Pilbara workers attack BHP over AWAs

June 13, 2007 - Hundreds of mine workers at BHP Billiton's Pilbara iron ore operations have protested over "belligerent and overbearing treatment" from management after being put on Australian Workplace Agreements.

A petition at BHP Billiton's iron ore mine at Mt Newman in Western Australia has been signed by over 200 people, complaining about an "atmosphere of intimidation and victimisation" surrounding workers who have signed Australian Workplace Agreements...
The miners say the were feared threats, stress, low morale and risks to safety as miners have been placed in areas had no experience. Up to 10 per cent of the total workforce at BHP's Mount Whaleback mine in Western Australia - believed to be about 2000 - had joined the protest.

Among the 200 miners alleged to have signed the petition, six spoke publicly about their treatment by management under AWAs.

Gary Martin, who has never been a union member is the supervisor of Newman's mobile equipment workshop. "I was considering just leaving. It's common enough that if you're not happy in a work environment you'll leave. This is a little bit different in that if I did leave and I happened to see on the news that someone was seriously injured or killed here, then I'd feel pretty bad about that," Mr Martin told the ABC

Most blamed a company culture under AWAs, the Howard Government's individual employment agreements, which have been spread to 80per cent of BHP's iron ore workforce.

Tony Maher, National President of the CFMEU said: "At Mount Newman, they are dominated by AWAs, people don't have the protection of a union, they're not able to speak up on safety concerns. What's happening is the management are ruin ruling by fear. They're intimidating people, daring them not to raise safety issues."

The petition says employees have been continually "looking over their shoulders" and fear harsh treatment by management. It says those who complain about safety are considered obstructionist and resistant to change, not champions of higher standards.

BHP's Ian Ashby said he was disappointed if employees felt they could not report safety incidents because of feared repercussions. He encouraged employees to report safety concerns directly to him.

Excavator Operator, Aaron Greenhalgh, believes that AWA workers are not reporting incidents. "These are blokes that are coming back to these wind rows and breaching it, tipping the tyres through and tipping loads and carrying on. That's a near miss, that's a potential, that truck could be going over. Apart from that, they're driving off and the next bloke comes along and he could be falling in that same hole..."

Allen Zadow, another AWA employee recently quit as foreman over his treatment in reporting a safety hazard that hadn't been fixed. "A lot of mine incidents aren't reported, full stop. Just ignored," he told the ABC.

After he filed a report on his computer, Mr Zadow was called into the manager's office and asked to explain himself. "It wasn't a very pleasant experience. I mean, I went into a meeting with five other people, me being the outsider and having five different people, all superintendent above, trying to intimidate me..."

The Federal Government says it has referred the matter to its workplace watchdog. Issues of health and safety are looked after at a state level. WA Employment Protection Minister Michelle Roberts says she is concerned by the claims and an investigation is under way to see if they can be substantiated.

ACTU secretary and federal Labor candidate Greg Combet said it was clear AWAs were the cause of the safety worries. "The trouble with the AWAs is that it leaves people one out on their own up against an international mining company and when it comes to a safety issue people one out on their own can't deal with it, feel intimidated," he said. "It underlines the importance of people being able to join together to collectively bargain because that's the only way you can have a say about something as important as safety.

"And it also underlines the importance of the freedom for people to be represented by a union, if that's what they want," he said in The West.

The CFMEU says recent ABS data (6306, Feb 2007) underlines that Australian mining does NOT rely on AWAs – just 31% of workers in metal ore mines, and only 16% of the mining industry’s workforce are on AWAs. Mining relies more on common law contracts (as provided for in ALP policy) rather than on AWAs. About 55% of metal ore miners are on common law contracts.

Sources:
730 Report
AM
ABC News
The Australian
ABC
The West
CFMEU

Massive Anvil Hill coal mine approved by NSW Government

June 7, 2007: Despite ongoing community protests, the NSW Government has approved the controversial Anvil Hill coal mine development in the Hunter Valley.

NSW Planning Minister, Frank Sartor, says he made the decision after 10 months of assessment. He says the total value of the coal reserve at the site is estimated to be about $9 billion. "It was time to resolve the issues and give certainty to land owners and other potentially affected by the mine," said Mr Sartor. But environmentalists say the decision shows that the coal industry is in the climate change policy driving seat...

The Anvil Hill coal mine at Wybong, about 20km west of Muswellbrook, is expected to produce up to 10.5 million tonnes of coal a year over 21 years for the domestic and export markets. It will have a capital investment of about $240 million and will support about 250 construction jobs and about 240 operational jobs.

Minister Sartor says 84 "strict conditions" had been imposed on the mine to deal with dust and noise issues.

Rising Tide Newcastle say the area is home to at least 178 animal species, including 4 threatened bat species, the squirrel glider, the koala, 14 threatened bird species and many more protected under international covenant. It is also home to at least 420 species of native flora, many of which are threatened and 3 of which are endemic to the area, including one newly discovered species of orchid found only at this site.

"This mine would have massive impacts on threatened species in the Hunter Valley, destroying one of the largest tracts of bushland remaining in the region," say RisingTide. "It would destroy a large area of water catchment for the already stressed Hunter River. The 10 million tonnes of coal from Anvil Hill will wreak irreparable damage on the global climate, tipping the planet further towards dangerous, runaway climate change. In the face of such massive impacts, the Iemma government still couldn't find the guts to say no to the coal lobby."

Greens MP Lee Rhiannon says the decision is a disaster and shows the NSW Government is not serious about climate change. "The Anvil Hill coal mine will add enormously to the climate change burden," he said. "Today's decision is a sell-out, not just of proper measures to deal with climate change, but is also of the Hunter community."

Senator Kerry Nettle also condemned the federal and state governments for the decision to approve the giant Anvil Hill coal mine. "The federal government is responsible for this mine as much as the state Labor government. The federal Environment Minister failed to even assess the impact on climate change of this mine," said Senator Nettle.

"The federal government and federal Labor support the expansion of the coal industry. Neither can be taken seriously on climate change if they agree to the expansion of the coal mining industry. The approval highlights the shocking inadequacy of the federal government and federal Labor climate change policies. You can't reduce greenhouse gas emissions by supporting a new coal mine that will produce 27 million tonnes of CO2 each year. The approval of this massive coal mine shows both Labor and Liberal's polices on climate change are worthless."

The approval of the new coal mine is sparking outrage. Greenpeace head of campaigns Stephen Campbell said: "The planning process is a farce. The Department of Planning has ignored advice on the environmental and climate impacts of this mine and ‘rubber stamped’ it... This is an absolute disaster for Hunter communities and for the climate."

About 500 environmentalists protested at the site last weekend, standing in formation to spell out Save Anvil Hill. The protest against the Hunter Valley coal mine has shown people from all walks of life, and not just "environmental jihadists", are worried about climate change.

Greenpeace campaign manager Stephen Campbell said about 500 people made the journey from around the state to show their commitment to dealing with climate change and opposition to new coal mines. "You've got people you'd expect to see at protests, like students and the Greens, but there's other people here who are associated with the mining industry, people who are associated with the horse and wine industry - not the kind of people who normally come to a rally such as this and they came today."

Mr Campbell said such diverse community representation demonstrated how deep and widespread concern about the expansion of the coal industry was. "The coal industry, the Labor party and others try to portray anyone who is opposed to the coal industry as some sort of mad man or environmental jihadist, and what we're showing is that is simply not the case," he said. "People from all over NSW are very concerned about the expansion of the coal industry, they're concerned about the local, social and environmental impacts.

Greenpeace spokesman Ben Pearson said: "People have had enough of new coal mines," Mr Pearson said. "They're ripping up the Hunter Valley. They're contributing to climate change. We know how great the threat of climate change is, but frankly if we're serious about climate change how can we justify opening massive new coal mines?"

SOURCES:
ABC
NQ Register
Daily Telegraph
Sydney Morning Herald
SMH
Rising Tide
Peace Bus
Rising Tide: Media Release

Street Action - Blocking the G8 - Germany

JUNE 6, 2007: Tens of thousands of people have marched through the north-east German port of Rostock, 25 kilometres from the Baltic resort of Heiligendamm, where invited leaders of the world's richest nations will begin their three-day G8 meeting. More blockades have been planned to disrupt the conference of global leaders.

Why block the G8 meeting? "Neoliberal capitalist globalisation – for which the G8 stands – increases the gap between the poor and the rich every day. The G8 claim they are combating global destitution, whereas they and those whose interests they represent are responsible for hunger, wars and environmental destruction.

That is why we will deny the G8 any legitimacy. We are not addressing the G8 with any demands, but say "No!". In order to express our clear "No!", we will not simply demonstrate. Instead we will actively thwart the G8 and block the access roads to the meeting place, which is used by numerous diplomats, translators and supply vehicles in order to get to Heiligendamm where the G8 summit will take place..."

On Monday, June 4th, anti-G8 actions and protest focussed on the demands for freedom of movement and equal rights for all.

Several decentralised actions took place: a demonstration with several thousand participants at the Immigration Centre in Rostock and another at the Sonnenblumen House in Lichtenhagen, where the Nazis attacked refugees in 1992. These were followed by a big march and rally in Rostock, which police restrictions and delays, but finally made it to the final rally at the city harbour. Decentralised actions also took place in other cities throughout the world.

On Sunday 3rd June, organisers said 80,000 people had taken part in a big demonstration, while Police put the figure at 30,000. Police sent in two anti-riot squads which led to clashes. "There is no justification for such violence against people and we formally distance ourselves from it," one protestor said.

The Rostock march was the biggest event of a week of demonstrations against the meeting of the leaders of Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia and the United States. Sunday's march began in a peaceful atmosphere. Protesters carried banners reading "Make Capitalism History". Others called for the world's most industrialised nations to fulfil their pledges to increase aid to Africa.

Protesters intend to block roads around Rostock airport from Wednesday to prevent the leaders and their delegations from reaching the summit venue. Organisers said they were expecting up to 100,000 people from anti-poverty and anti-corporate globalisation groups to demonstrate near where the leaders will gather. At a meeting of European and Asian foreign ministers in the northern city of Hamburg police used tear gas and batons to disperse a crowd of demonstrators.

All around the G8 venue tented camps have sprung up as affinity groups organise an alternative summit to highlight poverty and inequality. Dirk Mirow, a 37-year-old German taking part in the demonstration, said he was hoping the summit would achieve a major breakthrough on capping greenhouse gases. "I am here to protest for the climate because I have a two-year-old daughter and I'm wondering what sort of world we are creating for her," he said.

Tthe luxury beachfront hotel on the Baltic coast where the meeting will be held is surrounded by a heavily guarded fence topped with barbed wire. An underwater barrier has been erected to prevent ships approaching the hotel. German authorities have mounted an extensive security operation, with up to 16,000 police on duty.

Authorities can become brutal at G8 summits, most notoriously in the Italian city of Genoa in 2001 when a demonstrator was shot dead by police.

Check the Indymedia Timeline for immediate updates

SOURCES:
Resistance Against the G8
Why do you want to blockade?
G8 Protests Timeline
ABC News
ABC News
de.indymedia.org
Call for Action: June 5th, 2007
Germany: Pics from G8 protests - INFOSHOP

Students of Sustainabilty Conference 2007 - Murdoch Uni - Get some!

Students of Sustainabilty Conference 2007 - Respect Nyoongar Country

SoS_07 - July 9-15, 2007 - Students of Sustainability (SoS) is the largest student-run environment based conference in Australia. The next SoS convergence will happen July 2007 in Perth, Western Australia at Murdoch University...
Check out the website:
http://studentsofsustainability.org

So, what is SoS? Each year SoS offers an amazing opportunity for students, activists, academics, environment and Indigenous groups, and members of the wider community from around Australia to come together to share and gain knowledge, skills and information on environmental and social justice issues.

Please feel free to get involved with the organisation of SoS 2007.

We are all students of sustainability!

FIND OUT MORE:
http://studentsofsustainability.org

Rising Tide Perth condem BP/Rio Tinto giant coal plant for Kwinana

MAY 23, 2007 - Rising Tide Perth - Action against Climate Change

Perth Rising Tide crew, are gearing up to take action against the recently announced massive BHP/RioTinto Coal plant for Kwinana...

Rio, BP considering $2b coal-fired power project in WA: 21st May 2007 - Rio Tinto Ltd’s new joint venture with oil giant BP has unveiled plans for a $2 billion clean-coal power generation project at Kwinana.

Hydrogen Energy’s project, which will the subject of a feasibility study, would be fully integrated with carbon capture and storage to reduce its emissions of greenhouse gases. The power station could generate 500MW of electricity.

This would be the first new project for Hydrogen Energy, which was formed to develop decarbonised fossil fuel projects around the world, with the contribution of two existing projects in Scotland and in the US.

The industrial-scale coal-fired power and carbon capture and storage plant in Kwinana would generate enough electricity to meet 15 per cent of the demand of South-West WA.

It would capture and permanently store about four million tonnes of carbon dioxide.

The plant would draw on locally-produced coal from the Collie region to produce hydrogen and carbon dioxide. A decision to invest in the project is likely by 2011, and it could begin operating in 2014.

Energy Minister Fran Logan welcomed the announcement, saying the project had the potential to provide substantial benefits to WA and the nation.

Perth Rising Tide is a West Australian-based grassroots independent climate action collective. Perth Rising Tide say there are serious climate issues occurring within WA right now that require immediate grassroots action to aid their defence. Lets amalgamate, converge and take positive direct action against rapid-onset human-induced Climate Change at a local level...

Rising Tide Principles:
http://perthrisingtide.wordpress.com/principles/

We invite anyone with an interest in climate change issues to get involved. Join this WA autonomous movement against climate change. Please email us here: perthclimatealliance@yahoo.com.au

WEBSITE:
http://perthrisingtide.wordpress.com/

CLIMATE JUSTICE! - International Day of Direct Action against Climate Change and the G8 Friday 8th June 2007: The 8th of June International Day of Action Against Climate Change and the G8 has been called by the International Rising Tide Network.

This is a call for autonomous, decentralised actions appropriate for your town, city, or local area. Use this international day of action to support local struggles against oil refineries, gas pipelines, strip mines and coal-fired power plants. Disrupt the financial backers of the fossil fuel industry. Organise workshops to spread sustainable post-petroleum living skills. Find a weak point in the infrastructure of resource exploitation and throw a literal or symbolic wrench in the works. It’s time to visit your local polluters and give ‘em hell!

By 8th June actions will be planned around the world. Pass this call out on to all environmental justice, climate action, radical sustainability and related movements in all the G8 countries and the Global South.

Rising Tide will create a collection of outreach and agit-prop materials (including this call out in five different languages) that can be used by groups around the world to organise locally.

These materials will be downloadable from
http://risingtide.org.uk
and http://risingtidenorthamerica.org

Direct action and civil disobedience are the rational response in this time of crisis. Support the 8th of June International Day of Direct Action against Climate Change and the G8! Tell us about planned actions for climate justice being planned in your community.

Contact us - info@risingtide.org.uk and contact@risingtidenorthamerica.org In June 2007 the G8 will understand the meaning of rebellion, revolt and revolution. Their recipe for catastrophe will be met with our global resistance!

READ MORE
http://perthrisingtide.wordpress.com

Mining industry is bluffing on AWAs

14 May, 2007 - Mining industry is bluffing on AWAs: Kevin Rudd should not to be bluffed by the WA mining industry...

The Australian Mining and Minerals Association's Chris Platt says that the removal of AWAs is "a means of handing power back to union bosses and facilitating an increase in union membership."

Mr Platt writes, in an opinion piece for the Herald Sun, that Australian Workplace Agreements (AWAs) make the taking of industrial action during their term illegal: "Simply put, employers need to guarantee that they will not be subject to industrial action in order to attract and retain business and enhance our export reputation. AWAs also restrict the involvement of uninvited unions. A union cannot involve itself in the negotiation of an AWA unless an employee appoints it as his or her bargaining agent."

"he question remains, will the mining industry be able to continue to maximise the benefits of the boom period or will the industry's future be put in the hands of trade unions whose own management performance is abysmal?" said Mr Platt.

However Greens Senator Rachael Siewert says: "Quite frankly, what the WA mining lobby has been saying about AWAs underpinning the mining boom is nonsense. The boom was up and running well before Work Choices was in place," said Senator Siewert. "The resources sector is facing a serious shortage of skilled workers, and are having to offer huge wages to pull people out of other sectors of the economy. It is ludicrous to think that an award safety net and collective bargaining could undermine the boom as the mining sector claim."

"The mining industry are simply throwing their weight around. They have the WA state government under their thumb and think they can push around the whole nation. Mr Rudd needs to think about the long-term future of Australia and its workers, not pander to any one section of the economy for short-term gain.

The Australian Mines and Metals Association said in March that the Howard Government's spread of individual workplace deals (AWAs), had not led to a "race to the bottom" as Labor and unions had claimed. The AMMA said Australian Bureau of Statistics figures showed miners' average wages had risen to $1684 a week over the 12 months since Work Choices - up $642 a week. Mr Platt said about 30 per cent of miners were signed up to AWAs.

In Western Australia, he said, the proportion was 80 per cent. In the same period, time lost due to industrial disputes had fallen dramatically. Mr Platt said Labor's pledge to abolish AWAs was "economic vandalism" and would put at risk Australia's reputation as a stable business environment.

ACTU secretary Greg Combet rejected this, saying collective wage agreements could offer the same "human resources outcomes" and the same rewards in productivity and efficiency. He said the AMMA had conveniently omitted that workers covered by collective agreements earned an average $107.50 a week more than those on AWAs.

"Everybody knows we are experiencing a resources boom, but what about when the boom ends?" Mr Combet said.

SOURCES:
Australian Mines and Metals Association
The Australian
Herald and Weekly Times

Howard's Nuclear Future - Reeks of Cronyism, Hypocrisy and Misinformation

MARCH 5, 2007: The controversial appointment of high profile nuclear-power proponent, Ziggy Switkowski - to head Australia's nuclear research body (ANSTO) has been widely criticised. Dr Switkowski's report to Prim Minister Howard late last year proposed a scenario of 25 Australian nuclear reactors. Critcs say "due process had been thrown out the window in the nuclear debate".

“We are talking about the world’s most hazardous energy source, yet the Government process to investigate whether Australia should adopt it has not been independent, not rigorous, not transparent, not robust. It is simply not good enough,” said ACF nuclear campaigner Dave Sweeney.

Meanwhile, John Howard's push for dozens of Australian nuclear reactors and his relationship with nuclear reactor proponents - Ron Walker and friends - highlights the cronyism and hypocrisy of a nuclear power push in Australia...
The Federal Opposition has criticised the Government's appointment of Ziggy Switkowski as chairman of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO). Science Minister Julie Bishop says Switkowski is the ideal choice to head ANSTO, as Australia considers nuclear power as an alternative to coal.

Labor's Kim Carr is critical of Switkowski's ANSTO appointment, saying: "his recent report for the Prime Minister lends weight to the view that he will be pursuing an agenda by this Government, for this Government, to impose nuclear power upon Australia."

With the Prime Minister's push for nuclear reactors, and his dubious relationship with nuclear-reactor proponent Ron Walker, the subject of intense scrutiny, the nuclear power hypocrisy deserves to be put under the microscope.

Howard admitted last week that Liberal powerbroker Ron Walker was setting up a nuclear energy company around the same time he announced the taskforce, headed by former Telstra chief Switkowski. Mr Walker and fellow businessmen Robert Champion de Crespigny and Hugh Morgan registered Australian Nuclear Energy Pty Ltd on June 1 last year, five days before Mr Howard set up his prime ministerial taskforce. ANE was forced to deny newspaper reports that it was planning to build Australia's first nuclear power station in either Victoria or South Australia.

ANE issued a statement saying it was a "private company established to examine potential commercial responses to future energy needs" and denied it had proposed to build nuclear power plants.

Greens' nuclear spokesperson, Senator Christine Milne, said Howard and Rudd need to be straight with the community about uranium mining, exports, nuclear reactors and waste dumps and the discussions they are having with party backers, pollsters, the mining industry and nuclear proponents.

"It is no wonder Australians are confused about how Australia is suddenly in the grip of a major nuclear push when overwhelmingly the community opposes it. Conflicts of interest, hypocrisy, and cronyism are rife. Transparency of process and freedom of information are the cornerstones of democracy. They are sadly lacking in Australia right now," Senator Milne said.

The federal opposition says the new chairman of the Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) has been appointed to follow the government's agenda. "Whatever Mr Ziggy Switkowski's considerable professional qualifications, this will be seen as a highly controversial appointment," Labor's science spokesman Kim Carr said.

Despite scientists and the community objections, Switkowski's report proposed that nuclear-power would offset climate change because it would be clean and cost competitive in its own right.

Labor's Energy spokesman Chris Evans says Mr Howard is pushing an agenda. "It's clear that the Prime Minister is encouraging people to go down the path of nuclear energy," he said. "The Howard Government's plan to take us down the nuclear path is much more advanced than people thought."

The Australian Conservation Foundation (ACF) says Switkowski's appointment represents a conflict of interest. ACF's Dave Sweeney said Switkowski's appointment showed that due process had been thrown out the window in the nuclear debate currently raging in the country. Mr Sweeney said the appointment highlighted the Government's quest to push nuclear energy, especially when the Government had not yet responded to Dr Switkowski's nuclear inquiry report.

"We are talking about the world's most hazardous energy source, yet the government process to investigate whether Australia should adopt it has not been independent, not rigorous, not transparent, not robust," he said. "It is simply not good enough."

Mr Sweeney said the Prime Minister's haste towards a nuclear program had seen an unashamedly pro-nuclear Mr Howard hand-pick a taskforce to examine domestic nuclear power and then appoint as taskforce chairman a man who was on the board of Australia's largest nuclear agency.

He said the taskforce delivered a "one-eyed pro-nuclear report" that lacked detail on costing and siting, failed to address the two key issues of nuclear safeguards and radioactive waste, and was widely criticised. "Before the dust settles on this report, before the Government has even formally responded to this report, its chief author is promoted and put in charge of its implementation," Mr Sweeney said. "Mr Switkowski has a clear conflict of interest. "

Labor called Dr Switkowski a "pawn for the Government". But Dr Switkowski said his experience heading up the nuclear power study would be an advantage in his new position. "ANSTO itself, I think, is well progressed in its thinking around all aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle," Dr Switkowski said on ABC radio. "The fact that I now return as chairman will lead to a situation where the board will continue to be, I think, conversant with and in some cases quite expert in the areas of ANSTO, which is what you would want."

Meanwhile, John Howard himself told Parliament last week that: "I might remind the leader of the Opposition that the laws of the Commonwealth and the state as they now stand, prohibit any nuclear power generation in Australia..."


The Premier of Victoria, Steve Bracks, said he would hold a plebiscite if the Federal Government tried to override state laws and build a plant in Victoria. "There's no safe way of storing radioactive waste, No. 1," he said. "No. 2, the general safety of the plan is questionable, and No. 3, the economics are just not there." The South Australian Premier, Mike Rann, said no reactor would be contemplated while he was premier.

Labor's environment spokesman, Peter Garrett, said he was surprised the plans to build a plant were so advanced. "Australians are very clear that they don't want nuclear energy and nuclear power in this country."

The Wilderness Society spokeswoman Imogen Zethoven said any Australian nuclear plan must be stopped. "If we just went blindly down this path of producing nuclear power we would just end up with this massive waste problem which would become Australia's biggest waste problem ever and for an extremely long time."

The 'debate' continues...

---

SEE RELATED:
Suburban homes uninsured against nuclear accidents || NT Uranium Mine Danger: Heavy rains pose radioactive risk to Kakadu

---

SOURCES:
ABC News
Media Release - Senator Milne
The Age
News Ltd
Ziggy’s promotion a process meltdown - ACF
WA Business News
Govt to nuclear company - ABC PM
Howard's nuclear plan 'more advanced' - ABC News
Sydney Morning Herald
Businessmen deny nuclear proposal - SMH

Coal lobby censors climate change website

5 March 2007: MINING INDUSTRY SILENCING DISSENT: A satirical website created by climate action group Rising Tide Newcastle has twice been shut down this fortnight by powerful coal industry lobby group, the NSW Minerals Council...
The website is a parody of the NSW Minerals Council's big-budget spin-doctor campaign to promote the 'virtues' of the coal industry.

Climate activist group Rising Tide built the site to highlight the growing contribution coal exports make to climate change.

Greens MP Lee Rhiannon has criticised the powerful coal industry lobby group, the NSW Minerals Council, for attempting to censor the climate change debate by getting their lawyers to shut down a community based climate change website.

"This is an extraordinary case of censorship by the powerful coal industry," said Ms Rhiannon. "The NSW Minerals Council is pulling out all stops to censor public debate on the deadly impact of coal on our climate at a time when robust open debate on the future of coal is urgently needed."

"A recent Hunter survey that showed more than half of people in the Hunter now feel the negative impacts of coal far outweigh the positive benefits, has pushed the powerful coal lobby to this desperate measure."

After lawyers for the NSW Minerals Council complained to the website hosting company that Rising Tide's content was in breach of copyright, the website was shut down. Rising Tide contested this claim and hit back by re-designing the website to ensure it was not subject to copyright, but the lawyers moved in a second time and had the website shut down again. Rising Tide has now filed a counter claim that the NSW Mineral Council's grounds were spurious, and have re-launched their website today using an overseas internet service provider to protect the site from further attack.

"The NSW Minerals Council must be prepared to face open debate about coal instead of censoring community opinions that they are uncomfortable with," said Ms Rhiannon.

- NSW Mineral Council's coal public relations website – www.nswmining.com.au
- Rising Tide's parody website – www.miningnsw.com.au

The website was conceived as a response to the Minerals Council's “Life. Brought to you by Mining” advertising campaign.

The Minerals Council campaign, which argues that mining is inextricable from modern luxury can be viewed at www.nswmining.com.au. Rising Tide members created a parody website at www.miningnsw.com.au in order to present the other side of the story and address the damage wrought by mining to the local and global environment and to the local community.

Steve Phillips, spokesperson for Rising Tide Newcastle said, “The coal export industry constitutes NSW's biggest single contribution to global climate change. There is also growing public awareness of the terrible impacts of coal mining on biodiversity, water and air quality. The Minerals Council want people to know that luxury is dependent on mining: All we want is for the public to be fully informed about the consequences of that luxury, and to realise that while we can have jobs without coal, and we can have energy without coal, we cannot have a coal industry without climate change.”

Rising Tide has now moved the site to an off-shore host in order that the information contained within it can remain in the public domain.

“The Minerals Council is abusing legal process to ensure that its public-relations spin is unquestioned and that community criticism of its methods or message is quashed as quickly as possible” said Ned Haughton, the site’s graphical designer.

Mr. Phillips continued, "We have issued a counter-notice rejecting the Minerals Council's spurious claims. The Minerals Council now has ten days in which to take the matter further."

“The Minerals Council say they want a “balanced debate” on the impacts of coal mining on local, regional, and global environments – we welcome that wholeheartedly. Their rhetoric however, is sharply at odds with their attempts to silence legitimate criticism from community groups.”

For more information:

Ned Haughton on 0417 484 735
Steve Phillips on 0437 275 119.

Background:
* On February 19th this year, the NSW Minerals Council (NSWMC) launched an expensive public relations campaign with the slogan “Life: Brought to you by mining.” The campaign includes billboards, television, and newspaper advertisements, and the website www.nswmining.com.au

* Shortly after the launch of the NSWMC website, Rising Tide Newcastle (RTN)set up a satirical and critical website at www.miningnsw.com.au. This website was a mirror image of the NSWMC website, except that the text was different, describing the negative social and environmental effects of the mining industry.

* The hosts of the RTN website were contacted by NSWMC lawyers within 24 hours of the launch of the site. The NSWMC lawyers abused a clause of the Commonwealth Copyright Regulations to forced the website hosts to remove the site. RTN created the original website as a satirical imitation of the NSWMC site, with rewritten commentary. While this was most probably legal under the Copyright Act's Fair Dealing clause as a parody, the hosts were legally required to remove the site pending a response to the Minerals Council's claim of copyright infringement, which did not specify the articles of alleged copyright.

* RTN then completely re-made the site, with original layout and images that were either original or used with permission, in order to remove all possibility of copyright infringement. The NSWMC lawyers nevertheless contacted the new website hosts within 24 hours, with a similar claim letter, and again had the site removed under Regulation 20J of the Copyright Regulations.

* While the site had not contravened any copyright laws, as the lawyers for the NSWMC may well have known, the host was again legally obliged to remove the site.

* RTN have submitted a counter-notice, rejecting the allegations of the NSWMC. The NSWMC now have a 10 period in which they can take the matter further, which would require taking RTN to court over the incident.

* In the meantime, the RTN website has been relaunched with an offshore host. International copyright law does not have the same automatic take-down clause of Australian copyright law.

SOURCES:
melbourne.indymedia.org/news...
Parody Site: miningnsw.com.au
risingtide.org.au
Sydney Indymedia - Climate Mining

Protesters defy police, walk into Weld Valley

February 18, 2007: Weld Valley protesters ignore police caution - About 50 protesters have entered a Forestry Tasmania exclusion zone in the Weld Valley, south-west of Hobart. The protesters are trying to stop the logging of two coupes of temperate rainforest, next to a World Heritage Area. In the past week, behind locked gates, wilderness forests in The Lower Weld Valley have been attacked, and their world heritage qualities devalued at an alarming rate. This Sunday people are bearing witness to the beauty and the sad loss of these threatened ancient forests.

Huon Valley Environment Centre Spokesperson Jenny Weber says: "Forestry Tasmania’s unprecedented eleventh hour attempt to put an injunction on the Huon Valley Environment Centre is merely a distraction from their accelerated detruction of wilderness forest. Heavy machinery and chainsaws have been working on overdrive to rapidly devalue this precious landscape..."
Meanwhile Forestry Tasmania has failed in a court bid to stop the protest action. Today, police about inside the Weld "exclusion zone," formally cautioned the protesters, saying they would be charged with trespass if they continued walking into the forest. However, the caution was ignored by all but a couple of the protesters.

Jenny Weber says all that separates the Weld Valley logging coupes from neighbouring World Heritage forest is a line on a map. She says 95 per cent of the trees cut down by Forestry Tasmania will be woodchipped and the practice must stop.

Earlier, a conservationist who protested in the Weld Valley has escaped a conviction for locking himself in a forestry vehicle. Thirty-five-year-old Adam Burling of Lucaston was arrested in the Valley late last year. In the Hobart Magistrates Court, Burling pleaded guilty to trespassing while campaigning against logging in the Weld Valley.

The court heard he sat in the driver's seat of a forestry vehicle and refused to leave. When police used the electronic key to unlock the car, Burling continued to lock it again, but police eventually pulled him out of the car. Defence lawyer Cassandra Gregg said Burling was a former Huon Valley councillor, part-time employee of Greens Senator Bob Brown and a dedicated forest campaigner. The magistrate told Burling actions like his did not tend to further the cause. Burling was not convicted on condition of six months' good behaviour.

Previously, Forestry Tasmania failed dismally in an unprecendented 11th-hour legal attempt to stop a protest march going ahead in the Weld Valley. Three of the protest organisers were served with writs from Forestry Tasmania at their Huonville homes. Forestry Tasmania was seeking an injunction to stop the Huon Valley Environment Centre and six of its members from emailing, texting, handing out pamphlets or posting information on the internet about the "walk-in" rally into the out-of-bounds Weld Valley. It would also have prevented the centre from allowing protesters to sleep at its Huonville headquarters or at any of its named office-bearers' homes.

"It was a shock to get that delivered to your doorstep," said HVEC treasurer and spokeswoman Jenny Weber. "I felt scared and overwhelmed that Forestry Tasmania was prepared to go so far as to engage individuals trying to stop logging in the Weld in court proceedings."

In an embarrassing bungle, Forestry Tasmania was forced to withdraw its application for an immediate injunction. The backdown came after nearly two hours of legal debate, after Tasmania's Chief Justice Peter Underwood ruled the key evidence on which Forestry Tasmania was basing its injunction claim was inadmissible. Justice Underwood also ordered Forestry Tasmania to pay all legal costs of the Huon Valley Environment Centre and its co-defendants, estimated to be between $7000 and $10,000.

Weld Valley protester and president of the Huon Valley Environment Centre, Adam Burling, said he had no doubt the latest legal action was an attempt by Forestry Tasmania to demonstrate a new hardline approach toward protesters.

"We believe there are enough existing laws, such as the exclusion-zones powers at Forestry Tasmania's fingertips. Why do they need to crackdown even more?" Mr Burling asked. But Forestry Tasmania's Huon Valley district manager, Steve Davis, said trespassing protesters had become increasingly reckless in their attempts to impede logging, compromising safety at the site and risking injury to workers.

Forestry Tasmania was supported in its legal action by the Tasmanian Forest Contractors Association. Most of the evidence backing its case presented by Forestry Tasmania was obtained from websites associated with recent protest actions in the Weld Valley near Geeveston, which Justice Underwood ruled could not be accepted by the court as fact since the authorship of internet material was uncertain and unprovable.

Justice Underwood also ruled inadmissible parts of the sworn statement made by Mr Davis and presented to the court, stating that he expected protesters tomorrow to lock themselves to logging machinery, to conduct tree-sits and to "otherwise interfere with forest operations". The judge ruled these were Mr Davis' beliefs and not facts, and as such could not be accepted as evidence by the court.

A victorious Mr Burling, also one of the individuals named in the injunction, described the case's dismissal as a triumph for democracy and free speech. He said the attempted injunction was part of the new "heavy-handed" tactics being employed by Forestry Tasmania and the Lennon Government in the ongoing dispute about the logging of Tasmania's native forests. Forestry Tasmania withdrew not just its injunction application, but an associated longer-term writ based on a conspiracy charge against the named Weld Valley defendants.

"This is a desperate act from the State Labor Government to silence its critics of the unpopular forest industry and to do the biding of Gunns ltd," said Mr Burling. "Forestry Tasmania should be taking note of the Federal court's December decision in the Wielangta case and cease their illegal logging operations, not trying to start new legal case against community groups."

SEE ALSO:
Weld Valley Campaign's Online Home
http://www.huon.org/weldvalley/

Sources:
ABC NEWS
Mercury Conservationist avoids trespassing conviction
Weld Valley Campaign's Online Home
Forestry Tasmania launches legal attack against community walk

Halt the Salt: Stop the world's largest salt mine being built in WA's north west

February 15, 2007: The Halt the Salt campaign to stop the world's largest salt mine from being built on the sensitive eastern edge of the Exmouth Gulf continues to attract widespread support. Recently, there have been two major developments in the campaign...
Government authorities examining the proposal have now agreed to extend the public comment period by a further two weeks until March 12.

The Halt the Salt Alliance also organised a successful public forum at which leading scientists expressed grave concerns at the proponents' environmental management plans.

Scientific community calls for cautious approach and further research. Leading experts in wetland systems, hydrology, prawn fisheries, marine ornithology, humpback whale migration and dugong behaviour addressed a public forum held in Perth on February 5.

Several presenters said the current research into the proposal for a salt mine was inadequate and required further detailed review of the scientific modelling and risk assumptions used.

Wetlands expert Dr Vic Semeniuk, environmental hydrogeologist Dr Colin Walker, former Department of Fisheries research director Dr Jim Penn and marine ornithologist Dr Nic Dunlop detailed significant risks to the sensitive environment and the failure of the current proposal to adequately address these risks.

They argued the proponents did not have a full understanding of the Exmouth Gulf environment, had failed to address basic questions and were unaware of the impact they could make.

Humpback whale migration expert Mr Curt Jenner and Department of Environment and Conservation dugong researcher Dr Bob Prince outlined the importance of the area to marine mammals and further research required to properly understand how a salt mine operation could impact on these populations.

Forum presentations support Alliance concerns

The Halt the Salt Alliance has repeated its call for the proposal to be scrapped after scientific experts at the February public forum backed its concerns.

Alliance spokesman Chris Tallentire said the views expressed publicly by internationally-recognised experts were a clear demonstration that the Alliance is not alone in its concerns and Straits is risking damage to an environment that it knows little about.

"Speakers at the forum were asked to provide their own independent opinions based solely on their expert backgrounds and credentials in critical areas of this proposal - their criticism and words of warning were a huge wake-up call for the proponent and the government," Mr Tallentire said.

Public pressure causes comment deadline to be extended

The Western Australian Environmental Protection Authority and Straits Resources have bowed to public pressure and extended the period of community consultation for a further two weeks until March 12.

This decision was a clear acknowledgement that the community does have major, legitimate concerns and they must be properly and fully addressed.

The Alliance expressed its concerns
http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/news/news070102.php to the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) over the badly inadequate consultation period for comment on Straits' proposal.

What you can do to support the campaign

Growing numbers of people from Australia and overseas, determined to help protect this unique environment, are making their views known to the Western Australian Government via the pro-forma submission http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/hts_submission/hts_submission.php .

Personalised letters, faxes or phone calls to politicians are also very important and the Alliance website has a full list of contact details http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/main/what_can_i_do.php#politicians.

Another good way of putting your views across is to write a Letter to the Editor and again the Alliance has details of how to make contact with the State's major newspapers: http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/main/what_can_i_do.php#letters or you can spread the word via your own local community newspaper

If you haven't seen a campaign information brochure you can download a copy from this site: http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/main/publications.php or contact one
of the Alliance affiliated bodies.

You can find out more about the extensive support for the campaign
by visiting the About Us: http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/main/about_us.php
and Links http://www.haltthesalt.org.au/main/links.php sections on the
website.

Great Southern Plantations destroying Tiwi Islands

From the newswire February 8, 2007: Perth-based tax minimisation company Great Southern Plantations Ltd (GSP) are responsible for a massive native forest clearfelling project on the Tiwi Islands north of Darwin. GSP plan to expand its massive venture to clearfell to around 80,000 hectares of native bush. GSP's venture is the single largest native vegetation/native forest clearing project in northern Australia. Last year's clearing of 10,000ha is comparable to the total annual native forest clearfelling in Tasmania. Many endangered and endemic species live in these forests and in adjacent rainflorest patches which are being degraded as a result of the clearing.

GSP's forestry project is now under investigation by the Commonwealth Department of Environment following evidence of widespread breaches of the environmental protection conditions that the project is legally obliged to comply with, e.g. buffers around rainforest patches; protection of endangered species etc. This expansion would be "ecologically, economically and culturally disastrous..." 500 local people have petitioned against the company.

Following an action at the Great Southern Plantation's AGM, and a response on Perth Indymedia to a recent feature article about the ongoing Tiwi project, the Environment Centre of the Northern Territory have corrected several misleading statements made by Mr Ikin of Great Southern Plantations in relation to the ongoing destruction of Tiwi Island forest for woodchip plantations...

READ ON/Comment...

CORRECTIONS to Great Southern Plantation Ltd's PR manager || Anger over forestry plan || Great Southern Plantations shares fall after protest || Protesters rally at GREAT SOUTHERN PLANTATIONS AGM || Great Southern Plantations Ltd: ripping the heart out of Tiwi Islands

COKE - ETHICALLY OUT OF ORDER

Campaign to Hold Coca-Cola Accountable - Coca-Cola Crisis in India

Communities across India are under assault from Coca-Cola practices in the country. A pattern has emerged as a result of Coca-Cola's bottling operations in India.
* Communities across India living around Coca-Cola's bottling plants are experiencing severe water shortages, directly as a result of Coca-Cola's massive extraction of water from the common groundwater resource. The wells have run dry and the hand water pumps do not work any more. Studies, including one by the Central Ground Water Board in India, have confirmed the significant depletion of the water table.

* When the water is extracted from the common groundwater resource by digging deeper, the water smells and tastes strange. Coca-Cola has been indiscriminately discharging its waste water into the fields around its plant and sometimes into rivers, including the Ganges, in the area. The result has been that the groundwater has been polluted as well as the soil. Public health authorities have posted signs around wells and hand pumps advising the community that the water is unfit for human consumption.

* In two communities, Plachimada and Mehdiganj, Coca-Cola was distributing its solid waste to farmers in the area as "fertilizer". Tests conducted by the BBC found cadmium and lead in the waste, effectively making the waste toxic waste. Coca-Cola stopped the practice of distributing its toxic waste only when ordered to do so by the state government.

* Tests conducted by a variety of agencies, including the government of India, confirmed that Coca-Cola products contained high levels of pesticides, and as a result, the Parliament of India has banned the sale of Coca-Cola in its cafeteria. However, Coca-Cola not only continues to sell drinks laced with poisons in India (that could never be sold in the US and EU), it is also introducing new products in the Indian market. And as if selling drinks with DDT and other pesticides to Indians was not enough, one of Coca-Cola's latest bottling facilities to open in India, in Ballia, is located in an area with a severe contamination of arsenic in its groundwater.

Destroying Lives, Livelihoods and Communities

Water shortages, pollution of groundwater and soil, exposure to toxic waste and pesticides is having impacts of massive proportions in India. In a country where over 70% of the population makes a living related to agriculture, stealing the water and poisoning the water and soil is a sure recipe for disaster. Thousands of farmers in India have been affected by Coca-Cola's practices, and Coca-Cola is guilty of destroying the livelihoods of thousands of people in India.

Unfortunately, we do not even know the extent of the damage as a result from exposure to the toxic waste and pesticides as these are long term problems. Most affected are the marginalized communities such as the Adivasis (Indigenous People's) and Dalits (formerly untouchables), as well as the low-income communities, landless agricultural workers and women. Taken in its entirety, that's a lot of people in India.

Coca-Cola is destroying the food security of the people of the land, and by stealing the water and poisoning the water and soil, it is also responsible for ensuring a life of misery for future generations to come.

The irony is that most of the impacted community members, who are feeling the brunt of the water shortages and pollution, are unable to afford Coca-Cola. Which may be a good thing given that the product itself is poisonous. But it also raises the larger question of development in India. As is the case with the majority of other commodities in the Indian marketplace, only a fraction of the population are the "beneficiaries" of the current development policies. And unfortunately, the majority are not only left out of the so called "development" process, but they have to pay a high price for it as well.

The Struggles

The arrogance of Coca-Cola in India is not going unanswered. In fact, the growing opposition to Coca-Cola- primarily from Coca-Cola affected communities- has spread so rapidly and gained so much strength that Coca-Cola is now on the defensive.

READ MORE: INDIARESOURCE

BHP: 30 million litres of water per day for free - despite $8 billion 6 month profit

February 7, 2007 : Free water despite $8 billion 6 month profit

On the back of this morning's announcement of a 6 month profit of $8billion, Greens MLC Mark Parnell has called on BHP Billiton to start paying for water from the Great Artesian Basin as part of a complete renegotiation of the special deal that the Roxby Downs mine receives...
Mr Parnell says most Australians struggling with water restrictions would be very upset to learn that a company making an $8 billion profit in just 6 months is getting 30 million litres of water a day for free.

"BHP Billiton is laughing all the way to the bank - not only do they get special exemptions from a whole range of laws, they have an ridiculously generous deal on water," said Mr Parnell.

Since 1982, the Roxby Downs Indenture Act has granted extraordinary and unique exemptions from basic South Australian regulations and laws that all other miners and developers are required to follow. These include the South Australian Freedom of Information, Environment Protection, and Natural Resource Management Acts.

"On the back of the proposed massive expansion of the mine, and the switch to an open cut process, it is time to renegotiate the whole deal. Everything in the 1982 Roxby Downs Indenture Act should be back on the table, including water," he said.

The Roxby Downs mine is the single biggest user of water from the Great Artesian Basin, and the largest single-site industrial user of underground water in the Southern Hemisphere. When asked specifically by Phil Coorey of the Sydney Morning Herald about the amount of Great Artesian Basin water the Olympic Dam mine is using, and is likely to use in its expansion, John Howard stated last week that 'everybody's got to make a contribution to solving this problem'.

"Even John Howard has called for caps and pricing on Great Artesian Basin water, yet the Rann government still continues to give millions of litres of water away free every single day. This has got to stop," said Mark Parnell.

Great Southern Plantations destroying Tiwi Islands - Response

February 8, 2007: In 2005, Perth-based tax minimisation company Great Southern Plantations Ltd (GSP) took over a massive native forest clearfelling project on Melville Island north of Darwin (Melville together with Bathurst Is makes up the Tiwi Islands). GSP has been very open about its plans to expand its venture to clearfell around 80,000 hectares of native bush from the Tiwi Islands. The deplorable Great Southern Plantations project is the single largest native vegetation/native forest clearing project in the whole of northern Australia. Last year's clearing of 10,000 ha is comparable to the total annual native forest clearfelling in Tasmania. Many endangered and endemic species live in these forests and in adjacent rainflorest patches which are being degraded as a result of the clearing.

If approval is granted, this expansion would be ecologically, economically and culturally disastrous.

Following a response on Perth Indymedia to a recent Feature article on the ongoing large-scale destruction of the Tiwi Islands, The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) have corrected several misleading statements made by Mr Ikin of Great Southern Plantations (GSP) in relation to the ongoing destruction of Tiwi Island forest for woodchip plantations...
CORRECTIONS to Great Southern's PR manager by Environment Centre of the Northern Territory:

The Environment Centre of the Northern Territory (ECNT) would like to correct some of the statements made by Mr Ikin of Great Southern Plantations (GSP) in relation to the ongoing destruction of Tiwi Island forest for woodchip plantations:

"JOBS – Great Southern is the largest private sector employer on the Tiwi Islands, providing non-subsidised, full-time employment for 24 Islanders, with more to come this year and beyond. Current positions include 11 forestry apprentices; two forestry trainees; 10 land & marine rangers; and one Tiwi liaison officer."

FACT: GSP Ltd wrote to ECNT in November 2006 and stated that there is just ONE full time Indigenous Tiwi Islander working on the forestry project; there are TWO part time employees, and 11 apprentices - [who may or may not end up working on the forest destruction project.] This is after five years of project operation. The Land and Sea Rangers is a completely separate program run by the Tiwi Land Council, and assisted by WWF Australia and GSP. Over the years since this forestry project commenced all kinds of exaggerated claims have been made about how many jobs it would provide for the Islanders but up until very recently when adverse publicity started to grow, the employment was all but non-existent.
___________________

"THE ENVIRONMENT – Before the first tree was planted, the forestry project was subjected to a rigorous approvals process, involving both the Federal and Northern Territory governments."

FACT: the project was approved by the Commonwealth Environment Minister in 2001 after being subject to the LOWEST POSSIBLE level of environment assessment under the EPBC Act - 'Provision of Documents'.

_________________________

"Current approvals allow forestry to utilise less than 5% of the land mass of the Tiwi Islands."

FACT: This is a misleading statement because, as recent scientific research has shown (Firth R et al 2006), the company is targetting the highest quality native forest growing on the best soils with the most rainfall - forest that is extremely important for native wildlife.
_____________________________

"Land is selected for plantation development after consideration of a number of factors, including identification of various reserves and offsets around natural features and sensitive zones, restrictions on maximum slope and soil types, protection of vegetation, communities and sites of cultural significance.

FACT: GSP's forestry project is now under investigation by the Commonwealth Deapartment of Environment due to evidence of widespread breaches of the environmental protection conditions that the project is legally obliged to comply with, e.g. buffers around rainforest patches; protection of endangered species etc.
______________________

"LEASING OF LAND – The Tiwi have engaged the Australian Valuation office to verify that correct and fair market rents are paid. Establishing a plantation project on a remote island involves significantly different considerations than in well established forestry regions within mainland southern Australia. The Tiwi Islands have very low to nil infrastructure relevant to industry and forestry in general. Great Southern is therefore required to build all roads, ports, power generation etc – all items which in other forestry regions are typically already in existence and available for use."

FACT: The Traditional Owners are being paid FAR FAR less for the use of their traditional lands for the forestry project than plantation companies like GSP pay non-Indigenous landowners in southern Australia. The Tiwi Island traditional owners are being paid $15-$17/hectare/year for the lease of their land while southern Australian land owners are paid sums in the order of $200-$300/hectare/year!

No amount of fudging about the alleged extra costs on the Tiwi Islands can account for such a massive discrepancy. Furthermore, contrary to GSP's claims, much of the infrastructure being established on the Islands for use by the forestry project is being either wholly or substantially subsidised by the Commonwealth and NT governments. This includes a recent $1.5million subsidy for the upgrade of roads.
_________________

"In summary, the project has the full support of the Tiwi Land Council and is something that Great Southern is immensely proud to be associated with."

FACT: This is simply not true. There is opposition to the project throughout the Tiwi islands community as reflected in the recent petition signed by almost 500 Islanders and table in Federal parliament calling for an inquiry into the Tiwi Land Council. The petition was initiated by a Traditional Owner who is himsel a member of the Tiwi Land Council.

Peter Robertson
Coordinator
Environment Centre NT

P.S. When will GSP tell the Tiwi Islanders what became of the millions of dollars worth of high quality native forest sawlogs exported to Asia over the past few years for which they, the Islanders, have received a grand total of just $75,000???

---

ECNT Peter Robertson's response in the Perth Indy Newswires...

Response from David Ikin, Public Relations Manager, Great Southern Plantations Limited: http://perth.indymedia....

Why nuclear energy is not the solution to climate change

February 1, 2007: Faced with unrelenting local and global pressure over climate change, Prime Minister John Howard punches the nuclear power button almost every time he opens his mouth these days. His recent taskforce, looking at alternatives to fossil-fuel, yet stacked with nuclear industry proponents, announced over New Year 2007 that uranium mining be expanded and that nuclear energy is a viable option for Australia.

But nuclear power is not an answer to climate change...

If the argument is about greenhouse gases, Peter Bradford, former member of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission, says that: even if nuclear is fast-tracked over all other energy prospects, nuclear cannot provide more than 10-15% of greenhouse gas displacement likely to be needed by 2050.

Bradford says: "Not only can nuclear power not stop global warming, it is probably not even an essential part of the solution to global warming."

Extensive studies have shown that humans urgently need to shift to cleaner, safer energy sources to tackle the challenge of debilitating global climate change. And according to Friends of the Earth, there is no case for nuclear power to be part of the future energy mix. The environmental organisation said in November 2006, that nuclear power was a "dangerous distraction" from the safe solutions to the global crisis of climate change.

Globally, nuclear power currently supplies around three per cent of global energy - albeit at massive economic and environmental cost. Yet Friends of the Earth say renewable energy sources can supply considerably more than the International Energy Agency's highest global energy forecasts.

There are vast solar energy resources in Australia's deserts, for example, which can be converted to electricity by simple and safe mirror-based technologies. Globally, these could generate power on a scale of between ten and hundred times greater than any feasible nuclear expansion. And this technology is available right now.

Yet John Howard regurgitates the uranium industry line that nuclear power is "clean and green," when it is simply not true.

Nuclear power is not good for greenhouse gas reduction, because it requires huge amounts of fossil fuels - for mining, milling and enrichment of uranium. Furthermore, nuclear energy is dependent on the concentration of the uranium ore - and as more uranium is used, the quality of ore is depleted. According to recent analysis, even with high-grade ore, it would take 10 years to "pay back" the energy used in construction and fuelling of a typical reactor. And with lower-grade ore - if nuclear power were to be widely expanded - the net emissions would be far greater than a gas power station. Other studies show that uranium reserves would be depleted within 5-10 years if used to replace Coal as an energy source globally.

Water is also an issue in the nuclear energy cycle, consuming millions of litres of water to produce any fuel. Yet many towns and shires across Australia are struggling to get enough drinking water - let alone enough to satisfy the amount a nuclear station would need to guzzle. This is water that we simply cannot afford as chronic drought and looming climate change dry up water supplies in this country.

There is also the perpetual issue of nuclear waste. The nuclear industry is a producer of highly toxic, radioactive and hazardous waste. Yet in over 50 years, scientists have still not found a viable solution to the ongoing problem of radioactive waste. Nuclear power stations produce the most dangerous industrial wastes known to humankind. Reports estimate that even without expansion, by 2015 there will be roughly 250,000 tonnes to deal with. Beyond the waste issue, radioactive leaks continue. Since Chernobyl in 1986, more than 22 serious leaks have been documented. There are far greater safety issues involved with nuclear energy than any other method of generating power.

In terms of economic efficiency, nuclear power is the most expensive way to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Nuclear power is not economically viable without significant government subsidies. It is well known that the nuclear energy industry is heavily subsidised by taxpayers across the planet. Canada for example has a 4 billion dollar debt attributed to nuclear energy. And the USA provides direct subsidies to nuclear energy totalling $115 billion, with a further $145 billion of indirect subsidies.

But similar support has not been forthcoming for renewable energy. If the money invested in nuclear and fossil fuel subsidies were spent on energy efficiency and developing renewable energy sources - perhaps we would be much closer to meeting our needs at a far lower cost to the environment and power consumers.

Wind power, for example, is the fastest growing energy source in the world, and is far cheaper than nuclear. For the same investment, wind generates more electricity, and offers more jobs. Renewable energy is getting cheaper the more we produce in Australia. In recent years, over 6,000 megawatts of wind generation have been installed every year in Europe. This is the equivalent of three nuclear power plants.

Australians want renewable energy. A National Poll in 2003 found that 76% of respondents would pay an additional 5% on their energy bills for a 10% increase in renewable energy - when the alternative was cheap energy at any environmental cost.

Professor Ian Lowe, Australian Conservation Foundation President says, "be in no doubt: renewable energy works. Renewables now account for a quarter of the installed capacity of California, a third of Sweden's energy, half of Norway's and three-quarters of Iceland's. It is time we joined the clean energy revolution sweeping the progressive parts of the world," he said. "Renewables can meet Australia's energy demands. Just 15 wind farms could supply enough power for half the homes in NSW," said Professor Lowe.

Fitting solar panels to just half the houses in Australia could supply 7% of all our electricity needs, including industry needs - enough in fact for the whole of Tasmania and the Northern Territory. Currently, nuclear is a marginal energy source, supplying a small percent of the world energy demand.

Nuclear energy only produces electricity and can not replace petrol or diesel as fuel for cars, trucks, ships and planes - road transport is currently the source of 22% of carbon dioxide emissions, and aviation is the fastest growing source of CO2 emissions.

Nuclear power is not a sustainable energy source - it is greenhouse intensive, it is costly, dangerous, and produces toxic waste which hangs around for hundreds of thousands of years.

But don't let John Howard distort and polish the dubious reality of nuclear power, find out for yourself...

Sources:
- Media Release - FOE
- International Energy Agency
- Professor Ian Lowe. National Press Club, October 19, 2005
- Nuclear Power - Dr Helen Caldicott
- Boston Globe
- John Busby
- Sustainable Development Commission

Hollow Howard "unhappy" over Hicksy - Not good enough!

JANUARY 24, 2007: "Prime Minister John Howard's unquestioning support of the US military trial of David Hicks needs to end..."

John Howard has issued a hollow ultimatum to the US over the future of Guantanamo Bay detainee David Hicks. The Adelaide-born man has been held in Guantanamo Bay for more than five years. John Howard says he is unhappy it has taken so long for new charges to be laid.

The Prime Minister says he has asked the US to charge the Australian terrorism suspect by mid-February. Hicks has been detained since his capture in Afghanistan in December 2001. Supporters is showing more signs of mental anguish...

Shadow attorney-general Kelvin Thomson says John Howard's time line for the trial of Mr Hicks is meaningless: "It's a hollow ultimatum, the Howard Government continues to be in denial about the prospect of more legal challenges to an unfair process and the prospect that David Hicks will languish in Guantanamo bay indefinitely," said Mr Thomson.

"I think effectively he is calling for something which he believes that the US authorities intend to do in any event, I think that the Australian Government may well have had a nod and a wink from the Americans concerning their timing," he said. Mr Hicks appeared before a US military commission in August 2004 and pleaded not guilty to charges of conspiracy, attempted murder and aiding the enemy.

But all charges were dropped when the US Supreme Court ruled last June that the military commissions were unlawful.

Greens Senator Christine Milne says latest regulations concerning the military trial "breach accepted standards and will continue to deny David Hicks a fair trial." "Would Prime Minister Howard allow one of his own children to be tried under these rules?" Senator Milne said. "The chorus of opposition in this country to David Hicks' mistreatment during five years' incarceration and to the Howard government's abandonment of an Australian citizen grows louder each week."

She said Attorney-General Philip Ruddock's admission earlier this month that he has never even asked to see the evidence claims against David Hicks demonstrates the government's disregard for David Hicks' rights: "The government's treatment of David Hicks contrasts with its claims to stand for Australian values of fairness, decency and support of families.


MANUAL FOR MISTRIAL

Meanwhile, the US Defence Department has drafted a manual for trying detainees at the American naval base in Cuba. The manual allows terrorist suspects to be imprisoned, convicted and executed on the basis of hearsay evidence or coerced testimony. The Pentagon manual says so-called enemy combatants "are prosecuted before regularly constituted courts affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognised by civilised people".

The Law Council says these new rules fall short of fair trial standards: "After the Military Commissions Act was passed last year, we knew that this new regime... was fundamentally flawed and unfair," council president Tim Bugg said. "The manual, which contains the rules of evidence, simply confirms our fears." Mr Bugg said Hicks could be convicted on the basis of hearsay evidence that he won't have the opportunity to challenge.

"The rules even allow hearsay within hearsay, meaning that Mr Hicks could be placed in a position where he doesn't have the opportunity to cross-examine the person twice removed from the witness who actually made an allegation about him," Mr Bugg said. "The manual also makes it clear that evidence... used against Mr Hicks may come from informants in the field, former Guantanamo detainees long released and US and foreign security agents - none of whom the prosecution is required to produce at trial."

"Regardless of what lip service they pay to defendants' rights, the military commissions are designed to rubber stamp decisions about guilt that were made long ago," says Mr Bugg.

Hicks' defence counsel, US Marine Corps Major Michael Mori, said the new rules were even worse than the old system overturned by the US Supreme Court last year. "We have the same broken-down house with a fresh coat of paint," he said. "There is no difference. The same people who wrote the illegal system created this system..."

Major Mori said the manual denied Guantanamo inmates fundamental rights and placed unfair burdens on the defence. "Actually things are worse under this new system," he said. "Under the old commission system, a military defence lawyer was allowed to see all the classified evidence. Even if David Hicks couldn't, I could. Now they want to, basically, say that I may not see classified evidence. They may only use a summary and I may never get to see to check the classified evidence."

"It's very crafty how they put the burden on the defence to show why the Government's hearsay evidence is unreliable and yet they now give the ability to the government to classify how evidence was obtained and the methods by which it was obtained."

The rules, he said, "just don't provide for a fair trial". Major Mori said the rules diminished his client's rights substantially and made his job as defence counsel more difficult. "The right to a speedy trial - that's gone, any right against self incrimination has been taken away, the right to confront your accuser..." he said. "They say all hearsay can come in and the burden is on the defence to show why the prosecution shouldn't be able to use this."

Major Mori is examining avenues for a legal challenge, but said the US Supreme Court would not rule on such a case before 2009 or 2010, by which time Hicks would have been in detention for up to nine years. He said there was no indication from the Pentagon about a timeframe for laying fresh charges against Hicks.

Laying of fresh charges does not guarantee a quick trial, due to delays from legal battles in the US for those brought before military commissions.


MENTAL ANGUISH

Meanwhile, David's father, Terry Hicks, has expressed concern about his son's psychological state as he enters his sixth year at Guantanamo Bay.

However Foreign Minister Alexander Downer has rejected a suggestion Hicks might not be mentally fit to face trial. "There is no evidence of that from what I have heard from Guantanamo Bay. None at all," he said.

However, a US embassy spokeswoman has confirmed that a staff member spent "five minutes with Hicks" last Friday and a report of the meeting was given to the American ambassador to Australia, who briefed the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

"The official that met David Hicks is not a doctor so it wasn't an assessment as such," the embassy official said. "His quick impression was that David Hicks was physically healthy and mentally alert."

Major Mori questioned Downer's claim that Hicks was mentally fit to face trial. Major Mori said he understood Hicks had been "put on display for some visiting dignitaries". "He's being used as a monkey in a cage for people to come to stare at," he said.

The party included officials from the US embassy in Australia and there were no health professionals involved. "What I'm concerned about is, I don't believe David would want to reveal the problems he's having to the people who are controlling his life down there," Major Mori said.

SOURCES:
Law Council slams 'unfair system'
Father's fury at Hicks visit
Hicks like 'a monkey in a cage'
Five years on, Howard sets deadline for US to charge Hicks
PM Howard must demand David Hicks' return in wake of new rules

Woolworths: what about the other 364 days of the year?

January 22, 2007: Woolworths action "no more than a cynical marketing ploy".

In a major corporate advertising blitz, Woolworths on January 23, will "donate its entire day's profits from all Australian Woolworths supermarkets to the Country Women's Association (CWA) to help farming families with household bills and for research into sustainable farming practices."

Greens MLC Mark Parnell has called on Woolworths to do more for farmers all year round, rather than undertake a "one-day marketing-driven charity drive." There is growing concern across the country about power duopoly, Woolworths and Coles - who together control 70% of the Australian fresh food market and the control they have over the growing, distribution and sale of our food...

The General Manager of the SA Farmers Federation, Carol Vincent, describes Woolworths' National Drought Action Day as an "insulting" public relations exercise. "South Australian farmers don't want a tokenistic hand-out, they just want Woolworths to pay a fairer price for the produce they buy all year round," he said.

"The big two retailers have far and away the highest level of market dominance in the world," said Mark Parnell. "This is an incredibly unhealthy situation. Coles and Woolworths are able to exert too much influence over the size of farms, what crops are grown and what price they fetch - and as a result our farmers, and their communities, are doing it tough, drought or no drought. Because of their market power, Woolworths are in a wonderful position to make a real and lasting difference to our farmers and the wider community."

In 2006, Sunshine Coast strawberry and dairy farmers announced they were "sick and tired of being rorted by the major supermarket chains". According to the State member of Nicklin, "when I was trying to intervene on behalf of the dairy industry, I spoke to senior people in Woolworths and their response was, "we are not in the business of doing what’s good for dairy farmers, we are in the business of making profits for shareholders".

In 2006, Consumer Protection WA charged Woolworths with breaches of regulations relating to fuel pricing. Also the ACCC saw Woolies fined $7 million for anticompetitive behaviour in the liquor market. The CEO of Woolworths, a devout Christian, runs the largest liquor supplier and gaming operation in Australia - 12,000 gaming machines - as well as a major pusher of tobacco.

So far 2007 has seen Woolworths under further attack, first over grocery costs then the cost of fuel. Consumer experts say the nation’s supermarket duopoly is the reason. According to the NRMA, when it came to the cost of fuel, Woolworths are "reducing competition by squeezing independent chains out of the marketplace".

"If Woolworths are genuine about helping Australian farmers, they should stop robbing producers of the real value of their products, and start paying fairer prices 365 days of the year. Otherwise... (the) 'Drought Action Day' should be regarded as no more than a cynical marketing ploy," says Mark Parnell.

Woolworths CEO Michael Luscombe said the Woolworths National Drought Action Day is expected to raise in excess of three million dollars. He said 100% of the donation will be directed to the Country Women's Association. However, corporations like Woolworths, rarely wake up one morning, and decide it would be a good idea to dump a day’s profits into the bank accounts of organisations like the CWA. Woollies reported a billion dollar profit for 2005-6, paid its CEO $12 million, and expects 21 per cent growth.

Alan Matheson a human rights worker and christian minister says there’s a darker side to this retailing predator, which may shed some light on why Woolworths is prepared to overlook a day’s profit. "It’s farmers themselves who’ve been at the forefront of a continuing attack on Woolworths," he says. It’s farmers, and even Federal Government ministers, who see Woolies as a major threat to "the unique rural heritage of Australia". The $3 million the CWA will pick up is "peanuts compared to what is being alleged by farmers, and what the courts are saying about the friendly folks at Woolworths."

Australian fruit growers lost out as Woolworths sourced their Home Brand lines from China and South Africa in January 2006. Then Woolworths was "fined almost $9 million after being found guilty of fixing the price of bread and abusing market power". Growers complain of the "concentration of retail power", that led to grower returns getting less and less.

According to a Woolworths spokesperson, some of the donation "will be helping to put food on the tables, providing farmers with immediate support for household needs including paying bills, buying groceries and fuel." Families will be able to download applications for Woolworths funding from the CWA website starting April 1, 2006. As for the use of the remainder of the funds, the details are sketchy.

Mr De Landgrafft of the Western Australian Farmers Federation (WAFF) says it is encouraging to see farmers not having to rely solely on government handouts. "I think moves away from government assistance and back into industry... is a really good step forward," he said. "That's something that I think we haven't seen on this scale from industry, but I think that it's something [that] really needs to be done in the future."

Meanwhile, Woolworths has applied to New Zealand's competition watchdog to take over the country's largest listed retailer, The Warehouse. Michael Luscombe says the giant supermarket and retail chain may make a full takeover bid for the 85-store discount retailer.

SOURCES:
ABC News: Drought-stricken WA farmers pleased with retail support
Courier Mail: Buy up big to assist farmers
Woolworths CEO pledges substantial - Media Release
Melbourne Indymedia
Woolworths: the farmer’s friend!
Why our farmers get so paid little yet we're forced to pay so much
On the right track, but may lack sustainable commitment
ABC News: Woolworths seeks approval to buy Warehouse

ACTION: Stand Up for the Burrup this week!

::STAND UP FOR THE BURRUP::
Protest: The needless desecration of sacred art

The Burrup site, containing hundreds of thousands of rock carvings, said to date back thousands of years is under destruction.

From 12:30pm on Monday January 22 and Thursday 25, 2007 vigils will take place at the headquarters of Woodside in Perth to demonstrate against the relocation of rock art and destruction of the heritage values of the Burrup Peninsula.

Imagine a cultural icon six times older than the Pyramids, eight times older than Stonehenge. Imagine probably the earliest surviving rock carvings on this planet. Most Australians have never even heard of these rock carvings on the Burrup Peninsula, and have no idea this silent world treasure is being needlessly pulled apart and destroyed from blind industrial development...

The National Trust of Australia says the Burrup site, in north-west Australia, contains one of the world's largest and most important collections of petroglyphs - ancient rock carvings - dating back as far as the last ice age. It says the collection of standing stones may be the largest in the world.

In December 2006, Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell turned down an application for emergency heritage listing of the Burrup Peninsula rock art site, which is under threat from a major gas installation. Senator Campbell said that he did not believe the threat was sufficient to warrant emergency listing.

The application was made by Australian Greens senator Rachel Siewert, Labor MP Carmen Lawrence and independent MP Peter Andren. Senator Campbell said there were believed to be up to one million pieces of rock art in the Dampier Archipelago, including in the Burrup area. As a result of Campbell's rejection, Woodside will start initial preparation works at Site A, including engineering works and fencing.

Woodside announced last week that it has commenced work to remove ancient rock art from the Burrup. There has been opposition to its location because the company will have to move 150 ancient Aboriginal rock engravings to make way for the development. The plant is due to be operational by 2010.

"Woodside is needlessly vandalising the priceless heritage values of the Burrup when perfectly acceptable industrial land is just a few kilometres up the road," Friends of Australian Rock Art spokesperson Dr Sylvia Hallam said this morning. "The Government has failed to stop the desecration of Burrup Peninsula rock art, meaning it is up to the community to take their concerns directly to Woodside."

"This is a company that should seriously consider how further destruction on the Burrup will affect its' reputation. These vigils will be the first of many opportunities for us to talk directly to people about how Woodside's activities are ruining the ice age heritage of the Burrup."

Dr Hallam said that there are other sites nearby that should be used for Woodside's proposed Pluto LNG facility.

VIGIL:
Corner of St Georges Terrace and Milligan Street, Perth
Vigil 1 - Monday 22 January 2007, 12:30 - 1:30
Vigil 2 - Thursday 25 January 2007, 12:30 - 1:30
Contact: Dr Sylvia Hallam 9386 1366 or 0402 664 503

On the 9 January 2007 Woodside announced that work had started on the initial preparation phase of Woodside's Pluto project on the Burrup Peninsula. Woodside said site preparation work for LNG storage tanks will include fencing, road access and relocating cultural heritage material over the first half of 2007.

WA Senator Rachel Siewert says it's not too late to change the location. The Woodside project has drawn criticism because the company plans to move 165 Aboriginal rock carvings. A Woodside spokeswoman said the rock art relocation would start within two or three weeks, depending on the progress of other work.

Australian Greens federal Senator Rachel Siewert said the federal government and Woodside would be remembered as vandals for allowing the destruction of rock art. She said it was not too late to change the location of the plant to an already cleared adjacent site.

"Woodside have not even made the final decision to commit to the project... yet they are still proceeding with initial site works," Senator Siewert said in a statement," said Senator Siewert. "We need to ask why they are rushing to clear the site now, is it simply because in the New Year period they think people won't be paying attention?"

"This Government and Woodside will go down in the history books as vandals for allowing the destruction of rock art on the Burrup", said Senator Rachel Siewert. "I can not believe that in this day and age our Governments think it is acceptable to destroy ancient rock art to allow development," said Senator Siewert.

"It is not too late to relocate the development onto already cleared land next-door to the current site. Surely Woodside can negotiate with its joint venture partners to protect this unique rock art?" said the Senator. "Woodside have not even made the final decision to commit to the project, and reportedly will not be making this decision until later in the year - yet they are still proceeding with initial site works," said Senator Siewert. "I simply cannot understand why the Federal Government is not requiring Woodside to co-locate the plant just a couple of hundred metres up the road - thereby enabling the development to proceed and saving the rock art. Our failure to protect our unique Indigenous heritage is an international shame," she said.

Woodside is Australia's largest publicly traded oil and gas exploration and production company with a market capitalisation of more than A$25 billion

SOURCES:
Destruction of rock art to commence on the Burrup - Greens
Burrup.org.au
Vandalism/Destruction of Burrup rock art to begin - International Shame: Perth.indymedia
Protest Woodside's destruction of The Burrup. Perth.indymedia
Burrup tragedy: Campbell sends in the bulldozers. Perth.indymedia
Work starts on Woodside plant on Burrup - SMH January 8, 2007
Campbell rejects listing for Burrup site - The West December 22, 2006
GetUp Campaign to save the Burrup
Woodside reports record revenues. Perth.indymedia
Would the Egyptians knock down the Pyramids? Adelaide.indymedia
woodside.com.au