The Abbott Government's road map leading to the demise of a fair Australian society is revealed today

Depiction of food handouts Australia circa 1890
 "you got no charity [kindness] there" 
Professor Brian Dickey in 1987 quoting his grandmother 
Etching from Google Images

If ever one wanted proof that a federal government, led by a well-heeled, far-right god botherer and peopled at cabinet level by his fellow travellers, intends to send Australia back to late 19th Century inequitable economic and social conditions, this report is it – and make no mistake -  if the Abbott Government achieves a second term all of this will come to pass:

Australian Government National Commission of Audit 1 May 2014:

Towards Responsible Government

The Report of the National Commission of Audit

• Phase One – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Phase Two – March 2014       HTML | PDF

Appendices to the Report of the National Commission of Audit

• Volume 1 – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Volume 2 – February 2014   HTML | PDF
• Volume 3 – March 2014       HTML | PDF

What Metgasco Limited is telling the Australian Stock Exchange about Northern Rivers protesters at Bentley

Excerpt from Metgasco Limited Quarterly Activities Report 30 April 2014:

Metgasco goes on to say:

Australian Human Rights Commission submission on the proposal to repeal sections of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975

It is comforting to realise how little the far-right quisling, ‘Freedom Commissioner' Tim Wilson, actually counts when it comes to the Australian Human Rights Commission’s considered  response to proposed bad law.

His perspective did not prevail in the Commission's submission and he was reduced to writing his own brief submission to the Australian Attorney-General  who appointed him to his current position.

Australian Human Rights Commission 28 April 2014:

   1. The Australian Human Rights Commission makes this submission to the Attorney-General’s Department in relation to the exposure draft Bill on proposed changes to the racial hatred provisions of the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 (Cth) (RDA).

  2. The Commission welcomes the opportunity for community consultation on this important and complex issue. The Commission encourages the Attorney-General’s Department to make information about the key issues identified through the consultation process publicly available to inform future public debate.

 3. The Commission’s general observations on the proposal to amend the RDA and its specific observations on the text of the draft Bill are as follows.

General observations on any proposal to change Part IIA

(1) The Commission considers that the exposure Bill as drafted should not proceed. This submission sets out concerns that any future draft Bill would need to appropriately address. The Commission looks forward to engaging with any future proposal.

(2) Any proposal to amend the law should involve extensive public consultation as it has the capacity to affect the human rights of all Australians, and particularly consultation with those communities whose members are most vulnerable to experiencing racial discrimination.

(3) Proposals to change the law are recent and it should be recognised that, in its current form, the Racial Discrimination Act as applied by the courts and administered by the Australian Human Rights Commission has successfully resolved hundreds of complaints about racial hatred over the past two decades. Any proposed change requires further justification.

(4) The Commission considers that the legislation could be clarified so that it more plainly reflects the way in which it has been interpreted in practice by the courts. That is, to confirm that Part IIA deals with ‘profound and serious effects, not to be likened to mere slights’.

(5) It is also important to recognise that racial vilification cannot be addressed only by legal prohibitions. Complementary education and awareness raising measures are also required to promote a culture of respect for human rights and responsibilities. The Commission will continue to play a key role in this regard.

Particular observations on the draft Bill

The Commission has a number of particular concerns about the exposure Bill as drafted. If, following the consultation described above, the Government were to proceed with the draft Bill, the Commission considers that each of the following amendments would be necessary.

(6) The Commission is concerned about the narrow definition given to ‘vilify’. It considers that if there is a change to Part IIA that includes a prohibition on ‘vilification’ then this term should be given its ordinary meaning, including conduct that is degrading.

(7) The Commission is concerned about the narrow definition given to ‘intimidate’. It considers that if there is a change to Part IIA that includes a prohibition on ‘intimidation’ then this term should be given its ordinary meaning, which recognises that intimidation is not limited to causing fear of physical harm but includes conduct causing emotional or psychological harm.

(8) The Commission considers that an assessment of whether an act is reasonably likely to contravene the law must be made ‘in all the circumstances’. The Commission considers that the words ‘in all the circumstances’ should be inserted into subsection 1(a) of the draft Bill following the words ‘is reasonably likely’. On the basis that the legislation and any extrinsic material make clear that all the circumstances of the act including the likely impact on the target person or group must be considered, the Commission does not express any other concerns about the proposed community standards test.

(9) The Commission considers that the exemption for artistic works should be retained. This could be effected by inserting the words ‘the performance, exhibition or distribution of an artistic work, or’ after ‘in the course of’ in subsection (4) of the draft Bill.

(10) The Commission is concerned about the breadth of the exemption in subsection (4) of the draft Bill. The subsection removes the requirement that acts be done reasonably and in good faith. At the very least, including a requirement of ‘good faith’ as a minimum would prevent racist abuse offered up in the course of public discussion being permitted.

(11) The Commission considers that employers are well placed to address the risk of racial vilification by putting in place programs including training and codes of conduct for employees. The Commission considers that existing section 18E, which provides for vicarious liability for racial vilification, should be retained.

(12) The Commission considers that a person who engages in racial vilification should not be able to avoid liability by arguing that the act was also done for another reason. Section 18B provides that if an act is done for two or more reasons and one of those reasons is the race of a person, then the act is taken to be done because of race. Each of the federal discrimination Acts contains a provision equivalent to section 18B and its removal would make Part IIA inconsistent with all other federal anti-discrimination law. The Commission considers that this provision should be retained.

     4.   The right to freedom of expression is of fundamental importance, and extends to expression that may be regarded as deeply offensive. It is not, however, an absolute or unfettered right and carries with it special duties and responsibilities.

      5.    Racial vilification can also harm the freedom of those who are its targets. It can have a silencing effect and harm the ability of victims to exercise their freedom of speech, among other freedoms.

      6.    It is important to retain strong and effective legal protections against racial vilification. Such laws send an important message about civility and tolerance in a multicultural society, and ensure those who experience the harms of racial vilification have access to a legal remedy.

      7.    Throughout this submission, the Commission has been particularly concerned to ensure that it strikes the appropriate balance between freedom of expression and freedom from racial vilification.

     8.    In this submission, the Commission reflects on three areas of particular expertise relating to the draft Bill:

      o    how the draft Bill relates to Australia’s international human rights obligations;

      o    how the draft Bill would alter the existing level of protection of both freedom of expression and freedom from racial hatred; and

      o   the social harm that can result from racial vilification.

      9.   The Commission is uniquely placed to comment on these issues given our legislative mandate under the RDA and Australian Human Rights Commission Act 1986 (Cth),^[1] and our role in investigating and conciliating complaints alleging breaches of section 18C of the RDA.

      10.  In the submission, we use case studies of matters dealt with under the legislation to provide concrete examples of how the proposed changes would alter the level of protection that currently exists.

     11.  This submission addresses the following issues in turn:

a.    Australia’s international obligations to provide for freedom of expression while also protecting people from racial hatred;

b.   the background to the enactment of Part IIA of the RDA, and how it currently operates;

c.     in particular, a description of the seriousness of the conduct caught by Part IIA in the context of the recent public debate;

d.    the Commission’s concerns about aspects of the draft Bill;

e.    other measures to combat racial hatred in Australia.

      12.  In addition to this submission, the Human Rights Commissioner has also prepared an additional letter. It contains comments that are intended to complements this submission, and provide further elaboration on the key points of concern to the Human Rights Commissioner.

Read the rest of the submission here.

There hasn't been an incorruptible administration or government in New South Wales since the First Fleet sailed into Sydney Harbour.....

And here is more proof of that:

Wran, The Balmain Boy Gone Bad

By Wendy Bacon

….Much has been said in recent days about the achievements of Neville Wran, NSW Premier from 1976 until 1986, who died last weekend. Much of the praise is deserved.

His government did pass anti-discrimination laws, environmental legislation and other progressive reforms. But there has also been some nonsense written, including ALP leader Bill Shorten’s statement that Wran was a man of the "utmost integrity".

From reading the obituaries, you would have no idea what it was like to be in Sydney at the time. Wran presided over a state in which hundreds of prisoners paid their way out of prison. The police force was routinely corrupt and included detectives who killed people. Court cases were fixed, key judicial figures mixed with organised crime, and corruption in the property, racing and gambling industries was rife and backed by heavies.

At best, Wran resisted reform in these areas. At times, he actively conspired to cover it up. By the time he retired in 1986, his government had an appalling reputation for corruption in the administration of justice, which is why Liberal leader Nick Greiner was in the position to win victory in 1988 on an anti-corruption platform, including the establishment of the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption.

Wran’s own worst moment was undoubtedly in 1983, when the Street Royal Commission was set up after the ABC Four Corners report, The Big League. The story told how NSW Rugby League's President, Kevin Humphreys, had misappropriated funds from the Balmain Leagues Club and was charged by police.

It alleged that NSW's Chief Stipendiary Magistrate, Murray Farquhar, had intervened to have those charges dismissed and had told another magistrate that he was acting at the request of Wran. Wran refused to be interviewed by Four Corners and after legal advice and the approval of the ABC Board, it went to air.

The report created a political storm. Eleven days later a Royal Commission was set up and Wran stepped aside as Premier. Laurence Street, who was then the Chief Justice, found that Farquar had intervened — but not at the request of Wran, who denied he had been involved.

Farquar was later sentenced to four years imprisonment. But the Street Royal Commission did not really lay the matters to rest, as Wran himself knew. Evan Whitton, who was awarded Journalist of the Year in 1983 for for his "courage and innovation" in reporting of the Commission, regarded the terms of reference to be very narrow. The approach was "technical" rather than one of following up relevant questions as they arose. Whitton’s sketches and a diary of the commission that were published in the Sydney Morning Herald highlighted many of these flaws.

An underlying issue was the relationship between Farquar and organised crime figure George Freeman. This relationship had been revealed by The National Times in 1977. Instead of properly investigating these allegations, Wran, against the advice of others, supported extending Farquar’s appointment until 1979….

Read the rest of the article at New Matilda, 24 April 2014.

Welcome to the world of Hockeynomics - Part Two

This was Australian Treasurer Joe Hockey reported on ABC News, 24 April 2014:

The Treasurer Joe Hockey is talking tough on welfare measures in the lead up to the Federal Budget, saying means testing will become more important into the future, and Australians should keep working for as long as they can.

He's revealed some of the findings of the Commission of Audit, which shows that at $39.5 billion, Australia spends more on the age pension each year than it does on defence, hospitals, or schools.

"It is our single biggest spending program," Mr Hockey said.

"So the policies must be changed, either now or more dramatically in the future." [my red bolding]

According to Mr. Hockey in less than twelve months the Age Pension has gone from being the Federal Government’s third highest single recurrent expenditure item (approximately 10% of the Commonwealth Budget) to the highest at $39.5 billion.

Up an est. $2.5 billion since June 2013 and leaving Health expenditure at $62 billion and Goods and Services Tax transfers to the states at $48 billion miraculously way behind Age Pension costs using that mysterious method of accounting - hockeynomics.

Commonwealth government recurrent expenditure, 2012-13 

Grattan Institute analysis of Commonwealth budget papers

Grattan Institute 24 January 2014

In 2012-13 Defence as a recurrent expense was estimated to cost the federal government $30.8 billion and Education (minus the research component) was estimated at $27.16 billion, according to the Grattan Institute’s Budget Pressures on Australian Governments.

This is what Treasurer Hockey was waving in front of Spectator Magazine on 23 April 2014:

Again using hockeynomics, it appears that Defence as a recurrent expense has reduced in size by an est. $5.5 billion in less than ten months -  and this despite the Abbott Government spending many millions searching for the missing Malaysia Airlines plane since early March 2014 and increasing naval border surveillance since September 2013.

While Health expenditure is only shown as three discrete items in his Commission of Audit data and, is therefore reduced by $19.7 billion in under 10 months to make it appear as though the Age Pension is by far and away the largest contributor to the federal government's recurrent expenditure.

Education expenditure has $7.16 billion off its bottom line in less than 10 months in order for it to also fit into Hockey's universal-safety-nets-are-bad narrative.

If one looks at Mr. Hockey's chart; in 2013-14 Federal Government total payments (spending) are 25.93% of Australia’s Nominal Gross Domestic Product (GDP). By 2023-24 total payments are projected to be 26.50% of GDP. That expenditure growth is less than 0.57% over a decade, while the GDP is projected to grow 5.1% annually over that period.

Whereas, by comparison, in the United Kingdom (which also has a universal safety net policy covering health, education, employment, pensions and welfare payments) public sector spending was 42.2% of its GDP in 2013-14.

As for Australia's national public debt which is often quoted by the Abbott Government as a reason for taking the razor to government programs - the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in 2013 clearly stated that: Australian general government gross debt is expected to peak at around 32 percent of GDP in 2015 and is among the lowest in advanced nations.[International Monetary Fund. Asia and Pacific Department, Australia: Staff Report for 2013 Article IV Consultation-Staff Report]

While Mr. Hockey is trying to talk up his budget 'emergency' and demonise age pensioners (despite the fact that only seven per cent of Australia’s recent increase in health-care costs is due to aging, only 5% of people over 65 years require residential care as they age and more older people are already chosing to remain in the workforce longer), he remains almost mute on the subject of the new Abbott version of the Paid Parental Leave scheme.

This scheme will cost $14 billion in the first three years, or $4.66 billion a year. Costing taxpayers over $1 billion to meet the employer levy shortfall in its first year alone - in order to pay out up to $75,000 $50,000 (plus superannuation component) per non-means tested 6 month leave application granted.

The motivation behind this new scheme is not hard to find as it is based on feathering the nests of right-wing politicians' families and presumably the families of their political donors.

Here is Prime Minister Tony Abbott reported in The Sydney Morning Herald on 5 March 2014:

Mr Abbott said he opposed paid parental leave as a minister in the Howard government, but his views changed after considering what would be best for his daughters.

NOTE:

On 1 May 2014 at 2pm. the Abbott Government is finally releasing its first National Commission of Audit report. On May 13 full details of the Abbott Government's first federal budget are due to be released.

NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption Operation Spicer - Day One running sheet

To date one NSW Premier has resigned, one NSW minister has resigned and been suspended from the Liberal Party, one NSW Liberal MLC has resigned from a parliamentary position and stood aside, two NSW MPs been suspended from the Liberal Party and one Liberal federal senator has stood down, as a result of the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) Operation Credo and Operation Spicer investigations.

They are:

Barry O’Farrell - MP for Kur-ing-gai, former NSW Premier & Minister for Western Sydney until 17 April 2014

Chris Hartcher - NSW MP for Terrigal, Minister for Resources and Energy, Minister for the Central Coast & Special Minister of State until 9 December 2013 and now suspended from the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW)

Marie Ficarra - Member of the NSW Legislative Council and a former parliamentary secretary until 17 April 2014

Darren Webber – MP for Wyong now suspended from the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW)

Christopher Spence – MP for The Entrance now suspended from the Liberal Party of Australia (NSW)

Arthur Sinodinis - Federal Senator for NSW and former Assistant Treasurer in the Abbott Government

UPDATE: On 2 May 2014 NSW Police Minister Mike Gallacher stood aside after being named as a subject of the inquiry.

The following are some of the individuals who received mention in the opening statement by counsel assisting ICAC on the first day of Operation Spicer hearings (see transcript):

Liberal MP and then NSW Minister for Resources and Energy Chris Hartcher

The Liberal MP. Christopher Hartcher, together with persons who worked

with him, set out to attract additional funding for the benefit of a small group

of Liberal Party candidates on the Central Cost. To pull it off, one of those

employees, Timothy Koelma, set up a business called Eightbyfive. They

then attracted payments from 40 prohibited donors who were interested in

buying favours from Mr Hartcher.

Liberal MP for Lane Cove and NSW Minister for Resources and Energy Antony Roberts

Just one example of this will suffice; Mr Hartcher was wont to holiday

aboard the Gazal’s yacht Octavia at Hamilton Island, here I’ll show it up on

the screen, here for example is a record from Mr Hartcher’s diary recording

his trip to Hamilton Island in August 2007. “Fly to Hamilton Island, Nabil”,

that’s Nabil Gazal. And there you can see that how the cabins were

distributed, four cabins. Nabil’s got the master cabin, Mr Hartcher the VIP,

Anthony, we believe that’s Anthony Roberts the current Minister,

Anthony’s got a side cabin, there’s a junior cabin for kids, there’s a bit of a

blow there because they need a chef, et cetera et cetera. We tried to check

on who paid for the flights and the like but the records unfortunately were

long gone.

Sebastian Reed nephew of former of NSW Resources and Energy Minister Chris Hartcher

The Hartcher Reed Affair; small in size but serious in principal.

Christopher Hartcher got control of $4000 in donations which had to be

laundered before they could be used. To do so he dragged a respected firm

of solicitors and his own nephew unwittingly into an illicit enterprise and

into a misuse of a trust account.

Paul Nicolaou NSW Liberal Party fundraiser

On 27 February, 2010, Mr Nicolaou  wrote a letter to Alan Jones with the

apparent purpose of encouraging him to use his radio program to denounce

Sydney Water and traduce Dr Schott. Mr Nicolaou wrote to Mr Jones on

the letterhead of the Millennium Forum and the Millennium Forum is the

fundraising arm of the New South Wales Liberal Party…..

Commissioner, this was serious stuff. I’ll show some more transcript from

Mr Nicolaou’s evidence. It was very serious stuff and Mr Nicolaou agreed.

Question, “Based on what I’m saying”, I really regret reading this out

incidentally, Commissioner, Dr Schott has been warned that these awful

things could be said about her and I regret having to repeat them, I do so, I

want to preface it by saying this Dr Schott was shown to be absolutely and

utterly incorruptible but anyway I’ll go on it needs to be done. Based upon

what I’m saying, this is the question, “I’m reading to you your own words,

based upon what you said you were alleging Dr Schott was a based corrupt

criminal weren’t you?”, answer, “Based on the email that I sent, yes”,

question, “And you did that without any regard as to whether it was an

accurate complaint didn’t you?”, answer, “Yes”, question, “And you did it

in the hope that this fellow Jones would blurt it out all over this radio

program didn’t you?”, answer, “Yes”, question, “The objective was to

humiliate Schott and her senior executive team publicly wasn’t it?”, answer,

“Yes”

Liberal Member of the NSW Legislative Assembly Marie Ficarra

Marie Ficarra solicited a donation from the property developer, Tony Merhi,

knowing that Mr Merhi was a prohibited donor. Both knew what they were

doing was wrong. The same evidence will show that Ms Ficarra was

complicit in the Eightbyfive scheme.

Tim Koelma Liberal Party Member and former staffer to then NSW Minister for Resources and Energy Chris Hartcher

Commencing from April 2009, Australian Water Holdings paid a monthly

retainer to Eightbyfive. The payments continued until May 2011 and in all

around $183,000 was paid to Eightbyfive. The invoices submitted by

Eightbyfive to Australian Water Holdings describe the services as,

“Products and services as stipulated in service level agreement.” Whatever

that means.

Apart from the issue as to whether Mr Koelma had the skills and experience

necessary to provide anything of value, there is a deeper question as to why

it was necessary for Australian Water Holdings to purchase those services at

all, after all it had a barrage of lobbyists on retainer already and its board

included Liberal Party heavies such as Mr Di Girolamo and Arthur

Sinodinos….

And there’s yet another twist here. You’ll recall I mentioned this earlier –

Gazcorp resumed making payments to Eightbyfive from September 2011

until April 2012, this time in monthly amounts of $2,000, in all about

$16,000 was paid. Now, this is disturbing because Mr Koelma had resumed

work in the Ministerial office of Mr Hartcher and there is no way that he

should have been involved in any Government relations activities at that

time. Of course his subcontractors had gone on to bigger and better things,

 they were both elected to Parliament. Mr Koelma had no subcontractors so

he attempted to explain away these payments by suggesting that his wife,

Tennille Koelma, was providing the services, but unfortunately for Mr

Koelma, we’ve spoken to Mrs Koelma and she denied that.

Timothy Trumbull accountant

It all stems from some donations made by an unusual character, Timothy

Trumbull, an avid anti-socialist accountant. A number of donations tallying

$4,000 emanated from him. The donations were made by women he

employed. Mr Trumbull told us that this was because his staff were so

troubled by the socialist Labor Government in Canberra that they wanted to

make contributions to the New South Wales Liberal Party.

Well, this was all nonsense. We spoke to Mr Trumbull’s staff and we will

tender transcripts of their evidence. They deny being politically motivated.

In fact each of them I think from recollection was from overseas and none

of them even had a right to vote. They didn’t know there was a difference

between Labor or Liberal. Each of them says that Mr Trumbull organised

the whole thing and its transparent what the, what Mr Trumbull did was just

done to avoid the $5,000 cap which had been placed upon individual

donors. We can prove that Mr Trumbull had already reached his limit but

he wanted to give more. That’s all back story, it’s only where the story

starts. The donations were made bank cheques. Although the cheques were

drawn on 16 March, 2011 they seem to have lain dormant for some time.

On 17 November, 2011 the bank cheques were deposited into the trust

account of the firm of solicitors Hartcher Reid. I’ll just put that up on the

screen so that you can see it. This is a deposit slip that we’ve been able to

recover from the Westpac Bank, the branch in Martin Place, a three minute

walk from Parliament House. You can see up in the top left-hand side

where it says “Paid in by” that the identity of the person who made the

deposit has been rendered illegible. Commissioner, you might think that

that was deliberate. At first we wondered how bank cheques made out to

the Liberal Party of New South Wales could be banked to the credit of

Hartcher Reid but we were told that there was an arrangement under which

such cheques can be deposited into a solicitor’s trust account.

Darren Williams co-founder and director of Buildev

When Mr Williams pursued the payment, he did not speak of services

provided by Mr Koelma or services providing of Eightbyfive, I’ll just

show you who he referred to. This is a message that Mr Darren Williams

from Buildev sent to Troy Palmer. Up the top, “Mate, Libs are chasing me

up, mate. I don’t want to burn them, can you call them?” Commissioner,

at the end of this inquiry we will urge you to find that this was not a

transaction with Eightbyfive, it was a transaction with the Libs, it was

a payment which was being made to the Liberal Party.

Troy Palmer Chief Financial Officer of the Tinkler Group

On 19 April, 2013, Mr Palmer sent Mr Williams an SMS text message

and you can see it there. “Have you got Eightbyfive under control?

We can’t have Patinack involved in an ICAC hearing.”

Nabil Gazal, Nabil Gazal Jnr. and Nicholas Gazal

The Gazal family and Orange Grove; another major developer drawn into 

the Eightbyfive scheme was Gazcorp Pty Limited a company owned and 

controlled by the Gazal family who developed the controversial Orange 

Grove Shopping Centre. Over time Gazcorp paid $137,000 for fake 

services invoiced by Eightbyfive. 

Murdoch media cheerfully delivers Tony Abbott's 'deficit tax' message

Apparently Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott waxed lyrical about his plans to reduce his budget deficit when he attended a Sydney Institute dinner on 28 April 2014.

Amongst other measures it seems he is to introduce a deficit tax until the federal deficit disappears.

This is what News Corp's The Australian had to say on 29 April 2014:

The new debt tax will only apply to workers on incomes of $80,000 and above and the rates will increase in line with tax brackets.

Taxpayers in the 37c tax bracket — on incomes of $80,000 to $180,000 — are likely to pay an extra 1 per cent.

Those earning above $180,000 are likely to pay an extra 2 per cent. Like the Gillard government's flood levy, the debt tax will also be temporary, applying only while the budget is in deficit.

Under the new levy, a taxpayer on:

$80,000 will pay an extra $800 a year ($15 a week).

$150,000 will pay an extra $1500 a year ($29 a week).

$200,000 will be slugged an extra $4000 a year ($77 a week).

$400,000 will pay a huge $8000 extra tax ($154 more a week).

Bearing in mind that on 14 April 2014 Treasury apparently already expected average full-time employees to be paying tax of 39¢ in the dollar by 2015-16 and, even taking into consideration the introduction of this deficit tax reportedly worth an estimated $3.6 billion in total, the Abbott Government's Mid-year Economic and Fiscal Outlook 2013‑14 indicates that the federal deficit is still likely to last until 2023-24.

 As by that financial year total federal government payments are projected to be 26.50% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), federal government total receipts are projected at 26% of GDP, public net debt is projected to rise to 14.3% of GDP and, given the billions in additional borrowings still being undertaken by the Abbott Government and the fact that in April 2014 an additional $14 billion has been committed to the Australian air force in addition to the non-budgeted est. $20 million plus spent by Defence over the last 41 days on the search for a missing commercial aircraft, the annual budget will possibly still be in deficit then.

One has to wonder how the 5.8 million Australians, who despite the warning signs voted for Coalition candidates at the 2013 federal election, felt when they woke this morning to find so many of them liable for a new tax.

April 2014: The Battle For Bentley Continues

The Sydney Morning Herald 23 April 2014: Bentley protest camp

Richmond Valley Council media release, 23 April 2014:

Council Refuses Application for Continuation of Bentley Protest Camp

Richmond Valley Council General Manager John Walker has announced that the primitive camping site previously approved for up to 200 campers at Bentley, which is currently home to a large number of anti-gas protesters, will no longer have an approval to continue beyond Friday 25 April 2014 after the expiry of its original 2 month approval.

“The site’s subsequent growth since the approval was originally granted, the length of time that the camp has been operating, the ongoing breach of many of the approval conditions and the inability of the consent holder to control the activities of many of the campers and visitors to the site makes the use of a Section 68 approval under which it has operated as a primitive camping site inappropriate.” Mr Walker said.

In a further statement Mr Walker announced that the Development Application seeking planning approval to continue to use the site as a temporary primitive campsite for up to 600 campers lodged by the landowner, Green Mountain Group on 14 April has been refused due to its lack of essential detail, objections by Police and Roads and Maritime Services and the proposed inappropriate land use itself.

Accordingly the occupation and use of the land as a primitive campsite beyond 25 April will not be lawful.

Formal notices advising these decisions have today been issued to the owner of the land, the applicant and its representatives.

The Council is reviewing its options regarding closing the campsite and removing its occupants.

Metgasco Limited has probably been waiting for this protest camp expiry date and, for police to start moving people away, before it enters onto the tight gas drilling site known as Rosella E01.

Meanwhile, it appears to have confirmed to the media but not informed the stock exchange of yet another excuse for why it is keeping away. This time the drilling rig is not held up by rain in Queensland - it may possibly be contaminated by asbestos.

Protesters have been at the gates of Metgasco's drilling site for around three months to date, however the protest camp on an adjoining property has only been in existence for about two months.

Metgasco had originally told the Australian Stock Exchange that it expected to commence drilling in mid-April subject to the drilling rig being available.