Managing director of Ebono Institute and major sponsor of The Generator, Geoff Ebbs, is running against Kevin Rudd in the seat of Griffith at the next Federal election. By the expression on their faces in this candid shot it looks like a pretty dull campaign. Read on
The past decade has been one of unprecedented weather extremes. Scientists now argue that the high incidence of extremes is not merely accidental. From the many single events a pattern emerges. At least for extreme rainfall and heat waves the link with human-caused global warming is clear, the scientists show in a new analysis of scientific evidence.
Get The Highest Rate Of 6.50%pa* – RaboDirect, Australia’s Safest Bank
Impasse … there are competing interests over the organisation of Port Botany’s freight trucks. Photo: Louise Kennerley
A DISPUTE is brewing between the federal government and a company led by Chris Corrigan over competing plans to build freight terminals in Sydney’s west.
If unresolved, the dispute threatens one of the few proposals to remove hundreds of thousands of freight trucks that spill out of Port Botany each year and clog up roads through the city.
The impasse is over the use of adjacent sites at Moorebank, just south of the M5. One site, about 220 hectares, houses the Defence Department’s School of Military Engineering and is where sniffer dogs are trained for Afghanistan.
Advertisement: Story continues below
The government has spent $70 million on plans to move the school and on a business case for a freight terminal on the site. Cabinet must now decide whether to fund the project, understood to cost about $1.6 billion, in the budget.
The project would involve developing and then contracting out the operation of the freight terminal to logistics firms.
Freight trains would arrive from interstate and on a shuttle from Port Botany. Freight would be unloaded at the terminal and delivered by truck to warehouses across Sydney.
But Mr Corrigan’s company, Qube Logistics, part of a joint-venture with Stockland and Queensland Rail known as the Sydney Intermodal Terminal Alliance, is proposing to build and operate its own terminal on an adjacent smaller site (about 83 hectares), which it owns.
That site is now occupied by Defence’s National Storage and Distribution Centre. And while the alliance hopes Defence will soon announce plans to move, it does have the option to stay.
Qube has plans to buy out Stockland, and the project’s environmental impact statement will go on display this week.
However the two proposals are increasingly at odds and there is an expectation something will have to give.
The business case before cabinet argues for a larger facility to manage the expected growth in freight in and out of Port Botany for decades to come.
It also argues for open access at the site, which would enable different logistics companies to compete for the right to operate parts of the hub.
Officials who have worked on the business case believe that, in contrast, competition issues would emerge if Qube Logistics was allowed to control distribution at Moorebank.
The alliance last week wrote to the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, to intervene.
A spokesman for the alliance said yesterday: ”We are at a loss to explain the Commonwealth’s [lack of interest] in a private sector proposal which can be delivered at no cost to federal or state taxpayers and would provide the freight and rail infrastructure urgently needed in NSW.
”It would be a bizarre outcome if $1 billion of taxpayers’ money was spent on a project which the private sector is willing to build at its own cost,” the spokesman said.
Representatives from Infrastructure Australia and Infrastructure NSW met Qube’s managing director, Maurice James, and senior state and federal officials on March 13 to try to break the impasse.
EXPERTS have warned that a flood in the Hawkesbury-Nepean valley comparable to the one that devastated parts of Brisbane in January last year is inevitable, with catastrophic consequences for some of Sydney’s fastest-growing residential areas.
Passions are running high on the Hawkesbury following the overflow of Warragamba Dam due to flooding earlier this month.
According to residents, current planning is too focused on evacuations rather than what can be done to mitigate severe flooding. Flood-risk experts said planning authorities were not sufficiently upfront about the risks posed to residents, most of whom would be unaware that their houses were built on flood-prone land.
State government emergency planning for the Hawkesbury-Nepean basin is based on the likelihood of a repeat of an 1867 flood, which inundated 200 square kilometres of north-western Sydney including Windsor, Richmond, Pitt Town and Riverstone and the present-day suburbs of Bligh Park and McGraths Hill.
”At some time in the future a flood of this [1867] magnitude will occur. It is not a question of if, it is a question of when,” the state planning co-ordinator of the NSW State Emergency Service, Steve Opper, said.
The member for Londonderry, Bart Bassett, wants further investigation of the use of Warragamba Dam for flood mitigation as well as water storage. Mr Bassett said the service would be ”stretched” by the scale of evacuation required in the event of major flooding on the Hawkesbury.
Historian and flood mitigation activist John Miller, 83, has seen the river flood numerous times and confesses he is ”terrified” at the prospect of a big flood. ”We may get enormous loss of life,” he said.
Current planning is based on a one-in-100-years event – that is, a flood with a 1 per cent chance of happening in any given year, the peak for which was previously thought to be 16 metres at Windsor Bridge but has been revised to 17.3 metres.
The government says that it will establish a review into flood planning.
Former councillor Ted Books remembers rescuing people with an army duck in the 1961 flood, which went to 15.07 metres. He has been dismayed successive rises in the flood planning control level have put his home in a flood risk zone. ”It has dropped my [house] value by $150,000,” he said.
Hawkesbury City Council’s draft flood plain risk management plan will be revealed later this year. However, Hawkesbury councillor Bob Porter has been removed from the council’s flood plain management advisory committee for publicly criticising a recommendation that any new houses in flood-prone areas should be two storeys.
A flood plain management strategy document produced by the state government 15 years ago for the Hawkesbury-Nepean estimated 7000 houses would be inundated, 2000 houses destroyed and 40,000 people would need to be evacuated if a flood comparable to that of 1867 were to recur. Likely damage was estimated at up to $2.5 billion.
New residential developments on the flood plain have increased the likely magnitude of impact.
Home owners or buyers are not routinely provided with information about the specific risks to their properties.
This would be an absolute travesty. We must honour those who fought and paid the supreme sacrifice. Those of us who lost loved ones, relatives and friends, must have the opportunity to honour them as we always have.
The Anzac Day centenary celebrations in 2015 could cause divisions in multicultural Australia, a government-funded review has found.
News Ltd newspapers said focus-group testing found that multiculturalism represented a risk for the celebrations and one that should be considered to avoid unexpected negative complications.
The report said commemorating our military history in a multicultural society is something of a double-edged sword.
“While the 100th anniversaries are thought to provide some opportunity for creating a greater sense of unity, it is also recognised as a potential area of divisiveness.”
The RSL has rubbished the review and says Australia’s enthusiasm for the day remains as strong as ever.
RSL national president Ken Doolan told News Ltd that Anzac Day held a central place in Australia.
“The Australian people have said overwhelmingly that they want the centenary celebrated,” he said.
The LNP is set to lead Queensland after Labor’s devastating loss in Saturday’s state elections. The Drum takes a look at what political commentators around the country are writing in the wake of the landslide election.
PM faces punishment by deceived voters
Peter van Onselen, The Australian [Paywall]
Anna Bligh made no mention of her intention to sell $15 billion of state-owned assets at the 2009 election, yet that is exactly what she did in Labor’s final term.
On Saturday, voters registered their displeasure, reducing Queensland Labor to a rump.
At the 2010 federal election, Julia Gillard pledged “there will be no carbon tax under a government I lead”, yet last year she passed one through parliament and this year it takes effect.
The parallels are obvious and, unless something dramatically changes when the Prime Minister goes to the polls, they appear likely to add up to a federal replay of what we just saw in Queensland. Voters don’t like being deceived. Read more here [Paywall].
Labor dirt campaign enraged voters
Dennis Atkins, Courier Mail
Queensland’s ground-breaking election at the weekend did one thing above all else. Voters had an overriding message about the nasty, relentless campaign from Labor during the past nine weeks.
They said they hated what they saw and heard. The smash-up election result was always coming but its size was in doubt.
Let’s look at the empirical evidence. Crosby Textor, the best polling organisation working in real politics, did a serious exit poll on Saturday and found a big result – the top issue that affected voters was the nature of this campaign.
This, more than anything, was why Bligh Labor lost. It was why a premier’s super-safe 15 per cent seat was taken to the brink and severe doubts were raised.
This was why Labor lost with a swing of about 16-17 per cent of the vote. Read more here.
Ignore this bloodbath at your peril
Simon Benson, The Daily Telegraph
It was 1974 all over again, when Joh Bjelke-Petersen reduced Labor in Queensland to 11 seats.
A year later Gough Whitlam and Labor were wiped out at the 1975 federal election. The only Labor federal MP left in Queensland was Bill Hayden.
Behind the brave faces and denials that will come from Gillard’s troops this week in the wake of the massacre, many accept that the federal government is partly to blame. And they now have a taste of what might be coming next year.
Graham Richardson was right yesterday when he said it is not about NSW, or Queensland – the issue is Labor nationally. Read more here.
The hole where Queensland Labor used to be
Poll Bludger, Crikey
Suddenly Kristina Keneally’s performance doesn’t look so bad. What happened to Labor in Queensland on Saturday is without any precedent in Australian history – certainly not since the Second World War, prior to which the party system tended to be more fluid. Labor can be assured of only six seats, holds the lead in only seven, and on the best case scenario will win only eight, for a total of 9% of the Legislative Assembly’s 89 seats. That compares with the “cricket team” of 11 members that Queensland Labor famously managed to return in 1974, at what was previously the gold standard for Australian election massacres – and at that time the parliament only had 82 seats. As for Keneally, she managed to win 20 seats in a chamber of 93, albeit that she did so with 24.0% of the primary vote against a provisional 26.6% for Anna Bligh. Read more here.
Queensland tells Gillard she’s next
Andrew Bolt, Herald Sun [Paywall]
Fatal news for Julia Gillard. Labor’s humiliating annihilation in Queensland proves voters can’t forgive a politician who lies – and then taxes them.
Worse, it proved Opposition Leader Tony Abbott was right to say Saturday’s election was in part a referendum on the carbon tax.
Oh, and a third lesson: sliming opposition leaders is dangerous.
Bang. Three out of three. The Prime Minister’s re-election hopes destroyed. Read more here [Paywall].
Gillard has plenty to fear from wipe-out
Michelle Grattan, The Age Julia Gillard issued an extraordinary statement on Saturday night after Queensland Labor was decimated. She congratulated Campbell Newman, praised Anna Bligh and promised to deliver for Queenslanders. But she made no mention of the rout that flattened Labor and raised the spectre of Queenslanders — who don’t believe in half measures — wielding the axe federally next year.
Some Gillard government advisers want to think that because this election was fought overwhelmingly on state issues and involved the “it’s time” factor, the result does not have federal implications. This is delusional. There are political and practical messages for the ALP in Canberra, and they extend beyond the loss of campaigning resources and having to deal with another difficult premier. Read more here.
Bligh just the first victim of anti-Labor sentiment
Malcolm Farr, The Punch
The Queensland ALP was out-campaigned, chewed up and spat out by a rampant Liberal National Party at the weekend.
And defeated Labor Premier Anna Bligh became the first Australian political victim of the uncertainty and revenue losses caused by global economic collapses.
The search for federal consequences was immediate and Opposition Leader Tony Abbott’s claim the Queensland election was a referendum on the “carbon tax” was just as quickly dismissed.
This was intensely a state issues election, from the arrival of a credible leader to take on Labor, to almost three years of hostility over the running of the government. Read more here.
Federal ALP needs to stand for something
Peter Hartcher, Sydney Morning Herald
”Labor has died from below. There are no Labor branches left in most of the towns of Australia.”
Anna Bligh seemed to concur. In her concession speech she said Queenslanders had emphatically voted for a change of government but also for change in Labor: “Our challenge now is to hear that challenge and to turn our best efforts to rebuilding and renewing our cause and our sense of purpose.”
Federal Labor, even with its present dismal polling, does not face a devastation as bad as that in Queensland or NSW. An election tomorrow would give Abbott a victory about as big as that of Howard in 1996, says Stirton: “We’re not talking historic defeat federally at the moment. We are talking about defeat in the normal range.”
But defeat nevertheless. A senior Labor official said last night: “You need to stand for something. We need to think very hard about that or we are missing the message.” This is not about clever marketing or exercises in branding. It’s about belief and purpose. That is the message. Read more here.
Nine things to know about Campbell Newman
Paul Barry, The Power Index
Newman graduated from the Royal Military College at Duntroon, where he was mates with fellow officer cadet, Andrew Wilkie, of pokie reform and Iraq War fame. His old friend describes Newman as “very driven, very intelligent and very, very conservative”. And they now disagree on almost everything. Read more here.
“Bligh’s government suffered because of broken promises and a perception of incompetency.” Photo: Harrison Saragossi
If Julia Gillard were a coal miner, her canaries would not just be dead – they would be dead, buried and cremated.
The apocalypse which befell the Bligh government on Saturday has effectively rendered Queensland, which does not have an upper house, a one-party state.
Labor, sitting on fewer than 10 seats as of the latest count, does not even qualify as a political party, denying it the basic resources of staff, allowances and funding that this status permits.
Advertisement: Story continues below
Tony Abbott over-egged it on Friday when he coined the impending rout a referendum on the carbon tax and other federal issues, when such issues barely rated a mention during the state campaign.
But he was pretty much on the mark yesterday when he said more generally that the Labor brand was toxic, be it at state or federal level, and Queensland showed voters could be unforgiving if they felt they had been misled.
Bligh concurred that the problem was more systemic, saying with some understatement that ”it’s tough times for Labor”.
As all and sundry begin to mull the implications of Queensland for the federal government, Labor will be hoping that the orthodoxy of state-federal balance which once prevailed will count in its favour come federal election time.
That is, the voters have now vented their spleens in both the critical states of NSW and Queensland, which have 78 of the 150 federal seats between them, and will be more level-headed come the federal poll.
The early signs of this are not promising for the ALP. The NSW election was a year ago today. The 16 per cent swing that occurred in NSW, and the O’Farrell-led Liberals’ primary vote of 51 per cent to Labor’s piddling 26 per cent, were, within a percentage point or two, identical to Queensland.
In the 93-seat NSW Parliament, the Coalition went from 35 seats to 69 seats, and Labor fell from 52 seats to 20.
In the 89-seat Queensland legislature, the Liberal National Party soared from 31 seats to a predicted 78, while Labor fell from 51 seats to a predicted seven.
Almost identical swings and primary votes translated to a far greater rout in Queensland than in NSW, primarily because there are far fewer very safe or heartland seats in Queensland that can withstand enormous swings.
Nonetheless, a year after the NSW election and the published opinion polls show federal Labor still struggling in that state, although the situation is not hopeless.
For some time, the federal government has sought to firewall itself from what was coming its way in Queensland.
Party officials pointed out, quite correctly, that Bligh’s government was headed for the chop before Gillard announced the carbon tax and her government’s poll ratings fell off a cliff.
In February 2010, a week or two before the carbon tax was announced, Queensland’s Courier-Mail published an opinion poll with the headline ”Anna Bligh and Labor facing electoral annihilation”.
And the government was never ahead in the polls again – not even during the floods, which momentarily boosted Bligh’s personal ratings.
Apart from being around too long and conducting an overtly negative campaign, Bligh’s government suffered because of broken promises over privatisation and a perception of incompetency.
This is where Abbott is trying to make the link to the Gillard government – the broken promise over the carbon tax and the perception of incompetency.
One federal Liberal MP from Queensland told this column on Friday that Gillard and Bligh were especially unpopular among older male voters and both were frequently spoken of disparagingly in the same breath.
He is of the view that Queenslanders will come after the Gillard government with the same hostility as they showed at the weekend. Just as they had stopped listening to Bligh some time ago, so too had they given up on Gillard, he said.
Labor was pummelled in Queensland at the 2010 federal election and now holds just eight of the 30 seats there. Of these, seven are marginal, while Kevin Rudd’s seat of Griffith is held by a semi-safe margin of 7.8 per cent. Come the next federal election, it cannot afford to lose one of these seats if it is to survive.
From a practical standpoint, Queensland complicates Gillard’s task. The four most powerful states – NSW, Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia – are now under conservative rule and will work against her government and its mining and carbon taxes.
By being virtually wiped out in Queensland, Labor will have a much diminished influence and infrastructure, making it much harder to raise funds and support for a federal campaign.
Gillard is virtually persona non grata in Queensland and the west. Her only appearance on Bligh’s campaign was her warm-up speech at the official campaign launch.
It was only a month ago this week that Rudd quit his post as foreign minister and made a play for the ALP leadership.
Had he waited until after the Queensland election, as was the plan being pushed by his backers, the temperature in Canberra would be a lot hotter today.
The momentum for a leadership change to a Queenslander would have been stronger – especially as it was noted yesterday that the swing against Labor in the five state seats within the boundaries of Rudd’s electorate was about half that of the average swing.
By baiting Rudd and killing off the challenge so effectively when she did, Gillard and her supporters clearly won the tactical battle.
But if things don’t improve for Labor north of the border over the next six to 12 months, there is every chance the issue will be revisited.
Phillip Coorey is the Sydney Morning Herald’s chief political correspondent.
Follow the National Times on Twitter: