Government approves Santos Barossa pipeline and sea dumping

The Australia Institute Media Release Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek’s Department has approved a…

If The Jackboots Actually Fit …

By Jane Salmon If The Jackboots Actually Fit … Why Does Labor Keep…

Distinctions Without Difference: The Security Council on Gaza…

The UN Security Council presents one of the great contradictions of power…

How the supermarkets lost their way in Oz

By Callen Sorensen Karklis Many Australians are heard saying that they’re feeling the…

Purgatorial Torments: Assange and the UK High Court

What is it about British justice that has a certain rankness to…

Why A Punch In The Face May Be…

Now I'm not one who believes in violence as a solution to…

Does God condone genocide?

By Bert Hetebry Stan Grant points out in his book The Queen is…

As Yemen enters tenth year of war, militarisation…

Oxfam Australia Media Release As Yemen enters its tenth year of war, its…

«
»
Facebook

Advancing Queensland: Time For More Responsible Labor Policy Plunges at all Levels of Government?

By Denis Bright

Jessica van Vonderen’s interview with Premier Miles on 2 February 2024 was a launch pad for a more in-depth analysis of Queensland politics. Good critical news reporting as provided by ABC News introduces those structures of power and influence. From timber panelled offices at Parliament House and 1 William Street, cabinet ministers and trusted advisers steer reactions to topical incidents on our behalf.

As mentioned by ABC news reader Lexy Hamilton-Smith prior to Jessica van Vonderen’s interview with Premier Miles, the Queensland Labor Government is striving to provide cost-of-living relief to Queensland households. The Premier is also under pressure from reactions to climate change, crime and the delivery of health services and other major infrastructure commitments.

Milestones on the way forward are the local government elections across Queensland on 16 March 2024 with by-elections in Ipswich West and Inala on the same date. A good result in the Brisbane City Council election and local government elections in adjacent councils of Moreton Bay, Redcliffe, Redlands and Logan will provide a morale booster for either side of politics. The political stakes are particularly high in the weeks ahead.

Twelve years ago, Premier Can Do Campbell won the Queensland election for the LNP on an epic landslide to Queensland Conservatives with a 13.7 percent swing against Labor after preferences. There was a reduction of 15.6 percent in Labor’s primary vote with the loss of forty-four of Labor’s fifty-one state seats under challenge from the 2010 state election result.

Despite the eminent qualifications of the Treasurer and Financial Minister in the Bligh Government, ministerial advisers had panicked over conservative reactions to the budget deficits incurred during the GFC. Its impact had global proportions, but eyewitness news services focused on local debt issues. These concerns propelled both Premier Campbell Newman and Prime Minister Tony Abbott into Office.

Premier Miles noted that commitment to a 75 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2035 over prevailing emission levels in 2005 is in the best traditions of sustainable economic management and commitment to employment levels in new industries associated with alternative energy, advancement of hydrogen technology and the generation of lower cost electricity. There are commitments to provide cost-of-living relief for every household in Queensland during 2024 with particular emphasis on more disadvantaged households.

Premier Miles also promised a commitment to Tough on Crime Strategies. Such issues will be emphasized by the LNP in the Ipswich West by-election.

Official police data for the Ipswich Police District shows that crime rates as opposed to numbers of crimes have not increased so dramatically since 2000. Terrible incidents are still embedded in this data. However, the trendlines are not as alarming as claimed by the Murdoch Press, Sky News or other sensational media outlets.

There are variations in the rates of criminal offenses.

The Queensland Labor Government is striving for the right balance between responsible Tough on Crime Strategies and generation of local jobs, TAFE training programmes and new infrastructure options.

Communities such as the partially gentrified suburb of West End in Brisbane benefit when the corporate sector takes up Transport Oriented Development (TOD) initiatives at places like Montague Markets in West End, Brisbane are successful private sector initiatives:

 

 

Spacious shopping precincts with high profile retail anchors co-exist with professional health services and layers of medium rise housing units.

With significant support from government or its investment agency in the Queensland Investment Corporation (QIC) could transform Top of Town in Ipswich to make survival easier for small business outlets. Despite the very best initiatives by small entrepreneurs and family businesses, more support from government and the corporate sector should be able to expand business opportunities.

 

Making Heritage City Great Again

 

Fringe benefits from these co-investment initiatives by government and the corporate sector could assist in delivering a new transport terminal for buses and trains to Top of Town, immediate action on the Springfield-Ipswich Transport Corridor, new inner-city social housing for Ipswich and initiatives in flood control measures and landscaping in the vicinity of Timothy Molony Oval closer to the Bremer River. The combined leadership talents of a more progressive Ipswich City Council and the possible arrival of Wendy Bourne as Labor member for Ipswich West with the former Labor member Jim Madden on the Ipswich Council as a representative for Division Four would ensure that those two levels of government are reading from a similar page-book.

Perusal of Treasurer Jim Chalmer’s Monthly Essay (February 2023) also endorses the commitment to New Keynesianism with all the resources available to the federal Labor Government.

In a time of serial disruption – to our economy, our society and our environment – the treasurer argues for the place of values and optimism in how we rethink capitalism:

In late October, just before the Albanese government’s first budget, a journalist I have known for two decades messaged me a quote from one of the earliest Greek philosophers, Heraclitus: “No man ever steps in the same river twice. For it’s not the same river, and he’s not the same man.”

The “Washington Consensus” became shorthand to describe recommendations and orthodoxies for developing countries urged by the International Monetary Fund and World Bank – a reference to each institution’s proximity to the other in Washington, DC. Over time it became a caricature for ever more simplistic and uniform policy prescriptions for “more market, not less.” This school of thought assumed that markets would typically self-correct before disaster struck.

It’s clear now that the problem wasn’t so much more markets as poorly designed ones. Carefully constructed markets are a positive and powerful tool. As the influential economist Mariana Mazzucato has explored in her work, markets built in partnership through the efforts of business, labour and government are still the best mechanism we have to efficiently and effectively direct resources. But these considered and efficient markets were not what the old model delivered. And while the 2008 crisis finally exposed the illegitimacy of this approach, no fresh consensus has yet taken its place.

With the support offered by three levels of Labor administration, it is now time for Steven Miles to take the responsible policy plunge to save the State Labor Government from its Underdog Status as identified by the Premier himself in his epic interview with Jessica van Vonderen.

 

Advice from Brutus in Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar

 

Denis Bright (pictured) is a financial member of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA). Denis is committed to consensus-building in these difficult times. Your feedback from readers advances the cause of citizens’ journalism. Full names are not required when making comments. However, a valid email must be submitted if you decide to hit the Replies Button.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Australia finally joins rest of developed world on new vehicle efficiency standards

Electric Vehicle Council Media Release

The Electric Vehicle Council has today congratulated the federal government on driving Australia into the global mainstream through the introduction of New Vehicle Efficiency Standards, promising greater choice and lower fuel bills for Australian motorists.

New Vehicle Efficiency Standards (NVES) incentivise car manufacturers to ensure all new cars they sell, on average, meet benchmarks for efficiency. This means manufactures can still sell vehicles with heavy emissions, but they must be offset by sales of low or zero emission vehicles.

NVES have ensured that drivers in North America and Europe have been offered maximum choice, including the best and most efficient new vehicles on the global market. Australian cars use a third more petrol than American cars on average.

“Because previous federal governments failed to introduce New Vehicle Efficiency Standards, some car manufacturers have treated Australia as a dumping ground for their most inefficient models,” said EVC chief executive Behyad Jafari.

“This announcement from the federal government, when legislated, will give Australians a greater choice for the cars they want and put money back in their pockets through lower fuel bills.

“Within a few short years it will mean the average family will not have to spend as much on imported petrol, which we know is hugely volatile on price.

“Australia has always been at the back of the queue when it comes to the best and cheapest electric vehicles, because car makers have been incentivised to offer them elsewhere first. That should end now with this policy, and Australian car buyers should notice the change very quickly.

“By bringing Australia into line with the US and Europe, car manufacturers will now be incentivised to offer Australians their best zero and low emission vehicles. Motorists will still have the choice to buy what they want, but they will be offered much better options to choose from.

“Right now Australia is one of only two developed countries without new vehicle efficiency standards. Very soon, Russia should be on its own.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

National fuel efficiency standard puts Australia on the road to fuel and pollution savings

The Climate Council Media Release

Proposed settings for a strong fuel efficiency standard announced today by the Federal Government will give Aussies better access to cleaner cars that are cheaper to run.

The Climate Council welcomes the Federal Government’s announcement of a simple and transparent standard for new cars which will get Australia on track with countries like us to clean up our fleet of light vehicles. The proposed settings will deliver more choice for people in our cities and regions, by increasing access to all kinds of lower and zero emissions cars, vans and utes.

The Federal Government now needs to put the pedal to the metal and lock in these strong settings before the end of 2024 so Australians can start saving.

Climate Council CEO, Amanda McKenzie, said: “Today’s important announcement gets us off the starter’s grid and on the road to cheaper, cleaner transport.

“Many Australians are doing it tough right now, with petrol one of the expenses causing the most financial stress for households. At the same time, pollution from inefficient petrol-guzzling cars is fuelling harmful climate change.

“By giving Australians better choice of cleaner, cheaper-to-run cars, a strong fuel efficiency standard will cut household costs and clean up our air.”

Climate Councillor and energy expert, Greg Bourne, said: “A fuel efficiency standard will benefit all Australians – no matter what type of new car they are buying.

“Aussie drivers who have long commutes from our suburbs and regions are hurt the most by high and rising petrol bills. This means they’ll also see the biggest benefits from getting access to a wider range of affordable lower and zero emissions vehicles that are cheaper to run.

“Australians – especially those in our suburbs and regions – deserve access to the same choice of affordable, clean and safe cars that are already being sold in their millions overseas. A strong fuel efficiency standard can help deliver this.”

Fuel efficiency standards should be accompanied by other policies that support and enable the uptake of low and zero emissions vehicles. The National Electric Vehicle Strategy’s focus on improving the availability of charging infrastructure and incentivising uptake of the cleanest vehicles remains important to prepare our roads for this transition.

Learn more about Fuel Efficiency Standards here

View the Climate Council’s Fuel Efficiency Standards Consultation submission here

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Australia’s Immigration System Leaves Visa Applicants in Limbo for Years

By Loz Lawrey

In late 2021 Afghanistan’s capital Kabul fell to the Taliban. These religious zealots had swept through the country following the withdrawal of American forces from the country.

At the time I, along with other Australian citizens, assisted Afghans whose very existence was threatened by the new regime to complete and lodge applications for humanitarian rescue visas to Australia.

It can be hard for Australians, cocooned as we are in a democratic first world nation where our freedoms and human rights are taken for granted, to fully comprehend the stress, anxiety and fear which rules the lives of minorities living in societies controlled by toxic regimes, particularly religious ones such as that of the Taliban in Afghanistan and the Islamic republican government in Iran.

The very concept of religious extremists holding the levers of government power in any nation is abhorrent to all of us who favour science, critical thinking and reason over blind belief in whatever the high priests of religious dogma dish up.

Blind Freddie knows that government should always be secular and separate from the mythologies and doctrines of religion and belief.

Whilst those who label themselves “people of faith” tend to claim the moral high ground on all issues, there can be no doubt that most religions create deep division in societies around the world.

Once any religious group is allowed to take power and govern any nation there will always be ”non-believers” who will suffer at their hands. Inquisitions would become a constant evil once again.

During the Spanish Inquisition (1478-1834… nearly 400 years!), those who refused to follow and champion the often-absurd dictates of the high priests of Catholicism were labelled “heretics” and hunted down and often tortured and executed.

In theocracies, as in fascist/authoritarian regimes, minorities are often targeted for repression, and ultimately genocide and elimination.

Under Hitler’s Fascist regime in Germany communists, unionists, gypsies and Jews as well as the disabled were “othered” and cast aside, targeted for repression and abuse.

Under the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, women and Afghans of Hazara ethnicity as well as secular non-religious citizens are also demonised and hunted down.

Religion? Let’s face it. Religion ruins the world.

These (usually patriarchal) organisations that claim to offer “salvation” and “redemption” offer nothing more to humanity than fear, corruption, confusion, doubt, hatred, division and warmongering.

The world has witnessed the religious repression of women in Iran, where the “Morality Police” patrol the streets and harass women for not wearing bags on their heads.

One has to wonder: what drives men (and let’s face it, it’s always men) to inflict such suffering upon others?

Globally, we are witnessing thousands of desperate people annually fleeing impossible situations in their countries of birth in search of a better life – all they want is a chance to live, to learn and grow, to work, support their families and raise their children in safety and decency.

All they seek is the normalcy we here in Australia take for granted.

Sadly, so many nations around the world seem unable to meet the basic humanitarian needs of their own citizens.

The few bad apples always ruin things for the many…

And yet, once desperate people respond to their own situations by attempting to relocate to more humane societies, whether by paying “people smugglers” exorbitant prices for a place on overcrowded and often leaky boats or by crossing borders illegally to seek refuge as aliens in neighbouring nations with slightly less repressive governments, they find further demonisation and rejection.

Sometimes I myself, as an Australian who has enjoyed all the benefits of living in the “lucky country”, the “land of the fair go”, find myself cringing in disgust at the attitudes of some of my fellow citizens towards those of different cultural backgrounds and ethnicities. Ewe can be so selfish.

Are we not, in this Lucky Nation, well positioned to assist those in need?

We are world leaders in the establishment and maintenance of multiculturalism, and we continue, daily, to learn more as a people about inclusion and acceptance.

It hasn’t been easy and there remains much fear and bigotry to overcome, but our Australian melting pot of ethnicities and cultures is truly a wonder to behold.

People praise to the so-called “American Experiment” of democracy (which is sadly in great danger of foundering upon the rocks of right wing lies and propaganda) but the Australian Experiment of multiculturalism and inclusion is something to be proud of. It’s still a work in progress, but I believe we’re making headway.

And let’s be clear: desperate people all around the world see hope and opportunity here in our nation and look to us for refuge.

Yet how do we respond?

I write this piece in an attempt to put a human face to the suffering our own Australian government inflicts upon so many of those who approach us asking for our assistance.

In October 2021, within months of the Taliban takeover, I lodged a humanitarian visa application for a young Hazara woman and her family of nine.

I do not wish to endanger her, so I won’t name her, and I won’t disclose her family’s current location. Suffice to say, she is a sportsperson whose promising career ended when the misogynists of the Taliban took over the government of her nation.

To the Taliban she is a threat: a woman of Hazara ethnicity doing well in her chosen occupation. A woman who was set to thrive in the new emerging Afghan state which was destroyed overnight by U.S. President Joe Biden’s clumsy withdrawal of American forces and the subsequent Taliban takeover.

I have great admiration for this young woman because most members of her team are now resident here in Australia.

She had the opportunity to relocate with them but chose instead to remain in Afghanistan to support her family of nine.

Now they have relocated to another country where that must try to subsist as refugees in a society that does not welcome them.

I also lodged an application at the same time for a young Hazara man living in Kabul. His life and future were destroyed by the Taliban’s accession to power.

I shall keep his current location confidential as well.

He also lives in hiding as an illegal refugee in a nation which does not want him and whose authorities would repatriate him if he came to their attention, effectively sentencing him to likely death at Taliban hands.

Prior to fleeing his country of birth he was twice detained and tortured by Taliban members in Kabul. Other members of his family had been previously murdered in the regions during the Taliban’s march on Kabul in August 2021.

His crime? Simply being of Hazara ethnicity, being a 27-year-old non-religious graduate of Kabul University, holding progressive non-Islamist views, with a track record of championing women’s rights and the importance of voting and actively participating in democracy.

This young man, whom I have come to know quite well, would make a fine Australian citizen. Of this I have no doubt. I know that he already shares our values and humanitarian aspirations.

So, these young people, whose lives are currently on hold due to the circumstances in which they find themselves, waited over a year to learn that their applications had been accepted as valid.

Both were allocated case/file numbers. This meant that their applications were now in the queue for assessment and further action…

But WHEN???

Let’s remember that we are talking about humanitarian rescue visas here… how long should a “rescue” take?

The application form is 34 pages long! It’s labelled “humanitarian” but the process it engenders is totally cruel and inhumane.

Over two years have passed since these visa applications were lodged but under the current Home Affairs regime these desperate people can wait years to learn whether their visa applications have been successful.

The Department refuses all requests for updates and information from applicants. Letters and emails are left unanswered and all those who attempt to contact Home Affairs are effectively showered with contempt.

I do try very hard to maintain my faith in the basic goodness in the heart of our nation…

I must admit though… as a lifelong Labor voter I am disgusted to see our current government treating asylum seekers as cruelly as the previous one.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Seizing Australia’s AI opportunity

Productivity Commission Media Release

New research from the Productivity Commission finds that artificial intelligence could significantly boost Australia’s productivity if governments implement well-directed policy and regulation.

In this set of three papers, the Commission places Australia’s AI opportunity in a global context, to consider how our governments can help to maximise the potential economic benefits of this evolving technology.

Paper one outlines how Australia stands to benefit most from AI technology, and consequently, where governments should focus their policy efforts.

“Australian business is already adopting AI through its integration with existing software and services – but to get the big productivity dividends we need business to transform core systems and adopt new tools as they emerge. Governments can support this by investing in skills and digital infrastructure and modelling best practice,” said Commissioner Stephen King.

Paper two provides government with a playbook for developing AI protections in the context of the emerging AI regulatory landscape.

It outlines a stepped, gradual approach to regulation that’s focused on addressing harms as they emerge.

“Australia’s robust regulatory frameworks are one of our biggest strengths. Many uses of AI technology are already covered by this regulation. Before jumping to new AI-specific laws, we should examine existing regulations and better explain how they apply to the uses of AI,” said Commissioner King.

“AI will likely highlight gaps in current laws and regulations that we will need to address. But pre-empting these gaps with overzealous lawmaking could put local policy out of step with global norms, limiting the potential productivity gains of this new technology.”

The research finds the challenges presented by AI are particularly acute in the case of data.

Paper three considers how AI raises the stakes for data policy, and what Australian policymakers should do to address the new questions about data rights and incentives that AI presents.

“Advances in AI highlight that data is an increasingly valuable resource that is underutilised in Australia. Key challenges for governments will be to improve protections and public confidence in data sharing, and to establish clear and consistent arrangements for training AI models.

“The new wave of AI innovation may finally pull productivity growth out of the shallows – judicious policy interventions and a practical approach to regulation would put the Australian economy in the best position to ride that wave.”

The Making the most of the AI opportunity research papers and media release are available from the Commission’s website.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Cry, the Beloved Truckers

By James Moore

God’s Army has started out looking a bit more like a lost platoon. The “Take Our Border Back” (TOBB) group, which has been claiming 750,000 truckers would make their way to near Eagle Pass, left Norfolk, Virginia on Monday with a few dozen cars and trucks, launching on their profound mission from the outlet malls. The organizers insist their numbers will grow as the convoy travels from Virginia to Jacksonville, Florida, with stops in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, and then Dripping Springs, Texas. Their online itinerary said there was to be a rally in Drippin’ at the HEB grocery story but the famed grocer said it had “no truck” with truckers or anyone else using their busy parking lot for events.

What the TOBB folks hope to accomplish is a bit vague. They clearly want to support the governor of Texas, who is defying federal law by ignoring a U.S. Supreme Court ruling. Beyond that, it’s hard to know. The idea for the convoy appears to have originated from the mind of Pete, “Doc,” Chambers, a former military physician and a Lieutenant Commander in the U.S. Army, who waged a legal battle against mandated vaccines by Department of Defense. The Doc is fond of quoting scripture and explaining how the convoy will serve God by providing what can only amount to moral support because there is nothing legal for them to accomplish, unless they are bringing food and clothing in their trucks for the immigrants, who are “the least of these” the Bible suggests Christians care for, if you are into that sort of thing, which TOBBers appear to be, in word, if not act.

Doc Chambers now says he is the LTC (commanding) of a group he calls “Remnant A,” which is also from the Bible and a prominent reference in the Book of Revelation. The “remnants” remain faithful to God during tribulation and judgment. The letter “A” presumably refers to the unit that Chambers commands. In Revelation, though, remnants continue to keep God’s covenant when others lapse. The entire concept appears to suggest there are certain believers whose faithfulness to the almighty cannot be shaken and their devotion is unfaltering despite external pressures and challenges. (Hey, you think it’s easy organizing 750,000 truckers?). Even Job would be impressed.

 

 

Doc Pete sees dark things, very dark things afoot in America. In his next video below, he is swinging a rope and talking about “Nuremberg 2.0,” and he promises to round up those criminals with “this right here,” and then he raises his rope, a real “turn the other cheek” moment. I assume he means we are going to have a trial of some sort. Doc talks of “evil forces” and growing crops faster and explains that we need “food, not insects,” which isn’t exactly true because we couldn’t grow food very well without insects. It’s hard to know what to make of the commanding officer of Remnant A with his ramblings about markets collapsing and not buying anything that has been touched by the hand of corporate masters. (Dood, have you seen the Dow lately?) Kind of begs the question of what those trucks are supposed to run on since there isn’t anything much more corporate than fossil fuels.

 

 

The chance of there being 750,000 trucks rolling into Texas is about as great as House Speaker Mike Johnson and Trump reading the immigration bill coming over from the Senate and proclaiming, “Oh my God! This is it! We have a compromise bill that is the strongest ever passed and will deal with the problem of immigration at the border,” (not “boarder” as it tends to get spelled by the foot soldiers of God’s Army). Republicans do not want the border issue solved. They want more performative bullshit like truck convoys to bring attention to the problem and to increase tensions between a law-breaking governor of Texas and the federal government in Washington. The Speaker has the unrealistic idea that there should not even be one person crossing into the U.S. on a daily basis and he will not settle for anything less. Trump’s bootlickers can’t achieve that even if they were to build a Berlin Wall from San Ysidro, California to Brownsville, Texas, put armed guards in towers, and shoot at anyone who approaches. History has proved not even that stops desperate people.

The Senate immigration bill, which is the product of endless negotiations between the two political parties, is, in fact, the most effective to have ever been articulated. Republicans, who have been bitching about the border and immigration since before Biden took the oath of office, don’t care. Hell, in Oklahoma, just to make the case that the GOP no longer wants to solve any problem, the state’s Republican Party censured its Senator James Lankford for working with the Democrats on the issue. An Oklahoma State Senator, some jack-leg named Dusty Deevers, accused Lankford of “playing fast and loose with Democrats on our border policy.” What border policy? The Republicans don’t have one. They’ve proposed nothing for decades. But Lankford was censured by resolution of his own state’s Republican Party and ordered to “cease and desist jeopardizing the security and liberty of Americans.”

Lankford didn’t back down after all the hours he has put into the legislation over the past several months. Although details have been coming out slowly, his description of what has been cobbled together by Senators from both parties indicates there is a meaningful law available to begin addressing the humanitarian crisis on the Mexican border.

“It increases a number of Border Patrol agents and it increases asylum officers,” Lankford said. “It increases detention beds so we can quickly detain and then deport individuals. It ends catch-and-release. It focuses on additional deportation flights out. It changes our asylum process so that people can get a fast asylum screening at a higher standard and then get returned back to their home country.”

My hope is that Democrats will use the Trump party’s refusal to fix the border as a 2 by 4 plank to whack the GOP over the head with until Election Day. This is a perfect opportunity for them to flip the script and talk about how Speaker Johnson and Trump stood in the way and refused to fix the border when given the chance. The President can campaign on that tale of intransigence and move voters who believe immigration and the border are the biggest problems facing the nation. How can the far right spend years whining about something and with a straight face ignore a chance to make a true difference? Stupid question, I guess.

Maybe God’s Army of truckers will be of great assistance, but the evidence coming in doesn’t look good. Vice News is reporting that a conspiracy theory has taken over on Telegram channels that is impeding the convoy’s success. The parade of eighteen wheelers to Eagle Pass is supposedly falling flat because critics believe it may be some kind of psy-op or false flag scheme to get the white hats arrested and cause things to blow up. The belief is that the federal government has infiltrated the convoy, or Antifa is involved, or somebody or something, and participants are in danger of being arrested on phony charges. Sounds pretty insidious and unbelievable but about a quarter of all Americans are convinced the January 6th insurrection was a government operation that used Antifa to turn it into a riot.

Feel free to weep for our country.

 

This article was originally published in Texas to the World.

James Moore is the New York Times bestselling author of “Bush’s Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential,” three other books on Bush and former Texas Governor Rick Perry, as well as two novels, and a biography entitled, “Give Back the Light,” on a famed eye surgeon and inventor. His newest book will be released mid- 2023. Mr. Moore has been honored with an Emmy from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for his documentary work and is a former TV news correspondent who has traveled extensively on every presidential campaign since 1976.

He has been a retained on-air political analyst for MSNBC and has appeared on Morning Edition on National Public Radio, NBC Nightly News, Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, CBS Evening News, CNN, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Hardball with Chris Matthews, among numerous other programs. Mr. Moore’s written political and media analyses have been published at CNN, Boston Globe, L.A. Times, Guardian of London, Sunday Independent of London, Salon, Financial Times of London, Huffington Post, and numerous other outlets. He also appeared as an expert on presidential politics in the highest-grossing documentary film of all time, Fahrenheit 911, (not related to the film’s producer Michael Moore).

His other honors include the Dartmouth College National Media Award for Economic Understanding, the Edward R. Murrow Award from the Radio Television News Directors’ Association, the Individual Broadcast Achievement Award from the Texas Headliners Foundation, and a Gold Medal for Script Writing from the Houston International Film Festival. He was frequently named best reporter in Texas by the AP, UPI, and the Houston Press Club. The film produced from his book “Bush’s Brain” premiered at The Cannes Film Festival prior to a successful 30-city theater run in the U.S.

Mr. Moore has reported on the major stories and historical events of our time, which have ranged from Iran-Contra to the Waco standoff, the Oklahoma City bombing, the border immigration crisis, and other headlining events. His journalism has put him in Cuba, Central America, Mexico, Australia, Canada, the UK, and most of Europe, interviewing figures as diverse as Fidel Castro and Willie Nelson. He has been writing about Texas politics, culture, and history since 1975, and continues with political opinion pieces for CNN and regularly at his Substack newsletter: “Texas to the World.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Fears for 15,000 animals stranded on MV Bahijah grow as Department of Agriculture considers re-export

Australian Alliance for Animals Media Release

The Australian Alliance for Animals is calling for common sense to prevail as the Department of Agriculture considers an application to re-export thousands of Australian sheep and cattle stranded on the MV Bahijah currently anchored off the Port of Fremantle.

The vessel departed Australian waters for Jordan on 5 January 2024 but was ordered to abort the voyage and return to Fremantle amid escalating conflict in the Red Sea.

The Department of Agriculture issued a statement today advising that it was assessing an application to re-export the 15,000 sheep and cattle as a priority.

The new voyage would be expected to avoid the conflict zone by circumnavigating the African continent to access Jordan via the Suez Canal with an expected journey time of over 33 days.

Alliance for Animals Policy Director Dr Jed Goodfellow said the statement was alarming and called for common sense and decency to prevail.

“These animals have already endured 27 days at sea – that’s almost a month of standing and lying in their own faeces, weathering heat and humidity in tight quarters, and enduring the multitude of additional environmental stressors inherent to the live export process.

“The cumulative stress these animals have faced, and will face should they be re-exported, would be unbearable.

“The fact the Department is even considering this application is shocking – they haven’t even obtained an independent veterinary assessment of the animals’ health and welfare.

“It would be the height of recklessness to subject these animals to another gruelling 33 days at sea under these circumstances.

“The Department already made a serious error of judgement in approving the shipment to set sail in the first place, knowing of the risks posed by Houthi Rebel attacks in the Red Sea as far back as November.

“It shouldn’t make a bad decision worse, by re-approving this shipment to set sail again.

“We have learnt from decades of experience that live exporters will take whatever risks they can get away with.

“It’s incumbent on the Government to ensure animal welfare is put first for a change – the Australian community will be expecting nothing less.

“Rejecting this application and ordering all animals to be unloaded is the only reasonable decision to make in these circumstances.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Why stronger environmental safeguards are a necessary part of climate action

By Dr Michael Seebeck

Response to Dr Jennifer Rayner’s article arguing for exemption of renewables infrastructures from normal environmental laws – “Climate laws are key to protecting nation’s environment” – the New Daily, 26/1/24.

“Clean energy” is a misnomer and a wonderfully successful marketing term for an industry absolutely reliant on fossil fuels (1)(2)(3), and deforestation (4), and other facets of ecocide, including industrialisation of previously intact desert ecosystems (5), and previously never-cleared remnant forests on the Great Dividing Range (6), and decimation of cetacean populations (7).

There are massive environmental problems worldwide, not only in Australia, with the current and planned expansion of renewable industrialisation: “We identified 2,206 fully operational renewable energy facilities within the boundaries of these conservation areas, with another 922 facilities under development. Combined, these facilities span and are degrading 886 Protected Areas (PAs), 749 Key Biodiversity Areas (KBAs) and 40 distinct wilderness areas. Two trends are particularly concerning. First, while the majority of historical overlap occurs in Western Europe, the renewable electricity facilities under development increasingly overlap with conservation areas in Southeast Asia, a globally important region for biodiversity. Second, this next wave of renewable energy infrastructure represents a ~30% increase in the number of PAs and KBAs impacted and could increase the number of compromised wilderness areas by ~60%. If the world continues to rapidly transition towards renewable energy these areas will face increasing pressure to allow infrastructure expansion.” (8)

The infrastructure works at Port Hastings, which prompted the article by Dr Rayner (on behalf of the Climate Council in the New Daily), would destroy the integrity of the internationally recognised Ramsar Wetlands (9) there – is Dr Rayner actually suggesting that such international agreements, in this case to protect populations of migratory birds, which are in rapid decline (10), should be binned in favour of industrial development? The ecosystem that many migratory birds rely on are wetlands and freshwater habitats, which are the most destroyed and degraded worldwide (11).

The biggest cause of destruction of our environment is overshoot – population and economic growth (12), which has caused rampant ecosystem and habitat destruction worldwide (13)(14). This has been the case and will remain the case in the future unfortunately, given the power of the proponents of growth (15)(16). Climate change is simply a facet of this (17), and it certainly will cause more damage in the future. And political scientist Dr Rayner neglects to mention that climate change is at least 50% caused by ecocide and agriculture (18), and greenhouse gas emissions from ecosystem destruction are often grossly underestimated (19) and often not reported (20).

In 2013, the world had about 549 million hectares of intact tropical forests left, the study said:

Ensuring their future should now be a priority, with increased efforts and policies to keep them safe, Evans said. That should include better recognition of indigenous land rights and a halt to the expansion of mining, fossil fuel extraction, agriculture and infrastructure which often drives forest loss, he added.”Our results revealed that continued destruction of intact tropical forests is a ticking time bomb for carbon emissions,” the study’s lead author Sean Maxwell, a scientist with Australia’s University of Queensland, said in a statement.”There is an urgent need to safeguard these landscapes because they play an indispensable role in stabilizing the climate.” (83)

The Climate Council published an article on deforestation and climate change in 2019. They alleged that deforestation emissions were 8-10% of total emissions (84). This is somewhat at odds with other information which suggests “land use change emissions”, principally deforestation, accounts for 12-20% of total annual emissions (85); since 1850, 30% of all emissions have come from deforestation. (86) The scientists who reported that emissions from damage to tropical forests were 626% more than what was previously estimated, highlighted the role of edge effects: “we expect that cumulative net emissions from edge effects will approximately double those from direct forest clearance events observed in intact forest in the 2000s.” (87) Wind turbine industrialisation through old growth forests requires thousands of kilometres of interconnecting haulage roads, and often the adjacent degraded forests subjected to edge effects are often the “ecological offsets’ used to supposedly neutralise the damage done by forest clearing. Has the Climate Council updated their article and opinions in light of these findings?

Reducing fossil fuel emissions during Covid lockdowns (21) showed no demonstrated reduction in the upward trajectory of CO2 concentration (22), nor the concentration of any other greenhouse gas. So her stance is based on two false premises, that renewables will reduce emissions, and that emissions reduction, if it were to occur, will somehow solve climate change. There is no evidence for either assertion, except “modelling” based on the false assumption that renewables will stop emissions and committed warming, and that deforestation and loss of C sequestration will somehow cease despite ongoing population and economic growth (23). Hansen et al (24) allege that rapid phasing out of GHGs will stop most of “equilibrium warming” to plus 10 degrees Celsius though they assume that “clean energy” and other unspecified measures will achieve this.

Despite $11.7 trillion having been spent on “clean energy” globally from 1995 to 2022, fossil fuels increased by 58%, and the share of fossil fuels only decreased by 3.8% (25). We have now breached the 1.5 degree warming level and temperatures are rapidly increasing, possibly into a runaway phase (26). There is a 25- to 30-year time lag between greenhouse gases being released into the atmosphere and their full warming potential taking effect (26). Whatever we are doing or attempting to do is clearly not working. Obviously tackling growth, stopping and reversing it, is just as important as any attempt to directly reduce emissions. This has never yet been attempted anywhere. “A comprehensive comparison of ‘degrowth’ with established pathways to limit climate change highlights the risk of over-reliance on technology to support economic growth, which is assumed in established climate modelling” (27).

Dr Rayner did not mention that stopping deforestation is just as important for the climate as reducing fossil fuel consumption, which was stated at COP26 (28), and here Dr Rayner is barracking or “quicker approvals”, which one can only surmise will mean more environmental destruction and more rapid environmental destruction for “clean energy”.

Queensland already has “quick approvals” for renewables, so much so that the approval process of any industrial renewable energy facility is virtually automatic. State Code 23 was drafted for this purpose (29); it overrides all other relevant legislation, including the Vegetation Management Act (VMA). The purpose of the VMA was to give protection to essential remnant forests and wildlife habitat. The only factors which can stop RE in Qld now are proximity to schools and churches. State Code 23 has already led to catastrophic destruction of the environment at Clarke Creek and Kaban and Mt Emerald, and allowed ecocidal wind developments at Lotus Creek, Chalumbin (Wooroora), Upper Burdekin (Gawara Baya), and Mt Fox – all destroying remnant biodiverse forests on the Great Dividing Range. Lotus Creek is on the same Connors Range as Twiggy Forrest’s Clarke Creek wind development, which has led to the destruction of several hundred hectares of good koala habitat. Lotus Creek holds probably the best remaining population of koalas in North Queensland, and maybe the whole of Queensland, and was knocked back by Sussan Ley over environmental concerns, then approved by Tanya Plibersek when the proponents, Neoen, a French RE company, re-submitted a revised application (30). Clearly, “quick approvals” for renewable energy can have disastrous consequences. It should also be mentioned that solar farms in Queensland only need local government approval. The massive solar farm at the foot of the DeSailly Range north of Mt Carbine, FNQ, for instance, was approved by the unelected CEO of Mareeba Council. This solar farm will necessitate clearing of around 2000 hectares of dry sclerophyll forest and wildlife habitat.

It’s also a well-known fact that charcoal from tropical forests is used in high temperature kilns in the production of solar panels (31), and that balsa from virgin rainforests in central and South America is used for the blades in wind turbines (32). And renewables are the most land and sea area-intensive form of energy production, meaning inevitably that forests are destroyed for deployment, as evidenced in Scotland (33), Sweden (34), Germany (35), Brazil (36), and Australia (37)(38), and destruction of peat bogs in Scotland and elsewhere (39). The fragmentation and disturbance of wind industrialisation and the thousands of kilometres of haulage roads necessary is catastrophic to the habitat of many species – roads are the leading cause worldwide of habitat fragmentation and degradation, and their presence always leads to more destruction of habitat and ecosystems. New dams for “clean hydro-electric power” are destroying many rivers and ecosystems worldwide. (40)(41)(42) (43) (44). Mining for the “critical minerals” necessary for “green energy” and EVs already has had catastrophic consequences in Indonesia (45), the Amazon (46), WA’s jarrah forests (47), Cape York Peninsula wilderness (48), to name a few. In fact, mining for critical minerals has been identified as having catastrophic consequences to ecosystems and biodiversity worldwide (49). And then there’s the likely catastrophic impacts of deep-sea mining (50), which may cause 25x the biodiversity loss of land-based mining, as well as unleashing unknown carbon emissions from the seabed (51).

Could the reason for Dr Rayner’s stance be related to the fact that billionaires, investors, and the renewables industry itself, are major donors to the Climate Council, and that nature, wildlife, and threatened and endangered species, have no money to invest? A brief perusal of the funding of the Climate Council suggests this (52). The Climate Council seems to be flush with funds, and has had donations from 12 anonymous donors as well as, for example, Boundless Earth, a Cannon-Brookes charity (53), and The Sunrise Project, a renewable energy financing conduit, co-headed by the former chief of staff of Adam Bandt (54), and the European Climate Fund. The European Climate Foundation is funded by many large foundations, many based in the United States. Some of these funders include the Bloomberg Family Foundation (billionaire Michael Bloomberg), ClimateWorks Foundation, Children’s Investment Fund Foundation (hedge fund billionaire Sir Chis Hohn), Rockefeller Brothers Foundation (fossil fuel billionaires), the Growald Family Fund (Rockefellers), and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation (Hewlett-Packard billionaires) (55). These monolithic foundations have all backed renewable initiatives but money for environmental protections is scant or absent. For example, the Bloomberg FF donated only $2.5 million to Pew Charitable Trusts for conservation of marine protected areas (56).

“… billionaires’ investments in climate change solutions are often driven by personal interests, rather than a broader commitment to the planet’s well-being. While it is undeniable that many billionaires genuinely care about the environment, their motivations can be complex and multifaceted. For instance, investments in renewable energy can be viewed as profitable business opportunities, rather than purely altruistic endeavours. This profit-driven approach may lead to an uneven focus on certain technologies or industries, neglecting other critical areas that require attention. Furthermore, the unpredictable nature of private investments leaves room for sudden shifts in priorities, making long-term planning and consistency difficult to achieve.” (57)

I am not supporting fossil fuels – I would agree they should be phased out as rapidly as possible. However, advocates of “clean energy” are completely disingenuous, because if fossil fuels were to be phased out, renewables could not be mined, manufactured, and maintained. Same with steel, concrete, ammonia (food), plastics (58), modern medicine; everything that modern civilisation takes for granted for its current scale let alone growth. The globalism that allows minerals for “clean energy” to be mined all over the globe, transported to the factories, then shipped off to other countries to be deployed, is entirely dependent on fossil fuels. Such trade constitutes 30% of transport emissions and is projected to increase fourfold by 2050 (59). There are many reasons why hydrogen cannot replace fossil fuels for international transport (60), which I won’t go into here.

Scientific research of supply chains has shown that rare earth mining & processing has been responsible for 32 billion tons of CO2 emissions over 10 years (61). Magnets (wind turbines and EVs) are responsible for 23% of that (62); however, the amount mined for magnets needs to increase 11-25x over the next 25 years (63) for the attempted transition, resulting in around extra 16-17 billion tons CO2 emissions/ year (global emissions are currently 38 billion tons CO2e per year). And that’s just rare earths; the mining of many minerals needs to increase by multiples (64), contributing massive increases in emissions. There is doubt that there are sufficient reserves for many required critical minerals (64). And rare earths are difficult and energy-intensive to recycle (65). Increase in “clean energy” of 1% gives a 0.9% increase in CO2 emissions (61) but this may in fact be an underestimate as it’s based on rare earth elements. This calls into question the assumed emissions reductions of renewables, which is based on cherry-picking impacts, limiting scope, assuming unreasonably high average wind speeds (66), assuming insignificant ecocidal impacts, ignoring grid effects emissions of battery storage and balancing FF emissions which increase due to green energy, and fallacious presentation of emissions per energy delivered. That’s a topic for another article.

In addition, it appears that the royalties from coal mining are being used to finance renewables and their required infrastructure in Queensland (67), as well as other facets of new infrastructure made necessary by population and economic growth. It is unlikely that renewable energy could ever contribute to funding of other facets of infrastructure as it has a lower Energy Return On Energy Invested (EROEI) (68) and it is a net drain on government (taxpayer) funds, which seem to be mainly going to billionaires and foreign corporations and investors (69) as they expect return on their “green” investments. It should be remembered that “With the exception of [Australia’s richest person and fellow mining magnate] Gina Rinehart, no Australian has ever caused more damage to the environment than Andrew Forrest,” an Australian Financial Review columnist said in a recent commentary.”(70) “Green” billionaire Andrew Forrest has significant ecocidal renewables investments, including the Great Dividing Range’s Clarke Ck wind farm (power purchasing agreement with Anglo-American Coal (71)) and Gawara Baya (Upper Burdekin) wind farm – adjacent to Wet Tropics World Heritage Area. (Apple pulled out of a power purchasing agreement over environmental concerns (72)). The new Kaban wind industrialisation (owned by Neoen), which decimated old growth forest near Ravenshoe, has a power purchasing agreement with coal miner BHP Mitsubishi Alliance (73). Twiggy Forrest’s climate advocacy should be interpreted in this context.

Perusal of Australian and state governments press releases regarding mining and infrastructure for “critical minerals’ reveals that they actually believe the rampant mining made necessary for an attempted renewables transition to be a great boon for “jobs and growth’ (74), which is clearly what they are most interested in supporting – increasing energy demand, increasing ecocide, and worsening overshoot. “The climate” is just a useful pretext, a specious justification.

Commentary from the Australian Government’s Clean Energy Regulator, reveals that increasing electricity NEM spot price is regarded as beneficial for investment in renewables (75). The main investors in renewables in Australia are billionaires Twiggy Forrest, Cannon-Brookes and millionaire Simon Holmes a Court, as well as a large collection of foreign companies including Spanish Iberdrola, French Neoen, Irish Mainstream, Dutch Ingka, Thai Thatchaburi, and Filipino ACEN. Obviously fossil fuel suppliers of electricity also benefit from increasing NEM spot prices. Population growth via mass immigration is the chief means our government uses to increase demand for electricity and increase profits to energy providers, whilst destroying carbon sequestration and increasing overall emissions. Its quite clear who our government is governing for, and it isn’t average Australians, and certainly not our ecosystems and wildlife, and not the climate.

Australia’s Carbon accounting reveals net uptake of carbon during non-severe bushfire years (76). This has been confirmed by NASA satellite analysis of CO2 emissions and uptake over the course of 2021 (77). We only contribute about 1.3% of global emissions, obviously not including exported emissions of fossil fuels, which I do not support. The 1.3% of emissions that Australia directly contributes also does not include the offshored emissions of manufactured items. This obviously includes renewable energy industrial components such as solar panels and wind turbines.

Clearly what we should be doing is enhancing our carbon sequestration, protecting all remaining old growth forests from all development, and restoring degraded forests and farmland, and stopping burning everything, including forests, as the science shows that forests actually increase fire resistance as the fire-free interval increases (78). Forests also have beneficial effects on the climate as well as carbon sequestration. They also sequester energy that would have otherwise been released as heat, increase rainfall to enhance sequestration and cool through evapo-transpiration and shading (79). We should be winding down fossil fuel exports and unsustainable population growth, which contributes to more emissions and destruction of carbon-sequestering ecosystems. And reducing or eliminating the import of industrial products especially those with a high carbon footprint. Our coal-fired power stations should be converted to nuclear, as nuclear power is an easy substitute and does not require vastly increased transmission networks, more substations, switching stations, battery firming/storage and has far lower emissions and negligible destruction of carbon sequestration capacity compared to renewable energy (80). Unfortunately for nuclear power, it does not require the massive overbuilding (81) and mining (and huge emissions burden) that renewables do, so the profit potential is not there compared to renewables, so the billionaires aren’t interested. However, allowing more destruction of forests and habitat for any reason, is simply lunacy, and not based on science and reality.

We must ask ourselves, do we want a planet teeming with life or do we want lifeless industrial wastelands interspersed with monocultures grown for food & timber, in desperate states due to climate change and loss of insect pollinators, with global famines and other aspects of a ghastly future (82) just around the corner, and remnant wildlife populations of selected species incarcerated as breeding populations in zoos, being bred for release into habitat which no longer exists. The billionaires and their proxies in media and governments and environmental and climate NGOs clearly want the latter.

Dr Michael Seebeck, Conservationist with Rainforest Reserves, Far North Queensland

 

REFERENCES

(1) What I See When I See a Wind Turbine

(2) Why do we burn coal and trees to make solar panels?

(3) Through the Eye of a Needle: An Eco-Heterodox Perspective on the Renewable Energy Transition

(4) Renewable energy targets may undermine their sustainability

(5) “Study: California solar farms threaten desert species”

(6) Blowing in the wind: Former Greens eco-warrior says we should all fear wind turbines

(7) Letter: ‘Take’ authorizations prove NOAA is lying about whale deaths

8) Renewable energy development threatens many globally important biodiversity areas

(9) Tanya Plibersek blocks Victorian government’s plan to build wind turbine plant at Port of Hastings

(10) Rapid population decline in migratory shorebirds relying on Yellow Sea tidal mudflats as stopover sites

(11) 75% of Earth’s land areas are degraded; wetlands have been hit hardest, with 87% lost globally in the last 300 years

(12) Recognizing Overshoot: Succession of an Ecological Framework

(13) Population and economic growth are destroying biodiversity

(14) Increasing impacts of land use on biodiversity and carbon sequestration driven by population and economic growth

(15) ‘Extra level of power’: billionaires who have bought up the media

(16) Billionaires are out of touch and much too powerful. The planet is in trouble

(17) Why climate change is the symptom of a much deeper and bigger problem

(18) Why Agriculture’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Are Almost Always Underestimated

(19) Climate emissions from tropical forest damage ‘underestimated by a factor of six’

(20) Countries’ climate pledges built on flawed data, Post investigation finds

(21) Temporary reduction in daily global CO2 emissions during the COVID-19 forced confinement

(22) Broken record: Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels jump again

(23) The Zero Emissions Commitment and climate stabilization

(24) Global warming in the pipeline

(25) Opinion: The world still depends on fossil fuels despite trillions for clean energy

(26) How close is runaway climate change?

(27) Bet on technology or limit growth? Climate modelling shows ‘degrowth’ less technologically risky

(28) Not just coal: End to deforestation sought at COP26 climate summit

(29) Renewable energy project planning and approvals

(30) Australia’s approval of renewable projects has doubled, says Plibersek

(31) Burning down the house: Myanmar’s destructive charcoal trade

(32) A green paradox: Deforesting the Amazon for wind energy in the Global North

(33) 14m trees have been cut down in Scotland to make way for wind farms

(34) The wolf forests of Sweden threatened by onshore wind farms

(35) German government begins razing the forest that acted as a backdrop for many a Grimm’s fairy tale, to make way for wind turbines

(36) In Brazil, rural communities are caught in the eye of the wind farm storm

(37) Conservationists rubbish plan to build a windfarm near protected north Queensland rainforests

(38) The giant wind farms clearing Queensland bush

(39) Climate pollution from wind farms on peat ‘underestimated’

(40) Impacts of hydropower on the habitat of jaguars and tigers

(41) 8,700+ new hydropower plants threaten Europe’s biodiversity

(42) Batang Toru Hydropower Project

(43) Before the Flood: The dam that threatens one of Africa’s oldest national parks

(44) Giving a dam: how hydropower is destroying Europe’s rivers

(45) Nickel miners linked to devastation of Indonesian forests

(46 Ford’s Electric Pickup Is Built From Metal That’s Damaging the Amazon

(47) Mines clear more trees than logging in WA’s threatened forests

(48) Galalar Silica Project

(49) Renewable energy production will exacerbate mining threats to biodiversity

(50) Deep-Sea Mining Could Cause 25x the Biodiversity Loss of Land-Based Mining, Report Warns

(51) Deep Sea Mining and the Green Transition

(52) Climate Council Annual Report 2022-2023

(53) Mike Cannon-Brookes is ramping up the climate tech founder pipeline with Startmate

(54) The Sunrise Project

(55) European Climate Foundation

(56) Bloomberg Family Foundation (Bloomberg Philanthropies)

(57) Why Billionaires Won’t Save Us from Climate Change

(58) The Modern World Can’t Exist Without These Four Ingredients. They All Require Fossil Fuels

(59) The Carbon Footprint of Global Trade; Tackling Emissions from International Freight Transport

(60) Hydrogen Half Truths Keep Shipping Fuel Hopes Afloat

(61) Global environmental cost of using rare earth elements in green energy technologies

(62) Market imbalances for rare earths persist

(63) Critical Rare-Earth Elements Mismatch Global Wind-Power Ambitions

(64) The Mining of Minerals and the Limits to Growth

(65) Why rare earth recycling is rare – and what we can do about it

(66) A review of life cycle assessments on wind energy systems

(67) Queensland’s record coal earnings used for transition

(68) Wind and solar energy are neither renewable nor sustainable

(69) For better or worse, billionaires now guide climate policy

(70) A bit rich? Billionaires’ climate efforts draw scepticism, praise

(71) Anglo American sources 100% renewable electricity supply for Australia operations

(72) Apple pulls out of Andrew Forrest-backed windfarm at centre of threatened species controversy

(73) BMA signs new five-year renewable power purchase agreement

(74) What are critical minerals and why are we mining them in Queensland?

(75) Large-scale generation certificates (LGCs): Strengthening price signal for renewable investment

(76) Australia is already a net zero CO2-e emitter – thanks to our forests and rangelands

(77) Atmospheric Carbon Dioxide Tagged by Source

(78) Contrary to common belief, some forests get more fire resistant with age

(79) More than carbon storage – The role of forests in climate change

(80) Two studies make a strong case for nuclear power: less pollution, smaller footprint

(81) ‘Massive overbuilding’ of renewables is the way to 100% decarbonisation

(82) Underestimating the Challenges of Avoiding a Ghastly Future

(83) Carbon emissions from tropical forest loss underestimated, scientists say

(84) Deforestation and Climate Change

(85) What is the role of deforestation in climate change and how can ‘Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation’ (REDD+) help?

(86) Forests and Climate Change

(87) Degradation and forgone removals increase the carbon impact of intact forest loss by 626%

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Class warfare!

By Bert Hetebry

Headlines repeated the line endlessly, the cost-of-living crisis, again, again and again, ad infinitum.

So real action is taken to address the cost-of-living crisis on a number of fronts, but the main measure was to make amendments to the stage 3 tax cuts which were to come into effect on 1 July.

Need we go through it again?

All people who earn money will pay less tax from 1 July 2024.

Easy. Good, fantastic.

Apparently not.

The Australian Industry Group has asked the fair Work Commission to include the effect of the tax cuts when considering the size of the next wage decision.

How grossly unfair that a person struggling to pay rent and buy essentials should not only pay less tax, but should the fair work commission deem that because of the impact on inflation, they should also get a pay increase. HOLY MOLEY!

At the same time those earning around $190,000 per year are still going to pay less tax and get the CPI increases or whatever protection they enjoy in their employment contract, and we are told by the National’s leader, David Littleproud that the tax cuts are nothing less than class warfare.

Try telling someone struggling on the minimum wage that an income of $190.000 a year is not a lot. The minimum wage is $23.23 per hour, $882.80 per week, $45,905.60 a year, less than a quarter of $190,000. According to Mr Littleproud his constituents earning around $180,000 to $190,000 are doing it tough and should get the tax cuts under the original stage 3 legislation. He does fail to point out that they will be getting a slightly reduced tax cut, about four time in dollar terms that of a person on the minimum wage. besides, the lower income earners got tax cuts under stages 1 and 2 of the tax system and should be happy and stop bleating about the rent increases, mortgage increases, price of groceries and the cost of a beer.

Class warfare!

That’s what it is! Nothing but class warfare!

Again we see that politics is being played with empty rhetoric, slogans that imply something good is really something bad.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

UNRWA funding cuts threaten Palestinian lives in Gaza and region, say 20 NGOs

Oxfam Australia Media Release

Oxfam, together with 19 other aid organisations, is deeply concerned and outraged that some of the largest donors have suspended funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the main aid provider for millions of Palestinians in Gaza and the region. The aid cuts come amid a rapidly worsening humanitarian catastrophe in Gaza.

The suspension of funding by donor states will impact life-saving assistance for over two million civilians, over half of whom are children, who rely on UNRWA aid in Gaza. The population faces starvation, looming famine and an outbreak of disease under Israel’s continued indiscriminate bombardment and deliberate deprivation of aid in Gaza.

We welcome UNRWA’s swift investigation into the alleged involvement of a small number of UN staff members in the October 7th attacks. We are shocked by the reckless decision to cut a lifeline for an entire population by some of the very countries that had called for aid in Gaza to be stepped up and for humanitarians to be protected while doing their job. This decision comes as the International Court of Justice ordered immediate and effective action to ensure the provision of humanitarian assistance to civilians in Gaza.

152 UNRWA staff have already been killed and 145 UNRWA facilities damaged by bombardment. UNRWA is the largest humanitarian agency in Gaza and their delivery of humanitarian assistance cannot be replaced by other agencies working in Gaza. If the funding suspensions are not reversed we may see a complete collapse of the already restricted humanitarian response in Gaza.

With approximately over one million displaced Palestinians taking shelter in or around 154 UNRWA shelters, the agency and aid organisations have continued to work in near-impossible circumstances to provide food, vaccinations, and fresh water. The countries suspending funds risk further depriving Palestinians in the region of essential food, water, medical assistance and supplies, education, and protection.

We urge donor states to reaffirm support for the vital work that UNRWA and its partners do to help Palestinians survive one of the worst humanitarian catastrophes of our times. Countries must reverse these funding suspensions, uphold their duties towards the Palestinian people and scale up humanitarian assistance for civilians in dire need in Gaza and the region.

Signatory organisations:

War Child Alliance

ActionAid

Norwegian Refugee Council

Diakonia

Oxfam

Première Urgence Internationale

Médecins du Monde France, Spain, Switzerland, Canada, Germany
Danish Refugee Council

Johanniter International Assistance

The Association of International Development Agencies – Aida

Humanity & Inclusion/ Handicap International (HI)

INTERSOS

CCFD-Terre Solidaire

International Council for Voluntary Agencies

Norwegian People’s Aid

Plateforme des ONG françaises pour la Palestine

Norwegian Church Aid

DanChurchAid

American Friends Service Committee

Caritas Internationalis

Save the Children

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Advancing 2024: Towards a More Inclusive Agenda at all Levels of Government

By Denis Bright

Amidst the usual tensions associated with Australia Day, there was an underlying commitment to a more progressive national consensus after the unfortunate defeat of last year’s Voice referendum.

The eve of Australia Day brought the announcement of progressive tax rate changes as summarised by Lowe Lippmann-Chartered Accountants and Business Advisors.

The long delay in implementing these tax changes was a painful but politically strategic move. Lesser national leaders could have acted more spontaneously to break election commitments to Stage 3 Tax Cuts soon after 22 May 2022. An even more foolish errand would have opposed the Stage 3 Tax Cuts from Opposition. This would have provided oxygen for a federal LNP campaign on aspirational rewards for middle income Australians.

After almost two years in government, the Albanese Government has proved that it can operate a neoliberal economy more effectively than the LNP. The MYEFO statement from December 2023 offered that capacity to review Stage 3 Tax changes with a high degree of popular support.

Having inherited a quite unequal neoliberal economy in 2022, the Albanese Government can also work to attain a more equitable society as measured by current levels of Gini coefficients for comparative developed countries as estimated by OECD data.

Action on this cost-of-living problems is popular with the electorate and restores faith in mainstream political processes. My previous article on Queensland’s state government initiatives was covered for The AIMN (13 December 2023).

Not surprisingly, this commitment to the politics of improvements to cost-of-living challenges has been incorporated into Tracey Price’s campaign to become Lord Mayor of Brisbane on 16 March 2024.

Tracey Price is reaching out to the remnants of Labor heartland base which failed to respond more decisively to Labor’s BCC Campaign in 2020 in Municipal Wards like Northgate, Doboy, Bracken Ridge and Brisbane Central. Although there were significant swings to Labor through Green preferences in 2020, there were no increases in Labor’s representation on Council.

This local campaign initiative contrasts with austerity measures from the long-surviving LNP administration in Brisbane. Budgetary problems have resulted in urgent austerity measures:

“Brisbane City Council will reduce its budget by hundreds of millions of dollars in a cost cutting exercise by Lord Mayor Adrian Schrinner to deal with inflation.

The move, which comes just months after the budget was handed down in June, will equate to a 10 per cent reduction in council spending.

Mr Schrinner said about $400 million would be cut from the budget but the decision was necessary to keep rates down.

The savings measure will include putting a pause on the Toowong to West End green bridge, delaying the delivery of $5 million in shade on Victoria Bridge, and cutting the public art component of the Brisbane Metro line.”

This emergent BCC Council Budget deficit should have been corrected in the 2023-24 budget as presented on 14 June 2024. Despite generous state government support to the BCC which amounted to 15 per cent of total income, Council proceeded with a budget deficit of $1.1 billion that needed to be trimmed back some months later:

 

From the BCC’s Budget Papers for 2023-24: Emergent Budgetary Problems

 

In contrast, Labor’s lord mayoral candidate Tracey Price has announced a raft of new transport policies, including a $1 billion investment in road infrastructure over the next year.

Labor’s Fare Reduction Initiative

In a move that Labor says could save commuters about $1,000 per year, zone one and zone two bus fares, which include all of Brisbane, would be reduced by 50 per cent over the next four years.

Opening public pools throughout the summer holidays with just a two-dollar entry fee has been a popular move. The offer will expire at the end of February. It is within the resources of the BCC to adjust rates and changes so that this offer can be extended permanently. Recreational facilities at some BCC swimming pools are outstanding and are a solace to families who were experiencing cost-of-living challenges at the end of the holidays when accounts were due at public schools for computers and other essential resources for school children.

If Labor wants to win by a landslide as in some of the iconic election results from Labor’s long period in office after the 1960 credit squeeze under Lord Mayor Clem Jones era (1961-75), consideration could be given to a restructuring of rates and charges which provide most of the cash flows for BCC’s $4.3 billion dollar budget. BCC is too soft on levying rates and charges for major high rise commercial developments. These developments distort traffic flows and add to other infrastructure expenses. Developer contributions were projected to fall by almost 30 per cent. Rates and utility charges rose by 5.4 per cent since the 2022-23 budget. Labor’s alternative costings could be part of a very credible election campaign strategy for 16 March 2024.

This year’s BCC election is a test of Labor grassroots agendas for responsible changes in the revenue base and service delivery options. The results will have great implications for future state and federal election campaigns to roll back the heavy emphasis on more elitist rhetorical agendas. Such approaches brought poor election results in Queensland at federal and local government levels across Queensland for a decade.

Denis Bright (pictured) is a financial member of the Media, Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA). Denis is committed to consensus-building in these difficult times. Your feedback from readers advances the cause of citizens’ journalism. Full names are not required when making comments. However, a valid email must be submitted if you decide to hit the Replies Button.

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Goin’ South

By James Moore

Goin’ South – etymology. (become worse): The origin is unclear. Common belief attributes it to the standard orientation of maps, where south is the downwards direction. Alternatively, it could stem from a euphemism used by some Native Americans for dying.

Instead of working to solve problems at the border, there is cascading stupidity to make the situation unimaginably worse. There are supposedly 750,000 tractor trailers bound for the Eagle Pass area, where the Texas National Guard is blocking federal agents from Shelby Park. The giant truck convoy, if it manifests, is said to be heading to Quemado, Texas, about twenty miles north of where the Border Patrol is stuck in a standoff with Governor Greg Abbott and the Texas Military Department. As doubtful as it might be that three-quarters of a million trucks will roll into the brush country, the idea that such an event will serve to solve the immigration crisis is patently absurd. If they lined up nose to trailer all along the line from Brownsville to Tijuana, they might actually create an obstruction. Presently, though, they are just another distraction. And we’ve already got a few of those.

 

 

Hypocrisy is the Republican political fuel driving the crisis. Abbott of Texas and twenty-five other GOP governors are defying an order from the U.S. Supreme Court to allow Border Patrol agents to cut and remove the concertina wire lining the border. These Trump tools holding public office are people who sang the glories of the new conservative court and the rule of law when the justices overturned Roe v. Wade and ended a woman’s right to choose. The court, though, is not relevant when it rules against what the far right conservatives desire in their effort to turn this country into an authoritarian wasteland. Opponents to the decision are trying to artfully parse what they think it does not mean with Abbott deploying his doublethink to interpret the court’s intent.

“There were no sentences,” he said on a network news channel that has never questioned his actions, “Or paragraphs or pages of an opinion written by the Supreme Court, so no one knows at all what they were thinking.”

Greg thinks he knows what the justices wanted, though, and that’s for Texas to defy a law it finds offensive. He keeps citing the state’s constitutional right to protect itself from an invasion, but his misinterpretation of the language in the U.S. founding document is as dangerous as his rhetoric. Conservatives believe that Article I, § 10, Clause 3, give states the authority to muster up forces to stop foreign attacks, which is not what is occurring on the Rio Grande. Here is the exact text: “No State shall, without the Consent of Congress, lay any Duty of Tonnage, keep Troops, or Ships of War in time of Peace, enter into any Agreement or Compact with another State, or with a foreign Power, or engage in War, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent Danger as will not admit of delay.”

A few analysts have pointed out that the language was composed at a time when travel was slow and distances were too great for military forces to move quickly so the founders gave states power of self-protection until federal resources arrived. “Admit of delay” is the key phrase. In fact, Texas appears to also violate the clause simply by keeping troops in a time of peace. The Texas Military Department includes the Texas Army National Guard and the Texas State Guard and those organizations have provided the soldiers erecting razor wire and anti-climb barriers along the border, following orders of their adjutant general and the governor while defying the U.S. Constitution, which gives border protection authority only to the federal government.

Odds are increasing of a Constitutional crisis down here. Defying federal law and ignoring orders of the country’s highest court is no minor thing. What happens when secessionists convince our radical governor that Washington has no authority to collect taxes? Or protect the environment or guarantee product safety? Federal regulations guide American business and lives and if those can be capriciously cast aside by an attention-seeking politico, what is their actual value? Don’t they become meaningless words on parchment or in pixels? President Biden has complete authority to call up the Texas National Guard and issue new orders to the troops as their Commander-in-Chief. What happens then? The political blowback will be loud with conservatives claiming such actions prove he wants an open border and Whites to be replaced by brown hordes from the south. Such a move by the President has great potential for danger that could turn into a flash point of a greater crisis.

It’s easy to see this, too, as a Gov. George Wallace of Alabama moment. Wallace, who ran his administrations with the slogan of “Segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever,” did not want Blacks enrolled at the University of Alabama. When the first two African American students arrived to register for classes in 1963, the state’s governor was standing in the schoolhouse door to stop their passage. President John F. Kennedy, when informed of the governor’s plans, federalized the Alabama National Guard, which then arrived to give Wallace the message he needed to get out of the way and let the two students enroll and begin the racial integration of the university. Abbott’s defiance is hardly different, and the same powers are at the disposal of President Biden, should he choose to use them. It is impossible to guess, though, if the outcome would be peaceful.

There is not an open border, though; there is an overwhelmed border, however. Biden does not want an open border and he has had a supplemental budget proposal to help fight the crisis. The President has been asking Congress to fund 1300 more border patrol agents, 375 administrative law judges to process claims of asylum and arguments for cause of entry, and more technology to detect fentanyl, which enters the U.S. mostly hidden in trucks crossing at legal ports of entry, not in the backpacks of desperate immigrants. The Senate has devised a bi-partisan plan that Biden describes as the “toughest and fairest set of reforms on the border we’ve ever had in our country.” They give the President the power to shut down the border when certain numbers of apprehensions are reached on a daily basis. There are guidelines also that will trigger mandatory expulsions back to Mexico and process asylum claims within six months.

The president has vowed to shut down the border the day the new law hits his desk for signature, but Trump’s party has no interest in solving a problem that can be used to effectuate political harm on the incumbent president. The House Speaker, who has not even read the measure, has called it “dead on arrival” in the house and that he would not put the law to a floor vote. Trump told his minions he does not want the bill passed, and, consequently, the votes are not likely to materialize in the lower chamber. If you fix the border, you sure as hell can’t run a campaign bitching about problems on the border, so, as I’ve insisted previously, there will be no agreement passed and we will live with this crisis until Biden is reelected and gets a Democratic House and Senate.

Meanwhile, down on the Rio Grande, tensions increase. Greg Abbott sees himself as America’s savior, violating federal law and endangering lives. Border Patrol agents will probably not begin removing razor wire but they are certainly authorized by the court to cut it and rescue immigrants entrapped or stressed by conditions on this side of the river. The frightening moment arrives when a BP agent exercises his or her authority to cut the wire and a Texas soldier steps in front of them with a gun to prevent the action. What defuses that situation? It seems a confrontation wanted by Texas leaders as they invoke images and language from the Texas Revolution and the “Come and Take It” cannon from the first land battle. They are spoiling for a fight. Not a solution.

 

 

This article was originally published in Texas to the World.

James Moore is the New York Times bestselling author of “Bush’s Brain: How Karl Rove Made George W. Bush Presidential,” three other books on Bush and former Texas Governor Rick Perry, as well as two novels, and a biography entitled, “Give Back the Light,” on a famed eye surgeon and inventor. His newest book will be released mid- 2023. Mr. Moore has been honored with an Emmy from the National Academy of Television Arts and Sciences for his documentary work and is a former TV news correspondent who has traveled extensively on every presidential campaign since 1976.

He has been a retained on-air political analyst for MSNBC and has appeared on Morning Edition on National Public Radio, NBC Nightly News, Last Word with Lawrence O’Donnell, CBS Evening News, CNN, Real Time with Bill Maher, and Hardball with Chris Matthews, among numerous other programs. Mr. Moore’s written political and media analyses have been published at CNN, Boston Globe, L.A. Times, Guardian of London, Sunday Independent of London, Salon, Financial Times of London, Huffington Post, and numerous other outlets. He also appeared as an expert on presidential politics in the highest-grossing documentary film of all time, Fahrenheit 911, (not related to the film’s producer Michael Moore).

His other honors include the Dartmouth College National Media Award for Economic Understanding, the Edward R. Murrow Award from the Radio Television News Directors’ Association, the Individual Broadcast Achievement Award from the Texas Headliners Foundation, and a Gold Medal for Script Writing from the Houston International Film Festival. He was frequently named best reporter in Texas by the AP, UPI, and the Houston Press Club. The film produced from his book “Bush’s Brain” premiered at The Cannes Film Festival prior to a successful 30-city theater run in the U.S.

Mr. Moore has reported on the major stories and historical events of our time, which have ranged from Iran-Contra to the Waco standoff, the Oklahoma City bombing, the border immigration crisis, and other headlining events. His journalism has put him in Cuba, Central America, Mexico, Australia, Canada, the UK, and most of Europe, interviewing figures as diverse as Fidel Castro and Willie Nelson. He has been writing about Texas politics, culture, and history since 1975, and continues with political opinion pieces for CNN and regularly at his Substack newsletter: “Texas to the World.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Reaction to ICJ court statement on South Africa’s case against Israel

Oxfam Australia Media Release

In reaction to today’s statement by the International Court of Justice order to South Africa’s court case, which requests Israel to take all measures within its power to prevent and punish the commission of all acts in relation to the articles of the Genocide Convention, Sally Abi-Khalil, Oxfam Regional Director for the Middle East said:

“Oxfam welcomes the ICJ’s order and provisional measures as a crucial step towards recognising the ongoing atrocities in Gaza and stopping the bloodshed and unimaginable horrors that 2.3 million Palestinians have already endured.

“After more than 100 days of indiscriminate bombing in which it has killed more than 25,000 people, sparked a horrific mass displacement of civilians, weaponized starvation and systemically denied them adequate aid, the Israeli government must immediately abide by the court ruling.

“All States – particularly those supporting Israel with military weapons in spite of the clear risk of them being used to commit war crimes – must equally respect the court’s ruling and refrain from any actions that undermine it.

“Palestinians should not have to endure another day of this suffering. We urge all countries to do all in their power to ensure an immediate ceasefire, ensuring those responsible for violations on both sides are held accountable, and to end Israel’s decades-long occupation of Palestinian territory.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

Sorry, No Vacancy

By John Haly

“There is enough work in Australia for nobody to be on unemployment benefits except for those medically incapable.” (Quote from Twitter!)

This is a familiar theme on social media. Such claims are often made, predictably, by a privileged white male with a job; and no understanding of the misery of the unemployed because he has some anecdotal “proof” based on his personal experience of how his “mates” have kept him in work.

Outside of that cocoon, as my recent piece demonstrated, there are far more unemployed people than the ABS has ever stated. However, the notion that bounteous employment is available, prevails.

According to Roy Morgan’s research, full-time and part-time employment are increasing, but so are underemployment and unemployment rates beyond 2021. There are numerous reasons from my last exposition on this using October 2023 statistics to believe that one and a half million people are validly unemployed.

This is significantly more likely than the around half a million claim that has dominated the ABS estimate over the last year. I’ve already addressed that, so let’s move on to the subject of work opportunities in Australia.

 

Surveys vs Advertisements

 

Understandably, having a low unemployment rate serves corporate and government interests. There is strong motivation to find a high number of vacant positions to support the narrative that the unemployed are simply unmotivated, preferring to live off grandiose welfare cheques. The idea of below-poverty aid being sufficient to propel individuals into occupations clamouring to be filled by desperate employers is ridiculous. Unfortunately, so many people think this is true.

Despite the ideological incentives, data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) and estimates from the Department of Employment show that job opportunities have decreased in recent months. Businesses report a 35% higher number of job positions than the number of classic job advertisements as identified by the Department of Employment, (See Figure 1). Despite the drive for a narrative that implies there is enough employment. However, all the government can come up with is a little over 402K job positions. Only two-thirds of these are classically advertised. This is still less than the half million ABS estimates are unemployed. In October 2023, Nine News featured headlines like “The Aussie industries desperate to hire more workers”. If this is the case, why are there so few adverts in comparison to claimed vacancies? Figures 1 & 2 both show that over a decade ago, surveyed jobs were less than advertised positions.

 

RM Under and Unemployment & Job Vacancies (ABS & Dept Emp’)

 

There are reasons for this, to be fair, which are because of developing technologies. Seek, CareerOne, Australian JobSearch, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Twitter/X have emerged as key outlets for job seekers and employers in the digital era. The final three are not tracked by the IVI statistics. However, because of the abundance of inflated and outdated profiles, LinkedIn’s popularity has declined dramatically over the years as has Twitter/X. Hey, I glam my LinkedIn up as well, but I haven’t heard from a recruiter in years.

 

Advertised job classifications

 

The claim by businesses that surveyed vacancies are 35% above advertised positions appears dubious. If 35% of the total 402K positions indicated in the poll are not easily accessible for public scrutiny, we must wonder what kind of job market is being concealed from the public? It will almost definitely not be general labourers (5.8%), drivers (5.3%), salespeople (7.3%), or community workers (10.7%). (see Figure 3). The service industries, which have been complaining about being “desperate for workers,” will promote heavily. There are 76K jobs in that small group, which is distributed across Australia’s vast brown country, with 18 cities, over 100K inhabitants, and 1700 towns with populations ranging from that to a thousand people. The math suggests that if there are more than 40 job vacancies in a given location, you are most likely in a metropolis. If you are in a rural area with fewer than a thousand people, the chances of finding one job in all of those categories are slim. I haven’t even mentioned whether you have the skills to perform these non-professional occupations.

 

Surveyed position breakdown

 

Professionals, managers, technicians, and clerical and administrative staff vacancies (which make up the great majority of posted jobs) that require expensive higher education are the most likely categories to find unadvertised job vacancies. If you disagree, take a look at Figure 4 for a breakdown of the ABS survey of positions by industry.

The meeting of jobs and unemployed

 

Close but no cigar lit

 

Just consider the media excitement that occurred when for once, the surveyed job vacancies (not the advertised vacancies) and the ABS “measure” of unemployment nearly equalled. The Australian Financial Review reported a decline in job vacancies in June 2022, with the ABS unemployment rate falling to a new 48-year low of 3.4% in July. “For the first time on record in Australia’s history, there are more job openings than unemployed people to fill the vacant positions”. Technically, the ABS’s May 2022 quarterly survey recorded 476,900. The AFR rounded this up to 480K, but it had fallen to 460,400 by August. However, unemployed people (seasonally adjusted) were 488,800 in July, which is technically higher than 480K vacancies. Fairly close if you don’t consider that surveyed jobs were falling and had been doing so for two months before the ABS came up with the 480K. This had fallen to 460K job vacancies by the following month (see Figure 5). I can tell you that in July 2022, the ABS listed 90,600 gig employees as having no hours of labour and no compensation.

The ABS considers these people to be “employed” despite no pay or work because they have “job attachments”. I can also tell you that Jobseeker had a hard count of 892,066 people for whom they paid unemployment benefits. But, “for the first time on record in Australia’s history…”, the ABS and Job Surveys numbers came somewhat close to one another, loosely speaking. The hullabaloo from the MSM press was extraordinary. I so want to say FFS, but that would be unprofessional.

NON-Numeric employment obstruction

Roy Morgan’s annual workforce numbers have been steadily increasing over the last 16 years. These figures show an average of 222,000 new individuals added per year. Because Australia’s population is concentrated along a 35,821-kilometer-long coastline, job searchers are unlikely to live in areas where there are suitable vacant positions. When evaluating assertions of labour scarcity,” it is essential to take a more comprehensive approach, taking into account the substantial rise in the number of individuals actively looking for employment, limited economic diversification, and the decline of Australia’s secondary trophic economic level (Manufacturing).

Factors exacerbating the scarcity of employment opportunities in Australia include:

The media and the government have been hesitant to engage in a more detailed and nuanced debate on this topic. The media has issued propagandistic critiques asking that the unemployed “just get a job” or that “people lack the desire to work.” The unemployed are portrayed as intellectually and mentally inferior. Employers who exploit their employees and express irritation with the scarcity of susceptible individuals to fill low-wage temporary positions demonstrate a similar level of contempt.

 

Skills required for future employment

 

Skill levels continue to be important in meeting future employment needs, but Australia’s policy decision to impose huge educational debts on young people in return for a degree may be viewed as a disheartening display of policy short-sightedness. A more pragmatic solution, akin to Gough Whitlam’s educational policies, could be to develop higher education programmes tailored to expected future demands. (See Figure 6)

Long-term limits on actual employment development in Australia, as well as the persistent dissemination of misleading information claiming low unemployment figures, are all obstructions. Employers report difficulties in hiring candidates for roles that lack appeal at all skill levels. Unemployment, job markets, economic complexity, interest rate policies, corporate-driven inflation, income disparities, austerity measures without social support, and educational demands must all be addressed in Australia’s economic future. Governments, the media, and economists must address these difficulties head-on rather than hide behind the propaganda of flawed metrics.

This article was originally published on AUSTRALIA AWAKEN – IGNITE YOUR TORCHES and Independent Australia.

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

27 million ‘milestone’ no cause for celebration

Sustainable Population Australia Media Release

Australia’s passing the 27 million population milestone is a matter of deep concern and not a cause for celebration, according to Sustainable Population Australia (SPA).

According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics’ population clock, the milestone was passed at 3.45pm on Wednesday 24 January. It was helped along by a record 624,100 population increase in the past year.

SPA national president Ms Jenny Goldie says the annual national growth was even more than the current population of Tasmania (572,800).

“Imagine having to add the infrastructure of Tasmania – housing, roads, hospitals, schools, energy supplies, farms – to the country every year,” says Ms Goldie. “It all costs: economically, socially and environmentally.

“Australia does not need a big population to be successful economically. Indeed, many Western European countries including Ireland, Norway, Denmark, Netherlands, Iceland, Austria and Sweden all have smaller populations than Australia but higher GDP per capita, or wealth per person.

“The critical issue, however, is not wealth but the health of the environment. The latest State of the Environment – Australia report in 2021 was quite specific about population growth being damaging to biodiversity, largely because of loss of habitat.

“When the human population grows, other species lose habitat to urban development or farms to feed the ever-growing number of people.

“So long as we continue to grow our population, our environment will remain in a permanent state of decline.

“But many people lose out as well. Housing supply has not kept up with demand, resulting in record housing unaffordability. Homelessness is on the rise with many reduced to sleeping in tents or their cars.

“Recent projections for immigration will ensure these challenges become more intractable, whatever effort is made to mitigate them.”

SPA believes Australia’s population must stop growing before it reaches 30 million.

“That’s only three million people away. If we maintain the same annual growth in numbers, we will reach that in under five years,” says Ms Goldie.

“Population growth, largely driven by immigration, is neither necessary nor desirable and is not supported by the majority of Australians.

“Indeed, Australians are fed up and are saying NO to a Big Australia.”

 

Like what we do at The AIMN?

You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.

Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button