So where does Australia stand on climate change at the start of 2018?

On 21 December 2017 IPSOS Social Research Institute released its 2017 Climate Change Report which provides the findings the company’s annual climate change research.

It would appear that the Australian general public is not walking away from a belief that climate change is real, that it is affecting our lives and action on the part of government is required.

IPSOS, Climate Change Report 2017, excerpts:

Priorities of environmental action

Once again, renewable energy is the top environmental issue Australians would act on if they were in charge of decision-making. More than half (56%) identify renewable energy as an issue they would choose to address. The majority of Australians have identified renewable energy as an issue for action every year since surveying began in 2007.

Compared with 2016, there has been no movement in the top 6 issues of importance. Water and river Heath (49%) came in at number two. This is its highest rating for action since 2012 (when it was 52).

In third place in 2017 is illegal waste dumping (46%), followed by deforestation (45%), sustainability and climate change (both 43%).

In 2016 we noted that climate change had hit its highest rating since 2008 (when 47% believed it to be a top priority for action), and it retains that sixth place with more than two in five Australians once again identifying it as an issue for action.

Australians in regional areas are more likely to identify renewable energy as an issue for action compared with their counterparts in capital cities (62% ‘rest of Australia’ vs. 53% capital city residents). The same pattern is observed for water and river health (58% vs. 44%) and deforestation (51% vs. 42%).

The role of human activity in climate change

The past few years have seen a growing consensus in the political sphere that climate change is caused by human-driven processes. In the face of this change, Australians’ views of the causes of climate change have moved little in the past decade. This stasis has continued in 2017.

Only 3% of Australians think there is no such thing as climate change. Around one-in-ten (12%) believe climate change is caused entirely or mostly by natural processes. Two-in-five (42%) believe that human activity is mainly or entirely responsible for climate change and 38% believe that climate change is caused partly by humans and partly by natural processes.

Half of Australians aged under 50 years of age believe that climate change is mostly or entirely caused by human activity (50%) compared with one-third of those aged 50 and above (31%).

Voting intention, like age, is linked to public opinion on the role of human activity in climate change. Liberal voters and One Nation voters are less likely to think that climate change was mostly or entirely caused by human activity (34% and 25% respectively). Whereas, Labor voters and Greens voters are more likely to identify human activity as mostly or entirely causing climate change (50% and 69% respectively). There are no differences by geography, but those with a university degree are also more likely to say human activities are entirely or mainly responsible (51%).....

Climate change is a pressing issue with serious consequences

Most Australians think that climate change is already underway (62% either strongly or somewhat agree). More than half (54%) agree that it poses a serious threat to our way of life over the next 25 years. This increases to 64% agreement when considering the next 100 years…….

Who’s responsible for action on climate change, and who’s doing a good job?

….In 2017, Australians consider the international community to be performing best of the parties tested. More than one in five (22%) feel that the performance of the international community is very or fairly good (compared with 19% in 2016).

This means the international community overtakes State Governments in relation to perceived performance on climate change. In 2016, 20% said State Governments. This year, State Governments and the Federal Government sit in second place and 18% rated both these levels of government as very or fairly good. As in 2016, business and industry was considered the lowest performer (15% rated their performance as good).

Although business and industry is regarded as being the poorest performer of the groups tested, combined with such a low expectation of leading action on climate change, arguably this poor perception of performance is not as relevant as it is for the Federal Government (which carries the greatest weight of responsibility).

Liberal voters are far more complimentary about the current Federal Government’s performance on action on climate change (31% gave a good rating compared with 16% of Labor voters and 10% of Greens voters).

Who should be mainly responsible for action on climate change?

Participants were asked to rate the performance of the Federal Government, the international community, State Governments and business. It is apparent that Australians do not believe that any of these parties are performing particularly well on climate action.

Is lying now the default position in the public sphere?

Bald-faced lying and doing it very badly now appears so commonplace in the public sphere that one has to wonder if it is the new base line for politicians, diplomats and corporations.

Here is yet another American example….

Just perfect.
Dutch journalist to new US Ambassador: you said there were 'no go zones' in Netherlands, where are they?
Ambassador: That's fake news, I didn't say that
Journalist: We can show you that clip now.
Ambassador: Err 拉 pic.twitter.com/8ohIOzmYAc

— Sunny Hundal (@sunny_hundal) December 22, 2017

Via @sunny_hundal

Note: Once this clip went viral US ambassador to the Netherlands Pete Hoekstra issued the standard short, facile apology of a public figure caught uttering falsehoods.

Trump starts the New Year with the United Nation's thumbing its nose at his threats

Despite US President Donald Trump’s threats to pull foreign aid from countries which didn’t vote as he directed, seventy-four per cent of national representatives participating in the UN General Assembly  Emergency Session ‘Status of Jerusalem’ vote cast their ballots against the Trump Regime’s declaration of Jerusalem as the capital of the State of Israel.

United Nations News Centre, 21 December 2017:

General Assembly demands all States comply with UN resolutions regarding status of Jerusalem

Panels in the General Assembly Hall showing the final count for the resolution on ‘the status of Jerusalem, during the resumed 10th Emergency Special Session on Illegal Israeli actions in Occupied East Jerusalem and the rest of the Occupied Palestinian Territory. UN Photo/Manuel Elias

21 December 2017 – By an overwhelming majority, Member States in the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday “demanded” that all countries comply with Security Council resolutions regarding the status of Jerusalem, following an earlier decision by the United States to recognize the Holy City as the capital of Israel.

Through a resolution adopted by a recorded vote of 128 in favour to nine against (Guatemala, Honduras, Israel, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Togo, United States), with 35 abstentions, the 193-member Assembly expressed “deep regret” over recent decisions concerning the status of Jerusalem and stressed that the Holy City “is a final status issue to be resolved through negotiations in line with relevant UN resolutions.”

Action in the Assembly today follows a failed attempt by the Security Council on Monday adopt a similar text reflecting regret among the body’s members about “recent decisions regarding the status of Jerusalem,” with a veto from the United States, a permanent member of the Council.

Ahead of that failed resolution, Nickolay Mladenov, Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, told the Security Council that the security situation in Israel and the Occupied Palestinian Territory had become more tense in the wake of US President Donald Trump's decision on 6 December to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Subsequently, Yemen and Turkey, in their respective capacities as Chair of the Arab Group and the Chair of the Summit of the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation, requested the President of the General Assembly to “urgently resume’ the tenth emergency special session of the General Assembly in accordance with the so-named ‘Uniting for peace’ procedure.

This procedure, under Assembly resolution 377 (1950), is a pathway around a Security Council veto. By it, the Assembly can call an emergency special session to consider a matter “with a view to making appropriate recommendations to members for collective measures,” if the Security Council fails to act or if there is lack of unanimity among the Council’s permanent members, China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, and the United States.

Since the tenth such meeting, the Assembly has temporarily adjourned the emergency special session and authorized “the President of the General Assembly […] to resume its meeting upon request from Member States,” allowing for speedy consideration by the body of urgent issues.

The most recent resumed emergency session was in 2009 when the Assembly called a meeting on East Jerusalem and the Occupied Palestinian Territory.

Resolutions in the Assembly are non-binding and do not carry the force of international law as do measures agreed in the Security Council.

Find out more about the Assembly’s emergency special sessions and resolution 377 (1950) here

Today’s resolution demanded that “all States comply with Security Council resolutions regarding the Holy City of Jerusalem, and not recognize any actions or measures contrary to those resolutions.”

The General Assembly further affirmed that “any decisions and actions which purport to have altered the character, status or demographic composition of the Holy City of Jerusalem have no legal effect, are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with relevant resolutions of the Security Council.”

In that regard the Assembly also called upon all States to refrain from the establishment of diplomatic missions in the Holy City of Jerusalem, pursuant to Security Council resolution 478 adopted in 1980.

Reiterating its call for the reversal of the negative trends that endanger the two-State solution, the Assembly urged greater international and regional efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay, a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East.

The text of the ‘Status of Jerusalem’ resolution include the undertaking; to ask nations not to establish diplomatic missions in the historic city of Jerusalem, as delegates warned that the recent decision by the United States to do so risked igniting a religious war across the already turbulent Middle East and even beyond.

Joining historic 'medical' research which looked at the incidence of legume anorexia amongst children comes a ground-breaking article 'The science behind "man flu"'

Following on the very successful research behind The Etiology and Treatment of Childhood first published sometime last century comes the British Medical Journal’s release of more recent research articulated in The science behind “man flu” (11 December 2017).

In which women find out that:

The concept of man flu, as commonly defined, is potentially unjust. Men may not be exaggerating symptoms but have weaker immune responses to viral respiratory viruses, leading to greater morbidity and mortality than seen in women. There are benefits to energy conservation when ill. Lying on the couch, not getting out of bed, or receiving assistance with activities of daily living could also be evolutionarily behaviours that protect against predators. Perhaps now is the time for male friendly spaces, equipped with enormous televisions and reclining chairs, to be set up where men can recover from the debilitating effects of man flu in safety and comfort.

Ah, the hardships of the male condition are manifold.

Tweet of the Week

Our Prime Minister @TurnbullMalcolm ? A leader? No just a business mogul born rich and fluffed into power. Weak and characterless devoid of humanity, now a snivelling USA big biz follower. A Trump in sheep's clothing. #auspol https://t.co/AUmhQcQXYM

— chris murphy (@chrismurphys) December 22, 2017

Political Cartoons of the Week

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/cartoons/

http://www.smh.com.au/photogallery/federal-politics/cartoons/best-of-fairfax-cartoons-december-25-2017-20171225-h0a0vh.html

Shark Attacks in Australia: setting the record straight

On Saturday 23 December 2017 Liberal MP for Kooyong and Minister for Environment and Energy Josh Fydenberg penned a media release claiming big bad sharks were about to overwhelm his home state, Western Australia.

The shark in question is the Great White, Carcharodon carcharias, classified as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species and currently protected as vulnerable and migratory in the Australian EEZ and state waters under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999.

Federal Minister Frydenberg home for the parliamentary break is of course playing local WA politics during the silly season - having forgotten or ignored the fact that the White Shark (Carcharodon carcharias) Recovery Plan falls within his ministerial portfolio.

However, it does appear hard for many other politicians to accept that, in the 224 years of human-shark interaction record keeping undertaken since 1788, the number of deaths due to shark attack barely equates to one death per year along the est. 59,736 kilometres of coastline in this country.

Here are a few facts which are on that record.

A ‘shark attack’ is defined in the ASAF as any human–shark interaction where either a shark (not in captivity) makes a determined attempt to attack a person who is alive and in the water or the shark attacks equipment held by the victim or attacks a small-water craft containing the victim…..

Over the 218 years for which records were available, there have been 592 recorded unprovoked incidents in Australian waters, comprising 178 fatalities, 322 injuries and 92 incidents where no injury occurred. Most of these attacks have occurred since 1900, with 540 recorded unprovoked attacks, including 153 fatalities, 302 injuries and 85 incidents where no injury occurred. Attacks have occurred around most of the Australian coast, most frequently on the more densely populated eastern coast and near major cities…

In the 20 years since 1990, there have been 186 reported incidents, including 22 fatalities (Table 1). This represents a 16% increase in reported attacks during 1990–1999 and a 25% increase over the past 10 years (Fig. 3). The majority of attacks occurred in New South Wales (NSW) with 73 incidents (39%), then Queensland with 43 incidents (23%), Western Australia (WA) with 35 incidents (19%), South Australia with 20 incidents (11%), Victoria with 12 incidents (6%), Tasmania with two incidents (1.5%) and Northern Territory with one incident (0.5%)…..

[CSIRO, Marine and Freshwater Research, 2011, Shark Attacks In Australia, p.745]

SHARK ATTACKS AUSTRALIA-WIDE JANUARY 2012 to NOVEMBER 2017

2012 – 22 attacks (8 provoked) in total, 2 fatalities and 14 attacks involving injury

2013 – 14 attacks (4 provoked) in total, 2 fatalities and 10 attacks involving injury

2014 – 23 attacks (12 provoked) in total, 5 fatalities and 14 attacks involving injury

2015 – 33 attacks (11 provoked) in total, 2 fatalities and 23 attacks involving injury

2016 – 26 cases (9 provoked) in total, 2 fatalities and 16 attacks involving injury

2017 – 19 attacks (2 provoked) in total, 1 fatality and 11 attacks involving injury [up to 24 November 2017]

[Taronga Conservation Society Australia, The Australian Shark Attack File (ASAF), Annual Report Summary]

Throughout the world, human populations are increasing whereas shark populations are decreasing because of direct and indirect human impact (Castro et al. 1999). There is evidence that at least some shark populations in Australia have declined as a result of commercial and recreational fishing pressure (Punt and Walker 1998; Punt et al. 2000; Simpfendorfer et al. 2000; McAuley et al. 2007…..

Patterns of attack have changed substantially over time as a result of the changing population and human behaviour. If human activity related to water-based activities and the use of beaches, harbours and rivers continues to change, we can expect to see further changes in the patterns, distribution, frequency and types of attacks in the future. Encounters with sharks, although a rare event, will continue to occur if humans continue to enter the ocean professionally or for recreational pursuit.

It is important to keep the risk of a shark attack in perspective. On average, 87 people drown at Australian beaches each year (SLSA 2010), yet there have been, on average, only 1.1 fatalities per year from shark attack over the past two decades. It is clear that the risk of being bitten or dying from an unprovoked shark attack in Australia remains extremely low.

[CSIRO, Marine and Freshwater Research, 2011, Shark Attacks In Australia]

ABC News, 8 February 2016:

The shark nets used on Sydney beaches in New South Wales do nothing to reduce the chance of attacks, a statistical analysis has found.

Associate Professor Laurie Laurenson from Deakin University's School of Life and Environmental Sciences has analysed 50 years of data about shark mitigation programs and coastal populations in NSW and South Africa.

He told Four Corners reducing the density of local shark populations did not reduce the likelihood of shark attack.

"I can show statistically that there is no relationship between the number of sharks out there and the number of shark attacks," he said.

"It's just simply not there … I'm surprised that it's not there, but it's not there."

It is the first time a comprehensive analysis has been done in an effort to link populations of sharks and people and the number of attacks in netted areas.

The findings are included in an unpublished paper which is in the process of being peer reviewed.

"We could not demonstrate a statistically significant relationship between the density of the sharks and the number of attacks in the localised area around Sydney where there have been historically large numbers of attacks and there've been large numbers of mitigation programs," Dr Laurenson said.

In early 2017 North Coast Voices observed about the predictably lethal consequences of shark netting that the NSW North Coast marine species protection record is a very sad affair.

Climate denialists discuss suing a company for NOT increasing pollution

There are times when one wonders just how crazy the people associated with The Heartland Institute can get – then this sentence pops up a 6-page email from the Institute’s CEO Jim Bast to its Director of Communications Jim Lakely:

sue a company for not increasing CO2 emissions, force a court to consider the evidence on CO2 benefits.

The October 2017 email exchange can be read at https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4112082-Joe-Bast-Email.html

A list of people on The Heartland Institute’s mailing list who would be receiving such suggestions, courtesy of DeSmog Blog:

Heartland Institute's Climate Scientists Mailing List

Heartland Institute's Climate Economists Mailing List 

As far-right global warming denialists in the Turnbull Government tend to mimic US moves against science-based policy, I suspect that this pared-down version of the latest Heartland playlist will be used in Australia in 2018 whenever they plan strategy or are quoted in the media on the subject of climate change:

* be briefing news reporters and news readers

* simplify the issue by focusing on one or only a few arguments and images

* identify a few good spokespersons and focus on promoting them

* stop chasing the other side’s latest argument and focus instead on the benefits of CO2

* focus on the “tuning scandal” that discredits the models

* turn debate from referring to median temperatures to high temperatures, which show no trend

* find independent funding for [insert climate change denier of choice]

* respond to [insert climate report of choice]

* get good people onto EPA advisory boards

* we need to be able to say “EPA is reconsidering whether CO2 is a pollutant”

* document instances where EPA etc. fail to cite research findings that contradict their agenda

* conduct a new survey of scientists to refute the 97% consensus claims

* sue a company for not increasing CO2 emissions, force a court to consider the evidence on CO2 benefits

* read The Business of America is Lobbying to understand the tactics of those we are really up against

* never use the phrases “windmill farms,” “all of the above,” “carbon pollution,” “social cost of carbon,” or “air pollution”

* use “industrial windmills,” “reliable and affordable,” “carbon dioxide emissions,” “benefits and costs of fossil fuels,” and “air quality”

* emphasize that we are pro-science and pro-environment… and the other side is not

* always think about what is most important to your audience

* when being interviewed, deliver your headlines first, don’t let the reporter lead you astray or cut you off

* prepare to answer the “what if you are wrong?” question with “what if you are wrong? How much damage will you have caused by costing the average household $4,000 a year for nothing?”

* fundamentally challenge, reform, or replace the [insert government agency of choice], the source of much pseudoscience

* stop funding “more research”

* clearly distinguish “safe” – a policy concept – from “risk” – a scientific concept, and keep scientists from pontificating on the former and advocates from misrepresenting the latter

* doubling the concentration of CO2 in the atmosphere would increase plant productivity by 35%.

* any SCC calculation that doesn’t include the benefits of CO2 should be rejected out of hand

Welcome to the dog whistle season in Australia

Determined to keep the pot on the boil during their extended holiday break government ministers and humble backbenchers tend to release selected dog whistles to the media .

It appears we might have Liberal Senator for Tasmania Eric Abetz to thank for this one elicited by Treasury Budget Policy Division's answer to one of his Questions on Notice on or about 11 December 2017.

SBS News, 29 December 2017:

Working Australians are forking out roughly $83 per week to fund the nation's welfare bill.

Average taxpayers are handing over $35 every week to prop up aged pensioners, $20 per week to pay for family benefits and $17 to support Australians with disabilities.

Just over $6 per week goes to the unemployed, while $9 goes towards repaying interest on government debt, according to figures released to a Senate committee.

Going to the source it appears that based on a fictional, average "someone who owes $11,424 in tax" in 2014-15, the extended estimates breakdown works out at a notional: 

$42.25 per week for health care; 
$35.03 for aged pensions;* 
$20.42 for family payments (includes child care & paid parental leave);*
$19.65 for defence of the country; 
$18.50 as the contribution to education funding; 
$17.34 to cover disability payments (includes NDIS);* 
$9.11 for interest payments on federal government debt; 
$6.26 towards unemployment benefits;* 
$4.11 other;*
$3.32 for industry assistance;
$2.94 for public order & safety; 
$2.61 for housing & community; and 
$38.11 cents per week for the remaining seven listed categories.
* Classified in the media as "Welfare" with a rounded down total of $83 a week 

Both Senator Abetz and the media remain silent on the actual cost to the average taxpayer of the full range of business/company tax concessions. They also remain silent on how individuals can structure tax offsets and investment properties in order to reduce taxable income to zero or how personal income tax rebates at the end of each financial year may affect those weekly notional figures cited as a drain on taxpayers. However, Treasury does not keep quiet on the subject of revenue foregone and helpfully releases a Tax Expenditure Statement at the beginning of each year. 

In fact if Senator Abetz wanted to be honest he would have included a question concerning financial benefits from taxation revenue going to all Australian households for 2016-17. In 2015-16 that came to $105.8 billion in federal monetary transfers derived from taxation revenue in that financial year or notionally around est. $94 a week per person based on the number and average size of all households in 2016. In addition each person would receive the equivalent of est. $40 per week as 'in kind' government goods & services.

Which means a great many working Australians receive more from the collective income tax revenue pool than they actually pay out in individual income tax. 

Indeed Treasury's 2017-18 microsimulation model of Personal Income Tax and Transfers clearly shows that, based on equivalised disposable income quintiles, an est. 60 per cent of all Australian families pay no tax or less than est. $2,000 in annual income tax once government transfers received are deducted. Included in this percentage are working families with equivalised disposable incomes below $67,000pa.

It should be noted that the aforementioned fictional person owing an estimated "$11,424 in tax" is likely to have an equivalised disposable income well in excess of $67,000pa.

Both the microsimulation model and the fictional person make nonsense of the bald assertion that; "Working Australians are forking out roughly $83 per week to fund the nation's welfare bill".

In Australia every citizen of workforce age and over pays tax - even if its just the Goods and Services Tax (GST). And every citizen of any age receives a benefit from one or more forms of tax revenue redistribution in cash and/or kind, so it is the height of hypocrisy to argue that this benefit only goes to people receiving Centrelink/Veterans Affairs payments from the state and that the entire cost of any welfare 'bill' falls squarely on the shoulders of those with other incomes. 

Whoever authorised this particular media swipe at welfare recipients has forgotten that the Turnbull Government had been putting out versions of this story all last year and, not only has it grown whiskers but the electorate has become somewhat resistant to such tired political rhetoric.

No matter how hard political commentators try to classify receiving a government cash transfer as a form of social deviance, Australian society cannot be neatly divided into "lifters and leaners", "workers and bludgers" or "us and THEM".

Over the course of a lifetime everyone of us could be considered some or all of those things at some point, as we travel from childhood dependency through to adulthood and onto the grave.

NOTE:

Australian Parliamentary Library, What counts as welfare spending?, extract, 21 December 2015:

At its broadest welfare can be used to refer to all of the programs and services that make up the welfare state. This can include health and education, as well as income support payments such as the Age Pension, Carer Payment, Disability Support Pension and Newstart Allowance.

Welfare can also refer to the administrative category of ‘social security and welfare’. This category is used in budget papers and includes spending on aged care, child care, the National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS), family assistance payments and income support payments.

Welfare can also refer to a much narrower (and less clearly defined) category of spending on income support payments to people of working age. These welfare payments are means-tested benefits provided in cash. They go to people of working age who are not participating in paid employment or other activities such as education or vocational training. The term welfare can be applied loosely to spending that meets some or all of these criteria. It is a moral or political category rather than a legal or administrative one. It is often associated with the idea that recipients have not earned an entitlement to payments through contributions to the community.

Use of this political category of welfare has become increasingly common in Australian political debate. The category tends to include unemployment payments, such as Newstart Allowance, and payments to people of working age claiming support on the grounds of disability or single parenthood.

Statistics on welfare spending play a central role in debates over government policy. However, in public debate it is not always clear which category these statistics refer to. Sometimes statistics that refer to the broad category of social security and welfare are presented as if they referred to the narrower political category of welfare.

If public debate is to be informed by facts, commentators need to pay close attention to the way categories such as welfare are defined. When categories remain vague and ambiguous, the statistics can conceal as much as they reveal.

A reminder that the Government of Japan still allows its whalers to slaughter whales in the Antarctic section of the Australian Whale Sanctuary

Australian Whale Sanctuary, www.environment.gov.au

In 2015 Environmental Defenders Office ( EDO NSW) received instructions from Sea Shepherd Australia to help them obtain information from the Commonwealth Government relating to illegal whaling practices by Japanese vessels in the Southern Ocean. 

The resulting application was refused by the Department of Immigration and Border Protection, requiring EDO NSW to press their client’s case with the Commonwealth Information Commissioner. 

In May 2017, the Information Commissioner ordered the release of the documents and this video was made public in the following November.

https://youtu.be/1AE8Mhw-PNA

Turnbull & Co have to make up a lot of ground six months out from the start of the federal general election countdown

According to Newspoll Malcolm Bligh Turnbull commenced the new year with only 31 per cent of the population approving of his performance as prime minister and only 35 per cent of voters willing to give his government first preference at the next federal election.

An election which is due to be called sometime between 4 August 2018 and 18 May 2019.

As for the swing against the Turnbull Government in mainland states………

The Australian, 26 December 2017:

The Coalition has suffered a two-point fall in its two-party-preferred vote in the five mainland state capital cities since September to trail Labor 55-45.

On a two-party-preferred basis, Labor leads 55-45 in Queensland, 54-46 in NSW and Victoria and 53-47 in both South Australia and Western Australia. This represents a 4 per cent swing nationally to Labor, which, if ­repeated at the next election, could result in the loss of between 20 and 30 seats for the Liberal and Nationals parties.

The final Newspoll analysis of the year threatens to dampen the buoyancy in the Coalition parties that flowed from Mr Turnbull ­finishing the year achieving victories in two by-elections triggered by the High Court ruling on dual citizenship and claiming the scalp of disgraced Labor senator Sam Dastyari as it pursued popular new laws to curb foreign interference and influence.

A professed 'Christian' man named in at least one human rights complaint to the International Criminal Court vows to defend Christianity in 2018

The Sydney Morning Herald, 22 December 2017:

Scott Morrison says he will fight back against discrimination and mockery of Christians and other religious groups in 2018, in comments that position him as one of the leading religious conservatives in the Turnbull government. 

Mr Morrison also promised to play a leading role next year in the debate about enshrining further "protections" for religious freedom in law, which will be informed by a review currently being led by former Attorney-General Philip Ruddock.

For overseas readers who may not know this man, he is enthusiastic Hill Song Church devotee, Liberal MP for Cook, former Minister for Immigration and Border Protection, former Minister for Social Security and current Australian Treasurer Scott John Morrison.

On his ministerial watch alleged human rights abuses occurred in overseas detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru. These incidents included deaths of asylum seekers such as that of Reza Berati.

Alleged abuses continue to be reported to this day.

In a 2016 communique to the International Criminal Court, Scott Morrison, along with Malcolm Turnbull, Tony Abbott, Kevin Rudd, Julia Gillard, John Howard, Peter Dutton, Tony Burke, Brendan O’Connor, Chris Bowen, Chris Evans, Kevin Andrews, Amanda Vanstone, Phillip Ruddock, Baron Waqa and Rimbink Pato, was named as administrating authority having responsibility in relation to the offence of unlawful confinement.

Wild storms travel up Clarence Coast on the first two days of 2018

The NSW North Coast, including the Clarence Valley, was treated to a show of nature’s force again this afternoon.

The Northern Star, 2 December 2018:

Update 3.50pm: THANKS to a lightning tracking website we know that over 1300 strikes of lightning have hit the Northern Rivers in the last two hours.

Wind gusts of 76km/h wind gust have been reported at Evans Head AWS. There was also a report of wind damages in Yamba at about 01.50pm…..

Update 2.30pm: REPORTS of a severe storm hitting Maclean are emerging as a series of storm fronts impact towns including Evans Head, Casino, and Kyogle.

The Clarence Hotel in Maclean appears to have its roof ripped off in the tempest which hit mid-afternoon as it moved north.

This picture below was taken by James Young and uploaded to North Coast Storm Chasers Facebook page.

Residents described the storm as a "mini tornado".

STORM DAMAGE: The Clarence Hotel in Maclean has had its roof ripped off as a severe storm passed through this afternoon.

According to a Clarence Valley Council media release sent out this afternoon, the Maclean office of Clarence Valley Council will be closed tomorrow Wednesday 3 January so storm related repairs to the building can be undertaken.

Report on yesterday’s storm at: As NSW North Coast surveys storm damage this morning, one family boating on the Clarence River are thankful for a lucky escape.

As NSW North Coast surveys storm damage this morning, one family boating on the Clarence River are thankful for a lucky escape

The Northern Star, 2 January 2017:

A MAN has been praised for saving his family after he smashed a window of their sinking houseboat to help everyone escape.

The family of seven were staying on a houseboat on the Clarence River at Iluka when the boat started sinking just after a wild hail storm hit the region about 5pm last night.

Marine Rescue NSW regional operations manager John Murray said the Iluka Yamba crew were called to the incident after a distress flare was sent.....

Tracey Davis has been camping at Iluka for 27 years and she witnessed some of the dramatic events as they unfolded.

She said she was watching the storm and taking photos when she noticed the houseboat.

"It was just putting along and it was tiny, and I thought, 'oh no, it's in trouble'," she said.

"When I came out after the storm, everyone was saying that the houseboat had tipped over ... they said seven people were on board.

"We were told the father actually smashed the window so he could get everyone out.

"He's got cuts and maybe a broken arm.

"Once all the people were out, they realised the three dogs were still inside. There was a lot of cheering when the rescuers got the dogs out."

Ms Davis said there was plenty of hail at Iluka during the peak of the storms, and many of the caravans at the caravan park were damaged.

The houseboat has been anchored up and a salvage crew will assess the situation today.

Senate Inquiry into Corporate Tax Avoidance continues to sit in 2018

"Exxon’s primary Australian company is directly owned by a shell company in the Netherlands and the Dutch company is owned by another subsidiary in the Bahamas." [Tax Justice Network submission to Senate Economics References Committee Inquiry into Corporate Tax Avoidance]

ExxonMobil Australia Pty Ltd operates under the brands ExxonMobil Australia, Esso and Mobil. It declared no taxable income in 2013-14, 2014-15 and 2015-16 despite having generated a total income during these years of 24.7 billion within this country.  [Based on Australian Taxation Office Report of Entity Tax Information data]

The Senate Economics References Committee Inquiry into Corporate Tax Avoidance commenced on 2 October 2014 and continues to sit until 30 May 2018.

The Inquiry’s 154 submissions to date make for interesting reading and can be accessed here (1 to 127 ) and here (128 to 154).

Australia's greenhouse gas emission abatement record goes far beyond disheartening

In 1990 Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions were calculated at 547.7 million tonnes (Mt), CO₂ -equivalent (CO₂-e). This represented 32.1 tonnes CO₂-e per head of population.

In the following years emissions rose and fell in response to economic and environmental factors, so that in 2005 annual emissions totalled 584.2  Mt CO₂-e or 28.6 tonnes CO₂-e per head of population.

By 2007 these annual emissions had risen to 597.2 Mt CO₂-e. That was 28.3 tonnes CO₂-e  per head of population.  [Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), 4613.0 - Australia's Environment: Issues and Trends, Jan 2010]  

In 2008 total greenhouse gas emissions were still climbing to reach 618.1 Mt CO₂-e.

Total greenhouse gas emissions were still high in 2009 with an annual total of 599.8 Mt CO₂ -e.

At the close of 2010 national emissions had fallen to 543 Mt CO₂–e for the year.

Then by the end of 2011 annual greenhouse gas emissions came to 546.3 Mt CO₂–e.

Annual emissions for the year to December 2012 were estimated to be 551.9 Mt CO2-e

In 2013 annual greenhouse gas emissions were estimated to be 538.4 Mt CO₂–e.

2014 saw annual emissions reach an estimated to be 535.9 Mt CO₂–e.

Come 2015 and annual greenhouse gas emissions totalled 529.2 Mt CO₂-e. This gives an estimated 21.1 tonnes CO₂-e per head of population. [Dept. of the Environment and Energy, Progress of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory]

However, Australia’s Emissions Projections 2017 report released last December by the Turnbull Government states in part:

“Australia’s emissions have risen in the past three years. A major factor in this growth has been the rapid expansion of the LNG sector.”

“Total emissions in 2030 are projected to be 570 Mt CO₂-e.”

Back in 2015 the Australian Government promised to reduce annual greenhouse gas emissions to 26-28 per cent on 2005 levels by 2030. Based on ABS data that should equate to an estimated annual emissions level of 420.7 Mt CO₂-e to 432.4 Mt CO₂–e in 2030 or between 20.6 to 21.2 tonnes CO₂-e per head of population.

Instead the latest report is indicating that Australia’s emissions are expected to exceed not only the base line 1990 level but also the 2005 annual greenhouse gas emissions level, with per capita emissions remaining static at approximately the 2015 figure.

It appears that policy efforts of the last twenty-seven years have been for nought, because it looks for all the world as though Turnbull & Co have abandoned any pretence they care about genuine, effective emissions reduction.

If the current federal government and industry had to sit a climate change mitigation exam today they would likely receive an F for failure  from the examiners.

UPDATE

National Greenhouse Gas Inventory data for 2016-17 show that Australia's greenhouse gas emissions stood at 550.2 Mt CO₂–e as of September 2017, a 1.3% rise on the 2015-16 annual emissions total. The 2016-17 per capita estimate was 22.5 Mt CO₂–e per person.

A NEW YEAR'S RESOLUTION FOR 2018

I resolve to never vote for a political party, sitting politician or political candidate who creates a Facebook page, posts on any Facebook page, links to a fake news site hosted by Facebook or pays for advertising on Facebook in the lead-up to and/or during an election campaign.

This resolution includes members of all political party executives and associated entities/groups.

Signed

Clarencegirl

*******************Happy New Year 2018********************

2017 is no more

Let us all recall its lessons and make 2018 a year to remember