and there is a lot of habitat they may not find as
suitable. You need to rely on where the koalas are, not where they might be.”
Labels:
biodiversity,
Clarence Valley,
flora and fauna,
Koala,
Lawrence,
trees
National Redress Scheme: Morrison Government's deviation from royal commission recommendations without sound evidence had been "to the detriment of the scheme and against the interests of survivors"
Sadly Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his political cronies continue to wage war on the poor and vulnerable without exception.
This time it is victims of insitutional child sexual abuse they are trying to deny access to compensation and to unfairly limit the amount of compensation recommended by the Royal Commission into Insitutional Response to Child Sexual Abuse.
Herald
Sun, 4 April
2019:
THE Federal Government
must explain how it capped National Redress Scheme payments to child sex
survivors at $150,000 rather than a recommended $200,000, said
a parliamentary committee left "deeply dissatisfied" when
it was unable to find an answer during a review of the scheme.
The $150,000 cap
was rammed into legislation after the Turnbull Government warned any push to
lift it would delay the scheme's implementation by 18 months.
But the committee's
unsuccessful attempts to solve the mystery has left survivors believing
$150,000 was chosen because it matched Anglican and Catholic maximum
payments, a joint select committee reviewing the scheme found.
"The committee is
deeply dissatisfied that the maximum payment amount has been reduced and that
no clear explanation has been provided about why this occurred or who advocated
for this reduction," the report released on Wednesday said.
"The committee has
tried to ascertain the reason for the reduction in the maximum payment and has
put this question to various witnesses, including Department of Social Services
and the Department of Human Services on numerous occasions.
However, apart
from acknowledging that $150,000 was the amount agreed to between the
Commonwealth, states, and territories, the committee has not received any
explanation or rationale about this discrepancy."
The committee, headed by
Senator Derryn Hinch with Newcastle MP Sharon Claydon as deputy chair, was
told more
than 3000 people had applied for redress by February 28 after its
launch on July 1, 2018, but only 88 cases were finalised, with fewer than 10
survivors paid between $100,000 and $150,000.
At least one person
received the maximum $150,000.
"The committee
recommends that the government clearly and openly explain how the maximum
payments came to be set at $150,000 rather than $200,000, and the rationale for
this decision," it said in
one of 29 recommendations. The committee recommended amending legislation
to lift the cap to $200,000.
The cross-party
committee made up of four Liberal members, three Labor, one Green and Senator
Hinch issued a damning assessment of parts of the redress scheme that
vary from recommendations by the Royal Commission into Institutional
Responses to Child Sexual Abuse in 2017.
They include an
assessment matrix that restricts maximum payments to penetrative child
sexual abuse, counselling capped at $5000 and excluding people with
serious criminal convictions or making applications from jail.
The criminal conviction
and jail exclusions would "disproportionately impact" Aboriginal
and Torres Strait Islander peoples who made up almost one third of survivors
seen by royal commissioners during private sessions in jail.
"This is an
alarming statistic," the committee said.
Ms Claydon said the
Federal Government's deviation from royal commission recommendations without
sound evidence had been "to the detriment of the scheme and against the
interests of survivors".
BACKGROUND
On 20 June 2017 the House of Representatives
agreed to a Senate resolution that a joint select committee on oversight of the
implementation of redress related recommendations of the Royal Commission into
Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse be established following the
tabling of the final report of the Royal Commission.
Excerpts from Joint Committee's report:
Intrinsic to a
survivor's access to redress are the institutions responsible for the sexual
abuse and their decision to join the scheme. While all states and territories
are now participating in the scheme, there are no mechanisms to force private
institutions to join the scheme. Yet survivors will not be able to obtain
redress if the institution responsible for their abuse refuses to join the
scheme. This is both unfair and unacceptable. Plainly, more needs to be done to
pressure non-participating institutions to join the scheme, and provide survivors
with access to redress....
Central to the redress
scheme are the survivors. Wherever possible, the scheme should be an inclusive
scheme that does not exclude groups of survivors. Currently, certain groups of
survivors are either not eligible for redress or are subject to potentially
arbitrary decisions when seeking permission to apply for redress. The
government has suggested that some of these exclusions are necessary to protect
the scheme from particular risks, such as fraud, while others are necessary to
ensure the efficient administration of the scheme. These are not sufficient
justifications to unilaterally exclude large groups of survivors, who would
otherwise have a legitimate claim, from accessing redress.
Recommendation 14
8.94 The committee recommends that the government clearly and openly explain how the maximum payments came to be set at $150 000 rather than $200 000, and the rationale for this decision.
Recommendation 15
8.95 In line with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory governments agree to increase the maximum redress payment from $150 000 to $200 000.
Recommendation 16
8.100 In line with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory governments implement a minimum payment of $10 000 for the monetary component of redress, noting that in practice some offers may be lower than $10 000 after relevant prior payments to the survivor by the responsible institution are considered, or after calculating a non-participating institution's share of the costs.
8.94 The committee recommends that the government clearly and openly explain how the maximum payments came to be set at $150 000 rather than $200 000, and the rationale for this decision.
Recommendation 15
8.95 In line with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory governments agree to increase the maximum redress payment from $150 000 to $200 000.
Recommendation 16
8.100 In line with the recommendations of the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, the committee recommends that Commonwealth, state and territory governments implement a minimum payment of $10 000 for the monetary component of redress, noting that in practice some offers may be lower than $10 000 after relevant prior payments to the survivor by the responsible institution are considered, or after calculating a non-participating institution's share of the costs.
The full April 2019 Joint Standing Committee report can be read here.
NOTE:
The Anglican Diocese of Grafton on the NSW North Coast has now joined the National Redress Scheme.
NOTE:
The Anglican Diocese of Grafton on the NSW North Coast has now joined the National Redress Scheme.
Tuesday, 9 April 2019
Stevens Holding gets development approval on Iluka large lot adjacent to World Heirtage listed forest from Australian Govenment Dept. of the Environment and Energy
Australian Government Department of the Environment and Energy: APPROVAL lIuka Residential Subdivision, Hic... by clarencegirl on Scribd
https://www.scribd.com/document/404969621/Australian-Government-Department-of-the-Environment-and-Energy-APPROVAL-lIuka-Residential-Subdivision-Hickey-Street-lIuka-NSW-EPBC-2017-8003It should be noted that many of the conditions in this federal government approval only last for the life of the community title agreement. An agreement which can be altered or extinguished by lot holders as little as two years into the agreement.
Labels:
coastal development,
Iluka
Speaking truth about “the rightness of whiteness”
The
Guardian, 3
April 2019:
The Labor senator and
Yawuru man Pat Dodson spoke about the links between Australia’s massacre
history and the terrorist attacks in Christchurch, while addressing the censure
motion against Fraser Anning in
the Senate.
The
motion condemned Anning for his “inflammatory and divisive comments
seeking to attribute blame to victims of a horrific crime and to vilify people
on the basis of religion, which do not reflect the opinions of the Australian
Senate or the Australian people.”
Dodson said Indigenous
people carry the consequence of murderous prejudice “throughout our entwined
history”.
“First Nations’ peoples … know the impacts of
murder wilfully carried out and morally justified by hatred of minorities,
misplaced power and bullying superiority,” Dodson said.
“In Gurindji country,
they talk of the Killing
Times.
“Mounted Constable
Willshire was stationed at Victoria River Downs in the 1890s. He was a mass
murderer in uniform, who took it upon himself to protect the interests of
cattlemen by dispersing the traditional owners of the lands at gunpoint.
“He took to print,
justifying his actions with boastful pride and emboldened by the rightness of
whiteness and condemned the First Nations’ people to death.
“Willshire wrote about
the killing on Wave Hill: ‘It’s no use mincing matters. The Martini-Henry
carbines at the critical moment were talking English in the silent majesty of
these eternal rocks.’”
Dodson said he has
walked through some of the sites
of mass murder in Australia with descendants of the victims and
“sometimes too with the descendants of murderers.”
“In South Australia I
visited a monument erected by both sides in the small community of Elliston to
commemorate the mass murder of men, women and children pushed over the steep
sea cliffs by charging horsemen and barking dogs.
“I have visited the
sites of massacres, of mass murders in Balgo, in Forrest
River, and at Coniston.
Those mass murders took place in living memory.
“I have sat down with
old Warlpiri men and women who luckily survived those murderous attacks as
young babies, hidden from the attacks.
“1928 was not that long
ago. My mother was just seven years old.
“But we are in 2019 now
and a mass murderer, rejecting the richness of difference, driven by religious
hatred and xenophobia, empowered by military-style weapons, has waged his
atrocity in Christchurch,” Dodson said.
“The murder of 50
innocent people does not just happen. It arises from the feeding of hate,
irresponsible language and the demonising of people of colour, and difference.
“We know, and senator
Anning knows, the real cause of the bloodshed in Christchurch. The real cause
was prejudice, hate, and a passion for violent action, aided and abetted by the
availability of military-style weapons.
“We call out those who
exploit fear and ignorance for political gain: who mock the traditional dress
of women of another culture; who seek
donations from the manufacturers of weapons of war to override our own laws;
who argue that it
is “alright to be white”.
“Their values would
plunge our country back into the Killing Times.
“We should instead turn
our face to the light of a new future, a peaceful, non-violent, tolerant
country of hope, respect and unity.
“A country where no
innocent man, women or child is ever again the victim of mass murder.”
Monday, 8 April 2019
51st losing Newspoll in a row for Australian Liberal-Nationals Coalition Government
The losing
streak is not yet over for the Morrison
Government.
The last time
the Coalition were ahead on a Newspoll Two Party Preferred (TPP) basis
was on 2 July 2016 when the Turnbull Government stood at 50.5 per cent on the
day of the 2016 federal election.
Which means the
losing streak has now stretched to 33 months.
51st Newpoll results
– 7 April 2019:
Primary Vote – Labor 37 percent (down 2
points) to Liberal-Nationals 38 per cent (up 2 points), The Greens 9 per cent
(unchanged), One Nation 6 per cent (down 1 point).
Two Party Preferred
(TPP) - Labor 52
per cent (down 1 point) to Liberal-Nationals Coalition 47 per cent (up 1 point).
Voter Net Satisfaction
With Leaders’ Performance –
Prime Minister Scott Morrison 2 points and Opposition Leader Bill Shorten -14
points.
If
a federal election had been held on 7 April 2019 based of the preference flow
in July 2016, then Labor would have won government with a majority 82 seats
(down 2 seats since March poll) to the Coalition's 63 seats (up 4 seats since
March poll) in the House of Representatives.
In Page the current odds are Labor $1.64
Coalition $2.05 Greens $31.00, in Richmond
Labor $1.05 Coalition $7.50 Greens $31.00, and in Cowper Independent $1.72 Coalition $1.93 Labor $21.00 Greens $51.00.
UPDATE
According to
Antony Green’s Swing
Calculator Newspoll
results for 4-7 April 2019 mean that the electorates of Page and Richmond will
both have Labor MPs while Cowper will have a Nationals MP after the May federal
election.
The IPSOS
poll of 3-5 April 2019 produces the same results.
Labels:
Australia,
elections 2019,
poll,
statistics
The Morrison Government's Budget 2019-20 appears to be fooling very few
By 26 August
2018 North
Coast Voices was posting this……
On this
list are individuals who have:
* not yet
been approved for home care;
* been
previously assessed and approved, but who have not yet been assigned a home
care package; or
* are
receiving care at an interim level awaiting assignment of a home care package
at their approved level.
Waiting
time is calculated from the date of a home care package approval and this is
not a an ideal situation, given package approval times range from est. 27 to 98
days and the time taken to approve high level home care packages is now [more] than twelve months - with actual delivery
dates occurring at least 12 months later on average….
By June 2017 New South
Wales had the largest number of persons on the home care waiting list at
30,685.
Given the high number of
residents over 60 years of age in regional areas like the Northern Rivers, this
waiting list gives pause for thought.
This was the
Morrison Government announcement of 17 December 2018 reported online…….
Community
Care Review
magazine, 17 December 2018:
The federal government
has announced $553 million in aged care spending including the release of
10,000 home care packages and increased residential supplements for the
homeless and people in regional areas.
The splash-out is a
centerpiece of the federal government’s Mid Year Economic and Fiscal Outlook,
which forecasts a return to budget surplus and a raft of new aged care spending
initiatives.
The new high-care home
care packages will be available within weeks, Prime Minister Scott Morrison
said. Funding will be split across 5,000 level 3 and 5,000 level 4 care
packages, providing up to $50,000 per person in services each year.
This is the Morrison
Government pretending that the 10,000 aged care packages it announced last year
are a new round of age care packages in Budget 2019-20……
Budget Papers 2019-20:
To support older
Australians who choose to remain in their own homes for longer, the Government
is providing $282.4 million for 10,000 home care packages….
However, not everyone
was fooled……
The
Conversation,
2 April 2019:
In aged care, the government
will fund 10,000 home care packages, which have been previously announced, at a
cost of $282 million over five years, and will allocate $84 million for carer
respite. But long wait times for home care packages remain.
"USING 150 INTERVIEWS ON THREE CONTINENTS, THE [NEW YORK] TIMES DESCRIBES THE MURDOCH FAMILY’S ROLE IN DESTABILIZING DEMOCRACY IN NORTH AMERICA, EUROPE AND AUSTRALIA"
With Murdoch’s
News Corp mastheads dominating the local newspaper landscape in the NSW Northern Rivers region this should interest readers…….
Rupert Murdoch, the
founder of a global media empire that includes Fox News, has said he “never
asked a prime minister for anything.”
But that empire has
given him influence over world affairs in a way few private citizens ever have,
granting the Murdoch family enormous sway over not just the United States, but
English-speaking countries around the world.
A
six-month investigation by The New York Times covering three
continents and including more than 150 interviews has described how Mr. Murdoch
and his feuding sons turned their media outlets into right-wing political
influence machines that have destabilized democracy in North America, Europe and
Australia.
Here are some key
takeaways from The Times’s investigation into the Murdoch family and its role
in the illiberal, right-wing political wave sweeping the globe.
THE MURDOCH FAMILY SITS
AT THE CENTER OF GLOBAL UPHEAVAL.
Fox News has long
exerted a gravitational pull on the Republican Party in the United States,
where it most recently amplified the nativist revolt that has fueled the rise
of the far right and the election of President Trump.
Mr. Murdoch’s newspaper
The Sun spent years demonizing the European Union to its readers in Britain,
where it helped lead the Brexit campaign that persuaded a slim majority of
voters in a 2016 referendum to endorse pulling out of the bloc. Political havoc
has reigned in Britain ever since.
And in Australia, where
his hold over the media is most extensive, Mr. Murdoch’s outlets pushed for the
repeal of the country’s carbon tax and helped topple a series of prime
ministers whose agenda he disliked, including Malcolm Turnbull last year.
At the center of this
upheaval sits the Murdoch family, a clan whose dysfunction has both shaped and
mirrored the global tumult of recent years.
The Times explored those
family dynamics and their impact on the Murdoch empire, which is on the cusp of
succession as its 88-year-old patriarch prepares to hand power to the son whose
politics most resemble his own: Lachlan Murdoch.
A key step in that
succession has paradoxically been the partial dismemberment of the empire,
which significantly shrunk last month when Mr. Murdoch sold one of his
companies, the film studio 21st Century Fox, to the Walt Disney Company for
$71.3 billion.
The deal turned Mr.
Murdoch’s children into billionaires and left Lachlan in control of a powerful
political weapon: a streamlined company, the Fox Corporation, whose most potent
asset is Fox News…..
The Murdoch empire has
also boldly flexed its muscles in Australia, which was for many years Lachlan’s
domain.
In Australia, Lachlan
expressed disdain for efforts to fight climate change and once rebuked the
staff at one of his family’s newspapers, The Australian, for an editorial in
support of same-sex marriage (He says through a representative that he is in
favor of same-sex marriage). He also became close to the politician Tony
Abbott, whose 2013 election as prime minister was given an assist by Murdoch
newspapers.
The Murdoch family
changed Australian politics in 2016 when it took control of Sky News Australia
and imported the Fox News model. They quickly introduced a slate of right-wing
opinion shows that often focused on race, immigration and climate change. The
programming became known as Sky After Dark.
Last year, Mr. Turnbull
and his staff accused Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch of using their media outlets
to help foment the intraparty coup that thrust him from office in August. Mr.
Turnbull, a moderate and longtime nemesis of his friend Mr. Abbott, was replaced
by the right-wing nationalist Scott Morrison.
The Murdochs have denied
any role in Mr. Turnbull’s downfall.....
The night after his
arrival, Lachlan invited a small group of Sky employees and managers to his $16
million mansion in Sydney for drinks. With its new prime-time lineup of
hard-right opinion hosts, Sky had become a force in Australian politics. Its
audience was still small by American standards, but it was the network of
choice in the capital, Canberra, and it was finalizing a deal to expand its reach
into the Australian Outback — demographically speaking, the equivalent of Trump
country.
It was a mirror of Fox
News, with its fixation on race, identity and climate-change denial. Night
after night, Sky’s hosts and their guests stirred anger over the perceived
liberal bias of the media, “suicidal self-hatred” of Western civilization and
the Australian equivalent of the Central American “caravans” that were dividing
the United States: asylum seekers coming to the country by boat from Indonesia
and Malaysia, many of them Muslim. Days before Lachlan’s arrival, a national
neo-Nazi leader, Blair Cottrell — who had recently been fined for “inciting
contempt for Muslims” — appeared on one of the network’s shows. Cottrell had
been interviewed on Australian TV before, but his deferential treatment by Sky
caused a national outcry. Under gentle questioning, he called on his countrymen
to “reclaim our traditional identity as Australians” and advocated limiting
immigration to those “who are not too culturally dissimilar from us,” such as
white South African farmers. (Sky apologized and suspended
the program.)
Inside Lachlan’s living
room, the talk turned to national politics. “Do you think Malcolm is going to
survive?” Lachlan asked his staff. Malcolm was Malcolm Turnbull, the relatively
moderate Australian prime minister who took office a few years earlier. Inside
the government, a small right-wing uprising had been brewing over his plans to
bring Australia into compliance with the Paris climate accord. It is well
established among those who have worked for the Murdochs that the family
rarely, if ever, issues specific directives. They convey their desires
indirectly, maybe with a tweet — as Murdoch did in the spring of 2016 when he
decided to back Trump — or a question, the subtleties of which are rarely lost
on their like-minded news executives.
In the days that
followed, Sky Australia’s hosts and the Murdoch papers — the newspaper editors
had their own drinks session at Lachlan’s mansion — set about trying to throw
Turnbull out of office. Alan Jones, a Sky host
and conservative radio star, called for a party “rebellion” against him on his
program. Days later, the Murdochs’ major paper in Sydney, The Daily Telegraph,
broke the news that a
leadership challenge was in the works. Cheering on the
challenge, Andrew
Bolt, the Murdoch columnist who was once convicted of violating the
country’s Racial Discrimination Act, told his Sky viewers that Turnbull’s
“credibility is shot, his authority is gone.” Peta Credlin, the
commentator who was Tony Abbott’s former chief of staff, chewed out a member of
Parliament for the chaos inside Turnbull’s administration. The Australian, the
Murdochs’ national newspaper, was soon declaring Turnbull a “dead man walking.”......
It was always difficult
to separate the personal from the financial and the ideological with the
Murdochs. All appeared to be in evidence in their decision to turn against
Turnbull. To begin with, he took office a few years earlier by ousting
Lachlan’s friend Tony Abbott, and it was Abbott who helped lead the Turnbull
uprising. Turnbull’s policies were also not perfectly aligned with the
Murdochs’ interests. For instance, he had expedited the construction of the
country’s national
broadband network, which directly threatened the family’s highly profitable
cable business by giving Netflix a government-subsidized pipeline into
Australian homes.
The small number of
Australian media outlets that the Murdochs did not own portrayed
Turnbull’s ouster as a Murdoch-led “coup.” Kevin Rudd, a former prime
minister whom the family had helped push out of office years earlier, described
Murdoch in an op-ed in The Sydney Morning Herald as “the
greatest cancer on the Australian democracy.”
Turnbull was replaced by
the right-wing nationalist Scott Morrison, who quickly aligned himself with
Trump. The two met in person for the first time in late 2018 at the G-20 summit
meeting in Buenos Aires. “I think it’s going to be a great relationship,” Trump
said afterward. With a national election scheduled for May 2019, Morrison
quickly staked his party’s prospects on the polarizing issue of immigration,
promising a new hard-line approach. It dovetailed with Sky’s regular prime-time
programming. Andrew Bolt, who previously warned of a “foreign invasion,”
said in
one segment, “We also risk importing ethnic and religious strife, even
terrorism,” as the screen flashed an image of Australia’s potential future:
rows of Muslims on a city street, bowing toward Mecca. When the opposing Labor
Party managed to muscle through legislation that would allow doctors to
transfer severely sick migrants in detention centers on the Australian islands
of Nauru and Manus into hospitals on the mainland, Sky Australia’s prime-time
hosts went on the offensive.
Read the full
article here.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)