NSW - Brace for Extreme Fire Hazards on Tuesday 8th

Temperatures for Sydney are set to reach 43oC tomorrow (BOM, 1/7) as very hot winds drift in from the west.

People across NSW and Eastern Australia are warned to be especially cautious as some areas are set to reach the ‘catastrophic’ danger level. The rest of the state is under total fire ban, with an 'extreme’ danger level.

The Illawarra, Shoalhaven and Southern Ranges have a fire danger rating of Catastrophic. Widespread areas of the State have a fire danger rating of Extreme.

Do not enter any national parks or similar areas and stay alert for any warnings.

For updates and regional information:




anonymous asked:

just wondering, what's your opinion on how Norway instituted absolute primogeniture but it not affecting the immediate succession/CP Haakon and Princess Martha Louise? Do you know why they did it that way?

Well, the difference between Norway introducing the absolute primogeniture without retroactive effect and Sweden doing it with retroactive effect is that Norway changed the primogeniture in 1990 when Märtha Louise and Haakon were 19 and 17, respectively, whereas in Sweden, the change was introduced in 1979 (the same year in which Carl Philip was born) and came into effect in 1980 when Carl Philip wasn’t even a year old. So whereas changing the succession retroactively would be a huge gamechanger for both Haakon and Märtha Louise in 1990 (both probably resigned to their respective futures), the change in Sweden virtually had no effect on Victoria and Carl Philip’s lives because they were so young.

I think each country made the right decision. I can totally follow that it would be a bit of a mess to make such a life altering change to Haakon and (especially) Märtha Louise when they were that old, but it absolutely makes sense to me that Victoria was made Crown Princess over Carl Philip. And as for the people crying “INJUSTICE TO THE POOR BOY :((((( SEXISM :((((( UNFAIR :((((”, the absolute same can be said about the entire concept of both agnatic and male-preference primogeniture. Victoria was “robbed” first, she’s her father’s firstborn child and honestly, if you think it’s any more unfair to “rob” Carl Philip of his title than to deny Victoria her rightful title, you’re a sexist.

I think what’s intriguing about these two changes of primogeniture is the fact that whereas CG opposed Sweden’s change (bc poor eight month old baby’s life is gonna b changed 5ever), Harald actively supported Norway’s changed (and has since implied that it was about time it was changed). Neither of them would have been on the throne themselves, had absolute primogeniture been in effect when they were born so I think their respective reactions says a lot about who they are.