Morrison Government caught out attempting to retrospectively censor native bird export information

The Guardian, 4 April 2019:

The Australian government has attempted to retrospectively censor critical information related to exports of rare and exotic birds to a German organisation headed by a convicted kidnapper, fraudster and extortionist.

Guardian Australia revealed late last year that Australia had permitted the export of 232 birds, some worth tens of thousands of dollars, to the Brandenburg-based Association for the Conservation of Threatened Parrots (ACTP) between 2015 and November 2018.

Conservation groups and federal politicians had repeatedly expressed concern about the group, which is headed by Martin Guth, a man with multiple criminal convictions.

The Guardian’s investigation relied on internal government documents secured through freedom of information laws, released in August.

Guardian Australia made subsequent freedom of information requests and received further documents in January. But the federal department of environment has now attempted to retrospectively redact parts of the documents, saying it accidentally released information it shouldn’t have.

Some of the inadvertently released information could “facilitate fraudulent export applications”, the department said. The department had also accidentally released “personal information, such as birth dates and name, and confidential business information”.

The department has asked Guardian Australia to destroy its copies of the documents, and not further disseminate the newly redacted details.

“While we understand that the FOI decisions have already been made, and that you are under no obligation to follow the department’s wishes, we kindly request that you either: destroy the documents that the department has previously released to you and instead, use the redacted documents attached to this letter; or otherwise ensure that the information in question … is not further disclosed or made publicly available,” the department said in a letter emailed to the Guardian on Wednesday, but dated last month.

The documents have not been published on the department’s online FOI disclosure log. The department’s stance suggests that other parties – journalists or conservation groups, for example – would be subject to the newly introduced redactions if they requested the same documents.

Freedom of information experts say the government’s actions have “no legal basis”……

The new redactions remove details that made it possible for Guardian Australia to establish that the operator of ACTP’s Netherlands facility was convicted in 2015 of involvement as a buyer in a trading ring that was illegally selling protected exotic birds.

The department has also removed identification numbers for the birds that were exported to Germany, arguing that its original decision to release that information could lead to “fraudulent” exports of Australian birds overseas.

It has also blacked out permit numbers from the export permits issued in Australia, the names of individuals who operate other ACTP facilities in Germany and in other countries, and removed information relating to ACTP’s exemption status from corporate tax.

The redactions remove images of ACTP’s main breeding facility and maps that illustrate its layout.

In recent months, Guardian Australia has been trying to establish whether the department undertook adequate due diligence to ensure that all of the birds sent to ACTP were legally captive bred.

But the department has refused to release names of suppliers in Australia that would show the chain of custody for each of the birds before they were exported to Germany. Those details were redacted from FoI documents released to the Guardian in January and from documents tabled after an order for the production of documents in parliament.

Attempts by government agencies to retrospectively recover or redact FOI documents have previously been found to have no lawful basis under NSW freedom of information law. Landcom, the NSW government’s land and property development organisation, attempted to retrieve documents it had accidentally released to a school committee group in 2005, and took its case to the NSW Administrative Decisions Tribunal.

The tribunal found it had no power whatsoever to retrieve previously released FOI documents.

Tweet of the Week

During the last LNP gov, Centrelink required my blind son to have vision tests to see if his sight improved. He was born without eyes. https://t.co/cSCjxsPmvt

— EggShellBlonde (@HeyMum3) April 9, 2019

What a difference twenty-two months makes to that textbook hypocrite, Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison

A little over twenty-two months out from a federal election this was then Australian Treasurer Scott Morrison's voting down the creation of a Royal Commission into the abuse and neglect of people with a disability........ 

Less than six weeks out from a federal election Morrison will have to fight very hard to win we have tears being shed by the Prime Minister.....

* Snapshots by Highlighter‏ @tvdc99

Is NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian intending "to make it a priority to finish off effective protection of the natural environment – something started years ago under the Coalition State Government"?

On Thursday 4 April 2019 the local Knitting Nannas held a protest knit-in outside the electoral office of NSW Nationals MP for Clarence, Chris Gulaptis.

Below is the text of their letter to Mr. Gulaptis dated the same day.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 Knitting Nannas Against Gas

Grafton Loop

c/- PO Box 763

Grafton 2460

knaggrafton@gmail.com

4th April 2019

                                                                        C O P Y

Mr C Gulaptis MP

Member for Clarence

11 Prince Street

GRAFTON  NSW 2460

Dear Mr Gulaptis

Dissolving of Office of Environment and Heritage

The Grafton Nannas are very concerned about your Government’s recently announced intention of doing away with the Office of Environment and Heritage as an independent entity.

We have long been worried about the Government’s lack of concern about protecting the natural environment for current and future generations of humans as well as for other life forms.

Government policies over recent years have been seen by many in our community and elsewhere as being a de facto war on the natural environment.

For example:

• Changes to vegetation laws which have led to a large increase in clearing of habitat which is important to the survival of native flora and fauna.  This weakening of the former laws is also likely to lead to increased topsoil loss and general land degradation.

• Changes to logging regulations which threaten the sustainability of native forests which belong to the people of NSW – and not to logging interests. These changes include limiting pre-logging fauna surveys, an inevitable increase in clear-felling, and reduction in the width of buffer zones along streams.  

• Failure to protect the health of rivers, particularly those in the Murray-Darling Basin.  For years the NSW Government, as well as the Federal Government, has been pandering to the irrigation industry while ignoring the need to protect river health by ensuring that flows are adequate for river health.  The drought is not an excuse for this folly.

• Other examples include the cutting of funding to the National Parks & Wildlife Service and penny-pinching changes to its structure as well as the failure to ensure that the existing weak environment laws are enforced and appropriate penalties imposed on those who breach them.

We are aware that the Premier recently stated that her Government would make the environment a priority. 

Since hearing that OEH was to lose any of the limited independence it currently has and is to be pushed into a mega-Planning Department, we are left wondering about what the premier actually meant about “priority”.  Did she mean that she intended to make it a priority to finish off effective protection of the natural environment – something started years ago under the Coalition State Government?  It looks very much like that to the Nannas.

Yours sincerely

Leonie Blain

On behalf of the Grafton Nannas

 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Morrison’s plan to use whatever is left in Coalition MPs and Senators electoral communications parliamentary allowance to fund his national election campaign has been scuttled

Australian Senate Hansard, 3 April 2019, excerpt:

REGULATIONS AND DETERMINATIONS Parliamentary Business Resources Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2019 Disallowance Senator FARRELL (South Australia—Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate) (21:29): I move: That item 4 of the Parliamentary Business Resources Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2019, made under the Parliamentary Business Resources Act 2017, be disallowed [F2019L00177]. The PRESIDENT: The question is that business of the Senate notice of motion No. 2, standing in the name of Senator Farrell, relating to the disallowance of item 4 of the Parliamentary Business Resources Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2019, be agreed to. The Senate divided. [21:34] (The President—Senator Ryan)

Ayes ......................34 Noes ......................26 Majority.................8

The New Daily, 4 April 2019:

The Morrison government has lost a bid to allow MPs to use taxpayer-funded electoral allowances to pay for TV and radio advertisements during the looming federal election campaign.

Late on Wednesday night – in one of this parliament’s last votes before the election is called – the Senate dumped a government regulation allowing $22 million of public money to be used for political ads in the lead up to May’s federal poll.

MPs have a budget of about $137,000 for electorate communications, while senators have up to $109,000.

Under existing rules, they cannot use office expenses money to pay for content on television or radio. The government’s changes would have allowed them to use printing entitlements to buy TV and radio ads for the first time.

The Coalition had argued lifting the ban on TV and radio promotions would have put Australian media on a level playing field by ensuring all communities had the same access to information from their federal MP.

But Labor frontbencher Don Farrell, who moved the disallowance motion in the Senate, accused Prime Minister Scott Morrison of wasting taxpayers’ money in a bid to save his job.

“Publicly funded office budgets are for members and senators to communicate with their constituents – not for spamming voters with hollow election slogans from the ad man, Scott Morrison,” he said.

With the support of the Greens and a handful of crossbench senators, Labor won the disallowance vote.... 

The heroes of the hour who saved us all from what was clearly an attempt to create a lasting rort at taxpayer’s expense were:

Bilyk, CL. Carr, KJ. Chisholm, A. Ciccone, R. Di Natale, R. Dodson, P. Farrell, D. Faruqi, M. Gallacher, AM. Griff, S. Hanson-Young, SC. Hinch, D. Ketter, CR.  (teller) Kitching, K. Lines, S. Marshall, GM. McAllister, J. McCarthy, M. McKim, NJ. O'Neill, DM. Patrick, RL. Polley, H. Pratt, LC. Rice, J. Siewert, R. Smith, DPB. Steele-John, J. Sterle, G. Storer, TR. Urquhart, AE. Waters, LJ. Watt, M. Whish-Wilson, PS. Wong, P.

Well done one and all!

When local people power has a win

The rejection of a $25 million development at Byron Bay’s Ewingsdale Rd for a 282-lot subdivision was met with thunderous applause.

Villa World’s plan for a controversial development was unanimously rejected by members of the Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel at a meeting on Monday.

It was the second DA for the West Byron site to be refused by the panel, as a $40 million development put forward by West Byron Landowners Group was rejected earlier this year.

Numerous speakers pleaded with the NRPP on many grounds, including that they “did not want a Gold Coast” in Byron Bay.

The proposal was refused on 10 grounds including: adverse impacts to surrounding properties; a significant visual impact and undesirable impact on the street scape inconsistent with the northern entrance to Byron Bay; the development was likely to have had adverse impacts on threatened species and ecosystems; no adequate discharge of storm water and was not considered in the public’s interest.

Echo NetDaily, 9 April 2019:

No social or environmental license

Newly reelected MP Tamara Smith said this another great win for our community and people power. ‘The thousands of community submissions and actions highlighting the fundamental flaws in developing this land have successfully culminated in the NRPP rejecting both subdivision plans – against the odds,’ she said.

‘With the rejection of both the West Byron subdivision applications by the NRPP the developers should immediately approach the State government and request that they buy the land and restore it to the Cumbebin Swamp Reserve.

Ms Smith said there is no social or environmental license for a subdivision of the swamp land known as West Byron. ‘So why waste more money on legal battles when the community is utterly opposed.

‘Restitution is on offer for the landowners and they should jump at the chance to be made whole and walk away. They need only look to Condon Hill at Lennox to see decades of iconic land ownership that has never passed muster to see development on it. Get out now is my advice.

‘I strongly advise Byron Shire Council to shelve any idea of a reduced sub-division and instead respectfully ask them to help me actually deliver what the community wants – No West Byron Mega-development.”

Justifiable opposition

Former Byron Shire Mayor Jan Barham also spoke to the panel. She said she wanted to acknowledge the amazing efforts of the community in their justifiable opposition to the inappropriate proposals for the West Byron lands.

‘This development fails on every point,’ she said. ‘From the destruction of biodiversity and the threat to the local koala population and wallum froglet, the filling of a flood prone area, likely negative impact on the Belongil Creek and the Cape Byron Marine Park and further traffic chaos on Ewingsdale Road, that will not be alleviated by the bypass.

‘I’m confident these points have been raised in sufficient detail in the submissions to inform a refusal.’

Ms Barham summed up the general feeling on the day. ‘The refusal of Villa World by the Planning Panel alongside the previous West Byron refusal, justifies years of commitment by our community to protect and preserve our special place, with evidence, passion and genuine concern for the future,’ she said after the decision was announced.

‘It makes me feel so proud to be a member of an activist community who knows the value of standing up for what we believe in and thankfully, this time, the independence of the process delivered the right outcome.

‘Well done to everyone who took the time to be involved, no doubt there will be more challenges to come but the refusals vindicates us and our role as protectors.’

Climate change, what’s climate change?

Because the majority of rightwing members of the Australian Parliament refuse to accept the realities of climate change the nation ended up with legislation like this on 3 April 2019.

Unfortunately in this they were aided and abetted by Labor senators even though these senators had reservations about unintended consequences

Medium.com, 3 April 2019:

In the final sitting day before the election Senators passed a bill to greatly increase the powers and funding of the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation (Efic).

Under the guise of Australia’s ‘step-up’ in the Pacific, the Senate has turned this obscure agency into a larger ‘development bank’ for infrastructure oversea.

The changes were strongly criticised by Australia’s development community, and as Australia Institute research has warned, risk fast-tracking taxpayer funding towards fossil fuel projects in the region, undermining the climate action on which the safety of the Pacific depends.

What the Efic?

Efic is a lending agency whose core job is lending to support Australian exporters, ostensibly small and medium sized enterprises.

In recent years the government has used Efic to administer the Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility (NAIF) — the agency that wanted to lend Adani $1 billion dollars for its railway line — and the government’s multi-billion dollar Defence Exports Facility.

By passing the Export Finance and Insurance Corporation Amendment (Support for Infrastructure Financing) Bill 2019, the Senate gives Efic nearly unfettered scope to fund any sort of infrastructure, and access to an extra billion dollars, increasing six-fold its ‘callable capital’ to draw on to back up even larger loans.

Despite the stated purpose of supporting development, under the changes Efic is required only to maximise ‘Australian benefits’. There is no mention at all of the development needs and challenges of countries where Efic would invest.

Instead, Efic can now lend simply to benefit “a person carrying on business or other activities in Australia”, which the government states will empower Efic to promote fossil fuel “energy” exports from Australia.

Taxpayers Funding Fossil Fuels

Efic has a long and sorry history of funding fossil fuel projects, both overseas and in Australia. Half of its current portfolio is in the fossil fuel and mining sectors.

Despite being a Commonwealth agency, Efic explicitly states it is no constrained by the goals of the Paris Agreement and it has refused to disclose how it considers climate risk.

The biggest thing Efic has ever done was backing the PNG LNG project, a massive gas project in Papua New Guinea. Efic was warned in advance it would likely lead to civil conflict and economic disruption. And it did, sparking conflict verging on civil war.

Right now, under current rules, Efic is thinking about lending money to Woodside to develop an oil and gas field in Senegal in Africa. Efic has previously been in talks with Adani about its coal mine……..