Is the scale of the Australian Bushfires related to government policy?

Is the scale of the Australian Bushfires related to government policy?

Spoiler - Yes.

Watch the video even if you don't read the thread. It's powerful.

A detailed account of how the Government has failed us on Climate Change, again and again and again. I worked on this with @tomcballard @ChamberlinM & @closest_eves at Tonightly. Let Tom's rage power you through these terrible and terrifying days.

A year on and this isn't even satire anymore. #AustraliaOnFire #AustraliaBurning

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=stIYj4l2gAE

Here's a list of reasons why the scale of the bushfires in Australia is absolutely the Coalition Government's fault.

Advice ignored
The Morrison Government ignored expert advice, that's been rolling in since April 2019, saying they would need specialist equipment, including water-bombers, to fight off unprecedented bushfires this season.

Twenty-three former fire and emergency leaders say they tried for months to warn Prime Minister Scott Morrison that Australia needed more water-bombers to tackle bigger, faster and hotter bushfires. ABC

State cuts funding
As part of their '$3.5 billion shake up' to the public sector, the NSW Liberal State Government CUT $12.9 million from Fire & Rescue NSW, plus $26.7 million from the volunteers (Office of NSW Rural Fire Services).

While Scott Morrison offers thoughts and prayers to bushfire victims, the NSW Liberal Party has cut tens of millions from state fire services. Crikey

Vegetation isn't the enemy
The Morrison Government's response to the 2018 bushfires in Queensland was to attempt an inquiry into state land-clearing laws designed to protect much needed vegetation - blaming the trees for the fires.

The Labor premier said:

“If you want to know what caused those conditions, I’ll give you an answer – it’s called climate change”
"every candidate at the next federal election must reveal their stance on global warming, so voters would know if they were supporting climate change deniers or not." The Guardian

Premier begs for bushfire assistance
During the 2018-2019 bushfire season, the premiere of Tasmania had to BEG the Federal Government for extra assistance because federal funding (the NDRRA) doesn't support protection or relief for World Heritage Listed areas, or non-populated sites.
ABC

Relief NOT prevention
The Morrison Government's strategy to tackle climate change natural disasters has been solely focussed on injecting money into relief efforts after the event, with no new funding allocated to prevention and protection.

The strong business case for investing in disaster risk reduction has been underlined for some time by groups as diverse as the Australian Productivity Commission and the Australian Business Roundtable for Disaster Resilience and Safer Communities.The US National Institute of Building Sciences, for example, found that every dollar invested in mitigation can save six dollars in future disaster costs. The Strategist 

Lack of support for bushfire prevention
It isn't only the Government's spurious claims and ineptitude around Climate Change that are hurting us, it's their reluctance to even support the most basic of preventative measures. Including making enormous budget cuts to research and public services.

Government investment in research and development is at its lowest in 40 years

"Australian scientists have expressed disappointment over a budget update that cuts Aus$328.5 million from research funding that had been expected over the next four years." It will "rob Australians of life-saving treatments, research to help prevent floods and bushfires, and advances in almost every aspect of people’s lives" Nature

Where did the funding go?
That relief wilderness funding Tasmania begged for? It never came. Morrison has a long history of PROMISING relief funding for disaster efforts, and then deferring that funding to a later date - Delaying recovery efforts and making communities even more vulnerable. ABC

Decisions delayed, environmental positions unfilled, requests for meetings ignored & budget cuts.
Just last month, (December 2019) Morrison announced even more cuts to the public sector (the Government has cut billions). These services have a direct impact on fire prevention, rescue and relief including health, environment, research, communications, and community services like the ABC.

Disengagement with Environmental issues has been consistent.
Former Environmental Minister Melissa Price did the exact same disappearing act in the 2018-2019 bushfire season as many of our ministers have done this season.
The Guardian

More warnings ignored
While experts warned federal governments about the impacts of climate change denial, deforestation, and the impending bushfires, Environment Minister Sussan Ley invested her energy into getting Adani across the line and feral cats. I'm not joking.

Ley, who welcomed the Queensland government’s decision on Thursday to give the green light to the Adani coalmine, told Guardian Australia she wanted to see more action on recycling, threatened species and biodiversity protection, and a greater focus on individual action to achieve a better environment.

On climate change, Ley said she was “interested” in the emissions reduction task of government /and said she believed the Coalition’s climate solutions fund is “where we need to be”. The Guardian

Ignorance about the koala crisis 
And though she has been very performative about protecting wildlife and links to climate change, it's clear Sussan Ley is ignoring experts and has no idea what she's doing.

The major issues which need to be dealt with have been ignored. No moratorium on deforestation, mining projects or massive urbanisation development projects relevant to NSW and Queensland. NO EFFORT to address climate change impacts and the urgent need for protected refuge areas. NO PLANS to deal with ongoing drought impacts.

The situation is very concerning. Primary koala areas have been experienced a terrible drought for a long time, there’s massive dieback in the forests. No flowering, barely any new leaf growth.
Koala carers were already screaming for help because they were picking up joeys abandoned by their mothers who were struggling to survive. They can’t produce milk, the leaves have no nutritional value. This situation is going to be a major problem for sustaining koalas who have survived.

Taggart spells out the long-term impacts on trees that sustained fires so hot that they will not recover and produce pollen and nectar for at least 20 years 

‘Marsupials and nighttime animals use pollen as protein and nectar as energy. There’s going to be a real impact on native animals, gliders in particular. IndependentAustralia

Years of obstruction

Maybe the most insidious and dangerous member of Morrison's cabinet, Energy Minister Angus Taylor has been standing in the way of Climate related progress and policy for years.

Does Australia have a climate change record to be proud of? Spoiler - No
The Guardian

Funding stripped from Centrelink - AGAIN
Most bushfire disaster relief payments are made through Centrelink, as well as some RFS volunteer funds. The same Centrelink the Coalition has made a sport of stripping funding from for years. The Centrelink that Morrison targets again and again.

"harsh and short-sighted cuts: 18,000 jobs slashed and up to another 4500 predicted in 2017. More just last month.

unless the government uses this budget to begin a concerted and long-term effort to repair the damage it's caused, the problems will only worsen. Ordinary Australians will bear the brunt through shoddy services and more. Even a small increase in the so-called "efficiency" dividend, /would have a disastrous effect given how under-resourced key agencies are already.

THOUSANDS of regional jobs have been cut.

Instead of sensible policy, the Turnbull government uprooted the "Australian Pesticides and Veterinary Medicines Authority to Armidale at great cost, losing specialist regulatory scientists along the way. The Senate inquiry has made clear the damage to the pesticides authority.SMH

In fact, I would argue the Morrison Government has, more than any Government before it, campaigned to make 'public services' the enemy, those same public services who are on the ground right now, saving our country against all odds.

We're all aware of the Government's blistering incompetence when the fires started, but here is a great refresher from November, including Morrison refusing overseas assistance.

the NSW Premier and PM have recently taken and/or failed to take action that can reasonably be expected to have serious negative consequences for firefighters, communities and individuals threatened by bushfires — both currently and into the future. Independent Australia

Cuts over many years - 2011
But this didn't start with Morrison. It didn't even start with Tony "volunteer firefighter" Abbott and his cuts to services and systematic undermining of relief and recovery efforts.

the NSW RFS budget was cut from $307 million to $287 million in 2011-12.  infrastructure items such as tankers and capital equipment and control centre [construction] is [affected]

More cuts to come

Both the Rural Fire Service and Fire and Rescue in metropolitan areas face cuts to jobs and wages. The bulk of the RFS are already volunteer firefighters who take time off work to face fire emergencies. This means many are retirees, with a third of Queensland’s volunteers aged over 55. Cutting the few full-time staff will leave it even less equipped to fight fires.

What happened to the recovery payments?

Abbott’s federal government tightened the rules for disaster recovery payments to people affected by the fires, denying people cut off from their homes or without power and water for extended periods any payment.Solidarity.net

And yes there are failings from the other parties, ludicrous ones that beggar belief, but there is no party that has consistently harmed our environment, successfully undermined anti-climate change campaigns, and hurt firefighting efforts more than the Coalition. This is on them.

"A Nation Charred" 2003 - recommendations still not implemented
Attaching this tweet to the end here, so you have access to the link. I implore everyone to read this report from 2003. It's heartbreaking, but so important. #AustraliaOnFire

If you want to read the full report, with all the recommendations this Government didn't implement, here it is. Fair warning, it'll probably cause an emotional response you don't expect, like crying, or screaming, or punching a wall.

Search Results

Web results

[PDF]

A Nation Charred: Report on the inquiry into bushfires

https://www.aph.gov.au › House_of_Representatives_Committees › fullreport

Everything in this report still applies. Including the catastrophic lack of urgency & responsibility from politicians.

"If those very same notes are not considered or acted upon by policy makers and decision takers... that would indeed be the greatest tragedy of all" 

"These failures are systemic to the Coalition Government, who ignored the 2003 committee recommendations to develop a national strategy, to incentivise volunteer services, to invest in tech and research to model the rapid response on defence forces etc etc.

Some background on this is that we uncovered so much horrific shit Australian governments have done (or failed to do) in the face of impending climate change disaster that I still have nightmares about it, & I also fell out of love with Paul Keating which made me very depressed.

And the most INFURIATING THING is that Bob Hawke was one of the first leaders in the WORLD to attempt to centre policy on Climate Change. We could've been global leaders in this. We almost were.

in 1987, Hawke began to give speeches about the importance of action against the emerging threat of global warming.

Hawke was in the Lodge during the crucial period when Australia first became aware of – and tried to grapple with – the issue of climate change. And the trajectory of his leadership, not to mention the manner and timing of his political demise, leaves behind a huge question of what might have been The Conversation

These articles were collated by Kara Schlegl on Twitter and are shared here with permission. Twitter @karaschlegl

Strong women as role models.

Below is a 3 minute film about Alex Nissen, a woman I worked with a few years ago.  It was the first time I'd worked with a group of strong, socially active, vocal women (and one wonderful man) and it was an eye-opener. 

In the world I was raised in, in the 50's and 60's, women weren't argumentative, didn't challenge the system, and didn't speak out openly about inequity or injustice. They certainly did good works, cared for the sick, disadvantaged and elderly and made new migrants welcome, but it was a quiet, more submissive, deferring to authority kind of goodness. And there was no way they'd challenge injustices in society.

The professionals I was now working with, in particular Alex and Deborah, with minds strong as steel traps, confronted and challenged statements and opinions respectfully and honestly. There was no psychological game playing, no power plays or one-up-manship, which was extremely refreshing in comparison to other areas of my work life. 

At first I found it confronting  to watch and listen to people challenging each other, criticising, objecting, disagreeing. In the world I'd grown up and worked in, anger and associated emotions were hidden, denied, something to be ashamed of and they certainly weren't expressed cleanly or openly by either men or women. Expressions of anger and disagreement were met with disapproval, the cold shoulder and sulking. Conflict of any sort was studiously avoided. 

I'd never imagined a world like this - strong, vocal, assertive, secure women, speaking knowledgeably and confidently and it was like a breath of fresh air and I soaked it up, looking forward to spending time with the feisty group each week. 

By their choices and actions, Alex and Deborah showed not just me, but those with whom they came in contact with, that it's possible to live by deeply held values on a day to day basis. It might not be easy, it might not always be enjoyable but it's empowering.

One side of Alex which isn't highlighted in the video is her wonderful, warm, quirky sense of humour. 

One day, after yet again being unable to remember the complex (some people might disagree!) infuriating passcode on the security door, Alex smiled cheekily, took me by the hand, led me to the door and made up a little story and song about the number sequence. 

She had me in tears of (possibly quite loud) laughter as she bounced my fingers over the correct sequence time and time again singing the jaunty song until the numbers stuck! I'm sure passers by were bemused at the sight of two grown women singing at a security pad, but Alex made the lesson fun, and I remembered! What a skill!

Watching the video of Alex reminded me yet again of the importance and power of reflecting on values, clarifying them for you as an individual, then making daily choices which support them. 

And to that end when faced with a decision which needs to be made, you can ask yourself: 

Will this decision support my values or those of someone else?

Is this taking me closer to what I value or not?

and

Are the choices I'm making today leading me to where I want to be tomorrow?

On politics, ethics, integrity and lying.

I

From The Guardian: 

"It is hard to imagine how he thinks – having made such a point of the importance of keeping election promises, right down to the footnotes – that he will not be judged by precisely the same authenticity standard he used so implacably against his political opponents. 

If you promised to match school funding dollar for dollar over the next four years – if you promised that every single school in Australia gets the same deal whether there is a Labor government or a Coalition government after 7 September – then that's what you promised. 

You cannot subsequently put it down to some well-meaning person's hallucination, a mass delusion, as Abbott suggested on the Bolt Report on Sunday. "But Andrew, we are going to keep our promise. We are going to keep the promise that we actually made, not the promise that some people thought that we made or the promise that some people might have liked us to make. We're going to keep the promise that we actually made."

Katharine Murphy goes on to talk about the political campaign fudge - it's expected, it what happens in elections.

...

To fudge information is to avoid making something clear. Many of us do it with an (almost) clear conscience in response to questions about the style of clothing a friend may be about to purchase, and similar things which don't have a major impact on anyone else.

The above article uses the word fudge in an interesting way. It softens and almost lightens a very serious issue. After all, to call a Prime Minister a liar is unlikely to be something a responsible journalist would do without due consideration. (I'm thinking here of the photos of a grinning Abbott in front of posters of the then PM Julia Gillard, making a pun on her name - juliar .) 

At what stage does a "fudge" become a lie? At what stage are the standards which are expected of children, and of employees in the workplace - to be honest and to tell the truth - applied to adults in parliament?

If a person applies for a job and lies at interview, is hired and is found out to have lied, or fudges figures or information, the employer will take a dim view of the falsehood, and will most likely fire the person. To lie is considered to be a serious breach of appropriate behaviour, and there are consequences.

A scientist who 'fudges' data, who is shoddy and falsifies results will be named and shamed. We expect their work to be free from bias, for results to be presented accurately and as such their papers are subject to scrutiny from qualified peers. If something is amiss, steps are taken to correct the information. 

Yet politicians aren't held to the same standards expected elsewhere in society. Given what were learning about addiction and money as well as addiction and power, it is an oversight where we, the public are likely to lose.

In a speech to the UK House of Lords in 1770, the British Prime Minister said: "Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it." (here)

Abuse of power has been known since Roman times - Isn't it time to look the implications seriously and to attempt to address the issue before societies are ruined?

Is it acceptable for a politician, running for the highest office in a country, to "fudge" information relating to education? to healthcare? to issues which honesty and clarity would be more beneficial to voters PRIOR to an election?

Do we accept (or even expect) the 'fudging' of ethics, of integrity, of honesty? How can those in power be held accountable if we don't know which statements about policy are true and which are lies, when they're both presented as truths? Are we being taught to assume that everything a politician says is a lie? to expect the opposite of what's stated?

It's an appalling state of affairs when what's being affected is our lives, our liberties, our services. When it's a country which is being governed and voters expect to be lied to, it's vastly different to whether a pair of jeans suits a friend. It's serious and can have dire and unexpected consequences for those who expect a modicum of honesty and decency from their representatives.

How can you make an informed decision if lying is more common than honesty?

The voter then has to contort their thinking to go along the lines of:

" If he says this then he probably means that, but then again, it could be something else entirely, depending on what way the wind's blowing and the state of his digestion. "

Trust in relationships is eroded when one partner lies, shifts blame and is shown by words and actions to be self-serving, unreliable and dishonest. And yet, it's what we've learnt to expect from some of those who have some of the most influential jobs in the country ... by word and deed, too many politicians have taught the electorate not to trust them, and I believe we're all diminished as a result.

Our elected representatives would do well to pause often, and reflect deeply on the words of Stanley Melbourne Bruce, Australia's Prime Minister, 1923 - 29. 

"May those who enter this open door 

govern with justice, reason 

and equal favour to all. 

May they do so in humility and without self-interest. 

May they think and act nationally. 

May they speak with the voice of those who sent them here

 - the voice of the people." 

9 May 1927

Old Parliament House, Canberra.

...

One simple way to get the community and ratepayers offside.

The photo below shows the area which is currently the subject of deep emotion and distress to the people of the Mornington Peninsula in Victoria Australia. It's a disused quarry site nestled between arms of the Arthurs Seat State Park, organic farms and businesses, homes and schools.

In the background it's just possible to see a sliver of water which is part of Port Phillip Bay. Behind the hill, flourishing in the bay are mussel farms and the magnificent beaches are safe with little pollution. The bay is home to pods of dolphins and is occasionally visited by migrating whales. The state park is a sanctuary for eagles, owls, koalas, bandicoots and rare or threatened plant species.

In short it's a special place, but the Mornington council and the Ross Trust who owns the Pioneer Quarry site have decided this is the place for a tip with no recycling facilities. The proposed tip "would be servicing mainly other regions. At current figures, approximately 70% of the 150.000 tonnes annually would be coming from outside the Mornington Peninsula." (SaveArthursSeat)

The logic appears to be "It's a hole in the ground. Let's fill it up with unfiltered, un-recycled garbage and make this dumping ground available to businesses outside the Shire. What a good idea!"

photo - Melanie Cameron

Anyone would be excused for assuming that the Ross Trust isn't involved or interested in the environment. They'd be wrong. 

The following information comes from the RE Ross Trust website. 
The Trust will direct resources towards projects that will ...  "Protect and preserve Australian flora and fauna". It seems contradictory that a trust which actively supports environmental programs would not undertake to protect the Pioneeer Quarry site and surrounding areas including the creek which runs directly into Port Phillip Bay.

The Save Arthurs Seat community group have been working tirelessly to ensure that best practice guidelines are met:

The protection of environment and public health in waste management delivery is non-negotiable (State Government Vic)

“Encourage, promote and develop ecologically sustainable waste management” (Mornington Peninsula Regional Waste Management Group)

“Today’s landfills must not leave an unacceptable environmental legacy for our children to address” (EPA Vic)

The following is an open letter written by Francois Schamberger regarding his opposition to the proposal. (Edited and formatted for ease of reading)

**********

The Proposed Landfill at the former Pioneer Quarry Site 

There are many very serious concerns about this project which we are going to come to light over the coming weeks. 

Tip Liners
The first one is about the liner for the proposed landfill. All manufacturer of liners stress the limited performance of their liners and clearly state that no warranty as to their performance is ever implied. When the bottom liner fails, leachate migrates directly into the environment. All reports ever written by environmental protection agencies on the performance of landfill, state that all liners being made out of clay, plastic, and composite will have some leaks. Even the most up-to-date and elaborate ones (compacted clay with a minimum required thickness and a maximum allowable hydraulic conductivity, overlaid by a 2mm high-density polyethylene geomembrane) do not pass the 10 year test. 

All liners will have some leaks, due to their limited performance parameters, and their degradation is usually the result of insufficient tensile strength, tear resistance, impact resistance, puncture resistance, and susceptibility to environmental stress cracking. 

The role of discarded household chemicals
Quite a number of common household chemicals will also degrade them. The United States Environmental Protection Agency has stated that all barriers "will ultimately fail," while the site remains a threat for "thousands of years”, suggesting that even the most modern, up-to-date landfill designs delay, but do not prevent ground and surface water pollution. 

Location - in a water catchment area
Let’s not forget that the proposed site is at the bottom of a substantial water catchment area and within a very short time the leachate, and its toxic constituents, would flow into the underlying aquifers, the nearby creek and into Port Phillip Bay. 

If this proposal goes ahead, it will be undeniable: the legacy of the Ross Trust will be that of a polluted Bay, creek and groundwater for hundreds of years. 

How are we going to explain to our children and grandchildren that the beach is closed, the creek fenced off, the groundwater polluted and The Ross Trust and Mornington Shire Council were part of that lunacy? 

From the R E Trust website we know that "Mr Ross was a keen bushman, had an extensive knowledge of native plants and trees and made a study of the habits of birds and their calls."  We can only imagine what Mr R E Ross would say to his Trustees: “You are fired, you are destroying my legacy."  

Technical Reports
The quality of the technical reports and analysis so far, tabled by the proponents of the landfill is very disappointing - notable for their omissions, their unsuitable comparisons which are very generalist, almost direct copies of reports compiled for other landfill sites. 

I would like to draw your attention to Mr Latham’s statement that “they are very keen to consult the community on the project.” 

“Keen to consult” No! Just a slap in our face. For 5 years the council and Ross Trust have been secretly planning to turn the quarry into a tip and now they want to establish a Community Reference Group, chosen strictly by them, to advise them how the project could work better. 

Another statement which merits our attention was made by Mr Maltby, The Peninsula Waste Manager “Mr Maltby predicted shire residents would see an extra $100 on their rates bill each year if the shire had to send waste out of the area.” To make such a statement, you would expect somebody in such a position of authority to have the figures on hand to back his claims. So Mr Maltby please can we see those figures? If you do not produce them, we can only conclude that it was a cheap self serving quote, totally inappropriate for a person in your position. 

So now for my predictions and I am very happy to back them up. 

The proposed landfill is going to cost the residents a lot more than if the waste would be send out of the area; 

Why ? 

1. The proposed landfill is going to be operated by a private company which wants to make a profit (unlike now, Shire operated for the benefit of the residents) 

2. The proposed landfill is going to be in the top 5% cost bracket. 

3. The proposed landfill is going to be viable only if it becomes a regional landfill for the Bayside and Southern Councils. Peninsula Link would see hundreds of rubbish trucks making their way down the Peninsula every day. 

What horrifies me the most, is to see the incestuous relationship between our Council and a private company - a council which has already factored in the proposed tip (since 2009) as a fait accompli, even well before the proposal has been lodged. A council which would accept any tipping charges Peninsula Waste would demand. A council also prepared to accept the private company’s reports as their own, by-passing the need to get independent expert reports. A council putting the wishes of a private entity well before their residents and ratepayers. 

If the Councillors have any decency they would resign now - if not, the Victorian Government should dissolve the Shire of Mornington Peninsula Council and appoint an administrator, as the Council is failing the simplest test of impartiality and decency. United we stand, to stop the biggest threat ever to our environment, to our beautiful Mornington Peninsula and to our cherished Arthurs Seat. 

signed
Francois Schamberger.

********

It's cold comfort that "As a wholly owned subsidiary of the R E Ross Trust, 100% of the profits of Peninsula Waste Management will be distributed to community organisations through the Trust’s GRANTING STRATEGY." Loss of environment will remain lost, not just for this generation, but will be a toxic legacy for future generations as well, and no grant can fairly balance that out.

For detailed information regarding the poor location, lack of recycling facilities and outdated "technology" with the proposed tip see the Frequently asked Questions at Save Arthurs Seat. 

The Story of Stuff:The Story of Electronics, why designed for the dump is toxic for people and the planet - as it relates to the proposed tip site

On the contradictions in waste 'management' and being a transition town, "sustainable" and a UNESCO biosphere reserve.

.... http://www.visitmorningtonpeninsula.org/OurRegion/NationalParks.aspx

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/thousands-rubbish-plans-for-arthurs-seat-dump-20130604-2nndt.html


.

Where does e-waste go?

This is an excellent, informative 7 minute video by The Story of Stuff: The Story of Electronics, why designed for the dump is toxic for people and the planet. 

If all goes according to their plan, this is the sort of unfiltered, un-recycled, toxic waste the Shire of Mornington will allow to be discarded as landfill on a disused quarry on the beautiful Arthurs Seat, an area known for its peace, beauty and wildlife. 

There are other viable options and not surprisingly the local community is unimpressed and is energetically fighting the outdated and shortsighted plan.

There's more about the plans the Shire of Mornington has been working on behind closed doors here Save Arthurs Seat and  Waste Management in the Shire of Mornington.

.

Can blogging support your values?

I've just been reading an interesting post on G+. It explores some issues related to vulnerability which made me think of the recent ACBS conference  which I attended in Sydney where high profile, well respected speakers such as The Happiness Trap's Dr Russ Harris and the founder of ACT and RFT Steve Hayes who appear to be self assured and super confident, acknowledged their own insecurities and sense of vulnerability.  Not only is this unexpectedly empowering and reassuring, but my response (and I certainly wasn't alone) was "If they're not always as strong as they appear and have insecurities and doubts, then perhaps I'm not doing so badly after all!"

In the post I mentioned above on G+, Peter McDermott commented that we're discouraged from showing our vulnerability as we age and that this results in a tendency to share less of ourselves. 

"As we age we are taught to become more self-sufficient and less reliant on others. We are told to get an education and a high-paying job in order to build a family and have the process repeat itself. As we progress and become less vulnerable we notice that less people care about us and in result we tend to share less."

My experience is that we don't actually become less vulnerable, but that many of us have learnt, or been taught, to cover our hurts and insecurities with the facade of bravado, strength and confidence. Many people put on a mask which at best shows a smile, but sometimes a fragile, almost quivering, stiff upper lip. 

Peter is specifically talking about building an online presence and that the challenge of putting yourself out there  exposes the more vulnerable side of yourself.

In today’s world if you want to grow an audience, open yourself to exploring new ideas and opportunities, you need to put yourself out there. ... I’m talking about building a presence, sharing your passion and really putting yourself out there.

I've met many people who appear confident and who say they want to build an online presence, but that they feel exposed, nervous, insecure, incompetent, and that they don't want to be seen as being less than perfect. In fact they feel vulnerable. Will people laugh? Will they criticise? Will they rip you to shreds if you get something wrong?

Once you are honest with people about your opinions, ideas and wishes, you will find that lots of others share your passion and some of the challenges you face.   

I commented a couple of years ago when I finally started blogging, that I faced a lot of challenges in regard to having an online presence. I procrastinated for well over 3 years before I finally summoned the courage to even comment - anonymously - on a post and more before I began a blog! 

It took a year or more of gentle yet persistent encouragement for my web designer to get me to agree to go live! Blogging was only marginally easier; yet with my heart in my mouth and positively quaking at the knees and feeling sick with nervousness, I began. Perhaps I was overreacting!?

My posts were clunky, awkward and frankly, often boring. Sometimes they still are, but I've worked hard to learn from people I respect on line. Why? Because I value sharing, and I know that clients, friends and fellow bloggers have benefitted from some of my posts particularly about learning difficulties and workplace bullying. 

As one of the young women who climbed the Shard said: "It's a weird thing, knowing that you're going to be scared and doing something anyway". 

Putting yourself out there can lead to unexpected events. I was delighted when one young woman contacted me to say how much one of my photos meant to her and that when she feels down and discouraged she looks at it. So even the confronting aspect of putting a photo online (Is it ok? I'm not a professional. Will people think I'm full of myself?) can lead to unexpected, heartwarming outcomes. Her touching email means a lot to me, and in turn encourages me when I feel blogging is a waste of time, all to difficult, and too "out there".

In ACT language: 

• I've defined my values (in this case in regard to blogging)
• I refer to my values when I'm feeling discouraged and down 
• I acknowledge, accept and defuse from the negative gremlins in my mind who tell undermining stories and try to put me off acting in accordance with my values
• I regularly (more or less) set small goals (ie committed action) to consistently take me in the direction of my blogging values

I'll finish with another quote from Peter:

No one will know who you are until you are willing to show a little bit behind the curtain. It might be scary at first, but once you are able to share your thoughts and ideas, you will find yourself swimming in a whole new world of opportunity.

That's a very similar response to how those involved with the ACBS community work with uncomfortable thoughts and feelings. It's scary, but empowering, and opens up the possibility of deeper, more meaningful communication and connection - with others and with ourselves.

Undermining thoughts and feelings threaten to attack
and try to divert us from valued actions.

.
posted by Sue Travers