Comments

The ACT Commissioner for Sustainability and the Environment, Dr Maxine Cooper, since 9 September 2007 is unqualified to run an organisation that makes so-called expert claims about indigenous fauna such as kangaroos.

Cooper's academic qualifications are not in the natural environmental sciences as one would expect and assume, but in Environmental Planning, Environmental Design, and Urban and Regional Studies.

Cooper is a member of the Planning Institute of Australia and the Environment Institute of Australia and New Zealand (EIANZ). So in Cooper the ACT peak environment body is being run by a town planner!

That should enhance the bias of the body. Where is the ecological, biological and zoological expertise in Australian fauna?

Noting EIANZ's position statement on biodiversity, EIANZ recommends the adoption of the precautionary principle along with other principles of sustainable development in decisions affecting biodiversity, which sounds good, yet at the same time it also recommends research to "develop the taxonomic knowledge necessary for the...sustainable use of biodiversity".

In the Commission's most recent ACT State of the Environment 2007 report (now two years old), on the issue of conserving biodiversity it claims the threatened Grassland Earless Dragon population at Majura is due to "the recent drought and/or overgrazing by kangaroos or some other reasons". It ignores the bleedingly obvious fact that Majura is a busy Army training ground. Is this blissful ignorance or just playing politics?

The report also states "Land and infrastructure development (on the outskirts of Canberra) is a continuing threat to biodiversity". It suggests solving the problem by finding "potential avenues for the movement of species" - that is make way for development by relocating the biodiversity.

Cooper is another e-puppet placed to make government look as though it actually gives a damn about the environmental and biodiversity, while in reality achieving tuppenny squat. Putting a town planner in charge would be like NSW appointing ex-planning minister Frank Sartor as NSW Environment Minister. Would be a joke if it were not true.

Tiger Quoll
Snowy River 3885
Australia

Ministerial Accountability

When an external auditor makes a damning audit report on a company, that company had better act post haste to rectify the problem or else both the company and its directors risk serious legal repercussions.

Australians similarly are entitled to the same post haste rectification by Government departments and ministers when an auditor general makes a damning report on a government department’s abrogation of governance.

Australian legislation is wanting in requiring mandating auditory compliance by government departments with auditor general reports. Appropriate drafting of legislation at Federal level are a priority for 2010.

So the Victorian Auditor General’s Report on Fauna Potection for Victoria concludes that
the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 has been largely ignored. The Minister for Environment and Climate Change, Gavin Jennings should be put on notice and if found negligent in executing the objectives and rules of the Act, then sacked.
The executive head of the Department of Sustainability Victoria (DSE) charged with administering and executing the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act 1988 should also be sacked.

This confirms the long known chronic neglectful failing of the Victorian Government’s custodial responsibility for fauna protection in Victoria. The oft bandied, ’no data no problem’ excuse, is the second kneejerk response to challenges of accountability after the 'lack of resources' excuse, which is a blatant mischievous falsehood.

The Victorian Government is in breach of the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE), the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, and the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity.

These delinquent authorities need to be legally held accountable for exercising the objectives and clauses of every law under their responsibility.

Victorian Government Biodiversity Obligations

In 2002, the Victorian Natural Resources & Environment department was split into the (1) Department of Primary Industries and (2) Department of Sustainability and Environment. If the Victorian Government did not openly reject the pre-existing obligations to comply with the Intergovernmental Agreement on the Environment (IGAE), the National Strategy for Ecologically Sustainable Development, and the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity, then these obligations remain in force.

The Victorian Natural Resources & Environment (NRE) established guiding principles consistent with the National Strategy for the Conservation of Australia’s Biological Diversity under three main categories:

(1) Ecological principles

(2) Risk Management principles

(3) Development principles

Ecological Principles:

”Biodiversity is best conserved in situ (within species’ natural habitat).
Central to the conservation of biodiversity is the need for a ‘comprehensive, adequate and representative’ system of ecologically viable protected areas, integrated with the sympathetic management of other areas, including urban, agricultural and industrial areas.

Conservation is enhanced by knowledge and understanding of species, populations and ecosystems. We need to continue to develop our knowledge and understanding of Victoria’s biological diversity. We share the earth with many other life forms that have intrinsic value and warrant our respect, whether or not they are of immediate benefit to us.

Applying ecological principles to ecological systems
Plants and animals depend on each other for survival. They are effectively connected to each other through a web of interactions which, at the larger level, form a series of ecosystems and help shape the landscape. Individual species are easiest to conserve when they are maintained within their natural habitats and landscapes. Therefore, to conserve biodiversity, we must consider landscapes and their management as a whole.

Size
Human activity in Victoria has fragmented many of our natural ecosystems and landscapes. Any area of native vegetation, whether mallee scrub, coastal heathland or mountain forest, is more susceptible to damage if it is small and isolated from other natural areas. In the long term, large, consolidated areas of native vegetation are more viable than smaller, more fragmented areas. Large, intact areas of some ecosystems, such as Victoria’s grasslands and grassy woodlands, no longer exist. In future, some of these areas may be restored or re-aggregated in pastoral areas as part of drought preparedness arrangements.

Links and corridors
Fragmented ecosystems support less species and genetic diversity. Links between fragments can allow otherwise isolated populations of flora and fauna to remain connected to populations elsewhere.

Links therefore maintain larger gene pools, contributing to evolutionary development and long-term viability.

For some animals, the ability to move between different parts of their habitat is a critical requirement of their life cycle. In urban and rural areas, corridors of native vegetation along rivers and roads are literally lifelines for these animals.

On the other hand, roads and clearings through forests provide convenient corridors for the movement of introduced predatory animals like foxes and invasive pathways for weeds.

Many fish rely on free movement up and down rivers.

For them, structures such as weirs can become impregnable obstacles. At larger scales, the extensive coastal and inland freshwater wetlands linked by waterways enable waterbirds to survive droughts.

Boundaries
The boundaries between ecosystems are where change is most active. There the ebb and flow of seasons and environmental cycles have the most influence. Rapid, sometimes irreversible, change occurs especially at the boundary between natural ecosystems and altered ones. These so-called ‘edge effects’ include progressive invasion by pest plants and animals, changes to soil conditions and water flows, increased exposure to wind and sun, and changes to fire patterns.

Risk management principles
Taking into account these ecological considerations, the following risk management principles can be identified from the IGAE and the National Strategies:

The causes of a significant reduction or loss of biological diversity must be anticipated, attacked at the source, or prevented.
Prevention is better than cure. Protecting ecosystems from damage is far more cost-effective than attempting rehabilitation once the damage is done. Besides, some ecosystem changes and losses of biodiversity (for example, extinctions) can never be rectified.

The ‘precautionary principle’ (Principle 15 of the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, to which Australia has agreed) provides a general guide to dealing with the uncertainty and risk involved in conserving biodiversity, in two main ways:

When contemplating decisions that will affect the environment, the precautionary principle involves careful evaluation of management options ‘to avoid, wherever practicable, serious or irreversible damage to the environment, and an assessment of the risk-weighted consequences of various options.’

When dealing with ‘threats of serious or irreversible environmental damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation’.”

Tiger Quoll
Snowy River 3885
Australia

I held out hope that both would bring about worthwhile changes, but those hopes have been unrealised.

In Kevin Rudd's case, I find it hard to believe that he is "otherwise thoroughly decent". He has gone out of his way to inflict maximum harm on this society, the most glaring example being Australia's current record high rate of immigration.

In Barack Obama's case, it might be worth reading Russ Baker's new book "Family of Secrets: The Bush Dynasty, the Powerful Forces That Put It in the White House, and What Their Influence Means for America" proposes the same hypothesis for a number of other Presidents including President Obama. (For some more information, see "Week In Review: John Perkins & Russ Baker on Secret Empires" for brief article and see related video of interview on GRIT tv.) Russ Baker's hypothesis is that Obama is doing what the military-industrial complex, of which President Eisenhower warned, expects him to do and not what he would actually prefer to do.

All the same, I think we are still entitled to judge what Obama does at face value and at face value it is appalling.

Foreign ownership in Australia property not only pushes up prices for Australia real estate, by increasing demand relative to supply, increased scarcity indirectly pushes up prices of rents. Foreign ownership of residential property end up displacing local people, because it makes the Australian way of life which is centred around owning one's own home, out of reach.

Foreign ownership of Australian proerty is a form of invasion. It is property invasion.

Melbourne and Sydney have seen interstate migration to Queensland largely because locals cannot afford the lifestyle they once aspired to in these two cities. Queensland has been cheaper and still is comparatively. But look at the consequential sprawl from Lismore to Tweed to Noosa!

"The Australian Government's approach to foreign investment policy is generally to encourage foreign investment in Australian property, business and industry."
http://www.propertyinvestmentplanning.com.au/investors.htm

Foreign Investment Review Board Policy

Residential Real Estate
SOURCE: http://www.firb.gov.au/content/default.asp

"The Government seeks to ensure that foreign investment in residential real estate increases the supply of dwellings and is not speculative in nature. The policy seeks to channel foreign investment in the housing sector into activity that directly increases the supply of new housing (that is, new developments such as house and land, home units and townhouses) and brings benefits to the local building industry and its suppliers.

The effect of the more restrictive policy measures on developed residential real estate is twofold. Firstly, it helps reduce the possibility of excess demand building up in the existing housing market. Secondly, it aims to encourage the supply of new dwellings, many of which would become available to Australian residents, either for purchase or rent. The cumulative effect should be to maintain greater stability of house prices and the affordability of housing for the benefit of Australian residents."

But the policy is not working!

The policy states that "Foreign persons are prohibited from acquiring established dwellings for investment purposes (that is, they cannot be purchased to be used as a rental or holiday property), irrespective of whether they are temporary residents in Australia or not."

But here are the exceptions:

* "Foreign persons who are temporary residents in Australia do not require approval to acquire a second-hand dwelling as their principal place of residence."

* Foreign-owned companies can acquire second-hand dwellings for the purpose of providing housing for their Australian-based staff (including migrants) provided the company undertakes to sell or rent the property if it is expected to remain vacant for six months or more.

*Vacant Land can be acquired by foreigners so long as substantial construction of single dwelling or multi-dwelling commences within 2 years."

Other exemptions (extract):

* You are a New Zealander
* You hold a permanent resident visa
* You are a temporary resident
* You are purchasing new dwelling(s) from the developer, where the developer has pre-approval to sell those dwellings to foreign persons
* You are acquiring an interest in developed commercial property valued at less than $50 million or $953 million (indexed annually) for US investors
* You are acquiring an interest in developed commercial property where the property is to be used immediately and in its present state for industrial or non residential commercial purposes."

So foreigners with money can go for it!

Rudd has removed barriers to entry into Australia from both a property ownership and employment perspective. His globe trotting penchant makes him think he's on the world stage with the big boy like the US, UK and China. But he is sick of punching above his weight. I'll fix that thinks Rudd, immigration! Invite em in from everywhere, recond immigration will fix it. Australia will get big and populated like the big boys and then they'll start listening to me at the negotiating tables.

Neocolonial Ruddism is all about one man's insecurity as a diplomat. Of course people from less well off countries want to come to Australia. Of course people from overcrowded countries want to come to Australia. Rudd selfishly ignores the costs and impacts on Australia. State Governments can't cope with the populations they've got.
But that's we're Rudd's got the control and power. The populous states are all Labor.
For Labor premier to dare criticise Rudd would be heresy.

Tiger Quoll
Snowy River 3885
Australia