Time for a stronger climate change response

This evening, I wrote to Senator Penny Wong, Australia's Minister on Climate Change, urging her to resist the amendments being put forward by the Liberal opposition to water down the Rudd government's proposed greenhouse gas emissions trading scheme (ETS), and instead to strengthen Australia's greenhouse gas reduction strategy.

The email was prompted by Who on Earth Cares, the Australian Conservation Foundation's public climate change campaign. Personally, I find the Rudd government's ETS a whimpy, futile attempt at cutting greenhouse gas emissions and slowing global warming. The ALP government's targets for cutting emissions are pitiful – and certainly not based on what scientists say is needed to prevent dangerous climate change. However, the Turnbull Liberal opposition's attempts to weaken (let's not use mealy-mouthed 'water down', shall we?) the government's scheme and demand greater subsidies for carbon polluters to be worse!

The Who on Earth Cares/ACF online campaigning tool allowed me to send an email to Penny Wong (automatically generated), urging her to strengthen Australia's greenshouse gas reduction, not weaken it. It says:

Dear Minister Wong,

This week the Liberal Party has made it clear that it proposes to weaken the Government’s emissions trading scheme.

I ask you, as someone that is very concerned about climate change, not to cave in to their proposed amendments and weaken Australia’s response to climate change.

I ask you not to give more handouts to the big polluters. Doing so would take the scheme backwards, and impact greatly on Australian taxpayers.

Instead, I ask you to strengthen and pass the emissions trading scheme, and take real action on climate change ahead of the crucial climate negotiations in Copenhagen this December.

Australia has so much to lose from a climate change catastrophe, yet so much to gain in a clean, low carbon economy.

We have abundant renewable energy resources, and huge potential to grow jobs and investment by grabbing a fair share of the global boom in clean technologies.

You have the ability to strengthen the emissions trading scheme by:

• Improving the target for reducing greenhouse pollution. 25% below 1990 levels by 2020 is the minimum credible starting point for Australia; and scientists say we should be making a 40% reduction

• Decrease handouts of free permits to Australia’s biggest polluters – now that the economy is back on track we should be winding back corporate welfare, not increasing it

• Ramping up investment in clean energy jobs and industries that will ensure Australia remains prosperous in the 21st century

• Using funds raised by the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme to help bring developing countries and their people out of poverty through clean economic development, and to cope with climate impacts that are already hurting them.

Australia has a history of leading by example and punching above its weight. I ask you to help continue this tradition.

I added some text below that, in the bit meant for us to 'personalise' our emails and, I guess, prove we are real people rather than the digital version of the rent-a-mob governments so maligned a decade and more ago. I'm sharing it here as an open letter to Penny Wong, Minister for Climate Change. Feel free to use it, or let it inspire your own emails or letters to the Minister. (Write to [email protected])

To Penny Wong, Minister for Climate Change

On a further note, Minister Wong, I would like to strongly urge you to strengthen Australia's greenhouse gas reduction strategy with an insight from Victoria.

I am seriously concerned that in Australia we do all that we can do to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and prevent – not just slow down – dangerous climate change. If your government caves in to the demands of the Liberal Party and the carbon industry lobbyists, I strongly, strongly fear for the future of my children – my two boys, aged 9 and 3.

Last Saturday 17 October 2009, The Age reported that the huge aluminium smelters in Portland and Point Henry in south-western Victoria are costing Victorians more than $4.5 billion (by the time the contracts end in 2014 and 2016) in electricity subsidies for the smelters, and are likely to cost us more. Aluminium smelting is one of the most energy intensive – and greenhouse polluting – industries in the world, and it makes me angry that not only are we encouraging this industry, but we are actively subsidising it. Furthermore, these smelters are run on electricity generated from burning brown coal – one of the most carbon polluting forms of power generation there is!

If we instead subsidised and supported renewable energy such as solar power and wind turbines to anywhere the same amount, Australia would be in a much better position to tackle climate change!

Former Hamer and Kennett Liberal Victorian government minister Rob Maclellan, who was in the cabinet that decided to support and subsidise the smelters, was reported in that Age article as saying that decision was 'absolute madness' and a 'costly disaster' for our state. He clearly regrets those cabinet decisions! Please Minister, don't find yourself in a situation 10 years from now regretting any decisions you make to weaken Australia's greenhouse gas reduction strategy and throw greater subsidies at the carbon-polluting industries.

Victoria has already witnessed some of the most horrendous bushfires last summer, and I don't want my children living in a world where they have to fear every summer, rather than long for it and embrace the hope of its warmth and sunshine. This would be a horrendous future for us all. I want a carbon neutral future – and a brighter one – form my children. A future where my children will listen to Melbourne's weather report to figure out whether to take an umbrella or pack a jumper, or wear shorts and thongs – not whether to pack their belongings in a car and evacuate to a safe area to avoid a raging bushfire or a cyclonic storm.

Please – do the right thing. Strengthen Australia's greenhouse gas reduction strategy. Don't weaken it.

I welcome the opportunity to hear back from you about what you will do on this matter.

Regards,
Mark Lawrence

From a (little) more innocent summer some 4 years ago, Jacob (now turning 9) building a sandcastle at Squeaky Beach in Wilsons Promontory. I say a little more innocent, or idyllic, as we were still amidst a terrible draught then, and the heatwave that Australia Day weekend was awful! Photo by me.

Read more!

The audacity of Obama's peace prize

I only just caught up on Saturday afternoon with the news that Obama has won the Nobel Peace Prize. I'm amazed, and puzzled. I'm wondering: just what peace has Obama meant to have brought that is worth the Nobel? Iraq? Still tatters. Afghanistan? War. Well?

I haven't yet decided on Obama – on whether he is progressive enough and will be the catalyst for abiding positive change in the US and globally, or be another moderately liberal US President, like Clinton, hemmed in by powerful vested interests and neutralised by the desire to hang on to power. But based on his autobiography, The Audacity of Hope, which I really enjoyed listening to the audio of, I’m open to seeing what he can and will do, and I hope it will be many good and important things. As well as something big on climate change. Because we certainly need it.

It is the kind of hope that I never really had for Kevin Rudd (other than that he take Howard from power). Thus, while I feel less disaffected with Rudd (having expected less of him and the ALP and, perversely, received even less), I do feel we have more to lose if Obama falters.

But this Nobel Peace Prize is another matter. My partner reckons it will damn him. Everything he does now will be judged against the Prize. Will we always be asking of Obama, 'Is he living up to the Peace Prize?' She has a point. Will this mean that the small but crucial steps to peace that he may (need to) put in train will be seen to count for less? We will always expect the grand gestures for peace – even if such gestures are often empty?

In an email to supporters, international human rights online campaigning site Avaaz.org is more open to Obama’s Peace Prize, and sees in it the opportunity to push him to take stronger action on pressing issues of world peace, including climate change:

Obama himself says he's "surprised, humbled" and doesn't yet deserve it -- but he's accepted the Prize as a call to action, "to confront the common challenges of the 21st century" together. On too many pressing issues, the US President seems boxed-in by stubborn interests and has not yet taken courageous action. He deserves to hear our congratulations -- and our message to be bolder.
…
In his Cairo speech this June, Obama spoke of “the world we seek” -- one where “extremists no longer threaten our people, and American troops have come home; a world where Israelis and Palestinians are each secure in a state of their own” and nuclear energy does not trigger conflict -- a world where governments serve their citizens, and the rights of all are respected.

Obama’s words have offered a vision of profound change: all this can perhaps not be achieved overnight. But his push for Middle East peace has not yet been strong enough to overcome the resistance of hardliners in the region. Meanwhile, hawks and conservatives in the US are pressing him to commit 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan, instead of changing course to focus more on peace, development and diplomacy.

There is a real risk today that the hope of change will be lost. Leaders are judged finally by their actions, not their words. Only by following through with courageous, transformative action for peace can Obama fulfil his promise -- and only then will history judge that this Nobel Peace Prize is truly deserved.

Avaaz.org see nuclear disarmament, climate change, and peace in the Middle East and Afghanistan as needing Obama's focus and action in the coming months. They are calling on people globally to support Obama and prompt him to stronger action through an online petition:

Only by following through with courageous, transformative action for peace can Obama fulfill his promise -- and history judge that this prize is deserved.

Let's define this moment as a challenge to be bold -- let’s send Obama a million messages of encouragement and urgency, pressing him to turn hope into real and lasting change!

What do you think? Is this Nobel prize audacious? Will our hopes be dashed?

[Image: cliff1066™'s photo of Shepard Fairey’s Portrait of Barack Obama, used
under creative commons license]

Read more!

Help Save Reconciliation Victoria!

I just want to quickly share the news of this very important campaign. I got this call to action via email from ANTaR Victoria, and because I believe that the work of organisations such as Reconciliation Victoria is so important, I want to urge you all to help by taking whatever action you can:

Reconciliation Victoria (Rec Vic) is currently facing the possibility of forced closure, having received no future funding commitment from the Victorian Government for the coming financial year.

ANTaR Victoria is supporting Rec Vic in its cause, calling on the Brumby government to provide ongoing and increased funding, as a key aspect of its closing the gap strategy. In addition to this, ANTaR and RecVic are asking for your help to put pressure on the government, as it is only through organisations such as RecVic that the hard work of changing community attitudes can happen to make Victoria a culturally safe place for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

Learn more about how you can help save Reconciliation Victoria.

I'm taking a quick break from a terribly busy time at work, so apologies for a lack of details. When things settle down, I'll provide an update on the campaign and share why I think such organisations should be supported.

Read more!

Counting down the hours

In 24 hours, my boss will (hopefully, if things go well in his day!) shave off my hair for World's Greatest Shave.

This is the final stretch - it's been three weeks since I started this fundraising effort and so many people have been very generous in sponsoring me and donating to the Leukaemia Foundation. But I thought things would go pear-shaped when I discovered earlier this week that there was a technical glitch with my profile page at the World's Greatest Shave website – people couldn't find me to sponsor me!

Today, the very helpful people at World's Greatest Shave have fixed it up by setting me up a new sponsorship page, so you can find me online an sponsor me and raise money for the Leukaemia Foundation – if you haven't already. (I've also updated the links to my sponsorship page in this blog)

If you haven't yet, please do sponsor me and make a donation to the Leukaemia Foundation.

All sponsorship previously made to me will be transferred over, so rest assured your sponsorship of me won't get lost - thank you very much.

Thank you also to my friend Lynn, who has kindly knitted me a beanie to keep my head warm after the shave. And hopefully, tomorrow there will be photos and perhaps a video to share of the shave.

I have to admit to feeling a little nervous about how I will look with my head shaved – down to number 2 of the clippers, I think, or 2/8ths of an inch. But I'm sure it will be fine. After all, it is for a very, very good cause. And there are more important things to worry about in life, aren't there? Or rather, there are more important things in life to not worry about. And this is about those living with Leukaemia, isn't it?

Wish me luck.

Read more!

Five days and counting

In five days – Friday 13 March, to be exact – I will lose all my lovely hair, down to 2/8ths of an inch of stubble. But all for a good cause.

My boss is going to shave my head for a cure – that's right, I'm in my final week of Shave for a Cure, a fundraising initiative for the Leukaemia Foundation, and I'm hopefully well on my way to my extended target of raising $700 by Friday 13 March to assist the Foundation's efforts to find a cure for Leukaemia and other blood disorders, and to support those living with the disease.

I'm just under $150 shy of my target, so if you haven't already, please consider it and make a donation and 'sponsor' me.

I'm going to give my self a cold head, so that hopefully many, many others wouldn't need to.

Update: There's been a technical glitch in the site for my sponsorship page/profile this week, but the very helpful people at World's Greatest Shave have fixed it up by setting me up a new page. I've updated the link abve, so you can find me online an sponsor me and raise money for the Leukaemia Foundation. [updated 2.20pm Thursday 12 March 2009]

Read more!

See me shave my head–support World's Greatest Shave

I'm taking part in the Leukaemia Foundation World's Greatest Shave this year.

Do you want to see me shave my head? On Friday 13 March, I'm shaving my hair off.

My target is to raise $500 in 3 weeks – for the Leukaemia Foundation.

If I can get 50 people to donate $10 each, I can make my target! Please get your friends to donate too, and that will help me reach my target! But any amount – however small – can help me reach my target and support the Leukemia Foundation.

You can see my Profile Page on the World's Greatest Shave and donate online by making a secure online donation using your credit card. [note: the link to my profile/sponsorship page has been updated - see the update note below]

I'm doing this to honour my Dad's memory – before he died suddenly last December, Dad used to do the Leukemia Foundation door-knock appeal to help raise money. It was part of his way of dealing with his continuing grief at losing my older brother, Jeremy, to leukemia over 20 years ago (and his way to help out). Jeremy died after battling leukemia for nearly 18 months, aged 16. I was 11.

I've been meaning to do 'the Shave' for years now, but never got around to it. Now, my dad's example is spurring me on. This is also to honour Jeremy's memory.

See this all taken off!

On 13 February, my boss is going to shave my hair at work – I'm going to post a video of it online, so you can watch it here!

According to the Leukemia Foundation:

• Every hour of every day, at least one person in Australia is diagnosed with leukaemia, lymphoma or myeloma.
• Every two hours, someone loses their life to blood cancer.

Please help me raise as much as I can for the Leukaemia Foundation. Their vital work provides patients with practical support during their long and tough treatment, as well as funding important research.

Come on, we can help! We can help find a cure, support those living with this disease, and support their families.

I will be providing updates on this blog, via Twitter, and on my Profile Page. You're also welcome to drop me a comment here on a message on my Profile Page at World's Greatest Shave to show your support. Thanks for your support!

PS: Would anyone like to knit/crochet me a beanie for the cold weather?

UPDATE: There's been a technical glitch in the site for my sponsorship page/profile this week, but the very helpful people at World's Greatest Shave have fixed it up by setting me up a new page. I've updated the link abve, so you can find me online an sponsor me and raise money for the Leukaemia Foundation. [updated 2.20pm Thursday 12 March 2009]

UPDATE 2: A big thank you to Lynn who has knitted me a gorgeous beanie/hat to keep me warm after I shave my hair on Friday 13 March 2009! [updated 2.25pm Thursday 12 March 2009]

Read more!

Creativity, colour and noise put global warming on Melbourne's agenda

I've had a chance to upload my photos from Saturday's Walk Against Warming to flickr, so I can tell the story of that successful rally through pictures. There are more photos at that link to my flickr site.

The anti-nuclear power message was strong at Walk Against Warming in Melbourne.

But bicycle power was a very strong favourite instead.

As was turtle power.

People's creativity was shining through in the many banners, placcars and protest props people brought to make their message clear. As was the cooperation and community involvement evident in some of the larger and more elaborate ones.


The Walk Against Warming in Melbourne finished up at the steps of Victoria's Parliament on Spring St, to pressure the Brumby government to take strong action on climate change. At issue was its foot-dragging over 'Feed In' tariffs to pay those who feed solar-powered electricity into the grid.


This placard caught my attention at the steps of Parliament where the Walk Against Warming ended.


See also the reverse of that placard.

The samba percussion band and dancer were a huge hit at Melbourne's Walk Against Warming. Their loud, cheery dance rhythms and the colourful dancer really lifted the mood of the march, and got people cheering, clapping and dancing up the street.

Wasn't it Rosa Luxembourg who said 'If I can't dance in the your revolution, then I don't want any part of it?'*

I do believe that the big crowd, the creativity and the spirit of those marching on Saturday are strong signs that people believe that climate change is still a major issue that requires strong, urgent and concerted action from government – all governments: local, state and national, and international – and from the community.

To an extent, I do think that the upcoming local government elections will be a test of the extent to which the community will hold their government representatives accountable for the pace of action and policy work on this issue.

And it has the potential for being a litmus test for how Victorians perceive the Brumby government is acting on this and other enviromental issues – including logging old growth forests and the threat that extending clearways holds for local neighbourhood strip shopping and communities.

Let's keep an eye on this one, eh?

I have to say, though, this is still one of my favourite placards at the march, and it was a favourite of many others too.

*Yes, yes, it is probably one of those myths of the activist left that this saying is attributed to her, but hey, I love the sentiments…

Read more!

Walk against warming tomorrow – Saturday

Better late than never, I guess. In case you didn't already know, there will be another Walk Against Warming tomorrow, Saturday 15 November.

In Melbourne, the meeting place is Federation Square, at 1pm.

The Walk Against Warming website lists the details for other Australian cities.

If you think the struggle for strong action on climate change has passed, or it's time to relax, because Obama has been elected in the US and Rudd is promising an Australian emission reduction scheme, then think again! Now is the time to keep up the pressure on the Rudd government for clean energy, strong climate targets, and a safe future.

Amidst juggling the kids, Milo cricket and the usual Saturday requirements, I really hope to drag the kids out to Walk Against Warming this year. Hopefully, there will be so many people I won't have a chance to see you there! All the same, it promises to be a good family day.

Read more!

Why do you care about climate change?

Another step I took as part of my recent eddy of activity on climate change was to sign up with the 'Who on Earth Cares' website. An initiative of the Australian Conservation Foundation, the site allows people across Australia to express their concerns about climate change and pledge to take certain steps to cut their greenhouse gas emissions, and record and share their initiatives on a map. It also allows you to see how people in your neighbourhood are taking similar steps. It's quite encouraging.

The site asks you three basic questions, thus providing a frame for what you share online, and asks you to nominate various steps you pledge to take to cut your personal and household greenhouse emissions. I've decided to share what I wrote for Who on Earth Cares here – also because it captures my latest thoughts on action on climate change:

Why do you care about climate change?
I believe that global warming is one of the most pressing crises facing our planet, and our human society, and we need to take the most effective action possible as soon as possible to avert the most dangerous aspects of climate change. I want to be able to say to my children and grandchildren that I did what I could to help slow, stop and even reverse dangerous climate change.

How concerned are you about climate change?
I'm very concerned about climate change, and I'm very concerned that despite its promises, the efforts by the Rudd government will be too little, too late. The Rudd Government must commit to strong targets in any climate change plan – namely a reduction of greenhouse emissions by a minimum 40% by 2020 and no less.

Although I believe that the most effective action on cutting greenhouse gas emissions must come from government and industry, I think that families and households can reinvigorate our action to cut household emissions to show the government and industry that we are serious, and that we can 'do' as we 'say', just as we expect them to act. This is why I am renewing my and my family's commitment to continue reducing our climate impact and to cut our household emissions further.

What do you want Australia to be like in the future?
I want Australia to be carbon neutral – to be weened off the fossil fuel industries and generating our energy needs from sustainable, renewable energy. I want Australia to be nuclear free, and tapping into the vast resources of solar, wind, and geothermal energies. I want to see whole communities working together to make our food, transport, housing, health, well-being, culture, industry, education, government etc ecologically and socially sustainable – to be human and humane.

To reduce my greenhouse pollution, I have personally committed to:
* Switch my household power supply to accredited GreenPower
* Set my washing machine to wash my clothes in cold water
* Turn off computers and screens overnight at work and home
* Eat one less serve of meat a week
* Avoid one domestic air flight this year and purchase carbon offsets
* Drive 20 kilometres less each week
* Reduce my household electricity and gas usage by 20%
______

A lot of the steps I've pledged above are things I already do, like cycling and taking the tram to work instead of driving, but I'm renewing my comitment to do them.

Some steps are new – we're switching to 100% wind powered GreenPower. This has been a useful exercise because I discovered the GreenPower plan we're on at home only includes 20% wind energy, leaving the ballance to come from coal and hydro (which the government no longer accredits as GreenPower, I gather).

The other great thing about the site is that it encourages you to write to your local federal member of parliament to share your concerns and urge them to support stronger action from Australia on climate change. It automatically generates the letter's text based on what you've written for the first two questions above and additional material they provide on greenhouse gas emissions targets. Brilliant! I also used this feature to amend and prepare a second letter to federal Minister for Climate Change, Penny Wong. More action that is usefully directed at lobbying your MP and Minister.

I encourage you to sign up with Who on Earth Cares (if you haven't already, of course) and perhaps share what you've written there on your own blog if you have one (drop me a comment here to let me know if you've done this). One reason for this is that most bloggers I know aren't too keen on outing their locations so publically on a google map, which is what Who on Earth Cares does. After all, we are fond of our privacy and security, aren't we? Though perhaps not as much as we are fond of a decent and secure future for our kids.

So do remember to send your letter to your local member.

[Image is a screenshot from Who on Earth Cares]

Read more!

Taking climate change action to the workplace

Of late I have tried to reinvigorate my efforts and take further action on climate change – especially beyond this blog. The recent concern with Garnaut's proposed targets for cutting Australia's greenhouse gas emissions helped spark this.

I also think that after the first flush of concern and action around climate change that started two or three years ago, there is the danger of complacency setting in, or concern with the accelerating rate of warming turning into 'caught in the headlights' fear.

For these reasons, it is useful to remember what we're concerned about, renew a sense of responsibility, recommit to whatever steps previously made to cut our greenhouse emissions, and take further action. This includes taking action at work beyond chats in the tea room.

This morning at work, I organised a viewing of a DVD on the impact of climate change on poor communities in developing countries, including Australia's Pacific neighbours. The 15 minute DVD was from Make Poverty History, who are distributing it as part of their climate change campaign to highlight the disproportional impact of global warming on the poor of developing countries. They had also kindly provided pamphletes, posters, postcards, petitions and a host of other campaign material.

I was pleased with the positive reception – not just in the number of my colleagues who came (a big majority) but also in the short discussion we had after. A lot of my colleagues are already well versed in the issues around climate change and take their own personal action, but efforts to be more sustainable at work have been slower and a little more painful.

That is why I'm really heartened by some people saying they were inspired to act further, and a renewed interest amongst us in the organisation switching to GreenPower and exploring offsetting the carbon emissions for our various activies, including flights – including from my boss. We are a small organisation with a small budget, and there is only so much we can do. I could not have hoped for a better response.

I've volunteered to get information on carbon offsetting and switching to GreenPower, and having an energy efficiency audit done at work. More work to do, but good work.

Read more!

Message to Garnaut: we want to stop global warming

We are at another of those turning points in the effort to reverse, halt or even moderate global warming, with Professor Ross Garnaut about to finalise his report on how the Rudd government should tackle climate change. This report is crucial as it will be the basis on which the government formulates its plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions and position Australia in the world effort to halt global warming.

Going on Garnaut's draft report, those advocating stronger action have criticised Garnaut's proposed greenhouse gas emission targets as too little and too slow in effectively slowing CO2 build-up, and slowing global warming and the knock-on effects in dangerous climate change.

According to global warming campaigners, including Clive Hamilton, Get Up Australia and Avaaz.org (amongst others), Ross Garnaut must strengthen the greenhouse gas emission reduction targets in his plan in order to more effectively reduce CO2 in the atmosphere. The crux of the matter is that Garnaut doesn't believe that Australians are prepared to make the necessary sacrifices – including paying higher prices for energy and slowing in economy growth – in order to effectively cut our greenhouse gas emissions.

As Avaaz.org outlines it:

Solving the climate crisis will only happen if we can muster the political will for change, but Australia's leading climate change advisor Professor Garnaut, who is delivering his long awaited report to the Prime Minister at the end of the month, doesn't think Australia or the world has the mettle to face the crisis.

Avaaz.org wants as many Australians as possible to sign their online petition calling for stronger targets to be delivered to Ross Garnaut this Monday – hopefully in time to influence him as he prepares the final version of his plan to the government. Help them to get 20,000 signatures!

Clive Hamilton's concerns with Garnaut's plan hinge on the issue that while Garnaut recognises that climate scientists agree that greenhouse gases in the atmosphere must be reduced to 450 million parts per million in order to avert dangerous global warming, his plan advocates a lower target:

…Garnaut has decided that keeping warming at 2°C is too hard, at least for the next decade or more, so instead he says we should aim to stabilise at 550 ppm. Climate scientists believe that allowing the atmosphere to reach 550 ppm will dramatically increase the likelihood of catastrophes and runaway climate change, such as an irreversible melting of the Greenland ice sheet resulting in sea-level rise of seven - yes, seven - meters.

There have been a lot of information sheets, briefings and explanations explaining Ross Garnaut's draft report floating around, but for the time-pressed who can't digest these, I highly recommend Get Up's excellent video clearly explaining the report's recommendations, Get Up's reactions to them and suggestion of what really needs to be done (see the still from the video below).

Meanwhile, we have a small window of opportunity this time round to influence the global warming policy agenda in favour of stronger targets. We have the opportunity to show the government – and each other – that we are prepared to have the foresight to do what it takes to stop global warming. And we must show each other that we aren't alone. As Clive Hamilton says in the article I've already referred to:

Does anyone believe that Australians would be less happy if they had to wait an extra six months before they became twice as rich? The absurdity of the situation set out in the Garnaut report suggests our obsession with economic growth is so powerful that we are unwilling to contemplate sacrificing a tiny amount of consumption to sharply reduce the risk of irreversible damage to the Earth's climate.

I, for one, am prepared to join the thousands of others who are prepared to pay the price now to stop global warming, rather than making my children pay the price.

As I said at the start of this post, we are at one of those turning points in the effort to stop global warming. We can either continue to fiddle around the edges of policy and emissions targets while this continent burns – and other parts of this globe flood – or we can hold the Rudd government to its rhetoric and force its hand to pursue something more effective in stopping global warming. Something that is more befitting the futures of our children and grandchildren, rather than the profit margins of carbon polluters.

It is time to put a plug in the carbon economy, rather than continuing to pander to the carbon polluters.

[Images: 'flying over Greenland' by Doc Searls, Creative Commons licensed, found via Alex Steffen at WorldChanging.com - btw, Alex Steffen's article 'The Tyranny of Small Steps' is well worth reading – and still from Get Up's video on Garnaut]

Read more!

Support the campaign to end mandatory immigration detention in Australia

GetUp! is saying that the federal government has unexpectedly announced an inquiry into Australia's immigration detention regime, and is calling an people to support their online petition to end mandatory immigration detention.

It appears to have been just announced, as I have yet to find I have had great difficulty in finding mention of this on the online MSM (mainstream media).

This is something that so many have been waiting for: after the apology to the Stolen Generations, and the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, I began to wonder if the Rudd government would avoid moving on the remaining festering sore from the key triumvirate of the Howard government's sins.

So I am pleased to have just signed the petition calling for an end to mandatory immigration detention and for a humane immigration system. I have also added some comments in my online petition, which I trust will get sent to Kevin Rudd and Immigration Minister Chris Evans as part of the Get Up 'submission'.

I would urge you to do something similar, and also consider preparing and sending your own individual submission to the inquiry once all the inquiry's wheels are in motion.

Here are my additional comments I added to my support of the petition:

End Mandatory Immigration Detention!

It is important that a just and honourable immigration system recognise the principle that children should never be in detention.

Australia must develop a fair and humane approach to handling asylum seekers' applications for asylum, and in dealing with those in breech of immigration rules. This can and should involve a community-based system for caring for asylum seekers while processing refugee applications and immigration issues.

Australia must abolish temporary protection visas, and give full residential rights and status to those who have found to be refugees. This must include welfare, medical and other residential rights. If it is unsafe for someone to return to their home country, they should be allowed the decency of finding security and attachment here in Australia, and not the constant fear that their temporary visa will be revoked.

It is time that Australia corrects the great wrong in how we treat asylum seekers and close the immigration concentration camps!

Do no harm. The principles upon which Australia processes applications for asylum must be based on securing the safety of the asylum seeker, not on some misshapen foreign or domestic policy emphasis on quarantining Australia from the world or the movement of people fleeing violence, war, terror and harm.

It is time to raise our heads and take our rightful place in the world in looking after those fleeing persecution and harm.
--

You can find the GetUp Campaign petition here:
www.getup.org.au/campaign/EndMandatoryDetention

Other people working on this issue include the Asylum Seeker Resource Centre, A Just Australia, and the Human Rights Law Resource Centre.

[Update: I have found an ABC news item from June this year where Immigration Minister Chris Evans announced that "Federal Parliament's Joint Standing Committee on Migration has been asked to investigate the criteria for detention, length of time in detention, and accountability and transparency in immigration detention processes." I am wondering how and why things have been so quiet on this for so long. What did I miss? Unfortunately, the report suggests the ALP are going with a 'business as usual' approach to detention on Christmas Island, but this is no reason to give up on the campaign! Updated Monday 21 July, 4:23 pm]

Read more!

Big bank pulls funding for Tasmianan pulp mill

The ANZ bank has pulled out its funding for the Gunns pulp mill to be built in Tasmania, according to the Finance Sector Union.

As yet, I haven't seen anything else on the online news sources confirming this, only earlier growing speculation. But if it's true, this is a huge success for the campaign against this debacle of a pulp mill, and a big step in forcing corporations to face their ecological and social responsibilities. If only they didn't keep hiking up borrowing interest rates.

Read more!

Should we boycott the Beijng Olympics?

I think it is time to revisit the call to boycott the Beijing Olympics.

Various groups and campaigns have called for public boycotts of the Beijing Olympics, because attending the Olympics would be seen as turning a blind eye to the Chinese Government's domestic human rights abuses, and its role in the human rights abuses of other regimes. Foremost amongst these have been those campaigning for human rights and freedom in Tibet.

Reporters Without borders has information on the campaign to boycott the Beijing Olympics.

Not long ago, I supported the boycott call as a way to highlight how the Burmese military dictatorship is supported by China – in terms of political support, international legitimacy and trade dollars – and to pressure the Chinese to drop their endorsement of the Burmese regime, thus allowing the Burmese democracy movement room to breath.

More recently came the news that Steven Spielberg, following the example of other Hollywood celebrities, had pulled out of his involvement in the Beijing Olympics because many argued that such involvement was seen as an endorsement of the Chinese government – which was unacceptable in light of the Chinese's continuing arms sales to the Sudanese government, and how those arms are used to oppress the people of Dafur, and other minorities in Southern Sudan.

Now, according to ABC Radio 774 AM this morning, Australian Senator Andrew Bartlett has called for an Australian boycott of the Beijing Olympics because of China's brutal crackdown of protesters in Tibet who are highlighting China's brutal treatment of Tibetans in their homeland.

Now, you can consider how realistic a boycott of the Olympic Games would be – considering Rudd's attitude towards China, it is not surprising that Australia has rejected the call for an official boycott of the Games. Nor can we expect enough pressure to mount in this short time for other countries to formally boycott the games. In these changed geo-politics, we won't see the tit-for-tat Cold War tactics that led to the official Moscow and Los Angeles Games boycotts.

Howevever, in light of the brutal crackdown on Tibetan rights protesters, we must not allow China to once again brush off insipid international criticism and the UN's glacial, byzantium manouverings of registering its 'concerns'.

The fact is, China will put on a multi-billion dollar pageant for the world in only a few months – in the guise of an international sporting competition – that will be a huge propaganda exercise to show a modern, stable, prosperous, peaceful – and unified – China. And we should not buy it. Literally.

In an age of consumer awareness and growing public consciousness, and the tools available to us, the possibilities of a consumer boycott of the Games are stronger. Don't go to Beijing for the Olympics, and if you, like me, can't afford to travel to China anyway to watch the Games, don't buy Olympics merchandise associated with the Beijing Olympics.

You can write lots of letters, emails and faxes to your Chinese embassy telling them this is how you feel and what you are doing, and write similar letters to your local papers, mention it on talk-back radio, and leave such comments on blogs and online forums (as long as they are relevant to the topic, of course – I wouldn't endorse off-topic comment spam!).

You can tell your friends and family – especially if you know of people who are inclined to buy the inevitable sports clothes, tracksuit pants, predictable panda bear mascot and other paraphernalia emblazoned with the Beijing Olympics branding that we know will be made cheaply in Chinese factories with poor working conditions – that you don't want any of this stuff for either yourself or your kids (if you are parents), and why you think they should join you in boycotting it.

It worked with delegitimising South Africa's Apartheid regime, and it can work with China.

Let's not let China's regime off the hook for its deplorable human rights record.

[The image is of Tibetan monks who were beaten by Chinese security forces during the recent brutal crackdown on protests, from the ABC]

Read more!

Racism is alive and well in Australia

Despite the current media and online outrage, I am not surprised that a month after the National Apology to the Stolen Generations we are hearing reports of racism against Aboriginal people in Central Australia. Appalled and outraged, but not surprised.

A group of young women and children were asked to leave an Alice Springs backpacker hostel because they are Aboriginal – within a short while of their checking in and taking their luggage to their rooms. The group of young women leaders from the Central Australian Aboriginal community of Yeundumu had been brought to Alice Springs by the Royal Lifesaving Society, who had booked the accommodation for them.

According to ABC news online:

The group included several young mothers and a three-month-old baby. Most were young leaders, chosen specially for their standing in the Yuendumu community.

The resort manager told Bethany Langdon from the Yuendumu Young Leaders program the group would have to leave.

“The manager came out and told me that we weren’t suitable to stay there,” she told ABC1’s Lateline program.

“They said, because you’re Aboriginal, other tourists were making complaints that they were scared of us.

“I felt like I wanted to cry, because it made me feel like I wasn’t an Australian.”

Ms Langdon says it is her first experience of overt racism.

"It's a disgrace against Aboriginal people, especially when an Aboriginal women comes into town trying to be a role model to their community and get looked up to by elder people and younger people from their community and other communities," she said.

The Royal Lifesaving Society was obviously unaware that certain hostels and hotels in Alice Springs have racist policies of not allowing Aboriginal people to book and stay with them, or that this hostel – Haven Backpackers Resort – was one of them. Judging from what I've heard from people who know Alice, this racist practice is common.

The Hostel's manager disputed that they were asked to leave because they were Aboriginal, denied such a policy exists, and claimed that the reason was that other guests at the hostel had made complaints about the Aboriginal women, and that the hostel is intended for international guests. The manager also claimed that the women left of their own accord, and that the hostel arranged alternative accommodation for the women.

Now a former employee of that hostel has reported to the press her first hand knowledge of the hostel's racist policy of denying bookings and refusing accommodation to Aboriginal people.


The Royal Lifesaving Society had brought the group of young leaders to Alice Springs to learn life saving so that they can return to their community and act as life guards when their new swimming pool opens. Despite initial concerns that this experience would tarnish and undermine the Society's efforts to work with local Aboriginal communities, the picture above suggests that the woman are persevering with their lifesaving training – clearly a strong indication of their leadership qualities!

Apparently, the hostel is now facing lawsuit after telling the women to leave. It would be just as important for a complaint be taken to the Anti Discrimination Commision by the women against the hostel. Hopefully, this will open the big can of racist worms that is the tourism industry in Central Australia. And the Northern Territory overall, and Australia more widely.

Tigtog and Lauredhel at Hoyden About Town have led the charge in reporting this matter in the bloggerspere, and joined in the call for a boycott of the racist hostel, and for bloggers to help publicise this issue and the boycott online. In that spirit, I'm reproducing here this statement from them, which, it is suggested, is also intended to screw with the hostel in question's google search rankings:

Ethical tourists please avoid the Haven Backpacker Resort on Larapinta Drive, Alice Springs: it is a racist establishment, please don’t support it by staying there.

If it is true that this instance is just the tip of the iceberg, and that this practice is widespread in the Northern Territory tourism industry, and in Australia overall, then this should be only the start of a campaign to take the tourism industry to account for the way it capitalises on the appeal of Aboriginal culture and heritage to make its money, but gets away with treating Aboriginal people this way. The truth is, outrage that this should actually happen in 'muticultural, post-apology Australia' not withstanding, the racism experienced by Aboriginal people is very real, and quite widespread.

The apology was never meant to be a panacea. It is a first step. How we deal with the dirty reality of Aboriginal people being denied services and discriminated against will be the mark of this supposed new chapter that Kevin Rudd proclaimed in his apology speech (see the Update in that link, which is to my earlier post on the apology).

And while we're at it, let's remember the whole gamut of racism that Aboriginal people experience in the receipt of services – whether in accommodation, travel, or hospitality, where small minded people discriminate against Aboriginal people because they fear and loath them, or in in the provision of essential health, emergency, communication and other services, and the provision of education, infrastructure and employment, something governments are elected to do, but have consistently failed to do so. As we aim to make private enterprises accountable for their racism, so must we make our governments.

[Image source: it's an SMH pic, which I also found via Hoyden About Town (thanks!)]

Read more!

Equal work, equal pay

Tomorrow, 8 March, is International Women's Day. Coinciding with that, Get Up Australia is running a campaign for equal pay for women. They point out that:

For every $1 earned by men in Australia today, women earn just 84c.

Even worse - the gap has actually widened since 2004.

Isn't it outrageous that 99 years after the first International Women's Day, we still have to campaign for equal pay between men and women? Now we have a Labor government with more women in cabinet that ever before, you'd think that the Rudd government would be inclined to fix up that inequity. Well, you'd hope. Let's not take that for granted. As the Get Up email says:

From paid maternity leave to high-quality affordable childcare - a people's movement has the power to convince politicians and corporations to actively remove the stubborn systemic inequalities that still exist, to ensure productive participation - for equal reward.

You can sign Get Up's Equal Pay campaign petition at their website (the image above is off their site).

To help celebrate IWD, I also recommend that you visit and read these wonderful Australian, feminist bloggers:

• Ampersand Duck
• Blogger on the Cast Iron Balcony
• Cirsty at Two Peas, No Pod
• Galaxy
• Hoyden About Town
• Pavlov's Cat
• Reeling and writhing

Of course, there are heaps more out there, but these are the ones I enjoy reading regularly. If there are others you'd like to suggest, please feel free to leave a comment.

And happy International Women's Day to all women, and especially all those who read this blog, for tomorrow.
______
Update: as a further celebration of International Women's Day, I've posted the fabulous photograph of women workers at an American railway dated 1943. It is from the Library of Congress flickr collection. [updated Friday 4.16 pm]

Read more!

Bikes and trains

The ban on bikes on peak-hour trains – both metropolitan and country – by the Victorian government is stupid.

Instead of supporting commuters' travel options that keep cars off the road, and instead of putting on more carriages and trains to deal with overcrowding, the government is using smoke and mirrors to shift the blame for overcrowding onto those who take their bikes on trains.

The anger amongst cyclists who both ride trains and cycle to work or school is powerful, but, unfortunately, the State government and private train operator Connex are counting on the train commuters' antipathy against cyclists to back them up. As Barista so aptly points out:

cyclists are actively discouraged from putting treadlies on the train in peak hour. After all, they are awkward, and take up space. Other commuters get a chance to roll their eyes, act sniffy and indulge in righteousness - a piece of pack behaviour all too familiar to cyclists, dog owners, breast feeding women, owners of young children and backpackers (no hierarchy implied in the order)

But there has been an uproar – regional and country residents can still exert some influence as long as the Labor government needs their votes. VLine, the country rail operator, backed down slightly and have delayed the ban till 1 February. They've as much as hinted that it is up to Transport Minister Lyn Kosky to revoke the ban – and cyclists to convince her to do so. It is worth noting that

The ban on bikes on V/Line services during rush hour comes despite the trains having special bike spaces. The V'Locity trains have space for a small number of bicycles, while its 32 locomotives have a special luggage carriage, with ample room for cycles.

If anything, the bike ban is further evidence of Premier John Brumby’s reputed lack of commitment to environmental concerns or principles – first approving the Bay dredging, then putting the kibosh on the car free day for Melbourne, now a ban on bikes on peak-hour trains!

I was not convinced that Lyn Kosky was committed to making public transport work for all of us when she was appointed transport minister after the post-Bracks reshuffle. This new move suggests we have further reason to be disappointed in her.

Cities and provincial or state governments elsewhere are making huge efforts at increasing sustainable transport options to counter congestion, pollution and global warming. Many cities, especially in Europe, have car free days and, as I saw in Brisbane during my trip last Easter, Brisbane transit buses have bike carriers that allow cyclists to throw their bikes onto buses to get around further – especially on Brisbane's killer hills.

Compared with efforts made elsewhere, this economic-growth obsessed Labor state government is too short-sighted and clueless when it comes to enabling our cities and communities to be truly sustainable – and reducing the pollution risk to people.

Well, there is a campaign brewing, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the next critical mass heads for a peak hour train. And, to support more sustainable transport options, not fewer, I would be sympathetic to them!

Ironically, while Bicycle Victoria, supposedly the cyclists' lobby, supports the ban, the Public Transport Users' Group opposes it – because they know it will do little to deal with overcrowding! I'm having second thoughts on joining Bicycle Victoria this year.

Read more!

Science will not set us free – or why approving the Tasmanian pulp mill is wrong

The federal government's decision to back the Gunns pulp mill in Tasmania's Tamar Valley is wrong.

Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull's justification to support the pulp mill based on the 'science' of the Chief Scientist's report and recommendation is just hiding political expediency behind the 'black and white' of science. By claiming that the 'science' has 'spoken' is just hiding a wrong decision behind a flimsy excuse. Opposition Environment spokesperson Peter Garret's and the ALP's similar justification for their support for the Minister's decision is no better!

For one, the Chief Scientist's analysis was lopsided and narrow! How can he on the one hand advise the government that Australia needs to plant more trees to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and stop global warming, and on the other hand support the development of a pulp mill that will directly result in logging more trees than is sustainable? This kind of 'single-issue' science is blinkered and not only fails to consider the big picture, but is highly politic!

Further, the Chief Scientist did not consider the impact of the pulp mill on air quality or on the forests. How can his advice be taken at face value as providing a whole picture on the environmental impact of the mill?

More importantly, we cannot rely on science alone to justify or inform our actions. Especially as science does not actually work on certainties, but on levels of risk. Rather than being able to categorically state that the conditions placed on the mill shall make it 'safe', scientists rely instead on what are acceptable levels of of pollution, toxin, or danger to the environment and people – ie what are 'acceptable' levels of risk. Why offer us the false certainty of 'science' without being honest to us about the levels of risk scientists are prepared to accept – on our behalf?

In all, science should only help to guide our decisions, not dictate them. In the final analysis, the basis of the decision should be 'is this the right thing?'

Is this pulp mill the right thing for protecting forests, or reducing greenhouse gases? Is this pulp mill the right thing for the marine environment in the Bass Strait, or fisheries that rely on it? Is this pulp mill the right thing for ensuring the the viability of local sustainable fisheries against imported cheap fish and prawns from unsustainable fisheries and aquaculture elsewhere?

Is this pulp mill the right thing for protecting the health and safety of the residents in the Tamar Valley, or the growing food, wine, tourism and related industries there? Is this pulp mill the right thing for protecting Aboriginal heritage and supporting Aboriginal people's continued connection to the land, including their food collecting and cultural practices in that area?

On these and many more factors, the pulp mill is NOT the right thing. The federal government's decision to support the mill, and the ALP's support for it, is WRONG, and the claim of 'world's best practice' for the mill is a flimsy veil of deception. We should not let short-sighted political gain win over our capacity to think and do what is the right thing.

In this case, the right thing is to stop the pulp mill.

If you want to help do this, you can sign the petition against the mill at Get Up Australia, who say it is not too late to change this because "Nationwide opposition has forced the Federal Environment Minister to allow ten days of public comment before making his final decision."

Of course, the other thing people can do is put this issue on the agenda for the federal election: this has the chance to shift some of the polls-driven obsession with the lower house to some much needed attention on the Senate, and who will hold the balance of power there!

Read more!

Free Burma!

Free Burma!

Also, Avaaz.org's online petition for Burma has passed half a million, but they still want the full million ASAP! Things are getting worse in Burma, and the Burmese democracy movement needs all the help we can give them. You can sign the petition and see the advertisements they will publish in print press internationally here.

Read more!

So, should we now boycott the BBC?

It's one of those freaks of timing: the day I raised the possibility of including Lonely Planet guides in a boycott of companies profiting from the Burmese military dictatorship, the sale of the publishing house to BBC Worldwide (the commercial arm of the BBC) has increased the spotlight on Lonely Planet for their support of tourism in Burma.

The publishers of the world-famous travel guides have defended their support of tourism in Burma by insisting that they make their feelings about the Burmese military junta quite clear to their readers, and encourage them (as potential tourists to Burma) to think through their decision to visit the country.

It is clear, however, that their guide encourages tourism in Burma, in contravention of an international boycott of such tourism and commercial dealings in Burma – called for by democracy and opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi (amongst others).

While such tourism has been defended as allowing people to discover for their selves what's going on in Burma and help the people, others such as Britain's Burma Campaign have argued strongly that tourism directly benefits the junta, and is intimately tied to their repression of the population:

Burma's military regime has identified tourism as a vital source of income and it is working hard to develop the industry. According to the Ministry of Tourism, its top two objectives in developing tourism are to generate foreign exchange earnings and attract foreign investment. Compared to its neighbours, Burma's tourism industry may be small but it is still earning a cash strapped regime millions of dollars every year.
…
in Burma many human rights abuses are directly connected to the regime's drive to develop the country for tourists. Throughout Burma men, women and children have been forced to labour on roads, railways and tourism projects; more than one million people have been forced out of their homes in order to 'beautify' cities, suppress dissent, and make way for tourism developments, such as hotels, airports and golf courses.

So, I'm wondering now if a boycott of companies profiting from Burmese dictatorship should be extended to the BBC's commercial activities? Does that mean that I should refrain from buying the previous season of Dr Who on DVD? Darn. What would The Doctor do?

Well, if principles and ethical buying didn't make our choices challenging – even difficult – it wouldn't be so interesting, would it?

On another note, thanks to a commenter here this morning, we've learned that bloggers who support democracy in Burma are encouraged to join in the International day of Blogger action to free Burma on 4 October. You can do this by posting a banner from the Free Burma blog campaign on your blog.

Read more!