Cartoons of the Week

David Rowe

Mark David

Lismore City Council withdraws plan to increase rates due to community backlash and concern over potential COVID-19 economic impact

The discovery that Southern Cross University campus at Lismore had been exposed to the COVID-19 virus in early March 2020 and news that weeks before that a number of workers on the Pacific Highway upgrade had also been exposed, indicates that this virus is now in the Northern Rivers region. 

LIsmore City Council took that into consideration, along with the impacts of recent drought and bushfires, at its ordinary monthly meeting on 10 March 2020.

The Northern Star, 12 March 2020: 

Lismore City Council will be withdrawing its controversial plan to increase rates by 24 per cent over four years, partly due to growing concern over the impact of coronavirus. 

The council last year decided to apply to IPART to implement a staggered increase of 7.5, 9.4, 3.9 and 3.2 per cent over four years to fund an infrastructure and roads backlog. 

But after community backlash and further lengthy discussions within council, councillors voted in favour Tuesday night to withdraw its application to IPART. 

The fear of coronavirus, mentioned by community members and councillors, was added to the list of reasons why many people considered imposing the rate rise was the wrong decision for the region. 

Councillors also discussed at length the usual concern about the financial burden on ratepayers, the ongoing recovery from natural disasters and the low-socio-economic demographic of the region. 

Councillor Nancy Casson, who put forward the motion to withdraw the IPART application, said unless the council acted smarter, a significant rate rise would hike up the amount of homelessness and create further financial hardships on ratepayers......

According to the NSW Dept. of Health there have been 78 cases of COVID-19 in the state as of 1pm on 12 March 2020.

Out of these cases, 3 people died and at least 4 have fully recovered, leaving est. 71 people still infected.

A further 11,040 people have been tested for COVID-19 and been excluded, while another 1,181 people are under investigation in the state.

Media reports state that Australia-wide there have been 140 cases since the start of the virus outbreak.

A reminder that the NSW Nationals do not have the best interests of Northern Rivers communities at heart

This was the NSW Nationals Member of the Legislative Council Ben Franklin (left) on the subject of a particular fossil fuel whose by-products, flaring and fugitive emissions contribute to Australia's rising greenhouse gas emissions and poor water security...... 

Echo Net Daily, 21 February 2020:

A recently announced bilateral energy deal between the NSW and federal coalition governments – which includes expanding the gas industry – has the full support of local Nationals MLC Ben Franklin.

Franklin replied to the question of whether he was supportive of the expansion of the gas industry, despite it contributing to anthropogenic climate change.

He said, ‘The bilateral deal on energy signed between NSW and the federal government is a wonderful step forward’.

‘As the minister for energy and the environment Matt Kean says, “It is the single biggest state-based financial commitment to emissions reduction in the nation’s history and represents a massive Green deal for NSW”.’

It’s a statement rejected by The Greens and environmental groups.....

* Photograph from www.parliament.nsw.gov.au

Topsoil loss during 2020 flooding in the Clarence Valley

The Daily Examiner, 9 March 2020:

Anyone travelling around the recent flood-affected areas of the Valley, including along the Clarence River itself, couldn’t fail to notice the chocolate brown colour of those floodwaters.

The Orara River was particularly bad, and after the floodwaters had receded, council needed to use a front end loader to scrape thick layers of deposited mud off some roadways and bridges. The paddocks alongside creeks were likewise buried beneath a thick layer of mud.

This was always to be expected if torrential rain occurred soon after the bushfires, especially with ash washing off the bare ground into waterways.

But these floods brought more than ash. This was topsoil, something that is in short supply across much of the Australian continent. We are told that globally, some 24 billion tonnes of topsoil are lost annually through erosion, and Australia’s contribution is shameful, given we are a supposedly developed country with sufficient resources to protect this precious commodity.

Wind and water are the two main forms of erosion.

Both can be significantly mitigated simply by maintaining a good vegetation ground cover. Without that cover there is nothing to hold the soil, and this past season has highlighted that fact.

Firstly there was drought, and overgrazing to the point where only bare soil remained, resulting in one huge dust storm after another for months on end.

Then the bushfires destroyed what vegetation the livestock had left. Then came the floods, ripping apart fragile unprotected stream banks, and washing them downstream to the ocean.

Even without bushfires we lose far too much soil to erosion, and again, poor livestock management is largely to blame.

Many Australian rivers and creeks have no adequate vegetation to buffer against erosion and fewer still are fenced to exclude cattle.

As a result, these animals congregate along waterways, trampling banks, and browsing any available vegetation, so their impact is even greater than fire.

Landowners have a responsibility to manage erosion on their properties and to consider what they are leaving for future generations. If we are to solve the erosion problem, livestock management must be a focus point.

JOHN EDWARDS, Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition

COVID-19 exposure reaches the NSW Northern Rivers region in March 2020

ABC North Coast, 11 March 2020:

It is possible that another two people are already infected because of being "directly or indirectly associated with attendance at a workshop". NSW Health does not state where the workshop was held. [NSW Health, alert, 10 March 2020].

The Nationals MP for Clarence is predictable - in the first instance he always presumes the electorate is as ignorant as he is and in the second that what his bosses want is inherently right

Well it seems the nuclear lobby has resurrected that hoary chestnut, a nuclear power plant in the Clarence Valley.

This time it is at least a 2.2 gigawatt plant requiring an extensive power grid upgrade and, cooling as a once though from the Clarence River estuary or evaporative towers with off stream storage. One possible siting of the plant is in the Grafton-Koolkhan area.

https://nuclearforclimate.com.au/nsw-regions/

The NSW National Party MP for Page.....

The Daily Examiner, 9 March 2020, p.3:

There was a need for a mature debate before any decision on nuclear energy could be made, member for Clarence Chris Gulaptis has stated. 

But he believes the concept will go nowhere without first obtaining a “social licence” for the technology. 

His comments come in response to NSW Nationals leader and Deputy Premier John Barilaro expressing his, and the Nationals’ support for a bill introduced by One Nation’s Mark Latham to overturn the state’s ban on nuclear energy and uranium mining. 

Mr Gulaptis said there needed to be a clearer picture of the current state of the science as it related to nuclear energy. 

“At the moment the community’s perception of nuclear reactors is based on Fukushima, Chernobyl and Homer Simpson working at the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant,” he said. 

“Quite frankly, that’s all I understand about the technology. “I don’t know where we are with nuclear technology — I’m just like the rest of the community, and I need to know more before I can make more of a call.” 
Mr Gulaptis said scientists needed to lead a mature debate based on evidence and not fearmongering so the community could make an informed decision. 

“Whenever the question about the possibility of using nuclear energy comes up, it is always shut down by a minority, and I believe that minority is fearmongers who are just pushing that Chernobyl model down our throats,” he said. 

“Now if that’s where the technology is still at, then I certainly don’t want it. “But I believe that they have advanced significantly, just like all other technology has — people are walking around with this year’s latest iPhone in their pocket, they’re not carrying the bricks of 20 years ago......

Members of the Clarence Valley Community.....

The Daily Examiner, 10 March 2020, p.5:

The success of the recent fight against coal seam gas has reinforced the message to politicians that large scale developments such as nuclear power required a social license according to the Clarence Valley Conservation Coalition. 

Secretary of the group Leonie Blain said it was wise of Clarence MP Chris Gulaptis to realise there would need to be considerable discussion about any nuclear proposal. 

“It is interesting that Mr Gulaptis claims that the closing down of any debate about nuclear power in the past is the result of fearmongering by a minority,” she said. “I would like to know what evidence he has for this belief.” 

Ms Blain said the fact that Grafton was one of the possible sites for a nuclear power station meant there would be interest in the issue. 

“There would be considerable local interest in any debate on whether a nuclear power station should be built and where it would be located,” she said.....

Murdoch-News Corp doing a little editorial lobbying on behalf of the nuclear industry.....

The Daily Examiner, 10 March 2020, p. 11: 

It's true, we need to be able to talk openly and rationally about nuclear energy in Australia. 

Nationally, it must be considered as a low carbon emissions energy source, and a viable replacement for the phase out of coal reliance. 

In NSW, where nuclear energy and uranium mining is currently banned, it must be considered as an alternative industry for regional areas vulnerable to a future of agriculture yields being marginalised by increased desertification. 

Locally, our future depends on thinking differently and accepting new industries to boost our economy, job prospects and population growth. 

Nuclear for Climate Science [*] earmarked Grafton as one of 12 possible sites for a nuclear power station in the future. 

The Nationals’ endorsement of a call from One Nation’s Mark Latham to overturn the NSW ban has put nuclear squarely back on the agenda.....

NOTE:

[*] The correct name for this 'group' is Nuclear for Climate Australia. It has a post office box postal address in Berrima, but does not appear to be incorporated under its trademarked name or have an ABN number. It principally functions as a website.
The individual who seems to organise its social media presence is its founder Rob Parker, who coincidentally is also Vice President of the Australian Nuclear Association. It has one known associate Barrie Hill, who appears to be Managing Director of SMR Nuclear Technology Pty Ltd. 
Nuclear for Climate Australia lobbys to overturn the Australian nuclear power ban and for the adoption of Small Modular Nuclear Reactors (SMRs), which are alleged to have the same unresolved cost and safety concerns associated with larger plants and there is no consenus in the industry concerning SMRs.
Nuclear for Climate Australia has been riding the 2019-20 bushfire crisis on Twitter as a vehicle to push for nuclear power in this country.

Another perspective.....

The Climate Council, 23 January 2019:

What is a nuclear power station? 

Nuclear power stations run on uranium. When the nucleus of a uranium molecule is split inside a reactor, heat is produced. This process is called nuclear fission. The heat produced from this process is used to create steam from water. The steam drives a turbine that powers a generator. The generator creates electricity. 

Unlike coal and gas, no greenhouse gas pollution is created in the operation of the nuclear reactor. However, all other steps involved in producing nuclear power (from mining, to construction, decommissioning and waste management) result in greenhouse gas pollution. 

But nuclear energy is not “renewable”. Uranium is a finite resource just like coal or gas.... 

Nuclear power stations also present significant community, health, environmental, and cost risks associated with potential impacts from extreme weather events and natural disasters, such as occurred in Fukushima, Japan in 2011. Nuclear power stations leave a long-term and prohibitively expensive legacy of site remediation, fuel reprocessing and radioactive waste storage. 

Australia is one of the sunniest and windiest countries in the world, with enough renewable energy resources to power our country 500 times over. When compared with low risk, clean, reliable and affordable renewable energy and storage technology in Australia, nuclear power makes no sense.

Nuclear power stations are extremely expensive to build. For example, the Hinkley nuclear power station under construction in the UK will cost 20 billion pounds (AU$36 billion). Nuclear cannot compete on a cost basis with wind and solar, which are the cheapest forms of new generation. The cost of energy from the Hinkley Power station is significantly higher than large-scale solar, wind and offshore wind energy in the UK....

Australia finally gathers its courage and takes Facebook Inc to court over Cambridge Analytica privacy breaches

Office of the Australian Privacy Commissioner, media release, 9 March 2020:

The Australian Information Commissioner has lodged proceedings against Facebook in the Federal Court, alleging the social media platform has committed serious and/or repeated interferences with privacy in contravention of Australian privacy law. 

The Commissioner alleges that the personal information of Australian Facebook users was disclosed to the This is Your Digital Life app for a purpose other than the purpose for which the information was collected, in breach of the Privacy Act 1988. The information was exposed to the risk of being disclosed to Cambridge Analytica and used for political profiling purposes, and to other third parties. 

“All entities operating in Australia must be transparent and accountable in the way they handle personal information, in accordance with their obligations under Australian privacy law,” Australian Information Commissioner and Privacy Commissioner Angelene Falk said. 

“We consider the design of the Facebook platform meant that users were unable to exercise reasonable choice and control about how their personal information was disclosed. 

“Facebook’s default settings facilitated the disclosure of personal information, including sensitive information, at the expense of privacy. 

“We claim these actions left the personal data of around 311,127 Australian Facebook users exposed to be sold and used for purposes including political profiling, well outside users’ expectations.” 

The statement of claim lodged in the Federal Court today alleges that, from March 2014 to May 2015, Facebook disclosed the personal information of Australian Facebook users to This Is Your Digital Life, in breach of Australian Privacy Principle 6. Most of those users did not install the app themselves, and their personal information was disclosed via their friends’ use of the app. 

The statement of claim also alleges that Facebook did not take reasonable steps during this period to protect its users’ personal information from unauthorised disclosure, in breach of Australian Privacy Principle 11. 

Commissioner Falk considers that these were systemic failures to comply with Australian privacy laws by one of the world’s largest technology companies. 

Background 

The documents filed by the Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) in the Federal Court are: 

• Concise statement 

• Statement of claim (excluding material asserted to be confidential by Facebook) 

• Originating application 

The OAIC is an independent statutory agency established to promote and uphold privacy and information access rights. It has a range of regulatory responsibilities and powers under the Privacy Act 1988, Freedom of Information Act 1982 and Australian Information Commissioner Act 2010. 

The Privacy Act includes 13 legally binding Australian Privacy Principles (APPs) which apply to agencies and organisations covered by the Privacy Act (APP entities). 

APP 6 provides that ‘if an APP entity holds personal information about an individual that was collected for a particular purpose, the entity must not use or disclose the information for another purpose (the secondary purpose), unless the individual has consented to the use or disclosure’ (or another exception applies). 

APP 11 provides that ‘if an APP entity holds personal information, the entity must take such steps as are reasonable in the circumstances, to protect the information from misuse, interference and loss, and from unauthorised access, modification or disclosure.’ 

The Commissioner may apply to the Federal Court for a civil penalty order alleging that an APP entity has engaged in serious and/or repeated interferences with privacy in contravention of s 13G of the Privacy Act. 

The Federal Court can impose a civil penalty of up to $1,700,000 for each serious and/or repeated interference with privacy (as per the penalty rate applicable in 2014–15).