text:
184 F. 3d 1119 - United States of America v. Debbie H George
184 F3d 1119 United States of America v. Debbie H George
184 F.3d 1119 (9th Cir. 1999)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,
DEBBIE H. GEORGE, Defendant-Appellant.
No. 98-30307
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
Argued and Submitted June 8, 1999--Seattle, Washington
Decided July 26, 1999
Daniel Donovan and Michael Donahoe, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Great Falls, Montana, for the defendant appellant.
Bernard F. Hubley, Assistant United States Attorney, Helena, Montana, for the plaintiff-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Montana Donald W. Molloy, District Judge, Presiding. D.C. No. CR-92-00058-DWM.
Before: Donald P. Lay,1 Alfred T. Goodwin, and M. Margaret McKeown, Circuit Judges.
McKEOWN, Circuit Judge:
Debbie George appeals a 23-month sentence imposed upon revocation of her supervised release. George contends that the district court erred by failing to sentence her within the 7-to13 month range outlined in the policy statements set forth in Chapter 7 of the Sentencing Guidelines. We hold that, in determining an appropriate sentence upon revocation of supervised release, a district court must consider but is not bound by the Chapter 7 policy statements. We therefore affirm George's sentence.
In July 1993, George, a convicted felon, pleaded guilty to possession of a firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C.S 922(g)(1).2 She received a sentence of 70 months, followed by a threeyear term of supervised release with standard and special conditions. In October 1998, the district court found George in violation of various conditions of her supervised release. The district court revoked George's supervised release and sentenced her to 23 months imprisonment. Prior to sentencing, George's counsel argued that George should receive a term within the 7-to-13 month range stated in U.S.S.G. S 7B1.4, p.s. The district court rejected the argument, concluding that the ranges in section 7B1.4 are not binding.
II. Standard of Review
We review de novo the district court's application of the Sentencing Guidelines. United States v. Nieblas , 115 F.3d 703, 705 (9th Cir. 1997). We review for abuse of discretion the district court's consideration of non-binding policy statements. See United States v. Contreras, 63 F.3d 852, 855-56 (9th Cir. 1995).
III. Revocation of Supervised Release
Upon finding that a defendant has violated a condition of supervised release, the district court may "revoke a term of supervised release" and "require the defendant to serve in prison all or part of the term of supervised release authorized by statute," not to exceed a certain number of years, depending on the nature of the original offense. 18 U.S.C. S 3583(e)(3). In doing so, the court must consider the factors set forth in certain subsections of 18 U.S.C.S 3553(a). See 18 U.S.C. S 3583(e). The issue in this case concerns the effect of the 1994 amendments to subsection (4) of section 3553(a).
IV. Consideration of Chapter 7 Policy Statements
Before 1994, 18 U.S.C. S 3553(a)(4) required a court, "in determining the particular sentence to be imposed," to consider.
the kinds of sentence and the sentencing range established for the applicable category of offense committed by the applicable category of defendant as set forth in the guidelines that are issued by the Sentencing Commission . . . .
The 1994 amendments renumbered the above provision as subsection (A) of section 3553(a)(4), and added subsection (B), which deals specifically with probation and supervised release and requires a court to consider, in the case of a violation of probation or supervised release, the applicable guidelines or policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission . . . .
18 U.S.C. S 3553(a)(4)(B) (emphasis added).
The Sentencing Commission has not yet promulgated guidelines, but rather only "evolutionary" policy statements, applicable to violations of probation or supervised release. See U.S.S.G. Ch. 7, Pt. A1. The Commission intends to issue guidelines after a period of evaluation and comment regarding the policy statements contained in Chapter 7 of the Sentencing Guidelines:
Under 28 U.S.C. S 994(a)(3), the Sentencing Commission is required to issue guidelines or policy statements applicable to the revocation of probation and supervised release. At this time, the Commission has chosen to promulgate policy statements only. These policy statements will provide guidance while allowing for the identification of any substantive or procedural issues that require further review. The Commission views these policy statements as evolutionary and will review relevant data and materials concerning revocation determinations under these policy statements. Revocation guidelines will be issued after federal judges, probation officers, practitioners, and others have the opportunity to evaluate and comment on these policy statements.
Id. The Chapter 7 policy statements classify violations of probation or supervised release under one of three grades, A through C, depending on the severity of the conduct. U.S.S.G. S 7B1.1, p.s. Chapter 7 then provides a table, listing ranges of sentences to be imposed upon revocationof probation or supervised release, which are indexed by the grade of violation and the criminal history category assigned to the defendant at the time of original sentencing. U.S.S.G.S 7B1.4, p.s. For George, whose criminal history category was V, having committed a Grade C supervised release violation, the table in Chapter 7 showed a range of 7-to-13 months. Id. George contends that, pursuant to the new subsection 3553(a)(4)(B), the district court was required to sentence her within the range set forth in Chapter 7. We disagree.
In Williams v. United States , 503 U.S. 193 (1992), the Supreme Court observed that the Sentencing Commission has authority to promulgate both guidelines and policy statements concerning application of the guidelines. Id. at 200. Rather than drawing a distinction between "actual" guidelines and interpretative policy statements, the Court held that an interpretative policy statement constitutes "an authoritative guide to the meaning of the applicable Guideline" and, if misconstrued, could lead to "an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines" within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.S 3742(f)(1).3 Id. at 201. Likewise, in Stinson v. United States, 508 U.S. 36(1993), the Court viewed interpretative or explanatory commentary as binding on the courts, except when "plainly erroneous or inconsistent" with the guidelines. Id. at 42-43, 45; see also U.S.S.G. S 1B1.7 ("Failure to follow [interpretative or explanatory] commentary could constitute an incorrect application of the guidelines, subjecting the sentence to possible reversal on appeal.").
In contrast, the policy statements set forth in Chapter 7 are neither guidelines nor interpretations or explanations of guidelines. Thus, before the 1994 amendments to section 3553(a)(4), the overwhelming majority of circuits, including ours, distinguished Williams and Stinson and held that, although entitled to great weight, the policy statements in Chapter 7 are not binding on the sentencing judge. See United States v. Forrester, 19 F.3d 482, 484 (9th Cir. 1994); see also United States v. Hurst, 78 F.3d 482, 484 (10th Cir. 1996); United States v. Davis, 53 F.3d 638, 640 n.6 (4th Cir. 1995); United States v. Hill, 48 F.3d 228, 231-32 (7th Cir. 1995); United States v. Milano, 32 F.3d 1499, 1502-03 (11th Cir. 1994) (citing cases from the Second, Fifth, Sixth, and Eighth Circuits).
The Ninth Circuit has yet to address, in the context of supervised release, whether the 1994 amendments to section 3553(a)(4) alter the status of the Chapter 7 policy statements. Every other circuit to consider the question, however, has held that the 1994 amendments do not make the policy statements mandatory with respect to sentences imposed upon revocation of supervised release. United States v. Schwegel, 126 F.3d 551, 552 (3d Cir. 1997) ("[D]espite the 1994 amendment, the ranges set out in U.S.S.G. S 7B1.4 remain advisory and not binding."); United States v. Cohen , 99 F.3d 69, 71 (2d Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 520 U.S. 1213 (1997); United States v. Hofierka, 83 F.3d 357, 360-61, as modified on denial of reh'g, 92 F.3d 1108 (11th Cir. 1996), cert. denied, 519 U.S. 1071 (1997); United States v. Escamilla, 70 F.3d 835, 835 (5th Cir. 1995); United States v. West, 59 F.3d 32, 35-36 (6th Cir. 1995); see also Davis, 53 F.3d at 642 ("[W]e hold . . . that Chapter 7's policy statements are now and have always been non-binding, advisory guides to district courts in supervised release revocation proceedings.").
We are persuaded by the reasoning of our sister circuits. The purpose of the 1994 amendments was to clarify that "resentencing for probation and supervised release violations should be based `upon sentencing guidelines and policy statements issued by the Commission specifically for that purpose,' rather than upon the guidelines applicable to the initial sentencing" for the original offense. Schwegel, 126 F.3d at 554 (quoting 136 Cong. Rec. S14,893, S14,895 (1990)); accord West, 59 F.3d at 35-36. Because the Commission has not yet issued guidelines relating to revocation of supervised release or changed its view that the Chapter 7 policy statements are merely advisory, we see no reason to reduce the flexibility of district courts in sentencing supervised release violators. See Schwegel, 126 F.3d at 553, 555; Cohen, 99 F.3d at 71; Hofierka, 83 F.3d at 361; Escamilla, 70 F.3d at 835;West, 59 F.3d at 35-36; see also U.S.S.G. Ch. 7, Pt. A3(a) (policy statement "approach provided greater flexibility to both the Commission and the courts"). Of course, when the Commission issues "actual guidelines rather than`policy' statements for supervised release violations, we are required by prior case law to make them binding." West , 59 F.3d at 35.
George argues that our decision in United States v. Plunkett, 94 F.3d 517 (9th Cir. 1996), somehow dictates that a district court treat the Chapter 7 policy statements with the same binding effect as sentencing guidelines. We do not read Plunkett so broadly. In Plunkett, we addressed the effect of the 1994 amendments to section 3553(a)(4) in the context of a probation revocation. We observed that the new subsection 3553(a)(4)(B) identifies guidelines and policy statements in the disjunctive, and therefore held that, with respect to probation violations, the district court continues to have discretion to resentence the defendant under the applicable guidelines "to the range of sentences available at the time of the original sentencing." 94 F.3d at 519; see 18 U.S.C. S 3565(a)(2) (for probation violation, court may "revoke the sentence of probation and resentence the defendant under subchapter A").
To support her contention, George points to our statement in Plunkett that "because [the amended ] section 3553 incorporates policy statements by name, policy statements are independently mandatory." 94 F.3d at 519. This language is dictum and does not advance George's position. In Plunkett, we were not required to decide whether the Chapter 7 policy statements are themselves binding; rather, we were concerned only with whether the policy statements concerning probation revocation trumped the guidelines applicable to the original offense. We held they did not. Any conclusions about the status of the Chapter 7 policy statements standing alone were unnecessary to our holding in Plunkett.
The law of our circuit continues to be that the policy statements in Chapter 7 are advisory. Forrester, 19 F.3d at 484; see also Plunkett, 94 F.3d at 519 ("the result of Forrester remains intact"); United States v. Redmond , 69 F.3d 979, 98182 (9th Cir. 1995); Contreras, 63 F.3d at 855-56 ("Chapter 7 policy statements are not binding on the district court . . . , but they are an element in the exercise of discretion and it would be an abuse of discretion for the district court to ignore them." (citation omitted)). The Chapter 7 policy statements are "mandatory" only to the extent that the district court must consider them in calculating a sentence upon revocation of supervised release; the district court, however, is not bound by the ranges stated in Chapter 7. This rule is consistent with the holdings of other circuits addressing the effect of the 1994 amendments to section 3553(a)(4).
V. Review of George's Sentence
George does not suggest that the district court ignored the Chapter 7 policy statements or otherwise abused its discretion in determining her sentence. As in Forrester, the district court considered the policy statements of Chapter 7 and then "was free to reject the suggested sentence range." 19 F.3d at 485. The 23-month sentence George received upon revocation of her supervised release is below the applicable statutory maximum. See 18 U.S.C. S 3583(e)(3) (two-year maximum if the underlying offense was a class C or D felony). We therefore affirm George's sentence.
Honorable Donald P. Lay, Senior United States Circuit Judge for the United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit, sitting by designation.
18 U.S.C. S 922(g)(1) makes it unlawful for any person "who has been convicted in any court of . . . a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year . . . [to] possess in or affecting commerce . . . any firearm or ammunition . . . or to receive any firearm or ammunition which has been shipped or transported in interstate or foreign commerce."
18 U.S.C. S 3742(f)(1) requires an appellate court to remand for further sentencing proceedings, with appropriate instructions, if it determines that the sentence was imposed "in violation of law " or "as a result of an incorrect application of the sentencing guidelines."


House GOP leaders are crafting a new compromise proposal — but moderates and conservatives have yet to sign on.
House Republican leaders have drafted the outline of an immigration framework they hope will stave off an intraparty war over Dreamers.
But negotiators on both sides of the debate emerged from a Friday meeting without an agreement in hand, and many are skeptical that House Republicans — notoriously divided — can come together on such a contentious issue.
Conservatives in the House Freedom Caucus and moderate GOP lawmakers left Speaker Paul Ryan's office Friday afternoon promising to continue talks over the weekend. But key disagreements, particularly over legal status for the young undocumented immigrants known as Dreamers and border security, continue to bedevil the group ahead of a looming deadline next week.
Rep. Jeff Denham of California, leaving the meeting, said he wanted to see text on a deal by Tuesday — or he would encourage lawmakers to sign the discharge petition to trigger a series of bipartisan DACA votes that Republican leaders are desperately hoping to avoid.
Centrists need to get 218 signatures for the discharge petition by Tuesday — they're currently three shy of that total — if they want to force the series of votes this month.
Lawmakers in both camps, however, said they would continue negotiating all the way up until June 25, the day the votes would happen, to see if they can't come to a deal within their own conference. And in a sign of progress, Rep. Carlos Curbelo of Florida said lawmakers have already begun drafting text of parts of the deal that have been agreed to.
Lawmakers leaving the meeting said consensus was starting to form around how to solve the citizenship question for Dreamers — the main sticking point between conservatives and centrists. Negotiators appear to be leaning toward a new merit-based visa system conceptualized by Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-Idaho), a Freedom Caucus member and former immigration attorney.
"I think there is a growing consensus for one option, and yet there's still some details that have to be worked out on that option," said House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows. The North Carolina Republican also said lawmakers had agreed on the scope of the Dreamer population that would be covered under a deal but wouldn't divulge the number.
Yet some conservatives in the room are still uncomfortable with the plan and worry it will be labeled a "special pathway" or "amnesty" by the far right, killing any shot at passage.
It's also clear that conservatives want more in exchange for agreeing to this newly floated proposal. Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, another member of the Freedom Caucus, said he wanted to see not only the border secure but asylum reform and an overhaul of sanctuary city policies.
In a sign of how sensitive the issue is, a senior Republican source pushed back on any notion that this was a leadership proposal. Rather, the source argued that leadership facilitated the talks with the conference and put together something based on those conversations. Still, the unwillingness to claim the proposal shows just how worried leaders are about blowback from the far right.
The outline includes two options to address the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program. The first is a concept floated by Labrador to create a new visa program that Dreamers and other classes of immigrants could apply for after earning "points," which members described as a "merit-based green card program." That plan would end or curb the diversity visa lottery program that President Donald Trump wants to eliminate and then shift those visas to the new program.
Dreamers would eventually be able to apply for citizenship after they transition into the new visa system.
POLITICO was not able to verify the details of the second option in the proposal.
The plan would also end the ability of immigrants to sponsor married adult children and adult siblings. They would still be able to sponsor their minor children and parents.
The outline also includes Trump's border wall between the United States and Mexico. The plan would include some sort of shut-off valve for the entire package should the $25 billion in wall money not be allocated in future years.
But border security remains another key obstacle for negotiators — less haggling over a border wall and instead how much to focus on immigration enforcement inside the U.S.
It's clear negotiators are still far apart on that aspect of the negotiations. Rep. Michael McCaul of Texas left the meeting saying there was full support for including his border security bill in a final deal. But just moments later, Meadows disputed that idea to reporters.
McCaul's proposal would increase border security and enforcement as well as end "catch and release." The latter is a policy whereby undocumented immigrants are released into the country and given a court date to adjudicate their cases. Critics note immigrants sometimes disappear into the country and skip their appointments.
Last year, Trump announced he was rescinding DACA and called on Congress to codify the program but only after cracking down on illegal immigration. But Democrats and Republicans have been unable to come to an agreement. Many on the left have rejected the insistence on building a wall and curbing legal immigration. The far right, meanwhile, has been skeptical of a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers.
Moderate Republicans from Hispanic-populated swing districts have said they're sick of the impasse. They've threatened to band together with Democrats to use a rare discharge petition procedure to circumvent GOP leaders and put bills protecting Dreamers on the House floor.
Moderates have told GOP leaders they will halt their efforts if a GOP DACA bill finally hits the floor. Their only requirement is that the plan include a pathway to citizenship that they believe is viable for the majority of the DACA population.
Members in both camps weren't ready to rule out reaching a deal by Tuesday.


Box or Buxus hedging plants are evergreen and a great candidate for a low hedge. Box hedging is widely used as an edging plant around flowerbeds and pathways creating formal spaces. The dense habit of Box makes it ideal for hedging or screening and allows for close clipping into formal shapes for topiary. Box is very hardy and can survive the harshest of winters. Buxus sempervirens has small, glossy, dark green leaves are up to 3cm long. Box responds well to clipping and large hedges are usually clipped no more than once during the growing season. If a box hedge becomes overgrown it can be cut to within a few inches of the ground from where it will rapidly sprout and develop into and orderly feature once more. An excellent choice for a dense, low maintenance evergreen hedge. Great for low hedges.


Go to any craft fair, fashion expo, or design show these days and you will undoubtedly find upcycled clothing. Old garments, say for example a beautiful coat or sweater that developed wear and tear over the years, could be combined with another garment to be new, fresh, and exciting.
In Montreal, there is a hip shop in the St Henri neighbourhood that caters to this idea. La Gaillarde features finished clothing by Montreal designers, as well as sewing/alteration classes in their sewing room. They also sell fabric remnants and used garments that are ready to be worn as-is, or upcycled into something more enticing.
At the Biodome in Montreal, every winter there is a craft fair that features crafts and clothing and all sorts of exciting things made out of over 75% post-consumer waste. Many of the offerings I saw last year were of better quality, more stylish, and clearly more functional than their brand new counterparts.
The ability to truly recycle textiles is rare. We will donate unwanted (but still wearable) clothing to charity, but what do we do when there are too many holes or stains? We usually throw them into the landfill… Though I am not anywhere near perfect in this regard, I have tried to save fabrics from this fate.
I make felt wool scarves, and have been incorporating bits of used fabrics into them. Also I like to take unrecyclable (yet durable) materials, such as plastic/foil catfood bags, and use them within the scarves, too. This is more fun than anything, but I hope that my efforts have diverted yet more toxic landfill from accumulating!
Check out some of the DIY ideas we posted over the last while on Fleurbain… you can use old garments for these things, too!
And have some fun while you're at it!


Authors/Editor: Douglas, J. Graham; Elward, Kurtis S.
This Clinician's Desk Reference will be a practical resource and a daily aid for physicians in the hospital setting and in primary care.
Asthma is one of the most important chronic disorders in the developed world. Evidence from around the world shows the prevalence of asthma has increased considerably since 1975, and now affects around 7.2% of the world population (about 100 million individuals). In the UK asthma is now the most common chronic disease affecting all age groups with approximately 11% of the population being diagnosed as having asthma at some time in their lives.
Understanding of the basic mechanisms involved in the pathogenesis of asthma has improved dramatically over the past 20 years. Along with this increase in basic scientific knowledge, randomised clinical trials have produced evidence to guide clinicans in how to manage patients with asthma.
The book covers edipdemiology, diagnosis and management, and takes a look at future developments. The authors highlight the under diagnosis of occupational asthma and emphasise the importance of effective patient education, particularly asthma action plans. There are ten clinical cases dealing with common diagnostic and management problems, frequently asked questions and appendices containing resources for patients and clinicians including useful websites, information leaflets and major references.
Author/Editor: Douglas, J. Graham; Elward, Kurtis S.


text:
Council of Europe has Whois privacy concerns too
Kevin Murphy, October 11, 2012, 14:27:40 (UTC), Domain Policy
The Council of Europe has expressed concern about the privacy ramifications of ICANN's proposed changes to Whois requirements in the Registrar Accreditation Agreement.
In a letter this week (pdf), the Bureau of the Consultative Committee of the Convention for the Protection of Individuals with regard to Personal Data (T-PD) said:
The Bureau of the T-PD took note of the position of the Article 29 Data Protection Working Parking in its comments of 26 September 2012 on the data protection impact of the revision of these arrangements concerning accuracy and data retention of the WHOIS data and fully shares the concern raised.
The Bureau of the T-PD is convinced of the importance of ensuring that appropriate consideration be given in the ICANN context to the relevant European and international privacy standards
The letter was sent in response to outreach from ICANN's Non-Commercial Users Constituency.
The Article 29 letter referenced said that EU registrars risked breaking the law if they implemented ICANN's proposed data retention requirements.
Earlier today, we reported on ICANN's response, which proposes an opt-out for registrars based in the EU, but we noted that registrars elsewhere are unlikely to dig a two-tier RAA.
2013 RAA is illegal, says EU privacy watchdog
Whois "killer" is a recipe for a clusterfuck
These 33 people will decide the future of Whois
Tagged: council of europe, gac, ICANN, new gTLDs, privacy, raa, whois
As European registrar, I doubt that the exception will actually to our advantage. It will lead of additional registrations, but many of those will cause us to need to invest more heavily into abuse prevention and abuse staff.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


"I have spoken consistently about the challenges facing Cairns and the Far North Queensland economy during the past 18 months as a result of the global financial crisis that led to the global recession. Our region has been hard hit with the economic reliance on tourism and construction.
Unemployment peaked at almost 14% last year, up from around 5% prior to the GFC. Sadly, in the current debate around a mining super profit tax, when I look back on that period of time and the economy that I was left with as the new member for Leichhardt, there is a recognition that our economy was left very vulnerable because of a failure in many ways of us to benefit from the mining boom under the former Howard government.
There was no major investment in infrastructure, whether in roads, education or health in Far North Queensland under the former member as part of the Howard government. The former member now campaigning for re-election has been so embarrassed by the lack of investment in Leichhardt in his more than a decade in office that he has been left trying to claim credit for infrastructure projects being built in my first term. Why? Because our region did not benefit from the mining boom under the former government. That is why the mining super profits tax is important.
It is critical that all Australians benefit from the proceeds of what are all of our natural resources. The 14,000-odd small businesses in my electorate who have been doing it tough deserve to benefit from the planned tax cuts and the red tape reductions. We want to see more infrastructure investment and increases in superannuation retirement benefits in our region.
Since being elected I have been working in partnership with the local community business leaders and the Prime Minister and ministers to turn around our struggling economy. We have seen significant investments in projects like the new dental school at James Cook University currently under construction, a new $40 million bridge over the Mulgrave River and planning well under way for a $150 million upgrade of the southern access road into Cairns. In Cape York we have new houses under construction, in Cooktown a new multi-purpose centre, in Weipa a new childcare centre and I have secured funding for the upgrade of the Horne Island airstrip in the Torres Strait.
Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and the government have responded to the specific needs and challenges facing communities in Far North Queensland, unlike the previous government. We have been working hard to strengthen and diversify our local economy, including tapping into the developing opportunities in the mining sector in places like Papua New Guinea. Last week we started to see some light at the end of the tunnel with unemployment dropping to 10.4%, which is down from the 12.4% of the previous couple of months. The end of the wet season is seeing tourism picking up and more of the Rudd government's economic stimulus construction projects are beginning.
These economic stimulus projects have been critical to supporting jobs in the construction industry in my electorate. Builders like Laurie Lidner, whom I met at a recent Building the Education Revolution opening, said that he had not heard from a developer for more than 12 months and his business would be in real trouble if he had not had this economic stimulus work. Similarly, Wayne Cavallaro, who is building social housing at the moment, talked about how subcontractors were dependent on that work to feed their children and to help pay off their houses.
These critical projects are supporting jobs in local communities like mine. The tax task force that has been working in my electorate to support small businesses struggling with cash flow has been critically important—all direct responses from the Rudd government. Support for tourism has also been important. Recently, the return of flights from Japan and new flights from New Zealand have been supported with additional marketing funding from the Rudd government.
We know that there is much more work to be done. I continue to work in partnership with business and community leaders, like those in Advance Cairns, the local council and the government, to deliver ongoing support to our local community. Last week the Deputy Prime Minister announced that another jobs expo will be held in Cairns on 25 June this year, building on the successful expo last year where more than 300 people found a job. The local council has been working up a plan for a new cultural precinct on the waterfront in Cairns, and I am working hard to secure funding for a new regional performing arts centre as part of that project.
I want to see us go back to a fair system for funding air service charges at Cairns airport. The user pays system that was developed and implemented under the former Howard government has made our airport less competitive with other major gateways, and I want to see us go back to a network charging policy. That will encourage more airlines into Cairns and make our airport more competitive.
We cannot risk the Tony Abbot led opposition.
We can't risk another term of you jimmy boy. Instead of changing the native title act this sneaky little waste of a suit has organised another useless meeting to get indigenous people to hope fully stop slaughtering the endangered sea turtles and dugongs, funny it is the very same weekend I have bob Irwin up here !
HE DID THE SAME WHEN WE HAD SHADOW MP GREG HUNT UP HERE ,HE IS SO PREDICTABLE.
Representatives from the more than 70 Traditional Owners groups within the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park will converge on Cairns later this month for a landmark meeting aimed at enhancing communication and information sharing about sea country.
Environment Protection Minister Peter Garrett and Member for Leichhardt, Jim Turnour, today announced the two and a half day Sea Country Partnerships Forum scheduled for 28-30 May 2010.
"The Sea Country Partnerships Forum is a landmark event, signalling a real desire for partnership between Traditional Owners and marine managers for a sustainable future of the Reef," Mr Garrett said.
"This will be the first time such a large group of Great Barrier Reef Traditional Owners have come together to discuss broader sea country management issues under the Australian Government's Reef Rescue initiative and it builds on the great work already underway by Traditional Owners on these critical issues" Mr Garrett said.
Mr Turnour said the Forum will include a series of speakers, presentations and workshops aimed at working toward best practice sea country management and developing future leaders by strengthening youth connection to their sea country.
"The Government is committed to working with Traditional Owners and I am pleased that a big focus for all involved is a collaborative approach to sustainable management and use or our marine resources.
"This Forum follows requests from Traditional Owners to the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority for a collective opportunity to discuss sea country management. Several Traditional Owner groups have formalised agreements with the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority on how they manage their sea country," he said.
"The Forum gives Traditional Owners an opportunity to openly discuss their experiences in managing sea country and for valuable information sharing with marine managers," Mr Turnour said.
This Forum is part of the Australian Government's Caring for our Country Reef Rescue Indigenous Land and Sea Country Partnerships Program, which is delivered through the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority.
The Program aims to foster the expansion of the Traditional Use of Marine Resources Program across the Great Barrier Reef catchment.
WHAT HE SHOULD BE DOING IS THIS.
Here is how to solve this issue and everyone , but the die hard conservationists could live with it.
MAKE ALTERATIONS TO SECTION 211 OF THE NATIVE TITLE ACT .
3.Permits must be issued by DPI or similar body to elders nominated to issue. This would help restore respect to elders , as it stands now elders have no back up for non compliance.
4.Government rangers and indigenous rangers to be appointed to monitor permit use , this would help elders to refuse family/relations demanding extras.And skulls or shells to be kept for proof of permit compliance , any extras found action to be instigated .This would give the elders a strong excuse to refuse extras as they can say they are heavily monitored.
5.Any breach by anybody to be prosecuted by severe penalties.
6.No killing of sea turtles and dugongs by anyone in green zones especially high tourist areas ,e.G. Great barrier reef.
7.Any animal on the endangered species list to be excluded from killing by anyone .
8. If it is determined there are none to be taken in any given declared area so be it.


text:
Ontario court rules against Christian law school
Home/Issues/Human rights, Religion, Society & Culture/Ontario court rules against Christian law school
Paul Tuns2016-08-01T10:27:31-04:00July 29, 2016|Human rights, Religion, Society & Culture|
On June 29, the Ontario Court of Appeal allowed the Ontario legal profession to exclude graduates from Trinity Western University's proposed law school. TWU, a British Columbia Christian university, said it will appeal the decision.
The Law Society of Upper Canada said it would not permit graduates of TWU's law school, which is not operational, because the private universities Community Covenant requires all students to follow traditional Christian moral sexuality, including prohibiting sex between both homosexual and unmarried heterosexual couples.
The law societies of Nova Scotia and TWU's home province of British Columbia have also rejected TWU law grads, but courts in those provinces have overruled those law societies, upholding freedoms of religion, conscience, and association. The law societies have appealed the decisions; the Nova Scotia case has yet to be ruled on, while the B.C. case has yet to be heard.
Justice James MacPherson wrote in the unanimous decision that not accrediting TWU does, in fact, infringe the right to freedom of religion, but that it was justifiable because parts of the community covenant "is deeply discriminatory to the LGBTQ community, and it hurts." MacPherson explained, the Law Society's "decision not to accredit TWU does not prevent the practice of a religious belief itself; rather it denies a public benefit because of the impact of that religious belief on others — members of the LGBTQ community."
The Law Society of Upper Canada's spokesman, Paul Schabas, said "We are pleased that the Court recognizied the Law Society's role in preventing and removing discriminatory barriers to access to the legal profession." John Norris, who represented Ontario's Criminal Lawyers Association, an intervenor, approved the decision, saying, "The time has come to not accept at face value religious justifications for discriminatory conduct in the public sphere."
Amy Robertson, a TWU spokesperson, said, "this is a loss for all Canadians. Freedom of conscience and religion is the first of the fundamental freedoms mentioned in the Charter. It is deeply compromised by this decision, and everyone in Canada, religious or not, should be concerned. Canada is a diverse, pluralistic society, committed to living peacefully together even when we disagree. Many countries don't enjoy this privilege."
John Carpay, president of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms, which intervened on TWU's behalf, said the ruling "undermined the freedom of association of every other group in Canada." Carpay said, "for a free society to remain free, its citizens must accept that other people can and do have radically different conceptions of reality, including unpopular ideas about sex and sexual morality."
Pro-life not merely a religious view
The unacknowledged revolution


Telling your best stories in the right place at the right time is both art and science.
Our process— discovery and planning that gives way to data-informed implementation and ongoing performance measurement— is designed to understand your audience and generate momentum in line with your goals. When you work with us, we identify your most compelling, newsworthy stories and the right mix of conventional and unconventional marketing tactics to share them.
Our intrepid street-level approach takes your brand to the people through public relations, creative ideation, and grassroots tactics that think outside the typical agency toolbox.
We're not afraid to think big, be original, and ask, why not?


text:
Norway in Jordan Royal Norwegian Embassy in Amman
Ambassadens tjenester
Reiseråd for Jordan
Reiseinformasjon for Jordan
Praktikantordningen
Norway and Jordan
Norwegian businesses
Norway has topped the UN Human Development Index for a number of years, and is an attractive country to live and work in. Employees enjoy a high degree of gender equality and a good work–life balance.
The Norwegian business sector is technologically advanced and quick to adopt new technology. Norway has long been an innovative country, and has specialist expertise in areas such as oil and gas, energy, the maritime sector and seafood.
Norway is a safe, peaceful country with good welfare systems and a constructive, well-regulated employer–employee relationship. A flat organisational structure with a high degree of transparency and good opportunities for employee participation is typical of Norwegian workplaces. The workforce is highly qualified.
You can find useful tips and information about applying for jobs at nav.no. In order to receive offers from potential employers and subscribe to job advertisements, you must have a residence permit in Norway.
Information about living and working in Norway and on how to apply for a job
UN Human Development Index for Norway
How to apply for residence permit
Royal Norwegian Embassy in Amman
25 Damascus Street
Abdoun, Amman
Amman - 11183 - Jordan
Visa section:
The embassy does not handle inquiries concerning visa over the phone. Please send all inquiries concerning visa to [email protected] or contact VFS Global (+962 79 792 22 21) between 09.00 - 16.00 (local time), Sunday to Thursday.
VFS is responsible for submission and collection of documents for visas.
The Embassy on Facebook The Embassy on Instagram The Ambassador on Twitter


Gregg Commercial Construction Company (GCC) is a full service commercial general contractor formed from Metroplex Home Repair Inc, DBA Gregg Construction Co, a wholly owned subsidiary Cherubim Builders Group. The company is based in Hurst, TX, and successfully operates in the Dallas-Fort Worth metroplex and throughout the State of Texas, Oklahoma and Arkansas. Project consideration is given outside of these markets.
Copyrihgt 2014. Gregg Commercial Construction. All rights reserved.