Donations backflip – what the flies heard

From the blog of Lee Rhiannon, Greens MLC...

For a moment I would have loved to been one of the flies that hang around the NSW Labor government.

It is a weird thought but imagine being the proverbial on the wall when Premier Nathan Rees and his team were discussing their plan to ban developer donations.

This is a major back flip from a party that has ridiculed the Greens over the years for our work in advocating the same thing. So what was their motivation?

Labor would obviously be looking for a way to kill off all the bad news stories linking MPs with dodgy developers. And they would know, even more than the Green Democracy4sale team, that there are new scandals waiting to break.

I think they would have also weighed up how much money is involved. Developer money is moving over to the Coalition. Since 2007 NSW Labor has received $3.1 million compared to the Coalition's $2.2 million. The gap has closed from 50 to 30 per cent difference and there is every indication that the Coalition is set to win this race as the property industry move back to their traditional electoral allies.

And I reckon the flies hanging around the Premier would have some other tales to tell. When Labor came up with their grand plan to wipe the scandal sheet clean and out manoeuvre the opposition they would have been keen for some pay back.

Looking back over Labor's antics in recent weeks and the attacks they have launched against the Greens' fund raising activities it looks like a concerted plan to discredit the Democracy4sale project. This major research initiative of the Greens has played a central role in breaking many of the donation stories that have caused the government so much grief.

Senior government leaders have used dorothy dix questions, read more here

Hmmm

Newcastle Show Day will be Friday 26 March 2010.

Buman and Liberal in "Grinch Clinch" against Newcastle Show Holiday

Newcastle Greens

MEDIA RELEASE
18 November 2009

Newcastle Greens councillor Michael Osborne today called on conservative Newcastle councillors who again tried to axe the Newcastle Show holiday to show a bit more Christmas cheer to local workers in future years.

Conservative councillors, led by Aaron Buman (Independent) and Brad Luke (Liberal), last night tried to cut Newcastle's Show holiday back to half a day, after attempting last year to cut it entirely.

"For the past two years now, these anti-worker councillors have tried to make council "the Grinch who stole the show holiday", just before workers are preparing for Christmas," Cr Osborne said.

"If they don't stop doing this, this "Grinch clinch" against the Show holiday will become an annual set piece from Cr Buman, his Liberal brother-in-arms (Cr Luke), and others who support this campaign by the Hunter Business Chamber," Cr Osborne said.

"During last night's debate, Cr Buman admitted he wasn't even aware that Australian workers had amongst the fewest public holidays of any country in the world.

"Information put to councillors last night indicated that the Howard government's WorkChoices system had created confusion among local businesses about the status of the Show holiday, and Cr Buman voted with Liberal councillor Brad Luke, to cut the holiday on these grounds.

"For Cr Buman and Cr Luke to exploit the confusion created by the Liberal's WorkChoices system is particularly distasteful," Cr Osborne said.

"Fortunately, enough councillors saw through this to vote to preserve the holiday.

The decision coincided with yesterday's release of research by the Australia Institute (in their Something for nothing report) showing that Australian workers work some of the longest hours in the Western world, and really should have more time with family, friends and community," Cr Osborne said.

"No thanks to Cr Buman and Cr Luke, at least local workers can go to Christmas knowing that Newcastle Council won't be further cutting back this valuable off-work time by axing next year's Newcastle Show holiday.

Why the CPRS will do nothing

Climate Change on the agenda at Newcastle City Council

Here's the Notice of Motion I submitted today.

NOTICE OF MOTION: CLIMATE CHANGE

COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

PART A: CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS IN COPENHAGEN

A. Newcastle City Council call on the Federal government to base its position at the global Climate Change conference in Copenhagen on the generally accepted consensus of scientific opinion in relation to carbon emission reduction targets necessary to avoid dangerous climate change (that is, in the range of 25% to 40% reduction on 2000 levels by 2020). Council write to each of our Federal MPs asking them to take our message to the Federal government and to the Australian negotiating team for the Copenhagen talks.

PART B: CARBON POLLUTION REDUCTION SCHEME LEGISLATION

B. Newcastle City Council write to the Prime Minister, the Minister for Climate Change, the Leader of the Liberal Party, the Leader of the National Party, the Leader of the Australian Greens, Senator Steve Fielding and Senator Nick Xenophon, and express Council’s concern about the CPRS not recognising the efforts of residents, businesses outside the CPRS, and councils to reduce emissions; and call on all parties to amend the CPRS legislation to ensure that voluntary actions result in the abatement of greenhouse gases additional to mandatory emissions reduction targets and that CPRS Permits are retired for every tonne of abatement from voluntary action.

BACKGROUND

Climate change is already having a significant impact on local government around the world, and is now a major consideration in all of Newcastle council's relevant planning documents. Whilst it has significant local impacts and causes, the challenge of climate change is a global one.

Over the years, Newcastle Council has developed a reputation as a forward thinking council in responding to climate change, by developing innovative programs, and by adopting positions that have significantly contributed to the national debate on climate change.

Many scientists and citizens around the world believe that the Copenhagen conference (7 December 2009 to 18 December 2009) represents a last chance for the world community to avoid dangerous climate change (that is, to avoid a 2 degree centigrade increase on pre-industrial global temperatures, which is the generally accepted threshold of catastrophic climate change). The Federal Government's own Garnaut Report identifies that this will require a reduction in global greenhouse gas emissions of between 25% and 40% on 2000 levels by 2020. The Federal Government's current targets - 5% (unconditional) and 15% (conditional on a global agreement) - are well below the minimum science-based levels identified in the Garnaut report.

The clear scientific evidence is that, in order to deliver a safe climate, we must bring greenhouse pollution in the atmosphere back down to 350 ppm or lower.

A call from Newcastle Council to the Federal Government in the run-up to the Copenhagen conference would help remind the Federal Government that councils and local communities are key players in climate change, and would reinforce similar messages being sent to the Federal Government by many groups and citizens in the grassroots Newcastle community who are urging our Government to adopt a science-based approach that gives our city and the world a realistic chance of avoiding the worst impacts of climate change.

While many in the community see the Federal government’s proposed Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) as not likely to reduce the carbon pollution by enough to avoid the severe impacts of climate change, the current legislation before the federal parliament has a perverse flaw in its design that means that voluntary emission reductions by residents or by Newcastle City Council will not lower the total emissions cap.

Under the current rules of the CRPS legislation, residents and businesses who decided to install solar panels or invest in energy efficiency measures will effectively be making it cheaper for the big polluters such as coal-fired power stations to pollute. This perverse flaw in the scheme has the potential to undermine community action and even action by local councils to mitigate climate change.

The federal government should rectify this problem by retiring CPRS permits where there are verifiable complementary abatement measures in the broader community, so the polluters can’t use them.

A range of humanitarian organisations recently highlighted the suffering in the world that is caused by inaction on reducing carbon pollution (See here).

Climate change risks unprecedented global hunger in our lifetime
04 November 2009
Caritas is joining other humanitarian organisations to say climate change needs urgent action at a UN meeting in Copenhagen in December to prevent global hunger.

The statement “Climate Change, Food Insecurity and Hunger” is signed by Caritas, the UN's food and health agencies WFP, FAO, and the WHO, plus the International Federation of the Red Cross, Oxfam, World Vision, and Save the Children.

The statement says climate change is undermining current efforts to end the suffering of over one billion people already affected by hunger. Not having enough to eat is already the single largest contributor to the global burden of disease, killing 3.5 million people every year, almost all of them children in poor countries.

The risk of hunger and malnutrition could increase by an unprecedented scale within the next decades. There could be declines from 40 to 90 percent of grasslands in semi-arid and arid areas. Coastal areas may become flooded or unsuitable for farming due to increased salinity from rising sea levels may make. By 2050, hunger could increase by 10 to 20 percent and child malnutrition is anticipated to be a fifth higher compared to a no-climate change scenario.

Environment ministers and officials will meet in Copenhagen from 7 December for two weeks to agree a new deal on climate change. The summit must be a start to improving food production, scaling up social protection systems, and preparing for disasters. Poor communities need support to build climate-resilient lives and escape hunger.

Key messages for Copenhagen:
• Climate change will act as a multiplier of existing threats to food security,
• Achieving food security requires substantial increases in food production on the one hand, as well as improved access to adequate and nutritious food and capacities to cope with the risks posed by climate change on the other hand,
• Governments must be assisted in enhancing food production and access, scaling up social protection systems and improving their ability to prepare for and respond to disasters,
• Community-based development processes need to be fostered in order to enable the poorest and most vulnerable to build sustainable and climate resilient livelihoods and move out of chronic poverty and food insecurity,
• The humanitarian community must get prepared for more extreme weather events and protecting the already food insecure better by strengthening both crisis response and crisis prevention.

Failure in Copenhagen is not an option

If the world fails to deliver a political agreement at the UN climate conference in December, it will be “the whole global democratic system not being able to deliver results in one of the defining challenges of our century”, says incoming COP15 president, Connie Hedegaard.

Will there be a global climate deal at the UN climate conference COP15 in Copenhagen in December? With the clock ticking and a host of major political issues yet to be solved, some people have voiced their doubt.

One hand that is not shaking, however, is the one belonging to Connie Hedegaard, Danish Minister for Climate and Energy. As incoming COP15 president, she faces the daunting task of swinging the baton in front of delegates from all over the globe, thereby making them play the same tune and hopefully, after a concerted effort, end with an accord.

And while thousands of negotiators are still struggling to narrow the score down to something playable, Hedegaard is adamant that Copenhagen will “seal the deal”.

“If the whole world comes to Copenhagen and leaves without making the needed political agreement, then I think it’s a failure that is not just about climate. Then it’s the whole global democratic system not being able to deliver results in one of the defining challenges of our century. And that is and should not be a possibility. It’s not an option,” Connie Hedegaard tells cop15.dk in an interview.

Read more here...

Seal the deal

Finally!

The NSW Government's Sea Level Rise Policy Statement (don't call it a Policy!) is finally on exhibition.

The Policy Statement specifies sea level planning benchmarks for the NSW coastline, which are 40 centimetres by 2050 and 90 centimetres by 2100 above 1990 mean sea levels.

These are based on the 2007 IPCC modelling which is now about four years out-of-date!

(The modelling, reporting, reviewing, drafting, finalising the IPCC documents take some time!)

See the draft Statement (don't call it a Policy!) on the Department of Planning website.

Limits to development

Three Australians are part of a group of 28 scientists who defined limits to human development in a recent edition of Nature.

The Summary is

• New approach proposed for defining preconditions for human development
• Crossing certain biophysical thresholds could have disastrous consequences for humanity
• Three of nine interlinked planetary boundaries have already been overstepped

Although Earth has undergone many periods of significant environmental change, the planet's environment has been unusually stable for the past 10,000 years. This period of stability — known to geologists as the Holocene — has seen human civilizations arise, develop and thrive. Such stability may now be under threat. Since the Industrial Revolution, a new era has arisen, the Anthropocene, in which human actions have become the main driver of global environmental change. This could see human activities push the Earth system outside the stable environmental state of the Holocene, with consequences that are detrimental or even catastrophic for large parts of the world.

During the Holocene, environmental change occurred naturally and Earth's regulatory capacity maintained the conditions that enabled human development. Regular temperatures, freshwater availability and biogeochemical flows all stayed within a relatively narrow range. Now, largely because of a rapidly growing reliance on fossil fuels and industrialized forms of agriculture, human activities have reached a level that could damage the systems that keep Earth in the desirable Holocene state. The result could be irreversible and, in some cases, abrupt environmental change, leading to a state less conducive to human development. Without pressure from humans, the Holocene is expected to continue for at least several thousands of years.

The inner green shading represents the proposed safe operating space for nine planetary systems. The red wedges represent an estimate of the current position for each variable. The boundaries in three systems (rate of biodiversity loss, climate change and human interference with the nitrogen cycle), have already been exceeded.

Wallsend Aged Care

Here's a copy of my Notice of Motion supporting the Wallsend community.

NOTICE OF MOTION: WALLSEND AGED CARE FACILITY

COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

That Newcastle City Council:

1. congratulates the community of Wallsend for their steadfast defence of public health facilities in their area

2. supports the community campaign to keep the Wallsend Aged Care facility as a publicly owned and operated health facility

3. writes to the NSW Premier, Nathan Rees and to the NSW Minister for Health, Carmel Tebbut, urging the NSW Government to retain Wallsend Aged Care as a public sector facility, with copies to the NSW Leader of the Opposition, Barry O'Farrell, and to the NSW Shadow Minister for Health, Jillian Skinner.

4. arranges a visit by councillors to the community picket line, as a gesture of support for the community campaign, and to discuss with campaign participants how council might further assist them in their campaign.

BACKGROUND

Councillors will be aware that members of the Wallsend community have initiated a grassroots community campaign (including an ongoing picket-line) to save the Wallsend Aged Care facility from privatisation by the NSW government.

The Wallsend Aged Care facility is the largest care centre of its kind in the Hunter Valley and provides essential, high quality nursing care for extreme-need cases, including for young people with rare and special illnesses that are not accommodated in local private nursing care facilities.

The proposed privatisation of the facility would place both the quality and scope of the current service at risk.

The site and buildings also occupy a special place in the Wallsend community.

The land on which the facility is located was donated to the community by the Newcastle Wallsend Mining Company, and the hospital was built with money raised by miners.

The current facility was established after the controversial closure of Wallsend Hospital in 1991, which stimulated a long term community picket that ended in 1993.

Earlier this year, a petition with more than 10,000 signatures supporting the current community campaign was tabled in the NSW parliament. The NSW Legislative Council has recently voted to support keeping the facility in public hands, under the operation of the Department of Health.

This motion would establish council's general support for the community campaign, to convey this support to the NSW government, and to explore other ways that the council can support the community in this important issue.

Tate under investigation...

Mayor John Tate is being investigated over political donations.

Lord Mayor John Tate investigated

BY IAN KIRKWOOD

NEWCASTLE Lord Mayor JohnTate is being investigated by Newcastle City Council over his relationship with businessmanCon Constantine.

Council city engagement director Martin Coates confirmed lastnight that a ‘code of conduct’ investigation was under way.

The investigation is being carried out by Newcastle barrister Mark Brady, who described himself yesterday as one of a panel of practitioners hired by the council to do arm’s-length investigations.

Cr Tate said last night from Singapore, where he was on a short break, he knew a code of conduct matter was under way but he was surprised to find that members of the public were being interviewed about it.

"All that’s happened is that [council general manager] Lindy Hyam told me about a fortnight ago there was a matter to be finalised but that was about it," Cr Tate said.

He said it was ridiculous to suggest that he was influenced by any campaign donations from Mr Constantine or his companies or that he had acted in any way in breach of council procedures.

He said he was yet to be interviewed in relation to the code of conduct investigation and would be ‘having something to say’ if he was not given the chance to respond.

Maryville resident Martin Breen said he had lodged a complaint against Cr Tate over an April 21 vote that was viewed by some at the time as helping to pave the way for Mr Constantine’s proposed Maryville markets.

On that night, Cr Tate used his casting vote to allow a change to the Newcastle Local Environment Plan to be put on public display.

A plan for the markets and a draft amendment to the local environment plan have been put on display but a vote is yet to take place.

Mr Breen said he had lodged the complaint because he believed Cr Tate had previously abstained from voting on matters involving Mr Constantine and he believed he should have done so in this case.

He said regulations to the Local Government Act stated that "perceptions of a conflict of interest are as important as actual conflicts of interest".

The Herald report of the April 21 meeting said that Cr Tate had declared donations to his 2007 state election campaign from a Constantine company before using his casting vote to break a 5-5 deadlock.

Last night, Cr Tate said he voted that way in order give the public a chance to evaluate the proposal rather than have it killed off by "a handful of objectors".

Mr Constantine said he was disappointed and saddened by the accusations against the mayor.

He said the mutual business friendship would have no influence over Cr Tate’s decisions.

"Absolutely not, no way, nothing at all to do with it," Mr Constantine said.

He said Cr Tate was motivated by a desire for the future growth of Newcastle.

"Here is a man trying to create 1200 jobs for Newcastle and we’ve got some people out there accusing him of bias."

And a word from our sponsors...

Millions now know that 350 ppm of CO2 is the most that we can safely have in the atmosphere

Saturday, was the 'World's most widespread day of political action', with more than 5,200 actions in 181 countries.

Millions of people now know that scientists say that 350 parts per million carbon dioxide is the most that we can safely have in the atmosphere. The Secretary General of the United Nations was given the first delivery of a bunch of photos from around the world. More than 19,000 photos, and many hours of video, were taken documenting the day's actions.

We did our bit on a farm near Barrington...


Meanwhile, back home in Newcastle...


People from around Newcastle and Lake Macquarie gathered at the Newcastle Foreshore Playground with their children for a giant play date as part of the largest global day of climate action ever.




The event was organised by a stay-at-home mother from Tighes Hill who isn’t an activist but is terrified of one day being asked by her sons, “Mum, why didn’t you do something when the world still had a chance?”

Mine subsidence in Newcastle

NOTICE OF MOTION: MINE SUBSIDENCE WORKING GROUP
COUNCILLOR: M OSBORNE

MOTION

That Newcastle City Council establishes a sunset working party to formulate recommendations on mitigating the impact of mine subsidence on the revitalisation of Newcastle CBD.

The working party should consist of relevant stakeholders and experts including but not limited to: Council staff, a representative from NSW Mine Subsidence Board, a representative from NSW Department of Premier and Cabinet, a representative from NSW Department of Planning, a representative from Property Council and interested Councillors.

Investigations should include:

• Existing and alternative construction methods available

• Existing and alternative funding arrangements, including both public and private sector models, and State and Federal funding

• Existing legislation and possible amendments if necessary (eg for MSB to proactively address mine subsidence risk by releasing funds to partly pay for grouting)

• Consistency regarding the time that an approved DA remains valid (eg MSB approvals are valid for 2 years whereas approvals under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are generally valid for 5 years)

The working party should report back to Council within 6 months with recommended methods and actions, consistent with the City Centre Plan, on which Council can either act directly and/or play an advocacy role to other spheres of government.

BACKGROUND

Mine subsidence has been identified as a key issue affecting the revitalisation of Newcastle CBD.

Newcastle is unique in the amount of old underground mine workings under our CBD. The early history of mine subsidence in NSW is dominated by references to Newcastle (see the History section on the MSB website http://www.minesub.nsw.gov.au). For Newcastle to be revitalised, our history needs to be recognised and we need a unique solution.

The NSW Mine Subsidence Board (MSB) requires the ‘grouting’ or backfilling of old underground mine workings, up to 70 metres below ground of affected sites prior to redevelopment.

The issue has been raised in submissions to various planning studies including the Newcastle City Centre Plan and the Newcastle CBD Taskforce. The summaries of the Taskforce reports were provided at the Newcastle Panthers Club meeting listing Mine Subsidence as the highest priority.

Subsequent to the CBD Taskforce, the reports prepared by the Hunter Development Corporation completely fail to address the issue.

The MSB requirements mean that grouting usually extends well beyond the footprint of the site to be developed, under public space and adjacent sites. There is currently no mechanism for cost sharing back to the first site developed if an adjacent site is subsequently developed

Grouting is expensive, including a relatively large fixed mobilisation cost, regardless of the size of the site, just to get equipment on site and set up (before any costs for drilling and materials etc). Grouting costs add to unit costs, smaller sites generally incur much higher cost per unit.

The MSB collects levies from coal mines and uses the money as compensation for damage to buildings caused by mine subsidence.

Why can’t some of the money be used to work pro-actively to prevent mine subsidence in the Newcastle CBD given its unique nature? If this requires a change to the State legislation, then it should be changed.

The viability of both commercial and residential redevelopments in the Newcastle CBD is constrained by this issue. This leads to a reduction in housing stock at the lower end of the market within the CBD and a subsequent reduction in the socio-economic residential mix in CBD. This has flow on effects for pushing development away from our CBD, leading to transport issues across the city and ongoing issues relating to the derelict look of the CBD and the functioning of the retail sector in the CBD.

Fat as Butter

The Fat As Butter event is on this Sunday, spread all over Wickham Park.

If any residents have any issues that arise as a consequence of this event, they should call the Event Hotline.

Fat as Butter Event Hotline: 0410 204 203

If any residents see any graffiti incidents, they should call the Graffiti Hotline.

NCC Graffiti Hotline: 1800 223 840

All complaints will be logged, responded to or distributed to the appropriate authority for response.

Newcastle Council's website has a Frequently Asked Questions section about Fat As Butter, though it doesn't seem to have been updated in a long while.

See earlier information I've posted here and here.

Democracy diminished...

In June this year, Newcastle councillors voted to be an “open and transparent organisation that engages the community and encourages participation in Council matters.”

This week, Newcastle councillors were presented with proposals that – if adopted – will confirm Newcastle as one of the least open and transparent councils in the state.

Proposed changes to Newcastle council’s Code of Meeting Practice and Code of Conduct would entrench a rising community perception that the Council is democratically dysfunctional.

Current media attention is understandably focused on proposed restrictions to councillors speaking to the media, but the proposed changes go much deeper than this.
The new draft Code of Meeting Practice formalises that Council workshops will continue to be held behind closed doors, away from the view of the public and the media.

These workshops, held outside the open meetings provisions of the Local Government Act, are not new in Newcastle, but they've never been used on the current scale. I’m still awaiting an answer from the General Manager on the exact number of topics discussed in the past year, but I reckon 100 wouldn’t be much short of the mark.

If many of the topics discussed at these closed workshops were on the agenda of an official council meeting, they wouldn’t qualify as legitimately confidential under the Act, and the meetings couldn’t lawfully be closed to the public and the media. The workshops provide a way to sidestep these legal restrictions.

The only reason for having these secret workshops is the desire of some councillors and council staff to discuss matters away from the public view. My attempts to make these workshops open to the public have been opposed by most councillors. The public has a right to know what is happening in these workshops and what topics are being discussed.

How this is open or transparent and how it engages the community and encourages participation is not apparent to me.

Proposed changes to the Code of Conduct would further stifle the flow of information from councillors to the community.

The most insidious proposed change is the introduction of a new category of “sensitive information”. As currently defined, this would include any information that a councillor might be given by memo or email, or during discussions at a secret workshop. Under the proposed change, a councillor could only provide such information to the community or the media if specifically authorised by the General Manager. This directly fetters the statutory role of a councillor “to facilitate communication between the council and the community”, and hands monopoly control over the flow of information on council matters to an unelected council officer. Such a fettering of an elected representative’s role would not only be a major step backward for local democracy and the community right-to-know, but may even be illegal.

This same repressive, anti-democratic approach is evident in new sections seeking to impose restrictions on councillors speaking to the media. Similar restrictions would apply to councillors using online media, such as blogs. As a councillor, I've maintained a blog for many years, as a means of conveying information about council matters to the community.

No argument has been advanced for these proposed changes, other than vague, unsubstantiated claims in the council report that they “reflect industry best practice”.

Recently, the Local Government Act was changed to clarify that a council is a “body politic”, rather than a “body corporate”. A key distinguishing feature of a body politic is that it is democratic institution elected by and accountable to the community of citizens. As a body politic, a council is part of our system of democratic government, and not simply part of a “corporate business”. We don't refer to other spheres of government as a “corporate business”. The citizens that a council serves are more than merely “customers”, and the mission of democratic governance and public policy is not the same as the mission of private enterprise or corporate management.

Democracy is diminished when elected councillors start to see themselves as more in partnership with council staff than with the community. Democracy is diminished when elected councillors think they have a greater duty to stop the community from observing the discussion of the policies of council than in facilitating community involvement and knowledge about what is going on in local government.

In this year when we are celebrating 150 years of local government in Newcastle, the credibility of Council's claim to be an open and transparent organisation that engages the community and encourages participation is on the line.

Prince comes to the party

Supporting Blog Action Day on climate change...

The Googlers have done it again

Google has built a site where you “explore the potential impacts of climate change on our planet Earth and find out about possible solutions for adaptation and mitigation, ahead of the UN’s climate conference in Copenhagen in December.”

They’ve got a Google Earth mashup and an introductory video featuring Al Gore which I've included below.

Well worth checking out - as someone once said: "do yourself a favour!"



Supporting Blog Action Day on climate change...

The clock is ticking Kevin Rudd...

Supporting Blog Action Day on climate change...

Stop the Ruddy dithering

The latest science says that we should be targeting an average concentration for atmospheric CO2 of less than 350 ppm if we want to avoid dangerous climate change.

That is the amount that was in the atmosphere in 1987, a few years before the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.

Our current level is...

In 2008, the average concentration for atmospheric CO2 (Mauna Loa Observatory) was 385.57 parts per million (ppm). Based on CO2 measurements made so far, we know that the 2009 average for atmospheric CO2 is more than 387 ppm. (The seasonally-adjusted level atmospheric CO2 was 387.65 ppm in August 2009, and 388.00 ppm in September 2009.)

And yet Kevin Rudd and Penny Wong are still happy to play cat-and-mouse games with Malcolm Turnbull.

Supporting Blog Action Day on climate change...

The invisible hand of God

It was reported in the Guardian on Tuesday that Dr Rowan Williams, head of the Church of England, told an audience to pressure their governments to act on climate change.

"We need to keep up pressure on national governments; there are questions only they can answer about the investment of national resources. We need equally to keep up pressure on ourselves and to learn how to work better as civic agents."

Earlier this year Williams said that God was not a "safety net" that would guarantee a happy ending and that human pillaging of the world's resources meant the planet was facing a "whole range of doomsday prospects" that exceeded the results of global warming.

Humanity faced being "choked, drowned or starved" by its own stupidity, he said, and he compared those who challenged the reality of climate change to the courtiers who flattered King Canute, until he proved he could not command the waves by going to the seashore and trying to do so. "Rhetoric, as King Canute demonstrated, does not turn back rising waters," said Williams in a lecture in March.

What does well-known climate denier Catholic Archbishop Pell say to that?

Some of the hysteric and extreme claims about global warming are also a symptom of pagan emptiness, of Western fear when confronted by the immense and basically uncontrollable forces of nature. Belief in a benign God who is master of the universe has a steadying psychological effect, although it is no guarantee of Utopia, no guarantee that the continuing climate and geographic changes will be benign. In the past pagans sacrificed animals and even humans in vain attempts to placate capricious and cruel gods. Today they demand a reduction in carbon dioxide emissions.

Supporting Blog Action Day on climate change...

The gag provisions

In today's Newcastle Herald...

Newcastle councillors slam 'gag' policy as censorship attempt

BY JACQUI JONES CIVIC REPORTER

CIVIC leaders have slammed a new policy governing their conduct, saying it amounts to censorship because of a "gag provision" restraining comments made to the media.

Councillor Michael Osborne fears that Newcastle City Council's proposed revisions to its code of conduct will inhibit elected representatives' communication with the community.

"It's a gag provision," he said.

"It's trying to fetter the role of councillors."

Most councillors voted last night to put the draft code on public exhibition for 28 days.

Cr Osborne and colleagues Aaron Buman and Mike King did not support the decision.

Many councillors, including those who voted to seek public comment, had concerns about some provisions, especially a section on talking to the media.

The rules state that councillors are free to make personal statements to the media, but warns this must not include criticism of council officials, and suggests any criticism of the council's decisions would damage its credibility and unity.

The proposed code also dictates that councillors must give the administration's media officer a copy of statements given to the media.

"I think it's gagging us," Cr Buman said.

"And if I reflect back to the last council and its performance I spoke out a lot of the time about a lot of the decisions I was in the minority about.

"I wanted the general public to know how I felt."

Cr Nuatali Nelmes also expressed concern.

"I think it does need to be changed because I don't necessarily think the intention is censorship," she said.

"But I think when it's in black and white like that, that could be the end result."

Lord Mayor John Tate said he was comfortable with the rules.

"It doesn't fetter councillors' rights," he said.

Consultant Kath Roach told last night's council meeting that some provisions were based on the Department of Local Government's model code, but others were not.

A council spokeswoman said general manager Lindy Hyam declined to comment.

Newcastle Council: ‘democratically dysfunctional’

Newcastle Greens

MEDIA RELEASE
23 September 2009

Greens Councillor Michael Osborne today declared Newcastle Council democratically dysfunctional, after councillors voted down a Greens proposal to open secret councillor workshops to the public and the media.

“The first year of this council has seen unprecedented use of secret, behind-closed-doors sessions between councillors and council staff, held outside the requirements of the Local Government Act,” Greens councillor Michael Osborne said today.

“In many of these sessions, issues are discussed in detail and de facto decisions are made on a nod-and-a-wink, out of the view of the public and the media – exactly what the Department says should not happen in such sessions. This practice circumvents and undermines the open government provisions in the Local Government Act.

“Last night, I proposed that the council open these sessions to the public, and incorporate workshops protocol into the council’s code of meeting practice, as recommended by the Department.

“Amazingly, a majority of Independent and Labor councillors thumbed their noses at the Department’s guidelines - only Clr Mike King (Independent) and Clr Tim Crakanthorp (Labor) voted to support my proposal (Clr Mike Jackson (Labor) was absent).

“While the council mouths empty clichés about its commitment to openness and transparency, and leads the celebration of 150 years of local democracy in Newcastle, the elected council hasn’t even been prepared to observe basic democratic practices,” Clr Osborne said.

“In its first year, this council has shut down previous avenues of community input (such as Community Forums), slashed the number of publicly accessible council meetings, and increased its use of confidential sessions and informal councillor ‘briefings’.

“We haven’t seen such a closed, secretive council in Newcastle for nearly two decades.

“The public and the media are now seeing precious little information, debate or discussion in official council meetings on crucial local public policy issues, and local democracy and the public right to know are now being sacrificed in favour of secrecy.

“While some of the councillors who voted against my proposal complain about people in the community being too suspicious or negative about council, the fact is that this culture of secrecy is now the norm in the current council, and ordinary Newcastle citizens are beginning to realise this.”

Clr Osborne said that he intended to contact the Department of Local Government about his concerns, and would discuss the issue with members of the local community.

“Now that the community’s elected representatives have refused to act to protect local democracy and the public right to know, ordinary community members will have to consider what options they have to defend this,” Clr Osborne said.

“Something has to be done: people who care about democracy aren’t just going to stand by and accept this.”

Guidelines for workshops

At the Council meeting tonight, most Councillors voted down my motion to develop guidelines about workshops, including outlining the nature and purpose of the gatherings, and the circumstances in which they will be used.

Cr Tate stated during the debate that "this argument is hardly worth having" and Cr Sharpe said when he read the motion he "felt squirmish".

What do you think?

Here's who voted that we don't need to let the public know...



And, here's who voted that we do need to let the public know...



Cr Jackson was away, but stated that he supports developing the guidelines.

Council meeting 22 September 2009

At the Council meeting tonight, Councillors considered a range of issues, including placing the draft Voluntary Planning Agreements Policy, the draft Residential Development Strategy and draft Urban Renewal Corridor Guidelines on exhibition and adopting the Port Stephens Council Section 94 Plan - Inclusion of site specific cross boundary chapter for Fern Bay and Fullerton Cove.

Council also considered my Notice of Motion to ensure transparency in Council workshops. This is what happened:

ITEM-20 NOM 15/09/09 - COUNCIL WORKSHOPS
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/M KING)

Council incorporate appropriate protocols, procedures and guidelines in its Code of Meeting Practice covering the role and conduct of workshops or other similar gatherings of councillors that draw on council resources but that occur outside the provisions of sections 9 and 10 of the Local Government Act.

That these protocols, procedures and guidelines include provisions that inter alia:

a. outline the nature and purpose of such gatherings, and the circumstances in which they will be used,

b. specify that – unless otherwise determined in accordance with adopted council policies and procedures – such workshops or gatherings will normally be open to the public and the media (as observers), and will be publicly notified on the council’s website,

c. duly recognise and give appropriate priority to the public interest, the public right to know, the responsibilities of councillors to the community, and council’s commitment to openness and accountability,

d. state and reflect this council’s commitment to openness and transparency, and

e. incorporate relevant components of Part 13 (Workshops) of the Department of Local Government’s Meetings Practice Note (No.16) of November 2005, and any other relevant advice from the Department.

Councillor Sharpe gave notice of a foreshadowed motion that being that Council reaffirms its commitment to accountability and transparency and confirms it will continue to conduct workshops based on Department of Local Government guidelines.

During discussion Councillor Claydon questioned whether there was a possibility the matter could be considered as part of the review of the Code of Meeting Practice.

Councillor Osborne indicated that he could see his motion implemented by Council by including the protocol in the current review of the Code of Meeting Practice but wouldn't accept Councillor Sharpe's foreshadowed motion because the Department of Local Government Guidelines did not outline a protocol for workshops.
.
Following the mover's right of reply the motion was put to the meeting and Councillor Osborne called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the motion Councillors T Crakanthorp, M King and M Osborne.
Against the motion The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, S Claydon, S Connell, B Cook, B Luke, N Nelmes and S Sharpe.

The motion was declared defeated on the division of three votes to nine votes.

Councillor Sharpe was then asked to move his foreshadowed motion.

MOTION: (COUNCILLORS S SHARPE/B COOK)
Council reaffirms its commitment to accountability and transparency and confirms it will continue to conduct workshops based on Department of Local Government guidelines.

The motion was put to the meeting and Councillor King called for a division which resulted as follows:

For the motion The Lord Mayor, Councillors G Boyd, A Buman, S Connell, B Cook, T Crakanthorp, M King, B Luke, N Nelmes and S Sharpe.
Against the motion Councillors S Claydon and M Osborne.

The motion was declared carried on the division of ten votes to two votes.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS S SHARPE/B COOK)
Council reaffirms its commitment to accountability and transparency and confirms it will continue to conduct workshops based on Department of Local Government guidelines.