How new archaeological discovery in Yorkshire could rewrite British prehistory | The Independent Inbox mark gregory 11:50 (37 minutes ago) to me How new archaeological discovery in Yorkshire could rewrite British prehistory | The Independent

Mark, Join me at this special briefing on the implications of the Omnibus Legislation at 2pm (Eastern time) on Thursday 8 April. You can register here. The Morrison government’s Omnibus Bill was a severe attack on workers’ rights. Drawn directly from the wish list of the big employer groups it would have had a devastating effect on working people – especially the most vulnerable. Once again, the government underestimated union members – and has paid the price. Our campaign managed to stop four out of the five major elements of the bill. This was a testament to our dedicated opposition to these attacks on workers. But the changes that have been made will make sure that casual work will remain insecure, uncertain, and far too prevalent. The government also walked away from any action on wage theft – showing who it really works for. These decisions have major implications for us as a movement. This briefing will unpack the details of what was passed and what this will mean for us. We will also discuss the next steps for us as a movement, and how we can make sure these issues follow the government to the next election. Register for the briefing at this link. I will see you there. In Union, Sally McManus

Spike Lee has again been asked to chair the Cannes Film Festival jury after last year's event was cancelled because of the pandemic. The Malcolm X and Do The Right Thing director will be the first black film-maker to take on the prestigious role. Lee has premiered seven films at the festival. "Cannes will always have a deep spot in my heart," he said in a video message. This year's event is due to take place in July instead of its usual May slot. "Book my flight now. My wife Tonya and I, we're coming," the director added. But with Covid-19 cases still at high levels in France, there is a chance that the event could be called off again. "Throughout the months of uncertainty we've just been through, Spike Lee has never stopped encouraging us," festival president Pierre Lescure said in a statement. "We could not have hoped for a more powerful personality to chart our troubled times."

The Sydney Womens March

Fukushima Daiichi nuclear Human cost of the disaster remains immense

The Morning Star AS we mark the tenth anniversary this week of the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant, where an earthquake and a tsunami led to a meltdown of nuclear reactors, the emission of huge amounts of radiation and a continuing humanitarian disaster, the fact remains that only in a world with the political drive to rid itself of nuclear power can we be safe from nuclear disaster. Even 10 years later, the human cost of the disaster remains immense. The release of radioactive caesium and strontium isotopes over a wide area poses as yet not understood risks to human health, including the risk of cancers. Tens of thousands of people remain displaced from their homes. Towns like Iwaki and Iitate will likely never see human habitation again. A vast “no go” zone some of some one thousand square kilometres surrounds the remains of the plant. And as a recent report by Greenpeace pointed out, many former residents have faced the unenviable choice between returning to their radioactively contaminated homes or leaving their properties forever. The response of the Japanese people, if not Japanese politicians, was a swift and enduring one. In the two years immediately following the disaster, public support for nuclear power dropped from over 85 per cent of the population to below a quarter. Japan is decommissioning around half of its reactors completely and only nine ever restarted after the events of 2011. By way of contrast, targets for (cheaper and safer) renewable energy production in Japan have been broken time again, with the country hitting its 2030 target of around 23 per cent of energy from renewable sources nearly a decade earlier than planned. Yet in other regards, successive Japanese governments have been drawn in by the seductive but ultimately false allure of nuclear power as a somehow “green” energy source. The current government under Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga is aiming for around a fifth of the country’s energy in 2030 to be provided by nuclear. Parallels can be clearly seen closer to home, where in a 10-point plan for a Green Industrial Revolution unveiled by Boris Johnson and the then business secretary Alok Sharma in November 2020, the government promised hundreds of millions of pounds of subsidies to develop and bring online small modular and advanced modular reactors. As expounded by the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, the case against civil nuclear power remains a straightforward yet convincing one. Nuclear is hugely expensive, even more so when compared to the alternatives. Cost over-runs and crippling delays are frequent. In Britain at least, nuclear only remains viable because of the vast public subsidies it receives. One nuclear project alone, the reactor at Hinkley Point C, is expected to cost around £25 billion by the time of its completion and it is already four years late. More fundamentally however, as the long nightmare of Fukushima demonstrates, the cost of even a single nuclear disaster in human terms is unimaginably high. Even relatively minor nuclear safety breaches, which happen on a regular basis, can have serious unintended consequences. This is compounded when, as was the case in Fukushima, governments and corporations are unable or unwilling to provide transparency to their people and other countries about the scale of nuclear accidents, in part to protect the wider legitimacy of their nuclear programmes. Most frustrating of all, of course, is the fact that the UK is in some regards perfectly placed to take advantage of the shift to renewable energy, with plentiful supplies of wave and wind power, both on and off shore. Every pound invested in nuclear power is one that could be better spent on wind, wave or solar, with the much greater number of skilled and well-paid jobs they bring. In the medium term we can expect no relief. The dangers associated with nuclear will be further heightened as climate change drives the increasing frequency of extreme weather events in unexpected places. On current projections of global warming, the unexpected snow storms which paralysed much of Texas’s electricity grid are merely a harbinger of things to come. Other countries, particularly those in the Global South, will look at the renewed turn to nuclear in the developed world and see a high-prestige and supposedly “green” power source, particularly as small modular reactors technology continues to develop. For the right type of company, nuclear power remains a profitable business — and much like other big polluters, that profit will be fiercely defended. Ever since the opening of Calder Hall at Sellafield in 1956, billed by the government of the day as Britain’s first civil nuclear power plant (in actual fact, one of its key functions was the production of plutonium for weapons use), British civil nuclear has raised not only an environmental question but a political one. The American philosopher George Santayana once said that “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” Governments across the planet seem determined to repeat the errors of nuclear power which led to Fukushima. The best way for Morning Star readers to work for a clean, safe and sustainable future for people both here and across the world remains energetic democratic participation, including through the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, at 64 years old one of the oldest and most active campaigning groups in the country. Dr Ian Fairlie is vice-president of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and a former official government adviser on radiation biology.

The Independent UK

There is nothing wrong with a U-turn if it means that a government abandons the wrong policy and adopts the right one. The case of the proposed coal mine in Cumbria has seen such zigzagging from both the local council and the national government that a U-turn is too simple a description. The important point is that Boris Johnson has ended up in the right position. This week’s confirmation that the project will not go ahead came in the form of a letter from a planning decision officer in Westminster to Cumbria County Council. Formally, Robert Jenrick, the communities secretary, has “called in” the planning application and has not yet made a

Iconic 3801 Restoration

An iconic and widely adored steam locomotive from the 1940s has returned to the tracks today to the delight of rail lovers across NSW. For the first time in almost 14 years Locomotive 3801 will run again, offering passengers a chance to return to a bygone era of rail travel. The train is the last streamlined steam locomotive in the state and arguably the country's most famous as it's the only engine to have visited all mainland states and territories. A steam train in front of the Central station clocktower A class 38 train, most likely the 3801, passing Sydney's Central Station in 1980.(Supplied: City Of Sydney) To mark its long-awaited return, the 3801 is taking 1,500 passengers on sold-out trips between Sydney and Hurstville today and tomorrow. In the next few months 3801 will also make trips to the Southern Highlands, Albury, Wagga Wagga, Junee, the Blue Mountains and towns in western and northern NSW. Passengers can choose to travel in the open saloon or a private compartment car. The train has always attracted major public enthusiasm, says Transport Heritage NSW CEO Andrew Moritz, and is the most asked about engine in their historical fleet. "This engine has a following all of its own," he said. "Being the 'glamour express' it has always been a crowd favourite and attracts crowds wherever it goes." In 2013, when Transport Heritage NSW was established, Premier Gladys Berejiklian said the organisation should prioritise returning the 3801 to service. The 3801 is an important piece of Australian rail history.(Supplied: Transport Heritage NSW Via SJB Photography) When Locomotive 3801 first launched in 1943, it immediately changed the image of NSW railways and epitomised the romance of the steam era. The 38 class was fast, powerful and streamlined, and only the best crews were rostered to work the trains. "It is that iconic epitome of steam, it represents the best technology of the day," Mr Moritz said. "The streamlining makes it so representative of that Art Deco era, and the modernity that the railways were trying to project." In 1964 the train made the fastest journey at the time between Sydney and Newcastle in just over two hours and in 1970 it became the first steam locomotive to cross the continent to Western Australia. However, the 3801 was marred by tragedy in 1990 when an inter-city train hit the locomotive while traveling to Cowan, NSW, killing six people on the steam train. The impact completely destroyed the last carriage of the 3801 and a nine-month ban was introduced on steam trains in NSW.

Wendy Bacon Imagining an Independent Inquiry into Federal Attorney General Christian Porter By Wendy Bacon, 8 March 2021

Imagining an Independent Inquiry into Federal Attorney General Christian Porter Many people, including senior lawyers, are calling for an independent Inquiry into whether Christian Porter is a fit and proper person to be the Federal Attorney-General of Australia. In Perth, a group of legal academics has referred Porter to the Legal Practice Board of Western Australia to see whether he is fit to practice law. Two academics from University of Melbourne Law School are taking similar steps. Prime Minister Scott Morrison and Attorney General Christian Porter have asserted that an independent inquiry would bring the ‘rule of law’ in Australia to an end. Democracy itself would be threatened. In this piece, I discuss the issue of the rule of law and consider some of the evidence that could be relevant to an inquiry. Firstly, here’s a summary of events so far . Background This week, Four Corners again probed the Canberra Bubble. Their program followed up on an earlier program in November 2020 and a further explosive report on February 26th by journalist Louise Milligan. She reported that a woman, who has not been named, reported to NSW police in February 2020 that as a 16 year old school student, she was raped by a man now serving as a Federal Cabinet minister. Milligan did not name the Minister. On March 3rd, the Federal Attorney-General Christian Porter called a media conference and publicly acknowledged that he is the Minister. The woman alleged that she was forced to have oral sex and was anally raped in a bedroom at Sydney University’s Womens College at the end of a debating tournament in 1988. She was on the same national team as Porter and two other male students. He was then a 17 year old student from Perth’s exclusive private boys’ school Hale and she attended a private girls school in Adelaide. Porter repeatedly denied the rape allegations during the media conference. The woman suicided last year in her home city of Adelaide. Porter is now on mental health leave but has said he will not step aside for an inquiry or resign. Morrison has also said Porter is ‘innocent’ and will continue as AG. The women first disclosed the alleged rape in 2013 to a counsellor, who also has not been named. Subsequently she told a number of friends, journalist Tory Shepherd, former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull and his partner Lucy Turnbull and Labor Senator Penny Wong about the alleged rape. After meeting with her in February last year, NSW Police Sexual Assault officers prepared a witness statement which was supposed to be signed in March 2020. The NSW police have said that the statement was not signed due to COVID 19 travel restrictions but have not explained why they did not arrange for it to be signed in Adelaide. According to her friends, the woman’s mental health deteriorated over the ensuing months. In June, she told police she did not wish to continue with the complaint. This was not because she did not stand by her account of the alleged rape but because of personal and health reasons. She died by her own hand two days later. . As Milligan reported, the woman’s detailed statement was sent anonymously to the Prime Minister Scott Morrison, who instead of reading it himself sent it to the Federal police, who have no jurisdiction in this matter. After speaking with Porter, who denied the allegation, he confirmed his confidence in the Attorney-General and said he saw no need for him to take any further action. Labor Senator Penny Wong and Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young also received a copy of the statement, which they also referred to the police. The NSW police last week said that they had decided not to proceed with an investigation on the grounds that there was insufficient admissible evidence to support a criminal case against Porter. During the chaotic 20 minute media conference, Porter confirmed that he knew the woman and that he was in a national schools’ debating team with her. Asked whether he had been alone with the young woman, he said, “Look, I don’t think so. We did what normal teenagers would do. There were groups of people.” When told there is a photo of the two of them sitting together at a dinner, Porter said it did not surprise him. Having said he didn’t think they had been alone together, Porter was asked: Reporter: She’s more specific in her statement, she says that you and she and a group of others had been out for dinner. You’d then gone dancing at the Hard Rock Cafe, and then you walked her back to her room. Do you recall that and what’s your recollection? Mr Porter: That may well be the case. Reporter: You don’t remember that? Mr Porter: It is 33 years ago. I remember two evenings that week. One was a night with – at one of the colleges with bowls of prawns, which sticks in my mind. I do remember a formal dinner, and going out dancing sounds about right. Porter does remember the woman showing him and the other two male team members how to iron a shirt. He agreed that it was not impossible that she was correct in remembering that he had said that “she would make a wonderful wife one day” as a joke. In her statement she described him as saying that apart from being smart and pretty she could do the things that housewives do. Four Corners has not published much of the statement but it did quote these words: “I was drunk, and I trusted him, so I agreed. I had no real reason then not to. We went up to my room, and I let him inside … What did happen next was a total surprise to me.” Porter claims to remember little about the evening but says if the alleged rape had occurred, he would remember it. Porter first heard rumours that the woman had made an allegation against him last year. Did he make any inquiries then about how he could lay the rumours to rest, particularly in the light of all the other allegations about his sexist and in appropriate behaviour aired in the first Canberra Bubble program? He now claims not to be able to answer questions about specific details because he hasn’t read the woman’s detailed statement. He was not asked at the conference whether he had asked for the statement. On Tuesday, former Foreign Minister and Deputy Leader of the Liberal party, Julie Bishop, who is also a lawyer, said that she was surprised that Morrison and Porter had not read the statement. “I wonder why they haven’t,” Ms Bishop told 7.30. “I think in order to deny [an] allegation you would need to know the substance of the allegation, or at least the detail of the allegation,”she said. The Four Corners’ team were aware of the rape allegation before they went to air with the first Canberra Bubble story in November 2020. They were not able to report the allegation, perhaps because there were no friends prepared to go on the record at that stage. Their subsequent actions were triggered by the recent revelation by Brittany Higgins that she was raped by a then fellow Liberal staffer in the office of the Minister for Defence Linda Reynolds. Questions relevant to other allegations of inappropriate and sexist behaviour both in Perth and Canberra were put to Porter but were not answered. Porter has not explained why he did not answer questions. Porter also complained that ‘substantial’ questions had not been put to him before Milligan broke the recent alleged rape story . According to Media Watch, Milligan put questions to the Prime Minister and not to Porter because he was not being named. This practice is common. As Amanda Meade reported in The Guardian, Porter had not answered numerous questions put to him by a number of media outlets. His approach can be compared to ex-Prime Minister Julia Gillard’s preparedness in 2012 to wait until all questions had been asked at a media conference to respond to allegations that she had acted corruptly 17 years previously. Porter would understand that by providing a denial, he made it easier for Four Corners to continue to report on the rape allegations and other issues about his treatment of women. By providing ample space for his ‘strenuous’ denials. the ABC was able to broadcast the second episode of the Canberra Bubble story. As well as providing a forum for friends of the woman to describe their friend’s outstanding qualities, their sorrow at her death and some of the information that she passed onto them, Four Corners interviewed senior barrister and past President of the Law Council Arthur Moses. He explained he was opposed to an inquiry into the allegations because the criminal investigation had been closed. But he acknowledged that some of his respected “closest friends and colleagues” disagree with him. None of those senior lawyers, including the current President of the Law Council Pauline Wright who supports an Inquiry, were interviewed. If Porter was to sue, he would expose himself to even more scrutiny and questions about his past. The reports are clearly in the ‘public interest’ as they are relevant to whether he is ‘fit and proper’ to be the Attorney-General, which is not merely a political role but also one involving legal decisions to prosecute and responsibility for law reform including on matters of gender discrimination. Morrison and Porter mislead the public about the ‘rule of law’ There is no doubt that Porter, who is fighting for his political life, was under enormous pressure at the press conference. But in defending himself, he spread misunderstandings about the ‘rule of law’ which other LNP MPs are now parroting in their attempts to lay the matter to rest. Since the ‘rule of law’ is a fundamental legal concept this raises further questions about his fitness for office Mr Porter said it would be wrong for him to stand aside or quit his job. As he put it: If that happens, anyone in public life is able to be removed simply by the printing of an allegation,” he said. Every child we raise can have their lives destroyed by online reporting of accusations alone. “My guess is that if I were to resign, and that set a new standard, well, there wouldn’t be much need for an attorney-general anyway, because there would be no rule of law left to protect in this country. So I will not be part of letting that happen. In making this statement, he would have been very aware that those calling for an independent Inquiry would expect him to stand aside and not resign while the inquiry produced its findings. Others have already provided strong arguments that the AG was misleading the public about the rule of law. Former Editor and non-practising lawyer Jack Waterford wrote in the Canberra Times: “Morrison is talking self-serving nonsense in claiming that the fundamentals of the rule of law in Australia would collapse if action were taken to investigate allegations of sexual assault by the Attorney-General, Christian Porter, even though the alleged victim is now dead. So is Porter, who is using the claim for refusing to resign.” Adelaide barrister Clare O’Connor SC was interviewed on Radio National Breakfast and described the ‘rule of law’ allegation as a furphy aimed at avoiding an inquiry. She also posted on her facebook: There’s a serious allegation against the chief legal officer. It needs investigation. Inquiry? Inquest? Either. Both. Matters not. But an investigation. That press conference of Mr Porter would never be enough. Asking for an investigation of some sort is consistent with the rule of law. Just outcomes can be achieved. But she also warned those calling for an inquiry that Porter would have the right not to incriminate himself and that the victim would be vilified and that the easiest defence is to attack the credibility of the victim who suicided in 2020. ‘Rule of law’ as political spin I agree that the ‘rule of law’ argument is a deliberate ploy or debating trick by Porter. Two men, one the Australian PM and the other the AG or chief law officer didn’t bother reading the specific allegations before deciding that a ‘strenuous’ denial and political spin about the ‘rule of law’ were their best line of defence. The patriarchal symbolism of two men asserting that no inquiry is necessary and that we should accept that the Federal government needs to do nothing more than allow the Attorney-General to take a health break before resuming duties was not lost on many, especially during the week of International Women’s Day. The rule of law is a broad concept about which there is a lot of debate in the fields of political and legal thought. It’s a principle that is supposed to guarantee the protection of other values, including democracy and basic rights such as equality before the law. It is not simply about procedures, although it does include protection from arbitrary punishment and a right to a fair hearing. Some prefer a narrow, more procedural notion of ‘rule of law’ but even they acknowledge that the rule of law applies to all spheres of law and public decisions that have consequences for citizens. In fact, I can’t remember anyone suggesting as Morrison has done that it only applies to the criminal justice system. During the 20th century, human rights, anti-racism and feminist advocates critiqued narrow concepts of the rule of law and strengthened the notion that fairness in any legal system must depend on actual equal access to the law and just outcomes. Formal equality alone cannot deliver justice. Christian Porter is extremely familiar with these ideas. I’d be surprised if he didn’t debate them at school and at university. He would have been exposed to them in law school. In 1999, he was awarded a scholarship to the London School of Economics where he specialised in the history of political thought and theory in the 20th century, where debates about human rights and justice and the neo-liberal critiques of them would have been discussed in depth. Porter did well in the course so he understands that at the heart of feminist concerns about low levels of reporting of sexual assault and of convictions lie deeply ingrained gender biases in the legal system. A conservative in these debates, he disagrees with the substance of the arguments but he understands them. The same goes for the arguments that the high levels of incarceration of the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people compared to other Australians can be seen as a failure in the rule of law. He also understand that freedom for journalism including investigative journalism and equal access to justice are considered by most lawyers, including Australian judges, to be part of the rule of law. By resorting to false warnings about threats to the rule of law, Porter knowingly debases the very principle he claims to defend. A independent inquiry into whether Christian Porter is fit for the position of first law officer Porter has said it is up to others whether there is an inquiry. That really means Morrison – who is adamant that there will be no Inquiry. He has rejected a suggestion that he seeks advice from the current Solicitor-General from Justin Gleeson SC, who previously served in that role. There is plenty of support for such an inquiry although some are arguing that an inquest conducted by the South Australian Coroner would be the best way forward. If conducted in a broad way, an inquest could caste light on the woman’s circumstances before her death but it is hard to see how it can deal with all the serious issues raised about Porter in the two Canberra Bubble episodes. It is in the context of a fact-finding inquiry into all the serious allegations about Porter’s behaviour towards women that the likelihood of his committing the rape, his denials and credibility can be fairly assessed. It is also possible that an inquiry might find that it is not possible to reach a finding on the balance of probabilities whether the rape and assault occurred or not but that in the light of evidence relevant to the totality of allegations, Porter is not fit and proper to be the first legal officer of Australia. In any fact finding inquiry, much depends on the terms of reference. At this point, it’s important to revisit the first Canberra Bubble program and the shocking allegations that it exposed. In this episode, Four Corners journalists reported that they had spoken to many who witnessed Porter’s sexist and misogynist behaviour over a number of years. The material falls into a range of categories. Barrister Katherine Foley was interviewed and provided an account of her experiences and observations of Porter’s behaviour from when she was 16 until when she was working as a solicitor during the period when Porter was a Crown Prosecutor in Western Australia. This period of more than a decade covers the years following the rape allegation incident. It provides an insight into the young Porter and how he might have behaved at 17. Porter later responded that he was “surprised” to hear Foley reflecting on his character so long after they knew each other. This was scarcely the issue. At the time, I was struck by the strength and clarity of Foley’s statements, knowing that as a barrister she would have fully understood the implications of making them Foley told Four Corners that “Christian’s persona, particularly at UWA … was the sidelining of women in any kind of forum in which they wanted to be involved,” Ms Foley said. “They were treated as a joke; they were objects of ridicule. The only point to women, as far as I could tell from Christian’s way of treating women, was for him to hit on them, or for women to be made fun of, particularly for the way that they looked.” She could be called to give evidence of what she saw and heard during those years. Four Corners reported that they had spoke to other former UWA students who described incidents of inappropriate behaviour. They included “sexualised comments about female students, and a gratuitous focus on violent and sexually graphic material in the legal cases he taught”. Some of these people might be available to give evidence before an inquiry. Porter also wrote for law student publications and described how he intended to ‘slut’ he way through Law school. He has said that he now regrets these statements but shouldn’t he be asked what they conveyed in terms of his actual practice during more than eight years as a student? Louise Milligan, Lucy Carter and Peter Cronau also reported that they had spoken to many who “volunteered an example of what they believe is inappropriate conduct by Mr Porter” since his election as a Federal MP in 2013. Presumably, some of these people would come forward if there was an inquiry. If not, Four Corners could provide more details about these allegations while protecting the identity of sources, who may be too nervous to come forward. An Inquiry could also arrange to interview witnesses confidentially as occurred with the Royal Commission into Institutional Child Abuse. There was also the allegation that Porter was seen in a public bar having an intimate drink with a young Liberal staffer and that a photo of this taken was deleted. There are witnesses to this incident. Porter later rejected that interpretation put on his behaviour. This incident would be further explored in an inquiry. Former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull told Four Corners that he had heard rumours about Porter’s behaviour in Canberra and warned him that this could be a security risk. Porter has said he has a different memory of what occurred. Turnbull has contemporaneous notes. A further exploration of this could have bearing on an assessment of Porter’s truthfulness and credibility. Sarah Hanson Young told Four Corners that she had spoken to a young Liberal staffer who was in a consensual relationship with Christian Porter but that she felt very uncomfortable. The staffer was distressed about what was going on in her office. After watching the Canberra Bubble Episode One, I expected that all of these allegations might lead to an inquiry into Porter’s conduct . That proved to be naive. There was considerable media and political push back against the program. The old arguments about allegations being too old, and the private lives of public figures not being of public interest were raised. I could not help wondering if the issue had been one of race discrimination would the response have been different? I certainly hope so. We need to question why the allegations in the first Canberra Bubble program could be so easily pushed aside. Did we collectively “move on”? So long as we accept that discrimination and harassment of women can be tolerated. appalling levels of domestic assaults of women and sexual assaults will continue. This lack of basic respect for the rights of women has always undermined the rule of law. Porter’s career in Western Australia, in particular his attitudes to women and the rule of law, warrant further attention. After returning from London, Porter did a stint as a staffer for a Federal Liberal Minister and worked at the corporate law firm Clayton Utz. While Porter was teaching part-time at the UWA law school, he joined the WA Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) office and became a part-time Crown prosecutor. He continued in these two roles until he was preselected to stand for the state seat of Murdoch in 2008. How DPP lawyer Porter advised against continuing with a sexual assault case. At the media conference Porter referred to his knowledge and care for victims of sexual assault during his time at the DPP. As a prosecutor Porter was required to exercise his discretion in many ways including whether sexual assault cases would go to trial or end up in the ‘too hard’ basket with many other rape prosecutions. This discretion had to be exercised fairly - or in other words according to the rule of law. In order to find out more about how his discretion was exercised, I did a Factiva news database search and came across the following case. In April 2005, The West Australian newspaper reported on a rape victim who was very upset that the man who allegedly raped her had been allowed to leave the country, rather than go to trial. Mary, a social work student who was 19 when she was attacked in her home at Rockingham. She told The West Australian that she was “devastated by the decision. “I don’t know how they can put a price on what he’s done,” she said. “For a long time I had to deal with the guilt of it, thinking I had brought it on myself. When the DPP won’t go after him it makes me wonder and brings it all back to me.” The 23-year-old man had pleaded not guilty to three counts of indecent assault and one count of sexual penetration and was due to appear in the District Court next month. But because his student visa expired, the Director of Public Prosecutions needed to seek a ‘criminal justice stay visa’ which would have meant that his costs of staying in Australia would need to be covered. The DPP lawyer was Christian Porter. He told that paper that a number of matters were considered including the prospects of conviction, seriousness of the case and the importance to the alleged victim. “In these circumstances the decision was made not to apply,” he said. “We advised her of the decision and she told our office and she told me that she was relieved with it.” The idea that the Mary was relieved seems to have been a case of miscommunication. Mary said she was “completely terrified” when the man attacked her. “I absolutely froze, I was scared for my life,” she said. She described how she has struggled to get her life back on track since, attempting suicide six months after the incident, and is undergoing counselling. “It’s destroyed me, so I want something done. I don’t want him to get off,” she said. “I want some form of justice. By him just being deported and going home, he’s not having to face up to his actions at all.” This is only one case. Perhaps there were many other successful prosecutions. But it highlights a potential problems when a lawyer who exercises discretion is a person with a long record of misogynist and sexist behaviour to women is an appropriate person to be communicating with woman like ‘Mary’ and deciding on the fate of her complaints of assault. Mary was certainly left feeling that in her case the ‘access to justice’ part of the ‘rule of law’ had been denied. This is why the independent inquiry needs to take on board all of the serious allegations against Porter to assess whether he is fit and proper for office. In Part Two, I will update developments and examine other matters that could be relevant to Porter’s fitness for office and his understanding of the rule of law while he was an MP in WA. I can be reached at wendybacon1@gmail.com. I am also on Twitter and Signal For a well-researched article about Porter’s breaches of the law since he became Attorney General , read Elizabeth Minter’s article, first published on John Menadue’s Pearls and Irritations. I highly recommend johnmenadue.com Small editing changes have been made since publication

Trans-Tasman spat erupts after Peter Dutton refers to immigration deportees as 'trash'

Lawyers call for Porter to be subjected to the same standard of accountability as others in the legal profession

MEAA, the union for Australian journalists, welcomes today’s decision by a British judge to prevent the extradition to the United States of our member Julian Assange and calls on the US government to now drop his prosecution. The court ruled against extradition on health grounds, accepting medical evidence that Assange would be at risk in US custody. However, journalists everywhere should be concerned at the hostile manner in which the court dismissed all defence arguments related to press freedom. “Today’s court ruling is a huge relief for Julian, his partner and family, his legal team and his supporters around the world,” said MEAA Media Federal President Marcus Strom. “Julian has suffered a 10-year ordeal for trying to bring information of public interest to the light of day, and it has had an immense impact on his mental and physical health. “But we are dismayed that the judge showed no concern for press freedom in any of her comments today, and effectively accepted the US arguments that journalists can be prosecuted for exposing war crimes and other government secrets, and for protecting their sources. “The stories for which he was being prosecuted were published by WikiLeaks a decade ago and revealed war crimes and other shameful actions by the United States government. They were clearly in the public interest. “The case against Assange has always been politically motivated with the intent of curtailing free speech, criminalising journalism and sending a clear message to future whistleblowers and publishers that they too will be punished if they step out of line.” MEAA now calls on the US government to drop all charges against Julian Assange and for the Australian government to expedite his safe passage to Australia if that is his wish.

ACTU stands with NT gas plant workers fighting for fair pay

ACTU stands with NT gas plant workers fighting for fair pay ACTU stands with NT gas plant workers fighting for fair pay Maintenance workers at the Ichthys Gas Plant near Darwin have taken industrial action after their employer Trace Broad Spectrum refused to come to the table on key issues like paid leave, breaks and allowances. Workers at the Ichthys plant are highly skilled and doing technical and dangerous work, but are paid 10-20 per cent less than equivalent workers on plants in Queensland and Western Australia. Taking industrial action is a decision that no worker takes lightly and the decision was made in Darwin only after 10 months of negotiations stalled with management refusing to provide reasonable pay and conditions, in line with similar jobs elsewhere in the industry. Quotes attributable to ACTU Secretary Sally McManus: “The issues being faced by these workers in Darwin will be familiar to any worker who has ever tried to negotiate a pay rise or decent conditions in Australia. The odds are stacked against workers during bargaining and employers have far too much power. “The Morrison Government’s IR Omnibus legislation will make this even worse, giving more power to employers to drive down wages and strip away conditions. “These workers do hard work under difficult circumstances while their employers reap huge profits. They deserve to be paid fairly for their work, and this is all they’re asking for. “We stand with these workers and all other working people fighting for better pay and stronger conditions, and that is why we are campaigning against the Morrison Government’s Bill. It will crush wage growth and in turn hurt the economy.”

The Morning Star ON MARCH 5 2021, we celebrate the 150th anniversary of Rosa Luxemburg’s birth.

ON MARCH 5 2021, we celebrate the 150th anniversary of Rosa Luxemburg’s birth. No-one who wishes to get a sense of Rosa Luxemburg as a person, both political and private, will regret watching Margarethe von Trotta’s meticulously researched 1986 film of the same name. It is available with English subtitles. The film begins on December 7 1916 with Luxemburg in Vronke prison, cutting back to this location again and again. Von Trotta uses Luxemburg’s prison letters to her good friend Sonja Liebknecht like a leitmotif right through the film to paint a very sensitive and personal portrait of this Polish revolutionary. From this prison, the viewer relives many episodes of Rosa’s life in flashbacks. Some of these sequences evoke the more personal aspects of her life, such as early childhood. Some of them are in Polish, adding greatly to the authentic feel of the film. Indeed, throughout the film Luxemburg occasionally speaks in Polish, especially to Leo Jogiches, her close comrade and lover for many years. It is also suggested she may have had polio, as Barbara Sukowa, the actor who plays her, limps noticeably during the film. Luxemburg’s deep love for nature is emphasised in many ways — in her letters and in her tenderness for animals, her pet cat, and her “garden” in the prison. This garden comes as a surprise but is true to history. Luxemburg enthusiastically wrote to Sonja Liebknecht on May 19 1917: “I can hardly believe my eyes, today I planted something for the first time in my life and everything has turned out so well right away!” Luxemburg’s collection of dried plants was long considered lost and was only rediscovered in 2009 in a Warsaw archive, 23 years after this film was made. Her herbarium and nature drawings are an impressive document of her resilience during imprisonment in various gaols including in Vronke, where she tended the prison garden. Rosa’s tenderness and love of nature, of animals, so manifest in her letters, finds other expressions too, towards children and her close friends, creating the sense of a profoundly humane person. Luxemburg the private person and the political activist are presented as inseparable. Her uncompromising humanity motivates everything she does. Von Trotta does a magnificent job in bringing together important stages in Luxemburg’s political career, going back to earlier imprisonment in Poland for her involvement with the then strongest workers’ party in Europe, the German Social Democratic Party (SPD). Von Trotta does not tell the story strictly sequentially, so the consistency of Luxemburg’s views emerges more clearly. The main parts of the film focus on Luxemburg’s political activity in Berlin. Considerable time is devoted to Luxemburg’s growing disillusionment with the SPD. It shows her disgust with Eduard Bernstein, and her early alliance with Karl Kautsky. Poignantly, the SPD leader Friedrich Ebert says to Luxemburg at a dinner party that events in Russia have ultra-radicalised her, and continues chillingly to say: “We will hang you.” From early on, she senses and tackles the reformism of the SPD leadership. The film shows her political break with Kautsky and other leaders of the SPD, although she remains a lifelong friend and correspondent of his wife Luise. The complete betrayal of the social democratic leadership becomes shockingly clear in the scene where Karl Liebknecht emerges from the Reichstag to tell her that all SPD parliamentarians have voted in favour of the granting of war funds. Liebknecht was the only member of parliament in 1914 to oppose these. National chauvinism as a direct result of this party’s reformism drives them into their disastrous support for WWI. Luxemburg, keenly aware of the growing danger of war from very early on, unmasks the profoundly inhuman nature of war time and again, as the senseless slaughter of working people in the interests of power and profits. She steps up her activities even more as the world war approaches, and increasingly the anti-war struggle becomes a central focus of the film. All speeches quoted in the film are documented, and apply uncannily to our own times, over 100 years and two world wars later: “Were we suddenly to lose sight of all these happenings and manoeuvres, …could we say, for instance, that for forty years we have had uninterrupted peace. This idea, which considers exclusively events on the European continent, ignores the very reason why we have had no war in Europe for decades is the fact that international antagonisms have grown infinitely beyond the narrow confines of the European continent. “European problems and interests are now fought out on the world seas and in the by-corners of Europe. Hence the ‘United States of Europe’ is an idea which runs directly counter both economically and politically to the path of progress.” Following her arrest for speaking at an anti-war rally in Berlin in 1913, she defended herself in the courtroom: “When the majority of working people realise … that wars are barbaric, deeply immoral, reactionary, and anti-people, then wars will have become impossible.” Faced with the betrayal of the SPD leadership, Liebknecht, Luxemburg and Zetkin discuss the need for a new party, the Spartacus League, which went on to become the Communist Party. Luxemburg is put in “protective custody,” imprisoned again on July 10 1916, first in Berlin, later in Vronke Fortress and finally in Wroclaw in Poland. She was released on November 9 1918. During this time, she is allowed books and letters, and she secretly passes visitors her contributions to the “Spartacus Letters.” On the day of Luxemburg’s release the Kaiser abdicates, and SPD politician Philipp Scheidemann proclaims Germany a republic, with SPD leader Ebert taking power. He prevents the country from turning into a soviet, socialist republic, which Liebknecht proclaims on the same day. The Communist Party of Germany is founded on New Year’s Day 1919. Uprisings in Berlin against the Ebert government follow in the second week of January. Luxemburg and Liebknecht do not agree in their analysis of the rising and are now wanted persons. They are betrayed, tracked to their hiding place on January 15 1919 — and the rest is history. The film does not make clear Ebert’s final betrayal of his erstwhile comrades: General Staff Officer Captain Waldemar Pabst informed the Reich government at an early stage about the arrest of the two. Pabst took the decision to have Liebknecht and Luxemburg murdered, considering the executions in the national interest. Pabst lived until 1970 in West Germany and in old age maintained that the SPD leadership, in the person of Noske and in all likelihood Ebert, had agreed the killings. Expressing her profound belief in the eventual and unstoppable liberation of humankind, Luxemburg declares: “In Schiller’s drama, Wallenstein says on the night that was to be his last, as he gazes with inquiring eyes at the stars to unravel in them the course of things to come: ‘The day is near, and Mars rules the hour.’ “This also applies to today’s times. Mars, the bloody god of war, still rules the hour. “Power is still with those who rely solely on a forest of murderous weapons to thwart the working people in their just struggle. “Wars are still being prepared, parliament is still being controlled, and more and more military bills are passed, the people are still being sucked to the last drop by the gluttonous Moloch of Militarism. “Mars still rules the hour. But, as Wallenstein said: ‘The day is near, the day that is ours.’ “So, too, the day approaches when we who are at the bottom will rise! Not to carry out that bloody fantasy of mutiny and slaughter that hovers before the terrified eyes of the prosecutors, no, we who will rise to power will be the first to realise a social order worthy of the human race, a society that knows no exploitation of one human by another, that knows no genocide, a society that will realise the ideals of both the oldest founders of religion and the greatest philosophers of humanity. “In order to bring about this new day as quickly as possible we must use our utmost powers, without looking to any success, in defiance of all public prosecutors, in defiance of all military power. Our slogan will become reality: The people are with us, victory is with us!”

"Nuclear Risks" DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES

Senator “It’s Time to Wake Up” Whitehouse drops his climate change mic A few weeks ago, Rhode Island Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse literally dropped the mic, after a nearly eight-year streak of weekly speeches calling for action on climate change. In this interview with Bulletin deputy editor Dan Drollette, Whitehouse gives his reading of the prospects for dealing with climate change in the Senate and elsewhere. Read more. French report grapples with nuclear fallout from Algerian War A January report commissioned by France's President Macron signaled that radioactive fallout from the Algerian War has remained a thorn between France and Algeria. Here's a look at the countries' nuclear history — and possible steps toward reconciliation. Read more. DISRUPTIVE TECHNOLOGIES Regulating military AI will be difficult. Here’s a way forward If the international community doesn’t properly manage the development, proliferation, and use of military AI, international peace and stability could be at stake. Read more. "They keep growing back" design now available! Nuclear Disaster Compensation: A Call for Action Join Northwestern University and the Bulletin on March 9 for an event highlighting the human toll of nuclear catastrophes worldwide. We'll discuss actions scientists, policymakers and citizens can take to prepare for future nuclear accidents as the 10th anniversary of the Fukushima nuclear disaster approaches and the Doomsday Clock hits 100 seconds to midnight. Register here.

Paul Krugman

Where have all the unions gone?Unionstats.com Why did this happen? You often hear assertions to the effect that globalization killed the labor movement, because unionized firms couldn’t cope with international competition. But this story doesn’t hold up in the face of the facts. First, while unions have lost some ground in many countries, the collapse of organized labor in America is unique. Denmark is every bit as integrated with the global economy as we are, yet two-thirds of its workers are union members. A quarter of Canadian workers are unionized, which is only a modest decline from the proportion half a century ago. Also, while a global competition story might seem to make sense for manufacturing firms, there’s no reason unions have to be restricted to manufacturing. These days America’s biggest private employers are Walmart, Amazon, Kroger and Home Depot. (Amazon may look to consumers like a virtual company that exists only in cyberspace, but those quick deliveries are made possible by more than a million workers, mainly employed in a vast network of warehouses, and a complex delivery system.) And the services provided by today’s giant service-sector companies aren’t subject to global competition: You can’t get two-day delivery or fresh produce from a factory in Guangzhou. There is, in other words, no inherent economic reason for the implosion of the U.S. labor movement. So what did happen? Politics. Unions could have remained an important force in American life, even as we transitioned from a manufacturing to a service economy. But to do so they would have had to organize workers in rapidly growing service companies like Walmart and now Amazon. And they generally failed to do so, because the transition to a service economy took place in an era of conservative political dominance.

Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou will return to the British Columbia Supreme Court

Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou will return to the British Columbia Supreme Court on March 1 for the next phase of extradition proceedings, said a statement from Huawei Canada on Saturday. The next-phase extradition proceedings will revolve around "the four branches of abuse of process," including "political motivation, unlawful detention, material omissions and misstatements, and violations of customary international law", said Huawei Canada. The case against Meng violates customary international law and Meng's Charter rights, said the statement. "The court will be seized with whether these constitute an abuse of the Canadian judicial process sufficient to order a stay of the extradition proceedings," it added. "As the case enters its next phase, Huawei remains confident in Meng Wanzhou's innocence. We will continue to support Ms. Meng's pursuit of justice and freedom," said the company.