Comments on: More to Wild Rivers than meets the eye

By: SBH

SBH — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 04:53:06 +0000

Mr Squid he got money from us. The federal and Qld government’s paid the set up funds and special purpose grants and they get philabnthropic dough. Its all here:

http://www.cyi.org.au/finance.aspx

By: SBH

SBH — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 04:47:18 +0000

John James, your premise is wrong. The left have’nt launched an offensive on Pearson. Pearson didn’t get his own way and has come out swinging against the government, the public service, greens, left and a few others. Forgive the lot of us for refusing to take it lying down.

By: Liz45

Liz45 — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 02:27:00 +0000

John james -And you’re asking us to believe, that in years to come, aboriginal business owners will be driving around in BMW’s? Give me a break! More like a select few(one being Pearson) and the real ‘winners’ will be non-aboriginals living in luxury?

“Gees, sounds like Pearson wants them to have the same opportunities as other non indigenous Australians?”

Did you put in an extra word here - “other” or was it a freudian slip?

By: Mr Squid

Mr Squid — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 08:20:44 +0000

owe money to pearson, work for pearson and buy from pearson. all on his terms. that’s what it’s about.

john, dear, you’re typical of extremists of whatever persuason, although i have to say your foul mouth does add an extra dimension to your mindlessness.

By: John james

John james — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 07:41:09 +0000

”..he wants to turn his brothers and sisters into consumers, wage slaves and borrowers..”

Yes, funny about that! Noel would like to see his Indigenous brothers and sisters have the opportunity to have a small business ( borrowers ), have a job ( wage slaves ) and be able to buy ( consumers ) what is affordable for them and their families ( house, car, furniture, .. )
Gees, sounds like Pearson wants them to have the same opportunities as other non indigenous Australians?
The nerve of that guy!
The Left are unbelievable, aren’t they.F*ckwits of the world unite!

By: Mr Squid

Mr Squid — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 10:39:57 +0000

dear john (excuse my sense of humor), pearson’s interests in fact coincide with those of the left as well as the extremists in the LNP who stand four-square behind him - industrial/agricultural development at any cost.

he wants to turn his brothers and sisters into consumers, wage slaves and borrowers, in concert with his panderers from newscrap, and hang the consequences.

and guess who the profits will go to. that’s why he and ms major are squealing like stuck pigs.

that’s why they don’t like the wild rivers legislation - it protects and respects the vast majority of indigenous landowners.

that’s why the vast majority of landowners in the region support it.

By: John james

John james — Sat, 08 Aug 2009 08:59:53 +0000

Interesting to see the Left launching this offensive against Pearson. Pearson’s concerns are a miniature reproduction of the concerns all Australians should have for the political influence of the Greens and the threat they represent to economic advancement for vast swathes of Australians.
Of particular concern is the ‘deal’ stitched up by The Wilderness Society and the Labor government, with no consultation with Indigenous communities.
The Left will sell their grandmother if it suits them, and the Left and their ‘Green’ co-ideologues will certainly put trees before people and jobs and a secure economic future for these Indigenous communities.

By: John Hughes

John Hughes — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:04:14 +0000

It is not only the Tories who write ideologically, or who use political tactics. When landholders are restrained from using land in an income-earning way, they suffer loss. Where conservation values call for restrictions on land use, then the whole society - in this case including Gold Coast high-risers, Brisbane waterfronters and pastoral land-clearers - ought to share the burden.

Cape York native title holders are numerous and diverse, like any group of people, so of course some will be more adamant than others about particular conservation proposals. But they have strong conservation credentials, and they are used to balancing conservation of land with economic use, and their decision-making allows for differing viewpoints. They are right to begin organising when others, who won’t trust theim to make sensible decisions, use State power to impose blanket restrictions on native title holders, employing lack of warning and consultation as a political tactic.

By: AR

AR — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:58:25 +0000

Occupied/oppressed populations (or genders) often produce a Quisling or Vichy (or Arndt). Even the Oxley Moron was a similar exudation. Often these people are sincere, but mostly they are simply menials who’d otherwise be the local dog turd collector, to paraphrase Hanna Arendt, ”the evil of banality”.
Can anyone recall the last (any) time an Aboriginal protest received such backing from the meeja, esp Newscrap?

By: Mr Squid

Mr Squid — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:23:37 +0000

what i want to know is where is the money coming from?

who is paying for all of noel pearson’s dishonest propaganda?

has anyone seen the annual report of cape york institute yet? has anyone seen the annual report of balkanu yet?

how much federal and state money has gone into these two organisation over the past 10 years. has it been accounted for? how has it been spent?

i have not been able to find a word on the web.

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:02:18 +0000

Ex PM Howard has never been called to account for his breach of the 1996 election promise to provide $40M in implementation funds for the Cape York Land Use Agreement between peak green groups (eg TWS, ACF), Traditional Owners of Cape York, and the Cattleman’s union.

I seem to recall the late and great communicator Rick Farley helped in brokering that deal (?). Actually yes, according to a quick google.

Peter Garrett previously a non aligned greenie was at a national conference in Sydney around 1997 as an observer where this CYLUA was presented, and not as a ‘what do you think’ to the national green movement. More like, that’s the deal duly thrashed out, ready or not. There were concerns about cattle etc but the green movement to their credit copped it sweet.

In my view Tania Major and Noel Pearson could do alot of good raising that moral and policy deficit of the previous govt given that broken election promise has resulted in say 13 years of lost economic momentum on the Cape. With a serious human toll as a result. Why protect the ideology of 1950ies Man now? What about climate change threats to traditional lands?

And Ms Major (on penultimate Q & A), you talk with passion and intellect but you are still politically quite inexperienced. Most successful political careers benefit from a serious dose of diplomacy which helps to avoid damaging crashes into the speed barrier. Your mentor for instance might have contemplated the Howard Era would have to end eventually. Ask yourself why people actively vote for environmental protection in the 21C. Whatever race, colour or creed. The ecological issues are only going to get bigger. Worth reflecting on.