Guardian Accuses UNESCO of a Further Climate Coverup

Flag of the United Nations, Public Domain Image
Flag of the United Nations, Public Domain Image

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

WUWT recently reported how UNESCO allegedly yielded to pressure from the Australian Government, to clumsily excise criticism of Aussie management of the Great Barrier Reef from a climate report. The coverup PR disaster has just become even worse – The Guardian is now accusing UNESCO and the Australian Government, of conniving to try to cover up the coverup, to conceal details of how the coverup was arranged.

UN tries to hide involvement in deleting Australia from its climate report

In May, Unesco published a report with the UN’s environment program, Unep, and the Union of Concerned Scientists about the impact of climate change on world heritage sites, which were also major tourist attractions.

Australia was the only continent not mentioned, despite being home to several important sites, including the Great Barrier Reef, which were being heavily affected by climate change.

A Guardian investigation revealed in May that three Australian sites were included in an earlier version of the report, but were removed after the environment department objected.

As well, all mentions of Australia were removed from the introduction and other sections. The Guardian later published the draft section on the Great Barrier Reef that had been removed.

The department said it had asked for the changes because it was concerned the information could negatively affect tourism.

Now emails between various government agencies and Unesco have been released to the website Climate Home under freedom of information but almost all the content has been redacted.

“Unesco advised that it is their practice not to disclose exchanges of letters or correspondence between the secretariat and its member states, and requested that this type of material not be disclosed pursuant to this FOI request,” she said.

Read more:

If UNESCO and the Australian Government had come clean, apologised, and promised a review, the story would have fizzled and been forgotten. This absurd new twist in my opinion demonstrates beyond reasonable doubt that nothing UN agencies say should be trusted.

The UN seems to have an almost pathological need to try to conceal embarrassing or politically inconvenient information, even when the essential facts are already public knowledge.

Update (EW) – fixed a typo in the first paragraph

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
August 2, 2016 9:21 pm

it’s all a bunch of lies anyway. they are just abrogating one lie with another.

Reply to  chaamjamal
August 3, 2016 12:01 am

i see what you did…lol
that was a really good paper, too- from sonoma, even?
clear, concise, verifiable, well reasoned. from sonoma, really?
thanks for that link. it is quite the synopsis of UN’s Sophisticated Criminal Activity Methods.

george e. smith
Reply to  gnomish
August 3, 2016 12:40 pm

Who that UNESCO ?
What they do ?
Universal Network of SCOundrels ??
Sounds good to me. Do they tax me too ??

Reply to  chaamjamal
August 3, 2016 7:23 am

Excellent link. Thank you.
My theory is that the proposed “carbon” taxes are a UN ruse to obtain a funding source that does not depend on individual governments. It would make them a self-sustaining bureaucracy and would be the ultimate “taxation without representation” scam.
The global tax would need global administration. Who would be best placed to run this system? Who would define the level of such a tax and how much “overhead” needed to be deducted for its administration?

Gerry, England
Reply to  graphicconception
August 3, 2016 12:01 pm

Exactly the same thing the EU is after – a source of cash it can waste without begging from the member states.

Reply to  graphicconception
August 4, 2016 5:50 am

Don’t forget that the UN wants it’s own standing army as well – that’s why it needs the slush fund, among other things

Reply to  chaamjamal
August 3, 2016 5:28 pm
August 2, 2016 9:22 pm

No doubt it will be lead story on the ABC tonight.What a shambles.

August 2, 2016 9:23 pm

UN: Usurping Nations

Reply to  Josh
August 2, 2016 11:09 pm

Yet another demonstration of the problem with dipomatic immunity ( which makes sense for diplomats ) being extended to ANYTHING done by the unaccountable UN, free of any audit, control or judicial oversight.

Reply to  Josh
August 3, 2016 6:30 am

Unintelligent Nabobs.

August 2, 2016 9:32 pm

Since there is not much wrong with the reef that a couple of years of good weather won’t cure, it is all a load of hoo-haa.

Ben of Houston
Reply to  dudleyhorscroft
August 3, 2016 5:30 am

It still undermines their effectiveness and shows that they truly do not believe what they are saying.
I’d rather have someone honestly wrong, or even a zealot in charge rather than a self-interested hypocrite.

Reply to  Ben of Houston
August 3, 2016 11:23 am

I’d rather have someone honestly wrong, or even a zealot in charge rather than a self-interested hypocrite.
Ben of Houston

The three groups are mutually dependent and are never separate from one another.

george e. smith
Reply to  dudleyhorscroft
August 3, 2016 12:49 pm

All weather is good. That’s why Mother Gaia makes it.
Just imagine, if we eliminated any one class of weather on the grounds that somebody thought it was not good, pretty soon you would have everybody talking about the weather , but nobody doing anything about it.
Just think about that. How long would an election campaign cycle be, if people were not taking time to talk about the weather.
Mother Gaia is doing just fine managing the weather so just stop fretting over it. She does good work.

August 2, 2016 9:33 pm

Seems there is an interesting PR war going on between saying the reef is mostly already dead, saying it is mostly dying, saying it will die unless we spend billions of dollars, and saying nothing is wrong with it because we need the tourism.
Most go for options 3 and 4 because that keeps the money coming in.

george e. smith
Reply to  thingodonta
August 3, 2016 1:07 pm

Well who cares if it all goes pear shaped any way ??
Those Big Oil Camelaires in Dubai, are probably going to build an even bigger one than the GBR.
And every luxury Reef View apartment, will come with its own two man (him and her) submersible so Jack Cousteau and his fellow shark harassers won’t need to be killing reef fishes to work up the otherwise peaceful school sharks into a feeding frenzy so he can make videos, to show on American TV to raise money for him and his fellow Tropical Island deadbeats.
He used to be largely supported by recreational fishermen, until he called them the lowest form of life, crawling on their bellies like the snakes. He didn’t like catch and release fishing. Apparently he thought that he alone should be aloud to harass the fishes. Then he found out what a big part of his paying audience C&R fishermen are; excuse me, that’s WERE !

Robert from oz
August 2, 2016 9:46 pm

Sad thing is no one is interested in the facts or the real science just the air raid siren .

August 2, 2016 9:56 pm

“The Guardian” covering the “cover-up” regarding Climate Change? Will wonders never cease?

Reply to  asybot
August 2, 2016 10:25 pm

It gets even better. Reading “A Guardian investigation…”. Investigation? As in Investigative Journalism? That set off alarm bells. The Guardian has not done anything that remotely resembles Investigative Journalism for quite some time. Biased hack jobs, probably. Investigative Journalism, not so much…

M Seward
Reply to  AussieBear.
August 3, 2016 3:43 am

“A Guardian investigation…” move over ‘military intelligence’ as the epitome of oxymorons.
As for the GBR, that its northern end was affected by the recent short, sharp El Nino there is little doubt about but El Nino’s have nothing to do with so called ‘climate change’ , i.e. AGW CAGW or just ordinary AGW.
Ranting rags like the Guardian are the reason that the likes of Trump have appeal.

Reply to  AussieBear.
August 3, 2016 5:31 am

If Hillary, Obama, the democrats, the US Congress, the UN, the EU, Russia, China and the Middle East will just continue their tactics for three more months the US and the world will most likely get a very needed President Trump.
Then we may finally see a course correction the earth and billions of people need.

D. J. Hawkins
Reply to  AussieBear.
August 3, 2016 6:08 am

The easiest way for Trump to get elected is to develop a severe 3-month case of laryngitis. Every time he opens his mouth lately he puts in both feet, and occasionally a fist. I’m still voting for him, but I wish there was a grown-up running.

Reply to  AussieBear.
August 3, 2016 6:31 am

Investigative journalism: Reading some e-mails sent to us by activist organizations.

Reply to  AussieBear.
August 3, 2016 6:54 am

At least there was no “dark money” in this one.

August 2, 2016 9:58 pm

UNESCO stands for “United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization”, just for people like me who know that is is United Nations, but the rest was not spelled out…

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 3, 2016 2:38 am

OK, ‘UNESCO stands for “United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization”,’
70 years dispersing taxpayers money over the african continent, the ‘poor’ population doubling every few decades with poor to nil
Educational, Scientific and Cultural development.
In return the corrupt african cleptocracie feeds the UN with tales of colonialism – leaving out stories of african ethnies colonialise neighboring ethnis.

Steve Case
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 3, 2016 3:50 am

Thanks, saved me the trouble trotting off to Google.

george e. smith
Reply to  J. Philip Peterson
August 3, 2016 1:10 pm

Yeah there they go. Science and Multiculturalism are just like two pees in a pot; excuse me, I meant two peas in a pod !

August 2, 2016 10:11 pm

The big “problem” with the reef – “11 of 24 reef resorts closed” says the Brisbane Times in the last 4 days is that RED TAPE between the Australian Government, the Queensland Government, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, maybe Local Councils and any other self-interested group of Greenie laggards, has brought the maintenance and development of the resorts to a halt.
Thanks for nothing.
If we have a jewel in the world’s environmental crown, let’s show it and protect it.
Don’t slow everything down & pretend that it’s Global Warming causing the problem.

High Treason
August 2, 2016 10:26 pm

Like all liars, they lie to cover previous lies. Typically, a half truth underpins the entire tower of lies.Hopefully it eventually comes out and heads roll. Mind you, in this case, the monster lie(the UN) has gone on so long that they will stop at nothing , even murder and destruction of world economies and possibly civilization itself to hide the trail of deception.

August 2, 2016 10:26 pm

“The UN seems to have an almost pathological need to try to conceal embarrassing or politically inconvenient information, even when the essential facts are already public knowledge.”
Sounds all too familiar, in other areas too.
But I’d say their m.o. is “pathological” only in the sense that that’s exactly what they intend to do, act just like they are acting. Because it’s their belief that this “pathological tactic” will get them farther toward “winning” than even “fessing up and trying to do better” will. This otherwise “obsessive-compulsive” tactic seems all the rage now. People who use it, such as also the Progressive Democrat Party, think the cost-benefit works out more in their favor than any other tactic. At any rate, it has been in-effect Decreed in some way or other, so that’s what everyone in their Movement, Ideology, or Religion is going to do.
One of the epitomies of this tactic is to make all verbiage essentially a Fantasy World conception, where Reality doesn’t matter, aka “Rhetoric over Reality” or “Perception is Reality Delusionalism”.
When Delusions finally trounce Reality, Reality becomes irrelevant. At least until Reality or the “Dark” Realities finally catch up to them, and us, when it’s getting pretty late.
But in a society where Totalitarianism doesn’t yet have full sway, entities like the Main Stream Media and Sciences, the Universities, entrenched Establishment Political Parties, and the Pope have to help make the delusions work, whether they know it’s going to be Delusions All The Way Down, or don’t know it. Power,Control, Money, Group-Think, and “saving the world” are good enough motivators.
That’s what we’re seeing in the CO2-Climate Change Propaganda Op,, from the UN and Merkel, and from the Progressive Obama and Crooked Hillary Propaganda Mill. They want to Rig it all the way down starting right from the top.
I call them and their tactic so pathological that it’s Evil. For example, Comey won’t Prosecute Evil.

August 2, 2016 10:32 pm

Rule # 2
Be scrupulously truthful, even if the truth is inconvenient, for it is more inconvenient when you try to conceal it.
proof of the veracity of the rule if ever required.

Philip Schaeffer
August 2, 2016 11:30 pm

The UN asked for the documents to be redacted heavily, but the decision on whether or not to do so was ultimately made by the Australian government. The government pressured the UN into removing references to Australia in the first place, and are now quite happy to comply with the request from the UN that the whole thing be swept under the carpet, because the whole issue started with them trying to pressure the UN into not mentioning our problems.
“A department official, Deb Callister, told Climate Home Unesco had asked for the heavy redactions.
“Unesco advised that it is their practice not to disclose exchanges of letters or correspondence between the secretariat and its member states, and requested that this type of material not be disclosed pursuant to this FOI request,” she said.
Approached by the Guardian, the department declined to comment, other than to say that the documents were released in accordance with FOI laws.”

August 2, 2016 11:47 pm

There is a bigger problem than you currently know here:
“In this study we provide evidence that weighs in on the preservation side of the debate. Our findings support the view that changes in ocean chemistry (carbonate ion concentration) represent the primary factor responsible for CaCO3 variability. Furthermore, by analogy with past interglacial periods, when increased CaCO3 dissolution preceded the build-up of continental ice sheets, the late-Holocene increase in CaCO3 dissolution in equatorial Pacific sediments (e.g., eir and Berger, 1985; Berelson et al., 1997 ) suggests that ocean chemistry has already made the change that would precede the earth’s transition into the next ice age.”
“The late-Holocene increase in CaCO3 dissolution is levant to the ongoing debate concerning the expected duration of the Holocene in the absence of perturbation by anthropogenic greenhouse gases (e.g., McManus et al., 2003; Augustin et al., 2004; Ruddiman, 2005; Ruddiman et al., 2005). Paleoclimatologists have long expressed concern that the warm, stable climate of the Holocene may be near its end (for an interesting historical anecdote see Broecker, 1998). More recently, this concern has grown into a debate, as scientists look to records of past climate variability for clues about earth’s future.
“Glacial–interglacial climate variability is regulated by summer solar insolation at high northern latitudes (Hays et al., 1976). Recent interglacials have lasted for about 10,000 years, or one half of a precession cycle (Ruddiman, 2005). The Holocene has already extended to 12,000 years, leading to the view that its end is overdue (Ruddiman et al., 2005). However, the last time that earths orbital parameters were similar to those that occur today (i.e., low eccentricity), during MIS 11 roughly 400,000 years ago, the earth experienced an unusually long (28,000 years) interglacial period, leading some to suggest that the Holocene may endure for another 16,000 years (Berger and Loutre, 2002; Augustin et al., 2004), and perhaps much longer (McManus et al., 2003).
“Current debate centers not on the duration of MIS 11 (e.g., McManus et al., 2003), but on how best to align the present day with the MIS 11 record. Some investigators (e.g., McManus et al., 2003; Augustin et al., 2004) aligned the glacial termination preceding MIS 11 with the most recent termination, roughly between 18 and 12 ka. That alignment places today ’s equivalent conditions at between 405 and 410 ka and, by analogy with the MIS 11 record, the Holocene could last for another 16,000 years. Taking a different approach, Ruddiman (2005) argued that a more appropriate alignment is to link present insolation with conditions that existed at 398 ka, at a time when continental ice sheets had already started to advance. Following that analogy, Ruddiman argued that the Holocene should already have come to an end, and that northern hemisphere ice sheets should have started growing a few thousand years ago (Ruddiman, 2005; Ruddiman et al., 2005).”
“How are deep-sea CaCO3 records relevant to this debate? As noted above, CaCO3 dissolution increased dramatically prior to, and during, the initial stages of ice sheet growth for each of the late-Pleistocene glacial periods (Fig. 3). Today, the 230 Th-normalized flux of CaCO3 in equatorial Pacific surface sediments has dropped nearly to the level that existed 100,000 years ago when ice sheets were growing (Fig. 4). Furthermore, as noted in the preceding section, bioturbation creates an inherent lag in the sediment record, such that the average conditions that are recorded in the mixed layer represent those that existed several thousand years ago, not today. Using direct measurements of CaCO3 dissolution (Berelson et al., 1997), one sees that the actual preserved CaCO3 flux today has dropped to a very low value, with chemical erosion at some sites and little net CaCO3 accumulation at others. If these conditions were to persist for sufficiently long for the bioturbated layer to come to steady state with respect to supply and loss of CaCO3, then the 230 Th-normalized CaCO3 flux could well become as low as the minimum values of the late Pleistocene (Fig. 4) even without a further decrease in CaCO3 preservation. Does this mean that the end of the Holocene is necessarily near? Comparison with records from MIS 11, and other interglacial periods, may help answer this question.”
“Calcium carbonate minima (maximum dissolution) have become less intense over the past 300 kyr, whereas there is no systematic trend in CaCO3 maxima (maximum preservation). Whatever the combination of processes that has regulated late-glacial periods of maximum CaCO3 preservation, these seem to have changed little throughout the late-Brunhes carbonate dissolution cycle. Therefore, whereas the intensity of CaCO3 dissolution during the transition into MIS 11 may have been greater than during more recent interglacial–glacial transitions, the overall sequence of events remains unchanged. During each of the late-Pleistocene glacial cycles, changes in deep-sea carbonate chemistry, as reflected by CaCO3 preservation, preceded the onset of continental glaciation. The Holocene sediment record informs us that a similar change in deep-sea carbonate chemistry has already occurred, but it does not help constrain the expected duration of the Holocene. Of course, debate about the expected duration of the Holocene may be largely academic if anthropogenic emission of greenhouse gases prevents the initiation of the next ice age for another 500,000 years, as suggested by recent models (Archer and Ganopolski, 2005).”
“Dissolution of CaCO3 in equatorial Pacific sediments has intensified during the late Holocene, having now reached an intensity that is comparable to that which occurred during the onset of each of the late-Pleistocene periods of glaciation. Extrapolating from the robust relationship that has characterized at least the past 500 kyr, we conclude that the ocean’s carbonate chemistry has already made the transition that would lead into the next period of continental ice sheet growth.”
Modern CaCO3 preservation in equatorial Pacific sediments in the context of late-Pleistocene glacial cycles, R.F. Anderson, M.Q. Fleisher, Y. Lao and G. Winckler
Marine Chemistry xx (2007) xxx–xxx

August 2, 2016 11:56 pm

It seems we’ve discovered a decadal news cycle re: the Great Barrier Reef. I distinctly recall the fooforaw over the imminent demise of the GBR in 1998, after which it was discovered that corals essentially moult periodically, a condition that created tremendous alarm among junior marine biologists (with the assistance of fanatical hordes of doomsayers) until it was later shown the reef rapidly re-populated and returned to tourist attracting condition and the entire thing was quietly swept under the rug.
Here we are nearly 20 years later and a fresh batch of zealous acolytes repeating the mistake, alarming the Oz tourist boards and causing a UN level smackdown of irresponsible “scientists” and their “journalistic” brethren.
At this point, it may be more predictable than the ENSO itself…

Reply to  Bartleby
August 3, 2016 4:08 am

yeah, from the 70s on Ive been hearing how the reef is dying doomed ruined whatever
apart from the Crown of Thorns starfish.. the reefs pretty much as its always been..some bit have sunburn in a hot yr sometimes it doesn’t
and frankly I couldnt give a rats..Iam utterly sick of hearing about it.
bloody tourism and greentards what a combo
same pack of mongrels can pretty much close national parks to the taxpayers BUT then manage to install posh ecotourism for massive prices
Tasmania as one such
and others on mainland.
as for the gaurdian..mob of wankers with too much time and too little sense!

Joel O’Bryan
August 2, 2016 11:57 pm

Just a part of that ever larger “a tangled web we weave when we first endeavor to deceive.”
Climate science deceptions begets exponentialy more science deceptions to the public.
Now the sand pile of deceptions is in collapse.

Ivor Ward
August 3, 2016 12:34 am

The Guardian! Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha-Ha!!!!

August 3, 2016 12:50 am

My first reaction to this story was to wonder why anyone cared. Who would benefit because of this story?

In 1994, KGB defector Oleg Gordievsky identified Guardian literary editor Richard Gott as “an agent of influence”. While Gott denied that he received cash, he admitted he had lunch at the Soviet Embassy and taken benefits from the KGB on overseas visits. Gott resigned from his post.[43]
Gordievsky commented on the newspaper: “The KGB loved The Guardian. It was deemed highly susceptible to penetration.” link

Is Russia secretly abetting and encouraging the eco-loonies in their campaign to destroy capitalism?

Reply to  commieBob
August 3, 2016 5:27 am

It’s not a secret.

Mark - Helsinki
August 3, 2016 1:20 am

The UN is completely corrupted. From covering up rape of children by peacekeepers to covering up UN trucks used to ship weapons in war zones. The default UN stance is to ignore it.

Luther Bl't
Reply to  Mark - Helsinki
August 3, 2016 10:55 am

Indeed, their most successful enterprise to date has been to persuade people there is no ‘O’ after ‘UN’.

August 3, 2016 1:25 am

Strongly recommend a visit to the reef. Millions of tourists can verify it’s a sight worth seeing. The birds, the fish, the coral, the turtles, the dolphins and in recent years the return of the whales.
Perversely one of the reasons people go to visit is to see it before it dies, it’s a decades old story. The reef is thriving much to the anger of Greenies.
The Guardian has obviously never been there.

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Peter
August 3, 2016 1:28 am

Have heard it reported the activists only want to show the parts that were damaged, parts that are surely started on the road to recovery, well the parts impacted by sudden temp\light spectrum changes

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Peter
August 3, 2016 1:29 am

Those affected by competition (which will happen with linear biomass increase) runoff, nutrient imbalance and shortage, will continue to show signs of such.
It’s an epic much ado about nothing

Mark - Helsinki
Reply to  Peter
August 3, 2016 1:30 am

All populations collapse and bounce back, even humans when we get to a certain number

Bill McCall
August 3, 2016 3:06 am

Usual rubbish. The Reef will have its ups and downs and it will recover – there is plenty of science to support that expectation. It’s the left wing media and climate alarmists who want to control our lives in every respect that cannot accept reality, thus they perpetrate the ongoing myth that mankind is causing all this stuff when in fact it is nature itself that is responsible. However, the REALITY of NATURE is something that progressives cannot accept for the simple reason there is no way they can CONTROL it!

August 3, 2016 4:11 am

I have an old friend who lives up that way, being a local farmers daughter. A highly intelligent and observant graduate, in her mid 60’s. She tells me that the GB Reef was damaged in part a while back by a cyclone/typhoon that went through it and did not reach shore. This always causes extensive damage, but the reef always recovers in a few years and this has been going on for millennia.
There has also been a biggish El Nino and an associated drought in north Queensland, affecting fresh water runoff from the nearby coast adversely, and resulting is some change in water temperatures and content. When things get too warm in areas, the polyps leave, go somewhere, making the coral look very dead. But when things return to normal they come back. Thye reef recovers often quite quickly.
The local have seen it all before, and get annoyed by the outside experts coming in to tell them their business, and who are often motivated by trying to attract grants and academic funding. There is a big incentive to create a big scare to secure this money. Otherwise, sadly funding can be very difficult. The oil tends to go to the loudest squeak, from the politicians who control the purse strings.
Its all a part of the usual cycle of events. Too many people seem to think the environment should be in a static steady state. It never has been and never will be, particularly in tropical North Queensland.

August 3, 2016 5:28 am

No wonder they’re getting warmer.
They are undercover undercoverers (too many covers on).

August 3, 2016 5:30 am

Here’s my question:
If the GBR (which is in places subtropical) can’t survive “global warming” at 32S, why are there reefs living happily near the equator in Malaysia, Philippines, Thailand etc? Go in the water at Krabi it’s like a warm bath. Do it in August near Brisbane and you won’t have a pleasant experience.

August 3, 2016 5:46 am

Recently Hillary Clinton lied about having lied to the families of the Benghazi victims.
Compounded lies and compounded cover-ups are the modus operandi of the globalists.

August 3, 2016 6:21 am

EXCLUSIVE: Hillary Completed No Security Briefings Or Courses At State Dept
Read more:

Reply to  Marcus
August 3, 2016 6:59 am
Reply to  Latitude
August 3, 2016 8:31 am

Oh, but Obama changed all that in the years since making the statement. You know, just like he stopped oceans from rising, brought peace in the world, improved race relations, and united the people in both his country and the world. Do I need a sarc tag on this?
I wanted the Reoiblicans to start a new series of ads, highlighting a DIFFERENT Clinton scandal/lie EVERY DAY until the November elections. But to cover all of her misdeeds, they needed to start weeks ago. There’s only three months left.

August 3, 2016 7:04 am

This is odd: “UNESCO allegedly yielded to pressure from the Australian Government, to clumsily excise criticism of Aussie management of the Great Barrier Reef from a climate report.”
There is absolutely no doubt that the Australian Government demanded that UNESCO delete the sections regarding Australia from the UNESCO booklet regarding Heritage Sites in Danger. The Aussie government was proud of the fact and issued a press release on why they did so.
The section on the GBR has been separately published on the web by the authoring organization — The Union of Concerned Scientists. Oh, yes, that’s right, the report was not written by UNESCO at all, but by a blatant advocacy group.
Some of this story is included in my report on the Great Barrier Reef Wars.

James in Perth
August 3, 2016 7:06 am

Section 11 of the Freedom of Information Act 1982 provides:
“11 Right of access
(1) Subject to this Act, every person has a legally enforceable right to obtain access in accordance with this Act to:
(a) a document of an agency, other than an exempt document; or
(b) an official document of a Minister, other than an exempt document.
(2) Subject to this Act, a person’s right of access is not affected by:
(a) any reasons the person gives for seeking access; or
(b) the agency’s or Minister’s belief as to what are his or her reasons for seeking access.”
In short, the burden of proof is on the government to show that the documents are exempt. The most likely exemption is for documents that affect international relations. Section 33 of the Act provides:
“33 Documents affecting national security, defence or international relations
A document is an exempt document if disclosure of the document under this Act:
(a) would, or could reasonably be expected to, cause damage to:
* * *
(iii) the international relations of the Commonwealth; or
(b) would divulge any information or matter communicated in confidence by or on behalf of a foreign government, an authority of a foreign government or an international organization to the Government of the Commonwealth, to an authority of the Commonwealth or to a person receiving the communication on behalf of the Commonwealth or of an authority of the Commonwealth.”
The Australian Information Commissioner’s Guidelines (footnotes redacted) which must describe the scope of that exemption as follows:
“International relations
5.30 The phrase ‘international relations’ has been interpreted as meaning the ability of the Australian Government to maintain good working relations with other governments and international organisations and to protect the flow of confidential information between them. The exemption is not confined to relations at the formal diplomatic or ministerial level. It also covers relations between government agencies.
5.31 The mere fact that a government has expressed concern about a disclosure is not enough to satisfy the exemption, but the phrase does encompass intangible damage, such as loss of trust and confidence in the Australian Government or one of its agencies. The expectation of damage to international relations must be reasonable in all the circumstances, having regard to the nature of the information; the circumstances in which it was communicated; and the nature and extent of the relationship. There must also be real and substantial grounds for the conclusion that are supported by evidence. These grounds are not fixed in advance, but vary according to the circumstances of each case.
5.32 For example, the disclosure of a document may diminish the confidence which another country would have in Australia as a reliable recipient of its confidential information, making that country or its agencies less willing to cooperate with Australian agencies in future. On the other hand, the disclosure of ordinary business communications between health regulatory agencies revealing no more than the fact of consultation will not, of itself, destroy trust and confidence between agencies.”
The Australian Information Commissioner, using a broad definition of “peer review”, held that information relating to a review of New Zealand’s meteorological data is exempt under this provision. This ordinary correspondence however might not fall within the ambit of “peer review.”
The people have a right to know and this should at least include what the Commonwealth Government says to the UN. Appeal!

August 3, 2016 7:51 am

The irony is, if climate change weren’t blamed on humans, countries would be trying to get their important sites listed so they could get clean up money. Once again, the environment is harmed by the politics of environmentalism.

Mark T
August 3, 2016 11:05 am

You know it’s bad when the Grauniad is catching you on these things.

August 3, 2016 11:46 am

The department said it had asked for the changes because it was concerned the information could negatively affect tourism.
Now emails between various government agencies and Unesco have been released to the website Climate Home under freedom of information but almost all the content has been redacted.

With the Guardian accusing the Aussie Gov’t and UNESCO of not being green enough,
I am reminded of environmental groups suing the EPA for desired settlements.

August 3, 2016 1:08 pm

This UN organization is another one of the Baby Boomers’ chief cultural makers. I place it along side the book “Population Bomb” by Ehrlich (pictured here)comment image
…in it’s formative power over the 1942-1956 cohort. There are other major philosophical and cultural influences on the Baby Boomers such as Rachel Carson, JM Keynes and Timothy Leary — and many other totally destructive intellectual revolutionaries who ought to be mentioned, because their philosophies are now being implemented in grand social schemes.
In turn UNESCO is the Cannabis Generation’s tool of choice for destroying local and national histories, and replacing them with UNESCO narratives. The dangers continue to tumble out of UN treaties on “Education, Science, and Culture” made with the US. Two examples are the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). **
Incidentally, in Jan of 2015, millions of documents were lost in a fire in the Russian State Library. Among the lost texts were Slavic Language collections and UNESCO documents.
Russian State Library was previously the Lenin Library.

Reply to  Zeke
August 3, 2016 1:27 pm

What is CEDAW?
**”Feminist internationalists intend to use international law to coerce the restructuring of the institution of the family and the role of every man and every woman on the planet. Their vehicle is the United Nations Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW). Like the Convention on the Rights of the Child, CEDAW aims at reinventing the family and society at large.
And it is no secret. The Preamble of the CEDAW treaty boldly proclaims: “A change in the traditional role of men as well as the role of women in society and in the family is needed to achieve full equality between men and women.” ref: HSLDA
In short, one of the aims of CEDAW is to eliminate any and all differences between men and women in school books.
Some of you may not be aware that on tumblr, children are claiming that they have their own special gender. There are even kids who hate their parents because the parents do not recognize that they are neither a boy nor girl, and do not use the special pronoun invented for the new gender.
This is so widespread that normal kids keep their mouths shut for fear of being “called out,” which is a form of massive online bullying of those who disagree.

August 3, 2016 4:03 pm

This can be said in a few words – the Guardian has no credibility.

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights