Countdown to Green Earth Festival [Media Release 1/3/10]

With less than two weeks until Brisbane's newest environmental event, the countdown is well and truly on for Green Earth Festival taking place on Saturday 13 March at the Brisbane City Botanic Gardens.

This wide-ranging festival will comprise live bands, performers and roving entertainment; green cuisine, demonstrations, speakers, children's zone, video zone, art and fashion displays, plus stalls from many companies including local not for profit organisations.

Green Earth Festival is being organised by the fledging, not-for-profit environmental awareness group, Green Earth Group Inc that began early last year when like-minded friends of singer/poet and author Leigh-Chantelle's saw the need for the uniting of environmental and animal rights groups.

Leigh-Chantelle Koch is a one-woman powerhouse, the driving force behind Green Earth Festival who is extremely pleased with the amount of support, assistance and dedication she has found in many of the volunteers from Brisbane and beyond.

"People see that Green Earth Festival is coming from a sincere and positive place and people want to get involved from the grassroots up in helping us enact the positive changes that are needed in our society," says Leigh-Chantelle.

Combining with these passionate volunteers and friends are others who have the know-how: people who have been involved with large music festivals such as the Big Day Out. This combination, according to Green Earth Festival organiser and promoter Leigh-Chantelle, is what makes the magic happen.

"Every single person involved with Green Earth Festival has volunteered their time, energies and skills for the day and lead up to the day," says Leigh-Chantelle.

"We have had an overwhelming response from people young and old who want to be involved and I thank each and every person."

Green Earth Festival is a free, family orientated, drug and alcohol free community event which aims to stimulate awareness by bringing environmental, green, health and lifestyle, cruelty-free, recycling and sustainable issues into the public eye; and encouraging people to make simple changes in their everyday lives to help our environment and the world we leave for generations to come.

"My goal is to encourage all people from all backgrounds to be involved in a positive way to help our environment and to meet other like-minded individuals," says Leigh-Chantelle.

"Anyone can get involved with helping each other, our animal friends and the universe. It doesn't matter what age, sex or colour you are, what job you do, what your hobbies are, if you are willing to you can change yourself and others by your example."

It's easy being green and Leigh-Chantelle and her comrades are here to show you how.

The natural environment of the Broadwater has always been shaped by wind, waves and weather, while human intervention has played a hand in the shifting shoreline. .... Foreshore reclamation began with the first dredging of the Broadwater in the 1960's and has seen the parklands grow from around 6 hectares to 27 hectares over the years, providing room for recreational facilities such as the Olympic swimming pool and the Broadwater tourist park, as well as additional green space for all to enjoy.

Stand Up for Science Petition

The climate deniers use anonymous online polls to suggest that most people don't support the science of climate change. Here is your opportunity to send a different message. When the Townsville Bulletin won't even publish letters or Feedback from respected scientists then something is very wrong. Let's see how we go and remember to pass it along to your friends, family and colleagues. I suspect many people are getting sick of scientists continually being under attack so I set up this petition: http://www.petitiononline.com/clim4tr/petition.html

How to get carbon-free power in Australia

When it comes to avoiding the most catastrophic impacts of global warming then whatever the financial cost, the price is still worth paying. But new research by Beyond Zero Emissions (BZE) shows Australia could meet 100% of its stationary energy needs from renewables in a decade and stimulate the economy at the same time.

http://www.greenleft.org.au/2010/829/42628

Does Australia need a charter of rights?

Speakers: (Pro-charter) Former Senator for Queensland with the Democrats (1997-2008) Andrew Bartlett and (anti-charter) University of Queensland Garrick Professor of Law, James Allan.
When: Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Time: 04:00 pm to 05:00 pm
Where: University of Queensland Club
Contact: uqpubpolitics@gmail.com

Anti-Nuclear Rally

When: PALM SUNDAY 28TH MARCH 2010
Time: 1.30 -3PM
Where: REDDACLIFFE PLACE George St Brisbane - top of Queen Street Mall
Contact: ph 3855 9497 jshears28@yahoo.com.au
Rally for Peace and Nuclear Disarmament Inc.

News From Fiona Simpson MP

Work Cover Going Broke [4/3/10]

Work Cover is accumulating $9 billion worth of state debt.

It has been revealed that the Minister for Industrial Relations has failed to adequately oversee Queensland’s Work Cover scheme, leading to an enormous program deficit. Due to mismanagement by the Minister, the scheme has been allowed approve unprecedented numbers of worker compensation claims since the introduction of the 2003 Workers Compensation and Rehabilitation Act.

The Bligh Government has been unwilling to admit to the deficit crisis, attempting to conceal the extent of the debt that the ailing program has racked up. Laurence Springborg, LNP spokesperson for Industrial Relations, said that the level of the debt was serious.

Mr Springborg said that if the crisis is not resolved, “Work Cover’s net debt will be one-fifth of the entire Queensland State budget,” that is $9 billion within eight years.

Fiona Simpson is concerned about the implications the mismanagement of work cover will have for Queenslanders: “if Work Cover is left to collapse due to debt, Queenslanders will have no avenue for compensation for work-related injuries,” Ms Simpson said.

Still Waiting For The Results of the DERM's Investigation Into The January Pimpama River Fish Kill

Pimpama River [7/3/10]

Arcadia Woods development, Pimpama

Glossy brochure from sales office states:

Discover Arcadia Woods

It only takes one look... Crisp, clean, fresh air. Towering eucalypt trees and rolling green parklands. An enviable location nestled halfway between Surfers Paradise and cosmopolitan [sic] Brisbane. A peaceful escape. At Arcadia Woods, you get the unshakeable feeling that this is a place you can truly call home.

Arcadia Woods is an exclusive up market development from Devine Communities ideally located at Pimpama. Surrounded by unique theme parks, shopping, sporting and educational facilities, Arcadia Woods is every home owner's dream. Only 500 people will have the privilege of living in this beautiful new community so it's time to ask yourself what you really want.

Grab your slice of paradise now on Queenslands' [sic] Gold Coast.

Power poles being erected along Kerkin Road and work being undertaken adjacent to the Pimpama waste water treatment plant.

Sorry GCCC, this is the third time we've travelled out this way and we haven't spotted a koala yet

Urgent Murri Community Notice - Rally To Protest Continuing Aboriginal Deaths In Custody

When: 11 am, Thursday 11 March

Where: Parliament House, Brisbane

Another young Aboriginal man has died in custody in a Brisbane jail. Another Aboriginal family has buried a son. This is another death that should not have happened as the young man asked for medical help but was refused. The rally will demand an urgent coronial enquiry and that the people responsible be charged. No more deaths in custody! For more information, contact Sam Watson or Reverend Alex Gator on 0401227443.

Pied Oyster Catchers at the "Effluent Sampling Point"?????, Main Beach [8/3/10]

[ When this post originally ran, one of the principal objections was that homeless people would just hang out on transit. First, I think that is a pretty pathetic basis for making a major public policy decision. Second, I think there are many ways to prevent buses and trains from turning into rolling homeless shelters besides making everyone else pay a fare. ]

Following on from my transit award, I thought I’d turn from Chicago to smaller cities and look at ways they can design better transit systems. I think one of the best ways to do this is to simply build fareless systems.

Why have a fare in the first place? It is odd that we pay per use on transit. We don’t pay to check books out of a library. We don’t pay to visit most city parks. We don’t pay when the police or fire department come to our house for a legitimate emergency. Most non-utility municipal services are provided for free to users and funded by taxes. So why is transit different? I suspect it is rooted in the origins of public transit systems when they were private, for-profit companies. But they aren’t that today so why adopt those legacy practices?

It seems to me that there are two basic reasons you would charge for a government service. One is to recover the costs associated with it from users. Two is to ration usage.

For the first, think of something like getting a building permit. The city can charge a fee for this that more or less covers the cost of administering the permitting and inspection process. And only the people who are building something need to pay. Sounds like a fair system, as it were. Toll roads also fall into this camp. Of course, the question immediately proceeds to, if you can recover the full cost from users, why is the government providing the service in the first place instead of the market? A good question that should be seriously considered.

As for the second, one can again think of toll roads and using variable pricing as a way to reduce traffic congestion. There are several practical examples of this in actual operation around the world.

Does transit fit this model? No, especially in smaller cities. It is true that only a segment of the community rides transit and so it might seem logical to make them pay for it. But by itself this seems insufficient to justify it. There are lots of services that are not consumed by everyone, but nevertheless are paid for by everyone. As someone who doesn’t have kids but has a rather large property tax bill, schools immediately come to mind. This argument has seldom held water by itself.

Can we recover the cost of transit from riders? Not even close. Large city systems like the Chicago CTA can recover a significant percentage from fares, but nothing close to the cost of operations. The CTA’s farebox recovery is about 50%. And that’s just for the operating budget. It does not include, due to the vagaries of government accounting (not the CTA’s fault), depreciation, which is a huge expense in a capital intensive business like transit.

The Indianapolis IndyGo system recovers less than 20% of its operating costs from fares. IndyGo charges $2 per ride to collect $10 million a year in user fees (i.e., taxes), largely from the poorest segment of the community. But this is only a fraction of the $55 million operating budget. There are already $45 million in taxes going into IndyGo, just for operations. Despite the illusion of fares, the Indianapolis bus system is almost entirely tax supported today.

Again, if you look at a large city like Chicago you can find overcrowded routes where pricing can help regulate congestion. But in smaller cities, this is usually the least of concerns. The real problem is trying to figure out how to convince discretionary riders to use the system.

Add it up, and just generally transit in smaller cities seems like a bad fit for fares based solely on the inability to recover a meaningful percentage of the cost and the lack of any over-crowding problems.

On the other side, there are big benefits to going fareless.

1. Reduced capital expenses. No fares == no fare collection equipment. You don’t need to kit out buses with fareboxes, rail stations with turnstiles or ticketing equipment, etc.

2. Reduced operating expenses. Collecting fares means you need an entire cash management apparatus. Handling money requires care, proper processes, accounting, security, etc. Get rid of all that and you are saving money. Plus, you don’t have to worry about enforcement. Even on POP systems you’ve got the labor of people auditing tickets. Why bother? And you don’t need to pay repair technicians to service this equipment because it will never break down because it doesn’t exist. That also means no spare parts, which can mean less storage requirements, etc. And with less personnel you probably need a smaller office. The list of savings goes on and on.

3. Improved operations. How long does it take for everybody to board at a bus stop as one person after another swipes a pass or fumbles for change? No fare collection means boarding is quicker. You can even board through every door, not just the front. This means less time spent idling, lower fuel consumption, and faster journey times (a big point in getting people into transit).

4. Better ROI. You are building a transit system so that people will ride it. Fares discourage ridership, especially off peak, non-commute trips. That ain’t good. A transit system is a more or less fixed cost network like an airline. Every seat that goes empty goes to waste. We’re paying to run the buses or trains whether or not anyone is on them. The marginal cost of an additional passenger, up until the point where capacity is maxed, is very low. So why not make sure those seats don’t expire worthless?

5. Marketing. It’s a lot easier to sell something that costs nothing. And any city that did this would get major kudos.

The federal rules around transit are beyond byzantine, so I don’t know if this would be legal or not. If not, we need to change the law. But regardless, here’s my thought process. With so little federal New Start funds available, most cities that want to build say a new rail line or BRT system or significantly beefed up city bus network are going to be paying for most of the capex out of their own pocket anyway. This often means a referrendum to approve a tax. If you’re asking for hundreds of millions if not billions in tax dollars to build something, why not also ask for the taxes to run it? Frankly, it’s unfair to ask someone to vote for a tax to build something if the money to operate isn’t going to be in the bank. That’s why our transit systems seem to be in a state of perpetual funding crisis. If you are going to build something, you need to build the opex and long term maintenance into the deal up front. It strikes me that asking for a whole lot of money plus a bit more for operations isn’t that must different from just plain asking for a whole lot of money. And you are doing your citizens a service long term by avoiding the downstream crises. And if you have to pay for the whole thing yourself anyway, you can probably avoid many of the rules that might get in your way.

For America’s smaller cities looking to implement significantly improved transit systems, fareless is definitely the way go.

This post original ran on April 1, 2009.

... In all the discussions about the U.S. military prison in Guantanamo Bay, there is no mention of how Guantanamo came under U.S. control

Guantanamo was essentially taken at the point of a gun by the United States under what was called a treaty, but Cuba at the time was occupied by the United States. It was sign the treaty or else. So Cuba granted the United States rights for a coaling station at the base in Guantanamo. Coaling stations were important in those days. But that was it, essentially. Years later, Cuba tried to get out of the treaty, but the United States wouldn't allow it. So Fidel Castro has been refusing to accept the small payment for Guantanamo the United States makes every year.

The United States is completely violating the illegimate treaty that it imposed. It's not using it as a coaling station. The United States also violated the treaty before when it started using Guantanamo for Haitian refugees. Washington wouldn't live up to the requirement under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights that "everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution." So it shipped the refugees off to what amounted to a prison in Guantanamo. And now the United States is using Guantanamo for prisoners Washington wants to be able to hold outside any domestic or international law. The Supreme Court has argued that it can't rule on the rights of Guantaamo detainees because Guantanamo is not under U.S. jurisdiction, and the Bush administration and Congress effectively say Guantanamo is not under international law. So it's a convenient torture chamber.

There's no need to debate, really, what goes on in Guantanamo. First of all, it's totally illegal even to send people there. If they weren't intending to use Guantanamo as a torture chamber, why not bring people to a prison in New York? As soon as you see that they're sending them to Guantanamo, you know it's for activities in violation of international human rights law. You don't have to investigate further.

There are by now other reasons for the United States to maintain Guantanamo, which would be Cuba's major port. Holding on to Guantanamo prevents Cuba from using it as a port and prevents development of the eastern end of the island. So it's part of the strangulation of Cuba, the punishment of Cubans for what the Democratic administrations of the arly 1960s called its "successful defiance" of U.S. policies going back to the Monroe Doctrine.

Very much like defiance against the Mafia don: it can't be tolerated.

It can't be tolerated. In fact, international affairs has more than a slight resemblance to the Mafia.

You often make that analogy in your talks.

I think it's real. By and large, the state acts as something like the executive agency of those who largely own the domestic society in the United States, the corporate sector. It's a pretty standard feature of state policy. But there are some striking cases where state policy runs counter even to corporate goals. You see some interesting examples of conflict between state and corporate interests. It's kind of an interesting topic for the study of international affairs. Cuba is one example. U.S. agribusiness, even U.S. energy corporations, would be quite eager to overcome the strangling embargo on Cuba, which they see as a market and as an investment opportunity. Agribusiness would love to have Cuba as a market. The U.S. pharmaceutical industry is interested in Cuba's quite advanced biotechnology industry. But, most strikingly, energy corporations are interested in exploiting Cuban offshore oil in the Gulf of Mexico, which is apparently estimated to be substantial. But the state will not permit it. Of course, the majority of the U.S. population, which doesn't count, is in favor of establishing diplomatic relations with Cuba. But that's irrelevant. What's interesting is business interests are blocked, in pretty striking ways.

You may recall that about a year go there was a meeting in Mexico City between the Cuban energy specialists and representatives of Texas oil companies and also some of the majors, like ExxonMobil. The Bush administration comes straight out of that sector. But the Bush administration discovered that the meeting was being held in a Sheraton hotel, which is owned by a U.S. corporation, so they ordered the hotel to break up the meeting and expel the Texas oil representatives and the Cubans. It was a slap in the face to George Bush's friends and supporters. But state interests, the Mafia-style interests, overwhelmed even the interests of the core constituency of the Bush administration.

The same is happening in Iran. U.S. oil companies would be delighted to help enter into the development of huge Iranian natural gas and oil fieds, but they're blocked by the state. We have to punish Iran for its successful defiance in overthrowing a U.S.-imposed tyrant.

This morning, the Boston Globe reported something that has been known around here for a long time. In 1974, presumably at U.S. government initiative, MIT made a deal with the shah of Iran to effectively lease the nuclear engineering department, or a large part of it, to Iran, to bring in lots of Iranian nuclear engineers and train them in the development of uranium enrichment and other techniques of nuclear development. In return, the Shah, who was one of the most brutal tyrants of the period, with a horrible human rights record, would pay MIT at least half of a million dollars. The article also points out that several of the engineers who were trained at MIT are now apparently running the Iranian nuclear programs. Those programs were storngly supported by the United States in the mid-1970s. ...

Dear President Obama,

I understand you may be looking to replace Rahm Emanuel as your chief of staff.

I would like to humbly offer myself, yours truly, as his replacement.

I will come to D.C. and clean up the mess that's been created around you. I will work for $1 a year. I will help the Dems on Capitol Hill find their spines and I will teach them how to nonviolently beat the Republicans to a pulp.

And I will help you get done what the American people sent you there to do. I don't need much, just a cot in the White House basement will do.

Now, don't get too giddy with excitement over my offer, because you and I are going to be up at 5 in the morning, 7 days a week and I am going to get you pumped up for battle every single day (see photo). Each morning you and I will do 100 jumping jacks and you will repeat after me:

"THE AMERICAN PEOPLE ELECTED ME, NOT THE REPUBLICANS, TO RUN THE COUNTRY! I AM IN CHARGE! I WILL ORDER ALL OBSTRUCTIONISTS OUTTA MY WAY! IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DON'T LIKE WHAT I'M DOING THEY CAN THROW MY ASS OUT IN 2012. IN THE MEANTIME, I CALL THE SHOTS ON THEIR BEHALF! NOW, CONGRESS, DROP AND GIVE ME 50!!"

Then we will put on our jogging sweats and run up to Capitol Hill. We will take names, kick butts, and then take some more names. If we have to give a few noogies or half-nelson's, then so be it. In our pockets we will have a piece of paper to show the pansy Dems just how much they won by in 2008 -- and the poll results that show the majority of Americans oppose the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and want the bankers punished. Like drill sergeants, we will get right up in their faces and ask them, "WHAT PART OF THE PUBLIC MANDATE DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND, SOLDIER?!! DROP AND GIVE ME 50!" ...

Rudd's Health Reform: Keneally right to ask questions:

... I’ve often said it before: Fannie and Freddie are the epitome of the perversion in the financial system. Wait till they are forced onto the US federal budget. You’re going to love the spectacle. Americans will become like Icelanders, who, to satisfy the governments of Britain and Holland, face a bill of $135 per person every single month for the next eight years. Think America is going to like that? Iceland certainly doesn't, and it looks almost certain that tomorrow's referendum on the matter will result in a NO vote. Which will lead to a whole new set of conundrums. The question will emerge again if a country's citizens are responsible for the losses of its banks.

So far, Iceland is the one place where the losses would be implicit; in the US, Britain, France, Holland etc., the people still focus on the carrot of having their investments in their banks returned to them one day, and with interest or even profit to boot. Yeah, right. What will they do when they find out that is not ever going to happen? That they will need to pay up like the Icelanders, while the bankers keep getting their bonuses? ...

Anita: Never feel too small or powerless to make a difference.

Julia Butterfly:

For 738 days I lived in the canopy of an ancient redwood tree in northern California to protect this magnificent elder, known as Luna, and to help make the world aware of the destruction of our forests.

From my perch 180 feet high I could see barren hillsides, the small timber town where families lost their homes due to a mudslide, and the Pacific Lumber mill where once beautiful forests are converted into lumber. From my treetop perspective it was clear how the industrial logging practices of clearcutting and herbicide destroy wildlife habitat, the quality of our lives, and our communites.

For millennia the two-million acre redwood ecosystem thrived and sheltered myriad species of life. In the last 150 years, 97 percent of the original redwood forests have been destroyed by timber corporations. With only 3 percent of these native forests remaining, species like the marbled murrelet seabird and coho salmon are on the brink of extinction and people fear that they will lose their jobs and futures. Big business cut-and-run logging operations have instilled a false dichotomy: jobs versus the environment. As long as we label each other "loggers and environmentalists" it is difficult to find our common ground and restore the forests and diversity that are our true legacy.

Globalization of natural resources like ancient forests undermines the stability of our watersheds and communities. In order to achieve true sustainability for all life forms we must put our primary needs of fresh air, clean water, and biological and cultural diversity above corporate profit.

We can create a sustainable culture of life on earth by growing and purchasing organic foods, relying on our renewable natural resources like solar and wind power, conserving our precious fresh water, and reducing and revising the "waste" we generate as a society. When we are rooted deeply in love and respect for the interconnectedness of all beings, it becomes a joy to make choices that help sustain life rather than destroy it.

The Federal Government has finally announced it will repeal the Commonwealth Radioactive Waste Management Act. But it has left Muckaty Station outside Tennant Creek in the NT as the most likely target for the national radioactive waste dump.

The repeal legislation is, if anything, more coercive and predatory than the bill it replaces.

The attached fact sheet provides some background about the Bill and provides information about how to make a submission to the inquiry by 15 March.

Make a submission to the Senate Inquiry...

There are many ways to work for a more democratic and respectful approach to radioactive waste management. In the short term, we have an opportunity to communicate directly with policymakers through the Senate inquiry into the bill.

The deadline is 15 March 2010.

What is a Senate Inquiry?

The job of the Senate is to critically review the government's proposed laws. By holding inquiries into complex laws the Senate gives everybody a chance - experts, individuals, organisations, State and Territory governments -to suggest changes or to register support or protest.

Whether your submission is short or long, every contribution tells the government that people care about this issue enough to put their opinion on the public record.

The process goes something like this:

1. The Committee negotiates the timeframe - This inquiry will go for 8 weeks 2. The Committee sets a deadline for submissions - The deadline for this Inquiry is 15 March 3. The committee advertises the deadline and inviting people to have input: Underway 4. Public hearings to receive evidence & clarify information: Dates and location not yet set 5. A report is drafted with recommendations and amendments: Usually a week before tabling 6. The report is submitted to the Senate: This report will be tabled on 30 April 2010 After that, it is up to the Government to pay attention to the evidence taken. They may choose to ignore it, in which case the campaign will swing into the next phase. But they won't be able to say they weren't warned.

The best thing is to make a submission in your own words. If you keep the language reasonably respectful and avoid making personal accusations, the submission may be accepted as evidence and placed on the committee's website.

What?

Some points you might like to include:

1. The Committee must travel to Muckaty

It is essential that the Senate Committee pay due respects to the Traditional Owners on the front line, by travelling to Tennant Creek to take evidence from them directly.

2. The case for a remote dump has never been made

The radioactive waste management debate in Australia has never looked at options other than remote waste dumps on Aboriginal land. The industry has never made the case that a remote shed is the best place for this material.

3. This bill is highly coercive

In choosing a site, the proposed bill overrides all relevant state and territory legislation as well as overriding commonwealth environmental and Aboriginal heritage protections. It also overrides private property rights of affected individuals with regards the dump site or its access route. Once a site is chosen, it will be assessed under commonwealth environmental legislation which has almost no mechanisms for preventing the project from going ahead.

4. All discretion in the hands of the Minster

The Bill places enormous power in the hands of the Minister to assess whether or not the Muckaty site should go ahead. No information is given to how this assessment will be carried out, and the bill makes it clear that local people have no right of appeal.

5. We must do better than this

Nuclear waste should be moved as little as possible, and should be stored above ground close to the point of production, close to centres of nuclear expertise and infrastructure.

Who?

This Bill has been sent to the Legal and Constitutional Committee.

Chair: Senator Trish Crossin (ALP, Northern Territory)

Members: Senator Guy Barnett (Liberal, Tasmania),
Senator David Feeney (ALP, Victoria),
Senator Mary Jo Fisher (Liberal, South Australia)
Senator Scott Ludlam (Greens, Western Australia),
Senator Gavin Marshall (ALP Victoria) Send in your submission:
By email: legcon.sen@aph.gov.au
By fax: 02 6277 5794
By post: Julie Dennett, Committee Secretary, Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee - PO Box 6100 Parliament House Canberra ACT 2600 Australia

On Saturday 27 February, as the Olympic torch was handed on from this year's Winter Olympics in Vancouver to London, the Playfair 2012 coalition launched a campaign for an ethical London Games.

Playfair 2012 is co-ordinated by the TUC and Labour Behind the Label (the UK Clean Clothes Campaign) http://www.labourbehindthelabel.org/ and involves unions and various campaigning organisations. The coalition wants the organisers of the London Olympics to ensure that workers making sportswear for the 2012 Games won't be working in appalling and degrading conditions, and that all Olympic-branded goods will be ethically produced.

The campaign website http://www.playfair2012.org.uk/ sets out the standards the coalition expects from the London 2012 Games organisers, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) and sportswear brands, and explains how individuals can get involved in the campaign. There is also a resources section with reports and video clips.

Millions of people are employed in the global supply chains that produce kits for Olympic teams, and the sportswear and souvenirs available on our high streets. Evidence shows that the sportswear industry and Olympic movement have a poor track record on workers' rights, says the campaign. Playfair 2008 research published before the Beijing Games found workers employed by Adidas suppliers in China were making sports shoes that retail for upwards of £50 a pair for just £20 per month, and others working 80 hours a week stitching footballs.

In another factory producing stationery, children as young as 12 years old were being forced to work 15 hours a day. TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said:

"Delivering a legacy for London was at the heart of the Government's successful Olympic bid. And what better legacy than a commitment to end the exploitation and abuse involved in the sportswear and athletic footwear industries? We want London 2012 to raise the bar on workers' rights throughout Olympic supply chains."

See how major sportswear brands rate on workers' rights

"After being devastated by Cyclone Larry on 20th March 2006, the refurbished Johnstone Shire Hall, a joint initiative of the Cassowary Coast Regional Council and the Queensland Government, was officially opened by Peter Cosgrove AC MC 4 July 2009"

January 2010 February 2010

January 2009 February 2009 March 2009 April 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 September 2009 October 2009 November 2009 December 2009

June 2008 July 2008 August 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008

May 2008 April 2008

March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 2005

FEEDBACK

* All Copyright retained, but if you reproduce or copy any material from this website, please attribute to: www.springhillvoice.com and we may sue your sorry thieving behind, anyway.