Institutional response and Indigenous experiences of Cyclone Tracy

Early on Christmas morning 1974 Tropical Cyclone Tracy, a Category 4 storm, devastated the Northern Territory city of Darwin leaving only 6% of the city’s housing habitable. The extent of the disaster was largely the result of unregulated and poorly constructed buildings, predominantly housing. While the engineering and reconstruction process demonstrated a very successful response and adaptation to an existing and future risk, the impact of the cyclone of the local community and its Indigenous population in particular, had not been well recorded. NCCARF therefore commissioned a report on the Indigenous experience of Cyclone Tracy to document how Indigenous people were impacted by, responded to, and recovered from Cyclone Tracy in comparison to non-Indigenous groups. The report also considers the research literature on disasters and Indigenous people in the Northern Territory, with a specific focus on cyclones, and considers the socio-political context of Indigenous communities in Darwin prior to Cyclone Tracy.

Adaptation lessons from cyclone Tracy

This case study will review the impact of Tropical Cyclone Tracy on the city and people of Darwin, the Australian engineering and institutional responses that it invoked and the relevance of these lessons to a world threatened by global climate change. At Christmas, 1974, Tropical Cyclone Tracy laid waste the city of Darwin, an iconic episode in the history of Australian natural disasters. It provides one of the clearest and most successful examples worldwide of adaptation to a catastrophe. Following large losses in Townsville from Tropical Cyclone Althea in 1971, the level of destruction in Darwin was such that it led to new regulations mandating the use of the wind code for reconstruction, and eventually to similar regulations for new construction in other cyclone-prone areas of Australia.

Cyclone Tracy and the road to improving wind-resistant design

Early on Christmas morning 1974, tropical cyclone Tracy devastated the city of Darwin leaving only 6 per cent of the city’s housing habitable and instigating the evacuation of 75 per cent of its population. The systematic failure of so much of Darwin’s building stock led to a humanitarian disaster that proved the impetus for an upheaval of building regulatory and construction practices throughout Australia. Indeed, some of the most enduring legacies of Tracy have been the engineering and regulatory steps taken to ensure the extent of damage would not be repeated. This chapter explores these steps and highlights lessons that have led to a national building framework and practice at the fore of wind-resistant design internationally.

Applying for funding is the worst part of my job

That’s what one researcher told us when we asked them about applying for NHMRC Project Grant funding. Others said that applying for funding had made them ill, lost them friends, ruined Christmas and caused arguments with friends and family. What makes applying for funding so bad? We’ve tried to summarise the problems with the system in the diagram above. This is based on our group’s four years of research into the funding process. Some of the arrows are based on evidence from our surveys (Survey 1, Survey 2), others are based on anecdote or experience and so maybe wrong. Please let me know if I’ve missed an arrow or an issue.

Understanding the effects of complex seasonality on suburban daily transit ridership

Fluctuations in transit ridership pattern over the year have always concerned transport planners, operators and researchers. Predominantly, metrological elements have been specified to explain variability in ridership volume. However, the outcome of this research points to new direction to explain ridership fluctuation in Brisbane. It explored the relationship between daily bus ridership, seasonality and weather variables for a one-year period, 2012. Rather than segregating the entire year’s ridership into the four calendar seasons (summer, autumn, spring, and winter), this analysis distributed the yearly ridership into nine complex seasonality blocks. These represent calendar season, school/university (academic) period and their corresponding holidays, as well as other observant holidays such as Christmas. The dominance of complex seasonality over typical calendar season was established through analysis and using Multiple Linear Regression (MLR). This research identified a very strong association between complex seasonality and bus ridership. Furthermore, an expectation that Brisbane’s subtropical summer is unfavourable to transit usage was not supported by the findings of this study. A nil association of precipitation and temperature was observed in this region. Finally, this research developed a ridership estimation model, capable of predicting daily ridership within very limited error range. Following the application of this developed model, the estimated annual time series data of each suburb was analysed using Fourier Transformation to appreciate whether any cyclical effects remained, compared with the original data.

Our future is at risk: Disclose the Trans-Pacific Partnership now

Christmas has come early this year for big corporations. Wikileaks has revealed that the Trans-Pacific Partnership contains a swag of corporate gifts and baubles. The leaked intellectual property chapter of the TPP looks like it has been dictated by the United States Chamber of Commerce. Among other things, the agreement seeks to provide for longer and stronger copyright protection for transnational corporations. - See more at: https://newmatilda.com/2013/11/15/our-future-risk-disclose-tpp-now#sthash.axbmON9X.dpuf

A Submission to the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 (# ACTA)

“If Hollywood could order intellectual property laws for Christmas, what would they look like? This is pretty close.” David Fewer “While European and American IP maximalists have pushed for TRIPS-Plus provisions in FTAs and bilateral agreements, they are now pushing for TRIPS-Plus-Plus protections in these various forums.” Susan Sell “ACTA is a threat to the future of a free and open Internet.” Alexander Furnas “Implementing the agreement could open a Pandora's box of potential human rights violations.” Amnesty International. “I will not take part in this masquerade.” Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament Executive Summary As an independent scholar and expert in intellectual property, I am of the view that the Australian Parliament should reject the adoption of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. I would take issue with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade’s rather partisan account of the negotiations, the consultations, and the outcomes associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. In my view, the negotiations were secretive and biased; the local consultations were sometimes farcical because of the lack of information about the draft texts of the agreement; and the final text of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 is not in the best interests of Australia, particularly given that it is a net importer of copyright works and trade mark goods and services. I would also express grave reservations about the quality of the rather pitiful National Interest Analysis – and the lack of any regulatory impact statement – associated with the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The assertion that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 does not require legislative measures is questionable – especially given the United States Trade Representative has called the agreement ‘the highest-standard plurilateral agreement ever achieved concerning the enforcement of intellectual property rights.’ It is worthwhile reiterating that there has been much criticism of the secretive and partisan nature of the negotiations surrounding the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Sean Flynn summarizes these concerns: "The negotiation process for ACTA has been a case study in establishing the conditions for effective industry capture of a lawmaking process. Instead of using the relatively transparent and inclusive multilateral processes, ACTA was launched through a closed and secretive “‘club approach’ in which like-minded jurisdictions define enforcement ‘membership’ rules and then invite other countries to join, presumably via other trade agreements.” The most influential developing countries, including Brazil, India, China and Russia, were excluded. Likewise, a series of manoeuvres ensured that public knowledge about the specifics of the agreement and opportunities for input into the process were severely limited. Negotiations were held with mere hours notice to the public as to when and where they would be convened, often in countries half away around the world from where public interest groups are housed. Once there, all negotiation processes were closed to the public. Draft texts were not released before or after most negotiating rounds, and meetings with stakeholders took place only behind closed doors and off the record. A public release of draft text, in April 2010, was followed by no public or on-the-record meetings with negotiators." Moreover, it is disturbing that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 has been driven by ideology and faith, rather than by any evidence-based policy making Professor Duncan Matthews has raised significant questions about the quality of empirical evidence used to support the proposal of Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011: ‘There are concerns that statements about levels of counterfeiting and piracy are based either on customs seizures, with the actual quantities of infringing goods in free circulation in any particular market largely unknown, or on estimated losses derived from industry surveys.’ It is particularly disturbing that, in spite of past criticism, the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade has supported the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011, without engaging the Productivity Commission or the Treasury to do a proper economic analysis of the proposed treaty. Kader Arif, Rapporteur for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the European Parliament, quit his position, and said of the process: "I want to denounce in the strongest possible manner the entire process that led to the signature of this agreement: no inclusion of civil society organisations, a lack of transparency from the start of the negotiations, repeated postponing of the signature of the text without an explanation being ever given, exclusion of the EU Parliament's demands that were expressed on several occasions in our assembly. As rapporteur of this text, I have faced never-before-seen manoeuvres from the right wing of this Parliament to impose a rushed calendar before public opinion could be alerted, thus depriving the Parliament of its right to expression and of the tools at its disposal to convey citizens' legitimate demands.” Everyone knows the ACTA agreement is problematic, whether it is its impact on civil liberties, the way it makes Internet access providers liable, its consequences on generic drugs manufacturing, or how little protection it gives to our geographical indications. This agreement might have major consequences on citizens' lives, and still, everything is being done to prevent the European Parliament from having its say in this matter. That is why today, as I release this report for which I was in charge, I want to send a strong signal and alert the public opinion about this unacceptable situation. I will not take part in this masquerade." There have been parallel concerns about the process and substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 in the context of Australia. I have a number of concerns about the substance of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. First, I am concerned that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 fails to provide appropriate safeguards in respect of human rights, consumer protection, competition, and privacy laws. It is recommended that the new Joint Parliamentary Committee on Human Rights investigate this treaty. Second, I argue that there is a lack of balance to the copyright measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – the definition of piracy is overbroad; the suite of civil remedies, criminal offences, and border measures is excessive; and there is a lack of suitable protection for copyright exceptions, limitations, and remedies. Third, I discuss trade mark law, intermediary liability, and counterfeiting. I express my concerns, in this context, that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 could have an adverse impact upon consumer interests, competition policy, and innovation in the digital economy. I also note, with concern, the lobbying by tobacco industries for the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 – and the lack of any recognition in the treaty for the capacity of countries to take measures of tobacco control under the World Health Organization Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. Fourth, I note that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 provides no positive obligations to promote access to essential medicines. It is particularly lamentable that Australia and the United States of America have failed to implement the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health 2001 and the WTO General Council Decision 2003. Fifth, I express concerns about the border measures in the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. Such measures lack balance – and unduly favour the interests of intellectual property owners over consumers, importers, and exporters. Moreover, such measures will be costly, as they involve shifting the burden of intellectual property enforcement to customs and border authorities. Interdicting, seizing, and destroying goods may also raise significant trade issues. Finally, I express concern that the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 undermines the role of existing international organisations, such as the United Nations, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the World Trade Organization, and subverts international initiatives such as the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. I also question the raison d'être, independence, transparency, and accountability of the proposed new ‘ACTA Committee’. In this context, I am concerned by the shift in the position of the Labor Party in its approach to international treaty-making in relation to intellectual property. The Australian Parliament adopted the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, which included a large Chapter on intellectual property. The treaty was a ‘TRIPs-Plus’ agreement, because the obligations were much more extensive and prescriptive than those required under the multilateral framework established by the TRIPS Agreement 1994. During the debate over the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Party expressed the view that it would seek to mitigate the effects of the TRIPS-Plus Agreement, when at such time it gained power. Far from seeking to ameliorate the effects of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement 2004, the Labor Government would seek to lock Australia into a TRIPS-Double Plus Agreement – the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. There has not been a clear political explanation for this change in approach to international intellectual property. For both reasons of process and substance, I conclude that the Australian Parliament and the Australian Government should reject the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011. The Australian Government would do better to endorse the Washington Declaration on Intellectual Property and the Public Interest 2011, and implement its outstanding obligations in respect of access to knowledge, access to essential medicines, and the WIPO Development Agenda 2007. The case study of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement 2011 highlights the need for further reforms to the process by which Australia engages in international treaty-making.

Illicit drug use between an annual key holiday and a control period: Wastewater analysis in a semi-rural, an urban and a vacation area

Introduction and Aims: Holiday periods are potentially a time for increased substance use as social events and private parties are more common. Data on community illicit drug consumption during holiday periods are limited. Besides existing methods for determining drug use, such as population surveys, one emerging method is to measure illicit drugs and/or their metabolites in wastewater samples. This study examined the change in consumption of cannabis, methamphetamine, cocaine and 3,4- methylenedioxymethamphetamine in three different types of areas (an inland semi-rural area, a coastal urban area and a vacation island) with respect to holiday times. Design and Methods: Samples were collected at the inlet of the major wastewater treatment plant in each area during a key annual holiday (i.e. the summer holiday including Christmas and New Year) and control period. Illicit drug residues in the daily composited samples were measured by liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. Results: Drug use varied substantially among the three areas within each monitoring period as well as between the holiday and control period within each area. Use consistently increased and peaked over New Year particularly for cocaine and 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine whereas cannabis and methamphetamine were relatively less subjected to holiday times in all the areas. Discussion and Conclusions: Wastewater sampling and analysis provides higher spatio-temporal resolution than national surveys and supplements drug epidemiology studies originating primary in metropolitan locations. Such data is essential for policy makers to plan potential intervention strategies associated with these illicit substances in regional areas and other settings besides urban areas in the future.

The first application of wastewater-based drug epidemiology in five South Korean cities

Illicit drug consumption in five cities in South Korea was estimated by analyzing 17 drug residues in untreated wastewater samples collected during the Christmas and New Year period of 2012-13. Only methamphetamine, amphetamine, and codeine were detected at concentrations of tens of nanograms per liter or even lower concentrations in more than 90% of the samples. Other illicit drug residues (including cocaine, methadone, and benzoylecgonine) that have been detected frequently in wastewater from other countries were not found in this study. Methamphetamine was found to be the most widely used illicit drug in South Korea, and the estimated average consumption rate was 22 mg d−1 (1000 people)−1. This rate is, for example, 2-5 times lower than the estimated average consumption rates in Hong Kong and other parts of China and 4-80 times lower than the estimated average consumption rates in cities in Western countries. It should be noted that the wastewater samples analyzed in this study were collected during a holiday season, when daily consumption of illicit drugs is often higher than on an average day. The methamphetamine usage rates were calculated for different cities in South Korea, and the usage rates in smaller cities was higher (2-4 times) than the average.