From the beginning of 2010 onwards, the Opposition Leader Tony Abbott has committed himself to “overturning Queensland’s Wild Rivers laws” as a key personal objective.

Not wild about his Wild River's policy.

Immediately post-election, he nominated this issue as his number one legislative priority.

Last week he introduced a private member’s bill into Parliament to deliver on his pledge, with the hope of winning support from the lower house independents.

Abbott obviously assumes he is onto a political winner on this state-based issue, and in the process has relegated a series of fundamental national issues.

However, the last two months have not been an easy ride for the Liberal Party on the Wild Rivers front, and serious questions are arising about just how sound a political strategy this really is.

The trouble began in the first sitting week of Parliament, when a grassroots delegation of Traditional Owners landed in Canberra to make it known to the national media and key politicians that they strongly support Queensland’s Wild Rivers laws, and oppose Abbott’s bill. And they made it clear that vocal Wild Rivers opponent Noel Pearson doesn’t speak for all Aboriginal interests in North Queensland.

This undermined the premise that overturning Wild Rivers was all about Indigenous advancement – here was a group of Indigenous leaders explaining that they liked having their rivers protected, and that the supposed economic impacts of the legislation were being grossly overstated.

What’s more, they explained, there were jobs being created as part of the Wild Rivers initiative.

Until this point, the media dominance of Noel Pearson was the driving force in the campaign against Wild Rivers. Pearson had argued that Wild Rivers was grinding economic development on Cape York to a halt.

But as the Traditional Owners pointed out in Canberra, this campaign has been based on a string of entirely false claims about Wild Rivers, including that it stops the construction of tourism lodges or will lead to the banning of traditional hunting and fishing.

A couple of weeks ago, Abbott and Pearson were even inferring that Wild Rivers has stopped the construction of a public dunny in Hopevale – a claim that simply has no basis in reality.

In fact over 100 development applications have been approved in Wild River areas, as pointed out by Gulf of Carpentaria Indigenous leader Murrandoo Yanner, another strong supporter of the Wild Rivers legislation.

The Wild Rivers laws simply provide a protective buffer around sensitive waterways and wetlands from strip-mining, dams and intensive irrigated agriculture, while supporting sustainable economic development in the entire river basin and guaranteeing Native Title rights.

The only proposal halted to date has been the destructive Cape Alumina bauxite mine, planned on the Steve Irwin Wildlife Reserve, due to the 500m protective buffers now placed around sensitive rainforest springs as part of the Wild River declaration for the Wenlock River.

This means that Terri Irwin and her Australia Zoo have joined with conservation groups, prominent Indigenous leaders, tourism operators, and some Queensland graziers, in opposing attempts to overturn the Wild Rivers laws.

The great irony in this case is that the Steve Irwin Wildlife Reserve was created after the death of the Crocodile Hunter with a $6 million grant from then Prime Minister John Howard and Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull.

So in effect, removing Wild River protection would destroy one of the Liberal Party’s prominent environmental legacies.

The Wilderness Society is aware of key, environmentally progressive Liberal MPs who are very concerned about the impact that winding back Wild Rivers would have on places like the Irwin Reserve.

When combined with the Party’s stance of inaction on climate change and frustrating the restoration of the Murray-Darling Basin, one wonders whether the more savvy Liberals will soon feel compelled to urge their leader to tone down the anti-environmental crusade.

Indeed with environmentally-minded voters playing an increasingly crucial role in Australian politics, and Gen Y overwhelming nominating the environment as their number one issue of concern, the Liberal Party is taking a significant long-term risk here.

There is a strong indication that Abbott himself knows that attacking Wild Rivers isn’t the political winner he originally thought – his rhetoric has suddenly changed from “overturning” Wild Rivers, to “improving” Queensland’s laws. None-the-less what he is proposing is still a veto over Wild River declarations for the interests aligned with Pearson.

The Liberal Party have been very vocal on the issue of parliamentary scrutiny of policy and legislation, such as the NBN and the BER scheme. Abbott’s anti Wild Rivers push is about to receive such scrutiny, with the issue now referred to an inquiry to be conducted by the House of Representatives Economics Committee.

It will be fascinating to finally watch the outrageous claims made against the sensible river conservation regime finally put through the mill. I’m very confident they will simply not stand up to this level of forensic scrutiny.

Most commented

52 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Rob r Charteris says:

      05:50am | 26/11/10

      Abbott’s only policy is “Grab a sound bite and run with it” he like to go on about the governments waste and mis-management. Yet he is forcing the house of Rep’s to sit for another day of debating something that already has the numbers. Abbott is just a hypocrite and a wanker who is all upset he lost so he is not only going to try and make the government pay but every Australian as well. Abbott I hope you have a really nasty accident over the holidays now that would not only be very funny but also a benefit to all Australians… make it slow and painful

    • rob foster says:

      07:50am | 26/11/10

      I think everyone on here thinks it would be better if you have the accident…you jerk…

    • Aitch B says:

      08:01am | 26/11/10

      @Rob.

      Charming! You are a disgrace!!

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      10:26am | 26/11/10

      Rob r Charteris :  Hmmm , bad Karma indeed Rob , beware that wish may rebound on you.
      There is a lot more to this matter than Glen Walker has touched on in this debate.  Noel Pearson also represents a large number of indiginous people on the Wild Rivers Legislation.
      Even if the Legislation (Act ) is improved and favours the Aboriginals then Abbot’s Bill will have achieved some good.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:34am | 26/11/10

      @Rob.

      Charming! You are my hero!!

    • fairsfair says:

      11:48am | 26/11/10

      ** insert Foster after my @Rob there…. whoopsie.

    • acotrel says:

      09:18pm | 26/11/10

      .I don’t wish Abbott any physical harm.  My son the Lib supporter said recently that he felt Tony’s story is incomplete, that something really dramatic will happen to him.  I know the feeling, Abbott makes me feel apprehensive too, there’s a bit of bad kharma about, not helped by his cynical little ways.

    • acotrel says:

      05:52am | 26/11/10

      ‘Abbott obviously assumes he is onto a political winner on this state-based issue’

      That’s all that’s ever important to Abbott!  Well, you’ve got to get your priorities right? Malcolm Fraser pointed this out about Abbott - you always need to look at his prime motive in doing anything, it’s all about his own ambitions for his own career.  Eventually the Australian public will put two and two together, and his total credibility will be zilch for ever more!

    • Barry says:

      07:47am | 26/11/10

      Do you really find it suprising that a politician will pursue an issue, which they think is a winner??  Have you ever followed an election? Are you seriously that politically naive or are you just messing around?

    • ann jacqueline says:

      10:10am | 26/11/10

      acotrel its a private members bill!!! wake up its not about party politics

    • CJ Morgan says:

      10:46am | 26/11/10

      Very droll, ann jacqueline.  You were being facetious, weren’t you?

    • acotrel says:

      05:57am | 26/11/10

      Julia Gillard has labelled Abbott as ‘a wrecker’.  It’s a bit of a surprise to have a politician leading us who is so perceptive! I’ve become so used to people simply accepting the perverse behaviour of ratbags as ‘normal’!

    • Joan says:

      06:49am | 26/11/10

      Gillard `education is my passion ` has never got out of schoolyard with constant childish name calling , Gillard lacks the wit to know what wit is.  A government of misfits led by the witless Gillard…..the year ends on tragic polical note

    • St. Michael says:

      12:16pm | 26/11/10

      Wow, Joan, you once again managed to prove yourself capable of typing two sentences without any actual relevance to the topic under discussion.  Would you like to mention where Gillard’s name was mentioned in the above article?

    • Joan says:

      02:24pm | 26/11/10

      Wow St Michael -Acotrel mentioned Gillard previous post…. and my post missed the target - Acotrel . C`est la vie! Funny ... come to think of it , ... Acotrel 5.57am -use of Gillard name didn’t uspet you ... no comment from you there.

    • Louis says:

      06:54am | 26/11/10

      IQ 40’s from the city have no place in dictating how those who actually own something should use their land (maybe the IQ 40’s could buy it and see how they like when IQ 2’s and 4’s start dictating how they use it).Tony Abbott is right to pursue this issue. However, I don’t think doing it for indigenous people is the right approach. Doing it for the good of this nation is they only reason there needs to be.

    • GregS says:

      07:57am | 26/11/10

      There seems to be a fundamental contradiction in what you have written, even though this may have been inadvertent. You begin by arguing that city people have no right to dictate to those in the country, most of whom have been granted freehold or conditional freehold over that land.  You then finish by saying that the appropriate response and approach (for determining usage of wilderness land)  is to do “it for the good of this nation”.  Leaving decisions to those in the country has clearly and overwhelmingly not always been in the best interests of the nation. Bear witness to the problems of dry-land and irrigation salinity across the country due to poor irrigation practices and unfettered vegetation clearing.  The good of the nation is not served by allowing one group the sole right to determine how land is used. This works both ways - the coastal destruction brought about by unfettered development of cities and their urban sprawl are the opposite side of the coin.

      I absolutely agree though with your final sentence.

    • acotrel says:

      08:27am | 26/11/10

      C’mon Louis, even you must know Abbott has no interest in wild rivers beyond finding some Labor initiative he can obstruct.  It’s all about himself, not indigenous Australians or the average punter.

    • ian f says:

      08:57am | 26/11/10

      acotrel i guess thats why Tony gives up his free time over Xmas on a regular basis to do vounteer work in aborginal missions in the northern territory, i wonder if Julia or Bob do the same. Its about empowering aboriginals to manage their own affairs not big brother governments not labor v cons!

    • TheRealDave says:

      10:14am | 26/11/10

      Dunno if Joolz has the time to volunteer anywhere Ian, she’s a bit busy running the country. I know the failed aspirant PM has plenty of spare time and should be encouraged to actually work for his pay instead of spending his waking hours bitching, whining and polluting our airwwaves with his constant negativity and doom and gloom predictions. A bit of Community Service would do him, and all the other Opposition members who aren’t really doing anything constructive for the country or the constituents who elected them. Lets get ALL these buggers into the community helping out while they formulate some alternative policies and plot for the next election.

    • Aitch B says:

      10:42am | 26/11/10

      @TRD

      Busy running the country????

      Hahahahahahahaha!!!

      Busier covering her own backside more like it. However, if you had spelt it ‘ruining’ I would be in total agreement with you.

    • ian f says:

      11:51am | 26/11/10

      Real Dave like Abott or not he is an active member of his local surf club and bush fire brigade, i wonder if any other pollys from either side can match that.

    • TheRealDave says:

      12:30pm | 26/11/10

      See, thanks for backing me up - he has plenty of spare time on his hands.

      You’d think he’d use that time to maybe come up with some actual policies or at the very least something constructive don’t you think?

      Apparently our alternative PM doesn’t think so….

    • TChong says:

      07:04am | 26/11/10

      Very common main stream assumption that all Kooris are united .
      They are no more united ( nor should they be compelled to be ), behind a single cause than white society.
      Ol’mate Pearson seems to have taken over a self appointed role , a position not everyone in the Koori community agrees with.

    • fairsfair says:

      10:49am | 26/11/10

      So true T.Chong and therein lies the problem. I find it so very partonishing that politicians (from both sides) still look at aboriginal australians as one. They certainly are not. There are a few IQ40 in that group too Louis you know - but there are also some very intelligent, articulate individuals as there are in any group. Sadly for the wider community, Noel Pearson is not one of them nor is any member of the O’Shane family.

      As the article suggests - there are very wide views as to how this legislation will affect the local area. Why they have to go to Canberra to discuss I don’t know. This should have been bought to Cairns and discussed at a local, regional, state and federal level.

      Tony Abbot is responding to the public’s views just as much as Labor is responding to the other side of the coin. Anna Bligh is a twit - this is her baby and it needs to be discussed.

      If this legislation is to be put in successful it needs to be driven from the ground up by the Traditional Owners of the land. Organisations like Cape York Land Council seek to assist aboriginals to manage land acquired through the native title act and they should be able to assist.

      We also need to keep in mind that QLD govt is broke. It can’t afford to buy swathes of land that is (for all we know) the future Bowen Basin. What else can they do? Protect it under the guise of environmentalism and indigenous land rights so that it cannot be privately purchased and developed in anyway. When they are in a better position they will just have a crack at revoking the laws, buying it all up and then bring the dozers in.

    • acotrel says:

      08:59pm | 26/11/10

      Ianf.  Just Abbott doing what makes him look good!  How the hell can you trust such a self-serving ......., it obvious you’ll believe what you want believe t o ezxcuse his poisonous nature. Even if we forget he’s a lib polly,if he was working for me, I’d sack him! I’ve been told by several people that I’m a good judge of character.  I could never trust Abbott to do anything other than serve his own interests .

    • Joan says:

      07:09am | 26/11/10

      Are the Traditional Owners who support Wild Rivers self-sufficient or do they rely on the taxpayer funding for survival? Noel Pearson`s goal as I have understood it is advancement of aborginals to stage where they are off the Taxpayer teat. I go with Noel Pearson on this..

    • Steve says:

      12:15am | 29/11/10

      Off the taxpayer teat like the irrigators on the Murray-Darling?

    • Macca says:

      07:17am | 26/11/10

      I am Gen-Y, as are most of my friends, and the environment is not the most important policy area at the moment. But I suppose it’s easy to put young people in a box, as I have done with my Open Thread contribution today: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/open-thread-readers-soapbox/

      Shameless self promotion, you bet.

    • Glenn Walker says:

      07:53am | 26/11/10

      Macca,

      I did have a link to the comment about Gen Y to support my claim but didn’t show up in the piece.

      A major survey by Mission Australia showed that 46% of Gen Y elect the environment as their number one issue of concern. This is quite a large figure.

      Check out this link to see for youself: http://bit.ly/d6Uyzq

      I don’t mean to put young people in a box, but the generational change of attitude is overwhelming, and does pose a serious long-term question for how the major political parties approach environment issues.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      07:56am | 26/11/10

      Abbott is simply using Aboriginal people in order to try and score some political points and to look after his mates in the mining industry.  The Wild Rivers legislation, together with laws against broadscale land clearing, are some of the best environmental protections to have been enacted by a Queensland government, however belatedly.

      Abbott, and the people he represents, are not interested in protecting the environment or advocating for Indigenous people.  He’s just a cynical knocker and wrecker and his woeful campaign against Wild Rivers should be seen for what it is.

    • Norma says:

      08:47am | 26/11/10

      I’m sure the Abbott’s mates in the mining industry were truly thrilled by his 2 week stint as a teachers’ aid in an aboriginal community during a parliamentary recess last year. This aided their plan to wreck the river lands no end.
      There have for decades been stringent environmental approval processes to be obtained for any development anywhere. Why do the areas where the aborogines live need even more restriction? So tourists get to enjoy images of aboriginines sitting on their bums boozing at the taxpayers expense?
      I’m with Prrason. Get them working.

    • CJ Morgan says:

      10:29am | 26/11/10

      Norma, I have no doubt that Abbott’s mining mates thoroughly approved of his PR stint, indeed it seems like carefully constructed spin in retrospect.

      Also, Wild Rivers declarations are made to protect some of the few relatively pristine river systems in Queensland, and evidently have the support of many - if not most - Traditional Owners in affected areas. 

      Noel Pearson can only speak for people at Hopevale, and not all of them agree with him either.

    • acotrel says:

      06:16am | 27/11/10

      ‘Abbott is simply using Aboriginal people in order to try and score some political points ’
      Isn’t that what Howard did when he used the aborigines as election fodder in 2007?

    • Peter Oataway, Hay, NSW says:

      08:35am | 26/11/10

      Here we go my group of traditional owners is better than your group of traditional owners..how sad it is that Aboriginal people are being divided up by Left and Right wing politicians and used like pawns on a chess board to score political points.

    • acotrel says:

      09:04pm | 26/11/10

      So tourists get to enjoy images of aboriginines sitting on their bums boozing at the taxpayers expense?
      I’m with Prrason. Get them working.

      Perhaps we might use the NBN a s a teaching aid, so they’re qualified for jobs?

    • hot tub political machine says:

      09:24am | 26/11/10

      Its interesting you mention Noel Pearson as the driving force in the media. I’ve noticed the same thing. If you only read The Oz, you could be forgiven for thinking Noel Pearson was the sole spokesperson for Indigenous issues in all of Australia.

      I say this in pretty much total ignorance of the whoel WIld Rivers situation, but it seemed weird to me there would be “one view” for Aboriginal people, given that us white people have so many different views we hang parliaments

    • Paul C says:

      09:47am | 26/11/10

      Stay out of it, Abbott, it’s not your fight. Wild Rivers is the Queensland Government’s problem, not the Commonwealth’s. The Commonwealth should not be able to waltz in and overturn a state law without a damn good reason, and Abbott does not have that. I admire what Pearson tries to achieve, but he does not speak for all Aborigines and he does not own Cape York.

    • acotrel says:

      09:08pm | 26/11/10

      Abbott’s puppy, sophie mirabella, used her federal allowance to issue leaflets during the Victorian state election campaign.  The federal Libs seem to be making a habit of getting into state politics.  It’ll end up as a constitutional issue?

    • mags says:

      09:27am | 27/11/10

      What a pity Bob Hawke didn’t take your advice when he interfered in the Franklin Dam issue. Because of that intervention Tasmania lost a chance to pull itself out of the quagmire and produce clean energy with hydroelectricity which could have been sold to the mainland. Tasmanians have a lot to thank that watermelon Bob Brown for and Hawkie as well.

    • Ged Handley says:

      10:39am | 26/11/10

      It’s an interesting issue, I do think the claims about prevented development have been overhyped.  As a Liberal supporter I think the party needs to remember it has in the past been a leader on environmental issues.  There must be a right for an elected government who has taken a policy to the election three times, as Qld has with Wild Rivers, to have a policy that favours protection of rivers.  Even if I think the government is terrible in other areaqs, which I do, I support this. Of course there are a range of Aboriginal views on this as with any other issue. But we do need to be able to protect our rivers and develop accordingly outside buffer zones.  Which this legislation does and that’s why it was supported by the Qld liberal party.  I’m concerned that we are drifting away from the centre with this attack on the legislation and simply handing a free kick to the Greens and Labor.  It clearly doesn’t prevent development, just inappropriate development next to or in fact in sensitive watercourses. Just over the border they are actually strip mining river beds in the Northern Territory, just the thing this kind of legsilation prevents thank goodness.  I think Tony Abbot is an admirable leader but he really needs to drop this attack on a fairly sensible piece of legislation.

    • Glenn Walker says:

      11:04am | 26/11/10

      Ged,

      You’re comments are spot on. The Liberal Party in Queensland actually voted for the Wild Rivers Act in 2005. The current LNP Environment Minister Glen Elmes has even called for Wild River protection of the Noosa River, in his electorate.

      However this stance has been undermined by Tony Abbott and (former) Queensland National Party members, who unfortunately are overriding the more environmentally-minded Liberals.

      Compared to climate change and other big, complex environment issues, this is actually a much easier issue for the Liberal Party to get on board with. That is, that could support it, knowing it doesn’t “lock up” as some claim it does, and get much kudos from The Wilderness Society and others for doing so. The current position is just crazy.

    • Alan says:

      11:18am | 26/11/10

      Glenn Walker is a Wild Rivers campaigner with the Queensland branch of the Wilderness Society, which explains his viewpoint. Could you please advise readers of this fact at the top or bottom of his piece and save having to hunt around for this information.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      01:28pm | 26/11/10

      Is Glen Walker also a member of the Greens party . ? I respectfully ask this question on the basis of ascertaining if there any political intent via his subscription.

    • Glenn Walker says:

      02:16pm | 26/11/10

      No, I am not a member of the Greens or any political party.

      If the Liberal Party embraced the Wild Rivers Act, I would praise them as I do the ALP for delivering on this environmental reform. My job as an advocate is to assess political parties on their actions protecting the environment, and sadly at the moment under Tony Abbott’s leadership, they have fallen well behind on several important fronts.

    • Mike Winer says:

      05:05pm | 26/11/10

      You’ve got to ask the Wilderness Society why they have never had a public meeting in an Aboriginal Community on Cape York about Wild Rivers. They would be chased out of town. Instead they skulk around the bush and find a handful of indigenous supporters and parade them around to justify their unjust behaviour and try to force division - similar to the miners in the 60’s and 70’s. TWS say they believe in consent for Aboriginal people in relation to things that impact Aboriginal lands yet they keep pushing for more wild rivers declarations when no consent has been sought. How about that - a green group blatantly breaching a range of national and international agreements on human and Indigenous people rights. Glen Walker is a leader in the new age of dispossession. Take the Aboriginal lands to offset the destruction of the environment by western society in the southern regions of this country.

    • Wayne Fehlhaber says:

      08:41pm | 26/11/10

      Glenn thank you for your response to my question.
      Do you acknowledge Noel Pearson’s representation of a considerable section of traditional owners in regard to the Wild Rivers Act . ?
      The reason i ask , is that in your subscription , you reference Noel Pearson and Traditional Owners as being separate entities with interests in the Act.
      Obviously , Noel Pearson’s main concerns rest in the Traditional owners being in a position to benefit economically from development in Wild River areas. Do you regard that concern as being in the best interests of the Traditional Owners. ?
      I have noted that , in letter to All Queenslanders , Opposition Leader John-Paul Langbroek has signalled the intent of a L.N.P. government is to lead a push for the economic well being of Aboriginals in Queensland .
      There seems to be an increasing number of calls for Aboriginals to be given access to the economic benefits of developing or recovering resourses from lands governed by the Traditional Owners .
      Would you agree with that sentiment and could you comment on the reasoning put forward by Tony Abbott and Noel Pearson in this regard. ?
      Aboriginals are in an unenviable situation where they have ownership of lands but are unable to gain economic benefits from their holdings .
      Increasingly , they are criticised in failing to help improve their standard of living through their own efforts.
      The facts are that they are prevented from doing so by Legislation such as the Wild Rivers Act .
      When will we stop our constant criticism of Aboriginals for failing to help themselves when our governments legislate to prevent them from gaining economically from what they own.  ?
      Glenn , i have enjoyed your article and look forward to any further you may contribute on this issue.

    • Glenn Walker says:

      11:55am | 27/11/10

      Wayne,

      Thanks for the further questions.

      It is important to distinguish Noel Pearson from Traditional Owners on Cape York - he simply does not represent the views of all Traditional Owners and has not been elected or appointed by any means to be their spokesperson. He has assumed this role through his dominance in the media (particularly through The Australian) and an overwhelming lack of public understanding about issues of Aboriginal representation on Cape York (and elsewhere). I must add that no wild river declaration covers Noel Pearson’s traditional country.

      The point you raise about economic development is a very valid one, and of course this is in the best interest of Traditional Owners and all Australians.

      But Wild Rivers simply does not stop economic development - it ensures the most destructive forms (such as strip mining) are setback from sensitive aquatic ecosystems. In this way the economic costs of a degraded river system are avoided, while development continues.

      I encourage you to look at this simple diagram to judge for yourself whether Wild Rivers stops all economic development: http://bit.ly/dsPOpW.

      The point is that, yes, perhaps short-term profits could be made from strip mining right up next a river, but the environmental and economic costs far outweigh the benefit. Likewise, we don’t drill for oil the Great Barrier Reef or strip Fraser Island bare for sand to create short-term jobs - as a society we place a value on protecting these very special places, and use those values as the foundation of a sustainable economy.

    • Dave Kimble says:

      05:44pm | 27/11/10

      It is simply incorrect to say the Cape Alumina project has been halted. They have announced that they will continue to hold the leases, and will continue with the EIS process. They also say that under the current forecast economic conditions, (a glut of bauxite) the project won’t proceed, but that means if conditions pick up, it will be all systems go.
      More background at :
      http://www.peakoil.org.au/news/index.php?capealumina.htm

    • Mike Winer says:

      10:16pm | 27/11/10

      So Glen - does TWS represent TO’s or just bandy a few around when it suits. Noel Pearson has never said he represents all TO’s – That’s why he helped the establishment of the Cape York Land Council and Land Trusts as a way for each clan to have a say. Why have you never bothered (or do you choose to ignore) to read his stuff or try to understand Aboriginal governance structures and processes Aboriginal people have established on the Cape o protect themselves against groups like yours - imposing your own ideas of conservation over the top of Aboriginal Caring for Country and Traditional Law.  An Indigenous Land Use Agreement (ILUA) is a proper a consent mechanism for things like Wild Rivers and ensures all TO’s get a say

      Wayne – There has only been one independent economic reading of the Wild Rivers act – and it backs the fears of Noel, The Cape York Land Council and all Aboriginal Council Mayors whom all oppose Wild Rivers.  If you want to see it go to; http://www.anglicanbrisbane.org/au/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&cntnt01articleid=308&cntnt01returnid=28

      If TWS want to stop mining there are plenty of other ways such as through the Minerals Act – Its yet another TWS furphy that you have to stop mining or other threats by diminishing land Rights

    • Mike Winer says:

      05:11pm | 28/11/10

      P.S. Noels traditional country at Jeannie River is scheduled to be declared a Wild River Basin. Also much of his other traditional area near Wujul is in World Heritage - More Bull###* Glen.
      Also - Noel has been head of CYLC and on the Boards of various Aboriginal organisations. Noel was given direction at various land summits recognised as a key decision making forum for Cape TO’s) attended by many elders and TO’s s for many years, to go fight for Land Rights. Again and again TWS spread rubbish about Noel, Cape York and its people to obtain their own ends and to create an enemy for a public campaign- again - what has TWS done to gain consent or to declare to be the expert on Aboriginal aspirations -simply disgraceful.

    • Steve says:

      12:26am | 29/11/10

      calling the anglican church’s report “independent”. lol. what’s it called when a furphy is hilarious?

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

ToryShepherd

@Cmdr_Hadfield @mattpturner Hope you have sweet views while you heal

Lucy Kippist

RT @HeatherSmithAU: Can living in another country change your life for the better? by @lucyjk on @newscomau f. moi http://t.co/E5Ma3kBut2

David Penberthy

@mooks83 sophisticated response. Think the kids parents saw it differently

David Penberthy

More class from 9's footy show, lampooning a baby that allegedly looks like Sterlo with a pic swiped from Facebook http://t.co/BGoYP6Pn68

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter