Australia’s Katrina moment

Corruption and the cult of the market have made a natural disaster into an outrage.

When you fly over the earth's oldest land mass, Australia, the view can be shocking. There are scars as long as European countries, the result of erosion. Salt pans shimmer where once native vegetation grew. This is almost impossible to reverse. The first to die are the most vulnerable species. According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, Australia's devastation of its natural environment has caused more mammal extinction than in any other country. The iconic koala is used to attract tourists; the Queen and Oprah Winfrey are photographed cuddling one, unaware that this unique creature has enriched the state of Queensland for decades with its industrial slaughter and the sale of its skin to Britain and America. Today, the belatedly "protected" koala is threatened not by flood or drought, but rapacious land-clearing, of which Queensland is the national champion. Each year, according to the World Wide Fund for Nature, the state in effect destroys 100 million birds, mammals and reptiles.

The land is "cleared" by fire or machinery, often with a heavy chain tied between two bulldozers: a technique developed by Queensland's most notorious land-clearer, the late Sir Johannes Bjelke-Petersen, the conservative state premier for 19 years, whose self-awarded knighthood was given for "services to parliamentary democracy", such as winning gerrymandered elections with 20 per cent of the vote. In 1992, a defamation jury found that Bjelke-Petersen had been bribed "on a large scale and on many occasions". Two of his ministers and his police commissioner were jailed. Lucrative land became a prize for cronies known as the "white shoe brigade". Brown envelopes of cash were handed over at a five-star hotel recently lapped by floodwaters in the centre of Brisbane.

Wrong type of flood

Last May, the Queensland Labor government announced that it had sold swaths of the state's forests and plantations to Hancock Queensland Plantations, a subsidiary of a US-based timber multinational. Queensland has many low-lying flood plains on which developers have been allowed to make fortunes selling plots. The victims of the great flood have been mostly poor people. Most could not afford insurance, or discovered that their policy did not include "types of flood".

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission, says an ACCC report, deliberately stopped insurance companies from agreeing a common definition of flood so that "insurers will continue to compete vigorously by product differentiation" through offerings that use many definitions of "flood" to specify which risks are covered and which are excluded. The callousness of this imposed confusion is emblematic of how the Australian elite have treated those ruined by an inland ocean the size of Germany and France combined. Flooding also struck Brazil in April and Sri Lanka in December, but the disaster in Australia is far more revealing; for Australia is a "first-world" country with advanced technology and communications, and yet tens of thousands of people received no emergency warning. Here, the cult of the "market" has diminished public services and infrastructure budgets, and divided by wealth a society that once boasted the most equitable spread of personal income in the world.

Little of this is discussed in a media where Rupert Murdoch owns 70 per cent of state capital-city press. When the leader of the Greens, Bob Brown, dared suggest that the Queensland flood was due in part to "the burning of fossil fuels [causing] the hottest oceans we've ever seen off Australia", he was told to apologise to the mining industry. In the decade to 2005, says the Wilderness Society, "the amount of land-clearing in Australia was so extensive that the greenhouse gases produced rivalled the amount produced by cars and trucks".

Divide and rule

A feature of the floods has been the PR campaigns of leading right-wing Labor Party politicians, notably the prime minister, Julia Gillard, and the Queensland premier, Anna Bligh, who have talked up the "Aussie battler" spirit in the face of "Mother Nature's wrath". The media echo of this evokes Sir Johannes's description of spinning a line to journalists as "feeding the chooks". In truth, successive governments have rejected, ignored or suppressed the recommendations of their own experts which, if acted upon, could have saved Brisbane.

In 1999, a report commissioned by Brisbane City Council warned of "significantly higher" flooding than in the last great flood in 1974. When this was leaked, an alleged cover-up was referred to the state's crime and misconduct commission, but nothing happened.

Andrew Short, director of the coastal studies unit at the University of Sydney, compares the Queensland flood with the scandal of New Orleans following Hurricane Katrina. "This is something we have been waiting for . . ." he said. "Why were there no levees to protect the low-lying towns? . . . Why are major highways and railways still below flood level?"

Prime Minister Gillard has so far offered crumbs from a treasury in surplus, that subsidises the fossil-fuel industry with A$10bn (£6.2bn) and that is pledged to spend A$1.1bn on Australia's mercenary "commitment" to American wars. Having sent just 13 helicopters to rescue the stranded, Gillard appointed Major General Mick Slater to lead the recovery operation: an admission that the civilian emergency services had been so depleted, they could not cope. Slater's most interesting statement has been a threat. "There is no reason why we won't have [success]," he said, "unless . . . the media start to become divisive within the community and then, if there are areas of failure, I think I could find the reason and track it back to different areas within the media." He was not challenged. The chooks were fed.

128 comments

Mr. Divine's picture

@andyg: I don't deny that profit has won many a development battle and government needs to intervene in order to protect the land for the 'greater good'. But the article by John Pilger is about Australia (not Brazil), and in that article there are many false statements.

Big business doesn't always win in Australia and there are nowadays many government programs that protect the environment. What I am saying is that John is looking at the situation and inaccurately reporting on what is happening in AUSTRALIA because he is approaching it from a narrow perspective and trying to report/change the facts to fit his perspective.

But it doesn't work for people like me and Hans who are willing to question every reporter, be it left or right wing. The facts have got to stand up and as I have already pointed out, they don't. That's a problem for not just me but for people who want some sort of the left progression. To me people like John Pilger and Michael Moore can't be taken seriously because they misrepresent the truth.

andyg's picture

So the debate now narrows to this one question but you still fail to answer it. Lets try again because it demonstrates why Marx is right.
"Has the debt for labour increased in absolute terms in the last 150 years from a global perspective?"
If the answer is yes then Marx is right. Do you say 'No" Mr Divine?
And please stick to where we are in the debate. Do not try to evade the question and go off the topic You made out that there was nothing right with Marxist philosophy and I came up with this question. Answer the question. If you don't you lose the debate.
I dare say that you will evade the question like so many others I have asked because your brain is mush. Your thoughts are woolley and your ranting is nothing more than childish tantrums.
So let's try asking the question once more Mr Divine.
"Has the debt for labour increased in absolute terms in the last 150 years from a global perspective?" Yes or no?

jie4v7i14's picture

Overzealous farming in Western Oz has caused them problems in the past.

The Ozzies taking their land for granted is not a new thing.

Mr. Divine's picture

see: http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2011/01/student-protesters-young...

see feb 4 5;33 comment.

I never link .. I don't even have a mobile phone... I couldn't be arsed with that. I just write although I copy and paste what I write. I don't record where I have written it .. I live in the now I write for myself now although if the Murdoch press or any other body /establishment wants to donate to ME they can go ahead!

Mr. Divine's picture

How do you think capital has come about? How has it originated?

Answer: Through the labour of man.

So why the moral distinction between one product of labour and another? Capital is a vital component of economic growth. Without it we'll have an average lifespan of 30 years.

andyg's picture

Neither can you read or make obvious connections. I thought rather foolishly that you had an eye for interconnected grey areas that seperate black and white.
I await your next shot sire.

Mr. Divine's picture

@abrad/andgyg: you know something about ME. If you read Laurie Penny's blog you'll know more. But what about you two? What are your personal lives? You wanna know about me well I've showed your where. Now what about you? Who am I talking to abrad, andyg? Who are YOU? I've already given you some information (personal) about me. Now how about you? I dictate what information I give YOU on who you are. So who are you abrad?

Not up to the challenge?

LISTEN CAREFULLY ABRAD/ANDYG: People know ME but nobody knows who you TWO ARE. You see abrad you think that Hans and I are in conjunction or somehow in 'partnership' on this blogshpere. But you're wrong. People KNOW WHO I am. They don't really know Hans (isn't that right Hans?) and they don't abrad and andyg. YOU see to get where I am you have to reveal something about your personal life .. A

nd I've already done that. Bloggin is like when you answer the telephone and some telephone salesperson comes on the phone. WHO ARE YOU????????? Tell ME. I've told you. Until that happens I don't do anything you say .. got that? WHO THE F R U?

scouser//boozer/stonehad/prophet /comin out! right fing out otu otu tout outoutoutoutoutoutoutoutoutoutout

Mr. Divine's picture

Labour is owed a debt? I don't think so. For labour also owes capital a debt. They cancel each other out. Without capital there would no labour. And what exactly is capital? Capital is saved labour from millions of years.

And labour by itself is not the creating all of the wealth for the land can produce by itself through self seeding and raw materials on the surface. So again Marxism is flawed.

There are many flaws in marxist analysis of history but the most telling is the fact that the world has not moved in the way Marx has predicted it would.

The introduction of social security means that some people are living like owners of capital, off the labour of others. They don't fit into his 'pattern' of life. Are they the beggars that he talks about?

The most significant flaw is Marx's presumption that labour would rise up against the owners of capital. But in fact labour has become significant owners of capital and use it to gain further wealth (e.g. pension funds). So much so there is no need or hope of revolution in the developed world because people who work are materially well off.

You're an idiot if you're a Marxist or think that there is nothing wrong with the philosophy. Its time you expanded your education.

chicgoods3's picture

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====

===== http://www.chic-goods.com/ =====

Mr. Divine's picture

I'm never enraged. I'm laughing when I write and rather enjoy it when people insult me.. you should read what I have wrote in the past.. And actually I wasn't really insulting you... it was abrad I was having a dig at for trying to make me go back into blog archives and provide links .. who does he think I am .. his personal servant? But seeing as you got the hump by mistake I thought I'd string you a long a bit more .. just for the hell of it. I can pretend to be outraged. Man, you should be a pom in an Australian bush town... if you really want to know what it's like to be insulted/wound up on a daily basis. I apologise for arsing around.

Did you read my link? La Nina is the reason for the present flooding in Australia and Brazil. La Nina comes every 7 years or so. The rainfall this year has been huge everywhere in eastern Australia. Everywhere has had floods.

Pilger reckons that its due to bad farming methods that there is flooding. Nay it has been happening for centuries. Pilger says, that the Brisbane government could have prevented the flooding. Not really. The water has to go somewhere and honestly when you see a river flood it is massive. I mean bloody massive. You can have levee banks that stop it coming into one area but this only means it'll build up and go on to the next area even bigger. Take a look at a map of SE Queensland and you'll see other places before Brisbane: there will be levee banks in these places but like I said it just makes the water go somewhere else. By the time it hits Brisbane there is no stopping it. Its like a volcano. Maybe it is possible to put huge banks in central Brisbane but then the water has to go somewhere and there is Eastern Brisbane suburbs. In bush towns councils wont give planning permission in flood plains but Brisbane, well its too late.. and people here are obsessed with water nearness.

Now do you think you can counter/debate my view?

PS You can throw in a few insults if you want.

Latest tweets