Cultural Cringe makes the First XVIII?
Early in 2005 sports journalists in general, and
football writers specifically, will be faced with a language challenge - how to use the word ‘football’.
As reported in The Age of Fri 17 Dec 04, Australian
soccer authorities have decided to claim ‘football’
in its unadjectived form as the way they will refer to their game:
Click here
Similarly, in the Herald Sun:
Click here
It is true that, as The Age article reports,
Australia is one of the few countries in the world
that does not refer to soccer as ‘football’. There
is no doubt that in the southern states, ‘football’
refers, both in the popular mind and in media usage,
to "the game of our own", while in most of NSW and Qld,
it means one of the rugby codes. These established
usages have over 120 years of custom, even tradition,
behind them: they are the ways we Australians as
Australians have used this word.
Should football writers in particular and journalists
generally maintain our Australian usage, precisely,
among other reasons, because it is our usage?
Should we change our language simply because
lots of foreigners use the word ‘football’ differently?
In the Herald Sun article, soccer benefactor Lowy
is reported as acknowledging it is a big ask to convince
Australians to call soccer ‘football’. It is unlikely
that Joe and Joanna Citizen will submit to this change
of language simply on the say-so of a rich Sydney-sider.
The mid-20th century writer and critic, A A Phillips,
coined the expression "Cultural Cringe" for our tendency
at the time to consider that anything foreign and/or
British must be inherently better than our own efforts.
Surely, we will decide how we use the word 'football'
and the circumstances in which it is used. Why should
the thousands of past and present 'footballers' from
"the game of our own" have to change how they refer
to their achievements? Why should Herald Sun
contributor Gary Lyon have to stop saying "I played
226 games of football for the Melbourne Football Club"?
And The Age’s Robert Walls have to make ‘corrections’ to,
"I played 218 games of football for the Carlton Football Club"?
Let’s not revive the Cultural Cringe on the football field.
For many millions of Australians "going to the footy"
most decidedly does not mean attending a soccer match.
Australian journalists, sports writers and commentators
should be mindful how we Australians think of and talk
about our games, and resist inducements to jump on yet another trendoid bandwagon.
Leonard Colquhoun
7248
PS: We may not like every aspect of how Americans do things,
but can you imagine them changing the way they use the word
"football" just because the Hispanic lobby thinks it should mean "soccer"?
Sunday, December 19,2004
Gunns and lawyers
So, Gunns decides to retain a firm of "Lawyers that
work exclusively in employment and industrial relations
law for employers"
http://www.emaconsulting.com.au/legal/services.htm
to file
its SLAPP writ. One wonders if Gunns would use this same firm against
its own workers once the "common enemy" has been destroyed.
Gunns pursues profits for its shareholders. The interests of
Gunns employees and Tasmanians are different from those of Gunns.
We should all remember that.
THE CHAINSAW
Saturday, December 18, 2004
The nature of democracy
The Editor,
Democracy is not a given, it is not something we inherit or can
take for granted. Democracy is something we do and must strive
to keep alive each and every day.
Democracy is, by its very nature, under threat from self
interested and powerful forces at all times. So, it is
sobering to reflect that if we are to give way to petty
tyrants, bullies and thugs, we allow our freedoms to be whittled away.
If we allow this to happen, it can only end in tears.
John Ward
Gordon
Saturday, December 18, 2004
Legal action and the FTA
Is it a coincidence that Gunns have started legal action
so soon after agreement of the FTA between Australia and
the USA, or are we about to discover that the right of
corporations to make profits for a few is now enshrined
in law as more important than the right of citizens to
speak out for the interests of the many?
Tim Dub
Kettering
Saturday, December 18, 2004
A frightening precursor
What sort of ugly Orwellian world are we creating,
where lies are rewarded and truth is punished, where
free speech is suppressed and economics is god? Shame
on us if we stand back and let this happen.
Rosie Waitt
Kettering
Saturday, December 18, 2004
Tears
I could feel tears coming and my stomach
knotted when I heard of what John Gay and
his cronies have done to some fine Australians.
As is par for the course, the dynamic duo,
our state (Labor) leader and his sidekick
our state Liberal opposition leader are nowhere to be seen.
I presume they are squirming together with the writers of
spin weaving yet another tangled web. I’m sure another cock and bull story is on the way.
Amongst this travesty, blossoms inspiration.
I know that the Gunns 20 are high calibre people.
They have followed the truth and not the quest for
the holy dollar. I would like to thank them for their
courage and determination in helping to save what
is left of what has to be the most unique place on the planet.
At the same time I am surprised and impressed, that a
politician, Duncan Kerr has spoken out against Gunns
and free speech. I guess he can’t believe he is in Tasmania and not God bless America.
Good on him. I guess he’ll be on the hit list now.
I feel joy when Richard Flanagan speaks or writes
something. What a great person to have on the side
of the people. I have had the enormous privilege to
meet Bob Brown and I found him to be a wonderfully
positive and inspiring man.
Good luck to all of you and thanks again.
Cheers,
Dave.
Friday, December 17, 2004
Unable to take criticism
Is Gay enthralled by his own ego.
Having been declared an apology for a
lord of the forest, having a large pulpmill
investment assured by a tamecat government
he is now taking some of his opponents to
court in a civil case for compensation for supposed damage to the company's reputation.
Already worth $71 million is he not satisfied by
an income of $824,150 pa. Has he become
unable to take criticism.
People have demonstrated in support of free speech,
something growing from the common, not the statute
law. Australia’s Constitution only enshrines 2 rights,
the right to vote in a Federal election if an elector
in the state you reside and the right to a trial by
a jury of your peers. Any other statute right is determined
by the State jurisdiction.
A natural person may take another to civil court,
a corporation is a natural person under the law.
Mother nature is not a natural person and therefore has no legal rights.
And what have the many people who are dependent on
the non timber values of the forests have to put up
with for the 32 years of the woodchip export industry.
Many small businesses have been affected by the operations
of industrial forestry, people have had to put up with
the stress on the amenity of their lives for the export
of jobs, and have been unable to seek any recompense.
And now, almost on a winner among some in the community
with an investment in a pulpmill, Gay rushes to court.
A diversion, lost it, a mistake. Whilst many will have
an opinion, the court will decide on the merits of argument if there is a case to answer.
And what would have been the result if browed and cowed,
conservationists had remained silent. Forest cut over at
a face working out from their export mills, a giant concession,
monocultures and plantations to the horizon.
Not enough that the profit from the public forests has
been gifted to private interests by successive tamecat
governments, all the other non monetary values would
have been sacrificed in the interests of one sector of
the economy, stunting those other sectors more than
they currently are.
Gay has an opportunity to show his interest in Tasmania
and Tasmanians. He could close the loop on the proposed
pulpmill and get out of the public forest.
But he can’t because he needs that low cost resource
and costs passed on to society in the form of pollution
and destruction to pay for the new mills.
He has also chosen to see if he can raise the ire of the civil
libertarian, of the small l liberal and the Australians who
believe in a fair go and the freedom to speak your mind,
not all conservationists.
phill Parsons has no idea what the course of these events
will be and hopes that at least one author will start a book
about this sorry tale in the hope that sales will assist
the defendants and bring a lesson to us all. We have no choice
but to watch the crimes involved in the destruction of natural
systems by the wealthy and powerful and hope that the system
will be fair, experience denying confidence that it will.
Friday, December 12, 2004
An ode to Jim
Jim, oh Jim,
why did you depart
after showing us
you had a heart?
Like a mighty gum
you were felled clean,
not by Gun(ns) fire,
but nicotine.
From our one ship you made two.
It was the clever thing to do!
But for the Sydney run the crowd yelled "lease",
"this spending spree has got to cease!"
But forget the leaden loan,
you had to call all three your own,
and no matter if a loss it ran,
the Tasmanian public would carry the can.
So your three ships a sail now fill the State,
with punters who contemplate,
the pace at which our new found boom,
is filling every bit of room,
along the coast and in the parks,
with every rich-boy's silly lark.
And your mate, John,
he's run amuck!
His corporate brain has come unstuck!
The news, it's all over town,
how Gay John sued Green Brown.
Jim, oh Jim,
we miss you so.
We dearly wish you didn't go.
For so many reasons,
but most of all,
you've gone and left us here. . . . . . .
with Paul.
Albert Mitey Dollar
Hobart
Friday, December 17, 2004
Will Federal Hotels sue TasCOSS for complaining about pokies?
Will Woolworths sue RACT for complaining about their petrol prices?
The Gunns decision to sue forest activists must be bringing joy to
certain sections of the Tasmanian community. However, those who think it
is a good thing to teach those pesky greenies a lesson might want to
consider how it affects them. It has implications for anyone who wants
to dissent.
With lawsuits like this, the fear of being sued effectively stifles
dissent. This is a bad thing for our society. We could be on the path to
a society that prevents any action that affects a business's profits.
What will be next? Will Federal Hotels sue TasCOSS for complaining about pokies?
Will Woolworths sue RACT for complaining about their petrol prices?
Gunns is not just claiming against protestors who
directly interrupt operations with blockades or direct
action. Equally they are claiming against indirect actions
such as the lobbying of Japanese companies to ask them to not
buy Gunns' products. There would be massive implications in denying
people the right to recommend against a company or product.
Anyone who belongs to a labour union should be concerned. The Gunns
action has implications for the right to strike.
No matter which side of the logging fence one sits, anyone who values
our democracy should stand up against Gunns' lawsuits. Federal
Labor MP Duncan Kerr has spoken out against Gunns actions
because it is against his party's values. Which Labor parliamentarian will speak out next?
Barry Brannan
Sandy Bay
Sunday, December 17, 2004
Gunns' action threatens free speech
Yesterday, Gunns Pty Ltd served writs on 20 individuals and
organisations, including the Wilderness Society, Doctors for Forests,
the Huon Valley Environment Centre, Peg Putt MHA and Senator Bob Brown.
The writs seek over $6 million in damages.
Speaking at a protest vigil held in Sydney today in solidarity with the
twenty people and organisations targeted by Gunns attack on free speech
Senator Kerry Nettle said,
"I will stand by the activists who have stood up for the Tasmanian
forests. Unable to win the debate over the forests Gunns is now
pursuing legal action against its critics. This is an attack on free
speech and democracy.
"This case is putting free speech on trial. If Gunns are successful in
getting injunctions against protesters then they will have effectively
made political protest against corporations illegal.
"This suit is clearly intended to bully into silence politicians,
protesters, and anyone attempting to exercise their democratic right to
speak out.
"The Greens will not be silenced by Gunns or any other company from
identifying environmentally damaging practices and speaking out to
protect our ecological heritage."
Kerry Nettle
Friday, December 17, 2004
Paranoia
Dear Sir,
Has someone put a hefty dose of paranoia
into Gunns' drinking water?
Perplexed
Friday, December 17, 2004
An arrogant strategy
Maybe, in Gunns arrogance and ignorance, these
law suits could be what could turn around the whole
Tasmania Forestry practises of:
*outmoded and dangerous forestry practises.
*'judicious use of clearfelling' .. there is no such thing.
*the outrageous and shameful waste of residue
*the killing of native wildlife and endangered species
*the poisoning of the land in general
*the poisoning of waterways
*the poisoning of the atmosphere
*the entire lack of environmental sensitivity of
their own state ... causing their lower tiers
(employees), and the general public to think the same.
silencing, discrediting or intimidating any who speak out
Maybe this is the catalyst we have all been waiting for...
What law states that any government department has this sort
of ownership of the land, the way Forestrytas and Gunns have?
The general public are NOT ALLOWED to do what Forestry/Gunns do..
why should they? WHY do they have this power?, WHO gives them this power?
And if they DO have 'ownership' ... then their own government
departments should advise them (oh habloodyha) that raping and
poisoning is now to be discouraged.
Its not enough they get millions from wood-chips, they now want
millions from those who dare critisize, disagree and dissent.
This is an arrogant strategy, by a nucleus of arrogant people
Good luck WWS, Bob and Peg.
Good luck Tasmania, and beloved forests .. you need these people
to win .. this could be the 'Royal Commission' we have all been
waiting for.
Cheers,
Pat
Friday, December 17, 2004
Socialists condemn Gunns intimidation
Socialist Alliance has condemned the actions
of Gunns Ltd in attempting to sue environmental
activists and organisations and Greens Party leaders.
Gunns’ legal suit is a blatant act of intimidation
and should therefore be condemned as undemocratic.
Gunns directors are the (ones) who
should be punished for destroying Tasmania’s old
growth forests against the wishes of the majority of Tasmanians.
The people named in Gunns’ suit should be the
subject of congratulation not litigation for their
role in helping to defend our natural heritage.
Gunns claim to be acting to defend their employees (but)
they care only about their profits
and nothing else.
Socialist Alliance has consistently supported the campaign
to save old growth forests.
We also call for Gunns to be nationalised to end the ruthless
profit motive in the timber industry.
Kamala Emanuel
Friday, December 17, 2004
Gunns ... today's rally at Parliament House
Dear All,
This is vitally important.
Today, Tuesday 14 December, The Wilderness Society, Bob Brown, Peg
Putt
and
17 other forest activists have been issued with writs claiming a total
of
over $6 million for damages by Gunns Pty Ltd.
(Today), Wednesday 15 December, a rally has been organized in support
of
those who have been charged.
Please PLEASE attend and tell as many others as you can.
Rally is from 12.30pm - 1.30 pm at Frankin Square, Hobart. (The usual
Wednesday lunchtime meeting and update will be moved to 2pm tomorrow -
please come up to The Wilderness Society after the rally.)
This is not a rally with speakers but a silent demonstration with
banners
and key jingling. This was used in the former Czechoslavakia with
great
impact and the symbolism will resonate.
Please be there tomorrow at 12.30 with your banners, placards and
keys.
For more information please phone Zanni Waldstein on 6224-1550
Many many thanks for your great support always.
All at The Wilderness Society
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
A little chemical intake is good for you ...
How many glasses of poisoned water will
Minister Kons drink to show his confidence
that a little chemical intake is good for you.
Scammel was pilloried when he claimed oyster
deaths in St Georges Bay were the result of
atrazine and simazine runoff.
Now downstream of a private plantation in
Western Creek the evidence of contamination is clear.
Gunns disclaims use of the chemicals.
What is clear is that the use of the
triazanine group of chemicals is, as the
American experience shows, contaminates
water by their soluble mobility.
Given the high rainfall along the Western
Tiers these chemicals must be applied at very
high rates to show up in the tested water at the volumes measured.
How long is the government going to excuse the
sacrifice of Tasmania's valuable image, Clean
and Green, the Natural State, Holiday Isle,
years of work building a brand.
It gives new meaning to Tasmania Be Tempted and the
Apple Isle, the land of the Sleeping Beauty
[its just south of that mainland city, Hobart].
Whilst the levels of these pesticides may be below
the acute poisoning threshold the chronic effects
of these chemicals along with any others that make
it into the water are unkown.
And where does the water in Western Creek go. Drink
up Deloraine, drink up Westbury, drink up Prospect,
your Council truly believes in plantations but is unable
to ensure clean drinking water.
Time to ban this cheap and nasty chemical group as other
jurisdictions and the government's own business enterprise
has. You know, sorry mate but...................
phill Parsons sympathizes with Minister Kons,
he has the job of convincing us all it's okay whilst
undermined by his other team members, those in
private plantation forestry. Perhaps they will
realize that the public relations value of any
agreement is nil if it is not followed to the letter.
It is a lesson each governing party rejected at the
polls should remember if ever re-elected, but seems
to slip their collective mind in following a success.
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Famous Reporter ...
We're launching Famous Reporter30 at Hobart Bookshop 5.30pm for 6pm Thursday 16th.
POETRY
Kate Deller-Evans, Christopher Kelen, Adrian Flavell,
Adam Stokell, Graham Rowlands, Graeme Hetherington,
Philip Hammial, Tony Beyer, Andrew Burke, Brendan Ryan,
Todd Hardy, Susan Austin, Saxby Pridmore, Martin R. Johnson,
Ron Moss, Sue Szilvassy, Rory Harris, Margaret Bradstock,
Mary Jenkins, Martin French, Gail Galloway, Robert James
Berry, Kristin Hannaford, Esther Ottaway, Peter Jerrim,
Ray Liversidge, Philip Harvey, Shen, Lorin Ford, Sheryl
Persson, Karen Knight, Jackie Swift, Zoltan Kovacs, Kristen Lang, Shane McCauley
ESSAYS, COMMENT, MISCELLANY
Interview with Melbourne poet Peter Bakowski
Essay, View from the Christian Left Peter Grant
Essay, Did I escape, I wonder? Considering Sylvia Plath, Liz
Kirby
Comment, North to Garradunga, Ralph Wessman
Comment, Election reflections, David
Young, Kevin Bonham, Helen Gee
Recent writing, Not the review Ralph
Wessman
LAUNCH SPEECHES
Andrew Sant's Tremors, launched by Stephen Edgar
Kathryn Lomer's The Spare Room, launched by Adrienne Eberhard
REVIEWS
Luke Davies: Totem
J.M. Edwards & Rosemary Brown: Madge's People
Louise Oxley: Compound Eye
Karen Knight: Under the one granite roof
Tony Beyer: Isthmus
Sarah Day: The Ship
Louise Crisp: three golden fish: a ghost series
FICTION
Bill Cotter: The Complexities of Silence
Josephine Fry: Burnt Orange
WEBLOGS (BLOGS)
Sheila O'Malley: Fairy on the prairie
Christopher Sheil: Blog fast, die young
HAIKU
Jane Gibian, Jeffrey Harpeng, Jill Cartwright,
John West, Peter Macrow, Allen McGill, Ron Moss,
Andrea Sherwood, Sue Stanford, Myron Lysenko, Michael
de Valle, Sue Mill, Carla Sari, Jenny Barnard, Christina Kirkpatrick
Ralph Wessman
Wednesday, December 15, 2004
Biodiesel ...
phill Parsonns' recent letter, Scroll down,promoting the
idea of converting to the use of biodiesel
is, sadly, perhaps overly optimistic.
A recent article by George Monbiot in the Guardian
Weekly puts biodiesel into perspective,
Click here
Using old frier oil to run your tractor may be a great
idea in principle but if we start growing crops
specifically to run vehicles the amount of arable
land used would leave little space for food/fibre
production. He states that it would require some
25m hectares of land to produce the equivalent
amount of vehicle fuel that is currently used
in the UK (which has only 5.7m Ha of arable land).
Do we really want our land to feed cars not people
(not to mention animals etc!!)?
"We need a solution to the global warming caused by
cars, but this isn't it. If the production of biofuels
is big enough to affect climate change it will be big
enough to cause global starvation".
As for going down to your local chip shop and recycling
the waste oil. A friend of mine tried it and found the oil
so thick, filthy and gluggy (even when heated) that it
wouldn't go through the filters. Of course some chip
shops are better than others!
Pat Synge
www.buyselltrade.com.au
Tasmania's free classifed advertising.
Save fuel - shop online
Save paper - advertise online
Save money - advertise for free!
Sunday, November 12, 2004
A letter to the French Ambassador
A letter to draw the attention of the French Ambassdor,
I wish to write this in the hope that the French Ambassdor or
others will make this letter known to him/her and their colleagues.
I am writing not a conservation letter, damning all loggers to
the depth of hell because they have their feelings too.
I don't write as a 'greenie' a 'hippy' or other such stereotypes
for people that are interested in saving the environment. This is not a protest.
This is a plea to the French Ambassdor to talk to me. I will
speak to him/her in their native tongue. I will explain
the situation in French so that I can make contact and
present the case balanced. I urge them to talk and discuss
with me in the language they love and that I speak. I wish
to speak to the French Ambassador myself about why I think
Recherche Bay is important to the Australian people and
the French and why it is in France's interest to pay attention.
If they do not wish this I do not mind but I would like the
personal chance to explain the views of a 19-year-old girl
who is passionate about her second language and the country
in which she stayed. I respect the heritage of my native
Tasmania and the pain that I feel for the loss of areas
of Recherche Bay I feel as both a Tasmanian and as someone who has lived in France.
My contact details are as follows:
skye_matthews201@yahoo.com.au
Thank you,
Skye Matthews
Aged 19 - Tasmanian
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Gambling away their income
Dear Editor,
The increased level of spending on poker machines is concerning.
People are gambling away their income and in some case do not
have enough money left to feed their children properly and to pay their bills.
The Victorian Government has taken a step forward in combating
this problem by legislating a ban on the advertising of poker
machines. The bans, under the Gambling Regulation Act 2003 (
Victoria), will forbid any advertising that promotes poker
machines including television and newspaper commercials,
billboard advertising and unsolicited mail. Fines will be
imposed on gaming operators that breach the rules.
The Tasmanian Government should follow this move and ban all
advertising of poker machines in this state. The public would
certainly benefit from such a move. The government should
also introduce gamling education into school curricula so
that young people are taught about the dangers of gambling.
Maryanne Pritchard
Glenorchy
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Who is accountable to whom?
Under our Parliamentary system the Minister of
the day has been accountable to the voters of the nation
through the medium of Questions in Parliament.
To argue anything else removes from Australians the right
to question the propriety of government.
With De-Anne Kelly [Minister for Veterans Affairs] Prime
Minister Howard has moved accountability into the hands
of one, a dictatorship.
Whilst it may be a common for Ministers to turn the answer
to a question into an attack on the opposition, a result
of partisan government, it is unacceptable that the question
asked about the expenditure of taxpayers funds go unanswered.
Indirectly we have Howard’s dictatorial decision that Kelly
made a mistake and it’s now okay.
Propriety is dead. Parliamentary standards have been abolished.
Self interest and venality rule. It gives the arguments of fundamentalists evidence.
Were there any standard Kelly would be sacked for failing to answer.
She has breached the standards required of a Minister by failing
to follow the guidelines and question a temporary staffer about
their pecuniary interest and making a grant to that interest,
A2 Milk Marketers, and so been stupid.
However, the real failure is the long list of Ministerial failures
overlooked by Howard. Getting away with it does not make it right.
That Australians expectations of high standards by their elected
representatives appears to be falling does not condone.
Howard will be the first to lecture on appropriate behaviour.
Is it any wonder that nobody listens, community standards fall
and vandalism reaches new heights.
phill Parsons remembers Menzies, Howard’s hero, and wonders
if the Warden of the Cinque Ports would approve. He remembers
the Paddington Bear affair that cost a Minister his Portfolio,
and who could forget the white board process that cost another
Kelly. Accountability is the basis of democracy, the thing
Howard supposedly puts Australian lives on the line for.
Sunday, December 12, 2004
Did I believe my ears?
At a time when the government advises us that terrorists are
most likely to attack Australia the former Inspector General's
investigation into an intelligence failure was not exhaustive.
This allowed the government to claim there was no intelligence
failure in East Timor before the October election. Colonel Lance
Collins claimed there was and his repiutation and career prospects have no doubt suffered.
This error or lie was backed by the Chief of the Defence Forces,
General Peter Cosgrove.
Now the current IG tells us that the intel flow was ‘switched off’
for a time. No explanation or reasons given.
At whose direction and why were our armed force intervening in
the human tragedy that the end of the occupation of East Timor by
Indonesia denied the information that forms part of any such operation.
At least one head on pike at the gate to join the former IG in
the pillory please.
phill Parsons has been amused and bemused by the stumblings and
bumblings of the spooks since his Manly days. Freddie Longbottom
Inspector of the NSW Police Special Branch keeping tabs on the
left wing bias of all those hundreds of thousands of dupes opposing
the tragedy that the intervention in the people of Vietnam’s struggle for that most precious thing.
Yes John you may need to have a full belly, basic health and
be free from brutality to appreciate the finer things of
human rights. The question for you is why these things do not pertain throughout Australia.
Sunday, December 12, 2004
River Networds Bulletin
TASMANIAN RIVERS NETWORK BULLETIN #90
10 December 2004
DRAFT WATER MANAGEMENT PLANS FOR CLYDE RIVER AND LAKES SORELL & CRESCENT
These 2 draft plans are now out for public comment. The plans and
supporting information are available at:
Click here
Public comment period closes 31 January 2005
CONFIRMATION OF FROG DISEASE IN TASMANIA
In alarming news for freshwater biodiversity, the infamous chytrid
fungus, which has been blamed for the local extinction of frog
populations worldwide, has been confirmed to be present in Hobart's
Knocklofty reserve and at a private property in the State's northwest.
DPIWE Summary site: Click here
ABC News coverage: Click here
CSIRO Research Page: Click here
WWF Australia Frogs Site: Click here
WATER EFFICIENCY LABELLING LEGISLATION REINTRODUCED TO PARLIAMENT
After a delay caused by the election, legislation to introduce
a mandatory national water efficiency labelling scheme has been
reintroduced into teh Australian Parliament. It is hoped that
the scheme will cut domestic water use by 5% per annum, equivalent
to 87, 200 ML. For more information, go to Click here
NEW IRRIGATION DISTRICT PROPOSALS
Applications for 2 new irrigation districts,
Lake Leake/Elizabeth River/Macquarie River
and Tooms Lake/Macquarie River, have been
received by the Water Management Branch
of DPIWE. These are the first such proposals
under the Water Management Act 1999.
The proposals are open for public comment
until 22 December. for more information,
contact Kate.Guard@dpiwe.tas.gov.au
Craig Woodfield
Water Policy Officer
Tasmanian Conservation Trust
102 Bathurst Street
Hobart TAS 7000
Phone: 6234 3552 Fax: 6231 2491
How to write a letter
Dear Sir
[Insert name of target to discourage future correspondence] is [select illinformed / misinformed] in [his / her] claim.
[Insert name again to reinforce threat] is typical of [select extreme conservationists / dark greens / eco terrorists] and their [select emotional / unscientific] arguments. The scientific basis of the Regional Forest Agreement has preserved [select 86% of old growth / 40% of Tasmania / lots].
[Freeform through the use of humour. Avoid statements such as "The government's advisors are laughing behind closed doors" as this infers a covert government; and "Eco terrorists destroyed (select $50,000 / $100,000 / $250,000) damage to logging equipment in the Central Highlands between 1 pm and 2 pm on Wednesday" as this might implicate forestry contractors themselves].
Forestry provides [select 350 / 1,300 / 7,500 / 10,000 / lots of] jobs in the Tasmanian economy and [select $1 billion / $5 billion / lots of] dollars to the state. Forestry value adds by being [select sawlog / veneer / fine furniture] driven and woodchips are a [select by product / only a little bit].
[Insert name again to reinforce threat] is wrong and should seek the available information from [select our website / insert name of scientist on the forestry industry payroll].
INSTRUCTION: The above template can be emailed to employees of Gunns and Forestry Tasmania or members of Timber Communities of Tasmania and the Forest Industries Association with assistance provided for the technologically impaired.
Mark ("One of the usual suspects". PS: please do not judge me by the standards of pro-forestry supporters. I have not been as impacted by logging to the same extent as many in the community. I object to the senseless and corrupt lack of regulation, destruction of the last remnants of old growth and fair compensation to the disadvantaged).
Friday, December 10, 2004
What about biodiesel ...
Whilst the climate crisis continues to peep like the
nestling it currently is we see the results of its interaction with the stupid monkey.
In the 1990s the Peoples Republic of China suffered massive
floods, drowning many and causing widespread impact.
Their government decided that deforestation was a
major contributor and started a massive reforestation program
in the headwater areas of catchments. Recently Haiti and Hondurus had a similar events.
Government, being the proactive and foresighted body we are all
familiar with has shown itself to perform to its usual bourbon
standard in the Phillipines.
Post the first super-typhoon in my memory, that resulted in massive
flooding. The government is to act on stopping illegal logging.
No mention of reforestation but perhaps that isn’t as sexy as
President Aquino telling off all those nasty, thoughtless and greedy illegal loggers.
Is Aquino also telling us that no runoff flowed from the legally logged areas.
That a less developed country is not trashing its natural resources in
the global race to the bottom as countries compete for the interest of
capital by abandoning reulation and government in the interest of the community.
Needless to say beautiful tropical and montane forests are being pillaged.
But by whom? No doubt local people are involved. Someone needs to be on the
end of the chainsaw, with the dirt and danger.
Also there is no doubt the real money is made passing these logs up the chain
to China, Korea and Japan. A given that corruption and political donations
lie hand in hand with this. Does the Phillipines have a register for such
donations. This will tell an interesting story.
I hope the government's new paper on the climate crisis will include
measures for preparing for storm events. Aurora has already raised
the levels of the dam walls for storm surges.
Another related crisis before us all is the cost of fuel. As I mentioned
previously biodiesel has been around since Diesel made his little peanut
oil burner and has made a recent comeback.
To my knowledge this fuel is available in southern Queensland and Sydney
so it is possible to make it in Australia.
And now Malaysia is considering it. Tasmanians be envious. Fuel in Malayia
is seen as an economic stimuli and so this oil producing nation subsidizes
it to reduce the price at the pump to 0.35c per litre for petrol and 0.22c
for diesel. Yes diesel users, its cheaper. What happened to the excuse
about northern winters and world parity pricing.
Importantly though, the cat is out of the bag. Biodiesel will cost 0.23cpl
to produce. What a stimulus to the Tasmanian economy. An industry making
our own fuel for heavy transport, rail and tractors, either as a percentage
part or as the fuel. The cost of intrastate transport cut even with the excise.
So why are we waiting, is it those mates of Labor and Liberal,
the big donors from that mysterious big end of town standing in
their vests to ensure that their interests remain protected against
those of us all. Do we need a disaster to bring about action.
Sadly, experience leads to conclude that the answer is yes, unless
these yes [mostly] men are tipped out and replaced with a broom of
the hue of the forests worldwide. Those same forests that are being
destroyed for venality, the price of disaster.
I can see the leader of the day, wringing hands and putting the blame
somewhere else. If not those naughty, thoughtless and greedy illegal
loggers then cannot we blame those thoughtless and greedy greenhouse gas producers.
Oh, I know, blame everyone, that way we can get away with own blinkered
inactivity. phill Parsons venal dreams will be fulfilled when that
beachfront property comes to him reminding him of his Manly home.
At least he won’t need a sea wall, standing room only though.
Friday, December 10, 2004
Here's a great gift
Would you like to give a beautiful, inspiring
and thought provoking Christmas present?
Why not give a copy of the Winning Stories magazine,
There is No Place Like Home. The authors are aged 11-18.
The stories are unexpected, courageous, riveting.
The design is to die for. And all proceeds will go towards AAR projects.
How can you resist this? Judy Horacek created the cover art specially for this project. Order promptly!
Order here
Eva Sallis
Friday, December 10, 2004
Good on you, Kev
Dear Editor,
Good on you Kevin. (Scroll down). Anyone with any nous should be able
to see that Dr Bonham is no industry stooge and that he argues the facts.
The forestry debate is so polluted by spin from all directions that it’s
refreshing to read Kevin’s views.
To watch those get taken by his dangling baits is wonderful theatre to boot.
The debate needs more that are prepared to get back to the facts and not to
misrepresent the science. More power to you Kevin.
Disclaimer: Nathan Duhig is a Geoscientist with the Forest Practices Board
(affectionately referred to by some as those "paid to fuck up and shut up"),
so any support for Dr Bonham is certainly misplaced, biased and paid for from the outset.
Cheers,
Nathan
Friday, December 10, 2004
Grain of salt, please
Claims by Gordon Craven (Scroll down) to not be reading
my material must be taken with a large grain
of salt given his past dummy-spit in which he said
he would not be engaging with me anymore, only to soon enough
run back and do so, and now we have his constant transparent
"I'm pretending to ignore you so I don't have to engage with you"
line of vacuous dismissals. Indeed the reasons driving my output
are interesting, Mr Craven, but they're probably not what you think.
Perhaps if you thought about them with a clearer head you might
be able to see the solutions?
As for your ridiculous comparisons with the Nazis, Gordon, there is
clearly a very good reason why you are not a qualified political scientist
and I really cannot see why you should expect anyone to take
your unsubstantiated melodramas seriously.
KB.
Friday, December 10, 2004
Good on you, Kev
Hey Jason,
I loved your letter (8/12) (Scroll down) - Just in
case people didn't get your subtle irony, I have attempted a redraft below:
"Give it a rest, Jason"
Give it a rest will ya, Jason - your letter to today's
Tasmaniantimes was just as selective as the accusation(s)
it contained against correspondent Kevin Bonham.
In particular, your decision to group and label those in favour
of current forestry practices as members of "The forest industry
and its mates" is extremely selective and in fact matches Tasmanian environmental groups' spin.
I am in favour of judicious use of clearfelling in selected areas of
old growth forest and there are many, many Tasmanians like me - just
ask Kevin Bonham. The Environmental movement and its mates prefer
to cultivate community division by labelling those opposed to their views,
including people like myself and Kevin Bonham, as scientific sycophants
who are opposed to all conservation aims.
In essence those opposed are "others", people who are not "normal".
Anybody involved in a societal sub-group would know all about the effects
of this hatred of the "other", which is why it's disappointing to see an
apparently independent thinker pushing the same vitriolic rubbish.
The use of the phrase "unscientific" is also very selective in its failure
to address or even mention those scientists who believe the RFA process
used the science of the day to underwrite the scientific basis of the
entire agreement. We're not talking about non-PhD candidates here either,
the scientists who have supported the RFA are eminent. Once again,
it's disappointing to see an independent thinker slinging off about
selectivity while selectively ignoring other relevant independent
opinion.
Finally, your assertion that there is a clear electoral mandate for the
changes to the forestry status quo is piffle. Unlike yourself, I can see
the influence of environmental groups so I know that the anti-forestry
propaganda in this small state is distorting our democratic process.
They're not forestry bashing to make themselves feel good, it's being done
to influence the views and votes of the Tasmanian population.
Having watched this process for years, I believe that talk of
electoral mandates is completely redundant given the massive
distortive influence of all that propaganda.
As Joseph Goebbels prophesized, "If you say something often enough,
the people will believe it." Were he still around, I'm sure he'd be
impressed with the efforts of the Tasmanian environment groups...
and their syncophants (sic)."
Maybe both versions contain some truths and it's just difficult
to avoid slectivity and name calling?
Regards,
Mick
Friday, December 10, 2004
Letters Archive No. 14
|