Ray Goodlass

Rays peace activism

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 4 December 2018

School students show the way

Last Friday thousands of students wagged it and converged on MP offices, parliaments around the country, and various public spaces in the Big School Walk Out for Climate Action.

The movement, School Strike 4 Climate Action, has been inspired by a 15-year-old Swedish student, Greta Thunberg, who started boycotting classes before parliamentary elections in her nation on September 9, and continues to skip school every Friday.

Students in each state capital and across 20 regional Australian centres walked out of their classrooms this week to tell politicians that more of the same climate inaction is not good enough.

PM Scott Morrison hectored children to stay in class rather than protesting things that “can be dealt with outside of school”.

Of course, what Mr Morrison overlooked, and has for a very long time, is that climate change isn’t being dealt with outside of school. It certainly isn’t being dealt with by his government.

“What we want is more learning in schools and less activism in schools” he said, conveniently forgetting that this student activism isn’t happening in schools, but outside. But Mr Morrison isn’t one to let the truth get in the way of an indignant response, as he regularly demonstrates at press conferences and during Parliamentary Question time.

“The students want and believe that action on climate change is essential, which our parliament seems not to” (Mary Kidson, Letters to the Editor, 1st December).

Naturally enough students aren’t happy with the PM’s response. Melbourne student Jagveer Singh, who will take part in the protest, said Mr Morrison’s broadside made him “want to go on strike even more”. (SBS News)

Indeed, in Question Time Mr Morrison reacted furiously when Greens MP Adam Bandt brought up the protest, angrily saying “Each day I send my kids to school and I know other members’ kids should also go to school but we do not support our schools being turned into parliaments.”

Mr Bandt said he had met with some of the students involved and backed their actions.

“The PM is unbelievably out of touch with young people, not only in Australia but around the world,” he said.

“These students want a leader to protect their future, but they got a hectoring, ungenerous and condescending rebuke from someone even worse than Tony Abbott,” he said.

Students planning to participate in a national school strike last Friday should ignore the Prime Minister’s patronising speech on the matter, said Member for Ballina and Greens NSW Education spokesperson Tamara Smith MP.

“The idea that schools and students should have less activism – how incredibly out of touch is the Prime Minister to suggest that young people are not activists in their own right?” said Ms Smith.

“I will be supporting students from my electorate during their School Strike on Friday at Railway Park at Byron Bay. I am proud to be their local MP” concluded Ms Smith.

Last Tuesday, the Senate also approved a motion to support the students, moved by Steele-John and fellow Greens senator Mehreen Faruqi. Other students around the world have also posted messages of support on social media.

Swedish 15-year-old Greta Thunberg, the inspiration for our Australian students, leaves school each Friday and sits outside her country’s parliament to urge leaders to do more to tackle climate change.

“Countries like mine and Australia must start reducing our emissions dramatically if we believe in equality and climate justice.”

Greta has now seen her Friday vigils for action on climate change copied in many parts of the world, including Finland, Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands, Norway, Italy, Canada and Britain. “And Australia of course!” she says.

Students from Castlemaine, a town in the Victorian goldfields north-west of Melbourne, were the originators of the School Strike movement in Australia after reading about Greta Thunberg and also the recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Report.

Tully Boyle, a 15-year-old at Castlemaine Secondary College, has already taken part in several school boycotts. “It’s a massive emergency,” Tully says. “We want all governments to take it seriously.”

I’ll leave the last word to Greta. “And Australia is a huge climate villain, I am sorry to say. Your carbon footprint is way bigger than Sweden and we are among the worst in the world.”

Advertisements

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 27 November 2018

New forced adoptions law will create another stolen generation

Late at night last Wednesday, on its final sitting day for the year, the NSW Liberals voted to pass their cruel forced adoption bill into law.

Child welfare organisations, survivors of past forced removal practices, and thousands of individuals all came together to oppose these laws.

There was opposition from both Labor and the Greens, but sadly not enough to vote down these cruel new laws.

What many expected to happen today has happened despite the united call from Aboriginal people and the child welfare sector.

“These laws will mean more vulnerable, often Aboriginal, children will be forcibly removed and taken permanently from their families” said MP David Shoebridge, the Greens Justice spokesperson.

This is in clear contrast to the advice of almost every single welfare agency, Aboriginal organisations, survivors of past failed removal policies and legal body, who have told the government that these laws take us backwards.

The weeks of campaigning against these damaging laws has given strength to the growing alliance between the community, the Greens, Labor and everyone in the sector who has taken the time to understand the damage these laws will cause.

Let’s look at the detail of this sorry situation. The bill places a two year limit on the amount of time a child can remain in out-of-home care prior to the court having the power to order they be adopted.

These laws are set to disproportionately affect Aboriginal communities that are facing a system that’s increasingly removing their children. First Nations children and youths make up only 5 percent of people in this state under 18, but 37 percent of young people in out-of-home care.

First Nations groups have long asserted that current Indigenous child removal practices are a continuation of the paternalistic policies that saw hundreds of thousands of children taken during the 70-odd years of the Stolen Generations.

And these new laws are just more of the same. Not only does the legislation place an extremely tight maximum time frame on families seeking restoration with their children, but it also seeks to remove the judicial oversight of guardianship arrangements and it restricts provisions around parents applying for variations of court orders.

“This is going to totally annihilate Aboriginal culture,” said Aunty Hazel Collins, a founding member of Grandmothers Against Removals (GMAR). “This is genocide in the first degree and it should be abolished.”

And the Gomeroi woman understands all too well how unreasonable the proposed new forced adoption time limit is. “My own daughter fought for seven years to have her child returned,” Aunty Hazel explained. “Families are not going to get their children back within two years.”

“Nobody has the right to sign off on an adoption, when that child is not an orphan,” she added. “That child has parents, grandparents and family that want them back.”

The new law comes despite the findings of the Independent Review of Out-Of-Home Care in NSW report, which NSW family and community services minister Pru Goward stalled the release of for 18 months.

The damning report found that the NSW out-of-home care system “does not improve outcomes for children and families with complex needs”. And the $1.86 billion spent over 2015-16 was “crisis driven” expenditure and “not well aligned to the evidence”.

The report also found that Aboriginal children are overrepresented in the system. It revealed that around 7.5% of Aboriginal children in this state were in out-of-home care with only 1 percent of non-Indigenous kids.

Following the release of the report last June, Ms Goward rejected calls for the establishment of an Aboriginal child and family commissioner. “We’re not creating a separate system for Aboriginal children,” the minister told ABC radio.

However, as far as First Nations groups like GMAR are concerned, there’s already a separate system in place for Indigenous children under the guidance of FACS and it was implemented a very long time ago.

Fortunately this does not mean a permanent victory for the forces of darkness. “With the passage of these laws, the struggle has only begun. The Greens commit to reversing these laws in the first 100 days of a new parliament after the March 2019 election. We invite all MPs to join with us,” said David Shoebridge.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 20 November 2018

There is a simple way to save lives

As summer approaches so too does the music festival season, and regrettably we will read stories of many preventable deaths, which could be avoided if the state government would only adopt a common-sense harm minimisation approach to pill testing.

Instead, Premier Gladys Berejiklian established what she touted as an ‘expert’ panel to address the issue after the deaths at the Defqon 1 dance festival in Penrith. The result was a headline reading ‘NSW to introduce tougher drug penalties, but no pill testing, after festival deaths’ (Guardian Australia).

The new measures recommended by the panel included on-the-spot fines for drug possession and tougher penalties for dealers who supply drugs to people who die are among new measures proposed.

The police commissioner, Mick Fuller, a member of the panel, said the belief that pill-testing was going to save lives in NSW was a “myth”.

Yet doctors, harm minimisation advocates and drug researchers say there’s a simple solution to stop young Australians dying at music festivals, but it’s the one thing authorities refuse to try. That simple solution is pill testing.

Advocacy groups, including STA-Safe and some of the nation’s leading drug researchers, have begged the government to drop its “zero-tolerance” stance, insisting the answer is simple and lives will be saved if the government changed its approach.

“You would hope a tragedy like this would’ve pressed reset on the government’s approach to drugs but it’s clear that hasn’t happened,” Greens MP David Shoebridge told news.com.au.

Few festivals pushed a zero drug tolerance policy harder and had a stronger police presence than Defqon.1, according to Mr Shoebridge.

The festival, which features hardstyle and electronic dance music DJs, reportedly has a stronger drug-taking culture than some other Australian festivals.

But the reputation has led to Defqon.1’s organisers paying for police presence at the festivals in a bid to curb the drug culture.

“Defqon.1 signed on to the most hardcore zero-tolerance drug policy. They actively worked with, and paid for, a lot of police to attend and support them. There was a very active police presence,” Mr Shoebridge said.

Pill testing and amnesty bins have been debated as an option to reduce the risk of potential overdoses or deaths from contaminated pills at music festivals for more than a decade.

However, “Anyone who is advocating pill testing is giving the green light to drugs — that is absolutely unacceptable. Do not take them … Pill testing is not a solution,” Ms Berejiklian said.

Ted Noffs Foundation spokesman Kieran Palmer told Today the Premier had her “head in the sand”.

“We have the evidence. Shutting down festivals, getting tough on drugs, telling kids to ‘just say no’ doesn’t work. It doesn’t change behaviour.”

Indeed. pill testing advocates finally received the home soil evidence they needed in May when a pill testing trial at Canberra’s Groovin The Moo festival revealed two people had been stopped from taking deadly drugs.

The trial, which tested 128 batches, found a number of worrying chemicals, the worst of which was a drug called N-ethyl pentylone.

At the time, emergency doctor and STA-Safe representative David Caldicott told news.com.au the drug was particularly concerning “because it’s killed people”.

“The drug is known to cause mass-casualty overdoses, where you can have groups of 10-20 people just dropping at festivals,” he said.

Working in the emergency department of Calvary Hospital in Canberra, Dr Caldicott has become one of Australia’s most vocal advocates for a harm minimisation approach to illicit drug use.

Thankfully and following David Shoebridge’s comments, the Australian Greens have revealed a plan to open 18 pill-testing services across Australia at a cost of $16m, saying the policy would disrupt drug dealing networks and cut preventable deaths.

The Australian Greens parliamentary leader, Richard Di Natale, a former drug and alcohol doctor, said the war on drugs had failed because 1 million Australians still used ecstasy and cocaine every year and a number of them were dying because they had no idea what they were consuming.

He said the pill-testing services, which would allow people to test drugs for dangerous substances and their level of purity, would help Australians who were going to take drugs anyway make more informed choices.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for 13 November 2018

Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel

Last week’s announcement that Virgin Airlines would honour our veterans and offer them priority boarding brought many thoughts to mind, one of which was Samuel Johnson’s famous observation of 1775 that ‘Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel’.

Johnson’s biographer James Boswell doesn’t provide any context for the remark, but assures us that Johnson was not indicting patriotism in general, only false patriotism.

 

It is false patriotism used for political advantage that I will explore in my column this week.

 

The Virgin scheme followed Prime Minister Scott Morrison announcement of the Veterans Card Initiative and lapel pin.

 

“What this is about is businesses honouring the services by offering them a discount,” he said.

 

“Now we’re putting the details in place over the back of this year and it will be out and running next year and it means veterans will have a card which will entitle them to discounts and services.”

 

The PM announcing something before the details have been finalised is becoming something of a habit of Mr Morrison’s, as was his premature announcement during the Wentworth by-election of Australia moving its embassy to Israel from Tel Aviv to the contested city of Jerusalem.

 

However, Mr Morrison’s habit of governing by thought bubble is not my topic this week, rather it is the exploitation of our patriotism for selfish political ends that I’ll concentrate on.

 

But first a note that the Morrison/Virgin ploy thankfully seems to have exploded in their faces.

 

It seems that the veterans themselves saw through these attempts to exploit them, for “Following Virgin Australia’s announcement, Wagga RSL Sub-Branch’s Richard Salcole says veterans need more” reported the Daily Advertiser (6th November 2018).

 

The story in the DA went on to report that Mr Salcole said airlines need to make sure they are not naming veterans. “Veterans with mental health issues are going to struggle to fly as it is without the added spotlight,” he said.

 

He also noted that in 1989 the Defcon Card was introduced as a loyalty program offering discounts to ex-serviceman and it is still active today, and that he hopes to see more support given to veterans looking for a job or accessing medical services, points made by many other veterans after Mr Morrison’s thought bubble.

 

Virgin Australia has since energetically back-pedalled, releasing a statement saying it will consult with community groups following the backlash, but not Mr Morrison.

 

The Scott Morrison and Virgin Australia stunt using returned servicemen and women is of course a marketing ploy, in part a commercial one for the businesses, and a political one for the PM, which is bad enough.

 

But it’s more than that, and much worse. As the New Daily reported “It’s part of a calculated plan to exploit Australians’ respect for people who have taken risks and worse in our armed services.”

Patriotism, jingoism, militarism, national security threats, war memorials, flag waving, border security, medals, warships, policing, $200 billion military equipment budgets, military ceremonies, Captain Cook statues are all right-wing propaganda.

 

The more a reactionary government with low opinion poll ratings faced with the prospect of electoral defeat can associate itself with things military, and tap into the sacrificial ethos of Anzac, the better it hopes it will be.

 

It is very American, calculated to look good on our TV news and in the Murdoch tabloids. The shock jocks will loudly applaud. One Nation, Bob Katter and Australian Conservative voters will certainly lap it up, and so, the perpetrators hope, will Liberal voters thinking of jumping to the alternative right.

 

If the marketing types had really done their homework instead of calculating how good they would look in front of the War Memorial (or throwing money at it), they would have discovered that it wasn’t entirely a flag, a King or Queen or a monument that sustained our troops, it was their colleagues, their mates. As it was in the First World War, the Second World one, and in Vietnam. As it has always been.

 

Australians willingly acknowledge our returned and serving men and women. There’s respect and honour. We want them looked after and repaired if they are damaged.

But don’t use them for political gain or tawdry commercial marketing.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 6 November 2018

Minister’s blocking of university research grants smacks of totalitarianism

Recently we learnt that the previous federal Education Minister Simon Birmingham personally blocked $1.4m grants for humanities research. This quite rightly provoked a strong reaction from universities, individual academics, and the Liberal Party’s political opponents.

Australian Greens Education Spokesperson, Senator Mehreen Faruqi, has called Senator Simon Birmingham’s personal intervention “outrageous”. She also called for a completely independent process, free from Ministerial interference.

Senator Faruqi said: “As a former academic, I am horrified that the Minister intervened to block research grants. This is a massive and outrageous overreach from the Government” she concluded.

As I am also a former academic I share Senator Faruqi’s outrage, though I hope I would be equally appalled if I had not been an academic.

And as a proud member of the National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) I also share its condemnation of Birmingham’s action.

“NTEU members and other researchers expect the Minister to uphold the principles of academic freedom and to not directly interfere in the allocation of research grants,” said NTEU President Dr Alison Barnes.

“There was no transparency around these decisions. Applicants were not notified that their grants successfully navigated and found their way to the top of the extremely tough ARC vetting process only to be rejected by the Minister.”

“We can only speculate on what the reasons were. Was Senator Birmingham’s decision based on perceptions of how his colleagues or conservative commentators might react to these announcements? If this is the case, secretive political interference in the allocation of competitive research grants is totally unacceptable” she concluded.

Research grants are not there for the Minister to pick and choose based on his own political prejudices. The Australian Research Council should be trusted to guide research funding, free from political interference.

Academic research is too valuable to be hijacked by a narrow ideological agenda.

Labor accused Simon Birmingham of pandering to “knuckle-dragging right-wing philistines” by blocking 11 Australian Research Council grants in the humanities totalling $4m.

According to evidence given by Australian Research Council (ARC) officials, Birmingham rejected six Discovery grants worth a total of $1.4m, three Early Career grants ($1.1m) and two Future Fellowships ($1.7m).  The rejected projects are all based in the humanities and social sciences.

The grant projects were proposed by researchers at universities including the Australian Catholic University, the Australian National University as well as Sydney, Melbourne, New South Wales and Monash universities. All grants were independently approved by the Australian Research Council (ARC).

As the grants had been approved by the ARC they had been accepted as being worthy research topics and so should not be able to be blocked by the Minister.

Labor’s innovation spokesman, Kim Carr, accused Birmingham of judging research on its title and targeting the humanities because no research in other disciplines such as science were blocked.

Carr also picked up the ideological justification for blocking the grants. “He’s pandering to right-wing extremism in an attempt to peddle ignorance,” he told Guardian Australia. “There is no case for this blatant political interference to appease the most reactionary elements of the Liberal and National party and the shock-jocks.

“These are grants in arts, culture, music and history which somehow or other in his mind are not acceptable … what is his research expertise to justify interventions of that type?” he noted.

When the former education minister Brendan Nelson vetoed humanities grants in 2004-05 there was “outcry from the Australian research community”.

When in government Labor instituted a protocol that blocking research required a special declaration so the decision was public, which the Lib/Nat Coalition government had rescinded.

In a statement the Australian Academy of the Humanities expressed “shock and anger” that the minister intervened and called for the funding to be restored.

And to add insult to injury last week the Morrison government said academics who want to apply for research council funding will now have to explain how their proposed projects will “advance the national interest.”

The education minister, Dan Tehan, says a “national interest test” will be introduced to the application process for Australian Research Council grants, applying to all future grant rounds.

This is beginning to look like Nazi Germany, or at least fascism.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 30 October 2018

Pro-gun lobby buying its way into state and federal parliaments

In a week packed with important stories that are all worthy of comment one that might have escaped the notice of many really concerned me.

It was the story that the Shooting Industry Foundation of Australia (SIFA), a pro-gun lobby, is ‘muscling up’ to change our valuable post-Port Arthur gun laws by buying its way into state and federal parliaments (ABC TV Four Corners).

It wants to change gun laws for the worse, of course. For the very, very worse, as made abundantly clear in their propaganda.

SIFA is a gun industry lobby group backed by five of the largest Australian firearms wholesalers. It has declared its intention to intervene in state and federal elections to hold governments “accountable for the decisions they make”.

Its corporate members have bankrolled its activities with more than $1.2 million since late 2014.

Now it is leading a fresh bid to lobby governments over gun laws, 22 years after the Port Arthur massacre which saw the states and territories sign up to the National Firearms Agreement.

It has sponsored “shooting days” for federal politicians and donated tens of thousands of dollars to firearms-friendly political parties.

SIFA spokeswoman Laura Patterson told the ABC’s Four Corners program that the organisation would consider getting involved in future elections, after doing so in Queensland last year.

During that campaign, called “Flick em”, SIFA contributed $220,000, aimed at forcing a hung parliament by urging voters to place the major parties last.

Among the beneficiaries of the campaign were One Nation and Katter’s Australian Party, whose federal leader, Bob Katter, is the father-in-law of one of the owners of one of the corporations bankrolling SIFA, Robert Nioa.

One of SIFA’s goals was to push for discussions about the re-categorisation of some firearms, including the controversial Adler lever action shotgun the Queensland Government had recently made harder to acquire.

Mr Nioa’s company imports the Adler shotgun into Australia.

SIFA was also part of a firearms consultative committee convened by the Tasmanian Liberal government before the state election in March to come up with a new gun policy.

When the policy was leaked on election eve it caused outrage.

It proposed laws to give better access to high-powered guns to sporting shooters, to double the firearm licence period to 10 years, and allow some shooters access to silencers.

Gun control groups accused the Tasmanian Government of breaching the National Firearms Agreement struck between states and territories after the 1996 Port Arthur massacre.

The outcry forced the Government to dump the policy after the election.

Former deputy prime minister Tim Fischer, who as part of the Howard government was an architect of the 1996 firearms agreement, told Four Corners he was concerned about gun industry lobbying.

“There is a muscling up by those making money out of a trade of guns into this country, and we need to watch that very closely lest it lead Australia and the state and territory parliaments, legislatures, and at the federal level, down the wrong path,” Mr Fischer said.

With extremist right wing parties the likely benefit of SIFA’s campaigns there is a fair chance that the Liberals and the Nationals will move to the right to accommodate the lobby, just as they have done to accommodate the likes of Pauline Hanson’s One Nation’s racism.

So it is pleasing to see that one party won’t kotow to SIFA’s bribery. Greens NSW MP and Justice Spokesperson David Shoebridge was quick off the mark, when he said “After 4 Corners unmasked the gun lobby buying its way into state and federal parliaments the Greens are calling for action, starting with mental health checks before people get access to guns.

“This is a long-standing coronial recommendation that has been ignored and recent tragic shooting deaths have confirmed this reform is urgently needed. We need laws that put community safety before the interests of the gun lobby” he said.

Indeed, no one should get their hands on a gun unless they have had a mental health check to show they pose no risk to the community.

Let’s hope the major parties and independent cross-benchers don’t follow Bob Katter in accepting this tainted money.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 23 October 2018

Berejiklian again promotes alcohol and gambling

In a move frighteningly reminiscent of her approval of advertising the gambling and alcohol promoting Everest horse raise on the sails of the Opera House, last week we learnt that TAFE training facilities and Service NSW kiosks could be located inside registered clubs across the state, under a deal struck between the NSW government and the apparently all-powerful clubs lobby.

This Liberal/National government plan also maintains the special tax treatment for the pokies industry for another four years.

The agreement between the Coalition and Clubs NSW, signed at the conclusion of Responsible Gambling Awareness Week, has quite rightly drawn criticism from anti-gambling advocates and those concerned with alcohol abuse over the government’s relationship with the clubs lobby.

According to its terms, the memorandum of understanding “binds the parties” until the state election in 2023, locking in $3.4 billion of government revenue via the tax paid by clubs on the profits of pokie machines.

Worryingly, as part of the agreement, Premier Gladys Berejiklian committed to “facilitating a partnership between clubs, TAFE and other educational [and] training organisations” if the government is returned in 2019. (Sydney Morning Herald). Placing educational and service facilities in gambling gin palaces, in other words.

The agreement includes “formalising the role clubs can play in providing space for training and education” as well as providing “hands-on experience for trainees in their local communities.”

It also opened the pathway for clubs to become an access point for licences renewal, and birth, deaths and marriage services, with the government agreeing to “consider options for Service NSW kiosks in clubs in isolated communities.

As the full terms of the deal were publicly released on Monday of last week, anti-gambling advocates criticised the government for agreeing to consider setting up services inside venues that derive the bulk of their revenue from poker machines.

Alliance for Gambling Reform director Tim Costello said by freeing pokies taxes for NSW Clubs for the next four years, the NSW Coalition also locked in the lowest tax regime imposed on the industry by any Australian government.

“No other industry gets a special deal like this and when you consider NSW is the most gambling-captured jurisdiction in the world, the NSW Coalition should hang their heads in shame,” Mr Costello said. Indeed they should.

NSW Greens MLC Justin Field slammed the initiative as “an attempt by Clubs NSW to further embed themselves into communities and provide a steady stream of patrons to their pokies rooms”.

“These sorts of agreements are anti-democratic and another example of vested special interests getting the ear of political parties while the community is shut out,” Mr Field said.

Since the last MOU with Clubs NSW was signed in October 2014, about $25 billion has been lost on NSW poker machines because the pokies industry has negotiated and maintained the weakest pokies regulations in the world.

Under the existing tax arrangements, NSW clubs get tax rebates of up to 1.85 per cent of their poker machine profits over $1million each year if they support community development or donate via the Club GRANTS scheme.

Papers from the 2016 budget estimated the policy, which taxes clubs at a lower rate than pubs, cost more than a staggering $13 billion in forgone revenue over a twenty-year period. Easy money for the clubs, and lost revenue for the people.

The government’s claim that “The MOU recognises that clubs are multi-purpose venues with facilities and meeting rooms that can be used to deliver training” conveniently forgets that there may well be other facilities in remote communities, and if there aren’t then they could easily be provided and funded by government if NSW didn’t tax the clubs based pokey industry so leniently.

Given the Liberal Party loss of the seat of Wagga Wagga at the by-election in September, the well-deserved opprobrium heaped on the Premier after her decision to support Alan Jones’ use of the sails of the Sydney Opera House to advertise a horse raise, and the prospect of a loss at the March 2019 state election Ms Berejiklian should take heed of the old saying “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”. But heedlessly, the Premier and her ministers obliviously keep on digging.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 23 October 2018

Berejiklian again promotes alcohol and gambling

In a move frighteningly reminiscent of her approval of advertising the gambling and alcohol promoting Everest horse raise on the sails of the Opera House, last week we learnt that TAFE training facilities and Service NSW kiosks could be located inside registered clubs across the state, under a deal struck between the NSW government and the apparently all-powerful clubs lobby.

This Liberal/National government plan also maintains the special tax treatment for the pokies industry for another four years.

The agreement between the Coalition and Clubs NSW, signed at the conclusion of Responsible Gambling Awareness Week, has quite rightly drawn criticism from anti-gambling advocates and those concerned with alcohol abuse over the government’s relationship with the clubs lobby.

According to its terms, the memorandum of understanding “binds the parties” until the state election in 2023, locking in $3.4 billion of government revenue via the tax paid by clubs on the profits of pokie machines.

Worryingly, as part of the agreement, Premier Gladys Berejiklian committed to “facilitating a partnership between clubs, TAFE and other educational [and] training organisations” if the government is returned in 2019. (Sydney Morning Herald). Placing educational and service facilities in gambling gin palaces, in other words.

The agreement includes “formalising the role clubs can play in providing space for training and education” as well as providing “hands-on experience for trainees in their local communities.”

It also opened the pathway for clubs to become an access point for licences renewal, and birth, deaths and marriage services, with the government agreeing to “consider options for Service NSW kiosks in clubs in isolated communities.

As the full terms of the deal were publicly released on Monday of last week, anti-gambling advocates criticised the government for agreeing to consider setting up services inside venues that derive the bulk of their revenue from poker machines.

Alliance for Gambling Reform director Tim Costello said by freeing pokies taxes for NSW Clubs for the next four years, the NSW Coalition also locked in the lowest tax regime imposed on the industry by any Australian government.

“No other industry gets a special deal like this and when you consider NSW is the most gambling-captured jurisdiction in the world, the NSW Coalition should hang their heads in shame,” Mr Costello said. Indeed they should.

NSW Greens MLC Justin Field slammed the initiative as “an attempt by Clubs NSW to further embed themselves into communities and provide a steady stream of patrons to their pokies rooms”.

“These sorts of agreements are anti-democratic and another example of vested special interests getting the ear of political parties while the community is shut out,” Mr Field said.

Since the last MOU with Clubs NSW was signed in October 2014, about $25 billion has been lost on NSW poker machines because the pokies industry has negotiated and maintained the weakest pokies regulations in the world.

Under the existing tax arrangements, NSW clubs get tax rebates of up to 1.85 per cent of their poker machine profits over $1million each year if they support community development or donate via the Club GRANTS scheme.

Papers from the 2016 budget estimated the policy, which taxes clubs at a lower rate than pubs, cost more than a staggering $13 billion in forgone revenue over a twenty-year period. Easy money for the clubs, and lost revenue for the people.

The government’s claim that “The MOU recognises that clubs are multi-purpose venues with facilities and meeting rooms that can be used to deliver training” conveniently forgets that there may well be other facilities in remote communities, and if there aren’t then they could easily be provided and funded by government if NSW didn’t tax the clubs based pokey industry so leniently.

Given the Liberal Party loss of the seat of Wagga Wagga at the by-election in September, the well-deserved opprobrium heaped on the Premier after her decision to support Alan Jones’ use of the sails of the Sydney Opera House to advertise a horse raise, and the prospect of a loss at the March 2019 state election Ms Berejiklian should take heed of the old saying “If you find yourself in a hole, stop digging”. But heedlessly, the Premier and her ministers obliviously keep on digging.

My daily Advertiser Op Ed column for Tuesday 16 October 208

McCormack fiddles while the earth is burning

Ever since the Paris climate agreement was negotiated in 2015, questions have been asked about the feasibility of its ambitious goal to limit global warming to 1.5C. Now we have the answers, courtesy of a report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). It concludes that the goal is still just within reach, albeit with a ‘transformational’ effort to cut emissions to 45% by 2030 and to zero by 2050.

Most of us are broadly aware of this, if not the exact detail, but not the Australian Deputy Prime Minister and our very own local member, Michael McCormack, who promptly said “Nothing will replace coal soon and policy will not change based on ‘some sort of report’  (Guardian Australia). That Mr McCormack would belittle the IPCC with such a dismissive comment is almost as bad as his woeful ignorance about the science of climate change.

This is frighteningly reminiscent of the way President Trump and his sorry band of cohorts dismiss any sort of expert research findings as elitist and so not to be acknowledged as being of significance – as well as being ‘fake news’, of course.

The Labor leader Bill Shorten also did not commit to the total phase-out of coal.

Greens MP for Melbourne Adam Bandt seems to be the only one who can see what is staring us in the face when he said “The report contained a very clear message: if we don’t quit coal, we are screwed”. Well said, Adam.

Now to the detail what the IPCC is so persuasively arguing. It warns there are only a dozen years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5C, beyond which even half a degree will significantly worsen the risks of drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people.

Urgent and unprecedented changes are needed to reach the target, which they say is affordable and feasible. By mid-century, a shift to the lower goal would require a supercharged roll-back of emissions sources that have built up over the past 250 years.

As the report wrote “We have presented governments with pretty hard choices,” said Jim Skea, a co-chair of the working group on mitigation. “We show it can be done within laws of physics and chemistry. Then the final tick box is political will.”

So what are our political parties proposing to do to head off planetary catastrophe?

The Coalition’s official target for 2030 is to have Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions between 26 and 28 per cent below 2005 levels.

It’s main policy to achieve this is the Emissions Reduction Fund, but it is rapidly exhausting its funding and what it can achieve is “a drop in the ocean”.

Under Malcolm Turnbul the Coalition had one other headline policy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, the National Energy Guarantee, but new prime minister Scott Morrison has scrapped that policy, and replaced it with nothing. He also echoed McCormack’s remarks.

The Coalitions few other emissions reduction schemes will not result in anything meaningful, which means the Coalition is on track to miss its own target by a huge margin.

By 2030, Labor aims to generate 50 per cent of the country’s electricity by renewable sources but unfortunately coal will generate the rest.

The Greens’ policy is by far the most ambitious. They aim for net zero greenhouse gas emissions by “no later than” 2040; the banning of fossil fuel mining; and for 100 per cent of stationary electricity to be generated by renewable energy.

In a direct answer to the coal lobby’s claim that this will mean a huge increase in electricity prices research has shown that combining 100% renewables with a return of electricity generating and distribution to the public sector rather than the profit gouging free for all we have had to live with in recent years will actually keep prices down.

Pauline Hanson’s One Nation plan has no explicit policy to reduce emissions. Instead it is promising to build more coal-fired power plants, which would increase emissions, and so cook the planet, and almost all life on it, though perhaps cockroaches will adapt and survive. Or as Adam Bandt succinctly put it, “Quit coal, or die”.

My Daily Advertiser Op Ed column for 9 October 2018

Time for government to come clean about emissions

Last week saw disturbing news about the federal government’s attitude towards carbon emissions and the resulting climate change.

First cab off the rank was PM Scott Morrison’s claim Australia will meet its Paris targets ‘in a canter’, which is not borne out by the facts. So large a re-writing of the truth was this that “Scott Morrison is either lying about carbon emissions, or just plain ignorant” noted the New Daily.

Truth is we are not on track to meet our 2030 emissions reduction target “in a canter”. Mr Morrison is either being blindly optimistic or he is quoting ‘alternative facts’ so extremely untrue they would make even President Trump blush in shame. Is Mr Morrison becoming our Donald Trump?

That’s a big claim, but the real facts do tell the story. To meet the Paris target, by 2030 Australia must reduce its overall greenhouse gas emissions by 26 per cent at the very least on 2005 levels.

But are we on track to meet this? According to the Department of the Environment and Energy, we are not. And not by a long way.

The government’s most recent projections, released in December last year told us that “Total emissions in 2030 are projected to be 570 Mt CO2-e, which is 5 per cent below 2005 levels (597 Mt CO2-e).”

Let’s just dwell on that for a moment. The government’s own environment and energy department projects that Australia’s total greenhouse gas emissions will be 5 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Not 26 per cent below 2005 levels; not 20 per cent below 2005 levels; not 15 per cent, not 10 per cent; but 5 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030.

Given that the PM’s assertions about us meeting our emission reduction targets are not borne out by the facts it is not surprising that, as Greg Jericho reported in the Guardian Australia, “The government consistently buries the quarterly figures, and no wonder”.

For Friday of the week before last, under the cover of the release of the first interim report from the Hayne Royal Commission into the financial sector and the day before a long weekend of AFL and NRL grand finals, the government released the latest quarterly data showing that greenhouse gas emissions had once again risen.

Now you can call this government many things, such as a bunch of dolts deluded into believing climate change is a global conspiracy, a bunch of fools lacking the intellectual ability to believe the science, or a bunch of feckless cowards lacking the political acumen to combat the climate change denying fools occupying positions both on the backbench and in cabinet, but you can’t call them subtle.

Ever since taking office this government has sought to release the quarterly greenhouse gas emissions data at times when it will most likely be lost in the news cycle. The usual favourite is the week before Christmas.

The reason the government chooses to release the data at times when it is unlikely to get much attention is because the emissions data is continually awful and utterly shameful.

Perhaps this is not surprising given our emissions have been increasing every quarter since the end of the carbon price period in June 2014.

The good news is electricity emissions have been falling recently, the bad news is that so too has our level of renewable energy production.

And even though emissions from electricity have fallen since June 2016, in that time emissions from all other areas have increased by more than that amount.

Indeed, the government’s own figures reveal not only that we are not going to make the 26% target in a canter, but instead by 2030 our emissions will be about 29% above the level they need to be.

If the prime minister has some data in his back pocket that leads him to believe that Australia will meet its targets, maybe he could give those assessments to the Department of Environment and Energy so they can then publish them for all of us to see.

Though, of course, given how the government hides its emissions data, they’ll probably publish it at a time calculated for maximum exposure, rather than on Christmas or New Year’s Eve at 4.50pm.