Howard's indigenous land-grab military-invasion opens door to nuclear waste dump

July 4, 2007: Prim Minister John Howard's electioneering intervention in the Northern Territory is a ploy to allow the dumping of nuclear waste in the outback, anti-nuclear campaigner Dr Helen Caldicott says.

Radical measures announced by Mr Howard last week include welfare restrictions, compulsory health checks for children, bans on alcohol and pornography, abolition of the Aboriginal lands permit system and extra police and defence forces to restore order.

Feminist Germaine Greer said she believes the suspension of the permit system by which outsiders' movements to and from communities was the worst aspect of the intervention...

Dr Helen Caldicott, an anti-nuclear activist of more than 20 years, said she feared Prime Minister John Howard would turn Australia into the dumping ground for the world's nuclear waste. She said the takeover of Aboriginal land titles, part of the Government's crackdown of child sexual abuse in indigenous communities, was a ruse to clear the way for the dumping of waste in remote areas.

"The land grab from the Aborigines is actually about uranium and nuclear waste," Dr Caldicott said at the Australian Medical Students' Association conference in Adelaide this week. "It is obvious - you don't take land away from people just because their children are being sexually abused."

Dr Caldicott said Australia should reject nuclear power, ban uranium mining and concentrate on developing renewable energies such as wind, solar and hot rocks. She said the health consequences of uranium mining, nuclear power and nuclear power plants were serious and would induce epidemics of disease, malignancy and deformity that would be experienced for generations.

"Australia is in great danger of becoming a major nuclear nation now," she said. "I think it is very, very, very dangerous medically. I am worried that people making decisions do not understand medicine or genetics. They (the Government) are being pushed by the economy and wealthy corporations, like Western Mining and BHP Billiton, who seem to have no regard for the health and well-being of this generation and all future generations. We as doctors now have to teach the politicians the implications of the ramifications of what they are currently considering."

Meanwhile, feminist writer Germaine Greer says Howard’s emergency measures to deal with child abuse in the Northern Territory are a land grab which he knows will be a certain vote-winner. Ms Greer said the move was a mask to remove native title rights to allow freer access to mining companies.

"Howard has never been happy with the fact that small groups of illiterate hunter-gatherers can still hamper and delay exploitation of Australia’s mineral wealth for as long as they did in the case of the Ranger uranium mine and Jabiluka," Ms Greer says in The Bulletin.

Ms Greer, who supports a treaty with Aboriginal people, said authorities had known about the abuse of Aboriginal women and children for 30 years. "Indeed, the Little Children Are Sacred report adds little in the way of hard facts to what we knew already," she said. "Where the report plays into Howard's hands is in its slightly hysterical demand for immediate, decisive, unspecified action."

"If native title means Australian industries are uncompetitive, then native title must go. The real importance of Howard’s bizarre interpretation of the urgings to immediate action contained in the Little Children Are Sacred report is that it provides kneejerk justification for massive erosion of Aboriginal title — Howard knows, none better, that this will be a sure vote-winner," said Ms Greer.

The Guardian Newspaper also reports that it’s a Federal "land grab". The Prime Minister’s Department has already had talks with mining companies. The Guardian asks: Why should anyone believe that these talks were "increasing employment for Indigenous people" or protecting the environment or sacred sites.

Of all the plans and policies implemented by the Howard Government, this attack on the Indigenous people is the most disgusting, says the Guardian - the most cynical and the most evil and dishonest. Anyone who claims that it is out of care for children is at best extremely naïve and ignorant, but much more likely complicit in Howard’s schemes.

It is another in the long list of lies — invasion of Iraq, children overboard, no GST, and all of the others. It is being used as an excuse to destroy native title and land rights, and as a pre-election ploy from a government that could not even say the word “Sorry” for the Stolen Generations — the thousands of children removed from their parents and communities.

Howard has refused to guarantee that Aboriginal land leased for five years by the Commonwealth will be handed back to the communities. In the meantime, it may be sub-leased to a mining company or any other company. Mining operations could be up and running within five years and by then the damage will have been done. The Howard Government has always been an enthusiastic servant of these corporations.

Dr Sally Cockburn, a Melbourne GP and medical commentator says: "Let them prove this is not shallow electioneering. Let them put in place a proper collaborative, sustainable response against child abuse throughout Australia," she writes in the Herald Sun. "Child sexual abuse in our country is an election issue because any party without a sustainable plan for dealing with it does not deserve to win office."

Pat Turner, former head of the now-defunct Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission, warned yesterday that the takeover could lead to indigenous people losing their lands altogether. "Redressing child abuse and enabling our children to live safely and healthily in our communities has absolutely nothing to do with land tenure," she said. "I believe that's why the Prime Minister called it a national emergency, because the Land Rights Act has a national interest clause,' she said.

Ms Turner said the Government's claim it had to take over the land so it wouldn't waste time negotiating with councils to make repairs and collect rents was a farce. "Rubbish," she said, "it's rubbish. If the Government is serious about this it can negotiate an arrangement and no community is going to say 'no, we don't want you to come in here and build us houses'.

A Galaxy poll this week found 58 per cent of voters believe the reforms are a vote-grabbing move while just 25 per cent think Prime Minister John Howard launched the scheme because he really cares about the problem.

SOURCES:
Brisbane Times
The Age
Border Mail
The Guardian
Herald Sun
The Australian
The Australian

Mutitjulu question "military occupation" of their small community

Leaders of the Mutitjulu community today questioned the need for a military occupation of their small community.

We welcome any real support for indigenous health and welfare and even two police will assist, but the Howard Government declared an emergency at our community over two years ago - when they appointed an administrator to our health clinic - and since then we have been without a doctor, we have less health workers, our council has been sacked all our youth and health programmes have been cut.

We have no CEO and limited social and health services. The government has known about our overcrowding problem for at least 10 years and they’ve done nothing about it.

How do they propose keeping alcohol out of our community when we are 20 minutes away from 5 star hotel? Will they ban blacks from Yulara? We have been begging for an alcohol counsellor and a rehabilitation worker so that we can help alcoholics and substance abusers but those pleas have been ignored. What will happen to alcoholics when this ban is introduced? How will the government keep the grog runners out of our community without a permit system?

We have tried to put forward projects to make our community economically sustainable - like a simple coffee cart at the sunrise locations – but the government refuses to even consider them.

There is money set aside from the Jimmy Little foundation for a kidney dialysis machine at Mutitjulu, but National Parks won’t let us have it. That would create jobs and improve indigenous health but they just keep stonewalling us. If there is an emergency, why won’t Mal Brough fast track our kidney dialysis machine?

Some commentators have made much of the cluster of sexually transmitted diseases identified at our health clinic. People need to understand that Mutitjulu Health Clinic (now effectively closed) is a regional clinic and patients come from as far away as WA and SA; so to identify a cluster here is meaningless without seeing the confidential patient data.

The fact that we hold this community together with no money, no help, no doctor and no government support is a miracle. Any community, black or white would struggle if they were denied the most basic resources. Police and the Military are fine for logistics and coordination but healthcare, youth services, education and basic housing are more essential. Any programme must involve the people on the ground or it won’t work. For example who will interpret for the military?

Our women and children are scared about being forcibly examined; surely there is a need to build trust. Even the doctors say they are reluctant to examine a young child without a parent’s permission. Of course any child that is vulnerable or at risk should be immediately protected but a wholesale intrusion into our women and children’s privacy is a violation of our human and sacred rights.

Where is the money for all the essential services? We need long term financial and political commitment to provide the infrastructure and planning for our community. There is an urgent need for 10’s of millions of dollars to do what needs to be done. Will Mr Brough give us a commitment beyond the police and military?

The commonwealth needs to work with us to put health and social services, housing and education in place rather than treating Mutitjulu as a political football.

But we need to set the record straight:

There is no evidence of any fraud or mismanagement at Mutitjulu – we have had an administration for 12 months that found nothing

Mal Brough and his predecessor have been in control of our community for at least 12 months and we have gone backwards in services

We have successfully eradicated petrol sniffing from our community in conjunction with government authorities and oil companies

We have thrown suspected paedophiles out of our community using the permit system which our government now seeks take away from us.

We will work constructively with any government, State, Territory or Federal that wants to help aboriginal people.

Fuck off Pell - Go to hell!

June 7, 2007: It is against the law to coerce a member of parliament! Sydney's Catholic Archbishop George Pell is under attack after interferring in a New South Wales parliamentary vote. He's also been likened to outspoken Mufti, Sheikh Taj El Din Al Hilali. Cardinal Pell warned MPs that if they voted to allow therapeutic cloning there would be consequences for their life in the Church...

Cardinal Pell has urged all members of the NSW parliament to vote against the bill that would scrap the current ban on stem cell research, also known as Somatic Cell Nuclear Transfer.

Australian Greens Leader Bob Brown is warning Archbishop Pell against threatening federal members of parliament.

"Cardinal Pell's threats that there would be religious 'consequences' for Catholic MPs who voted for the stem cell legislation are completely unacceptable," Senator Brown said.

"Attempting to coerce Catholic members of the NSW state parliament is a serious matter. Cardinal Pell should understand that it could be a criminal matter if similar remarks were used to coerce federal politicians," said Senator Brown.

The Criminal Code Act 1995 provides a penalty of up to 12 years imprisonment for threatening commonwealth public officials and for both the giver and receiver of inducements for commonwealth public officials (including federal politicians) to change their behaviour.

"I urge Cardinal Pell to refrain from bullying Catholic MPs with religious 'consequences' when the Senate votes on my voluntary euthanasia bill, or any other matter of conscience," Senator Brown said.

NSW Shadow Health Minister Jillian Skinner feels very strongly about the importance of separation of Church and State. She says Members of Parliament should be able to make up their mind according to their conscience. Liberal Frontbencher Chris Hartcher says the Cardinal's comments are unambiguous and he's critical of practising Catholics dipping in and out of the Church.

Emergency Services Minister Nathan Rees today called Cardinal Pell a hypocrite, saying a politician would not interfere with the teachings of the church in exchange for funding. He said the cardinal was out of step and owed Catholic MPs an apology. Mr Rees says he considers Cardinal Pell's incursion a "clear and arguably contemptuous incursion into the deliberations of the elected members of this Parliament. And I think he's got three options; he can apologise, he can run for Parliament; or he can invite further comparisons with that serial boofhead Sheikh Hilali," said Mr Rees.

Sheik Alhilali's friend and confidant Keysar Trad said it was a "disgrace" the mufti had been dragged into the debate on stem cell research. The mufti was shocked at the insult and thought it showed great disrespect to Mr Rees' electorate of Toongabbie, he said. "Muslims are sick of being used as an example of ridicule. It is shameful," he said.

"I would like to see the premier show leadership on this issue and come out strongly condemning these remarks and to discipline this person. If he's (Rees) big enough then I would expect to see him at the mufti's office delivering an apology in person over the next few days."

"Oddly enough, if he was to research the mufti's opinion on this issue, he might be pleasantly surprised," Mr Trad said. "His fatwa (ruling) on this is that if it is for scientific research and does not risk the life of another human being and does not harm another living thing then it's fine."

George Pell's suggestion to in some way exclude Catholic politicians who vote for the legislation is nothing short of reprehensible, says Dom Knight. "It is fundamentally undemocratic for elected representatives to make judgements of this nature on the basis of their individual religious beliefs, rather than the position of the voters that elected them and the broader society that they represent," said Mr Knoght on his SMH blog. "If he wants to live in a state that's run according to his church's principles, I would strongly encourage him to move to the Vatican City."

NSW Labor MP Tony Stewart said he would risk his shot at the afterlife before he voted against the Bill. "Maybe I'll go to hell but if I go to hell I'm going to do so by saving a lot of lives, because that's what this Bill is about," the Catholic MP said. Mr Stewart said Cardinal Pell was entitled to his views but should keep out of politics saying the bill will make a difference to people with life-threatening diseases. "We don't need a religious leader telling members of parliament what should be done," he said.

Workplace Relations Minister Joe Hockey also object to the Cardinal's threat. Mr Hockey, also a Catholic, said Cardinal Pell should use his position to educate Catholics, not threaten them. "I don't object to him expressing that opinion, but I do object to any suggestion that there are consequences," Mr Hockey said.

The Bill would bring NSW into line with the Commonwealth, which has already approved therapeutic cloning. The bill is currently being debated in the Legislative Assembly, with a conscience vote now expected later this week.

Cardinal Pell refused to say whether Catholic MPs would be excommunicated from the church if they voted in favour of the legislation. The church would deal with that issue if it arose, he said.

"Cloning is not quite the same as abortion and the legislation for such a thing as cloning is different from actually performing cloning," Cardinal Pell told reporters. "But it is a serious moral matter and Catholic politicians who vote for this legislation must realise that their voting has consequences for their place in the life of the church." Cardinal Pell said the legislation had been rushed into parliament, with the public and MPs given little or no information about the issue.

Perth Archbishop Barry Hickey also came under fire after saying Catholics who did not condemn the cloning of human embryos for medical research were acting against the teachings of the Catholic faith and may face excommunication.

Prime Minister John Howard says he did not believe either man was trying to direct MPs on political matters. "I think that Cardinal Pell and Archbishop Hickey are both church leaders, they are entitled to express their views and I respect both of them."

--

UPDATE: The Stem cell research legislation passed its first stages in NSW Parliament with MPs exercising their conscience vote this morning. On Thurday the MPs voted 65 to 26 for the Bill to overturn a ban on therapeutic cloning.
The Bill is not expected to be finally passed until the next sitting of Parliament in a week’s time.

--

SOURCES:
PM - ABC
Village Voice
News Limited
SMH
The Age
The Australian
Herald Sun
Sunday Times
Dom Knight

DEC Inspectors missed the Esperance lead shed - Inquiry

May 2, 2007 - Dozens of Esperance residents have recorded high lead levels and thousands of birds have died from lead poisoning around the southern port town since December last year. High readings of lead and nickel have also been found in rainwater tanks around Esperance.

A parliamentary inquiry currently investigating the matter has heard illegal lead shipments out of Esperance, which poisoned local residents and left hundreds of water tanks contaminated, were not detected by the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC). The committee heard how an environmental inspector did not go into the loading area, but watched from a distance because he was concerned about his own health...
DEC's Kim Taylor said that during an initial inspection of the port in May 2005, just before the first lead shipment, the inspector did not enter the lead storage shed because his clothes did not meet OHS standards.

On an inspection in February 2007, an auditor again failed to identify lead was being shipped as powder and not as pellets — in spite of the export licence.

The committee was told of widespread contamination of town water tanks, soils and marine sediment surrounding the port, which had left 28 people with lead levels above the international recommended safe guidelines of 10 micrograms per decilitre.

Liberal MP Kim Hames, who is heading the inquiry, says if the committee can do a full inspection of the site in two hours today, a DEC inspector should have been able to do the same. Mr Hames expressed disbelief that no alarm was raised by the department about dust at the port. "We have had submissions from members of the public to say that when the lead is loaded, a cloud of dust can be seen above the ship," Dr Hames said.

The Department of Health revealed one in four children tested in the coastal town recorded lead levels high enough to warrant an inspection of their homes by health officials in an attempt to reduce any further lead exposure.

Of 239 children tested who fell into the high risk group of five years or younger, 56 recorded levels above 5mcg/dl and six tested above 10mcg.

Kim Taylor said DEC relied heavily on the Esperance Port and lead mining company Magellan Metals to inform it of any changes to the conditions governing the port’s lead export licence. He said the department, which is involved in the regulation of more than 2500 premises, could not meet its monitoring requirements.

DEC director-general Keiran McNamara, whose department is collecting evidence as part of a legal case against the port, said the responsibility ultimately lay with the port and mining company. Mr McNamara said DEC had also commissioned an independent review of its auditing and inspection processes.

The inquiry will also investigate how the lead was transported 900km from Wiluna to Esperance in dusty granules instead of heavier pellets, which produce fewer airborne contaminants. According to The Australian newspaper, government records show "Magellan was in breach of environmental and mine safety conditions as early as September 2004". Magellan Metals transported and exported lead carbonate through Esperance Port in powdered form rather than pellets.

The inquiry is due to report back to the Legislative Assembly by August 16.

---

Terms of Reference:
(1) That the Education and Health Standing Committee be requested to inquire into and report by 16 August 2007, on the cause and extent of lead pollution in the Esperance area, with specific reference to the following matters -
(a) how the environmental approval process for the transport and export of pelletised lead enabled the transport and export of granulated lead;
(b) the effectiveness of dust monitoring and reporting in relation to lead levels in the area and the adequacy of the response to those reported levels;
(c) the extent to which handling and other practices at Esperance Port gave rise to the benthic lead levels in the harbour;
(d) whether the Esperance Port Authority properly exercised its responsibilities in relation to the potential lead pollution;
(e) whether the Department of Environment and Conservation’s responsibilities in relation to the Esperance Port Authority processes , practices and procedures, including the legal and regulatory framework, were adequate and properly exercised; and
(f) that the Committee is given power to investigate any other issues pertinent to the cause and extent of lead pollution in the Esperance area.

SOURCES:
The West
News Ltd
ABC News
DEC - Esperance Lead
Inquiry into the Cause and Effect of Lead Pollution in the Esperance Area
The Australian
The Australian
1000s of birds die around Esperance - Toxicity? - Perth Indymedia
Government alerts Esperance residents - tests reveal higher than recommended Lead levels

Land carve up won't deliver Aboriginal home ownership

MARCH 15, 2007: Land carve up won't deliver Aboriginal home ownership

"Mal Brough's plan to overturn Aboriginal community ownership of their land is not about private home ownership on remote communities. It is just a foot in the door strategy to overturn community land tenure," said Senator Rachel Siewert today.

"This is not the way to tackle the Aboriginal housing crisis."
Federal Indigenous Affairs Minister Mal Brough is intensifying pressure on the West Australian and Queensland governments to reform land management to force indigenous people to buy their own homes - despite widespread poverty in their communities. The Federal Government argues that promoting private ownership can break the poverty cycle, and predicts families may one day be able to buy homes.

Mr Brough said he was tired of waiting for the Territory Government to create a system under which indigenous communities could sell their land. Mr Brough said said he wanted states to change their laws to fast-track home ownership across the country.

But Senator Racheal Siewart disagrees: "For a government that promotes itself on its economic credentials, this plan is an embarrassment. The Minister has failed home economics 101. Private home ownership is not the economic panacea, nor is it realistic," said Senator Siewert. "Any Australian family wanting to buy its own home does the maths to see what mortgage they can afford."

"Aboriginal families on these remote communities have the lowest disposable incomes in the country, and houses in remote communities are the most expensive to build," she said. "Which bank would loan a family $400 000 to build a house, knowing that they couldn't meet the payments and the resale value of the asset is so poor?"

"The government is not putting on the table the $2-3 billion needed to address the Aboriginal housing crisis," said Senator Siewert. "How is it that overturning community tenure suddenly fixes this problem? Research clearly shows that land tenure is not the major obstacle to Aboriginal home ownership," said Senator Siewert.

"In the absence of a major investment to back it up, it is clear that the push for private ownership of community lands is purely ideological and will not deliver an end to the housing crisis," she concluded.

Under the existing arrangements, home ownership is only legally possible on collectively owned indigenous land in the Northern Territory. But it cannot be delivered without a body to manage buying and selling 99-year leases which confer title over housing blocks to individuals.

The Federal Government can effectively seize control of the Top End process because it is a territory, but it cannot enforce changes in other states, which would have to introduce their own legislation.

Tangentyere Council day patrol worker Creed Joseph yesterday was sceptical about whether indigenous Australians should be encouraged to buy their own houses. "It's hard enough for Aboriginal people to get jobs," he said. "And those that do work can't afford a loan, so how can people be expected to pay for it?"

Senator Rachel Siewert
NT land seize plan - The Sunday Times

NT Uranium Mine Danger: Heavy rains pose radioactive risk to Kakadu

MARCH 5, 2007 - Ranger danger: Heavy rains pose radioactive risk to Kakadu - Australia’s largest National Park faces the threat of radioactive and heavy metal contamination from flooding at the controversial Ranger uranium mine in Kakadu. Operations have been halted and workers evacuated from Energy Resources of Australia’s mine after access was cut by rising water...
There are serious concerns over the risk of contaminated water and mine wastes from Ranger being spread through the wider Kakadu environment. In 2003 a Senate Inquiry into Ranger concluded that ‘the intense and highly seasonal wet season of the NT makes the dispersion of mine waste waters the main threat to ecosystems’ and found ‘a pattern of underperformance and non-compliance’.

The Australian Conservation Foundation has called for the urgent implementation of the Senate recommendations and an independent review of water and waste management at the Ranger mine in the light of the latest flooding and contamination risk.

“As the flood waters and radioactive risks continue to rise the federal government remains complacent,” said ACF nuclear campaigner Dave Sweeney. “For four years the government has failed to implement a set of commonsense recommendations. It has found time to try and dump radioactive waste in the NT and promote domestic nuclear power but not to protect World Heritage Kakadu.”

“This latest flooding shows the real impacts and risks of uranium mining,” said Dave Sweeney. “ERA wants to extend the life of Ranger mine, instead they should be cleaning up and clearing out – this industry is neither foolproof nor waterproof. Uranium mining is not a clean trade. Federal Labor should not consider new uranium mines when the existing ones are leaking, dangerous and deficient.”

Uranium mining consumes millions of litres of water every day and a huge amount of electricity. It generates an estimated 1 million tonnes of greenhouse gases every year, and has displaced many square kilometres of native vegetation to make way for the processing plants and tailings dumps.

The uranium is used to generate power in a nuclear reactor, power that Prime Minister John Howard says is "cleaner and greener than just about any other form of energy". But in the rush to embrace nuclear power as a way to combat climate change, the damage uranium mining does to the environment seems to have been all but forgotten.

Australian uranium mines and tailings dumps have a history of leakages and spills; many of the accidents have been minor but some have been serious. The most notable in recent years involved the contamination of workers' drinking water at the Ranger uranium mine in the Northern Territory in 2004. It happened when water used during the uranium extraction process was mistakenly connected to the drinking-water supply.

The Northern Territory Government viewed the breaches of regulations at the mine "very seriously". It recommended the first prosecution against Energy Resources Australia since it had begun operating the mine in the world-heritage Kakadu National Park in 1980.

Doctors were unable to advise the workers about the long-term effects on their health because no one in the world had ever drunk such large amounts of uranium-contaminated water.

SOURCES:
ACF MEDIA RELEASE
The Age
Sydney Morning Herald
Anti-Nuclear Alliance of Western Australia
Cyclone causes flooding across NT - ABC

Alcohol kills one Indigenous person every 38 hours - report

Monday, February 12, 2007: Alcohol causes the death of an Indigenous Australian every 38 hours on average, according to new research from the National Drug Research Institute (NDRI). Aboriginal women as young as 25 years old are dying of haemorrhagic stroke due to heavy drinking. The National Drug Research Institute, which studied every alcohol-related Aboriginal death between 2000 and 2004, says many Aboriginal Australians die from strokes or from suicide...
Disturbing new research by the National Drug Research Institute on Indigenous health shows that alcohol causes the death of an Indigenous Australian every 38 hours. The Institute's Dr Tanya Chikritzhs says trends and numbers vary widely across the country, but that the overall message is an alarming one.

The situation appears to be worse in the Northern Territory than anywhere else, while the trends over time in Western Australia show a significant increase since 2001. Suicide is the most common cause of death for Indigenous males.

In WA’s north, death rates rose from six to 10 per 10,000 between 2001 and 2004. It had the highest rate of deaths due to alcohol for Aboriginals in the country except for the Northern Territory and part of north-west Queensland. Australia-wide, cirrhosis of the liver was the number one killer — 46 per cent of all deaths — followed by suicide at 26 per cent.

"There are a whole range of reasons why there might be high levels of alcohol use. But one of the things to consider is the availability of treatment services and resources. I think for Western Australia, there's one treatment service in Broome which is intended to provide services for the entire northern region, and that's pretty incredible really," said Dr Tanya Chikritzhs.

NDRI has found that the deaths of 1145 Indigenous Australians between 2000 and 2004 were caused by alcohol. The cause of death for more than half was alcoholic liver cirrhosis or suicide, and the average age of death from an alcohol-attributable cause was about 35. The figures are contained in the National Alcohol Indicators Project (NAIP) Bulletin 11, Trends in alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians, 1998-2004, released today.

Researchers say trends and numbers of alcohol-attributable deaths vary widely both between and within State borders, which means targeted region-specific approaches are needed to improve Indigenous health.

NDRI Senior Research Fellow Dr Tanya Chikritzhs said this was the first NAIP bulletin to document numbers of alcohol-attributable harms among Indigenous Australians. "This kind of information is important in planning our response to Indigenous health issues and in showing where resources should be directed for the maximum benefit," Dr Chikritzhs said.

NDRI Indigenous Australian Research Team Leader Dennis Gray said the figures, which should be regarded as conservative estimates, showed Australia still had a long way to go to address the inequality between the health of Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. "If we are serious about addressing this disparity and reducing death rates among Indigenous Australians, we need to focus on the underlying social causes of that ill health," Professor Gray said.

"For instance, suicide is the most frequent alcohol caused death among Indigenous men, which reflects the despair that many Indigenous people feel."

NDRI, which receives core funding from the Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing, is based at Curtin University of Technology’s Health Research Campus in Shenton Park, Perth.

National Drug Research Institute WEBSITE:
http://www.ndri.curtin.edu.au/

----

State Breakdown:
Death rates by regional breakdown and year are available on page four of the bulletin. Overall, the national alcohol-attributable death rate for the period 2000-2004 was 4.85/10,000.

WA: About one-fifth (19.4%) of all deaths occurred in WA with 222 alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians between 2000-2004. The death rate in the WA North region has exceeded the national average in each year presented in the Bulletin. The WA Central and WA South East divisions have significantly exceeded the national average in all but one year.

NT: Almost one-quarter (23.5%) of all deaths occurred in the Northern Territory, with 269 alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians between 2000-2004. The death rate in the Northern Territory, in both the NT Central and NT North regions, exceeded the national average in each year presented in the Bulletin.

QLD: One in four (25%) of all deaths occurred in Queensland, with 285 alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians between 2000-2004. The death rate in the QLD Far North-West region has exceeded the national average in each year presented in the Bulletin.

SA: South Australia recorded 78 alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians between 2000-2004. The death rate in South Australia has exceeded the yearly national average (see page 4 of Bulletin) in each year presented in the Bulletin.

NSW: One-fifth (20%) of all deaths occurred in NSW, with 229 alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians between 2000-2004. The comparatively high number of deaths recorded in NSW is a reflection of the proportion of the Indigenous population that lives in the State. The death rate in New South Wales has not exceeded the yearly national average in any year presented in the Bulletin.

Indigenous population: As at 30 June 2001, the Indigenous population of Australia was estimated to be 458,500, representing 2.4% of the total population. That figure was estimated to be 474,310 at the end of 2004.

In 2001, most Indigenous Australians lived in New South Wales (134,900 people or 29% of the total Indigenous population), Queensland (125,900 people or 27%) or Western Australia (65,900 people or 14%).

Cause of death: The NAIP Bulletin contains a breakdown by gender of the five most common causes of alcohol-attributable death among Indigenous Australians. Suicide was the most common cause of death for Indigenous males and alcoholic liver cirrhosis the most common cause of death for Indigenous females. Overall, alcoholic liver cirrhosis was the number one killer and suicide was the second most common cause of alcohol-attributable death.

Haemorrhagic stroke, which was much more common among females than males, assault injury and road traffic injury each caused about 1 in 10 deaths. The average age of death from alcohol-attributable causes is about 35 years.

Comparing Indigenous and non-Indigenous death rates: Between 2000 and 2004, the overall ratio of all alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians (4.85/10,000) versus all alcohol-attributable deaths among non-Indigenous Australians (2.40/10,000) was about two to one. A detailed comparison of non-Indigenous versus Indigenous death rates from alcohol-attributable causes will be the subject of a forthcoming bulletin.

Total deaths, 1998-2004: The total number of alcohol-attributable deaths among Indigenous Australians over the entire study period, 1998-2004, was 1607.

SOURCES:
Alcohol killing young Aborigines: report ABC
Indigenous alcohol deaths shock - Sunday Times
Alcohol killed 1145 Indigenous Australians in five years - Media Release NAIP
Alcohol wiping out indigenous Australians - News Ltd
Alcohol killing young Aboriginals - The West

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

Decommisioned toxic nuclear reactor parts to be dumped in Australian desert?

JAN 30 2007: Used reactor parts: Environmentalists have warned against dumping radioactive waste from Australia's Lucas Heights old nuclear reactor parts in the Northen Territory. Federal Science Minister Julie Bishop says its not yet known which site in the NT will be chosen as Australia's first central nuclear waste dump. The 50-year-old HIFAR reactor in Sydney's south is being decommissioned. Minister Bishop shut down Australia's first nuclear reactor today...

January 30, 2007 marks the end of the Sydney's Lucas Heights nuclear reactor in the city's south, after almost 50 years of operation. The Australian Nuclear Science and Technology Organisation (ANSTO) says it is confident ongoing problems with Australia's next nuclear reactor "will be fixed by the time it is meant to come on line."

The work of the reactor will be taken over by the new Argentinian-designed research reactor called OPAL. The new $350 million OPAL reactor replaces the old facility, which opened in 1958 as Australia's first nuclear reactor.

ANSTO chief executive Ian Smith says he expects the new reactor to be up and running by April, despite some teething problems in the commissioning phase - citing certain leaks as one of the problems.

The federal government plan to build a nuclear waste dump in the NT. But critics have warned against dumping the Lucas Heights reactor's old radioactive parts in the desert. But Arid Lands Environment Centre spokeswoman Natalie Wasley says it would be much better for the old parts of the reactor to remain at Lucas Heights. "The Australian Nuclear Association have all said that there is room here, they have the technology, they have the capability and they have the storage room," she said. "Also there are trained personnel here who deal with radioactive material, and they'll be on site all the time. So that's definitely a lot better option than sticking it out in a remote area in the desert."

Wilderness Society nuclear spokeswoman Imogen Zethoven says the Federal Government should say where it is planning to dump radioactive waste from the decommissioned site. "We don't believe that the dismantled reactor should be shifted across Australia, through local communities, past people's homes and put in someone's backyard that doesn't want it," she said.

"We actually think that the reactor, now that it's shut down, should stay where it is and be managed locally."

The $50 million decommissioning process has begun with the official shutdown of the facility. Fuel will then be removed and fluid drained from the facility, before radioactive materials within the reactor are left there to decay.

NSW Greens senator Kerry Nettle said she feared the decommissioning process of the old facility would not be as successful as hoped. Science was not far enough advanced to safely dispose of nuclear waste, she said.

"Not one single commercial nuclear power reactor around the world has been successfully decommissioned," Ms Nettle said. "We know from the evidence this nuclear site may never become safe, regardless of any new reactor. We don't have the technological and scientific answers of how to dispose of this waste."

The Wilderness Society called on the Federal Government to fully outline its plans for the disposal of radioactive waste from the reactor. "The Federal Government must make clear to local communities where they plan on storing this nuclear waste that remains toxic for millions of years," said society spokeswoman Imogen Zethoven. "Local communities along transport routes will also be concerned about the tonnes of dangerous nuclear waste that will be trucked past their homes."

Over its 40-year life, OPAL will generate several cubic metres of high-level waste, which it intends to store in a remote location in the Northern Territory.

SOURCES:

Nuclear group says new reactor ready soon - ABC
Science Minister turns off nuclear reactor - ABC
Nuclear reactor's life coming to an end - ABC
Curtains for Lucas Heights after nearly 50 years - SMH
New nuclear reactor fires up energy debate
Where are they planning to dump radioactive waste? - MIM
Arid Lands Environment Centre

HREOC renews call to end mandatory detention

21 January 2007: Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission - HREOC has released a report on Villawood (Sydney), Baxter (Port Augusta), Perth, Maribyrnong (Melbourne) and Northern (Darwin) Immigration Detention Centres. It details observations made during visits in October and November last year by Human Rights Commissioner Graeme Innes and his staff. In a statement HREOC has renewed its call for an end to Australia's mandatory immigration detention laws...

One activity condemned in the report was the use of detainees to wash staff cars at the Northern centre in Darwin. HREOC said the staff were using detainees for their own personal benefit and the activity should be removed from the internal activities program. HREOC has renewed its call for an end to Australia's mandatory immigration detention laws.

Mr Innes is calling for the mandatory detention policy to be scrapped. He says detention has "an impact on the person's mental health," he said. Mr Innes says the biggest problem for detainees is the length of time they are kept in the centres.

Immigration Minister Amanda Vanstone says despite serious concerns over detainees' mental health, the Government's harsh mandatory detention policy will remain. She said the government has made some improvements in mental health assessments. "People [are] getting a mental health assessment on the way in to detention, so we pick up the problem earlier," said the Minister.

Mr Innes said detainees were still being held in detention for far too long, and he identified 41 areas for improvement. HREOC wanted mandatory detention laws to be repealed but said if this was not possible there should be greater efforts to release or transfer people out of detention centres within three months.

The HREOC report, "Summary of Observations following the Inspection of Mainland Immigration Detention Facilities - January 2007", states that the main complaint from detainees in the Perth facility is the length of indefinite detention, particularly for those detainees whose visas have been cancelled under section 501 of the Migration Act. Detainees also complained about crowded accommodation.

The report also outlines many other issues. The greatest problem in the Maribyrnong centre appears to be the indefinite periods of time for which detainees are held. There is particular frustration for those detainees whose visas have been cancelled under section 501 of the Migration Act, as many of them have strong family ties in the local community. It seems that detainees do not have legal assistance. They are apparently not entitled to legal aid or any other free immigration assistance. Further, it seems that there are no bridging visa options available to those detained under a section 501 cancellation.

In Baxter IDC, where six detainees attempted suicide in 2 days late last year, detainees complained about the quality and variety of food amongst other issues. The report noted that the notorious Red One compound (Solitary Confinement) is still used for "behaviour management purposes".

In 2004, HREOC found that Australia's immigration detention laws, as administered by the Commonwealth, and applied to unauthorised arrival children, create a detention system that is fundamentally inconsistent with the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC). The Commonwealth's failure to implement the repeated recommendations by mental health professionals that certain children be removed from the detention environment with their parents amounted to cruel, inhumane and degrading treatment of those children in detention.

Inside the Villawood complex, there is still a real fear about asbestos after the earlier removal operations. Another concern was that most mental health nurses are on short contracts, making it difficult for detainees to gain trust in any one staff member. Further, many of the mental health problems happen at night when there are no mental health staff available.

The human rights of hundreds of people are being abused daily, hourly by the Australian Federal government.

The full report is available here

SOURCES:
HREOC renews call to end mandatory detention - ABC
Detainees used to wash cars - The Age
HREOC - Media Release
National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
Submissions to the National Inquiry into Children in Immigration Detention
HREOC: Scrap mandatory detention - GLW

Government to blame for severity of Indigenous health crisis

DECEMBER 11, 2006: More than 30 of Australia's key medical and social welfare groups say Indigenous Australians are dying because of a lack of political will and action. An open letter published on Monday called for state and territory governments to work with the commonwealth to increase the life expectancy of indigenous Australians. Signed by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Australian Red Cross and Oxfam among others, the letter calls on both tiers of government to deliver life expectancy equality within 25 years.

"We call on all Australian governments to commit to a plan to achieve health equality for indigenous peoples within 25 years," the letter says. The organisations say Indigenous Australians are dying, not because of a lack of solutions but because of a lack of political will and action.

Federal health minister Tony Abbott said they are naive...

The 37 groups paid nearly $40,000 to publish an open letter in The Australian newspaper. The letter is to the federal, state and territory governments, asking them to put more money into Indigenous health immediately.

Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander social justice commissioner, Tom Calma, says an extra $300 million per year would stop Indigenous people dying an average of 17 years earlier than other Australians.

Mr Calma says governments need to commit to raising Indigenous life expectancy to normal levels within 25 years. "Government is not really listening to what Aboriginal people and the medical profession are saying," he said."We need to be able to get the Government to start to focus a lot more to setting some fairly realistic and achievable targets and benchmarks and time frames."

The Red Cross, Amnesty International and Ian Thorpe's Fountain for Youth have signed the document. The groups say it is inconceivable that a country as wealthy as Australia cannot solve a health crisis affecting less than 3 per cent of the population.

John Paterson from the Northern Territory's peak aboriginal medical organisation, AMSANT, says there is no mystery about what is needed. "Give us the money tomorrow," he said. "We're in the position to go and recruit GPs and other clinicians that Indigenous communities are currently screaming out for."

Federal Health Minister Tony Abbott is unwilling to make any commitments. He says the plan is far too idealistic. Mr Abbott says said he hopes no one thinks that Indigenous health outcomes are a function of governmental neglect. He said the Government is "trying."

"If it was as easy as all that to improve indigenous health it would have been done a long time ago," Abbott told the corporate media. "But certainly it doesn't hurt to have a whole lot of prominent people reminding us of the urgency of this task." Mr Abbott said life expectancy was not lower amongst indigenous people purely because of their race.

The Australian Medical Association (AMA) has also come out in support of the 37 groups. AMA vice-president Dr Choong-Siew Yong says the blame-shifting needs to end. "There needs to be a redesign of how health services are rolled out for Indigenous people," he said. The group wants governments to commit to bringing Indigenous life expectancy in line with the rest of the population within 25 years.

In November the AMA said Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders were facing a major health crisis, Dr Haikerwal said. "Our international reputation and our national conscience demand a concerted coordinated effort to bring the health of indigenous Australians into the 21st century,” he said.

The Australian Bureau of Statistics estimates that for Indigenous people born in recent years: Indigenous males could be expected to live to 59.4 years, more than 17 years less than the 76.6 years expected for all males; and Indigenous females could be expected to live to 64.8 years, more than 17 years less than the expectation of 82.0 years for all females.

Sources:
ABC NEWS
Nine MSN
ABC NEWS
AMA
Australian Indigenous HealthInfoNet