EcoRadio

Category: Sustainable Settlement and Agriculture

The Generator is founded on the simple premise that we should leave the world in better condition than we found it. The news items in this category outline the attempts people have made to do this. They are mainly concerned with our food supply and settlement patterns. The impact that the human race has on the planet.

  • Election clue in MP speeches

    Election clue in MP speeches

    Kevin Rudd

    An early Federal election …  could still be called.

    RETIRING Federal Labor MPs have been told to prepare their farewell speeches for the current parliamentary sitting session in a sign the Government wants to clear the decks to keep open the possibility of an early election.

    Senior Labor MPs confirmed that, while no official edict had been issued, several retiring MPs had been told to prepare for possible valedictory speeches before the end of June when Parliament rises for winter recess.

    The move raised speculation the Government may seek to go to the polls as early as August.

    In NSW, several MPs will not be contesting the next federal election. Roger Price (Chifley), Jennie George (Throsby) and Bob Debus (Macquarie) will not be recontesting.

    Belinda Neal will also not be running as the Labor candidate for Robertson after losing preselection.

    “MPs that aren’t going around again have been told they should be preparing for valedictory speeches in the second week of the current session,” a senior Labor source said.

    A spokesman for Infrastructure Minister and the leader of government business Anthony Albanese, who is responsible for scheduling the Government’s parliamentary agenda, denied any official notice had been sent to MPs about valedictory speeches.

    “That is news to us, nothing has been scheduled as yet,” his spokesman said.

    Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has maintained he will not call an early election and intends the Government to run full term, which would mean an election later in the year.

    However, with Parliament due to rise at the end of June and not return until the end of August, the possible scheduling of valedictory speeches for the current parliamentary sitting period would indicate Labor strategists want to keep their options open for an earlier election, if Labor can manufacture a bounce in the polls.

     

    With no good news on the horizon and inquiries to report into the home insulation scheme and the Building the Education Revolution, there is a view Mr Rudd may opt to call an early poll following US President Barack Obama’s visit in late June.

    It has been reported that Mr Rudd’s own department had recently issued new caretaker rules for public servants governing their conduct during federal election campaigns.

     

  • Ocean fish could vanish in 40 years UN

    Ocean fish could vanish in 40 years: UN

    AAP May 18, 2010, 9:03 am

     

     

    The world faces the nightmare possibility of fishless oceans by 2050 without fundamental restructuring of the fishing industry, UN experts say.

    “If the various estimates we have received… come true, then we are in the situation where 40 years down the line we, effectively, are out of fish,” Pavan Sukhdev, head of the UN Environment Program’s green economy initiative, told journalists in New York.

    A Green Economy report due later this year by UNEP and outside experts argues this disaster can be avoided if subsidies to fishing fleets are slashed and fish are given protected zones – ultimately resulting in a thriving industry.

    The report, opened to preview on Monday, also assesses how surging global demand in other key areas including energy and fresh water can be met while preventing ecological destruction around the planet.

    UNEP director Achim Steiner said the world was “drawing down to the very capital” on which it relies.

    However, “our institutions, our governments are perfectly capable of changing course, as we have seen with the extraordinary uptake of interest. Around, I think it is almost 30 countries now have engaged with us directly, and there are many others revising the policies on the green economy,” he said.

    Collapse of fish stocks is not only an environmental matter. One billion people, mostly from poorer countries, rely on fish as their main animal protein source, according to the UN.

    The Green Economy report estimates there are 35 million people fishing around the world on 20 million boats. About 170 million jobs depend directly or indirectly on the sector, bringing the total web of people financially linked to 520 million.

    According to the UN, 30 per cent of fish stocks have already collapsed, meaning they yield less than 10 per cent of their former potential, while virtually all fisheries risk running out of commercially viable catches by 2050.

    The main scourge, the UNEP report says, are government subsidies encouraging ever bigger fishing fleets chasing ever fewer fish – with little attempt to allow the fish populations to recover.

    Fishing fleet capacity is “50 to 60 per cent” higher than it should be, Sukhdev said.

    “What is scare here is fish,” he said, calling for an increase in the stock of fish, not the stock of fishing capacity.”

    Creating marine preservation areas to allow female fish to grow to full size, thereby hugely increasing their fertility, is one vital solution, the report says.

    Another is restructuring the fishing fleets to favor smaller boats that – once fish stocks recover – would be able to land bigger catches.

    “We believe solutions are on hand, but we believe political will and clear economics are required,” Sukhdev said.

     

  • Preferential Voting in Australia

    May 12, 2010

    Preferential Voting in Australia

    At the request of political science colleagues, I have updated an article I wrote for the ABC’s 2004 federal election site that dealt with the history of preferential voting in Australia. In the article I tabulated how preferences have changed results at elections since 1949.

    As politicians and political scientists in the UK scramble for information on the ‘alternative vote’, it turns out my article is the only attempt in decades to analyse the operation of the alternative vote at Australian elections. So I have updated the article with data from the 2004 and 2007 elections.

    There is a remarkable conclusion to the artcle. In the high period of the DLP between 1955 and 1972, the Coalition won a total of 34 seats at seven elections after trailing Labor on the first preference vote. In the same period, Labor came from behind to win in just one seat.

    Since 1980, the operation of preferential voting has had the reverse political impact. At the 11 elections since 1980, the Coalition has won only five seats where the combined Coalition vote trailed Labor on the first preference count. In the same period, Labor has won a total of 61 seats having trailed the combined Coalition vote on first prefernces.

    Indeed, Labor won 11 seats from behind the combined Coalition vote at the 2007 election, nine after finishing second on the first preference vote. The Labor Party would not have won a majority of seats at the 2007 election had the election been decided on first past the post rules.

    Given this record, it is a wonder that hard-heads in the Coalition haven’t realised they are being beaten by compulsory preferential voting, and perhaps optional preferential voting might be worth a try.

    Continue reading “Preferential Voting in Australia” »

    Posted by Antony Green on May 12, 2010 at 02:56 PM in Federal Politics and Governments, Psephology | | Comments (10)

    May 07, 2010

  • Sneaky new property tax in nsw: Libs

    Sneaky new property tax in NSW: Libs

    AAP May 12, 2010, 4:01 pm

    Related Links

     

    The NSW opposition is accusing the state government of using the federal budget as cover to sneak through a new property tax.

    NSW Lands Minister Tony Kelly announced in parliament on Wednesday that the government will introduce new charges on transfers of properties valued at more than $500,000, as part of a plan he says will prevent fraud.

    Ad valorem fees of 0.2 per cent will be charged for properties worth between $500,000 and $1 million, and 0.25 per cent for properties valued above $1 million.

    However, the first $500,000 will be fee free, making the payment on an average Sydney home of $600,000 about $200.

    “The new security measures will strengthen land title examination processes and will include an additional six authentication measure such as a new watermark and a security trust seal tailored specifically for certificates of title,” Mr Kelly said.

    The NSW opposition immediately seized on the announcement, accusing the government of trying to sneak through the new tax before next month’s Penrith by-election.

    “This is an attempt under the cover of a federal budget to get some bad news out from the state budget, well away from polling day in Penrith,” he said.

    “This is a tax on homebuyers, this is a tax that is going to hurt the property market.”

    Shadow treasurer Mike Baird says claims the scheme will prevent property fraud are “complete spin”.

    “Whatever way you dress this up, it is not Cinderella at the ball, it is an ugly dirty tax,” he said.

    “Whatever way they try to do it, it will not hide the fact that this is a tax on homes, it’s a stamp duty by any other name.”

    Premier Kristina Keneally defended the changes in question time, saying “70 per cent of property registrations will remain unaffected by the ad valorem charges”.

    “Western Australia, Victoria, Queensland and South Australia all have ad valorem fees on transfers,” she said.

    “The proposed ad valorem rates maintain NSW as middle ranking in government land transfer charges.”

    If passed by parliament, the new charges would come into affect in July.

    The fees are expected to raise about $90 million annually.

     

  • “Perverse subsidies’ to blame for wildlife loss, says UN

    ‘Perverse subsidies’ to blame for wildlife loss, says UN

    Ecologist

    10th May, 2010

    Promises to reduce biodiversity loss by 2010 have not been met by any national government, according to the UN, which is calling for taxes and incentives to encourage action

    The world is losing its biodiversity faster than ever before, despite world leaders setting targets for reducing the rate in 2002.

    An update report, ‘Global Biodiversity Outlook 3‘ from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) found that of the agreed indicators of progress towards 2010 biodiversity target, almost all are falling.

    Coral species in particular are moving most rapidly towards extinction driven by overfishing, pollution and ocean acidification.

    The only signs of progress have been the reduction in the rate of loss of tropical forests and mangroves in some regions.

    There has also been continued growth in protected areas, but the report says the area of marine and inland water ecosystems under conservation is still low.

    UN secretary-general Ban Ki-Moon said that biodiversity ‘underpinned the functioning of the ecosystems on which we depend for food and fresh water, health and recreation, and protection from natural disasters.

    ‘Its loss also affects us culturally and spiritually. This may be more difficult to quantify, but is nonetheless integral to our well-being,’ he said.

    Time to reform GDP

    The UNEP report blamed, in part, ‘perverse subsidies’ and a failure to put an economic value on the benefits provided by ecosystems for continued biodiversity loss.

    A major report published last year by The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiveristy (TEEB) project showed that safeguarding ecosystems could provide long-term economic benefit. For example, coral reefs were found to not only bolster fish stocks but also provide millions of pounds worth of tourism income and flood defence benefits.

    As well as fiscal policies to reflect the real value of ecosystems, the UNEP report also called on governments to stop basing economic growth objectives on a narrowly-defined GDP measurement. Instead, leaders should be ‘recognising other measures of wealth and well-being that take natural capital and other concepts into account’.

    It said the re-structuring of economies and financial systems following the global recession still provided an opportunity to use markets to create incentives and safeguard natural resources.

    ‘In 2008-9, the world’s governments rapidly mobilised hundreds of billions of dollars to prevent collapse of a financial system whose flimsy foundations took the markets by surprise. Now we have clear warnings of the potential breaking points towards which we are pushing the ecosystems that have shaped our civilizations.

    ‘For a fraction of the money summoned up instantly to avoid economic meltdown, we can avoid a much more serious and fundamental breakdown in the Earth’s life support systems,’ concluded the report.

    Useful links
    UNEP report on biodiveristy

  • There are lessons for Rudd in our forgotten election

     

    The house of review has been transformed into a house of obstruction. We should not be diddled into the belief the Senate somehow is more or even equally representative than the House of Representatives.

    The Senate represents the states, with the tiniest state having the same sized representation as the most populous state. The lower house represents the people. At least, that was the conception.

    Obstruction of the government’s legislation led one political and constitutional figure to observe, in those circumstances: ”A Senate opposition whose party had just been completely defeated at a general election would be in command of the nation. This would be absurd, as a denial of popular democracy.” (Bob Menzies.)

    The rorting of popular democracy really got up a head of steam after the election of the Whitlam government in December 1972. The leader of the opposition in the Senate, Reg Withers, said the arrival of a Labor government after 23 years of conservative rule was ”temporary electoral insanity”. The opposition was determined to destroy the newly elected government and its program of reform, and thereby purge the insanity.

    Rudd and co never strike one as great readers of history. However, they might cast their minds to the Whitlam era and the lessons of the May 1974 double dissolution election, and the subsequent first and only joint sitting of the unrepresentatives with the representatives.

    The House was passing vast amounts of legislation and the Senate was failing to pass it at a rate not seen since Federation. By April 1974, 10 government bills had been twice rejected by the Senate. Another nine had been rejected once.

    It took a misplaced punt by Withers and his troops to force a lower house election by monkeying around with the government’s supply bills that enabled Whitlam to ask the Governor-General, Paul Hasluck, to dissolve parliament and call a double dissolution election for May 18.

    The government was returned with its House of Representatives majority intact and increased numbers in the Senate; in fact, equal numbers with the opposition – 29 each, with two independents. In this ”forgotten election”, the voters expressed their unhappiness with an opposition that recklessly sought to trash the program the government was elected to implement less than 18 months earlier.

    This prompted the opposition leader, Billy Snedden, to proclaim the coalition had not been defeated, it ”just didn’t win enough seats”.

    Whitlam then sent to the Senate six bills that had been twice rejected and they were rejected again. They dealt with the establishment of a universal health insurance scheme (Medibank), electoral measures designed to give each vote the same value, and for the territories to have Senate and House representation.

    There was also a measure to regulate the exploration and development of natural resources, the Petroleum and Minerals Authority Bill.

    The scene was now set for an historic joint sitting of both houses of parliament to handle a ”stockpile” of legislation. There had been previous double dissolutions, but never a joint sitting of the parliament. All the bills so vehemently opposed by the Coalition were passed by 187 MPs sitting together.

    In Overland, Professor Jenny Hocking from Monash University argues that the joint sitting confirmed the political primacy of the House of Representatives in the formation and operation of government.

    The Liberals had also gone to the High Court to challenge every step of the way the process of the joint sitting and the bills to be considered there. They were unsuccessful with the exception of the resources legislation, which was struck down by the High Court.

    Importantly, the 1974 double dissolution election gave the government enough upper house support to subsequently get through two of attorney-general Lionel Murphy’s most hotly contested pieces of law, the Trade Practices Act and the Family Law Act. Both pieces of legislation were opposed by special pleaders, the opposition and even sections of the Labor Party. Yet they passed, thanks to Whitlam having the gumption to pull it on in 1974 and thanks to Murphy’s skilful manipulation of the Senate committee system and a determination never to give up.

    Fat lot of good it did the Labor Party in November the following year. But don’t you just wish Rudd had the balls to call the bluff of Abbott and his wreckers?

    justinian@lawpress.com.au