In this Q&A, Catherine Fox discusses her new book, Breaking the Boss Bias, with BroadAgenda editor, Ginger Gorman. Fox highlights the urgent need for gender equity in leadership. She addresses the stagnation of women in power roles and the systemic barriers they face, while emphasising the importance of diverse leadership styles. She offers hope and insight into how we can work together to create a more equitable future.
Why did you see the need to write your book “Breaking the Boss Bias”? What was the urgency, in your view?
I was alarmed to see the fragile progress made towards better gender equity actually plateauing or going backwards particularly in critical decision making roles. There is still only a handful of women running governments worldwide, in powerful CEO jobs, and they are lucky to make up 30% of senior ranks.
Even though there are more women in Australia’s federal parliament and in cabinet, men are over-represented in many influential roles across party lines and in the bureaucracy. The Global Economic Forum tracks leadership progress which has increased about 1% a year until last year when it went backwards. Yet instead of taking this seriously many signs suggest organisations are taking their eye off the ball or lapsing into complacency.
Let’s address the basics first. Why does it matter how many women are in charge? Some might argue it doesn’t actually help women at the other end of the scale – those in low-paid jobs like childcare or cleaning roles. How would you respond to that?
It does matter. Aside from being fundamentally unfair to marginalise half the population of a well-educated country from power jobs, the evidence shows it makes a difference to outcomes for all women.
When women run governments there’s usually more chance of gender legislation getting passed (I interviewed UTS law academic Ramona Vijeyarasa about this which was the focus of her book, (The Woman President: Leadership, Law and Legacy for Women’), the gender pay gap narrows and more women progress.
Not to mention that when there are more women on decision making bodies (not just one but two or more) the nature and scope of the discussion changes and so do the priorities. It’s not because women wave a magic wand or are ‘better’ than men. But they bring different experience and focus to the table, they are role models and their presence encourages more efforts to close the gap. Many also realise they have a vested interest in seeing things change.
Join Catherine in conversation with Professor Michelle Ryan about her new book ‘Breaking the Boss Bias’ at the ANU in Canberra. Tue 27 Aug 2024, 6:30 pm-7:30 pm. Register for the event here.
You argue there’s a lot of talk about female leadership, but the numbers of women in those roles remains stubbornly low. Arguably the data you set out actually points to a decline. Why is this?
Power systems are very good at recycling themselves and so the cohort in charge has minimised the problem, or pointed to examples of women in top jobs as proof there is plenty of momentum underway. This is often accompanied by gender washing – painting a much rosier picture than the reality particularly with tokenism like celebrations of International Women’s Day.
This over-optimistic and compliance driven messaging has been disturbingly successful – not just in organisations but across society (nearly 60% of Australians think we are near or already have gender equity according to 2023 Gender Compass research). It’s supported by claiming workplaces are meritocracies, pointing to limited examples of change, misleading statistics (‘half our employees are women’) and corporate value statements as credentials.
But this is becoming increasingly risky. Some of Australia’s largest employers had significant gender pay gaps which were published for the first time earlier this year. The data showed that despite the rhetoric, men dominated higher paid senior jobs from banks to retailers and supermarkets. Far from solving the problem, there’s been lots of convenient denial and very little effective action.
Why are women generally given “glass cliff” leadership positions where the likelihood of them succeeding is extremely low?
There’s a lot of glass cliffs about – I think Qantas may be an example with constant pressure on Vanessa Hudson to turn around the damage done to the brand in very difficult circumstances. QU academic Alex Haslam, who was one of the original glass cliff researchers (with Michelle Ryan, now the head of the Global Institute for Women’s Leadership at ANU) described the dynamic as a line of potential male candidates looking at the mess they would be inheriting and all taking a step back leaving the only woman contender in the hot seat – a last resort choice.
Happens in politics often – former PMs Julia Gillard and Theresa May are examples. Stereotypes about women being good at tidying up a mess and settling things down also tend to play into this dynamic. When women then struggle in these tricky situations they also get less time to prove themselves – women CEOs have a much shorter tenure on average than men.
Author Catherine Fox says she “…was alarmed to see the fragile progress made towards better gender equity actually plateauing or going backwards.” Picture: Shurtterstock
What structural issues still prevent or act as barriers for women aspiring to leadership?
Many workplaces reward employees who can work set hours over continuous years without breaks and accrue experience to then progress. This clearly penalises care givers who are mostly women and this burden hasn’t shifted much, while caring carries a stigma too. Men who take parenting leave are also now finding they are judged as less serious workers and less likely to progress.
Most of the accepted leadership models have a masculine skills held up as models are overtly masculine, inaccessible and expensive childcare is a massive deterrent to women’s workforce participation and hours, while superannuation is still structured around a primary earner with unbroken tenure.
On top of this set of issues, women from further marginalised groups – racially diverse, LGBTQ+, disabled – are facing a double whammy and are far less likely to get the same opportunities as other women or men. We don’t have
Increasingly around the world we’re’ seeing a backlash against gender equity. How does that play into the situation with female bosses? How do we tackle this?
Backlash about the ‘unfairness’ of programs supporting women means there’s more reliance on stereotypes and workplace myths about meritocracies so women are even less likely to get the opportunity to succeed. The small number of women leaders stand out and are over-scrutinised, with their failings often attributed to their gender. The bar is set much higher for women – US research looking at women leaders in four female-dominated sectors which I quoted found that women are seen as ‘never quite right’ for leadership.
The reasons include age, race, parental status and attractiveness – many of which are usually not applied to men. The excuses are used as a red herring to avoid confronting inherent gender bias and the researchers dubbed it ‘we want what you aren’t’ discrimination. Progression assessment and promotion decisions need to be carefully vetted to avoid these traps and ensure decision making is not biased consciously or unconsciously.
Cover image: Breaking the Boss Bias. Picture: Supplied
Women lead in ways that are proven to be different from men. And also proven to be more collaborative, productive and effective. How do we make way for these leadership styles to be accepted in businesses and organisations (and celebrated)?
As a management writer and journalist I saw much lip service paid to a more collaborative style of leadership (which is also peddled by many management consultants). But the reality is a heroic, masculine, command and control style is still common in many workplaces, and reflected in business media profiles and even in case studies used in business schools where 90% feature male leaders (as I examined in the book).
I don’t think women are naturally more and men less collaborative but women are encouraged to be collegiate and likeable and penalised if they are not. I think the only way to broaden the idea of successful leading has to be intentionally elevating evidence showing different leadership examples. For years I heard that a new generation of younger leaders would change the dynamics of what leadership looks like, particularly in sectors such as IT, but in fact it has barely shifted.
That’s why we need more women in decision making to show a different approach and keep up pressure to shift the parameters – such as former NZ Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern who spoke about kindness as a strength.
Is there anything else you want to say?
So much. But there’s plenty more in the book about what we can all do to break the bias and see fairer outcomes right now.
The companies and individuals linked to the owners of now-defunct Bonza Airlines are part of a complex global web used to whitewash billions of dollars. Matt Prescott with the investigation.
Bonza Aviation is in administration after its owner 777 Partners, a Miami-based private equity company that owns a curious mix of airlines and leasing companies, as well as stakes in several football clubs in Europe, South America and Australia.
MWM understands that 777 Partners’ inability to continue supporting Bonza’s floundering cash flow was partly due to a failed bid for English Premier League (EPL) team Everton FC.
The failed bid for Everton FC means it’s still owned by British-Iranian businessman Farhad Moshiri (no relation to the recently deceased Iranian artist with the same name). Moshiri was previously the chairman of USM Holdings, a Russian company with significant interests in the metals and mining, telecoms, technology, and internet sectors.
Alisher Usmanov
USM Holdings is 49% owned by an Uzbek-Russian billionaire, Alisher Usmanov, who is reportedly one of the 100 wealthiest people in the world due to his publishing house Kommersant, mobile phone carrier (Megafon), tech company (Digital Sky Technologies (DST), later renamed Mail.ru Group, and metal interests (Udokan; copper).
(Kommersant was formerly owned by Russian oligarch Boris Berezovsky. Originally close to Vladimir Putin, they fell out, and Berezovsky lost most of his assets, was exiled to London, and was found dead in his home in 2013 “with a ligature around his neck.”)
On 28 February 2022, the European Union (EU) blacklisted Usmanov in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Resulting in an EU-wide travel ban for him and the freezing of all his assets. On 3 March 2022, the United States imposed similar sanctions on him, with exemptions being given to some of his businesses, which authorities worried might otherwise disrupt the global economy and supply chain.
The Official Journal of the European Union described Usmanov as a “pro-Kremlin oligarch with particularly close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin [who is] one of Vladimir Putin’s favourite oligarchs.” Usmanov lodged an appeal in the European Court of Justice (ECJ) attempting to lift the sanctions, but the appeal was dismissed on 7 February 2024.
In 1992, Usmanov married Uzbek-born Russian rhythmic gymnastics coach Irina Alexandrovna Viner, head of the Russian national gymnastics team and President of the Russian Rhythmic Gymnastics Federation. Viner is considered to be close to Vladimir Putin, having introduced him to former rhythmic gymnast Alina Kabaeva, who is reportedly Putin’s long-time romantic partner. On 4 May 2022, Usmanov filed for divorce from Viner.
Usamov’s holding of 49% of Russia’s second-largest mobile telephone operator, MegaFon, gives him significant influence in Putin’s Russia.
Mail.Ru Group (now VKontakte)
In 2007, VKontakte – a social media company – or VK as it is commonly known, was founded by Pavel Durov (20% shareholder) and a trio of Russian-Israeli investors, Yitzchak Mirilashvili (60%), Mikhael Mirilashvili (father of Yitzchak, 10%) and Lev Leviev (10%).26 VK is the Russian equivalent of Facebook.
Later the same year, Digital Sky Technologies (DST), an investment company run by Yuri Milner (a co-founder of the Breakthrough Prizes in the US with Facebook’s / Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg), acquired 24.99% of VK shares from the initial shareholders for $US16.3m. In 2010, ahead of the Initial Public Offering (IPO), the international and Russian assets of DST were separated, and the international assets became part of the DST Global fund, while the Russian assets were merged into the Mail.ru Group. By mid-2011, Mail.ru had acquired a 39.99% stake in VK, with aspirations of acquiring 100%.
Web of money and influence. (C) Matt Prescott. CLICK TO ENLARGE
In March 2012, Durov heard about negotiations involving Yitzchak Mirilashvili and Lev Leviev selling their shares in VK to Mail.ru Group’s main investor, Alisher Usmanov. At this point, Durov deleted webpages referring to the initial investors in VK and shortly afterwards postponed its IPO.
At the end of May 2012, Milner and Usmanov’s Mail.ru yielded control of VK by offering Durov the voting rights to their shares. Combined with Durov’s 12% personal stake, this gave Durov 52% of the voting rights.
Subsequently, in April 2013, the Mirilashvilis sold their 40% stake in VK to United Capital Partners (UCP), and Lev Leviev simultaneously sold his 8% to UCP, giving UCP 48% ownership of VK.
Pavel Durov then sold his 12% personal stake in VK in January 2014 to Ivan Tavrin, the CEO of Megafon, a company owned by Alisher Usmanov (see above).
The end result of these complex financial dealings was that Usmanov and his allies now controlled 52% of the company. The CEO of Megafon then sold his 12% personal stake to Mail.ru, enabling Mail.ru to take operational control of VK.
April Fools Day
On April Fool’s Day, 1 April 2014, Durov submitted his resignation from the board of VK. Later, claiming this was an April Fool’s joke, he was dismissed as CEO on 21 April, claiming that VK had been taken over by Vladimir Putin’s political faction. He then fled the country and focused his efforts on the encrypted messaging service Telegram.
Additionally, it is worth mentioning that before all of the above shuffling of VK shares and voting rights, Usmanov became associated with Yuri Milner in 2008 and soon became a shareholder of DST and VK (Mail.ru Group).
Usmanov had 25.3% of the shares in VK but 60.6% of voting rights until he sold a $US530m stake in 2013, reducing his shares and voting rights to 17.9% and 58.1%, respectively. The plot thickened when, in 2013, Usmanov acquired Pavel Durov’s shares in VK.ru, to help Durov retain control of the Telegram app when UCP claimed that Telegram belonged to VK.
On September 16, 2014, the Mail.ru group bought the remaining 48% of VK from the UCP for $US1.5B, thus becoming the sole proprietor of the social network.
In December 2021, Usmanov’s USM Holding shares were sold to the Russian insurance company Sogaz and combined with a stake held by Russian state-owned Gazprombank to give a controlling interest in the company.26 Usmanov said that VK involvement has largely determined the development of USM.5
We don’t know everything that went on during the complex takeover of VK, but it is worth noting that during this period, Alisher Usmanov was involved in the takeover of VK with Kremlin loyalists via both Megafon and Mail.ru.
VKontakte has since been accused of becoming a tool for repressing opposition activists.
Social media investments
Alisher Usmanov’s importance in the world of social media, Silicon Valley, and the Big Tech industry does not end there.
In 2009, Mark Zuckerberg, the founder and CEO of Facebook / Meta, turned to Russian investors at a meeting brokered by Goldman Sachs. Usmanov invested in Facebook in 2009 via Mail.ru, investing $US200m for a 1.96% stake, valuing Facebook at $US10B. One of Mark Zuckerberg’s conditions was that Usmanov give Zuckerberg his voting rights on these shares.
By the time of Facebook’s IPO, in 2012, Usmanov’s stake in Facebook was worth at least $US1.4B, a three-year return of 600%.
Digital Sky Technology (DST), which Usmanov was involved with via Yuri Milner, made an $US800m investment in Twitter in 2011.
Through Yuri Milner’s Mail.Ru Group, formerly Digital Sky Technology (DST), Usmanov also made sizeable investments in Groupon, Zynga, Airbnb, ZocDoc, Alibaba and 360buy.5,31
Usmanov also invested $US100m in Apple in 2013 before selling an unknown number of his shares in early 2014. His investment in China’s Alibaba marketplace was thought to have gone up in value by 500% by late 2014.
In September 2018, a $US2B joint venture was reportedly agreed between Mail.ru and Alibaba Group Holding Ltd, which would merge the online marketplaces of Mail.ru and Alibaba in the Russian market. This deal was backed by the Kremlin via the Russian Direct Investment Fund (RDIF), Russia’s sovereign wealth fund.
Arsenal Football Club
Between 2007 and 2018, Alisher Usmanov was a major shareholder of the English football team Arsenal, having acquired a 14.58% stake. Usmanov and his business partner Farhad Moshiri (remember him?) bought their £75m stake from the club’s former vice-chairman David Dein. Dein was later appointed head of their investment vehicle, Red and White Holdings, which became the largest shareholder in the club outside of members of the board of directors.
Red and White Holdings increased its shareholding to 23% in September 2007. This made Red and White Holdings the second-largest shareholder in the club behind a non-executive director at Arsenal, Danny Fiszman. In February 2008, this stake was increased to over 24%, just short of Fiszman’s 24.11%, and to 25% a year later.
At this stage, Red and White Holdings confirmed that it was the club’s largest shareholder, with the company saying it “has the necessary funding to increase its stake further (but) it has no current intention to make a full takeover bid for Arsenal for six months.” This was significant because once a stake reached 30%, an investor such as Red and White Holdings would have to launch a formal takeover.
As a result of Usmanov’s interest in Arsenal, a “lock-down” agreement was initiated by the Arsenal board, with the chairman, Peter Hill-Wood, announcing directors at the club could only sell their stakes to “permitted persons” prior to April 2009, and should give other board members the “first option” to buy shares until October 2012. Arsenal’s managing director, Keith Edelman, said that “The lockdown … makes us bullet-proof” (from a hostile takeover).
In April 2011, American billionaire businessman Stan Kroenke (husband of Ann Walton, a Walmart heiress), who was already a significant Arsenal shareholder, increased his stake in Arsenal to just over 62% after buying out the stakes owned by Danny Fiszman and Lady Bracewell-Smith. whose family had held Arsenal shares for several generations. This made Kroenke the majority shareholder. As a result of Kroenke’s crossing the 30% stake threshold, he was now obliged to offer to buy out the remainder of Arsenal shares. Usmanov refused to sell to Kroenke and instead held on to his stake.
Usmanov increased his Arsenal shares beyond 29% in June 2011. He then purchased shares held by the Scottish football club Rangers in February 2012. As of October 2013, he owned over 30% of the club. In August 2018, Usmanov sold his shares to Kroenke for £550m.
Everton FC
Returning to the Everton part of the narrative, in January 2017, Usamanov’s USM Holding signed a five-year deal with Everton FC for more than £15m for the naming rights of Everton’s training ground, Finch Farm.
Usmanov’s accountant and partner in USM Holdings is Farhad Moshiri, the current majority shareholder of Everton FC and former co-owner of Usmanov’s Arsenal shares via Red and White Holdings. Moshiri owns 94% of the club.
In 2019, Megafon, the Russian mobile phone company 49% owned by, became the sleeve sponsor for the men’s training wear of Everton FC and its official matchday presenting partner. They then expanded their commercial agreement with Everton in 2020 to become the main sponsor of the women’s team. Usmanov continued to provide funding for the club despite the fact that he was barred from entering the UK in 2021.
Everton suspended its sponsorship ties with USM and MegaFon in March 2022 following the Russian invasion of Ukraine.
Money laundering risk
So why does any of this matter to anyone in Australia?
The wealth generated by Russia’s immense fossil fuel exports acts as a gigantic slush fund, which then gets diversified and laundered around the world. Anyone who comes into contact, directly or indirectly, with this Russian wealth and the influence it buys is vulnerable to being sucked into a dark and dangerous world of murky deals.
Russian wealth and influence may corrupt popular culture via sport, betting, or politics, shift energy, industrial, climate, tax, and competition policies in other fossil fuel-producing countries, and even influence transport options and economic development in countries like Australia, operating independently, outside the protection of large trade blocs.
We are not suggesting that 777 Partners or Bonza Airlines have been involved in anything illegal, but we question the wisdom of Australian aviation flying so close to Vladimir Putin and his oligarchs.
Aviation and sport are significant drivers of economic development and opportunities and should be viewed as strategic industries. They deserve far more national investment and regulation, as well as insulation from malign interests seeking to shift Western popular culture and politics.
* Spot the oligarch: Top row, from left to right: Fahrad Moshiri, Alisher Usmanov, Pavel Durov and Yuri Milner. Bottom row, from left to right: Boris Berezovsky, Vladimir Putin, Mark Zuckerberg and Stan Kroenke.
In 2018, a company began quietly buying up some $900 million worth of land from farmers in Solano County, California, an area just north of the Bay Area. As the parcel ballooned to more than 60,000 acres, their motivations remained a mystery — stoking unease and speculation. Then, last year, the news broke: The land was to become a brand-new eco-friendly city, backed by a roster of Silicon Valley billionaires, and built from the top-down by a company called California Forever.
The plan was launched by Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader and California Forever’s CEO. He said the project has three main goals: “Help solve the California housing crisis”; create a walkable metropolitan area with a high quality of life and low carbon footprint; and build a new “economic engine” for Solano County. “There’s no playbook here,” Sramek said. “What we are trying to do is really, really different.”
Before California Forever could break ground, their proposal, the East Solano Plan, needed approval from the people who already live in Solano County. Where Sramek envisioned growth, however, others warned of irreversible ecological damage. Despite launching a multimillion-dollar campaign to persuade the public to vote for the proposal in the upcoming November election, concerns continued to grow as elected officials began speaking out in opposition, and a coalition against the project formed. Local mistrust was further deepened by the company’s ongoing lawsuit against landowners who resisted their offers. In April, a poll showed that 70 percent of Solano’s voters would likely reject the measure.
Jan Sramek, founder and CEO for California Forever, talks to reporters after a news conference for the proposed new city in Solano County, in Rio Vista, California in January 2024.
Janie Har / AP Photo
On July 22, the day before the Solano County Board of Supervisors was set to decide whether to put the initiative on the November ballot, Sramek and the board agreed to retract the proposal. According to a joint statement announcing the decision, Sramek said that California Forever will try to get it on the ballot again in two years, after a report assessing the environmental impacts of the project is finished.
Other similarly minded and deep-pocketed projects have been springing up around the world. Masdar, a $20 billion planned zero-carbon city in the United Arab Emirates, has been delayed for decades and scaled back beyond recognition. Neom, the futuristic $500 billion renewable energy dream of Saudi Arabian royals, now anticipates less than a fifth of the 1.5 million residents they originally planned on. Malaysia’s Forest City, which won design awards for sustainability, has been called a ghost town. And the billionaire behind Diapers.com has big plans for Telosa somewhere in the deserts of the American West, a sprawling green energy metropolis.
These projects all seek to fulfill urban dreams of a better, environmentally friendly life by building a city from scratch. But even when the buildings exist, they fail to draw residents and, despite plans that emphasize sustainability, projects struggle to win the support of environmentalists. California Forever hopes to eventually house 400,000 people — goals comparable to those of Masdar or Neom.
“I have not seen one of this size which has been successful so far,” said Alain Bertaud, an urban planning researcher at the Marron Institute, part of New York University. “But that doesn’t mean that they will not be — there are so many in the pipeline now.”
Though Bertaud said he’s normally skeptical of proposals for these new cities, he thought California Forever’s plans looked well designed. One aspect that could help the project find success is its proximity to other Bay Area cities, he said, as the lure of the region’s job market might encourage people to move there.
A parcel of land recently purchased by Flannery Associates as part of plans for “California Forever” is seen near the Sacramento River near Rio Vista, California on September 15, 2023.
Josh Edelson / AFP via Getty Photos
But when it comes to the project’s environmental promises, he’s unconvinced — if only because it’s difficult to measure benchmarks, like carbon emissions, until a project is up and running. “I don’t doubt the dedication of people who are fighting for sustainability,” he said, “but unless you define it in a very clear way, I’m afraid that ‘sustainability’ is a self-satisfying slogan to put on whatever idea you have.”
The question of sustainability is at the heart of California Forever’s ambition and problems alike. Both backers and skeptics want to tackle the area’s housing crisis. Eye-popping rents and home prices far exceed national averages, with single-family homes going for a median price of $1.4 million. It’s one reason why the region has the third-highest homeless population behind New York City and Los Angeles.
Instead of solving these problems with a new city, California Forever’s critics would like to see more housing built in the seven cities that already exist in Solano County. “Building housing in existing communities is one of our best climate solutions, and paving over 17,000 acres of non-irrigated farmland is not,” said Sadie Wilson, director of planning and research at the Greenbelt Alliance. The nonprofit, along with the Center for Biological Diversity and the California Sierra Club, is one of the 16 groups in Solano Together, the coalition that opposes the project.
A person examines a map of the proposed community “California Forever” in Solano County, California during a news conference in Rio Vista, California, on Jan. 17, 2024.
Janie Har / AP Photo
Wilson says that the development threatens both the area’s potential for storing carbon in the soil and local biodiversity, and also risks leading to more pollution from people driving to work in nearby cities. And although California Forever holds water rights that could support the first 40,000 residents, Solano Together says that these don’t accurately reflect water availability. Securing a reliable supply, they argue, would be challenging in a region so prone to drought.
By starting from scratch, however, California Forever says their plans could avoid the baggage of urban problems like car-centric design and gas utilities, making it easier to support dense housing and run on renewable power. “Our plan will be the lowest per capita carbon emissions anywhere on the planet. It’s going to be pretty transformational,” said Bronson Johnson, the company’s head of infrastructure and sustainability, who added that he’s spent years grappling with barriers to retrofit existing cities. “I think when we look at the greater good of this project, that far outweighs local impacts,” Johnson said.
But the voters need convincing. After The New York Times named many of the investors behind the project — including Reid Hoffman, a LinkedIn cofounder, and Michael Moritz, a prominent venture capitalist — in August 2023, California Forever began working to bring residents over to their side in time for the 2024 election. By May, the company had spent some $2 million on its campaign and gathered enough signatures to qualify their initiative for the ballot.
In weeks leading up to the Solano County board meeting in July, an economic report by the business-backed Bay Area Council touted the potential jobs and housing benefits, saying that the county could increase employment in high-earning sectors by 53 percent. Meanwhile, the company proposed putting a lagoon right in the middle of the new town, “open to everyone from Solano County.”
Five days before the meeting, the county released its own assessment that said the initiative lacked details on key issues, such as infrastructure funding, traffic impacts, and water supply. Many of these unknowns would be clarified by an environmental impact report required under California law, which the company had said it planned to conduct after residents voted. According to county officials, it was this omission, and the lack of a binding development agreement, that ultimately tanked the proposal.
“This politicized the entire project, made it difficult for us and our staff to work with them, and forced everyone in our community to take sides,” said Mitch Mashburn, chair of the Solano County Board of Supervisors, in the statement announcing that the plan would be put on hold. According to the statement, Sramek and Mashburn came to the decision together after agreeing that the timing of the proposal had become unrealistic.
“I want to acknowledge that many Solano residents are excited about Mr. Sramek’s optimism about a California that builds again. He is also right that we cannot solve our jobs, housing, and energy challenges if every project takes a decade or more to break ground,” Mashburn said in the statement.
Cattle graze on a hillside with wind farms in the background in rural Solano County, near the proposed development site of California Forever, in August 2023.
Terry Chea / AP Photo
Solano Together heralded the news as a win. Wilson said that even though an environmental impact report would clear up many of the coalition’s questions, especially around water supply, the location of the development still poses what she considers an intractable environmental problem. “It is a vibrant landscape that supports our food systems, our environment, our water systems,” she said.
Sarah Moser, an urban geography researcher at the University of McGill in Montreal, said it makes sense that sparsely populated agricultural lands and deserts are appealing for mega developments like the proposed East Solano Plan because they’ll encounter less opposition. But by building on undeveloped land, “by definition, you’re going to incur a carbon debt that you may never be able to pay off,” she said.
Although Moser thinks it’s logistically possible to build a city from scratch, she says that such projects are increasingly high risk, with unattainable goals. “You can make affordable housing, or you can make money, but you can’t do both,” Moser said, adding that California Forever’s for-profit model fits into a broader pattern of “rich people getting richer” in the urban mega developments she has studied.
And perhaps the most important ingredient necessary to successfully build a new city is the very thing that stands in the way: people.
The promise of a city built on ideals isn’t enough to fill it with people, Bertaud said. There has to be an existing community of people, culture, entertainment, and jobs that draw people there. It’s a chicken-or-egg problem unique to starting from scratch. “Why would you go to a city where there is nobody?” he said.
New Caledonia’s mothballed nickel plant in Koniambo (north of the main island of Grande Terre) has announced it has started mass sackings of some 1200 staff, despite efforts to identify a potential buyer.
Koniambo (KNS-Koniambo Nickel SAS) operations had already been mothballed after the announcement, in February, from its major financier, Anglo-Swiss giant Glencore, that it wanted out.
KNS is jointly owned by Glencore (49 percent) and New Caledonia’s Northern province (51 percent).
While making the announcement, Glencore signalled a 6-month delay in the implementation of its decision, including payment of salaries.
The same timeframe was also supposed to be used to find potential buyers for the shares owned by Glencore.
Glencore said in February that keeping its stake in KNS was no longer sustainable.
It also recalled that the plant, in more than 10 years of existence and operation, had never made a profit.
Staggering debt
Over the past decade, KNS had accumulated a staggering 13.5 billion euros (NZ$25 billion) in debt.
As the August 31 deadline looms at the end of the six-month respite, what had been the symbol of New Caledonia’s Northern province empowerment and wealth “re-balancing” of the French Pacific archipelago’s provinces is now faced with a bleak reality.
Koniambo’s wealth relies on the Tiébaghi nickel massif, believed to hold about one quarter of New Caledonia’s nickel reserves.
The Koniambo nickel operation . . . a symbol of New Caledonia’s Northern province empowerment and wealth “re-balancing” programme. Image: Glencore
Koniambo: a highly political symbol KNS was born from a political and financial deal, including France — the “Bercy Accord” signed in December 1997, just months before the political Nouméa autonomy Accord was signed in 1998.
The deal was de facto enacting the transfer of the Tiébaghi massif to New Caledonia’s Northern province and its financial arm, the Société Minière du Sud Pacifique (SMSP).
It was the financial translation of the will to restore some balance between the affluent Southern Province and the less favoured Northern Province of New Caledonia, mostly populated by the indigenous Kanak community.
Since the Koniambo project and its construction started, the new activity has had a stimulating effect on the whole region, especially in the small towns of Voh, Koné and Pouembout.
The number of local companies increased, as well as the population.
In announcing the official lay-offs on Friday, KNS still wanted to appear optimistic: “Even though we are pursuing the search process for a potential buyer, and that three groups continue to display an interest for our company, we do not have at this stage a finalised offer”, the company admitted.
“We are therefore compelled to go ahead with the collective lay-off process on economic grounds”.
‘Cold’ sleep process
Beyond August 31, only a group of about 50 workers will remain employed in maintenance work on what will then be described as “cold” sleep process.
“But the fact that three world-class groups are still in discussions show that Koniambo Nickel still represents a strong interest for potential takeovers”, an optimistic KNS vice-president Alexandre Rousseau, told public broadcaster NC la 1ère on Saturday.
On top of the wave of sackings announced by KNS, some 600 contractors relying on the plant’s activities have also lost their jobs since February.
Idle nickel transport trucks lined up on Koniambo mining site in New Caledonia. Image: RRB
Local unrest – world nickel crisis The announcement comes as New Caledonia’s economy is in a critical situation.
It has suffered a major blow, on top of an already grave financial situation.
Since May 13, violent unrest has been ongoing in New Caledonia, with a backdrop of protests against French-proposed modifications of voters’ eligibility for provincial elections, regarded by pro-independence movements as a bid to reduce the political voice of the indigenous Kanak community.
Since the riots, destruction, looting and arson began, more than 700 businesses have been destroyed, 10 people killed (eight civilians and two French gendarmes), and the overall cost of the unrest has topped 2.2 billion euros (NZ$4 billion).
During the riots and unrest, nickel mining sites have been specifically targeted several times.
Entire nickel sector in crisis New Caledonia’s nickel industry has also been in profound turmoil over past years.
Its other two plants — in the Southern province (Prony Resources) and historic operator Société le Nickel (SLN) in Doniambo near Nouméa — owned by French mining giant Eramet — are also on the verge of collapse.
The situation comes from a world nickel market now dominated by Indonesian units, which have started to produce nickel in mass quantities and at a much lower price.
The result was a collapse of the world nickel price — it slumped by 48 per cent in 2023.
New Caledonia’s production, in this context, was also regarded as too expensive, prompting efforts for a deep reform, especially on the cost structure such as electricity.
A French assistance plan proposed in 2023 by French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire, including a 200 million euro (NZ$367 million) package, was declined by local authorities, who said too much was being asked by France in terms of strings attached to the massive funding loan.
The French-proposed reform also intended to diversify New Caledonia’s nickel buyers from an almost-entire reliance on Asian clients and instead turn to more European buyers, mostly car manufacturers for the purposes of production of batteries for electric cars.
Other plants on the verge of collapse As a result of the combined effects of the current situation (the ongoing riots and the pre-existing nickel crisis), Prony Resources’ operations are at a standstill.
Eramet, which in recent months had made no secret of its desire to disengage from SLN, earlier reported a net loss of some 72 million euros (NZ$133 million) for the first half of the financial year.
New Caledonia’s nickel industry is believed to employ about 25 percent of the French Pacific archipelago’s workforce.
This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Billions of dollars in public money are beginning to flow to seven “hydrogen hubs” around the country — regional nerve centers for a potentially clean fuel that could someday rival solar and wind and cut carbon from the atmosphere. Last week, California’s hub, a public-private partnership called ARCHES, became the first to negotiate an agreement with the Department of Energy to build out hydrogen power plants, pipelines, and other projects.
But researchers and community advocates warn that unless the federal government’s so-called hydrogen earthshot has adequate safeguards, it could worsen air pollution in vulnerable communities and aggravate a warming climate. They’re also concerned that specifics of the emerging efforts remain stubbornly secret from people who live near shovel-ready projects.
That’s true even in California, a state that has declared a commitment not only to ambitious climate goals but also to environmental justice.
“The people got left behind in this conversation,” said Fatima Abdul-Khabir, the Energy Equity Program manager at Oakland-based Greenlining Institute, an advocacy group. “It’s a massive step backwards.”
Hydrogen, a colorless, odorless gas, is the world’s most abundant chemical element. When it’s used in fuel cells or burned for energy, it generates no atmosphere-warming carbon emissions. That means it could power trucks and airplanes without spewing soot from a tailpipe or exhaust from an engine. Hydrogen could help steel plants and other heavy industries lower their carbon footprints.
A hydrogen engine on display at the technology conference CERAWeek in Houston, Texas in 2023. Chen Chen/Xinhua via Getty Images
But stripping hydrogen molecules from water or methane to use as fuel can be expensive and complicated, and if that process relies on fossil fuels, it could actually prolong climate pollution. That’s not the only health risk: When even cleanly-produced hydrogen is blended with methane and burned, it can still dirty the air with toxic byproducts that contribute to lung-irritating smog.
The nation’s hydrogen earthshot is a risky and ambitious bet. Congress created an $8 billion pot of money for the hub system. It also tucked nearly $18 billion in grants and incentives into the Inflation Reduction Act and the infrastructure bill. An uncapped federal tax credit for companies that produce hydrogen energy could cost the public at least another $100 billion.
“There’s so much hype right now for hydrogen because everybody wants a piece of the pie,” said Dan Esposito, an electricity policy analyst at the nonprofit firm Energy Innovation.
To bring clean hydrogen to market as quickly as possible, the U.S. Department of Energy selected regional hubs based in part on their ability to quickly produce and find uses for clean hydrogen. The chosen hubs also must promise jobs and other community benefits that advance federal environmental justice goals.
But California’s hub, a public-private partnership called ARCHES, is rejecting rules the federal government has proposed to help guard against the risk of rising pollution from incautious hydrogen projects. Along with the six other hubs, ARCHES signed a letter that warns of “far reaching negative consequences” if the rules are made permanent.
The Biden administration has set aside billions of dollars in grants, incentives, and tax credits for companies investing in new hydrogen energy. Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
The position held by ARCHES is directly contrary to that of experts who say such rules are the only guarantee that this huge investment will lead to a sustainable hydrogen economy.
“What our research has shown is that if we do this wrong from the start, either the hydrogen industry will fall apart or it’s going to lose a bunch of public support or it will really significantly delay our ability to clean up the power grid,” Esposito said.
Multipleanalyses based on public data and modeling, including Esposito’s own, have concluded that hydrogen produced under the wrong circumstances could worsen air pollution instead of improving it.
So far, the message from ARCHES is: Trust us. Trust California to do what is right with the $1.2 billion it has been awarded for its hub. Trust the hub’s projects to cut carbon and lung-searing emissions from the air.
“There’s reason to trust California,” said Dan Kammen, an energy professor at the University of California, Berkeley. “But only if California continues to follow the rules that California created.”
California’s hub began as an agreement among the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, or GO-BIZ, the University of California, the state building and trades unions and a nonprofit called Renewables 100, founded by ARCHES CEO Angelina Galiteva. It has around 400 network partners, including Amazon, Cemex, Chevron and investor-owned utilities, including SoCal Gas and Edison International.
Building on the state’s development of the world’s first standard to cut the carbon intensity of fuel, ARCHES promises to develop zero-carbon hydrogen using solar, wind, biomass and other renewable sources.
“We came together to go after the federal funding, but that federal funding is just a start,” said Tyson Eckerle, a senior advisor for GO BIZ, at an environmental think tank’s conference in the spring. “It’s the pebble that launches the avalanche.”
But California argues that its progress will be slowed if hydrogen developers have to meet rules the U.S. Department of the Treasury has proposed for projects seeking the lucrative 45V tax credit.
Angelina Galiteva is CEO of California’s hydrogen hub, which is the first in the country to negotiate terms with the U.S. Department of Energy for a billion-dollar award. Courtesy of the California Hydrogen Leadership Summit
Those rules are based on what energy experts refer to as the “three pillars” of clean hydrogen production. To make hydrogen clean and sustainable, it should be produced from a new source using carbon-neutral electricity. That electricity should be geographically close to where it’s needed, so delivering it isn’t costly. It should also be available when it’s needed, not traded or obtained through accounting from another time and place.
California’s hydrogen leaders counter that the state already has a successful strategy — and numerous requirements — for getting clean energy on the grid. Complying with the federal rules would undermine that progress, ARCHES has said in a public response, making it “impossible” to integrate hydrogen “in a timely and cost-effect manner without disrupting our carefully calibrated energy system.”
“We’re at almost 60 percent, 24/7 renewables across the board, which is a huge, huge step forward. We’re ahead of our goals in terms of meeting those obligations,” Galiteva told Public Health Watch.
If these federal conditions “had been required for the nascent solar or battery or any other industry, those industries would never have taken off,” she said.
Julie McNamara, a senior energy analyst at the Union of Concerned Scientists, called California’s position contradictory. Even if the state’s renewables-rich grid deserves freedom from constraining rules, why would California support a free-for-all that gives states that continue to depend on fossil fuels a pass?
“ARCHES is trying to have it both ways,” she said.
Fossil fuel-focused energy companies, including BP and Shell, have also argued for more leeway in qualifying for the federal money.
Clean hydrogen could be the angel of decarbonizing the energy sector, but Earthjustice senior research and policy analyst Sasan Saadat said that poorly defined hydrogen could be the devil, because it might prolong the use of fossil fuels.
“You’ve taken this thing that is really dangerous and muddled it up with the world of climate solutions and clean energy and that’s why it’s so risky,” Saadat said. “The fossil fuel industry knows this and they can blur the lines.”
ARCHES has prioritized 37 projects to spend its federal money, according to CEO Galiteva. This “tier one” investment reflects the hub’s vision for bringing clean hydrogen to California.
“We have another 33-plus projects … that can actually slide into a tier one project if a tier one project hits a bump on the road for any reason,” she said at a recent hydrogen trade conference in Sacramento. “So the economy and the scale is going to be pretty big once we start moving.”
There’s an incentive to move quickly: To qualify for the federal tax credit, shovels have to be in the ground by 2032.
In Los Angeles County, the Element Resources Project could be one of 37 projects granted money by California’s hub, ARCHES. The city of Lancaster’s project promises to produce hydrogen fuel with solar power. Courtesy of the City of Lancaster
But the criteria for what qualifies as tier one status aren’t public. Nor are the locations of most of ARCHES’ projects, or their potential health and environmental impacts.
To fully participate in the hub, partners had to sign a nondisclosure agreement. Environmental advocates call the NDA an “iron wall” that makes ARCHES a black box.
“This huge hydrogen thing is happening, and all anybody knows is that there’s a ton of money coming for it,” said Shana Lazerow, a lawyer with the nonprofit Communities for a Better Environment.
Even where hydrogen is produced without fossil fuels, enormous questions remain about where to prioritize its production and use, so it doesn’t pollute or cost more.
“No one has found the killer app for green hydrogen yet,” UC Berkeley’s Dan Kammen said.
At Valley Generating Station in Sun Valley, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power is demolishing four red-and-white striped stacks to make way for what it says will be renewable and possibly hydrogen projects. But the facility has a history of methane leaks, and neighbors are wary of the utility’s promises. Molly Peterson/Public Health Watch
Projects that might scoop up the federal money are beginning to emerge from the shadows. In eastern Contra Costa County, where land along the Suisun Bay once served as a stopover for boats supplying gold miners, a company called H Cycle is proposing to heat municipal organic waste to transform it into hydrogen. Diverting waste from a landfill is a particularly attractive idea, since overstuffed landfills release methane into the atmosphere.
But the draft environmental impact report for the project in the small city of Pittsburg is light on details. It’s not clear exactly what will be heated or what technology will be used to unlock the hydrogen. Under California’s regulations, organic waste can include some percentage of plastic and metal, which would emit toxins when burned. The report also references slag, a waste product that comes from burning material, not just heating it.
All of that is troubling to a neighborhood whose residents are in the 93rd percentile statewide for asthma risk. Charles Davidson, a Contra Costa resident and member of the Sunflower Alliance, points out that 25,000 people live near H Cycle. “It’s burning plastics and construction materials and other things with no limit, no specifications on what’s being incinerated next to people’s homes,” he said.
A news release says H Cycle “is positioned” for a piece of ARCHES’ billion-dollar pie. But whether it’s a tier-one project for the hub isn’t clear. H Cycle, as a partner in ARCHES, has signed the hub’s non-disclosure agreement, and the company did not respond to requests for comment.
A letter local air regulators sent to Pittsburg’s planners warns of health risks from the project.
“This thermal conversion process represents a novel renewable hydrogen production strategy,” wrote the Bay Area Air Quality Management District in March. “However, it will introduce additional air pollution into a community that is already overburdened.” The district recommended more consideration of residents – and more transparency.
H Cycle’s engagement with vulnerable communities is limited at best, said Amelia Keyes, a lawyer with Communities for a Better Environment.
“It’s no coincidence that a polluting facility like this is being built here,” she said.
At launch, ARCHES highlighted 10 unnamed hydrogen production projects, “with most in the Central Valley.”
Projects are popping up in marginalized or already-polluted communities around the state. Some involve producing the fuel; others will transport or use it. Amelia Keyes said advocates usually hear about these projects by word of mouth.
“I think it really illustrates the kind of Whac-a-mole that environmental justice groups have to play with these kinds of facilities,” Keyes said.
At the port of Stockton, there’s talk of a facility that would produce hydrogen by steaming it out of methane but could claim to be carbon neutral by using credits for reductions of pollution elsewhere. In a farmworker community in western Fresno County, a pilot project will blend hydrogen into gas lines that go directly into homes for 10,000 people. Southern California Gas is floating the idea of AngelesLink. It’s billed as the nation’s largest clean hydrogen pipeline and could pipe the stuff into the Los Angeles basin. But little information is available yet about where clean fuel will come from in the first place.
Pressure gauges on a hydrogen storage facility at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Colorado. Chet Strange for The Washington Post via Getty Images
Major environmental groups, including Communities for a Better Environment, complain they don’t know much about these projects because they didn’t sign the ARCHES NDA, fearing that the secrecy required would compromise their advocacy in public processes. They worry that health risks and the influence of fossil fuel companies are being waved away.
In a letter to federal energy officials, the California Environmental Justice Association called the NDA a “delay tactic that allowed ARCHES to move forward without needing to account for and include impacted communities in decision-making.”
“Why should we as the public be living in this poverty of information about a massive taxpayer funded climate program?” said Earthjustice energy analyst Sasan Saadat. “It’s really galling.”
People in environmental justice communities are exactly who the California hub claims will benefit from the hydrogen boom. ARCHES says its overall proposal could help the state save nearly $3 billion by increasing “the economic value of health-related benefits” and creating 220,000 new jobs.
In a brief on its website, ARCHES attributes the potential health savings to cleaner air, based on a research paper commissioned by the California Public Utilities Commission. That paper projects reductions in air pollution through the electrification of cars and trucks, ending the use of natural gas in buildings, and removing all emissions from natural gas power generation. It then models the anticipated public health benefits from each. But hydrogen is only glancingly mentioned.
As for the jobs estimate, the independent think tank Rhodium Group offers a stark counter-estimate. It suggests that California’s hub will create just 6,000 to 8,000 jobs during the construction phase and only several hundred long term.
Neighborhoods that might be affected by hydrogen development tend to be wary of promises of jobs or cleaner air. That’s particularly true in the Los Angeles basin, where people have long breathed fossil-fuel driven pollution from refineries and natural gas plants. Now the L.A. Department of Water and Power plans to retrofit one of those plants, the Scattergood Generating Station, so it can run on methane mixed with hydrogen. The plant would produce power to serve the region when demand peaks, as it does on hot days. The estimated cost to retrofit two of the plant’s three turbines is at least $800 million.
A view of the backside of the Scattergood Generating Station, which the L.A. Department of Water and Power plans to retrofit so it can run on methane mixed with hydrogen. Jay L. Clendenin / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images
But hydrogen burned at high temperatures where oxygen is present, as in a gas plant, can create nitrogen oxides; those, in turn, contribute to ground-level ozone, or smog. Emerging science suggests that blending hydrogen into fossil gas could even increase those emissions, unless pollution controls are added.
“We should not be shooting for extending the life of combustion technology,” Earthjustice analyst Saadat said. “We know that we need to stop burning fuel at the tailpipe and the smokestack.”
ARCHES and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power plan to transition Scattergood to 100 percent hydrogen — “as soon as it is technically and practically feasible to do so.” In the meantime, state officials have acknowledged that the continuing transformation of California’s energy economy comes with tradeoffs.
“Not everything is going to be zero all of the time in terms of emissions,” Rajinder Sahota, deputy executive officer for climate change at the California Air Resources Board, said at the hydrogen summit in Sacramento. “But making sure that, cumulatively, the exposure to harmful pollution is reduced is going to be important.”
The L.A. Department of Water and Power, or LADWP, is also “actively exploring” what happens next at its Valley Generating Station in Sun Valley. Valley notoriously leaked methane, which contributes to smog, for at least three years before officials notified anyone living nearby. The leak prompted a campaign by residents of the largely Latino neighborhood to shut Valley down, and water and power officials say demolition will soon begin. But the 12-acre property remains connected to gas infrastructure, and LADWP emphasizes that having dependable energy generated near where it’s needed in the L.A. basin is essential to a cleaner energy future.
An LADWP spokeswoman said the utility “is actively evaluating hydrogen as well as other emerging technologies [at Valley] that will maximize environmental and equity benefits. We have consistently engaged the community and will continue to do so.”
But residents aren’t reassured.
“So far it’s been hard to understand, Why this? Why this technology?” said Miguel Miguel, a policy advisor for the community advocacy group Pacoima Beautiful.
Molly Peterson/Public Health Watch
Miguel says the opaqueness about Valley’s future helped push California environmental justice advocates to circulate principles for an equitable energy transition to hydrogen last year. By their definition, green hydrogen relies on surplus water and renewable energy and doesn’t keep fossil fuels online. It also means communities are consulted respectfully from the start.
“There’s a possibility of green hydrogen as long as it doesn’t exacerbate problems,” Miguel said. “But for us, at Valley … in our opinion it’s the natural gas industry’s last-ditch effort to say, ‘You still need us.’ And that’s the hardest pill to swallow.”
Advocates like Miguel acknowledge that balancing Southern California’s energy sources responsibly, to avoid brownouts or skyrocketing costs, isn’t easy. That’s why they oppose dirty hydrogen — not all hydrogen.
But Martha Dina Arguello, the executive director of Physicians for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles, says talk of green hydrogen has left her frustrated.
“You realize that nobody wants to make green hydrogen, right? There’s no profit in making green hydrogen,” she said. “The political reality is that nobody’s building that right now.”
In the coming months, federal agencies will set policies that clarify the direction ARCHES and the other hydrogen hubs will take.
When Energy Department ARCHES funding, it also finalized the hub’s operating rules. The Treasury Department, too, must finalize guidelines for companies wishing to access hydrogen tax credits. The two agencies don’t always agree; Politico has reported that some in the DOE were advocating internally for weaker rules, as many industry leaders have sought.
Meanwhile, California lawmakers are considering legislation that would streamline the state’s environmental review process for hydrogen projects. And some Democratic members of California’s congressional delegation are lobbying Treasury for weaker rules.
California’s hydrogen boosters seem confident about their strategy.
“Frankly, if you want green hydrogen to succeed, you need California,” ARCHES CEO Galiteva said at the Sacramento summit. She told a story about how Gov. Gavin Newsom sold federal officials on the state’s capacity to advance clean fuel.
Galiteva said the governor emphasized California’s strong climate goals and its robust marketplace for clean energy. And his pitch didn’t stop there.
“You need us more than we need you,” Newsom, by her account, told the DOE. “So you’d better give us a hub.”
Laughter erupted in a ballroom of industry representatives and public officials, as Galiteva smiled. “I guess they listened,” she said.
A former Papua New Guinea army leader, Major-General Jerry Singirok, is furious after being arrested and charged under the Capital Markets Act.
He was a trustee of Melanesian Trustee Services Ltd, part of a superannuation agency with 20,000 unit holders, but its trustee licence was revoked last year.
General Singirok said the agency was already embroiled in legal action over that revocation and he said his arrest on Wednesday was aimed at undermining that action.
He said Task Force Shield, which he said had been set up by Trades Minister Richard Maru, had made a series of allegations about the degree of oversight at Melanesian Trustee Services Ltd.
“They said that we did not audit, [but] we got audited, annual audits for the past 10 years,” he said.
“They said we didn’t do that. [They claimed] we continued to function without consulting our unit holders, which is wrong.
“There is a list of complaints, and as I said, it is now going to be subjected to a court. What’s important is that they are using the Capital Markets Act to charge us.”
General Singirok said in a Facebook post that he had spent his entire life fighting for the rights of the ordinary people and he would clear his name after what he is calling a “witchhunt”.
He said he had been a member of the superannuation operator since 1989.
The collapse of Bonza Aviation was sudden but not unexpected. While most start-up airlines in Australia fail, Bonza’s demise raises questions about why and who was behind it. Matt Prescott with the story.
The collapse of Bonza raises, yet again, the question of how to make the Australian Aviation industry more competitive. Can the cosy duopoly of Qantas and Virgin on major routes ever be challenged without giving more landing slots to international airlines at our capital city airports? Is the regulatory regime fit for purpose? Should we put limitations on who can own an Airline operating in the local market? Are the capital requirements for airline licenses adequate?
Bonza is just the latest in a long list of Australian airlines that have failed over the last three decades, including TigerAir Australia, Air Australia, BackpackersXpress, Impulse, Compass, and Ansett. Apart from Tiger Air and Ansett, the others all failed within two or three years; Compass managed that feat twice. (Virgin, of course, went into administration during the early month of COVID but was later resurrected.)
Apart from Qantas, the only long-time survivor in recent times is Rex Airlines, which has managed to carve out its own niche without getting too much in the way of Virgin and Qantas.
The difficulties associated with setting up airlines in Australia have pushed new entrants, such as Bonza, to adopt riskier business models, which skirt domestic regulations and shift financial risks onto customers, employees, and suppliers. As has recently been demonstrated by 57,933 Bonza customers having their flights cancelled, 323 employees being left unpaid, and 120 trade creditors being left millions out-of-pocket by Bonza’s collapse.
It also raises many questions about Bonza’s owner and who its ‘friends’ are.
The Bonza story
Bonza was set up as an Australian low-cost airline with ‘no frills’ such as airport lounges or loyalty schemes. It commenced operation on 31 January 2023 and lasted a mere 15 months. It is now in liquidation.
It prided itself on being the ‘Bogan’ airline, with marketing campaigns sporting branded budgie smugglers to prove it. Its business model was piggy-backed on infrastructure investments made in under-serviced regional airports, including Albury, Mildura, Port Macquarie, Bundaberg, Tamworth and Toowoomba. It also leaned heavily on the desperation of States, regional councils and businesses to attract investment, transport links and tourists.
The owners of Bonza, 777 Partners, have business interests all over the world and spent many months trying to buy Everton football club from Farhad Moshiri, a close business partner of Alisher Usmanov, who is one of Vladimir Putin’s favourite oligarchs and has been sanctioned by the UK, EU and USA for his links to the Kremlin following the invasion of Ukraine.
This is all public knowledge, and no illegal activity by Bonza Aviation has been alleged. However, it is notable that Australia has allowed one of its few airlines to be owned and operated by a business flying close to Vladimir Putin’s orbit.
In addition, Bonza’s business model was unusual and made use of aircraft ‘wet-leased‘ from a sister airline in Canada, Flair Airlines, which is also partially owned by 777 Partners. This meant that aircraft could be more effectively utilised by flying them in Australia during the Canadian winter and in Canada during the Australian winter.
The Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA) didn’t welcome the use of wet-leased Boeing aircraft crewed by Canadians, and it took until late 2023 to resolve this by using Australian crews.
“Three 737 MAX 8s and one 737-800 leased to Flair from a trio of Ireland-based lessors were seized last March, which reportedly resulted in 777 Partners sending planes that had been earmarked for Bonza to Flair to make up the shortfall. Up until it entered administration, Bonza was flying its own aircraft from the Gold Coast, with both its planes leased from Flair otherwise occupied. The two wet-leased Flair 737 MAX 8s, C-FLKC and C-FLHI or ‘Matilda’ and ‘Bruce’ respectively, shifted to a dry-lease arrangement, with the intention they would be operated by local crews from the Gold Coast. It’s been reported by The Guardian that the leasing companies Corvus Lights Aviation, MAM Aircraft Leasing 4 and Columba Lights Aviation were seeking $28.5 million (USD) from 777 Partners, but these demands have been ignored.”
Bonza went into administration on April 29, but it quickly became clear that liquidation was the only option. However, when the full extent of Bonza’s financial woes were laid bare at its first creditors’ meeting in Sydney, it was revealed the airline owed nearly $77m across two loans, almost $16m to trade creditors, and another $10m to landlords.
Other debt included more than $5m in staff wages and annual leave entitlements and $3 million to government authorities such as the Australian Taxation Office. Plane lessors, who sparked a crisis of cancellations at Bonza by terminating agreements and repossessing aircraft, are owed $4.6 million.
777 Partners
Based in Miami, Bonza’s owners own a curious combination of international soccer clubs and airlines. 777 Partners has, directly and indirectly, owned stakes in “soccer teams in Italy, Spain, Belgium, France, Brazil and Germany, as well as a 19.9% stake in Melbourne Victory (with an option to buy 70%). It also owns the London Lions basketball team and the mentioned minority stake in Canada’s Flair Airlines.
Allegedly, 777 Partners’ investment in Spanish club Sevilla FC was partly funded by a loan from Oleg Boyko, a business associate of Roman Abramovich, via EVRAZ Holding. Roman Abramovich was the owner of Chelsea Football Club until 2022 when he was forced to sell.
Earlier in his career, Roman Abramovich was a business partner of Boris Berezovsky via Sibneft (now Gazprom Neft) and Oleg Deripaska via RUSAL. He flourished for many years under the patronage of both Boris Yeltsin and Vladimir Putin but is now subject to international sanctions and has become a citizen of Israel and Portugal.
Oleg Boyko is a Russian businessman who has been sanctioned by several countries for his reported connections to the Russian state. In 2024, Boyko allegedly demanded 777 Partners’ shares in Sevilla FC as collateral for his loan.
As a side note, Rupert Murdoch recently married Elena Zhukova, the mother of Dasha Zhukova, Roman Abramovich’s third wife.
Extract of Bonza and 777 Partners network diagram. (C) Copyright Matt Preston
The Everton FC mess
In September 2023, 777 Partners agreed to buy Everton Football Club of England’s Premier League by purchasing the 94.1% owned by Farhad Moshiri.
Everton has been struggling with over £400m of debt and tried to raise over £150m from New York-based GDA Luma Capital so that they could repay a £158m loan from MSP Sports Capital and complete construction of their new football ground at Bramley Moore Docks in Liverpool.
777 Partners ran into trouble with Bonza at the same time as they were attempting to close the Everton deal. 777 Partners eventually had to send a payment of £16m to Everton so they could maintain day-to-day operations and this inevitably meant attention and resources were diverted away from solving Bonza’s problems.
Hence, Farhad Moshiri, a British-Iranian businessman based in Monaco, remains the majority owner of Everton FC and a former chairman of USM Holdings, a Russian holding company.4 Earlier in his career, he worked for EY and Deloitte Touche, prior to serving as the chairman of Metalloinvest and subsequently becoming chairman of USM Holdings.4
In April 2024, with the deal with 777 Partners not complete, Everton called upon the services of insolvency advisors Teneo. Amid lawsuits against 777 Partners in other countries, the Everton Shareholders’ Association wrote to Moshiri requesting that he terminate the deal. 777 enlisted B. Riley Financial for advice to complete the deal.
According to 777’s own lawyers, Josh Wander and Steven Pasko resigned as managers of the company on May 6, 2024, but remained as its 100% owners. On June 1, 2024, 777 Partners’ deadline to conclude the takeover of Everton expired. Despite the 777 Partners bid for Everton Football Club falling through, this deal was a serious proposition for a prolonged period of time and is worth considering some of the main protagonists in further detail.
That story – about the hyper-complex, subtle and stealthy commercial activities of Vladimir Putin’s closest oligarchs in the football world – to come.
With digital media and the rise of streaming music services, the sale of physical albums and singles has dried up. Artists now rely on making a living from live performances, but that, too, is under threat. Michael Sainsbury with the story.
Australia’s Arts Minister Tony Burke has a guitar strapped on for his Instagram profile pic. He regularly posts shots of himself at gigs and was vocal in his support of the local live music industry during his time in opposition.
But it’s the multinational music and ticketing companies that are benefitting most from these changes, not the local music industry.
In government, so far, Burke has followed through with launching the first serious national arts initiative in living memory in the shape of Revive, a national cultural policy whose centrepiece is Creative Australia, backed with $286 million. Long ignored by the government, the live music sector is about to come under the microscope, with a Federal parliamentary inquiry into “the challenges and opportunities within the Australian live music industry” finally underway.
Venues struggling
Yet for all of Burke’s good vibes – and a small slice of the new government-funded cultural pie – the local live music sector remains in trouble.
“Small venues are a crucial step in the ladder to success that is widespread enough to earn a living from having enough monthly listeners on Spotify and playing bigger venues,” Howard Adams, President of the Australian Live Music Business Association (ALMBA), tells MWM.
The fallow years of COVID saw many venues close and continue to struggle, along with ill-conceived projects like Sydney’s long-standing lockout laws. Today, rising costs for energy, insurance, and security, as well as fans watching their spending due to the cost-of-living crisis, have seen venues close, leaving local artists struggling to be heard.
And venues are still struggling post COVID. Great Club in Marrickville and The Zoo in Brisbane are two important venues that closed their doors recently, Adams cites, adding “there is constant chatter about the viability of venues.”
According to musician (and MWM video producer) Joshua Barnett,
“Insurance companies are continuing to charge extortionate amounts after COVID and local venues like the Zoo simply can’t afford that on top of raising rents.”
Multinational domination
One major concern is that the $3 billion local live music industry is increasingly dominated by overseas corporations like Live Nation and its subsidiary Ticketmaster and private equity firms, such as US-owned and Cayman Islands-domiciled Silverlake, which owns other major players, including Ticket Entertainment Group (TEG).
This model favours big-name offshore artists performing at mega venues.
Live Nation’s vertically integrated model sees it promote everything from mega-shows such as Taylor Swift, Coldplay and Billie Eilish to festivals like (recently cancelled) Splendour in the Grass and Harvest Rock. Along with ownership or controlling interest in venues, ticketing companies and also clipping the ticket on merchandise and on-site concessions.
In Australia, it has bulked up with a string of acquisitions across the sector in recent years in ticketing and promotions, as well as building and buying a number of major venues.
“If a promoter company owns the ticket company, they get all sorts of advantages, Brian “Smash” Chladil, founder and managing director of local ticketing company OzTix, explained to MWM. “Ticket companies have both a lot of data and a lot of cash. Both are usually protected by consumer law and privacy law. The promoter company is able to gain access to the cash and data.”
And here’s the rub, Chladil says – and Live Nation’s financials bear him out – that the promoter realises that they don’t need to make money by promoting anymore because they make so much in ticket fees, selling their customer’s data and investing the cash.
Last year, Live Nation reported a 2% profit margin in its concerts division, while ticketing made 38% and ads and sponsorships 62%.
“If you are a promoter trying to make money on a tour, how can you compete with a company that doesn’t need to make money on the promoting side? It’s inherently anti-competitive and should never have been allowed,” Chladil says.
An analysis provided to MWM shows that concerts ticketed by Ticketmaster take from 19 to 24% of the ticket’s face value, compared to only 9 to 11% by Australian vendors Oztix and Moshtox. Ticketmaster also takes up to 20% of merchandise sales at the venues.
In the US, the Department of Justice wants to split Live Nation’s ticketing and promotion businesses. It was joined in an anti-trust lawsuit filed in May by Attorneys General from 29 states, and the District of Columbia joined the federal antitrust lawsuit.
As mentioned, Live Nation’s accounts show that it is from ticketing rather than artist tours, where almost all its profit flows. Critics argue that the company has won a key battle in having the so-called “all in ticketing” legislated by the ‘Transparency in Charges for Key Events Ticketing Act‘ that passed Congress recently.
“Because Ticketmaster or Ticketek has exclusive control of venues there is no regulation to stop them charging what they want and calling various invented charges whatever they want,” one industry insider who did not want to be named said.
The integrated model is increasingly prevalent in Australia, where independent promoters and ticketing companies say money is being sucked from consumers by international acts and global companies – that pay little or no tax in Australia – increasingly starving smaller venues and local artists. Yet in Australia the company – in tandem with its fellow ticketing oligopolist TEG (Ticketek), continues unimpeded.
Venues need support
It’s a widespread problem, but solutions are emerging. In the UK, a one-pound venue ticketing levy has been proposed to help fund small venues and local acts, and in some European countries, government-funded live music “passports” are handed out to young people to help them form gig-attending habits.
In 2022, the Spanish Government funded a Youth Cultural Bonus that saw Spanish young people given €400 of vouchers to spend on the arts when they turned 18. This constituted up to €200 on live events or activities up to €100 on physical products and up to €100 on digital products and services, including music streaming subscriptions.
Here, the ALMBA is gathering industry support for an arena ticket levy based on the UK model. This levy would involve collecting a small amount – projected at $1 – from each ticket sold for major events in large arenas. The funds would be managed through a trust specifically established to support smaller, independent venues that are crucial to the nurturing and development of local talent.
The levy would directly support the maintenance and upgrading of small to medium-sized venues. This would also providide financial resources to venues that are foundational to the music ecosystem, ensuring they can continue to host new and existing talent. The idea is to
encourage a healthier balance between large-scale events and grassroots music scenes, fostering a diverse and vibrant cultural offering.
“We need broad support; we simply can’t have grassroots venues fall out of the market”, Adams says.
In terms of what the government can do, Adams says that it’s “a big education piece – they mean well, but can’t be expected to know the details about an industry that has been happy to be quite opaque for years. “So the same vested interests are sounded out each time – this will take time as well as some genuine thought and a new approach.”
Support local musicians, not mega-artists
Recent news emerged that the Western Australian government handed $8 million to Live Nation to subsidise exclusive Coldplay concerts for the state, adding to $16 million previously reported that was given to Live Nation or companies it owns by state and federal government programs.
Compare this to last month’s announcement that Music Australia, a new body to promote local music under the Creative Australia umbrella, would give $1.45 million to support 98 projects involving a range of artists, from solo acts to bands, producers, composers and songwriters.
This disparity highlights the need for plenty of education on how taxpayers’ money should be spent in the sector and the urgency of regulation.
With much fanfare and celebration, Georgia Power, the state’s largest electricity provider, just marked a major milestone: Two new nuclear reactors near Augusta are now generating enough energy to power a million homes, without using fossil fuels or emitting planet-warming carbon dioxide.
The new Plant Vogtle nuclear reactors are the first built in the United States in decades. They entered service years later than originally promised and at twice their original budget, after more than a decade of construction and financial delays.
At the launch event in May, a parade of utility executives and elected officials celebrated the project as a triumph of perseverance — and as a major step forward for clean energy.
Also applauding the effort was Chris Smith, the chief implementation officer for Hyundai’s new electric vehicle plant near Savannah.
“I’m very happy to be here to support another positive step toward clean energy in Georgia,” Smith told the crowd. “Hyundai is committed to contributing to the sustainable future of society and seeks to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045.”
Smith said the carbon-free power from Plant Vogtle will help the car company reach its climate goal. But it doesn’t achieve it entirely.
As part of its target, Hyundai has pledged to use 100 percent renewable energy from the start of mass production at the Georgia plant, expected later this year. Even with the new reactors at Plant Vogtle, less than half of Georgia Power’s electricity is carbon-free, according to the utility’s data.
While Georgia Power’s next long-range plan isn’t due until next year, the current plans put forward by the utility and approved by the state’s Public Service Commission won’t significantly change that ratio in the near future; the utility has expanded solar, for instance, but also added gas turbines and floated delaying coal plant retirements. That has left Hyundai to make up the difference on its own. The company recently signed a deal to offset its Georgia energy use with power from a solar farm in Texas.
Voluntary clean energy targets like Hyundai’s are increasingly common among corporations and government entities — as are gaps between their ambitions and the clean energy that utilities and their regulators are providing.
As climate change intensifies, this story is playing out repeatedly in Georgia and across the country. Key deadlines for clean energy targets are looming — many of them cite 2025 or 2030 as their first goalposts — and companies and local governments can’t achieve those goals on their own. They need support from electric utilities and regulators in the form of pro-renewable energy policies and investments as well as more carbon-free energy, support that some say isn’t coming fast enough.
“Your schedule for operation is not dependent on your utility’s programs,” said Katie Southworth, who leads policy work in the U.S. Southeast for the Clean Energy Buyers Association, which represents more than 400 members looking to go carbon-free. “You have to have energy Day One.”
Georgia Power’s parent corporation, Atlanta-based Southern Company, has announced it aims to hit net zero carbon emissions by 2050. At the company’s annual meeting in May, CEO Chris Womack touted its progress: “Over 80 percent of the resource additions planned across our system, totaling nearly 10,000 megawatts from 2023 to 2030, are zero-carbon emitting resources,” he said.
But Southern Company subsidiaries like Georgia Power are still adding new gas plants and putting off coal retirements, committing to continued carbon emissions for years in the future.
Georgia Power and Southern Company both declined interviews for this story. Georgia Power pointed to its programs to expand clean energy, and Southern says it’s committed to its own net zero target.
Still, these and other utilities’ pace of change has companies and governments worried about meeting their own clean energy targets. Some are bypassing public service commissions and utilities by looking for alternative sources of energy outside, as in the Hyundai example. Others are wading into the world of state energy regulation, aiming to change utilities’ plans.
The city of Decatur, Georgia’s energy and sustainability manager David Nifong said the town is adding solar panels and improving energy efficiency as it aims to reach 100 percent citywide clean energy by 2050. But, he said, Decatur can’t do it alone. The city needs help from Georgia Power, which supplies electricity to 2.7 million customers in 155 of the state’s 159 counties, including all of Decatur.
“Our clean energy plan says it explicitly. We’re not going to be able to meet our clean energy goals without the utility,” he said.
So Decatur has joined forces with other local governments across the state to intervene before the state’s Public Service Commission, which has final say over Georgia Power’s prices and energy sources. They have opposed the utility’s proposals to add fossil fuel generation and pushed instead for expanded use of renewables, as well as more affordable energy for residents.
Large corporations with a presence in Georgia, like Microsoft, are citing their own fast-approaching clean energy deadlines as they aim to influence the state’s Public Service Commission, or PSC, as well.
Even the U.S. Department of Defense, which is trying to achieve carbon-free energy by 2035, had harsh words at PSC hearings earlier this year, criticizing Georgia Power’s updated integrated resource plan, or IRP, which lays out the utility’s long-range plans for generating electricity.
“I’m frustrated that we are probably your biggest customer and nothing in this IRP addresses any of our needs, which are substantial,” said Defense lawyer John McNutt.
Southworth of the Clean Energy Buyers Association said large customers are willing to pay for adding clean energy. “Our members are very motivated to bring solutions to utility commissions and to utilities,” she said.
There are small signs of progress from these efforts: Georgia Power has pledged to develop a new clean energy program that Nifong in Decatur and the other local governments pushed for, which will help customers install renewable energy paired with batteries that Georgia Power can draw on to bolster the power grid when demand spikes. The company’s latest IRP, approved by the Public Service Commission in April, also adds battery storage to existing solar fields at two Air Force bases.
Still, as death tolls from blistering heat rise and extreme weather intensifies, critics say the utility is moving too slowly — extending carbon emissions that climate experts say the planet can’t afford.
“We need utilities to match our ambition,” Southworth said.
Child sexual exploitation, drug trafficking and large-scale tax fraud threats are on the rise, says a damning report from AUSTRAC. Michael West reports on the epic 17-year failure to deliver money-laundering reforms whose effect is to lock Australians out of affordable property.
The CrowdStrike meltdown, which wrought chaos across the globe, did make one thing clear, the need for alternative currency when online systems breakdown. Coles supermarkets was asking customers to pay in cash.
And while cash is often criticised as a tool of money launderers, and rightly, a damning report from money-laundering regulator AUSTRAC this week confirmed illicit cash transactions are just a bit of the money-laundering picture.
The Big End of Town, the white collar world of lawyers, accountants and property people, is the real growth sector for money-launderers.
Mega dithering
The failure of successive governments to introduce (AML-CTF Tranche II legislation) promised 17 years ago have made Australia a haven for white collar crime. Or, “an attractive destination for illicit funds” as the AUSTRAC report frames it. And this failure is due to relentless lobbying by vested interests.
Not only has it allowed accountants, lawyers and property firms to facilitate money-laundering with impunity, the foreign flows of ‘black money’ into this country put upward pressure on property prices. They lock young Australians out of the property market and put pressure on rents too.
You would think that such an epic failure, a failure so much in the public interest, would entail some explanation by those who govern us. Sadly, there is none, just stonewalling and promises of a crackdown.
Rex Patrick, the former senator turned “Transparency Warrior” and MWM columnist has received heavily redacted responses to recent Freedom of Information requests. But they do indicate that “stakeholders” with vested interests (property, law, accounting professions) are still lobbying against AML reforms.
Recent efforts by Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus to assure the international community and the Financial Action Taskforce in Geneva (FATF) that change is afoot, have met with scepticism. And efforts by this journal to garner public information on the progress of Dreyfus’s “crackdown” remain, at this point, simply words.
And what of the outlook? This week’s release of a National Risk Assessment, Money Laundering in Australia, by regulator AUSTRAC shows the risks are on the rise, even rising risks for children, risks of sexual exploitation by predators.
AUSTRAC National Risk Assessment, Money Laundering in Australia
AUSTRAC finds that money-laundering remained an “intractable issue” and its report is a concession that successive governments have failed to deliver reform.
Dirty money ‘invested’ into our real estate market pushes up house prices. A new @AUSTRAC report shows it’s rife. @MarkDreyfusKCMP refuses to make some simple #transparency fixes🤷♂️. While he sits idle new home buyers lose and crooks, lawyers & property developers win. 1/2 #auspolpic.twitter.com/USyjD4rCPj
“Underpinning many money laundering activities in Australia is opacity, anonymity and a lack of transactional visibility. The use of cash, trusts, identity crime, mule accounts and third-party transactions that obscure identity, beneficial ownership or financial flows continues to be a mainstay of money laundering,” says the report.
The key theme to emerge from this assessment is persistence: persistent exploitation of channels that have historically been used to launder funds (e.g. banks, remitters and casinos); persistent exploitation of high-value assets like luxury watches, vehicles and real estate; and persistent involvement of professional service providers to help establish complex business structures and associated banking arrangements to help individuals launder funds and conceal wealth.
Dissembling
Although the AG’s department got cracking on the AML reforms when the new government got into office two years ago, all we have seen yet is talk of a crackdown, a press release and a speech at the National Press Club by Mark Dreyfus saying things were happening. Then the inevitable press:
“A crackdown on money laundering means real estate agents, lawyers and accountants will need to report suspicious transactions” declared the ABC.
“Australian crackdown to stop dirty money buying real estate,” trumpeted the AFR.
The Rex Patrick FOIs showed the government is still in consultation with stakeholders but it seems, despite the promises, that the stakeholders and their donors are getting the better of the politicians and bureaucrats
“The Albanese Government recently commenced the next stage of consultation on reforms to Australia’s AML/CTF regime, demonstrating our commitment to combat criminal abuse of our financial system after nearly a decade of inaction by the former government,” said the A-G.
And while the media lapped it up, the money laundering lobby did not see it quite the same way.
The Law Council of Australia, long-term champions of the money-launderers, welcomed the AG’s ‘consultation paper’ and the loopholes to which the government appears to have already conceded.
Its press release was headlined “Further consultation on Australia’s AML/CTF regime welcome”.
This post was originally published on Michael West.
The gangsters, bikies and union antics exposed by Nine’s investigation into the CFMEU are the tip of the corruption iceberg. Michael West investigates a $2.5B wage theft of mineworkers arising from collusion between governments, insurers, mining corporations, lobbyists and the CFMEU.
“The mates, the cronies, the bikies … a sinister shakedown is about to go boom. The fall-out will shake Canberra!” Thus spake the voiceover man for 60 Minutes.
And it has. union boss John Setka has fallen on his sword, and the Victorian branch of the union has gone into administration in the wake of the weekend’s expose by investigative journalist Nick McKenzie, Nine newspapers and 60 Minutes.
While an admirable story in exposing building industry corruption, it was a predictable Coalition media hit on the unions and only reveals the tip of the iceberg of systemic corruption: a cover-up which involves not only unions but governments, coal mining giants such as BHP and Glencore, mining lobby the Minerals Council of Australia, labour hire firms and insurers.
The story nobody wants to touch
There has been a wage theft of black coal miners of $2.5B or more stretching back to 2010. Rather than ‘shaking Canberra’, this imbroglio has been deftly buried by Canberra. It is too big. Its revelations suit neither the political agendas of Labor and the unions or the Coalition and their corporate sponsors. And neither do the revelations suit the agendas of the Coalition media duopoly News Corporation and Nine Entertainment.
Yes, the politicians in Canberra know about it. They know about it in NSW politics too. There have been successive court cases; and settlements with crusading coal-miners have come close, only to be defeated in eleventh-hour legal wrangles and subterfuge by coal industry vested interests. Court actions remain afoot for compensation for underpaid wages.
Later this week, we will tell the story of the men behind the crusade to bring justice to coal industry workers. Today, we will deliver the story in a nutshell.
The wage theft allegations are simple at their core. Casual labour is prohibited in coal mining, a sector where safety is paramount.
Yet, by deception, and by using labour hire firms to distance themselves legally, the coal sector multinationals have been able to pay miners below the award.
No casuals allowed … but …
The employment of a casual mineworker is illegal under the Black Coal Award, but they managed to do it. That much is simple. What is far more complex is the web of deceit spanning government, insurers, labour hire firms, mining corporations including BHP and Glencore and the CFMEU.
It is all about the money trail, the ownership, the flow of rich coal mining revenues to all the parties involved.
MWM first twigged to this earlier this year when a source pointed out some anomalies in the political donations filings with the Australian Electoral Commission (AEC). These were smartly buried but so lumpy that they stuck out in the fine print.
It began with the discovery of an unusual disclosure that an entity called Abelshore which had had donated $39m to the CFMEU. Who was this ‘Abelshore’? As it turned out, company searches showed it was a subsidiary of Swiss coal mining leviathan Glencore. Why then was the mining company ‘donating’ such a large chunk of money to the union, and why was it disclosed in the category of ‘other’ payments?
Secret web of ownerships
The secret lies in the web of ownership. The big conflict of the CFMEU – bigger even than kick-backs and pay-offs by gangsters and other hangers-on to seal deals between the unions and construction companies such as Multiplex and Lendlease on worksites – is that the CFMEU owns large stakes in and operates joint ventures between government, the mining companies and insurance groups.
The political donations admissions were the tip of the iceberg. Interviews with former coal miners who discovered the rort will be published later this week. Simon Turner, who is about to file another lawsuit for compensation, told MWM that conflicts of interest meant the story of gross underpayment of coal workers had been buried until now both legally and politically.
“[The contracts] were all done illegally. “I was living below the poverty line for over 6 years … my full pay under the Award should be $137k a year. I was being paid $400 a week!”.
Here are the findings of our investigation:
The AEC transparency register shows $48m dollars in “cloaked” payments from Abelshore to Labor via the CFMEU which were labelled as “other receipts”.
This is not the sole “cloaked” donation from a company part owned by the CFMEU.
Loopholes were created to cover up the multi-billion dollar wage theft conceived and condoned by the Commonwealth Government in the black coal mining industry.
Protected rates of pay. In the coal industry “casual” labour hire workers are paid up to $47,000 less per annum than direct hire full time workers. This benefits the employers in keeping their costs down. Protected rates of pay seek to have labour hire employees covered by the host mine’s enterprise agreement (EA) by using the “casual” base rate of pay if found in the site EA. If not found then a 25% loading would be added to the full time EA base rate of pay.
The only way a labour hire employee can be misclassified as a casual is through an EA as the Award expressly prohibits their employment as it prescribes that mineworkers must be hired on a full-time or part-time basis only.
Historically, the Mining and Energy Division of the CFMEU and CFMEU has been involved in the vast majority of EA’s (around 85%)
Currently, the large mining companies do not direct hire “casual mineworkers”.
A history of secrecy
From 1993 to 2017 the CFMEU operated all functions of The Australian Government’s Coal Mining Industry (Long Service Leave Funding) Corporation(Coal LSL), including the application of a payroll tax on an illegal employment type (“Casual Mineworker”), under a series of secret contracts.
During this period the Australian National Audit Office (ANAO) dutifully audited the sanitised as always presented records of Coal LSL ABN 12 039670 644 (from 2000 onwards) when the real records with all the real data and misinformation, underreporting and illegal income stream were held by Auscoal Services ABN 49 051 315 014.
The CFMEU owns 50 percent of this company Auscoal Services.
The CFMEU also has reps on the board of directors of Coal LSL
The CFMEU was also instrumental in negotiating, recommending and endorsing the EA’s that allowed the use of casual labour.
The CFMEU has long fought off the attempts by the industry to include casual mineworker roles in the Award.
In this 24 year period Coal LSL had no direct employees of the Government.
The players and their conflicts
Corporations
BHP, Glencore, Yancoal, Anglo, Whitehaven.
The insurers
CMI: Coal Mines insurance is owned by 50% by the CFMEU and 50% by NSW Minerals Council
The conflict of interest is that the union, which is supposed to stand up for the safety of mine workers owns the monopoly industry insurer *with* the mine owners. Why would they accede to a decent payout?
The labour hire firm
Chandler Macleod is the labour hire firm used by the corporations to deal with the workers – it delivers them legal distance. Chandler is Japanese owned by the ultimate holding company Recruit Holdings. Conflicts include that the labour hire group has billions in Federal contracts including with the Department of Defence and Fair Work Australia. Chandler is used for payroll.
The government
Coal LSL (Long Service Leave) is the federal government corporation which raises the 2.7% wage levy. Casual employees never take their LSL so government just books that to consolidated revenue. The role is contracted out by Coal LSL to the union owned AUSCOAL Superannuation.
AUSCOAL Superannuation: the Coal LSL is 2.7% levy comes directly from the weekly wage of workers. But when the wage is illegal everything else is wrong. Coal LSL it has no employees. AUSCOAL pays the levy to at to the government. An estimated 98pc of casual workers never get to take non-service leave so all that money is kept.
AUSCOAL is owned 50% by the CFMEU and 25% apiece by the industry lobby groups NSW Minerals Council and Queensland Minerals Council
The lawyers
Fair Work Australia agreed in proceedings in 2018, “We can confirm the Award (Black Coal Mining award 2010) doesn’t have a casual rate for this level”.
Simon Turner is preparing a compensation case now which claims the deeds – for workers’ comp redemption, which cover lump sum payments up to retirement age – are illegal because the Certificate of Currency had him paid $28,000 a year and “they were paying me 80% of that when my full pay under the Award for 78 weeks is $137,000 a year”.
With conflicts of interest like these, it is no wonder that both the politicians, the lobby groups and the corporations want the story buried. The recent industrial relations reforms by Labor under Minister Tony Burke have gone some way, says Turner, to addressing the issues of underpayment but they have not fixed the past injustice.
Stay tuned for the Simon Turner story later this week.
Papua New Guinea will face a grim reality of a ban on its shipping of oil and hydrocarbons in international waters if it continues to ignore the implementation of a domestic waste oil policy that is 28 years overdue.
The Conservation and Environment Protection Authority’s Director for Renewable Brendan Trawen made this stark revelation in response to queries posed by Post-Courier Online.
In the backdrop of investment projects proposed in the resource space, the issue of waste oil and its disposal has incurred hefty fines and reputational damage to the nation, and could seriously impact the shipments of one of the country’s lucrative exports in oil and LNG.
“International partners are most protective of their waterways. Therefore, PNG has already been issued with a warning on implementation of a ban of oil and hydrocarbon shipments, including LNG from PNG through Indonesian water,” he said.
In addition, the issuing of a complete ban on all hydrocarbon exports from Singapore through Indonesian waters to PNG.
“In light of growing international concern about the need for stringent control of transboundary movement of hazardous waste oil, and of the need as far as possible to reduce such movement to a minimum, and the concern about the problem of illegal transboundary traffic in hazardous wastes oil, CEPA is compelled to take immediate steps in accordance with Article 10 of the Basel Convention Framework,” Trawen said.
He indicated CEPA had limited capabilities of PNG State through to manage hazardous wastes and other wastes.
Safeguarding PNG’s international standing
The government of PNG had been “rightfully seeking cooperation with Singaporean authorities since 2020” to safeguard PNG’s international standing with the aim to improve and achieve environmentally sound management of hazardous waste oil.
“Through the NEC Decision No. 12/2021, respective authorities from PNG and Singapore deliberated and facilitated the alternative arrangement to reach an agreement with Hachiko Efficiency Services (HES) towards the establishment of a transit and treatment centre in PNG.
“In due process, HES have the required permits to allow transit of the waste oils in Singapore, Malaysia and South Korea for recycling.”
Minister of Environment, Conservation and Climate Change Simon Kilepa acknowledged that major repercussions were expected to take effect with the potential implementation ban of all hydrocarbons and oil shipments through Indonesian waters.
Political, economic and security risks emerged without doubt owing to GoPNG through CEPA’s negligence in the past resolving Basel Convention’s outstanding matters.
“It is in fact that the framework and policy for the Waste Oil Project exists under the International Basel Convention inclusive of the approved methods of handling and shipping waste oils. What PNG has been lacking is the regulation and this program provides that through,” he said.
“CEPA will progress its waste oil programme by engaging Hachiko Efficiency Services to develop and manage the domestic transit facility.
“This will include the export of waste oil operating under the Basel and Waigani agreements dependent upon the final destination.”
CEPA will proceed with the Hazardous Waste Oil Management Programme immediately to comply with the long outstanding implementation of the Basel Convention requirements on the management of Hazardous waste oil.
A media announcement and publicity would be made with issuance of Express of Interest (EOI) to shippers and local waste companies
A presentation would be made to NEC Cabinet and a NEC decision before the sitting of Parliament.
Matthew Variis a senior journalist and former editor of the PNG Post-Courier. Republished with permission.
“News Corporation is a reflection of my thinking, my character, and my values,” said Rupert Murdoch. Alan MacLeod investigates the media baron’s financial and political ties to the Israel war lobby and finds it’s number one propagandist.
Without a sympathetic media, Israel’s powerful military would be next to useless in its attempts to ethnically cleanse Gaza. It relies on crucial Western support for its project, and no one is as important in manufacturing consent for Israel as Rupert Murdoch.
The Australian-born press baron has close and extensive personal ties to the Israeli political elite and myriad business connections to the country. He has used his media empire to defend Israel and sing its praises, even amidst an attack on Gaza commonly condemned as genocidal. As such, his holdings effectively serve as an unofficial arm of the Israeli propaganda machine.
The Murdoch machine comprises well over 100 newspapers – some of them among the world’s most well-known and influential, as well as dozens of TV channels and a formidable publishing empire. This power allows him to set the political agenda across much of the world. Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair claimed that Murdoch was an “unofficial member” of his cabinet and that he was one of the four most powerful men in the United Kingdom.
Political connections
President Joe Biden, meanwhile, has described him as the world’s “most dangerous” individual. His influence on American public life – through ventures like The Wall Street Journal and Fox News – is well documented. Less understood, however, are his close ties to Israel, and in particular, to its political leadership.
In 2010, Israeli newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth published a leaked list compiled by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of whom he considered his best sources of campaign contributions. Murdoch’s name appears on the list alongside the designation of number two, meaning Netanyahu considered him a close ally and one of the most likely sources of funds. An estimated 98% of Netanyahu’s contributions came from abroad.
Did Piers Morgan’s boss at Talk TV, Rupert Murdoch, fund Benjamin Netanyahu in the past?
At 93, Murdoch has relinquished much of the day-to-day running of his businesses to his son, Lachlan. Earlier this year, Lachlan traveled to Israel to meet Netanyahu and former prime minister Benny Gantz. While the details of the meetings remain murky, it is clear that support for the Israeli offensive in Gaza and beyond was a principal topic.
This was not the first time the younger Murdoch had met Netanyahu, In 2016, he flew to Israel for secret meetings with the prime minister, where, according to local newspaper Haaretz, he attempted to convince Murdoch to purchase Yedioth Ahronoth, and to start a Fox News-style TV channel for Israel.
Netanyahu, however, is far from the only prime minister with a close relationship with Murdoch. Ariel Sharon, for instance, has enjoyed a decades-long friendship with the Australian mogul. Murdoch stayed with him on his farm and was treated to a helicopter tour of Israel, where the supposed vulnerability of Israel from its hostile neighbours was stressed.
Financial ties
In addition to his political ties, Murdoch has several economic commitments to Israel. In 2010, he and banking billionaire Lord Jacob Rothschild each purchased equity stakes in Genie Energy and joined the company’s board of directors.
While he was on the board, Genie was awarded a contract to drill for oil and gas over approximately 400 square kilometres of Golan Heights, Syrian territory that Israel has illegally occupied since 1967. In effect, Genie was attempting to profit from an occupation deemed illegitimate under international law.
Murdoch also owned Israeli software company NDS, which was at the centre of a hacking scandal that brought down British television company ITV Digital. NDS’s activities helped huge numbers of Britons access paid TV for free, causing the corporation to fold under reduced revenues.
Another ethically questionable connection is Murdoch’s reliance on lobbying firm LLM Communications. The billionaire hired the group, co-founded by Lord Jonathan Mendelsohn, to help them overturn British government laws that ensured trade unions could ballot for workplace recognition. Lord Mendelsohn was the chairman of the Israel lobbying group Labour Friends of Israel, which was crucial in smearing and defeating the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, a lifelong peace activist and proponent of Palestinian rights.
Zionist hardliner
“My ventures in media are not as important to me as spreading my personal political beliefs,” Murdoch said, and supporting Israel and its expansionist policies is one of the core values the Australian has tirelessly worked towards.
At a 2009 meeting of the American Jewish Committee, he explained that he saw Israel as the linchpin underwriting Western civilisation:
In the West, we are used to thinking that Israel cannot survive without the help of Europe and the United States. I say to you: maybe we should start wondering whether we in Europe and the United States can survive if we allow the terrorists to succeed in Israel… In the end, the Israeli people are fighting the same enemy we are: cold-blooded killers who reject peace… who reject freedom… and who rule by the suicide vest, the car bomb and the human shield”.
In 2005, he wrote the foreword to the book, “Israel In The World: Changing Lives Through Innovation,” a fawning tome lionising Israel as an unqualified success that has built a robust democracy and a vibrant economy despite setbacks and threats from its neighbours.
He has also put his money where his mouth is: in 2007, his News Corp business donated to the Jerusalem Foundation, a group that builds illegal Israeli settlements in the West Bank, including in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhoods of Jerusalem.
Murdoch has led the fight against the global Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement, claiming that it represents an “ongoing war against the Jews.” “The war has entered a new phase,” he said.
“This is the soft war that seeks to isolate Israel by delegitimising it. The battleground is everywhere – the media, multinational organisations, NGOs. In this war, the aim is to make Israel a pariah.”
He made these comments at an Anti-Defamation League (ADL) event, where the organization presented him with its International Leadership Award. That the ADL, which purports to be a group standing against racism, would honor Murdoch with such an award, despite his networks pumping out relentless bigotry, underlines how little emphasis it places on genuine anti-racism and how much it works to simply promote Israeli interests.
The ADL is hardly the only Jewish organization that has heaped praise on the media mogul, however. The Simon Wiesenthal Center decorated him with their humanitarian laureate award; other groups, such as the Museum of Jewish Heritage and the American Jewish Committee, have also sung his praises. The United Jewish Appeal Federation of New York declared him their “humanitarian of the year” at a lavish ceremony, where Henry Kissinger presented him with the award.
Murdoch took over his father’s Adelaide newspaper in 1952 and quickly built a giant global enterprise, particularly across the English-speaking world. He used this power to spread his conservative agenda.
His British holdings, including The Sun, The Times and Sunday Times, constitute one-quarter of newspaper circulation in the country. His News Corp company also operates Sky television, TalkTV, TalkRadio and TalkSPORT.
Murdoch is widely believed to have swung both the 1992 elections for the Conservatives and the 1997 election towards Labour after Tony Blair struck a deal with him. “It’s difficult to think of a prime minister in the last 40 years who has won against the Murdoch instinct,” said former Guardian editor-in-chief Alan Rusbridger.
In the United States, Murdoch owns influential outlets such as The Wall Street Journal, The New York Post, and much of the Fox network. This is in addition to owning the influential Harper Collins publishing house.
He is known as an unusually hands-on owner, insisting that the tone and political line of all his outlets conform to his thinking. “For better or for worse, The News Corporation is a reflection of my thinking, my character, and my values,” he admitted.
This included wholehearted support for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. “We can’t back down now, where you hand over the whole of the Middle East to Saddam… I think Bush is acting very morally, very correctly, and I think he is going to go on with it,” he said. He also made sure that every one of his 175 global newspaper titles expressed similar vociferous support for the invasion.
Inside the industry, Fox News is known for its particularly strict, top-down editorial procedure. One former contributor claimed that working under Murdoch was “almost as if we were being monitored by a Stalinist system … it is very much an environment of fear”. A second confided that “if you don’t go along with the mind-set of the hierarchy, if you challenge them on their attitudes about things, you are history”.
But it is in his local Australia that his power reaches almost banana republic-like proportions. Murdoch owns 7 of the country’s 12 national or capital daily newspapers. In half of the country’s state or territory capitals, there is no local alternative to the Murdoch publication. Former prime minister, Kevin Rudd labeled his empire a “cancer” on Australian democracy.
Piers Morgan exposed
Until he recently went independent with his talk show, Piers Morgan was one of Murdoch’s most recognisable anchors. Hosting a popular talk show that reached millions, Morgan has played a crucial role in informing the public about Israel and Palestine.
Although he has claimed he is entirely neutral on the issue and does not support either side, Morgan has a number of close connections to Israel worth noting. Firstly, he has supported the Norwood Charity on a number of occasions, helping to raise hundreds of thousands of dollars for the group.
Norwood is headed by the aforementioned Israel lobbyist, Lord Mendelsohn, alongside his wife, Lady Nicola Mendelsohn. Lady Mendelsohn is also head of global business for social media giant Meta (the parent company of Facebook, WhatsApp and Instagram). She has consistently lobbied for Israeli causes and even met former president Shimon Peres. During her time at Meta, the company has begun to employ dozens of former agents of the Israeli spying group, Unit 8200 – all in sensitive positions within the company.
Facebook in particular has grown closer to Israel, even appointing former General Director of the Israeli Ministry of Justice Emi Palmor to its oversight board, the group that decides what direction the company goes and what content to allow and disallow on the platform.
Norwood’s previous president was Sir Trevor Chinn. Chinn is currently head of United Jewish Israel Appeal, a British-Israeli group whose goal is to increase young British Jews’ sense of connection to Israel. He is also on the executive committee of Britain’s largest Israel lobby group, BICOM, and has funded Labour Friends of Israel.
On October 22, at the height of Israel’s attack on Gaza, Morgan met Lady Mendelsohn in New York for dinner. Also present at the meal was Welsh singer Katherine Jenkins, who has raised money for the Jewish National Fund, the largest settler-building body in Palestine. It is unclear what they discussed, but given their careers and interests, it is hard to see how news from the Middle East did not arise.
Thus, while Morgan may have invited individuals from all points of the spectrum of debate on Gaza, he does appear to move in circles filled with top Israel lobbyists.
Unsurprisingly, given what we have seen, Murdoch’s top publications have displayed an overwhelming bias in their coverage of Israel’s war on Gaza, constantly defending Israeli actions and demonising both Palestinians and those who have opposed the violence.
On October 19, an Israeli airstrike targeted the Church of Saint Porphyrius in Gaza City, where hundreds of refugees had taken shelter. In describing the attack, the Wall Street Journal ran with the headline “Blast goes off at Orthodox Church Campus in Gaza,” turning what was one of the most notorious incidents in Israel’s months-long assault on Gaza into a regrettable accident.
At no point during the article did the Journal suggest that the “blast” might have been an attack or even hint at Israeli involvement.
The Journal has also led the attack on Americans protesting the onslaught. “Who’s Behind the Anti-Israel Protests: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis and others are grooming activists in the U.S. and across the West,” ran the headline of one story, clearly intended to vilify people opposing a genocide as agents of a foreign power.
Another story, entitled “Welcome to Dearborn, America’s Jihad Capital,” echoed Bush-era levels of Islamophobia in its attempts to equate the heavily Arab-American city with anti-American hatred. Campus demonstrations, meanwhile, were written off as “terrorist-glorifying protestors” who constitute “the left-wing counterparts to the Charlottesville mob that chanted ‘Jews will not replace us.’”
The newspaper has also published articles demanding the U.S. go to war with Iran. “The U.S. and Israel Need to Take Iran On Directly. Make the ayatollahs pay for sowing chaos through their Hamas, Hezbollah and Houthi proxies,” wrote former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett.
And for Palestine? The Wall Street Journal envisages its future as a giant arms factory making the weapons for Israel’s assault on Iran. In an op-ed entitled “A Plan for Palestinian Prosperity,” columnist Andy Kessler wrote that producing the weapons for the next Israeli attack would bring middle-class jobs to Gaza. “They can even work on Saturdays” and “without handouts from the politicised United Nations,” he claimed, although he cautioned that perhaps the explosives should be added elsewhere by more trustworthy employees.
No ‘babies beheaded’
Murdoch’s other publications have followed suit, relentlessly supporting Israel and demonizing its critics. Fox News, for example, spread the now-debunked assertion that Palestinian fighters had beheaded 40 Israeli babies on October 7. In reality, no babies were beheaded, although Israeli bombs or bullets have since decapitated countless Palestinian children.
The New York Post, meanwhile, published a remarkable article titled “Just how many of Gaza’s civilians are entirely ‘innocent’?” in which it repeatedly insinuated that essentially every adult in Gaza was a legitimate target, even using the word “civilian” in scare quotes.
On Israel/Palestine, journalists in corporate media are under enormous pressure to toe an ownership-imposed line. The New York Times, for example, has told its reporters not to employ words such as “genocide,” “slaughter,” and “ethnic cleansing” when discussing Israel’s actions. It has even forbidden the use of terms like “refugee camp,” “occupied territory,” or even “Palestine,” making it virtually impossible to report accurately on the situation.
Murdoch publications are surely no different. Indeed, this sort of stifling censorship has been in place for decades, if former employees are to be believed. In 2001, Sam Kiley, a former correspondent for The Times of London, revealed that he was instructed never to refer to Israel as “assassinating” or “executing” their opponents. And when he was tasked with interviewing an Israeli Army unit responsible for killing a 12-year-old Palestinian boy, he was asked to file the article without somehow mentioning the dead child at all.
Friends in high places
The nine-month-long Israeli attack on Gaza has inspired outrage across the world. While its standing has dropped even further in the Global South, Israel still maintains a considerable base of support in the West. This is down in no small part thanks to oligarchs such as Rupert Murdoch, who have marshaled their considerable resources to fight a committed media war in support of the Israeli state, attempting to hide its atrocities and shore up support for its expansionist project.
For Israel, which could not continue in its current form without outside support (particularly from the United States), the battle for public opinion is every bit as important as the fight on the ground. Fortunately for Netanyahu and his ilk, they can rely on Rupert Murdoch, who has for decades championed Israel’s cause and is now pushing his media empire into overdrive to defend the indefensible. If the pen is indeed mightier than the sword, then Rupert Murdoch is one of Israel’s most powerful weapons.
This post was originally published on Michael West.
More than half the companies in Australia’s battery supply chain are either equipment suppliers or offer integration services and maintenance, according to a new database launched by the Queensland government. The Battery Supply Chain Database, launched on Tuesday, lists companies that have existing capabilities in one of eight supply chain segments, as well as their…
High-end properties in Malaysian cities are attracting buyers from China as they move here for educational opportunities and to expand businesses, particularly in industries tied to efforts to establish a semiconductor hub in Southeast Asia, analysts said.
Post-pandemic sales have shown an influx in demand, causing property prices to surge by 15% since last year, according to the owner of a property firm in Penang, home to major global semiconductor factories. Other hot spots in Peninsular Malaysia are Johor Baru and Kuala Lumpur.
There has been an uptick in interest since early 2023, with roadshows and projects targeting international markets, said Tan Kian Aun, president of the Malaysian Institute of Estate Agents, or MIEA.
“In 2022, Chinese buyers were still reluctant, but since last year, we are seeing renewed interest,” he told BenarNews.
Earlier this year, local media reported that 24,765 Chinese nationals had participated in the Malaysia My Second Home program. It allows foreigners to get long-term visas to live in the country.
Penang is particularly attractive to Chinese buyers because of cultural amenities and because 40% of its population comprises ethnic Chinese Malaysians. The island has seen renewed interest in factories related to the manufacturing of batteries for electric cars, with Chinese businesses either renting or building new commercial properties, Tan said.
A crowd gathers at a shopping mall in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, April 26, 2023. (S. Mahfuz/BenarNews)
The 15% rise in property prices in upscale areas has been caused by increasing demand from students and businesses, according to Long Soo Keat, principal owner of Shijie Property, a Penang firm.
“We noticed this trend since last June, especially with students and businesses seeking to stay on the island,” Long told BenarNews, adding that Chinese customers prefer premium areas with modern amenities for food, entertainment, education and shopping.
“The properties cost over 1 million ringgit [US$212,200] or have rental prices starting at 4,000 ringgit [US$850] a month,” he said.
In the southern peninsular state of Johor, businesses from mainland China are keen on purchasing land for factory operations in the areas of Kulai and Pulai — mostly for microchips, said Chia Zi Jin, a Johor-based realty consultant.
He noted that favorable conditions for raw material sourcing and manufacturing were attracting Chinese investors.
“There has not been much interest yet to buy residential property in Johor but more Chinese nationals are looking to buy land, especially in the northern part of the state which is still cheaper than the southern part of the state, which is closer to Singapore,” he told BenarNews.
In July 2023, real estate analysts said they expected property values at the Forest City project in Johor to fall because Chinese developer Country Garden was facing financial woes that could disrupt resale and rental values.
However, in a Facebook post earlier this month, Johor Chief Minister Onn Hafiz Ghazi said Forest City’s Special Financial Zone was expected to be finalized in August. The zone is expected to attract financial institutions willing to invest in the project.
In May, Malaysian Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim announced plans by his government to invest 25 billion ringgit, or US$5.3 billion, in expanding the local semiconductor industry and to train 60,000 local engineers as part of this.
Link to Singapore
In Johor Baru, the upcoming Rapid Transit System, or RTS, link with its neighbor, Singapore, is driving property demand in the Malaysian coastal city.
Chia described it as a “game changer.”
Set to open in early 2026, the RTS is expected to integrate with the Thomson-East Coast Line on Singapore’s Mass Rapid Transit system, significantly reducing travel time caused by traffic congestion at the Johor Causeway, which connects the Malaysian state with the Lion City.
A bus crosses the Johor-Singapore Causeway from Johor Bahru, Malaysia, Nov. 29, 2021. (Vincent Thian/AP)
Chia said Singaporeans and Chinese nationals who work in Singapore were buying properties in Johor because of the currency exchange rate ranging around one Singapore dollar to about 3.5 ringgits.
“With RTS, they could go to Singapore in five minutes rather than getting stuck in a causeway jam for three hours,” he said.
Meanwhile, Kuala Lumpur, the capital city of Malaysia known for the iconic Petronas Twin Towers and Merdeka 118 — the second tallest building in the world — continues to attract Chinese investors to expand e-commerce and to open data centers, MIEA’s Tan said.
Chinese investors are also buying and renting properties in Sepang, a township 50 kilometers (31 miles) from Kuala Lumpur, largely due to the presence of Xiamen University Malaysia which offers degrees in the sciences, cybersecurity and communications, according to Tan.
One of the main reasons to study in Sepang is the cheaper cost of living compared to big cities in Beijing or Shanghai.
“The students come here because the township has modern facilities and there is a community of students here,” Tan said.
About 2,200 Chinese are among the 7,500 students from 44 countries studying at Xiamen’s first branch outside of China, according to Malaysian state news agency Bernama.
Overinvestment
Economist Yeah Kim Leng of Sunway University attributed the increasing Chinese interest to trade and investment ties between Malaysia and China. But he also warned that overinvestment by the government could lead to resource shortages and increased prices.
Skyscrapers, including the Petronas Twin Towers (L, rear) fill the Kuala Lumpur skyline in Malaysia, June 7, 2023. (S. Mahfuz/BenarNews)
The Malaysian Investment Development Authority reported that Chinese investments in Malaysia had reached 11.6 billion ringgit, or US$2.5 billion, in the first nine months of 2023. This is a significant portion of the 225 billion ringgit, or US$47.8 billion, total approved investments in the country during this period.
“This favorable environment has led to an increased interest from Chinese investors in setting up their businesses in Malaysia, with property being a core part of their operations,” Yeah told BenarNews. “Real estate ownership serves as a base for their activities.”
Still, he said, adequate resources and skilled labor are essential to sustain the influx of investment without causing harm.
For instance, he said too many data centers and energy-intensive industries could cause water and energy shortages.
“We must be cautious of not overheating the market,” Yeah said. “Overinvestment could result in excessive demand and strain on resources and drive up the prices.”
BenarNews is an RFA-affiliated online news organization.
This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Minderjeet Kaur for BenarNews.
FOI reveals ASIC and ACCC officials spent as much time talking about sanctioning Qantas executives as it takes a customer to rebook one of their 86,000 ‘ghost flights’. Rex Patrick reports on the untouchables.
No criticism is made of the judicial system in this article. The judiciary deal with the cases bought before them. But they have no business in deciding who gets charged and placed before them. That’s the role of government.
And that’s where the problem lies. It very much seems that whether you get charged by the government depends on who you are and whether you are among the ranks of the powerful and privileged, say a company executive.
The RoboDebt let-down
The RoboDebt Royal Commission report, handed down in July 2023, was scathing of former Prime Minister Scott Morrison, former government services minister Stuart Robert and former department of human services secretary Kathryn Campbell.
Despite the deaths that resulted from RoboDebt, despite all the terrible harm caused by the unlawful scheme, no-one at the top of the political and bureaucratic tree has been sanctioned.
Since the report was handed down, Scott Morrison has moved on to become a non-executive vice chairman of US consulting firm American Global Strategies and has also assumed a strategic advisor role with AUKUS investor DYNE Maritime, to assist the firm benefit from the $368B submarine program that he orchestrated when he was Prime Minister.
The only public news in the last 12 months that intersects with Morrison’s RoboDebt past was a revelation that Attorney-General Mark Dreyfus gave approval for the taxpayer to continue covering his RoboDebt legal fees.
Taxpayers to cover Scott Morrisons ongoing RoboDebt Legal Fees (Source: FOI)
Stuart Robert has moved on, as has Kathryn Campbell – both without sanction. Ms Campbell got an extra year on a top public service salary for very little real work, effectively a paid holiday, and still holds entitlement to wear an Order of Australia medal for “distinguished service to public administration”.
The that’s it.
News on June 6 that the National Anti-Corruption Commission (NACC) has decided not to pursue those individuals referred to it by the Royal Commission will come as a huge relief to anyone that might have been named in the sealed section of the Commissioner’s report.
Any further inquiries by the Australian Public Service Commissioner aren’t going to amount to anything more than a slap with the proverbial wet lettuce leaf, and indeed even that.
Untouchables
It just seems to be the way.
If you’re a large player in breach of the tax code, the Tax Office’s fear of a deep pocketed defendant will ensure a prosecution won’t go ahead, and its business as usual for the tax dodger. If you’re a small player in breach of the tax code, look out. Ask Richard Boyle.
If you’re a general in the Army and war crimes occur under your watch, feel free to pursue your career with immunity. After you leave the Army, you’ll come back regularly on contract work and maybe get a Vice-Regal appointment.
But if you call out the war crimes, you’ll find yourself doing a 5-year stint in an ACT jail (the Government will spend $2.4M in legal fees ensuring you get a bed there). Ask David McBride.
If you’re a large company who received millions in taxpayers’ JobKeeper funds during COVID, in circumstances where you were actually making a bigger profit in the pandemic than before it, enjoy the gift. But take just $50 more JobSeeker than you were entitled to and they’ll spend tens of thousands pursuing you.
The lesson is, don’t be the little guy.
Qantas misleading conduct
And that brings us back to Qantas.
In late August 2023 the ACCC lodged an application in the Federal Court alleging Qantas engaged in conduct that was “misleading or deceptive, or likely to mislead” and “made false or misleading representations” to customers and “engaged in conduct that was liable to mislead the public”.
In support of the application, the ACCC advised the Court that, despite having cancelled flights, Qantas continued to:
offer for sale tickets for over 8,000 cancelled flights for 2 or more days after cancellation. On average, such flights were offered for sale for approximately 16 days after cancellation;
display the details of over 10,000 Cancelled Flights for 2 or more days on the “Manage Booking” page of consumers who had purchased tickets on those flights, with no indication that the flight had been cancelled. On average, it took approximately 18 days for consumers who had purchased tickets on those flights to be notified of the cancellation of their flight.
The proceedings have been discontinued after Qantas admitted it misled tens of thousands of travellers and agreed to pay $120 million made up of remediation payments of $20 million to customers and a $100 million fine. Those penalties will not be paid by the Qantas executive, but by the shareholders (who include a bunch of little guys).
No penalty for Qantas executives
So, what of the senior executives purportedly responsible for the conduct of the company?
FOI reveals … not very much.
On September 12, 2023, ASIC did ask to speak to the ACCC about the Qantas action being taken in the Federal Court and whether the ACCC had looked into the involvement of Qantas officials and executives.
ACCC meeting request (Source: FOI)
The ACCC and ASIC met on Teams at 930 on Tuesday 19 September. They had another short Teams meeting on 27 September and a final meeting on 15 November. From there on in there’s been deafening silence. Nothing. Zilch. Nada.
Some have left the company with millions in bonuses. Others have been promoted to new positions. Everyone has moved forward, untouched.
The message that flows from this Qantas saga is that directors of large companies can engage in egregious conduct against their customers, and whilst there is risk for the shareholders who foot the bill for executive blunders and malfeasance, nothing will happen to them.
No punishment, no deterrence
There is no action from the corporate regulator and no deterrence either. It’s a free for all (except the paying public).
Like so many others that sit high in the chains of command in our society, they’re unaccountable and untouchable. Politicians could act, but it’s not really in their interest to do so. After all, what’s good for corporate goose must be good for political gander.
Over time, this sort of injustice destroys public trust in our regulatory institutions. It destroys faith in the system. At some point the price to be paid by all will be very high indeed. But by that time today’s privileged fat cats, members of a business and political elite who think they are above and beyond accountability, will have moved on.
“It’s very encouraging to hear that there are many Fijians in business in New Zealand. We are happy to support all initiatives that improve the well-being of our communities,” Ratu Inoke said.
Siva Naulago, owner of 679 Logistics, said: “iTaukei indigenous people’s point-of-difference is our communal strength.
“Solesolevaki, is an integral part of our culture, and is the coming together for the greater good. This is a more cost-effective and inclusive way of doing business.”
Rachael Mario, from the NZ Rotuman Community Centre, thanked the High Commissioner, saying: “We are very appreciative of His Excellency, Ratu Inoke, for taking the initiative to bring us all together”.
The business leaders agreed to work together with the aim of encouraging and mentoring more indigenous people into entrepreneurship.
And finding more business opportunities for women and youth, to increase family incomes.
Mexican street food, spicy Indian takeout, saucy, savory Chinese—there are plenty of different cuisines that are eaten and loved across America. But there’s something extra-comforting about Italian that leaves us obsessed, and it’s not hard to understand why. Italian dishes are equal parts cozy and delicious, thanks to the mix of carbs and the blend of simple, flavorful ingredients like tomatoes, garlic, basil, and cheese.
But while we will never say no to an Italian restaurant, pasta dishes are arguably at their best when cooked in the comfort of your own home, and preferably, when shared with loved ones. This is a philosophy that Richard Klein believes in wholeheartedly. The California-based entrepreneur loves cooking lasagna for friends and family, and his dinner party guests can’t get enough of his food either.
Klein wants to share his food with as many people as possible, but we can’t all fit around his dining table. So instead, he has brought his Italian cooking into everyone’s home, with the launch of Sunday Supper, a plant-based frozen Italian food brand.
Sunday Supper
Sunday Supper: easy, delicious Italian food, without animals
Klein’s cooking is great—his friends and family can attest to it. But he knew that to make something really show-stopping, he had to collaborate with someone at the top of the culinary game. So he teamed up with the award-winning Italian chef Celestino Drago to create mouthwatering frozen lasagna, ravioli, and manicotti products—all of which are made with simple, Italian ingredients and vegan cheese and meat—for Sunday Supper.
The brand’s meals, now available in several grocery stores across the US, have quickly gained popularity. The secret? Incredible taste and a mission-driven approach. Klein and Drago created food that people love to share, all while maintaining a commitment to quality, community, and sustainability.
We recently spoke with Klein to learn more about the origins of Sunday Supper, its mission to give back to the community and animals, and the brand’s exciting future. Here’s what he had to say.
Sunday Supper
VegNews: Take us back to the beginning. How did the idea for Sunday Supper originate?
Richard Klein: It started with the idea of making plant-based lasagna for friends. I was hosting Sunday suppers at my home and guests would rave about my lasagna—even my most carnivorous friends! All of that positive feedback inspired me. I continued making lasagnas and serving them to friends at get-togethers, collecting feedback, and refining the recipe. I decided to test the waters and started selling the lasagnas on a site [my friend and vegan marketing executive] Florian Radke and I quickly built, using a fulfillment center just outside of LA. In four months, we had sold 3,000 lasagnas, just from word-of-mouth.
VN: And now you’re selling them in frozen aisles nationwide, including the viral and upscale California grocery chain Erewhon. What is the secret to this success do you think?
RK: What sets us apart from other frozen food brands is taste. We’ve worked with incredible chefs, including a James Beard Award-winning chef, to get our product where it is. We consistently win in blind taste tests against both vegan and non-vegan competitors. So, taste and quality are number one, but our other strong focus is building community within the vegan circle and outside of it. As a brand, we are all about sharing amazing Italian food, hence our name Sunday Supper.
Sunday Supper
VN: You’re also focused on transforming the food industry, which was evident when you hosted an industry-led panel discussion on the future of food at Soho House recently. Why did you decide to take this step?
RK: We couldn’t help but notice that the vegan food community has been under attack. It has come up in discussion with many of our friends and colleagues. So we thought we’d bring that discussion to a public space. Hosting this panel was a way for us to bring together some incredible thought leaders in our community, both on the stage and in the audience.
VN: It’s true that vegan businesses, and indeed many other food businesses, are struggling to stay afloat right now. We’ve seen many plant-based brands and restaurants have to close their doors. What were some of the key takeaways from the panel?
RK: We need to stick together and support each other as a community. There are so many great vegan businesses out there, and while success starts with a great-tasting product, it takes much more to stick around—mostly the support of the vegan community and the non-vegan community, who will buy into it as long as it tastes good and the price isn’t outrageously more than non-vegan brands.
“There is so much ammunition fired against vegans from the meat and dairy lobbyists that we can’t have infighting within our community adding to any of the negativity. Support your plant-based restaurants and vegan brands.”
VN: The panel demonstrates how frozen food brands can be a big part of the conversation when it comes to bringing the vegan community together, and indeed anyone who cares about the future of food.
RK: When the conversation continued over a dinner of Sunday Supper mozzarella sticks and lasagna at Soho House with our panelists and a few friends, it really brought me back to the brand’s beginnings at my dinner parties. It was great and just what I envisioned for this brand: bringing people together around food to share ideas and community.
VN: Your dinners also often have another important purpose. Can you tell us about the inspiration behind hosting fundraisers for organizations food security nonprofit Support and Feed?
RK: It goes back to building community and helping our community. The dinners are a way for us to pay it forward, but also to invite vegan and non-vegan people to our dinner tables to experience the culture and food of Sunday Supper. What Maggie [Baird] and her team have built with Support & Feed is so inspiring, and we’ve loved aligning with them and supporting the cause over the last few years.
“We want to create Sunday Suppers in every major city to share incredible food and enjoy life while helping the planet, the animals, and our health.”
VN: It was also great to see you working with and fundraising for the animal welfare nonprofit Farm Sanctuary.
RK: Farm Sanctuary is also such an incredible organization. Our last event was the first time we worked with them, but I am visiting the sanctuary in Watkins Glen this summer to see how we can be more involved.
VN: To bring it back to the actual products, there’s no doubt that Sunday Supper’s meals are delicious—from your Three Cheeses Lasagna to your Mushroom Ravioli. We can’t wait to see more. How does the brand plan to continue innovating and expanding in the frozen food market?
RK: We plan to continue developing the most delicious Italian plant-based food, from appetizers and entrees to eventually pizza, creating products that taste just as good if not better than their original recipes with meat and dairy. Our line of Mozza Fritto (mozzarella sticks) will debut this Fall. And our line of singles—including a gluten-free eggplant parm—will also hit around the same time!
Sunday Supper
VN: Exciting! And where can consumers find all of your delicious products?
RK: We can be found in the frozen aisles of The Fresh Market, Erewhon, Bristol Farms, Besties, Central Market, Plum Market, and online retailers Fresh Direct, Good Eggs, and our own site. Soon, we will also be available on Thrive Market.
Less than half of Australian businesses are now considered innovation-active, according to new biennial data that reveals a tough economic environment is drying up the funds and skills needed for new ventures within firms. This innovation-active measure captures the introduction of new goods, services, or processes in addition to innovation that was under development or…
Elizabeth Mitchell received a notice from her commercial property insurance company in April that set off alarm bells.
Acadia Insurance, the insurer for the market, workspace, and wellness-center nonprofit she runs in West Cornwall, Connecticut, would no longer cover “bodily injury, property damage, or personal and advertising injury” from “contact with, exposure to, existence of, or presence of any ‘PFAS.’”
PFAS, as Mitchell soon discovered, is short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, which appear in everything from clothing to cleaning products to cookware and are linked to a wide range of health risks. Since most of these toxic substances don’t break down and are now found in the blood of people all over the world, they’ve earned the nickname “forever chemicals.”
An increasing number of Connecticut towns have found forever chemicals in their water supplies, and for decades, the river that runs through Mitchell’s community has been contaminated by hazardous waste, leading to hundreds ofmillions of dollars in settlements. Now, if forever chemicals were found in the local water supply and someone sued Mitchell’s nonprofit for exposure, the operation would be at risk of bankruptcy.
“Places like us, you can’t get sued,” said Mitchell. “We definitely could not sustain a lawsuit.”
Mitchell, who is my mother, is one of thousands of business owners who could be getting notices that their insurers will no longer cover PFAS risks.
As concerns about the dangers of forever chemicals rise nationwide and lawyers warn of a deluge of “astronomical” lawsuits, commercial insurers are quietly eliminating liability coverage for these chemicals’ health and ecological consequences. Such coverage exclusions can leave small businesses on the line for costly litigation and victims without recourse for their medical costs from life-threatening PFAS exposure.
This trend “is definitely well underway,” said John Ellison, an attorney who works on behalf of insurance policyholders at the global law firm Reed Smith. “Certainly large portions of the insurance industry have decided that they’re not interested in selling liability insurance coverage for PFAS.”
Acadia Insurance declined to comment.
Companies are so worried about the cost of future PFAS litigation that they have labeled these chemicals the “new asbestos,” in reference to the once-ubiquitous building product whose links to cancer have led insurers to pay out nearly $100 billion in claims and sent dozens of firms into bankruptcy.
According to The New York Times, a defense lawyer recently warned at an industry conference that PFAS lawsuits could “dwarf anything related to asbestos” and that plastic-industry executives should “do what you can, while you can” to prepare for the onslaught of lawsuits “before you get sued.”
The elimination of PFAS insurance coverage is happening amid a nationwide crackdown on the chemicals. The Environmental Protection Agency just designated two widely used forever chemicals as “hazardous substances” and set the first-ever limits on these chemicals in drinking water. At least six states including Colorado, Kentucky, and Maine have enacted bills related to PFAS regulation this year.
Yet insurers’ fears about not being able to afford PFAS lawsuits may be misplaced, said Joanne Doroshow, executive director of New York Law School’s Center for Justice & Democracy. The industry had stored away more than one trillion dollars in surplus profits by the end of 2021 — an all-time high.
“We have insurance in order to protect us and we pay a lot of premiums to these companies with the expectation that when there is a claim they’ll pay it — and they don’t want to pay it,” Doroshow said.
Dumping risk
First discovered in the late 1930s, forever chemicals have been commonly used across a wide range of consumer products since the mid-20th century. Not long after, major PFAS manufacturers like 3M and DuPont began conducting animal studies that uncovered disturbing findings, such as that a low daily dose of these chemicals could kill a monkey within weeks.
Yet the multinational conglomerates followed in the footsteps of Big Tobacco and hid the dangers of PFAS from the general public for more than 40 years. This included suppressing their own research and spending large sums to quietly settle lawsuits and fight federal regulations. A 2015 report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention discovered that PFAS can be found in the blood of 97 percent of Americans.
In 1999, a West Virginian farmer filed a lawsuit against DuPont for contaminating his water with forever chemicals that allegedly killed his cattle. Since then, law firms have filed 9,800 suits alleging that forever-chemical exposure has led to cancer, heart damage, and other harms, resulting in almost $17 billion in settlements across 140 industries, according to a 2023 report by the Seattle-based consulting firm Milliman.
This March, a court approved a multibillion-dollar settlement from the multinational conglomerate 3M after the manufacturer was accused of contaminating public drinking water systems nationwide with forever chemicals that it had long been producing.
Now, insurers are working to limit their risk by dropping their PFAS coverage.
“Insurers, mindful of the high cost of defending and indemnifying their insured businesses’ PFAS risks, have begun modifying or reinterpreting business insurance policy provisions to mitigate their own coverage burden,” wrote attorneys from Minnesota-based Nilan Johnson Lewis, a law firm that represents businesses across a wide range of industries, in an online report.
Last year, the Insurance Services Office, a property and casualty insurance advisory organization that develops and publishes policy language for insurers, endorsed the exclusion of PFAS coverage. The organization’s endorsement provided language for insurers to “broadly exclude bodily injury, property damage and personal and advertising injury related exposures associated with PFAS” from business owners’ general liability insurance policies.
“Every sophisticated insurance company worth their salt would have [PFAS] on their radar as a potential concern,” said Chip Merlin, founder of Merlin Law Group, a litigation firm that advocates for the rights of policyholders. “They learned these lessons through things like asbestos.”
Over the years, hundreds of thousands of people across the United States have filed compensation claims for asbestos-related injuries, with the average settlement ranging from $1 to $2 million. In 2019, insurers saw $92 billion in losses from asbestos liabilities.
Erik Olson, a senior strategic director at the environmental advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council, said PFAS lawsuits are more likely to target big businesses like DuPont or 3M, rather than neighborhood nonprofits.
So far, “the folks getting sued are those that have deep pockets, where [victims] can get substantial payouts,” said Olson.
But this does not mean small businesses are immune from future claims, said Ellison, the Reed Smith attorney. Ellison has represented larger businesses experiencing PFAS-related lawsuits, but suspects smaller businesses will experience similar litigation down the line.
“Any small business that is in the stream of commerce that PFAS is a part of, they are all subject to being sued,” he said. “Those companies have a big fight on their hands about whether they have insurance to defend those claims. It’s naive to say they’re not at risk.”
Labeling PFAS a pollutant
Along with stripping PFAS coverage from their plans moving forward, insurance companies are using long-standing pollution exclusions to avoid PFAS lawsuit payouts in other instances where business insurance policies did not explicitly bar PFAS liability coverage.
Now these exclusions are paying legal dividends for insurers aiming to avoid PFAS liabilities.
In 2022, a U.S. district court judge ruled that an insurer’s “total pollution exclusion” meant it did not have to cover a Dalton, Georgia, recycling facility after town residents alleged they were injured by PFAS chemicals the plant discharged into local waterways.
In a New York case that same year, an appellate court judge likewise ruled that insurers’ pollution exclusions meant they didn’t have to cover the maker of nonstick, heat-resistant materials in lawsuits claiming the manufacturer polluted groundwater with PFAS chemicals. The firm that represented the insurers called the ruling a “significant win for the insurance industry” and their client, who “was facing potentially enormous” expenses.
Some of these pollution exclusions also bar coverage for the testing and removal of pollutants from the environment, which could potentially be used to avoid payouts for PFAS cleanup efforts. Removing PFAS from the environment is incredibly costly: One study in Minnesota found that removing forever chemicals from wastewater streams in the state would cost between $14 and $28 billion over 20 years. The American Water Works Association estimates PFAS cleanup in drinking water nationally would amount to between $3.2 and $5.7 billion annually.
With this in mind, avoiding PFAS lawsuit payouts is par for the course for insurers, said Doroshow. “It’s about dumping risk,” she said. “That seems to be the business model of insurance companies.”
Yet Doroshow questions if PFAS pose a dire risk to insurers’ profits.
In the decade leading up to 2020, industry data showed that total commercial insurance payouts “had not spiked and generally tracked the rate of inflation and growth of population,” according to research by Doroshow and her colleagues. Meanwhile, insurers like Travelers — a major player in property and casualty insurance — hit their largest-ever profits this January, while premiums for policyholders soared.
Regardless, noted Doroshow and her collaborators, industry leaders “publicly spin the notion that the industry is financially beleaguered and cannot pay claims without significantly raising rates.”
While collusion to raise prices is illegal in many businesses, certain activities by insurers are exempt from federal antitrust laws, allowing them to share information about past losses and make future coverage and premium decisions accordingly.
“It’s really a function of a completely unregulated industry,” said Dorowshow. “They don’t have any federal regulation.”
The state of affairs is concerning for small business managers like Mitchell, who are now getting PFAS exclusion notices from their insurers.
“I’m the steward of this nonprofit and then the insurer sends me this letter, so what am I really covered for?” said Mitchell. “I like to believe that nobody would ever come in and sue, but I never know.”
A new report from the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization, or FAO, has found that more fish were farmed worldwide in 2022 than harvested from the wild, an apparent first.
Last week, the FAO released its annual report on the state of aquaculture — which refers to the farming of both seafood and aquatic plants — and fisheries around the world. The organization found that global production from both aquaculture and fisheries reached a new high — 223.3 million metric tons of animals and plants — in 2022. Of that, 185.4 million metric tons were aquatic animals, and 37.8 million metric tons were algae. Aquaculture was responsible for 51 percent of aquatic animal production in 2022, or 94.4 metric tons.
The milestone was in many ways an expected one, given the world’s insatiable appetite for seafood. Since 1961, consumption of seafood has grown at twice the annual rate of the global population, according to the FAO. Because production levels from fisheries are not expected to change significantly in the future, meeting the growing global demand for seafood almost certainly necessitates an increase in aquaculture.
Though fishery production levels fluctuate from year to year, “it’s not like there’s new fisheries out there waiting to be discovered,” said Dave Martin, program director for Sustainable Fisheries Partnerships, an international organization that works to reduce the environmental impact of seafood supply chains. “So any growth in consumption of seafood is going to come from aquaculture.”
But the rise of aquaculture underscores the need to transform seafood systems to minimize their impact on the planet. Both aquaculture and fisheries — sometimes referred to as capture fisheries, as they involve the capture of wild seafood — come with significant environmental and climate considerations. What’s more, the two systems often depend on each other, making it difficult to isolate their climate impacts.
A worker removes a stack of oyster baskets during harvest.
Bloomberg Creative / Getty Images
“There’s a lot of overlap between fisheries and aquaculture that the average consumer may not see,” said Dave Love, a research professor at the Center for a Livable Future at Johns Hopkins University.
Studies have shown that the best diet for the planet is one free of animal protein. Still, seafood generally has much lower greenhouse gas emissions than other forms of protein from land-based animals. And given many people’s unwillingness or inability to go vegan, the FAO recommends transforming, adapting, and expanding sustainable seafood production to feed the world’s growing population and improve food security.
But “there’s a lot of ways to do aquaculture well, and there’s a lot of ways to do it poorly,” said Martin. Aquaculture can result in nitrogen and phosphorus being released into the natural environment, damaging aquatic ecosystems. Farmed fish can also spread disease to wild populations, or escape from their confines and breed with other species, resulting in genetic pollution that can disrupt the fitness of a wild population. Martin points to the diesel fuel used to power equipment on certain fish farms as a major source of aquaculture’s environmental impact. According to an analysis from the climate solutions nonprofit Project Drawdown, swapping out fossil fuel-based generators on fish farms for renewable-powered hybrids would prevent 500 million to 780 million metric tons of carbon emissions by 2050.
Other areas for improvement will vary depending on the specific species being farmed. In 2012, a U.N. study found that mangrove forests — a major carbon sink — have suffered greatly due to the development of shrimp and fish farming. Today, industry stakeholders have been exploring how new approaches and techniques from shrimp farmers can help restore mangroves.
Meanwhile, wild fishing operations present their own environmental problems. For example, poorly managed fisheries can harvest fish more quickly than wild populations can breed, a phenomenon known as overfishing. Certain destructive wild fishing techniques also kill a lot of non-targeted species, known as bycatch, threatening marine biodiversity.
But the line between aquaculture and fish harvested from the wild isn’t as clear as it may seem. For example, pink salmon that are raised in hatcheries and then released into the wild to feed, mature, and ultimately be caught again are often marketed as “wild caught.” Lobsters, caught wild in Maine, are often fed bait by fisherman to help them put on weight. “It’s a wild fishery,” said Love — but the lobster fishermen’s practice of fattening up their catch shows how human intervention is present even in wild-caught operations.
On the flipside, in a majority of aquaculture systems, farmers provide their fish with feed. That feed sometimes includes fish meal, says Love, a powder that comes from two sources: seafood processing waste (think: fish guts and tails) and wild-caught fish.
All of this can result in a confusing landscape for climate- or environmentally-conscientious consumers who eat fish. But Love recommends a few ways in which consumers can navigate choice when shopping for seafood. Buying fresh fish locally helps shorten supply chains, which can lower the carbon impact of eating aquatic animals. “In our work, we’ve found that the big impact from transport is shipping fresh seafood internationally by air,” he said. Most farmed salmon, for example, sold in the US is flown in.
From both a climate and a nutritional standpoint, smaller fish and sea vegetables are also both good options. “Mussels, clams, oysters, seaweed — they’re all loaded with macronutrients and minerals in different ways” compared to fin fish, said Love.
Landmark verdict against Chiquita marks first time major US company held liable for funding human rights abuses abroad
A Florida court has ordered Chiquita Brands International to pay $38m to the families of eight Colombian men murdered by a paramilitary death squad, after the American banana giant was shown to have financed the terrorist organisation from 1997-2004.
The landmark ruling late on Monday came after 17 years of legal efforts and is the first time that the fruit multinational has paid out compensation to Colombian victims, opening the way for thousands of others to seek restitution.
How was the experience of growing up on the border with Mexico? When did you realize that you wanted to be an artist?
I was born in Cancun, Mexico, and raised there for about six years. My mom’s side of the family is from Reynosa Tamaulipas, and then the bordering city of Reynosa is McAllen, Texas. And then I moved to Austin, but I don’t recall a time necessarily where I was like, “I want to be an artist.” I started playing guitar when I was nine in Austin, and I think I just knew the guitar was my tool to express myself, that it was the only way that I could make myself understood, the only way that I could say what I wanted to say, that was my voice, and I didn’t think that that was being an artist until I was maybe 15. What shaped my need to express and my need to create as a tool, as my voice was being raised by a single mom, and as an only child throughout Mexico and Texas.
How was the process of discovering the guitar, and learning to play it? Are you self-taught, or did you take any classes?
I went to a camp that was called Natural Ear Music Camp, so I learned by ear. Then I would just learn different classic rock songs by ear, so I was self-taught in the way that I taught myself how to write music, and I was self-motivated. The process of discovering the guitar wasn’t that fun, because I came to the guitar during a time when it wasn’t culturally acceptable for girls to play, especially lead guitar, which is what I prefer. There were a lot of obstacles and a lot of times when I wanted to stop playing because it wasn’t fun. It took a lot of miracle moments for me to stay with it, and eventually find a community to want to be a part of.
You funded She Shreds Magazine. What was the main motivation to fund that project?
The first time that multiple of my worlds came together, which was like my anger, my desire to express through music, and also my desire for community support, was at the Girls Rock camp in Portland, Oregon. My mom drove me out there when I was a teenager, and that’s when I learned about women’s impact in music history, it was the first time I saw women play, and I got to ask other women questions, and beyond women, women of color, too. It was a point where I realized like, “This actually exists, and we exist. It’s just very, very hidden.” I wanted to create She Shreds, because up until that point, I felt alone in music-making, and in looking for, again, support and community. I wanted to make She Shreds as a space to help other women and women of color find community and resources that are taught by other women.
Running a magazine also comes with the business side of it. How was the process of managing both the editorial and the operational side of it?
The idea for the magazine came when I was 18, and it took until I was 20 or so years old to finally put an issue out. That took organizing a festival, raising money, and bringing volunteers together to write and photograph, edit, and illustrate the magazine. The process of putting the magazine together was new for me. I didn’t go to college, this was my college.
There was so much learning that I was just fascinated, excited, and determined. Going and finding financial support, I’d never done that before. I was so passionate about She Shreds and this needed to exist. I think the first five years were just like, “Wow. I’m learning so much about myself, and I’m learning so much about marketing, and business, and fundraising,” but really it’s just because this magazine had never really been done before, I was able to just do it my way and in collaboration with other artists and other musicians. That was really fun. As things started to get more business-oriented, the magazine had already been around for 10 issues or so, and we had gotten established with brand partnerships.
It started to get a little bit more boring. It wasn’t learning anymore. It was just repetition, and doing the same things. That’s what burned me out. For me, the most fun parts were when I didn’t know anything, and then once I started to know, and I started to just do the same things, I lost interest. It didn’t feel like it was doing anything new. That’s when I decided to stop, because if I’m not doing something that’s actually changing a need or filling a gap or something, then I’d rather stop and rethink why this needs to exist, and then come back to it when it’s needed again.
It’s not easy to say, “Okay, this is enough,” particularly, when it’s something that you put so much effort into it.
Luckily, for me there are so many things that I do, there are so many outlets, and Reyna Tropical is an extension of She Shreds. They’re sisters. So, it’s not like I’m not doing She Shreds. It’s just that I’m doing it another way. Reyna Tropical will, and is, inspiring me, and giving me a different perspective to come back to She Shreds in a way that is refreshing and new, and needed by people today.
I’ve also just learned why rush it? Why force it? Just give it the time it needs, and it’ll come back, and it’ll feel really good, rather than come at it when you’re burnt out, and you don’t have anything to give, and you’re just dehydrating yourself.
How did you start to feel comfortable with singing and being a frontwoman onstage?
It was all difficult for me. I didn’t want to do any of it, singing or being a frontwoman, and it was really awkward at first. I didn’t know how to move, and I was really shy, and I was really in the back, hiding behind Sumo. But as the guitar for me was less about being artistic and more about expressing, and my voice started to become that intuitively, so I didn’t have a choice, because I started to get to know myself through that process.
I think that the theme between the guitar, She Shreds, and singing is all three of these things have taught me so much about myself, have brought me so much education, internally, and externally, about the world, and have brought me to different communities and have allowed me to learn what the people need, what the people want, and that feels important for me, as my way of connecting in my lifetime.
That’s what singing was starting to do, it was starting to guide me, and I just had no choice. I think it was maybe summer 2021, after the pandemic that we played a show in LA, and everyone knew the words, and it was just this new energy, and it brought me into my huge frontperson personality.
From then on out, I needed that energy, I needed that complete release, so that’s what I tried to channel onstage, and that’s what I still do now. But it took at least five years to get there with Reyna Tropical. I’m still working, vocally, on being confident. It’s still a process, but I think I have a clear vision of where I want to go.
From what you are saying, it also seems like your intuition guided you to also be with the flow.
Right, which is a scary thing to trust. In my experience, it guides you and lands you in places, where you can’t quite consciously make those decisions. You just have to say yes, follow it, and trust.
How do you think that trust also comes into creating music?
I think any relationship that we have with each other. For me, connecting with people is important, because it sets the foundation for how my relationship with everything else is going to be, with animals, with the Earth, with water, with everything, and I feel like music is a relationship.
It’s one of my deepest, most intimate relationships, and it’s the language that I feel like I can connect to my ancestors with. I feel like that music is sort of the direct translation of my intuition, and all of the different communications that happen through that ancestrally, and subconsciously.
I just feel like everything about music is about trust, and it’s about not knowing what’s going to come through, it’s about not knowing how it even is formed, or where it’s even coming from, and you just have to trust that when it comes through, you have to say yes, and even collaborating with people. I can meet you for 10 minutes, and just feel a trust there, and we can write, but if I don’t, it’s not going to come through, it’s not going to flow, and it’s not going to be offered to the people in the most transformative way. I need to trust the collaborator, but, also, to spend time on the land, and spend time with the people of that land, so that it’s reciprocal. It’s not just me needing to trust them, or it. It’s it and them needing to trust me too.
How do you know when you are done with writing a song or an album?
I need pressure, I need deadlines. I need a little bit of chaos to make it all come together and be released. Otherwise, I’m just going to keep trying to perfect it. That’s always been the practice with Reyna Tropical write something for four hours, and then just release it right then and there. What you wrote is what you wrote. I guess the trust is just I’m going to trust that whoever needs to pick this up, whoever needs to receive this is going to, and if it works, it works, and if it doesn’t, it doesn’t. What do I have to lose?
When you toured with your first EP you sold out shows with no manager or marketing efforts. How was that experience?
If it wasn’t for people asking for it, or for things like that happening, I would have never followed up with Reyna Tropical. It wasn’t my dream to be a singer or frontwoman. Because I was singing in this project, I didn’t care to do it. I never really wanted to play live in it. It was just an experiment for intuitive expression, and it wasn’t meant to be played live or anything.
Doors started to open. Bomba Estereo asked us to go on tour with them, and then they took us to Colombia, and then all kinds of things started to open up for Reyna Tropical, so it was clear that people wanted it, and so I diverted my attention to it. To us, selling out shows was just a testament of how important this music was, partly because of the drive that was coming through, but also [how important it was] to the people listening. It’s another one of those things where it’s like I feel like I didn’t have a choice. That’s what people were asking for, and that’s the whole thing. I just listen to what the people want, and if they don’t want it, then I’m not going to do it.
You just mentioned that back then doing music with Reyna Tropical was not your dream. You recently released a new album with this project titled Malegria. Are you in a place where this is your dream?
I’m in a place where I’m completely open to the possibilities and what the opportunities are to come from it. I could go either way. I’m prepared for it to not be received, and for it to not be distributed, or for it not to be loved, and I can change my life, and go to the beach, and do whatever if that doesn’t happen, but I’m also prepared for it to be extremely well-received, and for the doors to open for this to be my life, for the rest of my life.
This is my dream because my dream is to connect with people through music, to investigate diasporic experiences, to research history as it’s impacted by Black and brown people, and to tell that truth. My dream is also to continue to create spaces where Black and brown people and Indigenous folks and women can feel their most potent potential. My dream is to create those spaces, and I think I believe that Reyna Tropical and Malegria are here to do that. If they do that, then that will be my dream fulfilled, to just create bigger and bigger spaces with those visions, and that ethos in mind. But if that doesn’t happen, then I’ll just try something else.
You are describing a mindset where you are open to possibilities. I wonder if under this vision there is room for expectations or to think about failure.
The biggest failure would have been to not have done it, because that was a possibility. If this album wasn’t coming out right now, I would have felt like I missed an opportunity. This album, for me, is the most accurate expression of what I went through the last four years, and, for me, it couldn’t have been a better album–for what I wanted to say to myself, for the documentation that I wanted to have for this moment–it couldn’t have been better.
I am so extremely happy about being able to have done that, to be able to have expressed it so accurately, for myself, period. That’s the biggest success I could have ever possibly had. Whether people want to write about it, or want to listen to it, or whatever, is all extra. I’m excited when people want to listen to it, and I’m super excited when people receive it in the way it was meant to be received, and that’s like, “Wow, I can’t believe that people can pick up on that.” And, “Wow, how powerful of a communication tool music is when people who don’t even know me know exactly what I’m saying.” But, there’s no failure in it because I created the perfect thing for myself.
Your bandmate Sumo died in 2022. In one of your recent Instagram posts, you mentioned that this album is a story about your loss and grief, and along the way, you felt a kind of imposter syndrome as well. How was the process of going through this grief, the collaboration that existed between you and Sumo, and creating this album without him?
When someone so close to you passes away, someone that, especially, you were dedicating your whole life to, and it was all very weaved together, the question, inevitably, comes. Maybe you don’t even have to be that close. I just think when something so great like grief comes through, one of the first questions is, “Who am I without this person? What am I capable of without this person? Am I capable of it? Of anything?” I just got completely filled with insecurities, because I didn’t really know what life could be like without him. I had to start over in a lot of ways. It’s interesting because I had that confidence before he passed away of, “This is who I am. This is what I do,” but for whatever reason, when he passed away and the grief came, I, all of a sudden, just felt like I needed him so badly.
It just took time to come back to myself, to who I am, and to not be completely enveloped by the grief, and it was a huge opportunity for a rebirth. It was like you were zapped completely clean slate, and it was like being lost in that empty room, and being like, “Wait, this doesn’t look familiar,” but then being able to bring in elements, redecorate the room, and not bring in the things that you didn’t want. My insecurities just came from grief. I don’t even know if they were mine. I think it was what grief does to somebody.
What excites you about the future?
I’m grateful to be in a position where people are interested in listening to me, so I’m excited to get my words, and my expression more and more concise, so that I can say things in a way that people can receive them, and it’s more accessible. I’m in this place where I have no idea what the future brings, and I love that feeling. I love not knowing. But in the meantime, I’m just going to keep studying, practicing, and learning, so that when those opportunities come, my words come, and I can be ready to connect with people.
Being mindful about our plastic consumption and finding alternative ways to consume, sustainable for our everyday life (reusable glass, stainless steel, bamboo utensils)
BroadAgenda is featuring a short series of profiles on amazing women and LGBTIQ + folks. You’re about to meet Dr Bomikazi Zeka.She’s an Assistant Professor in Finance and Financial Planning with the Faculty of Business, Government and Law, University of Canberra.
If you were sitting next to someone at a dinner party, how would you explain your work and research in a nutshell?
I’ve always wondered why women receive the short end of the stick when it comes to our financial outcomes. I often found myself asking questions like why do women have lower savings rates then men? Why are older women more likely to be impoverished? Why does parenthood financially penalise women more than men?
I want to know the answers to these questions which is why so much of my work focuses on understanding how women’s social identities influence their financial outcomes. More broadly my work takes an intersectional approach to understand how parts of our identity such as race, age, gender, culture, marital status, family dynamics and employment influences women’s savings trajectories, financial security, and financial independence.
What are you currently working on that’s making you excited or that has legs?
I recently published an article for The Conversation on ‘Financial abuse from an intimate partner? Three ways you can protect yourself’. I was both terrified and excited about putting this out there because it’s such a difficult topic to broach. As much as we’ve been making huge strides in highlighting the challenges women face when it comes to financial planning, we also need to talk about this silent assassin called ‘financial abuse’ which jeopardises our safety.
Most people still think of financial abuse as something that only occurs within marriages or romantic partnerships, but it can happen in families too (between siblings or children and parents). When money becomes entangled within our personal relationships, it can become an incredibly difficult situation to navigate.
This is why I want to educate people about the signs of financial abuse which is the first step to empowering yourself and getting away from that situation.
Let’s wind back the clock a bit. Why did you go into this field? What was compelling about it?
I remember getting pocket money as a child which I suppose was my parents’ way of teaching me how to manage money. But I also remember my parents borrowing my pocket money to pay for something and promising to pay it back with interest. I loved the idea of making more money from lending money and it made much more sense than being paid to do chores! Somewhere along the way I started to realise that the scales are unbalanced and despite working for money, many people are still left disadvantaged.
What impact do you hope your work has?
My dream is to demystify and destigmatize conversations about money because I believe in the old adage that ‘a problem shared is a problem halved’. When we get to a place when we can talk openly about finances, ask questions and share knowledge freely with one another we can hopefully start changing attitudes about money talk. There are too many people that are scared, embarrassed and perhaps even ashamed to admit they aren’t sure how to approach things when it comes to personal finances. While I understand why people may feel this way, burying your head in the sand won’t make those emotions and problems go away.
So, if you know a thing or two about money, I’d encourage you to pass that knowledge on. Tell a friend, talk to your kids, siblings or cousins – you could even offer to mentor someone if you have the knowledge and skills to do so. We all have a part to play, and you never know whose life you might change by simply sharing what you know.
As they say, knowledge is power, and when you know better, you do better, and in turn those around you become better too! And isn’t that what empowerment is all about?
Do you view yourself as feminist researcher? Why? Why not? What does the word mean to you in the context of your own values, and also your work?
Oh definitely! Among other things, feminism is also about women having equal access to economic opportunities and being able to use those opportunities to achieve financial security. And when we get to that point, we should be unapologetic about it because everyone deserves equal access and financial security.
What have you discovered in your work that has most surprised or enchanted you?
Before I started doing research on women’s financial planning, I’d never truly understood the extent to which our gender can affect our financial outcomes.
Learning that so many factors negatively impact women compared to men and the cumulative effect this has on our personal finances deeply resonated with me.
It’s obviously not a pleasant surprise, but it was a huge eye-opener for me because I never considered how inequality in one area of our lives can result in inequality in other areas. For example, someone who is experiencing job insecurity is also likely to have inadequate access to health care, experience food insecurity, have difficulty with transportation access as well as deal with housing insecurity. This is not even to mention the toll this all takes on our mental health which creates another obstacle for a person to contend with.
Is there anything else you want to say?
There’s so much that we take at face value when it comes to women’s finances, but when we consider how social and economic identities play a role, we start scratching the surface. After we understand this, then we can find a more nuanced approach to help women achieve their financial goals and figure out how to help the next generation of women.
Today is the 24th anniversary of renegade and failed businessman George Speight’s coup in 2000 Fiji. The elected coalition government headed by Mahendra Chaudhry, the first and only Indo-Fijian prime minister of Fiji, was held hostage at gunpoint for 56 days in the country’s new Parliament by Speight’s rebel gunmen in a putsch that shook the Pacific and the world.
Emerging recently from almost 24 years in prison, former investigative journalist and publisher Josefa Nata — Speight’s “media minder” — is now convinced that the takeover of Fiji’s Parliament on 19 May 2000 was not justified.
He believes that all it did was let the “genie of racism” out of the bottle.
He spoke to Islands Business Fiji correspondent, Joe Yaya on his journey back from the dark.
The Fiji government kept you in jail for 24 years [for your media role in the coup]. That’s a very long time. Are you bitter?
I heard someone saying in Parliament that “life is life”, but they have been releasing other lifers. Ten years was conventionally considered the term of a life sentence. That was the State’s position in our sentencing. The military government extended it to 12 years. I believe it was out of malice, spitefulness and cruelty — no other reason. But to dwell in the past is counterproductive.
If there’s anyone who should be bitter, it should be me. I was released [from prison] in 2013 but was taken back in after two months, ostensibly to normalise my release papers. That government did not release me. I stayed in prison for another 10 years.
To be bitter is to allow those who hurt you to live rent free in your mind. They have moved on, probably still rejoicing in that we have suffered that long. I have forgiven them, so move on I must.
Time is not on my side. I have set myself a timeline and a to-do list for the next five years.
Jo Nata’s journey from the dark, Islands Business, April 2024. Image: IB/Joe Yaya/USP Journalism
What are some of those things?
Since I came out, I have been busy laying the groundwork for a community rehabilitation project for ex-offenders, released prisoners, street kids and at-risk people in the law-and-order space. We are in the process of securing a piece of land, around 40 ha to set up a rehabilitation farm. A half-way house of a sort.
You can’t have it in the city. It would be like having the cat to watch over the fish. There is too much temptation. These are vulnerable people who will just relapse. They’re put in an environment where they are shielded from the lures of the world and be guided to be productive and contributing members of society.
It will be for a period of up to six months; in exceptional cases, 12 months where they will learn living off the land. With largely little education, the best opportunity for these people, and only real hope, is in the land.
Most of these at-risk people are [indigenous] Fijians. Although all native land are held by the mataqali, each family has a patch which is the “kanakana”. We will equip them and settle them in their villages. We will liaise with the family and the village.
Apart from farming, these young men and women will be taught basic life skills, social skills, savings, budgeting. When we settle them in the villages and communities, we will also use the opportunity to create the awareness that crime does not pay, that there is a better life than crime and prison, and that prison is a waste of a potentially productive life.
Are you comfortable with talking about how exactly you got involved with Speight?
The bulk of it will come out in the book that I’m working on, but it was not planned. It was something that happened on the day.
You said that when they saw you, they roped you in?
Yes. But there were communications with me the night prior. I basically said, “piss off”.
So then, what made you go to Parliament eventually? Curiosity?
No. I got a call from Parliament. You see, we were part of the government coalition at that time. We were part of the Fijian Association Party (led by the late Adi Kuini Speed). The Fiji Labour Party was our main coalition partner, and then there was the Christian Alliance. And you may recall or maybe not, there was a split in the Fijian Association [Party] and there were two factions. I was in the faction that thought that we should not go into coalition.
There was an ideological reason for the split [because the party had campaigned on behalf of iTaukei voters] but then again, there were some members who came with us only because they were not given seats in Cabinet.
Because your voters had given you a certain mandate?
A masked gunman waves to journalists to duck during crossfire. Image: IPI Global Journalist/Joe Yaya/USP Journalism
Well, we were campaigning on the [indigenous] Fijian manifesto and to go into the [coalition] complicated things. Mine was more a principled position because we were a [indigenous] Fijian party and all those people went in on [indigenous] Fijian votes. And then, here we are, going into [a coalition with the Fiji Labour Party] and people probably
accused us of being opportunists.
But the Christian Alliance was a coalition partner with Labour before they went into the election in the same way that the People’s Alliance and National Federation Party were coalition partners before they got into [government], whereas with us, it was more like SODELPA (Social Democratic Liberal Party).
So, did you feel that the rights of indigenous Fijians were under threat from the Coalition government of then Prime Minister Mahendra Chaudhry?
Perhaps if Chaudhry was allowed to carry on, it could have been good for [indigenous] Fijians. I remember the late President and Tui Nayau [Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara] . . . in a few conversations I had with him, he said it [Labour Party] should be allowed to . . . [carry on].
Did you think at that time that the news media gave Chaudhry enough space for him to address the fears of the iTaukei people about what he was trying to do, especially for example, through the Land Use Commission?
I think the Fijians saw what he was doing and that probably exacerbated or heightened the concerns of [indigenous] Fijians and if you remember, he gave Indian cane farmers certain financial privileges.
The F$10,000 grants to move from Labasa, when the ALTA (Agricultural Landlord and Tenants Act) leases expired. Are you talking about that?
I can’t remember the exact details of the financial assistance but when they [Labour Party] were questioned, they said, “No, there were some Fijian farmers too”. There were also iTaukei farmers but if you read in between the lines, there were like 50 Indian farmers and one Fijian farmer.
Was there enough media coverage for the rural population to understand that it was not a one-sided ethnic policy?
Because there were also iTaukei farmers involved. Yes, and I think when you try and pull the wool over other people, that’s when they feel that they have been hoodwinked. But going back to your question of whether Chaudhry was given fair media coverage, I was no longer in the mainstream media at that time. I had moved on.
But the politicians have their views and they’ll feel that they have been done badly by the media. But that’s democracy. That’s the way things worked out.
“The Press and the Putsch”, Asia Pacific Media Educator, No 10, January 2021. Image: APME/Joe Yaya/USP Journalism
Pacific journalism educator, David Robie, in a paper in 2001, made some observations about the way the local media reported the Speight takeover. He said, “In the early weeks of the insurrection, the media enjoyed an unusually close relationship with Speight and the hostage takers.”
He went on to say that at times, there was “strong sympathy among some journalists for the cause, even among senior editorial executives”.
David Robie is an incisive and perceptive old-school journalist who has a proper understanding of issues and I do not take issue with his opinion. And I think there is some validity. But you see, I was on the other [Speight’s] side. And it was part of my job at that time to swing that perception from the media.
Did you identify with “the cause” and did you think it was legitimate?
Let me tell you in hindsight, that the coup was not justified
and that is after a lot of reflection. It was not justified and
could never be justified.
When did you come to that conclusion?
It was after the period in Parliament and after things were resolved and then Parliament was vacated, I took a drive around town and I saw the devastation in Suva. This was a couple of months later. I didn’t realise the extent of the damage and I remember telling myself, “Oh my god, what have we done? What have we done?”
And I realised that we probably have let the genie out of the bottle and it scared me [that] it only takes a small thing like this to unleash this pentup emotion that is in the people. Of course, a lot of looting was [by] opportunists because at that time, the people who
were supporting the cause were all in Parliament. They had all marched to Parliament.
So, who did the looting in town? I’m not excusing that. I’m just trying to put some perspective. And of course, we saw pictures, which was really, very sad . . . of mothers, women, carrying trolleys [of loot] up the hill, past the [Colonial War Memorial] hospital.
So, what was Speight’s primary motivation?
Well, George will, I’m sure, have the opportunity at some point to tell the world what his position was. But he was never the main player. He was ditched with the baby on his laps.
So, there were people So, there were people behind him. He was the man of the moment. He was the one facing the cameras.
Given your education, training, experience in journalism, what kind of lens were you viewing this whole thing from?
Well, let’s put it this way. I got a call from Parliament. I said, “No, I’m not coming down.” And then they called again.
Basically, they did not know where they were going. I think what was supposed to have happened didn’t happen. So, I got another call, I got about three or four calls, maybe five. And then eventually, after two o’clock I went down to Parliament, because the person who called was a friend of mine and somebody who had shared our fortunes and misfortunes.
So, did you get swept away? What was going on inside your head?
George Speight’s forces hold Fiji government members hostage at the parliamentary complex in Suva. Image: IPI Global Journalist/Brian Cassey/Associated Press
I joined because at that point, I realised that these people needed help. I was not so much as for the cause, although there was this thing about what Chaudhry was doing. I also took that into account. But primarily because the call came [and] so I went.
And when I was finally called into the meeting, I walked in and I saw faces that I’d never seen before. And I started asking the questions, “Have you done this? Have you done that?”
And as I asked the questions, I was also suggesting solutions and then I just got dragged into it. The more I asked questions, the more I found out how much things were in disarray.
I just thought I’d do my bit [because] they were people who had taken over Parliament and they did not know where to go from there.
But you were driven by some nationalistic sentiments?
I am a [indigenous] Fijian. And everything that goes with that. I’m not infallible. But then again, I do not want to blow that trumpet.
Did the group see themselves as freedom fighters of some sort when you went into prison?
I’m not a freedom fighter. If they want to be called freedom fighters, that’s for them and I think some of them even portrayed themselves [that way]. But not me. I’m just an idiot who got sidetracked.
This personal journey that you’ve embarked on, what brought that about?
When I was in prison, I thought about this a lot. Because for me to come out of the bad place I was in — not physically, that I was in prison, but where my mind was — was to first accept the situation I was in and take responsibility. That’s when the healing started to take place.
And then I thought that I should write to people that I’ve hurt. I wrote about 200 letters from prison to anybody I thought I had hurt or harmed or betrayed. Groups, individuals, institutions, and families. I was surprised at the magnanimity of the people who received my letters.
I do not know where they all are now. I just sent it out. I was touched by a lot of the responses and I got a letter from the late [historian] Dr Brij Lal. l was so encouraged and I was so emotional when I read the letter. [It was] a very short letter and the kindness in the man to say that, “We will continue to talk when you come out of prison.”
There were also the mockers, the detractors, certain persons who said unkind things that, you know, “He’s been in prison and all of a sudden, he’s . . . “. That’s fine, I accepted all that as part of the package. You take the bad with the good.
I wrote to Mr Chaudhry and I had the opportunity to apologise to him personally when he came to visit in prison. And I want to continue this dialogue with Mr Chaudhry if he would like to.
Because if anything, I am among the reasons Fiji is in this current state of distrust and toxic political environment. If I can assist in bringing the nation together, it would be part of my atonement for my errors. For I have been an unprofitable, misguided individual who would like to do what I believe is my duty to put things right.
And I would work with anyone in the political spectrum, the communal leaders, the vanua and the faith organisations to bring that about.
I also did my traditional apology to my chiefly household of Vatuwaqa and the people of the vanua of Lau. I had invited the Lau Provincial Council to have its meeting at the Corrections Academy in Naboro. By that time, the arrangements had been confirmed for the Police Academy.
But the Roko gave us the farewell church service. I got my dear late sister, Pijila to organise the family. I presented the matanigasau to the then-Council Chairman, Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba (Roko Ului). It was a special moment, in front of all the delegates to the council meeting, the chiefly clan of the Vuanirewa, and Lauans who filled the two buses and
countless vehicles that made it to Naboro.
Our matanivanua (herald) was to make the tabua presentation. But I took it off him because I wanted Roko Ului and the people of Lau to hear my remorse from my mouth. It was very, very emotional. Very liberating. Cathartic.
Late last year, the Coalition government passed a motion in Parliament for a Truth and Reconciliation Commission. Do you support that?
Oh yes, I think everything I’ve been saying so far points that way.
Do you think it’ll help those that are still incarcerated to come out and speak about what happened in 2000?
Well, not only that but the important thing is [addressing] the general [racial] divide. If that’s where we should start, then we should start there. That’s how I’m looking at it — the bigger picture.
It’s not trying to manage the problems or issues of the last 24 years. People are still hurting from [the coups of] 1987. And what happened in 2006 — nothing has divided this country so much. Anybody who’s thought about this would want this to go beyond just solving the problem of 2000, excusing, and accusing and after that, there’s forgiveness and pardon.
That’s a small part. That too if it needs to happen. But after all that, I don’t want anybody to go to prison because of their participation or involvement in anything from 1987 to 2000. If they cooked the books later, while they were in government, then that’s a different
matter.
But I saw on TV, the weeping and the very public expression of pain of [the late, former Prime Minister, Laisenia] Qarase’s grandchildren when he was convicted and taken away [to prison]. It brought tears to my eyes. There is always a lump in my throat at the memory of my Heilala’s (elder of two daughters) last visit to [me in] Nukulau.
Hardly a word was spoken as we held each other, sobbing uncontrollably the whole time, except to say that Tiara (his sister) was not allowed by the officers at the naval base to come to say her goodbye.
That was very painful. I remember thinking that people can be cruel, especially when the girls explained that it was to be their last visit. Then the picture in my mind of Heilala sitting alone under the turret of the navy ship as she tried not to look back. I had asked her not to look back.
I deserved what I got. But not them. I would not wish the same things I went through on anyone else, not even those who were malicious towards me.
It is the family that suffers. The family are always the silent victims. It is the family that stands by you. They may not agree with what you did. Perhaps it is among the great gifts of God, that children forgive parents and love them still despite the betrayal, abandonment, and pain.
For I betrayed the two women I love most in the world. I betrayed ‘Ulukalala [son] who was born the same year I went to prison. I betrayed and brought shame to my family and my village of Waciwaci. I betrayed friends of all ethnicities and those who helped me in my chosen profession and later, in business.
I betrayed the people of Fiji. That betrayal was officially confirmed when the court judgment called me a traitor. I accepted that portrayal and have to live with it. The judges — at least one of them — even opined that I masterminded the whole thing. I have to decline that dubious honour. That belongs elsewhere.
This article by Joe Yaya is republished from last month’s Islands Business magazine cover story with the permission of editor Richard Naidu and Yaya. The photographs are from a 2000 edition of the Commonwealth Press Union’s Global Journalist magazine dedicated to the reporting of The University of the South Pacific’s student journalists. Joe Yaya was a member of the USP team at the time. The archive of the award-winning USP student coverage of the coup is here.
This content originally appeared on Asia Pacific Report and was authored by Pacific Media Watch.
Education department secretary Tony Cook will chair a new committee set up to support the implementation of reforms recommended from the Universities Accord. Announced alongside the federal Budget on Tuesday, the 10-member advisory committee features representation from higher education, VET and policy experts to support continued engagement between the government and the tertiary education sector…
Campaigners say move to use the arts to reinforce economic ties with Riyadh may help to launder Gulf state’s human rights record
It was an unusual gig for YolanDa Brown, the saxophonist and composer who this week performed high above the clouds for a UK delegation on a private British Airways plane bound for Saudi Arabia.
The flight was part of a trade offensive for British businesses and institutions in Riyadh, with Brown’s performance part of a new focus for Saudi-UK relations – international arts.
Macquarie Group, dubbed the ‘Vampire Kangaroo’ in Britain, played a the key role the privatisation disaster which is Thames Water – now facing a multi-billion pound bailout by the UK Government. Matt Prescott reports from London.
Macquarie Bank was the mastermind behind the financial engineering that has a simple water authority mired in debt, then paid itself and its co-investors billions in dividends and walked away just before the shit (literally) hit the river because of operational failures and neglect.
Now, a major insolvency crisis is brewing in the English water industry, which could soon lead to the UK Government renationalising England’s largest water company, Thames Water, and taking on £15.6B to £18B ($29.6 to 34.1M)* of its corporate debt as part of an emergency rescue deal.
Thames Water, which serves 15.5 million people, is teetering on the brink of collapse. Its parent company, Kemble Water, recently defaulted on a £190 million debt repayment and suffered from investors reneging on a £500 million commitment. Now, Thames Water is claiming that The Water Services Regulation Authority’s (Ofwat) refusal to allow it to raise bills by 40% will make it “uninvestable”.
In 2006, Macquarie Bank bought into Thames Water, leading a consortium of 14 international investors called Kemble Water, including Dutch, Australian and Canadian pension funds.
The consortium paid German energy company RWE £2.3 billion for Thames Water in an overly complex deal that few, if any, independent observers fully understood (see Figures 1 and 2).
According to Macquarie, “The two main funds used to acquire Thames Water were the €1.5B Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund (MEIF) and Macquarie European Infrastructure Fund II (a €4.2B fund) (MEIF II). Together, these funds, along with other Macquarie-managed funds, accounted for £1.1B of the purchase price and constituted around 48% of the ownership of Thames Water in 2006. International funds investing directly in Thames Water provided the remaining equity capital, and some remain owners of Thames Water today.”
Figure 1. Structure of ownership (2007) produced by Martin Blaiklock for the House of Commons Select Committee on Treasury
Macquarie has since stated that “Thames Water was acquired for an enterprise value of £8.5 billion comprising c. £2.3 billion in equity and c. £6.2 billion in third-party debt. The proceeds were paid to RWE by the acquiring consortium upon completion of the sale. At the time of acquisition, the Regulated Asset Base of Thames Water was c. £6.5 billion.”
BBC Investigation
In 2017, a BBC investigation discovered that much of the Macquarie refinancing funding their acquisition of Thames Water ended up on Thames Water’s balance sheet, via a network of linked subsidiaries. The BBC found “transactions which culminated in Thames Water having the additional £2B of debt on its books took place inside a network of companies set up by Macquarie at the time it bought Thames Water.
A consultation paper published by the industry regulator Ofwat in February 2007, showed that Macquarie and their investors paid £5.1B for Thames Water, of which £2.8B was money Macquarie borrowed to help fund the purchase.
What happened subsequently to that £2.8B so-called “acquisition debt” is revealed in a letter, dated October last year, from Thames Water’s then-chairman, Sir Peter Mason, to Martin Blaiklock (a consultant with international experience of privatised utility funding who undertook an analysis for the BBC). It was written in reply to questions arising from Mr Blaiklock’s attempts to understand Thames Water’s offshore financial structure.
In this letter, Sir Peter reveals that, of the £2.8B acquisition debt, £2B had been repaid. Not by Macquarie and its investors who borrowed the money, but from new borrowings raised by Thames Water through a Cayman Islands-based subsidiary. Martin Blaiklock said:
“That letter was a red flag to me because it showed clearly
that the debt which Macquarie funds had used to buy Thames Water had been transferred over to Thames Water.
“So now, it was a responsibility of Thames Water and not of Macquarie.”
Figure 2. Illustration of Thames Water corporate structure, ownership and debt by @JPMorgan published by @FTAlphavilla in 2023
Following the purchase by Macquarie, water bills were securitised with a bond profile extending to 2062.
Meaning water users will still be paying for Macquarie’s financial engineering for the next 38 years, even if the company is re-nationalised.
Macquarie initially sold its MEIF-controlled shares in Thames Water in two stages in 2011 and 2012, and the remaining 26.3% it managed and controlled via MEIF II in 2017.
Debt, dividends and disaster
During Macquarie’s co-ownership, debt jumped from £3.4B at the time of purchase to £10.8B by the time of sale, while Thames Water paid out dividends exceeding £2.5B between 2007 and 2017.
Since privatisation in 1989, over £7.2 billion has been extracted in dividends.
It doesn’t seem like a coincidence that Thames Water is now struggling with £18 billion of debt.
Figure 3. Thames Water Utilities Limited, dividend payouts by year, company reports 1990-2023. Graphics by The Guardian.Thames Water has since stumbled from criminal conviction and pollution calamities to imminent insolvency, partly because it cannot service its outstanding debts (which averaged 28% of annual revenues between 2018 and 2023) and maintain the basic functions expected of a major regulated water utility. Nearly all of Thames’s revenues come from servicing water users.
Water discharge conviction
Days after Macquarie Bank sold its final stake, Thames Water was convicted of discharging 4.2 billion litres of partially and untreated sewage across 6 sites in the River Thames and its tributaries between mid-2012 and early 2014, and sentenced to pay £20M in fines and costs. At Aylesbury Crown Court, Judge Francis Sheridan said there had been
inadequate investment, diabolical maintenance and poor management,
assessing incidents as “reckless” or “borderline deliberate.” Judge Sheridan concluded: “Knowledge of what was going on went very high indeed.”
Thames Water was found guilty of engaging in an illegal practice known as “flow clipping,” which involves discharging sewage via storm tanks during non-storm conditions. Storm tanks are designed to store and eventually discharge overflow effluent only during heavy storms, but instead, they were being used to sidestep the full treatment process.
Ultimately discharging sewage into the rivers and streams anglers fish in, people swim in, children play in and wildlife call home. Furthermore, up to 50% of the sewage the treatment works are designed to treat was bypassing the entire treatment process.
By diverting over 4.2 billion litres of untreated or partially treated sewage to storm tanks and unlicenced discharge points, Thames Water was undermining the data that Ofwat and the Environment Agency use to monitor water companies’ performances and regulate the industry.
It was subsequently revealed the River Thames has been polluted by at least 72 billion litres of sewage discharges since 2020, roughly the equivalent of 29,000 Olympic swimming pools.
Re-nationalisation
Given the mess Thames Water’s sewage-filled rivers and debt-filled finances are in, it will not be a straightforward process to re-nationalise water supplies.
England’s inadequate water infrastructure will require £10s of billions of investment, and existing bondholders are likely to have claims on essential water assets via the covenants and other conditions attached to their bonds.
Depending on the technical details attached to the bonds, we could find that bondholders have the first claim on water assets following an insolvency crisis and the UK Government could be left with few options. Primarily because it needs to continue borrowing from the bond market, and the nation already carries trillions in debt.
The solutions to funding and regulating essential utilities are not just about ownership; of equal importance is how vital public utilities are to be responsibly regulated and adequately financed.
After decades of naïve privatisation, “light touch” oversight, self-regulation and deregulation, it is clear that essential public utilities have not been operated in the public interest and need to be strictly regulated. Ensuring bill-payers are receiving value for money, sufficient financing is available for critical infrastructure, that apolitical and independent regulators specify and enforce service standards, and that the environment is protected must remain consistent priorities.
Since privatisation, corporate structures and accounting tricks are becoming increasingly incomprehensible and hyper-complex debt arrangements are putting outsiders, including regulators, at a significant disadvantage when it comes to protecting the community from the worst excesses of technically legal, yet morally dubious and environmentally damaging, financial dark arts.
The sting in the privatisation tail
Macquarie correctly claims to have helped invest £11B during its ownership of Thames Water. But water users and taxpayers will still need to make up for decades of underinvestment. If the entire industry has to be re-nationalised, this could cost £96B across all of England, according to The Guardian.
The unnecessary complexity and hidden costs associated with privatisation are not in the public, customer or national interest.
The role of debt, and specifically bonds, in the collapse of Thames Water, a large regional monopoly, deserves to be highlighted. The majority of this debt was effectively used to fund unaffordable dividends, and other payments, which would not otherwise have been possible.
Some might view this debt as having enabled a large-scale, multi-decade fraud on the public purse.
The irony is that privatisation has relied upon complex, expensive, opaque and risky forms of debt and investment, displacing far simpler and less risky funding models based on a mix of adequate bill revenues and cheap national debt, yet bill-payers and the nation could soon be forced to pick up the tab for decades of artificially inflated private profits, asset stripping and financial engineering.
All the years of excessive private profits, debt-subsidised shareholder dividends, complex inter-company loan payments and multi-billion under-investment have not achieved any more than good business managers would have achieved, at minimal risk, with adequate water bills and reasonable backing from responsible Governments. Instead, they have jeopardised and “gamed” the entire system.
Somehow, by slowly and steadily piling on debt and risk unchallenged, a succession of investors, including Macquarie, have pushed a relatively simple, vertically integrated regional monopoly, which primarily has to move water and sewage from point A to point B, to the brink of bankruptcy and environmental disaster.
The role of Macquarie in the downfall of Thames Water should act as a cautionary tale for anyone in Australia who still thinks that sophisticated, commission-based financiers will magically and responsibly solve our problems.
In today’s era of weaponised financial engineering and globalised wealth extraction, essential public utilities require proactive and strict regulation in the public and national interests.
The rhetoric associated with “privatisation” and “the market” simply do not match the reality for the community at large, customers or the environment, with water infrastructure falling over, bills skyrocketing and more than just rivers outrageously full of shit.
Reload document 
Open in new tab 
Sunday Supper
Sunday Supper
Sunday Supper
Sunday Supper
