Wednesday 19 October 2016

Just three weeks to go until the U.S. presidential election and America is getting worried


Committee To Protect Journalists (CPJ), statement:
New York, October 13, 2016--In an unprecedented step, the Committee to Protect Journalists today released a statement recognizing that a Donald Trump presidency would represent a threat to press freedom. In response to Trump's threats and vilification of the media during his campaign, the chairman of CPJ's board, Sandra Mims Rowe, issued the following statement on behalf of the organization:
Guaranteeing the free flow of information to citizens through a robust, independent press is essential to American democracy. For more than 200 years this founding principle has protected journalists in the United States and inspired those around the world, including brave journalists facing violence, censorship, and government repression.
Donald Trump, through his words and actions as a candidate for president of the United States, has consistently betrayed First Amendment values. On October 6, CPJ's board of directors passed a resolution declaring Trump an unprecedented threat to the rights of journalists and to CPJ's ability to advocate for press freedom around the world.
Since the beginning of his candidacy, Trump has insulted and vilified the press and has made his opposition to the media a centerpiece of his campaign. Trump has routinely labeled the press as "dishonest" and "scum" and singled out individual news organizations and journalists.
He has mocked a disabled New York Times journalist and called an ABC News reporter a "sleaze" in a press conference. He expelled Univision anchor Jorge Ramos from a campaign press conference because he asked an "impertinent" question, and has publicly demeaned other journalists.
Trump has refused to condemn attacks on journalists by his supporters. His campaign has also systematically denied press credentials to outlets that have covered him critically, including The Washington Post, BuzzFeed, Politico, TheHuffington Post, The Daily Beast, Univision, and The Des Moines Register.
Throughout his campaign, Trump has routinely made vague proposals to limit basic elements of press and internet freedom. At a rally in February, Trump declared that if elected president he would "open up our libel laws so when they write purposely negative and horrible and false articles, we can sue them and win lots of money." In September, Trump tweeted, "My lawyers want to sue the failing @nytimes so badly for irresponsible intent. I said no (for now), but they are watching. Really disgusting."
While some have suggested that these statements are rhetorical, we take Trump at his word. His intent and his disregard for the constitutional free press principle are clear.
A Trump presidency would represent a threat to press freedom in the United States, but the consequences for the rights of journalists around the world could be far more serious. Any failure of the United States to uphold its own standards emboldens dictators and despots to restrict the media in their own countries. This appears to be of no concern to Trump, who indicated that he has no inclination to challenge governments on press freedom and the treatment of journalists.
When MSNBC's Joe Scarborough asked him in December if his admiration of Russian President Vladimir Putin was at all tempered by the country's history of critical journalists being murdered, his response was: "He's running his country, and at least he's a leader, unlike what we have in this country... Well, I think that our country does plenty of killing, too."

Australian Government agencies still closing the cyber door after hackers have had their way



Australia treats cyber attacks as extremely serious and provocative events.

Fortunately, Australia still has not been subjected to malicious cyber activity that could constitute a cyber attack as defined on the previous page.

Contrary to speculation, this is not simply a matter of failed detection; the effects of a cyber attack could not possibly have gone unnoticed.

However, the threat of a cyber attack being conducted against Australian government, infrastructure, industry or other networks has grown following a series of high-profile disruptive or destructive incidents in other countries over the last five years.

The ACSC has previously assessed that cyber attacks against Australia would most likely occur against high value targets such as critical infrastructure, government networks or military capabilities during periods of very high tension or an escalation to conflict.

Although this remains broadly accurate, the nature and targets of recent incidents overseas – combined with a growing understanding of adversaries’ capabilities and intentions – highlight the breadth of potential targets and different ways cyber capabilities can be employed by adversaries seeking to achieve damaging or destructive effects outside conflict……

Australian government networks are regularly targeted by the full breadth of cyber adversaries. While foreign states represent the greatest level of threat, cybercriminals pose a threat to government-held information and provision of services through both targeted and inadvertent compromises of government networks with ransomware.

Hacktivists will continue to use low sophistication cyber capabilities – website defacement, the hack and release of personal or embarrassing information, DDoS activities and the hijacking of social media accounts – to generate attention and support for their cause.

As such, issue motivated groups pose only a limited threat to government networks, with possible effects including availability issues and embarrassment.

However, some hacktivists intend to cause more serious disruption and may be able to exploit poor security to have a greater impact.

As the Prime Minister acknowledged during the launch of Australia’s Cyber Security Strategy on 21 April, the ACSC has worked with government organisations to Between 1 January 2015 and 30 June 2016, ASD, as part of the ACSC, responded to 1095 cyber security incidents on government systems which were considered serious enough to warrant operational responses.

As cyber security awareness has increased, and government organisations have improved their ability to respond to their own lower level cyber security incidents, the number of incidents requiring an operational response has decreased. We can expect to see this trend continue.

The security of government networks and information is not only measured by how many cyber security incidents occur – it is about the type of incidents, their scale and the impact they have on national security and economic prosperity. Australian government organisations are required to report cyber security incidents to improve the ACSC’s understanding of the threat and to assist other organisations facing these threats………

Bureau of Meteorology In 2015, ASD detected suspicious activity from two computers on the Bureau of Meteorology’s network.

On investigation, ASD identified the presence of particular Remote Access Tool (RAT) malware popular with state-sponsored cyber adversaries, amongst other malware associated with cybercrime.

The RAT had also been used to compromise other Australian government networks.

ASD identified evidence of the adversary searching for and copying an unknown quantity of documents from the Bureau’s network.

This information is likely to have been stolen by the adversary.

ASD recovered a password dumping utility used by the adversary and identified the malicious use of at least one legitimate domain administrator account.

ASD identified at least six further hosts on the Bureau’s network that the adversary attempted to access, including domain controllers and file servers.

The presence of password dumping utilities and complete access by the adversary to domain controllers suggested all passwords on the Bureau’s network were already compromised at the time of the investigation.

ASD also identified evidence suggesting the use of network scanning and time stamp modification tools, used to analyse the network architecture and assist with hiding the adversary’s tools on hosts. In this instance, the ACSC attributed the primary compromise to a foreign intelligence service, however, security controls in place were insufficient to protect the network from more common threats associated with cybercrime.

CryptoLocker ransomware found on the network represented the most significant threat to the Bureau’s data retention and continuity of operations. The implementation of security controls outlined in ASD’s Strategies to Mitigate Targeted Cyber Intrusions publication will significantly improve the security posture of the Bureau’s corporate network. The ACSC continues to work with the Bureau of Meteorology to implement a number of further, specific recommendations to mitigate future compromise.

ABC News, 12 October 2016:

The ABC has previously been told China was behind the breach, but the Minister Assisting the Prime Minister for Cyber Security, Dan Tehan, would not be drawn on which foreign state was believed to be responsible.
"We don't narrow it down to specific countries, and we do that deliberately, but what we have indicated is that cyber espionage is alive and well and that's why we want to be transparent in this report about the incident," Mr Tehan said.
In December, the ABC was told it would cost millions of dollars to plug the security breach.
The ACSC said between January 1, 2015 and June 30, 2016, ASD responded to 1,095 cyber security incidents on government systems which were considered "serious enough to warrant operational responses".

Tuesday 18 October 2016

Thank the gods! Senator Bob Day resigns


The Australian: Senator Bob Day at a home being built by his family firm in Broadview, Adelaide

Far-right politician and former Liberal Party member, Family First’s Senator Robert “Bob” Day, having run his building company into liquidation has resigned from the Australian Senate.

He had been a senator for just over 28 months and was the only member of the senate with a Facebook page dedicated to a financial disaster he oversaw.

During his time in office he strongly voted for:

He voted against:


NSW ICAC Operation Cavill: former NSW Liberal MP for Gladesville & former Ryde Mayor committal hearing on charges of blackmail and misconduct in public office


The Sydney Morning Herald, 16 October 2016:

A former Liberal state MP and Sydney mayor will face court on Monday to determine if he should be committed to stand trial for blackmail and misconduct in public office.
Ivan Petch was Ryde mayor when, in 2012, a controversial redevelopment of the Ryde Civic Centre triggered a series of flash points that later became the subject of a two-week hearing by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC).
Mr Petch now faces a range of charges arising from the inquiry, including two counts of blackmail, misconduct in public office and giving false or misleading evidence to ICAC.
Mr Petch lashed out at the corruption watchdog last week for having "discoloured" his "whole career in one fell swoop".
"I have spent 37 years serving the people and, in that time, I have always acted in the interests of the community," he said. "I have stood by them all the way through."
After losing his state seat of Gladesville in the 1995 election to Labor's John Watkins by the narrow margin of 250 votes, Mr Petch became an independent councillor who went on to serve six terms as Ryde mayor.
However, in 2013, ICAC investigated Mr Petch over the alleged release of confidential council information "on many occasions for various reasons" but most notably to "undermine" council employees such as the former general manager John Neish.
During the inquiry, a phone tap was played of Mr Petch threatening to "destroy" Mr Neish. It emerged that, a short time later, sensitive material was leaked in a bid to discredit the council's head, after he refused to delay a high-rise residential redevelopment plan for council's ageing civic centre.
Mr Petch, who is charged with one count of misconduct in public office for allegedly releasing that material, has also been charged with "being an accessory before the fact of a count of blackmail" in relation to the alleged threat, for which property developer John Goubran is also facing a blackmail charge.
Mr Petch is also facing a separate charge of blackmail for allegedly attempting to improperly influence Mr Neish's acting replacement Danielle Dickson after her predecessor quit.
The then mayor allegedly threatened Ms Dickson that councillors, including himself, would block her application for the permanent position if she failed to resolve an ongoing Supreme Court costs dispute in their favour.
Mr Petch's three-day committal hearing will be heard in Sydney Local Court by Deputy Chief Magistrate Jane Mottley.

BACKGROUND

NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC):


The ICAC investigated a number of allegations involving the former Mayor of the City of Ryde, Ivan Petch, and others, including the alleged release of confidential council information by Mr Petch on many occasions for various reasons, including in an attempt to undermine council employees, such as the former General Manager, Mr John Neish.
In its report on the investigation, made public on 30 June 2014, the Commission makes corrupt conduct findings against Mr Petch, John Goubran and Richard Henricus. The Commission is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) with respect to the prosecution of Mr Petch, Mr Goubran, Anthony Stavrinos, John Booth and Mr Henricus for various offences.
The ICAC is of the opinion that consideration should be given to obtaining the advice of the DPP also with respect to the prosecution of Mr Petch, councillors Justin Li, Jeffrey Salvestro-Martin, Terry Perram and former councillor Victor Tagg for offences under the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 in relation to advertising published in The Weekly Times in August and September 2012. The Commission also recommends that the Office of Local Government gives consideration to disciplinary action against Mr Petch, with a view to his dismissal…..

Recommendations for prosecutions…..
The ICAC is of the opinion that the advice of the Director of Public Prosecutions should be obtained with respect to the prosecution of the following persons:
Ivan Petch
* The common law offence of misconduct in public office in relation to his handling of the discovery of adult material on Mr Neish's computer and his attempts to leak the material to the media.
* Five offences of giving false or misleading evidence pursuant to section 87 of the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988 relating to the discovery of adult material on John Neish's computer.
* The common law offence of misconduct in public office in relation to his release of confidential advice from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure, and also internal Council emails concerning planning approvals.
* Making an unwarranted demand with menaces with the intention of influencing the exercise of a public duty pursuant to section 249K of the Crimes Act 1900 in relation to the approach to Danielle Dickson.
* Offences of accepting an indirect campaign contribution pursuant to section 96E of the Election Funding, Expenditure and Disclosures Act 1981 in relation to advertising published in The Weekly Times on 1, 7, 15, and 22 August 2012, and also 29 August and 5 September 2012.

Full report here.

Monday 17 October 2016

Australia has joined the Open Government Partnership (OGP) - but will that make a difference?



The Gillard Government committed to this organisation's principles on 22 May 2013:

According to the France and the World Resources Institute Co-Chair Declaration for OGP, October 2016 - September 2017; Establishing an open government is essential for the renewal of democracy and public action. Open government is building a world where increased government transparency and stronger accountability to citizens leads to greater prosperity and wellbeing. A world in which access to information restores faith in government and rekindles a desire among citizens to engage with public officials and build trust. A world where open government means government for the people and which serves the larger public interest. A world where collective wisdom reinforces public action to address the great challenges facing our planet.

Unfortunately the level of redactions in Freedom of Information (FOI) documents supplied by Australian federal governments to date frequently makes a mockery of these aims.

Right to Know is a website dedicated to Australian requests for information made under FOI legislation.

If readers are interested they may browse the available requests as well as documents supplied here.

An est. 2.99 million people including 731,300 children are living below the poverty line in Australia, the 15th richest country in the world today


This was the Australian Council of Social Services (ACOSS) tweeting on 15 October 2016 on the eve of Anti-Poverty Week, in the 15th richest nation in the world based on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita.

And these are some of the statistics informing its comment on the entrenched inequality in federal government economic and social policy in a country where in 2016 every person is nominally worth an est. $48,288 GDP per annum. 

Snapshot of poverty in Australia – in 2014:
· The poverty line (50% of median income) for a single adult was $426.30 a week. For a couple with 2 children, it was $895.22 a week.
· 2,990,300 million people (13.3% of the population), were living below the poverty line, after taking account of their housing costs.
· 731,300 children under the age of 15 (17.4% of all children) were living below the poverty line.
· Child poverty in Australia increased by 2 percentage points over the decade 200304 to 2013- 14.
· 36.1% of people receiving social security payments were living below the poverty line, including 55% of those receiving Newstart Allowance, 51.5% receiving Parenting Payment, 36.2% of those receiving Disability Support Pension, 24.3% receiving Carer Payment, and 13.9% of those on the Age Pension.
· 57.3% of people below the poverty line relied upon social security as their main income and 32.1% relied upon wages as their main income.
· Between 2012 and 2014, poverty rates increased for: children in lone parent families (36.8 to 40.6%), those receiving Youth Allowance (50.6 to 51.8% and those receiving Parenting Payment (47.2 to 51.5%). They remained very high (61.4% to 59.9%) from 2007 to 2014 for unemployed households.
· The vast majority of people below the poverty line were in rental housing in 2014 (59.7%), with most in private rental housing (44.2%). Only 15.5% of people living below the poverty line were home-owners.
The Poverty in Australia Report 2016 was produced in partnership with the Social Policy Research Centre at the University of NSW, with the support of the Australian Communities Foundation (Social Justice Fund), St Vincent de Paul Society, Mission Australia, and the Salvation Army. [ACOSS, 16 October 2016]


The ACOSS media release of 16 October stated:

The Australian Council of Social Service (ACOSS) today released a new report showing that 731,300 children or 17.4% of all children in Australia are living in poverty, an increase of 2 percentage points over the past 10 years (from 2004-2014).
The report finds that nearly three million people were living in poverty in Australia in 2014, or 13.3% of the general population.
“The overall picture from the last decade is one of persistent and entrenched poverty across the community with an increase in child poverty.
It is a national shame that after 25 years of economic growth, we have not done better at changing this trajectory and ensuring our most precious national resource, our children, are given the best possible start in life,” said ACOSS CEO Dr Cassandra Goldie.
“Those most at risk are children in lone parent families, who are more than three times likely to be living in poverty (40.6%) than those from couple families (12.5%). Since 2012, the poverty rate for children in lone parent families has gone up from 36.8 to 40.6%.
“The housing profile of people below poverty highlights the concentration of disadvantage in the rental market. The vast majority of people below the poverty line are in rental housing (59.7%), with most in private rental housing (44.2%). Only 15.5% of people living below the poverty line were home-owners.
“The report confirms that people who are unemployed are at greatest risk of poverty, with 63.2% living in poverty. Unsurprisingly, the majority of people below the poverty line relied on social security as their main source of income (57.3%), but a significant proportion received wages as their main income (32%). This indicates that having a job is no guarantee of keeping people above the breadline, especially if the job is low paying and insecure.
“Our report shows those doing it the toughest are overwhelmingly people living on the $38 a day Newstart payment, 55% of whom are in poverty. This is followed by families on Parenting Payment (51.5%), the majority of whom are lone parents with children.
“This report is a further wake up call to the Government to address the inadequacy of the lowest income support payments and bolster support to low income families through the family payments system. It is also a reminder that housing remains the biggest cost of living issue for households and must be addressed as a policy priority.
“Newstart and Youth Allowance are $110 and $158 a week below the poverty line respectively. Along with improvements to training and employment supports, an increase to these payments of at least $50 a week would go some way to alleviating poverty and improve people’s chances of finding paid work.
“The alarming increase in child poverty revealed by this report should also act as an urgent appeal to senators to reject further cuts to family payments, currently before the upper house. The cuts would strip another $60 a week from single parent families. The current proposal to withhold Newstart support for young people for up to four weeks should also be rejected. Both proposals would likely lead to increased poverty.
“At the start of Anti-Poverty Week, we call on all political leaders to put reducing poverty at the centre of the policy agenda. This must include assessing the poverty impact of all major policy changes,” Dr Goldie said.
The OECD Pensions At A Glance 2015 statistics indicate that 36 per cent of Australians receiving the aged pension also live below the poverty line – that’s well over 800,000 older people.
The Turnbull Government, like the Abbott Government before it, will quickly blame the poor for this problem as an excuse for inaction on its part.

This Anti-Poverty Week we can all email or ‘phone our federal MPs and senators and tell them there is no excuse for this level of poverty in a country which has experienced twenty-five years of continuous economic growth.

Contact details for member of parliament can be found at: http://www.aph.gov.au/Senators_and_Members/Members

Sunday 16 October 2016

Not impressed by the arguments made for shark netting the NSW Far North Coast


The following article was one of the more balanced media reports on shark attacks on the NSW North Coast since the fatality at Ballina in 2015.

A fatality which brought shark attack deaths in the region to seven in thirty-four years – that is, an average of one fatality every 4.85 years.

The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 October 2016:

The Baird government's decision to drop its opposition to shark nets for the state's northern beaches ignored recommendations of one of its own departments and the scientific consensus, experts say.

Another shark bite last week – the sixth since the start of 2015 for the Ballina-Byron area alone – was the last straw for Premier Mike Baird. On Wednesday, he explained his backflip, saying it was time to "prioritise human life over everything".

Only one fatality has been recorded in the state's 51 netted beaches since their introduction in Sydney in 1937, back in 1951. There have, though, been 33 so-called unprovoked attacks some serious ones.

"We need some sort of protection," said Richard Beckers, owner of Ballina Surf shop and a supporter of the nets.

Mr Beckers said he had cancelled $100,000 in orders after two incidents in as many weeks. Sales of body and surf boards have dived about 90 per cent as surfers head to beaches considered safer elsewhere….

Until last week, Mr Baird – himself a keen surfer – had resisted calls for the nets. Instead, he heeded advice from scientists who argue there is little evidence nets alone make beaches safer while killing thousands of marine creatures over the years.

The policy reversal "is a political decision – it's not based on data," said Culum Brown, an associate professor at Macquarie University. "The costs are well known and there's little to nothing in terms of benefits."

Existing nets are typically 150 metres long and about six metres deep, allowing plenty of space for sharks to get around, over or under them.

A parliamentary inquiry earlier this year recommended the Department of Primary Industries "move toward replacement of current shark meshing with more ecologically sustainable technologies".

Colin Simpfendorfer, director of the Centre for Sustainable Tropical Fisheries and Aquaculture at James Cook University, said great white sharks have been protected for two decades in a bid to reverse their population's steep decline.

"The whole point [of nets] is that they catch sharks," Professor Simpfendorfer said. "You are looking to reduce the abundance of sharks where people want to swim."

The 189 sea creatures caught in the existing nets in 2014-15 included 44 target sharks – whites, tigers and bulls – as well as harmless shark species, dolphins and turtles. Of these, 116 died before they could be released, government data shows.

Over the past century, the national annual deaths from sharks is 1.3 people on average, rising to two people during the past five years, according to Taronga Zoo's shark file. Australians make an estimated 100 million visits to the beach a year.

By contrast, five people died from dogs in 2013, with 44 killed by falling out of bed, the Australian Bureau of Statistics said.

"You're more likely to get killed by bees or by horses than by sharks," Professor Brown said.

Of course the NSW Coalition Government, and particularly Premier Mike Baird furiously chasing electoral popularity in the face of falling poll numbers, is not inclined to step back from the recent back flip on shark netting.

Readers can make up their own minds about whether trying to lay shark netting on the NSW Far North Coast in the face of an increasingly warm and fast Australian Eastern Current and frequently gale-driven coastal seas is going to work.

The Baird Government's $16 million attempt earlier this year to install shark netting at Lighthouse Beach, Ballina and Seven Mile Beach, Lennox Head failed miserably due to predictable rough conditions, large swells and sand movement along the coast.

Below are excerpts from Changing patterns of shark attacks in Australian waters (2011) by John G. West Coordinator, Australian Shark Attack File, Taronga Conservation Society Australia.

ABSTRACT. Although infrequent, shark attacks attract a high level of public and media interest, and often have serious consequences for those attacked.
Data from the Australian Shark Attack File were examined to determine trends in unprovoked shark attacks since 1900, particularly over the past two decades.
The way people use the ocean has changed over time. The rise in Australian shark attacks, from an average of 6.5 incidents per year in 1990–2000, to 15 incidents per year over the past decade, coincides with an increasing human population, more people visiting beaches, a rise in the popularity of water-based fitness and recreational activities and people accessing previously isolated coastal areas.
There is no evidence of increasing shark numbers that would influence the rise of attacks in Australian waters. The risk of a fatality from shark attack in Australia remains low, with an average of 1.1 fatalities year1 over the past 20 years.
The increase in shark attacks over the past two decades is consistent with international statistics of shark attacks increasing annually because of the greater numbers of people in the water.
RESULTS
Over the 218 years for which records were available, there have been 592 recorded unprovoked incidents in Australian waters, comprising 178 fatalities, 322 injuries and 92 incidents where no injury occurred.
Most of these attacks have occurred since 1900, with 540 recorded unprovoked attacks, including 153 fatalities, 302 injuries and 85 incidents where no injury occurred.
Attacks have occurred around most of the Australian coast, most frequently on the more densely populated eastern coast and near major cities (Fig. 1).
In the first half of the 20th century, there was an increase in the number of recorded shark attacks, culminating in a peak in the 1930s when there were 74 incidents (Fig. 2).
The number of attacks then dropped, to stabilise ,35 incidents per decade from the 1940s to the 1970s. Since 1980, the number of reported attacks has increased to 121 incidents in the past decade (Fig. 2).
There had been a decrease in the average annual fatality rate, which had fallen from a peak of 3.4 year1 in the 1930s, to an average of 1.1 year1 for the past two decades.
The number of fatal attacks relative to the number of total attacks per decade has also decreased over this period, from 45% in the 1930s to 10% in the past decade. These declining chances of a shark attack resulting in fatality are also reported elsewhere in the world (Woolgar et al. 2001; Burgess 2009).
In the 20-year period of the 1930s and 1940s, the fatality ratio was 1:2.4 incidents. In the past 20 years, the fatality ratio has been 1:8.5 incidents.
Comparison of attacks per capita indicated that the number of incidents was highest in the 1930s, at 10 attacks per million people per decade, decreasing to an average of 3.3 attacks per million people per decade until the 1990s.
The past two decades have exhibited an increase in attacks, up to 3.5 attacks per million people per decade (1990–1999) and 5.4 attacks per million people per decade 2000–2009 (Fig. 3).
In the 20 years since 1990, there have been 186 reported incidents, including 22 fatalities (Table 1).
This represents a 16% increase in reported attacks during 1990–1999 and a 25% increase over the past 10 years (Fig. 3).
The majority of attacks occurred in New South Wales (NSW) with 73 incidents (39%), then Queensland with 43 incidents (23%), Western Australia (WA) with 35 incidents (19%), South Australia with 20 incidents (11%), Victoria with 12 incidents (6%), Tasmania with two incidents (1.5%) and Northern Territory with one incident (0.5%)
CONCLUSION
Patterns of attack have changed substantially over time as a result of the changing population and human behaviour.
If human activity related to water-based activities and the use of beaches, harbours and rivers continues to change, we can expect to see further changes in the patterns, distribution, frequency and types of attacks in the future.
Encounters with sharks, although a rare event, will continue to occur if humans continue to enter the ocean professionally or for recreational pursuit.
It is important to keep the risk of a shark attack in perspective. On average, 87 people drown at Australian beaches each year (SLSA 2010), yet there have been, on average, only 1.1 fatalities per year from shark attack over the past two decades.
It is clear that the risk of being bitten or dying from an unprovoked shark attack in Australia remains extremely low.
According to Taronga Conservation Society there have been 216 recorded unprovoked shark attacks in New South Wales in the last 100 years of which 48 were fatal. 

UPDATE

The unintended impacts of shark mesh was on show on Saturday, with a juvenile humpback whale becoming entangled in a net near Coolangatta on the Gold Coast. The calf's mother helped keep the animal near the surface long enough for a patrol to arrive and cut the whale free. [The Sydney Morning Herald, 15 October 2016]

in 1951, New South Wales recorded its worst year of shark encounters at netted beaches, with three separate incidents, including the fatality of local surf ski champion Frank Olkulich (21) who was fatality bitten at a Newcastle Beach called Merewether while treading water……In the 23 years, since September 1992, there has been 21 unwanted shark encounters at netted beaches in NSW; almost one per year*. This doesn’t include the death of a 15-year old boy who drowned after being caught in a shark net at Shoal Bay in March 2007.[3] It does however include the shark incident on 12 February 2009 at Bondi Beach when Glen Orgias (33) lost his left hand after being bitten by a 2.5m white shark while surfing and the severe bite that Andrew Lindop (15) received by a suspected 2.6m white shark at Avalon Beach on 1 March 2009……In January 2012, surfer Glen Folkard was severely bitten by a bull shark at Redhead Beach, north of Sydney. This incident is still waiting a review by DPI, New South Wales, and, along with another two unwanted shark encounters at meshed beaches, was meant to be part of the programme’s 5-year review in September 2014. At the time of this article, this review has still not been finalised. [Sea Shepherd, 5 August 2015]