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

Maryville Markets proposal

The Maryville markets proposal is put to rest...

Despite the earlier vote to place the amended LEP on exhibition to allow the proposed development to proceed being close, and only passing with the Lord Mayor's casting vote, this vote was unanimous.

DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY /NON-PECUNIARY INTEREST
Director City Assets
Mr Edmonds indicated that he had a non-pecuniary interest in Compass Housing as a Director of that particular organisation which he believed may be discussed in relation to Item 106 – Draft Amendment 7 to Newcastle LEP 2003 – Proposed Markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville.

Councillor Claydon
Councillor Claydon declared a significant non pecuniary perceived interest in Item 106 – Draft Amendment 7 to Newcastle LEP 2003 – Proposed Markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville and stated as follows: I am declaring an interest in relation to item 106, Draft Amendment 7 to Newcastle LEP 2003 – Proposed Markets at 248 Hannell Street Maryville.

As noted in an earlier declaration of interests, prior to this matter being discussed at the Public Voice Committee last week, I wish to advise Council that I am again declaring a significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest in this matter.

In doing so, I have been guided by sections 7.10, 7.16 part (a) and 7.17 of Newcastle City Council's Code of Conduct.

I have a non-pecuniary interest in this matter, which arises from the fact that my parents now reside in Hannell Street, Maryville. I do not know my parents opinion on this matter as we have agreed not to discuss the issue and they did not live in the LGA when this matter first came to Council for discussion last April.

I have not received political contributions or political donations from the proponent and there is no reasonable likelihood or expectation of appreciable financial gain or loss regarding this draft amendment to the Newcastle LEP.

But my non-pecuniary conflict of interest is significant by virtue of the fact that it involves my parents. Having declared a significant, non-pecuniary conflict of interest I am advised that I must manage it in one of two ways. Given that I cannot relinquish or divest myself of the interest that creates the conflict (in this case, my parents) I must have no further involvement in the matter. I will therefore absent myself from and not take part in any debate or voting on Item 106.

Councillor Claydon left the Chamber for determination on this matter.

Councillor Sharpe
Councillor Sharpe declared a pecuniary interest in Item 106 – Draft Amendment 7 to Newcastle LEP 2003 – Proposed Markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville indicating that his family owned a plant nursery and the proponent had stated in the media that plants may be sold if such markets proceeded.

Councillor Sharpe also stated that his mother wrote for the Post Newspaper which he also understood the proponent to have an interest.

Councillor Sharpe left Chamber for determination of this matter.

The Lord Mayor
The Lord Mayor declared a non pecuniary interest Item 106 – Draft Amendment 7 to Newcastle LEP 2003 – Proposed Markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville.

The Lord Mayor declared that in the March 2007 State Government Election a company known as Newcastle Soccer Pty Ltd purchased a number of tickets to a fund raising event which was towards a campaign to raise money for the elections in which he was a candidate. He advised it was public knowledge by virtue of the returns to the Electoral office at that time and the details are available through the Electoral office.

The Lord Mayor believed that Newcastle Soccer Pty Ltd was a related company to the applicant of Item 26 – Proposed Amendment to Newcastle LEP 2003 with respect to 248 Hannell Street Maryville and he formally declared it under the Code of Conduct and he noted it was not a pecuniary interest in his view of significance. He noted the provisions of the Code of Conduct and the provisions of pecuniary interest therefore he made the declaration.

ITEM-106 CCL 17/11/09 - DRAFT AMENDMENT 7 TO NEWCASTLE LEP 2003 - PROPOSED MARKETS AT 248 HANNELL STREET, MARYVILLE

Note: Councillors Claydon and Sharpe were absent from the Chamber for this item.

MOTION: (COUNCILLORS B LUKE/M OSBORNE)
Council resolve to:
a not proceed with draft Amendment 7 to the LEP 2003 to permit markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville; and
b advise the Department of Planning that Council does not wish to have this draft plan made by the Planning Minister.

Following brief discussion the motion was put to the meeting and declared carried.

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

The Lord Mayor declared the motion carried unanimously on the division of nine votes to nil votes.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS B LUKE/M OSBORNE)
Council resolve to:
a not proceed with draft Amendment 7 to the LEP 2003 to permit markets at 248 Hannell Street, Maryville; and
b advise the Department of Planning that Council does not wish to have this draft plan made by the Planning Minister.

Laman St Trees

Tonight (17 November 2009), the majority of councillors voted to cut down all the Laman St trees.

Here's an extract from the minutes of the meeting.

ITEM-28 ECAG 17/11/09 - LAMAN STREET TREES
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS B LUKE/S SHARPE)

a Councillors participate in a community design process using place making principles to inform the Civic Cultural Precinct Laman Street design during December 2009- March 2010.

b Council adopts a whole-of-street replacement strategy for the Civic Cultural Precinct Laman Street to be commenced in 4th quarter 2009-10 financial year after the adoption of street design for the Precinct.

AMENDMENT: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/N NELMES)

Council notes the arborists' report, particularly Appendix B that rates five (5) of the Laman Street trees as having a SULE risk of 4 (meaning up to a 5 year life) and nine (9) of the Laman Street trees as having a SULE risk of 3 (meaning between a 5 and 15 year life).

Council convene a Civic Cultural Precinct Laman Street Trees working party, comprising councillors, community members, Councl staff and relevant experts, to develop a community design process using place making principles.

That the working party receive a public briefing paper outlining a range of risk management approaches for the Laman Street trees with the view to retaining the trees for as long as practicably possible. Such briefing paper to come back to council for placement on public exhibition for public comment prior to consideration of the paper by the working party.

At this stage of the meeting, the time being, 7.00pm, the Lord Mayor proposed that the meeting adjourn in order to hold dinner and commence the advertised Council Meeting by 8.00pm.

PROCEDURAL MOTION
MOTION: (The Lord Mayor)

The meeting adjourn for its scheduled dinner break.

The procedural motion was put to the meeting and declared defeated.

Following further discussion the amendment was put to the meeting and Councillor Osborne called for a division which resulted as follows:

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

The amendment was declared defeated on the division of four votes to seven votes.

The motion was then put to the meeting and declared carried.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS B LUKE/S SHARPE)
a Councillors participate in a community design process using place making principles to inform the Civic Cultural Precinct Laman Street design during December 2009- March 2010.

b Council adopts a whole-of-street replacement strategy for the Civic Cultural Precinct Laman Street to be commenced in 4th quarter 2009-10 financial year after the adoption of street design for the Precinct.

Land transfers from Hunter Water

Tonight, Council resolved to accept the transfer of a number of properties (and part parcels) from Hunter Water Corporation.

Council meeting 17 November 2009

Newcastle Show Day

ITEM-105 CCL 17/11/09 - SHOW DAY HOLIDAY 2010
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS N NELMES/M OSBORNE)
Council makes application to the Minister for Industrial Relations seeking the proclamation of Show Day for Friday 26 March 2010.

Councillor Luke gave notice of a foreshadowed motion that being Option 2 outlined in the report that Council makes application to the Minister for Industrial Relations seeking the proclamation of Show Day, commencing after noon on Friday 26 March 2010 (part day).

Following discussion Councillor Sharpe moved the motion be put.

PROCEDURAL MOTION
RESOLVED: (Councillor S Sharpe)
The motion be put.

Following the mover's right of reply the motion was put to the meeting and declared carried.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS N NELMES/M OSBORNE)
Council makes application to the Minister for Industrial Relations seeking the proclamation of Show Day for Friday 26 March 2010.

Newcastle's Environment Advisory Committee

ITEM-117 CCL 17/11/09 - ENVIRONMENTAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE
RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS A BUMAN/S SHARPE)
1 That Council adopts the EAC Constitution at attachment A.

2 That Council call for nominations for Councillor members to the EAC and elect three (3) Councillor EAC members from the nominees by open voting (show of hands) using the single non-transferable vote system described at paragraph 26.

3 That following the election of the three (3) Councillor EAC members, Council call for nominations for the position of Chairperson of the EAC from the elected Councillor EAC members and elect the Chairperson from the nominated Councillor EAC members by open voting (show of hands) using the single non-transferable vote system described at paragraph 26.

4 That following election of the Chairperson, Council call for nominations for the position of Deputy Chairperson of the EAC from the elected Councillor EAC members and elect the Deputy Chairperson from the nominated Councillor EAC members by open voting (show of hands) using the single non-transferable vote system described at paragraph 26.

In relation to the above the following nominations were received:
Councillor M Osborne – Chair
Councillor B Cook

The Lord Mayor declared Councillors Osborne (Chair) and Cook duly elected as Council's representatives to the Environmental Advisory Committee.

Support to protect the Wallsend Aged Care Facility

ITEM-26 NOM 17/11/09 - WALLSEND AGED CARE FACILITY
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/T CRAKANTHORP)
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. Write 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. Arrange 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.

Councillor Boyd asked the mover and seconder whether they would accept the following modifications:
• Part 1 be amended to read as follows:
Newcastle Council…..Congratulates the community for their steadfast defence of public health facilities in their area.
• Part 4 be deleted.

The mover and seconder agreed to accept Councillor Boyd's modifications.

The motion was put to the meeting and declared carried unanimously.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/T CRAKANTHORP)
Newcastle City Council:

1. Congratulates the community 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. Write 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.

Mine subsidence

ITEM-25 NOM 17/11/09 - MINE SUBSIDENCE WORKING GROUP
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/M KING)
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.

Councillor Nelmes indicated that motion was valid however, proposed that the motion be referred to the newly formed Environmental Advisory Committee for consideration.

The mover and seconder indicated that they would accept Councillor Nelmes' proposal.

The motion was put to the meeting and declared carried.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/M KING)
The following Notice of Motion be referred to the Environmental Advisory Committee for consideration:

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.

Copenhagan

ITEM-27 NOM 17/11/09 - CLIMATE CHANGE
MOTION: (COUNCILLORS M OSBORNE/M KING)
PART A: CLIMATE CHANGE NEGOTIATIONS IN COPENHAGEN
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
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.

Councillor Nelmes asked the mover and seconder if they would consider referring the motion and background information to the newly formed Environmental Advisory Committee.

Councillor Osborne indicated that he would accept a Part C that the background on this Notice of Motion be referred to the Environmental Advisory Committee.

Councillor Crakanthorp then gave notice of a foreshadowed motion that being Part A and Part C as enunciated.

Following discussion the motion was put to the meeting and Councillor Osborne called for a division which resulted as follows:

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

The motion was declared defeated on the division of five votes to six votes.

Councillor Crakanthorp was then asked to move his foreshadowed motion.

MOTION: (COUNCILLORS T CRAKANTHORP/M KING)
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.

C The background on this Notice of Motion be referred to the Environmental Advisory Committee.

Councillor Nelmes asked the mover and seconder whether they would consider moving Part C only.

The mover and seconder indicated that they were moving parts A and C as presented.

Councillor Cook then gave notice of a foreshadowed motion that being Part C only.

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

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

The motion was declared carried on the division of six votes to five votes.

RESOLVED: (COUNCILLORS T CRAKANTHORP/M KING)
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.

C The background on this Notice of Motion be referred to the Environmental Advisory Committee, ie

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 (http://www.cathnews.com/article.aspx?aeid=17519).
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.

The Lord Mayor noted that the foreshadowed motion had lapsed.

Show Holidays - the facts!

An international report shows that employees in the UK, Netherlands and Australia have the least public holidays.

Global comparison: employee holiday entitlements

Employees in Lithuania and Brazil have the the most generous holiday entitlements reveals a report from Mercer which shows widely differing holiday entitlements between countries across the globe.

London – Employees in Europe receive the most generous statutory holiday allowances in the world, according to data released by Mercer. Taking public holidays into account, however, employees in Lithuania and Brazil have the potential to access the most time off work.

The data comes from Mercer’s '2009 Worldwide Benefit and Employment Guidelines' which provides data into global working practices and regulations. The report analyses both the statutory minimum number of days’ holiday that companies must provide to staff, as well as the number of public holidays in over 40 countries.

The following comparison is based on statutory entitlements for an employee working five days a week, with 10 years’ service. Statutory holiday allowance is the term given to the amount of paid leave that companies must, by law, offer their staff.

Global overview
Employees in Finland, Brazil and France are entitled to the greatest amount of statutory annual leave and those in India, Canada and China, the least.

Employees in Japan and India have the highest number of public holidays while those in the UK, Netherlands and Australia, the least.

Lithuanian and Brazilian employees potentially have access to the most generous overall holiday entitlements.

Employees in Finland, Brazil and France are entitled to receive as many as 30 days’ statutory holiday a year, with those in Lithuania, Russia and the UK entitled to 28 days. Poland follows closely behind (26 days), with employees in Greece, Austria, Denmark, Sweden and Norway entitled to 25 days’ statutory holiday.

By comparison, Asia-Pacific countries fare poorly, with Australian, New Zealand and Japanese employees receiving the region’s highest levels of statutory holidays (20 days) followed by Taiwan (15), Hong Kong and Singapore (14), India (12) and China (10). Employees in Canada are amongst those with the lowest entitlement with only 10 days and while there is no statutory minimum in the US, employees typically receive 15 days a year.

Public holidays can markedly increase the amount of time employees have off work. Japan and India top the global list with 16 days’ public holiday a year, closely followed by Cyprus, Slovakia and South Korea with 15. Malta and Spain both have 14 while Portugal, Austria, Lithuania, Slovenia and Taiwan all have 13 days’ public holiday.

The UK, Australia and the Netherlands have the lowest number of public holidays (eight) followed by Denmark, Ireland, Switzerland, Canada and Romania (nine).

According to Matthew Hunt, a principal in Mercer’s International team who advises multinationals on their employment practices, “There are wide variations in the local implementation of employment practices governing public holidays. Employers are often within their rights to ask employees to work on public holidays, or require that they be taken as part of their annual leave entitlements.

“For example, while it appears that employees in the UK have more total holidays than those in Malta, company contracts can create a different picture. While the UK statutory minimum is 28 days, companies are allowed to include the 8 public holidays as part of this entitlement, so some employees may only be given 20 days holiday a year and Maltese employees may, in fact, have a better deal.”

Assuming they receive the maximum statutory holidays in addition to public holidays, employees in Brazil and Lithuania would have the world’s most generous holiday regime with a potential 41 days off a year, while those in Finland, France and Russia could receive a total of 40 days. In contrast, Canadian employees receive only 19 days, Chinese employees 21 and those in the US and Singapore both 25.

Europe holiday overview
Finland and France make provision for a statutory minimum of 30 days’ holiday a year for employees, closely followed by Lithuania and Russia (28 days), the UK (28), Poland (26) and Greece (25). The vast majority of countries have a statutory minimum of 20 days including Germany, Belgium, Cyprus, Ireland, Italy and the Netherlands.

Cyprus and Slovakia (15 days) have the most bank holidays in Europe followed by Malta and Spain (14) and then Lithuania, Austria, Portugal and Slovenia (13). France, Poland, Finland, Germany and Belgium have 10, while Denmark, Romania and Ireland have nine. With eight bank holidays a year, the UK and Netherlands have the fewest in Europe. However, in some European states such as Norway and Switzerland, public holidays can be nullified if they fall on a weekend.

Overall, including the statutory minimum and public holidays, employees in Lithuania are potentially entitled to the greatest amount of paid leave in Europe with 41 days’ holiday per year. France, Finland and Russia rank second with 40 days, followed by Austria and Malta (38), Greece (37) and Sweden, Spain and the UK (36). Employees in Italy have 31 while those in Germany, Romania and Belgium have 30. Employees in Ireland and the Netherlands have the least amount of holiday at 29 and 28 days, respectively. If employers provide eight bank holidays on top of the statutory minimum, UK employees would receive 36 days’ paid holiday a year, one of the most generous in Europe.

The Americas holiday overview
The United States offers employees no statutory minimum holiday allowance but the typical average is 15 days compared to Canada which offers a statutory minimum of 10 days. Contrary to popular European belief, low levels of statutory holiday in the United States and Canada are not comparative to European standards when taking public holidays into account.

Employees in the United States and Brazil have an additional 10 and 11 days public holiday respectively, while workers in Canada are entitled to nine days’ public holiday. In total, employees in Brazil who can take the full entitlement and the full number of public holidays would receive 41 days off, those in the United States typically 25 days and those in Canada 19 days.

Asia holiday overview
Australia, Japan and New Zealand have the most generous statutory holiday regime, offering employees 20 days’ statutory holiday. South Korea (19 days), Taiwan (15), Hong Kong and Singapore (14), India (12) and China (10) have less generous entitlements. In addition, Japanese and Indian employees receive 16 public holidays a year followed by South Korea (15), Taiwan (13), Hong Kong (12) and New Zealand, Singapore and China all have 11 days. With eight days, workers in Australia are entitled to the fewest public holidays in Asia.

In theory, employees in Japan are entitled, in total, to the most generous holiday allowances with 36 days followed by South Korea (34 days) and New Zealand (31). Employees in Australia, Taiwan and India would potentially get 28 days followed by Hong Kong (26), Singapore (25) and China (21).

In addition to annual leave and public holidays, employers in some states are required by law to give special leave for getting married or for the death of a spouse or close relative, for example. Even when there is no requirement, many larger employers provide additional leave for special circumstances.

“Employers trying to co-ordinate business operations across the world are caught in a maze of legislation when it comes to holidays,” commented Matthew Hunt. “Public holidays tend to be rooted in local tradition or religious beliefs, so it can be difficult to change practices. But with the increasing cultural diversity of the global workforce there is pressure for greater flexibility around public holidays.”

An extraordinary intervention

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

Presentation on climate change

Tonight, Council received a presentation on climate change and some of its impacts for Newcastle.

Some selected slides are below...

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.