By Steven Schubert Six Christian peace activists who illegally entered the top-secret Pine Gap defence base near Alice Springs have avoided jail time, with a judge telling the court he didn’t want to make a “martyr” of one of the offenders.
The group were charged under the Defence (Special Undertakings) Act, which carries a maximum of seven years in prison.
One of the group members, Andy Paine, faced another two years for carrying a smartphone onto the base.
But Justice John Reeves fined the group a total of $15,500.
While sentencing the oldest member of the group, Jim Dowling, 62, Justice Reeves expressed concern that Dowling had committed 27 similar trespass offences since 1986.
“If I imprison you, I think that would be likely to make you a martyr to your cause, rather than to underscore the law breaking in which you were involved,” he said.
Dowling was fined $5,000 as one of five people who entered Pine Gap on September 29, 2016.
In that group, Margaret Pestorius was fined $3,500, Andy Paine fined $2,500, while Franz Dowling and Tim Webb were fined $1,250.
Mark Parnell MLC , Parliamentary Leader, Greens SA, 6 Dec 17,
The last couple of sitting weeks of the year in State Parliament have been huge, and the Greens have had some significant wins
A win for democracy
My amendment to the South Australian Constitution to make it fairer to all parties and candidates passed both Houses of Parliament. Under the mis-leadingly named “fairness clause” in the Constitution, the boundaries of electorates were required to be rigged so that one of the two major parties would form a government. This is despite the fact that a growing number of South Australians don’t vote for either of the old parties.
For elections beyond 2018, the review of electorate boundaries will have regard to population, one-vote-one-value, geography, communities of interest and other relevant factors but won’t be artificially rigged to favour the old parties. The Greens have ensured that future elections will be more democratic and better reflect the will of the people of South Australia.
No more public money to spruik nukes
A big majority in Parliament passed my Greens Private Members Bill to prohibit the Government spending public money on spruiking the benefits of nuclear waste dumps in SA. We won the campaign against the high level international nuclear waste dump but we still have the national dump proposed for the Flinders Ranges and Kimba. Not only are these dumps illegal in SA, but now it is also illegal to use public money to encourage or finance nuclear waste dumps……..
There is a real crisis in biodiversity in South Australia, which is under threat from many sides including loss of habitat and climate change. Whilst passing a law for a new State Biodiversity Planning Policy won’t fix the problem overnight, it sends an important message to State and Local Governments that they can’t ignore the natural environment when making decisions about development or rezoning land.
Can SA be 100% renewable?
Absolutely! Despite attempts by some opportunistic MPs to blame renewable energy for the Statewide electricity blackout last year and other weather-related outages, a Parliamentary Inquiry has found that renewable energy was not to blame. What’s more, there is now a clear pathway to achieving 100% renewable energy in South Australia. The key is to use wind and solar energy backed by batteries, pumped hydro and solar thermal storage. This is achievable without compromising system reliability, security and affordability for consumers. With our State’s national leadership on renewables and our fantastic wind and solar resources, the future is looking bright. My report is at p.42 of the Committee’s Report.
5B plans module pre-fab facility in Adelaide, “gigafactory” in Asia
Australian solar plant innovators 5B have announced plans to set up a production facility in Adelaide, and potentially a “gigawatt” production line in Asia.
Burning coal for power “like burning dollar notes” in era of cheap solar
Burning coal to generate electricity in era of solar at 1c/kWh makes as about as much economic sense as “burning dollar notes”, says leading researcher Martin Green.
Energy regulator smashes illusion of “cheap” coal power in NSW
AER report absolves big generators of predatory bidding during demand peaks, but they hardly need to: The cost of “baseload” coal supply in NSW has jumped so high that there is no such thing as “cheap” coal generation.
Blockchain App that pays households to cut energy use wins Future Cities Hackathon
Held at UTS, the hackathon brought together some of the best and brightest from the fields of sustainability, design and technology, the corporate and academic world, and the start-up community.
WOMADelaide announces the 2018 planet talks program
WOMADelaide today announced the full program of speakers and presenters for The Planet Talks, its renowned series of political, social and planetary discussions hosted as part of the festival from March 10 – 12.
Enphase Energy roars into Indian market with the company’s largest solar installation in the Asia-Pacific region
Occupying 67,000 square feet over six rooftops in multiple orientations, the landmark installation overcomes shading challenges to power a large, fast-moving consumer goods company.
As the nation’s energy future remains at the forefront of federal political discourse, SMR Nuclear Technology has reignited the nuclear debate. Robert Pritchard serves as chairman of the board at SMR Nuclear Technology and is executive director of the Energy Policy Institute. He is calling for communities across Australia to consider whether nuclear power could be generated in their area.
“Ipswich ticks the box. “Places like Ipswich, Mt Isa, Broken Hill, Olympic Dam in South Australia, somewhere up in the Pilbara – there are lots of places where this makes all sorts of sense in 10 years’ time.”
Mr Pritchard said the station would not be built tomorrow, but called for the community to envisage the future. “The first one that would ever operate would not operate until 2030 – you’ve got 13 years,” he said.
“We’ve got the timeline mapped out as to what would happen in those 13 years but the work has to start now. Where you start is not with the technology – that’s a given – you’ve got to start with the community support.”
Mr Pritchard said there was a growing interest in nuclear generation across the community, which would be vital to its future……..
Federal Member for Blair Shayne Neumann dismissed the call.
“I don’t think it’s in the best interests of Ipswich to have a nuclear power plant on the banks of the Bremer River,” he said.
“It’s got to be renewables – solar, wind and geo-thermal energy.”
He said the nation was moving away from a high-emissions-intensity economy towards a green future.
“I’ve come to the conclusion a long time ago, as far as I’m concerned, not for our future here,” he said.
The strong opposition from the Member for Blair does not discourage Mr Pritchard, who, although encouraged politicians to keep an open mind, said it was up to the people to decide. “I think this is going to capture the public’s imagination, mainly because it’s not being pushed by politicians,” he said.”If the community doesn’t want it, we’re not going to have it, that’s the end of the story,” he said.The energy policy executive said it was a matter of; “fly the kite and see what happens”.
Mr Neumann was “convinced” the majority of residents in Ipswich would be opposed to nuclear generation technology.
Mr Pritchard said it would take the community time to learn about nuclear power generation.
He pledged to set up a series of meetings around the country where people were expressing serious interest.”What we want to do over the next little while is start these dialogues with community people,” he said.”You’re not going to push anything down people’s throats – people just won’t cop that.”The vast majority of people will be interested.” revolution, https://www.qt.com.au/news/ipswich-ticks-the-boxes-for-nuclear-revolution/3281160/
1000+ at an Adelaide rally yesterday to protest Canberra’s plans to dump Sydney’s nuclear waste in SA … People travelled from Hawker and Kimba regions of South Australia today to come and protest about the Federal Government’s plans to dump nuclear waste around their land and farms. All the speakers were very angry and cynical about the way that the Federal Government was behaving towards the people in this State.
Paul Waldon Fight To Stop Nuclear Waste Dump In Flinders Ranges SA, 3 Dec 17,
December the 4th, another red letter date in the nuclear arena.
On this day 37 years ago, at Cap La Hague, where a report of several litres of highly contaminated liquid containing one gram of Plutonium per litre leaked, this happened in part of their vitrification plant where Uranium, and Plutonium are separated from fission products. One gram of Plutonium per litre may not sound like much to the ignorant, but remember the contamination on a leg of a fly at the Hanford nuclear installation initiated a shutdown and evacuation of 20 acres.
Australia has recently held France up as a poster child for the risky and dangerous nuclear industry, with DIIS, and ANSTO’s falsely claiming with their factoids that the French nuclear industry is one to be applauded.
There are many ignorant people in the political arena, like Cory Bernadi espousing to the production of nuclear waste with no understanding that electricity is only a costly “byproduct” of reactor generation that future generations and the environment will have to pay for, so we can indulge for a meagre time in their history.
Some people embracing Thorium reactors do so without the understanding that such reactors share the same risky technology of a reprocessing plant on site to separate fuel and fission products to maintain a neutron moderator. This also opens another can of worms with the location of a site to abandon the radioactive waste, and the promotion of a reprocessing plant may dilute the Basel Convention which Australia signed in 1992 to keep all dangerous and toxic material as close as possible to the place of production. https://www.facebook.com/groups/344452605899556/
ABC News, By Josh Robertson and Isobel Roe 4 Dec 17, A group of traditional owners fighting Adani’s central Queensland coal mine have filed a court injunction against both the mine owner and the Queensland Government, hoping to prevent a National Native Title Tribunal decision on the Carmichael mine site. The legal fate of Australia’s largest proposed coal mine hinges on the tribunal registering an Indigenous land use agreement (ILUA).
After months of pressure from Adani, it is understood the tribunal has moved to fast-track its ruling and was due to hand down its decision some time this week.
The move shocked mine opponents within the Wangan and Jagalingou (W&J) traditional owners, who fear having a huge swathe of their native title claim on Galilee Basin country irreversibly struck down before the Federal Court can rule on a separate challenge to the validity of the ILUA.
Former national servicemen involved in British nuclear test have gold card bids rejected ABC, 4 Dec 17,By political reporter Dan ConiferA former national serviceman involved in a 1950s nuclear test in Australia is pleading for his lifetime healthcare application to be reconsidered.
Key points:
Operation Hurricane was the first British nuclear test in Australia and took place at the Montebello Islands
Ken Palmer believes exposure to radiation from a nuclear blast contributed to his illnesses
The national servicemen are now pleading to have their cases reviewed by Dan Tehan
Ken Palmer, 83, believes exposure to radiation from the blast has contributed to illnesses, including cancers.
“Please Mr Minister … you’ll still be in the job for a little while, make a clean breast of things, let your guard down a bit,” he said, referring to Veterans’ Affairs Minister Dan Tehan.
Mr Palmer was a teenager aboard HMAS Murchison in October 1952 when he saw “a big mushroom cloud” form on the horizon.
Operation Hurricane was the first British nuclear test in Australia and took place at the Montebello Islands, off Western Australia’s coast.
“It’s about five operations I could safely put down to being at Montebello,” Mr Palmer said.
He attributed having both thyroid glands removed to the nuclear test, along two hip procedures, back surgery, and having his prostate removed.
But Mr Palmer’s application was rejected by the Department of Veterans’ Affairs…….
Those aboard the ship have long argued they were as close as nine kilometres away, saying photographs taken moments after detonation prove their claims.
To qualify for gold cards, the national servicemen had to be within 10 kilometres.
“Was there a curtain they put up to stop the radiation heading towards our ship? I doubt it. I didn’t see it,” Mr Palmer said.
Veterans advocates estimate about 60 national servicemen were on the navy ship.
Another former ‘nasho’ aboard the HMAS Murchison, who has also been knocked back, estimated fewer than a dozen of his crewmates were still alive.
A Wangan and Jagalingou (W&J) representative said he was paid $2,000 by Adani to boost numbers at the meeting, where he said many who were “not part of my mob” voted on the compensation deal.
Another W&J woman said her family of eight voted against the deal but the official vote recorded just one person against and 294 people in favour.
What’s the deal with the Adani deal?
Traditional owners need to sign off on a deal for compensation
Adani can’t get finance until the deal is done
The deal’s divided the W&J group
Last year’s meeting was to sign off on the deal
A trial next year will decide whether the meeting was legitimate
The claims are made in sworn statements filed in the Federal Court, ahead of a trial in March to decide whether the meeting legitimately endorsed the Adani deal, which has bitterly divided the W&J Continue reading →
By senior business correspondent Peter Ryan Adani’s controversial Carmichael mine has been dealt another blow after one of China’s major banks said it would not bankroll the project.
Key points:
Two of China’s major banks have ruled out funding the Carmichael mine
This leaves Adani “increasingly reliant on public funding”, expert says
Adani previously claimed it would have finance in place by the end of this year
Industrial & Commercial Bank of China (ICBC) issued a statement to clarify it had no intention of funding Adani’s proposed mine in Queensland.
“ICBC has not been, and does not intend to be, engaged in arranging financing for this project,” ICBC said in a statement on its website.
“ICBC attaches great importance to its social responsibilities and keenly promotes green financing.”
While not mentioning coal, ICBC said it had provided finance in Australia “for a series of renewable energy projects”.
Earlier, China Construction Bank also rejected financing links with Adani saying it “is not involved with, nor considering involvement with, the Adani Carmichael Mine project”.
The anti-Adani lobby has hailed the rejection by two of China’s major banks as a significant development in blocking the construction of the mine.
Blow follows failure to secure finance from other banks
Market Forces executive director Julien Vincent said arranging finance from China was one of Adani’s last remaining hopes given that Australian banks had walked away.
“Having failed to secure finance from banks in the US, Europe and Australia, Adani has now seen the world’s largest and second largest banks by assets rule out support for its massive proposed coal mine,” Mr Vincent said.
“This leaves their attempts to open up Australia’s largest coal mine in tatters, and increasingly reliant on public funding.” Mr Vincent said Adani has been working to contract China Machinery Engineering Corporation (CEMC) into the Carmichael mine and rail project.
However, CEMC would potentially need to source credit and support from Chinese banks to participate in the Adani project.
Adani has, on numerous occasions, pushed back the start date for the mine.
Adani has previously claimed it would have finance in place by the end of this year and, later, said it expected to finalise finance by the end of the Indian fiscal year in March.
Global banks, including Australia’s major banks, have baulked at funding the Carmichael coal mine on concerns about its financial viability and the push towards renewable energy sources.
Brisbane, 3 December 2017. ‘For the fourth time since 2012, W&J Traditional Owners have voted unanimously at an authorisation meeting to reject an Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) with Adani, underlining their sustained opposition to the mine.
The far Right in Australia have turned their attention, for the moment, away from efforts to sabotage the Equal Marriage Bill, and on to efforts to sabotage Australia’s laws against the nuclear industry .
In the Australian Senate, Cory Bernardi (Australian Conservatives) introduced the Nuclear Fuel Cycle (Facilitation) Bill 2017 and 3 right-wing senators backed it:
– Ian MacDonald (Liberal)
– David Leyonhjelm (Liberal Democrats)
– Eric Abetz (Liberal)
We surely miss Greens Senator Scott Ludlam. However, Senator Claire Moore (Labor) rose nobly to the defenceof Commonwealth bans on nuclear power and on nuclear fuel processing, reprocessing and enrichment. These bans are found in the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, and the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Act.
SPEAKER: Moore, Sen Claire (ALP) 30 Nov 17
“…..Over the years, issues around nuclear energy have come before this place and they have been part of the wider community discussion. Through that process, a number of investigations have taken place, and, as our shadow minister, Mark Butler, has said, the simple fact is that nuclear power in Australia simply doesn’t add up. The arguments do not add up now and they didn’t add up in the past. Sometime in the future they may, but at this time they just don’t add up. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation, which is well skilled and well knowledgeable in this space, noted: ‘It’s difficult to envisage traditional nuclear power plants being established on the NEM given the current grid structure.’…..
In the CSIRO publications out there on the public record, the issues surrounding challenges to nuclear power in Australia include the legislative and regulatory framework development, including for protection, operational safety, waste storage and decommissioning. I’ll go back to some of those later, but they are areas of concern that would need to be considered when debating further implementation or consideration of nuclear energy in our nation. Another area is education, science and technical skills development in this area. Amidst a range of university and developmental areas of research across Australia—a very competitive field, as you know—there has not been a focus on nuclear energy. I’m led to believe that there are no universities in Australia offering courses in nuclear engineering and that there’s little nuclear engineering experience in our nation. Again, that is not to say that there should be an absolute denial; it’s a statement on the reality of the knowledge base in our country at the moment.
Another concern raised by CSIRO is the commercial and economic framework to support significant up-front capital costs and eventual planned decommissioning. There has been considerable debate over the years about the various costs of different forms of energy in our nation and, consistently, the costings that have come forward about introducing a nuclear energy process in Australia have led to very significant calculations of the costs that would be involved. These costs need to be taken into account when you’re looking at the various forms of energy options that we have. The expense of getting a new industry started, the expense of the technology needed and the expense of the actual infrastructure needed are very important elements for consideration. Currently, the indications we have and the data that’s available to us indicate that the significant up-front capital costs are a major concern for anyone who is looking at this discussion around nuclear energy. Also, we have seen overseas—and, naturally, a lot of our experience is from overseas—that the cost of plant decommissioning has been found to be extremely expensive. Where countries have had to decommission nuclear power stations, nuclear power plants, it has caused a great deal of concern in terms of how much it costs to make them safe and also in terms of being able to continue operating in the area after they have gone through the process of closing them down.
Another major issue, if a decision were made to build a nuclear energy facility at a particular point, would be how long would it take for it to be operating on the ground, providing the kind of energy that we, as a nation, require? The CSIRO calculations say that it’s a 10- to 15-year interval from the commencement to the start-up of a reactor. I know that Senator Bernardi gave other figures. I understand that it would be part of a discussion in this area, but the data that we have before us on the current knowledge that’s out there from the CSIRO says that the time frame from commencement to completion and to operation is a 10- to 15-year process, and that, of course, is a very long-term plan, if we’re looking at a transition to another form of energy.
There is also the issue of reactor locations. When we talk about nuclear reactors and nuclear waste facilities, a massive community discussion occurs when proposals are put up for these types of facilities. ….. Our personal experience in Australia has been that when these things are brought out into the open—when finally, after discussions that often take place in secret, I’ll say, and when finally decisions are made public as to where a nuclear reactor or a nuclear waste facility could be located—there does seem to be a reaction from the community that is not positive…..
…water use. CSIRO has done a lot of work generally on the issue of water use in our community. They’ve used that knowledge in the discussion on what would be necessary for nuclear plants or nuclear operations. The indications that they have—and this is available on their website—is that nuclear plants use more cooling water than coal and gas plants. In terms of the sensitivities in our community and also the necessities of our climate and our access to water in Australia, that is a really important issue. Where would you be able to ensure that there were appropriate water sources, that would be safe and that would provide the support that would be necessary for the implementation of nuclear energy?
Even if you were to overcome the community, legal and political barriers to nuclear energy, it’s clear that due to the skills and other technical barriers it would take very many years, over a decade—and that’s the optimistic option—for Australia to be ready to begin construction of a nuclear power plant. That also does not take into account, as I said, the real need existing in our nation, and I am very much aware of strong community opposition to nuclear power…
As I was saying, that remains a major issue within the community in terms of any acceptance of a change to the current position that we have in the country around nuclear power. Senator Macdonald did allude to the ‘issue’ or ‘incident’—I should have written it down—of Fukushima. His dismissal of the significant issues around what happened at Fukushima was, I think, indicative of the lack of genuine understanding of the concerns in the community around this issue. Certainly over a long period of time one of the clear issues that has been raised within the community about anything around the further development of nuclear energy in our country has been a concern around a guarantee for safety and that there not be the kind of environmental, social and serious damage that occurred as a result of a series of nuclear incidents over many years. The most recent of those was in Fukushima, but the Chernobyl situation, of which we’ve just passed a significant anniversary, caused immense damage all across northern Europe and into the Arctic. In parts of Europe and the UK—I know that the UK are probably not referring to themselves as part of Europe any longer—there is still monitoring being done of ongoing issues around environmental damage in that area as a result of an incident that happened well over 20 years ago.
Paul LangleyNuclear Fuel Cycle Watch South Australia, 1 Dec 17
Today in this forum, the implication has been made that I131 as a treatment for thyroid disease is a benefit and that therefore, it is implied that the benefit of I131 as a nuclear medicine is harmless to the general public who are not in need of treatment dose I131.
It is easy to point out that low dose I131 is acknowledged as a public risk factor and is a known carcinogen. The cost/benefit equation used in medicine to determine treatments does not apply to members of the community. In fact, in the case of treatment dose radiation therapy patients, the general rule is to minimise addition exposures outside of the medical setting. It is also easy to point that world wide governments approve the medical use of nuclear medicines (radio isotopes) according to strict ethical and medical need guidelines.
What is good for someone seeking to lengthen their survival time in the context of disease is not good for someone who has no illness. Radiation is a double edged sword. In the context of the five year survival time for cancers, radiation treatments work. Longer term limits to treatments include recurring cancers and heart disease. The research clearly shows this.
The hope that I131 may be considered to be innocuous is a false one. Here is a list of US FDA approval nuclear medicines. It is forbidden under US law, Australian law etc to administer these substances to any person for any reason apart from medical need and with patient consent:
The future of the Adani mine,Overwhelming public opposition to the Adani coalmine in northern Queensland tipped the scales in state election campaigning. But now that’s over, what influence does it have at a federal level and on the mine’s future? The Saturday Paper, By Alex McKinnon. 2 Dec 17,
“……Palaszczuk’s explanation for abandoning her long-time support of the loan was to avoid a potential conflict of interest, arising from her partner’s work on Adani’s Northern Australia Infrastructure Facility (NAIF) loan application as a consultant for PwC. But state treasurer Curtis Pitt admitted during the campaign that the real reason for Palaszczuk’s about-face was the overwhelming public opposition to taxpayers’ money being used to fund a private mine.
Queensland’s Labor government supports the Adani mine going ahead, to provide jobs in struggling regional areas. But GetUp! environmental justice co-director and Stop Adani campaigner Sam Regester points to the huge swings to the Greens in a swath of inner-Brisbane electorates as proof Labor recognised anti-Adani sentiment was hurting them enough to force a response. Counting still under way in Maiwar could lead to the Greens winning their first seat at a general election, and candidate Amy MacMahon came close to knocking over Labor deputy premier Jackie Trad in South Brisbane.
ON THE ISSUE OF THE NAIF LOAN, AT LEAST, PUBLIC OPINION IS EMPHATIC ENOUGH TO PRESSURE PALASZCZUK INTO KEEPING HER WORD.
“The Greens’ strong position on Adani was directly responsible for their strong showing in the inner city,” Regester says. “Labor tried to have it both ways for three years, and they offset some of the damage by deciding to veto the NAIF loan, but voters rewarded the party that had a consistent stance.”
Given Labor will most likely form a majority government, that balancing act appears to have worked for now. What comes next – for the mine, those opposing it, and the government that could make or break it – is less clear. As counting continues and the Palaszczuk government prepares to go back to work with whatever parliament the voters have given it, anti-Adani campaigners are planning their next moves.
The Stop Adani Alliance, the umbrella organisation of environmentalists, climate scientists, traditional owners and civil society groups that formed to campaign against the mine in March, largely regards the election result as a win. Nicholls’ Liberal National Party, which has backed the mine to the hilt, remains in opposition. One Nation’s promised windfall of seats failed to materialise………
Palaszczuk’s Labor government will likely hold 47 or 48 seats in Queensland’s 93-member, single-house parliament. Once it nominates a speaker, the government will have the barest of majorities, provided every Labor MP stays in line. Given the record of Palaszczuk’s previous government, which lost Pyne and former Cook MP Billy Gordon to the crossbench, that may be too much to hope for. If Labor is forced to negotiate with the KAP’s three parliamentarians, One Nation’s Stephen Andrew, or Noosa independent Sandy Bolton, it may find the competing interests over the Adani mine can’t be finessed away.
On the issue of the NAIF loan, at least, public opinion is emphatic enough to pressure Palaszczuk into keeping her word. ReachTel polling conducted for the Stop Adani Alliance during the campaign found 70 per cent of Queenslanders oppose directing public funding towards the Carmichael project, with voters across political lines expressing strong support for the government using its veto power.
Queenslanders are more evenly split on the larger question of the mine itself, but losing the NAIF loan will compound Adani’s difficulties in securing the $3.3 billion it needs to fund the first stage of the project, and could sink the mine altogether. While Adani has made noises about seeking financing from Chinese banks, such a move would likely require construction materials and infrastructure contracts to be sourced from Chinese firms, further souring the project in the public eye and undermining the argument that the mine will bring local jobs.
So much attention has been devoted to Palaszczuk’s manoeuvring, it’s easy to forget how much of Adani’s ultimate fate lies in Canberra. The federal opposition leader, Bill Shorten, stayed far away from Queensland during the campaign, not least to avoid awkward questions about where he stands. Shorten tied himself in knots trying to articulate his various positions on the mine earlier this year, sometimes changing his mind mid-sentence……..
With the state election over, Shorten and federal Labor no longer have the luxury of dithering. Regester says the anti-Adani movement’s top post-election priority, “besides ensuring the veto goes through” and “working to ensure Adani can’t secure funding from anywhere else”, will be recentring the campaign on the national stage.
“Unless a major party moves on Adani, we’ll be making it an issue at the next federal election,” Regester says, highlighting “marginal seats in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane” where support for Adani could prove costly. Labor’s Terri Butler and the Liberals’ Trevor Evans will be looking nervously at the huge upswing in the Greens’ vote across territory their inner-Brisbane seats cover, while the Stop Adani movement’s large Melbourne presence could see the thumping Greens victory in the Victorian Northcote byelection repeated in Batman, Wills, Higgins and Melbourne Ports…….. https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2017/12/02/the-future-the-adani-mine/15121332005585
India’s finance secretary has called for decision clearing company of allegations of siphoning huge sums into tax havens to be reviewed, Guardian, Michael Safi in Delhi, 1 Dec 17, The Adani Group is likely to again have to answer allegations it siphoned more than US$600m (£445m) into overseas tax havens after senior Indian finance authorities recommended an appeal of a judgment clearing the mining giant.
The Indian finance secretary has confirmed to local media the August decision clearing the Adani Group had been reviewed by senior officials in November who ordered an appeal to be lodged by 14 December.
According to two sets of Indian customs intelligence documents from 2014, the Adani Group was accused of inflating the cost of electricity equipment for power projects in Maharashtra and Rajasthan states using fraudulent invoices. Authorities valued the alleged scams at nearly $852m.
The company or entities linked to it are currently being scrutinised for their suitability for a $681m concessional loan from the Australian government to build a railway line linking the proposed coal mine to a Queensland port. However it is reportedly close to securing loans from a Chinese state-owned company that would make the Australian loan unnecessary.
The Adani Group has denied any wrongdoing and was cleared on one set of allegations in August and a second set in October.
But the Indian finance secretary, Hasmukh Adhia, has confirmed the August judgment – referring to fraud allegations worth around $600m – has been recommended for appeal by senior customs officials.
“As per the procedure for review of orders of the Adjudication Authority, a committee comprising of two chief Commissioners of Customs has reviewed this order of Adjudicating Authority and directed the Commissioner of Customs vide their order dated November 15, 2017 to file an appeal in the tribunal,” Adhia said
Customs officials have until 14 December to lodge the appeal, which will be heard by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal. Any subsequent appeals would be heard by the Indian supreme court.
Six Adani subsidiaries are among 40 companies being investigated by Indian authorities over a separate alleged fraud involving the over-invoicing of coal imports from Indonesia.
The general modus operandi of the alleged scams is that the energy companies used fake middlemen to inflate the price of equipment or coal they sourced from overseas.
The extra money allegedly paid by the businesses was allegedly channeled into offshore bank accounts out of the reach of Indian regulators or tax authorities.
The Indian Express reported on Thursday that the outcome of the allegations against the Adani Group could impact a $125m compensation package the company has been promised from electricity distribution companies in Haryana state over its “financial difficulties” in the area.
Indian opposition groups have called for a supreme court inquiry into the company over the fraud allegations which, if proved, could have pushed up power prices for local consumers.
A public-interest lawsuit has also been filed in the supreme court calling for an investigation into alleged over-invoicing by the Adani Group and other energy companies.
Nuclear Technology and is executive director of the Energy Policy Institute. He is calling for communities across Australia to consider whether nuclear power could be generated in their area.
Antinuclear 