Some online responses to NSW Nats Steve Cansdell's announcement that he had given false evidence in a stat dec

A brief selection taken from the comments sections of online newspaper articles, blog posts/comments and Twitter:

He said 'he might have been able to ride out the political storm, but did not it would have been honourable to do so.' Honourable??? After lies and deceit?
And still gets to keep a parliamentary pension. Should hang his head in shame.

this also must cast questions and that the mayor was telling the truth about being offered the nationals pre-selection.

Bloody depressing this - I can't see any question but he had to go - not "tough it out", God almighty!

I'm sure he would have never owned up to it, unless someone had him by the nuts.

So much for Mr law and order. Do as I say not as I do!

What a waste. I hope he makes a comeback in public life, as he has a lot to contribute.

What a waste of a great opportunity for our valley.
Yes he has let us down. So sad for us. I feel betrayed

I have no sympathy and I don't think we need a "comeback" thanks. That aside, I wish him well.

It beggars belief that this guy was an MP. He had not "recognised the gravity of the offence." I am not sure what is worse, deliberately lying on a stat dec or not understanding that this isn't merely an error of judgement- it is a criminal offence. My sympathies to Clarence voters for having either an idiot or a criminal for a member of parliament.

After banging on about law and order for years this man should be ashamed. And to keep his very lucrative parliamentary pension is truly disgusting.

Deputy Premier, Mr Stoner said Cansdell had informed him today of TWO allegations levelled against him.

So why aren't the allegations over misuse of staff allowances being explained?

Never liked him - never voted for him - glad to see the back of him.

There's sure to be more to come on this. Stay tuned.

which staff member took the blame ? more importantly why? What persuasion or influence was used? what are the consequences for h now?

Anyone remember that letter to the editor questioning the legitimacy of Cansdell's last taxpayer-funded study tour overseas? Hhmmmmm....

'I don't think it would have been honourable to ride it out.'
What a crock of poo! By resigning before any charges are laid he manages to retain a parliamentary pension of more than $80,000 a year.

They reckon he might have resigned before being publicly discovered to save his $80,000 or so per annum pension; reported himself to police to get a 25% discount on any sentence he might possibly receive if the matter of falsifying a stat dec ever went to court; announced both actions on a Friday to limit the amount of immediate media coverage in the hope of taking some of the heat out of the disclosure

Didn't Cansdell (who was made parliamentary secretary to the NSW Police Minister) get well over 62% of first preference votes in the Clarence electorate at the recent 2011 NSW election? The man just threw away a seat for life. :-0

A lying NSW Liberal Party Member of Parliament facing gaol. Will George Brandis help the NSW Police this time?

Steve Cansdell should have the same fate as did Marcus Einfeld, maybe reopen Kirkconnell to house him??

re: Cansdell. I usually vote Lib, but wait w/ baited breath 2 c if BOF demands own resignation after 3 MPs SNAFU in 1 year

Rumour Cansdell resigned as 3rd party who stated 'she' was driving car was about to tell all and then more.

The media seem to be treating this offence as a mere peccadillo, but had Cansdell been a labor MP I'm sure it would be a cause of great concern or, more likely, even hysteria and panic.

Steve Cansdell is out. Who is next?

nobody adds 1+1 and suggests that the former staffer whom the newspapers say was going to report the matter is the same staffer who lied for him in 2005 and the very same who is alleging that he abused his parliamentary allowance/s.

Life's journey - an alternating joy and a bitch

 

This brief observation on life with early onset senile dementia can only be viewed as a link, but it’s well worth the mouse click:

http://open.abc.net.au/collections/1-year-in-01yr0in#/items/23zb3zx

 

A preview of a letter to the editor in The Daily Examiner

Will the notorious right winger who regularly rabbits on in the letters column of The Daily Examiner save himself a bit of time and effort and use the letter that appeared above his name in today's paper as a template for his next contribution?
Today the cereal serial letters writer had free shots at a Minister in the Gillard government, so if he's fair dinkum and even-handed tomorrow's edition will carry another effort from him with paragraphs that begin as shown below. All he has to do is insert the name of his hero, the now disgraced former Member for Clarence.

Admission: The cereal / serial error was due to this writer thinking about fruit loops at the time.

Political Independence: what a difference six months makes

Richie Williamson for Clarence on Facebook 12 March 2011:

Real representation needs to be free of party politics to be truly effective. The people of Clarence deserve a state representative whose entire focus is on the electorate.

The Northern Rivers Echo 17 March 2011:

It is for this reason I am proud to be running as an independent. I will always put Clarence first.

The Sydney Morning Herald 17 September 2011:

Mr Williamson, who stood as an independent, said he would be ''willing to have that discussion'' if approached to stand for the Nationals.

The Sunday Telegraph 18 September 2011:

NSW Politics: prized bull to mincemeat

A Week Is A Long Time In Politics says Clarence Valley Today on Sunday 18 September 2011

Here is Steve Cansdell (4th from the right with hat) winning best celebrity hamburger at the Gate to Plate Market one week ago. On Friday he resigned from the New South Wales Parliament as Member for Clarence after making a false statement on a Statutory Declaration over a speeding fine. What do they say about roosters to feather dusters or is that prized bulls to mincemeat in this situation?
Click here for a trip down memory lane.

*Thanks to Mark for allowing this cross-posting

NSW Police media release re NSW Nats Steve Cansdell

 

Just for the record.....

NSW Police Force media release

Man facing charges after allegedly making false statutory declaration - Grafton

Friday, 16 September 2011 04:53:07 PM

Police are conducting investigations into an alleged false statutory declaration for a traffic offence six years ago.

About 12pm on 28 September 2005, a then 54-year-old man was driving a Ford Falcon along the Pacific Highway at Woodburn when his vehicle was allegedly detected travelling in excess of the speed limit.

A speed camera infringement notice was subsequently issued and mailed to the man’s home address.

It will be alleged on 25 October 2005, the man signed a statutory declaration and nominated another person as driving the vehicle.

Police will allege the false declaration was made to avoid the loss of demerit points and subsequent loss of his drivers licence.

About 11:50am today (Friday 16 September 2011) the man attended Grafton Police Station with his legal representative and was spoken to by police.

Investigations into the matter are continuing.

U.S. organic seed growers find friends in their fight against self-replicating GM technology

In the matter of ORGANIC SEED GROWERS AND TRADE ASSOCIATION, et al v MONSANTO COMPANY AND MONSANTO TECHNOLOGY LLC; the summary from the amicus brief lodged by Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance, Biodynamic Farming and Gardening Association, Carolina Farm Stewardship Association, Ecological Famers of Ontario, Fair Food Matters, International Organic Inspectors Association, Michigan Land Trustees, Natural Environment Ecological Management, Nebraska Sustainable Agriculture Association, Organic Council of Ontario, Slow Food USA, and Virginia Independent Consumers and Farmers Association.

Case 1:11-cv-02163-NRB Document 39 Filed 08/10/11 Page 9 of 23

SUMMARY

Monsanto has a track record of aggressive enforcement of its patent rights. Monsanto has sued or settled with hundreds of farmers, and investigated unknown numbers more. Because of the nature of Monsanto’s patented seeds, the individual Plaintiffs and the farmer members of Plaintiff organizations (hereinafter collectively “Plaintiff farmers”) cannot avoid infringing on Monsanto’s patents unless they entirely abandon growing corn, soybeans, canola, cotton, sugar beets, and, as of this year, alfalfa. While Monsanto tries to downplay the threat of enforcement by pointing to its “commitment” not to sue farmers for “trace” infringement, this provides no enforceable protections for Plaintiffs. Because of the nature of the patented seeds and the realities of farming, it is certain that at least some of the Plaintiff farmers already have more than trace contamination, and the number of such affected farmers will only grow over time. While many of the Plaintiff farmers are certified organic, not all are, so the simple fact that Monsanto has yet to sue a certified organic farmer has no impact on their standing.

Not only does Monsanto’s patented technology inevitably lead to infringement through no fault of the Plaintiffs, but, by their design, the majority of Monsanto’s patented crops only

provide the alleged benefits if a farmer applies herbicides, specifically Roundup®, directly to the crop. Monsanto could easily protect its patent rights by agreeing not to sue for unintentional contamination absent an affirmative action by the farmer to make use of the patented traits. By failing to do so, and instead offering an ambiguous and ultimately meaningless commitment, Monsanto has made it clear that it intends to maintain the threat of patent infringement lawsuits against Plaintiff farmers and those similarly situated.

Plaintiff farmers have, by the simple act of farming corn, soybeans, canola, cotton, sugar beets, or alfalfa crops, undertaken meaningful steps towards infringement. Due to Monsanto’s

decision to release patented seeds and market them for widespread planting, it is now impossible for farmers to remain 100% free of genetically modified crops because of the multitude of ways that contamination can occur.

Given the difficulties in minimizing GM contamination, farmers must make numerous decisions about which steps are worthwhile for them and which steps are not. They are not able

to make these decisions based on their own and their customers’ interests, but must instead make these decisions with the threat of litigation against a giant corporation looming over their heads. The constant threat of a patent infringement suit by Monsanto creates significant, unquantifiable costs for the Plaintiff farmers and similarly situated farmers. Unless this Court allows this case to proceed, the Plaintiff farmers will face the choice of abandoning growing such crops or risking prosecution whenever Monsanto chooses.

More on OSGATA here.

Clarence lawmaker makes the news on the international scene

The Shanghai Daily has picked up and run with a piece on the Cansdell circus.

Read more here.

This is what The Climate Institute told Australia's federal politicians on 11 September 2011

This is what The Climate Institute told Australia's federal politicians – but are those on the Opposition benches listening?

The Climate Institute September 11, 2011 media release:

The independent Climate Institute has launched a new Myth Busters series and mailed the Top 5 to all 225 Members of Parliament on the eve of debate on the Clean Energy Future legislation.

Institute CEO, John Connor, said the mother of all scare campaigns had left many Australians and probably a few politicians confused and wrongly forecasting economic doom and gloom.

“We have launched these new Myth Busters to correct the record. Australia is a big polluter. We can have significant pollution reduction while growing jobs. Australia is at no risk of leading the world in taking action.”

“Instead, taking decisive action now will open up new clean energy opportunities, creating up to 34,000 new jobs in the electricity sector alone by 2030, and ensure our industries remain globally competitive as the world switches to cleaner energy and cleaner economies.

“It’s time for our politicians to stop the squabbling and remove the sensationalism that has dominated this issue and get on with a mature debate on the challenges and opportunities of taking action.”

“We’ve written to all MPs, providing them with a package of ‘Myth Busters’ to set the record straight on pricing and limiting pollution, and the real implications and opportunities for Australia.”

Each MP has been sent a package of five ‘Myth Busters’:

1. MYTH: Australia is not a significant polluter so there is no need for us to act.

• FACT: Australia is the world’s 15th largest total emitter and has the highest amount of emissions per person among the major polluters (Figures 1 and 2).1 Whilst Australia accounts for around 1.5 per cent of global emissions, our total pollution levels are comparable to those of Mexico, United Kingdom, South Korea, Italy, France and the Ukraine. This is despite the fact all of these nations have populations at least twice that of Australia.

2. MYTH: A price on pollution will not do anything to help the environment.

• FACT: A price on pollution will make new cleaner energy technologies relatively cheaper than older dirtier sources. As products and services made from cleaner energy sources become cheaper, businesses and households will change their investment and purchasing decisions to save money, meaning the Australian economy will increasingly rely on cleaner energy sources like gas, solar and wind. Over time, this will decrease the amount of carbon pollution Australia produces. Combined with the action of other countries this can help avoid accelerating climate change.

3. MYTH: A pollution price will see the demise of mining and other sectors. There will be massive job losses.

• FACT: Pollution reduction and jobs growth are not mutually exclusive. All credible studies show strong employment growth under a pollution price and in the transition to a low carbon economy. It’s estimated we’ll see an additional 1.6 million jobs between now and 2020 whilst cutting pollution by at least 159 million tonnes. Even the coal industry is expected to see between 10,000-16,000 new mining jobs above 2008 levels.

4. MYTH: Other countries aren’t acting so why should Australia move ahead of the rest of the world?

• FACT: All major economies are acting on climate change, driving clean energy investment and developing new green industries. There is absolutely no risk of Australia moving ahead of the rest of the world; the far greater risk is that Australia gets left behind.

5. MYTH: If you have a pollution price then you don’t need other clean energy measures.

• FACT: A pollution price is central to how we begin to effectively address carbon pollution levels; however, it’s not the only policy measure we need to undertake. Complementary policies, that drive renewable energy development, promote energy efficiency and promote farm sector solutions, also need to be an important part of Australia’s holistic and lower cost response to climate change.

The full set of ‘Myth Busters’ is available here.
For further information:
John Connor | CEO, The Climate Institute | 02 8239 6299
Tom Laurie | Communications, The Climate Institute | 03 9600 4039