Then Rob Oakeshott walked in grinning and beaming, cracking jokes and in turn waiting for Tony Windsor to keep his date with destiny. Tension mounted as the media shuffled nervously and texts and tweets flew across the country.

Finally the two wise men spoke. We heard from Tony Windsor and Rob Oakeshott as they announced, not just who they would be backing – both went for Julia Gillard – but also why they would be backing her government.

It became clear that the two big winners out of this extraordinary election are the environment and future generations. The Independents made it clear they support action on climate change and renewable energy. They recognised the enormous opportunities that exist for regional Australia if we invest at scale in renewable energy.

At last – but who could have guessed it would take two guys from regional Australia to state the obvious.

Greenpeace went into this election asking for three things to combat climate change; a price on carbon, shifting subsidies from the fossil fuel sector to renewables and a rigorous pollution standard for new power stations.

While no one could have predicted this outcome to the election, it is clear the Australian community want action now on climate change. This crisis will no longer be used as a political football – punted from one generation to the next.

The time for action is now and that makes the 7^th of September a truly historic day.

The verdict in our trial is approaching, and on Monday September 6 we will know what our fate is. We don’t really know what the result would be, all we know now is that it is going to show what the status of Japanese democracy is. It’s a long way from what started this case – our investigation to end Japan’s whaling.

In early 2008, following tip offs from a whistleblower and a four-month investigation into the embezzlement of whale meat by the crew of the Japan’s whaling fleet, we were closing in on evidence that could finally end this whaling programme.

Annual protest actions in the Southern Ocean have raised awareness and created international outcry about this destructive and completely unnecessary hunt, however, it was clear that the only place Japanese whaling would ever be ended was at home in Japan. When we intercepted a box of embezzled whale meat, we knew we finally had the evidence to prove the corrupt nature of the industry and shut it down by bringing an end to its huge taxpayer subsidies.

We knew the industry would not go quietly, we didn’t expect the harsh reaction that was to come.

At the start the media strongly covered the embezzlement scandal, and asked serious questions about the industry for the first time. However, one month after we exposed the large-scale theft of whale meat and embarrassed the authorities, they struck back, and had us arrested, interrogated, detained for 26 days and finally charged with “theft” and “trespass”.

The media were tipped off about out arrest and the raids of our homes, so when the images of our arrest appeared on national television the embezzlement scandal was dismissed and we were immediately seen as criminals by the public.

This has been our image for the last two years – until now.

In the last week alone we have seen three hugely positive articles appear in major newspapers around Japan. All of them detailed our trial and the flimsy, contradictory nature of the prosecution case against us, discussed the embezzlement and the rights of NGOs to expose wrongdoing, asked serious questions about human rights in Japan, and, finally, seriously questioned the legitimacy of the whaling programme.

We have come full circle and for the first time since the embezzlement scandal broke there is serious, positive discussion about the legitimacy of the whaling programme, and for once the arguments are not based on fisheries agency propaganda. Japanese society has changed and we are finding support wherever we turn.

On Monday the judges will hand down their verdict, and we are very much looking forward to it. We have proved our case, and anyone who looks at the facts with a clear mind can see that we should be acquitted, and that the official case simply does not stand up to even the most basic questioning.

That said, given Japan’s harsh 99.8% conviction rate, we understand that our chance of a good result is low, so while we are optimistic that we have advanced civil society and put whaling on trial both in court and in the media, we are also anxious about out fate.

Our families and friends are with us all the way. They can only accept an acquittal as they know we have committed no crime. They want us to fight as hard as we can, and were very happy to see the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary detention’s support for our case, but there is a definite feeling that our argument is ten-years ahead of Japanese society. This has been a difficult few years, and our actions have come at great personal cost, but we have to win for ourselves, for whales, for Greenpeace and for Japanese society.

We believe that this verdict is going to be a landmark for Japanese society. Aomori District court is being forced to make decisions in front of both the domestic and international audience whether Japan is ready to be a true democratic society, a society where citizens have the right to speak up in the public interests – or not.

Everyone we know is with us, and we could not have gotten this far without theirs and your support. We have finally kick-started the discussion about whaling, activism and civil rights that Japan desperately needs to have. Whatever happens on Monday, we know in our hearts that we did the right thing, and sooner or later, we will win this fight.

Junichi Sato and Toru Suzuki

Read the latest messages of support & leave one of your own:
Since Junichi and Toru’s arrest two years ago over half a million people have expressed their support. Now that a verdict is coming – we need your voice again more than ever.

Join our online march for justice: send a message of support for the Tokyo Two, tag it with #whaletrial, and ask others to join you!
Tweet your support | Share the online march on Facebook
And link to this:
http://www.greenpeace.org/international/en/campaigns/oceans/whaling/ending-japanese-whaling/whale-meat-scandal/tokyo-two-march-for-justice/

I’m sitting on the heli-deck of the Arctic Sunrise near a small group of islands located at the end of the Florida Keys in the United States. As I write, a dolphin is in the lights of the ship teaching her calf  to hunt fish. I watch them playing and think, ‘What if the oil had pushed its way down here and choked these dolphins? Why do we need to take such drastic risks?

The day has been long and hard, but rewarding. We ventured out to a beautiful dive site early this morning called the Sherwood Forest. Chuck Messing and Jose Lopez from NOVA South Eastern University were taking sponge samples, looking for dispersant chemicals or traces of oil from the Deepwater Horizon spill. The sponges filter thousands of litres of seawater each. Day. If the oil has gotten this far, our little sponge friends will be the first to know.

Tomorrow we set off to do more diving at sites we’ve mapped out for exploration. While the sun beats down on this green steel ship, the crew is committed to complete the necessary research. Like many, we’re sceptical that the oil could have just ‘disappeared’. Last week scientists reported that up to 80 per cent of the oil was still lurking underneath the surface. The question is, where is it, and what damage is it doing?

The gulf oil spill has been a catalyst in many regards. I feel that we can’t continue on this road of pollution dependence – it’s leading us nowhere. I believe it’s time for change.

A sunburnt, but driven actions co-ordinantor,

Shannon.

When Kevin Rudd won the 2007 election in a landslide, it was heralded as the world’s first climate change election. Three years later, having squandered their mandate, the ALP went to Saturday’s election having tried to bury the issue. With little clear difference between the offerings of the two major parties, and neither pushing their climate change credentials as a strong point of difference, it was little wonder that climate change didn’t feature strongly in the media coverage of the election campaign.

But with the results almost in, it is clear that climate change once again played a major role in the election, but in a very different way than 2007.

In 2007, the Greens got 7.8% of the primary vote, a disappointing increase of only 0.6% from the previous election. Public concern over climate change was channelled into a vote for Labor – which was promising strong action and a clear alternative to Coalition inaction. But in 2010, with both major parties failing on the issue, the Greens were the only party promising strong and credible action on climate and their vote jumped 3.6% to 11.4%. Of the 5.4% swing against Labor, nearly 70% of it went to the Greens.

The result is a hung Parliament for the first time since 1940 and the clear emergence of the Greens as a third political force in Australia.

It shows that climate change is an issue that can’t be ignored. It can’t be dismissed with a talk-fest, a grab bag of half baked ideas, or pork barrels. Concern over global warming has entered the bedrock of the Australian body politic and politicians ignore it at their peril.

The big question is how the ALP will respond to the climate crisis if they manage to form a minority Government (as appears to be the most likely option)? They were punished for backflipping on the issue and the strong Green vote (not to mention opinion poll after opinion poll) indicates that the public want action.

While the role that climate change played in the electoral success of the independents is open to conjecture, it is interesting to note that all but Bob Katter have been strong and vocal advocates for action on climate change. Tony Windsor has been a strident critic of the coal industry and in 2008 sponsored the Climate Protection Bill in the Parliament, calling for 30% cuts by 2020. Rob Oakeshott has made it clear that climate change is a priority issue for him, and Andrew Wilkie ran as a Greens candidate in NSW and is a strong supporter of climate action.

With independents pushing for action, and the shift to a new Senate in July next year, the ALP would do well to move quickly to make the difficult decisions early in the next term of Government.

They will almost certainly need to abandon the citizens assembly after the near total ridicule it received. It was the wrong idea, on the wrong issue at the wrong time and reflected a serious misreading of the public mood.  Maybe the “New” Julia could announce the “New” climate policy, and jettison the hackneyed rubbish that she ran with during the election campaign?

We are, after all, rapidly running out of time to stop runaway global warming that, according to the latest summary by the Australian Academy of Science, has the potential to increase average global temperatures by up to 7 degrees within our children’s lifetime.  Maybe that’s why so many people steadfastly refuse to allow policians to ignore it?

Rarely can Greenpeace win campaigns alone. It’s the power of acting together that creates positive change. Our power often lies in our ability to act as a catalyst in mobilising others. Without the support of thousands of passionate people who share our vision for a greener world, we could not achieve important changes.

We need you to help us!

Join one of our fabulous groups taking action in various ways and help us win our campaigns. These groups carry out specific tactics and offer different levels of involvement to suit you.

Armchair Activists

• Do what? Respond quickly to current issues and shape public debate. They ensure the green voice is heard in the media, in the online world or by key targets.
• How? Send emails to MPs or companies, write letters to media, use Facebook or Twitter or call talkback radio.
• Suitable for? People who have access to a computer at home or work and who want something that’s easy but effective. Suitable for those who live inside and outside capital cities.
• What will you receive? An Armchair Alert in your email inbox every 1 – 3 weeks with a single call to action. It will also contain tips, interesting articles and a space for you to share your story with other Armchair Activists.

Community Activists

• Do what? Get mobile and spread the word in their community.
• How? Help out at information or market stalls, distribute flyers or posters, collect petition signatures, visit MPs or join in rallies.
• Suitable for? People who like talking to community members, have free time on the weekend or after work and enjoy being outdoors.
• What will you receive? An email newsletter once a month with all the latest opportunities to take action. Occasional one-off emails with a specific opportunity that may be relevant to you.

Office Volunteers

• Do what? Help our daily operations at one of the Greenpeace offices in Sydney, Canberra or Suva.
• How? From working on administration tasks to more strategic campaign work.
• Suitable for? People who can commit to volunteering during office hours on a short-term or ongoing basis. All abilities, including students and seniors, are welcome to apply.
• What will you receive? An email newsletter once a month with all the latest opportunities to take action. Occasional one-off emails with a specific opportunity that may be relevant to you.

Event Fundraisers

• Do what? Get creative and organise or participate in events that raise money for Greenpeace.
• How? Get sponsored to join a fun run, walk or swim, or organise a trivia night, garage sale or cake stall.
• Suitable for? People of any age, including children. Those who want to involve their friends and family in the issues they’re passionate about.
• What will you receive? An email newsletter once a month with all the latest opportunities to take action. Occasional one-off emails with a specific opportunity that may be relevant to you.

Each activist group plays an essential role in winning our campaigns. Join a group and meet like-minded people or grab your friends and family and have fun taking action together.

To join one or more of these groups – click here

To read volunteer profiles – click here

The Greens are the only party that have responded directly to us. The Coalition and the ALP have released various relevant policies over the course of the election campaign.

The good news first. This is the short bit.

The ALP has announced the details of legislation to prevent the import of illegal timber. If implemented, the legislation will be world class and will, along with EU and US legislation, provide strong signals to illegal logging industries and countries that their markets are closing down. Greenpeace has been invited to be active participants in the development of the legislation.

The Greens, not surprisingly, continue to provide important environmental policies and leadership. They are supportive of all Greenpeace election asks.

Additionally, the Greens are likely to secure the balance of power. Perhaps they can use that leverage to bring the ALP and Coalition into the 21st century.

The bad news. On climate change there is, as Bernard Keane from Crikey has said “a bipartisan policy of protecting the economic interests of polluters.”

We are faced with two sets of bad climate policies that fail to achieve necessary cuts in emissions, fail to transition away from a pollution-driven economy and fail to show ambition, courage or leadership.

Both parties now promise they can reach a 5% emissions reduction on 2000 levels by 2020. It’s not clear what happened to the 25-40% cuts that the UN has said are necessary in order to avoid runaway climate change. Tony Abbott did mention during the election that he now accepts that we live on one planet. Maybe that’s a step forward. Gillard has announced that she accepts the science. She just prefers to ignore it.

The Coalition is running on a direct action platform. It will be an outrageously expensive taxpayer funded subsidy for the big polluters. They oppose a less expensive market mechanism, because it will be an impost on taxpayers.

On the other hand, the ALP is simply delaying any real action on climate change. They may or may not accept a price on carbon. They may or may not re-introduce an emissions trading scheme.

The ALP has released more detailed climate information during this campaign than the Coalition. They have announced cash for clunkers – high cost abatement with the funds being taken from the solar flagship programme. Their carbon farming initiative will be funded from the renewable energy future fund. They have announced some kind of pollution performance standard for coal fired power plants, but both the timing of the standard and its thresholds are likely to mean that it won’t prevent any of the 12 proposed new coal fired power plants from being constructed.

The ALP has made it clear it will not offend the big polluters by living up to its commitment to eliminate inefficient fossil fuel subsidies. They took a creative approach to avoiding that commitment, announcing that Australia has no inefficient fossil fuel subsidies to eliminate! It is estimated that taxpayers hand over up to nine billion dollars annually in support of fossil fuels in Australia. Support for renewables is dwarfed by that figure.

The Coalition has not made many climate announcements during the campaign and has relied on policy announcements made in February and endless repetition that they are taking action. Their policy relies heavily on providing an income source for farmers but it isn’t clear that it will reduce our emissions. It certainly won’t reduce industrial emissions.

Neither party has a policy on genetically engineered (GE) food, except generally to support continued research, development and facilitation.

Neither party mentions labelling in their policies. The ALP has initiated a labelling review that will report back to Government before the end of the year. Greenpeace has called for full GE labelling and for labelling of fish products so that species, catch method and catch location are all identified on packaging and consumers can make informed choices about what they buy.

The Coalition has taken the spectacular backwards step of opposing further marine reserves in Australia. Incredibly, this bit of nonsense is coming from the recreational fishing industry, which obviously doesn’t believe the mountain of science that says closures increase the number and size of fish.

If 2007 was the climate election, 2010 is the election of denial and delay. It is difficult to overstate how poorly the major parties have performed on environmental issues that will affect the lives and livelihoods of all Australians for generations to come.

Shannon Lo Ricco, a lad from country Victoria, writes from his cabin on the Greenpeace Arctic Sunrise. Shannon is a logistics co-ordinator on board a ship tour in

We dropped anchor early this morning off the Dry Tortugas National Park and I went ashore with the skipper Pete to discuss our plans for research dives with the park rangers.

A team of scientists from a university in Florida has joined Greenpeace on our expedition to investigate sponge and coral samples. They are looking for any traces of oil or oil-dispersant that may have passed through the area. Sponges are great indicators of what’s in the water because they filter vast amounts of water for their food and any foreign material accumulates in their bodies.

This expedition is aiming to find what can’t be seen but can be measured. The phase of seeing harrowing images of oiled pelicans and turtles appears to be over, but just because the oil is “out of sight” doesn’t mean to say it must be “out of our minds”.

My job is to prepare the boats and the dive gear so that the scientists can get on with their research. We’ve had a few issues with the winch they use to tow their instruments behind the ship to do plankton tows and flurometer readings. We have to fix it by Friday when we head out towards the site of the Deepwater Horizon spill, so the engineers and I have been desperately trying to fix it with what we have on board.

I’ve done all I can do today though. Now I’m sunburnt, exhausted and ready to slink into my bunk.

I’ll be sending more updates via the Greenpeace USA site throughout our Gulf expedition and reporting back more to this blog over the coming weeks.

So until next time,

Shannon.

Greenpeace is sending two ships to the frontiers of the world’s oil problem. The mission of the Esperanza is clear: to confront the kind of reckless oil exploration that keeps wrecking our environment. In the Gulf of Mexico the Arctic Sunrise will examine the drastic long-term impacts of what happens when it’s all going wrong.

Accidents like the sinking of the Deepwater Horizon oil rig, which caused the biggest oil spill in US history, are bound to happen again. That is unless we leave dirty fossil fuels behind and instead start using the affordable, efficient and renewable energy technologies that are available today. That’s why the Esperanza is taking the message “go beyond oil” right to the source of the problem.

Oil giant BP might have finally managed to close its leaking well, but the crisis in the Gulf of Mexico is far from over. In fact, many of the spill’s impacts – for endangered wildlife, the region’s ecosystems and its fisheries – will only become clear with time. The Arctic Sunrise will host a team of independent scientists, who will examine everything from the plankton on the surface to the subsurface plumes and the deep-sea corals on the floor of the Gulf.

While we can’t give away the details of exactly where the Esperanza will be going, Aussie activist Shannon Lo Ricco will be sending back eyewitness accounts from on board the Arctic Sunrise in the Gulf. Stay tuned.

The 65th Anniversary of those tragic events will be remembered today in over 4000 cities around the world.

During the Cold War, nuclear-powered states tested their weapons around the world. The US repeatedly exploded devices in the Pacific, where the legacy from those terrible experiments is still felt today.

Greenpeace is remembering Hiroshima Day by revisiting the Marshall Islands where, in 1985, forty years after Hiroshima, the Rainbow Warrior helped move hundreds of Pacific Islanders away from the deadly fallout of US nuclear testing.

Today, by threatening to cut their aid, the US is pressuring Marshall Islanders to return to their still-contaminated homeland. Greenpeace New Zealand chief, Bunny McDiarmid, reports from Rongelap in the Marshall Islands. These are excerpts from her report.

“Twenty-five years ago, just before the Rainbow Warrior was bombed in Auckland’s harbour, the Greenpeace flagship was in the Marshall Islands to help move 350 people from their irradiated home island of Rongelap. Today those same islanders are being pressured to return home, but many believe that despite some “clean up”, Rongelap is still unsafe. I was aboard the Rainbow Warrior when we moved the people in 1985 and have stayed in touch with them over the years. I am now back again in the Marshall Islands to find out how the community is doing and how they will respond to a US deadline to return to the island next year. The legacy from the terrible experiment that started more than 56 years ago with one of the largest nuclear tests in history, continues today.

The senator of Rongelap, Jeton Anjain, took a big risk when he approached Greenpeace to help relocate his people in 1985, but with no support coming from the US, or his own government, he believed they had no choice. After years of enduring health problems, from high rates of miscarriages and strange birth defects to thyroid cancers, they no longer believed the military doctors that their island was safe.

It took us 11 days to move everyone, from 80-year-olds to newborns and their belongings, to the island of Mejato, in the northwest corner of Kwajalien atoll. The relocation had a profound impact on all of us on board the Rainbow Warrior.

In the 1950s, the Marshall Islands was a UN Trust territory under the care of the US. It was also the site of 67 nuclear tests conducted by the US. One of the largest was “Bravo” in 1954. The fallout from the Bravo test was carried downwind and literally rained down on inhabited islands to the southeast. The people, who had received no warning, were exposed to dangerous amounts of radiation. One of those islands was Rongelap, where 82 people lived at the time. Documents released later revealed that the US military deliberately went ahead with the test knowing that the wind would carry the fallout to these inhabited islands.

The US has resisted taking responsibility for what happened to Rongelap and other affected islands every step of the way. It has consistently downplayed the extent and the degree of exposure and has used double standards when determining “safe” levels of radiation for the Marshallese. It has been an ongoing battle for the people to get information and compensation for their damaged health and their contaminated islands.

One year after the 1985 relocation of the 350 inhabitants, the US government, which was under increasing pressure from other affected communities in the Marshalls, came to an agreement with the Marshall Islands government to pay compensation for the effects of its nuclear testing programme.

The US allocated money to support the displaced Rongelap community on Mejato and to establish a Rongelap resettlement fund after an independent study recommended that radiological clean up was necessary before people could return. One informed estimate set this cost at $US95m. The US agreed to pay $US45m which has severely limited what has been done.

The US appears to want closure and is using financial pressure to force some progress on resettlement. After October 2011, financial support will go only to those living on Rongelap not to those who choose to stay in Mejato.

If people return, they will be restricted in where they can gather local food, how much of the local food can be eaten and where they can live. The Rongelap Council is trying to eke out the Resettlement Fund money to establish some houses, a dock, a runway, a school and a reverse osmosis plant for fresh water and to continue the clean up, but it is not enough to clean up the whole atoll and there are valid questions about whether the most irradiated northern islands can be cleaned with this method.

And, what of those who genuinely feel it is unsafe to move back and will never believe US assertions of safety? Will they really be cut off from any financial support?

The leadership of Rongelap is divided about whether to move back or not and the Marshall Islands government is once again taking a backseat on this so as not to upset relations with the US. But, the first step in protecting the rights of the Rongelap community must be a united front among the Marshallese leadership. No ultimatums given by the US should take away its responsibility to see through a thorough clean up of the land it contaminated or its support for the generations of Marshallese whose health has been compromised. The cost will be minimal compared to the billions that have gone into and continue to go into nuclear weapons development.”

Hiroshima Day will be remembered at candlelight rallies around Australia:
Sydney – Belmore Park (near Central Railway) – 6pm Fri 6 Aug
Brisbane – Brisbane Square, George Street – 1pm Sat 7 Aug
Perth – Cnr of Hay and William Streets (outside Wesley Church) – 12pm Fri 6 Aug
Melbourne – St Paul’s Cathedral (corner of Swanston and Flinders Streets) – 7am Fri 6 Aug
Hobart – Parliament House lawns – 10am Sat 7 Aug

It contains some disturbing information.

We know that whales face many threats beyond  whaling including ship strikes, entanglement in fishing nets and the impacts of climate change.

But the program contains  evidence that the greatest threat to whales could be overfishing – it claims that we are starving our whales by pillaging the seas.

And our exploitation of fish stocks has moved from larger species such as tuna down the food chain to animals like krill -  a key stable for many great whale species.

The Japanese Government undertakes a fraudulent “scientific” whaling hunt each year in the Southern Ocean that kills anywhere between 500 and 1000 whales.

But how many whales does our insatiable appetite for seafood leave hungry?

You can view the program here:

http://www.3news.co.nz/Deep-Trouble-/tabid/209/articleID/169002/Default.aspx

In fact, not only are they not likely to come ‘clean’, but we have just released fresh evidence that Sinar Mas’ notorious forest destroying practices continue unabated and in direct violation of the company’s own environmental commitments on protecting forests and peatlands.

Sinar Mas is Indonesia’s largest palm oil, and pulp and paper group. The recent KitKat campaign saw hundreds of thousands of you ask Nestlé to stop buying palm oil and pulp and paper products from Sinar Mas because of their involvement in rainforest and peatland destruction in Indonesia.

New photographic evidence shows Sinar Mas clearing rainforest in peatland areas on the island of Borneo(seen below). Further photographic evidence shows Sinar Mas has cleared rainforest that has been identified as orang-utan habitat by a United Nations Environment Program study.

Lat week, Sinar Mas was meant to publish an audit it had commissioned into its own activities on only a small number of palm oil concessions – not on all of its operations. The release of this audit has now been postponed by Sinar Mas and its public relations company, Bell Pottinger, to August 10th.

While Sinar Mas makes public promises to protect Indonesian forests and peatlands – it does just the opposite. In addition to these broken promises the company plans to expand its empire of destruction ever further. Last week the head of Sinar Mas’s palm oil division confirmed intentions to expand into an additional 1 million hectares, including the untouched forests of Papua.

Indonesia’s rainforests and peatlands cannot afford to continue to be the victim of Sinar Mas’s ever expanding ambitions – after all, this is a country with one of the highest rates of deforestation in the world.

Recently we’ve seen positive steps – multinational companies like Unilever, Kraft and Nestlé have responded to evidence of Sinar Mas’s destructive practices by dropping contracts. Until this company is no longer involved in destroying rainforest and peatland , other companies who still purchase from them – like palm oil supplier Cargill – should know that they are purchasing environmental destruction. Other companies have already learned that this is not good for business.

And if you think it all sounds very far away, think again. Sinar Mas’ affiliate, Asia Pulp and Paper (APP) has recently announced they will open a $20 million plant in Sydney’s west. Other APP products sold in Australia through the PaperlinX group include Spicers Paper, Dalton Paper and Southern Cross Converting. Any of us could be unknowingly using paper products like toilet roll or office paper directly linked to Sinar Mas’ rampant and unregulated destruction of forests and habitats.

Greenpeace activist, Zhong Yu, gives an eyewitness account from the oil spill site:

I arrived here at the site of the oil spill last week to discover fishermen neck-deep in the oil trying to clean it up. I was completely shocked.

There was a strong smell of acid and oil in the air, and untrained people were in the sea using their bare hands to clean up the oil. They don’t even have facemasks, the most basic and necessary of precautions, so we had to give them to them.  They don’t even know that they need to protect their skin from crude oil.

Greenpeace activist Zhong-Yu at the site of the oil spill in Dalian, China

We’re doing our best to help, but there’s only so much we can do. The Chinese Government desperately needs to send professional clean-up staff with safety equipment to work on the oil spill.

The worst thing is, pollution from the oil spill cannot be completely cleaned up. Health hazards from the oil spill will be here for generations to come.

I’ll be working with Greenpeace over the next few months closely monitoring the development of the spill and the clean-up efforts.

Greenpeace is campaigning for an Energy Revolution, replacing polluting fuels like oil with safe and clean renewable energy like wind and solar.

While you could think a law established in the EU is a very distant thing for us in Australia and the Pacific, Greenpeace Australia Pacific and our supporters actually played a very important role in this outcome.

Greenpeace has been campaigning to prevent the trade in illegal timber for a decade, and has done some amazing actions and public work around the problem. Greenpeace was central to elevating the issue of illegal logging as a global environmental issue, and concerning all our forest areas including the Amazon, Africa, Papua New Guinea (PNG),  southeast Asia, Russia and Finland.

How we contributed to the outcome

Greenpeace Australia Pacific (and our forests team) has contributed mightily to this effort.

Our work in PNG has been an important strand of the campaign and was used by Greenpeace offices in Europe to chip away at their governments and the EU Parliament.

Our offices here in Australia and the Pacific supported the investigations that exposed scandals of illegal logging in many remote places in PNG, particularly in the Western and Gulf Provinces. We have written reports, exposed scandals, undertaken peaceful direct action, and spread the word through the media and various political fora.

Several of our PNG colleagues visited Europe in this time, notably Annie Kajir, the Goldman Prize winner, lawyer and activist. And, of course, our own team, including Dorothy Tekwie and Sam Moko. Our work has been used by ABC’s Four Corners, SBS’s Insight and BBC’s Newsnight.

Of coursed, we’ve achieved many other things as well. A really key part of our work is in the timber industry itself – highlighting illegal timber in the marketplace, as well as driving change by targeting furniture, book, timber and paper traders. We started to turn the market in China by telling the PNG story in 2005-06, and obtained major concessions from multinational DIY supply centres like B&Q as a result.

In many ways the corporate road has been quicker. But, the legislative side of the campaign is important to bring home because it solidifies otherwise precarious corporate promises.

Still more work to do

There is still a huge amount to do. We still have to reach the endgame in Australia on illegal timber, but this may not be too far off. The forests in PNG continue to be trashed – there’s been an additional 2.5 million hectares of concessions allocated in the last couple of years.

The PNG Government wants to use the REDD framework to continue to log and to include plantations and agribusinesses as ‘carbon offsets’, and this fight is far from over.

All in all, it’s worth taking a moment to acknowledge that Greenpeace Australia Pacific and our supporters has yet again contributed to a win on something of great significance through global campaigning.

Congratulations everyone!

 
Stephen Campbell is Head of Campaigns at Greenpeace Australia Pacific.

You’ve come all the way from Fiji for this international meeting on tuna. What’s the meeting about and why is it so important?

Kobe II is the only time that all the tuna commissions from around the world come together to discuss overfishing issues. These organisations are responsible for managing our tuna sustainably, and in many cases they’ve failed.

Tuna is overfished in many parts of the world. For example, Bluefin tuna is critically endangered in the Mediterranean Sea and the Southern Ocean. In the Pacific, Bigeye and Yellowfin are overfished.

Most of the world’s tuna comes from your home in the Pacific. How is the tuna industry affecting Pacific Islanders?

In the Pacific, we fish on a daily basis to feed our families, the same way we did many centuries ago. But things have drastically changed.

Ask any Pacific Islander about the fish in their waters and the story is the same wherever you go – there are fewer fish in the waters and fishermen have to travel further away to catch enough to feed their families. Friends and relatives of mine that work as semi-commercial fishermen are all complaining of the declining number of fish in the seas and the lower income they receive.

We have a lot to lose if fishing continues on its current unsustainable path. Even though the Pacific is the most productive tuna fishery in the world, just one in 20 fishing boats there are from the Pacific Islands. Most tuna is fished, or even stolen, by foreign fleets from countries like Japan, Korea and Taiwan.

Fishing needs to be sustainable and equitable, so that Pacific Islanders have a greater share and responsibility in protecting tuna.

What solution is Greenpeace proposing?

Greenpeace wants leaders at this meeting to declare a ban on destructive fishing practices such as FADs (or Fish Aggregation Devices). FAD fishing is responsible for the sharp decline in tuna and the wasteful catch of turtles and sharks. Greenpeace is urging Pacific Island countries to become leaders in the governance of oceans by declaring a ban on FADs.

Can you explain what a FAD is and how it works? Why are they so bad?

A FAD is an artificial reef designed to attract tuna and other marine animals. FADs alone are not the problem. When FADs are used together with purse seine nets, they become part of a deadly combination. A purse seine vessel lays a single net capable of encircling multiple city blocks around the FAD, taking everything including turtles, sharks and small tuna that haven’t had a chance to breed. This is highly destructive and needs to stop.

Here’s a video explaining how FADs work and contribute to marine destruction.

How can we all help stop overfishing?

As consumers, we have a major role to play in helping to stop overfishing. We can start by choosing sustainably caught tuna at the supermarket.

» See how Australian canned tuna brands rate on sustainability

Regardless of what Tony Abbott may hope, climate change isn’t going away as a public issue. It will continue to gnaw away at the body politic as surely as waves on the shore. The need to transform Australia from one of the dirtiest, most fossil fuel dependent economies in the world, into a modern, clean energy economy of the 21st century is the defining challenge of our generation.

Julia Gillard’s first speech as Prime Minister had to address the issue that was widely credited as the catalyst for Rudd’s political demise. But her first words on climate change didn’t give much away. “I believe in climate change” was followed by a statement of belief that humans are contributing to the problem, and that she would seek consensus towards a price on carbon – as global economic conditions improve.

If she is serious about climate change, the first thing she would do when she attends the G20 meeting this week would be to commit to shift subsidies from the fossil fuel sector to the renewable energy sector. She would go to the election with a proposal for the immediate introduction of a carbon levy as advocated by Professor Garnaut, and she would immediately set a limit on the amount of carbon pollution allowed from new power stations to make sure we stop building new coal plants.

It is far too early to predict if she will be able to break the pattern of past leaders and stand up for the kind of strong climate action that the Australian public wants. We wish her well in meeting the challenges of leadership of the Australian Government and meeting her responsibilities, not just to the current generation of Australians who elected the ALP to govern, but to future generations who will live with the decisions that she makes.

New South Wales allocated around $21Million to leverage private sector investment for 6 new large scale renewable projects – but it hardly makes up for the lack of a coherent policy to promote renewable energy. There was also a good chunk of cash that just got flushed down the toilet, with another $25Million allocated to “clean coal” in 2010/11.

Interestingly in NSW, they didn’t mention anything about funding their “Climate Change Action Plan” which was supposed to be developed to replace the 2005 State Greenhouse Plan. The climate policy vacuum looks set to continue in NSW for some time – but, to be fair, it isn’t the only policy vacuum in the state.

Queensland is in a similar position with a small cash splash for solar energy which is substantially more than NSW but still lacks any mechanism that would actually drive the growth of large scale renewables.

One of the interesting things that stood out in the transport section of the QLD budget was $864.2 million for coal network track works and new and upgraded locomotives and wagons to support coal haulage across Queensland. There is also $40.2 million to continue capacity improvements and upgrades at the RG Tanna coal terminal at the Port of Gladstone, at a total estimated cost of $95.3 million.

Hmmm…why are taxpayers paying for coal trains? Isn’t that something that coal companies should be paying for? We don’t buy trucks for woolworths to transport veges, so why on earth are coal companies getting special handouts?

When you look for the figures on coal royalties, it shows that in 2009/10 QLD earned a bit over $1.6 billion – over half of which will be spent this year on direct subsidies to the industry. Royalties are set to increase dramatically in 2011 due to booming sales to China, but how much will subsidies have to increase next year to further upgrade coal trains and infrastructure?

Seems like corporate welfare to me. I can’t think of an industry less deserving, given the vast uncounted costs of greenhouse emissions and destruction of water resources by coal mining around the country.

Find out all about the issue by downloading the story and listen to it on the way into work or school. Or listen on the website now.

Check it out here: http://www.abc.net.au/rn/backgroundbriefing/stories/2010/2908767.htm

Don’t forget that if you’re thinking about buying a product made from timber or want to know more about timber species and products check out our Good Wood Guide: www.goodwoodguide.org.au

Whole logs exported from Indonesia.

Check it out on the ABC Unleashed site here: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2911068.htm

Professor Dirk Voorhoof recently provided testimony  in the case again the Tokyo Two, our activists who risked jail time for exposing the fraud that is Japanese “scientific” whaling. He explained that it is the role of activists and NGOs to sometimes break the law in order to expose a far more sinister crime.

In the case of the Tokyo Two, they are alleged to have trespassed and stolen whale meat. But after intercepting the meat they handed it over immediately to police as evidence of corruption in the whaling industry.

What do you think about breaking the law for something you really believe in?

Would you spend time in jail to help end whaling?

Watch the short video on what the Tokyo Two did here:

The Tokyo Two face up to 10 years in jail for fighting the whaling industry in Japan

Greenpeace is calling for an end to oil exploration and an end to deep-water oil drilling, so that the industry is sent a clear message: that the age of oil is over and we are moving into an age of clean, renewable energy.

In the video below, Paul talks about some of the impacts he’s seeing on the Delta shoreline.

Our Canadian colleagues are thrilled about a new, far-reaching agreement between campaign groups and logging companies that should see vast areas of the country’s boreal forest protected.

After 7 years of campaigning to save the boreal forest, Greenpeace was pretty thrilled to announce a win.

The biggest, most ambitious forest conservation deal ever was announced: the Canadian Boreal Forest Agreement. After more than seven years of hard-fought campaigning to end the ongoing destruction of Canada’s boreal forest, Greenpeace and eight other non-government organisations have agreed to a truce with the logging industry: we will suspend the battle for the boreal.

In return, 21 of the biggest logging industry players from the Forest Products Association of Canada (FPAC) have agreed to an immediate moratorium on logging in nearly 29 million hectares of forest that covers virtually all the critical habitat for the threatened woodland caribou.

The long-term agreement includes a commitment from the parties to work over the next three years to undertake conservation planning for the entire area covered by the agreement. This unusual alliance of logging companies and environmental groups will work together to ensure long-term protection within 72 million hectares of forest – an area twice the size of Germany – that stretches right across Canada.

Back home in our own region, the forests still need our help.

The Asia–Pacific region is said to have the highest annual deforestation rate in the world. Two of our closest neighbours, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, are suffering rampant and illegal logging for palm oil, paper and timber products that Australians buy every day.

Australia currently imports approximately $840 million worth of illegal timber from these forests and there are currently no restrictions on the importation of illegal or suspect timber.

You can take action by emailing the Rudd Government and asking them to stick to their election promise to ban illegal timber imports.

Here are some photos of Canada’s great boreal forests.