It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
Sunday, April 03, 2022
Serbian elections could improve chances for Rio Tinto’s lithium project
Cecilia Jamasmie | April 1, 2022 | Jadarite is a mineral containing lithium and boron that was discovered by the Rio’s geologists in 2004. (Image courtesy of BHP.)
Rio Tinto (ASX, LON: RIO) might have a chance to see the licence for its $2.4 billion Jadar lithium project in Serbia reinstated if the country’s pro-mining president, Aleksandar Vučić, and his ruling Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) win the elections this weekend, analysts believe.
The country heads to the polls on Sunday to vote for both president and parliament, with opinion surveys showing that Vučić is likely to win another five-year term and that the SNS is also set to win a majority.
An SNS victory is likely to deal a blow to the environmental movement blossoming in the country since September 2021, Capucine May, Europe Analyst at risk intelligence company Verisk Maplecroft said.
Over the past five months, green groups such as Ecological Uprising and Kreni Promeni have used high-profile mining projects — notably Rio Tinto’s Jadar lithium project – as rallying points for their cause, May said.
Protests gained momentum when the government attempted to reform the referendum and expropriation laws in November 2021, which activists saw as easing the way for foreign miners into the country.
“This gave environmental protests an anti-government element and proved to be a unifying force for the historically fragmented political opposition in Serbia,” the Verisk Maplecroft expert noted.
May believes Belgrade’s latest concessions, including pulling the plug on Jadar and leaving expropriation laws unchanged, were part of a political strategy to secure a win on April 3.
Thousands blocked major roads across Serbia in November to protest against two new laws that pave the way for foreign companies to mine the country’s resources. (Screenshot from: Sharjah24 News | YouTube.)
“Once re-elected, we expect the SNS will maintain its pro-mining stance,” May said. “The fact that the government has so far refused to consider a potential lithium mining ban in Serbia points in this direction.”
While rather unlikely, there is a chance the SNS will re-issue permits for Jadar, May noted, adding that locals have reported that Rio Tinto continues to buy land in the Western Serbian region, which is rich in jadarite. The new mineral containing lithium and boron was discovered by the Rio’s geologists in 2004.
Vučić’s critics say his popularity is due to his autocratic style of rule, which includes firm control of media and benefits such as employment in state-run firms that they say are reserved for his supporters.
The Verisk Maplecroft analyst believes Serbia’s governance reputation could be affected should Vučić reinstate Rio’s licence for the Jadar project. She predicts such move, while unlikely, would trigger a fresh wave of protests. Battery ambitions
Rio Tinto had invested $450 million on pre-feasibility and other studies for Jadar as of January this year.
It has also spent years developing technology to economically extract lithium from jadarite and it even shipped a pilot lithium processing plant last year to Serbia in four 40-foot (12 m) shipping containers of equipment.
The Jadar lithium project was slated to be Europe’s biggest mine of the battery metal, with a production of 58,000 tonnes of refined battery-grade lithium carbonate per year, enough to power one million electric vehicles.
In April 2021, the miner kicked off lithium production from waste rock at a demonstration plant located at a borates mine it controls in California.
Rio took another step into the lithium market this week, completing the acquisition of the Rincon lithium project in Argentina for $825 million, which has reserves of almost two million tonnes of contained lithium carbonate equivalent, sufficient for a 40-year mine life.
UK Diane Abbott MP: This crisis of living standards is government made
'History suggests that political upheaval is very likely to follow. The Labour government of 1997, for example, was ushered in on the back of rising food prices.'
The current fall in living standards is not really a ‘cost of living crisis’ at all, implying as that does some kind of natural phenomenon. Just as in the Western economies in the 1970s and in Germany in the 1930s the surge in prices is a reflection of government policy.
We have a situation in which the Office for Budget Responsibility is forecasting prolonged and respectable rise in nominal wages over many years, but a fall in real household incomes after tax.
The discrepancy arises from two factors, both of which are the products of government (or governments’) policies. It is ministers who have made the decisions to renege on the pensions triple-lock, or to hit students with higher loan repayments, or to keep benefits and public sector pay below the rate of inflation.
These are policy choices made by the government. So too are the decisions to provide tax cuts for big business and banks, or to break government promises on the climate and cut the fuel duty. None of these have anything to do with Ukraine or global market conditions.
At the same time though, there is an upward pressure on oil and other commodities’ prices which long preceded the war. These pressures primarily reflect the catastrophic mismanagement of the pandemic by the richest major countries in the world, including in Britain.
Wall Street and City financiers talk about the ‘Great Resignation’ arising from the pandemic. In effect there were tens of millions of people put on lower pay, or no pay at all during the lockdown phases of the pandemic. In general, these enormous sacrifices were completely unnecessary and largely in vain, as Western governments could have made the financial support more generous (100% of pay) and more widely available (including the self-employed and casual workers) especially if they had committed to the lockdown policy until we had achieved maximum suppression of the virus.
They didn’t do that. One consequence is the bizarre outcome where we simultaneously have labour shortages, fewer people in work and falling pay. This is because it simply became not worthwhile for many to go to work. This is one of the key contributors to the ‘supply chain bottlenecks’ that are so widely discussed.
The economy relies on people. Ultimately, all services are about people. So ‘transport services’ require HGV drivers. If they are paid too little, or waiting too long at the ports because of the Brexit non-tariff barriers (checks on goods and paperwork), then many will quit. This scenario has been replicated in many countries across many sectors of the economy.
In addition, levels of investment plummeted over the last 2 years. In Britain, we have largely abandoned strategic energy storage, for example. When lockdowns ended there was a surge in global demand, without any spare capacity. This drove commodity prices higher.
It is the combination of these factors, government fiscal policy which transfers from poor to rich, the attack on wages and conditions in the pandemic and the refusal to invest which have caused the ‘cost of living’ crisis.
It is really the effects of government austerity policy. This was also the real content of the Spring Statement. As it follows more than a decade of austerity, the OBR is now forecasting the worst period for living standards on record. Literally tens of millions of people are going to be worse off.
History suggests that political upheaval is very likely to follow. The Labour government of 1997, for example, was ushered in on the back of rising food prices.
So, the key political question for the next period is indeed who can provide security for the population. But that will have to include financial security, and voters will judge harshly anyone who does not have a credible plan to end the misery.
Diane Abbott is the Labour MP for Hackney North and Stoke Newington
Resistance builds against ‘government-made’ cost of living crisis
Thousands of people are coming together today, demanding the redistribution of wealth and power, decent wages for all, and justice for the sacked P&O workers.
As Britain battles a cost-of-living crisis, with everything from energy bills to food skyrocketing, public outrage is mounting, with people are taking to the streets today to build a collective resistance.
Organised by the People’s Assembly Against Austerity, an organisation dedicated to ensuring the government faces a movement of opposition against cuts, austerity and privatisation, protests are taking place up and down the country under the banner ‘Cost of Living Crisis – We Can’t Pay.’
Today’s demonstrations are also in solidarity with the 800 P&O Ferries’ workers who were cruelly sacked for cheaper foreign labour last month.
People refuse to pay for the government’s crisis
A principal aim of the day of action is to send a clear message to the government that the people refuse to pay for their crisis.
The protests come just a day after the energy price gap was lifted by a staggering 54%, creating what has been described as an “impossible choice for many” – to heat or eat. A spokesperson for the People’s Assembly said: “Public outrage over the cost of living crisis is growing fast, and our response is gaining momentum.”
In London, protests are taking place outside Downing Street, where former Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is speaking. Commenting on the impact of the escalating crisis, Corbyn said: “With rising fuel, food and energy bills, the soaring cost of living is pushing millions into poverty, and the disgusting treatment of the sacked P&O workers needs urgent action from the government.”
‘Intolerable’
Laura Pidcock, national secretary of the People’s Assembly, who is speaking at the protest in Liverpool, said: “What people are experiencing is intolerable. No matter how patiently we explain that government inaction over soaring energy and fuel costs and sharply rising food prices is deepening poverty, misery and hunger, it is met with at best indifference and at worse more of the same.”
“The truth is they are so wedded to the economic system we have, comfortable with a hands-off approach, that even when markets are obviously failing us, they continue with business as usual.
“We tell them about children going hungry and the government shrug, politically speaking. Our anger and frustration with them must be directed and organised to build pressure on them,” Pidcock continued.
Spring statement slammed by unions
The demonstrations follow Rishi Sunak’s spring statement which has been slammed by unions for doing nothing to allay fears about soaring energy bills and rising inflation. The statement did very little to help the poorest of households with the support they need as energy and food prices soar and was noted for its “complete disregard for the hardship facing millions of households.”
Instead of tackling the cost of living crisis, the chancellor has left the average family around £1,000 worse off than last year, equating to the biggest fall in living standards since records began.
Today’s protests, which come the day after what has been dubbed as ‘Bleak Friday’ and new estimates from the End Fuel Poverty Coalition warn 2.5 million households with children are in fuel poverty after the new energy price cap rise, are demanding “immediate relief” from the government. Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is a contributing editor to Left Foot Forward
100 protesters take to the streets of Newcastle city centre as cost of living crisis deepens Around 100 protesters joined the People's Assembly North East rally at Grey's Monument in the centre of Newcastle to campaign against the soaring cost of living and sacking of 800 P&O workers
Demonstrators have taken part in a People's Assembly North East protest in Newcastle against the cost of living crisis and the sacking of 800 P&O workers
(Image: Craig Connor/ChronicleLive)
Demonstrators have marched through Newcastle in protest at the UK's worsening cost of living crisis - with some pushed to voice their fear and anger in public for the first time.
Around 100 turned out for the People's Assembly North East organised demonstration to protest at the soaring cost of living as well as the shock sacking on March 17 of nearly 800 P&O crew without notice or consultation.
It was the third in a series of protests that have taken place across the UK since February coordinated by the national branch of the People's Assembly - which is fighting austerity, cuts and privatisation - and is supported by trade unions, community and campaign groups.
For some taking part in Saturday's lunchtime protest in Newcastle, it was their first experience of airing their grievances at a public gathering. They told The Chronicle they had been galvanised into action as the cost of living has soared, pushing people who would never once have struggled financially towards poverty.
Catherine Rooney, 62, from Sunderland, was one such first-time marcher who said she had felt compelled to make the trip from Wearside to Tyneside because "the Government isn't doing enough; they're not listening to the people."
Whilst not facing financial hardship herself, she said she felt morally she couldn't "sit back and do nothing. People need to show some solidarity. The time has come to stand up; people need to be writing to their MPs, to their councillors, and be doing what they can to say they don't agree with what is happening.
"The cost of living crisis isn't something that is going to affect me personally very deeply, but I feel we need to support each other, especially those with disabilities where they have CPAP (oxygen) machines, mobility and IT needs and things like that. All that uses electricity, and it's all going up and they aren't getting any help at all. I just think it's wrong."
Another lady who would only give her name as Gwen added: "What we have at the moment is a crisis, and it's not one affecting just the very poor. Energy prices went up by 54% on April 1. It's a staggering amount. That alone would push many people into financial hardship, but on top of that we're all paying more for food, fuel, council tax and our utility bills, as well as National Insurance.
"I work, I have savings and I'm hopefully going to be OK. But I know people who are on low wages who are finding it difficult to cope and are struggling. That is what has attracted me to this demonstration today - to show my support for them. The time has come when we all need to take a stand and to stop pretending that the cost of living crisis is someone else's problem. It's not. It's everyone's."
The Newcastle march wound its way in the early spring sunshine from the city's Civic Centre along a packed Northumberland Street to Grey's Monument - the traditional meeting place for protesters.
The People's Assembly North East protest against the cost of living crisis wound its way through a busy Newcastle city centre before converging on Grey's Monument
(Image: Craig Connor/ChronicleLive)
It is no coincidence that most rallies - whether it be fighting for workers' rights, campaigning against climate change, or speaking out against the Government - converge on the monument, given it pays homage to the Northumberland born 19th Century politician, Charles Grey, whose biggest achievement was the passing of the much-opposed Reform Bill in 1832 which amongst others things abolished slavery in the British Empire.
The march mainly attracted positive support from shoppers on the 10 minute walk from the Civic Centre, with many expressing their concern at what the future is likely to hold, especially come next autumn when energy prices are likely to again rise to an unprecedented level.
Organiser Tony Dowling of the People's Assembly North East said the cost of living traditionally affects people more in this region as wages tend to be lower. He said: "When your income and outgoings are finely balanced and energy goes up by 54% and your wages don't rise to match the increase in the cost of living, it puts people in a very scary position.
"The Government has done nothing to allay people's fears about the rising costs of energy and inflation in general."
In a speech read out to demonstrators on behalf of Durham CityLabour MP Mary Foy who had been unable to attend the event in person, she said when the economy struggles and households are unable to meet the cost of living, "it's the duty of the Government to help lift the pressure of ordinary people."
She said the cost of living crisis is one of the biggest issues currently facing the people of this country. "Household and energy bills are out of control, the prices of petrol are skyrocketing and inflation is outstripping wages and welfare."
Protesters continue to block UK oil terminals despite more than 100 arrests
Just Stop Oil activists have been climbing on to tankers and glueing themselves to roads since Friday
Members of Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil protest at the Esso fuel terminal in Purfleet, Essex.
More than 100 people have been arrested as climate change protesters continued to block UK oil terminals as part of a campaign to disrupt the fossil fuel industry.
Supporters of Just Stop Oil began the action in the early hours of Friday morning at refineries near London, Birmingham and Southampton by climbing on to tankers and gluing themselves to roads.
The activists continued to disrupt oil terminals on Saturday morning and said they had gained access to further sites.
Essex police said officers arrested a total of 83 people after protests in the Thurrock district.
The force said 63 were arrested on Friday following protests in Oliver Road, Grays, London Road, Purfleet, and Askew Farm Lane, Grays. Another 20 people were arrested on Saturday in Oliver Road and Stoneness Road, Grays.
Police said they were arrested on suspicion of a variety of offences. Officers are continuing to engage with protesters in Oliver Road, Stoneness Road and London Road.
Assistant chief constable Rachel Nolan said: “Our officers are continuing to work in exceptionally challenging circumstances with a view to bringing these protests to a safe and swift conclusion. I would like to thank businesses, local drivers and workers for their continued patience while we carry out our work.”
The group announced on social media that they had blocked Navigator terminals in Essex, posting photos of protesters in hi-vis jackets on top of a tanker and others blocking a road with a banner reading “Just Stop Oil”.
They said protesters had blocked access to the Titan Truck Park and revealed a secret underground network of tunnels leading to the site. The development means the main and emergency access roads to the critical oil terminals are closed.
“We need the government to stop funding new oil projects and we need it now! Our only means of highlighting this issue is mass civil resistance,” they said in a post on Instagram.
The group is demanding the government end the expansion of new oil and gas projects. Just Stop Oil said this week’s campaign was part of a transition from using tactics of civil disobedience to exercising civil resistance.
Explaining what this shift would look like, one supporter told the Guardian last month that it would mean “stopping pointing out what the government should or shouldn’t be doing [and instead] actively stopping government doing what they shouldn’t be”.
The campaign, which has involved protesters being glued to roads, suspended on bamboo tripods, and locked on to oil drums and each other, is taking place in defiance of a temporary high court injunction banning protests outside oil terminals.
Outside Kingsbury and on roads leading to the site, posters said: “Temporary high court injunction in force. Blocking, slowing down, obstructing or interfering with traffic on to this road as part of protest activity by Just Stop Oil, Extinction Rebellion, Insulate Britain movements and other connected movements is strictly prohibited. Failure to comply with the injunction may lead to imprisonment.”
As a result of the blockades, the oil pipeline distribution network ExxonMobil UK closed down three of its terminals. Police from at least five forces were deployed to deal with the protests, making arrests for offences including aggravated trespass, criminal damage and obstructing the highway.
The Metropolitan police arrested 14 activists who broke into a facility at Bedfont Road in Staines, Surrey, and West Midlands police arrested six people at a terminal in Tyburn, Birmingham.
Police said arrests were made for offences including aggravated trespass, criminal damage and obstructing the highway.
Fix energy-leaking homes and fund wind turbines to wean UK off Russian gas, Boris Johnson told
New analysis says ‘energy security starts at home’, as cabinet rows hold up PM’s ‘independence plan’
Rob Merrick Deputy Political Editor THE INDEPENDENT
Boris Johnson is pushing to get 25 per cent of the UK’s electricity from nuclear power – requiring up to six new power stations – at a cost that is alarming Rishi Sunak, the chancellor.
Now an analysis by the climate change think tank E3G says a strategy that “starts at home” is the route to reducing reliance on Vladimir Putin’s gas supplies.
Dramatically improving the energy efficiency of the UK’s buildings “could secure an 80 per cent cut in the amount of gas we import from Russia this year”, it is arguing.
If combined with government funding for solar and onshore wind projects already in the planning pipeline, “the UK could cut the amount of gas we get from Russia by 100 per cent within a year”.
“Energy security starts at home,” said Ed Matthew, E3G’s campaigns director, ahead of the expected release of the “energy independence plan” this week.
“By ramping up the energy efficiency of UK buildings and accelerating renewables deployment, the government can take an axe to UK gas demand.
“Not only can this help cut household bills, it is the single most effective action the government can take to protect UK and European energy security.”
E3G is pointing out that a war-torn Ukraine managed to “unplug from Russia’s electricity grid” within a fortnight, adding: “We should take inspiration from Ukraine’s power engineers.”
Instead, Mr Johnson wants to focus on reviving nuclear power, with a mix of big plants and small modular reactors (SMRs), which are easier and cheaper to build.
However, the National Infrastructure Commission has warned that large nuclear power plants are “incredibly difficult to deliver on short timescales”.
Even if the government gave the go-ahead now, they would not come online until the mid-2040s if they took as long as the current Hinkley Point C project is expected to take.
The prime minister’s view on onshore wind is mired in confusion, after he appeared to come out against an expansion when speaking to MPs last week.
Despite that, the strategy is expected to trigger a review of the effective moratorium imposed by planning laws introduced under David Cameron’s government.
Kwasi Kwarteng, the business secretary, has proposed doubling onshore wind turbine power from 14 gigawatts to 30GW by 2030, with the bulk of new projects in Scotland.
He is also said to be pushing for the government to go further to hit a target of 45GW of energy from offshore wind by 2035.
Kwasi Kwarteng suggests UK could massively scale up nuclear power capacity by 2050
The move to scale up nuclear power production will reportedly form part of a major expansion of homegrown energy in the wake of the Ukraine crisis.
George McMillan
SENIOR DIGITAL PRODUCER PUBLISHED Sunday 03 April 2022
The UK could massively scale up its nuclear power capability by 2050 – with new stations having far greater capacity, it is understood.
Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng has suggested six or seven new sites could be in operation by that point, with all but one of Britain’s existing plants set to be decommissioned by 2030.
While the number of stations is likely to remain similar to now – the plan is for each new site to be far more powerful than those they will replace, significantly pushing up the UK’s capacity, according to the PA news agency.
The Sunday Telegraph reported that Boris Johnson is preparing to announce plans to expand the Government’s commitment to move forward with new large-scale nuclear power stations this decade. Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng James Manning The newspaper said the plan had been to back one by 2024, but it is thought the new ambition will be to support the construction of two by 2030.
The move to scale up nuclear power production will reportedly form part of a major expansion of homegrown energy in the wake of the Ukraine crisis.
It comes as the Government’s energy security strategy is expected to be unveiled on Thursday.
Asked about the scale of the its nuclear ambitions, Mr Kwarteng told The Sunday Telegraph: “There is a realisation across Government that we could do more on nuclear.
“With energy, you’re thinking maybe 30, even 40 years [ahead]. If we fast forward to 2050, there is a world where we have six or seven sites in the UK. That isn’t going to happen in the next two years, but it’s definitely something that we can aspire to.
“The Prime Minister said, in terms of the energy generation mix, we could see maybe a quarter of that being nuclear. I’d say 15 to 25 per cent. But obviously in the first three years you’re not going to suddenly have six new nuclear stations in three years. It’s physically impossible to do that.”
Steam is released from Reactor 4 at Hunterston B nuclear power plant in North Ayrshire. Jane Barlow
Britain could get seven new nuclear power stations by 2050
Edward Malnick Sat, April 2, 2022, Hinkley Point C in Somerset, under construction by French firm EDF Energy, is due to open in 2026 - Luke MacGregor/Bloomberg
Britain could build up to seven new nuclear power stations as part of a radical expansion of homegrown energy following Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine, the Business Secretary has said.
In an interview with The Telegraph, Kwasi Kwarteng said "there is a world where we have six or seven sites in the UK" by 2050 as part of a push for self-reliance.
Ministers have agreed to set up a development vehicle, Great British Nuclear, to identify sites, cut through red tape to speed up the planning process and bring together private firms to run each site.
As a first step, Boris Johnson is preparing to announce plans to significantly expand the existing commitment to back one new large-scale nuclear power station by 2024.
The Prime Minister and Mr Kwarteng have been battling with Rishi Sunak, the Chancellor, to secure funding for new plants – a row first disclosed by The Telegraph.
However, a meeting between Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak on Wednesday is said to have ended in agreement on expanding Britain's existing set of ageing nuclear plants, all but one of which are due to be decommissioned by 2030.
The energy security strategy, due to be unveiled on Thursday, is expected to commit the Government to supporting the construction of at least two new large-scale plants by 2030 in addition to small modular reactors.
A government source said: "Nuclear will definitely look larger in the British energy mix by the end of this decade."
Mr Johnson and Mr Kwarteng then want to more than treble the country's existing seven gigawatts of nuclear capacity to 24 GW by 2050.
The Business Secretary acknowledged that in France, which now generates the majority of its electricity using nuclear power stations, "it has cost a fortune... but it has given them a measure of independence which is envied, frankly, by other people on the continent – by the Germans, for example, and the Italians".
The Prime Minister told industry leaders he has "a dream" that a giant floating wind farm could provide "gigawatts of energy and do it within a year", according to a government source.
Nuclear and offshore wind energy are expected to be at the centre of the document being finalised by No 10. A separate row has been sparked by Mr Kwarteng's push for a dramatic expansion of onshore wind farms following a moratorium imposed by David Cameron in 2015.
The strategy is expected to raise the prospect of relaxing planning laws in England to make it easier to build turbines on land but, in the face of significant opposition from ministers and backbenchers, Mr Kwarteng acknowledged: "Any movement has to have a large measure of local consent."
His remarks appear to backtrack from his recent declaration that, while there "were quite understandable political reasons that people didn't want to see large scale, onshore wind farms in their vicinity... I think that's changed".
Mr Kwarteng confirmed ministers are discussing possible incentives, such as reduced energy bills, that could be offered to people in exchange for agreeing to the development of a wind farm in their area.
Asked about the scale of the Government's nuclear ambitions, he said: "There is a realisation across Government that we could do more on nuclear.
"With energy, you're thinking maybe 30, even 40 years [ahead]. If we fast forward to 2050, there is a world where we have six or seven sites in the UK. That isn't going to happen in the next two years, but it's definitely something that we can aspire to.
"The Prime Minister said, in terms of the energy generation mix, we could see maybe a quarter of that being nuclear. I'd say 15 to 25 per cent. But obviously in the first three years you're not going to suddenly have six new nuclear stations in three years. It's physically impossible to do that."
The Great British Nuclear delivery body is likely to be a government-owned company akin to HS2 Ltd, which is building the high speed railway line.
Asked which arguments he had used to lobby Mr Sunak for vast sums at a time when the Chancellor is resisting further public spending, he said: "I think it's a long term thing. Also, we're committed to having a vehicle which looks at this, and which actually can facilitate that, and I think there's a measure of agreement on that.
"Obviously I don't want to anticipate what's in the strategy, but I think there is a realisation across government that we could do more on nuclear, and that's why in the Prime Minister's 10-Point Plan, which was published in November 2020, the third point was all about nuclear."
Mr Kwarteng said that if the emerging technology of small modular reactors was successful, Britain could deploy up to 10 on one site to provide the equivalent output of a large-scale nuclear plant.
Last Energy wants to build its first "mini-nuclear" power plant by 2025 and has identified a site in Wales. The company will invest £1.4 billion to build 10 reactors by the end of the decade.
AUSTRALIA
As water levels rise so too does the pressure to stop building houses on flood plains
Residents of flood-prone Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley near Sydney say real estate agents should have to advise buyers of risks
Stacey O'Toole, a property owner in Sydney's north-west says prospective buyers need to be informed of risks, as the threat of flooding in the area worsens.
Before Stacey O’Toole bought her new property in North Richmond, on the outskirts of Sydney, she diligently checked everything she could to ensure it wouldn’t be affected by flooding.
But when Australia’s east coast was hit by a “rain bomb” in early March, it had to be evacuated because two local stormwater dams were at risk of failing.
They didn’t – but O’Toole says “we were very concerned because we thought we’d bought somewhere that wasn’t going to be impacted”.
O’Toole has lived and worked in north-west Sydney for nearly 30 years and has three properties in the area – making her a seasoned navigator of the flood-prone region.
But the flooding has been getting worse with the area hit with two “one-in-100-year” floods in two years, she says.
“It’s starting to change and places are flooding that have never flooded before, especially around the Pitt Town area. It might be nuisance flooding or local flooding – but it got to a point where it was impassable.
“I’ve never really been concerned with floods before because I know where the water is going to go. [But this time] our main evacuation route went underwater while we were on it.”
Potential flooding presents a dilemma for prospective buyers. In Sydney’s white-hot housing market the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley proved an opportunity for buyers – although prices surged by up to 45% during the pandemic, according to real estate website Domain.
In Richmond, prices grew by up to 32%, and O’Toole believes the influx of new homeowners aren’t as well informed as they should be.
Stacey O'Toole says north-west Sydney is ‘starting to change and places are flooding that have never flooded before’.
Photograph: Blake Sharp-Wiggins/The Guardian
“A lot of people in the new areas thought the floods wouldn’t impact them but they had power and water cut to their homes because it all comes from the same place,” she says.
“They weren’t particularly educated, they think they are safe up on a hill, but they’re absolutely not.”
There are many blocks of land and properties for sale in flood zones – including in Richmond, Windsor, Pitt Town and Penrith – where the advertisements do not mention the flood risk. None of the real estate agents selling the properties contacted by the Guardian responded to requests for comment.
O’Toole argues communication with prospective buyers must improve.
“People spend a lot of money on those homes, but you can’t change the fact that you are on a flood plain,” she says. “There needs to be a better system for people to actually understand what the dangers are.”
Sign up to receive the top stories from Guardian Australia every morning
Marcus Claxton, who is building a house on a block of land in the Redbank estate in North Richmond, agrees. He says it should be mandatory for real estate listings to mention the flooding risk.
“If it is in a flood zone, they should have it front and centre, because people may not know to ask,” he says. “If a home is in those flood zones – and long term Hawkesbury residents know those areas – I would strongly advise against buying there.”
Claxton and his wife have always lived in the region and intended to stay – but are worried about the rising flood levels.
“During this year’s flood, the road used for flood-free access actually flooded, which was a bit weird,” he says.
“I was a bit unnerved watching the water rise because it did come a lot higher. They [the authorities] really need to scrutinise what land they make available for building. And they need to rethink the one-in-100 year flood line … we need to go maybe one or two metres above that.”
Chief executive of the real estate institute of NSW, Tim McKibbin, says it is not mandatory to include flood-risk warnings on listings but agents must disclose if a property has been flooded in the past five years. There is no obligation to disclose if a property is on a flood plain. Josh Frydenberg open to intervening in insurance market as climate change pushes up premiums
“It becomes very uncertain because the legislation and the regulation only talks about the past five years,” McKibbin said. “The legislation and regulation are also silent on how agents should disclose that [recent event] information – they only need to demonstrate they have made that disclosure.”
Tom Hubble, a geologist and associate professor at the University of Sydney, says it is “quite reasonable” to expect more frequent and higher floods to hit the region.
“I’m expecting repeat events of floods of similar sizes and possibly quite a bit larger over the next few decades,” he says.
“If I was placed in charge, I would be endeavouring to reduce the number of people that are located in what we would recognise to be flood-prone ground.
“The inherent cyclicity that is probably evident in the Hawkesbury-Nepean Valley, and the specific nature of the channel geometry suggests to me that that’s not the best place to have large urban populations, or even large, semi-urban and semi-rural populations.”
NSW floods: drone footage shows scale of devastation in Lismore – video
The NSW government is pausing new developments while it revises its flood strategy but pressure to open up more land for housing isn’t expected to ease. The Coalition is pursuing a controversial plan to raise the wall of Warragamba Dam which it argues could mitigate some risk.
Hubble says the area has experienced long term cycles where floods then droughts dominate – with each period lasting 30 to 50 years.
He says the lack of major floods in the region between the early 1990s and recent years reflects we are shifting into a new cycle. “If the observation of the flood-dominated regime versus drought-dominated regime is real then we can expect floods as large or larger to occur on a relatively frequent basis.”
The geologist says authorities should rethink planning decisions based on the one-in-100-year flood line and the advice given to people buying land or homes in the area.
“Unfortunately, the geography and the geology of that area means that the one-in-200-year and the one-in-500-year flood and the probable maximum floods are much, much higher events than we would expect to encounter on most flood plains.
“So the probable maximum flood is about twice the height of the one-in-100 year flood in that particular river system down around Windsor and Sackville. And if there is cyclicity in the system, then a lot of our estimates may well be underestimates.”
Northwest India records highest temperature in 122 years
The temperatures are rising across the country and in some places the heat wave conditions can be witnessed. But there is some respite from April 2 to April 4 before the temperature rises again.
SNS | New Delhi | April 2, 2022 Representational image (Photo: Facebook)
The temperatures are rising across the country and in some places the heat wave conditions can be witnessed. But there is some respite from April 2 to April 4 before the temperature rises again.
RK Jenamani, senior scientist, India Meteorological Department (IMD), while speaking with agency, said, “Northwest India has contributed to the highest temperature of 30.73 degrees Celsius which is the highest in 122 years. The temperature was continuously higher and the western Himalayan region recorded heatwave conditions.” “Along with this, Northeast India which normally gets thunderstorms did not receive much rain and because of that, Northeast India’s minimum temperature is the highest in 122 years. It was 25.20 degrees Celsius,” he said.
Jenamani said that India got an early heatwave, particularly Gujarat, Rajasthan and Maharashtra.
Azov Battalion hopes to relieve the blockade of Mariupol and calls on rescue workers to clear rubble
Saturday, 2 April 2022, 20:13
Sviatoslav Palamar, Deputy Commander of the Azov Battalion, said that another "batch" of Russian military equipment has been destroyed and called for the relief of the blockade of Mariupol and for rescuing people from under the rubble of the destroyed buildings.
Source: Sviatoslav Palamar’s Twitter video address
According to Palamar: "Mariupol’s defenders are constantly on the verge of life and death. Despite the complete blockade, they continue the heroic struggle for Ukraine and for their fellow citizens, fighting for every metre of their land.
I would like all Ukrainians to be as true to themselves, as courageous, as determined as our guys. Yesterday alone, they destroyed 2 infantry fighting vehicles. And today, one tank and enemy infantry.
We hope for the blockade to be relieved. We know that politicians and the military are doing everything they can to achieve this. We believe that Ukraine has a way out of this situation.
In the history of our country there have been many victories, instances of fortitude and heroism among our military […] Therefore, we have to win, because we are capable of it. I call on all Ukrainians to fight for our territory, for our children, for our future. I urge that everything possible be done, that rescuers come to Mariupol with special equipment to clear away the rubble…"
Background: On 31 March, the command of the Azov Battalion of the National Guard of Ukraine called on the military and political government of Ukraine to carry out an operation to relieve the blockade of Mariupol.
Pavlo Kyrylenko, Head of the Donetsk Regional Military/State Administration, said that Ukraine’s military leadership is making every effort to help those fighting in Mariupol, but it remains very difficult to break the blockade of the city.
Earlier, Sviatoslav Palamar, the deputy commander of the Azov Battalion, explained why Ukrainian defence forces have not left Mariupol when the situation there became particularly grave, in spite of President Zelenskyy having given permission to do so.
How the West enabled genocide in Mariupol with its misguided Azov obsession
Editor’s NoteThe Azov Regiment has been combating Russia’s genocidal invasion of Ukraine, heroically resisting the siege of Mariupol, where Russia murdered at least 5,000 civilians, with incredible stamina. Yet, they are woefully underarmed in their epic struggle against a superior invading force: because of the Kremlin-abetted Western obsession with the “Neo-Nazi threat” of Azov, the defenders of Mariupol are armed with neither Javelins nor Bayraktars. As Azov continues to resist the brutal slaughter of Ukrainians in Mariupol, political scientist Anton Shekhovtsov invites Western commentators to contemplate their own moral procrastination that enabled a true genocide to unfold before their eyes.
More than a month has passed since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Russian invaders have already committed multiple war crimes, and the genocidal intentions of the current Russian leadership towards the Ukrainian nation are becoming increasingly obvious.
Although massively demoralized and often – and understandably – turning arms against each other, Russian invaders do not hesitate to shell and bomb any building they can reach. No matter if it’s a residential building, a hospital, a kindergarten, a local council, a theater, or a museum. They destroy everything, they kill indiscriminately.
It sometimes feels that they have adopted the United Nations definition of genocide as literally their program: Killing members of the group – check! Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group – check! Preventing births within the group – check! And now they have started kidnapping Ukrainian children and moving them to Russia. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group – check!
In order to distract Western attention from the immense humanitarian catastrophe caused by the invasion, Russia is using a wide range of “smoke and mirrors” techniques. One of those deceptive practices is Moscow’s focus on the Ukrainian Azov Regiment which is falsely described in the Russian and pro-Russian media as a “fascist” or “neo-Nazi” “battalion” or “militia.”
All these descriptions are wrong, and this article discusses Azov, its history, and evolution, as well as explaining the reasons behind the information attacks on this military unit that plays an important role in resisting the Russian genocidal invasion. From the Azov Battalion to the Azov Regiment
Back in 2014, when pro-Russian Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych fled to Russia after his regime had killed more than a hundred of protesters, Russia took advantage of the political turmoil in Ukraine and the hesitancy of Western leadership.
It illegally annexed Crimea and invaded eastern Ukraine. Ukraine could hardly defend itself – years of corrupt pro-Russian leadership almost destroyed Ukrainian armed forces. And many in the Ukrainian military were simply not psychologically ready to offer an armed response to those who were their neighbors. Malicious Russian leaders were obviously aware of those weaknesses of the Ukrainian society at that time and exploited them to the maximum. What Moscow was not aware of was the strength of Ukrainian volunteer networks.
Those networks were built during the EuroMaidan revolution and following the beginning of the Russian invasion, they formed the first resistance groups that were eventually transformed into volunteer territorial defense battalions and special tasks patrol police units. Azov was formed as a volunteer police battalion in May 2014.
The original battalion consisted mostly of football hooligans and members of the Ukrainian far-right, and it was the far-right organization “Patriot of Ukraine” that was in charge of the original battalion.
Like many of my colleagues researching the far right, I was extremely skeptical and critical of the original Azov battalion for the following four major reasons: The “Patriot of Ukraine” was one of the most racist and anti-Semitic groups in Ukraine. Its members were involved in spreading far-right propaganda and occasional political and criminal violence. It was almost impossible to trust those people, especially given their anti-establishment and anti-democratic rhetoric. With very few exceptions, the leadership of the “Patriot of Ukraine,” including the first commander of Azov, did not participate in the Maidan revolution, as they were imprisoned on different charges. They were released – together with other people who were considered political prisoners of the pro-Russian regime – right after Yanukovych fled to Russia. That meant that the leaders of the “Patriot of Ukraine” did not have an opportunity to show their worth during the dramatic periods of the Ukrainian revolution, and we did not know what to expect of them. The far-right imagery of the original Azov battalion played into the hands of the Russian propaganda that pictured the Ukrainian revolution as a “fascist coup” and presented all Ukrainian volunteer military units as “neo-Nazis.” As the West was hesitating to help Ukraine in its defense against the Russian aggression, the far-right imagery of the battalion contributed to the Russian discreditation of Ukraine on the international level. Several key people who were directly involved in the formation of the Azov battalion had an extremely dubious history of cooperating not only with pro-Russian forces in Ukraine but also with Russian political spin-doctors. Moreover, neither Azov nor other battalions did proper screening of volunteers, some of whom came from Russia. All that created a huge security risk of Russian operatives seizing control of Azov and turning it into an anti-Ukrainian force.
To sum up these points, we had well-justified concerns about Azov and did not trust it. Nobody doubted the fact that, at that time, Ukraine needed volunteers of any social or political background – again, the Ukrainian army was almost non-existent then. If you are drowning, you are unlikely to ask about the social attitudes or political convictions of those willing to save you from drowning. But what if they were willing to save you just to kill you in a different manner?
With time, some of our concerns disappeared. In June 2014, Azov played an important role in liberating the Ukrainian city of Mariupol from pro-Russian forces, and that proved not only Azov’s combat effectiveness but also their truly pro-Ukrainian position. Because of its proven fighting abilities, Azov started to attract more volunteers, and many of them had no political background at all.
In autumn 2014, the battalion was transformed into a regiment and was enrolled in the National Guard of Ukraine, which is part of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. That created a hierarchical vertical to ensure – as much as possible – that Azov would remain loyal to the Ukrainian state.
A military ceremony in the Azov battalion on 19 November 2021.
Photo: t.me/polkazov
Moreover, within a few months after the creation of the Azov battalion, people with a history of dubious links to Russian and pro-Russian stakeholders moved away from Azov. And although several Russian agents indeed infiltrated the regiment, they were never able to exert any serious impact on its military service.
The remaining major concern was the political aspect of the regiment. However, because of the domestic and international criticism of the far-right background of the regiment’s original leadership, Azov started the process of de-politicization. In 2015, a number of former fighters of Azov formed an NGO “Azov Civil Corps,” which was transformed into a political party National Corps in 2016.
Far-right figures departed from the command of Azov and became engaged in the party-building.
They hoped that the popular support for defenders of Ukraine would somehow translate into political success and electoral victories. Hence, at that time, the separation of the National Corps from Azov was yet not complete – they had to keep the link, even if only symbolical, between the defenders of Motherland who enjoyed respect from the Ukrainian society and the political project. But already then, it was clear that the regiment followed orders of Ukraine’s Interior Ministry, while the National Corps had no power over the military unit.
The party’s hopes to benefit from Azov’s military valor were all in vain.
Figures for the National Corps and other Ukrainian far-right parties in public opinion polls were devastatingly low. The National Corps kept on referring to Azov as its affiliated organization, and naïve Western journalists and experts took all that bluster at face value instead of realizing that Azov was not a political organization and that its command structure was completely separate from the National Corps.
By the time of the parliamentary elections in 2019, it became evident that no Ukrainian far-right party would make it to the parliament. Out of despair, the Ukrainian far-right joined forces to compete in the parliamentary elections. However, their united list, which included members of the Freedom party, National Corps, Right Sector, and a few minor far-right groups, received only 2.15% of the vote and failed to get them elected into the parliament. The electoral failure of the Ukrainian far-right can be explained by the fact that they cannot offer any viable modernization program to the Ukrainian state and society.
Men evacuate a pregnant woman injured by a Russian airstrike on a maternity hospital on 9 March 2022. It was later reported that the woman and her unborn child died.
Photo: Yevheniy Maloletka/Instagram
The only time when the Ukrainian far-right was relatively successful in the elections was in 2012 when the Freedom (Svoboda) party received 10.45% of the vote.
The only reason for their relative success was because at that time they were considered the most radical opposition to the pro-Kremlin foreign policy agenda of Yanukovych’s regime. It is important to stress: they secured seats in the Ukrainian parliament not because of their far-right program but because of their radical criticism of Russia and its agents in Ukraine.
After the start of the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2014, the Ukrainian far-right lost their monopoly on radical criticism of Russia, and, with that, they lost all the electoral appeal they had.
The Ukrainian far-right in general fell into irrelevance, and the National Corps and groups around it suffered an identity crisis. They tried to experiment with different ideological narratives, largely borrowed from Western far-right discourses, but none of them worked outside of very small circles
Ironically, while Western far-right groups tried to exploit the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020-2021 to promote their anti-establishment conspiracy theories, the National Corps ran an information campaign on how to avoid getting infected, and their explanations and recommendations conformed to the mainstream domestic and international understanding of the new coronavirus and its spread. The National Corps still refers to its symbolical link to the Azov regiment, but it is rather political propaganda of the National Corps than a reality.
Azov today: defenders of Mariupol
Azov today is a highly professional special operations detachment. Not a political organization, not a militia, not a far-right battalion. It is still formally subordinated to the National Guard of Ukraine’s Interior Ministry, but now it largely coordinates its military activities with the Armed Forces, therefore, one can expect that Azov will move under the command of Ukraine’s Defense Ministry.
The Azov regiment uploaded this video of a street fight in which they destroyed a Russian IFV on 14 March 2022
Azov consists predominantly of Ukrainian citizens of various ethnic backgrounds. Among Azov’s members there are ethnic Ukrainians, Russians, Belarusians, Crimean Tatars, Jews, Georgians, Greeks. But whatever their ethnic origin, they are all Ukrainian patriots who are risking and sacrificing their lives for Ukraine’s sovereignty, freedom, and democracy.
The Kremlin, pro-Kremlin, and far-left media picture Azov as haters of Russian speakers. But not only do Azov fighters speak mostly Russian language among themselves, on average they speak better Russian than the Russian invaders. This fact alone dismisses blatant Kremlin lies about Azov allegedly fighting against Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine.
One may ask: why has Azov become one of the main targets of lies, falsehoods, and fabrications produced by the Kremlin and pro-Kremlin propaganda?[/box]
An obvious explanation is that the attack on Azov is part of the Kremlin’s disinformation narrative on Nazis in Ukraine.
A less obvious yet probably more important explanation is linked to the place where Azov has been stationed since 2014. This is the Ukrainian city of Mariupol and the area around it. Back in 2014, Azov greatly contributed to the liberation of Mariupol from the pro-Russian henchmen.
Mariupol is not simply yet another Ukrainian city. If you look at the map of Ukraine, you will see that Mariupol is the largest and most important city located in the area that is considered to be a potential land bridge from Russia to the annexed Crimea. Given the logistical troubles that Russia has with supplying Crimea with water, electricity, and other resources, it is crucial for Russia to occupy the territories of that potential land bridge. But Mariupol stands in the way. And Azov stands in the way.
The entire regiment is now in Mariupol.
Through its agents in Ukraine and elsewhere, Russia has been trying to destroy Azov or, at the very least, weaken its military capabilities.
Especially in NATO member states, there was a massive effort to prevent members of the Azov unit from receiving training from Ukraine’s Western allies, as well as to prevent Azov from obtaining advanced weapons and hardware.
The Kremlin’s efforts have, to a certain extent, succeeded. And today, the Azov regiment, which defends Mariupol completely surrounded by the Russian invaders, has neither Javelin portable anti-tank missile systems nor Bayraktar combat aerial vehicles that would have helped them to defend the city and save the lives of thousands of residents of Mariupol.
All “thanks” to those people – Western pro-Russian politicians, pseudo-journalists, fake experts, ignorant consultants – who directly or indirectly lobbied against training Azov and equipping it with advanced weapons. There is no doubt that they all share responsibility for the humanitarian catastrophe in Mariupol.
Mass graves in Mariupol, where the dead killed by a Russian airstrike on 9 March 2022 are buried. Photo: Yevheniy Maloletka/Instagram
The West’s dysmetropsia and moral procrastination
Naturally, one can say that the Westerners obsessed with the alleged “neo-Nazi” threat of Azov are all victims of dysmetropsia, an inability to judge an object’s size. In one of the episodes of the great British sitcom, “Father Ted,” the main character tried to explain to his less smart colleague, Father Dougal McGuire, the difference in size between the small toy cows in his hand and the real cows in the distance. Father Ted was unsuccessful because Father Dougal had dysmetropsia and, frankly, was an eejit. The same can be said about Western commentators who see no difference between the alleged “far-right” threat of Azov and the Russian genocidal invasion of Ukraine.
But I think that dysmetropsia cannot explain everything, and I would rather talk about Western moral procrastination.
Procrastination is about voluntarily distracting ourselves with insignificant activities from performing really important tasks. Moral procrastination is about giving preference to small exciting things instead of dealing with difficult issues that actually matter.
Mariupol, where Azov is based, is a predominantly Russian-speaking home of ethnic Ukrainians, Russians, Greeks, Belarusians, Armenians, Jews. Or it used to be their home; before the Russian invaders came.
The Russian invaders have already killed thousands of people in Mariupol and are killing them as I write.
Many of the dead are lying on the streets of Mariupol because every time their relatives and friends try to pick them up to bury them, Russian invaders shoot at them. If people are lucky to pick up the dead, they often have to bury them in mass graves. And those Ukrainians who still survive are forced to hide in the basements, where they starve, freeze, and die.
This chilling horror is psychologically hard to process, but we are morally obliged to be aware that this is happening in Europe, just around the corner. And our human nature pushes us to do something to stop Russian inhuman war crimes. There are many in the West who – instead of even starting to comprehend the brutal horror of the Russian war against Ukraine – prefer to distract themselves with inquiries of whether Azov fighters have any politically incorrect tattoos or t-shirts.
It’s much more exciting, of course, than to stand up to the Russian genocidal invasion. This is moral procrastination that should be met with disdain and contempt.
For Azov’s selfless epic struggle against superior numbers of the Russian enemy forces in Mariupol, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy recently awarded the country’s highest award, “Hero of Ukraine,” to Azov Commander Denys Prokopenko. Well deserved.
President Zelenskyy awards Azov commander Prokopenko during the Independence Day parade on 24 August 2021
In Mariupol, Azov defends not only the living and the wounded but also the dead. Not only do they deserve to be properly buried, but they are also silent witnesses of the Russian war crimes. As we well know, Russian invaders are equipped with mobile crematoriums which they use to destroy evidence of their villainy. And in Mariupol, Azov is now defending not only the freedom of the living but also the dignity of the dead.
Dr. Anton Shekhovtsov is Director of the Centre for Democratic Integrity (Austria), Senior Fellow at the Free Russia Foundation (USA), and an expert at the European Platform for Democratic Elections (Germany). Follow him on Twitter: @A_SHEKH0VTS0V
