Goodbye Andrew O'Keefe

Bettina Arndt

For those of you who haven’t followed this story which broke late January, Andrew O’Keefe was a former Channel Seven host but, more importantly, one of the founders of White Ribbon, a domestic violence organization which recruits men to denounce violence against women.

O’Keefe has been out there for years promoting misinformation about domestic violence, denying women’s role in family violence, and twisting statistics to promote feminist myths shaming men. Here’s Mark Latham [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OQsnFqckx0] debunking O’Keefe’s misrepresentation of our official statistics. And you might enjoy Latham having a very lively few rounds with O’Keefe here [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQxC7iCP6Ac]

I had my own run in with O’Keefe when I was involved in organizing media interviews for the filmmaker Cassie Jaye, when she was in Australia speaking at an international men’s issues conference and promoting her movie The Red Pill. O’Keefe was then one of the hosts on the breakfast show Sunrise, and blatantly lied during the interview with Jaye, claiming they hadn’t been sent the movie. I then released the email correspondence with their producer from many weeks before, which included links to the documentary.

Watch O’Keefe’s appalling attack on Jaye. This performance almost led to him being fired, after over 10,000 people signed a petition demanding he lose his job. But he survived… until now.

O’Keefe’s chickens come home to roost

On Jan 31, came news that he’d been charged with domestic assault of his partner, Dr Orly Lavee. According to The Daily Telegraph, police will allege O’Keefe punched Dr Lavee in the face, pulled her hair, kicked her in the back of her legs and spat on her.

Channel 7 immediately threw him under the bus with an announcement that he was no longer with the network, stressing that he had departed before getting into this spot of bother.

Next came White Ribbon hastily explaining that, “White Ribbon Australia went into liquidation in 2019 and was relaunched under new management in 2020. Andrew O’Keefe has no role in this new chapter of White Ribbon Australia that has seen many changes to our approach and activities. We stand in solidarity with every victim and survivor of men’s violence against women, and believe men who use violence must be held to account.”

O’Keefe’s lawyer announced Dr Lavee’s allegations would be contested in court, stating that “O’Keefe was certainly not the aggressor in the situation. And Dr Lavee will have a lot to answer for.”

Orly responded that she was devastated that O’Keefe had implied she was the aggressor. “It was a reckless thing for the lawyer to say and is totally baseless,' a Lavee friend told the Daily Mail.

You may like to watch Janice Fiamengo's new video commenting on the whole saga. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_jq9Ws5O5dk]

So, here we are. Who knows the truth about what happened that night in Lavee’s Randwick apartment? Perhaps O’Keefe is telling the truth and wasn’t the aggressor, or at least not the only one?

But this arrogant male feminist is about to discover he’ll be up against it convincing the courts, let alone the press, that he, a man, is telling the truth about what happened. He’s about to learn that whatever happens, most people will believe Dr Lavee with the result that his reputation, his career, his life will never be the same. Like men across the country, he’ll learn the consequences of the dangerous feminist rhetoric he’s been promoting for nearly a decade.

For me, the most amusing aspect of all this was that all the initial news stories mentioned the fact that Andrew O’Keefe in 2017 had received an Honours award, in part for his work with White Ribbon. But not one press story demanded his award be rescinded. Not one editorial, not one ABC commentator. Not one word from the Attorneys General and politicians who lined up to condemn me for allegedly misrepresenting the truth about domestic violence.

The deathly silence from the woke, finger-wagging NSW Attorney General Mark Speakman is particularly telling.

Bettina Arndt newsletter: newsletter@bettinaarndt.com.au

**************************************

Cornavirus pandemic making students anxious, depressed, with suicide fears, new report finds

National Mental Health Commission chief executive Christine Morgan yesterday warned the COVID-19 pandemic is making young Australians anxious and depressed.

Ms Morgan, who is also national suicide prevention adviser to Prime Minister Scott Morrison, said children and young people are suffering due to repeated lockdowns, lifestyle restrictions and disruptions to school and sport.

“I’m concerned about increases in self-harm among young people – that is a sign of distress – and I’m concerned about … suicidal risk,’’ she told News Corp Australia.

Commission data reveals that Lifeline, Kids Helpline and Beyond Blue fielded a record 112,000 calls for help last month – 23 per cent more than in January 2020, before the start of the pandemic, and 38 per cent more than in January 2019.

Ms Morgan said high school principals had raised concerns about the “increasing number of young people at risk’’.

“For teenagers, this is the time in your life when you’re finding your place, pushing against parental restrictions and wanting to find networks,’’ she said.

“A lot of that has been impacted not just by lockdowns but a sense of ‘my future is being impacted by something I can’t control’.

“(The COVID-19 restrictions) impact on their ability to engage with others, to make choices, it impacts their families, their school and their future.’’

Australian Education Union president Correna Haythorpe said all schools need qualified counsellors on staff, as children and teenagers wait months to see psychologists or psychiatrists for help with high anxiety or depression.

Ms Haythorpe said a “significant number’’ of teenagers had dropped out of school as a result of COVID-19 shutdowns last year.

But she warned there were not enough school counsellors, or outside psychologists and psychiatrists, to “make sure students have access to the help they need’’.

“Teachers shouldn’t give psychological advice – they should refer students to appropriate services, but we need to have the appropriate services in place,’’ she said.

“There is not enough provision of services.’’

“We need to have fully trained and qualified counsellors in schools, with teaching qualifications, who can work with children around anxiety and mental health issues,’’ she said.

“At the end of last year teachers were chronically fatigued in terms of the pandemic, looking after student health and wellbeing, and managing their own needs.’’

Stress on teachers during the pandemic has also been exposed by University of Sydney Associate Professor Rachel Wilson, in a study for the Centre for Strategic Education.

The study found that teachers were overworked with extra hours, student welfare issues and paperwork, and anxious about the risk of catching COVID-19 in classrooms.

At least half of teachers were not confident students were learning well, and felt most students were “not positively engaged’’ with online classes.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/education/cornavirus-pandemic-making-students-anxious-depressed-with-suicide-fears-new-report-finds/news-story/693cd07257d17d592d95ee44c24b5b79

************************************

NSW dumps education proposal to let students progress at their own pace

The NSW government has abandoned one of the boldest recommendations in the NSW Curriculum Review, dumping a proposal for “untimed” syllabuses that let students progress at their own pace instead of grouping them by age.

The plan grew from concern students were moving ahead without mastering key skills, but Education Minister Sarah Mitchell said the government would instead reduce syllabus content to give teachers more flexibility to help students falling behind in their class.

Ms Mitchell said 200 expert teachers had been recruited to help with the curriculum reforms by advising on whether the new syllabuses work well in the classroom. The first new syllabuses, for kindergarten to year 2 maths and English, are due to be taught in schools from the beginning of next year.

“Streamlining and updating the curriculum is more than just removing content – the curriculum needs to be ‘teachable’ in the classroom, so as to enable teachers to meet the needs of their students,” Ms Mitchell said.

The NSW Curriculum Review, which was billed as the biggest in 30 years and involved two years of consultation and preparation, made three key recommendations when it was handed down last June: cutting content, streamlining the HSC, and ‘untimed syllabuses’.

Professor Geoff Masters, the review’s chair, said untimed syllabuses would involve redesigning content so students could progress at their own pace rather than being grouped according to their age and studying a two-year, stage-based syllabus.

Professor Masters’ concern – one echoed by many teachers – was that huge differences in ability within each year group led to some students moving forward without grasping key concepts, which left holes in their learning and some were unable to ever catch up.

But there was little detail about how this might work in practice. The government accepted the proposal “in principle” when the report was handed down, but said it would seek further advice from the NSW Education Standards Authority.

Ms Mitchell told the Herald that the stage and year-based syllabuses would remain, but reducing the amount of content would give teachers more time to ensure students of different abilities were across the concepts they needed before moving forward.

“While we will be retaining a year and stage-based syllabus, by streamlining and decluttering we will give teachers far more bandwidth and flexibility to teach students at various stages,” said Ms Mitchell.

Secondary Principals Council president Craig Petersen said he was not surprised by the decision to abandon untimed syllabuses. “They’re good in theory – the idea students progress as they achieve the outcomes,” he said. “There’s no point getting you to do calculus in year 11 when you can’t even do multiplication yet.

“The difficulty is, given the current structures and resources, it’s difficult to see how we would do that in practice.”

But Greg Whitby, the head of the Catholic Education Diocese of Parramatta, said the exciting element of the curriculum review had been “a clarion call to do more than tinker around the edges, and for educators to think completely differently about schools and learning.

“Continuing to segregate learning by chunking students into year groups and stages based on age doesn’t create flexibility – it just puts more barriers around learning.” He also said the state’s best teachers should spend more time teaching rather than less.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/nsw/nsw-dumps-education-proposal-to-let-students-progress-at-their-own-pace-20210212-p5722z.html

****************************************

China's trade sanctions on Australian agriculture force farmers to find new markets

Barley growers say they are getting good prices from markets in the Middle East and Asia, while wool, wheat and dairy are largely unaffected by the trade bans and, despite impacts on some abattoirs, red meat sales to China remain high.

Cotton growers are also making some inroads in markets including Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam and Bangladesh and the wine industry has been active in finding new markets.

But the lobster industry has struggled to fill the gap caused by the loss of the China market.

The Department of Agriculture will not say what the cost to farmers has been of higher tariffs and unofficial customs bans across a range of commodities, including barley, beef, wine and cotton.

"China has not imposed sanctions on Australian agriculture, fisheries and forestry products," a spokesman said.

It is also careful about how it refers to the row: "Australian agricultural, fisheries and forestry exports faced a number of challenges, including drought, bushfires, COVID-19 and disruptions to regular trade flows for some commodities into the China market."

The National Farmers' Federation has speculated farmers could lose more than $35 billion over the next decade because of the trade fallout, although it is unclear how the lobby group arrived at the figure.

Signs of recovery for barley exports

Eight months after China introduced hefty tariffs on barley, Australia's largest grain handler, CBH Group, says growers are being paid similar prices to when its most valuable customer was buying.

"For the Australian barley industry, yes it has been a tough 2020, but we're certainly recovering here and prices have recovered to basically the same levels as pre the anti-dumping tariffs," CBH Group chief marketing and trading officer Jason Craig said.

On the road back

Jason Craig from CBH Grain hopes a trial to send barley from WA to Mexico will help fill the void left by China.

Mr Craig estimated a bumper 13 million tonnes of barley had been harvested across Australia this summer.

He said strong demand from feed markets in the Middle East and Asia and an Australian-first trial to sell premium malting barley to brewers in Mexico had helped to replace lost trade to China.

"Currently it's one shipment of 35,000 tonnes that's worth more than $10 million, so it's an important trial," he said.

Red meat still selling into China

Exports including, wool, wheat and dairy are so far largely unaffected by the trade spat and, despite some abattoirs being restricted, sales of red meat to China remain high.

In 2020, six Australian abattoirs were suspended from the trade over labelling issues and claims of meat contamination.

A further two meat plants in Victoria are also waiting to resume selling beef and lamb to China after staff were infected with COVID-19, but prices for Australian cattle are at record highs.

"Yes, there was disruption, but the material impact on overall exports wasn't that great," Mr Strong said.

Australia's recovery from drought has seen the price of cattle soar to record levels, and Mr Strong said, "finding a home for beef not going to China isn't a major challenge".

China was Australia's third most valuable market for red meat last year.

"We sent them 197,000 tonnes of beef, so that was the second biggest year by quite a bit that we've sent to China and they were only number three by about 25,000 tonnes less than the US," Mr Strong said.

Cotton spreads risk, returns still high

Australia's cotton industry has diversified since China stopped buying

"It's not all doom and gloom" says cotton analyst Pete Johnson about China's exit from the Australian market.

Cotton growers are also expected to receive high returns for their produce in 2021, as the industry expands into markets across Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Bangladesh.

Australian growers and shippers claim Chinese spinning mills were told last October to stop buying Australian grown cotton, and the billion-dollar a year trade essentially stopped.

Toowoomba-based cotton trader and industry analyst Pete Johnson estimated growers would lose a $10-$20 a bale premium without China in the market, but that returns to growers this year were expected to be "historically high".

"Would we prefer the Chinese were there to take our cotton? Absolutely, but [we are] spreading our risk into a range of other markets throughout the subcontinent and Asia," Mr Johnson said.

"Spreading that risk is ultimately not a bad thing for the industry.

"While the price is good for the growers, and we're able to spread our risk further. It's not all bad news and its not all doom and gloom," he said.

Winemakers look to new markets

In the two months since China introduced tariffs on Australian wine, the value of exports fell by $250 million when compared to the same time last year.

The loss of such a lucrative market is disappointing for New South Wales winemaker Bruce Tyrrell, who spent much of last year looking for new customers.

"We're opening markets in the 'Stans'— in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan," Mr Tyrrell said. "They're not going to be massive, but they're good markets — wealthy countries building their level of sophistication, so as that happens, wine drinking goes with it," he said.

The Australian wine industry will also look to other Asian countries, into parts of Africa and the US.

Mr Tyrrell said 60 per cent of Australian wine is exported, and while it might be nice to think the domestic market could absorb some of the loss, it was unlikely.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-14/farmers-find-new-markets-after-china-trade-spat/13148704

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************

China loses trust of some its closest allies after punishing Australia

I predicted this. China had been on a charm offensive to the rest of the world and that made sense. But it just needed Morrison to utter a sharp rebuke to China over the coronavirus for Xi to lose it and try to punish Australia. Xi could very easily have simply ignored Australia so Xi must have been thin-skilled to react as nastily as he did.

At any event China has now lost what it had been aiming for -- a good "face". It is now seen as a bully and there is no obvious way back from that. Instead of respect China has now generated hostility to itself

China is losing the trust and respect of some of its closest allies and neighbours who are increasingly worried about the superpower following its punitive trade embargoes against Australia.

Beijing’s anti-Australia measures like blocking our coal have already backfired on a number of fronts, with coal supplies running out, residents struggling to heat their homes in the coldest winter in 50 years, and Australian exports booming as other economies like Japan and India fill the void.

Michael Shoebridge, the director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute’s (ASPI) Defence, Strategy and National Security Program, told news.com.au the measures were “not about Australia”, rather they were about sending a message to the world — that smaller countries should not dare go against China’s interests.

He said China is even prepared to let its own people suffer to make a point.

But if China is trying to impress other nations with its tough stance, it is failing miserably according to damning new survey of its closest neighbours.

The study from the think tank ISEAS canvassed views from 1032 academics, policymakers, business people, civil society leaders, the media as well as regional and international organisations from 10 ASEAN member states — which have a combined population of 655.51 million people — and it raises significant concerns for China.

Despite Donald Trump ruffling feathers on a global scale over the past four years, more than six in 10 respondents now say they would choose the United States over China if the grouping was forced to align with either power.

This is an increase from last year’s survey, where 53.6 per cent were in favour of the US. In contrast, only 38.5 per cent chose China, down from 46.4 per cent last year.

Nations like Thailand, Indonesia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Cambodia and the Philippines said they their support for the US over China has increased.

In a slap in the face to China’s economic posturing against Australia, only military-run Myanmar, Brunei and Laos now say they prefer working with the Asian superpower.

The survey found that although China was overwhelmingly regarded as the most influential economic power in the region, the people who live there are not happy about it.

Among those who see China as the most influential economic power, 72.3 per cent are “worried about its growing regional economic influence”.

Respondents were also asked if they had confidence that China will do “the right thing” to contribute to global peace, security, prosperity and governance. This year, 63 per cent said they either had little confidence or no confidence that China would do the “right thing”.

The simmering distrust had increased from 51.5 per cent in 2019 to 60.4 per cent last year.

Researchers directly linked the Asian superpower’s economic showboating with the decline in trust, combined with its increasing military power.

The respondents saw these factors as a potential threat to their respective country’s interest and sovereignty.

“The region’s best hope is for China to take the mantle of leadership in a manner that does not impinge on the sovereignty and strategic autonomy of its neighbouring countries,” said the researchers.

Here in Australia, the ASPI’s Mr Shoebridge said the results show that China’s economic muscle-flexing with Australia was spectacularly backfiring.

“It shows that China is losing trust on a global stage, and that trust in America has risen,” he said. “It proves to me that other smaller nations are looking at how China has treated Australia and they do not like what they are seeing.”

The trade stand-off is having worrying repercussions for China domestically too, with an eye-watering surge in prices for coal, supply shortages and its residents struggling to heat their homes in the coldest winter in 50 years.

In a desperate bid to shore up its supplies, the government has curtailed electricity to businesses to make sure there’s enough supply for home heating – leading to a surge in orders for portable generators and extra demand for the diesel that fuels them.

Not only is the coal shortage affecting everyday citizens, it is hitting China’s industries hard as factories are forced to use poor-quality domestic coal.

Steel mills in particular were reliant on using high-grade Australian premium hard coking coal – a crucial raw material for steel making.

Now they are forced to use expensive low-quality coal that is highly polluting to nearby residents. It also damages the equipment used in the process and can lead to the production of brittle steel products.

In other circumstances, they have been forced to pay steep premiums for imports from farther afield – like US, Russia, Canada and Mongolia – on top of prices that have risen 84 per cent since mid-year, according to the The Wall Street Journal .

In a further slap in the face for China, its punitive measures designed to hurt Australia have had precisely the opposite effect. Other major buyers like Japan and India have stepped in to fill the void, and Australia’s coal prices have boomed.

Another additional unofficial Chinese ban on imports of Australian-mined copper imposed in November may also come back to bite China.

The South China Morning Post reports that the superpower is facing a potential shortage with disruptions in the production and transport of copper from key producer Peru.

Mr Shoebridge said it was clear China didn’t care about the impact of the trade stand-off on its own people. “They claim to be doing this on behalf of the Chinese people, but clearly that’s not what it’s about. Chinese people want coal for the winter to heat their homes,” Mr Shoebridge said.

“But I don’t think they are bothered by Chinese people not having energy to heat their homes because they don’t want to course on their message to the rest of the world.”

https://www.news.com.au/world/asia/china-loses-trust-of-some-its-closest-allies-after-punishing-australia/news-story/2677ef4514f792d8f3500b592987da79

************************************

Biden confronted China in call to Xi - and that’s good for Australia

If anyone was unsure whether Joe Biden would adopt a hard line on China, his first phone call with Xi Jinping should leave no one in doubt.

Biden’s posture on China, so far, has been good for Australia.

There seemed to be a view floating around in sections of the Australian commentariat in recent weeks that Biden’s re-engagement with Beijing could leave Canberra in the dark.

Former public service chief Martin Parkinson on Wednesday said the election of the new US President would make it even more difficult for Australia to manage its deteriorating relationship with Beijing because the US had maintained open channels of dialogue.

But in his phone call with the Chinese President this week, Biden criticised Beijing for its “coercive and unfair economic practices”. This has been widely interpreted within the Morrison government as Biden standing up for countries such as Australia that have been hit by trade strikes from Beijing for standing up to its coercive behaviour.

Biden also underscored his fundamental concerns about China’s “crackdown in Hong Kong, human rights abuses in Xinjiang, and increasingly assertive actions in the region, including toward Taiwan”.

It is worth comparing the readout of Biden’s call with that of his predecessor, Donald Trump, four years ago.

In his first chat with Xi, Trump made no mention of Xinjiang or Taiwan. In fact, it contained no criticism of China at all.

The White House readout said: “Trump agreed, at the request of President Xi, to honour our ‘one China’ policy”. The discussion was described as “extremely cordial” and both leaders looked forward to “further talks with very successful outcomes”.

The stark difference between the two calls is partly due to the centre of gravity in Washington shifting immensely over the past four years on the question of how to deal with China’s rise.

Biden has shown from the outset that while he is prepared to have constructive engagement with Beijing, certain topics are non-negotiable. These include China’s democratic crackdown in Hong Kong, human rights abuses in Xinjiang, militarisation of the South China Sea and growing assertiveness against Taiwan.

This is what Biden’s national security advisor Jake Sullivan and Indo-Pacific coordinator Kurt Campbell have called “competition and cooperation”.

What many didn’t grasp, if they weren’t paying attention during the US Presidential campaign, was the display of strength Biden planned to show towards China.

None of this is to say Biden’s approach will provide a silver bullet for the Morrison government to improve relations with its biggest trading partner. Australia is in the diplomatic freezer and needs to find a way out on its own.

US President Joe Biden and Prime Minister Scott Morrison reaffirmed the alliance between the US and Australia during a phone call today.

But it is in Australia’s interests to have an America that accepts the optimistic assumptions underpinning the four-decade-long strategy of diplomatic and economic engagement with China have failed, and that the US is now in competition with Beijing.

This competitive posture needs to be pursued in a way that is strategic, coordinated with allies and avoids confrontation and potentially conflict.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/biden-confronted-china-in-call-to-xi-and-that-s-good-for-australia-20210212-p571yx.html

****************************************

International students receive exemptions to travel to Australia for study

More than 1000 international students have quietly been allowed to “jump the queue” and enter Australia during COVID-19, while a whopping 40,000 Aussies remain stranded overseas.

Figures obtained by NCA NewsWire reveal the Australian Border Force Commissioner has granted 1050 foreign nationals an exemption from Australia’s international travel ban since the start of August.

The federal opposition has blasted the decision, saying the 40,000 Australians should be Scott Morrison’s priority.

“Instead he’s letting international students and business investor visa holders jump the queue,” Labor senator Kristina Keneally said.

“If Scott Morrison had implemented a national quarantine plan from the beginning of this pandemic, Australia would be in a position to safely welcome international students without their arrival coming at the expense of stranded Australians.”

An Australian Border Force spokeswoman said people seeking an exemption must provide evidence of a “compelling case” and meet exemption categories, which includes students in their final two years of study of a medical, dental, nursing or allied health profession university degree.

Those students must also have a confirmed placement at an Australian hospital or medical practice that starts within the next two months.

One university in the Group of Eight had at least half of their 65 international medical students granted a travel exemption.

Group of Eight chief executive, Vicki Thomson, said the universities had provided supporting evidence for students that fitted the exemption criteria.

She said about 600 international graduates entered the workforce every year but COVID-19 had caused serious disruptions.

“If medical students can’t get back into the country, then this will impact the pipeline of new doctors into the system over the next few years,” Ms Thomson said. “There will be a shortfall.”
She said there was also a risk that if international students deferred their studies now, the intern system would not be able to handle the influx when they returned.

A Universities Australia spokesman said some PhD students may have also received exemptions on the grounds they must return to complete research critical to their degree.

International Education Association of Australia chief executive Phil Honeywood welcomed the limited travel exemptions made available.

However, he said they were only the “tip of the iceberg” compared to the number of third and fourth year students that remained offshore.

“Whether it be travel challenges or gaining approval for the exemptions, we are still way behind competitor countries such as Canada, the UK and New Zealand,” Mr Honeywood said.

Nursing degrees are popular among international students from South Asia, while dentistry and medicine attracted students from across the globe.

High commissions are also understood to have written supporting letters to boost student exemption applications.

But Mr Honeywood said he was aware of dentistry students in Canada that were unable to return to their Melbourne University courses.

Education Minister Alan Tudge was last week asked if a cohort of international students should come to Australia.
“Our priority from a national government is on bringing Australians home,” Mr Tudge said. He did not respond for comment about the exemptions.

More than 210,000 people have returned to Australia through hotel quarantine arrangements.

At least 35,000 foreign nationals have been granted an exemption to travel to Australia since the March ban to January 31.

Sixty-three students arrived in Darwin under an international student trial held in November last year.

South Australia is also planning to bring in up to 300 students in pilot early this year.

https://www.news.com.au/travel/travel-updates/travel-stories/international-students-receive-exemptions-to-travel-to-australia-for-study/news-story/ef436b9e557440652d82ed5d9715610f

**************************************

Microsoft president says the US should make Google and Facebook pay publishers for news like Australia

Microsoft has urged the US to consider a version of a proposed Australian law that would force Google and Facebook to pay publishers for news because it would 'strengthen democracy' and 'support a free press'.

The Australian law would have Google and Facebook give internet publishers an indeterminate fee for including links to news articles on their platforms.

News publishers say it's unfair that Google and Facebook get to run the links for free, boosting their own traffic and in turn making more money through ad sales.

According to Australian watchdogs, for every $100 spent on online advertising, Google gets $53 and Facebook gets $28.

The proposal hasn't yet been adopted but is being heralded as a solution to the declining ad revenues newspapers and outlets face, especially after a crippling economic year thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Google is fighting it in court. The company is even threatening to pull out of the country if the law is passed. It has proposed an alternative - News Showcase - where it would select stories from news outlets to project and pay them only for those stories. Facebook says it will stay in Australia but is considering stopping users there from being able to share news stories on their accounts.

Microsoft, which runs a rival internet search engine Bing, has vowed to stay, pay the fees - even though it wouldn't be bound to by the law - and, in turn, take over the market if Google leaves. Microsoft already pays media outlets through licensing deals with MSN.

The Silicon Valley giants have traded insults over the issue for weeks and on Thursday, Microsoft President and Chief Legal Officer Brad Smith delivered the latest blow, saying not only should Australia go ahead with the law but that the US ought to make one of its own. 'The United States should not object to a creative Australian proposal that strengthens democracy by requiring tech companies to support a free press. It should copy it instead

'What is wrong with compensating independent news organizations for the benefits the tech gatekeepers derive from this content?' Smith wrote.

He said that Google and Facebook have a 'bargaining imbalance' that favors them and crushes others, and that President Joe Biden should not intervene on their behalf in Australia if he's asked to.

'Australia’s proposal will reduce the bargaining imbalance that currently favors tech gatekeepers and will help increase opportunities for independent journalism. But this a defining issue of our time, going to the heart of our democratic freedoms.'

Smith hinged his arguments on the recent Capitol riot and said America's democracy is more fragile then ever. 'As the dust slowly settles on a horrifying assault on the Capitol, it’s apparent that American democracy is in a fragile state...Technology has been both a positive and negative force for democracy...

'Without new and greater restraints, there is a growing risk that more politicians and advocates will exploit the algorithms and business models underlying social media and the internet to turn disinformation into a new political tactic of choice.

'There is another side of this disease, and it’s the erosion of more traditional, independent and professional journalism,' he said.

After Google threatened to remove itself from Australia if the law is imposed, Smith and Microsoft Chief Executive Officer Satya Nadella contacted the government there and made it clear that they would stay and be happy to abide by it.

Microsoft would clean up if Google left the country. Now, it controls just 5 percent share of the market there, while Google dominates. But if Google left, Microsoft would stand to soak up the internet users it abandoned.

Another side of the argument that is drawing ire is that if Google leaves, the many businesses that rely on it for advertising could fail.

Google hit back at the Smith's comments and said that it does support a free press, but wants to know what it's paying for.

'We’re not against providing support to the industry. The question is, what are we paying for? 'And are those arrangements structured in a way that is fair and equitable to the full ecosystem of publishers as well as to our commercial deals with those publishers?' Richard Gingras, vice president of news at Google, told Bloomberg.

Australian lawmakers have said the law is needed to help media firms stay afloat and so will press forward despite the threat, which Google formalized in a securities filing last week that stated forced bargaining 'could result in our having to alter or withdraw products and services'.

Final passage of the legislation could come as early as next week.

Google is pitching its own payment program with terms it can better control, and last month reached a deal with major publishers in France as well as Reuters.

In Australia, Google users, advertisers and business partners have begun to worry about losing Google, which has a 94% share of the country’s search market.

The interconnected nature of Google’s products means that devices including Android phones, Chromebook laptops and Nest smart speakers could be impaired without search.

'If Google’s search function no long longer exists in Australia, that will remove a lot of the features I use on Google Nest,' said Margaret Morgan, a screenwriter from Sydney who keeps a speaker in most rooms of her house and owns a Google Pixel smartphone.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9254009/Microsoft-says-adopt-Australian-proposed-law-make-Google-pay-publishers-news.html

****************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************

Australia’s vaccine sovereignty has received a boost, with the only jab produced onshore to enter its final manufacturing stage shortly

Australia’s onshore COVID-19 vaccine capacity has received a boost, with the AstraZeneca vaccine to reach its final manufacturing stage in Australia next week.

Drug manufacturer CSL has confirmed the first two million doses produced at its Melbourne facility are on track for release by the end of next month, subject to approval by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison on Friday morning toured the facility, which he said would be dispatching over a million doses per week from mid-March.

“That’s a big production effort. And that is going to change the country for the better,” he said.

“People here have been working long hours for a long time to deliver this, and they are doing it to deliver for Australians.

“I want to thank them very much for that. Our vaccination program is on track and it is sovereign.”

Fifty-million doses of the AstraZeneca jab will eventually be manufactured at the site as part of an around-the-clock manufacturing push.

Health Minister Greg Hunt said the gargantuan effort proved “CSL can do just about anything”.

“It was almost impossible (at the beginning of the pandemic) that they could retool, that they could divert their entire processes and they have done this,” he said.

CSL chief scientific officer Andrew Nash said he was “incredibly proud” of the development.

“Reaching this milestone would not have happened without around-the-clock work from our skilled team … with ongoing support from AstraZeneca,” he said.

“While the work isn’t over, we are incredibly proud to be on the cusp of delivering a locally made vaccine for Australians.

But Dr Nash warned “some of the most critical work is still to come”, with each batch to undergo an “extensive quality check process” conducted by CSL, AstraZeneca and the TGA.

Mr Morrison said the thorough process should give comfort to Australians who will receive the jab.

“They check it, and they check it, and then they check it again,” he said.

“(That) makes sure … you can have great confidence, not just in the vaccine itself but the Australian production process that actually got it to the clinic.”

The World Health Organisation (WHO) recommended the AstraZeneca vaccine to immunise against COVID-19 on Wednesday.

The WHO recommended its use in people over 65 despite some fears over its efficacy in that age group.

The AstraZeneca vaccine would account for the bulk of Australia’s vaccine rollout under the government’s plan.

It argued producing the majority of Australia’s vaccines onshore reduced vulnerability on overseas supply chains.

The development comes just a day after the European Commission confirmed it had rubber-stamped the first shipment of the Pfizer vaccine to Australia.

Australia had ordered 20 million doses of the jab, the only vaccine approved for use by the TGA.

But there were fears their arrival could be delayed after the European Union placed export controls on vaccines produced within its territory, including the AstraZeneca and Pfizer jabs.

https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/australia/coronavirus-australia-astrazeneca-vaccine-to-enter-final-australian-production-stage-next-week/news-story/b720997d8e97d66689e283b58fd5eb0d

****************************************

Missed chance for civics

The current review of the national Curriculum seems an almost covert operation, and neglects the pressing need to elevate Australian Civics and Citizenship.

The latest CIS paper, A 2021 education resolution: keep an eye on the Australian Curriculum, assesses the potential opportunities at risk of being neglected in the review.

Australian students and their teachers deserve the best possible curriculum, but the trajectory of the review doesn’t inspire confidence.

A clever country would shine a probing spotlight on this national education project, which claims to ensure the nation’s ongoing economic prosperity and social cohesion.

The paper follows recently released results of the National Assessment Program – Civics and Citizenship, which revealed 62% of Australian students nearing school-leaving age didn’t achieve the proficiency standard, and 87% couldn’t interpret the results of a hypothetical federal election.

For this reason, the review must chart a balanced approach to the nation’s heritage as a Western liberal democracy and must redress a curriculum that is currently completely lacking in intellectual and cultural firepower.

There are replicable examples of curriculums that prioritise a ‘love of country’, particularly high-performing Singapore. Closer to home, this is also a common theme in the education and broader aspirations of Indigenous Australians but can barely be detected in the wider curriculum.

This is the time to recast Civics and Citizenship — ironically, the subject that few seem to care or know much about — as the major integrating feature of the Australian Curriculum.

Centring the curriculum around our cultural and intellectual heritage would mean a far more solid foundation, but there should also be room for schools and teachers to weave in material appropriate to local students and communities.

This would help ensure students can meet the objective of becoming successful lifelong learners who can make sense of their world and think about how things have become the way they are — as the goals outline.

However, there has been no widespread public consultation to determine priorities and there is only a brief window of opportunity to comment on proposals for changes.

Every Australian has a stake in this review, especially as the country works to recover from the consequences of the pandemic and position strongly for the future.

https://www.cis.org.au/commentary/articles/missed-chance-for-civics/

****************************************

Australia ‘dead against’ climate tariffs, declares Energy Minister

Energy Minister Angus Taylor has declared Australia is “dead against” carbon tariffs as Prime Minister Scott Morrison awaits an invitation from United States President Joe Biden to climate talks in April.

The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age revealed on Thursday that Australia would push back against Britain’s bid to use the G7 leaders’ summit in June to establish climate tariffs, arguing the sanctions would be a new form of protectionism designed to shield local industries from free trade.

Asked whether he opposed carbon tariffs, Mr Taylor said: “We have always been against tariffs in this country under this government.”

“We’ve actually made great gains in entering into free-trade agreements to eliminate tariffs,” Mr Taylor told Sky News on Thursday. “We are dead against tariffs and we believe in the role of trade in driving prosperity.”

“We will work with the United States, with Japan, with Korea, with the UK, with other countries around the world, to invest in the technologies that are really going to move the dial, because that’s how we reduce emissions without smashing our industries.”

Mr Biden will host a climate leaders’ summit on Earth Day, April 22, when he is likely to outline his carbon-reduction commitments under the Paris agreement.

“America must lead in the face of this existential threat. And just as with the pandemic, it requires global co-operation,” Mr Biden said last week.

The Biden administration has not yet said whether the summit will be held in person or online.

Mr Morrison would be expected to travel to Washington, DC if the talks were in person, potentially making his first meeting with the US President on the fraught issue of climate change, and raising the prospect of the Prime Minister doing 14 days’ quarantine shortly before the May budget.

Mr Morrison has been eyeing a more ambitious target of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050 despite unrest within the Nationals, but plans to push back on Britain and the European Union’s plan to impose carbon tariffs.

Australia’s ambassador to the US, Arthur Sinodinos, said on Thursday the Biden administration was “serious” about climate change, with plans for net-zero emissions by 2050 and decarbonising the power grid by 2035.

“Among his [Mr Biden’s] first executive orders have been a slew ... to review things like oil and gas drilling on federal land, to start to implement new environmental regulations [and] reverse some measures from the previous administration which impacted on the ability to address climate change,” Mr Sinodinos said.

“What they’ve done is they’ve said ‘we will marry our infrastructure commitments with our clean energy targets’ … so they’re seeing it as both a job creation program as well as a clean energy program.”

Britain and the EU are looking to settle on plans to impose carbon tariffs in the coming months, while Mr Biden has pledged to implement a “carbon-adjustment fee” at the border. The move would establish levies on energy-intensive imports from carbon-price-free jurisdictions such as Australia.

The Morrison government will argue carbon tariffs are not aimed at combating climate change, but rather at economic objectives including protecting local industries such as British and European meat, cheese and wine.

A briefing prepared for the European Parliament found carbon tariffs would not amount to protectionism provided they did not discriminate against one particular country and were set at the correct rate.

Tony Wood, director of the Grattan Institute’s energy program, said the tariffs were actually about “levelling the playing field” and could encourage other countries such as Australia to boost their domestic climate policies.

“If the British government imposed a carbon price on their own producers and then imposed a border tax on overseas producers for the same thing – then it would give an incentive to countries which did not have a carbon price to do it,” Mr Wood said.

Opposition trade spokeswoman Madeleine King said Australia’s major trading partners were moving towards establishing climate border levies “aimed at countries like Australia that have weak climate change policies”.

“This government has its head in the sand about carbon borders. Our exporters, with the jobs they create, will pay the price,” Ms King said.

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/australia-dead-against-climate-tariffs-declares-taylor-20210211-p571iq.html

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************

Peter Ridd case to go to High Court

He dared to say that Greenie scare stories about the barrier reef were not well founded in the facts

A former James Cook University professor fired over his comments about his colleagues’ climate change findings will have his case heard in The High Court.

Academic Dr Peter Ridd was speaking “hard truths” but should have been protected from being sacked by his contract, the High Court heard as it granted his case special leave to be heard.

Dr Ridd was fired from James Cook University in 2018 for making disrespectful comments about his colleagues when he claimed their findings on climate change could not be trusted as they were too “emotionally involved”, breaching the university’s code of conduct.

The case, which has become a flash point for freedom of speech and intellectual freedom, will be heard by the High Court later this year after it agreed on Thursday to hear the case.

Counsel for Dr Ridd, Stuart Wood QC, said his client’s enterprise agreement granted protection from the code of conduct’s requirement for respectful and courteous behaviour towards colleagues, as well as not bringing the university into disrepute.

“It’s freedom... for academics to go about their work which involves the robust exchange of ideas and to be... protected from the university,” he said.

“One of the provisions (of the code of conduct)... an academic must be respectful and courteous to other members of staff, that obligation cuts across section 14 (of the enterprise agreement).”

Mr Wood said as long as his client did not “harass, bully, vilify or intimidate” his colleagues, his intelligence and academic freedom was protected by the enterprise agreement.

He said it was agreed his client had breached the code of conduct by his “extremely disrespectful” comments about his colleagues, but that the enterprise agreement protected him from disciplinary action when he was speaking within his field of expertise.

“The purpose of the clause... is to allow academics to robustly exchange ideas without being censured. That purpose was ignored,” he said. “Section 14 (means) you can speak hard truths as long as you don’t harass, bully, vilify or intimidate.

“The court should be very troubled by the facts of this case. The commitment from the university to protect the academic freedom was resiled from and Dr Ridd was punished for doing what he should be doing.”

Dr Ridd said he was not surprised, but still relieved by the court’s decision. He said the case would determine the future of academic freedom in Australia. “If we go down... essentially academic freedom doesn’t effectively exist,” he said.

“Academics will always be wondering, actually, can I really say that. They will just zip up. “If universities are not there to have robust debate, then what the hell are they there for?”

Dr Ridd said there were times when intellectual freedom and respectful debate could not occur side-by-side because respect was a broad term. “It can mean from bare tolerance to almost adulation,” he said.

Acting for JCU, Brett Walker SC said the code of conduct and enterprise agreement should be read together, allowing intellectual freedom while treating colleagues with respect.

“It’s a long bow indeed that facts don’t support... that suggests behaving with respect for others is in incongruence to the exercise of intellectual freedom,” Mr Walker said.

“If you assume in your interpretation that intellectual freedom includes freedom from all modes of complying with norms of conduct, such as respect, courtesy, lack of abuse, we have a detraction in the code of conduct.”

Mr Walker said the code of conduct was not simply a tool of the university, but its existence was required by law, though the Public Sector Ethics Act.

He said there was no disagreement between the parties that Dr Ridd breached the code of conduct and if it was found the code and enterprise agreement could be read together then Dr Ridd had “no right of complaint”.

The case will be heard at a date to be set.

The Institute of Public Affairs welcomed the historic judgement.

“This will be the most significant test case for academic freedom in a generation to be settled by the highest court in the land,” IPA director of policy at the IPA Gideon Rozner said.

“Today’s decision continues the David vs Goliath battle on the fundamental issue of freedom of speech, against a university administration backed by millions of taxpayer dollars.”

A 2019 court decision found Dr Ridd had been unfairly dismissed and awarded him $1.2 million in compensation. However JCU won an appeal in the Federal Court last July.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/truecrimeaustralia/police-courts/sacked-uni-professor-case-to-go-to-high-court/news-story/abfee6fbd8a051ff4e72fc9820b76aeb

**************************************

Andrew Bolt: ABC proves it’s blind to the facts

Who can you still trust to tell the truth about saving yourself from the coronavirus? Not Paul Barry, host of Media Watch on the taxpayer-funded ABC.

On Monday, Barry gave a stunning example of how malice and bias blinds our Leftist national broadcaster even to facts that could save your life.

He joined the bizarre media pack-attack on Liberal MP Craig Kelly, and also criticised Sky News.

Thundered Barry: “Sky has regularly given Kelly airtime to tout unproven treatments he claims can beat COVID-19 — the head lice drug ivermectin and the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine.”

Bad Sky! Hadn’t Australia’s COVID-19 taskforce banned hydroxychloroquine, and recommended against ivermectin? So how dare we on Sky let Kelly point out that dozens of studies suggest these drugs do help stop people getting sick, when used early, before the virus gets to the lungs, and when used with zinc.

Barry fumed: “Andrew Bolt allowed him to rubbish the work of Australia’s COVID-19 taskforce.” Kelly told me it had looked at less than 10 per cent of the evidence on hydroxychloroquine.

Barry should have checked if that was true. And whether the taskforce relied on studies where the drug was given too late, or in an overdose.

Instead, he found an academic who’d already trashed Kelly, claiming, “we know for sure that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work”. As for ivermectin, “there’s no evidence that it works”.

What! We “know” hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work? False. Just last month, the American Journal of Medicine published a paper saying it did.

There’s “no evidence” ivermectin works? False again. Just last Friday, the technical lead of the World Health Organisation’s fight against the virus confirmed what Kelly has said — but what Barry damned as dangerous “misinformation”. She said 11 studies showed “promising” results for ivermectin, and 56 more were coming.

In fact, even the COVID-19 taskforce last week quietly admitted it would now examine five new studies on ivermectin, which it failed to admit all suggested the drug worked. As Kelly said.

And on the day Barry attacked Kelly, the Herald Sun reported senior doctors had “called on Australia’s COVID-19 task force to consider letting doctors prescribe both hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin as a cure against coronavirus”.

So experts believe these drugs may work, but journalists like Barry still savage any conservative who dares tell you. Facts are dead. People, too.

https://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/opinion/andrew-bolt/andrew-bolt-abc-proves-its-blind-to-the-facts/news-story/b9d8fabd3e49b53350bad7cabf518a44

*******************************************

Australian expert claims coronavirus likely started in China following WHO investigation

An Australian virus expert who recently travelled to China to investigate the coronavirus pandemic is convinced it originated there.

NSW Health infectious diseases expert Professor Dominic Dwyer was part of the World Health Organisation’s (WHO) 14-strong virus investigation team which visited Wuhan for two weeks to study the outbreak’s source.

While the investigation did not definitively declare China as the source, Prof Dwyer, who is now in quarantine following his return to Australia, told Nine he believed COVID-19 “started in China”.

“I think the evidence for it starting elsewhere in the world is actually very limited. There is some evidence but it’s not really very good,” he said.

The WHO team visited a number of placed linked to the initial outbreak, including the Huanan Seafood Market, the Wuhan Institute of Virology, the Hubei Province Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Hubei Provincial Hospital.

Prof Dwyer also added bats were the “most likely” source of the virus but that it had been active in the community for “weeks’ before the outbreak connected to the wet market in late 2019.

It comes as NSW Health researchers uncovered a virus breakthrough which will help authorities across the globe contain coronavirus outbreaks faster, after experts from NSW Health Pathology successfully grew the live virus from NSW patients.

“Early and accurate diagnosis of infectious and deadly viruses is critical because undiagnosed patients can unknowingly transmit it to others,” Health Minister Brad Hazzard said following the announcement.

“But unless clinicians understand the epidemiology of the disease – how it behaves and replicates – they can’t develop reliable diagnostic testing to identify and contain it.

“A team of elite NSW researchers have achieved this by undertaking genome sequencing of the virus and growing the live virus from real patients as opposed to using synthetic materials.”

Prof Dwyer, who is NSW Health Pathology’s director of Public Health Pathology, said the discovery would save lives.

“This cutting-edge work will expand access to faster, reliable diagnostic testing for infected patients, not just here in NSW but around the world,” Prof Dwyer said.

“Being able to cultivate the novel coronavirus with samples from NSW patients as opposed to trying to mimic it from synthetic specimens is a terrific breakthrough.

“Synthetic virus tools don’t offer the same high degree of diagnostic accuracy needed to help us develop effective antiviral drugs that can be used to treat infected patients,” he said.

“We’re proud to be able to share our discovery with the World Health Organisation, and international researchers and clinicians, so together we ultimately help save lives.”

It is almost a year since WHO officially declared coronavirus a pandemic. It has so far infected 107 million people around the world and killed 2.35 million.

https://www.news.com.au/world/coronavirus/global/australian-expert-claims-coronavirus-likely-started-in-china-following-who-investigation/news-story/5f3a6b8037bebe52c9e9fcc1fdd4fee0

*********************************************

No law to set target: Ministers stare down Nats’ complaint on carbon

Federal ministers are planning to neutralise a backbench threat on climate change by making sure a new carbon target will not be mandated by law, avoiding a vote in Parliament that could rock the government.

The Morrison government is aiming to achieve the contentious target of net zero emissions by 2050 by pledging billions of dollars on energy projects without a mechanism that requires majority support from a divided backbench.

But the plan could undermine business confidence in the path to matching other advanced economies, with a top economist saying company chiefs would need the certainty that comes from a mandate set by law.

Australian National University Professor Warwick McKibbin said a binding emissions target was one of several critical policies required to achieve lower emissions with the least economic harm.

“If you don’t have a legislated target built into the system then the private sector won’t risk capital to hit the target,” said Professor McKibbin, a former Reserve Bank board member.

“You need a target at the core of policy, but it has to be measured over the long term as an average over time.”

Australian Industry Group principal adviser Tennant Reed said the organisation’s members overwhelmingly supported a clear 2050 net zero target.

“The more specific the government can be the better, and a net zero target by 2050 is something many, many of our members have said they are happy for us to advocate for,” he said.

United Nations secretary-general Antonio Guterres this week told member nations “the drive to net zero emissions must become the new normal for everyone, everywhere” and said the target had to be backed with credible plans to achieve it.

The warning came as three former Nationals ministers – Barnaby Joyce, Matt Canavan and Bridget McKenzie – warned they would reject a net zero target that imposed costs on rural Australia.

The moves put Prime Minister Scott Morrison on notice about the unrest within the Nationals over his declaration last week that the government would “preferably” set a target of net zero by 2050.

The government’s current stance is to reach the net zero goal sometime between 2050 and 2100, a position seen as inadequate by European leaders who argued against Mr Morrison speaking to a London climate summit in December.

Senator Canavan, a former resources minister, said he would vote against a net zero target for 2050 because it would cost too much to achieve. Senator McKenzie, a former sports minister, also warned against the target but acknowledged it might not come to a vote.

Mr Joyce, who was Nationals leader and deputy prime minister for two years, said he was willing to cross the floor on the issue.

But Environment Minister Sussan Ley played down the prospect of a vote in Parliament to put the target into law, the point at which Nationals might cross the floor.

“I don’t know that it’s a legislative issue,” Ms Ley told radio station 2GB. “I don’t know whether it’s appropriate for it to be legislated – if it is, it is, and we will work through that along the way.”

Others within the government said Mr Morrison did not intend to legislate the target and had already ruled out a scheme that imposed a burden on regional Australia, the issue that sparked the backbench concerns.

One of the key questions is whether to include farming in the target, but Ms Ley signalled on Tuesday the Nationals could not expect the sector to be totally exempt from policies to cut emissions.

“Agriculture needs to be at the table for the discussion,” she said, adding that many farmers were already reducing their emissions.

“They’re not on the back foot. They’re well and truly on the front foot,” she said.

The unrest within the Nationals’ backbench – no ministers joined the calls – sends another warning shot to party leader and Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack after complaints that he does not stand up for the Nationals against Mr Morrison.

Mr Guterres said net zero must be a focus for every country, company, city and financial institution, as well as key sectors such as aviation, shipping, industry and agriculture.

“The world remains way off target in staying within the 1.5-degree limit of the Paris Agreement,” he said.

“The global coalition for net zero emissions needs to grow, to cover more than 90 per cent of the emissions. This is a central objective for the United Nations this year.”

Mr Reed said it was a widely held view among Australian businesses that not only would the private sector be better able to plan and allocate resources with a clear target, so would federal government agencies such as the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

Professor McKibbin also said a market mechanism, in the form of either a carbon tax or emissions trading scheme, would be required to give polluting industries the means and flexibility to switch to lower emissions systems and comply with the target.

“But a safety valve is required. You have an institution called a carbon bank that can issue permits to stop the costs of emissions rising above a threshold,” he said.

”The scheme has to have credible flexibility, like the way we run monetary policy where a carbon bank has a mandate to smooth costs and monitor what is happening in the economy and inform the market – so industry can change the way they generate or use energy.“

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/no-law-to-set-target-ministers-stare-down-nats-complaint-on-carbon-20210209-p570zm.html

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************

AstraZeneca vaccine: why Australia is forging ahead as South Africa tackles Covid variant

Medical experts say the jab is effective against severe infection, as researchers work to adapt vaccines against variants and experiment with mixing inoculations

Australian health authorities have moved to calm concerns about
the effectiveness of the AstraZeneca vaccine, after a small-scale study suggested its efficacy against mild to moderate infections from the the South African variant of the virus could be as low as 10%.

AstraZeneca is going through the Therapeutic Goods Administration approval process now and is slated to be rolled out from April. This is what experts are saying.

You should still get the AstraZeneca vaccine

That’s the advice of Australia’s chief medical officer, Prof Paul Kelly. He has urged people not to put too much stock in the results of the South African study, which he stressed was both limited in scope and had not yet been peer-reviewed.

Kelly told reporters on Tuesday that people should be wary of “taking small amounts of information quickly, without looking at it carefully, and making conclusions”.

“At the moment, I can absolutely say – and this may change in future, and we will be nimble in the way we look at that information and putting that into our planning – but at the moment, there’s no evidence anywhere in the world that AstraZeneca effectiveness against severe infection is affected by any of these variants of concern. And that is the fact.”

His comments were echoed by Prof Mary-Louise McLaws, an Australian epidemiologist and advisor to the World Health Organisation on Covid-19.

“I commend your readers to get any vaccine that is offered to them, because it will reduce severity,” McLaws told Guardian Australia. “Any vaccine is better than no vaccine. If you do get the virus it will improve your outcomes, your response, and you may not get severe Covid.”

There is also evidence from another unpublished study in Israel on the Pfizer vaccine, which suggested that people who are not protected by the vaccine nevertheless had a reduced viral load. So even if a vaccine had a reduced efficacy, there is evidence to suggest it will reduce the extent to which a person spreads the disease, McLaws said.

AstraZeneca, unsurprisingly, also played down the study on the South African variant, saying it was a small phase one or two trial, which showed limited efficacy against mild disease from the variant.

“While we have not been able to properly ascertain its effect against severe disease and hospitalisation given that subjects were predominantly young, healthy adults, we do believe our vaccine will still protect against severe disease for the B1351 variant, particularly when the dosing interval is optimised to 8-12 weeks,” AstraZeneca said.

What the South African study actually showed

The study was a small-scale trial of 2,000 people aged 31 which showed the AstraZeneca vaccine had as little as 10% efficacy in preventing mild to moderate infection against the South African variant of Covid-19, B1351. However the researchers expressed hope the vaccine would still offer significant protection against more serious infection, which is the goal of the global vaccine program.

The study is yet to be peer-reviewed or published. The South African government has paused its planned rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine in response.

It is not the only vaccine to show reduced efficacy against the South African variant. Trials of the Novavax vaccine also showed 60% efficacy against the South African variant, compared with an 89% efficacy overall – 95.6% against the original coronavirus and 85.6% against the UK variant.

Kelly said Australian authorities will be looking very closely at all information which comes out about the efficacy of the AstraZeneca vaccine, but said there was to date no information to suggest it did not protect against severe infections from the South African variant.

He said Australian authorities will be talking closely with the UK, where AstraZeneca has already been widely distributed.

“This is a very good vaccine, very safe, and once it goes through those processes, of safety, quality and efficacy, we will be able to look to roll out that vaccine as well – as always, subject to the TGA advice,” he said.

Yes, but it will take time. AstraZeneca said it has already started adapting its vaccine against the South African variant, “and will advance rapidly through clinical development so that it is ready should it be needed”.

Novavax responded to the lower results in South Africa by saying it would immediately start developing a new vaccine aimed specifically at the South African variant.

AstraZeneca is a viral vector vaccine, which relies on the use of an RNA molecule – the same part of the virus as used in the mRNA Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. Novavax is a more traditional protein-based vaccine, and they take longer to modify.

Kelly said mRNA and viral vector vaccines can be adapted more quickly than protein vaccines, but even if they are able to be adapted,” it is another issue to make nine billion of them”.

“If we’re going to vaccinate the whole world, it’s going to take time,” he said.

Why don’t we just all take the Pfizer vaccine?

That would be a great option, says McLaws. Except we don’t have enough, and there is significant pressure on the global supply. Australia recently secured an additional 10m doses of the Pfizer vaccine, taking the total contracted amount to 20m doses by the end of the year.

That’s enough to administer the required two doses to 10 million people, or just under 40% of Australia’s population. The first 80,000 doses of the Pfizer are still on track to arrive in Australia by the end of February, Kelly says, and authorities are hoping for weekly deliveries thereafter. People in the highest-risk cohort – frontline medical staff, hotel quarantine workers, aged and disability care home residents and staff – will get that vaccine.

The balance of the population is likely to receive either AstraZeneca, which is manufacturing 50m doses in Melbourne that are expected to be administered from March, pending TGA approval, or the Novavax vaccine, which is several months away.

What are the other options?

Well, we could mix vaccines. That concept is being trialled in the UK – they called for volunteers just last week – and will involve giving 820 unvaccinated people over the age of 50 a first dose of either the AstraZeneca or the Pfizer vaccine. Half the group will have their vaccine switched for the second dose, and the other half will get the same again.

It is an option worth considering, McLaws said. Without it, the risk is that people vaccinated with AstraZeneca – largely the 20- to 39-year-old cohort – may not be fully protected against Covid-19. That’s a problem because that age group, while not at highest risk of serious disease or death, made up half of all people who contracted Covid-19 in Australia last year. They are highly mobile and more likely to be underemployed and working multiple part-time jobs, which increases their risk of exposure.

Even without considering new variants, AstraZeneca has a lower reported efficacy than Pfizer and Novavax, the other options in Australia’s stable. It sought regulatory approval in the UK on the basis that it has about 70% efficacy.

“The risk is that if our 20- to 39-year-olds are vaccinated with AstraZeneca, we have at least a 30% risk of them not eliciting an immune response without the additional problem of a variant,” McLaws said. “This is an opportunity to look at how we protect the unknown 30-odd percent. And that may be to mix up the second dose with something that doesn’t have such low efficacy for the South African strain and the Brazilian strain.”

What does this mean for borders and other restrictions?

To date there have been no reported cases of the South African variant in the Australian community.

But the risk remains. Since Friday there have been 87 samples of B117, the UK variant, detected in hotel quarantine in Australia and 18 of B1351, the South African variant.

But the vaccine results solidify what epidemiologists have warned for some time: that life will not instantly go back to normal once the majority of the population has been vaccinated

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/feb/09/astrazeneca-vaccine-why-australia-is-forging-ahead-as-south-africa-tackles-covid-variant

************************************

Climate risk sees bank divest from Port of Newcastle, the largest thermal coal terminal in the world

The port is the largest thermal coal terminal in the world, last year exporting 160 million tonnes and accounting for 99.2 per cent of its exports by volume.

ANZ was previously a major lender to the port as part of its $950 million debt pile, but in November the port refinanced and ANZ took the opportunity to divest.

It is understood the bank deemed the port too risky an investment which could end up a stranded asset in a world that is quickly shifting away from coal.

Last year the bank also announced an ambitious net-zero emissions action plan which adopted the issue of climate change as a condition of lending.

Analyst from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, Tim Buckley, said ANZ's decision was not surprising and in the best interest of its shareholders. "It will absolutely end up a stranded asset if the world is able to deliver on the Paris Climate agreement, and my conviction that the world will deliver on the Paris agreement has never been stronger," Mr Buckley said.

"The world is moving 100 miles an hour to address this critical global issue of climate risk and ANZ is understandably working with all of its customers to transition."

The United States has committed to rejoining the Paris Agreement to drastically cut carbon emissions, while large coal consumers like Japan and Korea have set net zero emissions targets for 2050, and China 2060.

The National Australia Bank, among several others, have meanwhile stepped in to underwrite the Port of Newcastle as it plans to diversity into non-coal operations in the long term, particularly container cargo.

"We are working with responsible lenders who are interested in helping businesses like Port of Newcastle become more sustainable and diversify," it said in a statement. "This is crucial to a business that supports our local, regional, and national economies."

The Federal Minister for Trade Dan Tehan said he was disappointed by ANZ's decision and described the port as a viable and strong business.

"I'm very pleased that it looks like there's going to be alternative finance that will be secured because it's an incredibly important business. It supports 9,000 jobs and plays an important role in our export mix," he said.

"It's incredibly important to understand that our coal is the cleanest coal exported in the world and if we're not exporting our coal other countries will be, and that will add to emissions."

When asked, Mr Tehan did not acknowledge that there was any need for the port to diversify its activities in the long term as demand for coal declines.

The port itself has openly acknowledged the need to diversify, but its push to develop a container terminal for general cargo has so far been hampered by the NSW Government.

When selling Port Botany and Port Kembla, the state implemented laws that would restrict any container traffic through Newcastle for the next 50 years. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) deemed the move anti-competitive and illegal, and the matter is currently being dealt with in the Federal Court.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-09/climate-risk-sees-anz-divest-from-port-of-newcastle/13136462

**************************************

MGA Thermal, a start-up born at Newcastle University, hopes to revolutionise the storage of energy and accelerate the shift to renewable power

"This is our lab where our manufacturing currently happens at the University of Newcastle," MGA Thermal's Alex Post tells the ABC as he takes us into a workshop in the engineering faculty.

The young engineer has the dual titles of chief technology officer and chief disruption officer at the company.

He's a protégé of Erich Kisi, a professor of materials science at Newcastle, who pioneered a technology for storing energy as heat in "bricks" made from an alloy of recycled metals.

Alex Post explains a process that's remarkably simple. "We stack the bricks up into large energy storage systems; we heat them with waste heat from industry or with electricity from the grid when we have too much solar, and these bricks store all of that energy as heat.

"Six to eight hours later we can use all that stored heat to drive an industrial process or create steam to run a power plant and put energy back onto the grid." It's modular, scalable and carbon emissions free.

The main applications for the technology will be powering factories and providing storage for solar power plants that use concentrated solar thermal power, but it could also be used to turn the turbines in former coal-fired power stations — without burning coal.

It's the kind of clean technology that groups working on the transition from coal see as the future of this region.

"Our vision is that, by 2030, the Hunter is the electric motor of the Australian economy and possibly the global economy," says Sam Mella, Hunter engagement lead for the think tank Beyond Zero Emissions.

"We have everything we need to electrify industry using renewable energy and create thousands and thousands of jobs."

Another business, Energy Renaissance, is looking at manufacturing large-scale lithium-ion batteries for storing clean energy.

The Hunter Valley has also this week been announced as a centre for the development of hydrogen fuel — a clean energy when generated from renewables — that could become a multi-billion-dollar Australian export to Asia.

Newcastle, the city that was synonymous with BHP's giant steelworks for decades until it shut down in the late 1990s, is now looking at manufacturing steel again — in blast furnaces powered by renewable energy.

The great legacy of the coal industry and the old power stations is a massive network of electricity transmission infrastructure and a vast rail freight network going directly to a deep-water port.

"We'll have massive renewable energy industrial precincts making green steel, green aluminium, carbon-free batteries and we'll be exporting all of this through the port," says Sam Mella.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-02/coal-transition-climate-change-hunter-region/13109642

****************************************

Cold snap blamed for mass deaths of tree martin birds in WA's South West

What! No global warming?

Conservationists have blamed a summer cold snap for the widespread deaths of a small native bird in Western Australia's South West.

A low pressure system brought unseasonal cold temperatures and heavy rainfall to southern WA for several days from the weekend.

Parks and Wildlife conservation officer Ben Lullfitz said after the cold weather people had found dead tree martin birds from Augusta to Bunbury.

"It's a small bird which looks a bit like a swallow, basically they are insect feeders which don't like cold weather in the summer … which has caused them to get into quite a bit of distress," he said.

Mr Lullfitz said the birds were unable to feed or regulate their body temperature during the cool conditions.

"We don't know how many exactly have died but it's been a widespread event," he said.

"We haven't had any reports of other species not surviving this cold weather but generally [birds] will find a spot to shelter and wait out," Mr Lullfitz said.

He recommended local residents dispose of any dead birds they find. "If animals are still alive and in distress take them to the nearest vet or call the wildlife helpline," he said.

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-02-09/cold-weather-blamed-for-mass-tree-martin-bird-deaths/13135174

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************

Victoria gives $10m for hydrogen hub which will study storage and clean energy vehicles

Idiots. Where are they going to get the hydrogen from? It is all about us but separating it out needs energy, electricity. And where is the electricty coming from? From fossil fuel power stations, mainly. It is just an indirect way of using fossil fuels

And what about the cost and weight of the massive pressure vessels needed to store it? Whatever it is, it is not environmentally friendly

The hub will be based at Swinburne University of Technology and study both clean energy vehicles and hydrogen storage.

The government says about 300 jobs will be created and construction is expected to take about 18 months after it commences in 2022.

Swinburne will partner with the CSIRO to establish it.

“This hub will help give Victorians the skills and experience we need to unlock the hydrogen industry – driving down emissions while creating green jobs in a growing industry,” Victoria’s energy minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, said on Saturday.

The CSIRO said that as part of the arrangement it would get $1m to help develop a refuelling station for hydrogen vehicles.

“As Australia considers energy alternatives, we know hydrogen is clean and will be cost-competitive, but a major barrier to it becoming a fuel source for cars and trucks is how to refuel, and the lack of refuelling infrastructure,” the CSIRO’s executive director, Nigel Warren, said.

“The refueller is a significant step towards removing that barrier.”

Swinburne university’s vice chancellor, Pascale Quester, thanked the government and said the hydrogen hub would demonstrate the ways in which technology can “create a better world”.

A sister site will also be built in Stuttgart, Germany.

The Victorian government is also expected to release a hydrogen industry development plan in the coming weeks.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/feb/07/victoria-gives-10m-for-hydrogen-hub-which-will-study-storage-and-clean-energy-vehicles

**************************************

Demand for arts and humanities still high despite Coalition university fee increases

Demand for arts and humanities university courses has risen in some states, despite the federal government’s fee increases aimed at pushing students into more “job-ready” degrees.

Students appear willing to pay increases of up to 113%, with university offers for society and culture degrees up 25% in Queensland among year 12 school leavers. Offers for the creative arts are also up 11.3%, according to early data from the Queensland tertiary admissions centre.

In contrast, offers for information technology, which had its student degree cost slashed from $9,698 to $7,700, are up only 18.8%, and engineering, with the same discount, is up 15%.

In New South Wales, preferences for society and culture rose 5.7%, and nearly 2,000 more students applied than at the same time last year.

Despite student fees more than doubling from $6,804 a year to $14,500, 40.6% of NSW prospective students chose it as their first preference, by far the largest cohort, although the figure is down slightly on 41.3% in 2020.

However, in Victoria the number of applications (at any preference) to study arts and the humanities fell 7.3%, to 15,494 – even as total undergraduate applications rose 1.5%. Arts and humanities still made up 23% of all applications.

Commerce and law, whose fees also rose, had a drop in Victoria. Commerce applications dropped 3.4% and law applications 3.6%.

Final enrolment numbers will not be known until after the census at the end of March. Until then, students can drop out or change courses without being charged.

Higher education expert Andrew Norton, from the Australian National University, said it appeared the government’s changes to student contributions were not having a “dramatic” effect on students’ choices.

“[Applications] are up overall, including in some states’ arts degree fields that have more than doubled in price,” he said.

In June last year, the architect of the Hecs scheme, Bruce Chapman, predicted the fee rises would not move students into the areas the government wanted to prioritise.

Norton said the dip in applications in Victoria was among any preferences, not just first preferences, which made its data different from NSW.

“In Victoria the number of arts applications at any preference level is down – $14,500 a year might be too much to pay for a second or lower preference course,” he said.

“But we have to wait for enrolment data to see the true effects of changed student contributions.”

Under last year’s changes, fees were reduced for agriculture and maths by 62%, teaching, nursing, English and languages by 46%, and science, health, architecture, IT and engineering by 20%. The cost of humanities rose 113%, and law and commerce 28%.

The then-education minister, Dan Tehan, said the changes would “incentivise students to make more job-relevant choices … by reducing the student contribution in areas of expected employment growth and demand”.

“It’s common sense,” he said in a speech to the press club. “If Australia needs more educators, more health professionals and more engineers then we should incentivise students to pursue those careers.”

In NSW, overall applications rose 7.5%, meaning the percentage of humanities applications out of the total dropped slightly from 41.3% to 40.6%.

Applications for health degrees rose 13.5% and architecture rose by 10%. Information technology rose 5.7%, and natural and physical sciences rose 4.3% – both slightly less than society and culture.

Applications for creative arts and management and commerce, which both had degree costs raised, were the only areas to drop – by 1.2% and 2.1% respectively.

In Queensland, offers for education rose 35.2%, natural and physical sciences rose 30%, architecture rose 18.8% and agriculture rose 8.8%.

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2021/feb/08/demand-for-arts-and-humanities-still-high-despite-coalition-university-fee-increases

****************************************

They may be bigots, but here’s why we can’t gag Israel Folau or Margaret Court

Pru Goward

He’s baaack! Just as we had gotten used to the idea that a so-called religious bigot had been awarded Australia’s highest honour for being Australia’s greatest ever tennis player of any gender, another religious figure, with a similar antipathy for homosexuals as Margaret Court AC, is in the news.

Yes, Izzy Folau, having been banished by Rugby Australia, is looking for the honour of playing NRL. How dare he seek the adoring roar of the crowds and the big bucks again with views like his, you may well ask.

Margaret Court may have been the female equivalent (and more) to Don Bradman for at least a generation of Australian women, who, like me, knew of only two other famous women: the Queen and Dame Pattie (Menzies). Mysteriously, Court had never received the same recognition as the wondrous but silent Ken Rosewall or Rod Laver.

Not for we girls of the 1950s were there female government ministers, world-leading scientists, a dazzling array of sporting stars or even women reading the news on radio, let alone television, to admire and emulate. But there was always Margaret Smith, as she was then.

I haven’t heard the outcry from political leaders who want Israel Folau removed from public life again, or threats from famous fans to tear up their NRL membership tickets if he’s allowed back with St George Illawarra – albeit with a gag order in his proposed contract – in the same way others have rejected their honours over Margaret Court, but no doubt they’re warming up in the wings.

For all I know, Izzy has been in isolation at a re-education camp for the past 12 months, contemplating his reduced income and the attractions of discretion; we have heard little of his views since he was dragged from the scene, taking with him the head of then Rugby Australia chief Raelene Castle.

Eddie McGuire was in danger of being condemned in the same way over his, in my view, much more ill-judged remarks about racism at Collingwood Football Club but, since he had attached no theological belief to it, recanting was painless and swift.

Now we are flagellating ourselves yet again, wondering aloud how Australia could allow two people as undeserving as Court and Folau to prosper on our watch.

The country that finally threw off the shackles of religious convention in the ’60s, when the pulpits ruled and unspoken sins were roundly condemned (they never were spelt out by the preacher, or more of us teenagers might have tuned in for the naughty words), has gradually replaced it with another sort of equally religious puritanism, with exactly the same effects: silenced debate, silenced freedom of speech, reduced tolerance, reduced trust.

Maybe it’s a post-COVID trauma and will pass. The emergent parochialism of the states (except our own) has been breathtaking and premiers have clearly fed off opinion polls that told them their electorates enjoyed seeing other states as the enemy far too much. In 2020 we found out what cancel culture really meant, and it wasn’t great. But we’re at it again, seeking to cancel people we don’t agree with.

Calls to disgrace people who offend us were the warm-up acts of dictators and the early warning signs of totalitarianism in places as disparate as the old South Africa and the Soviet Union.

It is not as if people have an unfettered licence to insult and defame individuals or groups; unlike the United States, Australian human rights law is very clear on vilification and the inciting of others to commit crimes or acts of terror. Our defamation laws are extremely tough by the standards of other democracies.

While I share Julia Gillard’s “murderous rage, really” – her description of how she felt about those men who attacked her with snide references to gender – and while I have a large group of male dolls in my head I regularly stick pins into, to cancel them is a dangerous descent into censorship which must be fought until there is no breath left in the frail body of democracy.

That goes for Wednesday’s refreshingly basic biffo over vaccine “crazy conspiracy theories” between Labor’s Tanya Plibersek and the Liberals’ Craig Kelly

https://www.smh.com.au/national/they-may-be-bigots-but-here-s-why-we-can-t-gag-israel-folau-or-margaret-court-20210203-p56z0f.html

**************************************

Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk reveals response to youth crime crisis

Queensland will launch a major crackdown on young offenders as it’s revealed a 400-strong group of teenagers is responsible for half the state’s juvenile crime.

Justice authorities have consistently said youth crime figures are falling but they fear a small cohort has held the state’s police force under siege, with just 10 per cent of young offenders responsible for nearly 50 per cent of juvenile crimes.

The alarming statistic combined with deafening community outrage has led to Queensland Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk enlisting the state’s anti-terror boss to clamp down on the crisis gripping the Sunshine State.

Under new laws announced on Tuesday, repeat youth offenders will be slapped with GPS tracking devices and bail conditions will be toughened.

The death of a pregnant couple in Brisbane on Australia Day allegedly at the hands of a teenager in a stolen car thrust youth crime concerns back into the spotlight.

And the fury in the community has continued to escalate, culminating in the death of Jennifer Board, 22, on Friday night in Townsville during an alleged wild vigilante chase of teens in a suspected stolen vehicle.

“The community expects us to do more and that is exactly what we will do,” the premier told reporters, announcing she will appoint Assistant Commissioner Cheryl Scanlon to take charge of a Youth Crime Taskforce.

“Families have been shattered and lives have been lost. And that is why today we are taking very strong action. “They have no concept of the consequences of their actions and no fear of the law.”

Ms Scanlon, a 33-year police veteran, will set upon the 10 per cent of repeat youth offenders who police fear have zero regard for consequences as the Palaszczuk government adopts a plea from the Queensland Police Union who wanted this group of about 400 offenders slapped with GPS tracking anklets.

This measure will be implemented in a new trial and used in Morton, North Brisbane, Townsville, Logan and the Gold Coast for 16 to 17-year-olds as part of bail conditions.

The presumption of bail will also be removed for serious indictable offences such as breaking and entering, serious sexual assault and armed robbery.

“The courts will be empowered to require repeated offenders to give reasons why they should have bail instead of requiring prosecutors to prove why they should not,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

“Where courts can seek assurances from them that the offender will adhere to the bail conditions or bail will not be granted.”

The breakdown of the new rules to be introduced later this month include:

Require fitting of electronic monitoring devices (GPS Trackers): As a condition of bail for recidivist high risk offenders aged 16 and 17

Create a presumption against bail: For youth offenders arrested for committing further serious indictable offences (such as breaking and entering, serious sexual assault and armed robbery) while on bail

Seek assurances from parents and guardians that bail conditions will be complied with before an offender is released

Strengthen existing bail laws: The Youth Justice Act will be amended to include a reference to the community being protected from recidivist youth offenders in the Charter of Youth Justice Principles

The announcement comes a day after the opposition called for the immediate reinstatement of breach of bail offences for juvenile criminals.

Opposition Leader David Crisafulli admitted the supposed youth crime crisis requires a nuanced and holistic approach, including early intervention support schemes and improving cultural connections with Indigenous youths.

But he demanded Ms Palaszczuk remove bail exemption provisions in the Youth Justice Act on the first day of the parliamentary sitting year in two weeks. “I don’t want to rush, I don’t want to make mistakes. I want to fix what we see as the core tenet of the problem,” he told reporters on Monday.

The chorus of demands follows a desperate plea from Ms Board’s close friend and police officer, Luke Matthews, who said something had to change after the death of his “loveliest” and “most innocent” friend.

“Myself and my fellow officers deal with these same offenders all the time, and the current youth justice process does not work,” he said in a detailed Facebook post.

“Stop letting these criminals out on bail. We need to start acknowledging that despite the fact they’re juveniles, their actions have very serious consequences, and if they they’re committing these very serious offences of the exact same nature, over and over again, why are they even being released?

“This should have been prevented.”

https://www.news.com.au/national/queensland/crime/queensland-premier-annastacia-palaszczuk-reveals-response-to-youth-crime-crisis/news-story/a34c2ab00a90baa99efb012d43b4b86a

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com (TONGUE TIED)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

https://heofen.blogspot.com/ (MY OTHER BLOGS)

***************************************