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

Protests are passe?

Public protests and marches have passed their use-by date according to Annabel Crabb, particularly if you’re a uni student.

Not surprisingly the student protests she's discussing condescendingly, aren't living up to the standard of well resourced, professional campaigns, run by expensive marketing companies, for political parties or multinational businesses.

And while she's - 

... not arguing there is nothing to protest against in the budget, nor that university students should not take every opportunity to explain what the full deregulation of tertiary fees in Australia will mean for parents and children. 

 - when they do just that - take an opportunity to publicly protest the impact of deregulation and the hypocritical double standards of a government, many of whom benefitted from a free education, they're criticised from pretty much every sector of the main stream media (msm). 

Ms Crabb goes on to ask:

How, then, can it possibly be that student protests have not changed even one little bit over that time? And how can it be, as even our phones gets smarter, that protesters are somehow getting dumber?

Protesters are not getting dumber, but unfortunately, informative reporting is, particularly in some dominant and less balanced areas of the msm.

Students and others are called slacktivists if they sign petitions, uninvolved if they protest with hashtags, and lazy when they don’t take to the streets. Creative YouTube clips are made, artists and cartoonists express their frustration and anger ... and are either ignored or vilified. How much easier it would be for the government if the uni protests hadn't received any media attention, and students obediently opened their anorexic wallets, handed over credit cards, and said “take the lot, it’s yours.”

Thankfully our students and many other Australians are more intelligent than that. They understand that a well educated population makes for a wealthy country, way beyond monetary value. They also understand that withholding education or making it unattractive in a variety of ways, is a means of control and manipulation. Understandably the proposed measures don’t sit well with those raised to believe in an egalitarian Australia, where giving less privileged people a ‘fair go’ is respected.

Ms Crabb goes on to wonder  "why university students … are still protesting like it’s 1969".

This is partly why:

As someone said to me: “Marches and protests are not outdated .... Eventually they go on to show the true power of “we the people”. The right looks down upon the unions and little people and tries its best to make it an evil because these unions stand up to immoral corporations, for the people’s rights."

What Ms Crabb and many other msm commentators completely fail to notice, is that the power of a protest goes way beyond posters, chants and slogans (which, by the way, can be enormously powerful, as was the repetitive and effective 3 word slogan, AXE THE TAX, which we're reaping the doubtful benefits of now.)  

The reality is, that if the msm covered the current protests maturely and informatively, rather than demonising those involved, we'd all be a lot better off. (This includes the candlelight vigils for Reza Barati, March in March and March in May protests) At present, they're either not covered at all or the activists are presented as revolting ferals and beneath contempt. 

• What's the real agenda when this happens?
• Who benefits from demonising protesters?
• What prejudices (ie pre-judgements) are being encouraged and why?
• Which of our 'hot buttons' are being pushed - why?
• Who benefits from misinforming the general public?
• What are we being distracted from looking at?

Sadly it also seems that if the issues were discussed fairly and rationally by the media, it’s highly likely that this would be perceived as bias against the government, and there’d be loud and sustained outrage about the particular media outlet being "unpatriotic”.

Protests aren’t attended on the naïve assumption that that alone will change government behaviour.  That misses the point entirely. I attended one of the March in March protests. I didn’t know what to expect – would they all be scary ferals much the same as presented in the murdoch press? Would there be anyone else there? Would I feel silly and out of place?

The reality was none of the above. It was an extraordinary experience. I’ll never forget the incredible sense of togetherness, the goodwill and strength of spirit - “we’re in this together”. I’m sure that anyone who has attended a huge sporting event understands the impact of being with thousands of people focussed on the shared experience - chanting and singing! Why think that a protest is lesser than that expression of shared emotion in sport?

When you’re a single person, sitting at home grieving over what is being eroded in Australia: honesty, integrity, a sense of shared values; when you’re disgusted with the lies being spread about vulnerable peoples, appalled at the willingness of our political parties to embrace injustice, and disgusted at extreme power of multinational corporations to manipulate. And when you’re sick to the core of writing letters and emails to politicians, where if you’re lucky you’ll receive a reply - a form letter sprinkled with empty rhetoric and ‘it’s all Labour’s fault’, when responsibility is avoided… then you come together and protest.

There’s a sense of community in banding together with similar minded souls. There’s the power of song, of shared jokes and laughter, discussing experiences, forging friendships, swapping business cards.  The sense of isolation passes. Being with others underlines that we’re not alone and there’s power in numbers. And those numbers grow during the march as people standing on the sidelines ask what’s going on, hear from real people (not filtered through snide, insulting or belittling comments from the media) what’s happening – many are supportive, some join in. And they go back to work, chat over the urn, go home and speak to their friends. Information is shared, perspectives are able to shift, change happens.

People who drive past a march honk and wave and smile and hi-five. They’re joining in and enjoy the “feel-good factor” of participating and being engaged as well. Some passers by see that the protesters and marchers aren’t threatening as they’ve been led to believe, they’re normal everyday people, mums and dads, grandmas and grandpas, suits and tradies.

Protests happen, they’re a sign of a healthy, vibrant democracy. They don’t have the slick professional shine of an extremely well funded and highly orchestrated multimedia campaign. They’re an expression of frustration and are homespun, homegrown, and to sneeringly belittle them with condescending remarks, overlooks their very human importance - a sense of community. 

People overseas who've been horrified at Australia's willingness to ignore human rights abuses and vilify and lie about asylum seekers, who've been dismayed at the erosion of environmental protections including loss of jobs in the sciences related to the environment, climate change and climate change adaption have said "you Aussies should take to the streets". Messages of support for the various protests come from all over the world. Protests can make world news. That's significant!

It’s time the media got over the snarkiness about people exercising their democratic right to protest.  How about we see some genuine discussion about what’s really important and stop criticising protests and protesters.  

What kind of country do we want Australia to be? One tied to the apron strings of massively profitable multinational mining companies, obstructing fair taxation on the pollution they cause, frightened that their obscene profits might be affected, or one looking ahead to address the impact that our changing climate will have on every person in this country?

Are we going to be a well educated, innovative country, welcoming investment and with solid skills in climate change adaptation and renewable energy, or one stuck in the past where a compliant or complicit mainstream media continually points the finger at the wrong group of people?

More information:

http://m.smh.com.au/comment/students-sovietera-antibudget-protests-outdated-in-our-era-of-communication-20140523-zrlu6.html

http://www.alex-mckinnon.com/blog/annabel-crabb-yells-at-students-for-protesting-recommends-they-use-the-internets

http://m.smh.com.au/national/the-rage-of-a-new-generation-20140523-38u7u.html

The value of political memes: 

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/22/sharing-political-memes-isnt-as-frivolous-as-it-seems

The dire circumstances of those living in poverty:

http://www.smh.com.au/national/young-people-on-newstart-forced-to-beg-and-approach-charities-20140523-38ufw.html

  

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-06-25/nrn-dist-mining-subsidies/4778042

.

On the meme about Irena Sendler

I've come across this meme a couple of times recently and felt uncomfortable after reading it, but hadn't spent much time looking at my reaction or the structure of the wording.

My superficial impression was that it was a backhanded, unsavoury dig at Al Gore, and presumed it was written by climate change denialists.

The reader is being asked to agree that the lady in question acted honourably and selflessly (which I gather the did), yet the wording compares her acts of wartime courage with Al Gore's attempts to raise awareness to the challenges associated with climate change and the need for action.

I felt manipulated. Given how the piece is written, if I agreed that Irena Sendler was a good and honourable woman, then I would have to acknowledge that Al Gore wasn't deserving of the Nobel Peace Prize. But like many people I moved on, not giving it any further thought.

However yesterday, I saw the meme again and was directed to a blog, The Daily Mull, where the author had analysed and outlined some of the tasteless aspects of the piece.

Most readers won't even know that a criteria for the Peace Prize is being involved in significant activities during the past two years, and that therefore she didn't even qualify by the basic rules, at the time.

And regarding Al Gore:

They won't bother to find out that it was for all of his "efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change."

Since then I've done some more reading and found further interesting information. In Examples of Really Faulty Logic, I discovered that what is now a handy-to-forward meme, apparently began as an email which you were encouraged to share (aka a poisoned letter) during a US campaign year. 

the email originated before June of 2008 – about4 years ago – during a political campaign year (gee, could that have something to do with it?)  At that time, it only mentioned Al Gore, not President Obama.  Since it mentions that award (The Nobel Peace Prize 2007), which, by the way, was awarded jointly to Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and Albert Arnold (Al) Gore Jr. “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change, and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”, that might have been part of the incentive. 

The letter has apparently morphed a few times and President Obama doesn't appear in the latest incarnation. Only the dismissive and poisonous punch line mentions Al Gore and the barely accurate, snide comment about a "slide show on global warming" remain from the original. 

Someone clearly has an issue here and is working to perpetuate the fantasy that climate change is a myth, sneakily planting the seeds that encourage readers to be predisposed to further derogatory, undermining comments and minimising the desperate need for action. 

Despite being recognised and honoured for her great work, Irena Sendler's significant awards aren't mentioned in the meme. 

She has been honored by international Jewish organizations - in 1965 she accorded the title of Righteous Among the Nations by the Yad Vashem organization in Jerusalem and in 1991 she was made an honorary citizen of Israel. 

Irena Sendler was awarded Poland's highest distinction, the Order of White Eagle in Warsaw Monday Nov. 10, 2003. 

In 2003 Irena Sendler also received the Jan Karski Award for Valor and Courage. This is awarded to a "person whose substantial life work best exemplifies Karski's valor and compassion, including selflessness, a profound sense of humanity, extraordinary courage and willingness to accept a burden, pain and suffering to save or help others. Clearly, not an insignificant award!

These are impressive decorations, and not to be taken lightly, yet the reader is encouraged to assume that she hasn't been adequately recognised for her work. This is clearly not the case.

If these words and photos were honestly designed to celebrate the life of a courageous woman why are these awards completely ignored?

So now I know why I felt uncomfortable after reading the meme. Irena Sendler's good deeds are being used to degrade and devalue the important work of others. It's undermining. It's not honest. It lacks integrity. It deflects from focusing on the importance of action on climate change, and equally offensively, by manipulating the reader, it detracts from the celebration of Irena's courage.

Manipulation? You bet.
Underhanded? Absolutely.
Nasty? Yes.
Open an honest about its intent? No.
Accurate? Only partially.

Some questions to ask:

• Who benefits from this kind of meme?
• What is the real agenda?
• What am I being asked to accept in the hidden message?
• Am I being placed in a bind where if I agree with one message, then by default I have to agree with the second message? (In this case that climate change is unworthy of attention)
• Is there room for complexity and grey areas?

The whole thing is as unsavoury as biting into a crisp fresh apple and finding that it's rotten to the core.

********
Since writing this post, I've been contacted by Mary Skinner the writer and director of the PBS Documentary about Irena Sendler - In the Name of Their Mothers. Her comment is in the comments section below, and she confirms that the email and meme are indeed not appropriate and would be disliked by Irena Sendler.

In an interview, Mary Skinner talks about meeting with Irena Sendler and encouraging her to be filmed:

"It was very hard for her to talk to be filmed. She was embarrassed.  She didn’t feel extraordinarily heroic. She didn’t like to recount her memories of the war, but we eventually convinced her to give us some time on camera, mostly because we used the argument that the more women, especially young women, learned about her story and the story of these other women that were part of her network — basically teenage girls — the more people will be inspired toward that kind of moral courage. It was essential for people like her to talk and to recount what actually happened, because so many of the eyewitnesses are passing and  we can’t ever forget how devastating that experience was for the Jewish people, especially in places like Warsaw." (my bold)

In the above paragraph, the phrase "moral courage" stands out. It is definitely lacking in both the meme and offensive emails. A person or group who displayed moral courage would be honest and upfront about their motives.


Further information:
Irena Sendler: 
http://www.irenasendler.org/thestory.asp

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=364634856891928&id=69502133435

Climate change: http://www.skepticalscience.com/

On sharing memes:
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/may/22/sharing-political-memes-isnt-as-frivolous-as-it-seems
.

The environment minister receives a massive petition from GetUp to "Save the reef"

"Look mummy, there's a shark!"

A young child squeaks in delight as a shark, turtle, crab, assorted fish and a man in a wet-suit complete with spear gun, walk past the Fred Smith Reserve playground in Hastings Vic, with the express purpose of delivering a petition, recently signed by 243,236 people (and still coming in!), to the Environment Minister's office. 

Small groups of people formed, chatted for a while, then reformed as they either met up with acquaintances or used the opportunity to expand their network of friendly, local, like minded people. 

The atmosphere was warm and welcoming. I'd been unsure what to expect as I hadn't attended a GetUp function before, but the email I received had been positive and explained what to expect when I arrived. What they hadn't mentioned was to expect dozens and dozens of cheerful, local people, many decked out in orange, all with the purpose of standing up for what is important. Some people clearly knew each other but there was a welcoming air and above the general hubbub of chatter you could hear words like 'dugongs', 'turtles', 'mangroves' and 'our children's future'. It was great! 

I chatted with someone who had taken time off work to attend. She'd told her boss that she had an important appointment that she couldn't miss and which couldn't be changed. She also hadn't been to a Get Up event before but felt this was too important not to support. It was local, and she wanted to be there in person to show solidarity for our natural heritage.

Young mums had picked their children up from kinder and come down, a couple of tradies seemed to have downed tools for a while to make time to come along. All age ranges were represented from children in prams to the elderly with walking sticks and everyone in between. 

After a short briefing we set off like a long undulating, orange reef-worm past the playground and shops towards Mr Hunt's office.  Enthusiastically waving drivers were tooting and cheering - that was unexpected and fun!

I remember hearing once that each person who shows up at something like this represents hundreds of people who are unable to attend. I wonder how many people are represented by tooting?!

There was no guarantee that Mr Hunt would be there in person to receive the masses of signatures and see the large group of people from the electorate who had made the effort to show support. But Sam, a GetUp organiser checked; it seems that Mr Hunt was expecting us!  Sam escorted Mr Hunt out to meet the enthusiastic throng.

Sam spoke to Mr Hunt, the media and the crowd about why we were all there - in short to protect the Reef. He was professional, respectful, assured ... and very tall!

Fiona Maxwell, another Get Up organiser also spoke and gave Mr Hunt the placard stating that "243,236 Australians say SAVE OUR REEF". She was thoroughly professional and spoke courteously, yet strongly about how the reef needs to be protected for future generations. 

People who speak disparagingly about Gen Y, about the cult of the self, of selfishness and self-centredness, could get out and spend time with the young activists who will be impacted dramatically by climate change. Many of them are not only aware of the damage climate events will have on their lives, but are committed to doing whatever they can to avert the worst of the impacts. They are truly wonderful and worthy of our respect and commendation.

 

Mr Hunt appeared to listen and was gracious in his reply. He acknowledged the organisers and crowd and accepted the petitions with respect. I was quite relieved as a friend had been involved in presenting a petition to a state minister who had received them with a smirk, then with her watching, had put them straight in the bin. Hardly the response worthy of an elected representative. Mr Hunt, in contrast, appeared to acknowledge the concerns and gave the impression that he'd listen. He then invited a small group into his office to discuss the matter. If/when I hear the outcome of that meeting, I'll add a link.

I've written a bit about the Great Barrier Reef in the past, the first post was in 2011. It's incredibly disheartening to realise that it still has no real security and even though Mr Hunt spoke soothingly, and appeared to acknowledge and understand the concerns expressed, I don't feel entirely reassured that he fully realises the enormous implications from continuing and increasing the use of fossil fuels. However, that's a much bigger issue that what was being specifically addressed today. 

The Great Barrier Reef has been described as one of the 7 wonders of the natural world, as a treasure, as a gift. Surely we should be responsible stewards for this magnificent area and not continue to treat it as a temporary and irrelevant inconvenience. How about we stop treating the fossil fuel industry with kid gloves and kow-towing to their every whim? 

How about we factor in the cost of health care, pollution and environmental damage for those people and areas impacted by fossil fuel mining? My grumpy post about that is at: The vital topic that's not being discussed this election.

Whether the Great Barrier Reef will be adequately and appropriately protected - who knows. However, for myself, and for many others, we can say "we did our best". I know there are many, many other groups both in Australia and around the world trying to get assurance that the reef shouldn't be lined with ports to transport fossil fuels and that dredging shouldn't be allowed. Let's hope that once and for all, sound action is taken to preserve what's left of this incredible wonder!

I grumbled here after seeing the excellent 4 corners programme: The Great Barrier Grief. 

A year later, in 2012, not much had changed, the threats to the reef continued and I wondered if it was to become an open sewer. 

Why the Great Barrier Reef is worth preserving from GetUp!

• The Great Barrier Reef is the largest coral reef in the world and is recognised as a global treasure, due to the amazing biodiversity which it sustains and it's unparalleled beauty.
• The Great Barrier Reef is one of the 7 Wonders of the Natural World.
• The reef brings in billions of dollars of economic activity every year and supports tens of thousands of jobs in tourism and the fishing industry.
• The largest dredging project ever undertaken in Australia was approved to occur within the Great Barrier Reef WHA, at Gladstone Harbour, and is slated to remove a total of around 50 million cubic metres of soil.
• The ecosystem of the GBR is already very fragile and is facing total collapse with the added pressure of the dredging, which releases toxic chemicals into the sea.
• In the past 6 months (the first stage of dredging) there has been a steep increase in deaths of endangered marine wildlife - 6 dolphins, 10 dugongs and 231 turtles have washed up dead near Gladstone on the Great Barrier Reef.
• Fishermen and their families have been getting sick and have noticed that many of the fish have washed up with a strange flesh disease.
• The Australian government failed to inform UNESCO of the approval of the gas facilities in the Great Barrier Reef WHA.

And if you would like to email Mr Hunt and ask him to say no to all mega-ports and shipping superhighways along the Great Barrier Reef coastline: 

www.getup.org.au/email-greg-hunt 

.

The vital topic that's not being discussed this election

For a long time I've been trying to get my head around something that seems completely illogical and so far, I'm simply not getting there. Maybe you can show me where my logic is out of whack?

The role humans play in climate change is accepted in 97% of the world's peer reviewed climate papers, the burning of fossil fuels is a known factor in climate change. The scientists conducting the studies are experts in their field and have devoted their careers to the study of climate, and I accept and respect their expertise.

Health impacts
What is routinely overlooked are the health impacts from the extraction and burning of coal - coal dust makes people ill. Not just an itchy throat kind of ill, but debilitating, health destroying cancers, strokes and lung diseases - extremely unpleasant illnesses to have and all because of exposure to coal dust (also here).

At the moment those health costs are borne by the individual and community while our government subsidises the companies to extract the coal. Seriously, our government pays foreign owned companies to remove part of our country which can never be replaced to sell it overseas. And that's good because some jobs have been created. And any job is a good job. Even if it's slowly poisoning you. So they say.

But if the cost of personal and environmental ill health was factored in, and the generous subsidies removed, how viable would fossil fuels really be? 

"A major Chinese power company is in line to win millions of dollars in federal and state government grant money to develop Victorian brown coal." The Age

Development? How is it development? That implies to improve. I've tried to see where this is good and how we benefit, but try as I might, I'm at a loss. Not only are we paying a foreign company to rip out our coal and poison our communities, but it's also directly contributing to climate issues. That's not particularly smart is it? Or else I've got it all wrong. And so have the doctors, the scientists and every other trustworthy person involved.

We are only ever told that coal mining is good for the country. How is this good? Our taxes are at work to subsidise foreign companies to dig up our coal (which can never be replaced) and ship it away to other countries. We're not stockpiling it for future use, to use within a mix of sustainable technologies. It's gone. Forever. And we're left with the clean up bill. And we're told we don't want these companies to be taxed for polluting our land, our water, our sky, our communities. Really? Why not?

Some people have jobs with the fossil fuel companies. Some people get very ill. So more of our taxes are used to assist them with doctor and hospital visits, medications, nursing, maybe even palliative care. And funding is pulled from hospitals, there are cuts to nursing and beds are closed. What a lucky country!

We're left with the costs of pollution of land and waterways. With the loss of drinkable water. Loss of environment. With the ongoing expensive health impacts, not only for the people who made a conscious decision to work in coal dust, but for the innocent families and children living nearby. And this is good. So they say. But I'm not convinced.

Alternative energy
Then, in Victoria, we have the vilification of alternative energy, and in particular wind power. On health grounds. Some people report getting headaches and not being able to sleep. Really? And in its wisdom, the Victorian Government makes the wind industry jump over all sorts of hurdles that aren't applied with the same enthusiasm when it comes to coal and CSG.

The government listens to a cashed up, vocal minority who are repeatedly discredited and yet NEVER comment on the very real and negative aspects of reliance on coal. It's hard not to be cynical. The vocal minority who don't like wind power and with spurious claims have more clout than those suffering with real, genuine and identifiable diseases. It's as if the people living in and around coal mines and coal fired power stations are expendable. Their lives are of less importance. That seems to be the unspoken message from the government. And this is good. So they say. But it doesn't seem right to me.

Doctors warn of "the costly legacy unfolding for Australia from under-regulation of the pollution caused by many [coal and CSG] resource projects" (link). Yet simultaneously we have over-regulation and rejection of studies in the case of wind power. Who benefits from this inconsistency? ...

"It is clear that State government approvals of coal and coal seam gas projects are often influenced by potential economic gain without thorough assessment of potential harms," said DEA spokesperson, Dr David Shearman.  

"Permitting dangerous pollution is creating a costly legacy for Australia that is being picked up in the healthcare and other sectors."  

"The social and financial costs of this pollution are not being measured or factored in when projects are given the go ahead." (here) 

But 'no worries' says the government, and gives the green light to more and more coal and CSG operations - and people who live along roads and train-lines where the coal is transported continue to get ill. But this is good for the country. So they say.

My apologies. I don't have the source for this graphic.

The end of coal?
And while all this is happening (or not in the case of wind farms) ...

"Goldman Sachs this month produced an explosive report, titled "The window for thermal coal investment is closing." In it, the bank revealed that "thermal coal's current position atop the fuel mix for global power generation will be gradually eroded by the following structural trends:
1) environmental regulations that discourage coal-fired generation
2) strong competition from gas and renewable energy and
3) improvements in energy efficiency." 

and of a statement that should be of great concern to everyone:
"there is little evidence Australian Governments are acting to adjust our economic and social structure to the reality that coal is over: despite knowing this must be the case if we are to avoid dangerous levels of global warming and if emerging economies are to act on the health and water crises precipitated by their too-fast growth of coal power." (here) (my bold)

And so we come to an election where none of this is mentioned. Not climate change. Not our role in it. Nothing about building a resilient country. Nothing at all from the major parties about plans for the inevitable impacts of rising seas, changing and erratic weather patterns and the effect this will have on food production or communities and cities. Nothing about the clash of water requirements for people, farming, agriculture, mining. Nothing to do with the incredible heating of our country. Nothing. Not a hint that with climate change, we are currently facing what has been described as "one of the greatest threats posed to the future of human-kind and the world"- Stephen Hawking.

In the minds of Australian politicians feted by our embarrassingly mediocre media, these issues don't rate a mention, and in the case of Tony Abbott they're shunned. And I'm appalled because our changing climate affects us all whether we like it or not.

To date, glib politicians are showing a marked lack of understanding, wisdom, courage and leadership on climate change. Hiding their heads and continuing to support coal so generously doesn't appear to benefit Australia or the world. (For an Indian perspective on Australian coal being shipped there this is an interesting article.)

And if I'm wrong, could you please explain how. Nicely of course!

Or if you happen to also be uncomfortable about our reliance on fossil fuels, and the dreadful associated health impacts you can do something and encourage your super fund to divest from fossil fuels. (Are you the Vital Few) Because fossil fuel investments are seen as being increasingly risky and you wouldn't want to see your super go down the gurgler would you. (Forbes)

.......

On the importance of voting thoughtfully: Why vote? Because if you don't vote, someone will speak for you.

........
Some of the articles used in the above spray:
http://www.theage.com.au/environment/climate-change/not-much-climate-change-doubt-science-says-20130515-2jmup.html

https://theconversation.com/our-carbon-black-hole-the-real-budget-shortfall-17282

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/leadership-us-insurance-companies-climate-change

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/24/arctic-methane-climate-change_n_3643917.html

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/living-in-the-dusty-shadow-of-coal-mining/story-e6frg6z6-1226255705308

http://www.crikey.com.au/2013/01/08/get-fact-has-rupert-got-it-right-on-climate-change/?wpmp_switcher=mobile

http://dea.org.au/images/general/DEAtheHealthFactorV2_2013.pdf

http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/note-to-australia-thermal-coal-is-over-65519

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/15/tony-abbott-climate-plan-maths

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-14/doctors-fear-coal-dust-health-impacts-going/4572022

http://www.weeklytimesnow.com.au/article/2013/02/04/558676_latest-news.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalworker's_pneumoconiosis

http://climatecommission.gov.au/report/the-critical-decade-2013/

Australia’s legendarily irresponsible mining industry has a new plan: while the planet faces catastrophic climate change, build the world’s largest coal mining complex, and then build a shipping lane to that port straight through the greatest ecological treasure we have - the Great Barrier Reef! 
http://www.avaaz.org/en/australian_coal_disaster_global_rb/?pv=43&rc=fb

http://aweablog.org/blog/post/wind-turbine-syndrome-farm-hosts-tell-very-different-story
.
Blogged by Sue Travers