Feed aggregator

Paul Llewellyn, former South West Greens MP and Adele at the Albany Wind Farm on 18 February 2010

Adele Carles says “the time has come for a wind farm off Rous Head at the Port of Fremantle. With 6 turbines sitting on sea walls, we could produce enough power to supply 4,500 houses in Fremantle and reduce our greenhouse gases by 43,500 tonnes a year. We would also replace 50,000 tonnes of electricity currently being generated by coal and gas and accordingly produce significant environmental benefits. In the decades to follow, our children will thank us for investing in renewable energy today. There are similar urban wind farms at the Port of Amsterdam and the Port of Liverpool.”

Fremantle Wind Farm – Letter to Energy Minister

by leave-I wish to speak briefly on the government response to the report of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties, which Senator Faulkner has just tabled. The report was tabled a short time after I began my term here. It was just being wound up when I was appointed to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties. This committee does enormously valuable work. It is a very valuable addition to the committees that we have here. The report was on the proposed Russian uranium deal which was on the verge of being signed at the time of the change of government. It was just as well that that deal was put on hold, because the JSCOT report worked very hard in scrutinising the expert evidence that was presented to the committee.

The committee has been resoundingly insulted by the government in the response that the minister has just tabled. John Carlson, the Director General of the Australian Safeguards and Non-Proliferation Office was quite conspicuous in his spruiking of safeguards as the answer to every concern raised by the committee, while failing to tell the committee that there had been no inspections of Russian nuclear facilities by the International Atomic Energy Agency since 2001. So how does the world know, as ASNO and the government so firmly believe with such enormous faith, that all is well in the Russian nuclear programs?

The government has issued a glib and dismissive response to the JSCOT report. To say that Russia is desperate for nuclear fuel and will therefore behave is not an argument that carries much weight or allays many of the concerns of the committee or, indeed, of the international community. That the government says that Australia has no scope to implement the suggestion that the IAEA actually do some inspections begs the questions: what exactly is our delegation doing in Vienna; how can we share the extraordinary confidence expressed at every turn by the government in the IAEA inspections when we cannot call upon them to actually do anything; and what opportunities are provided by being a member state of the IAEA if we have no voice in these fora?

There is no opportunity or leverage whatsoever to make suggestions or interventions regarding the appropriateness of safeguards activities in the countries to which we are considering selling uranium. Instead, we get these dismissive government responses saying, ‘Everything's fine.' The fact is that the people who wrote that government response do not know that everything is fine; rather, they are taking the word of people who do not know themselves. To say that no other countries are arguing for the general application of IAEA safeguards inspections in nuclear weapons states is to ignore the concerns that have been expressed quite regularly at Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty meetings and other fora by non-nuclear weapons states about the highly discriminatory nature of this treaty and the asymmetrical obligations and degrees of inspection that they are subject to in contrast to the cone of silence under which the nuclear weapons states-and none more so than Russia-conduct their business.
It is just blatantly false to say that Russia is complying with its disarmament obligations under the NPT. Russia is doing no such thing. Russia has an arsenal of more than 14,000 nuclear weapons with an explosive yield equivalent to 200,000 Hiroshima sized weapons. The reduction in the number of weapons held by Russia is no comfort since, in Vladimir Putin's words, Russia plans to make its arsenal ‘more compact but more effective'.

So reading about the Australian government's belief that Russia is upholding its obligations under article 6 of the NPT would be funny if it were not so serious. The joint standing committee noted that there is no imperative for early ratification of the Howard-Putin agreement and advises reconsideration of the agreement after the 2010 NPT review conference. That is coming up in a matter of five weeks or so. A legal opinion from Professor Donald Rothwell, Professor of International Law at the Australian National University College of Law, states that Australia has an international obligation to pursue work in good faith towards the objective of nuclear disarmament consistent with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Professor Rothwell states quite correctly that this obligation is heightened in the case of Australia's interaction with a nuclear state that is a party to the NPT such as Russia and in relationships where parties are mutually engaged in matters related to nuclear disarmament, including nuclear energy and proliferation.
Some quite reasonable and sensible suggestions were made during the course of the inquiry, including: to renegotiate the key terms of the treaty if it is to proceed and not just rubber-stamp and wave it through; to allow for higher monitoring, verification and safeguard standards than are currently envisaged under either the proposed treaty or the International Atomic Energy Agency additional protocol-measures that were introduced in 1997 to strengthen the inspection authority of the IAEA; and to insert conditionality clauses into the treaty on the rule of law, democracy and human rights and a termination clause on nuclear disarmament, allowing Australia to terminate the treaty, inter alia, in the event that Russia does not make progress towards its disarmament obligations, which it clearly has failed to do thus far.

This is a flawed treaty and it will weaken Australia's policy and practice on nuclear safeguards. It will compromise our efforts to rid the world of nuclear weapons and will make Australia complicit in serious failures of the Russian state, where the rule of law, democratic values and human rights are, quite simply, not being observed.

This government response is being taken by the Australian Greens as a dismissal of the findings of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties and essentially paving the way to do what the mining industry has been demanding since Prime Minister Howard was in government-that we open the floodgates to sales of uranium to Russia. It is quite transparently preparing the ground for exactly that kind of move. While they might be popping champagne at the Minerals Council of Australia and in the offices of BHP and Rio Tinto tonight, we strongly believe that this is a move that the Australian public, the Australian government and probably the people of Russia will regret. This is an absolutely retrograde move.

JSCOT very, very rarely tables a report on a treaty proposed by the Australian government with such strong language. It is extremely rare for the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties to recommend that treaty action not proceed. I do not know of many times that that has occurred in the history of the committee. For the government to wait around for 12 or 18 months and then issue this trite, dismissive and factually incorrect statement in response is nothing more than what we might have read in a press release from BHP or Rio Tinto. JSCOT deserves more respect than that for the hard work that has been done on a cross-party basis. The people under the footprint of the mining industry where this material is excavated deserve better than that. Quite frankly, this is a move that the Australian people and the Australian government will regret.

“The release of contamination by the dredger is an ongoing problem as these latest results demonstrate – lead and arsenic feature consistently in the results. The cumulative effect of these toxins is not being examined. The big concern now is the concentrations of tributyltin (TBT) which is being detected around Rous Head and the Inner Harbor at levels exceeding management triggers.

TBT is a compound that is applied to ships hulls to prevent fouling by marine organisms such as barnacles. TBT is extremely toxic to marine and river biota and has been responsible for major environmental impact in rivers and estuaries overseas. TBT is a highly potent endocrine disruptor which can induce imposex characteristics in shellfish, such as mussels, at extremely low concentrations.

The aerial photos are showing extensive impacts now along Cottesloe Beach and yet testing results will not be available for weeks. These high concentrations of TBTs may well be causing negative impacts at Port, Leighton and Cottesloe beaches. These latest results should be finally setting off alarm bells in the EPA and the DEC. The Environment Minister should step in to halt the dredger so that urgent testing of our beaches can take place.”

On the eve of the most important international disarmament negotiations in a generation, the Rudd Government has foreshadowed uranium sales to Russia, which holds the world's largest stockpile of nuclear weapons.

Late in 2008 the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties (JSCOT) made a strong recommendation against a Howard-era Russia uranium deal proceeding, unless a number of important conditions were met.

"Instead of a reasoned rebuttal of the JSCOT report, the Government's response reads like a poorly worded press release from the uranium mining industry," said Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, spokesperson on nuclear issues.

"This feeble attempt to dismiss the entirely legitimate concerns of JSCOT is nothing more than Prime Minister Kevin Rudd clearing the decks on behalf of the uranium miners.

"The Rudd Government wants to open the uranium floodgates to Russia, which is currently proliferating nuclear technology into Iran and Burma, where journalists and anti-nuclear activists are intimidated and murdered, and where a nuclear weapons modernisation process is forging ahead.

"This is a new and shameful low for Prime Minister Rudd," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

That the Senate notes:

(a) the ‘unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon States to accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to nuclear disarmament to which all States parties are committed under Article VI', agreed by consensus at the 2000 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) Review Conference;

(b) the statement made by Australia on 30 April 2008 at the NPT Preparatory Committee meeting that, ‘at an appropriate time, the international community will likely need to consider complementary legal frameworks, including a possible nuclear weapons convention, for the eventual abolition of nuclear weapons';

(c) the statement made by the then Australian Labor Party foreign affairs spokesperson, Mr Robert McClelland, on 17 September 2007, that the proposal to establish a Nuclear Weapons Convention is ‘timely and responsible' and that ‘[u]ltimately the question to be asked is not why there should be a nuclear weapons convention but why the international community has not yet agreed to start negotiating one';

(d) the recommendation contained in report 106 of the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties that, ‘the Australian Government make clear in international fora its support for the adoptions of a Nuclear Weapons Convention' and ‘allocate research and consultation resources to the development of a Nuclear Weapons Convention with a clear legal framework and enforceable verification';

(e) the Australian Government sponsored International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament report statement that, ‘An important project for the medium term will be to develop, refine and build international understanding and acceptance of the need for a Nuclear Weapons Convention-a comprehensive international legal regime to accompany the final move to elimination';

(f) the first proposal in the United Nations Secretary-General's five-point proposal on nuclear disarmament urges, ‘all NPT parties, in particular the nuclear weapon-states, to fulfil their obligation under the treaty to undertake negotiations on effective measures leading to nuclear disarmament. They could pursue this goal by agreement on a framework of separate, mutually reinforcing instruments. Or they could consider negotiating a nuclear-weapons convention, backed by a strong system of verification, as has long been proposed at the United Nations'; and

(g) the 10 March 2010 resolution of the European Parliament on Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons which noted:

‘a. a distinct lack of progress in achieving concrete objectives in pursuit of the goals of the NPT Treaty ... coupled with greater demand for, and availability of, nuclear technology and the potential for such technology and radioactive material to fall into the hands of criminal organisations and terrorists,

b. that nuclear weapons states that are signatories to the NPT are delaying action to reduce or eliminate their nuclear arsenals and decrease their adherence to a military doctrine of nuclear deterrence,

c. called on Member States to make a coordinated, positive and visible contribution to the 2010 NPT Review Conference discussions, in particular by proposing an ambitious timetable for a nuclear-free world and concrete initiatives for revitalising the UN Conference on Disarmament and by promoting disarmament initiatives based on the "Statement of Principles and Objectives" agreed at the end of the 1995 NPT Review Conference and on the "13 Practical Steps" unanimously agreed at the 2000 Review Conference'.
Question put.

Negatived

The government and the opposition today voted against a Senate motion that simply noted a number of public statements.

"If the government can't even note statements made by its own Ambassadors, the Attorney General, the UN Secretary General, Gareth Evans and an article of a treaty Australia signed in 1973 we are in real trouble," said Senator Scott Ludlam, Australian Greens spokesperson on nuclear issues.

"Far from the leadership the government has promised on nuclear weapons issues, by voting against this the government undermines the global consensus, winding back the progress made when the nuclear weapon states gave an ‘unequivocal undertaking for the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals' at an historic consensus reached in 2000.

"Weakening the global consensus on nuclear weapons, and undermining the historic document agreed in 2000 was the Bush Administration's agenda.

"By indicating just how much it fails to grasp the details of the issue, the government has also failed to support President Obama's ambitious nuclear disarmament agenda which he set out in his April 2009 Prague statement.

"It remains to be seen whether the government is capable of heeding the advice provided to it by Gareth Evans to seize this moment," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

The Australian Greens have moved a proposal that would save the Government unnecessary expense and prevent telemarketers from being able to call people who are about to be inadvertently deleted from the "do not call" register.

"Around one million telephone numbers are due to come off the do not call register in May, as entries lapse every three years," said Greens Communications spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam.

"The Government is about to embark on a costly process of advertising to get Australians to put themselves back on the register when they lapse.

"There is no reason why people should have to register their number every three years. I think it is unlikely they have changed their views on intrusive telemarketing during the three year period, and in any case a person can remove their number from the Register at any time.

"We have drafted a sensible amendment to simply preserve peoples' status on the do not call register. We encourage the Government to urgently adopt it - either as an amendment to the Telstra legislation, or in the 'non-controversial' debating time tomorrow," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

The Federal Government has taken a lead internationally by agreeing to "investigate possible options for the establishment of a United Nations commission of inquiry" into war crimes and crimes against humanity in Burma.

"The Australian Greens have been calling on the Government to take this step for more than a year, and this is extremely welcome news," Greens Senator Scott Ludlam said today.

"This is the first step towards the UN conducting a full investigation into the facts and evidence relevant to the crimes of this vicious military regime and its corrupt judiciary - the lethal force against civilians, the torture, detention, forced labour, persecution and rape. Australia has been holding back from supporting this initiative, but its change of position overnight is absolutely to be welcomed."

"The Greens will now be following up the precise actions taken by the Australian Government in pursuit of these objectives," Senator Ludlam said.

A senate motion welcoming the Government's initiative passed with unanimous support this afternoon.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

UN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION: "The progress report of the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar, Tomas Ojea Quintana (A/HRC/13/48) notes that a pattern of gross and systematic violation of human rights has been in place for many years. Given the extent and persistence of the problem, and the lack of accountability, there is an indication that those human rights violations are the result of a State policy, originating from decisions by authorities in the executive, military and judiciary at all levels. The Government needs to take prompt and effective measures to investigate these facts." http://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=9909&LangID=E 

The Government has missed the deadline for a Senate order for the production of the $25 million KPMG / McKinsey National Broadband Network Implementation Study.

The suppression of the only independent analysis of the much-hyped $43 billion project will further erode confidence in the Government's plans for sweeping telecommunications reform.

"This is an offensive snub not just to the Senate's accountability role, but to anyone with an interest in whether the NBN can deliver education, health and communications services for all Australians, and the business case behind this massive infrastructure project," said Australian Greens telecommunications spokesperson Senator Scott Ludlam.

"With the numbers in the Senate so finely balanced and a hostile opposition, the Minister seems determined to burn what little goodwill remains on the crossbenches. The support of the Australian Greens is essential for the Governments telecommunications agenda to progress. That support can no longer be taken for granted.

"In essence, this is the Minister saying 'trust me' with a cheque for $43 billion dollars, and then expecting the Senate to wave through complex and far-reaching legislation without proper scrutiny. That isn't going to happen."

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

The Australian Greens have warned the Rudd Government that the signing of a Compact with the Community Sector risks being seen as an empty gesture.

"Signing this important statement of principle as they make fundamental changes to Australia's social security system is not a good look for the Rudd Government," said Greens Senator Rachel Siewert today.

"With legislation introducing national income management measures being debated in the Senate shortly, the first question on everyone's lips will be - is the promise to consult with the community services sector going to be just as superficial and meaningless as the promises to consult with Aboriginal communities?

"These laws, which are likely to be passed in the Senate this week, potentially apply to disadvantaged communities across Australia - but there has been no consultation whatsoever with the community sector on their effectiveness or design.

"Widespread and consistent condemnation of the government's indiscriminate approach to mandatory income quarantining by social service providers and community organisations in evidence to the recent Senate Inquiry was completely ignored.

"How these two contradictory processes can be happening at the same time in parallel beggars belief," Senator Siewert said.

"While the proposed Compact commits the Government to adhere to some important general principles of consultation and engagement, it is light on detail and process, and doesn't firmly lock the government into behaving any better in the future.

"It would be nice to think the signing of the compact today might mean such major sweeping changes could not be introduced without consultation or evidence - but frankly, I won't be holding my breath," concluded Senator Siewert.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

“The controversial ING development planned for Victoria Quay is back in the news with the announcement that building works are set to commence next January. The developers received WAPC approval in December 2008. I presented a petition in Parliament on 16th March on behalf of the Fremantle Society containing 590 signatures, calling for an immigration museum and the retention of the O’Connor Centre which was gifted to port workers during WWII by then Prime Minister John Curtin. I am talking to Government Ministers about the possibility of a performing arts theatre being included in the development, as it seems extraordinary that we don’t have one in Fremantle given the support for the arts here. I hope that the developers seize this last opportunity to include something more for the community, so that this development will be one that we can all enjoy.”

My questions to the Minister for Planning can be read here in Hansard (bottom of page)

The petition can be read here in Hansard

The Federal Government and Coalition have united to ensure that homebirth in Australia will be further marginalised by rejecting amendments to provide midwives with access to indemnity insurance irrespective of the location or venue of the births that they attend, the Australian Greens say.

In addition the government chose to reject Greens amendments that would have taken away the power of doctors to veto aspects of midwifery practice, such as homebirth, that they are philosophically opposed to, despite the near universal evidence that safe low risk homebirth has positive outcomes for mother and child.

"We have consistently said that the Government amendments to their Midwives legislation give doctors too much control over midwives practice," said Greens health spokesperson Senator Rachel Siewert.

"It is extremely disappointing to see the major parties side together against the interests of midwives in refusing a Greens suggestion to broaden the scope of collaborative arrangements between midwives and medical practitioners to include health services, thereby ensuring that doctors can't veto homebirths.

"They have also voted down a call by the Greens for a 12 month review of the changes to ensure they are effective and don't merely restrict midwifery and women's choices as many fear.

"The Greens will not rest until the voice of midwives and women across the country are heard by this Government in such an important area of healthcare reform," Senator Siewert said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

The Federal Government and Coalition have united to ensure that homebirth in Australia will be further marginalised by rejecting amendments to provide midwives with access to indemnity insurance irrespective of the location or venue of the births that they attend, the Australian Greens say.

In addition the government chose to reject Greens amendments that would have taken away the power of doctors to veto aspects of midwifery practice, such as homebirth, that they are philosophically opposed to, despite the near universal evidence that safe low risk homebirth has positive outcomes for mother and child.

"We have consistently said that the Government amendments to their Midwives legislation give doctors too much control over midwives practice," said Greens health spokesperson Senator Rachel Siewert.

"It is extremely disappointing to see the major parties side together against the interests of midwives in refusing a Greens suggestion to broaden the scope of collaborative arrangements between midwives and medical practitioners to include health services, thereby ensuring that doctors can't veto homebirths.

"They have also voted down a call by the Greens for a 12 month review of the changes to ensure they are effective and don't merely restrict midwifery and women's choices as many fear.

"The Greens will not rest until the voice of midwives and women across the country are heard by this Government in such an important area of healthcare reform," Senator Siewert said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

The Federal Government has admitted it has possession of a secret anthropological report which provides the foundation and sole basis for the nomination of Muckaty Station, near Tennant Creek, as the most likely site for a radioactive waste dump.

Last week Resources Minister Ferguson insisted that neither he nor his office ‘are or had ever been in possession of an anthropological report commissioned by the Northern Land Council' and supplied to then Minister Julie Bishop in 2007.

"Today we saw Minister Kim Carr backflip and admit that Martin Ferguson has the report, but that it won't be put in the public domain," said Greens Senator Scott Ludlam.

"This government cannot on the one hand claim the previous process was corrupt and a sham, and on the other continue to withhold the very piece of evidence that the Muckaty nomination rests on. The report should be tabled immediately.

"The Muckaty nomination should be scrapped and a new transparent process set in motion," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

Note: After questioning in the Senate today, Senator Kim Carr tabled a one and a bit page précis of the secret Anthropological Report - see attached. 

AttachmentDateSize AnthroReportPrecisHeader.pdf15/03/10 7:27 pm252.75 KB AnthroReportPrecis1.pdf15/03/10 7:27 pm288.04 KB AnthroReportPrecis2.pdf15/03/10 7:27 pm95.75 KB

The Australian Greens have introduced a range of amendments to strengthen accountability in the Telstra legislation and improve protection for users of telecommunications services.

"We have an opportunity to bring down costs for end-users, ensure more equitable access and faster services," said Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, spokesperson on Broadband, Communications & the Digital Economy.

"The Greens have been constructively working to improve the bill and provide greater protection for consumers. We are still deadlocked on the issue of the eventual privatisation of the National Broadband Network, and are insisting the Government show flexibility and common sense.

"The Greens will move further amendments to provide greater consultation on payphone removal, disability access to payphones, and better protection for smaller players in telecommunications markets. We believe we have Government support for the majority of our amendments: the key stumbling block will be the privatisation clauses," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

Date:  Mon, 2010-03-15 (All day) Type:  Media

The Greens (WA) today backed Australian Greens leader Bob Brown’s call for an independent National Inquiry into Australia’s population capacity to 2050.

 Greens MLC Robin Chapple said that although current boom conditions in Western Australia had created an understandable push for more skilled migration, the State will have to look at the realities of resource depletion and long-term environmental trends when considering the impact of

The Federal Government is trying to silence the Tennant Creek community with its decision not to bring a radioactive waste dump inquiry to Central Australia, the Australian Greens say.

"This is extremely disappointing given that Muckaty Station is the only proposed site for the nations' first ever waste dump," said Senator Scott Ludlam, Greens spokesperson on nuclear issues.

"Locals will be forced to make the long, expensive trek to Darwin or Canberra to be heard, which is completely unacceptable.

"The Greens will continue to oppose the shonky process leading to the nomination of Muckaty that Labor condemned when it was in opposition.

"We urge all Territorians to take part in the inquiry and send a strong message for this Government to install a proper scientific, transparent and accountable process, as it promised at the last election," Senator Ludlam said.

Media Contact: Fernando de Freitas 0417 174 302

National Radioactive Waste Management Bill 2010 Inquiry hearing in Canberra 30 March, and Darwin 12 April. Submissions received by 15 March 2010, and Committee report due 30 April 2010. http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/legcon_ctte/radioactivewaste/index.htm

The Greens today outlined the approach they will take to the Prime Minister's health and hospital's reform plan.

Senator Rachel Siewert said that improvements to Denticare, more and better hospital services, mental health, aged care services and protection of regional hospitals would all be key tests of Greens support for the Government's package of health reforms."The Australian Greens have written today to the Prime Minister seeking early negotiations on a range of issues including:

• The implementation of a universal dental care scheme as part of Medicare
• Guarantees on the protection of rural and regional hospitals
• Ensuring an actual increase in health services as a result of reforms.

"Dental health is essential to good physical health and emotional well-being," said Senator Siewert. 
 


"There are more than 500,000 people on dental waiting lists in Australia.

"We are also seeking to ensure that regional hospitals are protected."

The Greens will announce a full detailed health reform plan in the coming weeks.

 

Article in The West Australian