Moir cartoon from The Sydney Morning Herald
Council report dated 12 September 2006 is attached and contains detailed background information. Following the resolution of 12 September 2006, the General Manager and Deputy General Manager (Civil and Corporate) met with Mr Joe Feeney, representing the owners, on 7 November 2006. Mr Feeney was not amenable to Council's offer of $10,320.25 plus the refund of $1,325.00 for DA fees and in fact made a counter-request in writing dated 7 November 2006 for $150,000. This was not accepted as it was substantially outside the figure set by Council.
ISSUES
A copy of the submission from McNamara James and O'Connor dated 18 July 2008 is attached.
- What action did the Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECC) take in relation to the report of illegal land clearing in Maclean, Lot No. 1711, 1712 (DP 616116) and Lot 1072 (DP 702367)?
- Did the landowner have a Property Vegetation Plan in relation to these properties?
- Has the landowner made any representations to DECC as to the reason for undertaking the clearing activity?
- Is the clearing undertaken by the landowner covered by any exemptions under the Native Vegetation Act?
- Did DECC notify the Clarence Valley Council staff of the state conservation significance of the Gulmarrad area in mid 2007?
- Specifically, what advice did DECC communicate to the Clarence Valley Council?
- Has DECC or any representative of DECC visited and inspected the land in Maclean, Lot No. 1711, 1712 (DP 616116) and Lot 1072 (DP 702367)?
- Did DECC identify any old growth Endangered Ecological Communities (EEC) on the land?
- What findings, preliminary or final, have DECC made in relation to the construction of roadway and other infrastructure on the site?
- Does the process of sediment moving into Endangered Ecological Communities Swamp Sclerophyll Forest fall within the scope of matters prescribed in Schedule 3 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (General) Regulation 1998?
- If evidence indicates that sediment created by the clearing process has polluted water in EECs will DECC use Section 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 to prosecute the land owner or holder?
- If not, why not?
- The alleged illegal clearing was first reported to the Department of Environment and Climate Change on 18 July 2008 and the matter is being investigated.
- No record of a Property Vegetation Plan has been identified to date.
- Yes. The landowner indicated that the clearing was undertaken for agricultural purposes, in accordance with exemptions available under the Native Vegetation Act 2003 for "routine agricultural management activities".
- The Department is investigating this issue as part of its broader investigation.
- Yes, as part of broader advice provided to a number of local councils on the North Coast.
- The Department provided maps to Clarence Valley Council (and other councils on the North Coast) showing areas of state, regional and local biodiversity significance. The mapping identified areas of state biodiversity significance in the Gulmarrad area.
- Yes. An initial inspection was undertaken on 23 July 2008.
- It is not appropriate to comment as this is part of an ongoing legal investigation.
- It is not appropriate to comment as this is part of an ongoing legal investigation.
- Yes.
- The local council is the appropriate regulatory authority with respect to water pollution issues on the property.
- See response to question 10.
Did anybody bother to count the number of times that the Federal Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, Stephen Conroy, assured Australians that they would have the option of 'opting out' of any Internet ISP filtering scheme the Rudd Government foolishly put in place?
Hands up the number of people who telephoned the Minister's office and were also told that they could 'opt out' of ISP filtering?
Well it seems as though we have all been lied to by an arrogant Labor minister in an increasingly paternalistic Rudd Government.
Global Voices Advocacy on Friday:
The issue of internet censorship generally involves countries deemed non-democratic or "repressive" (something I discuss in my new book, The Blogging Revolution.) We regularly read reports about the regimes in China or Iran blocking countless "subversive" websites for overtly political gain.
Alas, a growing number of nations in the West are examining the possibility of censoring sites that allegedly harm society. France and Germany are leading the way and the United States is not far behind.
We can now add Australia to the list.
Computer World reported on 13 October 2008:
Australians will be unable to opt-out of the government's pending Internet content filtering scheme, and will instead be placed on a watered-down blacklist, experts say.
Under the government's $125.8 million Plan for Cyber-Safety, users can switch between two blacklists which block content inappropriate for children, and a separate list which blocks illegal material.
Pundits say consumers have been lulled into believing the opt-out proviso would remove content filtering altogether.
The government will iron-out policy and implementation of the Internet content filtering software following an upcoming trial of the technology, according to the Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy.
A spokesman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the filters will be mandatory for all Australians.
"Labor's plan for cyber-safety will require ISPs to offer a clean feed Internet service to all homes, schools and public Internet points accessible by children," Marshall said.
"The upcoming field pilot of ISP filtering technology will look at various aspects of filtering, including effectiveness, ease of circumvention, the impact on internet access speeds and cost."
Internet Service Providers (ISPs) contacted by Computerworld say blanket content filtering will cripple Internet speeds because the technology is not up to scratch............
Newton said advisers to Minister Conroy have told ISPs that Internet content filtering will be mandatory for all users.
The government reported it does not expected to prescribe which filtering technologies ISPs can use, and will only set blacklists of filtered content, supplied by the Australia Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).
EFA chair Dale Clapperton said in a previous article that Internet content filtering could lead to censorship of drugs, political dissident and other legal freedoms.
"Once the public has allowed the system to be established, it is much easier to block other material," Clapperton said.
According to preliminary trials, the best Internet content filters would incorrectly block about 10,000 Web pages from one million.
But wait for it - here's the anomaly according to The Australian:
THE federal Government says it may be flexible with mobile internet providers in its mandatory ISP filtering policy....
Telstra spokesman Andrew Maiden said network filters were becoming increasingly difficult for carriers to install as more phones had the smarts needed to let users explore beyond the confines of their carrier's "walled garden", where content was much easier to control.
Internet service providers (ISPs) are sitting on the fence on whether to participate in the government's upcoming live trial for ISP-level filtering of undesirable internet content, with their involvement depending heavily on the terms of the trial.
* Don't bother trying to access Senator Conroy's January 2008 media release in which he promised the 'opt out' feature in his Internet censorship proposal - you will receive a 404 notice and immediately be re-directed to http://www.minister.dbcde.gov.au/ and surprise, surprise, media release 70 is no longer to be found.
Nor can one find his reported media release of 30-31 December 2007 on the same subject.
* No Clean Feed (which protests Minister Conroy's plan) is currently receiving complaints that the NSW Government is blocking its website. I can verify that entering this site will frequently see Internet Explorer close it within a minute.
If Stephen Conroy holds dual citizenship - it's time Kevin Rudd advised this little dictator to go home before he loses the electoral base the Prime Minister needs to get re-elected in 2010.
