Category: News

Add your news
You can add news from your networks or groups through the website by becoming an author. Simply register as a member of the Generator, and then email Giovanni asking to become an author. He will then work with you to integrate your content into the site as effectively as possible.
Listen to the Generator News online

 
The Generator news service publishes articles on sustainable development, agriculture and energy as well as observations on current affairs. The news service is used on the weekly radio show, The Generator, as well as by a number of monthly and quarterly magazines. A podcast of the Generator news is also available.
As well as Giovanni’s articles it picks up the most pertinent articles from a range of other news services. You can publish the news feed on your website using RSS, free of charge.
 

  • Setting Australia’s post-2020 target for greenhouse gas emissions – Issues Paper

    Publication abstract:

    Climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution. The Australian Government has committed to review Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and settings this year. This review is in the context of negotiations for a new global climate agreement to be concluded at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties in Paris in late 2015 (30 November to 11 December).

    All countries have agreed to propose a post-2020 emissions reduction target well in advance of the Paris conference. Australia will announce a post-2020 emissions reduction target in mid‑2015.

    Full publication:

    Climate change is a global problem that requires a global solution. The Australian Government has committed to review Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets and settings this year. This review is in the context of negotiations for a new global climate agreement to be concluded at the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Conference of the Parties in Paris in late 2015 (30 November to 11 December).

    Countries have agreed to propose a post-2020 emissions reduction target well in advance of the Paris conference. Australia will announce a post-2020 emissions reduction target in mid‑2015.

    A strong and effective global agreement, that addresses carbon leakage and delivers environmental benefit, is in Australia’s national interest. The latest climate information from the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) and the Bureau of Meteorology indicates that Australia has warmed by 0.9°C since 1910, with most of the warming since 1950. There has been a rise in sea levels of about 20 centimetres over the past century, increased ocean acidification and a shift in rainfall patterns.[i]

    Australia’s climate will continue to have high variability. Nevertheless, average temperatures are projected to continue to increase and extreme rain events are projected to become more intense. Average rainfall in southern Australia is projected to decrease.[ii]

    Australia is taking strong action on climate change. Between 1990 and 2014 the economy nearly doubled in size and our population grew strongly, while greenhouse gas emissions remained broadly the same. Australia’s emissions per capita have reduced by 28 per cent since 1990 and by 20 per cent since 2000 and emissions per unit of gross domestic product have fallen by 52 per cent since 1990 and by 35 per cent since 2000.

    The Australian Government is committed to achieving a five per cent reduction on 2000 emissions levels by 2020. This target is equivalent to a reduction of 13 per cent below 2005 emissions levels and a 19 per cent reduction from projected business as usual emissions.[iii]

    The Government’s focus is on taking direct action, including through the $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund, which is a market-based scheme. Actions by state and local governments, business, farmers and the broader community are, and will continue to be, critical to Australia’s climate efforts.

    International efforts to address climate change

    Australia plays a constructive role in international climate change efforts. Since its formation in 1992 the UNFCCC has been an important forum for countries to cooperate on climate change. Australia was one of the first countries to join the UNFCCC and it now has almost universal membership. In 1997 Australia, alongside other countries, adopted the Kyoto Protocol which established binding emissions reduction targets for developed countries.

    Australia performed well over the Kyoto Protocol’s first commitment period (2008-2012). During that time Australia’s emissions were limited to 103 per cent of 1990 levels, which was considerably less than Australia’s target of 108 per cent. Australia’s target under the second commitment period, which began in 2013 and ends in 2020, is 99.5 per cent of 1990 levels. Australia is on track to meet this target, which is consistent with our UNFCCC target of a five per cent reduction on 2000 emissions levels by 2020.

    The Paris Agreement

    Australia is working with the international community to conclude a new global climate agreement at the Paris conference. The Paris Agreement will set out how countries will tackle climate change after 2020, when current emissions reduction commitments under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol lapse.

    Commitments by all countries to reduce or limit their greenhouse gas emissions are needed to make a genuine impact globally. To do this, the Paris Agreement must encourage full participation and commitments to take serious, coordinated action from all countries. Australia, together with all UNFCCC Parties, has agreed that new commitments should be appropriate to countries’ national circumstances so these can work alongside plans for strong economic growth, jobs and development.

    Australia’s national circumstances

    In setting their post-2020 emissions reduction targets, all countries will consider what would represent a fair and appropriate contribution to tackling climate change in light of their particular national circumstances. Compared with other developed countries, Australia has stronger economic and population growth, and our economic structure is different. Our resource and agricultural industries represent a significantly larger share of national economic output. These factors affect the emissions intensity of our exports and economy. This is putting upwards pressure on our greenhouse gas emissions, in particular:

    • The economy is projected to grow approximately 17 per cent over the five year period 2014 to 2019 (or at an annual average of about 3.3 per cent)[iv], compared to around 12 per cent (or an annual average of 2.4 per cent) for other advanced economies.[v]
    • Australia’s population is growing more quickly than comparable countries, at around 1.6 per cent in 2014.[vi] The average annual rate of population growth in the developed world was around 0.4 per cent over the period 1980-2013 and this is projected to decline further over the coming decades.[vii]
    • Coal accounts for nearly 60 per cent of our total primary energy supply, against an average in other developed countries of 20 per cent.[viii]
    • 95 per cent of Australia’s energy consumption comes from fossil fuel sources[ix], compared to an OECD average of 81 per cent.[x] This is primarily the result of Australia’s abundant energy and mineral resources and limited scope to harness hydroelectricity.
    • In 2013, iron ore and concentrates, coal and natural gas made up around 40 per cent of Australia’s exports at a value of around $124 billion.[xi]

    For the foreseeable future, Australia will continue to be a major supplier of crucial energy and raw materials to the rest of the world, especially Asian countries. At present, around 80 per cent of the world’s primary energy needs are met through carbon-based fuels. By 2040, it is estimated that 74 per cent will still be met by carbon-based sources because of growing demand in emerging economies.[xii]

    Australia’s action on climate change

    Australia will continue to play its part to tackle climate change. A new target will build on current efforts and policy, including direct action through the $2.55 billion Emissions Reduction Fund.

    Research, development and deployment of new technologies will underpin global emissions reductions. Australia has long supported the development of alternative energy sources as part of Australia’s energy mix and has invested heavily in the development of both renewable energy supply and low-carbon technologies. The Australian Government is providing $588 million for low emissions fossil fuels programmes. Collectively these are designed to support a range of low emissions technologies, including carbon capture and storage (CCS) demonstration projects. Other important initiatives include the Government’s investment of over $1 billion in 200 projects across a range of renewable energy technologies. The Australian Government will continue working with industry to promote research and development of new technologies to reduce emissions from carbon-based energy production.

    Across Australia all levels of government, business, farmers and the broader community are continuing to take action in ways that make critical contributions to Australia’s emissions reduction efforts.

    Australia also continues to support other countries to take climate action and build resilience and capacity to adapt to a changing climate through our aid programme. Most recently, this included a contribution of $200 million to the Green Climate Fund which will be targeted to assist Indo-Pacific neighbours meet their climate goals.

    Australia’s strong advocacy and implementation of the Montreal Protocol is another way Australia can play a key role in global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. The Montreal Protocol is the logical forum to take action on synthetic greenhouse gas emissions.

    It has worked with industry to reduce emissions of ozone depleting substances, and has the expertise to phase down hydro-fluorocarbon gases.

    Setting Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target

    The Australian Government will set its post-2020 emissions reduction target within the framework of the UNFCCC and its objectives. At the UNFCCC’s Lima conference in December 2014, all Parties confirmed they would bring forward intended nationally determined contributions setting out the targets they will adopt from 2020 onwards. The expectations for intended nationally determined contributions include that they be a progression beyond the country’s current undertaking and be transparent, easy to understand and announced well in advance of the Paris conference.[xiii]

    Countries are expected to describe the key parameters of their target, including a reference point (e.g. base year) and coverage of greenhouse gases and sectors. They are also expected to explain how the target is fair and ambitious in light of their national circumstances, and how it contributes to achieving the UNFCCC’s objective of stabilising emissions at a level that would avoid dangerous climate change.

    Australia’s current undertakings are a five per cent reduction on 2000 emissions levels by 2020 under the UNFCCC, and our target under the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce emissions to 99.5 per cent of 1990 levels from 2013-2020. These undertakings cover all sectors of the economy and all seven Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gases, and are expressed as an absolute reduction from an historical base year.

    The Australian Government will announce Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target in mid-2015, well ahead of the Paris conference at the end of the year.

    Australia’s target must provide certainty to business and the Australian community to facilitate decision making and investment.

    The target will represent Australia’s fair share of the global effort needed to respond to climate change.

    The Australian Government will consider a range of factors in determining Australia’s post‑2020 target, including:

    • Australia’s national circumstances – our economic structure, projected economic growth, resource endowments, geography and demography – will have implications for Australia’s emissions reduction opportunities. Different targets have different costs and benefits for Australia.
    • The scope and nature of other countries’ targets – so that our target represents Australia’s fair share and does not put Australia at a competitive disadvantage to our key trading partners and the major economies.

    Australia’s post-2020 target will be consistent with continued strong economic growth, jobs growth and development in Australia.

    Identifying the policies that will help achieve a post-2020 target is also important. The Australian Government’s preference is for direct action and it recognises there is a range of effective and cost-efficient options for actions supplementary to the Emissions Reduction Fund and its safeguard mechanism. These could include fuel efficiency standards for light and heavy vehicles, building and appliance energy efficiency standards and measures to reduce synthetic greenhouse gas emissions. Before taking decisions on such policy measures, the Australian Government will consult with business and the community.

    The Australian Government values your views. You are invited to make a submission on Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target, and in particular on the following issues:

    • What should Australia’s post-2020 target be and how should it be expressed? In responding to this question you could consider the base year (e.g. 1990/2000/2005), the end year (e.g. 2025/2030), the type of target and why the suggested target is preferred.
    • What would the impact of that target be on Australia? In responding to this question you could, for example, consider the impact on our economy, jobs, business and on the environment.
    • Which further policies complementary to the Australian Government’s direct action approach should be considered to achieve Australia’s post-2020 target and why?

    You can make a submission at https://www.dpmc.gov.au/taskforces/unfccc/

    Submissions close 3pm AEST on Friday 24 April 2015.

     


    [i] CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology, State of the Climate Report 2014.

    [ii] CSIRO and the Bureau of Meteorology, State of the Climate Report 2014.

    [iii] Department of the Environment, Australia’s Emissions Projections 2014-15.

    [iv] The Treasury, 2015 Intergenerational Report.

    [v] International Monetary Fund, World Economic Outlook, January 2015.

    [vi] Australian Bureau of Statistics, 3101.0, December 2014.

    [vii] United Nations, World Populations Prospects, 2012 Revision, Table I.3.

    [viii] Climate Change Authority, Reducing Australia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Targets and Progress Review Final Report, February 2014.

    [ix] Australian Bureau of Resources and Energy Economics, Australian Energy Statistics 2014, Table O.

    [x] World Bank, World Development Indicators, Fossil fuel energy consumption 2014.

    [xi] Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, Trade at a Glance, 2014.

    [xii] Based on the new policies scenario. World Energy Outlook 2014, International Energy Agency.

    [xiii] United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Decision –/CP.20.

     


    © Commonwealth of Australia 2015

    ISBN 978-1-925237-47-4 (PDF)

    ISBN 978-1-925237-48-1 (HTML)

    Ownership of intellectual property rights in this publication

    Unless otherwise noted, copyright (and any other intellectual property rights, if any) in this publication is owned by the Commonwealth of Australia (referred to below as the Commonwealth).

    Creative Commons licence

    With the exception of the Coat of Arms, this publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence.

    Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence is a standard form licence agreement that allows you to copy, distribute, transmit and adapt this publication provided that you attribute the work. A summary of the licence terms is available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/deed.en. The full licence terms are available from http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/au/legalcode.

    The Commonwealth’s preference is that you attribute this publication (and any material sourced from it) using the following wording:

    Source: Licensed from the Commonwealth of Australia under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Australia Licence.

    The Commonwealth of Australia does not necessarily endorse the content of this publication.

    Use of the Coat of Arms

    The terms under which the Coat of Arms can be used are set out on the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet website (see http://www.dpmc.gov.au/guidelines/).

    Show full publication

  • Australia’s climate change ‘debate’ all talk and no action

    cities development

    australia
    world
    opinion
    sport
    football
    tech
    culture
    lifestyle
    fashion
    economy
    travel
    media

    all
    Climate change
    Australia’s climate change ‘debate’ all talk and no action

    Climate policy has become more untenable over the past nine months as the Coalition built its rhetorical smokescreen
    drought
    A crippling drought near Mingenew, in Western Australia, in January as the eastern states suffered the nation’s costliest floods in its history. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty Images
    Lenore Taylor

    Lenore Taylor Political editor
    @lenoretaylor

    Friday 10 April 2015 14.40 AEST
    Last modified on Friday 10 April 2015 18.17 AEST

    Share on Facebook
    Share on Twitter
    Share via Email
    Share on LinkedIn
    Share on Google+
    Share on WhatsApp

    Shares
    352
    Comments
    184

    Australia’s climate “debate” screamed itself out nine months ago and fell over in exhaustion, having smashed a workable policy and failed to produce an alternative.

    People who care about the subject, which you’d think would be most people considering what is at stake, struggled to maintain a rational conversation, given that the former government’s policy had been taken down by rhetorical nonsense – Whyalla wipeouts and $100 lamb roasts and the like – and the Abbott government’s still sketchy policy was propped up by the same.

    But eventually facts challenge nonsense rhetoric, and the past nine months have made it clear just how untenable Australia’s position is. Here are seven sadly ridiculous things about our current situation.

    Emission reduction businesses that used to sell greenhouse gas abatement to polluters will start selling the same abatement to the government next week, for about the same price the polluters would be paying for it if we still had an emissions trading scheme. The first auction under the Abbott government Direct Action policy’s $2.55bn emissions reduction fund will be held on 15 and 16 April. Experts say the most likely winners are companies like Greencollar, that gather up land-clearing permits from farmers who promise not to clear the land, so the farmer and the company get paid for the emission reduction from avoided deforestation, and companies that capture methane from places like garbage dumps.
    Those same companies were selling their abatement to polluters under the old ETS and its carbon farming scheme. By now the old carbon price would have been floating close to the European price of about $10 a tonne. Norton Rose Fulbright partner Elisa de Wit said she expected next week’s auction price to be between $10 and $20 a tonne. Same abatement – as far as it goes – similar price, except we pay instead of the companies doing the polluting.
    Manufacturers, miners and electricity generators (that together produce more than 60% of Australia’s emissions) won’t have to reduce their emissions under Direct Action and may in fact be able to increase them, which could cancel out the emissions reductions the government is spending billions trying to achieve. Direct Action included something called a “safeguards mechanism” that was supposed to stop this from happening. In fact, if the emission “baselines” under the “safeguards mechanism” were tough, it could have potentially forced industrial emissions down and turned the policy into something halfway workable.
    But a recent discussion paper revealed the safeguards mechanism had been designed not to safeguard that emissions were reduced, but to effectively safeguard against industry having to do anything. The Carbon and Environment Daily newsletter has calculated that the system described could allow Bluescope steel to double its emissions without suffering a penalty. The exceptions and out clauses mean it is unlikely to force any change in any company’s behaviour. The South Australian senator Nick Xenophon, who provided one of the six votes that got Direct Action through the Senate on the understanding that the safeguards would be rigorous, feels dudded, and is protesting. It’s probably too late for that, although the discussion paper is seeking feedback.
    Successive governments have negotiated special emission reduction deals for Australia and, together with reduced electricity use – mostly because of the decline in manufacturing – this might take us close to our pretty easy emission reduction targets. But that does not mean we are pulling our weight, as we seem to be claiming. In 1997 in Kyoto, having threatened not to sign, Australia managed to get a special deal to increase our emissions by 8% in the first period – ending in 2012 – and to count changes in land use.
    Almost every other country had to reduce emissions over the same period. Effectively this meant we knew we had already almost achieved the target when we signed up to it because of land-clearing restrictions already in place. In fact we overshot that super-easy target, which meant we got to “carry over” the excess to the second commitment period – ending in 2020. Both major parties promised a 5% reduction by 2020 (actually that was supposed to be a bare minimum but the pledges to do more seem to have slipped by the wayside while we were all arguing about the future of lamb roasts) but if you take away the “carry over” from the first target then the 5% becomes 1%, according to calculations by the Climate Change Authority.
    And if that 1% is achieved it will be mostly because of declining electricity use. We wouldn’t be the only country claiming credit for emission changes that happened for other reasons – European countries looked good when their coal industries closed for reasons that had nothing to do with climate change – but it doesn’t mean we can claim to be model global citizens and it doesn’t mean we should be deluded into thinking we have made any of the necessary changes to reduce the emissions-intensity of our economy, because we haven’t.
    The government appears to be working out Australia’s post-2020 emissions reduction target based on figures that assume global warming of almost four degrees, when the whole point of global negotiations is to try to limit global warming to two degrees. Its recent discussion paper does not mention the 2C goal, but does mention a scenario that could result in almost 4C global warming. Discussing Australia’s special “national circumstances”, the discussion paper says that “for the foreseeable future, Australia will continue to be a major supplier of crucial energy and raw materials to the rest of the world … At present, around 80% of the world’s primary energy needs are met through carbon-based fuels. By 2040, it is estimated that 74% will still be met by carbon-based sources.”
    A footnote confirms that estimate comes from the “new policies scenario” of the International Energy Agency’s world energy outlook 2014, which was a baseline calculation of what would happen if countries implemented only the policies announced at that time, a scenario seen as unacceptable because it would pave the way for at least 3.6C of global warming. All governments try to wrangle themselves a good deal in these kind of global negotiations, and the foreign affairs minister, Julie Bishop ,and her team are taking an active role in the negotiations. But Australia will have to agree to something like a fair share of the globally-accepted starting point.
    The government will set a post-2020 emissions reduction target without a policy to get there. The discussion paper also asks what policies might be implemented to achieve a new target that were “complementary” to Direct Action. Independent modelling has suggested Direct Action might not have enough money to meet even the 5% target, and all analysis suggests it would be extremely difficult to “scale up” to a higher target. Modelling has also found that cutting emissions further than 5% would be prohibitively expensive, the same charge levelled by the Coalition minister Malcolm Turnbull when he explained in 2011 that continuing to use a big government taxpayer-funded scheme to reduce emissions in the long term would “become a very expensive charge on the budget in the years ahead”.
    The government is not including climate change in long-term planning exercises that really should be planning for climate change. The recent intergenerational report – supposedly an economic planning document for the next 40 years – claimed that some economic effects of climate change “may be beneficial – where regions become warmer or wetter this may allow for increased agricultural output, while others may be harmful”. It was otherwise largely silent on the economic consequences of climate change, saying its focus was “primarily on government expenses that are affected by demographic change”.
    Previous intergenerational reports didn’t see it that way. Global warming changes rainfall patterns, drought frequency and the frequency of extreme weather events, but the recent agriculture green paper didn’t really mention it either. “We’ve put billions of dollars on the table to try to address the issue of climate variability … In fact, I would love to have some the money that’s been invested by previous governments in so-called ‘changing the temperature back’. If we’d had that invested in agriculture, we’d be an agricultural superpower,” the agriculture minister, Barnaby Joyce, said at the time. And this week’s energy white paper – the long-term planning document on Australia’s energy supply – didn’t mention it as a policy driver either, even though electricity generation and transport fuels are major sources of emissions.
    The government is refusing to accept a political compromise on the renewable energy target (backed by Labor, the renewables industry and big business) because it thinks the industry won’t be able to reach the target, but the only reason industry wouldn’t reach the target is the absence of a political compromise. This fight has been going on ever since the government accepted that it wasn’t going to be able to ram through the findings of the review by self-professed climate sceptic and businessman Dick Warburton, to gut the RET –which was supposed to ensure 41,000 gigawatt hours of renewable energy by 2020.
    Negotiations with Labor have been dragging on. Now Labor, the renewables industry, big business and energy users have all agreed on a compromise plan for 33,500 gigawatt hours. The industry minister, Ian Macfarlane, says he won’t budge from 32,000 gigawatt hours because the industry can’t build any more. The industry says it certainly can, but the biggest risk is the investment drought during this endless wait for some kind of political compromise.

    Climate policy is complicated, but it’s also really simple. We have to find a way to gradually reduce emissions, including from industry, transport and electricity generation. Most experts think some kind of carbon price is the most cost-effective way. There are other ways – direct government regulation, for example. But trying to hide this basic goal behind a smokescreen of rhetoric or the creative manipulation of complicated concepts and numbers cannot avoid the inevitable.

  • The John James Newsletter 54 Inbox x

    The conversation has been marked as not important.

    1 of 32

     

    The John James Newsletter 54

    Inbox x

    John James

    5:45 AM (2 hours ago)

    The John James Newsletter 54
    10 April 2015

    Power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs.Thomas Jefferson

    Is this why our weather in Australia has become so interesting?The map shows that much of ocean warming in the past decade has occurred in the Southern Hemisphere. http://e360.yale.edu/feature/how_long_can_oceans_continue_to_absorb_earths_excess_heat/2860/
    Greece draws up drachma plans, prepares to miss IMF payment‘We are a Left-wing government. If we have to choose between a default to the IMF or a default to our own people, it is a no-brainer.’ Greece is drawing up drastic plans to nationalise the country’s banking system and introduce a parallel currency unless the eurozone takes steps to defuse the simmering crisis and soften its demands. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/economics/11513341/Greece-draws-up-drachma-plans-prepares-to-miss-IMF-payment.html
    Is The Hidden Hand Behind the Islamic State Militants Saddam Hussein’s?Theold-regime Iraqi officers are in command: they make the tactics and the battle plans.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41447.htm
    Why is Assad Still in Power?Syria is split along geographic and demographic divides grow ever more intractable. There is no realistic prospect of a military victory for any side. The plight of ordinary Syrians gets more desperate as extremist groups take advantage of the chaos. The only solution is a negotiated political settlement that includes the ruling regime that represents the central state, the Syrian army and a sizable chunk of Syrians. At the end of the day, it is the enemy you negotiate with to end war, not your friends.http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41421.htm
    What Would Happen If Martial Law Was Declared In America?A WELL-REFERENCED HISTORY OF A TRENDThere is concern that an upcoming eight week military exercise on US soil known as “Jade Helm” is a dress rehearsal for the imposition of martial law when you would have no rights, and the federal government would be able to do just about anything it wanted to do.http://endoftheamericandream.com/archives/what-would-happen-if-martial-law-was-declared-in-america Army Manual Outlines Plan To Kill Rioters and Demonstrators In Americahttp://www.infowars.com/army-manual-outlines-plan-to-kill-rioters-in-america/
    Studies conclude climate change will cause less severe winters in the long termA cold wave as powerful as the January 7, 2014 event could cease to exist by the end of the century.http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2015/03/31/studies-conclude-climate-change-will-cause-less-severe-winters/?postshare=4571427881186043 
    North sea cod stocks bounce back, analysis shows Cod was heavily overfished in the North Sea in the 1980s and 1990s but since 2006, with stringent regulations imposed on the industry, there has been a steady recovery and stocks are approaching the level of maximum sustainable yield, the measurement widely accepted as the gold standard of responsible fishing.http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/apr/08/north-sea-cod-stocks-bounce-back-analysis-shows
    Soaring dollar puts the world on sale for AmericaThe US currency’s value has surged over the last nine months, reaching levels against some world currencies last seen more than a decade ago. In Europe, it now costs just $1.09 to buy one euro, down from $1.37 a year ago and almost $1.50 four years ago. The rapid devaluation of other currencies against the dollar is being abetted by foreign governments and their central banks. http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-king-dollar-20150405-story.html#page=1
    Environmental Terrorism Cripples Palestinian FarmersAccording to the Palestinian Authority and the Applied Research Institute Jerusalem approximately 800,000 olive trees have been uprooted since Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza in 1967. Following a farmers’ eviction, Israel settlers can argue that the land has been abandoned and then move in and take it over with Palestinians having little legal recourse. No action will be taken against the settlers by the Israeli police. http://www.ipsnews.net/2015/04/environmental-terrorism-cripples-palestinian-farmersPalestinian Authority becomes member of international criminal court This could open the way for Israelis to be prosecuted for war crimes – despite Israel not being a member – and for the prosecution of Palestinian militants such as Hamas. This may bring accountability to years of conflict. http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/apr/01/palestinian-authority-becomes-member-of-international-criminal-court?CMP=ema_565
    US Climate Plan ‘Treats the Wound But Does Not Stop the Bleeding’As the White House unveils blueprint for emission reductions ahead of UN climate talks, groups warn that unless US moves beyond fossil fuels it will not avert climate catastrophehttp://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/03/31/us-climate-plan-treats-wound-does-not-stop-bleeding
    New Report Debunks Myth That GMOs are Key to Feeding the WorldTraditional methods ‘shown to actually increase food supplies and reduce the environmental impact of production’http://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/04/01/new-report-debunks-myth-gmos-are-key-feeding-world
    Assessing The Iranian Framework DealThe deal is a spectacular victory for all, with tougher arrangements far beyond expectations. The months and year ahead are significantly difficult and all the players have to take a measured approach with careful moves to reach a final agreement.http://www.countercurrents.org/abbasi050415.htm Full text on preliminary nuclear accord with Iranhttp://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/02/us-iran-nuclear-text-idUSKBN0MT2CY20150402
    The Oil Price WarOil prices fell more than 50% between June 2014 and March 2015. The fall started when Saudi Arabia oil began to flood the markets. Some analysts believe that it is an attack on the growing shale oil industry in the US, while the US is betting that the low oil prices will destroy the three major oil producers which are not under its political and/or military control: Iran, Venezuela and, of course, Russia. http://www.countercurrents.org/venturini050415.htm
    Fateful Steps That Led to the Crisis in Ukraine (Part Two)The objective was to humiliate Ukraine’s Russian-speaking population. The radical nationalists of western Ukraine, for whom the rejection of Russia and its culture is an article of faith, intend to force the rest of the country to fit their narrow vision, with its roots in irrationalism, fascism and the anti-Semitism and the ethnic massacres of WWII.http://www.opednews.com/articles/Conclusion-Fateful-Steps-by-Thomas-Riggins-Culture_Democracy_Fascism_Ideology-150402-297.html
    US and CIA Interventions Since World War IIIf you check out American foreign policy of the past century… invasions … bombings … overthrowing governments … occupations … suppressing movements for social change … assassinating political leaders … perverting elections … manipulating labor unions … manufacturing “news” … death squads … torture … biological warfare … depleted uranium … drug trafficking … mercenaries … It’s not a pretty picture. It’s enough to give imperialism a bad name.See chapter 40 for Australia – 1973-1975: Another free election bites the dusthttp://williamblum.org/books/killing-hope/
    Over 200,000 troops during the first Gulf War were exposed to nerve gas When the Iraqi weapons plants and storage sites were bombed, poisonous plumes floated across the desert to thousands of troops on the Saudi border. Sirens wailed daily, but officers announced that the chemical-detection alarms were faulty. They were not. A Czech detection unit found “trace concentrations of sarin”.http://www.newsweek.com/how-us-nerve-gassed-its-own-troops-then-covered-it-317250
    By 2050, Muslims will make up about 10 per cent of the Europe’s populationThe Hindu population is projected to rise by 34% worldwide, from a little over 1 billion to nearly 1.4 billion by 2050. By that time, Hindus will be third, making up 15%, followed by people who do not affiliate with any religion, accounting for 13%. The people with no religious affiliation currently have the third largest share of the world’s total populationhttp://www.timesofoman.com/News/49804/%E2%80%98India-to-pip-Indonesia-as-country-with-most-Muslims-by-2050%E2%80%99

    to John
  • NSW 2015 – Legislative Council update by Ben Raue

    The conversation has been marked as important.
    1 of 27

    [New post] NSW 2015 – Legislative Council update

    Inbox
    x

    The Tally Room <donotreply@wordpress.com> Unsubscribe

    11:00 AM (14 minutes ago)

    to me

    New post on The Tally Room

    NSW 2015 – Legislative Council update

    by Ben Raue

    The count in the Legislative Assembly is now largely complete. As of late Thursday evening, the Electoral Commission had “pushed the button” and finished the count in 41 out of 93 seats, including the key seats of Lismore (Nationals beat Greens), East Hills (Liberal beat Labor), Gosford and the Entrance (Labor beat Liberal), giving us a final figure of 54 Coalition, 34 Labor, 3 Greens and two independents.

    In the Legislative Council, there has been substantial progress in counting since I last posted eight days ago.

    I’ve produced a projection based on comparing the above-the-line votes counted in the first count and second count, and using this to project how the remaining below-the-line votes will flow.

    Candidate Party Votes Quotas Projected votes Projected quotas
    Courtney Houssos Labor 47,383 0.5699 167,269 0.8583
    Robert Borsak Shooters 56,956 0.6851 164,310 0.8431
    Fred Nile Christian Dem 54,144 0.6513 121,423 0.6230
    Peter Jones No Land Tax 39,828 0.4791 80,485 0.4130
    Mark Pearson Animal Justice 33,147 0.3987 75,323 0.3865
    Hollie Hughes Liberal 50,453 0.6069 75,209 0.3859
    Shayne Higson Voluntary Euthanasia 16,086 0.1935 39,637 0.2034
    Justin Field Greens 25,472 0.3064 35,517 0.1822

    The first four of these candidates will get elected. On this projection, No Land Tax is leading on primary votes in a very tight race with Animal Justice and the Liberal candidate, leaving open the possibility of preferences being decisive, and/or a court case challenging the result.

    Below the fold, I’ll explain the progress of the count and how I came to this projection.

    The Electoral Commission is planning to ‘push the button’ sometime between Wednesday and Saturday next week. Read more of this post

  • You pay, are they? LABOR

    enable desktop notifications for Gmail.   Learn more  Hide
    1 of 26

    You pay, are they?

    Inbox
    x

    Sam Dastyari via sendgrid.info 

    10:52 AM (2 minutes ago)

    to me
    .
    Neville —

    One of the certainties in life is that you have to pay your taxes. We all pay our fair share.

    So why should big multinational companies be any different?

    Did you know that right now in Australia companies are shifting their profits overseas to avoid paying their fair share of tax?

    It’s BIG MONEY too. In 2012-13 companies shifted more than $300 billion from Australia to overseas companies.

    It’s even worse when you think about the fact that these taxes could have been spent on things like our schools and hospitals. Things that the Government are cutting back on right now.

    Worse than that, the Liberal Government handed back $1 billion to multinationals in their last budget – while cutting pensions and asking students to pay more for a degree?!

    We think there is a better way. Labor has released our plan to stop multinational tax avoidance by shutting down the loopholes that allow these companies to send their profits overseas.

    But what do you think?

    multitax_button-yes.png
    multitax_button-no.png

    For me, paying tax is the price we pay for a fair society with healthcare, education and support for the disadvantaged. That’s why it’s so important that everyone contributes.

    You can find out more about our policy on multinational company tax here.

    Thank you for your support,

    Senator Sam Dastyari

  • French banks rule out Galilee coal — now let’s make CommBank

    Click here to enable desktop notifications for Gmail.   Learn more  Hide
    More

    1 of 3

    French banks rule out Galilee coal — now let’s make CommBank

    Inbox
    x

    Josh Creaser – 350.org Australia josh.creaser@350.org.au via list.350.org 

    4:05 PM (12 minutes ago)

    to me

    Dear Friend,

    In breaking news, Indian mining giant Adani can say au revoir to funding for the Galilee Basin mega coal mines from France’s three largest banks*.

    Overnight, BNP Paribas, Société Générale and Credit Agricole have publicly ruled out involvement in the Galilee coal mines and expansion of Abbot Point port on the Great Barrier Reef. This is a huge victory and adds to the commitments of eight other European and Wall Street banks that have rejected this climate and reef disaster.

    Click here to help us build community pressure on Commonwealth Bank – Australia’s oldest and largest Bank – to join them.

    While their global peers show leadership, Australia’s big banks continue to fence sit. However, one bank has already jumped the fence. As we speak, the Commonwealth Bank is advising Adani and considering financing the largest mine in the Galilee Basin.

    As Adani becomes increasingly desperate for money, they’ll be pressuring CommBank to fund this climate disaster harder than ever — which means that, over the coming months, we must show CommBank that Australians everywhere reject massive new coal expansions in the Galilee Basin and ports on the Reef.

    And that’s why we are going to Raise the Heat on CommBank! From 19-23 May, at CommBank branches around the country, Australians everywhere — customers and non-customers alike — will engage in creative and bold actions to put the Bank’s reputation on the line. We’ll even be joined by friends taking action at CommBank offices around the world.

    Sign up to take part in Raise the Heat actions at a branch near you!

    The announcement last night from the major French Banks shows, once again, that there is no future for the Galilee Basin coal mines. Yet CommBank continues to block its ears to the enormous environmental, social and economic risks that have driven the major coal-lending banks away. That’s why, branch by branch, it’s time to make our case louder and more powerful than ever. It’s time to put CommBank’s reputation on the line.

    Signup to a Raise the Heat in you area and help us build a movement strong enough to get CommBank out of the Galilee.

    Yours for a safe climate and reef,

    Josh and Janelle for the 350.org Australia Team

    P.s Can’t see a CommBank branch near you? Keen to be involved? You can register a CommBank branch of your choice here and help coordinate actions during Raise the Heat. We’ll be here to support you each step of the way — get started by registering a branch today.
    —-

    *Big French Banks Rule out Galilee Coal Funding, The Sydney Morning Herald, 8th April.

    Click here to enable desktop notifications for Gmail.   Learn more  Hide
    More

    1 of 3

    French banks rule out Galilee coal — now let’s make CommBank

    Inbox
    x

    Josh Creaser – 350.org Australia josh.creaser@350.org.au via list.350.org 

    4:05 PM (12 minutes ago)

    to me

    Dear Friend,

    In breaking news, Indian mining giant Adani can say au revoir to funding for the Galilee Basin mega coal mines from France’s three largest banks*.

    Overnight, BNP Paribas, Société Générale and Credit Agricole have publicly ruled out involvement in the Galilee coal mines and expansion of Abbot Point port on the Great Barrier Reef. This is a huge victory and adds to the commitments of eight other European and Wall Street banks that have rejected this climate and reef disaster.

    Click here to help us build community pressure on Commonwealth Bank – Australia’s oldest and largest Bank – to join them.

    While their global peers show leadership, Australia’s big banks continue to fence sit. However, one bank has already jumped the fence. As we speak, the Commonwealth Bank is advising Adani and considering financing the largest mine in the Galilee Basin.

    As Adani becomes increasingly desperate for money, they’ll be pressuring CommBank to fund this climate disaster harder than ever — which means that, over the coming months, we must show CommBank that Australians everywhere reject massive new coal expansions in the Galilee Basin and ports on the Reef.

    And that’s why we are going to Raise the Heat on CommBank! From 19-23 May, at CommBank branches around the country, Australians everywhere — customers and non-customers alike — will engage in creative and bold actions to put the Bank’s reputation on the line. We’ll even be joined by friends taking action at CommBank offices around the world.

    Sign up to take part in Raise the Heat actions at a branch near you!

    The announcement last night from the major French Banks shows, once again, that there is no future for the Galilee Basin coal mines. Yet CommBank continues to block its ears to the enormous environmental, social and economic risks that have driven the major coal-lending banks away. That’s why, branch by branch, it’s time to make our case louder and more powerful than ever. It’s time to put CommBank’s reputation on the line.

    Signup to a Raise the Heat in you area and help us build a movement strong enough to get CommBank out of the Galilee.

    Yours for a safe climate and reef,

    Josh and Janelle for the 350.org Australia Team

    P.s Can’t see a CommBank branch near you? Keen to be involved? You can register a CommBank branch of your choice here and help coordinate actions during Raise the Heat. We’ll be here to support you each step of the way — get started by registering a branch today.
    —-

    *Big French Banks Rule out Galilee Coal Funding, The Sydney Morning Herald, 8th April.