Monday, December 19, 2005
Breaking the koala 'duck'
Finally, we have broken our koala 'duck'. The great irony is that despite endless tramping through their prime habitat of open eucalypt forest, head in the air, searching, searching, one eventually turned up, asleep in a tree above a suburban street.

The locals to Lawnton (Pine Rivers Shire) probably have to contend with a whole bunch of koalas in their front yard each morning, but needless to say, it was exhilarating to see one in the wild (not ‘wilds’) for the first time; rather than in an enclosure or being cuddled by a Steve Irwin look-a-like at Australia Zoo.

Fortunately, I didn’t have my own camera at the time, so you are not subject to any amateurish attempts at photography from me. In the event, Andy was there with vastly more talent and exciting camera gear; and koalas – which hardly scatter like rabbits the middle of the day – are easy to snap.

As you see, it was a male.

---

Wednesday, December 14, 2005
Beattie pops out his 4 millionth
At one minute to four, on the morning of Friday 9th December 2005, the four millionth Queenslander was born at a hospital in Caboolture.

The mother of the baby girl, weighing a respectable 8lbs, will receive a commemorative certificate to mark the milestone, although as this baby was just the ‘statistical’ four millionth, any child born on that day is eligible to receive a certificate and tee-shirt.

Judging by the gushing self-platitudes emanating from George Street, you’d be inclined to believe that the Premier himself had given birth, or that he was responsible for the growing population.

Not by fathering all the kids himself, of course, but by his careful, omnipotent stewardship of the Queensland economy.

The Premier said “Queensland is growing strong and we are proud to mark this significant milestone today. Hitting the four million mark is just another sign of our State’s growth and it is a symbol of our potential.”

It took over 100 years for the population of Queensland to reach 1 million. It took just 36 years for the population to reach 2 million and 18 years to reach 4 million. By this time growth was motoring; the next million – the fourth - was reached in just 13 years.

From here, population growth is projected to slow quite rapidly, with the fifth million not expected for another 17 years and the sixth for another 18 years.

Australia is one of the few places that consistently views population growth as an unambiguously good thing. Earlier this year, Federal Treasurer, Peter Costello, urged Australians to have more children, a girl, a boy and one more ‘for Australia’. He then promptly boosted the cash gift to new parents to $500 per year.

(A subsequent rise in the numbers lottery tickets sold should have suggested to him that money wasn’t the reason why people are not now as fertile.)

That Queenslanders have an ecological footprint five and a half-times that the planet would be able to sustain for everyone, surely should send alarm bells ringing. Despite what Prometheans and optimists might tell you (that agricultural production and yields are up), there is really only one environmental problem – and that is human population growth; too many people consuming too much of the biotic potential of the earth and generating too much waste.

Of course, the population cannot just stop growing; people cannot/will not stop having children. They will have – and are having - fewer and this will be reflected as a demographic bulge, eventually generating ever more older people and less younger (and subsequently less people of child bearing age and less children).

A demographic pyramid too top heavy could be calamitous, but an eventual managed reduction in human numbers is surely essential, particularly if future generations are to experience something like the quality of the natural environment that is in existence (in an already near-catastrophically depleted form) today.

Australia’s and the global human population is now tapering off. Global proportional growth reached its zenith in the 1962 and 1963 when 70m were added. Total growth has been reducing from a high of 88m in 1989 to the current level of 74m. Australia is little behind, but total annual population growth here is now reducing.

But politicians like population growth. It diverts voter’s scrutiny away from other measures of their well being. With high population growth, GDP will always rise, and governments will get re-elected, never having to face up to the reality of managing an economy with zero population growth; something that requires a whole new mindset and economic system.

Global human population at current rates of consumption and waste production is unsustainable. It prospers merely by drawing down on the earth’s capital, oil, minerals etc. But this is just another way of saying we survive by stealing from our children. Until we can achieve sustainablity, any use of population growth for political hyperbole and points scoring seems to me irresponsible, not to mention wholly unwarranted. It is doubtful that growth can be directly attributable to the presence of mind of the Beattie administration.

Debate about living ‘more sustainably’ is nonsense. You cannot live ‘more sustainably’ any more than you can be ‘quite unique’. You either are sustainable or you are not. Perhaps when we have achieved this, we can marvel at the ingenuity of the human race.

---

Hicks (understandably) abandons Australia
David Hicks, the Australian political prisoner held the US base at Guantanamo Bay has been granted UK citizenship. This should clear the way for his eventual release, after fours unlawful incarceration.

That Hicks had a British mother – and was hence eligible for UK citizenship - was discovered in a chance conversation with his lawyer. This set in motion his application for citizenship, which should theoretically secure his release. The UK government demanded of the US that non of its citizens should be face a military tribunal and sought and gained their release into UK custody. So far, all have been successfully released.

Hicks’s application was initially refused by the British government, but a contrary High Court decision will force the government to grant it. Arrangements must now be made for Hicks to recite the citizenship oath from within his Guantanamo prison cell, so further administrative wrangling is likely to continue for a while yet.

The decision by the UK High Court should embarrass the Australian government, which simply washed its hands of one of its own citizens, even when the death penalty for Guantanamo detainees had not been rules out. Howard and Downer have been callous and disregarding of the rule of law and of natural justice. Not surprisingly, both maintain they remain neutral in the affair; in private, I suspect they are livid.

Now David Hicks may or may not be an international terrorist; that is beside the point. He may or may not be a clear and present danger on his release. That too, is beside the point. But the evidence presented by his tireless father paints a much less threatening picture of a man – misguided or disillusioned perhaps – but one who was guilty merely of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, holding a gun; for a long time unaware of the events of 9/11.

Yet the shameful response of the Australian government at the unlawful actions of the US government mean that Hicks has received more sympathy that he probably deserves.

The downside of this very public legal battle is that secret prisoner rendition and unlawful incarceration by the Bush administration is likely to intensify as it seeks to keep its political prisoners well away from any public and – particularly –legal scrutiny. Bush will not want to be humiliated again.

---

Australia’s climate change contribution…..
Australia’s contribution to the threat of climate change has been reduced to a simple barrage of ‘ifs’ and ‘justs’. From today’s Australian:

“Federal Environment Minister Ian Campbell said yesterday a breakthrough in capturing carbon (dioxide, presumably) at the top of a power station's chimney was crucial to addressing climate change.”

“If we get that breakthrough, it's just a matter of pumping it underground. That could happen in six months, two years or 10 years," he said.

Phew, problem solved.

---

Tuesday, December 13, 2005
Nuerum Creek Bush Retreat
A return to an ole' favourite last weekend, to break my Mother and Andy into the Buckwell routine...

Generally a weekend of eating, drinking, eating, resting to cool off in creeks and scrambling up mountains. Oh, and did I mention eating?

---

Thursday, December 08, 2005
Howard’s short-termism a disaster for climate change
The Howard government has released its latest “Tracking to the Kyoto Target” report, for 2005. This annual statement measures Australia’s progress towards meeting its greenhouse gas emissions reduction objectives, as agreed at Kyoto.

Although Australia never ratified the Kyoto Protocol, the government did make a commitment to meet its allocated target during the accounting period; that is CO2 emissions at 108% of 1990 levels, between 2008-2012.

On a positive note, Australia continues to be on target. Average annual emissions of CO2 between 2008 and 2012 – with mitigation measures adopted - will be 585 Mt (mega tonnes), 8% higher than the 1990 level of 543 Mt.

Furthermore, over the last 12 months the Howard government has taken the positive step of actually recognising that human induced global warming is a serious and lasting threat. While most of the planet understood this years ago, this is a big step for the current government, which has for a long time remained unconvinced by the whole thing. Such is the government’s concern, John Howard has agreed to the Asia-Pacific partnership on clean development and climate, a process that will run parallel to Kyoto and include some of the planet’s biggest gross emitters of greenhouse gases.

That’s the good news. The downside – and it’s mostly downside – is that the Tracking report reveals considerable weaknesses in the government’s long term strategy for tackling CO2 emissions. This is political short-termism at its very worse. The report is a litany of poor excuses, obfuscation and spin.

By 2010, ALL (well 99.9% anyway) of Australia’s emissions reductions will have been achieved by changes in land use, land use change and forestry (LULUCF), mostly by reducing Australia’s shocking record of land clearing. Virtually all other CO2 emitting sectors will have ballooned out to levels far and above 1990; transport energy by a massive 53%!

But if this is allowed within Kyoto accounting rules, what’s the big deal?

In relying solely on emissions reductions from LULUCF, Australia is storing up big trouble for the future. Since 1990, CO2 emissions from land clearing have plummeted from 128 Mt pa to 52 Mt pa. The long-term trend for emissions from land clearing is projected to stabilise and in 2010 to be only slightly lower (at 43 Mt pa) than today. Therefore, all emission reduction potential from land clearing has already been exhausted, there is no further give in the system from this sector. (See graph below.)

When combined with reforestation (carbon sequestration), LULUCF has consistently been a net emitter since 1990. By 2010, the LULUCF account will be adding 21Mt of CO2 to the atmosphere each year; representing a growth in emissions of 3% on its own.

In any post-Kyoto world, when diligent nations will be seeking to further reduce their emissions to below their 2010 levels, Australia will be left in an impossible position, as only fractional reductions will be available through LULUCF. Australia will have to make reductions on other accounts (such as energy, industry and agriculture), all which are currently spiralling into the stratosphere.

To go back in time, briefly; this is precisely why Australia negotiators fought long and hard to have LULUCF included under Kyoto accounting rules (only then of course, to not ratify the Protocol - after nearly trashing it). In 1997 – the year the Kyoto Protocol was signed - Australia had already reduced emissions from land clearing to pretty much today’s levels. The government then knew it could achieve its 108% ‘commitment’ with minimal action in any other sector than land clearing.

This is also why the Australian government will never again even consider any future CO2 emissions reduction regime. Current government policy is supporting a blow-out in all emitting sectors; through road building, subsidies to the extraction industry and encouraging the profligate waste of every single resource available to Australians. This is why John Howard exuded smoke and mirrors when he agreed to the Asia-Pacific deal on climate change – a document so far lacking any rigour and currently running to just two sides of A4 paper; and already subsequently all but forgotten.

Be under no illusions, the Asia deal is a sham and a political stunt, designed to assuage criticism from others who take the threat of global warming more seriously than John Howard. While the public service buckles under the strain of government imposed targets, Howard’s reluctance to use targets in this case reminds us of just how much his government is in hoc to business interests.

Australia will continue to be a climate change recalcitrant. The Tracking report demonstrates that Australian CO2 emissions are simply out of control. This, while some climate scientists estimate that to allay global warming, CO2 emissions will need to be cut to 40% of current levels by the end of the century. Based on recent trends, Australia will make no contribution to this global challenge, and most likely will simply free ride, continuing to pour CO2 into the atmosphere.

Indeed, the report even admitted that emissions in 2020 will be at 122% of 1990 levels, showing an acceleration in rates of polluting, from 3.8% per decade to 13%.

Despite the smug assurances from the Howard government that Australia will meet its commitments, this report is a disgrace.

---

Australia trounce Kiwis... at something
It was close – 3 runs – but Australia have finally managed to get one over its smaller (but obviously invariably more talented) neighbour, New Zealand.

After dumping the prodigious All Blacks out of the Rugby Union World Cup in 2003 and holding their own in the 2004 Tri-Nations series, Australia’s rugby team has fallen apart, suffering the indignity of being completely written-off before the final game this year.

Also since then, the mighty Kangaroos have been beaten at their own game; by a precocious Kiwi side built on a dominating defence and peppered with experienced and cool heads; all whilst missing two of the best players in the NRL.

But last night, with the Kiwi cricketers needing 35 off the last 3½ overs, I was beginning to take some comfort that we could still beat them at something. A few minutes later, when they needed just 7 off the last 6 – after a shocker 8-ball over from Lee in the penultimate – I was thinking maybe we should start inviting the Kiwis over for a game of Aussie Rules; a game at which we might stand a chance.

But an inspired piece of fielding from Michael Clarke saved the game for the Australians; the Kiwis were beaten; sanity - and at least some pride - was restored.

---

Wednesday, December 07, 2005
This year's must haves
This festive season we have been told that ‘tech-savy’ kids are shunning the ‘traditional’ (wooden toys? top trumps?) and demanding the “latest in electronic interactive entertainment” (Courier-Mail). And don’t bother trying to second-guess them, just cut the crap, go-ahead and ask them what they want.

We have been told too, what are this year’s ‘in-brands’. If we are to maintain our status as ‘cool parents’ we must buy Simpsons (still), Billabong and some other that I can’t now remember. Oh dear, my tenuous claim to ‘cool’ has been fatally undermined; stress levels have risen a notch.

Christmas has always been a consumption helter-skelter; each year retailers try to out-do not only each other, but also last year’s numbers. Failure to ‘grow the top line’ is synonymous with failure. The advertising is rapacious and in-your-face; newspaper copy reverts from reporting to editorial, demanding we spend more. Magazines feature ‘101 things to make your Christmas perfect’, but instead reveal a further ‘101 more things to get stressed about’.

Also about this time in December, without fail, we are informed by the business community of retailer’s concerns that this year’s sales have yet to match last year’s. Battling families, worried about their household finances, are simply not spending as much. This reluctance to splurge is the harbinger for recession, meltdown, or simply the end of the world as we know it. But thankfully, by the time the silly season is over, consumers have come through again, ensuring that 2005 is every bit the record as last year. We can all rest easy.

But this year, the packaging of Christmas is more bullish than ever. Any semblance that this is the season for giving has been unceremoniously dumped. Forget about being good for Santa; an iPod or roboraptor from the fat old bugger is the minimum expected level of a service delivery. There’s probably even a customer hotline to register consignment discrepancies or report inferior quality goods.

There is a sense of extra urgency, and menace. Business has abandoned any notion that Christmas is anything other than an advertising hook to help shift stock out the door. Christmas lists are not wish lists, but goods manifests, which are presented to your festive benefactor for ticking off. The best magazines even have ready-made lists for you.

Why is business being so militant? Is it just all a result of the constantly shifting trends in advertising - and this year’s fashion is simply, I want? Or is competition between retailers now so intense they have resorted to merely imploring to part with your cash, like a good citizen.

Or is it that the retailers – through their proxies, the advertisers – are genuinely concerned that people just aren’t ‘getting it’ any more. People are becoming increasingly content with what they have in their already over-junked up lives. They are realising that they do nothing for their children when they ask them, unconditionally, what they want for Christmas. Do they now understand that such endless, frenzied binge-buying is wreaking the planet, perhaps not in their backyard, but in China. And what happens in China affect us all.

Business appears threatened by dangerous left-wing fanatics such as Clive Hamilton (author of Affluenza: When more is never enough) and bloggers such as Jason Dykes, who are threatening to bring the entire capitalist super-structure crashing down through their radical nonsensical reluctance to consume. Kathleen Noonan (in a Murdoch paper!) writes of ‘sufficiency’ in what she experiences in life. She needs nor wants anything more or anything less.

Sadly, in reality, these remain fringe views and business can rest easy. And with the passing of John Howard’s Industrial Relations legislation - deregulating the labour market - Australian workers will be free to trade away time spent with their families for more time at the office. Here, they can earn the bucks which pay for the electronic gadgets demanded by their kids, as guilt down-payments for missing out on their kids’ growing-up. We can only afford to assuage this guilt by spending even more time away from who and what we know is important to us.

But perhaps the biggest irony is the festive picture painted by advertisers, of humble and wholesome family enjoyment, spent with loved ones, sharing gifts; a representation far, far removed from the reality of its purpose. Christmas is no longer about being thankful (for the faithful) or even simple enjoyment (for the faith-less), but about pandering to our greedy and callous instincts. Christmas has become the means – the marketing vehicle - where wants and demands and the perpetuation of consumption, become the ends.

Goodwill to all and Merry Christmas.

---