Secord and Saffin fight One Nation over nuclear power https://www.echo.net.au/2019/05/secord-saffin-fight-one-nation-nuclear-power/?fbclid=IwAR1kVyvdy4J_DhZi_kbM5DAQQ5OI8rujTpkNoHgutlrmwyFndVbiF1w1b9g–16 May 19, NSW State Labor parliamentarians Walt Secord and Janelle Saffin have vowed to work together to fight One Nation senator Mark Latham’s legislation to set up a nuclear power industry in NSW.
The Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Repeal Bill 2019 was the first bill introduced by Mark Latham into the new State Parliament on May 7.
It reads: ‘a bill for an Act to repeal the Uranium Mining and Nuclear Facilities (Prohibitions) Act 1986 and make consequential amendments to other legislation’.
In 2012, the then-O’Farrell government (Liberal/National) passed the Mining Legislation Amendment (Uranium Exploration Bill) 2012 to allow exploration for uranium in NSW. At the time, the Liberal-Nationals claimed that it would only allow exploration and not the creation of an industry.
Secord and Saffin say that Mark Latham’s bill follows a push last year by Nationals leader and Deputy Premier John Barilaro, to establish a nuclear power industry in NSW.
They also say that Mr Barilaro also completed a taxpayer-funded visit to the United States where he was drumming up interest in US investors to build nuclear reactors in NSW. At the time, 18 sites were identified as possible sites for nuclear power plants in NSW– including a 250km stretch of coast from Port Macquarie to north of Grafton.
Fight against nuclear power
Mr Secord, who is Shadow Minister for the North Coast and Upper House deputy Opposition leader and Ms Saffin, who is the Country Labor MP for Lismore said they would fight the bill.
‘This is the next step in the development of a nuclear power industry in NSW,’ said Mr Secord said. ‘It is no coincidence that the first piece of legislation to come from the new parliamentarians was a bill to set up a nuclear power industry.
‘The Berejiklian Government has always supported a nuclear power industry.’
Ms Saffin said that the North Coast community is clear and has spoken. ‘They do not want to see nuclear reactors in NSW. We fought them on CSG and unconventional gas and we will fight them on nuclear power.
‘North Coast primary producers pride themselves on the quality of their goods and their clean and green reputation,’ she said. ‘The National Party Leader’s obsession with building nuclear reactors would jeopardise this hard fought for advantage for local producers on the North Coast.’
Saffin says nuclear reactors would tarnish NSW’s clean and green image, and threaten the reputation and emerging markets of many north coast primary industries.
‘Nuclear power is a distraction from real long term energy solutions that provide the cheapest and most sustainable forms of electricity for the community and business – which is renewable energy,’ she said.
‘The NSW Coalition Government has always harboured dreams of nuclear power plants in NSW, having first proposed a site for Jervis Bay on the South Coast in the 1960s’.
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
New South Wales, politics |
Leave a comment
• Sally Whyte Federal Politics
Resources Minister Matt Canavan has failed to comply with an order to process a freedom of information request by the Information Commissioner, with concerns the chance for scrutiny will be lost after Saturday’s election.
Centre Alliance Senator Rex Patrick first requested access to parts of the minister’s diary at the end of 2017, seeking information about who the minister met with regarding the National Radioactive Waste Management Facility at Kimba and Hawker in South Australia.
Resources Minister Matt Canavan may avoid scrutiny if he loses his job on Saturday. The two towns are proposed locations for a nuclear waste storage site, and Senator Patrick said he wanted to know who was being consulted over the plans.
The request has been bogged down in bureaucracy for 18 months, culminating in an order on March 25 by Information Commissioner Angelene Falk to process the request within 30 days.
Senator Patrick has heard nothing from the minister’s office, despite repeated attempts by the Information Commission to contact the office. He is concerned the minister could dodge scrutiny if the Coalition loses the election and Senator Canavan is no longer minister.
Under a precedent set by the former information commissioner in 2013, if documents are requested from one minister, and then the minister changes, the documents are considered no longer subject to Freedom of Information laws because they are not held by a current minister.
“If Minister Canavan holds out until Saturday and the current polling correct, it is likely that he will have successfully avoided
disclosure, but in a manner contrary to law and in contravention of the Prime Minister’s Statement of Ministerial Standards,” Senator Patrick said.
Senator Patrick also believes the failure to obey the information commissioner’s order shows disregard for the law.
“The minister disobeying the lawful direction of the Information Commissioner shows a complete lack of respect for the Information Commissioner and my constituents,” Senator Patrick said.
“This sort of conduct shows the Coalition’s complete disregard for openness and transparency and to the FOI regime.”
A spokesman for the minister said Minister Canavan’s office received a large volume of requests under the FOI scheme.
“All applications are processed with adherence to the law, and
mindful of the other workload that must also be completed at the same time as processing FOI requests,” he said.
“This FOI request is being completed and all transparency
requirements will be met.”
Gaining access to ministerial diaries has been a fraught legal frontier for transparency advocates, with former attorney general George Brandis fighting a three-year legal battle to keep his diaries under wraps. The 34 pages of printouts from his Outlook calendar were released after he was threatened with contempt of court proceedings
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, Federal nuclear waste dump, secrets and lies |
Leave a comment
Veneer of ‘impartiality’ no longer needed
When it was founded in 1923, News Limited concealed its mining company connections at the same time it promised the public that its news would be “independent” and “impartial”.
Lip service or not, notions of balance and the public interest were important then. This was because News Limited’s founders knew that respect was an important precondition for influence, and that newspapers had to be responsive to the communities they served in order to attract a wide audience and prosper.
News Corp’s recent behaviour suggests it now sees such notions as quaint.
Professor, University of Melbourne, May 16, 2019, News Corp must have been startled to find itself
becoming one of the major issues in this election campaign. But this is just another sign that, in recent years, the company’s ability to read the public mood has gone wildly off-kilter.
From attacking the decision of the jury in the sexual assault trial of Cardinal George Pell to last week’s Daily Telegraph attack on Bill Shorten using his deceased mother as ammunition, there are mounting signs of panic and folly at one of Australia’s largest media companies.
With the media and political landscape shifting rapidly around the company, there is a feeling akin to the last days of the Roman Empire.
Rupert Murdoch is winding back after six decades building up an Australian, and then global, media empire. The Murdoch family has retreated from buying up assets and instead become a seller, offloading, for instance,
21st Century Fox to Disney last year.
If the next generation of Murdochs starts looking to sell unprofitable assets, the Australian newspapers have reason to be concerned. Because they are no longer financially valuable to the newly slimmed down company, the Australian papers seem to be trying to prove their worth by being politically useful while they still can.
Since 2013, the News Corp papers have become more politically aggressive, with some adopting the shrill, cartoonish and openly-partisan approach of British “red top” tabloids. During the 2019 election, News Corp journalists – past and present –
have spoken out against the company’s determined barracking for the return of the Coalition government.
Academic Denis Muller
recently called News Corp a “propaganda operation masquerading as a news service”. Remarkably, this statement neatly encapsulates how News Corp actually began.
Continue reading →
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, media, reference |
Leave a comment
 The Conversation, Anna Skarbek, CEO at ClimateWorks Australia, Monash University, Anna Malos,  Project Manager, climate and energy policy, ClimateWorks Australia, Cameron Hepburn, Professor of Environmental Economics, University of Oxford, Matthew Carl Ives, Senior Researcher in Economics, University of Oxford, May 15, 2019 No matter who wins the upcoming federal election, both the ALP and LNP are committed to remaining in the Paris Climate Agreement.This means every five years Australia is expected to submit progressively stronger targets to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and report on progress. And by 2020, Australia is expected to submit a long-term emissions reduction strategy showing how to get to net zero emissions.
Regardless of what policy mix is chosen to achieve this, the process of hitting the Paris targets is now a permanent feature of economy-wide decision-making, one that will need credible ongoing support from government and businesses. Policy uncertainty, and a lack of national framework, has reduced investment confidence.
The UK has shown how national climate change legislation can guide institutional action, and not only dramatically cut emissions, but also promote economic growth.
Victoria rolled out similar legislation in 2017, one of the first pieces of legislation in the world to be modelled on the Paris Agreement.
But Australia lacks a national version of Victoria’s or UK’s legislation.
We have national targets, but not yet ongoing systems embedded in departments. These systems would include measures to ensure continuous target-setting every five years (as used in other jurisdictions) with guidelines and progress reporting obligations. A lack of national legislation means the community and businesses lack transparency about Australia’s long-term direction, pace and progress.
How national climate change legislation would work……..
How Victoria did it
In 2017, the Victorian Labor government rolled out state-wide climate legislation, the Victorian Climate Change Act.
This legislation recognises how addressing climate change needs a whole-of-government approach, extending obligations to each state government portfolio.
And it has already catalysed climate change reporting and planning activity across government. An independent committee has been tasked with advising on the first ten years of emissions budgets.
Government departments are preparing adaptation plans for each sector, reviewing operational guidelines and establishing regular reporting of emissions in sectors and their future plans.
The UK’s success story
The UK passed its Climate Change Act in 2008 with a near unanimous vote. It has guided government decisions on national energy and industrial policy ever since…….. https://theconversation.com/the-uk-has-a-national-climate-change-act-why-dont-we-115230
|
|
|
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, election 2019 |
Leave a comment
SBS 16 May 19 A group of more than 60 scientists and experts have penned an open letter to the next Australian government, calling for immediate action on climate change.
A group of more than 60 Australian scientists and experts are calling on the next government to prioritise action on climate change.
The 62 experts, including Nobel Prize winners and former Australians of the Year, have penned an open letter to politicians, which features a prominent graph showing Australia’s emissions have been rising since 2014.
“The consequences of climate change are already upon us – including harsher and more frequent extreme weather, destruction of natural ecosystems, severe property damage and a worldwide threat to human health,” they wrote.
“The solutions are all available to address climate change, all that is missing is the political will.”
The group includes former Australian of the Year and Nobel Prize winner Peter Doherty, former Australian of the Year Fiona Stanley and former premier of Western Australia Carmen Lawrence.
“Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions are rising, moving the country further away from its Paris Agreement obligations,” the letter says.
“Whichever party wins government on Saturday, urgent action on climate change must be a top priority for the 46th parliament of Australia.”
Climate change has emerged as a top issue of the federal election ……https://www.sbs.com.au/news/pm-says-climate-goal-will-end-lib-conflict
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, election 2019 |
Leave a comment
|
Australia can be ‘superpower of post carbon world’, says Ross Garnaut, SMH, By Peter Hartcher, May 15, 2019 Australia has the opportunity to surpass other rich countries to become more prosperous than ever before in a post-carbon world, according to the eminent economist Ross Garnaut.Australia could become “the superpower of the post-carbon world economy”, said the former economic adviser to prime minister Bob Hawke and author of the Hawke government’s strategy for economic engagement with Asia.
The Australian political debate has been preoccupied with the cost of moving to a lower-carbon economy, but new work by Professor Garnaut finds that the economic costs would be far outweighed by economic gains.
“Embrace the post-carbon economy, and Australia will greatly expand new minerals processing and chemical manufactures, way beyond the limits of coal, gas and the industries they supported in the past,” he said in a Melbourne University lecture on Wednesday night.
New developments in renewable energy and Australian advantages have made it clearer than ever that the country could “prosper exceptionally in the post-carbon world”.
Intelligent climate policy would mean that wholesale electricity prices would fall “substantially”, he said, a source of competitive advantage…….
He said that Australia could plausibly achieve zero net carbon emissions by 2040, making its contribution to the global effort to limit global warming to 1.5 per cent, if it embraced the Labor party’s emissions target. The Labor policy is to cut emissions by 45 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030.
However, he said that it was “implausible” to reach net zero in that time if Australia continued with its existing Paris commitment under the Coalition to cut emissions by 26 to 28 per cent….. https://www.smh.com.au/federal-election-2019/australia-can-be-superpower-of-post-carbon-world-says-ross-garnaut-20190515-p51nsb.html?utm_source=newsletters&utm_medium=email&utm_term=SMH+AM+News
|
|
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming |
Leave a comment
|
UN secretary-general meets Pacific leaders to discuss ‘global catastrophe’ of climate change ABC
“…….. Key points:
- UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres said the Pacific is on the “front line of climate change”
- Pacific leaders have voiced frustration over Australia’s failure to curb its emissions
- Australian politicians say rapidly cutting emissions would be “ruinous” for Australia
Regional heavyweights had gathered at an historic climate change summit convened with the UN secretary-general Antonio Guterres.
Mr Guterres is intent on building global momentum for sharper cuts to emissions, arguing that drastic action is necessary to stave off ecological disaster.
The Pacific is on the “front line of climate change”, Mr Guterres told the meeting.
“It has a unique moral authority to speak out. It’s time for the world to listen.”
Senior Australian officials at the meeting could do little else; sent in the place of Prime Minister Scott Morrison only days before the federal election, they were bound to observer status by the caretaker conventions.
As a result, Australia did not sign up to the final statement by Pacific leaders, which declared climate change a “global catastrophe” and called for “transformative action” to stop it……
while Pacific leaders have praised New Zealand’s announcement that it wants to go carbon neutral by 2050, many are frustrated that Australia has failed to curb its emissions.
One Pacific official told the ABC the meeting’s call for radical action on climate change “really was aimed at the whole globe” but “for those in the room [it] was a message for one country”.
“Of course no-one said Australia. No-one needed to say Australia,” the official said. “What other country in the room could we be referring to?”
The outspoken Prime Minister of Samoa, Tuilaepa Sailele, went much further, wading straight into Australia’s election campaign during the post-summit press conference…….
decision makers in Canberra also know that the Pacific is increasingly impatient about Australia’s long and painful debate on climate policy.
The argument will flare up again in only months when regional leaders gather for the Pacific Islands Forum on tiny Tuvalu, which has long been a vocal champion for drastic climate action.
And this time, Australia will not be sitting on the sidelines. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-16/guterres-antonio-un-pacific-meeting-climate-change/11115816
|
|
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics international |
Leave a comment
ABC By Claire Campbell 15 May 19, World-renowned primatologist Jane Goodall has weighed in to Australia’s federal election campaign, calling on the nation and its leaders to take greater action on climate change.
Key points:
- Dr Jane Goodall has dedicated her life to studying chimpanzees
- She visited Monarto Zoo to announce one of its chimpanzees is pregnant
- She says the nation’s leaders need to do more to combat climate change
Dr Goodall told ABC News she was seeing the impact of climate change everywhere she travelled around the world and there was no time for complacency.
“Any leader, any individual has to realise that climate change isn’t something that might affect their country, it’s actually affecting everywhere around the world,” she said.
“A lot of them do nothing because they don’t know what to do, they feel helpless.
“Sea levels are rising, people have had to leave their island homes … hurricanes are getting more frequent and disastrous and the same with flooding and drought.
We just have to do something about fossil fuel emissions and the methane from breeding cattle.” ……. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-15/jane-goodall-calls-for-more-action-on-climate-change/11116766
|
|
|
May 16, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming |
Leave a comment
UN chief Antonio Guterres hits out at climate change ‘paradox’ ahead of historic Pacific trip https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-05-13/un-chief-antonio-guterres-talks-climate-historic-pacific-trip/11106622
The United Nations secretary-general Antonio Guterres has warned the world is “not on track” to meet its climate change commitments kicking off a historic trip throughout the Pacific intended to focus on the looming threat of climate change.
The trip marks the first time a sitting UN secretary-general will meet with Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders in the region.
Key points:
- Mr Guterres said the “paradox” is that political will fades as climate change gets worse
- He is set to visit Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Fiji following after his trip to New Zealand
- Samoa says climate change is not just a Pacific issue and that “Sydney could go down”
“Climate change is running faster than what we are … the last four years have been the hottest registered,” Mr Guterres said yesterday alongside New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinta Ardern.
“The paradox is that as things are getting worse on the ground, political will seems to be fading.”
Under the Paris Agreement, many countries agreed to a long-term commitment to keep the rise of global temperatures well below two degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels in a bid to substantially reduce the effects of climate change.
After New Zealand, Mr Guterres will travel to Tuvalu, Vanuatu, and Fiji to meet with leaders who have for years been warning that many of the Pacific’s small island nations face being washed away by rising sea levels due to global warming.
Mr Guterres added to those sentiments yesterday warning that Pacific nations are on the frontlines of climate change.
“We cannot allow for runaway climate change,” he said.
“We need to protect the lives of our people and we need to protect our planet.”
However, he praised the efforts of Ms Ardern’s Government who just last week, introduced an ambitious bill that aims to make New Zealand mostly carbon neutral by 2050 while giving some leeway to farmers.
‘With America or Australia — Sydney could go down’In Fiji, Mr Guterres will meet with PIF leaders and senior government officials from the region. Samoa’s Prime Minister Tuilepa Sailele, a leading critic against nations who he believes are ignoring the threats of climate change, told the ABC’s Pacific Beat program that he had a message for Mr Guterres.
To impress on him the importance of the smallness of our islands, and the quicker moves that our vulnerable islands would like to see from the bigger countries responsible for all these problems that we are facing today,” he said.
Mr Sailele, who has previously blasted countries for ignoring the warnings, added that rising sea levels is not just an issue for the Pacific, but for those very same “bigger countries” as well.
“With America for example, or Australia — Sydney could go down,” he said.
His comments follow a controversial withdrawal from the Paris Agreement’s commitments by United States President Donald Trump in 2017, a move that was praised by former Australian prime minister Tony Abbott who last year said that Canberra should do the same.
The secretary-general’s Pacific trip comes ahead of an anticipated Climate Action Summit that he plans to convene in September in New York.
|
|
|
May 14, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics international |
Leave a comment
SMH 14 May 19, Ten people have been arrested while three protesters remain dangling from the Sydney Harbour Bridge after environmental group Greenpeace called on Prime Minister Scott Morrison to “declare a climate emergency” on Tuesday morning.
The abseiling protesters could be hanging from the bridge all day, with a Greenpeace spokesperson saying they were “fully stocked up” and had enough provisions in their bags to last at least 24 hours.
The three people can be seen holding small banners that read “100% renewables” and “make coal history”.
A NSW Police operation is attempting to remove the protesters who are attached to ropes beneath the bridge….. https://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/protesters-scale-sydney-harbour-bridge-to-declare-climate-emergency-2019051
May 14, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming |
Leave a comment
Adani water plan ticked off within hours despite lack of detail, internal CSIRO emails reveal
Key points:
- Internal CSIRO correspondence explicitly shows the agency went out of its way to avoid giving any categorical scientific advice on Adani’s plans
- A letter from the CSIRO to the environmental department noted other concerns were yet to be addressed
- The emails obtained by the ABC also show how rushed the CSIRO was to provide its “formal assent” to the department
Despite the Government saying Australia’s top science agencies “confirmed” Adani’s water plans had “met strict scientific requirements”, the emails show CSIRO was determined not to give a “categoric” response.
The correspondence obtained by the ABC through freedom of information laws exposes further discrepancies between what the Government said about the assessment of Adani’s environmental plans, and what actually occurred.
The newly uncovered emails follow hand-written notes from Geoscience Australia, obtained by the ABC in April, showing Adani refused to accept several of its recommendations, counter to what the Government said at the time.
Two days before the federal election was called, Environment Minister Melissa Price signed off on Adani’s two groundwater management plans,meaning Adani had passed all the tests required by the Federal Government before it could start constructing its proposed Carmichael coal mine.
When announcing the decision, Ms Price said she was simply following the advice of scientists.
“I have accepted the scientific advice,” she said, declaring that CSIRO and Geoscience Australia had provided “assurances that these steps address their recommendations”.
May 14, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, politics |
Leave a comment
M’s claim Coalition saved reef from nonexistent ‘endangered list’ condemned as ‘ridiculous’, Guardian, Lisa Cox, Mon 13 May 2019
Scott Morrison says government took reef ‘off the endangered list’ – despite no such list existing. Scott Morrison has credited his government with having “saved” the Great Barrier Reef, a claim rejected as “ridiculous” by scientists, environmental groups and the Queensland government.
At the Liberal party’s campaign launch in Melbourne on Sunday, Morrison thanked the former environment ministers Greg Hunt and Josh Frydenberg for their work on reef issues.
“We have saved the Great Barrier Reef – well done to Greg Hunt particularly on his work when he was environment minister – taking it off the endangered list,” he said.
“We’ve invested record funds in researching and protecting its future thanks to Josh’s time as environment minister.”
Morrison’s statement contained more than one inaccuracy, including the suggestion the reef was on an “endangered list” at all.
“There is such a thing as the ‘in danger list’ for world heritage properties,” the coral reef scientist Prof Terry Hughes said. “The barrier reef was never on that list.
“If Morrison is claiming Hunt got Australia off the ‘in danger’ list, the obvious response is: it never was on it.”
In 2017, Unesco opted not to list the reef as in danger after reviewing the government’s Reef 2050 plan. But it will reassess that decision in 2020 and whichever party wins the federal election must submit an update on progress of the plan at the end of this year.
Hughes said recent surveys of the Great Barrier Reef showed the impact climate change and rising ocean temperatures were having on coral cover.
The Australian Institute of Marine Science – the government’s own agency responsible for monitoring reef health – reported in 2017-18 that trends in coral cover in the north, central and south reef showed steep decline that “has not been observed in the historical record”.
Hughes’s most recent paper found that the production of baby coral on the reef had fallen by 89% after the climate change-induced mass bleaching of 2016 and 2017.
Under the Liberal-National coalition government, Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions have continued to increase, which Hughes said was “an abject failure” for the Great Barrier Reef……… https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/may/13/scott-morrisons-claim-coalition-saved-great-barrier-reef-condemned-as-ridiculous?CMP=share_btn_fb&fbclid=IwAR0
May 14, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, election 2019, spinbuster |
Leave a comment
Adani, Yeelirrie and mining: Our environmental laws are broken, https://independentaustralia.net/environment/environment-display/adani-yeelirrie-and-mining-our-environmental-laws-are-broken,12664
By Dave Sweeney | 11 May 2019, The Morrison Government’s quiet approval of a controversial uranium mine in Western Australia the day before the Federal Election was called is evidence that our national environment laws are broken and too often subverted for political purposes.
Environment Minister Melissa Price approved the Yeelirrie uranium mine on April 10, the day before the Prime Minister headed to Government House to call the 2019 Federal Election. Ms Price did not announce the approval via a public release. Instead, two weeks later a notice was placed on the Environment Department’s website, late in the day ahead of the Anzac Day public holiday.
Perhaps the view was that when it comes to public awareness of irresponsible sign-offs for radioactive pollution and species extinction, we best forget.
Minister Price’s approval came despite a clear commitment that she would not advance any further federal approval until a continuing legal challenge to the earlier state approval for Yeelirrie had been decided.
The controversial project, which is in Ms Price’s electorate of Durack, is still being legally challenged on appeal by senior Tjiwarl native title holders and conservationists.
Ms Price had previously told media: “My department advised that it was prudent to wait for the result of the WA Supreme Court proceedings before finalising the federal assessment [for Yeelirrie].”
The mine had been previously rejected by the WA Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) because it could drive rare subterranean fauna species to extinction and do harm to other wildlife species like the Malleefowl, Princess parrot and Greater bilby.
Critics have identified that Yeelirrie could produce more than 35 million tonnes of radioactive mine waste, use up to 10 billion litres of groundwater and require 2500 hectares of vegetation to be cleared for its nine-kilometre long open pit.
The lack of respect for the Australian people and due process demonstrated by this clandestine approval under the cover of a national election is a sign of both Government desperation and the fact that environmental protection currently runs a poor second to political imperatives.
The WA EPA’s prudent recommendation not to approve Yeelirrie was overruled by the conservative Barnett Government just weeks before it lost the 2017 state election.
Now the Morrison Government has performed the same trick, approving Yeelirrie hours before the Federal Election was called, without regard for the Tjiwarl Traditional Owners on whose land the planned mine sits or other stakeholders who might be adversely impacted.
The proposal threatens the area which is part of the Seven Sisters Dreaming songline. The word Yeelirrie translates to the word Yullala – which mean to weep or mourn – and Yeelirrie is referred to as a “place of death”. The cultural stories and connections with Yeelirrie are a major factor in the strong and consistent opposition to this project by members of the Tjiwarl Traditional Owners.
The community has been dudded doubly over this project with both the State and Federal governments putting politics and corporate interests ahead of science and the national interest.
The approval decision followed hard on the heels of Minister Price’s rushed approval of Adani’s plans to guzzle billions of litres of groundwater for its massive coal mine on the eve of the election and was greeted with widespread scepticism and described by Opposition leader Bill Shorten as “shonky”.
Environment groups have called the assessment deficient and urged that this rushed rubber stamp be reviewed by any future federal government. The Conservation Council of West Australia has started an online call to Federal Labor: It’s not worth wiping out a species for an unsafe, unwanted and uneconomic uranium mine.
Radioactive risks last longer than any politician and deserve real assessment, not backroom fast-tracking. Australia’s environment laws have long been abused and short-changed by politicians cutting deals that put the interests of big companies over nature, traditional owners and local communities.
For environmentalists, the lessons from the Yeelirrie and Adani eleventh hour approvals are clear. Australia needs new and stronger national environment laws that protect nature and take politics and undue influence out of approval decisions for major industrial projects.
These laws should be overseen by an independent national EPA that is charged with making approval decisions free from the interfering hand of big businesses and their politician mates.
Since the Minister’s rubber stamp there have been three further developments.
Mining company Cameco has stated it will not immediately develop the project due to “challenging market conditions”. An expert international body has warned of one millionlooming species extinctions. And Minister Price has been missing, just like the species at Yeelirrie will be, should this flawed project ever go ahead.
Approving Yeelirrie is a deeply deficient decision that makes neither dollars nor sense.
|
|
|
May 13, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, environment, politics |
Leave a comment
|
The climate change election: where do the parties stand on the environment? Guardian, Adam Morton
With the global and local environment at crisis point, Australians have a clear choice at Saturday’s election. Here are the parties’ key policies This has been called the climate change election, and with good reason: concern about the climate and environment has never been greater.
A Lowy Institute poll found nearly two out of three adults believe climate change is the most serious threat to Australia’s national interests, an 18-point-increase in five years. It was taken before a landmark UN global assessment defined the extent of the unprecedented biodiversity crisis facing the planet, with a million species at risk of extinction and potentially dire consequences for human society.
Australia has a big stake in these issues. It is one of the world’s top greenhouse gas emitters on a per-capita basis and in the top 20 for total pollution, with a footprint greater than Britain or France. It is already experiencing the effects of climate change, including increased heatwavesand mass coral bleaching on the Great Barrier Reef, and is the global leader in mammal extinction.
There are clear choices between the parties on these issues at this election. Guardian Australia looks at how the policies of the Coalition, Labor and the Greens line up.
Emissions
Carbon pollution in Australia has been rising since the Coalition repealed carbon price laws in 2014. The country is on track to meet its modest Kyoto protocol target – that emissions be 5% lower in 2020 than in 2000 – but not 2030 targets.
Coalition
Under the Paris climate deal, the Coalition says it will cut emissions to 26% less than they were in 2005 by 2030. It is significantly less than what scientists advising the government say is necessary for Australia to play its part in meeting the goals of the Paris deal (a 45%-63% cut by 2030 compared with 2005).
Scott Morrison explained in February how he planned to meet this goal. About eight points of the cut would come from using what are known as Kyoto carry-over credits. Unlike international and domestic carbon credits created through offset projects, Kyoto carry-over credits do not represent an actual reduction in carbon dioxide. They are bonus credits that Australia wants to award itself for beating the low 2020 target it set itself. It would just mean counting the same emissions cut twice. It is unclear if they will be allowed under the Paris deal; almost all other developed countries have said they will not use them. Developing countries do not have the option.
Scott Morrison explained in February how he planned to meet this goal. About eight points of the cut would come from using what are known as Kyoto carry-over credits. Unlike international and domestic carbon credits created through offset projects, Kyoto carry-over credits do not represent an actual reduction in carbon dioxide. They are bonus credits that Australia wants to award itself for beating the low 2020 target it set itself. It would just mean counting the same emissions cut twice. It is unclear if they will be allowed under the Paris deal; almost all other developed countries have said they will not use them. Developing countries do not have the option.
The Coalition nominates two other significant sources of emissions reduction. One is the direct action emissions reduction fund, now rebadged as the climate solutions fund, under which farmers and businesses bid for cash from taxpayers to cut pollution. The government announced in February it would spend an extra $2bn on it over 10 years, but that was stretched to 15 years in the April budget, including just $189m over the next four. While some projects backed by the fund are widely considered worthwhile, an investigation by Guardian Australia has found questions over its design and uncertainty over what taxpayers were getting for their money.
The biggest flaw is in the administration of the other half of the direct action program, known as the safeguard mechanism. It was supposed to put a limit on industrial emissions to ensure they did not just wipe out the cuts taxpayers are buying through the emissions reduction fund, but in practice industrial emitters have mostly been allowed to increase pollution without penalty. The Coalition has criticised Labor for planning to use the safeguard mechanism to do what government frontbencher Greg Hunt designed it to do: reduce emissions.
The other major measure on the Coalition’s carbon budget chart (see p8) is “technological improvements”, which have not been explained.
An analysis by scientists from Climate Analytics released on Friday found the Coalition’s target was insufficient to deal with the climate challenge and said there was no evidence the government planned to release further policies.
Labor
Labor has a more ambitious emissions target: a 45% cut by 2030, which Climate Analytics says falls just within what is necessary for Australia to play its part in limiting global warming to 1.5C, and net zero emissions by 2050. Rather than an across-the-board carbon price similar to what it introduced in 2011, it is promising different policies for different parts of the economy.
On electricity, it wants to bring in a national energy guarantee, a policy devised and abandoned by the Coalition. Similarly, for heavy industry, it plans to toughen up the government’s safeguard mechanism to set limits and reduce them over time. It is yet to say what the limits would be and the trajectory – how fast they would be cut – but it says both the electricity and industrial sectors will have to meet the 45% target.
It wants 50% of new cars to be electric by 2030 and has pledged vehicle emissions standards to limit transport pollution, building on work done under the Coalition but not adopted. It would boost the use of carbon offsets from Australia, allow business to buy an undefined amount from offsets from overseas and has suggested it would limit land clearing.
Despite some scary headlines about costs, Labor’s ambition and direction has been praised by policy analysts and scientists. But unanswered questions remain. It has not released a carbon budget explaining how it would hit the 45% target. And it has been accused of hypocrisy for a promise to spend $1.5bn to boost natural gas supply in Queensland and to connect the Northern Territory’s Beetaloo sub-basin to the east coast. Green groups say the emissions that result could dwarf those from Adani’s proposed Carmichael coalmine.
Speaking of which: Labor has struggled to articulate a position on the mine. Shorten has expressed personal reservations but not committed to either blocking or supporting it.
Greens
The Greens want emissions cut by between 63% and 82% by 2030 compared with 2005, and zero emissions by 2040. Their policies include ending fossil fuel subsidies, phasing out fossil fuel mining and electricity generation by 2030, vehicle emissions standards that become a ban on new petrol-fueled cars by 2030 and an economy-wide carbon price to reflect the true cost of pollution. A new public authority, Renew Australia, would lead the transition to low emissions.
Climate Analytics says the Greens’ goals sit well within what the scientific literature says would be Australia’s fair share of emissions cuts.
Renewable energy
Coalition
The government does not have a renewable energy policy for beyond 2020………
The government has indicated it would underwrite some new energy projects, having released a shortlist of 12. The list includes one coal upgrade project in New South Wales.
Labor
Bill Shorten has promised 50% of electricity from renewable sources by 2030. He says he will aim to win support in parliament for the national energy guarantee, which would force energy companies to reduce emissions and meet reliability obligations. If unsuccessful, he would tip $10bn into the government’s green bank, the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, and create a $5bn fund to modernise the power grid. Other promises include $200m over the next four years for a household battery program, with a goal of 1m homes having batteries by 2025.
Greens
The Greens want the electricity grid to be 100% renewable energy by 2030. They would extend and boost the renewable energy target and back public investment, feed-in tariffs and regulations for clean generation, storage and energy conservation.
Environment protection and threatened species…..
Waste and recycling…..
|
|
May 13, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming, election 2019 |
Leave a comment
Whatever the election result, we must tackle climate emergency https://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/whatever-the-election-result-we-must-tackle-climate-emergency-20190511-p51mcf.html May 11, 2019 Election 2019 is in its final week – and for many people that will be a relief.
Many voters have switched off from politics and been disengaged from the campaigning, which may be one reason why almost 2 million people have already voted.
But beyond the usual photo set-ups and faux outrage during the campaign, an issue of fundamental importance has gained greater prominence across the nation: climate change. It has become one of the fastest-rising issues of concern for Australians, as it has in many countries. Just over a week ago, the British parliament became the first in the world to declare a ‘‘climate emergency’’, and students across the globe have protested about the lack of action from all governments.
In Australia the issue has gained momentum on the back of relentless drought and a North Queensland flood in early February that killed tens of thousands of livestock and wildlife. A lack of coherent and effective policy on managing our waterways has also been blamed for the death of millions of fish in the Darling River near Menindee.
Last week we received another grim warning: a global report on biodiversity said 1 million species around the world face extinction. The 2019 report for the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services revealed the pace of destruction was as much as 100 times faster than the natural rate over the past 10 million years.
Few mainstream politicians in Australia deny that climate change is real. So why is there not enough being done about it? The main point of contention centres around the argument that given whatever Australia does in isolation will make negligible difference, why take risks on harming the local economy?
The obvious counter to that is that Australia is and must be a global citizen. We are all in this together and Australia must pull its weight. And we, like the rest of the world, must act now.
This paper has long argued for urgent action to bring down Australia’s emissions and to prepare the economy for a cleaner future.
In his landmark review of the impact of climate change in 2006, economist Sir Nicholas Stern warned governments to make the changes early or pay a much steeper price later. His analysis – updated in 2008 – was that ignoring climate change was many times more expensive than fixing it.
Australia did not heed his advice.
Climate action became nothing more than a political weapon for the Tony Abbott-led Coalition, especially through its attacks on the carbon-abatement scheme introduced by the Gillard government – a scheme that saw the country’s emissions fall.
According to the last report of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change in October 2018, we have only 12 years to halve emissions – and almost eliminate them by 2050 – to keep the rise in temperature around 2 degrees above pre-industrial levels. Exceeding 2 degrees could trigger irreversible tipping points.
“There is nothing opaque about this new data,’’ Christiana Figueres, the former UN climate chief said. ‘‘The illustrations of mounting impacts, the fast-approaching and irreversible tipping points are visceral versions of a future that no policy-maker could wish to usher in or be responsible for.”
To do nothing, then, abrogates our and every government’s responsibility to future generations.
Whatever the result of this Saturday’s federal poll, our elected politicians would do well to emulate their British counterparts. A united approach to tackling this emergency is needed. The time for shallow partisan politics has long past.
Our future depends on it.
May 13, 2019
Posted by Christina Macpherson |
AUSTRALIA - NATIONAL, climate change - global warming |
Leave a comment
THE CANBERRA TIMES MAY 16 2019 
Antinuclear 