Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph crowds gathering on June 16 on the streets of Causeway Bay before an estimated 2 million people take part in march protesting the government's push for extradition laws to China and demanding an apology from the chief executrive Carrie Lam. Nearly 2 million’ people take to streets, forcing public apology from Hong Kong leader Carrie Lam as suspension of controversial extradition bill fails to appease protesters. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3014737/nearly-2-million-people-take-streets-forcing-public-apology )carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

The Age, Monday, December 4, 2023, p11 Article about local protest at Victorian Government decision to build a community hospital on the site of an old derleict farmhouse owned by the Department of Transport at 405 Ryans Road, Diamond Creek. The site was until 2017 part of a potential route fior the North East Link.community hospital, cr. ben ramcharan, cr. natalie duffy, department of ttransport, diamond creek, eltham community hospital, james bant, james merrett, martin penrose, north east link, petition, protest, ryans road

Bumper sticker protesting Victorian Liberal government's widespread privatisation of the public health service (and other public services) in the 1990s, led by Jeff Kennett. which resulted in job cuts and site closures throughout the state. The Australian Nursing Federation, the union representing nurses in Victoria, was a strong opponent of these cuts and closures, that resulted in pressure applied on an already overstretched and poorly resourced group of workers. This sticker was one of many pieces of protest materials and merchandise produced by the Australian Nursing Federation.Rectangular black and white bumper sticker. Sticker printed with 'R.I.P. The HEALTH SYSTEM KILLED by KENNETT' in large font, an illustration of a tombstone and an authorisation statement.nursing, nurses, victoria, jeff kennett, 1990s, stickers, bumper stickers, trade unions, labour history, protest, rationalisation, australia, politics, privatisation, australian nursing federation

Before the end of August 1851 the government had decided to charge a large licence fee for the right to search for gold. When news of that decision reached the Buninyong diggings, the first protest on the Victorian goldfields was held. The monument to that meeting has been placed at the site where it is believed that the meeting took place, in Hiscock Gully Road, about 400 metres from the Midland Highway.Colour photograph of a rock with a commemorative plaque outlining goldfields agitation at Buninyong.The plaque on the monument reads:- "Plaque on the Ballarat Reform League Inc. Monument at Buninyong, 2012. After the discovery of gold at Buninyong in August 1851 the government announced that the diggers would be charged a large licence fee. The injustice of that decision sparked a public protest here at the diggings. 'Buninyong 26 August - Tonight for the first time since Australia rose from the bossum of the ocean, were men strong in their sense of right, lifting up a protest against an impending wrong, and protesting against the Government. (Melbourne Argus, 20 August 1851)"ballarat reform league inc, goldfields agitation, buninyong monument, eureka stockade

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerCrowds mass on Queens Way in Hong Kong as an estimated 2 million people march in protest at the government's refusal to withdraw a controverisal law allowing people to be extradited to mainland China. Chants demanded the chief executive apologise and the legislation be withdrawn, while many held signs protesting police violence. Nearly 2 million protesters flooded the streets of Hong Kong on Sunday, organisers claimed, delivering a stunning repudiation of Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor’s governance and forcing a public apology out of the city’s leader over her campaign to bulldoze a controversial extradition bill through the legislature. A day after Lam suspended her push for the bill, expecting it to defuse a crisis that has seen violent clashes between mostly young protesters and police, the centre of Hong Kong was brought to a complete standstill as the masses marched to chastise her for refusing to withdraw the bill or apologise when first asked to, and declaring that nothing short of her resignation would satisfy them now. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3014737/nearly-2-million-people-take-streets-forcing-public-apology ) carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, admiralty

In 1954, as the defeated French forces left the State of Vietnam, Ngô Đình Diệm, a devout Roman Catholic, became the first prime minister. In 1956, a government-controlled referendum determined that South Vietnam should become a republic rather than stay under the control of Emperor Bảo Đại (who was living in Cannes, on the French Riviera). Ngô Đình Diệm appointed himself the first President of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). He then appointed his younger brother, Ngô Đình Nhu, to be his chief advisor and head of both South Vietnam’s secret police and its largest intelligence agency. During 1963, a campaign of civil resistance led by Buddhist monks protested religious discrimination. The government’s brutal treatment of Buddhists convinced many that Ngô Đình Diệm should go. While the United States publicly denied playing any part in the 1963 coup that overthrew Diệm, it was revealed that American officials had met with and encouraged the generals who planned the coup. Both Ngô Đình Diệm and his brother, Ngô Đình Nhu, were executed on 2 November 1963. 1st elected president of South Vietnam, Ngo Dinh Diem. 1st president vietnam, ngo dinh diem, republic of vietnam, south vietnam, assassination, execution

The Red Ribbon Movement of 1853 represented a significant series of events in the history of Bendigo. During that year there was much agitation on the Bendigo gold fields, particularly during July and August of 1853, directed against the payment of what the miners called a tax - a licence fee of thirty shillings ($3) a month for the right to search for gold on what was declared Crown land. They had to pay the licence whether they found gold or not. The miners, or diggers as they were called, also resented the means used by the authorities at the time to collect the gold licence - through so-called 'digger hunts'. The miners were expected to carry their licences with them, and the police, who were often untrained, used harsh methods to check these licences. In Bendigo, the miners took to wearing a red ribbon ‘as a symbol of their protest against the licence. Red was a very common colour in items such as shirts, so was readily available. Shopkeepers too tied red ribbons to their premises as a sign of support for the miners. It should be remembered at that time virtually everyone was a miner. The diggers also had their own banner, designed by William Dexter, a china painter from Devon. This flag showed the pick, shovel and cradle representing labour, the scales representing justice, the Roman bundle of sticks meaning unity and the kangaroo and emu of Australia Many thousands of Bendigo miners signed a petition to La Trobe, the Governor of Victoria, protesting against the licence fee. When the Governor rejected the petition, thousands of diggers marched in peaceful protest. Miners from White Hills, Eaglehawk, Golden Square, Kangaroo Flat as well as from Bendigo Flat, converged on what is now Pall Mall and View Point, surrounding the ~government camp on Camp Hill. The camp had been reinforced with soldiers of the 40 Regiment, as the Government feared bloodshed. The miners then gathered on the hill behind View Point to hear from their leaders - among them George Thomson, Captain Harrison, Captain Brown and W.D.C. Denovan. They resolved to pay a token fee often shillings ($1) for the September licence, whenthey met with Commissioners Panton and Wright on Camp Hill. Although Wright and Panton were sympathetic to the miners, the offer was rejected, but no licence fees were collected for September. Thus a possible bloody conflict was averted by the common sense shown by the miners' leaders and the commissioners. It was a truly democratic protest against arbitrary government and preceded the Eureka Stockade Incident by over a year. Bendigo Historical Society Committee on a Tram, two photos, one of five people standing behind a display cabinet, and the second one a Banner stretched across the tram. On the rear of the photo is "L-R Jim Evans, Terry Davidson, Ron Monro." Second from left is Jim Evans (President) and fourth from the left is Terry Davidson, with extreme right, Ron Munro (Vice President). In the cabinet is the 1853 Bendigo Goldfields Petition (Red Ribbon Rebellion) The society holds the petition in digital form. The diggers had their own banner, designed by William Dexter, a china painter from Devon. This flag showed the pick, shovel and cradle representing labour, the scales representing justice, the Roman bundle of sticks meaning unity and the kangaroo and emu of Australia history, bendigo, tram, 1853 bendigo goldfields petition, red ribbon rebellions

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph of a street art poster taken on the streets of Hong Kong during the protests against legislation to allow Hong Kong suspects to be extradited to mainland Chinese carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, poster art, posters

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerMore than a thousand protestors surround Hong Kong's main police headquarters on Arsenal Street in Wan Chai on June 26th following a peaceful rally at Edinburgh Place in Central. Doors to the complex were barricaded by protestors, who left after a six hour siege in protest at police violence at a prtest held earlier on 12 June 2019. Protesters ended a six-hour siege of Hong Kong’s police headquarters – their second in a week over the now-suspended extradition bill – early on Thursday morning. More than 1,000 were involved at the height of the protest, which began after 10pm on Wednesday. Around 100 were left at the end and dispersed without a fight when officers with riot shields emerged from the building in Wan Chai at 4am on Thursday. After a peaceful rally attended by thousands earlier at Edinburgh Place in the Central business district, hundreds descended on Arsenal Street, blocking the junction with Lockhart Road to all traffic and sealing the entrances to the police base. (https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3016238/hong-kong-police-under-siege-again-protesters-surround )carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerSeven police officers stand guard in front of Hong Kong's main police headquarters on Arsenal Street in Wan Chai as an estimated one thousand protestors surround on 26 June 2019. Protestors take turns to step up and hurl abuse at the officers, in a protest lasting 6 hours before peacefully dispersing. The protesters chanted 'Release the martyrs' and 'Stop police violence' in reference to violent clashes with police in the days previous. ( https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3016238/hong-kong-police-under-siege-again-protesters-surround)carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, police, wan chai

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph of a crowd or protestors against proposed extradition laws gathering on the streets of Causeway Bay, Hong Kong, leading down to the gathering area. carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, had plenty of political support in the territory’s pro-Beijing legislature to pass a bill that would allow extraditions to mainland China. The legislators were set to begin discussing the bill in early June, and intended to vote on it just weeks later. A series of protests took place, and after a June 16 protest saw the largest turnout yet, Ms. Lam made a major concession: She postponed the bill, at least temporarily. It was an undeniable victory for the protesters — but it did little to quell the unrest. Since the bill could later be reintroduced, protesters felt they remained in danger. The police tactics to break up the demonstrations on June 12, including the use of more than 150 tear gas canisters to push protesters far away from the government office, created a new set of demands from the protesters. Now, instead of just calling for the withdrawal of the bill and Ms. Lam’s resignation, they said they wouldn’t be content unless there was an independent investigation of officers’ conduct. They also wanted the release of protesters arrested on June 12, and for the government to rescind its description of the demonstrations as a “riot,” a designation that carries legal significance. None of that has happened. Many analysts say Ms. Lam is unlikely to step down, nor would Beijing accept her resignation if she offered it. She has more wiggle room on the other demands, but has not indicated any willingness to budge. The Hong Kong Protests are a leaderless, digital movement.There is no single leader or group deciding on or steering the strategy, tactics and goals of the movement. Instead, protesters have used forums and messaging apps to decide next steps. Anyone can suggest a course of action, and others then vote on whether they support it. The most popular ideas rise to the top, and then people rally to make them happen. At its best, this structure has empowered many people to participate and have their voices heard. Protesters say it keeps them all safe by not allowing the government to target specific leaders. Their success in halting the extradition bill, which was shelved by the territory’s chief executive, speaks to the movement’s power. Despite the lack of a clear leader, protesters have shown extensive coordination at the demonstrations, having planned the specifics online beforehand. Supply stations are set up to distribute water, snacks, gloves, umbrellas and shields made of cardboard. Volunteer first aid workers wear brightly colored vests. People form assembly lines to pass supplies across long distances, with protesters communicating what they need through a series of predetermined hand signals. Anyone walking in dangerous areas without a helmet or a mask is quickly offered one. No individual can speak on behalf of the protesters, which makes negotiations difficult, if not impossible. (https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/02/world/asia/hong-kong-protest-explained.html, accessed 07/07/2019) Hong Kong’s amended extradition law would allow the extradition of suspects to mainland China for the first time. Supporters say the amendments are key to ensuring the city does not become a criminal refuge, but critics worry Beijing will use the law to extradite political opponents and others to China where their legal protections cannot be guaranteed. The government claims the push to change the law, which would also apply to Taiwan and Macau, stems from the killing last year of a Hong Kong woman while she was in Taiwan with her boyfriend. Authorities in Taiwan suspect the woman’s boyfriend, who remains in Hong Kong, but cannot try him because no extradition agreement is in place. Under the amended law, those accused of offences punishable by seven years or more in prison could be extradited. The new legislation would give Hong Kong’s leader, known as the chief executive, authority to approve extradition requests, after review by the courts. Hong Kong’s legislature, the legislative council, would not have any oversight over the extradition process. Many Hong Kongers fear the proposed extradition law will be used by authorities to target political enemies. They worry the new legislation spells the end of the “one country, two systems” policy, eroding the civil rights enjoyed by Hong Kong residents since the handover of sovereignty from the UK to China in 1997. Many attending the protests on Sunday said they could not trust China as it had often used non-political crimes to target government critics, and said they also feared Hong Kong officials would not be able to reject Beijing’s requests. Legal professionals have also expressed concern over the rights of those sent across the border to be tried. The conviction rate in Chinese courts is as high as 99%. Arbitrary detentions, torture and denial of legal representation of one’s choosing are also common. Many in the protests on Sunday 09 June 2019 said they felt overwhelmed by a sense of helplessness in the face of mainland China’s increasing political, economic and cultural influence in Hong Kong. Hong Kong’s top political leader is not elected by ordinary voters but by a 1,200-strong election committee accountable to Beijing. Half of its legislature are chosen through indirect electoral systems that favour pro-Beijing figures. Many Hong Kongers also cited the jailing of leaders and activists from the 2014 Occupy Central movement– a 79-day mass civil disobedience movement – as well as the disqualification of young localist lawmakers as signs of the erosion of civil freedoms. Resentment towards China has been intensified by soaring property prices – with increasing numbers of mainland Chinese buying properties in the city – as well as the government’s “patriotic education” drive, and the large numbers of mainland tourists who flock to Hong Kong. Many Hong Kongers are also concerned about China’s growing control over the city’s news media, as they increasingly self-censor and follow Beijing’s tacit orders. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jun/10/what-are-the-hong-kong-protests-about-explainerPhotograph of a crowd on the streets of Hong Kong to protest against proposed extradition laws, heading towards Admiralty. carrie lam, hong kong protests, extraditions, protest, protestors, admiralty

Produced by Contour Consultants Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of Dallas Price Homes Pty Ltd as part of the planning process for redevelopment of the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. In 1963 the Shire of Eltham purchased the Shillinglaw property of approximately 2 acres in Main Road, Eltham for the widening of Main Road and as a site for new Council offices. This land, which contained the Shillinglaw Cottage (c1878-80), was the remaining section of the Shillinglaw family holding that originally comprised 30 acres, being Lot 90 of Holloway's 1851 subdivision. Eltham Council intended to demolish this cottage, but through extensive community action it was saved, funds were raised, and it was relocated to the current site adjacent to the Eltham Library. The new Eltham Shire Offices opened in 1965 were designed to ensure retention of the three Italian Cypress trees that were located outside the Shillinglaw Cottage. In 1971 the building was extended at the southern end to provide additional space, including for the Eltham Library and Council's Engineering Department. Renovations were undertaken to the offices during 1987. The Victorian State Government commenced to restructure local government in 1994, which resulted in the establishment of the Shire of Nillumbik and the cessation of the Shire of Eltham. This new Nillumbik Shire Council was headed by government appointed commissioners, who decided in 1995 to put the former Eltham Shire offices on the market. Eventually in June 1996 the property was sold for $1.1 million and the building was subsequently demolished. A planning application for the site was then submitted to Nillumbik Shire Council in September 1996 for construction of a 24-hour service station, convenience store, cafe/takeaway food premises, a retail facility and community facility. There were many objections to this proposed development and in controversial circumstances a planning permit was granted by the Nillumbik Shire Council commissioners. After protracted actions involving a planning panel and a planning advisory committee, established by the Minister for Local Government, the proposal was eventually rejected as not satisfying the requirements of the planning scheme. In December 1997 the purchaser withdrew from the contract of sale, just prior to Council announcing a withdrawal from the contract. While there have been a number of possible development proposals considered by subsequent Nillumbik Shire Councils, this site has remained vacant since July 1996. TIMELINE (Prepared by Jim Connor, Eltham District Historical Society- March 2018- Based on press, council and personal records) June 1996 - Eltham Shire offices sold to Dallas Price Homes for $1.1 million. July 1996 - Shire office building demolished against community's wishes. Council claimed building riddled with asbestos. September 1996 - Planning application submitted to Nillumbik Shire Council to construct on the site a 24 hours Shell service station, convenience store, Hungry Jacks café/takeaway food premises, a retail facility and community facility. 213 objections and petition of over 1400 signatures received. Minister for Planning and Local Government orders an independent investigation into valuation and sale. 9 October 1996 - Permit granted by Nillumbik Shire Council commissioners, in controversial circumstances. A Planning Special Committee consisting of 3 commissioners and 3 community representatives considered 32 community objections. One commissioner declared a potential conflict of interest so only 2 commissioners were able to vote. After hearing all objections, the community representatives moved a foreshadowed motion to refuse a permit. The commissioners then closed the meeting, formerly opened a council meeting (for about a minute) and approved the application. October 1996 - Community members appealed planning decision to Administrative Appeals Tribunal. November 1996 -Minister for Planning and Local Government Robert McClelland calls appeal in and directs MT to refer this 'major policy issue' to the Governor in Council. February 1997 - Planning panel (Dimity Reed and Margaret Pitt) established to consider submissions. March 1997 - New council elected with five councillors. April 1997 - Three of the five new councillors vote to fight Commissioner's decision to grant a permit. April 1997 - Planning panel (Dimity Reed and Margaret Pitt) conducts hearings at Nillumbik Shire offices. June 1997 -Planning panel rejected Dallas Price Homes proposal as being 'totally inappropriate' for the site and recommends the site be rezoned for 'public purposes'. July 1997 - Dallas Price Homes threatened to sue Council and individual councillors. October 1997 - Report released of an Advisory Committee (Paul Jerome) established by the Minister for Planning and Local Government. Committee considered Dallas Price Homes proposal and an alternative concept plan proposal by Council for a gallery, workshop, offices and cinema community-based development. Advisory Committee recommended Dallas Price Homes proposal be rejected as not satisfying the requirements of the planning scheme and recommended further testing of the financial viability of Council's proposal. December 1997 - Dallas Price Homes withdrew from the contract of sale, just prior to Council announcing a withdrawal from the contract, which expired on 28th November and was not renewed by either side, after previously being extended twice pending a decision by the Minister. Council had to pay developer $58,000 for demolition costs. February 1998 - Dallas Price Homes application rejected by Planning and Local Government Minister. October 1998 - Nillumbik Councillors suspended and an Administrator appointed (until March 1999). The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw cottage, shillinglaw farm, shillinglaw trees, jim connor collection

Nillumbik Commissioners used 'reserve power's to permit a controversial Shell service station and Hungry Jackls restaurant development at the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. More than 200 people attended the Council meeting in the public gallery and protested at the decision. 32 personal submissions were made to Council's Planning Special Committee meeting whose members vioted 3-2 against the development. The Committee consisted of the three Nillumbik Commissioners and three community members (Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske). Chief Commissioner Don Cordell, a former Shell employee excused himself from voting and the three communbity memebrs voted against the submission. The other two commissioners, Vin Heffernan and Kevin Abbott voted against it. They then immediately closed the meeting and opened a Council meeting lasting just seconds to use special reserve powers to overturn the decision. The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw farm, shillinglaw trees, jim connor collection, dallas howgate, frank burgoyne, robert marshall, nillumbik planning special committee, jim connor, bronwyn south, janet mattiske, don cordell, vin heffernan, kevin abbott

Nillumbik Commissioners used 'reserve power's to permit a controversial Shell service station and Hungry Jackls restaurant development at the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. More than 200 people attended the Council meeting in the public gallery and protested at the decision. 32 personal submissions were made to Council's Planning Special Committee meeting whose members vioted 3-2 against the development. The Committee consisted of the three Nillumbik Commissioners and three community members (Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske). Chief Commissioner Don Cordell, a former Shell employee excused himself from voting and the three communbity memebrs voted against the submission. The other two commissioners, Vin Heffernan and Kevin Abbott voted against it. They then immediately closed the meeting and opened a Council meeting lasting just seconds to use special reserve powers to overturn the decision. The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw farm, shillinglaw trees, jim connor collection, dallas howgate, nillumbik planning special committee, jim connor, bronwyn south, janet mattiske, don cordell, vin heffernan, kevin abbott

Nillumbik Commissioners used 'reserve power's to permit a controversial Shell service station and Hungry Jackls restaurant development at the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. More than 200 people attended the Council meeting in the public gallery and protested at the decision. 32 personal submissions were made to Council's Planning Special Committee meeting whose members vioted 3-2 against the development. The Committee consisted of the three Nillumbik Commissioners and three community members (Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske). Chief Commissioner Don Cordell, a former Shell employee excused himself from voting and the three communbity memebrs voted against the submission. The other two commissioners, Vin Heffernan and Kevin Abbott voted against it. They then immediately closed the meeting and opened a Council meeting lasting just seconds to use special reserve powers to overturn the decision. Community residents who made submissions included Russell Yeomans speaking on behalf of the Eltham Gateway Action Group and Eltham District Historical Society, Des Ryan on belaf of Eltham Senior Citizens, Angela Newhouse, others on behalf of Our Lady Help of Christians Primary School and Judge Book Village, Tom Munro, Ian Jennings, Margartet Ball a fifth generation descendant of the Shillinglaw family, one of the early settlers of the area and owner of the land that was sold to Council, Frank Burgoyne who said "there will be a lot of creaking and rumbling in the cemetery if this goes through. So many old people who have done so much for Eltham are buried up there and it is up to us to pass on what they left to the younger generation. Eltham is a beautiful spot; why louse it up?" A second article "Anger over reserve power" by Laeta Antonysen provides commentary from the three Planning Special Committee community members, former Eltham Shire Councillor Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske about the process that took place and the first time use of the spoecial reserve power to overturn the decision of the committee. Barry Rochford, Nillumbiuk CEO defends the use of the power.The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw farm, shillinglaw trees, jim connor collection, dallas howgate, nillumbik planning special committee, jim connor, bronwyn south, janet mattiske, don cordell, vin heffernan, kevin abbott, russell yeomans, eltham district historical society, eltham senior citizens, des ryan, our lady help of christians primary school, judge book village, angela newhouse, tom munro, ian jennings, margaret ball, shillinglaw cottage, frank burgoyne, andrew biasci, barry rochford

Nillumbik Commissioners used 'reserve power's to permit a controversial Shell service station and Hungry Jack's restaurant development at the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. More than 200 people attended the Council meeting in the public gallery and protested at the decision. 32 personal submissions were made to Council's Planning Special Committee meeting whose members vioted 3-2 against the development. The Committee consisted of the three Nillumbik Commissioners and three community members (Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske). Chief Commissioner Don Cordell, a former Shell employee excused himself from voting and the three communbity memebrs voted against the submission. The other two commissioners, Vin Heffernan and Kevin Abbott voted against it. They then immediately closed the meeting and opened a Council meeting lasting just seconds to use special reserve powers to overturn the decision. Subsequent to this the Commissioner run Council held a special meeting on Wednesday, October 23, 1996 where Commissioners Kevin Abbott and Vin Heffernan thanked all three community members of the Planning Special Committee and advised that their powers had been revoked. The article includes a joint statement from all three sacked members in which they state they have been able to bring a community perspective to the planning applications placed befopre the committee which has resulted in modifications to planning decisions. The members stated that "unfortunately, despite our best efforts to express considered apolitical opinions, it appears the Commissioners believe that any dissenting comment is politically motivated, and should therefore be disregarded." "We feel sad that this situation exists even though we have done everything possible tio represent the views of our community, whilst maintaining the integrity of the planning process."The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw farm, jim connor collection, dallas howgate, nillumbik planning special committee, jim connor, bronwyn south, janet mattiske, don cordell, vin heffernan, kevin abbott

Nillumbik Commissioners used 'reserve power's to permit a controversial Shell service station and Hungry Jack's restaurant development at the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road. More than 200 people attended the Council meeting in the public gallery and protested at the decision. 32 personal submissions were made to Council's Planning Special Committee meeting whose members vioted 3-2 against the development. The Committee consisted of the three Nillumbik Commissioners and three community members (Jim Connor, Bronwyn South and Janet Mattiske). Chief Commissioner Don Cordell, a former Shell employee excused himself from voting and the three communbity memebrs voted against the submission. The other two commissioners, Vin Heffernan and Kevin Abbott voted against it. They then immediately closed the meeting and opened a Council meeting lasting just seconds to use special reserve powers to overturn the decision. Subsequent to this the Commissioner run Council held a special meeting on Wednesday, October 23, 1996 where Commissioners Kevin Abbott and Vin Heffernan thanked all three community members of the Planning Special Committee and advised that their powers had been revoked. The article includes a joint statement from all three sacked members in which they state they have been able to bring a community perspective to the planning applications placed befopre the committee which has resulted in modifications to planning decisions. The members stated that "unfortunately, despite our best efforts to express considered apolitical opinions, it appears the Commissioners believe that any dissenting comment is politically motivated, and should therefore be disregarded." "We feel sad that this situation exists even though we have done everything possible tio represent the views of our community, whilst maintaining the integrity of the planning process."The demolition of the former Shire of Eltham offices and proposed sale and development driven by the Commissioners for Nillumbik Shire Council brought the community together in substantial protest at the infrigement of ratepayers democratic say in local government and ciommunity assets combined with protests about inappropraite development of Eltham's Gateway. This issue led to the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group which still operates strongly today (2023) on behalf of the community to ensure appropriate development within the community.895 main road, commissioners, dallas price homes, development application, eltham hub, hungry jacks, nillumbik shire council, re-zoning, shell service station, town planning, eltham gateway, eltham gateway action group, eltham shire offices, shillinglaw farm, jim connor collection, dallas howgate, nillumbik planning special committee, jim connor, bronwyn south, janet mattiske, don cordell, vin heffernan, kevin abbott

Bronze Memorial plaque and Memorial Scroll issued to families whose relative was killed in action during word war 1. The history of the dead man's penny began in 1916 with the realisation by the British Government hat some form of an official token of gratitude should be given to the fallen service men and women's bereaved next of kin. Production of the plaques and scrolls, which was supposed to be financed by the German reparation money began in 1919 with approximately 1,150,00 issued. There were some relatives who returned the pennies to the Australian Government in protest as b they felt it was insulting and it did not replace their loved one's life.Killed in Action William Edward Ernest Bond joined the 58th Bn on the 24th November 1915 as a labourer from Geelong. As a private (4296), he was sent to France and the Western Front. He initially went missing in action in the Fleurbaix area on 19th of July 1917. It took a court of Inquiry in the field in September,1917 to determine he was killed in action, although his body was never recovered. He died aged 18. His name can be found on Panel 14, VC Corner Australian Cemetery and Memorial, Fromelles, Lille, Nord Pas de Calais, FranceMemorial Bronze Plaque and Scroll. The Memorial Plaque was also known as the WW1 'Death Penny' in memory of William Edward Ernest BONDBrass Plaque " He died for Freedom and Honour William Edward Ernest Bond" Scroll Commemoration to Pte Edward Ernest Bond 58th Bn AIFbrass memorial plaque and scroll dead man's penny bond william lara geelong killed in action world war one kia

Newspaper articleArticle about meeting of Dairymen's Association of Phillip Island to protest about withdrawal of concessions by the Company operating the San Remo - Newhaven Punt Service because the Government proposes to build a bridge.local history, documents, newspapers, punt service phillip island, black & white newspaper clipping, dairymen's association of phillip island

Put together by a member of the Eltham Gateway Action Group (EGAG) in participation with various artists, writers, local business people and other local citizens and sent to Minister Maclellan, Planning Minister in the Kennet Government in protest of proposed plans to sell the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road Eltham in order to develop a Shell Service Station and Hungry Jacks fast food outlet. The purpose was to express what is unique about the character of Eltham, why people live and work there and why such a development would be out of character and inappropriate for the Eltham Gateway along with alternative development proposals. This protest was the catalyst for the formation of the Eltham Gateway Action Group, which later evolved into the Eltham Community Action Group (ECAG).Scrapbook album approx 40 x 30 x 4 cm, black hardcovers and 36 double page openings, numerous blank pages.alan marshall, alistair knox park, alistair knox, alternative proposals, ampitheatre, artists, betty langley, bohdan kucyk, bootmakers cottage, bridge street, cultural heritage map, david armfield, diamond creek, diamnond valley news, eltham art house theatres, eltham community action group, ecag, eltham gateway action group, egag, eltham library, eltham traders, eltham, flavour of eltham, george stebbing, gordon ford, hamish knox, helen lucas, hungry jacks, janet r boddy, jarrold cottage, jarrold family, john pizzey, jon weaving, lena skipper, letters, local business register, 895 main road, main road, eltham shire office, matcham skipper, ming mackay, minister maclellan, montsalvat, mudbrick, newspaper clippings, peter dougherty, peter glass, pioneers and painters, railway line, shell service station, shelltham, protests, shillinglaw cottage, shire of eltham, nillumbik shire, st margaret's anglican church, todaro, trestle bridge, wingrove cottage, charles symons wingrove

Put together by a member of the Eltham Community Action Group in participation with various artists, writers, local business people and other local citizens and sent to Minister Maclellan, Planning Minister in the Kennet Government in protest of proposed plans to sell the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road Eltham in order to develop a Shell Service Station and Hungry Jacks fast food outlet. The purpose was to express what is unique about the character of Eltham, why people live and work there and why such a development would be out of character and inappropriate for the Eltham Gateway along with alternative development proposals. This protest was the catalyst for the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group.Scrapbook album approx 40 x 30 x 4 cm, black hardcovers and 36 double page openings, numerous blank pages.alan marshall, alistair knox park, alistair knox, alternative proposals, ampitheatre, artists, betty langley, bohdan kucyk, bootmakers cottage, bridge street, cultural heritage map, david armfield, diamond creek, diamnond valley news, eltham art house theatres, eltham community action group, eltham library, eltham traders, eltham, flavour of eltham, george stebbing, gordon ford, hamish knox, helen lucas, hungry jacks, janet r boddy, jarrold cottage, jarrold family, john pizzey, jon weaving, lena skipper, letters, local business register, 895 main road, main road, eltham shire office, matcham skipper, ming mackay, minister maclellan, montsalvat, mudbrick, newspaper clippings, peter dougherty, peter glass, pioneers and painters, railway line, shell service station, shelltham, protests, shillinglaw cottage, shire of eltham, nillumbik shire, st margaret's anglican church, todaro, trestle bridge, wingrove cottage, charles symons wingrove

Put together by a member of the Eltham Community Action Group in participation with various artists, writers, local business people and other local citizens and sent to Minister Maclellan, Planning Minister in the Kennet Government in protest of proposed plans to sell the former Eltham Shire Office site at 895 Main Road Eltham in order to develop a Shell Service Station and Hungry Jacks fast food outlet. The purpose was to express what is unique about the character of Eltham, why people live and work there and why such a development would be out of character and inappropriate for the Eltham Gateway along with alternative development proposals. This protest was the catalyst for the formation of the Eltham Community Action Group.Scrapbook album approx 40 x 30 x 4 cm, black hardcovers and 36 double page openings, numerous blank pages.alan marshall, alistair knox park, alistair knox, alternative proposals, ampitheatre, artists, betty langley, bohdan kucyk, bootmakers cottage, bridge street, cultural heritage map, david armfield, diamond creek, diamnond valley news, eltham art house theatres, eltham community action group, eltham library, eltham traders, eltham, flavour of eltham, george stebbing, gordon ford, hamish knox, helen lucas, hungry jacks, janet r boddy, jarrold cottage, jarrold family, john pizzey, jon weaving, lena skipper, letters, local business register, 895 main road, main road, eltham shire office, matcham skipper, ming mackay, minister maclellan, montsalvat, mudbrick, newspaper clippings, peter dougherty, peter glass, pioneers and painters, railway line, shell service station, shelltham, protests, shillinglaw cottage, shire of eltham, nillumbik shire, st margaret's anglican church, todaro, trestle bridge, wingrove cottage, charles symons wingrove