R.G.Menzies above

The original version of this blog is HERE. Dissecting Leftism is HERE (and mirrored here). The Blogroll. My Home Page. Email me (John Ray) here. Other mirror sites: Greenie Watch, Political Correctness Watch, Education Watch, Immigration Watch, Food & Health Skeptic, Gun Watch, Socialized Medicine, Eye on Britain, Recipes and Tongue Tied. For a list of backups viewable in China, see here. (Click "Refresh" on your browser if background colour is missing) See here or here for the archives of this site


Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?

****************************************************************************************



30 April, 2011

Abuse in lieu of reason again -- from a Watermelon, of course

"Scepticism is bastardry", says head of ACF

THE president of the Australian Conservation Foundation has attacked the "scientific bastardry" of climate change sceptics amid weakening public consensus that humans are to blame.

Ian Lowe, who is also professor of science, technology and society at Griffith University, lamented the narrowing of the carbon tax debate.

He said it was "naive" to believe putting a price on carbon was the solution to the problem, arguing the carbon price would have to rise to "politically unrealistic" levels if it was to drive the transition away from coal-fired power.

He said other complementary measures would be needed to encourage renewable energy.

Addressing a conference in Melbourne organised by the academics' union, the National Tertiary Education Union, Professor Lowe called on scientists to become more active in promoting the scientific evidence of human-induced climate change.

"As a profession who are paid from the public purse, it is a fundamental part of our responsibility to the community to be engaged in the public debate about these issues," he said.

He said the evidence for human-induced climate change was backed by virtually all scientists. He described the views of climate change sceptics as "illegitimate arguments that you could call scientific bastardry".

SOURCE




Julia Gillard no hope of going the distance, says Tony Abbott

TONY Abbott has completed a week of election-style campaigning with a prediction the Gillard government will crumble before completing its term.

The Opposition Leader has criss-crossed the nation in the past week, swooping on the advantage given to him by Julia Gillard's absence from the country to further exert pressure on a government he now views as unsustainable.

He has sought to squeeze Labor's most sensitive political points, highlighting asylum-seeker unrest, community discontent with the carbon tax and ongoing violence and alcohol abuse in indigenous communities in the Northern Territory.

Speaking to The Weekend Australian yesterday, Mr Abbott said he did not expect the government to go its full term because of the mounting pressure of unpopular policies and an untenable governing position.

"This is a very fragile government with a sense of impermanence about it," he said. "I have no expectation that any of the independents are going to come knocking on my door anytime soon. And I have no expectation that a disgruntled Labor backbencher or frontbencher is going to resign anytime soon. Nevertheless, it is such an obviously incompetent government and it is in such a difficult parliamentary position that it is hard to imagine this shambles surviving for another 2 1/2 years."

Mr Abbott has taken full advantage of the Prime Minister's absence while she travelled to South Korea, Japan, China and Britain, attending yesterday's royal wedding.

The Opposition Leader said the current political climate made him feel as though he was in a "continuous campaign".

Earlier in the week, he travelled to the Christmas Island detention centre, which has been rocked by riots, as well as OneSteel's headquarters in Whyalla, South Australia, which he warned would be "wiped off the map" under a carbon tax.

On Wednesday, he arrived in Alice Springs to highlight problems in the town and outback indigenous communities, consulting with local politicians and indigenous leaders over his proposed "second intervention". While defending Ms Gillard's right to travel overseas and attend events such as the royal wedding, Mr Abbott also took a political potshot at the Prime Minister for not accompanying him to central Australia despite a standing invitation.

"Everybody understands the Prime Minister has to travel. Everyone expects the Prime Minister to go to the royal wedding.

"But I was a little disappointed that she wasn't prepared to come as part of a bipartisan joint visit or at least thus far hasn't been prepared to come under those circumstances."

Wayne Swan has been increasingly talking up the likelihood of a tough federal budget next month, but Mr Abbott said he doubted the government would make spending reductions where necessary. Instead, he said, it would favour "sneaky" cuts.

"This government has talked about a tough budget, but they have never delivered one," he said. "Every year they talk about how tough their budget is going to be, but none of their budgets have been at all tough.

"I suspect this budget will be tougher than previous ones, but I doubt very much there is going to be serious systemic cuts."

However, Mr Abbott said the Coalition would not be outlining its own list of budget savings, as it did before last year's election and before the introduction of the flood levy.

"In good time before the next election we will publish a detailed statement as to how our policies are going to be funded. But I don't think you should expect from us an alternative saving list to accompany this budget," he said.

SOURCE






Nambour Hospital procedures reviewed after boy dies of rare condition

QUEENSLAND Health has promised to review child assessment procedures at Nambour Hospital after a heart-wrenching campaign by the parents of a little boy who died while waiting to see a doctor.

Andrew and Trudy Olive, of Mooloolah on the Sunshine Coast, lost their four-year-old son Tom after an emergency department ordeal on August 25 last year.

In The Courier-Mail on January 26, they called for an investigation into Tom's treatment so other families did not suffer the same anguish.

They revealed every parent's worst nightmare where no doctor was on hand, a student nurse attended the boy with faulty equipment and Mr Olive had been forced to start CPR on his dying son when medical staff failed to notice his heart had stopped. Tests have since confirmed Tom died as the result of an episode brought on by a hereditary muscle-destroying disease that has claimed only a handful of lives worldwide.

The outcry brought an offer from Queensland Health management to sit down with the Olives. Mr Olive said he and Trudy felt that the latest meeting last week was a breakthrough and brought an acknowledgement that more could have been done to save Tom.

"I outlined that basic mistakes had been made at the assessment level. All the warning signs were there that Tom was dangerously ill and they were all ignored," he said.

"His temperature was low at 33.9C, his heart was racing, he was slipping in and out of consciousness and there were indications the potassium levels in his blood were soaring, which can mean cardiac arrest is imminent. And here we were in the corner with a Uni student and nurse for 30 minutes."

The latest meeting was attended by Sunshine Coast Health District chief executive Kevin Hegarty, regional Director of Emergency Medicine Dr Stephen Priestley, pediatrician Dr Tom Hurley, district executive Jackie Hanson and the Olive's solicitor Peter Boyce.

Mr Olive said the outcome was hospital management had agreed to look at what measures they could put in place to ensure what happened to Tom never happened again. "They promised us they would review procedures in the emergency department at Nambour and come back to us within a month of the April 18 meeting with a document outlining the improvements."

Mr Hegarty said the hospital would look at the Emergency Department issues raised by the Olives. "While the clinical review indicated that Thomas's treatment was appropriate, we have undertaken to Mr and Mrs Olive that we will write to them in a month indicating any changes that are being made to emergency department procedures in response to their concerns," he said. Hegarty declined to answer which issues would be looked at.

The Olives are expecting another child in two weeks and while their three-year-old daughter Laura has been cleared of having the double mutation of the LPIN1 gene that killed her brother, a sample of their baby's blood will have to be sent to Paris for testing.

Mr Olive said their new daughter would have a one in four chance of inheriting the disease, but there would be a management plan available if she did.

In recent months, the Olives have discovered a family in Port Macquarie who lost their eight-year-old boy a day before Tom to the same illness. They also have connected with a Victorian family, whose two-year-old has survived it. All three boys have two things in common, the illness and sharing the name Thomas.

An LPIN1 awareness and support page has been set up on Facebook and the Olives have plans for a "Shine for Thomas Foundation" to raise funds to have testing, currently only available in France, performed in Australia.

There has been no decision as to if, or when, a coronial inquest will be held into Tom's death as investigations are ongoing. The Olives are eagerly awaiting a response from the Coroner and are seeking an immediate investigation.

SOURCE







Playground stimulus

Dr Oliver Marc Hartwich

My wife and I spent the long weekend in the NSW Central West. The air was crisp, the sun shining, and the autumn leaves glowed in all shades of orange. However, even in this picture-perfect idyll of countryside Australia, you are never far from government folly.

On Easter Sunday we visited Carcoar. A heritage listed village, guidebooks describe Carcoar as one of the historic gems of the area. Rightly so: three old churches, a few former bank buildings and an Italian style courthouse remind tourists of Carcoar’s proud past. Today, however, they look grossly out of proportion in a village of 218 people.

The world probably only became aware of Carcoar’s existence when a double axe murder happened there in September 1893. The other highlights in the village’s history were the shutdown of the Carcoar Chronicle in 1943, the closure of the court in the 1950s, and the discontinuation of the railway station in 1974.

By all accounts, Carcoar is not so much a dying village as it is a dead village. Indeed, that’s what makes it such as charming place to visit – it is frozen in a time long gone by. But one thing most certainly it is not: a thriving, developing settlement.

The Australian government does not agree with this assessment. At the edge of Carcoar, in front of a small playground (without any children in sight) are two big signs. One reads ‘Nation Building – Economic Stimulus Plan supporting jobs and building our infrastructure for the future.’ The other explains that the junior swing, the small slide, and the little rocker were ‘funded through the Australian Government’s Community Infrastructure Program.’

As it turns out, the Carcoar playground was one of five ‘stimulus’ projects undertaken by Blayney Shire Council, which cost a total of $289,000. The last census counted only 34 children in Carcoar. The village’s median age in 2006 was 50 – higher than Japan’s. And Carcoar is shrinking further as local house prices under $150,000 demonstrate.

How a new playground in a fossilised village can amount to ‘nation building’ is a government secret. They could have just as well repainted the disused railway station or installed a new dock in the closed courthouse.

In two weeks’ time, Treasurer Wayne Swan will present a budget that is already foreshadowed as ‘tough’ and a deficit that will look frighteningly high for times of near full employment. For a government engaging in nation building in dead villages, this should not surprise anyone.

The above is a press release from the Centre for Independent Studies, dated 29 April. Enquiries to cis@cis.org.au. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590.





Wedding ban attracts immature reaction

Christopher Pearson

MICHAEL Shmith is a senior arts journalist with The Age. His mother's second marriage was to Lord Harewood who, as well as being an opera impresario, is a grandson of George V and a first cousin of the Queen.

Shmith has spent a good deal of time in the company of his stepfather and that branch of the family, so his response to the news that the Chaser team had been prevented from providing a running commentary on the royal wedding on ABC2 came as something of a surprise.

"Call it what you will, fetch whichever cutting device you wish from the toolshed, this is, to me, nothing short of censorship. Worse, it is censorship initiated not by the broadcasters concerned but from within the severe stucco Nash facade of Clarence House . . . How narrow-minded, how unnecessary."

No doubt there are people who imagine comedians are somehow entitled, as of right, to footage of the royal wedding and that being denied it is a form of artistic or political censorship, but Shmith really ought to know better. Would he expect the Pope to grant the Chaser team a live feed of Easter mass at St Peter's, for example?

Of course he wouldn't, because as an arts editor he'd know that the head of the Catholic Church has intellectual property rights in that celebration, not to mention the performances of the Sistine Chapel choir, and rights over permitting film crews access to the building. The Pope also has obligations to prevent the solemnities over which he presides and the Petrine office itself being profaned or, with his consent, held up to ridicule.

The comparison with the Queen is precise because she too is head of a sovereign state and supreme governor of the Church of England.

She has intellectual property rights and powers over what happens in Westminster Abbey, a church that comes into the category of "a royal peculiar institution".

Like the Pope, she is sworn to uphold the Church of England and the dignity of its solemnities. She is also duty bound in a special way that does not apply to popes, who are elected, to uphold the honour of her own dynasty and its rites of passage: coronations, baptisms, weddings and funerals.

Given the Chaser team's weakness for stunts in questionable taste, not to put too fine a point on the matter, it's perfectly understandable that Clarence House should have refused permission.

The wonder is, rather, that the BBC and the ABC could have imagined that the Windsors would meekly submit to such mockery.

It probably confirms most people's suspicions about the level of staff-capture in the highest echelons of both institutions.

The Age wasn't the only organ of the wet Left to wax indignant.

The Jesuits' online journal Eureka Street published a piece by Ellena Savage, the immediate past editor of Melbourne University's student magazine Farrago.

"Clarence House's ban on ABC's The Chaser's Royal Wedding Commentary has irreparably undermined the House of Windsor in Australia."

What's more: "Its effective ban on democratic media representation provides a welcome jolt back to reality. British monarchy is not the benevolent and benign institution we pretended it was, but a neurotic, self-perpetuating liability.

"It was their benevolence alone that guaranteed our unquestioned support, or at least tolerance, of their persistence as anachronistic figureheads in our parliamentary structure."

This is all pretty silly, even by the standards of student magazines, and the fact a Jesuit organisation chose to publish it goes a long way towards explaining why the phrase "Catholic intellectual" nowadays strikes so many people as an oxymoron. But there's worse to come.

According to Savage: "We consume the Windsors as we do soap operas. We want them to get fat and to struggle. Celebrity culture is fundamentally about schadenfreude, even where it is disguised as idolatry."

While I've no doubt that's how Savage sees Prince William and his bride, I think most of the people in Australia, as well as Britain, who are the least bit interested in the royal wedding will think they're an attractive pair, recognise that Catherine Middleton has taken on a very demanding role and wish them well.

In the same way, people of goodwill habitually wish luck and perseverance to any couple who embark on a life commitment to one another in full knowledge of the difficulties in living up to their vows.

Judging from the Chaser team's statement in response to the ban, it's hard to imagine that we'll have missed much: "To ensure that our coverage was respectful, we were only planning to use jokes that Prince Philip has previously made in public or at least the ones that don't violate racial vilification laws."

Now if the Chaser team were half as anarchic and politically incorrect as they claim to be, they'd at least give Prince Philip some credit for speaking his mind. As things stand, their parasitic relationship to the people and institutions they hold up to derision is plain for all to see.

The ABC's director of television, Kim Dalton, had the effrontery to say he was "surprised and disappointed" by Clarence House's intervention, adding "we are a mature enough country to enjoy this particular take on this event". However, the truth is that the Chaser's stunts were always undergraduate and appealed to a streak of immaturity in its audience. As well, assuring us that we're "mature enough" is an attempt to ingratiate, transparent enough to be offensive, which had well and truly passed its use-by date long ago, during the republican referendum debate.

Instead, what the public was entitled to expect from Dalton was a grovelling apology that the national broadcaster had even considered commissioning that sort of immature commentary.

If there is any lingering suspicion that the royal family is humourless or overly censorious, readers should remember that Dame Edna Everage was allowed a part in the proceedings, as she had been in the jubilee celebrations and command performances. In this respect she is like King Lear's jester, the "all-licensed fool". Edna's wit is no less anarchic than the Chaser team's. It's just better judged and funnier.

SOURCE



29 April, 2011

Another Greenie scheme implodes

NSW solar bonus scheme suspended

THE NSW Government has suspended the Solar Bonus Scheme due to cost blowouts.

No new applications will be considered while the future viability of the program is considered next week, Energy Minister Chris Hartcher announced today. Mr Hartcher said the scheme would add an estimated $651 million to the budget deficit over the four years to 2014-15.

The scheme pays householders for all energy generated by residential solar panels, including what they use themselves as well as what they feed into the grid. But it ran into trouble last year when the Government was forced to slash the feed-in tariff.

Responding to spiralling demand for the scheme, the former Labor government cut the tariff from 60 to 20 cents per kilowatt hour (kWh), to curb the take-up and future price hikes for customers not signed up to the program.

Mr Hartcher said all applications currently under consideration would continue to be processed.

The scheme was set up by the previous Labor government and was expected to run until 2016. "People in the scheme are not affected," Mr Hartcher said in Sydney.

Closing the scheme permanently to new applications and opportunities to limit cost blowouts to the existing scheme will be considered at the government's promised Solar Summit on May 6.

SOURCE





Expert warns carbon tax is 'crazy'

Professor Bob Carter, speaking in Mackay, would rather see the government spend money on ‘climate reality’

QUEENSLAND’S resources sector and every day families would suffer for nothing if the Federal Government introduced a carbon tax, a Mackay forum heard last night.

Climate scientist Professor Bob Carter and Institute of Public Affairs (IPA) executive director John Roskam told the forum that a carbon tax would disproportionately impact Australia’s north and have a very negligible effect on reducing emissions.

Meanwhile, Mackay businesses reliant on the resources sector expressed concern that a carbon tax would eventually lead to mining companies looking overseas for exploration, resulting in a large downturn in the economy and local job losses.

Yesterday, Professor Bob Carter told the Daily Mercury that a carbon tax would cost Australia trillions of dollars and it would be better if the Federal Government spent money on dealing with “climate reality” by building cyclone and bushfire centres.

Prof Carter, who has studied ancient climate change, said there was no doubt human activity impacted global temperatures.

However, he said this was insignificant in the context of natural climate change and policy makers needed to abandon the “illusionary goal of preventing global warming by reducing carbon emissions”.

“Climate change always occurs.

"It is certain that humans have an affect on climate locally,” he said. “No scientist on the planet doubts that humans have an effect on temperature locally. Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse and there is more in the atmosphere the extra amount of warming is so tiny we can’t measure it – so what’s the problem?”

Mr Roskin told the 120-odd people at last night’s forum that a carbon tax would have no real environmental benefit, but would hurt northern Australia’s “great economic potential”.

He said there was the real threat that mining companies would take investment elsewhere, resulting in widespread job losses.

The Federal Government plans to introduce a carbon price from July 1, 2012.

Yesterday, Treasurer Wayne Swan said setting a carbon price was a necessary move to low pollution economy and defended union claims it could wipe out industrial jobs. “For anyone to say that this transition doesn’t have to happen or should be put in the too-hard basket or should be delayed - what they are really saying is they have given up on jobs,” Mr Swan said.

However, the government has conceded that a carbon tax would impact on living costs. A treasury analysis has showed households may pay $863 a year more for food, petrol, gas and power.

Prof Carter said the cost of a carbon tax was “absolutely enormous” and described it as “crazy”.

He said the Federal Government would be better off focusing a policy which dealt with the reality of climate change and invest in disaster centres and more disaster equipment, such as firefighting helicopters.

SOURCE




Carrot approach replaces big stick in Queensland prisons

Another triumph of theory over reality

JAIL staff banned from punishing unruly prisoners could now be ordered to reward them for toeing the line. Prisoners who are polite, undertake work and stay off drugs look set to be offered inducements such as extra jail visits, phone calls, better accommodation and more recreation.

A leaked memo obtained by The Courier-Mail revealed Queensland Corrective Services had developed the framework for a new reward scheme.

The change of philosophy in prisoner management comes after a 2009 Ombudsman's report criticised the agency's approach to prisoner discipline and a year after officers were stripped of disciplinary powers. Now in an attempt to appease frontline staff, QCS has proposed working groups starting this week develop policy recommendations on how to manage criminals through inducements.

QCS deputy commissioner Marlene Morison said it would be the first broad policy of rewarding prisoners to be implemented in the state's 15 jails.

Inmates who remained incident and drug free, were employed, completed required programs and training, maintained good relationships with other prisoners and who were "polite and co-operative" would be rewarded. "This ranges from access to the range of privileges (e.g. visits, phone calls) through to access of less restrictive environments (e.g. residential accommodation or low custody) to additional access to recreation ... " the memo said.

Ms Morison said well-behaved prisoners could also score better jobs while in jail. "It is as much about ensuring poor behaviour has a fair and real consequence as it is about giving reasons for prisoners to behave well," she said. Prison expert Dr Dot Goulding, of Curtin University, called the plan a "huge step forward".

"I'm delighted to hear that someone has some vision that the stick doesn't always work; sometimes the carrot and reward system is a far better way of looking at things," she said. "(The plan) is looking at positives rather than just the negative and to prepare these people to be job-ready and ready to be law-abiding citizens in the community."

However, Opposition corrective services spokesman John-Paul Langbroek said the plan reeked of desperation. "Prison officers have been forced to resort to (this plan) ... just to get unruly prisoners to behave," he said. "The establishment of this working group was an admission that Labor's soft prisoner discipline system was a complete failure and needed to be fixed."

Ms Morison said the plan's draft policy would be developed by the end of next month and available for consultation with staff and the Queensland Public Sector Union, which represents prison officers.

SOURCE





No money for lifesaving drugs but plenty of money for a useless fibre network

THE government's dilemma over funding new medicines has deepened with its expert panel recommending another six significant drug treatments for prescription subsidies.

The drugs join seven others that have been recommended for the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme, but which cabinet had deferred acting on for budgetary reasons.

The new drugs to join the waiting list include novel or revised treatments for colon cancer, multiple sclerosis, bipolar disorder and hypertension.

The government's decision to pit cost-saving against potential life-saving measures has drawn criticism from doctors and patient groups for undermining the evidence-based process for determining which drugs get subsidised.

The outcry has prompted the Health Minister, Nicola Roxon, to attend a summit in Melbourne tomorrow to face consumer, pharmaceutical and medical groups.

For scheme listing, drugs require a positive finding from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Advisory Committee and, after pricing negotiations, a decision of cabinet. But critics say the deferral for budgetary reasons in the listing of recommended drugs has undermined the committee and threatens to turn the process into a more politicised contest subject to intense lobbying from drug companies.

Drugs on the scheme, that can cost up to thousands of dollars each treatment, are available to patients for between $5 and $34 a prescription.

Cancer Council Australia's chief executive, Ian Olver, said the government's approach to the listing of new drugs was a "very worrying" development for cancer treatment.

"Over the years the PBAC has served us well in the very difficult area of balancing patient benefits with the cost of new drugs," Professor Olver said.

The Consumers Health Forum chief executive, Carol Bennett, said the addition of the new recommended drugs would "further compound the issue" for the government in choosing which drugs to subsidise. "It attacks the principle of safeguarding a cost-effective system that is the envy of the world," Ms Bennett said.

Her organisation and affiliated patients groups had received hundreds of complaints from patients affected by the deferral of scheme listings.

Anger over the issue has drawn together organisations including Medicines Australia and the Generic Medicines Industry Association, the Australian Medical Association, a variety of patient groups and the Consumers Health Forum who will attend tomorrow's meeting.

In February Ms Roxon announced the cabinet had deferred recommendations of the advisory committee to list six medicines and a vaccine, including medicines to treat chronic disabling pain and lung disease.

SOURCE







Australia's rejection of "asylum seeker" claims stokes detention centre unrest

IMMIGRATION officials have begun delivering a fresh round of rejections to detainees on Christmas Island, sparking concerns of more unrest.

A detainee who received one of the rejections this week sewed his lips together. A fellow detainee was found pacing the detention centre with razors in his mouth.

The Australian has been told that the Immigration Department is in the process of handing down about 200 decisions to asylum-seekers on Christmas Island and, in keeping with recent rejection rates, many of them will be what are termed "negatives".

Yesterday, protests and disputes continued at Villawood and the island's family camp but federal police and guards succeeded in ending a three-day rooftop protest at the Christmas Island detention centre by locking more than 1000 fellow detainees in their compounds on Wednesday night.

The men on the roof were told that the centre would remain "in lockdown" until they came down. The standoff lasted about four hours before the six men used a ladder left by guards to climb down, The Australian has been told.

"They got told that the others locked in their rooms would be really angry with them if they kept up their protest because as long as they stayed up there no one would be allowed out in the fresh air," one centre worker said.

Centre manager Serco took the step after West Australian Premier Colin Barnett urged the federal and NSW governments to send in police to get detainees off rooftops at Villawood and Christmas Island.

Yesterday two Iraqi men in the Perth immigration detention centre were receiving medical checks after guards intervened to stop them acting on threats to kill themselves.

It emerged yesterday that by February this year, the incidence of self-harm inside Australia's immigration detention centres was already more than four times higher than last financial year.

The number of self-harm attempts in immigration detention was the highest since 2003-04 and surpassed the 2002-03 total of 182, one of the worst years for self-harm attempts.

Responding to questions on notice from Senate estimate hearings in February, Immigration head Andrew Metcalfe revealed that, as of the end of February, there were 186 incidents of self-harm across the network this financial year.

Since then there have been numerous suicide attempts and protests that have resulted in serious incidents of self harm.

The figures came as Mr Metcalfe also revealed there were 46 full-time mental health staff at mainland detention centres, with three facilities in Perth and Brisbane having no available staff on-site.

SOURCE



28 April, 2011

Anglican Church urges Government to cut baby bonus in attack on Australia's birth rate

C of E used to stand for Church of England. My late father was not a churchgoer but I remember him putting himself down -- with some satisfaction -- on forms as "C of E". These days it seems to stand for the Church of the Environment. If I were religious, I would describe it as the Devil's mockery of Christianity.

What the Bible says: "Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them" (Psalm 127)

THE baby bonus should be scrapped to rein in rampant population growth, the Anglican Church said yesterday. The church's key advisory group wants the Gillard Government to get rid of incentives that increase the birth rate and also called for a cut to immigration.

In a submission to a federal population inquiry, the General Synod's public affairs commission described population growth as a taboo subject and the "elephant in the room". The commission wanted a halt to "any policy that provides an incentive to increase population, notably the baby bonus".

A church spokesman said yesterday that a recent resolution by the general synod had asked the Government to carefully consider any such incentive, "while continuing to support low-income families and sustainable immigration". It has called for increases to paid parental leave.

The resolution also called on the Government to "avoid any reliance on continuing population growth to maintain economic growth".

The $5294 baby bonus is paid to families who earn $75,000 or less for the six months after the child's birth. Last year, there were 278,000 payments nationally.

Australian Family Association spokeswoman Terri Kelleher said it would be unjust. "Our fertility rate is under replacement level, I don't think families should be discouraged," she said.

The church said the migrant intake should be cut while being more generous to refugees and family reunion applicants: "The question must be asked whether our population growth is fair to future generations of Australians. "The growing congestion of cities, destined to become worse, means time lost in commuting, more polluted suburbs, denser housing."

The spokesman said, while the church wanted the Government to carefully consider population incentives, it was not questioning the baby bonus in particular. "The public affairs commission is an advisory body which does not carry the authority of the Anglican Church," he said.

But commission chairman and former Labor MP Professor John Langmore said a resolution based on the submission was passed by the general synod. "That clearly implies scepticism about the baby bonus," he said.

SOURCE






Tony Abbott backs use of force on rioting asylum seekers

As vigils by several asylum seekers continue at Villawood and on Christmas Island, Mr Abbott called for the Government to act. But Immigration Minister Chris Bowen said it would not be appropriate for him to order authorities to kick protesters off a roof because it could endanger lives.

Mr Abbott told 2GB radio that it was not good enough for the Government to try to ignore protests in detention centres. "You can't have a situation ... where people are acting in consistent defiance of legitimate authority and these protests have to be ended," Mr Abbott said. "It just has to be sorted out and I think that the problem is that the Government is just not strong enough to do it."

Mr Bowen said a call for him to order police to take down asylum seekers was unrealistic. "I'm not going to say to people like the Australian Federal Police and Serco, I want you to get up on the roof, have an altercation with them and get them down," Mr Bowen told radio station MTR. "That's an operational decision, as to when the right time to do that sort of thing is."

Mr Bowen said it wasn't his job to meddle in operational matters. "I don't take the view that my job, sitting in my office, is to say, 'You get up on the roof and you have an altercation with them, you fight with them; if somebody falls off the roof as a result of that, it's not my fault'."

Last night three protesters remained on the roof of Villawood's detention centre, and five people were on a roof of the Christmas Island centre.

SOURCE




Dodgy figures, wrong questions plague carbon debate

Gary Johns

AUSTRALIA has had two chances to make a dignified exit from the foolhardy proposition of carbon abatement.

The first was Tony Abbott's proposal to then opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull to pass then prime minister Kevin Rudd's emissions trading scheme, with the proviso that it not be invoked until there was an international scheme in place. An international scheme is a chimera. Second was Prime Minister Julia Gillard's promise to wait until Australians had achieved a consensus on pricing carbon: in other words, to talk it out until after yet another election. For the foreseeable future, these two options have been closed.

Having cost the political lives of one prime minister (Kevin Rudd) and two opposition leaders (Brendan Nelson and Malcolm Turnbull), Australia is now in the end game for pricing carbon. Pricing seemed like a good idea 10 years ago: it is now looking very sick.

Ask an economist the most cost-effective way to abate carbon and they will tell you market pricing. Right answer, wrong question. Ask an economist the most cost-effective way to prepare for the risk of climate change and you will get answers about priorities and adaptation. You hear about research and development, and spending money on things to make people (especially in developing countries) more able to cope with change: health infrastructure, skills, cheap energy.

Instead, the Gillard government walks headlong to its political death with its Climate Change Minister Greg Combet spruiking nonsense. For example, Combet is softening up the electorate for Labor's carbon tax by arguing China puts a higher price on carbon than Australia.

Combet, on ABC's Lateline this year, cited the Chinese and Australian implicit price for carbon from the 2010 Vivid Economics report for The Climate Institute: $8 per tonne for China and $2 per tonne for Australia. The idea is to tell Australians they are not pulling their weight. The Chinese must think Gillard a fool. Vivid Economics has been colourful with its analysis. They wildly overstate China's and wildly understate Australia's implicit carbon price. For a start, Chinese energy policies have not been developed with the aim of promoting greenhouse gas emission reductions.

The primary effort is to harness energy to create jobs and deliver improved living standards. The majority of renewable energy being built in China is large-scale hydro. Chinese power companies are interested in harnessing energy. Greenhouse gas abatement rarely rates a mention. Moreover, the Chinese subsidise coal fuel. As most new generation in China is coal, this implies that at the margin, China has a negative carbon price. Combet, the Climate Institute, and the Climate Change Department are knowingly feeding the electorate complete bunkum.

Australia's average carbon price is assessed by Vivid across a variety of programs, including feed-in tariffs, Renewable Energy Target (the old scheme), the Qld Gas scheme and the NSW GGAS scheme.

There is no assessment of the state government policies opposing coal-fired power stations that make gas the fuel of choice for non-renewable generators. At the margin this imposes a significant carbon price particularly in NSW and Queensland. Even in Victoria it implies a marginal cost of carbon in excess of $10 per tonne. Vivid ignores these policies. The current marginal cost of carbon in the generation sector would be well above $10 per tonne and for some parts of the sector (in particular RET) more than $40 per tonne.

Typically socialist, the development of small plant generation until very recently was largely promoted by Chinese government policies to dispatch all plants equally, that is, regardless of efficiency. Australia's efforts, which Vivid and Combet criticise, have always promoted efficient merit-order based dispatch. Australia has chased the best technology such that no small coal plant was installed here in the last two decades (with the possible exception of Western Australia).

That China is just now scheduling plants in merit order (from lowest cost to highest cost), which means that more competitive plants are built over conventional plants is simply the way it happens anyway in market-based economies in order to minimise the cost of production and maximise welfare. In essence, 94 per cent of the implied carbon price estimated for China is based on removing a mandate to dispatch plants inefficiently and then promote action to shutdown plants that would probably not have been built in the first place on efficiency grounds.

The Productivity Commission has been asked to report on the price of carbon production in other countries. Already, chairman Gary Banks has warned about the difficulties of comparison, and that proper comparison will not deliver the government the picture it wants.

The electorate is becoming less enamoured with the climate change cause. Once they sniff brumby figures, Gillard will be the fourth political life lost to carbon abatement.

SOURCE





Gillard channels her inner Howard

Prime Minister Julia Gillard and partner Tim Mathieson visit the Forbidden City in Beijing yesterday. Picture: AFP Source: AFP
JULIA Gillard should count her northeast Asia tour a modest success. There were no big breakthroughs but neither were there significant stumbles.

This is doubtless a relief for her advisers after the Prime Minister's ill-judged revelation that she lacks a passion for foreign policy. Indeed, Gillard's trip to Asia marks a return to many of the key tenets of former prime minister John Howard's foreign policy.

Despite Paul Keating's gibe that Asian leaders would never deal with him, Howard left office with an enviable record as a statesman. He achieved his aim of revitalising the US alliance while strengthening our most important regional relationships, particularly those with Japan, India, China and Indonesia.

This grid of bilateral partnerships formed a solid platform for regional multilateral successes, such as securing Australia's inclusion in the East Asia Summit and the formation of the Bali Process to counter people-smuggling.

This week, Gillard turned to the Howard foreign policy playbook. Her itinerary was constructed to avoid her predecessor Kevin Rudd's error of bypassing our oldest and most important regional partner, Japan, in his enthusiasm to visit China.

The timing of her visit to Japan was serendipitous, coming just as the country starts to return to a semblance of normality and making Gillard the first foreign leader to make a substantive visit following the earthquake and tsunami disaster.

In my two days of talks with Japanese officials and scholars, many were genuinely touched by the Prime Minister's gesture of support in visiting the scene of the disaster, an event that received extensive coverage in the Japanese media.

The Japanese government was initially reluctant to accept outside help, but there is real appreciation in Japan of Australia's rapid assistance, which included a seasoned disaster relief team and three military transport aircraft. Operating out of US air bases, these have played an important role in ferrying much-needed equipment and supplies to the disaster areas, a tangible dividend from three-way strategic links initiated in 2002 and a bilateral defence relationship that started to accelerate after Australian and Japanese military forces operated together in southern Iraq.

Even before the earthquake, Japan was an anxious nation, unable to throw off more than a decade of economic stagnation and political sclerosis and increasingly spooked by China's growing economic and military muscle. Japan has an even bigger mountain to climb following the disaster. But Gillard's visit provided important reassurance to a friend at a time when it was much needed.

In opposition Labor dismissed the bilateral free trade agenda of the Coalition government, yet the most substantial policy outcome from Gillard's stop in South Korea was her agreement with President Lee Myung-bak to wrap up a bilateral agreement by the end of this year. It was unfortunate that foot-dragging on the part of the South Koreans meant that it was not possible to finalise the negotiations before the visit.

But Gillard's pragmatic focus on bilateral trade and security co-operation and her strongly expressed solidarity with South Korea in the face of the North's belligerence were clearly appreciated in Seoul.

It was in Beijing, though - which loomed, after a spate of recent bilateral difficulties, as the toughest leg of Gillard's tour - that the return to a more modest and realistic foreign policy approach was most evident.

The Howard government got off to a bumpy start with Beijing after firmly backing Washington in a military stand-off over Taiwan and cancelling a development assistance program, and after Howard met the Dalai Lama.

It was only when the then prime minister met then Chinese president Jiang Zemin in Manila in the margins of the 1996 APEC leaders meeting (described in Howard's recent memoir as one of the most consequential meetings of his prime ministership) and laid out a clear and durable conceptual framework for the bilateral relationship that strains between the two nations started to ease.

In essence, Howard told Jiang that Australia wanted a constructive relationship, with a particular focus on the enormous potential of the economic relationship. But he made clear Australia had different values and institutions and would not compromise on those or on vital strategic interests, such as the US alliance.

Howard's tacit understanding with the Chinese leadership provided the political foundation for the explosion of trade that has seen China overtake Japan as Australia's largest trading partner, accounting for one-quarter of all Australian exports.

Gillard's China visit this week seems deliberately modelled on the visit made by Howard in 1997. The Prime Minister came to Beijing bolstered by having already visited the US, Japan and South Korea, Australia's most important strategic partners.

She reportedly told Premier Wen Jiabao that Australia would retain its strong links to the US as well as pursue a constructive relationship with China. The business leaders were there again, as they had been in the 1997 tour, to highlight burgeoning commercial links between the nations.

And when Gillard rightly raised Australia's legitimate concerns about human rights with Chinese leaders she reportedly did so frankly and directly but privately and in a measured way.

An unnamed Australian official, who briefed journalists on the talks, stated explicitly that she did so more in the mould of Howard than Rudd.

Gillard's visit could scarcely have marked a more sweeping renunciation of Rudd's China policy. Gone, apparently, is the romantic conceit that Australia can form a special relationship with the Middle Kingdom. Gone are the mixed messages and the disappointed expectations on both sides. Gone, too, is the notion that political, cultural and strategic differences can be brushed over and that a sustainable relationship with China can be based on anything other than a sober, hard-headed assessment of Australia's long-term strategic and economic interests.

Yet the Prime Minister cannot afford to rest on her newly acquired foreign policy laurels. She can build on her success by remaining clear-eyed in her dealings with China: there will be further tests, whether on foreign investment, human rights or China's military muscle-flexing.

Her dealings with China will be reinforced, rather than impeded, if she continues to develop the US alliance and further strengthens defence and security links with Japan and South Korea.

She should press ahead to conclude free trade agreements with both countries as soon as possible. She also has to find a way through the uranium impasse with India, which is holding back Australia's engagement with Asia's other rising power and the world's largest democracy.

She also needs to make sure her Foreign Minister is fully behind her agenda rather than pursuing his own, which may be her hardest foreign policy test of all.

SOURCE



27 April, 2011

Africans don't change their spots

Whether in Africa, America, Jamaica, Haiti or in Britain, Africans are characterized by stratospheric rates of violent crime. In recent years, Australia has taken in refugees from Somalia and Sudan -- to a total of about 40,000 people. Very surprisingly, a police chief (Nixon) from the State of Victoria proclaimed a little while ago that the crime rate among Africans in her jurisdiction was unexceptional. Subsequent information suggests that she was lying.

When the police lie, however, how are we to know what is the case? We cannot. But the following list of incidents compiled by Andrew Bolt suggests that Africans in Australia are no different from Africans elsewhere. Remember that these incidents come from a very small community of only 40,000 people and that police rarely mention race where Africans are involved. Usually, it is only when the crime cases come to court that we get information that identifies the criminal as African

From Melbourne yesterday: "Two policemen were pelted with bottles when they went to break up the latest brawl at Braybrook ... Police were investigating whether the incident was related to a brawl the night before at a 'kickback party' for the Miss South Sudan Australia beauty pageant."

Darwin last weekend: "Two teenage boys were wounded with a machete while a third was beaten unconscious ... The attackers were described as being of African appearance."

Toongabbie, April 18: "An elderly motorist escaped unharmed after his moving vehicle was pelted with rocks ... The driver reported seeing three males aged 13 to 14 of African appearance."

Adelaide, April 15: "A Marden woman has been indecently assaulted ... Police described the suspect as of African appearance."

Adelaide, April 15: "Detectives ... are investigating a sexual assault that is alleged to have occurred in a toilet of a city nightclub ... by a male ... of African appearance."

Shepparton, April 15: "Three armed men terrorised two staff members in a brazen attack at a fast food restaurant ... Police are looking for three men ... of African appearance."

Melbourne, April 13: "A man was stabbed in the head during an altercation with two other men ... believed to be of African appearance."

Dandenong, April 11: "Two men ... were approached by four males, one of whom struck the 25 year old man across the head with a baseball bat ... The man armed with the baseball bat is of African appearance."

Melbourne, April 10: "Police said a group of 15 men ... was walking home from a party ... (A) second group ... set upon the party-goers leaving two men with serious stab wounds ... The aggressors were of African appearance."

Melbourne, April 6: "A 24-year-old man was ... stabbed him in the shoulder with a knife ... His attacker is ... of African appearance."

Canberra, April 2: "A 19-year-old man (was) stabbed in the abdomen ... The offender (took) the victim's mobile phone. The offender is described as being African in appearance."

More HERE





Another brawl involving Sudanese community erupts in Melbourne

A THIRD brawl in as many nights involving the Sudanese community has left at least two people injured. The pair was reportedly hit with a bottle during the clash in the car park of Daisey's Hotel, Ringwood, about 10.30pm last night.

A spokesman for ALH group, which owns and operates Daisey's Hotel, David Curry said the men had not been at the venue before the stoush. He said the hotel would assist police with their investigation in anyway it could.

Police were called after reports of a large group of Sudanese men fighting. It's believed up to 30 men could have been involved in the brawl, which saw two people suffer head and leg injuries.

Paramedics were also called to the scene and treated two people. It's believed one man, 19, was bashed twice. He initially refused treatment from paramedics after the initial brawl. It's believed he was assaulted a second time in a nearby park and became unconscious. Paramedics arrived to find him conscious. The man, who suffered bruising to his face and a leg injury, was taken to Maroondah Hospital in a stable condition. A second man, 20, was also taken to hospital with a cut to the head.

Some of the men involved in the brawl were from interstate. It's believed they had been in Victoria for the Miss South Sudan Australia beauty pageant last weekend.

The latest incident comes after a man was stabbed and others injured at a "kickback party" for the beauty pageant in the early hours of Monday morning.

Then yesterday a policeman was hit in the face with a stubby and another punched when an unruly mob descended on them in Melbourne's west.

SOURCE




Carbon tax 'will clean out workers' wallets'

LABOR'S carbon tax will not clean up the environment but it will clean out workers' wallets, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott says.

Speaking from Whyalla in South Australia, Mr Abbott said 4000 local jobs dependent on the steel industry would be at risk under a carbon price. "It's very important that workers right around Australian understand that this carbon tax won't clean up the environment but it will clean out their wallets and it will wipe out jobs big time," the Liberal leader told the ABC.

Today is the first anniversary of former prime minister Kevin Rudd's decision to shelve his carbon pollution reduction scheme.

Mr Abbott said that course of action was backed by current Prime Minister Julia Gillard who was now saying a carbon tax was needed to save the world. "Kevin Rudd couldn't trust her then and the public can't trust her now," he said. "Australia should not try to save the world on its own."

But Mr Abbott went on to claim "all of us want to do the right thing by the environment". "The coalition has a strong and effective policy to reduce emissions by planting more trees, getting better soil and using smarter technology."

SOURCE





Government hospitals leaving patients malnourished

Australia is catching up with Britain

DOCTORS have called for a hospital food review, because patients are being discharged malnourished. Australian Medical Association state president Andrew Lavender said the below-par quality of hospital food, set serving times for three meals a day, and a one-size-fits-all approach could lead to patients checking out malnourished.

"A lot of patients do become malnourished in hospitals," he said. "They are trying to improve nutrition, but when you're cooking for 700 or 800 people the quality is often not up to scratch."

"Generally, the elderly and those who are sick don't have an appetite and there isn't much of a follow-up in terms of what someone doesn't eat. People having major operations are in a state where their body requires extra nutrients to recover and they often they don't get that. People do depart hospital down in weight."

Dr Lavender said a review of nutrition within hospitals was needed to produce an "individual focus rather than a mass-meal type approach".

In New South Wales, Health Minister Jillian Skinner has ordered the Nutrition And Food Committee to develop new standards for hospital food to make it tastier, its packaging easier to open for frail patients and more meal time flexibility. It follows reports that seriously ill children at the state's hospitals were being served party pies, sausage rolls and chicken nuggets.

A 2009 inquiry found that 50 per cent of NSW hospital patients were malnourished and starving. Australian Nursing and Midwifery Federation SA secretary Elizabeth Dabars said that she supported any improvements to nutrition in hospitals.

Ms Dabars said the federation was particularly focused on making sure elderly people could easily open the food they were served. "We'd be very supportive of ensuring the food is nutritious, is available and can be easily opened," she said. "If the packaging does become difficult to open, there is every possibility the meal may be taken way without them being able to consume it."

SA Health chief executive David Swan said the quality of meals in public hospitals was evaluated regularly with feedback sought from patients and dietitians involved in the planning of menus. "We are developing new models of care for hospitals that will take into consideration the provision of food for patients," he said.

At Royal Adelaide Hospital, meals for a standard diet can include mixed sandwiches, cold meat and salad, lasagne, roast chicken, fish and potatoes and goulash. Deserts include apple crumble and chocolate mousse, with special menus prepared for patients suffering from a range of conditions such as diabetes and low cholesterol.

Nutrition Professionals Australia dietician Tania Ferraretto said a "decent amount" of time in any facility could lead to malnutrition. "What we tend to see with malnutrition is weight loss, nutritional deficiencies like a lack of vitamins and wounds not healing quickly. And contrary to what people think, you can have a malnourished obese person," she said.

Ms Ferraretto agreed tailoring hospital food to individuals was a key to preventing malnutrition.

Opposition health spokesman Duncan McFetridge said he regularly had complaints from people being served food they couldn't eat because of a specific condition, prompting him to write to Health Minister John Hill. "It's a perennial problem and hospital food should be independently monitored," he said.

Children, Youth and Women's Health Service director Trish Strachan said the Women's and Children's Hospital "provides high quality food to all its patients".

SOURCE



26 April, 2011

Australian Government toughens rules on asylum-seeker character test

ASYLUM-seekers who commit offences while in detention will be barred from gaining permanent protection in Australia but will still be allowed to live in the country under temporary visas.

Amid growing violence and unrest in detention centres across the country, Immigration Minister Chris Bowen has announced a toughening of the character test to encourage better behaviour among asylum-seekers.

Under the proposed legislation, asylum-seekers convicted of an offence in detention will be prevented from permanently settling in Australia and bringing family members to join them.

Penalties for those possessing or making weapons would also be increased to five years in prison.

The changes would be backdated to today, meaning those involved in recent uprisings at detention centres, but who are yet to be charged, would face the new character test.

“These changes send a clear message to anyone considering engaging in unacceptable behaviour in immigration detention that this will only increase their chances of not being granted a visa,” Mr Bowen said. “This will apply to all people in immigration detention: onshore and offshore arrivals, asylum-seekers, or otherwise.”

However, Mr Bowen admitted those found guilty of offences could not simply be deported. He said a temporary protection visa, akin to those used under the Howard government, would still be available to those found guilty of offences.

“The one thing I'm indicating is that of course we will not (remove) people to where they will be in danger, but there are a range of options available to me including temporary visas, which are less attractive,” he told ABC radio.

The government will rely on support from the opposition to have the legislation passed.

The Gillard government has been struggling to maintain control of immigration centres amid ballooning detainee numbers and a massive processing backlog.

Protests at Villawood detention centre last week left buildings destroyed by fire, while rioting Christmas Island detainees razed facilities last month.

The announcement came as three detainee protesters maintained their vigil on the rooftop of Sydney's Villawood detention centre into a sixth straight day, and after reports a man on Christmas Island had stitched his lips together.

A hunger strike at Western Australia's Curtin detention centre has also continued into a third day while protest groups have rallied against mandatory detention and the treatment of detainees outside Maribyrnong Immigration Detention Centre in Victoria and at Villawood in Sydney.

SOURCE





Make poor teaching a sackable offence

A POPULAR myth about teaching is that if you increase salaries, you will get better teachers. This is an idea that gains traction with the teachers unions. It also resonates with those frustrated with poor school outcomes.

The pay and performance equation is disarmingly obvious. If you don't pay teachers enough, you can't attract the best. This view informs the position of Greg Craven, vice-chancellor of the Australian Catholic University, who wrote on this page on April 13: "If you want brain surgeons and international lawyers to consider teaching as an option, then you are going to have to supplement altruism with cash."

And Ben Jensen, director of the school education program at the Grattan Institute, wrote on this page on April 18 that a "system of meaningful appraisal and feedback for teachers will increase their effectiveness by 20 to 30 per cent".

Jensen goes further and says of the institute's recent report on appraisal: "Our proposal concentrates on improving teaching, not sacking teachers." But how can teaching be improved by not getting rid of inferior teachers? Why is teaching sacrosanct?

There is no other profession, job or vocation that closes ranks on incompetence in the same way. When was the last time you heard a teaching union call for the sacking of incompetent teachers? Never. "It's OK to be a dud, we won't tell on you" is union-speak for membership.

This is why Australian Education Union president Angelo Gavrielatos says the union supports the idea of appraisal and is reported as saying on the release of the Grattan Institute report that it reinforces the union's view that the best professional development for teachers occurs when they are given time to work together.

But appraisal is a delaying tactic on palpably bad teachers. It can take years with minimal or no improvement. In the meantime, students are damaged. In a normal full-time teaching load of, say, five classes of 25 students each, this means 125 students. Multiply that by a three-year cycle of appraisal. That is 375 students who have not been well taught.

A survey by Britain's National Foundation for Educational Research shows only 21 per cent teachers think schools have enough freedom to sack incompetent colleagues. The Times Education Supplement reported on April 8 that a study of 2100 teachers found 73 per cent of school heads and 52 per cent of classroom teachers agreed there was not enough freedom for schools to dismiss poorly performing teachers. In response, Britain's National Union of Teachers general secretary Christine Blower said: "It is regrettable that colleagues agree it is not easy enough to dismiss teachers." There was no mention of appraisal being used to fix the problem.

Why the AEU does not ask its members similar questions is obvious. Many would support sacking teachers. Colleagues are aware of teachers who are failures. They all know who should go and why.

If appraisal and dollars held the key to better teachers, why hasn't performance-related pay been an unambiguous winner? In a report titled "The bonus myth" in New Scientist magazine this month, Alfie Kohn, a teacher turned writer, says: "Economists and workplace consultants regard it as almost unquestioned dogma that people are motivated by rewards, so they don't feel the need to test this." The magazine notes that, in many circumstances, paying for results can make people perform badly, and that the more you pay, the worse they perform.

It is obvious what will improve teacher performance. Australian schools, particularly state schools, must be given the autonomy to hire and fire. The growth in independent school enrolments is in part related to the view held by parents that state school education in some areas is in serious decline and teacher quality is a lottery. They pay independent school fees for not having to gamble on incompetence. The problem is also who gets into teaching. This is unpleasant to say but many teachers are simply not high-flyers, something that the federal government partly understands.

As of 2013 there will be tougher university entrance requirements for teaching. The pool of potential teachers will come from the top 30 per cent of Year 12 students, as well as others who meet the expectation of a high level of proficiency in literacy and numeracy.

Federal School Education Minister Peter Garrett said on the announcement of the new teaching entry expectations earlier this month: "We want the very best people coming into the teaching profession. The Australian community wants to see high-quality teaching in schools."

The problem with poor outcomes in schools is not a matter of funding, class sizes, difficult children or any other excuse. The problem is teachers.

Those who are incompetent, who are inadequately trained or are allowed to consolidate poor performance under union sanction, secure that they will be appraised continuously rather than sacked, are the malady of Australian education.

The only way to tell a teacher they are hopeless is to remove them, as in the case of every other job I know.

SOURCE






Australian Christian Lobby chief Jim Wallace's Anzac Day slur sparks outrage

I have known quite a few "old diggers" (elderly Australian Army veterans) in my day and I am pretty sure what most of them would say if asked whether they fought so that homosexuality would be promoted as normal. The reply would be cutting, very cutting

THE head of the Australian Christian Lobby says outrage over a claim that Australian soldiers didn't fight for gay marriage is down to "misinterpretation".

Earlier today ACL managing director Jim Wallace said on Twitter: "Just hope that as we remember Servicemen and women today we remember the Australia they fought for — wasn't gay marriage and Islamic!" The comment sparked widespread condemnation from other Twitter users, who said Mr Wallace should be "ashamed".

This afternoon Mr Wallace apologised "unreservedly" for having made the comment on Anzac Day and said the comment had been misinterpreted. "There is no way I was trying to infer that our veterans didn't fight for all Australians. Of course they did," Mr Wallace told news.com.au. "I spent 32 years in the army myself, I'm imbued with that. "I'm the last person to (want to) demean Anzac Day or our veterans."

However Mr Wallace stood by his belief that the "nature" of the country that veterans had fought for was changing. "I was simply there with my father, a 96-year-old veteran of Tobruk and Milne Bay," Mr Wallace said. "And he was lamenting, as he had in the past, that he found it difficult to identify the Australia that he fought for. "I think that the nature of our society that our soldiers fought for was based on Judeo-Christian heritage."

Mr Wallace said he cited gay marriage and Islam as they were "two things that, in the future, are certainly going to define the nature of our society".

The ACL boss admitted his comment was ill-timed, but said he had not expected it to spark such widespread outrage. "It's the first time I've experienced that," he said of the potential for controversial comments to be shared quickly via Twitter. "I apologise for the fact that it was ill-timed. I had no intention and no thought that it would go into this."

Mr Wallace this afternoon deleted the original comment from his Twitter page.

SOURCE






Bossy Indian doctor raised hackles in Australia

An unfortunate case of culture clash. Bossiness is the opposite of what works in egalitarian Australia. Not all Indians are bossy but Dr. Virdi is a Sikh and they have a warrior tradition



A TOWNSVILLE surgeon wrongly dismissed by Queensland Health for bullying and harassment has been awarded six months' full pay. Dr Inderjit Virdi, a cardio-thoracic specialist, was stood down on full pay in 2007 after an investigation was launched into 19 claims of bullying and harassment by the doctor.

A hearing before Queensland Industrial Relations Commission president Adrian Bloomfield found it "impracticable" to reinstate Dr Virdi, but instead pay him the maximum compensation of six months' wages, believed to be worth about $150,000. "Given that Dr Virdi's continuing loss for his (conceded) unjust dismissal is significant . . . I should award the maximum compensation allowable," President Bloomfield said.

Dr Virdi, an Australian citizen, was a full-time surgeon at Townsville Hospital when allegations were made against him and in 2009 he was granted leave without pay and moved back to India to work.

In President Bloomfield's decision handed down last month, he described Dr Virdi as a "person of strong will and strongly held views". "Dr Virdi firmly believes that it is his right as "captain of the ship" to talk to and direct, subordinate staff in the manner he thinks appropriate," he said. "His previous behaviour towards his subordinate and other professional colleagues would not change if he was reinstated."

Dr Virdi participated in anger management training and effective communication treatment following complaints about his behaviour.

During the hearing the hospital's medical services executive director Andrew Johnson said he was concerned about patient safety if Dr Virdi was able to be reinstated. Dr Virdi vigorously defended these claims and said his hospital had the best clinical results of any cardio-thoracic surgery in Australia.

Dr Virdi's Australian representative and Salaried Doctors Queensland past president Don Kane said the Indian-born surgeon had suffered after a long-running saga with Queensland Health. "He's been badly affected by what has been done to him," he said. "His family have had a horrendous time with this over the last five or six years and he's paid a huge penalty through no fault of his own."

Dr Virdi is the chief of cardio-thoracic surgery at New Delhi's Max Delhi Devi Heart and Vascular Hospital, one of India's largest private hospitals.

SOURCE



25 April, 2011

ANZAC DAY TODAY

For many Australians this is the holiest day of the year. In recognition, I am going to put up just one long story today, a story well worth reading, however. It is about an heroic Australian and his experiences in Afghanistan. Unlike the Arabs, Afghans are real fighters so hard-fought actions are the rule there

For a video report of the actual Anzac day ceremonies in Sydney, see here for a commentary in a very broad Australian accent (You can click "Close" to stop the introductory commercial)

Even heroes have their heroes. For Victoria Cross holder Ben Roberts-Smith, the benchmark for valour was set by his mate Sergeant Locke.

The Special Air Service Regiment corporal says Locke's courage probably saved his life and stopped a heavily outnumbered Australian patrol being overrun on a mountain top in Afghanistan late one afternoon in 2006.

"He was a very, very brave person, Matt, in every sense of the word," Roberts-Smith says. "He was one of these guys who would stand up in the middle of a firefight in front of a wave of fire and just hook in."

Roberts-Smith's extraordinary tales from Afghanistan, revealed to The Weekend Australian, have opened a rare window into the exploits of our special forces.

They also provide a vivid portrayal of violence and heroism in the war zone for this year's commemorations of Anzac Day, which normally evokes battles fought long ago and immortalised in sepia images and jerky film.

When Roberts-Smith was awarded the Victoria Cross of Australia for his extraordinary charge into a Taliban machine-gun position in June last year, it brought an unexpected burden: the weight of suddenly being a very public hero while his unit fights on with unsung gallantry.

"They're out there every day doing their job and not seeking any recognition for it," Roberts-Smith says. "I'm just one of these guys and I'm so not special."

These guys included Locke, an instructor when Roberts-Smith joined the unit. They hit it off and ended up in the same patrol. "He was a nice guy and a natural soldier," Roberts-Smith says. "I looked up to him a lot as an operator and thought, that's the gold standard, you want to behave like this guy, he knows his job inside out.

"The way I saw him fight in Afghanistan on a number of occasions was inspirational. "He wouldn't look for a fire position. He'd just take it and you'd be thinking, just get down, mate, you're going to get hit. He never cared, always cool and calm."

Locke had served in Afghanistan before. "For me, on my first trip to Afghanistan, having a guy like that in my patrol, that's the kind of thing you want to emulate."

In 2006, the Chora Valley, in Oruzgan province, was a Taliban stronghold considered impenetrable to coalition forces. There were none of the forward operating bases, the small stone forts that now provide a defensive network through the valley, and patrols that tried to move through the pass came under heavy fire.

As Australian and Dutch forces based in Tarin Kowt set about driving the insurgents out, a small SAS patrol infiltrated on foot to the top of a mountain overlooking the valley to work out where the insurgents were set up.

Five SAS soldiers and an American "joint terminal air controller" walked and climbed for 10 hours at night with their night-vision glasses providing eerie light on the landscape. As scout, Roberts-Smith picked out the route. The men had to stay constantly alert, aware they could walk into an enemy force.

The team chose a position just below the top of a mountain and with daylight saw, far below, insurgents openly carrying weapons. The Australians pinpointed Taliban commanders by the amount of security they had with them and the way they conducted themselves.

The plan was for a strong force of SAS and Dutch troops to drive into the valley in vehicles, but as that force moved into the lush green belt along the valley floor, it came under heavy machinegun and rocket fire and the JTAC called in air support.

The insurgents were blasted by A-10 Warthogs, aircraft designed to destroy ground targets. "Being savvy, as they are, they realised that there must have been someone controlling the attacks because even when the vehicles left, we kept calling in fire missions anti them," Roberts-Smith says.

Once the big force in the valley pulled out, the men on the mountaintop were on their own and on the third day an armed insurgent walked to within 30m of their position. Not knowing whether the man had spotted them but unable to take the risk, Locke and Roberts-Smith went after him. They killed the insurgent but one of their bullets set off a smoke flare on his webbing. Across the valley came bursts of heavy machinegun fire used by the insurgents to signal to each other across the valleys - "You OK? I'm OK."

Then three insurgents walked up the other side of the mountain right to the patrol's position and the Australians could hear more voices further back. "Matt and I engaged and dropped the first bloke," Roberts-Smith says. "That started the firefight."

Some of the insurgents got above the Australians to fire down on them. "Rounds were bouncing off the rocks around us," he says. "At that point, I saw Matt Locke sling his weapon."

The insurgents were atop a sheer, vertical rock face 8m or 9m high. "Matt climbed it completely exposed with no way to fire back if he needed to," Roberts-Smith says. "He got to the top and over the lip and engaged them and held that flank by himself." Locke was awarded the Medal of Gallantry for that action. "I remember yelling out to him, 'Are you good?' and he called back, 'Yeah'," Roberts-Smith says.

By then, another group of insurgents had arrived. The patrol commander, a member of the British Special Boat Service seconded to the Australian SAS, decided to stand and fight rather than breaking contact and facing a long-running battle. "That was the right call," says Roberts-Smith, who was also awarded a Medal of Gallantry for this battle. "If we'd tried to break contact and moved downhill, we probably would have got slaughtered in the valley."

As more insurgents moved in, the American called for air support and was told all aircraft were involved in other operations.

The Taliban clearly aimed to surround or overrun the patrol. Armed with a sniper rifle with telescopic sight, Roberts-Smith moved out about 50m from the position to protect a flank. Under fire from two groups coming from different directions, he crouched behind a rock and remembers seeing splinters flying as bullets hammered it.

"The guys on my right were shooting at me and we were having a bit of a three-way gunfight," he says. "Then Matt got on to them and gave them stick from above. That took the emphasis off me. It broke up their formation.

"I felt that Matt had probably saved my life during that contact because he put himself up in that position and he was able to suppress the enemy that was engaging me from the flank that I couldn't see. He took a lot of the heat off me. "If he hadn't done that, they would have taken all day to work out a pretty effective shot."

Roberts-Smith fired single shots at the insurgents moving up the hill to break up their attack but he was concerned he would run out of ammunition. "One well-aimed shot is just as effective as a burst of machinegun fire - especially if it hits them," he says. "If you're running forward and you see a round hit the ground right in front of you, you look for cover and that stops your advance."

The fighting was intense. At one point, a bullet smashed the night sight on Roberts-Smith's rifle and a soldier who'd joined him out on the flank realised later that a thick code book in his breast pocket had saved him from large bullet fragment.

Finally, the American signalled to headquarters that the unit could be overrun and the Warthogs swept back over. While the other SAS men fought off the approaching Taliban, the American was lying on his back with a handset to each ear and bullets bouncing around him as he co-ordinated the attacks by pilots who could not see the patrol. The JTAC told the pilots to make runs using their 30mm chain guns not much more than 50m away from either side of the Australian position. That was when the fight turned and the enemy began to withdraw. It was just on sunset and the light was fading.

"It was one of those days where we were probably extremely lucky," Roberts-Smith says.

As the gunfire ended, the American air commander could not raise the the patrol by radio. "When they did make contact," Roberts-Smith says, "you know Americans, 'Goddam, it's good to hear your voice. I thought I'd killed you. We couldn't see you on the hill.' "

The coming darkness was another reason the insurgents broke off the attack. They did not have the night-vision equipment that gave special forces such an advantage. Since then, the insurgents have recognised the value of night-vision gear and pick up sets whenever they can - from the internet or from supply convoys attacked in Pakistan or coalition positions they have overrun.

The patrol commander decided the team would stay in place for another seven hours to cover the return of the main force. "Then we walked off the hill in darkness. It was a pretty long four days."

Roberts-Smith says all of the men in his unit faced that sort of experience every day. Whenever he was in action, there were mates ahead of him or protecting his back.

Whenever the SAS men climbed into a helicopter, they knew they were in for a fight. "Please say to everyone, I wear my medal for every one of these blokes who walk down the street and never have anyone shake their hand because no one will ever know who they are, like I used to be," he says.

"The things I've seen other blokes do . . . I've seen people storm rooms with guys inside there firing. That's gallant. "I've seen blokes in hand-to-hand situations where they're wrestling with people to take weapons off them. "And guys get up and run across open ground to drag wounded mates out of car seats because half their face has been blown off."

Like the SAS unit caught in a village and blasted by scores of rocket-propelled grenades. "Blokes having to jump over walls, fighting through the streets, destroying the codes in their radios because they thought they were going to be captured," he says. "They spent six hours fighting back until they they could recapture the vehicles they lost in the initial contact. "That kind of thing has happened every year for the whole time we've been there.

"I just want people to understand that all the guys do it. "We want to do it because someone needs to do it. That's what we do and we're all wired that way. There's a strong possibility that you'll be incapacitated or not make it home. The reality is this year everyone in this unit will go there at some stage and they may not come back. That's reality."

For 33-year-old Locke, reality struck on October 25, 2007, when he was leading a patrol in the Chora Valley. The forward scout crossed a creek and Locke moved forward to cover him. The sergeant was lying on his stomach in a shooting position when a Taliban machinegun opened fire.

A bullet struck Locke from the front and hit his heart. Matty Locke, hero, mentor and mate, was dead within seconds. "That is battle," Roberts-Smith says.

SOURCE



24 April, 2011

Riots among illegals ongoing in Australia

This is excellent. It gives publicity to the fact that illegals are often not granted residency and are locked up for long periods. It is the publicity from just such riots that put a stop to illegals coming during the term of the previous conservative government

Three protesters remain on the roof of Sydney's Villawood Detention Centre, as detainees stage a sit-in and go on a hunger strike at Western Australia's Curtin facility. Two of the trio at Villawood have been on the roof since Wednesday morning, the same day a riot involving up to 100 detainees broke out leaving nine buildings gutted by fire.

Twenty-two of those protesters were transferred to Silverwater Correctional Centre, where they were questioned by Australian Federal Police.

On Sunday morning, three detainees were still on the detention centre's roof, protesting against the rejection of their asylum applications.

"They are being negotiated with. Currently, the Australian Federal Police are in charge of the negotiations," a Department of Immigration and Citizenship spokeswoman told AAP on Sunday morning. "They have asked to speak to department staff. We are prepared to meet them, if they come down from the roof."

Meanwhile, Social Justice Network spokesman Jamal Daoud has complained of mistreatment by police. Well known for speaking out on behalf of refugees and detainees, Mr Daoud said he was handcuffed and forced to kneel after an argument with police on Saturday afternoon at the centre.

He said he was taken to Bankstown police station and later released with a $350 fine. "The police officers were acting with deep hate, disregard to basic civil rights," he alleged.

In Western Australia, refugee advocate Ian Rintoul said a hunger strike and sit-in involving around 300 detainees at Curtin Airbase detention centre, in the state's remote West Kimberley region, was expected to escalate. Their protest over visitors being prevented from going to the centre over the Easter weekend began on Saturday morning, Mr Rintoul said.

"The asylum seekers are asking that they be allowed to see refugee supporters, who have travelled from Perth and cities to see them over the Easter weekend," Mr Rintoul said in a statement on Sunday. "Serco (the centre's management company) have insisted that only one-on-one visits will be allowed, an arrangement that will only allow about 50 asylum seekers to see a visitor."

SOURCE




Serious and rational Labor party minister fed up

Tanner was one of the few who understood economics and tried to apply it

ONE of the Labor Government's "gang of four" key ministers has taken a swipe at his former colleagues and reveals that one of Kevin Rudd's grand election promises - a powerful business advisory panel - was pure fantasy that never existed.

In the first memoir written by a Rudd government insider, former finance minister Lindsay Tanner also describes Ms Gillard's "moving forward" election slogan as setting "new records for banality".

Mr Tanner, who quit politics on the same day that Julia Gillard became Prime Minister, said the 2010 election campaign was the "worst in living memory", with "banal slogans, robotic delivery, and trivial policy announcement deployed by both the major parties".

He also says Ms Gillard has dyed her hair red for years to help build her personal brand. "It makes her more noticeable. She has registered as an individual personality in the sideshow."

Delivering a damning assessment of politics, Mr Tanner largely blames the media in a new book, Sideshow, for descending into "info-tainment" rather than serious policy analysis.

Mr Tanner, who was one of the "gang of four" ministers who ran Labor's policy agenda, also writes that the media failed to twig that the government did nothing for two-and-a-half years to deliver on a key economic pledge by Mr Rudd in 2008 to boost national savings.

In 2007, when Mr Rudd announced the business advisory panel headed by the respected Sir Rod Eddington, The Australian "splashed the story on its front page, complete with a big photo of a smiling Rudd and shadow treasurer Wayne Swan".

"Did anything actually happen?" Mr Tanner writes. The truth, he explains, was that "Kevin Rudd may have announced the creation of the advisory panel but ultimately it was never established".

"In spite of occasional cursory inquiries from journalists about when the names of its members would be announced, no one ever worked out that it was a chimera. A potentially highly embarrassing story was never written," Mr Tanner said.

The Sunday Telegraph did not obtain an embargoed copy of the book, released this week, but was briefed on key extracts, and understands Mr Tanner:

* DENIES he was the source of damaging cabinet leaks that derailed the ALP's election campaign after it was claimed that Ms Gillard opposed an aged pension increase, accusing the media of ``collective psychosis" after he refused to rule himself in or out as the culprit.

* ATTACKS Ms Gillard's 2010 election slogan of "Moving Forward" as a cliche that would have irritated anyone who had spent time with second tier business executives.

* REVEALS the ABC edited out of a Lateline interview a stumble when he was asked by Leigh Sales to describe Mr Rudd in one word and replied, "Nasty." Mr Tanner quips his gaffe was edited out because he thought he was talking about John Howard.
His book is believed to pull its punches on the ETS debate, following Mr Rudd's claims that Ms Gillard and Treasurer Wayne Swan were in favour of dumping it while Mr Tanner and Senator Penny Wong were against.

WHAT LINDSAY TANNER'S BOOK SAYS:

On the 2010 campaign:
"The worst in living memory. Banal slogans, robotic delivery, and trivial policy announcement deployed by both the major parties."

On federal politics:
"Modern politics now resembles a Hollywood blockbuster: all special effects and no plot."

On the press gallery:
"Journalists like to pick up on Gillard's earlobes, Rudd's earwax, Anna Bligh's botox, Mark Latham's man-boobs."

On Julia Gillard:
"Some might think it's strange that Gillard dyed her hair red. In fact, it's perfectly sensible: it makes her more noticeable."

SOURCE




Rationed maternity care in NSW government hospitals

PREGNANT women are being bumped from NSW hospitals despite having booked in, as the baby boom and an increase in birth complications put more pressure on maternity units. Many large public maternity units have introduced a cap on numbers and geographical limits on patients.

But one mother, who was not accepted at her hospital, was forced to do a four-hour round trip on public transport to bring expressed milk to her premature twins. When Prue Corlette, from Rose Bay, went into early labour with IVF-conceived twin boys last month, she was told there was no room at the Royal Hospital for Women in Randwick.

The 15 high-care cots in its neonatal intensive care unit were occupied, and the closest ones available were at Canberra Hospital, John Hunter Hospital in Newcastle and Liverpool Hospital. Ms Corlette chose Liverpool, which at 45 kilometres away was a lot closer than Canberra (288 kilometres) or Newcastle (163 kilometres).

"But from the moment I got into the back of the ambulance, the continuity of care I had built up with the staff at the Royal was gone," she said. "Up until then I had been seeing one dedicated midwife and obstetrician throughout my pregnancy. They knew the type of birth that I wanted and I knew what their preferences were."

She gave birth to one baby vaginally, and the other was delivered in an emergency caesarean section for which she was under general anaesthetic.

"When you are expecting premature twins, you want to be able to trust and have some kind of relationship with the people looking after you," she said. "I have to wonder what would have happened if my own doctor was there, whether the outcome would have been different."

Ms Corlette's midwife and obstetrician were unable to attend the birth at Liverpool Hospital as they are both employed by the Royal Hospital for Women.

Born nine weeks premature, baby Theodore weighed 1840 grams and Hugo 1770 grams. They stayed at Liverpool Hospital's neonatal intensive care unit for 10 days. Ms Corlette was discharged after three days. But she could not drive after the caesarean and was forced to undertake a four-hour round trip on public transport to take expressed breast milk to her babies.

"It was a bus, two trains and a walk to the hospital," she said. "The whole trip took two hours door to door from Rose Bay to Liverpool to take milk in a freezer bag in for the twins."

While geographical limits apply to the Royal Hospital for Women, it accepts women with high-risk pregnancies from outside the area. "If RHW's neonatal intensive care unit reaches capacity, babies can be referred through the state-wide network to other NICUs within NSW, and then return to RHW's NICU when a cot becomes available," a hospital spokeswoman said.

The Royal Hospital for Women is one of the state's busiest hospitals, delivering about 4000 babies a year.

The busiest is Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Women and Babies in Camperdown, where 5321 babies were born last year despite being designed for a capacity of 4000 births when it opened in 2002.

Two years ago the hospital was forced to transfer about two women a month to nearby Canterbury Hospital when it reached critical mass but that number has halved following new limits on numbers.

Westmead Hospital, which delivers 5200 babies a year despite being funded for only 3800, has also introduced caps on women living outside the area.

Australian Medical Association president Andrew Pesce, also an obstetrician at Westmead, said: "The birth rate has increased and yet beds have been closed and the funding has not expanded in the way that it needs to to look after the number of women booking in. "The staff-to-patient ratio - especially the number of midwives - is not what it should be. All of these are contributing to the situation."

The birth rate in NSW has been steadily increasing since the introduction of the baby bonus in 2004, rising from about 85,000 a year to 96,000 last year. Caesareans and multiple births have also increased, according to the latest NSW Mothers and Babies Report. Dr Pesce said the proportion of older mothers has also increased, along with obesity and diabetes.

Ms Corlette's sons were transferred back to the Royal Hospital for Women when cots became available. She took her twins home last week and is relieved that they are healthy, but questions how such a large hospital can end up overbooked.

"The problem with the Royal Women's is that it was opened in 1997 when the birth rate was decreasing," she said. "They could not have foreseen the birth rate as it is now."

The NSW government will spend $42 million over four years to meet the demand for maternity services. Reducing the caesarean rate to 20 per cent by 2015 is part of the plan to alleviate pressure on public maternity hospitals.

SOURCE




Australia's Thermopylae

Full details of the battle here. The action was much more complex than the one fought by Leonidas and his Spartans but the spirit was as dauntless and the odds also great.

And, unlike Thermopylae, the enemy was stopped. The Chinese were numerous, well led, well-trained and even had the advantage of surprise -- but were not prepared for the doggedness of Anglo-Saxon troops

JULIA Gillard has credited Korean war veterans with laying the foundations of the modern Australian army at a ceremony to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the Battle of Kapyong.

Surrounded by towering mountains in a rugged landscape where Australians foiled the Chinese army's final assault on the South Korean capital of Seoul in April, 1951, the Prime Minister said too few Australians knew the history of the battle.

Watched by surviving veterans and their families on the first day of a three-day visit to South Korea, Ms Gillard said the men had been worthy inheritors of the Gallipoli legacy.

"You, the men of Kapyong, know your story," Ms Gillard said. "I believe it is time more Australians did."

The battle began on April 23 as Australian troops form the 3rd Battalion of the Royal Australian regiment were preparing to celebrate Anzac Day with a nearby brigade of Turkish soldiers also fighting to protect South Korea from the communist north.

But their preparations, including collecting wild azaleas to make Anzac wreaths, had to be put on hold as the Chinese launched their spring offensive, with more than 300,000 troops pouring through the Kapyong Valley in a bid to take the Korean capital. "It was the final attempt to take Seoul," the Prime Minister said.

"That night the defining night for the Australians in the Korean Way began. Kapyong - the great fighting withdrawal - the battle that stopped a breakthrough. "That night you fought them. In the dark, radios failing, telephone lines cut, outnumbered."

She said the men had come to Korea carrying the Gallipoli legacy of "mateship, courage, teamwork and initiative". "You were more than worthy of the tradition you inherited," she said. "You have added to it for the heirs you have today.

"You came here as the sons of ANZAC, you left here as the fathers of our professional army. "And on operations in Afghanistan or East Timor, in training overseas, the modern Australian Army is still Kapyong's child."

The ceremony had a commonwealth feel with Australian, New Zealand and Canadian servicemen on hand to welcome the veterans and a British Army band providing the music.

They remembered the 32 Australians who died in the battle as their South Koreans hosts bowed their heads amid the flapping of brightly coloured banners declaring "Korea will always remember your sacrifice."

More than 17,000 Australians served in the Korean War, which cost 340 Australian lives.

SOURCE







Note: I have two other blogs covering Australian news. They are more specialized so are not updated daily but there are updates on both most weeks. See QANTAS/Jetstar for news on Qantas failings and Australian police news for news on police misbehaviour



23 April, 2011

Labor left holding the ashes

Are these the signs that Labor's climate change policy is heading for a second disaster? Big unions and big business are in revolt as the mining boom's strong dollar squeezes the rest of the trade-exposed economy. Households are up in arms over surging power bills.

And since the shambles of the late 2009 Copenhagen climate summit, Labor hasn't doused worries that its carbon tax would put Australia in front of the world, a critical risk for a carbon-intensive economy.

This treble of jobs, cost of living and international competitiveness engulfs Julia Gillard and Greg Combet as they attempt to reverse Kevin Rudd's humiliating 2010 retreat on his emissions trading scheme. It is replete with political and policy failures, some of which are only now becoming evident.

Facing a revolt among steel industry members, Australian Workers Union secretary Paul Howes last week vowed to oppose Labor's carbon tax if it cost just "a single job", even with unemployment below 5 per cent. Remember this is Wayne Swan's union, which was mostly responsible for replacing Rudd with Gillard. Helped by a $US1.07 Aussie dollar, Tony Abbott has hammered a wedge between the blue-collar AWU and Labor's Green alliance, echoing what John Howard did to Mark Latham over Tasmanian forests.

Big business this week joined the rebellion, including a terse return fire of letters with Gillard. Business Council of Australia president Graham Bradley objected to Combet's April 13 National Press Club promise to quarantine more than half the carbon tax money to overcompensate mostly low-income households.

Business fears that Combet's vow to "put households first" will leave a cash-strapped minority government with less to protect industries threatened by the carbon tax, particularly compared with Rudd's 2009 emissions trading scheme deal with Malcolm Turnbull.

Yet the Labor-Greens carbon tax design looks costlier and more uncertain for business than the Rudd-Turnbull plan, for instance by ruling out industry access to international emissions permits that would eat into Canberra's carbon tax revenue.

And the Greens rejected the Rudd-Turnbull deal in part because they reckoned it was too generous to big carbon "polluters".

As well, Gillard needs to hand over more to households because electricity price cost-of-living pressures have worsened. Since late 2006, capital city average household power bills have jumped 52 per cent, or 35 per cent more than the consumer price index. While still a small share of family income, the power bill hikes send out a jolt of sticker shock.

This is before any general carbon price. And it is not happening in other developed economies. Labor's climate change adviser Ross Garnaut figures that real electricity prices in the seven big advanced nations rose only 5 per cent between 2006 and 2009.

This Australian peculiarity is a material change since 2007, when Howard proposed his own emissions trading scheme for an economy that generates 80 per cent of its electricity by burning coal.

Already since then, the power bill shock helped force Rudd's February 2010 backdown and was embodied in Abbott's August 2010 election campaign slogan against a great big new tax on everything. And it is ongoing, bewildering for voters and largely self-inflicted.

NSW households will be slugged with a further 17.6 per cent hike in electricity bills from July 1 following last week's ruling by the state's Independent Pricing and Regulatory Authority. In the coming financial year, NSW households on average will pay between $228 and $316 more for power.

Of this 18 per cent jump, 10 percentage points will come from higher "network" costs and six percentage points from recent changes to the federal government's own renewable energy target, says IPART chairman and adviser to Labor's multiparty climate change committee, Rod Sims.

Sims and Garnaut suggest this reflects two critical policy failures.

The first is the $39 billion five-year electricity network investment surge by mostly state government-owned transmission and distribution monopolies such as Ausgrid (NSW), Energex and Ergon (Queensland) and Aurora (Tasmania).

The high-voltage metal towers that connect generators to substations and the lower-voltage wires and poles that send the power from substations to customers account for about half of retail electricity bills.

As some point out, the electricity network infrastructure boom is almost as big as Labor's contentious National Broadband Network.

Yet Sims and Garnaut suggest that the national energy market regime that regulates these network monopolies encourages excess investment and even "gold plating" under the cover of replacing ageing assets, insuring against a repeat of storm damage blackouts in NSW and Queensland and coping with the sharper peaks in demand.

Under these rules, the regulator can't reject the network monopolies' investment plans unless it can prove they are not "reasonable". The monopolies can cherry-pick specific points to appeal. These rules are more monopoly-friendly than in Britain, where appeals are rare.

The implication is that state treasuries ensured that the Australian Energy Regulator rules protected strong dividend flows from their network monopolies. That is, the rules support generous risk-free regulated rates of return on excess capital spending. These regulated network costs then flow to separately regulated retail prices. As a policy issue, it has slipped under the radar until now.

The second failure is Labor's Renewable Energy Target, which requires 20 per cent of energy to be generated from renewables such as wind and solar by 2020.

Garnaut notes that Labor's RET originally was estimated to add 4 per cent to electricity prices between 2010 and 2015, or less than 1 per cent a year. Yet Sims's IPART ruling says the splitting of the RET into large-scale and small-scale renewable energy early this year alone will increase NSW electricity bills by 6 per cent.

"Green schemes have emerged as a new driver of price increases," warns IPART.

It's the result of federal and NSW incentives for households to install solar panels on their roofs. The bigger than expected take-up has overtones of Labor's disastrous home insulation program. It serves the yearning by higher-income environmentally aware consumers to save the planet by acting locally while getting other consumers to subsidise their power bills.

Sims slams the combination of federal and NSW solar panel incentives as "an expensive, cost-ineffective way of reducing carbon emissions". "Its cost will be borne either by consumers or taxpayers for many years to come," the IPART ruling says. Of course, the whole point of a carbon tax is to eliminate the need for such high-cost abatement. Yet the power price increases fuelled by high-cost green schemes are inflaming the catch-22 backlash against a lower-cost carbon price.

The pre-carbon tax power price surge also is aggravating the cost and hence jobs squeeze on carbon-intensive industries - including steel, aluminium and motor vehicles - exposed to the strengthening exchange rate. Imposing a carbon tax on top of a mining boom means a double hit for manufacturing and processing industries.

Swan this week made the business case by blaming the strong dollar for reducing non-mining company profits in 2010 and, in turn, hitting his budget tax revenues. The dollar averaged US78c in the mining boom mark I before the financial crisis hit. The day after Swan's pre-budget speech, it broke up through $US1.07.

This two-speed economy tension also is provoking claims that Labor is putting Australia in front of global climate change efforts. The notion that Australia should act in tandem with the rest of the world remains central to the nation's climate change policy. While Australia is a heavy per capita emitter, it accounts for only 1.5 per cent of global emissions. Getting out in front may only shift carbon-intensive industries and their pollution offshore.

This risk has been brewing since Rudd's self-inflated hopes of helping to broker a post-Kyoto global climate change deal collapsed at Copenhagen. Recall his private remarks about being "rat f . . ked" by the Chinese.

Combet's suggestion that countries such as China, the US and India are in front of Australia is not yet convincing and is undercut by Productivity Commission analysis. Labor is setting expectations of an initial $20 to $26 per tonne carbon tax before the Productivity Commission has reported on the effective carbon price in other key countries, as required by the country independents' deal with Labor.

In one of his two letters to Gillard, Bradley said Australia "must recognise this reality" that a meaningful cut to global greenhouse gas levels required "international action led by major emitting nations".

He warned that a unilateral carbon price penalty on trade-exposed manufacturing. agricultural and resource sectors would "damage Australian businesses with no net benefit to the world environment". And a carbon price that hit the asset values of coal-fired power generators would require higher rates of return for future generation investment and so lead to higher electricity prices that would undermine productivity across the economy.

In quick reply, Gillard demanded to know whether the Business Council still supported Australia's bipartisan target for reducing emissions by 5 per cent by 2020 and whether it still preferred "using a market mechanism by putting a price on carbon".

Gillard appears to have figured that Rudd's big mistake was to have abandoned his emissions trading scheme, even if it was at her own urging. With the Greens due to get the power balance in the Senate, reviving a carbon price became a political key to her 2011 year of minority government decisiveness.

Yet doing this with the Greens also required her to break her election promise not to introduce a carbon tax.

Labor's disaster scenario now is that the political climate for a carbon price has deteriorated, rather than brightened, since the 2010 federal election. Last month's NSW election wipeout included big Labor losses in its Illawarra and Hunter Valley industrial heartlands and setbacks for the Greens. And the mood may darken further after Swan's budget belt-tightening in two weeks.

SOURCE





Refugee riot highlights a dilemma

THE trashing of Villawood detention centre by asylum-seekers will make the Australian public more hostile to boatpeople and pose a significant test for Labor's new Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen.

The political and policy dilemma Bowen faces is acute. He must take a firm stand against criminal behaviour in detention centres yet the current crisis also demands detention management reform and Labor's delivery on its previous pledge to keep detention to a short base period.

The sharper edge to this Villawood riot is that the instigators, according to Bowen, are mainly people whose claims for refugee status had been rejected at the first point. Bowen said in many cases such claims had been rejected at the second point, the independent merits review. Some claims were now before the courts.

In short, people were unhappy because Australia had found against their refugee claim. The minister said Villawood was under-capacity and rejected assertions that overcrowding was the spark for the riots. Given the damage, certain to run into millions of dollars, with the computer room, kitchen and medical facilities destroyed and firefighters impeded from stopping the blaze, Bowen said the public had "a right to be angry" at the violent behaviour. Indeed, he announced that "I share their anger".

The minister said there was evidence of threats against other detainees. Frankly, it is hard to imagine an event guaranteed to make the Australian public more hostile to boatpeople.

The anger of the rioting inmates is understandable. If you self-select Australia as your destination, pay people-smugglers thousands of dollars, travel a third of the way around the world, transit through several countries and are well aware of your rights on arrival, then rejection is a cruel blow.

This process means that genuine refugees become part of a wider movement where people may be evacuating failed states or searching for improved economic prospects, that is, seeking a migration result. That does not constitute grounds for refugee status.

For Australia, effective border protection is a non-negotiable obligation for Labor and Coalition governments alike. The problem, however, lies in the means and the law.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott was quick to repeat the principle on which the Coalition will stand. "This is criminal conduct," Abbott said. "People who are guilty of criminal conduct don't get permanent residency. The government has to make it absolutely crystal clear that people can never expect permanent residency in Australia if they are guilty of criminal acts against Australian officials, Australian government agents and destruction of Australian taxpayer-funded property."

The public would back overwhelmingly Abbott's position. Indeed, along with proper staff management and faster processing, this principle is basic to winning stability in detention centres. Once people know their residency claim will be delayed or destroyed, such behaviour will be curtailed.

The reality, however, is Bowen feels constrained by the Migration Act. It is a truly monstrous document seeking to govern people movement to this country but not always with success.

"Australia does not make its visa decisions based on protest action," Bowen said after the initial riot. Yes, people who have been rejected cannot intimidate a decision reversal. But what of those waiting to have claims processed?

Bowen says he can use section 501 of the Migration Act, where a visa can be refused or cancelled on "character grounds". After the Christmas Island violence and now Villawood the minister has said he will apply the character test to the people involved. "And I'll be applying it vigorously," he said on Thursday.

Really? The evidence over many years suggests the character test is a paper tiger. Indeed, at face value it seems almost worthless. Its use has been limited in the extreme. Shadow minister Scott Morrison said then: "This government learns nothing from every incident that takes place. We had some veiled threats about potential uses of section 501 of the Migration Act that this government simply has no form in implementing."

After the December 2009 riot on Christmas Island 11 boatpeople were charged. Of these, eight had their charges dismissed. Three were convicted, two being placed on a good behaviour bond and one fined. Each of these three was granted a visa late last year. These facts were confirmed by the Immigration Department yesterday.

They show several things highly relevant to Villawood and Bowen's dilemma. First, it is hard to bring successful convictions against asylum-seekers. Second, having an asylum-seeker convicted is no impediment to them later getting a visa. Third, the actual application of the character test - Bowen's principal weapon - is shown to be ineffective. If the Australian public was aware of this situation it would become even more angry.

Morrison identified and hammered the above example. "Crimes were committed last night again in Villawood and the Australian people expect the government to take control of the detention network," Morrison said on Thursday.

Bowen's problem is that in relation to criminal records, the Migration Act essentially requires a prison sentence for more than 12 months for the character test to be applied. That is, being a criminal is OK; the problem arises only if you are a serious criminal.

The same constraint will apply at Villawood. It will be hard to get convictions. It will be hard toget convictions beyond a 12-month sentence. Therefore, it will be hard for Bowen to say such criminal behaviour rendered theVillawood asylum-seekers ineligible for Australian residency.

It has been reported that as many as 100 people were involved in the riots and violence. This seems a high number. The point, however, is that the history of such riots and the operation of the Migration Act leave no basis for confidence that the criminal behaviour, in its own right, will make the individuals ineligible for a visa.

There is an alternative so-called general provision of the Migration Act under which the minister can veto an asylum-seeker on character grounds. Immigration sources said yesterday the use of this alternative discretion was contentious and would be challenged in the courts.

What does Bowen do? His credibility is on the line. Labor looks weak on asylum-seekers and it cannot tolerate looking any weaker on an issue where it should, on merit, take a stand. Bowen is not the sort of politician who likes being played for a mug.

He may need to seek a quick review of the relevant provisions of the act, explain its shortcomings to the public and, if required, propose tougher amendments to the law. At some stage, however, he will run into the power of the judges and their reluctance to concede power in this jurisdiction.

Interviewed yesterday, Morrison told Focus the problem was the Labor Party, not the law. Morrison identifies the general provision under which the character test can be applied. He argues it is workable, it should be used by the minister and that section 501 has a caveat that "natural justice does not apply", thereby constraining the courts from overruling the minister.

"My first step as immigration minister would be to send a message that people who engage in this behaviour have their processing immediately suspended," Morrison says. "There needs to be an immediate sanction across the entire detention network that misbehaviour will freeze your claim and may stop your claim."

This event is a micro example of the great dilemma presented by boatpeople. This is not a contest of right against wrong. It is about clashing principles and realities in the globalised world.

Under the 1951 Refugee Convention asylum-seekers have the right in international law to be protected and granted residency if found to be genuine refugees regardless of their numbers, their origins or the burden they impose on host nations.

This conflicts with the competing principle that one of the pivotal privileges the public enjoys in a constitutional democracy is the right to protect its borders, uphold its sovereignty and decide who is allowed to join its society and its citizenship.

Governments cannot easily solve this dilemma. They can only find an uneasy balance. Detention, a Labor initiative, is now bipartisan policy. Villawood is alarming because it exposes both the psychological damage suffered by inmates as well as their false belief they have a right to be accepted into Australia.

It is Bowen's task to restore order to the system and show that criminal behaviour has no place.

SOURCE





Big Government talking down to big Australians

The Australian government is bent on making fat people slim in the most condescending way possible. Last month, an incredibly juvenile media campaign was launched to encourage Australians to make healthier lifestyle choices. The “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign is a multimedia extravaganza, featuring television, print and radio ads, an iPhone app and Facebook page.

I feel stupider for receiving healthy lifestyle tips from a simple-minded balloon called Eric. Some pearls of wisdom from the portly blue balloon include swapping “big for small” portions on your plate and “often for sometimes” in regards to naughty treats.

The campaign reaches its nadir with the audacious promise that you can “lose your belly without having to lose out on the things you love.”

Eric doesn’t want to end up with cancer, type-2 diabetes and heart disease, much like a non-balloon person. But diet and exercise is a personal choice and I would be staggered if anyone adopted a healthier lifestyle because the government tells them to.

With the budget bottom-line looking perilous, the taxpayer shouldn’t be funding an enormous health campaign imploring us to swap four scoops of ice-cream for a calorie-light two. It’s an expensive way to inform Australians of the completely obvious.

A utilitarian might rationalise that a costly public health campaign is justified if a healthier public reduces the burden on the government-funded health system. As the saying goes, prevention is cheaper than a cure.

Health Minister Nicola Roxon referred to the cost of obesity when announcing the “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign—claiming that it cost Australia $58.2 billion in 2008 alone. Fat people are not only cardiovascular time-bombs but, according to these figures, economic vandals too.

Roxon’s claiming, in effect, that a healthy society is responsible economic management. But the obese aren’t a great burden on the government’s finances—simply because unhealthy people tend to die prematurely. A healthy pensioner, after all, costs the government more than a dead one.

I’m not saying that a healthier society isn’t an end in itself but that economic considerations shouldn’t be used to justify government health campaigns when all the data isn’t included in their headline-grabbing figures.

The “Swap it, Don’t Stop it” campaign also raises the important issue of whether the government is overreaching, especially when we presently have all the information we need that eating junk food is bad for you and exercise good.

Even the empty-headed understands the virtue of brown bread over white, a regular morning walk and pitfalls of a KFC Double Down burger. There is no information vacuum around these simple lifestyle choices and no such thing as an unwitting glutton.

A constant criticism of Labor is that it doesn’t know what it stands for but I would argue it does.

Since the Rudd government was elected in 2007, Labor has demonstrated an ideological commitment to big government. It’s a uniquely Labor trait for the government to impose itself on the country.

The Labor government suffered from delusions of grandeur in economic management, stimulating the economy in 2008 with malfunctioning pink batts, overpriced school halls and cash handouts for everyone; it intends to build; operate and monopolise a $36 billion national broadband network; it re-regulated the workplace via the Fair Work Act; it imposed a gratuitous new tax on the mining industry without consultation; it hiked taxes on cigarettes and is legislating to deprive smokers the right to choose an aesthetically pleasing brand—for an entirely legal product, mind you; it’s seeking to de-carbonate the economy; and now wants to protect us from ourselves in relation to diet and lazy lifestyles.

Maybe the government should stick to its core functions and leave people with the responsibility to lead relatively healthy lives.

If people want to be gluttons, so be it—they’ll suffer the consequences.

Anyway, few people are going to eat less or exercise more because the government says so, especially when its spokesman is a balloon.

SOURCE





Tony Abbott is grabbing the workers away from the Labor Party

It helps that he comes across as fair dinkum



TONY Abbott went west this week, talking tax and drinking beer with blue-and-yellow workshirt-wearing miners in Western Australia's Pilbara region. It was Abbott's new comfort zone, carved out in recent months at factory gates in Sydney and Melbourne.

When Abbott started courting workers as part of his relentless assault on the Government's carbon pricing "great big new tax on everything", he was mocked by trade union leaders.

The Australian Workers Union's national secretary Paul Howes said he'd be happy to go to the factory floor with Abbott, adding derisively that the Liberal leader was really visiting the bosses, not the workers.

A week ago Howes dropped what could be the death notice for the carbon tax plan by demanding a guarantee that "not one job" go under its implementation.

It's a demand the Government can't meet. Pricing carbon is about economic transformation and, as was the case with breaking down tariff walls 20 years ago, jobs must go, if only to make way for new ones or so the theory goes.

Abbott quickly welcomed Howes' support in his fight against the Government's carbon plan, using it as a rhetorical backdrop to his bar-room schmoozing with the iron ore crowd.

He also had a ready-made comeback for Howes and his "no job losses" demand on Gillard.

"I can guarantee that under the Coalition's climate change policy not a single job will be lost because we won't have a carbon tax," said Abbott.

The miners in the front bar were cheering.

To the minds of some Labor figures Howes' intervention was akin to senior NSW Right powerbroker John Della Bosca belling the GST cat (he said it wasn't such a bad tax) in an interview in late 2000 derailing federal Labor's campaign against John Howard's own big new tax.

There's a growing perception that senior Labor figures are underestimating Abbott, taking refuge in seemingly poor poll numbers for the Liberal leader to deflect from the correspondingly shocking Labor primary vote.

This week's Nielsen poll had Abbott on a net negative approval rating of minus 9 per cent and eight points behind Julia Gillard as preferred prime minister. Newspoll and Galaxy tell a similar story.

However, the voting intention numbers make these figures less relevant. A 16 per cent primary lead and a whopping 56-to-40 two-party preferred advantage means Abbott would become prime minister at a canter if an election was held this weekend.

Another reason to discount Abbott's relatively poor showing is that Gillard's approval is also in negative territory, albeit just over half that of the Opposition Leader.

Unpopular opposition leaders have a habit of becoming popular prime ministers or premiers, having been willing to take the knocks of carping attacks on government policies in return for voter support in the game that matters winning the election.

After Abbott addressed an anti-carbon tax rally outside Parliament House, standing in front of a few sexist, nasty anti-Gillard posters, Labor ministers were lining up to pronounce the Opposition Leader unelectable.

While it was at best poor staff work on Abbott's part to allow himself to be photographed with such offensive posters, it has had no impact on his standing with his personal ratings hardly moving.

"When I saw Abbott on TV with that `bitch' banner in the background, I knew he'd pay a high price," said one minister.

Another remarked that voters were not going to make someone who associated with "the mad right mob" prime minister of Australia.

These perceptions which are regarded as accepted wisdom among most senior Labor politicians reinforce the view formed after last year's election that the 2010 poll was Abbott's best chance.

"That was the speech of someone who knows he's never going to make it to the top," said one senior minister after hearing Abbott's response to Gillard's deal with the Independents to form her government.

Since then Abbott has continued to attack the Government without rest, travelling constantly and delivering the same lines time and again. Meanwhile, Labor's standing in the polls has slipped to historic lows.

Late last year Abbott went off for a very short break, declaring that he would use this year to broaden his political and policy agenda, moving on from his tireless oppositionist position.

Even some of Abbott's Coalition colleagues doubted he would change his spots, something that was given currency by the early renewed attacks on all things Labor.

But Abbott has been quietly rounding out an agenda, adopting one of Kevin Rudd's successful tricks from his 2007 campaign against Howard.

Then Rudd would anticipate Government action and announce Labor's policy on whatever upcoming policy Howard had in the works.

Abbott in recent weeks has stolen a march on Gillard twice, first on welfare to work and this week on mental health. It not only unsettles the Government, it devalues the eventual official announcement.
In his book Battlelines (also unrated by Labor), Abbott reflects approvingly on Howard's strategy of stealing voters from Labor's home turf, calling him "the great boundary buster" of Australian politics.

It's clear Abbott is trying to out-bust his hero - and he's having some marked success.

SOURCE



22 April, 2011

A clergyman who should stick to themes he knows something about

"God's vision is threatened by climate change"? Is this guy a Christian at all? He doesn't seem to have much faith in his God. But the "Uniters" are very wishy washy these days. They had real faith when they were Methodists but their gospel these days appears to be a purely social and political one.

My old Presbyterian church stayed out of the "Uniters" and when Anne and I attended there this morning it was the Gospel of salvation only that I heard. To preach anything else on Good Friday is very peculiar Christianity indeed. And it was the moderator of the Presbyterian Church of Queensland that we had preaching

THE crippling of Japan, the devastation of Christchurch and the floods that ravaged Queensland were not the work of God, church leaders said. But the leader of one of Sydney's three main Christian denominations blamed man for some disasters that caused human suffering.

The Moderator of the Uniting Church Synod of NSW and ACT, the Reverend Niall Reid, said in his Easter message that climate change was the result of "unsustainable, unfettered and unthinking addiction to economic growth", and those who could not entertain a less destructive path were like those who sent Jesus to the Cross for expediency's sake.

Rising sea levels and more ferocious storms, floods and fires caused by climate change had the potential to threaten food security, exacerbate poverty and create an environment ripe for war, he said.

"God is found in the lives of those who seek remedies and work towards God's vision of a reconciled and renewed creation," he said. "Surely in our time [God's] vision is most threatened by climate change, which the science seems to be telling us is caused by human activity."

SOURCE





Carbon confusion

Adam Creighton

If you think Australia needs to ‘do something’ about climate change, a carbon trading scheme should be a long way down the ‘to do’ list.

Carbon trading schemes are designed to increase the ‘price on carbon.’ Yet the government maintains a set of policies that actually act to lower the price on carbon.

Before foisting a cumbersome and irreversible carbon trading scheme on us, the government should first remove some of these price depressants.

Fringe benefits tax for company cars is the most egregious example. The more you drive, the more congestion is created and carbon emitted – but the less tax you pay! Tax owed on a company car drops by almost half if driven more 25,000 kms a year, and by almost two-thirds once the odometer ticks over 40,000 kms. Many thousands of cars are driven purely to exceed these thresholds.

The latest national greenhouse accounts noted that carbon emissions from transport have been ‘one of the strongest sources of emissions growth in Australia.’ Indeed, since 1990, emissions from domestic air travel have grown faster than from any other type of transport. Yet aviation fuel continues to be taxed at a special low rate of 3.6 cents a litre, compared to the standard 38 cents for high-energy fuel.

The government forgoes about $2 billion a year maintaining these policies, money that could be used to cut taxes elsewhere.

Then there’s the Fuel Tax Credit (FTC) scheme, which gives tax rebates to businesses that use big trucks or fuel-intensive machinery. The government’s most recent budget notes that ‘expenses under the Fuel Tax Credits Scheme are also expected to increase progressively across the budget and forward years.’ That’s because the scheme has been expanding since it was introduced in 2006. The FTC scheme is set to cost about $6 billion a year by 2013, about $1 billion more than it does now.

These policies are overseen by the same government that now advocates a higher price on carbon.

Finally, the real excise on petrol has been falling by about 3% a year since 2001, when indexation to inflation ceased. The Henry tax review sensibly flagged its reintroduction, but the government ruled it out. It is hard to see how an ever lower petrol tax will help the government reach its carbon abatement goals.

Australia seems poised to have policies that try to raise and lower the price of carbon at the same time.

Only a government devoted to form over substance would tolerate such absurdities, and only a populace so bamboozled by the array and complexity of government interventions would overlook them.

The above is a press release from the Centre for Independent Studies, dated 21 April. Enquiries to cis@cis.org.au. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590.




Private choppers saviours during flood

LACK of air support has emerged as a key issue in the flood inquiry as a regional police officer revealed he relied on privately owned choppers on at least two occasions to do his job during the deluge.

The inquiry moved to Dalby yesterday to examine disaster management in the bush after thousands of residents suffered inundation on the Darling Downs in the dying days of 2010.

Blurred lines between police and emergency services boundaries were examined, along with problems with flood warning systems.

Farmer Glen Taylor, who lives outside the tiny town of Condamine, used the forum to blast bureaucracy which he believes has overburdened localised disaster management with petty rules. "Regulation is just about choking all these people," he said.

The rift between city and country was also evident in the inquiry, as one police officer noted flood information was available on a website. "We're not always on computers," declared a voice from the public gallery.

Police Sergeant Ben Wiltshire, officer in charge of the Miles police station, highlighted one of the most serious problems of regional flooding when he told of hitching rides on choppers to help out in the flood.

At 11am on December 30, he was phoned by a resident of Condamine who advised water was knee-deep in the pub and large parts of the town were in danger of inundation.

Sgt Wiltshire was told a chopper from M1 Helicopters in Roma had landed in Miles to refuel and asked if he could hitch a lift. "I spoke with the manager, Peter Clatworthy, who approved travel to Condamine without charge," he said.

Sgt Wiltshire said without the generosity of Mr Clatworthy, the subsequent evacuation of the entire town of Condamine, which he helped manage, would have been more difficult and dangerous. During the evacuation he relied exclusively on private or military owned choppers, and could not communicate directly with the pilots nor issue instructions.

On another occasion during the floods, Sgt Wiltshire said a privately owned chopper landed near him and the pilot walked over and advised him he had 20 minutes of fuel left if a chopper was needed for flood work. Sgt Wiltshire used the time to check on people in vulnerable areas.

"But it was just luck," he said. Sgt Wiltshire said dedicated police choppers were needed to address the issue.

SOURCE





Rioting illegal immigrants face prosecution after fires at Sydney detention centre

TWENTY-TWO detainees at Sydney's Villawood Detention Centre have been removed and are being questioned by police over this week's riot. The Villawood centre erupted in a riot on Wednesday night involving up to 100 detainees, leaving nine buildings gutted by fire.

A Department of Immigration and Citizenship (DIAC) spokeswoman said while a small number of detainees remained on a rooftop at the centre, there were no further reports of disturbances last night. "We can report that the centre has been calm throughout the night," she said.

She said that early today, 22 people of interest had been removed from Villawood and taken to Silverwater Correctional Centre in an operation by DIAC, NSW Police, Australian Federal Police and the centre manager Serco. She said they would be questioned in relation to the events of Wednesday and yesterday at the detention centre. No one had been arrested or charged at this stage, she said.

Social Justice Network member Jamal Daoud said detainees had told him overnight that Federal Police in full gear had entered Villawood, searched rooms, removed some detainees - mainly Kurdish and Afghani - and taken them away in a bus. He described the actions as insensitive and said they added tension to an already intense situation. "The detainees are demanding to know the destination their fellow detainees were taken to and on which basis they were identified," he said.

The protest was triggered after two men climbed onto the roof of the main centre early on Wednesday. They were soon joined by 11 others and, by midnight, up to 100 people were involved, vandalising and setting fire to buildings. An oxygen cylinder was torched, leading to an explosion shortly after 2am yesterday.

By yesterday afternoon, six protesters were left on the roof of one building.

The asylum seekers involved in the violent rampage at the Villawood Detention Centre face criminal charges and deportation to their country of origin.

An angry and hard-line Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, yesterday said while he understood the frustration, there was "no justification at all" for setting fire to nine buildings and hurling roof tiles at firefighters.

Mr Bowen said the group of men who took to the roof of the detention centre in Sydney's southwest, sparking the protest, had already had their refugee claims knocked back. Some of them were being readied for deportation to their country of origin.

"These are people in many instances who are not happy with that outcome but ... if they think they will change their visa outcome, if they think they will be accepted as refugees because of this sort of protest action, they've chosen the wrong government and the wrong minister, because that won't be happening."

With the damage bill to run into millions of dollars, Mr Bowen said protesters could potentially face criminal charges following an investigation by the Australian Federal Police.

In Tokyo, Prime Minister Julia Gillard also took a tough stance, sending a message to those involved in the riot. "Violence is wrong and it doesn't help your claim," she said.

Opposition immigration spokesman Scott Morrison said the Government should immediately suspend processing of refugee claims of people who were involved in the violent fracas. "If you're not a refugee then you shouldn't be here, and you should be returned," he said.

Mr Bowen said he would "vigorously" apply the character test to asylum seekers who had visa applications pending.

Reports that police were delayed from entering the burning detention centre compound on Wednesday night because of jurisdictional issues were vigorously denied by the Government.

However The Daily Telegraph understands police were called out at 11.20pm but it was 1am before they entered the compound. It is believed it took some time for the riot squad to be assembled.

Because only minor damage was done to accommodation blocks, detainees were able to remain at Villawood last night but Mr Bowen said that may change over the coming days. A temporary kitchen was last night being flown in from Melbourne.

The Villawood Immigration Detention Centre is due to undergo a $187 million redevelopment.

Mr Bowen said the violence would be investigated as part of an existing independent review into the protests that occurred at the Christmas Island immigration detention centre last month.

SOURCE





Note: I have two other blogs covering Australian news. They are more specialized so are not updated daily but there are updates on both most weeks. See QANTAS/Jetstar for news on Qantas failings and Australian police news for news on police misbehaviour





21 April, 2011

Dam safety experts awaiting their moment of truth

There's a smell of a coverup already

MAJOR consulting firms that have done exhaustive studies on the Wivenhoe and Somerset dams have yet to make submissions to the flood inquiry. SKM, GHD and SMEC - the dam's major safety and improvements experts over the past decade - say they have not yet been asked to submit anything by inquiry commissioners

An inquiry spokesman yesterday was unable to explain why the request had not been made. Consultant reports were among the materials being reviewed by the inquiry, he said.

The engineering firms have done studies for Seqwater on dam operations, including suggesting ways to boost capacity for the dams that still fail to meet the guidelines of ANCOLD, the Australian National Committee on Large Dams

The lack of dam capacity and fears over possible dam failure played a role in massive water releases that contributed to the flooding of Brisbane and lpswich in January.

Submissions to the inquiry have accused dam operators of slow reactions and flawed and risky decision-making by allowing the dam to fill well beyond its full water storage capacity from January 4 to 11.

Seqwater also has been criticised for not boosting the capacity of the dam, following a 2007 report that highlighted a "high" safety risk for not meeting ANCOLD guidelines.

The inquiry has yet to hear from long-time Seqwater boss Peter Borrows, who was in charge during the releases and also oversaw dam operations during most of the period when improvements lagged.

Mr Burrows was expected to be the last witness in Brisbane, but he didn't testify before the venue shifted to Toowoomba. He is still expected to testify.

Mr Borrows' statement to the inquiry shows memory lapses in discussions with his staff during the period when the dams filled to nearly 200 per cent of their water supply capacity. Fears of a catastrophic failure prompted dam operators to release the equivalent of two North Pine dams of water on January ll, leading to the flooding of thousands of homes along the Brisbane River.

Critics writing to the inquiry say the water should have been released more gradually, after January 4.

The above article by Tuck Thompson appeared in the "Courier Mail" on 21 April




Anti-Israel BS: Labor's infected and the Greens are gangrenous

by Eric Abetz

Last night at a meeting of the Marrickville Council, the council voted eight to four to not pursue its boycott of Israel.

Marrickville Council's abortive attempt to implement the Global Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (GBDS) campaign against Israel in Sydney's Inner West should be a wake-up call. The moment to turn this objectionable campaign around should not be lost, else we will see more loopy home-grown forays into foreign policy. While this campaign may have been temporarily halted at a municipal level, it has gained considerable ground within Australia's unions.

In moving her motion at Marrickville Council, Greens Councillor, Cathy Peters noted that the BDS campaign had the support of the Victorian Trades Hall Council, the South Coast Labour Council, and various state branches of the ASU, Teachers' Union, LHMWU, CFMEU and MUA. In fact this is only half the list.

Branches of the AMWU, CEPU, ETU, FSU, HACSU and RTBU, along with the Geelong Trades Hall Council, Newcastle Trades and Labour Council, Queensland Council of Unions and Unions ACT, have also lent their support to this campaign.

This support ranges from in-principle backing, through active involvement in the BDS campaign, to pressuring the ACTU and Labor Party to support the BDS movement.

To give you the flavour, the Victorian Trades Hall Council last September resolved to:

Promote this campaign within the community, work with unions and other organisations that support the campaign to maximise its effectiveness" and to "provide reports to Executive Council at 6 monthly intervals and will include information on the effectiveness of the campaign (Sis Halfpenny and Bro Cragg will be the responsible officers).

The BDS campaign in Australia has a more sinister side. The Australian BDS movement, which promoted Marrickville Council's BDS intiative, is conducting a campaign of direct harassment and boycott against Israeli linked businesses.

For over six months the cosmetic company Seacret has had its shops picketed by screeching BDS activists because it is allegedly `profiteering from resources in the land stolen by Israel'.

Cosmetics companies L'Oreal and Jericho have also been targeted for similar reasons, as has Caterpillar because its bulldozers are used by Israeli authorities.

These highly-charged "actions" by BDS protestors are disruptive and intimidating. As Michael Danby said of Marrickville Council:

Are they now going to paint the Star of David on shops selling Israeli products?

Now is the time for Australia's political leaders to act if we are to halt this extremism.

To his credit the AWU's Paul Howes has taken a strong stand against the BDS campaign taking root in the unions. He has rightly concluded that it is just the first step in of a broader campaign enlisting `useful fools' to demonise all Israel and attack its legitimacy.

But to date the ACTU has been conflicted on the issue. It must take a stand. It must come down hard on the Sister Halfpennys and Brother Craggs in the union movement who think that they can implement foreign policy out of Trades Hall.

This situation would never have been allowed to get so far out of hand under Bob Hawke.

As far as Labor is concerned, Kevin Rudd and Craig Emerson did not hesitate to lambast Marrickville Council over its BDS policy.

However, Labor still has a lot to answer for. Four local Labor Councillors voted for the policy and NSW Labor directed preferences to the Greens Mayor of Marrickville, Fiona Byrne, when she contested the seat of Marrickville at the recent state election.

Meanwhile Labor has the internal problem of Labor 4A Just Palestine - an anti-Israel group which supports the BDS campaign - convened by David Forde, who could be preselected for the Brisbane seat of Stretton.

But if BDS has infected Labor, it's positively gangrenous in the Greens.

Senator-elect Lee Rhiannon shepherded the BDS policy through the NSW Greens state council. The policy called for all Australians and the Australian Government to boycott Israeli goods, trading and military arrangements, and sporting, cultural and academic events.

Greens Leader, Bob Brown, failed to condemn Marrickville's BDS policy during the NSW state election; he opposed a Senate motion condemning it; and has subsequently tried to diffuse responsibility by blaming the Labor councillors on Marrickville Council.

Nevertheless I congratulate Greens Leader Bob Brown and Prime Minister Gillard for heeding calls to pull their councillors into line - albeit they should have done so long before now.

So where to now? Firstly, Labor, the Greens and the unions must be honest about the extent to which the BDS movement has taken root in their parties and set about countering it.

In light of the rebuff to Marrickville Council I will amend my motion, to be considered by the Senate when it returns in May, so as to give Labor and the Greens the opportunity to acknowledge that Israel is a legitimate and democratic state and a good friend of Australia, and to condemn the BDS campaign wherever it has taken hold.

It is only by subjecting this objectionable BDS campaign to public scrutiny that we can make Marrickville Council's reversal on this issue a watershed in this debate.

SOURCE






Carbon slug on property repayments

MORTGAGE repayments on newly built homes could jump almost $43 a month unless housing is compensated under a carbon tax.

Spread over a typical 25-year loan for a new home in Melbourne, the total hit could top $12,800.

The Housing Industry Association says costs of making and transporting building materials would soar once a price was put on carbon.

The Gillard Government, the Greens and independent MPs are still working out the exact price and compensation.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet recently guaranteed millions of households would be "over-compensated" for rising day-to-day living costs.

But the HIA wants compensation for the biggest single expenditure item most people ever face - their own homes.

"The Government has not addressed the impact of a carbon tax on a new home, where a family will incur a much larger cost impost and one that will hit the household budget for the life of their loan," HIA chief executive (association) Graham Wolfe said.

If the eventual carbon price is set at $25 a tonne, the HIA calculates an average family home would cost $6000 more.

The figure is based on 240 tonnes of carbon estimated to be used in manufacture and transport of materials. It does not include GST or stamp duty.

Applied to a median-priced Melbourne home of $537,522, the price hike would increase monthly loan repayments from $3258.43 to $3301.22 - $42.79 or about $10 a week.

Mr Wolfe said the figure was greater than the Governments' projections of how much a carbon tax would increase costs of life's daily essentials.

The Government says money from taxing big carbon polluters would go into compensating households, job protection and carbon reduction programs.

But the HIA warned that new house price rises would undermine the goal of reducing emissions by discouraging building of energy-efficient new homes.

SOURCE






10 big errors in Warmist speech by Federal mimister

by Bob Carter, David Evans, Stewart Franks & Bill Kininmonth. (Bob Carter is a geologist, David Evans a mathematician and computer modeller, Stewart Franks a hydrologist and engineer, and Bill Kininmonth a meterologist and former Director of the National Climate Centre.)

Climate Minister Greg Combet delivered a major speech at the National Press Club on April 13th entitled "Tackling Climate change in the National Interest".

The earlier part of Minister Combet's speech traversed various scientific issues, which we analyse below, putting his statements in italics, and our commentary in ordinary type.

1. The evidence of atmospheric warming is very strong, and the potential for dangerous climate impacts is high. The scientific advice is that carbon (sic) pollution (sic) is the cause.

Atmospheric warming and cooling happen the whole time naturally, and global temperature has been level or cooling gently for the last ten years; and that despite the fact that a quarter of all human emissions of carbon dioxide, over all of history, have occurred since 1998.

No empirical evidence has been provided, and especially not by the IPCC or Professor Steffen, that a significant part of the late 20th century warming was caused by human carbon dioxide emissions. Instead, warming alarmist arguments rely upon computer modelling and assumptions about positive feedback from moist air and clouds.

Neither has any evidence been provided that the number or intensity of dangerous climatic events has in the near past fallen outside of normal natural variation.

The term "carbon pollution" is a pejorative term that displays ignorance by those who use it. In reality, the public debate is about the magnitude of the warming effect exercised by human carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide from whatever source is an environmental benefice that sustains most of the ecosystems on planet Earth.

2. Globally, 2010 was the warmest year on record, with 2001 to 2010 the warmest decade. 2010 is the 34th consecutive year with global temperatures above the 20th-century average.

Were this true, so what? The world has been in a warming trend since 1680, the depth of the Little Ice Age, so of course later years tend to be warmer. Human carbon emissions were insignificant before 1850 and tiny before WWII, so human-sourced emissions are obviously not the sole cause of warming.

But in fact it isn't true. Amongst the major records of global temperature, only one shows 2010 as the warmest year since global thermometer records began (about 1850). That record is the NASA GISS index compiled by James Hansen, and its limitations and inaccuracies are well known. The temperature record used by the IPCC is the U.K. Hadley Centre's HadCRUT thermometer plot, and the most accurate record of all is that measured from satellites (which covers nearly the whole planet, not mainly airports and carparks). These two records show that the 2010 global temperature was 0.2 and 0.1 deg. C below the warm peak attained during the 1998 El Nino year, respectively.

More generally, all versions of the 20th century thermometer temperature record on which the Minister places his reliance are of limited accuracy and also encompass a warming bias. Representing, as they do, only 3 climate data points, they are a completely inadequate basis on which to make grand statements about climate change.

Judged against climate records of adequate length, the temperature has been declining gently for the last 10,000 years (since the Holocene post-glacial climatic optimum) and increasing for about the last 330 years (since the depth of the cold Little Ice Age around 1680). So it is no surprise (i) that overall warming occurred during the 20th century; and (ii) that 2001-2010 was a relatively warm decade, for the same reason that most of the warmer days each year cluster around mid-summer's day - in both cases, the grouping of warm temperatures is because of position within a known climatic cycle.

3. In Australia, each decade since the 1940s has been warmer than the preceding decade. With rising temperatures we can expect to see more extreme weather events, including more frequent and intense droughts, floods and bushfires.

In some places, each successive decade of the last 50 years may indeed have been warmer than its predecessor, for the same reasons explained under Point 2; the Earth is currently still recovering from a Little Ice Age.

But Australian temperatures, and those in other regions, do not move in perfect synchronisation with global temperatures, because of regional scale circulations and responses to multi-decadal climate oscillations. So whereas southeastern Australia (and offshore waters) started warming around 1950, after nearly a half century of flat temperatures, they have (along with global temperature) also stabilised over the last decade. But, in any case, it is global temperatures that are the point at issue, not Australian ones.

In the early 1970s, some climate scientists were full of talk about global cooling and the looming possibility of a new ice age -- they based their alarm on the fact that the global thermometer record had been falling for the previous three decades. These scientists also cited models that showed that a new ice age might indeed occur (their models, like the current ones, were loaded with too much positive feedback). Minister Combet is now apparently claiming that the 1945-1975 cooling didn't occur in Australia. Perhaps he is relying upon a temperature graph that has been revised in retrospect?

The accompanying statement that extreme weather events have increased with warmer temperatures is contradicted by the available empirical evidence - and that they will increase or become more extreme in the future should warming resume is derived from speculative, unvalidated and invalidated computer climate models.

4. The environmental consequences translate readily into economic costs - as well as potential negative impacts on water security, coastal development, infrastructure, agriculture, and health.

Natural climate events and change do indeed impose economic and social costs, as the bushfires, floods and cyclones of the last few years in Australia readily show. There is no evidence whatever that these costs have been greater in recent years because of human influences on global climate.

5. Professor Will Steffen, a leading expert in the climate science, has advised the Multi-Party Committee on Climate Change that there is 100% certainty that the earth is warming, and that there is a very high level of certainty it will continue to warm unless efforts are made to reduce the levels of carbon (sic) pollution (sic) being sent into the atmosphere.

Professor Steffen is spectacularly wrong. The earth is NOT currently warming, and hasn't been for the last 10 years, and perhaps longer. That this lack of warming has been accompanied by increasing carbon dioxide levels proves that carbon dioxide is not the predominant controlling influence on global temperature.

Neither Professor Steffen nor any other scientist can state with certainty whether global temperature in ten years time will be warmer or cooler than today. But given the currently quiet sun, and acknowledging the importance of multi-decadal climatic oscillations such as the Pacific Decadal Oscillation, many scientists currently hypothesize that cooling is more likely than warming over the next two decades.

6. It is in our national interest to take action on climate change. The national interest case is clear.

It is indeed, and the climate events and change that the Minister should be paying attention to are those KNOWN hazards of natural origin. Because the government instead is focused upon the entirely HYPOTHETICAL risks of dangerous warming caused by human-related carbon-dioxide emissions, it has taken its eye off the main game. The national interest case for better preparation for natural climate events and change is clear, and it is past time that the Minister focused on it.

7. Climate change is an environmental problem with an economic solution.

This is an absurd statement, which should read "Climate events and change cause environmental and social damage, and are therefore an economic cost".

For natural climate events and change are obviously hazards with attendant economic costs, and they are more costly the less prepared that we are - as the Victorian bushfires and Brisbane floods have clearly shown.

Perhaps "climate change" (as the Minister intends the term to be understood) is an invented problem to justify a desired and particular political "solution"? Be that as it may, whatever the Minister is referring to here is certainly not based upon science as we have learned to practice it over the last two centuries.

8. Just as the 1980s reforms laid down the bedrock of our current prosperity, pricing carbon (sic) will ensure that the Australian economy of the 21st century remains globally competitive.

Competitive with whom? Australia will be way out in front in leading de-industrialisation and economic decline, for no other countries are proposing to handicap themselves nearly as much on a per capita basis.

Putting a rising tax on carbon dioxide will have one, and only one, result, which is to render the Australian economy more and more uncompetitive against its overseas competitors, with a concomitant inexorable rise in the cost of living.

At the same time, a tax on carbon dioxide will do nothing to effect global temperature in a measurable way.

9. Intergenerational equity is a key determinant of long-term economic policy making. Our obligation is to leave the world a better place, not to pass on the problems we found too difficult to deal with to our grandchildren and to their grandchildren.

The government's Climate Commissioner, Professor Tim Flannery, has indicated that some computer models that he favours project that a period of 1,000 years or more will be required before any cuts in Australian carbon dioxide emissions take effect.

The intergenerational equity that the Minister speaks of is therefore like King Canute being held responsible for the living standards of present day Australians. It is astonishing that such fantasies are now being introduced into public discourse by government ministers who, King Canute-like in their turn, appear to believe that they can "stop climate change".

In any case, there never has been intergenerational equity. The gross inequities that exist across both geography and generations are caused by contrasting access and lack of access to cheap energy. It is estimated that 1.5 billion persons today lack adequate sanitation, clean drinking water and basic health care and education. Such poverty kills innumerable persons in developing countries each and every year.

There is no equity in restricting access to cheap energy, and future restrictions on cheap sources of energy such as coal will condemn millions to future poverty or death.

10. Australia is one of the world's top 20 polluters and we release more pollution per person than any other country in the developed world - more than the US. Not only is it in our national interest to act, we have a responsibility to do so.

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, but an environmental benefit.

Even according to the IPCC's faulty models, if Australia stopped all emissions of carbon dioxide from tomorrow, the total effect on the temperature in 2050 would be to theoretically lower it by 0.0154 øC.

Regarding real air pollutants, Australia has good controls on industrial emissions through clean air legislation, and it is unlikely that our pollutant emissions are significantly higher than other western countries with similar controls.

Which is not to say that further improvements to air quality might not be effected, especially in metropolitan areas. Indeed, expenditure of public money on that (to demonstrable effect) would be a far preferable course of action to squandering money on cuts in carbon dioxide emissions that will have no effect on either pollution or future climate.

Final remarks

The later part of the Minister Combet's speech is concerned with political and policy matters which we do not analyse in detail. We note, however, that the relevance of these issues depends entirely upon whether there is a dangerous global warming problem to deal with in the first place.

Minister Combet provides no evidence whatever that there is.

SOURCE



20 April, 2011

You've got to have "panic or distress" in your voice for police emergency operators to take you seriously???

Amazing behaviour

A TOOWOOMBA man says his wife and son may still be alive if their initial triple-0 call during the flood crisis was handled by a different operator.

John Tyson, whose wife, Donna Rice, and 13-year-old son, Jordan, were swept away in the January 10 flash flood, disputed claims his wife sounded calm during the call.

Mr Tyson and son Blake, 10, sat in the public gallery as the Queensland floods inquiry heard distressing recordings of two triple-0 calls, one from Donna Rice and a later one from Jordan. The police officer who responded to the first triple-0 call repeatedly castigated Ms Rice for driving through a flooded intersection minutes before their deaths. The first, in which Ms Rice phoned to report she was stranded in a car at an intersection, went unanswered for a long time. She then reported that water was up to the door of her car and she was stuck.

"Why did you drive through the flooded water?" the police officer, Senior Constable Jason Wheeler, asked. After taking down her details, Senior Constable Wheeler said emergency services had been receiving a huge number of calls.

Before the call ended, he said: "You shouldn't have driven through it in the first place, OK."

In the second phone call, several minutes later, Jordan Rice spoke to a Queensland Fire and Rescue Service operator. He initially had trouble describing where they were stuck and was asked to calm down: "No, we're scared. "We're nearly drowning, hurry up please."

Before the call cut out, there was a discussion about getting on to the roof of the car.

Senior Constable Wheeler, who took Mrs Rice's call at 1.49pm, said he had no appreciation she was in major danger. "There was no panic or distress in her voice," he said.

He said minor flooding had occurred at the same intersection in the past, and her request to him to call a tow truck did not suggest a sense of urgency.

Senior Constable Wheeler said he had told her to call a tow truck herself because the police service could not be seen to give preferential treatment to a particular towing company.

He reported himself to a welfare officer a day or two after the call, expressing concern he did not keep his frustration in check.

Mr Tyson spoke to the inquiry, saying his wife was "a guardian angel" and saying Jordan loved his family unconditionally.

SOURCE





Arrogant' RTA to get humbling overhaul

A rare admission about a government instrumentality

THE Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) will be a "very different" organisation in 12 weeks time, New South Wales Roads Minister Duncan Gay said as he pledged sweeping reforms to curb a culture of "arrogance".

"The people sitting in the cars today, they're our customers, and we have to make that customer service is right," Mr Gay said today.

"What we're doing is in the first stage moving people from the back rooms into customer delivery, into the frontline of development."

Mr Gay said a sense of "arrogance" had seen the RTA and its 7000-odd workers stray from its core responsibilities, but praised staff for identifying some of these underlying problems.

"RTA should be providing roads, planning for roads and providing those services that they do on licences and registration, and doing it better," Mr Gay told Macquarie Radio.

"The good thing I've found in the RTA is that they've identified that there's a persona of arrogance and they're starting to work on it.

"We have got to be careful - there are some great people in all these organisations - that we maintain the good bits and the good people as we go through the changes."

Mr Gay said the Coalition's new single integrated transport authority included sweeping changes to the RTA structure to boost frontline staff and customer services.

"The RTA will still be an important sector," Mr Gay said on ABC Radio. "But as I said yesterday, the RTA will be very different. We envisage a different organisation."

He said the Government had given itself 12 weeks to introduce the changes.

SOURCE





Another failure of a government computer project

When will they learn to buy "off the shelf">

A NEW Victoria Police crime database has been put on hold for at least two years amid a $100 million cost blow out.

But even as the police tried to suggest the LINK project was still the best option, Mr Ryan suggested the system may still never get off the ground, taking a hard line on the expensive project.

After already spending $45 million of a $56 million budgeted for the project, consultants have found the scale and cost of the project were “underestimated” in the initial business case.

“This fiasco has been going on since 2005. Unlike the former Labor Government, we are not going to have more money poured into this project, which is akin to tipping water down a well,” Mr Ryan said.

“We are not going to put another cent into this, not another red cent, until such time that we know where the money that has been spent already has in fact gone, let alone where any future money is to be directed.''

Mr Ryan has refused to guarantee the future on the LINK database until it could be convinced by a compelling business plan.

“We will consider it on its merits. I can tell you though … we are not going to spend another cracker on the development of this project unless and until we have a business case, which reflects the needs of police.”

Mr Ryan said the government's response follows an approach “a few weeks ago” by police about the cost over-run.

“The development of the LINK project has stopped,” Mr Ryan said.

The LINK system was supposed to have replaced the outdated LEAP system, but today police command said they had been forced to delay the project for "at least two years".

The 18-year-old LEAP system has come under criticism for flaws, leaks and inappropriate use.

SOURCE





'Dodgy' rental car practices exposed in Choice study

This is a real problem, with lots of ripoffs. Europcar is not mentioned below but seems to have been the biggest cause of complaints that I have seen. I advise people to use Hertz, as they seem like a well-conducted business in my experience

THE "ludicrous" fees and policies of some of the nation's car hire companies have come under the spotlight in a new report.

Consumer watchdog Choice claims to have exposed a variety of “unfair” practices in its report, which analysed the contracts of car rental firms Avis, Bayswater, Budget, East Coast Car Rentals, Europcar, Hertz, Redspot and Thrifty.

Excess reduction policies, fees for not-at-fault accidents and “premium location” surcharges were among the fees and policies singled out as being "unfair".

One of the main offenders, East Coast Car Rentals, has come under fire for allegedly including a clause that essentially means they can rent out a car that doesn't work.

"With an insurance policy riddled with exceptions, a huge administrative surcharge and what seems like an illegal attempt at eroding consumers’ legal rights, East Coast Car Rentals has some of the nastiest fine print out there," the Choice report said.

Choice said it has reported the offending clause to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission.

Meanwhile, Bayswater was criticised for its policy of charging travellers for not-at-fault accidents, even when the other driver has been located. "Their rates are some of the lowest, but we are unimpressed with their policy of charging consumers for not-at-fault accidents,” the report said. "Where the other driver is located, any costs would already be covered by their insurance, so it’s double-dipping."

The review comes at a time when customers are being driven mad by hire car rip-offs. A recent survey of 2500 Australians by consumer ratings agency Canstar Blue found that excessive fees and poor service are a major cause of frustration. The Choice study has added weight to these consumer complaints, finding that while car hire may seem cheap at first, hidden costs can add up quickly.

Excess reduction fees were singled out as one of the most expensive “optional” extras. The report said travellers seeking to avoid being hit with a hefty fee in the event of an accident are placed in a no-win situation. Standard excesses were said to be “unduly high”, however, the excess reduction policies themselves can add up to $40 a day to a car renter’s bill.

“Consumers should be aware of insurance exclusions. We found a number of companies charging up to $2200 on top of existing excesses for single vehicle accidents,” Choice spokeswoman Ingrid Just said. “Other companies only conditionally cover collisions with animals or those incurred whilst reversing.”

Other “unfair” practices in the report included customers being charged extra to pick up a car from a “premium location” such as an airport and fees for e-tag hire, which can result in consumers being forced to spend a lot more than expected. “Paying an extra 22 per cent on the total cost per rental simply because you pick up your car at an airport is ludicrous as is being charged for an e-tag even if you don’t use it on a toll road,” Ms Just said.

One car rental company was even busted charging a 9.95 per cent administration fee on the total cost of the rental.

Bayswater and East Coast Car Rentals have been contacted for comment.

Choice’s tips to avoid being stung by a dodgy car rental contract:

• Read contract terms and conditions carefully before signing

• Photograph your car rental vehicle at the beginning and end of hire

• Return your car during opening hours and insisting on an immediate inspection

• Familiarise yourself with hidden fees and charges by doing a run through the company’s online booking system

• Fill up the vehicle as close as possible to the drop off point and keep the receipt to avoid a refuelling fee

• Take out domestic travel insurance that covers rental car excess instead of paying car hire companies to reduce your liability

• If driving in the Eastern states, look into your e-tag options in advance – in many cases it is cheaper to buy a visitor’s pass or pay as you go than to rent an e-tag with your car

• Avoid one way fees, which are charged by most companies, by hiring from and returning to the same location

SOURCE



19 April, 2011

Carbon tax 'will destroy' major centres such as Port Pirie and Whyalla

THE state's two key industrial cities will be "wiped off the map" by a carbon tax, a major union warns. The tax would strip thousands of jobs from Whyalla and Port Pirie, the Australian Workers Union state secretary Wayne Hanson said.

The internal revolt from Labor's industrial heartland threatens not just the reform but the Government's survival.

Mr Hanson yesterday stepped up his union's opposition to the tax, claiming the future of both cities would be in serious doubt because both had economies based on the high-emission production of steel, iron ore and zinc. "Goodbye. They will be off the map," he said.

His opposition to the tax appears to be a calculated manoeuvre by the AWU and follows last week's surprise about-face by the union's national secretary, Paul Howes, who declared the AWU's support would be conditional on absolutely no jobs being put at risk in the steel sector.

The Gillard Government's support base now appears to be fracturing, threatening the future of the Prime Minister's signature reform for this term.

With Whyalla's main employer, OneSteel, and fellow steelmaker BlueScope in Canberra today for talks with the Federal Government over the proposed tax, the fact that such an important union has broken ranks and is openly campaigning against the Government is highly significant.

The AWU, the oldest and most influential union in the ALP, is demanding either an outright exemption for the steel industry or a 100 per cent compensation package.

An estimated 3000 to 4000 jobs are dependent on OneSteel's Whyalla operations alone. The company produces some 1.3 million tonnes of steel per year from its operation there, accounting for around 20 per cent of the national industry.

Adding to Ms Gillard's woes, food manufacturers are now also seeking special treatment. "We don't oppose a price on carbon, but industry is opposed to a tax that will increase the cost of food and grocery manufacturing in Australia, which is already under intense pressure," the Australian Food and Grocery Council's Kate Carnell said in a statement yesterday. "Whatever decision is made, the Government must ensure that Australian-manufactured food and groceries will not be made less competitive."

The Government now faces a wall of opponents as groups across the political spectrum from employers and industry bodies, to unions and the welfare sector, seek exemptions or more compensation.

The unpopular tax, which the Government is struggling to sell - not least because it has not designed it yet - is also a factor driving Labor's support into the basement. The latest Neilsen poll showed Labor at its lowest level in 15 years.

Mr Hanson said union members at Whyalla's OneSteel plant, and at Nyrstar's lead and zinc smelter at Port Pirie were rightly worried. "It's ridiculous to consider (a carbon tax) when you don't have other countries that are prepared to adopt a common approach," he said. "To allow your steel industry to disintegrate is just reckless. Should we be the trail-blazer?"

That argument appears to be straight out of Tony Abbott's anti-carbon tax playbook after he called for a people's revolt on the tax on the grounds it would destroy jobs and send investment off-shore.

However, the state Labor MP for Giles, Lyn Breuer, said the Federal Government understood what was at stake. "Why would the Federal Government send an industry broke, put in jeopardy the jobs of thousands of workers, particularly in my area in Whyalla? ... I'm confident that we'll be able to make some sort of arrangement that will satisfy everyone," she said before acknowledging: "without the steel making operations at OneSteel, the town (Whyalla) would not have a future."

SOURCE




More Gillard stupidity

JUST as even her friends felt free to stab her in the front, and it appeared impossible she could alienate another single person or group, given that pretty much everybody who could be, had been, Julia Gillard has united the most vulnerable and the most venerated in the community against her government.

It takes a rare kind of talent to contemplate a measure that compels three outraged mums from Bendigo to jump on a bus for Melbourne, or for a couple whose son had just been diagnosed with a brain tumour to travel from Bathurst to Sydney to join terminally ill patients, researchers in lab coats and office workers in their thousands in cities across Australia.

Only a truly methodical approach could weave together such a coalition, including Nobel Prize winners, the Greens, the independents and the opposition. Yet the government has achieved just that thanks to plans to slash $400 million from medical research funding in the May budget.

And it is happening as Tony Abbott attaches a plus to his name and minimises the negative by addressing issues such as welfare reform, indigenous intervention and infrastructure spending.

It could take a while for his approach to penetrate and his next chance to prove he is serious will be his budget reply speech, but if he persists, people could begin to think he has the odd good idea and maybe is a viable option. Stranger things have happened.

As a former health minister, Abbott is well acquainted with the value of medical research and also the potency of any campaign that its supporters may mount, so he found it difficult to believe, as did others, that the government would even think about cutting research funding.

Let's assume it is not true. One simple sentence from the Prime Minister would have killed the story stone dead.

She could have said: "I'm not in the business of ruling things in or not, but just let me say I have always placed a high premium on the work done by our medical researchers. It has been recognised internationally and it is valued highly here, and as a government we would not do anything that would endanger that."

End of story. Literally end of an extremely damaging story. Spare us the twaddle about refusing to rule in or out any pre-budget speculation. They do it when it suits and usually in those terms.

In fact, Gillard used a bullhorn last week at Luna Park to rule welfare reform into the budget.

Unless the reason it could not be denied was that it was true. Which, unhappily, it was.

The pre-budget season is always marked by different varieties of leaks. Portfolio ministers brief friendly journalists on their success in saving pet projects from the razor gang's slicing and dicing.

Occasionally the Prime Minister's office or even the Treasurer's feeds out juicy titbits to generate excitement, or unsavoury ones to prepare people for the worst, saving the best for the budget.

The leak on medical research was different, and what it revealed was deep frustration and divisions in the government over its operations, priorities and political risk assessments.

According to sources, the leak to the medical community came first from within cabinet then was backed up by the bureaucracy. It was leaked to them deliberately to warn that a $400m cut was on the way and if they wanted to stop it they had better mobilise quickly because they had only about a week to stop it.

They were told the government had decided medical research was ripe for cutting because it was not a "front of mind" issue for "ordinary Australians" that would trigger angry calls to Alan Jones, Neil Mitchell, Ray Hadley, Howard Sattler and the rest.

Let me declare an interest here and also provide an anecdote to illustrate a couple of points. In 1999, when I was Peter Costello's media adviser, I received a phone call from Jonathan Cebon, head of the Ludwig Institute cancer centre at Melbourne's Austin Hospital.

Cebon had overseen treatment for my sister Christina, who had died a few months before. He rang because he was concerned that a big report recommending a boost to medical research funding would be overlooked.

We arranged a meeting with medical researchers who pleaded with Costello to nurture the culture that had produced such greats as Howard Florey (penicillin) and Frank Macfarlane Burnet (Nobel Prize in medicine).

Costello doubled funding for medical research in the May 1999 budget, and I pinched the line about nurturing the culture from the researchers for his speech.

In those days the Liberal Party's pollster Mark Textor conducted focus groups each budget night. Tex produced a tape of the audience reaction using people with Worm-O-Meters attached as they watched the speech. The worm went off the chart when Costello announced the medical research funding.

It was gratifying but unsurprising, given the high regard in which Australia's medical research community is held.

A succession of surveys confirms this, including a study last year commissioned by Research Australia, which found 90 per cent of Australians rated support for health care and hospitals above stopping asylum-seeker boats, reducing government debt, reducing taxes or introducing an emissions trading scheme to fight climate change, and that most people thought spending on research was already too low.

Australians are well acquainted with the calibre of research here and the life-changing and life-saving discoveries it has brought, from the early humidicrib, to spray-on skin for burns victims, to a vaccine for cervical cancer.

So why this government thought it would be able to cut $400m and nobody would notice is perplexing.

If the Gillard government had been more prudent in its spending and more rigorous in its administration, the budget would not be in the parlous situation they would have us believe it is in now, but even so, cutting medical research will not save, it will cost. Every dollar spent on Australian medical research results in savings on health spending of $2.17.

Late last week the size of the cut was "being negotiated". If it comes in at half the $400m planned, the government thinks it will be able to placate its critics with another well worn post-budget tactic: see, it wasn't so bad after all.

Here's a hot tip. It won't work. There is zero tolerance for any cut in this area. Long after the headlines have disappeared, the patients, their families and those who try to help them remember.

A young woman with Parkinson's disease told one of the rallies that what the researchers gave her, and she thanked them for it, was hope. That is priceless. Money helps keep it alive. Wayne Swan of all people should know that.

SOURCE






Save us from the gamble of living

Paul Syvret gets fired up by an attack on two-up, Australia's traditional gambling game

THE world can be a dangerous place. Luckily though, we have the forces of law, order and social engineering to guide us through its perilous waters.

Thus it was a relief last week to see our authorities threaten a Cairns hotel with all manner of perdition should the publican persist with thumbing his nose at the law by hosting a two-up game on Anzac Day.

Two-up is, after all, one of the most villainous of gambling pursuits in that it is one from which the Government can't rake any tax revenue.

But why stop at the Red Beret Hotel in the north, given that on Monday there will hundreds of pubs and clubs across Queensland openly flouting the laws of our land?

We should have squads of crack police mobilised across the state ready to swoop at the first sign of a couple of pennies spinning through the air in a lazy arc; ready to batter down the doors of any drinking den from within which can be heard the beery cries of "head 'em up".

Normal policing duties should be suspended for the day, so that our officers can once and for all wipe this scourge from our midst. Federal Independent Andrew Wilkie has the right idea with his fixed-bayonet charge at the poker machine lobby.

Mind you, it's all very well to propose we issue "licences" to people who want to have a flutter, set pre-determined spending limits and decrease the amount you can wager but we're still being sort of half-pregnant here, aren't we?

Even we casual punters, who don't mind the occasional bet on the silly things, would be better off with that $20 in our pockets than the coffers of some rapacious leagues club which will only squander the money on yet more sporting facilities or subsidised Sunday roasts for the nannas.

If pokies are such a pestilence, wreaking misery on the hapless minority who don't know when to stop, why not ban the things altogether?

Then we could return to the good old days when pokies were illegal, and the gaming machine business was run quietly and efficiently (and out of the public eye) by organised crime rings and certain entrepreneurial elements of the Queensland Police Service.

One thing I don't understand though is why some forms of gambling (the pokies) are considered so much more evil than others.

The long-suffering Mrs Syvret and I were at the local leagues club on Saturday night to watch the mighty Broncos flog the Roosters rather than for the purposes of the punt and sitting in the sports bar.

At the next table was a posse of very well lubricated young men who had amassed a spectacular collection of losing TAB and Keno tickets, which eddied in great swirls around the empty pot glasses.

They looked to be having a whale of a time (and had a thirst you could photograph), but surely there lay in those piles of discarded betting slips the same seeds of ruination that were being planted by the purseful by the little old ladies in the gaming room next door?

And booze is part of the problem here. With the tobacco industry fighting a rearguard action and Andrew Wilkie's war on the pokies being prosecuted with brutal resolve, the demon drink appears to have slipped under the radar of those tireless social engineers whose self-appointed task it is to save us from ourselves.

We need labelling akin to that planned for a pack of smokes, depicting diseased livers and torn, bloodied faces of glassing victims.

And if a licence to gamble, accompanied with pre-set bet limits is good enough for the punters, then perhaps similar self-harm minimisation mea- sures should apply to tipplers.

Why not a licence to drink, accompanied by a weekly ration card that would allow no individual more than two standard drinks a day with a couple of days off the grog altogether? Admittedly there could be a just a wee problem in controlling the subsequent black market in ration card trading, but it would certainly make shouting a round of drinks at the local pub a lot more affordable.

The protectors of our physical and moral fibre also need to cast their eyes farther afield than the so-called sin industries of smoking, drinking and gambling, for there are myriad other traps lurking amid our everyday lives.

While much attention and debate has been devoted to the hazards of junk food, what of seemingly innoc- uous foodstuffs that harbour potential nastiness?

Why, for example, is the carton of full cream milk in my fridge not plastered with confronting health labels warning me about the dangers of cholesterol? Surely some photos of diseased arteries from the cow juice would save lives?

And salt. You can buy the deadly stuff by the kilogram with not so much as a single cautionary word of warning to be seen on the packet.

So please, someone, take responsibility for our lives and remove the temptations of all potentially risky life choices. We clearly don't know what's good for us and are incapable of making our own decisions.

SOURCE





Opposing gay marriage doesn't mean I'm barking

By Barry Cohen, who is homosexual and who happens to be my favourite Australian politician, sadly now ex. His book, "The Yartz" must be about the funniest book I have ever read -- JR

I'M in love with Jamie and Hamish, before that it was Fergus and Dougal. Now that I've got that off my chest I sense an enormous feeling of relief. No more regrets. No more hiding my preferences. Everyone knows now. I can relax.

Despite that, I don't plan to marry any of them, primarily because I don't like nails down my back during the night even if they are those of a border collie. Which brings us into the topic du jour: gay marriage.

When I first saw it mentioned about 20 years ago I nearly had a conniption. What a wonderful sense of humour these boys and gels have. Then I realised they were serious. My amazement was exceeded only when I saw recent polls sponsored by the gay movement to show the majority of Australians actually support marriage between same-sex couples. My, how things have changed.

If I had any doubts, they were removed while watching a recent episode of ABC1's Q&A. The subject was raised and any doubts as to whether Q&A stacks its audience with a Left bias were dismissed by the sneering, booing and ridicule at any member of the panel who was less than enthusiastic about gay marriage. The inference was that those who opposed it were homophobic and-or barking mad (no pun intended).

This tactic has been used by the Green-gay lobby because they are well aware there is nothing the cognoscenti and commentariat dislike more than to be called right-wing, neo-conservative or redneck. One's views on same-sex marriage, climate change, hatred of Israel and the US guarantees you acceptance by the cafe latte set. Just in case you hadn't realised it by now, I'm of the view that the idea of two people of the same sex being "married" is absurd. But homophobic, I think not. Unlike many of the "in" crowd I have runs on the board.

Let me take you back to October 18, 1973, in the House of Representatives.

John Gorton, member for Higgins: "I move that in the opinion of this House homosexual acts between consenting adults in private should not be subject to the criminal law."

A stirring address by the former prime minister was followed by Moss Cass (Maribyrnong), John Cramer (Bennelong) and Bert James (Hunter). The debate was cut short due to the visit of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. Please, no jokes about queens.

The question was put and carried by 64 to 40. Among those who voted yes were Les Bury, Jim Cairns, Clyde Cameron, Moss Cass, Don Chipp, Frank Crean, Kep Enderby, Gorton, Bill Hayden, Phil Ruddock, Ian Sinclair, Tom Uren, Gough Whitlam, Ralph Willis and you guessed it, yours truly.

On the "no" side were Lance Barnard, Kim Beazley Sr, Lionel Bowen, Rex Connor, Cramer, Fred Daly, Paul Keating, Jim Killen, Phil Lynch, Billy Snedden, Bill Wentworth. Gradually the states followed suit.

My philosophy was simple. It is enshrined in a column I wrote in The Australian (January 25, 1995) when gays started to get serious about what most Australians thought was a huge joke.

I wrote: "It concerns me not at all what adults do in the privacy of their own bedroom or for that matter their kitchens, bathroom or laundry. Should they choose to stand on their heads, wave their legs in the air or swing from chandeliers, providing they do not do each other a serious mischief, it is, or should be entirely a matter for them."

Having held that publicly expressed view for as long as I can recall, it will not surprise readers that on those occasions when I was called upon to vote in the House of Representatives on such matters I voted against legislation that discriminated against homosexuals. I have since applauded any measure by any government or institution that has broken down the prejudice against those with a different sexual preference.

A lot has happened in the past 40 years that has been of benefit to the gay community. Some I agreed with, others went too far, but marriage between people of the same sex giving them equal status with heterosexual couples, in my view, goes way beyond the pale. They argue that the present law discriminates against them. It does. And it's the same reason why I can't marry Jamie or Hamish.

And how about the discrimination against pedophiles, prohibiting sexual relations with children? Why do we discriminate against 15-year-old girls and boys for what used to be called carnal knowledge? Why do we ban men from entering women's toilets or vice versa? I could go on but I'm sure you discern my drift. We discriminate because society believes it is the right and moral thing to do.

Marriage was considered, until recently, sacrosanct. Bigamy and polygamy are banned. Why should we discriminate against men who want more than one wife, or wives who want more than one husband?

With all its flaws, and few marriages are perfect, marriage is the bedrock on which our society is based. It won't be if these twerps have their way.

The time has come for us "neocons" to fight back and tell the gay community that we've gone from prohibition to tolerance to acceptance, but we won't accept that gay marriage and conventional marriage is the same thing.

They might have got some of what they wanted if they had asked for a gay marriage act, quite separate from conventional marriage but can you expect them to accept a gay marriage certificate proclaiming them to be a gay couple?

It is to be hoped that those who support conventional marriage as one of the building blocks on which our society is built will stand up and tell the gay community it's not going to happen. Not even if hell freezes over.

SOURCE



18 April, 2011

An absurd government monopoly that killed a lot of people

It is against the law for private meteorologists to disseminate weather warnings, but at least one weather expert wishes he had broken the law.

Anthony Cornelius, a meteorologist with the private forecasting service Weather Watch, says he and others on the blog site predicted the extreme flash flood in Toowoomba and the Lockyer Valley on January 10 but his hands were tied to get the message out.

"By law we are not allowed to issue warnings and as a private meteorologist we are not allowed to contact the media or other authorities and warn them of something that the bureau hasn't warned for, but at the same time I wish I didn't obey that law that day," he told ABC Radio. "It is something, unfortunately, you have to live with."

The torrent of water hit Toowoomba and rushed down the range into the Lockyer Valley, killing 22 of the state's 35 flood victims.

Mr Cornelius said he made a submission to the Queensland Floods Commission of Inquiry, which is hearing evidence in Toowoomba on Monday.

He said in his submission he calls for private meteorologists to have more power. "There is a lot of things that need to be fixed throughout the warning systems and the way we get weather information out to the public," he said.

"The private meteorological companies, they can play a fairly significant role in these things, and they should be able to have the authority to be able to contact people in the know if they honestly believe there is a situation that at least warrants having somebody look at the event."

SOURCE





Carbon guilt trip just won't wash

Julia Thornton

FROM time to time, when governments realise they're not getting anywhere with us, they turn to the politics of guilt to get us to support their pet projects or policies. The latest is the carbon tax.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet addressed the National Press Club this week and gave six key arguments that summarise the Gillard Government's response to the climate change challenge.

The first one was Australia is one of the world's top 20 polluters and we release more pollution per person than any other country in the developed world, more than the United States even.

I used to think Americans had the monopoly on big cars and icemakers, but apparently we are worse. This explains why so many Hummer drivers have been tailgating me lately.

The first thing that came to mind is we must have a garbage island similar to that of the great toxic plastic garbage island the Americans have floating in the Pacific between Hawaii and Japan. Apparently it's twice the size of Texas.

But I know we don't have a great big toxic garbage island and being told that, as an Australian, I produce more pollution than an American annoys me.

Australia emits per capita the most carbon emissions because of our mining industry. The mere fact we open the ground up and take stuff out of it creates carbon emissions. The use of the coal in electricity produces carbon emissions.

And these are factoids which go into the statistic which says Australia is one of the world's top 20 polluters and we're worse than the Americans.

It hasn't bothered me that the Government has used guilt from time to time to get us to toe the line. We've reduced deaths on the road by reducing the incidence of drink driving and speeding, for example. But now it's getting very personal.

For all those people who have conscientiously recycled and composted, it's a statistic which doesn't do them justice. There is enough anecdotal and actual evidence in the media and on opinion pages to show Australians are highly aware of their waste and their pollution and they want to do their bit to reduce it.

Shortly after the carbon tax was announced by Prime Minister Gillard, Mr Combet offered us advice as to how to reduce the cost of a carbon tax. He suggested we avoid using airconditioning and change our high-energy lightbulbs to low-energy ones.

Minister Combet is a Victorian who spends a lot of time in Canberra. He doesn't really get Queensland, does he? Those of us who were not in the thick of flood clean-up or in the middle of a cyclone, were experiencing the usual late summer temperatures which make airconditioning not so much a luxury, but a cool relief.

Telling us we're more wasteful than Americans isn't fair. And it isn't right. Just as an example, if you've ever been to a restaurant in America, you'll be given a frosted glass full of ice with a little bit of water. At the turn of the 1900s, New York went through a heatwave unlike any before. Ice became a sign of prosperity and it remains a habit. Visit any American hotel and they have ice makers in the hallways and an ice bucket in the room.

Here in Brisbane, in high summer, I've asked for a glass of water and got a tiny little glass with a dying ice cube. And that's ok, because I am an Australian with sensitive teeth.

We need the full facts on how a carbon price will affect us and how much it will cost. We don't need the politics of guilt on this one.

SOURCE




Qld. Premier slams judges as 'out of touch'

Mandatory sentencing is always a second-best solution but the actions of some judges would seem to make it a better system than what we have at the moment

PREMIER Anna Bligh has accused the judiciary of losing touch with the community after two controversial decisions involving serious child sex offenders in as many days.

Attorney-General Cameron Dick has been ordered to review a decision that allowed an Ipswich man, 45, to walk free on bail after being charged with 24 offences, including four of rape and 20 of indecently dealing with a minor.

Mr Dick will also review the case last week of a child sex offender in Cairns who was jailed for seven years for raping and abusing six girls.

Ms Bligh yesterday said the State Government would do whatever it could to appeal the decisions. "People want to see these types of offenders treated very harshly and that isn't what they have seen in the past two days," she said.

Bravehearts executive director Hetty Johnston said an inquiry was needed on sex offenders. "The system does not protect children. We want an opportunity to sit down and try to find some logical solutions to a very difficult problem," she said.

SOURCE




Greens' wilting appeal

Miranda Devine

NOW we know that the meddling ideological extremism of the Greens cost them the inner-city seat of Marrickville in the NSW election last month. What should have been a shoo-in in one of the most barmy left electorates in the country resulted in more than one-in-three voters rejecting the Greens because of Marrickville Council's Israel boycott, according to a poll by a Jewish group.

This is a boycott that, by the Green-controlled council's own figures, will cost it as much as $4 million to stop using Israeli-linked products such as Hewlett-Packard computers (apparently used at Israeli checkpoints) and Motorola telephones.

The voters were first to show some backbone, after abiding years of Green dabbling in Middle East politics. But last week Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd slammed the boycott as "nuts" and NSW Premier Barry O'Farrell threatened to sack the council if it doesn't reverse its stance.

Sensing the end of his dream run, even the Greens' supreme leader, Bob Brown, rejected the boycott and distanced himself from his failed state candidate, Marrickville mayor Fiona Byrne, although he can't help offloading blame onto what he calls the "hate media" for costing his party the seat. But he should look a little closer to home for the culprit.

Jake, a 55-year-old Jewish health professional with friends in Marrickville, was so incensed by the council's Israel boycott that he took three weeks off work to wage a guerrilla campaign against the Greens, plastering the suburb with posters late at night, accusing them of homophobia for boycotting gay-friendly Israel.

"I felt so angry," says Jake, who wants to remain anonymous. "I couldn't sleep at night, so I organised the posters, hired some utes and ladders" and enlisted the help of his son and his friends. Greens supporters harassed them, ripped down the posters, called police, and tried to intimidate Jake's young helpers, posting footage of them on YouTube.

Two nights before the election, a "black sports car with neon high beams and a pseudo photographer kept flashing his camera right up on our eyes . . . It slowed us right down."

Another night "cowboy" greenies in a Toyota Camry started following them home, until Jake confronted the driver at a roundabout. "It was like something out of a movie".

On election day, Jake and his son organised 10 friends wearing T-shirts with "Boycott the Greens" logos to visit polling booths, prompting "Zionist pigs" abuse from greenies.

"The Greens knew we were the enemy, but the Labor people all nodded and smiled and gave us the thumbs up. Anthony Albanese [whose wife Carmel Tebbutt was ALP candidate] shook my hand and thanked me. We must have had quite an effect.

"On Sunday I took the boys out to dinner. It's not often in life a private citizen can make a difference." And make a difference he did. The Greens lost to Labor by fewer than 700 votes, in a seat they were favourites to snare.

The backlash was quite a shock to the Greens, whose extremist ideological baggage is at last costing them votes.

After all, as Jake points out, if they actually cared about the environment or human rights they would realise Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East, and the only country in the region where people can be openly and proudly gay. Israel's neighbours, meantime, routinely stone homosexuals to death.

Israel is also the Middle East's Eden, having greened the desert with millions of trees, eco friendly exports, and superior water conservation.

And if anti-Israel Greens are so concerned about children in the Middle East why haven't they lamented the fate of the Fogel children of Samaria -- 11-year-old Yoav, four-year-old Elad and three-month-old Hadas, murdered in their beds by Palestinian terrorists just two weeks before the NSW election.

The Middle East conflict is not a game. Yet it has somehow become a vehicle for moral preening half a world way and a badge of belonging for lazy leftists whose talents are best suited to fixing potholes, which, by the way, abound in Marrickville.

SOURCE






Coldest March On Record In Australia, says BOM

Is this why we need a carbon tax?

Maximum temperatures nationally were the coldest on record with a national anomaly of -2.19°C. Most of Australia recorded below average mean maxima with parts of the north and south of the country recording their coldest March on record.

This was partly due to increased cloudiness across most of the country associated with the above average rainfall recorded throughout the month. March 2011 included some contrasts between the majority of Australia and the west and east coasts, which were the only areas that experienced above average daytime temperatures.

Temperatures were coolest in the central part of Australia where rainfall was most abnormal, with maximum temperatures more than 3°C below average Similarly, drier conditions matched up with areas of above-normal maxima in western WA.

More HERE



17 April, 2011

Time for action on heartbreak highway

Why is the ALP wasting billions of the people's money on nonsense schemes when real problems like this need fixing?

BARELY a week goes by without it claiming a life. Every second day, on average, it's impassable. It is littered with blackspots and plagued by potholes. The Bruce Highway, the state's main artery and Queensland's contribution to National Highway 1, is a national disgrace.

As the Federal Government prepares its Budget, the need to fix our highway of shame is more apparent than ever. In the first three months of this year, the road has been cut 84 times because it can not cope with seasonal flooding.

Leading the charge for action are grieving families of the almost 200 people who have lost their lives in the past five years, frustrated truck drivers and local mayors fed up with years of pleas for funds falling on deaf ears.

The State Government shifts the blame to its federal counterparts, with Roads Minister Craig Wallace calling for more funding from Canberra. "Both sides of federal politics have ignored the Bruce Highway for nearly 40 years and it will take time to reverse these years of impact," he said. A recent report released by Mr Wallace claimed $5.3 billion was needed to flood-proof the highway.

Miners, businesses and farmers say Queensland can no longer afford to keep vital freight and produce trucks waiting at flooded crossings. "There are goods and services we need, like fertilisers and chemicals, that get held up because we've got trucks sitting on the road for a week to 10 days," Bowen and Gumlu District Growers Association president Carl Walker said.

Whitsunday Mayor Mike Brunker said flood-prone sections were a severe threat to development and tourism. "Up near Sandy Gully which is going to be a state development area and could be the biggest coal port in Australia the whole state's resources are going to be held up by flooded creeks," he said. "If Abbott Point takes off in the next two years, you could have 3000 workers on one side of the creek not being able to get to work."

Upgrading of the Bruce Highway has long been stymied by political buckpassing, with state and federal governments arguing the other should be doing more.

The Queensland Government claims it will spend almost $1 billion between 2006 and 2014 but argues that given the Bruce Highway is a crucial part of the national network, the bulk of future funding should come from the Federal Government.

The Federal Government points out there is nothing stopping the states contributing more to the upkeep of their most important roads.

Federal Transport Minister Anthony Albanese said the Labor Government had committed $3.2 billion until 2014. He blamed the current state of the Bruce Highway on the Howard Government, saying average annual spending had increased by $281 million since Labor took office. "Despite having 12 years to do something about this road and the record tax revenues to pay for it, they chose to do very little," Mr Albanese said.

Shadow Transport Minister Warren Truss said the blame game had to stop. "It's high time federal and state Labor worked together to ensure Queenslanders have a major highway they can rely on," he said.

State Opposition Leader Campbell Newman said the LNP would unveil details before the next state election outlining how it would deliver better flood protection. "The LNP is committed to addressing the state's infrastructure needs," he said.

The RACQ said the condition of the Bruce Highway was "totally unacceptable". "We need a quantum leap in investment to bring it up to standard," RACQ executive manager traffic and safety John Wikman said. He said the highway was 10 years behind current traffic volumes and more four-lane stretches were vital.

IT'S been more than five years since the Bruce Highway claimed Jamie McTackett's wife and daughter and he's still waiting for it to be fixed. In August 2005, Karryn McTackett, 33, and 12-year-old Jessica were killed in a head-on smash with a semi-trailer while returning to Bowen from a junior football match in Townsville.

While he says he has never blamed the truck driver involved, Mr McTackett called for extra lanes to be added to the troubled Bruce Highway. "If it was a four-lane highway, the chances of (his wife's accident) happening would've been pretty scarce," he said.

He said Queenslanders had been neglected by policy-makers for far too long. "Get your finger out and fix the road," he said. "Our national highway's a disgrace."

SOURCE




Government attacks fantasy environmental problems while real environment problems are virtually ignored

Senator Barnaby Joyce

I relax by taking a walk behind Red Hill onto the ridge that overlooks the city; the lights of our nation’s capital lay below with all their troubles resting before the next day’s frenetic activity. As you fly in, the Brindabella’s are sometimes dusted with winter snow that can be seen amongst the snow gums, ribbon gums, stringy barks, acacias, banksias and callistemon. If you are interested in botany or even if you are not, there are interesting walks around Parliament.

A local builder, Joel, took me for a walk out near Mt Stromlo to the top of Camel’s Hump. I could have been a million miles from work as we sat and had a couple of beers on what was a pretty cold afternoon, but a spectacular view.

It is very hard to go bushwalking in Canberra, or in Australia for that matter, and not be near a member of the Myrtaceae family. The ubiquitous eucalypt, angophora with its masses of white honey scented blossoms, the massive tallow woods which form part of the Corymbias, paper barked Melaleucas on your creeks, rivers and coasts, for the more inquiring, the leptospermums and for the smarty pants, the Metrosideros.

An introduced fungus has now placed our arboreal heritage at risk. The carbon sequestered by these plants will be severely hampered by what appears as a yellow fungus, yet this issue does not rate a mention in the carbon debate.

Uredo Rangelii is spreading from the initial sighting at Gosford in last year across the Myrtle (Myrtaceae) family of Eastern Australia. Myrtle rust as it is commonly known is part of the Guava Rust (Puccinia psidii) complex and both are similar in their DNA.

Guava rust was discovered in Brazil in 1884 and causes severe damage to Australian plants of the Myrtle family. The introduction of this fungus was not planned but that amounts for nought now that it is here.

The Federal Government’s concern for what could be a devastating environmental problem amounts to $1.4 million. I am sure they have stopped work at ANU to line up for that!

Do we have to hope and pray for a Dr Jean Macnamara coincidence, who while researching poliomyelitis in the US bumped into Dr Richard Shope researching Myxomatosis on rabbits?

Obviously we are hoping that a fluke of associated research like this by somebody else will bring a solution. While living carbon in trees dies the government says it is essential to sequestrate carbon.

The Government’s attention thus far is culpable. Whether you are a bush walker or a logger, a gardener or just conscientious this is an issue for you.

If we were clever we would be inspiring the acumen of diligent minds and motivated researchers to deal with a problem that is within our capabilities to fix. If our Government had started earlier we could have isolated this disease.

On a similar environmental front we now could isolate the great threat to apiarists and native honey bees from the Asian honey bee, another introduced pest marauding its way across our nation.

The Government is outraged by 400 head of cattle in the Alpine National Park but does nothing about the hundreds of thousands of deer, tens of thousands of pigs or thousands of brumbies.

Multiple billions of dollars are to be spent on something we cannot possibly affect, the temperature of the planet, while these other afflictions that we could deal with are running rampant. If we cannot stop a fungus in Australia it is highly unlikely that we have the acumen to change the temperature of planet earth. If a bee is beyond our control, is it then rather a large step to convince the globe that atmospheric recalibration is within Australia’s grasp. What is bad about a cow that is good about a feral pig?

If we see one day great swathes of our local environment effected by Myrtle Rust, then concerns about insolvable problems and the money expended chasing rainbows whilst a raging fire was burning at our back door will leave us all negligent.

We should target our research to tackling solvable problems at home, such as Myrtle Rust, rather than be lured into an absurd Wizard of Oz type multiple billion dollar carbon frolic.

SOURCE




Incompetent weather bureaucrats again

AN AMATEUR weather buff predicted what trained meteorologists did not, a flash flood that threatened lives in the Lockyer Valley, 90 minutes before it struck. Neil Pennell, a medical sonographer who monitors the weather as a hobby, told the Queensland Floods Commission he feels "considerable guilt" that he did not do more to warn people of the impending disaster.

Seventeen people died and 150 homes were damaged or destroyed when a wall of water rushed through the Lockyer Valley on January 10.

Mr Pennell, who lived in the nearby Fassifern Valley for most of his life, was watching the weather develop that day. At 1.10pm, under the username Buster, he posted on the Weatherzone online forum. "Those rain rates between Esk, Crows Nest and Toowoomba are truly frightening. I fear that there could be a dangerous flash flood very soon, particularly in Grantham. Am I overreacting?"

Half an hour later, Mr Pennell posted again: "I live in an area that is equally not used to being so saturated and equally not used to falls of that nature … I just know that 56mm in an hour right now here would produce a flood of frightening proportions and one likely to put lives at risk … I repeat my question … Does someone in Esk, Grantham, Toogoolawah need to know what's possible? Who do we tell?" Some time between 2.30pm and 3pm, the "inland tsunami" swept through Grantham.

In his submission to the commission, Mr Pennell said he is "carrying a burden for the shattered lives in the Lockyer Valley". He blames himself for not contacting the Bureau of Meteorology or the local police that day, believing they could have given locals at least 45 minutes' warning of the deluge.

Mr Pennell wants the commission to thoroughly investigate why "someone with my limited formal meteorology/hydrology experience could be made to sound like Nostradamus while the Bureau of Meteorology remained silent about the impending danger in the Lockyer Valley".

He argues that the fact the catchment was saturated and the upper Lockyer creek was already at minor flood levels meant it did not take much rain to cause the disaster.

The commission's first week of hearings focused on whether Wivenhoe Dam could have been managed better to prevent the city flooding. But Mr Pennell, whose own house in the Brisbane suburb of Rocklea was flooded, believes concern about the dam should be a "distant second" to the loss of life in the Lockyer Valley. "Grantham needs to be the number one focus of the inquiry. Things are one thing, people are another."

Mr Pennell was reluctant to discuss his experience. "I'm just a bit of a nobody," he said. "The only reason I [made a submission] is because what happened in Grantham is just beyond the pale. Those people weren't doing anything. They were just at home living their lives and the flood came to them."

The Floods Commission will hold public hearings in Toowoomba tomorrow and Tuesday.

SOURCE






Federal solar scheme hits the poor

Inequity spurs grant rethink

SOLAR panel rebates could be slashed again after the Government confirmed it was still concerned the scheme was driving up electricity prices for the poor.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet said he was deeply concemed about the equity of the program that some experts estimated was already costing families that couldn’t afford panels about $100 a year. That’s because the cost of the uncapped solar credits scheme that offers grants of about $6000 is passed on to consumers by electricity retailers, rather than being a cash grant in the Federal Budget. Electricity users pay again when a feed-in tariff scheme “pays” the solar householders who produce more electricity than they use.

Mr Combet has already said the rebates will be slashed from about $6000 to $5000 from July 1, prompting a stampede of customers. "It is a program that we inherited from the Howard government. And it was a thoroughly poorly designed, inequitable program,” he said. “We’ve progressively wound back the levels of assistance. I announced before Christmas a fluther wind»back to take effect from July 1.

“In the meantime, I’ve been watching closely the levels of demand that are still being created by this scheme. The thing that's appropriate for me is watch it very closely, to take steps to reduce the levels of subsidy, which I am doing

Mr Combet said the surging demand for solar roof panels was “not purely a function of a federal govemment level of assistance". “Various state govemments have what’s called a feed-in tariff. The NSW feed-in tariff led to a complete explosion in demand. “They’ve both contributed to very high levels of demand. As well as the high dollar, because it means that the solar panels being imported from China are relatively cheaper. So I am very mindful of that and I am watching it very closely, because I have been particularly concerned about the equity of that program. Because it is effectively a subsidy that is paid through electricity prices.”

For families who can afford it, the generous scheme can reduce the cost of installing solar panels from $10,000 to just $4000

The above article by Samantha Maiden appeared in the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" on 17 April





Your regulators will protect you -- NOT

Lazy Queensland Office of Fair Trading blasted for inaction in rain tank rip-off

QUEENSLAND'S fair trading regulator is under fire after failing to act on a tip-off about a rainwater tank venture that left a $1 million trail of debt. More than 600 people paid deposits or in full for tanks advertised by companies Aqua Conscious and Columbus Sales Group. They are now fighting to get their money back after the tanks never arrived.

It has emerged the Queensland Office of Fair Trading received a phone call and written complaint about Aqua Conscious more than three months before a public warning was issued by NSW Fair Trading on January 28. During that time, the companies continued advertising, attracting buyers across three states.

Leisa Donlan, the chief executive of the Association of Rotational Moulders, the peak body for tank manufacturers, phoned Fair Trading on October 12, but could not progress beyond the call centre despite insisting it was urgent. Ms Donlan then sent a fax the next day warning that Aqua Conscious was taking payment for tanks she believed may not exist. "We have used our industry resources to establish that this company currently has no contract for supply in place," the letter warns. But no reply was received.

"It's very disappointing and certainly helps someone doing the wrong thing to go on and create even more damage for players in the industry."

Fair Trading in NSW was the first to act after consumer complaints.

A spokeswoman for the Queensland Office of Fair Trading said the complaint appeared to have gone to the wrong area. It is not clear why the complaint was not passed on to the complaint intake unit and there was no record of it.

SOURCE



16 April, 2011

Gillard's carbon tax dead on its feet

Her political judgment is woeful. Abbott gets the steelworkers on his side

THE Gillard government's plans to put a price on carbon have suffered a body blow, with key unions demanding exemptions for industry that are unacceptable to the Greens. With his own job under threat from a hostile membership, the national secretary of the Australian Workers Union, Paul Howes, demanded yesterday that the steel industry be given a complete exemption from the carbon scheme and that there be generous compensation for the aluminium, cement and glass sectors.

Mr Howes issued the demand after a fiery crisis meeting with nine union branch secretaries from across Australia. It is understood Mr Howes, who is up for re-election before the next federal election, faced being dumped if he did not issue the demands. The AWU is influential in the Right faction of the ALP and was instrumental in Julia Gillard's coup against Kevin Rudd last year.

Immediately after Mr Howes's announcement, he was backed by the powerful Australian Manufacturing Workers Union, which influences the party's Left. The loss of support from the industrial wing of the party leaves the government stuck between the unions and the Greens, whose support is critical.

The government is negotiating with the Greens to put a price on carbon and one key sticking point is the level of compensation for trade-exposed industries. The other is the starting price for a tonne of carbon. As a starting point, the government was proposing the same generous levels of industry assistance devised under the emissions trading scheme negotiated with Malcolm Turnbull. The Greens derided this as "backroom deals for rent seekers" and want less compensation this time.

As well as exempting steel altogether, Mr Howes wants the compensation for aluminium, cement and glass to be "at least" as generous as that negotiated under the old scheme.

If the Greens vote for this, they would be signing on to a weaker scheme than the one they blocked in 2009 because, in part, they felt the compensation was too generous.

The Greens climate change spokeswoman, Christine Milne, was unhappy with the unions' backdown but said she would confine her negotiations to the multi-party climate change committee which meets again next week. "Conducting negotiations is not well served by threats to withdraw support if you don't get your way," she said. "Paul Howes should follow the example of many of his colleagues in the union movement who, like us, see the tremendous jobs potential in building a new clean economy."

The unions stuck with the Rudd government during the original ETS process and, until yesterday, had been rock solid with the Gillard government. But the steel sector, which is a big exporter, has been crying foul for weeks, saying it is already under pressure from the high Australian dollar and high input costs caused by rising prices for ore and coking coal.

This week the Climate Change Minister, Greg Combet, challenged the industry, saying a carbon price of $20 would add just $2.60 to the price of a tonne of steel.

But Mr Howes sided with the steel makers yesterday. "We think there is a special case to be made for steel," he said. "Steel is going through a hard time at the moment, not because of carbon pricing. "When the dollar sits at 1.05, all export-based industries are under a huge amount of pressure. But there is no solid argument we shouldn't be making steel in this country."

Tony Maher, from the Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union, said Mr Howes has "got a very good argument and I would urge the government to consider it". "The economic circumstances of today are not those of two years ago."

Mr Combet refused to exempt steel. He said current economic circumstances were already being factored in and steel would again be in line for generous compensation. "A very significant level of assistance has been proposed," he said. "This assistance will be designed to stop 'carbon leakage' of jobs overseas and is the subject of continuing discussion with the steel industry and other industries."

One source said the Opposition Leader, Tony Abbott, had undermined Mr Howes by whipping up worker resentment during recent visits to BlueScope at Port Kembla, and OneSteel in Victoria. Mr Abbott welcomed Mr Howes's stance yesterday.

SOURCE




Youth vote splits as young desert Labor

LABOR'S youth vote is diving under Julia Gillard, with young voters close to being evenly split between the Coalition, the ALP and the Greens.

Tony Abbott has defied commentators who claimed he would have a problem with young voters by stabilising youth support for the Coalition on a primary vote of 31 per cent.

But an analysis of Newspoll surveys over the past decade shows Labor's youth vote has been hemorrhaging, with many of their young supporters defecting to the Greens since March 2002.

The Newspoll data shows Labor's youth vote crashing from 46 per cent in 2002 to 32.1 per cent for the corresponding quarter this year.

This was from a high of nearly 52 per cent in 2007, as the "Kevin Rudd for prime minister" momentum was building for Labor.

The Newspoll analysis shows Labor's youth support fell 10 points in the year to last month. Ms Gillard assumed the Labor leadership in June last year.

The Newspoll graph suggests that if the trends continue, Labor is in danger of falling below the Coalition's youth support numbers.

But both major parties have been left to watch the Greens' support among the young soaring to 27 per cent, while in 2002 Bob Brown's minority party could attract only 8 per cent support among the youth vote.

Newspoll chief executive Martin O'Shannessy examined data from the most recent March-quarter demographic analysis of voting intentions, comparing it with the same quarter for each year going back to 2002.

He notes that the Greens were a big winner in total primary vote growth over that period. "However, the rise of Tony Abbott as Liberal leader has restored the Coalition primary vote to past levels generally and within the youngest cohort of voters," he says.

Analysis of separate Newspoll figures taken about the same time as the so-called Tampa election in November 2001 shows that rather than losing the youth vote during the controversy, the Coalition picked up support.

The longer-term challenge for Labor appears to be that the growth in the Greens vote across all ages has been in part at the expense of the ALP.

More HERE




Pro-Asian, anti-Muslim will deemed discriminatory

A man wanted to leave his estate to people whom in his opinion would benefit most from it: Non-Muslim young Asians. There would be many people in that category but anti-discrimination laws mean that his executors cannot advertise for people of the sort he specified

A man who instructed the funds of his estate be donated only to non-Muslims may have his wishes overturned by the Queensland Supreme Court. Abraham Werner, who died in Brisbane in 1989, has had his will deemed discriminatory in several states. The estate executor, Perpetual Trust, has sought a court order to allow them to distribute the funds outside of his strict conditions.

Mr Werner's will bequeathed almost $700,000 with conditions the executor "first consider destitute male orphans of Asian parentage without any known relatives". Further conditions were that his money not go to followers or devotees of Islam, those not in "good health and mentally alert of good intellect and of good behaviour" or to anyone older than 21.

He also wished his funds not to go anyone involved in "using or marketing any form or drug of addiction" and that beneficiaries "must speak English adequately or undertake to learn to speak English within two years".

Mr Werner, who was originally from Holland, had never married nor had children. He donated his body to science.

In documents filed last month in the Supreme Court in Brisbane, Perpetual Trust says between 1991 and 2001 it managed to grant funds to charities which fell within Mr Werner's conditions. But in 2002 lawyers advised the organisation the criteria they put forward on Mr Werner's behalf could be unlawfully discriminatory in three Australian states and the ACT.

Lawyers considered the exclusion of "followers of Islam" was unlawful in Tasmania, Western Australia, the ACT and possibly unlawful in New South Wales.

Andrew Thomas, of Perpetual Trust, wrote in an affidavit the organisation "had difficulty identifying potential benefits because it could not advertise for applications given the discriminatory nature of criteria to be applied".

"Charities that assist disadvantaged children could not provide any assistance to Perpetual Trust as they either could not distinguish between individuals on criteria such as those set out in the will, or were not prepared to," Mr Thomas said.

He said the organisation ceased dispersing Mr Werner's funds in 2005. Almost $600,000 remains in the estate.

The court documents seek an order from the court to allow Perpetual Trust to distribute the remainder of Mr Werner's money to The Smith Family. Perpetual Trust say the charity would then pass on the money in a manner as near as possible to Mr Werner's wishes. Mr Thomas said Mr Werner's funds would go to a program The Smith Family operates to assist disadvantaged children.

"Negotiations with The Smith Family .. confirmed it is not able to confirm the religion [of children] and it's not its practice to collect such information," he said. "Perpetual Trust considers that it now has no other option but to make this application to the court for an order to apply the income from the trust [as close as possible."

The case has been adjourned will return to court on a date to be fixed.

SOURCE





Dodgy traffic forecasts in the gun at last

Less than two months after the spectacular collapse of listed toll road operator RiverCity Motorways, its traffic modelling forecaster Aecom faces a $700 million class action.

Litigation funder IMF will bankroll the class action and alleges that Aecom's statements in the PDS were misleading and deceptive and failed to provide investors with full information about another set of traffic figures it compiled on the project 18 months earlier.

The case will be a landmark as it is the first time a traffic forecaster has become the target of a class action. It could also open up a can of worms as the spotlight turns to other traffic forecasters, particularly given the poor track record of such forecasting in toll road projects in the past decade.

What will make this case interesting is that Rivercity provided an indemnity if the modeller was sued. The action will rely upon the insurance of RiverCity. RiverCity collapsed on February 25 after it was found that it only had enough cash to cover interest payments for a few months.

The class action will be thrown open to all shareholders who took up shares in the float of RiverCity, which floated on the ASX in 2006.

The issue of two instalments at 50 cents each raised $690 million. A number of shareholders went back into the market and bought more shares when the share price started to tank on the basis they still believed the traffic forecasts in the PDS.

The nub of the claim is that in the Product Disclosure Statement (PDS) Aecom forecast daily traffic numbers in the Clem7 Tunnel, which were chronically inaccurate.

Aecom also failed to mention that it provided a different set of traffic figures 18 months earlier to Brisbane City Council's Environmental Impact Study on Clem7m, which were vastly different and would have raised questions about the viability of the project, according to the claim.

In the PDS distributed to shareholders, Aecom forecast the average daily number of vehicles using the tunnel would be 90,676 within six months of operation and jump to 94,706 after 12 months. By 2011 they would hit more than 100,000 passing through the 6.8 kilometre tunnel, which runs between Bowen Hills in the north and Kangaroo Point and Wolloongabba in the south.

In the PDS, Aecom refers to this earlier study and suggests that the modelling in the PDS is an “enhanced” form of the modelling used in the environmental impact study. What Aecom did not reveal in the PDS was that in their modelling for the EIS Aecom had forecast traffic volumes in 2011 of only 57,000 per week assuming a $3.30 toll.

The PDS contains no reference to the fact that Aecom's PDS forecasts for 2011 are more than 65 per cent higher than its EIS forecast, made only 18 months earlier.

IMF believes investors may have rights to recover their losses in RiverCity under the Corporations Act 2001 because Aecom's statements in the PDS were misleading or deceptive; and/or Aecom omitted to provide investors with critical information relevant to their decision to acquire the units.

The actual traffic numbers are averaging less than 24,000 per day. RiverCity's financial performance has been so disastrous that on 25 February 2011 it was placed in administration.

RiverCity was a tale of woe from the beginning, and follows a number of other listed tollroads across the country that have suffered similar failures and left shareholders will little or nothing.

SOURCE



15 April, 2011

Do-gooder was a goon

His current political campaign is to "protect" people from spending too much of their money on gambling

INDEPENDENT MP Andrew Wilkie says he cannot remember ordering military cadets to honour Adolf Hitler. But he says he is regretful of other inappropriate behaviour when he was at Duntroon Military College almost 30 years ago.

As a senior cadet in 1983 Mr Wilkie allegedly forced his juniors to salute the 50th anniversary of Hitler's rise to power, News Ltd has reported.

"I honestly cannot remember anything about that specific allegation," Mr Wilkie told reporters in Hobart today. "But I have never made a secret of the fact that I was one of many cadets involved in the bastardisation scandal at the Royal Military College Duntroon in 1983. "In fact I was disciplined for misconduct at the time." Mr Wilkie said he was "obviously regretful" of that.

He acknowledged the behaviour was wrong and inappropriate but insisted it wasn't physical or sexual. "I've obviously grown up a lot in the last 30 years."

Mr Wilkie said he was a cadet in his early 20s at the time. "That sort of behaviour at the time was wrong, and I regret I was in any way involved in that sort of behaviour," Mr Wilkie said.

"I am absolutely appalled at the stories that are coming out of the defence force academy these days, I applaud the Defence Minister Stephen Smith for intervening and taking the strongest possibly action to stamp out misconduct at the academy."

Mr Wilkie refused to apologise over the Nazi allegations because he couldn't remember "that particular incident".

"If there's anyone in this country who, to this day, feels aggrieved in any way by anything I've ever said or done to them, then I apologise unreservedly," he said. "But I will not apologise for the allegation in the paper because I honestly have no recollection."

The Tasmanian MP noted he gained security clearance to undertake intelligence work later in life and passed "repeated" character tests during his military career. "So I would hope that no one would have any doubts over my character these days, particularly as a member of parliament.

"This is happening ... against the backdrop of the poker machine industry launching its campaign ... against the government and me personally."

Mr Wilkie said it was as much a cultural problem as an issue with specific events. "What happened to me as a cadet when I was bastardised and then what I did to other cadets was endemic at Duntroon at the time to many cadets involved," he said. "It would probably clean out the senior ranks of the defence force if we were to search out and remove every person who in anyway brushed up against bastardisation."

Mr Wilkie urged the government to conduct a specific review of Duntroon in the wake of the Skype sex scandal. "I have no reason to think that there's a problem at Duntroon these days," he said. "(But) if we are going to have a fresh look at what's going on ... it would be healthy to not just look at the (Australian) Defence Force Academy but to look at Duntroon as well."

ADFA provides university education for officer trainees from all services while Duntroon trains army officers.

Prime Minister Julia Gillard noted the alleged events took place when Mr Wilkie was a "very, very young man".

But she wouldn't comment on the detail of the report. ``I didn't know the Andrew Wilkie of 30 years ago, I'm sure he can speak for himself," Ms Gillard told Austereo. ``Andrew Wilkie is the only person who can tell his life story."

An anonymous barrister has also publicly described the mental, physical and sexual abuse he and others suffered at Duntroon in the early 1990s.

Former cadet Brendan Etches said he was disappointed to be rebuffed by Mr Wilkie after making an appointment to see the Member for Denison on Tuesday. He was at first assured that Mr Wilkie would speak to him but later told the politician refused to discuss his time at Duntroon.

Mr Etches said he has wondered if and when the independent MP would speak out against the harsh treatment that the then Senior Cadet Wilkie and others condoned - and sometimes inflicted - on teenage cadets.

In his book Axis of Deceit, Mr Wilkie admits he was a "larrikin" while at Duntroon and that he set "some sort of record" for incurring punishments for offences such as "giving junior cadets a hard time".

Mr Etches, whose grandfather had fought against Hitler's troops at Tobruk, said he had been shocked at orders to salute the Nazi regime. "He was drilling us before breakfast," Mr Etches said. "I have a memory of him in a dressing gown, watching as the other senior guys were running around giving us a hard time."

SOURCE






Aboriginal sophisticates betray bush sisters

Marcia Langton

LARISSA Behrendt's foul Twitter message about Bess Price's comments on the absence of rights for Aboriginal women in her community on ABC Television's Q&A program is an exemplar of the wide cultural, moral and increasingly political rift between urban, left-wing, activist Aboriginal women and the bush women who witness the horrors of life in their communities, much of which is arrogantly denied by the former.

Whereas Bess, a grandmother who resides in Yuendumu, is a first-hand witness of terrifying violence against women, lives in one of Australia's poorest communities, and campaigns for the needs of women and children, especially their safety and everyday physical needs, professor and lawyer Larissa Behrendt lives in Sydney in relative luxury as compared with Bess's situation, has no children, has a PhD from Harvard and is the principal litigant in a case against conservative columnist Andrew Bolt, who published several columns accusing the "fair-skinned" Behrendt and others of falsely claiming to be Aboriginal to get the perks.

Australians, whether they support reconciliation or not, must be astonished at the viciousness of the twittering sepia-toned [not black] Sydney activists. Andrew Bolt should be rubbing his hands with glee - Behrendt has delivered on all of his stereotypes, and this time I have to wonder if he is not right after all.

What indigenous or human rights, or for that matter, civil rights, are Behrendt and her Twitter followers defending in this extraordinary exchange? Which Aboriginal woman should I listen to, many must be asking.

On Monday night this week, Bess was the subject of shocking personal abuse by Behrendt in a Twitter message following Bess's appearance on the Q&A program that focused on the sex scandals in the ADF and the calls for reform of the culture of abuse of women.

Behrendt twittered: "I watched a show where a guy had sex with a horse and I'm sure it was less offensive than Bess Price." This was one of several Twitters circulating among the Aboriginal protestati of Sydney. While none were as offensive as Behrendt's, at least one that consisted of outright lies was far more damaging to her and her husband's reputations.

I have never in my life witnessed such extreme disrespect shown by a younger Aboriginal woman for an older Aboriginal woman, except where the perpetrator was severely intoxicated on drugs or alcohol. Nor have I witnessed, except once or twice, such snide dismissal by a younger Aboriginal woman of an older Aboriginal woman's right to express her views. Those of us who were brought up in the Aboriginal way were taught from a young age to show respect for our elders and not to speak while they are speaking. This is a fundamental and universal law in Aboriginal societies.

What Bess said to incite such abuse was this: "Equal opportunity doesn't exist for our women, and once the military have done their overhaul of their men and policies . . . maybe they could come our way and sort some of our fellas out, because what's happening now women just haven't had a voice." They "want to move forward and be respected and be seen as equals". What happened to the girl whose complaint brought these matters to a head "was not right", Bess said.

Asked by Emma Beard what was the most important thing that could improve the standard of living for Northern Territory Aboriginal people, Bess replied: "Education is the first one on the top of the list . . . from six up to 18, children don't know how to write their names." She responded to another questioner who cited "treaty obligations" that if the UN indigenous rights rapporteur who visited the Northern Territory had been a woman, there would have been more understanding and a better outcome for Aboriginal women.

Asked by Tony Jones if she still supported the intervention, Bess said: "I am for the intervention because I've seen progress, I've seen women who now have voices. They can speak for themselves, and they are standing up for their rights. Children are being fed, and young people more or less know how to manage their lives. That's what's happened since the intervention."

I met Bess Price on the banks of the Katherine River with her husband in 1980. It was a delight to meet a well-educated young Aboriginal woman. Bess and her husband were engaging and optimistic, and we were in agreement on so many things in those heady days when land rights were new and great changes in the administration of Aboriginal affairs were afoot.

More here






Minister unleashes his inner Germaine Greer

By Ted Lapkin, who served as an infantry officer in the Israeli army. He has an important point but I still think officers can be gentlemen

THE sex scandal at the Australian Defence Force Academy has sent the Gillard government into a conniption fit of political correctness.

In a gross overreaction to this sordid episode, the Prime Minister has set in train a contradictory set of initiatives that would be ludicrous if they weren't so tragic.

The Sex Discrimination Commissioner has been directed to investigate the defence force with the intention of rooting out loutishness in the ranks. But Defence Minister Stephen Smith also wants to see women serving in front-line roles where they will encounter close-quarters barbarism of the worst sort imaginable.

The rank incoherence of these policies is obvious. If women require special protections against a bit of coarse sexual barrack-room banter, how can they be expected to deal with the unbridled savagery of infantry combat?

The battlefield is a brutal, physically exacting and unforgiving environment where there's no Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission to be found.

Appeals to fair play will do nothing to help an infantrywoman against an AK47-wielding jihadi who seeks to thrust a bayonet into her chest.

There is no place for special dispensations in war. Our enemies couldn't care less whether our armed forces operate according principles of gender equality.

The government has seized on the ADFA scandal as the trigger for a full-fledged assault on what it sees as the army's culture of machismo-laden aggression. Yet the Defence Minister seems oblivious to the reality that martial belligerence is what wins wars.

The military is a killing machine that in the final equation exists to vanquish Australia's foes by shooting people and blowing up things. It's an institution that has no parallel elsewhere in civilised society.

And, as such, the Australian Army operates according to a unique set of rules that are designed to fit the exceptional circumstances it encounters when the bullets fly. Nowhere else can you be ordered to advance against people who are trying their best to kill you, and nowhere else can you be sent to prison if you refuse. Nowhere else do you receive accolades for slaughtering human beings wholesale.

Since time immemorial, groups of young men have been melded into effective fighting units through a chest thumping, testosterone-laden macho warrior culture. Shakespeare perfectly captured this emotional dynamic with in his famous Agincourt "band of brothers" speech from Henry V.

A singular sense of brotherhood is what makes soldiers willing to assault an enemy machinegun when every rational instinct screams at them to run like hell the other way.

The integration of women into combat units will disrupt the psychological small group dynamic that forges rifle companies into effective fighting machines.

Military feminists seek to impose on the war room a set of principles taken directly from the boardroom. The arguments in favour of a gender-neutral Australian military are all couched in the civilian language of equal opportunity.

No one even tries to claim that permitting women to serve as infantry soldiers will enhance the combat efficiency of the ADF. Activists pushing for this revolutionary change in military culture are utterly indifferent to the impact it will have on the army's ability to fulfil its most basic purpose, winning our wars.

And then there's the inevitable issue of sex. The lifestyle of any ground combat unit in the field is rough, rude and raw.

Writer Sebastian Junger accompanied a unit of American paratroopers three years ago through their 15-month deployment to Afghanistan.

In his bestselling book War, Junger described his platoon's outpost as "a hilltop without hot food, running water, communication with the outside world or any kind of entertainment".

Anyone who believes that there'll be no hanky-panky if young men and women are posted in such conditions is naive to the ways of the human heart. And romantic affection, with its instinctive passions, jealousies and favouritisms, will wreak havoc when injected into the tightly knit fraternity that is a rifle platoon.

It's also time to dispel the mythology about the status of women in the Israeli military that has been bandied about in this debate.

In its 1948 War of Independence, the Israeli army quickly scuttled its egalitarian experiment with female fighters. It turned out that male soldiers were so focused on protecting their female colleagues that they neglected their unit's mission objectives.

And today women still do not serve in the front line units of the Israeli army that engage in close combat with the enemy. The single mixed-gender "Caracal" battalion is assigned to gendarmerie duties along the sleepy Sinai border between Israel and Egypt. Women also carry out rear area security duties with the paramilitary border police. But there are no female fighting personnel in Israel's infantry, tank or combat engineer units.

Elevating the theory and principle over tactics and practicality, the Gillard government seeks to transform the Australian military into a softer and more sensitive institution. But close quarters combat is a savage business and a feminised army will not fare well at the sharp end of war.

The ADF must never be used as a laboratory for trendy social experimentation because the stakes are so high. Getting it wrong means dead Australians and battlefield defeat.

It's fine that Smith has discovered his inner Germaine Greer. But in that process he's dragging the Australian Army down the primrose path of political correctness that will ultimately kill people. The wrong people. Our people.

SOURCE





GREENIE ROUNDUP

Three current articles below

Friends and foes flay carbon tax

THERE is now a common view among the Gillard government's friends and foes about the additional costs to industry of a carbon tax.

That is, it could be the straw that breaks the camel's back in relation to future investment, the survival of some of the manufacturing sector and the full recovery of a still fragile, patchwork economy.

Company chiefs and shop-floor workers find they are now on the same side. There is also a common view among employers and employees that the government's process and timetable are flawed, short on detail, politically motivated and not guaranteed of success.

Such sentiments may have been shared by some of those same people during the Rudd government's negotiations of the failed carbon pollution reduction scheme, but there have been dramatic changes to the economy, industry, jobs and the body politic since 2009.

Not least among those is the fact the Gillard government is now a minority one dependent on independents and the Greens to get its agenda passed.

Perhaps the biggest difficulty the government faces is that workers' concern for their jobs, whether based on the real impact of the carbon tax or not, is so deep the previous goodwill on climate change, faith in Labor looking after Australian workers and suspicion of Tony Abbott are evaporating. Labor's working heartland is rebelling because of concern for job security and not because they are climate change deniers or extremists. Chief executives of big companies and welders on the shop floor are seeing eye-to-eye on the threats from a carbon tax and the government appears to be losing the argument badly on compensation for want of detail since Julia Gillard announced the carbon tax on February 24.

These changes and difficulties are not just about more complicated and delicate negotiations with MPs on the cross benches but go to the heart of the challenges faced by the government: a lack of authority, a sense of growing cabinet and leadership tension, emboldened critics, community scepticism towards reassurances and a growing list of sections of industry and the community angry with government policies.

A negotiated government born without electoral momentum is sinking as its friends question its ability to get things done and its foes press home an advantage.

Not least among those foes is the Leader of the Opposition, who has played up industry and business concerns on the effect of the tax on investment and development, harped on increased prices for food, petrol and electricity, and argued that the tax will not cut greenhouse emissions.

What's more, Abbott has not only attacked Gillard's integrity about going back on her promise about a carbon tax and run a highly successful negative campaign, he also has started to split Labor from its formal allies in the Greens and labour movement.

Three weeks ago Climate Change Minister Greg Combet told industry leaders the compensation for business for the carbon tax would not go beyond the compensation earmarked for the CPRS in 2009-10 under Kevin Rudd's prime ministership. He told the coal industry not to expect any compensation for coalminers and exporters beyond 2009.

Industry and unions want it to be the starting point.

Combet was told oil refinery investment in Australia was threatened by a carbon tax, help for the natural gas sector had to be revisited and a range of exporting industries were threatened. Shell and Caltex expressed concerns about the future of oil refinery investment in Australia because a series of taxes and costs were accumulating and the carbon tax represented the fatal straw.

Since then the liquefied natural gas industry has sought an exclusion from the tax, at least a rise in free permits to emit greenhouse gases to 94.5 per cent, because of fundamental changes in the industry and as it ponders investments in the near future of $130 billion. Shell has signalled the closure of its Clyde oil refinery in Sydney with the possible loss of 500 jobs and Ford has announced a downsizing of 240 jobs. To cap it off, Australian Workers Union national secretary Paul Howes has declared he is facing a workers' revolt on the tax and that if one job were to be lost then the union's in-principle support would also be lost.

Howes has been forced into the open by Abbott's dual campaign against Gillard and the tax and against the union leadership for not addressing members' concerns. Since the announcement of the tax Abbott has visited at least 16 workplaces, including a steel works and a cement plant, to campaign against it. At the OneSteel rolling mill at Laverton in Gillard's electorate of Lalor in Melbourne, Abbott observed the growing opposition of workers and drove a wedge between union officials and their members.

"The steel market is highly competitive. They're under a great deal of competitive pressure, particularly from imports, and that's why Julia Gillard's carbon tax is a dagger aimed at the heart of manufacturing in this country . . . it will cost jobs big time," Abbott said. "Most of the workers here are members of the Australian Workers Union and I think if Paul Howes was doing the right thing by his workers he would be talking to the Prime Minister and saying: 'Think again, if we want manufacturing jobs in this country, think again about this bad tax.' "

Don Voelte, chief executive of the biggest Australian-owned LNG company, Woodside Petroleum, argued that while existing projects would not be affected future investment could be directed elsewhere in the world and "carbon leakage" meant China's contribution to global carbon emissions would increase at the cost of Australian LNG exports.

On the face of all this, Combet tried to turn the public discourse back in the government's favour this week by releasing a compensation package for households. It had a guarantee that more than 50 per cent of the revenue raised would be used for permanent compensation to households.

But the package, like all the others, lacked the detail that would enable those fighting for a carbon price to actually have something to use in an argument rather than assurances and moral arguments. As well, the basic concern being felt on the shop floor, worry about keeping your job, wasn't addressed at all by reassurances of compensation for rising costs. When Howes and Voelte agree that workers are worried about the same thing the debate's not favouring the government.

SOURCE

"Green" senator from a distinguished Communist background unrepentant in her hatred of Israel

Her parents were both lifelong members of the Communist Party of Australia and her own views are Trotskyite. Trotsky was the chief murderer of Russia's Red revolution

INCOMING Greens senator Lee Rhiannon says she will support a controversial boycott of Israel right up until she enters Federal Parliament. She will continue to speak out for the sanctions against Israel even though it clashes with the policies of federal Greens leader Bob Brown.

And Ms Rhiannon insisted the stance, part of the Greens' New South Wales platform, is not anti-Israel. She told Sky News the aim was to "bring forward policies that will work for Palestinians because at the moment Palestinians just don't have a lot of the human rights we take for granted".

"I said that yes, we have that position in NSW and I'll support the NSW position. But it's not something we're taking to the Federal Parliament," she said.

Mr Brown suggested Labor should share some of the flak over Marrickville Council's decision to ban Israeli products.

Foreign Minister Kevin Rudd earlier today slammed the boycott as "nuts" but Senator Brown said that it was not just the NSW Greens that had voted for it. "It was four Labor councillors that made that policy possible," he told reporters in Canberra. "Kevin Rudd's Labor party is as every bit responsible for the outcome ... as the Greens were. "So he might address that issue."

The federal coalition has already called on Prime Minister Julia Gillard to distance herself from the Labor councillors who voted for the boycott in December. More than 20 ALP-affiliated unions have also backed banning trade links with Israel.

Ms Rhiannon said the boycott was part of a global movement. She said: "My own position is that its not an anti-Israel position at all. "It is about a boycott to bring forward policies that will work for Palestinians because at the moment Palestinians just don't have a lot of the human rights we take for granted, they cant move easily around their country, there's not equity in jobs and education, they cant be confident their house isn't going to be blown up."

The NSW Greens were strong contenders for the state seat of Marrickville until its candidate, the local mayor Fiona Byrne, was targeted by a media campaign over her inconsistent position on the boycott to isolate Israel.

The move has drawn the ire of politicians, business leaders and the Jewish community.

The Greens controlled council continues to back sanctions, even though its own business papers have revealed it could cost it $4 million. Ms Byrne issued a statement yesterday saying the sanctions would be implemented in such a way as to not financially disadvantage residents and businesses.

New Premier Barry O'Farrell has written to Marrickville mayor Fiona Byrne threatening to sack the council unless it drops the boycott within 28 days. "We're happy to take whatever action is required to get Marrickville Council back focused on the needs of its ratepayers, not trying to engage in foreign affairs," he told Macquarie Radio today.

He advised Ms Byrne to leave the council and run for federal parliament if she wanted to pursue the boycott.

SOURCE

Solar panel boondoggle

It's an object lesson in how not to run government policy. Solar roof panels on domestic houses deliver relatively little greenhouse gas abatement at a very high cost that is borne disproportionately by the poor.

An economy-wide carbon price delivers a lot of abatement at about one-tenth of the cost and can fund compensation to make sure the heaviest cost falls on the people who can afford to pay.

IPART, the pricing regulator, is warning that the former scheme is eroding the willingness of the public to consider the latter.

Yesterday's report reveals NSW homes are already going to be paying about $100 a year more in annual electricity bills to cover the benefits flowing to people who can afford to put solar panels on their roofs. And there's no compensation to pensioners or low-income earners for that.

The concern is that people are now likely to be less willing to pay $140 to $200 a year more on their annual household bills to cover the cost of the carbon tax, even though low and middle income earners will get compensation for that impost.

How did we get into this back-to-front position? Governments didn't think the policy through.

After spending more than $1 billion on direct rebates for solar photovoltaic cells, continued cost blowouts forced the cancellation of the federal scheme in 2009. It was subsumed into the renewable energy target - a policy actually designed to help large-scale renewables attain a viable market share in the lead-in to a full carbon price.

But the small-scale rooftop incentives swamped the market and rendered the big projects unviable, so the government hived them off into their own scheme - requiring electricity generators to buy all the renewable certificates they generated and giving four extra certificates for every certificate actually earned. The retailers warned from the get-go that the new scheme could also blow out.

On top of this incentive, state governments offered households feed-in tariffs to sell the electricity they generated back into the grid.

Both the federal and former NSW government have already tried to wind back their lucrative incentives, but the message from IPART is that they are not doing it fast enough.

The result is the risk that a bad policy cruels the chances of a potentially efficient one.

SOURCE



14 April, 2011

Pseudo-Aborigine slurs real Aborigine

Behrendt is as pink-skinned as I am. She is nothing like a real Aborigine, even if she has some remote Aboriginal ancestry. She is just a conventional Leftist. She is comfortably ensconced with others of her ilk at the University of Technology, Sydney, far away from the day-to-day problems of real Aborigines. Her many awards and honours suggest that her claims of Aboriginality have served her well, however. It's so comforting to give awards to "Aborigines" who are just like us. It helps to hide the real and sad differences that need to be dealt with constructively

HIGH-profile indigenous lawyer Larissa Behrendt tweeted that sex with a horse was less offensive than an Aboriginal leader who supports for intervention in the Northern Territory.

Professor Behrendt made the comments after watching Bess Price on the ABC's Q&A program on Monday night. "I watched a show where a guy had sex with a horse and I'm sure it was less offensive than Bess Price."

Ms Price has been vocal about the high levels of violence in central Australian indigenous communities and supported the Northern Territory intervention, angering left-leaning indigenous leaders who consider her a traitor.

Speaking from Darwin, Ms Price told The Australian yesterday she was appalled by the comment. She accused Professor Behrendt, an Australian of the Year finalist, of trying to silence her because of her different views. "I'm going to seek legal advice," she said. "This is worse than what she is accusing Andrew Bolt of."

News Limited columnist Bolt has spent the past fortnight in court fighting accusations that he vilified a group of nine Aborigines, including Professor Behrendt, on the basis of their race.

Professor Behrendt told The Australian yesterday the tweet was taken out of context and had been made as she watched the notoriously crude TV series Deadwood. "The tweet has been taken out of context. I did not mean any offence to Bess Price personally and I am on the record with views contrary to hers on the intervention and she knows that," she said.

Ms Price said the comment showed how out of touch the indigenous academic was with central Australian Aborigines.

SOURCE





Vilification laws unnecessary and counterproductive

Gary Johns

LARISSA Behrendt, a professor of law and indigenous studies at the University of Technology, Sydney and of Aboriginal heritage, is suing Andrew Bolt under the Racial Discrimination Act for racial hatred.

Following the appearance of Aboriginal woman Bess Price on ABC1's Q&A on Monday, it is reported in this paper today that Behrendt tweeted, "I watched a show where a guy had sex with a horse and I'm sure it was less offensive than Bess Price."

I assume Behrendt was offended by Price's firm support for the Northern Territory Emergency Response. I guess one Aborigine hating another in public doesn't cut it under the Racial Discrimination Act. Price will have to be satisfied knowing Behrendt is a gross hypocrite.

Still, Price may take a closer look at the response to Behrendt from fellow "academic" Padraic Gibson of UTS. As reported in this newspaper today Gibson tweeted: "ha! Being offensive pays. BessP and her white husband make a $packet$ doing 'cultural awareness' for NTER."

I think Price may find that the old-fashioned law of defamation may be appropriate. Gibson is co-editor of Solidarity, a socialist magazine, an Aboriginal rights campaigner and "researcher" with Jumbunna, a unit of UTS through which Aborigines can "gain special entry to university". I trust the university reviews the roles of Behrendt, Gibson, Jumbunna and any persons in the university with similarly prejudicial views.

Behrendt, Gibson and others may like to reflect on where 20 years of racial hatred, of the white man, has landed Aborigines. They may like to consider that the two most egregious instances of public racial vilification in Australia in the past two decades were the Aboriginal deaths in custody report (1991) and the report on the separation of Aboriginal children and their families (1997).

The deaths in custody inquiry began knowing that black deaths in custody were at a rate similar to white. There was no agitation to investigate white deaths.

Within the first six weeks of the inquiry the research revealed that a black in custody was no likelier to die than a white in custody. Indeed, the death rate for a black male was no greater in custody than in the community. Moreover, not one of 99 cases of black deaths in custody revealed wrongdoing by prison officials. And yet white society was publicly vilified for years during the inquiry. The assumption was that the white man had done in the black man.

Fortunately, but only incidentally, subsequent actions arising from the recommendations of the inquiry lowered white as well as black deaths in custody.

The speculative conclusion of the deaths in custody inquiry was that family separation was the principal cause of black incarceration. Apparently there was no interest in the causes of the incarceration of whites.

Speculation about the causes of black incarceration led to the second inquiry, into the separation of Aboriginal children from their families. It concluded that the commonwealth, that is, the white man, had deliberately set out to destroy Aboriginal culture by taking half-caste children and that this action was tantamount to genocide.

This outrageous public vilification was allowed to run at length until the test case - Lorna Cubillo and Peter Gunner - for the Stolen Generations was soundly defeated.

The separation of Aboriginal children inquiry was set up in 1995 under the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, the same group that now administers the provisions dealing with racial hatred. These provisions are being used to prosecute journalist and broadcaster Bolt before the Federal Court.

The provisions in the Racial Discrimination Act 1975 inserted by the Racial Hatred Act 1995 were strongly opposed by the Coalition on the grounds that it might infringe free speech. I, along with Graeme Campbell and Jim Snow, opposed the bill in the Labor caucus on the basis that it was as likely to incite ill feeling between racial groups as stop it.

The provisions make it unlawful to insult, humiliate, offend or intimidate another person or group in public on the basis of their race, colour or national or ethnic origin if it is reasonably likely in all the circumstances to offend.

Fortunately, there are partial protections for free speech under the act, where "done reasonably and in good faith", someone can make public statements likely to offend in the course of, for example, a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest if the comment is an expression of a genuine belief held by the person making the comment. These are the matters being tested in the Bolt case.

The most malleable part of the provision is to define what is "reasonably likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate".

According to the HREOC, the victim's perspective is the measure of whether an act is likely to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate. For example, if derogatory comments are made against Aborigines, the central question is whether those comments are likely to offend or intimidate an Aboriginal person or group. It is a very subjective test.

Granted, the victim's response to the words or image must be reasonable.

The "reasonable victim" test states that the victim "should not be a person peculiarly susceptible to being roused to enmity, nor one who takes an irrational or extremist view of relations among racial groups". The test allows the standards of the "dominant class" to be challenged by ensuring cultural sensitivity when deciding the types of comments that are considered offensive.

Almost certainly those who are politically active in ethnic or Aboriginal politics, such as Behrendt, are those who would be most sensitive to racial insults. Moreover, HREOC's role is to make people aware of their rights under the act, which may well make them more sensitive to insults.

It seems that HREOC has a conflict. It administers an act, the heart of which is reliance on sensitivity, the job of which may make people more sensitive.

Defamation laws have been available to "victims" for a very long time as a remedy for outrageous slurs. Apparently, the defamation laws were too insensitive.

What lies in people's hearts can be changed, but is it more educative or less educative to prosecute speech? Is racial hatred more or less likely in an overly sensitive electorate?

Following the Bolt case, it may be time to revisit public racial vilification and the role of HREOC.

SOURCE





Julia Gillard declares war on the idle

A worthy aim. Let's hope there is more to it than talk

JULIA Gillard has declared war on idleness, revealing she will use the May 10 budget to press Australians to "pull their weight" and not give in to welfare dependency and economic exclusion.

The Prime Minister last night vowed to use the prosperity of the mining boom to fund programs to boost workforce participation, arguing that many people on disability and other pensions should be working.

She said taxpayers should not have to fund welfare for people capable of supporting themselves, and that she would offer training opportunities as part of a push to "entrench a new culture of work".

Her uncompromising comments came in a speech to the Sydney Institute in which she also promised to withdraw government spending to reduce pressure on inflation as the private sector lifted its activity after a period on the economic sidelines forced by the global financial crisis.

Since ousting Kevin Rudd from the Labor leadership last June, Ms Gillard has frequently expressed her belief in what she describes as "the dignity of work" and promised to use education and training to deliver equality of opportunity. At the same time, the government has been working on policy to deal with the fact that current work participation rates will be insufficient to support the ageing population.

In her speech last night, Ms Gillard married the themes, declaring that Labor was "the party of work, not welfare" and placing respect for work and a fair go at the centre of the national policy agenda.

While she conceded there would always be some Australians who were unable to work because of disability, Ms Gillard said it was a "social and economic reality" that some people who could work would not. "Relying on welfare to provide opportunity is no longer the right focus for our times," the Prime Minister said.

"In today's economy, inclusion through participation must be our central focus." She said the nation's strong economy provided a perfect opportunity to target people stuck on welfare with reforms based on "high expectations that everyone who can work, should work".

While she gave no details of the reforms, the Prime Minister hinted at measures to help those she described as "hard cases" to prepare themselves to work by dealing with their health issues and providing opportunities for them to balance work with their family responsibilities.

Ms Gillard suggested welfare recipients could be ushered back into the workforce with the right mix of policies. This could involve training or measures "as simple as learning to read and write at a higher level". "It is not right to leave people on welfare and deny them access to opportunity," she said. And every Australian should pull his or her own weight. It is not fair for taxpayers to pay for someone who can support themselves."

The comments are likely to upset the welfare sector, which has recently warned against punitive measures to force welfare recipients to work.

Labor's left wing could also baulk at the reforms, although the opposition has been proposing its own measures to lift workforce participation, including grants to help the unemployed move to areas of high employment.

The Prime Minister said 230,000 Australians had been unemployed for more than two years, while 250,000 families did not have an adult in the workforce for at least a year.

"The party I lead is politically, spiritually, even literally, the party of work - the party of work, not welfare, the party of opportunity, not exclusions, the party of responsibility, not idleness," Ms Gillard said.

"The values I learned in my parents' home - hard work, a fair go through education, respect - find themselves at the centre of Australia's economic debate in the challenge to cut long-term welfare dependency."

Ms Gillard rejected claims that her pledge to return the budget to a surplus by 2012-13 was a political decision and that she could cause less pain for taxpayers if she delayed the plan.

The Prime Minister said that although her promise was political in the sense that she made it during the election campaign, it was also economically prudent for the government to cut spending after more than two years of heavy economic stimulus to offset the effects of the global recession.

"When the private sector was in retreat, the government stepped forward to fill the gap," she said. "Over coming years, as the private sector recovers strongly, it is the right time for the government to step back."

Ms Gillard also allowed herself a note of satisfaction, saying she was sceptical of "exaggerated" commentary about politics. She noted that people had predicted she would be unable to deliver reforms such as her flood levy, health reform package or her National Broadband Network legislation. In each case, she said, she had prevailed with patience and perseverance.

Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey said last night the government's mismanagement and wasteful spending on programs such as the Building the Education Revolution, pink batts and the National Broadband Network "makes a mockery" of the Prime Minister's claim in her speech that Labor was committed to fiscal responsibility.

"The government's budget in May will not be worth the paper it is written on," Mr Hockey said. "It will not include the revenue and expenditure from its new carbon tax."

Former Labor minister Graham Richardson launched a blistering attack on what he said was the Gillard government's use of a politically unheard of "big-target" strategy on a series of issues ranging from carbon tax compensation to cuts to health research funding.

Mr Richardson used his Sky News show Richo to criticise the government for not giving details of the likely impact of the carbon tax and how people would be compensated. Planned measures to limit gambling on poker machines ensured that every pub and club in Australia would become a campaign office for the opposition, he said.

Mr Richardson added that it all got worse this week when it emerged the budget would cut $400 million in health research.

That was mean-spirited, he said. "If they do it, they're crazy."

Ms Gillard's appearance at the Sydney Institute dinner at Luna Park attracted a band of gay marriage protesters, who called on her to "open your heart" to "marriage rights now".

SOURCE






Childcare reforms 'will shut centres'

This was always obvious

THREE Gillard government ministers have been warned that childcare centres across the nation will collapse unless reforms to increase staff-child ratios are stalled.

The ministers were called on by the Child Care National Association to postpone for two years the reforms that are due to take effect on January 1.

With vacancy rates in centres across the nation at unsustainably high levels, IBISWorld has forecast an industry profit margin of only 0.3 per cent for this year.

Association spokesman Chris Buck said he had relayed his concerns informally to Education Minister Chris Evans and Childcare Minister Kate Ellis. He subsequently had a formal meeting with the staff of Schools Minister Peter Garrett and Ms Ellis to tell them the industry needed immediate assistance.

Mr Buck said the government was in denial about the unsustainability of the system and warned parents were pulling kids out of care and using informal care as costs rose.

The Productivity Commission Report on Government Services for 2010 advised the average utilisation for small childcare businesses to be a low 64.9 per cent, Mr Buck said. "Profitability is woeful. One of the worries I've got is that the banks will be studying that and they will be saying 'childcare centre in Wodonga prove to me that you are viable'," he said. "The government can't stick their head in the sand and say this isn't happening. It's their figures."

Mr Buck said people were finding other options for their childcare, including using relatives, to cut costs. "They are putting them with their grandparents and it's because they are being more frugal," he said.

The new standards will force centres to boost staff-to-child ratios and improve training.

Mr Buck said he had asked the ministers to stall the reforms for two years to ensure they did not cripple the industry. "We need a slowdown on the national quality framework. If you push the costs up, the utilisation will fall," he said.

The IBISWorld report says good news in childcare is "conditional on shrinking margins for operators".

"Government regulation mandating higher staff-to-child ratios and higher levels of staff qualifications are likely to increase wage costs for operators. As wages make up the single largest cost for childcare providers, operators trying to make a profit in the industry will find themselves increasingly pressured," it says.

"The industry as a whole is barely profitable, primarily due to the presence of not-for-profit community-based centres and a lack of economies of scale."

The report warns that profitability is likely to suffer as non-profit operators continue to proliferate, and increases in labour costs resulting from more stringent regulation cannot be fully passed on in the form of higher childcare fees.

The Australian revealed yesterday that workers would seek a 50 per cent pay rise this year. The United Voice union is planning a long-term industrial campaign to dovetail with new regulations.

The union's assistant national secretary, Sue Lines, said childcare workers with a Certificate 3 qualification -- which is equivalent to a six-month TAFE course -- earned the minimum wage of $17.46 an hour.

SOURCE






GREENIE ROUNDUP

Four current articles below

Carbon tax may never happen, says key independent

He has rightly twigged that it "does nothing"

ONE of the independents Julia Gillard will rely on to get her carbon tax across the line has warned it may never become a reality.

New England MP Tony Windsor today said he would not vote for a package of climate change measures “that does nothing”. “There is no carbon tax, there may not be a carbon tax,” Mr Windsor told ABC radio this morning.

Mr Windsor said people in his rural NSW electorate were concerned about the lack of detail around the proposed carbon tax.

Climate Change Minister Greg Combet released more details of the government's proposed carbon price yesterday, pledging more than 50 per cent of revenue from the tax would be returned to millions of households and reassuring businesses on the impact of the scheme.

The Prime Minister played down Mr Windsor's comments this morning, describing them as “perfectly consistent with everything he has ever said about pricing carbon”. “He has said consistently, and I very much respect this, that he would wait to the end and judge the full package,” she said.

Ahead of a visit to his electorate by the government's chief climate change adviser Ross Garnaut today, Mr Windsor said he was happy to work with other members of the multi-party climate change committee, but wouldn't guarantee his support for the carbon tax. “The Prime Minister doesn't have the numbers as I understand it,” he said. “When things get into the parliament people have a vote; I have a vote, others do as well. You can never get anything until it gets through a minority parliament,” he said.

“I'm not inclined to vote for something that does nothing if we can get something that does something I'm more than happy to vote for it.”

Ms Gillard said consultations with business, community and environment groups and unions would ensure a balanced package, which the government would present to parliament in the second half of this year.

“What Tony Windsor has said to me and said publicly is that he does believe climate change is real and that we need to tackle it, he does believe that pricing carbon is the best way, an important way of tackling climate change,” she said. “But for an individual legislative package he's going to look at the package and wait to the end and then judge.”

SOURCE

Working families to pay for the gesture

By Senator Barnaby Joyce

Minister Combet’s announcement that they are going to compensate working families for the cost of carbon tax should confirm one thing; a carbon tax is going to cost working families.

The fundamental issue here is that a carbon tax is not going to change the temperature of the globe or change the climate in any shape or form. It is merely a gesture. A gesture that means that those who are already finding it extremely difficult to get by are going to have that difficulty exacerbated by a pointless tax with a deceitful inference that it will the change global climatic conditions.

What is the point of taking money off people, spinning it around a bureaucracy and giving people back a bit of their own money and expecting be thanked for it? Why don’t you just let people keep their own money and go away?

In the meantime you put up the price of the fundamental mechanism of commerce, power, so what is now our competitive advantage? Obviously we don’t want lower wages so ultimately there will be fewer jobs.

Is Australia going to be reduced to a country that digs up red rocks and black rocks, iron and coal and sends them over to where they don’t have a carbon tax so they can produce the things we used to produce?

Doesn’t the government get it? The people don’t want this tax and surely the have some right in being respected on this decision.

Even on the CFMEU website, the majority of the workers don’t want a carbon tax. I’m sure that this is not a National Party stronghold, so my advice to the Labor party is, listen to your own people otherwise it will end up in tears, like the NSW election.

SOURCE

Marrickville council to boycott HP, others at $3.7m cost

Independent Marrickville councillor Victor Macri described the boycott as ludicrous. Picture: Jane Dempster Source: The Australian
A MOVE by a Greens-controlled council in Sydney's inner west to boycott goods and services from Israel will cost ratepayers at least $3.7 million and force the council to abandon Holden cars and Hewlett-Packard computers, among many other disruptions.

The stark warning on the cost of the council's decision to support the global boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign earlier this year is contained in a paper by the council's manager of services, Gary Moore, which is due for discussion next week and has been obtained by The Australian.

Marrickville, the only council in Australia that has approved an Israel boycott, has been a hotbed of political controversy since its Greens Mayor Fiona Byrne said she would push for a statewide version of the Israel boycott if elected to the NSW lower house at last month's election.

During the election campaign, Ms Byrne made contradictory remarks about the boycott, which was a factor in her failure to wrest the seat of Marrickville from Labor MP and former deputy premier Carmel Tebbutt.

Ms Byrne could have the casting vote next Tuesday on whether to continue with the campaign and slug ratepayers with the added cost, when a motion to repeal the boycott is put forward.

Mr Moore's paper details goods and services the council would have to forgo in order to comply with its directive, such as Hewlett Packard computers, Holden and Volvo cars, telephones and other equipment from Motorola and concrete from Fulton Hogan.

These companies, according to the council's original motion to join the global BDS movement, "support or profit from the Israeli military occupation of Palestine".

The report estimates the cost of replacing certain IT assets at $3.5m, and the annual cost of using a different concrete supplier at $250,000. It does not attempt to estimate the cost of replacing vehicles, and says changing waste-disposal service providers may not even be possible.

Mr Moore's paper admits staff have been unable to fully research ties between companies providing goods to the council and Israel and have largely relied on www.whoprofits.org - an anti-Israel website.

Independent councillor Victor Macri described the boycott plan as ludicrous. "We weren't elected to do this; we were elected to look after the streets and trees and pick up garbage," Mr Macri said.

"People vote federally to direct foreign policy. A boycott of Israel will hurt Marrickville ratepayers far more than it will Israel."

The costs will likely be exacerbated after Randwick council in Sydney's east passed a motion last month that excluded Marrickville from collective purchasing agreements because its boycott would limit other councils' ability to negotiate for the best price.

Mr Moore's report found the boycott measure would lead to "substantial" impacts on council's operations. "Significant change would have to be planned for and managed to enable council operations to be maintained whilst new sets of providers of computer hardware, concrete, waste services, some vehicles and some other construction materials and consumables are obtained and existing contracts are completed/suspended," the report said.

It noted the council might need to spend $5000 to $10,000 in legal fees just to determine whether the original motion on the boycott was lawful under anti-discrimination laws. A council source said a "conservative approach" had been used in determining the cost of implementing a boycott.

"It's fair to say that the report is measured - built around realistically what the council is able to look at replacing," the source said. For example, the costs of breaking existing contracts or finding a replacement water supply to the Kurnell desalination plant, which is operated by Veolia, another company on the global BDS blacklist, are not included.

Mr Macri said if a complete divestment campaign were implemented, the council might as well "shut its doors".

Spread over Marrickville's roughly 40,000 homes, the costs estimated work out at about $100 a household. The council has an annual budget of about $72m.

Mr Macri said contrary to council policy, the BDS motion was not attended by detailed costings when passed in December.

Mr Moore's report described the cheaper option of phasing out goods and services as they expired, rather than divesting them completely, but found such a decision would "still have significant impacts on council's operations".

A council source told The Australian the cheaper option would cost at least $1m. Labor councillor Emanuel Tsardoulias said the costs associated with both options were "outrageous".

Mr Tsardoulias, who initially supported the boycott but later changed his mind, said he and others had had hundreds of complaints since the council's motion began getting attention.

Council is said to have received a petition of 4600 signatures.

Of Marrickville's 12 councillors, four Labor and two independents are expected to support Tuesday's motion to repeal the boycott; one independent is set to side with the five Greens in opposing the motion, although The Australian understands one Green is having second thoughts.

SOURCE

Commission slams desal plants

More Greenie waste of resources

PROLONGED water restrictions and expensive desalination plants are the least efficient way of providing water security, the government's key economic advisory body has found.

In a scathing draft report, the Productivity Commission yesterday called for an urgent overhaul of the urban water sector, declaring consumers were paying more than necessary for their water as a result of poor government decision-making.

The 600-page report is highly critical of decisions by state governments across the country to overinvest in expensive and inefficient desalination plants, with economic modelling indicating desalination plants in Melbourne and Perth alone could cost consumers between $3.1 billion and $4.2bn more than cheaper water-saving measures over 20 years.

The commission also criticised the federal government for "distorting investment decisions" by offering generous subsidies for the construction of desalination plants. But a spokesman for Parliamentary Secretary for Urban Water Don Farrell last night hit back, saying the federal government contributed to only two of the six major desalination plants in Australia, and this made up "only a portion" of the $1.5bn the government had spent on urban water security.

In a recommendation that will probably draw criticism, the commission also declared state governments and water bodies should be open to returning highly treated recycled wastewater to waterways for drinking.

The report says governments have been too quick to discount recycled wastewater for political, rather than economic, reasons: "Negative community perceptions have become entrenched in the absence of good evidence about the costs and benefits."

The Productivity Commission is the latest in a chorus of voices calling for the urgent reform of Australia's urban water sector, with the National Water Initiative last week declaring new consideration needed to be given to the use of recycled water, as well as the construction of new dams.

The commission wants to open up the market for urban water trading and remove all remaining bans on trading between urban and rural areas that would allow water to be purchased at its highest value. It also recommends that state and territory governments should move away from setting water prices to monitoring how utilities price water and whether they abuse their market power.

The Productivity Commission found water restrictions imposed by state governments were likely to cost the nation about a $1bn in lost production, and governments would be better off charging consumers extra for different tiers of water packages and allow the market to regulate water use.

A spokesman for Senator Farrell said the government welcomed the draft report, including the recommendation that recycled wastewater should be considered as a more effective way to manage water shortages.

Opposition water spokesman Barnaby Joyce said the Productivity Commission was correct to criticise investment in desalination plants, saying they should be any government's "absolutely last-ditch alternative".

SOURCE



13 April, 2011

No penalty for black pedophile

Young black girls are less deserving of protection than are white girls, apparently

A MAN who "married" a 13-year-old girl and got her pregnant has escaped jail after pleading guilty to having sex with a child under 16. The Northern Territory Supreme Court heard the man was 23 when he married the girl, "in the Aboriginal sense" in a remote community, the Northern Territory News reports.

The relationship only came to light when the girl gave birth and a subsequent DNA test proved he was the baby's father.

Chief Justice Trevor Riley told the man that the court would be "blind to reality" if he did not impose a penalty which allowed him to return to his wife, who is now 17.

Chief Justice Riley sentenced him in the Alice Springs sittings of the Supreme Court to nine months in jail suspending it immediately. The maximum sentence for having sex with an underage person is 16 years in prison.

Upon sentencing the man Chief Justice Riley said it was "not a case of an older predator taking advantage of a young girl". "You are in a relationship with her. The relationship existed before the birth of the child and continues until today."

SOURCE





Hypocritical South African becomes a professor

He was a great critic of apartheid in its time but when he got his wish and South Africa became black-ruled, he decided he didn't want to live there anymore.

NOBEL laureate and author J.M. Coetzee is now a Professor of Literature at the University of Adelaide. The South African writer of acclaimed novels such as the Booker Prize winners Life & Times of Michael K and Disgrace, will provide mentoring and oversee students' work in the University's School of Humanities.

Professor Mike Brooks, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Research), yesterday confirmed Prof Coetzee's appointment as Professor of Literature in the Discipline of English.

He said the appointment "reinforced and extended" their relationship with Prof Coetzee who joined the University as a Visiting Research Fellow in 2003 and was awarded an honorary doctorate for his contribution to literature in 2006. "We are absolutely delighted and honoured that Prof Coetzee is continuing his association with the university as a staff member," he said. "To have the talent of someone of his world-class standing on faculty here in Adelaide is a privilege."

Prof Coetzee, who retired to Adelaide in 2002, published his first book, Dusklands, in South Africa in 1974. Others include: Waiting for the Barbarians, Foe, Age of Iron, The Master of Petersburg and three fictionalised memoirs, Boyhood, Youth and Summertime. He was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature in 2003.

"The university is proud to have been associated with five Nobel laureates in its history, each representing the very pinnacle of international achievement in the fields of medicine, literature and physics," Prof Brooks said.

As well as the University of Adelaide, Prof Coetzee has taught in institutions all over the United States including the State University of New York, Johns Hopkins University, Harvard University, Stanford University and the University of Chicago.

The 71-year-old, who is renowned for shunning publicity, said in a rare interview in 2003 published by Swedish newspaper Dagens Nyheter: "That has always seemed to me one of the stranger aspects of literary fame - you prove your competence as a writer and an inventor of stories, and then people clamour for you to make speeches and tell them what you think about the world," he said.

SOURCE





"Childcare" now a bad word (!)

THE term "childcare" should be cut from job descriptions and names of government departments, an early childhood advocacy group says.

Pam Cahir, the chief executive of Early Childhood Australia, says it should be replaced by the phrase "early childhood education and care" in order to recognise the sector's importance.

Childcare representatives are split over the push. One group says it's political correctness "gone mad". But the union representing early childhood workers supports a change, saying it would show staff were more than just "babysitters".

In a report on early childhood reforms, Our Future On The Line, Ms Cahir says governments should lead the way in changing the sector's language. "I want to bring an end to 'childcare' and call it what it is, early childhood education and care," Ms Cahir said.

"A change as subtle as 'disabled' to 'people living with disabilities' opens up huge potential and empowers people.

"In the same way, the early childhood education and care sector needs to be recognised for the quality education, nurturing and care it gives to children."

Child Care National Association president Chris Buck said families wanted affordable care, not political correctness "gone mad". He said the focus should be on rewarding staff, and training more, rather than on paying for new letterheads. "The thought police have had a brain snap," Mr Buck said. "Stop wasting money."

SOURCE




Julia's true faith -- if any

Peter Costello

An anti-carbon tax rally in Sydney shows some of the feelings about Prime Minister Julia Gillard. Photo: Adam Hollingworth
Fresh back from the United States where she announced her undying love for America, the Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, let us in on a secret no one could have guessed. She is an old-fashioned traditionalist.

In an interview for Australian Agenda on Sky News, Gillard declared she opposed euthanasia, opposed gay marriage, and wanted people to study the Bible. She doesn't sound too different from Tony Abbott. He is a one-time Catholic seminarian - now married with children - who deeply opposes euthanasia and abortion. She is an atheist who keeps her unmarried partner in the Lodge. But when it comes to traditional family values Gillard wants you to know they are Tweedledum and Tweedledee.

I sat opposite Gillard for a decade in the House of Representatives and it never occurred to me - not for a minute - that she was a moral conservative. But she was . . . or is.

Why has she done this now? Well it turns out that Labor research shows the government is suffering in the polls because people think it gets its marching orders from the Greens and Bob Brown. They think it is pandering to a group with some pretty far-out demands they didn't vote for - like a new tax on carbon dioxide designed to increase electricity and petrol prices.

So Labor and Gillard want to show they are more mainstream than the Greens. As Gillard put it: "To our right we have the Liberal Party . . . climate change deniers . . . To our left we have the Greens." So what do you get when you cross Tony Abbott and Bob Brown? You get Julia Gillard as their political love child.

We all know in the genetic lottery of life, offspring cannot choose which characteristics they derive from which parent. If Julia had taken Bob's moral views with Tony's environmental policy, she could dump the new tax while maintaining a more liberal position on gay marriage and the like. That seems to be the way the faceless men, Labor right-wing powerbrokers like Mark Arbib, want her to go. But you can't pick your moral beliefs, can you? Moral convictions do not turn on the spin of political convenience.

The last Labor leader who paraded on morality was Kevin Rudd. He championed an emissions trading system as the great moral issue of the age. When it looked like being the death of him Gillard advised him to drop it, which he did, shortly before it was the death of him. At that stage Gillard was not so committed to saving the world from carbon dioxide. And during the election she did all that she could to reassure people she was no fanatic, declaring last August: "There will be no carbon tax under the government I lead."

But that was then. She now wants a carbon tax as a step along the road to an emissions trading system: the very system she urged Rudd to drop. She has found faith, the environmental faith. In an evil world burning fossil fuel a great warming catastrophe awaits us (as hot as the fires of hell itself) which can only be averted through repentance, and the good works of an emissions trading scheme. This is a faith that needs no god. It is a faith for progressive atheists and Christians alike.

So the Gillard of 2011 is right now where the Rudd of 2010 was. I'll tell you someone who has noticed: Rudd himself. He popped up last week to remind everyone that when he was suffering for the (environmental) faith Gillard was dumping it. He wants people to know that he does not chop and change. He is principled.

If you listened to Rudd you might think Gillard is not so sincere about her views, that perhaps even her newly disclosed belief in traditional family values is just political positioning. I'll concede that politicians do change their mind and change their policies. But usually they are firm in their convictions on moral issues. That's why the parties give them a conscience vote. It's too much to expect MPs to bend positions of conscience to the will of the party line. People could get very cynical if they thought their leaders chop and change these values for a passing political advantage.

SOURCE



12 April, 2011

Another Labor Party boondoggle coming up

A new health records system that will be incomplete and may not be accessible to your doctor!

ALMOST $500 million is being spent on an e-health record system that will not provide real-time medical information at the point of care. Instead, it will serve copies of some clinical documents uploaded from doctors' systems in a voluntary program that puts the control of access in patients' hands.

The long-awaited draft concept of operations for the personally controlled e-health record, to be released today by the Health Department, shows how clinical documents will be pulled together by a "viewing service" and displayed in a format for viewing by patients and health professionals.

Critically, the system will not support clinical decision-making and lacks sophisticated analytics capabilities.

The design gives people a great deal of control over access to records held in the Personally Controlled Electronic Health Record system and consumers will be able to add their own notes to a GP-managed health summary record.

Consumers will access the system via a portal. Doctors also will initially access patient records through a separate provider portal, although in time their systems will be integrated with the PCEHR repository.

A novel approach is the ability for individuals to set access parameters, including requiring providers to use an access code (a PIN or passphrase selected by the patient) to verify consent.

Other controls will be "include" and "exclude" lists for participating healthcare organisations and an ability to limit access to certain documents within in the record.

This ranges from the default "general access" to "no access", which restricts viewing to the original source provider of the information.

Documents loaded to the system will carry a date stamp, but it will be up to medical providers to ensure patient records are consistently updated.

Consumers will be able to identify unauthorised activity through an audit trail, and there is a process for errors to be referred to the originating provider for correction and replacement.

Where clinical documents are loaded into the wrong person's record, the system operator, initially Medicare, will work with those concerned to fix the problem.

But patients have no control over the source material held in doctors' records, and medical providers will still share patient data through existing channels.

As a secondary system that will not replace doctors' records and which may not provide a complete set of patient information, it is unclear whether GPs and others will want to rely on it. So far, it has been understood the system would pull data from wherever it is held to provide a real-time view and support interactive alerts or warnings at the point of care. But the concept of operations states: "An individual's PCEHR may not represent a complete set of health information."

In fact, the system will only contain copies of documents pushed up by treating doctors with the patient's explicit consent. It is unclear how the currency, quality and provenance of this material will be guaranteed.

But with the live and complete data still locked in doctors' clinical systems, the public health benefits of real-time interventions --avoiding adverse drug events, better management of chronic conditions and improved prevention -- will remain elusive.

More HERE




Julia Gillard commits to free trade path

Some economic intelligence in evidence. Good to see

JULIA Gillard will turn to a new round of trade liberalisation to drive economic productivity, particularly in non-mining states that are struggling to keep pace with the resources boom.

Labor will also turn its back on negotiating low-quality trade deals with individual nations, decoupling trade policy from political issues under a regime that mirrors the reformist Hawke era.

The government appears to have conceded Australia has misused its quarantine system for protectionism, citing as an example its use of fears to exclude imports of New Zealand apples.

Trade Minister Craig Emerson, who was Bob Hawke's economic adviser, will announce the new policy today. It follows debate within Labor about how to tackle productivity reform without alienating voters or business. Some ministers have pressed hard for reform while others, including Wayne Swan, are understood to have called for political caution.

The Prime Minister, who has committed her government to pursuing free trade as a pathway to more jobs and prosperity, is understood to have strongly backed the trade shift, based on the argument that only economic prosperity will strengthen Labor's ability to tackle disadvantage and spread opportunity.

The 27-page trade policy document, obtained by The Australian yesterday, argues that parts of Australian which are not benefiting from the mining boom could fall further behind.

It argues that the movement of production resources such as labour, management and equipment to mining areas should "not be impeded by interventionist government policy" but notes it draws resources from non-mining regions and cities.

In the absence of reform, the paper says, such areas could be left ill-equipped to "take up the slack" after the mining boom.

"That's why an economic reform program designed to restart productivity growth as the basis for securing the competitiveness of Australian industries - mining and non-mining - is essential," the document says.

Although not all industries would strengthen, "productivity-raising economic reform gives Australian businesses a better chance of competing", it says.

The policy commits the government to a "unilateralist" approach to trade under which it would pursue trade reform irrespective of the actions of other nations. Trade would also be non-discriminatory, with Australia to spurn special two-way deals that exclude other nations from the same access.

The paper argues that such action simply diverts trade away from more efficient partners. "Trade diversion amounts to a redistribution of jobs and prosperity instead of the creation of more jobs and prosperity," the paper says. "Worse, trade diversion is inherently job-destroying and income-destroying from a global perspective."

The policy puts Labor at odds with the Greens and some sections of the trade union movement by strongly rejecting the idea of linking trade deals to political or policy concerns, such as the insistence that trade partners adopt similar standards of environmental or labour laws as Australia.

It insists Australia should ignore political imperatives, except with regard to trade deals concerning goods that were harvested or produced illegally, including those involving rare and endangered species....

Labor plans to pursue its new approach by working harder on multilateral trade deals in preference to bilateral trade deals, which were favoured by the Howard government.

However, it will continue to pursue talks for free trade deals with nations such as Japan, Korea, and China, but no bilateral deals that undermine multilateral principles will be accepted.

More HERE




Premier Anna Bligh announces infrastructure charges cap to boost housing affordability

A good move. Councils have been treating new building as a milch cow

ANNA Bligh has capped infrastructure charges for new developments in a bid to boost housing affordability.

The Premier also hopes the cap, announced this morning at a Building Revival Forum in Brisbane, will help the struggling construction sector.

Councils will be limited to a maximum $28,000 charge for homes with three or more bedrooms, a saving for developers of up to $22,000. One and two-bedroom homes will have a maximum $20,000 charge, a $10,000 saving. Annual increases will be capped to inflation.

The charge is used to fund the building of new water, sewerage, stormwater, roads and park infrastructure.

SOURCE





Dam operators ignored weather forecasts

ENGINEERS operating south-eastern Queensland's biggest dam before the Brisbane flood based decisions on whether to release water on there being no further rain, an inquiry has heard.

As the first day of hearings into the state's deadly floods focused on dam management shortfalls, the Premier, Anna Bligh, was forced to hose down suggestions the government was hiding documents from the inquiry.

Yesterday the $15 million inquiry looked at the role of Wivenhoe Dam, which has a dual purpose of storing drinking water and minimising the impact of floods.

Under scrutiny ... the dam operator has faced criticism over water releases in the day before Brisbane flood. Photo: Dean Saffron
Its owner, Seqwater, has faced criticism over dam releases in the days before the Brisbane flood, amid claims that it did not let out water soon enough and was then forced to ramp up releases.

A senior Wivenhoe engineer, Rob Ayre, was questioned about why his team did not rely heavily on rainfall forecasts when managing water releases into the Brisbane River before the city's flood peak on January 13.

Mr Ayre said rainfall predictions were volatile and he believed it was best to rely on a no-rainfall scenario. "It's been proven to be the most reliable in the past," he said.

Mr Ayre was one of four engineers who decided on the timing and scale of hotly debated water releases into the Brisbane River based on the government-approved dam manual.

Engineers had "some communication issues" while trying to contact agencies, including Brisbane City Council, a few days before the Brisbane River peak, Mr Ayre said.

SOURCE





Snow arrives two months early in Victoria

Global cooling!



The wet weather which lashed southern Victoria overnight has also reached the high country, with Mt Buller, Falls Creek and Mt Hotham all reporting good snowfalls since the weekend.

With the official start to the ski season still two months away, the snow continues to fall across Mt Buller today after temperatures fell below zero last night. At 9.30am the temperature had climbed back to minus 0.2 degrees after plunging to minus 1.6 degrees. About 10cm had fallen at Mt Buller by 9am.

"Early snow is always exciting to see and it gets everyone into thinking about the season ahead," said Laurie Blampied, general manager of Buller Ski Lifts.

Snow continues to fall across the ski resort. Photo: Supplied
He said that although snow was not unusual for April, 10 centimetres was a "significant amount for this time of year".

"It's still two months until the official opening of the snow season but we love to see the temperatures dropping and snow coming to the mountain."

The snow season will officially open on the Queen's Birthday long weekend - June 11.

Falls Creek and Mt Hotham also reported snow, but Terry Ryan of the weather bureau said it was likely to melt in coming days.

"The ground is still a bit too warm for it to last," he said.

"You really need it to fall in late May to early June for it to hang around. We'll get warmer days up there by late this week and it will melt the snow which has already fallen."

SOURCE



11 April, 2011

Minister says burka is 'alien', prompting applause from Libs

THE federal opposition has backed a West Australian minister's controversial comments on the burka, saying the dress goes against Australian culture and should not be worn.

WA Minister for Women's Interests Robyn McSweeney sparked heated debate when she spoke out against the burka at the weekend, labelling it "alien" to Australia's way of life. "I'm saying that it's confronting when somebody's face is not showing and I personally think that they're being oppressed," Ms McSweeney told The Australian yesterday. "I would just love for them to have the freedom to show their faces."

Opposition parliamentary secretary for the status of women Michaelia Cash said the burka had nothing to do with religion because Islam stipulated modesty only, not the wearing of a face covering. She said the dress deprived women of their identity and isolated them from society. "It is inconsistent with our culture and values and I truly believe that women should not do it," she said.

Both Senator Cash and Ms McSweeney said they were not advocating legislation to ban the burka but wanted Australians to have a "conversation" about whether it should be worn.

But Liberal senator Cory Bernardi renewed his calls for a burka ban because the garment was a security threat and restricted social interaction. In Europe to monitor France's anti-burka law -- under which veiled women will be fined E150 ($205) from today -- he supported Ms McSweeney.

Minister for the Status of Women Kate Ellis said the government was not considering a burka ban and there were differing views about the covering. She said her view was that governments should support a person's choice in dress and encourage understanding of diversity.

Queensland Minister for Women Karen Struthers said Australians respected cultural traditions "as long as no one is being hurt". South Australian Minister for the Status of Women Gail Gago said there was no reason to influence a Muslim woman's choice if it were made freely.

WA opposition women's interests spokeswoman Sue Ellery claimed Ms McSweeney was playing the race card. Victorian opposition women's affairs spokeswoman Jill Hennessy accused Ms McSweeney of engaging in "dog whistle politics".

SOURCE





A carbon illusion we can't afford

By Sinclair Davidson, a professor of economics

IN implementing its carbon tax the Gillard government is involved in a massive campaign of misinformation.

First there is the fiscal illusion. It is creating confusion about who will pay the tax in order to disguise the full cost of the policy.

Andrew Leigh -- first-term ALP backbencher and former professor of economics at the Australian National University -- recently said that the policy consisted of big polluters being taxed and money given to households, while the Coalition policy consisted of households being taxed and the money being given to polluters.

On the ABC's Insiders yesterday, Finance Minister Penny Wong said: "This is not a tax that people pay; this is a tax that polluters pay." That sounds all very reassuring, until we remember that Treasury thinks that household expenditure will go up by $860 per year for a $30 a tonne carbon tax.

What many people don't know is that the carbon tax will have to be much more than $30 a tonne to be effective.

As both Leigh and Wong know the argument that only the big polluters will pay is nonsense, some might say dishonest. There are two points to remember. It is household demand for goods and services that gives rise to carbon pollution. In any event big polluters will simply pass on the cost to their customers. So we know the carbon tax will be paid out of the household budget through higher prices and in some cases job losses.

The reality is that while big polluters will have to pay money to government , the burden will fall on people.

Then there is the notion that households will be compensated. Not all households, mind you; only low and middle-income households.

People should be worried that the government won't define what middle-income households are until late in the piece. Many households are going to be unpleasantly surprised.

The idea is to overcompensate low-income households. This will simply lead to them consuming more carbon intensive goods and services paid for by those higher in the income stakes.

How this would contribute to lowering total carbon emissions remains to be explained.

All sorts of anomalies and confusions are going to arise and this government hasn't shown itself capable of clear communication and explanation.

It is going to be very difficult to compensate households while also protecting trade-exposed industries. Wong knows this too. In Shitstorm, their excellent account of the Rudd government, Lenore Taylor and David Uren recount that Wong "had reached the conclusion the business executives filing through her office were not making ambit claims but were genuinely worried about the potential impact of the plan".

The government is hoping the introduction of the carbon tax will be similar to the introduction of the GST. When the GST was introduced there were compensating tax cuts and increased welfare payments. This compensation has been permanent. True, the GST raises more revenue than expected, but a whole raft of inefficiencies were eliminated and replaced by a more efficient revenue system.

Consumers very quickly got used to the GST and there is broad acceptance that the GST was a worthwhile and valuable reform. It is unlikely something similar will happen this time around. The GST is a tax designed to raise revenue. The carbon tax is designed to change behaviour: revenue is a secondary and, if the policy is successful, a temporary consideration.

Yet most of the discussion has revolved around how to spend the revenue.

The policy objective is to cause a substitution from low-cost but dirty energy production to higher-cost but cleaner energy production. In plain language the policy objective should lead to a permanent increase in household prices and fewer carbon emissions. But if successful, the revenue will decline, meaning there will be no money to pay compensation. There just isn't enough money to finance this scheme.

The government is planning to allocate revenue from a windfall gain to permanent spending. This is a recipe for structural deficits and fiscal irresponsibility. In the short run this policy isn't revenue neutral and in the long run it isn't budget neutral either. So rather than being reminiscent of the GST reforms, the notion of carbon tax compensation is more like Paul Keating's L-A-W reform. It is just not affordable.

SOURCE





Political conversation sours with Nazi comparisons

The pity is that false comparisons such as the ones detailed below tend to discredit accurate comparisons -- such as the fact that Hitler campaigned on a platform of peace and equal rights.

One of his election posters from the 1930s below. Translation: The marshall and the corporal fight alongside you for peace and equal rights"



At the end of each year I write a column devoted to the exaggerations and false prophecies of the previous 12 months. There is no problem finding material. At times, in delusional mode, I like to imagine that people are competing for a citation.

Australia is a democratic society noticeable for its relative lack of political violence and relatively low level of ethnically motivated crime. Yet the language in political discourse is at a different level altogether, at times replete with hyperbole and ready comparisons to the most violent dictatorships.

Take the past couple of days. On Insiders on Sunday the Herald Sun columnist Andrew Bolt said democracies sometimes make errors and this was the case with those Germans who voted for the Nazi party in 1933. His point was that Australians who vote Greens today also err. The NSW Greens MP Jamie Parker then upped the ante by maintaining Bolt had said that the Greens were like the initiators of Kristallnacht, the Nazis' 1938 pogrom against the Jews.

Last week, in the Federal Court, Bolt was accused by Ron Merkel, QC, of making comments on Aboriginal identity that were akin to anti-Semitic Nuremberg laws introduced by the Nazis in 1935. Merkel declared: "The Holocaust started with words and ended with violence." It is difficult to imagine a more serious allegation. However, like virtually all attempts to link modern democracies with totalitarian regimes - whether by the extreme right or the extreme left - the comparison fails.

As Richard J. Evans documents in The Coming of the Third Reich, the Nazi Party was a violent revolutionary force even before the 1933 election. Germany was not a democracy like Australia in 1933. And the Nazi reign of terror did not start with words. It started with violence. Merkel should know this.

The debate about racial vilification in Australia should focus on Australia. This is not a new discussion. In 2007 Julie-Anne Davies reported in The Bulletin that Mal Brough, the minister for Aboriginal affairs in the Howard government, has a sister who identifies as an Aboriginal woman, even though he does not. Some years ago the Tasmanian indigenous leader Michael Mansell queried the Aboriginality of some Tasmanians who identified as indigenous.

Like Bolt or loathe him, it is both ridiculous and ahistorical to link him - directly or by implication - with the Holocaust. In January 1996 Amanda Vanstone drew some comparisons between Paul Keating and the Nazi propaganda chief Josef Goebbels. Last month, the Gillard government parliamentary secretary Mark Dreyfus accused Tony Abbott of engaging in "Goebbellian cynicism" in his anti-carbon tax campaign.

Goebbels was more than a mere propagandist. He was into street violence as early as the 1920s and was one of the chief advocates of what was called the "final solution" for the Jews and Gypsies of Europe. Before he died by his own hand, Goebbels murdered his children by poisoning them.

Yesterday, in a letter to The Australian, the Melbourne academic Robert Manne linked the journalist Greg Sheridan with "Julius Streicher's notorious anti-Semitic Nazi periodical Der Stuermer". Manne was responding to a considered piece by Sheridan on why he had changed his mind and become a critic of multiculturalism.

Manne is entitled to criticise Sheridan. But his comparison is over the top. In Who's Who in Nazi Germany, the historian Robert S. Wistrich described Hitler's friend Streicher as "corrupt, dishonest, sadistic, obscene and brutal in manner". Convicted of murder, Streicher was hanged in Nuremberg in 1946.

Then there are the comparisons with that other mass murderer Josef Stalin and the communist dictatorship which he controlled in the Soviet Union. The Canberra academic Norman Abjorensen recently opined that the experience of the NSW Labor Party today "is eerily reminiscent of the decaying communism of the Soviet Union as described by Yugoslav dissident Milovan Djilas in his book The New Class".

Nonsense. Djilas wrote The New Class in 1957, when the Soviet Union had three decades to run. He was imprisoned for his opposition to Moscow. Incarceration in a Belgrade prison is a long way from political snakes and ladders in Sussex Street. And then there is the continuing leftist John Pilger, who told a WikiLeaks forum at the Sydney Town Hall last month that Julia Gillard's speech in Washington reminded him of "a grovelling Stalinist party boss in eastern Europe summoned to Moscow during the Cold War". Just crazy.

In modern Australia there are no Hitlers and no Stalins. These days the only real political violence is found in the abuse of language. This is best treated by a reading of history.

Gerard Henderson is executive director of The Sydney Institute.

SOURCE




Pauline Hanson poised to pick up NSW seat



Former One Nation leader Pauline Hanson looks likely to claim the last seat in the New South Wales Upper House. The result will be officially declared tomorrow, more than two weeks after the state election.

ABC election analyst Antony Green estimates Ms Hanson has a lead of more than 6,000 primary votes over Greens candidate Jeremy Buckingham, who is also vying for the final position.

With 91 per cent of the vote counted, the Coalition has secured 11 of the 21 Upper House seats. Labor secured five, the Greens two, and the Shooters and Christian Democrats each have one.

Despite Pauline Hanson's primary vote lead, the Greens are still confident of winning the last seat. Greens MP John Kaye says Mr Buckingham will be better placed once preferences are distributed tomorrow. "We have every chance of defeating Pauline Hanson on preferences," Mr Kaye said.

Before the state poll, both major parties vowed not to preference Ms Hanson, who has moved to Corlette on the state's north coast. But the One Nation party threw its weight behind Ms Hanson, saying it still shared many views with its one-time leader.

Last year, Ms Hanson said she was selling her home and moving to the United Kingdom but later reversed her decision.

She made her name as the independent member for Oxley in Queensland between 1996 and 1998, during which time she set up One Nation.

SOURCE



10 April, 2011

Environment? What environment? Federal inaction at Mt. Morgan is brewing a toxic disaster

A mine tailings dam about to fail is a REAL environmental problem but is not "sexy" enough to attract the attention of the grand people of the Gillard government, apparently -- but it could be a disaster for a lot of people.

Well we do not have a problem as long as the 7,000 mega litres of water held back by the tailings wall does not break. In total there is 11,500 mega litres in the Mount Morgan Mine pit laced with cadmium and other heavy metals which would flow into the Dee River, then into the Don River, into the Dawson River and down into the city of Rockhampton's water supply on the Fitzroy. To understand the scale Lake Burley Griffin holds 33,000 mega litres.

They say that the cyanide that was used in processing is now inert but it is the acid rock drainage (ARD) that is the real problem. The water has a ph between 2.8 to 3.5. Understandably those downstream are a little anxious as the water is pouring through the tailings wall.

Because of the wet weather it would have been a good idea if the water course leading into the mine could be properly diverted around it.

The Government management could be described as a kiss it better job on a train crash. The State Environment Minister, Kate Jones, is almost pathological in her defence of bats. Maybe we could tell her that bats go to the river on the weekend. The locals are scratching their heads as to whether Kate has even visited the site. If she did it was low key.

Stirling Hinchcliffe, the Mines Minister, said how I dare impugn Kate's portfolio. Good-o. Well Stirling, apt name for a minister responsible for a mine which extracted 247,000kg of gold, 360,000 tonnes of copper and also 40,000kg of silver, what are you going to do apart from saying in a "yes minister" like form, nothing to see here, move on please.

When a ship the Shen Neng 1, ran onto a reef near Gladstone creating approximately one kilometre of damage, an aerial circus of everyone including Kevin Rudd, Bob Brown, Peter Garrett and Anna Bligh flew back and forth over the site crying tears of blood all over the cabin of the plane. It was a shame the planes with pollies instead of flying east to sea did not fly north west to Mt Morgan.

Later, cyclone Yasi knocked out, on a conservative estimate, 20,000 sq km of reef virtually shutting down sections of the much maligned fishing industry. An act of nature, sure, but there were no tears for the fisherman, apparently.

I do not recollect if we had spent all of Mr Garrett's, sorry your, $2.5 billion at that stage on ceiling insulation. If we had kept back $120 million of that we could have treated the water, emptied the pit, filled it in and covered it up.

Now, instead of a solution we are catching the water in dams that spills out and pumping it back in so it can spill back out again. Let me assure you that the little boy who stuck his finger in the dyke to save Holland had far more effect than the remedial work at Mt Morgan Mine. They have constructed a treatment works for 650 mega litres a year. Pathetic when compared to the enormity of the task at hand.

The locals down stream say they are looking up the hill to one of the greatest potential environmental disasters in Australia. The Dee River is already the most polluted in Queensland. The wealth of the mine was critical in the formation of BP and on a benevolent note, the Walter and Eliza Hall Trust. Unfortunately, it is becoming Australia's version of the former gold mines of Montanna and the environmental disaster they have bequeathed on the Bitter Root River. The Zortman-Landusky Mine was one of the first in the USA to attempt large scale cyanide heap leach extraction of low grade gold ores, unfortunately the water got out.

Where it really, counts the Labor party have deserted the environment. If the Labor Party, Mr Hinchliffe, Mr Garret or Ms Jones, who champions cleaning up our rivers, don't want to do it for the farmers or the people of Rockhampton, then possibly they may want to do it for the bats or the Barrier Reef. But wherever their motivation is, they should please do something more.

SOURCE





Abortion is OK but selecting the sex of a baby is not?

A COUPLE who have had their bid to choose the sex of their child rejected by VCAT say they may go overseas in their desperation for a baby girl.

The couple, who are still grieving for a baby girl they lost at birth, had appealed the Patient Review Panel's decision against their wish to select sex by IVF treatment.

The panel - an independent, hospital-based authority - ruled that under Victoria's 2008 Assisted Reproductive Treatment Act, any conflict between the welfare of the child to be born and the health of the person undergoing assisted reproduction must be resolved in favour of the child.

"They (the couple) believe having a child of the same sex as the one who died would assist their recovery from post-traumatic stress disorder, or assist their psychological health or wellbeing," the VCAT judgment read. "The tribunal was not satisfied the matters relied upon by the applicants gave paramountcy to the welfare and interests of the child to be born."

The couple, who have three children, said they may go overseas to fulfil their wish. "We expected that result. We were trying to do the right thing and do it here in Australia and it looks like they're stuck in the 1980s on the panel," the father said.

"I can understand that a woman coming off the street and asking for that, they'd say no. But this isn't about choosing the sex, it's about the chance of having a child we should have had, that we lost.

"The pressure is on for change. The legalities will eventually catch up with the science. We have to move with the times."

All IVF clinics in Australia must stay within National Health and Medical Research Council guidelines that say sex selection should not be done, except to reduce the transmission of a serious genetic condition.

SOURCE





Anger at schools' Christian 'bias'

BUDDHIST community leader Dr Sue Best has complained of the "Christian bias" in religious education in Victoria, saying if her group had access to government funding, they too could expand to hundreds of schools. And social commentator and Muslim Waleed Aly said it was a "logical necessity" to "get proselytisation out of the classroom".

Public debate on the issue was sparked by a Sunday Age revelation that the Education Department was forcing schools to host Christian religious education whether they wanted to or not. It took a new turn last week when state Education Minister Martin Dixon granted $200,000 in extra funding to Christian religious education provider Access Ministries to improve its training. Mr Dixon, a Catholic, said that despite the controversy he had no intention of reviewing the system.

The move sparked anger yesterday from groups representing other religions, who said Mr Dixon had not consulted them. "We were requesting a meeting with the minister and have not even received a reply," said Anna Halaffof of the Religion, Ethics and Education Network Australia, which promotes religious tolerance and respect. "Instead he made a decision to support Access without doing any community consultation."

Access is the only religious instruction provider that receives government funding, and only Christian religious education is given to children as a default if their parents forget to opt out.

The leaders of Access Ministries say their syllabus gives children an introduction to spirituality and values, and they insist that they do not proselytise.

Mr Aly asked whether "the providers of Christian education feel equally comfortable if the religious education spot were handed over instead to Jewish teachers, or Buddhist teachers or, shock horror, Muslim teachers? "If they're not comfortable in that, then it's clear that there's a bias in the teaching that they would wish to preserve." He said children in state schools should be taught about all religions.

Dr Best said Buddhist education was offered in 14 Victorian schools, but did not have the advantages enjoyed by the Christians, who teach 96 per cent of all religious education. "There is definitely a funding bias . Ours is funded by volunteers and donations," she said. She said half the children attending Buddhist classes came from other religious traditions, but their parents were keen for them to experience their world view. If they had the resources, "I am confident that we could be in hundreds of schools".

Scott Hedges, a parent involved with the "Fairness in Religions in School" grassroots campaign, said that the Christianity taught in his daughter's Hawthorn school was missionary in nature. "The only difference between my daughter's class and an African village to these people is that we have cleaner water and shoes."

SOURCE







Some hospital reforms which look promising

PATIENTS will know how many people are waiting in hospital emergency departments ahead of them before they arrive, under a radical overhaul of the health system.

As one of her first acts as Health Minister, Jillian Skinner will also legislate to give power back to doctors and nurses to run their hospitals.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph yesterday, Mrs Skinner said she would not rule out job cuts and wanted bureaucrats in "ivory towers" to get back to working in hospitals.

But under a major reform of the system, "real-time" waiting times will be introduced, giving patients the chance to hospital-shop on the internet to find those emergency departments with shorter waiting times. A similar system already operates in Western Australia.

Mrs Skinner said her plan was to introduce the same system in NSW's major teaching hospitals, such as Royal Prince Alfred. "We've said we will have real-time data on the internet for our major tertiary hospitals so you can log on and see how many people are sitting in the waiting room at Royal North Shore Hospital," she said. "We have said all along we want people to get out of their ivory towers and get down to closer where the services are delivered."In her first week since being sworn in on Sunday, Mrs Skinner has sent a letter to all NSW Health employees promising to bring reform.

One goal is to re-draft the employee code of conduct based on core values including collaboration, openness, respect and empowerment. She has promised the 100,000 employees she wants to stamp out bullying.

"One of my first objectives is to address the bullying and harassment that has been around for a very long time," she said. "I ask everyone to be patient. It's not going to change overnight."

Despite Premier Barry O'Farrell saying before the election he would not sign up to the national health agreements, Mrs Skinner said she was "open" to negotiating with the Federal Government. She has contacted Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon to set up a meeting.

At the same time, she will change the name of all 15 local health networks to local health districts and will be meeting governing board members to ensure they have the right skills to financially run the hospitals.

Wanting to avoid budget over-runs that have plagued hospitals, Mrs Skinner said doctors, administrators and specialists who run the boards will have ultimate responsibility for budgets. "I am giving them greater authority and responsibility," she said. "There will be greater accountability, particularly in relation to finances.

"The Director-General has overall responsibility for the operations of the health department. I'm accountable for the system, the boards will have responsibility for local operations and that will mean, and I'm saying this to all the [board's chairpersons], I will look at the skills set of those bodies to make sure they do have sufficient expertise, not only in clinical matters but in management and finances."

SOURCE





Big pipe wanted

Might be more use than Julia's fibre network

IT IS inevitable that water in West Australia's far north will eventually be channelled to the south, Premier Colin Barnett says.

As opposition leader in 2005, Mr Barnett's commitment to build a canal to carry water from the remote northern Kimberley region to Perth was blamed as the reason he lost the election. The plan was widely rubbished with then premier Alan Carpenter saying it would be cheaper to relocate Perth.

Although the idea of a canal has been put on the backburner, there have been renewed calls for a pipeline to pump water from the wet Kimberley to the drier areas of Perth and the south.

Former Labor MP Ernie Bridge has called for a pipeline to be built to take water from the Fitzroy River in the west Kimberley to Kalgoorlie where an existing pipeline to Perth would be utilised.

Mr Barnett said that while the Kimberley continues to become wetter and the south becomes drier, it is certain that water will be pumped from the north some time in the future. "I have not lost my desire, my interest to see water come south," the Premier told Fairfax Radio despite his panned 2005 canal proposal.

"I think there are projects and other water resources closer to Perth that would come first but I think it's inevitable that, over time, and it might be over the next 20 years, there will be an integrated water system across the state."

Mr Barnett said Environment Minister Bill Marmion is currently looking into the issue of longer term water supply for Perth and the southern regions.

It comes as some of the state's biggest dams are at record lows, including the 138-gigalitre South Dandalup Dam which is less than nine per cent full. The total water content in dams across the state is less than 25 per cent while the six-gigalitre Samson Dam is completely dry.

Mr Barnett said that although WA's dams levels were dropping, if the situation became dire the Government could rely on getting water from the north. "One thing you can say in WA is that, worse comes to worse, you've got water in the north and we've got an opportunity to solve that problem that other parts of the world don't have," he said.

Mr Marmion said he hadn't ruled out "some sort of scheme to incrementally stage some sort of piping scheme from the Kimberley in the future". "But the facts are that the costs of piping water from the Kimberley are well above the costs of just doing a desalination plant.

"The premier has always been keen on a scheme, as people know, of using water from the north. "The last time someone looked at it was around 2006. The costings showed it was prohibitive. It's probably worthwhile having another look at the feasibility of it," Mr Marmion said.

But Environs Kimberley Director Martin Pritchard said proponents of a north-south pipeline had yet to demonstrate its viability. "That the north is wet and the south dry is no reason to build an inefficient canal or pipe the length of the state."

Mr Pritchard said that in 2006, the then Labor government in WA looked into the viability of bringing water from the Kimberley to the south and found it would not be economically viable. "The report costed water transported this distance via a pipeline or canal to be between 100 and 200 times the normal prices for bulk water." Mr Pritchard said the report estimated that household water bills would be at least doubled with such a project.

He said Mr Barnett needed to get serious about water efficiency and local water supply measures instead of "flogging a dead horse in the Kimberley".

SOURCE



9 April, 2011

Former Labor Party leader a likely Soviet spy

But Leftist historians deny it, of course. Calling Robert Manne a conservative historian is a joke. He was Rightish for a while but now leans so far Left it's wonder he doesn't fall over. So I have omitted his and other such judgments below.

Evatt did some good work for Israel in his earler years but did go mad eventually. His Soviet involvement may have been an early sign of his mental deterioration. That such a man could lead the Labor Party for so long is however disquieting. He was even retained as leader after he provoked a breakaway party (the DLP) from the Labor party

ONE of Australia's leading intelligence experts, Des Ball, says newly released MI5 documents have convinced him to express publicly for the first time his belief that former Labor leader Herbert Evatt secretly worked for the Soviet Union against Australian interests.

Dr Ball, a Labor Party supporter, said he had previously held back from expressing his long-held suspicion that Evatt was a Soviet agent.

"But I have got to the point now where I would be surprised if Evatt was not working for the other side," he said yesterday.

The MI5 files that were released in London this week did not include any clear evidence that Evatt was a Soviet agent and most historians say there is no firm proof of the theory, which is one of the longest-running controversies in Australian political history.

But they do reveal that then prime minister Robert Menzies was so concerned Evatt would win the 1958 election he handed top-secret ASIO documents to US and British spy agencies for fear Evatt would destroy them if he won.

Dr Ball, a co-author of Breaking the Codes, a 1998 book on the Venona code-breaking affair, said the documents "show the amazing extent to which Menzies and the people running the intelligence services were utterly convinced that Evatt could not be trusted".

"I think Menzies was clearly being told by ASIO that Evatt was a serious threat and my research has led me to believe now that they were right."

While other historians were sceptical of Dr Ball's claims, he said he had become even more confident of his view after being told by The Weekend Australian that the newly released MI5 files had revealed an unusual last-minute decision by Menzies just before the 1958 federal election.

Spooked by signs that Evatt might win the November 22 election, Menzies secretly ordered ASIO to hand sets of top-secret documents to Britain and the US for safe-keeping because of his fear that Evatt would bury or destroy the material if he became prime minister. Until then the Australian government had refused for four years to give the British and US governments full access to the material, a pile of Russian documents handed over by former KGB man Vladimir Petrov when he defected in 1954.

But two days before the election Menzies suddenly decreed that Britain's spy services MI5 and MI6 should each be given a complete copy of the documents and two more sets should go to the CIA. The originals were held in the PM's office. The copy given to MI5 filled nine envelopes and was among the material released on Monday by the spy service.

"There is some concern that true copies of these documents are preserved as there is no knowing what Evatt would do if he regained the premiership," an MI5 agent reported from Canberra after being briefed by ASIO chief Charles Spry.

Dr Ball said his research on the 1940s spy scandals while writing Breaking the Codes had convinced him that either Evatt or John Burton, Evatt's department chief when he was minister for external affairs, must have supported a group of officials in the department who have since been found to have fed material to the Soviets.

"It was not logistically possible for them to get away with providing the Russians with material every week for several years without somebody at the top providing cover, and the only two possibilities are Evatt or Burton," Dr Ball said. "I don't think there is any question that at least one of them was involved."

Dr Ball said the only previous time he had expressed this view was in a draft of Breaking the Codes, which was published when Burton was still alive, but the reference was removed on legal advice. Burton died last year at the age of 95.

The Australian reported this week that the MI5 files show that just before the 1954 election Spry showed a similar distrust in Evatt by warning MI5 that if Evatt was elected the British "should seriously consider withholding important secrets" from Australia.

The MI5 files show that the KGB defectors Vladimir and Evdokia Petrov and their secret service handlers shared the distrust of Evatt, fearing that if he was elected he would even send them to their deaths in Russia.

In March 1955 during the Petrov Royal Commission, one of the MI5 agents helping to deal with the Petrovs reported to London that "the evident animosity of Dr Evatt is seriously disturbing the Petrovs. He in particular fears for his future if Dr Evatt should ever become PM."

On October 12, 1956 the Petrovs were delighted to become Australian citizens. "This must have come as a great relief to them for now they know that they are safe against arbitrary deportation or extradition to the USSR, even in the event of Dr Evatt being returned to power," the MI5 man wrote to London.

Evatt troubled many Labor Party members with his non-confrontational approach to the Communist Party.

It was an approach that helped to split the ALP and spawn the Democratic Labor Party which helped to keep the conservatives in power until the 1970s.

Evatt courted controversy by defending several of his staff members who were found to have links to Russian agents, and telling parliament that he was sure there were no Russian spies in Australia because he had contacted then Soviet foreign minister Vyacheslav Molotov and asked him.

SOURCE





Air Force cadet who was subjected to a disgusting prank has been attacked for daring to complain

The pranksters should at least be discharged if not prosecuted for rape and acessory to rape. And the culture of coverup makes it all the worse -- with the beetle in charge (Kafer) being part of the problem

AUSTRALIAN Defence Force Academy boss Bruce Kafer sat across from an air force cadet in his office this week.

He is a powerful, decorated, senior military officer. She is a slender young woman, barely 18, who had learned just days before that an army cadet with whom she had slept had broadcast the event via Skype to half a dozen fellow cadets sitting in a nearby room. Pictures snapped by one or more of the voyeurs had been distributed around the ADFA campus.

The news had made her physically sick. Worse was the advice that had come down to her that there was no possibility of police action. The young men would be dealt with at a misdemeanour level, under the low-level catch-all charge of "prejudicial conduct". They would probably be docked a few days' leave.

The cadet, who we have named Kate to protect her identity, chose to go public. She knew no one in the media. She rang and left a message on a general number at the Ten Network. Her motivation, she said, was to try to make sure it wouldn't happen to other women. She never asked for, nor has she been offered, money.

Commodore Kafer assured Kate that she had the support of ADFA staff. Kate nodded. In her meeting with him on Tuesday night, she says, the ADFA boss told her she "needed to think about how (the media exposure) would affect" the young men involved in the Skyping incident.

Kate tells me Commodore Kafer told her that his concern was not just for her welfare but for theirs. Further, Kate maintains that during that conversation, Commodore Kafer said "he'd like me to address my division (of cadets) because they'll be angry". Specifically, she says Commodore Kafer said "it might help if she apologised (to her classmates) for bringing the division into disrepute by going to the media".

She dreaded having to do this but early the following morning, she fronted up before her division. The assembled cadets were first told by an officer present that because of the media attention, journalists would be hanging around outside the academy and they were not to say anything. During this address, one cadet yelled out "name and shame the dirty slut". Other cadets took up the cry, yelling "Do it!" The officer present cancelled Kate's planned address, fearing the cadets' mood was too volatile.

Defence Minister Stephen Smith says he has received advice from Defence that Kate was never ordered to apologise or humiliate herself in front of her peers.

Commodore Kafer was not available to comment yesterday. But Kate thinks she can explain the discrepancy. In telling her that an address to the cadets "might help", Commodore Kafer might have viewed his comments as advice rather than a formal order. However, she says, he is a "one-star" - the equivalent rank to a brigadier - and she felt she had no choice but to comply.

As Kate left Commodore Kafer's office she walked past a sergeant. In a growling sneer, he said, "You've gotta be kidding, don't you?" She'd heard worse. Since going public on Tuesday, Kate had been called to her face a "skank", a "slut", a "dirty whore" and more. The comments came from both male and female cadets.

She no longer felt comfortable sleeping in her room, which had been plastered with shaving foam. She had stopped eating in the mess because she had become the subject of gossip and whispers.

A Defence spokeswoman last night insisted that the welfare of all cadets, male and female, was of utmost concern to Defence. She said all individuals were being provided with full support.

Where had this begun? Kate thought the army cadet she slept with on March 29 was a nice guy. Events suggest he was not a nice guy. He had tipped off his mates, who gathered to enjoy the show. There has been universal revulsion at that betrayal.

Sue McLean, a former police officer with decades of experience investigating sex crimes, says the psychological effect on Kate would have been similar to a serious sexual assault.

The Australian Federal Police now investigating the matter are examining whether the Skyping without her knowledge "negates her consent" to the sex because it amounts to "fraudulent misrepresentation". If so, under the law, it can be treated as rape.

Kate's decision to go public pushed this matter to a new level. Mr Smith was soon directing searching questions to the ADFA commandant via defence force chief Angus Houston. Mr Smith said Defence advice to him was there had been no vilification of Kate. The air force cadet, hearing this, as well as the shouts of some of her colleagues, might reasonably have wondered if her superior officers had any idea of what she was going through.

On Wednesday night, she was moved from the cadets' accommodation to the officers' mess. She says the officers there were "nothing but supportive".

Since the minister became involved things have been much better. She was granted compassionate leave on Thursday and is spending this weekend with family. She is getting counselling and has been buoyed tremendously by support from around the country.

Does she still want a career in the air force despite all this? "Definitely," she says. "Definitely."

SOURCE






An ideology-driven educational systen victimizes teachers as well as students

Teachers often not free to teach

CHRISTOPHER Bantick (Viewpoint, April 1) did a great job summarising and supporting all the false analyses and "solutions" for fixing our dreadful state of education.

He, like others on this particular bandwagon, starts with the explicit premise that the quality of the teacher determines the quality of education and doing something about "poor" teachers will therefore fix the problem.

The implied premise is that principals, parents, students, administrators, bureaucrats, theorists, lecturers, education ministers and everybody else who has any bearing on schools are blameless and helpless victims of teachers and their unions and that all would be well if a way could be found to "fix the teachers". Anybody who has ever worked in a school knows that teachers are at the mercy of just about anyone and everything. The "best" teachers can do next to nothing in a class of unco-operative students and much less when the students don't even attend.

Our failed system has for decades been propped up by spending billions of dollars that should not need spending, by endless propaganda, by bullying and belittling members of the public who question its approaches and results, by denying anything's wrong, by intimidating teachers, by government slogans and by dumping every fad, pointless innovation or ill-fated attempt to deal with system-caused problems on to teachers. The same system has for decades persecuted teachers who tried to resist mindless dictates they knew to be wrong and harmful to children's education.

If the teaching unions were anywhere near as powerful as the Davis Guggenheim thesis in the film Waiting for Superman, as cited by Bantick, makes out, they would be in a position to stop many of the things that turn capable, dedicated teachers into "failures" unrealistic, unnecessary and uncompensated-for workloads constantly being added to an already unmanageable job, lack of support (often outright hostility) from parents and employing authorities, lack of authority commensurate with their responsibilities, insolent children and stress levels that in any other field would have been the subject of a judicial inquiry years ago.

But they aren't. They cannot even protect their members from suffering the worst rates of attrition and early death of any profession.

The true causes of our problems lie in the system itself. Along with the indiscipline of vast numbers of children, its foundational ideologies have given rise to an overcrowded curriculum and a mountain of peripheral activities, an emphasis on process and method over content and achievement, the shunning of the critical fundamentals of learning and the substitution of essential drilling of basics with creativity and fun, all of which have led to an increasing dependence on time-wasting PR to make it seem the school is doing a good job.

Many brighter children have survived this type of schooling, but many more have not. For many who needed remediation, it hasn't worked and the system has never asked itself why.

Teachers can be blamed for this only to the extent that they participate in this regime of system-mandated idiocy.

This is not to deny there are under-performing teachers, or to argue that they should be protected. It is to emphasise that the problem is the system, not the teachers, and that nobody in any job can be said to be below standard if there are no standards, or if they are denied the opportunity to perform to the best of their ability.

Teaching, more than any other profession, suffers this denial of opportunity.

The most glaring flaw in Bantick's argument is that he delimits education to just teachers. But surely any attempt to remove teachers on the basis of quality must apply equally to parents, students and administrators, especially those who undermine the rightful authority of the one who has to teach.

We must never forget that the ideologies responsible for all of this also laid the foundation for the abolition of teacher authority, a social calamity that the bad-teacher thesis bypasses in its entirety.

Would-be reformers need to go back to the 1960s and look at the philosophies and ideologies that, without any consultation or mandate, were injected into our education systems and labelled "progress".

SOURCE




Bureaucrats in charge of mismanaged dam trying to pass the buck

SENIOR engineers in charge of Brisbane's "flood shield", Wivenhoe dam, were instructed by city council officers to cut water releases in the crucial days leading up to January's devastating flooding.

The four supervising engineers acted on the instructions from the Brisbane City Council that they cut back planned discharges from the dam, allowing its capacity to swell further from the saturated catchment, despite the principal hydrologist saying it was the first time he had heard of the lower limit.

The water held back on January 10 and the subsequent massive water releases on the following two days -- which contributed to the inundation of 14,200 Brisbane properties -- will be a key focus of the commission of inquiry into the Queensland floods that opens on Monday.

Late yesterday the Brisbane City Council posted its submission, arguing the communication between council and the flood operations centre showed the protocol was working.

"Council communicated with FOC about a matter which was within its role and responsibility (impacts of flooding in the City)," it said. "It was then a matter for the FOC to consider its own response to this information."

Among those to give evidence at the inquiry will be Queensland Utilities Minister Stephen Robertson, Environment Department director-general John Bradley, Bureau of Meteorology chief Jim Davidson and SEQWater bosses.

Under Supreme Court judge Cate Holmes, the inquiry has the powers of a royal commission and will conduct hearings across Queensland to determine the state's preparedness for the floods and cyclones, and investigate the adequacy of the dam operations and insurance industry response.

Wivenhoe operations will be the focus of the Brisbane hearings. Southeast Queensland's biggest dam released 645,000 megalitres of water -- more than the volume of Sydney Harbour -- on January 11, as inflows threatened its structural integrity.

Witness statements from the four men who controlled Wivenhoe's operations were released yesterday, revealing the dramatic circumstances within the flood operations centre at the height of the Brisbane flood crisis.

Under the direction of the Wivenhoe operations manual, the engineers and hydrologists implemented the flood-mitigation strategy dubbed W3 from Saturday, January 8.

This dictated that flows were not to exceed 4000m3 per second at the Moggill flood gauge, in the city's west, as any higher would cause damaging flooding in downstream communities.

But when SEQWater principal hydrologist Terrence Malone reported for work on January 10, colleagues John Ruffini and Robert Ayre informed him a council officer said the upper limit was 3500m3 per second. "This was the first time I had heard this suggestion," Mr Malone said.

SOURCE






Gang of 40 bash bystanders in Melbourne

"Of varying nationalities". Is that police code for Sudanese and Somalis? A gang that large would have to be at least largely African

A VIOLENT gang of up to 40 youths bashed at least four people and went on a wrecking spree in the streets of Frankston overnight. A 15-year-old boy and a 42-year-old man were taken to hospital after being beaten by the gang. The man was beaten unconscious and two security guards from a nearby shopping centre were also injured.

Police are still looking for the group who went on the rampage in Wells St about midnight after being kicked out of a McDonald's restaurant.

The youths, mostly wearing hooded tops or caps and described by police as ``of varying nationalities'' damaged several cars parked along the street. They attacked two patrons leaving a pub who suffered facial and head injuries and fled when police arrived.

Police this morning urged anyone with information about the spree or who was assaulted or had their car damaged by the youths to contact them.

SOURCE






The usual Green/Left double standard

They actually have no standards. In a typically psychopathic fashion, they just say what seems convenient at the time

GREENS leader Bob Brown has been accused of double standards after declaring it "undemocratic" to judge politicians on the company they keep at rallies and other public forums.

Opposition frontbencher Andrew Robb yesterday accused Senator Brown of "hypocrisy writ large" over his attack on Tony Abbott's appearance at an anti-carbon tax rally last month, where placards portrayed Julia Gillard as a "witch", a "bitch" and a "frump".

Senator Brown on Thursday defended the actions of Greens senators Sarah Hanson-Young and Scott Ludlam for appearing at rallies in 2009 and last year, respectively, where protesters called on Australia to sever ties with Israel. "If you're saying there that members of parliament should not take the stage or be on a rostrum or be at a rally or go on (television program) Q&A if you are going to be judged by the people you are there with, then we're getting to a very undemocratic path, aren't we," Senator Brown told ABC radio.

Mr Robb yesterday contrasted the comments with Senator Brown's demands last month that Mr Abbott apologise for appearing alongside offensive placards at the March 23 carbon tax rally.

Mr Robb, who is in Jerusalem on a trade mission with the Australia-Israel Chamber of Commerce, said the Greens disliked being exposed to the same level of scrutiny as the major political parties. "We all remember Bob Brown giving sanctimonious lectures and demanding apologies from Tony Abbott just a week or so ago because he addressed a very legitimate demonstration against the carbon tax," Mr Robb said.

"When the boot is on the other foot he gets all defensive about his own senators Hanson-Young and Ludlam addressing protests. "Bob Brown doesn't like being exposed to the same level of scrutiny as the major parties. They do have extreme views on many things and they are pure political opportunists."

The opposition's attack came as environmental lobby groups defended the Greens from criticisms by two of the party's founding fathers, who said it had lost the plot by moving away from its core business of environment.

Cam Walker, from Friends of the Earth, said while the minor party had broadened its focus and strongly pursued other social issues, he did not believe this was being done at the expense of their environmental agenda. "I just don't see that there is any issue there, they work in their core issues and their strong social agenda -- and that is probably what you'd expect from a Greens party," he said.

SOURCE



8 April, 2011

Australian taxpayers' bill for $100 BILLION coming up

It's as certain as death and taxes: Government projects always end up costing at least twice as much as the initial estimates. An extreme case is the Sydney Opera House, which went from $2.5 million to $100 million.

And now that the quotes from potential NBN contractors are coming in, senior people at NBN Co. are walking out rather than being associated with that. I don't blame them. It'll be the biggest boondoggle in Australia's history. John Howard's big boondoggle, the Alice Springs-Darwin Railway, cost only one hundredth of what Gillard is proposing. Think of how many desperately-needed highway improvements you could buy with the money.

FRESH fears have emerged that the peak funding of the National Broadband Network could balloon beyond $44 billion, as construction companies urged the government to pare back the reach of its ambitious fibre footprint so it can meet its budget.

The warnings follow a tumultuous week inside NBN Co headquarters in which a number of senior staff have resigned after a multi-billion-dollar construction contract was placed on indefinite hold.

Yesterday it was revealed that NBN Co's manager of cost and resource estimates, Nick Sotiriou, exited the network builder following the shock resignation of the company's network construction head Patrick Flannigan earlier this week. "I've got no comment as to why I left," Mr Sotiriou told The Australian. "It's inappropriate that I comment at this stage."

He added that he "very much" believed in the NBN project. "From time to time people have differences of opinion and that doesn't mean one is right or wrong," he said. "And sometimes you have to move on."

Mr Sotiriou declined to comment on a report that he left after sending an internal email expressing unhappiness at NBN Co's suggestion that contractors had been "price gouging".

A spokeswoman for Communications Minister Stephen Conroy said the Government did not believe NBN Co was experiencing a staffing crisis, but the Opposition seized on the latest resignation to say the company was "in disarray".

Opposition communications spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said: "If this was a publicly listed company, their share price would be in freefall at the moment and management would be out there explaining and providing information."

As the two-year anniversary of the NBN ticked over, new documents released by Treasury under Freedom of Information laws showed that budgetary risks associated with the NBN were raised before Kevin Rudd unveiled plans for a $43 billion fibre-to-the-home project.

Construction executives said yesterday that NBN Co could significantly lower the costs of its construction tender if it could reduce the target of laying fibre to 93 per cent of homes and businesses.

An executive of a firm pitching for the building said costs could be significantly lowered if existing fibre networks - such as Telstra's and Optus's cable networks for pay-TV and broadband - could be used in the NBN roll-out, or otherwise allowed to compete with the NBN. "NBN Co could lower its costs if it just dispensed with the Government's stubborn ideology to roll fibre to 93 per cent of homes," the executive said. "They have gone to the extreme but they still claw it back, but there will have to be some eating of a lot of humble pie if they do."

Last night, another industry source said that even if NBN Co took on more risk as construction contractors were demanding, it would still struggle to meet the project within its budget. "My gut says that even if they get an appropriate risk model, they are still going to struggle to get it built for their budget," the source said.

"We are sailing into the biggest infrastructure boom the country has seen - it's going to be bigger than the last one in 2007-2008. The escalation on labour and materials is something that contractors will put a large premium on if they are asked to take that risk. "We can see what the market is doing, the industrial agreements, industrial relations risk. It's such a long project. The short answer is, they will struggle."

The Australian yesterday revealed that construction firms bidding for NBN contracts had warned that unless more risk was transferred to the government business, the capital works bill could surge beyond the $20 billion mark. It is believed that NBN Co had hoped to spend only about $12 billion on the contract.

According to NBN Co's corporate plan, the project relied on "mid-range" construction costs to stay within its $36bn budget. But the corporate plan warns that "high" construction costs would lead to substantial blowouts in funding requirements for the project and erode the already modest internal rate of return.

SOURCE






The Greens are now "concerned with everything except the environment", say Greenie elders

Norm Sanders, environmentalist and retired senator, near his home in northern NSW, believes the Greens have lost their way. Picture: Jack Tran Source: The Australian
TWO founding fathers of the Greens say the split between the old-school environmentalists and the new generation of ideologically driven urban activists now swelling the parliamentary ranks could destabilise the party and alienate voters.

The man who gave up his seat in the Tasmanian parliament 29 years ago to launch Bob Brown's political career, Norm Sanders, said the Greens had "lost the plot" by shifting away from their core business of the environment.

And Queenslander Drew Hutton, who co-founded the party in 1992 with Senator Brown, hit out at the "ludicrous" decision by the NSW division of the Greens to thumb its nose at federal policy and back an international trade boycott of Israel in the recent state election campaign.

"I just shake my head in wonder at why a state-based party would go into an election pushing out front of a federal issue that the state party has no reason to be concerned with," said Mr Hutton, 64. "Why would you be profiling issues above environmental issues at this particular time? . . . I don't think it helps to alienate significant groups inside the NSW voting public."

Mr Sanders, 78, said scathingly that the Greens were now "concerned with everything except the environment".

"You hear them going on about the tax system, same-sex marriage, adoption, all these social equity issues, but they don't talk about the environment much," he said. The concerns of two such experienced and respected figures in the green movement will intensify the values debate that was kicked off by the actions of NSW Greens figures Fiona Byrne, a suburban mayor in Sydney who stood unsuccessfully at last month's state election, and senator-elect Lee Rhiannon in backing the campaign for boycotts, divestment and sanctions against Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians.

While Senator Brown, the party's veteran leader, has tried to distance himself and the federal Greens from the BDS push, yesterday he supported West Australian senator Scott Ludlam in advocating a ban on any arms sales to Israel, as part of a halt to Australian military exports.

The Australian revealed yesterday that Senator Ludlam and South Australian Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young had previously supported calls for Australian sanctions against Israel, widening the party's exposure on the issue.

They will be joined in parliament from July 1 by four senators elected at last year's federal ballot, taking the Greens' numbers to nine in the upper house and securing the balance of power there. Adam Bandt, who became the first Greens MP to be elected to the House of Representatives at a general election, will push the Greens partyroom into double figures.

Mr Sanders was elected to the Tasmanian parliament in 1980 and resigned in 1982 to make way for the future senator Brown, giving him his start in politics.

Mr Sanders said Senator Hanson-Young, 29, a former campaign manager for human rights group Amnesty International, who challenged Christine Milne for the Greens deputy leadership after the federal election in August, personified the contemporary Greens. "That Sarah Hanson-Young, she's on television and radio all the time, but I've never heard her talking about the environment," Mr Sanders said, speaking from his home near Byron Bay in northern NSW.

"All those social issues they're on about, that's what the ALP's for. Even the Liberal Party can handle some of them. The Greens have lost the plot, and who's looking after the environment?"

Brisbane-based Mr Hutton is still on the front line of environmental activism, having been arrested recently while protesting against coal-seam mining on the Darling Downs, west of the Queensland capital. He stood unsuccessfully for the Senate three times and is now an organiser for the environment group Friends of the Earth.

Mr Hutton said there had always been "tension in the Greens between those who come from a Left background, and those who come from a green background". Describing the furore over the BDS as "mildly destabilising", he said the key role of the Greens

was to address environmental issues "in a way that none of the other parties is prepared to do".

"I would be the last person to say non-environmental issues aren't important, because for the past 40 years I have been involved in a whole lot of issues - the democratic movement in the Joh Bjelke-Petersen days, Aboriginal issues and so on - so I am not just a pure greenie," Mr Hutton said. "But there is no doubt in my mind that the key issues today, and the reason we formed a green party, was that we've reached a time when if we don't take determined and far-sighted decisions on the environment, then the whole planet is going to be in trouble."

But he said the tensions with the "hard Left" of the Greens would subside. "In time, that strong left-wing element will diminish, because the people coming in are wanting us to be in government and they are wanting us to be in policymaking positions," Mr Hutton said.

Both veterans praised Senator Brown's leadership. "Bob and Christine are the only ones who've been on the barricades," Mr Sanders said. "They're the only activists in the Greens. I don't know where the rest come from."

SOURCE






Expensive government secrecy

Queensland Health cash 'wasted' on lawyers' fees

A DOCTORS' group has attacked Queensland Health for wasting scarce resources on lawyers after a futile two-year battle by the Bligh Government to prevent the release of hospital data. AMA Queensland president Gino Pecoraro said the use of lawyers sucked up valuable money that could have been better spent on patients.

Dr Pecoraro called for more transparency in the release of health information so patients could make better choices about their medical care. "I'm a firm believer in that patients need to have access to timely, accurate and complete information," he said.

Dr Pecoraro was commenting on Queensland Health's dogged fight to keep secret reports outlining Emergency Department deaths at three of the state's biggest hospitals.

"Some of these patients may well have died, despite the best efforts of emergency department staff," he said. "But we know from Queensland Health's own figures that there are delays in getting people out of emergency departments and into hospital beds. It would be nicer for them to have met their maker in a quiet room with their families by their sides in a hospital bed, not in the emergency department."

The documents were released to The Courier-Mail by Queensland Health after an order by the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal.

They were heavily vetted so as not to identify patients or staff. Dr Pecoraro said this was how it should be. "Unwell patients use emergency departments, so we need to be careful not to turn into pariahs the people who work in them," he said. "Part of the quality control and improvement of hospitals necessitate that people can talk openly and freely but without the threat of being got-at over adverse events that occur in a hospital. "No matter what happens, that must be preserved for everybody's sake."

The documents outline 21 emergency department deaths at the Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital in the first half of 2009. Of those, 15 were category one (resuscitation), five category two (emergency) and one category three (urgent).

At Nambour General Hospital on the Sunshine Coast, 18 emergency department deaths were recorded in the six months.

Queensland Health director-general Mick Reid said the department's patient safety record was among Australia's best. "We have developed the most open and thorough patient safety reporting in Australia, far exceeding the national minimum standards," Mr Reid. "We are committed to continually improving health care. That's why our health practitioners together review all deaths, as well as the most significant and difficult cases, to learn and improve care." [Well, why the secrecy?]

SOURCE






Drift to private schools continues

Now one third overall and more in private High schools. Anyone who can afford to wants out of government schools, particularly in the teenage years of their kids

ENROLMENTS in state high schools have dropped as parents look increasingly to the private sector to educate their teenagers.

Figures released yesterday, taken on Day 8 of the academic year, show overall enrolments in Queensland state schools increased less than 1 per cent between 2010 and 2011.

But all of that growth was in primary schools. State high school enrolments dropped slightly from 174,721 on Day 8, 2010, to 174,685 in 2011.

Similar figures provided by the Queensland Catholic Education Commission show their enrolments in high schools went up about 3 per cent, while the state's population has been growing at about 2 per cent a year.

Enrolment figures for state primary schools were much brighter. They increased their Day 8 numbers from 307,147 students in 2010 to 310,104 this year. Prep enrolments grew by almost 5 per cent from 40,974 to 42,912 this year.

Queensland Secondary Principals Association president Norm Fuller said he was unsure of why enrolment in high schools went down by less than 40 students.

He said principals had anecdotally reported that some parents had moved their children from the private sector to their state schools after looking at data on the My School website.

But Shadow Education Minister Bruce Flegg said the figures were "a continuation of a very long-term trend" of parents voting with their feet because there was a perception of more opportunities and better discipline in the private sector.

The figures were released yesterday, only a day after The Courier-Mail applied for the data through the Right to Information process.

While the figures are normally released in the weeks after Day 8, Education Queensland initially delayed them this year because of the floods. The numbers are expected to go online today with a statement that overall, enrolments grew by 1.1 per cent between 2009 and 2011.

Independent Schools Queensland said they had not yet received their enrolment figures.

It is the third year in a row that Queensland state school Day 8 enrolments have grown less than one per cent overall, while the Catholic sector has been growing at about 3 per cent.

But Education Minister Cameron Dick said Queensland parents knew state schools offered quality education and the enrolment figures proved it. "Sixty-seven per cent of all Queensland students attend state schools, the third highest proportion in Australia and higher than the national average," he said.

The Day 8 figures, and those supplied by the QCEC, are initial data collections at schools with an official census carried out for the Australian Bureau of Statistics later in the year.

SOURCE






Vicious Polynesian let off lightly

Only 20 months in actual jail for grievous attack. There is a high crime rate among Polynesians (e.g. Maori) generally



A TEENAGE amateur boxer has been jailed for five years for a "brutal, sickening and protracted" attack on a blind man who rushed to the aid a distressed woman in a Brisbane inner-city public toilet block.

The Brisbane District Court was told Samoan national Kevin Paisa, then aged 18, savagely punched disabled man Glenn Trapnell, 41, in a Brisbane City Council public toliet block in an Albert Street section of Brisbane's Queen Street Mall about 4.30pm on July 28, 2009.

The court was told Paisa attacked Mr Trapnell so viciously that his jaw sustained serious fractures - forever robbing the vision impaired man of one his most prized pursuits, that of playing the harmonica.

Prosecutor Caroline Marco said Paisa, after knocking Mr Trapnell unconscious, then attacked the blind man's carer, Nathan Reith, 30. She said Paisa punched Mr Reith in the head three times and then stole $60 from the unconscious man as he lay in the toliet block alongside his friend Mr Trapnell.

Paisa, now aged 20, pleaded guilty on February 1 to one count each of assaulting Mr Trapnell and causing him grievous bodily and Mr Reith and causing him bodily harm and stealing.

Paisa today pleaded guilty to one count of going armed so as to cause fear by waving about a machete and menacing students at Mabel Park State High School, at Slacks Creek on Brisbane's southern outskirts, on February 18, 2009.

Judge Wally Tutt sentenced Paisa, who has been in presentence custody for more than 19-months, for five years, but ordered he be suspended after 20-months. The sentence imposed means Paisa will be released from jail in about three weeks.

Barrister Kim Bryson, for Paisa, said that because of the fact her client was a Samoan national and did not hold Australian citizenship he was almost guaranteed of being deported upon his release from jail. "(Paisa) is not an Australian citizen," she said.

Judge Tutt said he hoped immigration authorities were made aware of Paisa's case and subsequent convictions and resulted in his immediate deportation back to Samoa.

Ms Marco, during sentencing submissions, said after the attack Paisa gave police a "self-serving" account of what happened and claimed the had acted out of self-defence. She said Paisa falsely claimed he did not know Mr Trapnell was blind until after the attack, but that Mr Reith had told him that after the first blow was thrown. The court was told Paisa admitted to police he was an amateur boxer.

Judge Tutt, in sentencing Paisa, described the acts on Mr Trapnell and his carer as "callous, cowardly and violent." "Your actions are on of the serious examples of (of this type) ... (and) a more despicable act is hard to imagine."

SOURCE






Crooked Keddies again

Now that they have merged with Slater & Gordon, it is Slater & Gordon that I would steer clear of. One wonders what Slater & Gordon were thinking of when they took Keddies in

THE law firm Keddies has settled a claim by a 95-year-old woman who alleged the firm overcharged her when handling her personal injury case.

Margaret Shuetrim was hit by a car and injured while crossing a road in Petersham in 2003. The following year, the pensioner engaged Keddies as she claimed compensation under the Motor Accidents Compensation Act. According to a statement of claim filed with the District Court, the insurer of the vehicle at fault admitted liability and her claim was settled for $150,000, before court proceedings were commenced.

But Keddies charged Mrs Shuetrim $66,747 for costs and disbursements - an amount she claimed was ''grossly excessive''. Mrs Shuetrim claimed that under the relevant regulations, she should have paid $14,400 plus GST. She said she suffered ''disappointment, anxiety and distress'' after being left more than $50,000 out of pocket.

Keddies recently merged with another law firm, Slater & Gordon. Mrs Shuetrim sued former partners Tony Barakat, Russell Keddie and Scott Roulstone, trading as Keddies Lawyers, seeking economic compensatory damages and damages for distress.

The case was set for hearing yesterday but the parties reached a settlement, with Keddies to pay Mrs Shuetrim $75,000 plus legal costs. Rob Tassell, for the defendants, said Mrs Shuetrim's age was taken into account.

SOURCE



7 April, 2011

Liberal Party MP under fire for telling the truth

VICTORIAN MP Bernie Finn has landed the Liberal Party into a race row after comments about the Muslim community. But Victorian Premier Ted Baillieu has refused to condemn the Liberal MPs who denounced the Islamic religion in comments on Facebook.

The Facebook comments followed a Herald Sun story earlier this week reporting that many Muslims live in ghettoes because of racist fears. Mr Finn wrote on the social media site that he failed to understand "how concerns about a religion that seems to sanction decapitation can be construed as racism".

In a rowdy question time, Labor attacked Mr Finn's comments as racist "dog whistle" politics.

But Mr Finn defended the comments as having nothing to do with racism. "No religion is specific to a skin tone or colour. Some people need to get a hobby as they have too much time on their hands if they were concerned with those comments," he said.

Mr Baillieu yesterday told Parliament multiculturalism is vital for Victoria but refused to respond to his Upper House colleague's comments as he had not seen or heard them. And the Speaker Ken Smith refused to allow Labor to table a copy of the Facebook comments.

"I would encourage all Victorians to demonstrate tolerance and their commitment to multiculturalism," Mr Baillieu said.

Earlier this year Federal Liberal leader Tony Abbott disassociated himself from outspoken South Australian Senator Cory Bernardi's attack on Islam on as a "totalitarian, political and religious" ideology.

SOURCE





Greens can't hide their hatred of Israel

No hiding the fact that they are watermelons

TWO Greens senators have publicly supported calls for Australian sanctions against Israel over the Middle East conflict, putting them at odds with party policy and their leader Bob Brown.

West Australian senator Scott Ludlam last year demanded an arms embargo on Israel, which he described as "a rogue state", while South Australian colleague Sarah Hanson-Young addressed a rally where protesters called on Australia to sever ties with the Jewish state.

The stance by the two senators conflicts with Senator Brown's assurance last week that his federal party was not anti-Israel and did not support the NSW branch of the party advocating sanctions against Israel.

The Coalition last night labelled the Greens "reds", while the Australia/Israel & Jewish Affairs Council called on Senator Hanson-Young to visit Israel before jumping to conclusions.

Senator Brown yesterday refused to comment on the activities of his senators and directed The Australian to his party's policy on Israel, which clearly advocated a peaceful two-state solution.

The Greens have been criticised for having an anti-Israel position since several of its candidates in the NSW election advocated a trade embargo on the Jewish nation.

Senator Brown last week distanced himself from the policy, saying the federal Greens opposed a trade embargo and favoured a peaceful two-state solution to the decades-old conflict.

Nationals senator Ron Boswell yesterday produced photographs of Senator Hanson-Young and Senator Ludlam addressing rallies organised by the Friends of Palestine organisation. According to its website, the organisation promotes the rights of Palestinians. The West Australian branch website also calls for "sanctions to be imposed on the state of Israel by the Australian government until the occupation of Palestinian territories is ended in accordance with UN resolutions".

In a YouTube recording of Senator Ludlam's speech to a West Australian rally last June, he called for an end to Australian sales of weapons to Israel, particularly a $41 million contract for the sale of body armour. "It's time for an arms embargo," Senator Ludlam said. "If Israel chooses to behave like a rogue state, then it's going to be treated as one."

An Australian Associated Press report of the rally said Senator Ludlam had called for an embargo on Israel as he addressed a group of protesters shouting anti-Israeli slogans and waving Turkish and Palestinian flags.

The photograph of Senator Hanson-Young at an Adelaide rally in 2009 shows her surrounded by placards demanding Australia "Cut ties with apartheid Israel".

Senator Boswell yesterday described the Greens, who will assume sole control of the balance of power in the Senate from July 1, as dangerous and extreme and demanded Julia Gillard condemn the party's policies.

"The Greens are setting a dangerous agenda for this country and (are) allowed free rein to do so by their Labor joint venture partners," he said. "The Greens have morphed back into reds. They sell themselves as environmentalists but are really just a rebranded socialist alliance party. There's nothing cuddly about them."

The Australian sent Senator Hanson-Young and Senator Ludlam questions about their involvement in the rallies.

Senator Hanson-Young reiterated through a spokesman her support for the Greens' federal policy for a peaceful two-state solution for Israel and Palestine. The spokesman said the senator had never visited Israel. Senator Ludlam did not respond to The Australian's questions.

Australia/Israel and Jewish Affairs Council executive director Colin Rubenstein hit back at the Greens' involvement in the protests, saying they should visit Israel before making statements against it.

An organiser of the rally attended by Senator Hanson-Young, Jeanie Lucas, of the Australian Friends of Palestine group, said the Greens senator had been invited to attend. She said a number of people had spoken at the rally, which was a protest against the Israeli bombing of the Gaza strip at the time. "I can't recall her words exactly at the time . . . except to say that it was outrageous that Israel was perpetrating action on innocent people," she said.

The organisers of the protest attended by Senator Ludlam, Friends of Palestine WA, did not return The Australian's calls.

SOURCE




Patients dying in Queensland hospital emergency departments waiting for treatment

SECRET government reports show Queensland emergency departments are so overstretched that patients are dying before seeing a doctor. The State Government has spent 20 months fighting the release of details revealing the problems leading to patient deaths including misdiagnosis, lack of staff and beds, failure to see a doctor in time, and inadequate treatment.

The documents were obtained after the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal on Monday ordered that Queensland Health obey the Information Commissioner and hand the documents to The Courier-Mail.

The documents (see below) raise concerns of "unexpected" deaths, patients dying after not being categorised as "emergency", and "red flags" that were missed in three of Queensland's major emergency departments.

Reported clinical incidents at the state emergency departments have more than doubled between 2007 and 2009 but Health Minister Geoff Wilson said only 5 per cent caused patients harm.

He acknowledged some of the details revealed in the documents highlighted systemic issues. "The records include a small number of cases in which clinical review teams found that junior doctors should have consulted earlier with more senior colleagues, or incomplete advice from a referring GP resulted in delays in diagnosis," he said.

However, the minister would not reveal the outcome of internal investigations. "Queensland Health cannot comment on . . . whether the death was ultimately found to be avoidable or not, whether there was any blameworthy action (or inaction) on the part of staff, whether co-morbidities or other external factors contributed to the death (or) whether there was any system failure," he said.

Opposition Health spokesman Mark McArdle said access to health treatment in Queensland was at a critical level. "People are dying in the emergency department after being wrongly triaged and categorised as not needing urgent treatment," he said. "It is a section of a hospital system that is in crisis and in chaos. It will continue to get worse because the Government has not planned for (population) growth."

SOURCE




'Stupid and insensitive': cadet punished for speaking out about sex abuse

I agree with the Defence Minister. It was a fit up -- JR

A female Australian Defence Force Academy (ADFA) cadet has been fined and confined to base, in a manner that creates the impression she has being punished for speaking out about sexual abuse, Defence Minister Stephen Smith says.

Mr Smith said the Commandant of the ADFA, Commodore Bruce Kafer [Commodore Kafer is a beetle; Kafer is German for beetle; rather fitting in the circumstaces], had acknowledged a major error of judgment in allowing an unrelated disciplinary matter to proceed at this time.

The charges, relating to alcohol consumption and being absent without leave last month, were dealt with yesterday, with the 18-year-old fined a day's pay and restricted to base for five days.

The action comes as the Defence Force and federal police investigate allegations that consensual sex between the woman and a male student was broadcast, without her knowledge, to six other Defence Force members watching in another room.

"Now that I have access to the full facts and circumstances, it is quite clear that, at precisely the same moment that the young woman was advised of the Skype [sex scandal] incident, she was charged with these matters," Mr Smith told ABC TV today. "I regard that ... as being somewhere from completely insensitive to completely stupid." Mr Smith said that action now coloured the entire view of what happened.

"It's very easy now to make the assertion that this was done in response to the other investigation," he said. "I could not be stronger in my response that double tracking those two processes was a most serious error of judgment and that unfortunately not only now colours my view of events, but colours the public's view of events."

He said Commodore Kafer acknowledged that he was aware of these matters and that it was a serious error of judgment by him.

Mr Smith said he had to reflect carefully on whether this indicated a systemic problem and, if it did, what needed to be done. "There are now, regrettably, two issues," the minister said. "There is a very serious issue which is the subject of a criminal investigation. "There is also now a very serious issue of the way in which this matter has been handled."

Mr Smith said he received advice late last night that the woman was immediately provided appropriate counselling and other support. He had been advised that Commodore Kafer did not demand she apologise for going to the media.

SOURCE




Nearly two-thirds of teachers want to quit - survey

NEARLY two-thirds of Australian teachers are considering quitting their jobs for a new career.

The Centre for Marketing Schools was commissioned to survey staff satisfaction levels of 850 teachers in government and non-government schools in South Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, Tasmania and Western Australia.

Centre for Marketing Schools director Dr Linda Vining said the survey confirmed the "deeper issues" of concern to teachers.

They included a lack of communication between staff and principals, and feeling undervalued and not being consulted.

"Teachers are feeling steamrollered . . . they are feeling that things are happening too quickly," Dr Vining said. "Through my research comes a sense they feel they are not valued members of the team - they are simply there to work and for many of them that's not fulfilling."

The survey also found:

SIXTY per cent of teachers said the school's direction was not clearly communicated.

FIFTY-ONE per cent did not feel part of a close-knit school community.

FIFTY-FOUR per cent said communication between staff and management was poor.

TWENTY-SEVEN per cent said the school principal was not approachable.

Education Minister Jay Weatherill said he had been "concerned about the morale of the workforce" when he was put in charge of the portfolio.

He said he had since announced a range of new policies aimed at improving communication between the central office and teachers.

"Many of the Supporting our Teachers initiatives are directly aimed at addressing teacher morale - such as the Public Teaching Awards, a major conference about teaching in the 21st century, a new outstanding teacher classification, a new recruitment policy and the Teacher Renewal Program," he said.

Association of Independent Schools of SA executive director Garry Le Duff said a more strategic approach to teacher retention was vital. "It seems unusually high that such a high proportion of people in teaching would be looking for alternative careers," he said. "But we certainly have to accept that people are more mobile in their occupations than a few years ago . . . and be more strategic in what sort of career pathways we're offering teachers."

SOURCE



6 April, 2011

A rare flash of light illumines the brains of a chronically dense bureaucracy

LONG overdue, though. Note the unprecedent thought in red below. Against all precedent, they actually want to buy something that works!

A TENDER for an automatic grenade launcher for Australian troops in Afghanistan has been scrapped 3½ years after bids were received, after the Department of Defence accused the company provisionally awarded the contract of breaking promises.

The Defence Materiel Organisation confirmed last week that the negotiations over the contract, believed to be worth about $150 million, had been cancelled. A Defence spokesman said the effect on the troops in Afghanistan would be "minimal".

But tender documents show the weapons were to address "the current direct fire support deficiencies" in infantry battalions. "A weakness exists … in that at the rifle company/combat team level, the principal systems are limited to small arms with an effective range of 400 metres."

The tender states the automatic grenade launchers must be able to fire a stream of grenades at least two kilometres.

"Defence has cancelled contract negotiations with the preferred tenderer because it became clear that the company was not going to deliver what Defence had assessed it had promised," the spokesman said. He did not name the company but it is believed to be a Melbourne business..

The spokesman said Defence was working out the best way to give troops automatic grenade launchers and might turn to the "off-the-shelf" weapons used by allies in Afghanistan.

SOURCE




Single carriageway claims another life

Julia can find $46 BILLION to build a white-elephant fibre network but can't find the money to make Australia's major North/South road safe?? Insane priorities

The single-carriageway stretch of the Pacific Highway where a male motorist was killed in a fiery collision with a semi-trailer was only 500 metres from where two elderly women were killed in a crash just weeks ago.

A 30-year-old Alstonville man died after he was thrown from his southbound Subaru when it collided with a northbound semi-trailer at Warrell Creek, just south of Macksville, at 4am yesterday. The semi-trailer, which was loaded with chemicals, almost immediately burst into flames and incinerated both vehicles.

Despite the inferno, the 52-year-old semi driver was able to get far enough away from the blaze that he suffered only minor injuries. He was released from hospital yesterday.

The fire left little more than a charred wreck and closed the highway to traffic in both directions for 11 hours.

Investigators are examining whether the collision occurred because the Subaru was trying to pass another truck on a no-overtaking section of the highway. It is believed the Subaru crossed to the other side of the road and struck the semi-trailer going the opposite way.

The crash occurred 500 metres north of a roadside memorial erected to mark where two sisters, aged 77 and 78, from Tuncurry died in a head-on collision on February 16.

Five kilometres north of that site a man was killed in October 2009 when his car was ripped in half after going under a truck as he tried to overtake two semi-trailers.

It took fire crews more than two hours to extinguish the fire yesterday. Firefighters had only limited access to water because of the remote location.

SOURCE




Spray and pay: repeat graffiti offenders should face jail, says new NSW A-G

YOUNG people repeatedly convicted of graffiti offences and property damage should be given jail terms as a reminder that graffiti is a "serious offence", the new state Attorney-General, Greg Smith, has said.

Graffiti infuriated the community, said Mr Smith, who knows the problem first hand: the building housing his Epping electorate office is targeted every few weeks.

Youths accused of graffiti crime should be brought before the courts, not diverted to youth conferencing or given cautions. A repeat offender could be sent to jail, lose their driver's licence or be ordered to clean up graffiti, the former Crown prosecutor said.

"I don't think it is just a spanking offence myself. It is also a sign for the lack of respect of the community. If it is unchecked, a lot of the young guys … get worse and move into worse crimes," he said.

Although graffiti is not his first priority, he spoke about it with passion.

Mr Smith listed his first priorities as appointing a new chief justice and director of public prosecutions, closely followed by reviews of the Bail Act, sentencing legislation and standard non-parole periods.

Recent changes to the Crimes Act and apprehended violence laws would also be reviewed, he said, citing the case involving the 2GB broadcaster Ray Hadley.

Mr Smith wants judges to have more discretion to give weight to the trauma of relatives of murder victims by allowing judges to take into account their victim's impact statements.

The job of the DPP would be advertised, he said, and a selection panel would choose the preferred candidate, while the chief justice would be selected after consultation.

Mr Smith refused to be drawn on likely candidates, saying of the DPP appointment: "I don't have a shortlist but I have in mind [some of] the people who are likely to apply."

After a decade of dispute between the previous DPP and the attorney-general, Mr Smith said there was a need to mend bridges between the departments.

And there are other jobs to be filled; the Coalition wants to reinstate the position of inspector of corrective services, which Labor abolished.

Mr Smith said he had no plans to get rid of the head of the Corrective Services Department, Ron Woodham. But, he added: "I may have wondered out aloud whether he would fit in with the changes I would like to see."

The Coalition had talked about reducing the prison population and criticised Mr Woodham and the "penal culture" in NSW. Jail should be reserved for violent offenders and others should be given greater support for rehabilitation, they said before the election.

Mr Smith also promised to introduce shield laws to protect journalists and their sources, saying: "I think it is time we recognise the importance of those laws."

This week the NSW Law Society also called for a review of court funding and staffing, improved funding for DNA testing, a charter of human rights and rationalisation of the model of personal injury claims.

SOURCE




Feisty mayor of South Australian city

THE mayor of a regional city in South Australia has threatened to set the dogs on Aborigines from interstate if they try to squat in her town.

Port Augusta mayor Joy Baluch said she would bring in the dog squads to stop illegal camping in the South Australian city, The Northern Territory News reports.

Dozens of indigenous people from the Northern Territory have moved to Adelaide after fighting in the Central Australian community of Yuendemu.

"They will not camp illegally in my city," Ms Baluch said. "We have got the police, we have got a dog squad and I would arrange merry hell.

"Anybody who comes and camps illegally on the foreshore or anywhere else in Port Augusta would be moved on. I would not tolerate such stupidity.

"I would not put up with any government authority, any government agency, that allowed that to happen in my city."

SOURCE







Racial Discrimination Act has chilling effect on freedom of speech

By James Allan (Garrick Professor of Law at the University of Queensland)

COLUMNIST Andrew Bolt is before the Federal Court because various plaintiffs are seeking a declaration against him under the Racial Discrimination Act (together with a court-ordered apology, which sounds Orwellian even writing it down).

They want the court to declare that Bolt's opinion pieces about light-skinned Aborigines were unlawful under the act, which strangely enough need not be the same thing as being a criminal offence under that act. And they want the court to enjoin their being republished.

In 1995, the last year of the Keating government, this act was amended to include racial vilification, meaning it became unlawful "to offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate another person or a group" on the basis of their race. But because of the fear of how stifling this could be for free expression in this country, the act also limits remedies for this as well as providing for lots of exemptions. So you don't infringe the act if your words were said reasonably and in good faith in such contexts as being part of an artistic work, or an academic debate, or was "a fair comment on any event or matter of public interest".

The Bolt trial is testing the limits of this legislation. We will see how this 1995 legislative amendment, controversial even back then, is interpreted by the courts. We will see how much room there is in Australia to say things that offend others, the sort of issues that really do lie at the heart of free speech concerns.

Four comments only indirectly related to that trial are worth making. First, I have always said that Australia has more free speech than Canada and Britain. And in practice, if you factor in the sort of self-censorship you see on American university campuses, then we have more scope to speak our minds here than even in the US.

Depending on how this trial goes, that could all change.

Second, a number of commentators have mistakenly claimed this couldn't happen if we had a bill of rights. Wrong! Canada has one of the strongest bills of rights in the common law world. It also has way more limits on your scope to speak your mind when it comes to so-called hate speech, and indeed defamation and campaign finance rules, than we have here. That's why Mark Steyn was dragged before courts and pseudo-courts in Canada, bill of rights and all. The mistake is to think a bill of rights with its "right to free speech" somehow gives you an absolute right along those lines. Wrong. All you buy with a bill of rights is the judges' views about the proper scope of the right, how it relates to other enumerated rights, and what limits on it are reasonable.

Put differently, you can be an unstinting critic of bills of rights at the same time as you are in favour of lots and lots and lots of free speech. There is nothing inconsistent in that and people who point to some supposed mismatch between the two simply don't know how bills of rights work. When you buy one, you are simply buying the views of the unelected judges. You are not buying absolutist guarantees of rights.

Third, however this court case goes, and even if there be some sort of appeal, the people to blame for this infringement of free speech are our legislators. This 1995 amendment ought to be repealed, and now. Sure, you can read this statute as giving such wide exemptions that you could drive a truck through them. So maybe Bolt will walk away unscathed.

But the very fact he (and you) can be brought to court at all can impose a massive chilling effect on free speech. We shouldn't have an act that allows complaints of a quasi-defamatory nature to be turned into ones dressed up as racial vilification. Those who think, like me, that the valuable sort of free speech is the kind that protects stuff many find offensive and distasteful will want this 1995 amending legislation repealed.

Otherwise claims to be in favour of free speech start to look like favouring only the warm, fuzzy varieties of free speech.

The only valuable sort of freedom of speech is the sort that allows people to do or to say what others find wrong-headed, offensive, distasteful and intolerant.

Being free to say and do what everyone else wants you to say and do is not a liberty or freedom you will ever have to fight for; it will make little difference to anything.

Already this Bolt trial is getting publicity in the US. Steyn is writing about it, as are others. And they're painting us as a Mickey Mouse little jurisdiction where being offended is enough to allow victims to paint some speakers as acting unlawfully. Some are suggesting we might be heading down the road Canada travelled.

I think any good, well-functioning democracy requires its citizens to man up and grow a thick skin. If you're offended, tell us why the speaker is wrong. Don't ask for a court-ordered apology and some two-bit declaration.

Of course none of this is the court's fault. They didn't pass this legislation. Our legislature did. And it's time to repeal it. Now.

SOURCE



5 April, 2011

The Gillard gospel

Most of her "Whitlam" speech dealt with day to day politics but on broad philosophy there was a fair bit that conservatives could applaud. Some excerpts below. Some critics have dismissed that segment as too mushy but emotion plays a considerable part in politics (particularly Leftist politics) so I think it will help the lady to have said those things

I am absolutely clear what Labor stands for, what we aspire to achieve, what our culture is and our role as a party of government.

The historic mission of our political party is to ensure the fair distribution of opportunity. From the moment of our inception our mission has been to enable the son of the labourer, the daughter of the cleaner, to have access to same the opportunities in life as the son of the millionaire, the daughter of the lawyer.

Creating opportunity and enabling social mobility has required different policies in every age. We have moved beyond the days of big government and big welfare, to opportunity through education and inclusion through participation.

But at every stage in our history fair access to opportunity has been our historic mission.

And we have always acknowledged that access to opportunity comes with obligations to seize that opportunity. To work hard, to set your alarm clocks early, to ensure your children are in school. We are the party of work not welfare, that’s why we respect the efforts of the brickie and look with a jaundiced eye at the lifestyle of the socialite.

The Labor culture values effort more than status.

It prizes the great Australian tradition of informality and rejects the sort of snobbishness and obsequiousness that infect other societies.

Labor culture values the strength that comes from working as a team and supports the role of unions in ensuring working people succeed together and that their work is recognised, rewarded and appreciated. This is the best self to which Labor must always be true.

This is our continuing culture, born in Barcaldine and Balmain, the culture of mateship and the fair go, hard work and respect, that we have shared from our first days.

We happily leave to the Greens being a party of protest with no tradition of striking the balance required to deliver major reform.

The differences between Labor and the Greens take many forms but at the bottom of it are two vital ones.

The Greens wrongly reject the moral imperative to a strong economy. The Greens have some worthy ideas and many of their supporters sincerely want a better politics in our country. They have good intentions but fail to understand the centrepiece of our big picture - the people Labor strives to represent need work.

And the Greens will never embrace Labor’s delight at sharing the values of every day Australians, in our cities, suburbs, towns and bush, who day after day do the right thing, leading purposeful and dignified lives, driven by love of family and nation.

SOURCE




Julia Gillard reaches out to Christian leaders

JULIA Gillard has reassured leaders of Australia's 20 major Christian churches that she supports traditional values and freedom of religion, and is listening to their concerns about the Greens' social agenda on legalising same-sex marriage and euthanasia.

The Christian leaders urged the Prime Minister to ensure that freedom of religion in public continued to be protected by law and a clear human right.

Ms Gillard repeated her personal opposition to same-sex marriage and euthanasia, while the church leaders told her of their concerns about changes to the anti-discrimination act that could make it more difficult for Christian schools to hire on the basis of religion.

Australia's Catholic leader, George Pell, told The Australian last night that the Prime Minister "as always" was "friendly and gave us a good hearing".

Cardinal Pell said the leaders told Ms Gillard: "We are very keen to ensure that the right to practise religion in public life continues to be protected in law. It is not ideal that religious freedom is protected by so called 'exemptions and exceptions' in anti-discrimination law, almost like reluctant concessions, crumbs from the secularists' table. What is needed is legislation that embodies and recognises these basic religious freedoms as a human right."

Cardinal Pell also asked Ms Gillard to do "what she could to protect the rights of religious minorities in Islamic countries, particularly for Coptic Christians in Egypt, whose situation has deteriorated in the last few months and worsened since the revolution".

The meeting with Ms Gillard in Canberra yesterday - which came as Tony Abbott took part in a charity bike ride part-sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, or Mormons - was organised by Australian Christian Lobby chief Jim Wallace. Mr Wallace had organised similar meetings with Kevin Rudd when he was prime minister.

Leaders of the Catholic, Anglican, orthodox and evangelical churches all raised concerns about social policy agendas that threatened Christian values, and appealed for help for refugees.

The meeting came as Ms Gillard continues her fight with the Greens over "traditional family values", and as her Immigration Minister, Chris Bowen, overturned a ban on giving religious books such as the Bible or the Koran to newly sworn-in citizens of Australia.

In recent weeks, Ms Gillard, who has publicly declared she is an atheist, has told parliament she can still recite scripture learned at her Baptist Sunday school and opposes euthanasia and same-sex marriage on the basis of maintaining traditional values.

The Prime Minister has portrayed herself as socially conservative and last Thursday attacked the values of the Greens, who "wrongly reject the moral imperative to a strong economy". "The Greens have some worthy ideas and many of their supporters sincerely want a better politics in our country," she said. "They have good intentions but fail to understand the centrepiece of our big picture - the people Labor strives to represent need work. And the Greens will never embrace Labor's delight at sharing the values of everyday Australians, who day after day do the right thing, leading purposeful and dignified lives, driven by love of family and nation."

Greens leader Bob Brown says Ms Gillard is wrong to suggest the Greens and their supporters do not value lives driven by "family and nation".

SOURCE




Strife in the Green/Left coalition

GREENS leader Bob Brown has labelled Julia Gillard's claim his party is out of touch as "obnoxious, quite insulting and unacceptable" and demanded a face-to-face meeting to settle the row.

Mr Brown slammed the Prime Minister's claim in a speech last Thursday that the Greens would never embrace "Labor's delight" at sharing the values of average Australians who led "purposeful and dignified lives, driven by love of family and nation".

He said her comments, whilst delivering the Gough Whitlam Oration, had been a "huge mistake" and accused her of "very clearly turning both barrels on her supporters in government".

"The tone of those words, carefully weighted, I would say, that 1.5 million Australian voters who backed the Greens at the last election weren't people who would love their family or love their country or who would want to do the right thing was obnoxious, quite insulting and not acceptable," Mr Brown told ABC's Lateline. He did temper his remarks, however, saying the stoush would not undermine his party's alliance with the minority Labor government.

His comments come as a liberal MP and gay rights advocate also rejected Ms Gillard's as "desperate" and warned it could leave her open to the suspicion she was homophobic.

And the Prime Minister faced a fresh attack from former Labor leader Mark Latham, who has accused her of lacking empathy because of her decision not to have children and to focus instead on her career.

Coalition MP Warren Entsch, who represents the Queensland seat of Leichhardt, said Ms Gillard's comments were like saying only the Greens cared for the environment or that only Labor cared for social justice.

Mr Entsch said no politician had the right to make comment on another politician's love of their family.

"If I was a Greens supporter, I would be highly offended by that," said Mr Entsch, who campaigned hard in the Howard government for equal legal rights for same-sex couples. "I don't agree with a lot of the stuff that he (Senator Brown) does, either, but I don't say that he doesn't love his mum or love his family or anyone else."

Ms Gillard made clear she stood by her speech. She said through a spokesman late yesterday that some suggestions about the speech and her views which had appeared in the media were "absurd".

Carol Johnson, a professor of politics at the University of Adelaide, said Ms Gillard might have been deliberately provocative.

"I think Labor is currently sandwiched and is losing votes to the Liberals and votes to Greens and they are desperately trying to differentiate themselves from both to regain support," she said.

SOURCE






Warmists admit to pervasive uncertainties

So their hedging is well underway. They feel sure that there is SOME warming but not sure how much. And one of their scenarios envisages a temperature rise of around one degree Celsius -- which even skeptics would be comfortable with. Such a rise would be trivial in its effects -- as it was in the 20th century

It was a long way from picture postcard blue skies in Cairns yesterday as the nation's top 450 climate scientists gathered to take stock of global warming.

The tropical rainstorm may pale alongside the political cyclone that has been unleashed by the federal government's talk about a carbon tax. But the continued wet weather may prove relevant to this week's scientific discussions, which are expected to have a heavy focus on how much there is still to understand about climate change.

For Australia, whether the north can expect to get more or less rainfall because of global warming remains one of the great unknowns.

The Cairns meeting is Australia's peak biannual conference at which climate scientists meet to discuss the state of research. And while organisers of Greenhouse 2011 say participants represent a broad church, the uniform view is undeniably one of a warmer future for the planet.

Beyond that, everything from atmospheric carbon, feedback cycles, ocean temperatures, sea levels, carbon sinks, mitigation and adaptation are on the table for discussion.

Delegates will even be told how emotional responses to climate change represent a missing link to behaviour, with those who accept man-made climate change motivated to act by fear. Others who believe the climate is changing naturally are likelier to feel irritation and refuse to engage or respond.

CSIRO principal research scientist Kevin Hennessy says understanding the causes, both natural and human, of climate change is central to the conference agenda, as is consideration of future projections of climate change globally and regionally.

Surprisingly, a key theme through the conference will be the state of scientific uncertainty. This does not mean that sceptics have crashed the CSIRO-sponsored climate change party, however. "These are the real uncertainties as opposed to the uncertainties that some of the sceptics might claim are important," Hennessy says.

The uncertainties include things such as the various causes of regional climate change and extreme weather events, uncertainty about the future level of greenhouse gas emissions, the rate of global warming, the rate of future sea level rises and the scale and impact of future extreme weather events.

"When we are talking about global warming it is not about whether there will be global warming but about the rate of change," Hennessy says.

The approach reflects a new approach by the climate science community after the issue lost significant momentum in the lead-up to the 2009 Copenhagen conference following claims of exaggerated research claims.

The new caution was reflected in an updated statement issued by Britain's Royal Society last year summarising the scientific evidence on climate change and its drivers. The statement highlighted the areas where the science is well established, where there is still some debate and where substantial uncertainties remain. The Royal Society even held a two-day discussion meeting in March last year on handling uncertainty in science.

The Australian conference agenda reflects the new approach has been taking place elsewhere ahead of the release of a new data from global modelling that will form the basis of the International Panel of Climate Changes update due in 2013.....

Penny Whetton, a senior scientist with the CSIRO's Centre for Australian Weather and Climate Research, says there are two ways to deal with the uncertainty. "One is trying to reduce it," she says. "The other is working with uncertainty and communicating it because we have to decide how to deal with the climate change issue while the information is somewhat uncertain.

"There are some things we know with great certainty in our climate change understanding and some things we know with less certainty, and we really need to make that clear in our communications as well. "The best example is that we are expecting increasing temperatures in future and the only uncertainty associated with that is how much and exactly how rapid it will be.

"If you move to another variable such as rainfall change, although we are reasonably certain about decreased rainfall in southern Australia we don't actually know the direction of rainfall change in northern Australia.

"As we go forward, some of that growth in knowledge creates new uncertainties while clarifying the certainties we have been previously working with." ....

Clarification is also needed on what global warming means for rainfall in the tropical north. "I will be particularly interested to see what the new crop of models are showing for rainfall in northern Australia because that has been a major source of uncertainty," Whetton says.

"Many lines of evidence over many years have pointed towards decreases in rain in southern Australia. "But it has been more uncertain about how precipitation will change in the north, with some models showing decrease and some showing increase," she says.... Research is still under way to establish what role, if any, climate change has had on the most recent extreme rainfall events in Queensland.

Climate scientists generally say it is not possible to identify a climate change signal in any particular weather event. And the higher than average rainfall in eastern Australia last year is consistent with the La Nina weather pattern.

But the question of whether the La Nina system was strengthened by associated climate change phenomena is contested, just as there is global discussion about the extent to which natural feedback mechanisms, such as cloud and air-borne particulate matter, complicate the task of modelling effectively.

One of the reasons global climate models differ from one another on how much warming they show relates to different feedback processes operating in those models. Water vapour feedback is well understood as a positive feedback, reinforcing warming. Aerosols tend to have a cooling effect, but the amount of aerosol in the atmosphere is expected to decrease, limiting their beneficial effect.

While high cloud is understood to reinforce warming, there is uncertainty about the extent to which low cloud has a cooling effect.

More HERE





Neville Nicholls on Australia's Extreme Rainfall



Neville Nicholls is one of Australia's leading climate scientists. He is also a long-time participant in the IPCC and current president of the Australian Meteorological & Oceanographic Society. I first met Neville in the mid 1990s (at a meeting in Vietnam I think) and I have had nothing but great respect for him ever since. In his latest "AMOS - President's Column" he asks, "What caused the eastern Australia heavy rains and floods of 2010/11?"

He begins his answer by pointing to the strength of the current record La Niña event and the relationship of the SOI (Southern Oscillation Index, a measure of the strength of La Niña and El Niño events) and Australian rainfall (see his figure above). He concludes: "Given the well-known relationship between the SOI and heavy rains in eastern Australia (eg., McBride and Nicholls, 1983) we can conclude that the fundamental cause of the heavy rains this past six months was indeed this record La Niña event. Other heavy rain years (1917/18, 1950/51, 1973/74, 1975/76) were also the result of strong La Niña events. The relationship between rainfall and the SOI is very strong, with a correlation coefficient of 0.66. So, the heavy rains were not caused by global warming, but by a record la Niña event – a natural fluctuation of the climate system."

But he doesn't stop there. He next asks: "But perhaps 2010/11 was a record La Niña because of global warming?" His answer: "There has not been any trend in the SOI over the past 111 years, despite the warming of global mean temperature of about 0.75°C over that period. Nor do climate models consistently predict increased strength of La Niña events from enhanced atmospheric content of greenhouse gases (eg., Vecchi and Wittenberg, 2010). So there is no reason, at this moment, for us to suspect that global warming is increasing the frequency or intensity of La Niña events.

He doesn't stop there either, and next asks, "But was the impact of the 2010/11 La Niña on Australian rainfall stronger because of the record warm sea surface temperatures around northern Australia in 2010?" His answer: "These waters have increased substantially over the last century and are now about a degree warmer than early in the 20th century. If these warmer waters were enhancing the impact of La Niña on Australian rainfall we might expect to be seeing heavier rains in recent decades, relative to the rains that accompanied earlier strong La Niña events. There is some evidence of this (eg., Nicholls et al 1996), and there has been a weak tendency towards increased rainfall since 1900, independent of the influence from the El Niño – Southern Oscillation. Perhaps this trend towards increased rainfall might be related to the warmer sea surface temperatures – but much more work is needed to test this. The effect, if there is one, does not look very strong."

He concludes: "The record La Niña event was the fundamental cause of the heavy rains and floods, ie it was a natural fluctuation of the climate system. There may be a global warming signal enhancing this natural variability, but if so then this effect has been quite subtle, at least thus far."

SOURCE



4 April, 2011

Ban on childcare naughty corner, Easter parades

This is just a feast for lawyers and the people paying for it will be the parents -- as fees go up to cover liability insurance. Isn't childcare dear enough now?

CHILDCARE workers who send tantrum-throwing toddlers to "time out" risk hefty fines under national childcare laws to come into force next year.

New regulations will expose childcare centres to penalties if children are required to take part in religious or cultural activities, such as Christmas tree decoration or Easter hat parades hunts.

Childcare supervisors risk personal fines for the first time, under the national legislation being adopted by state and territory governments.

Centres could be fined as much as $50,000, and supervisors $10,000, for failing to ensure children are adequately supervised, or for using "inappropriate discipline" to keep order.

Centres will be banned from using any form of corporal punishment, as well as "any discipline that is unreasonable in the circumstances".

The Education and Care Services National Act, which has been passed by Victoria as the "host jurisdiction" and will be replicated by other states and territories, does not define "unreasonable" discipline.

But draft regulations with the legislation show childcare supervisors risk $2000 fines for "separating" children.

Supervisors must "ensure that a child being educated and cared for by the service is not separated from other children for any reason other than illness or an accident", the regulations state.

Children cannot be "required to undertake activities that are inappropriate, having regard to each family's family and cultural values, age and physical and intellectual development".

The childcare industry yesterday demanded greater clarity, warning that staff could be fined for putting a toddler in "time out" or asking a child to help decorate a Christmas tree.

The Australian Childcare Alliance, representing private centres, called for a definition of "separation", noting that each state and territory could interpret the law differently.

Childcare centres had banned smacking, and no longer used the "naughty corner" technique of isolating children who were violent or disobedient, alliance president Gwynn Bridge said.

But the regulations left the way open for a supervisor to be fined if a litigious parent objected to a child being taken out of a group for hitting other children, or throwing sand.

"There is time out but naughty corners went out years ago," Ms Bridge said. "You move a child a short way from the group and talk to them about their behaviour.

"But we don't know the meaning of the word 'separate' - is it distance? This needs clarification, otherwise people will be in breach without realising it."

The regulations also require family carers, who normally look after a handful of children in their homes, to ensure regular visitors are "fit and proper persons".

Criminal checks would have to be carried out on any neighbours, friends or relatives who visit while children are present on more than three days in a month, or seven days a year.

SOURCE






Mark Latham says Julia Gillard has no empathy because she's childless

For once I actually agree with Latham but politics is more than emotion. Cost-benefit calculations are more important and with her hugely expensive boondoggle of a fibre network that will be obsolete as soon as it is built, Gillard is a major failure there -- not to mention her witless carbon tax that will achieve exactly nothing

MARK Latham has renewed his attack on Julia Gillard's personal life and character, questioning her ability to empathise and experience true love because of her decision to remain childless.

After derailing her election campaign last year, the former Labor leader today resurfaced to critique the Prime Minister once again.

In an interview to spruik a re-release of his 2005 book The Latham Diaries, Mr Latham said the ability to empathise with small children was a good test of character.

“I think having children is the great loving experience of any lifetime. And by definition you haven't got as much love in your life if you make that particular choice,” he told ABC radio.

“Choice in Gillard's case is very, very specific. Particularly because she's on the public record saying she made a deliberate choice not to have children to further her parliamentary career.

“One would have thought to experience the greatest loving experience in life having children you wouldn't particularly make that choice.”

Mr Latham said the proof Ms Gillard had no empathy was her “very wooden” performance during the Queensland floods.

“I'm not the only one saying that. I've also had some experience where around small children she was wooden. And I think the two go together.”

Mr Latham has previously attacked Ms Gillard's decision to pursue her career over children, saying in February: “Anyone who chooses a life without children, as Gillard has, cannot have much love in them.”

He's not the first politician to attack the Prime Minister on such grounds.

In 2007 Liberal senator Bill Heffernan said that “anyone who chooses to deliberately remain barren ... they've got no idea what life's about”.

And last year opposition legal affairs spokesman George Brandis questioned Julia Gillard's ability to “understand the way parents think” about virginity because she didn't have children.

Defending Tony Abbott's right to discuss the advice he gave to his daughters on virginity, Senator Brandis said Ms Gillard was a “one-dimensional” person who had “chosen not to be a parent”.

SOURCE






Millions behind on basic skills; threatens Australia's international competitiveness

AUSTRALIA'S international competitiveness is under threat because up to eight million Australian workers don't have the reading, writing or numeracy skills to undertake training for trade or professional jobs.

The nation's 11 Industry Skills Councils will today call for a new campaign to tackle endemic numbers of workers with poor reading and writing skills, launching a report detailing the problems being faced by industry training bodies.

The bodies say they are confronting inadequately prepared school leavers, an ageing workforce struggling to cope with technological advances and overseas-born workers with English as a second language.

The report, No More Excuses, calls for the Council of Australian Governments to develop a national "overarching blueprint for action on language, literacy and numeracy".

The report will reignite the skills debate at a time when industry is warning of the re-emergence of shortages of trained workers and Julia Gillard and Tony Abbott have thrust workforce participation and getting the long-term unemployed into work to the front of the political debate.

The report says "the situation looks as if it could be getting worse, not better" in terms of the language, literature and numeracy skills of workers.

"International studies have shown that over the past two decades, Australia's literacy and numeracy skill levels have stagnated while those of other countries, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region, have improved.

"By continuing to accept the current levels, we are limiting the future success of individuals, businesses and our economy," the Industry Skills Councils say in a joint statement to be released today.

The report calls for industry training programs to be provided with specific funding to tackle language, literacy and numeracy gaps faced by students and overseas-born workers with English as a second language.

It also calls for recruits to be given better advice about the language and maths requirements of training courses.

Forest Works chief executive Michael Hartman, who runs training programs for the forest, wood, paper and timber products industry, said literacy and numeracy were the "foundation of productivity".

A failure to improve skills among both school leavers and experienced workers would see Australian businesses fall behind international competitors.

Electrocomms and Energy Utilities Industry Skills Council chief executive Bob Taylor told The Australian a decade of calls for skill-ready school leavers had failed to achieve any tangible improvements.

And the resources and infrastructure industry skills council, SkillsDMC, writes in the report that some indigenous recruits on resources projects have learning levels as low as primary school grade four.

This means that providing them with literacy and numeracy skills "is costly and time-consuming, and often results in the employee spending more time at training than at work".

Mr Taylor said industry had been complaining about the poor quality of literacy and numeracy among school leavers looking to enter the trades for more than 10 years and there had been no improvement.

He said the report was aimed at ending the "blame game" and incorporating basic reading, writing and numeracy skills into preliminary training courses.

He said lack of skills in this area was a "real issue" in terms of drop-out rates of apprentices and schools needed to become more focused on providing the relevant skills to the 70 per cent of students who would not attend university and seek work in a trade.

Mr Taylor said preliminary training courses to allow regional workers access to jobs on the National Broadband Network included facets of basic literacy and numeracy training.

He said it was "quite frustrating" that basic maths and physics of the 15- to 16-year-olds seeking trades in the 1960s was superior to today's 18-year-olds seeking trades.

Mr Hartman said his industry was confronting literacy and numeracy problems among older workers who had been long-term employees in industries that were suddenly facing technological change.

He said under current training arrangements, there was not a lot of money available to enable trainers to help students struggling with basic literacy and numeracy skills and this needed to be addressed: "It is a major problem in our society; unless we tackle it, we'll fall further behind in terms of international competitiveness and the skills of our people."

SOURCE






Confidential documents reveal Queensland's public hospitals are risky business

CONFIDENTIAL documents have raised questions over public hospital mismanagement which has put Queenslanders' lives at risk.

The Queensland Health documents reveal incidents in hospitals ranging from admission or behaviour problems, to falls, infections, medication, nutrition or treatment issues.

On Brisbane's northside, in October 2008, hospitals averaged 26 incidents and three deaths a day listed in Queensland Health's reporting system. By May 2009, it was 32 incidents and four deaths a day.

Opposition Health spokesman Mark McArdle acknowledged that while it was natural that not everybody who went to hospital survived, more needed to be done to ensure the system improved, not deteriorated.

"Death is a part of our hospital system (but) it is important to understand, however, why people die and learn as much as we can to prevent these deaths,'' he said.

"It's time for the Minister to open the books and fully inform Queenslanders of what is going on so they can properly assess the status of their public hospital system.''

Queensland Health is locked in a legal battle to prevent documents being released to The Courier-Mail under Right to Information laws.

Information Commissioner Clare Smith has ruled that Queensland Health hand over documents on deaths in emergency departments but the Government has refused. Queensland's Civil and Administrative Tribunal will rule on the matter.

Other documents obtained by The Courier-Mail show Metro North Health Service District monthly reporting for incidents and patient deaths increased or stagnated over 2008-09 at Prince Charles, Redcliffe, Caboolture-Kilcoy hospitals and northside mental health, aged care, residential and disability and community health services.

Root cause analyses show breakdowns in the system, such as a patient with a history of bipolar and attempted suicides, who was released from a mental health unit and found dead from a drug overdose by her young son two days later.

Another included a very sick man who died when he tripped over his IV pole.

Health Community Councils, introduced by former premier Peter Beattie and now disbanded, previously monitored performance reviews and discussed improvements.

However, it's unknown what, if anything, is being done to reverse the upward trend of hospital errors and negligence.

Mr McArdle said he was alarmed the figures showed the situation wasn't improving. "Consequences could be dire if the Government continues to get this wrong,'' he said.

Health Minister Geoff Wilson said constant vigilance was needed in hospitals, which was why Queensland Health has a Patient Safety and Quality Improvement Service that proactively reported on clinical incidents and hospitals' responses to them.

SOURCE



3 April, 2011

Lighthouse light dimmed to protect muttonbirds

This is criminal. People could die from failing to notice a lighthouse

A Tasmanian bird conservation group has praised efforts to protect muttonbirds that are being killed by a lighthouse in north-east Tasmania.

The Tasmanian Aboriginal Land Council raised concerns that thousands of muttonbirds are killed each year after flying into the Eddystone Point light.

The historic main light at the lighthouse has now been switched off and replaced with a lower intensity light.

Eric Woehler of Birds Tasmania says the Eddystone Lighthouse has killed many birds over several years. "We're talking about not just the shearwaters or the muttonbirds that are killed by lighthouses but a very high number of species are killed by flying into lighthouses." "So any measure that we can argue to improve the conservation of birds we'd certainly propose that," Mr Woehler said.

SOURCE







Reconsidering compulsory voting

Jeremy Sammut

The NSW election made me reconsider my opposition to compulsory voting.

The case against compulsion is that people with little interest in public affairs are driven into polling booths. A good citizen – according to the classic liberal conception – should not need to be forced to fulfil his or her fundamental civic duty.

The fear is that the votes of the informed and public-spirited will be discounted by the votes of the apathetic and ignorant, who only turn out to avoid the fine. The collective wisdom of the polity is reduced.

In addition, people cannot choose to stay away in disgust with the low standards of politics. If ever there was an election when voters wished to register their contempt for the political class by not turning out, last Saturday’s was it.

The counter view is that most compelled voters take their civic duty to decide who governs seriously. Most cast their ballot for one of the major parties because they know something about their programs. They do not spoil their ballot or vote for a minor party, such as the Australian Greens.

Commentators have noted the underperformance of the Greens at the NSW election. No matter the circumstances, the Green vote does not seem capable of rising much higher than 10% of first preferences.

I think compulsory voting plays a role in keeping the Greens politically marginalised, relatively speaking.

The NSW Labor Party shed an unprecedented number of votes. But most of these votes went straight to the Coalition and only a small percent to the Greens. This happened even in the key inner-city seats that the Greens were tipped to win: ‘Trotsky-ville’ (Balmain) and ‘The People’s Republic of Marrickville.’

The Greens’ agenda is radical and its constituency is the tertiary ‘educated,’ latte-left who are engaged with politics and ideologically motivated. Nothing short of a disaster of biblical proportions would keep Greens supporters away from the polls. A low turnout in NSW would have been in the interest of the Greens, as it would have increased the value of its rusted on (composted?) 10% of the vote.

But if there had been no compulsion to vote, and had Labor voters either stayed away in disgust or not taken the duty to decide between the major parties seriously and drifted to the Greens, then the election might have turned out differently.

The Greens might have won the seats they didn’t, and the election might have shifted the political culture in the state and the nation to the Left.

Instead, the compelled voters of NSW, in their collective wisdom, helped keep the Greens on the political fringe – where they belong.

This suggests that compulsory voting helps put the ‘main’ in mainstream politics. Therefore, despite what I think about compulsory voting in theory, in practice the outcomes are not malign.

The above is a press release from the Centre for Independent Studies, dated April 1. Enquiries to cis@cis.org.au. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590.





Transport Department racks up huge taxi bill

Physician heal thyself

THE state government department responsible for Victoria's train, tram and bus network has racked up an enormous bill for staff to catch taxis.

Department of Transport bureaucrats spent up to $659,853 on cabs in a single year as Victorians were left stranded by late trains.

Financial documents obtained by the Sunday Herald Sun through Freedom of Information laws show transport bureaucrats charged thousands of cabs to the taxpayer instead of riding on the trains, trams and buses they are employed to get moving. Instead of catching public transport to city meetings, many of the workers charged the public for cab fares as low as $5.20.

Many caught taxis between Melbourne airport and the eastern suburbs at fares beyond $130.

One public servant had an $8.80 claim for a cab fare from "hotel to hotel" in the CBD at the peak of the festive season.

The big spend on taxis could have bought 173,645 zone-one two-hour Metlink fares, 94,264 daily zone-one travel tickets or 548 yearly zone-one passes.

Public Transport Users Association treasurer Kerryn Wilmot said public servants should get out of taxis and on board the services in need of improvement. "They should be using the transport that they have a responsibility for and actually experience what people who don't have the luxury of a corporate Cabcharge do," she said.

"If it's not good enough for them, then why should it be good enough for us? "Either use the services and get to know what is wrong or fix them so they are suitable."

Monthly Cabcharge reports and receipts show Transport staff spent $293,784.88 from February last year to February 2 this year, but a separate list of expenses shows the department spent $363,096.41 in the same period on taxis and miscellaneous expenses. The department spent $20,198 on cabs in May last year alone.

Former public transport minister Martin Pakula spent $3347 on cabs in the period.

With 1280 staff on the department's books at June 30 last year, the cab bill equates to more than $515 per employee.

SOURCE





Budget cuts at Queensland hospitals will cost lives, warn doctors

SENIOR doctors are predicting chaos and possible deaths at Queensland's biggest hospital if beds and theatres are closed as part of a budget crackdown.

The Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital specialists warn of bigger ambulance queues outside the emergency department, longer elective surgery waiting lists and damage to staff morale if threatened budget cuts are carried out.

Bed and theatre closures have been discussed at several meetings of RBWH staff as part of measures to rein in the budget, but no decisions have been made.

"Bed and theatre closures at RBWH are highly likely to cause harm and death for people in Queensland," senior doctors said in a letter to their management, leaked to The Courier-Mail.

"Bed and theatre closures will create havoc in the emergency department, with worsened access block and ramping. Bed and theatre closures will damage staff morale, and make it much more difficult to pursue efficiency measures. Poor staff morale also impacts on the quality and safety of healthcare provision.

"We want to make it absolutely clear that as health professionals, we do not support these measures."

However, they said they understood the harsh financial reality confronting Queensland Health and were committed to finding efficiencies and responding with innovative solutions. The doctors' names have been withheld on their request.

The Courier-Mail has previously revealed the RBWH is $60 million overbudget so far this financial year and QH faces a $300 million budget blowout unless savings are made.

RBWH Medical Staff Association chairwoman Dana Wainwright said doctors had a moral objection to bed and theatre closures because of their commitment to patients.

"Our hospital is underfunded for the services it supplies at a time when we've got increased demand," she said. "The budget isn't adequate for what we do. Staff are upset. We can't do any more. We're doing all we can."

Opposition health spokesman Mark McArdle said the doctors' letter was a clear statement the budget crisis sweeping Queensland Health could impact upon RBWH with catastrophic consequences for patients. But Queensland Health Director-General Mick Reid said he had made it clear to all health service districts any budget-saving measures must first be approved by the department. "Metro North Health Service District has not proposed the closure of beds or theatres," he said.

Health Minister Geoff Wilson said Mr Reid had assured him he had processes in place to ensure any budget measures implemented were responsible.

The RBWH doctors said they would not sanction closures or having their budgets reduced so beds and theatres remained fully operational, but not funded unless directed to in writing by Mr Reid.

SOURCE



2 April, 2011

Crooked Muslim jockey

He has been in trouble with the Stipes before. They suspended him for 9 months for testing positive for cocaine, for instance. Not mentioned below is that, following his second placing at Eagle Farm, Bold Glance won the $100,000 Gold Coast Stakes on March 19 when ridden by another jockey



JOCKEY Bobby El-Issa was resolute and composed as racing stewards hit him with a two-year disqualification.

Racing Queensland Limited stewards issued El-Issa with three charges emanating from his ride on runner-up Bold Glance in the $100,000 Falvelon Stakes at Eagle Farm on February 26.

El-Issa appeared resigned to the lengthy penalty but declared: "I have not broken any rules of racing. I will beat these charges on appeal."

An appeal was lodged late yesterday and a stay of proceedings granted allowing him to ride at Eagle Farm today.

The charges effectively were based on the fact El-Issa did not show his usual vigour over the final 200m when Bold Glance was challenged by the odds-on favourite Essington.

Stewards took exception to the fact El-Issa had used the whip only in a back-hand motion on three occasions in contrast to his ride at Bold Glance's previous start, when he rode aggressively in the straight to win at the Gold Coast. The charge stated El-Issa had "deliberately and consciously ridden to deprive Bold Glance of a real and legitimate chance of wining the race".

El-Issa's defence on his riding style was that "Bold Glance was trying his heart out and I chose not to punish the horse".

"The charge you face is one of the most serious, if not the most serious, a jockey can face," Racing Queensland chief steward Wade Birch told El-Issa. "It goes straight to the heart of the integrity of thoroughbred racing. And this was in a feature race at the state's premier venue. You have betrayed the trust and offended people (punters) who in effect keep it going."

One of the charges against El-Issa was that he had colluded with professional Sydney punter Stephen Fletcher to succeed with bets to win on Essington and backing Bold Glance to lose.

Fletcher's betting records in the previous three months with betting exchange Betfair showed he had bet heavily against horses ridden by El-Issa in 10 southeast Queensland races.

An inquiry into Fletcher's betting on the Bold Glance race was later adjourned to allow him until Wednesday to provide evidence of his normal betting activities.

SOURCE






How I lost faith in multiculturalism

Greg Sheridan

In his speech Bowen sets up a neat dichotomy between a good Australian multiculturalism and a bad European multiculturalism.

Bowen is right to point out that Australian official policy, whether at any given moment describing itself as multiculturalism or not, has always stressed English as the national language and the need for immigrants to commit to democracy and the rule of law. But at the declaratory level, European multiculturalism has also stressed the national language and a commitment to democracy.

There are two obvious, logical flaws in the way Bowen treats immigration into Europe.

The first is that he puts the entire burden for the success or failure of an immigrant community's experience down to the attitude of the host society and places absolutely no analytical weight at all on the performance and behaviour of the immigrants themselves.

Second, the problems that Bowen is talking about are problems with Muslim immigrants, not with immigrants generally. Chinese and non-Muslim Indian immigrants have been immensely successful in Britain. Indeed, being Indian in Britain is extremely chic.

These minorities for the most part have done OK in France, too. Certainly immigrants to Britain from the rest of Europe don't display anything like the alienation of a serious minority of Muslim immigrants.

So this must, logically, lead to one extremely inconvenient, politically incorrect and desperately fraught question. Could it be that the main difference between Europe, with its seething immigration problems, and the US, Canada and Australia, with their success, is not actually a difference based on some footling interpretation of multiculturalism?

There is one other variable that is consistent with the results. The US, Canada and Australia have far smaller Muslim migrant communities as a percentage of their total populations than do most of the troubled nations of Europe. Could this be the explanation?

Several trends in Australian society give pause to wonder whether we, all unintentionally and all fast asleep, may be heading away from the US-Canada-Australia success story and towards a European future. That would be a very bad outcome for Australia.

Discussing these issues is very difficult. It goes without saying that most Muslims in Australia are perfectly fine, law-abiding citizens. The difficulty with discussing Muslim immigration problems is that you don't want to make people feel uncomfortable because of their religion.

Muslims are not only individuals, wholly different from each other, but national Islamic cultures are very different from each other. The Saudi culture is different from the Turkish culture, which is different from the Afghan culture. So generalisations are dangerous.

Then there is the ever present risk of being labelled a racist. No matter how calmly the discussion is conducted, that is a big danger.

But the only people who don't think there is a problem with Islam are those who live on some other planet. The reputation of Islam in the West is not poor because of prejudiced Western Islamophobia, still less because Western governments conduct some kind of anti-Islamic propaganda. Instead, it is the behaviour of people claiming the justification of Islam for their actions that affects the reputation of Islam.

In January, the governor of the Punjab province in Pakistan, Salman Taseer, was murdered because he opposed the severity of the nation's blasphemy laws.

One of his last acts was to visit a Christian woman sentenced to death for insulting the prophet. The governor's murderer won wide public support.

ABC television recently showed a documentary on the killing of Ahmediya sect members in Indonesia, among the most liberal Muslim nations, because their Muslim murderers regarded them as a deviant sect. On YouTube you can watch scenes of a young Afghan woman being publicly flogged because she was seen in the company of a man who wasn't her husband or brother.

In Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive cars. In Iran, government thugs beat protesters to death to safeguard the rule of the mullahs.

This list could go on and on. It may very well be that the overwhelming majority of the world's Muslims reject such actions. But it is fatuous to try to find a similar pattern of Christian, Buddhist or Jewish behaviour. You can find extremists in every religion and from every background, but there is no equivalence in the size and strength of the extremist tendency in other religions. The Australian Muslim population is still relatively small, perhaps 400,000 or just under 2 per cent of the population.

Because of my passionate commitment to the refugee issue, it took me a long time to wake up to the routine scamming of refugee processes today.

The same is happening in northern Australia now, and as the Gillard government loses control of the situation, the number of illegal immigrants, almost all Muslim, will increase, exactly replicating the dynamics of Europe's disaster, though of course on a much smaller scale.

Lakemba and surrounding areas such as Punchbowl had a large Lebanese Muslim population, many of whom had come when Malcolm Fraser crazily instituted a come-one, come-all admissions policy for those claiming to be refugees from the Lebanon conflicts of the 80s.

Replicating the European experience that the second generation had more trouble than the first, it was the sons of some of these immigrants who figured heavily in anti-social activities.

I was shocked to discover the growth of jihadi culture in Lakemba. We used to go to its main street for shopping and for food.

One day, waiting for a pizza order, I wandered into the Muslim bookshop. I was astounded to see titles such as The International Jew or The Truth about the Pope, amid a welter of anti-Semitic, anti-Christian and pro-extremist literature.

The revenge attacks on white Australians after the Cronulla riots originated out of Punchbowl. A number of media crews were attacked when they went to local mosques. A large number of those charged with terrorism offences in Australia stayed in or had associations with the area.

Due to the brilliant and fearless reporting of this paper's Richard Kerbaj, who spoke perfect Arabic, we found that at a number of the mosques in the area outright hatred was being preached: anti-Semitic, misogynist, conspiratorial. Most of the time, these sermons didn't advocate violence. The speakers were what Britain's David Cameron has called "non-violent extremists".

The advent of satellite television made it easier for these folks to live a life apart. Hezbollah's Al-Manar TV station was available on satellite packages. Most Arab homes you went into had Arabic TV playing in the background.

The anti-social behaviour became more acute. One son was playing cricket with friends when they were challenged by a group of teenagers, whom they presumed to be Lebanese but may have been of other Middle Eastern origin, who objected to white boys playing cricket. A full-scale, if brief, fist fight ensued.

One son was challenged by a boy with a gun. Lakemba police station was shot up. Crime increased on the railway line.

The worst thing I saw myself was two strong young men, of Middle Eastern appearance, waiting outside the train station.

A middle-aged white woman emerged from the station alone. She was rather oddly dressed, with a strange hair-do.

The two young men walked up beside her, began taunting her and then finished their effort by spitting in her face. They laughed riotously and walked away. She wiped the spittle off her face and hurried off home. It was all over in a few seconds.

These events in Lakemba and nearby are not unique. Lots of people from lots of different backgrounds commit violent crime in Australia. There is a good deal of unemployment, combined with a highly advanced informal culture of welfare exploitation, often freely discussed at the local schools, in the area. But Lakemba is different from most of Australia.

A senior policeman from nearby Bankstown once told me that policing in the Bankstown area was unlike working anywhere else in Australia, and he was amazed how much violent crime went unreported by the media.

Does Islam itself have a role in these problems? The answer is complex and nuanced but it must be a qualified, and deeply reluctant, yes.

This is the only explanation consistent with the fact other immigrant communities, which may have experienced difficult circumstances in the first generation, don't display the same characteristics in the second generation.

Australia has been a successful immigration country. But the truth is not all immigrants are the same. And it may be much easier than people think to turn success into failure.

Much more HERE






Catholic school bans gay 'cure' seminar at Caboolture

Some ideas may not be expressed -- even ones that the Holy Father would endorse!

A CATHOLIC school has kiboshed a "curing homosexuality seminar" set to be held at their Caboolture college.

The meeting sparked outrage on Facebook, with a protest page set up against it.

But the group holding the meeting has accused Catholic Education of discrimination over the decision.

A statement released by Brisbane Catholic Education says St Columban's College at Caboolture "immediately" withdrew permission for its hall to be used as a venue by the Miracle Christian Center when they realised what the meeting was about.

"Permission was given by the school, on the basis that the nature of the meeting would need to be in line with the college's Catholic Christian values," the statement said.

Principal Ann Rebgetz said the group had deliberately withheld from the school the real nature of the event.

But Miracle Christian Center president Dorian Ballard denied the accusation, saying when they hired halls they didn't advise what they would be preaching about.

He denied the group was homophobic. He said they had been discriminated against and the case was now with their lawyers.

"We are not homophobic, many of us have come out of the homosexual lifestyle," he said.

"We are not afraid of homosexuals; we love them, we've ministered to them for years.

"This topic is always up for debate. It's great to hear a lot of different views in the broad spectrum and we have been silenced, we have been discriminated against."

Former student and Facebook "Protest against the curing homosexuality seminar" page organiser Lexi Ryan said the school had done the right thing and she had cancelled the protest, which had 353 people who had replied they would be attending.

SOURCE




GREENIE ROUNDUP

Four articles below:

Carbon pricing could add $860 to annual household bills, Treasury documents show

THE carbon tax Prime Minister Julia Gillard promised never to introduce will cost average families $860 a year, Federal Government modelling has revealed.

Based on a carbon price of $30 a tonne, families would pay up to $218 more for electricity, $114 for gas, $187 for petrol and $88 for food, The Daily Telegraph reported.

Treasury documents, released under FOI, revealed households would pay the fixed price for between three and five years (before moving to an emissions trading scheme), leaving families with a bill between $2589 and $4315 over that time.Heavily censored documents claim price rises would "drive household behaviour change, with households substituting to less carbon intensive goods over time".

But it was acknowledged in a Treasury executive minute last October that low-income families would suffer the most because they spend more on things like electricity and are least able to afford low emissions technology.Treasury also raised fears the tax would reduce people's wealth.

"A carbon price will also affect wealth as the change in prices flows through to the value of financial assets, including shares, and reduces the real value of savings," the minute states.

It also shows the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme proposed in 2009 by former PM Kevin Rudd would have raised electricity prices by a maximum $120 a year and gas by $52 - half the cost of the Treasury estimates now.

"This just demonstrates that the Government has known all along that its carbon tax won't clean up the environment but it will clean out your wallet," Opposition Leader Tony Abbott said.

Treasurer Wayne Swan hit back yesterday, claiming the figures were preliminary numbers and he said he could not nominate how much assistance families would be given by way of compensation.

"Until the final design and modelling have been settled, anyone who uses these figures to scare families about prices is engaging in a scare campaign," he said.

The Government is reportedly considering tax and welfare breaks of between $600 and $1500 a year.

It comes as an exclusive survey by The Daily Telegraph reveals why voters are so angry about the proposal. A quarter of the 2500 households surveyed said they were already struggling to make ends meet and almost 9 per cent said they didn't have enough money to pay bills.

"I think it might be an unnecessary tax, I could probably do better with the money in my pocket and make a concerted effort to reduce my carbon emissions, rather than be taxed," Greg Hudson, 32, from Neutral Bay, said yesterday.

SOURCE

Labor at war with climate adviser Ross Garnaut

ENERGY Minister Martin Ferguson has slapped down the government's chief climate change adviser, Ross Garnaut, flatly rejecting calls for more regulation on electricity markets and warning that mandatory renewable energy targets are pushing up power prices.

Mr Ferguson rejected Professor Garnaut's claims that electricity price rises were a result of "gouging" by electricity generators.

The senior cabinet minister said electricity prices had risen because of costs in replacing ageing plants and he warned that prices would rise by 30per cent in the next three years because of investment costs, a carbon price and the mandatory target for renewable energy generation.

Mr Ferguson and the Australian Energy Market Commission both warned that the government's compulsory target of 20 per cent electricity generation from renewable sources by 2020 was coming at a "cost to the community" and could "challenge" the national electricity grid.

Professor Garnaut this week recommended coal-fired power electricity generators not be compensated for a carbon tax and that a new energy regulator be formed.

At an energy conference in Melbourne yesterday, Mr Ferguson said Professor Garnaut had a role in advising the multi-party climate change committee, which includes the Greens, but he "does not speak for the government, nor for the Ministerial Council on Energy", which represents every government.

Mr Ferguson's comments come as the Labor government fights with the Greens over "extreme" policies.

It has also indicated that compensation for industries for a carbon tax will be the same as that offered in 2009, a policy the Greens voted against on the grounds it was too generous.

Mr Ferguson said: "The regulatory framework for Australia's energy sector is leading edge, and as such the Ministerial Council on Energy and the energy market bodies often review different aspects of our regulatory environment to ensure it delivers optimal outcomes for the community.

"Residential electricity prices have increased by about 40 per cent over the last three years and are forecast to increase in the order of 30 per cent in the three years to June 2013. As those who study these issues will know, there is no quick fix to rising prices.

"Prices reflect the cost of investment to maintain and replace ageing assets to ensure the community gets the reliability it has come to expect. We must ensure investment occurs to reduce emissions and meet demand, while importantly, maintaining sufficient competition and avoiding concentration in the sector."

Professor Garnaut this week released his final report on climate change for the government and said the owners of the transmission and distribution networks were overinvesting in their assets to increase their returns.

Calling for an urgent inquiry into power sector regulatory arrangements, Professor Garnaut said the current arrangements had allowed too high a rate of return for power companies, which "increases electricity prices that (are) just passed right on to the consumer".

He put the cost of a carbon tax on electricity prices at $4 to $5 a week for the average household and called for an urgent inquiry into what he believes is a "prima facie" case of excessive increases caused by electricity regulation in Australia.

Professor Garnaut conceded there might have to be commonwealth loan guarantees to keep high carbon emitting generators operating if they failed financially under the proposed carbon tax from July 1 next year.

Mr Ferguson said the nation's energy ministers tried to keep "away from the spotlight of the daily media cycle". "It is not in the public interest to trivialise these matters in a high level public debate over the network regulatory regime," the Energy Minister said.

"The market bodies and institutions already exist and have responsibility for finding the appropriate balance between reliability and value to the community.

"Trying to suppress prices ultimately leads to pain in the future when catch-up is required, as some jurisdictions are now finding."

Mr Ferguson said that, as Australia moved towards a price on carbon, "we have to be very mindful" of damaging asset values of power generators because these financial considerations can have "real energy security and market stability implications". "I am also conscious of the imminent refinancing requirements of the generation sector, with an estimated $6.4bn needed to be refinanced prior to the end of 2012.

"The expanded Renewable Energy Target, through supporting wind capacity, has delivered significant new investment over the last 15 months.

"The expanded Renewable Energy Target is effective in displacing generation investment that would otherwise come from non-renewable technologies; however, it is doing this at a cost to the community," Mr Ferguson warned.

"The fact remains that if we are hoping to achieve abatement from the electricity sector we will need to see significant investment in new generation capacity in the years ahead. At some point in the future we will need additional investment in baseload capacity."

SOURCE

Background on an Australian "Green" senator

Being Green is the way to get on in politics for a far Leftist. She's a Trot so the fact that she disowns Stalinism means nothing. The Trots and Stalin never did get on. Before Stalin rose to power, however, Trotsky led the Red army and murdered hundreds of thousands

AS the child of Australian communists and a former member of the Socialist Party, Greens senator-elect Lee Rhiannon insists she's been unfairly tagged as a hardline left-winger or "watermelon" -- green on the outside but red inside.

She says her parents were among many Australians who became disillusioned with Moscow after Soviet tanks crushed Czechoslovakia's move towards "socialism with a human face" in 1968.

That was when the Communist Party of Australia formally split from the Russian communists.

Ms Rhiannon is the daughter of women's rights activist Freda Yetta Brown and Bill Brown, who were both CPA members.

She has insisted that her parents joined the CPA because of their deep commitment to social justice and equal rights and not for any subversive reason.

But the association was enough to have her feature in an ASIO file when she was just seven years old.

During last year's election campaign, Ms Rhiannon insisted that she would support Bob Brown's pragmatic approach to politics, and said she had no wish to lead the party.

"I am not a communist," Ms Rhiannon told The Weekend Australian in August. "I and Greens members condemn the crimes committed under Stalin."

She strongly denied then that she wanted to steer the Greens towards a more radical agenda and said dealing with climate change was her priority.

Ms Rhiannon, 59, was elected last year to one of the six NSW seats and will join the Senate in July. She joined the Greens in 1991 and was elected to the NSW Upper House in 1999.

Among her priorities in the Legislative Council were better public transport and a ban on the building of any new motorways.

In the 1970s she was arrested during anti-apartheid protests and in the 1980s she helped organise the peace camp outside the joint US-Australian intelligence facility at Pine Gap in central Australia.

SOURCE

Eight myths of a carbon tax

Even a Warmist (below) can see that the arguments for an Australian carbon tax don't stack up

1. The greatest myth is that if we lead the world in carbon pricing the rest of the world will follow. We produce 1.5 per cent of the world's CO2; China and America account for 40 per cent. A 5 per cent reduction in Australia's emissions would be cancelled out by as little as a 0.3 per cent increase in China's emissions.

2. Another myth is that we have to lead the world because we are a carbon-based economy and will be more affected when and if the world introduces carbon pricing. Our carbon-based economy is one of our main competitive advantages. To lead on a carbon tax puts our industry at a serious disadvantage against our competitors.

Eighty per cent of power is generated from coal. This low-cost power has underpinned our standard of living by encouraging manufacture and giving low-cost electricity to consumers.

A carbon tax on imports from countries without CO2 pricing is unworkable. We would need to significantly increase the Customs Department and we would still be at risk. Such a move would undo the hard won reforms of the 1990s.

3. Another myth says if we introduce the tax now it will give industry time to adapt. Industry needs years to make the investment to meet the new environment. Planning approval alone can take four or more years. The logic of starting a carbon tax in barely 12 months' time has not been thought through; five years would barely be enough.

It would be better to advise industry that CO2 will be taxed at about $50/$60 a tonne in 10 years' time when our trading partners also start to price carbon and industry should start to adjust its long term capital plans and debt financing accordingly.

The rise in the cost of fossil fuels is already affecting local prices. We must be careful not to hit the domestic and business consumer with a double whammy. If the domestic price for gas continues to rise the price for CO2 will have to rise further to force the change from coal to gas generation.

4. Another myth is that Big Business should have known a carbon tax was coming and should have been prepared. Most of our coal-fired power stations were built and owned by state governments. The taxpayer is the largest single owner with 36 per cent capacity overall, 54 per cent in NSW and 67 per cent in Queensland.

The recent sale in NSW was at a deep discount to the replacement value because of the threat of carbon pricing; NSW taxpayers virtually lost their equity on the threat of a tax.

In Victoria power stations were sold at huge prices largely to foreign investors expecting a proper electricity market that never eventuated. The owners invested in good faith with the reasonable expectation that if a price were put on CO2 they would be given adequate notice and compensation.

Indeed, CO2 trading in Europe, the obvious precedent scheme, was accompanied by the issue of close to 100 per cent free permits to the power generators for the first decade. If we can purchase permits globally as planned why not adopt common measures with the EU?

To say to government and private investors that the federal government will wipe out your equity without compensation is patently unfair. It will introduce a dangerous level of sovereign risk for long-term investment in Australia.

5. Then there is the myth that we are morally obliged to lead the way because we generate a larger proportion of carbon dioxide a head of population. Yes we do, but there are good reasons for this. We are rich in resources such as coal, iron ore, bauxite and uranium. It gives us one of our few competitive advantages.

We also have a significant agricultural sector and are a large exporter of beef and lamb, which are high CO2 emitters. Given the size of the country, our transport consumption is higher than more densely settled economies.

Exports contribute to more than 30 per cent of Australia's carbon emissions. If we want to cut emissions sharply, should we just stop exporting?

6. Closer to home is the myth that the carbon tax will hit the so called 1000 big polluters and consumers will be protected. In the end the consumer, whether local or overseas, will always pay. If the cost is not passed on, trade exposed industry in particular will either fail to survive (and jobs will be lost), or move elsewhere (loss of jobs again).

The other illogicality in this myth is that the consumer should be protected. If the government wishes to discourage the production of CO2 then the end consumer must be sent a price signal.

The concept of charging the big emitters and passing the proceeds back to the consumer is fatally flawed. The big emitters will reduce emissions or be forced out of the economy. Then there will be no money for compensation and the shock will be large.

7. Then there is the myth that renewable energy can replace coal and gas-fired energy production without a substantial cost to the consumer or business.

Putting aside the serious issues of reliability, availability and transmission, the cost of all of the available renewables, such as wind, is far higher than coal.

8. And then there is the myth that a carbon tax or ETS will force the same big polluters to invest in alternative technologies that will create jobs. The expectation that investors who have seen their investment seriously impaired by a carbon tax will race to invest in new high-cost technologies is illogical. Banks won't lend to the impaired incumbents.

Where is the plan for what Australia will look like in 2020 or 2030? Will we still have an aluminium or steel industry or any form of processing requiring energy such as food or an agricultural sector?

California legislated to introduce a cap and trade scheme in 2006, with effect from 2012. There has been no explosion in green jobs there and unemployment stands at 12.5 per cent. Jobs have simply moved across state borders.

Global emissions are a global problem. A global solution is the only answer. If we reduce our carbon emissions unilaterally there will be no benefit to the global environment.

What is the negotiation benefit of giving away our hand now, when we should be seeking to agree an emissions trajectory for Australia as part of a global deal?

This is a momentous decision and we appear to be relying on a business and investment community that we are proposing to punish. A cross your fingers approach is just not good enough when we are considering the very basis of our economic future.

SOURCE



1 April, 2011

Another one of Australia's charming Muslim citizens



A PARAMEDIC was threatened and assaulted as she tried to treat a crash patient, a court heard yesterday. Police allege Ali Mobayad, 30, was involved in a verbal altercation with paramedic Karen Matthews outside Berala Public School as she was treating a patient who was injured in a car accident.

Documents tendered to Burwood Local Court yesterday revealed that the Auburn man double parked in a school zone - the only charge he pleaded guilty to - before allegedly getting out of his car and pounding on the Rapid Response vehicle's driver-side window and "threatening" the 37-year-old paramedic.

It is alleged Mobayad then began yelling and swearing at the ambulance officer before assaulting her just after 3pm on March 7. Court documents stated the alleged offences "caused a real fear of actual physical violence" and prevented Ms Matthews from "executing her duties as a paramedic".

The court heard the accused left the scene, but was arrested [on Yarram Road, Lidcombe] shortly after 4.30pm. He was charged with negligent driving, menacing driving, common assault and hindering an ambulance officer by act of violence - all of which he has denied and pleaded not guilty to yesterday.

Outside court, Mobayad became irate after he spotted The Daily Telegraph waiting with cameras. "You see this face - if you use that image you will never see the end of this," he said. "I don't care what happens to me, I'll kill you if you use that photo ... you f ... ing idiot."

SOURCE







The Jewish Agency makes a special deal for Australia

The Australian Jewish community is mostly in Melbourne and Zionist sentiment is very strong among them -- with many Australian Jews emigrating to Israel, despite the relative safety of Australia

Australia will be the only Western country where the Jewish Agency will retain a fulltime Israel immigration emissary, despite the organization’s recent decision to replace all such employees with officials dealing with a broad spectrum of issues.

“It was decided that in Australia we keep the classic model, because Australia is a little bit different from other countries in the world,” the Agency’s director of English-speaking countries, Yehuda Katz, told Anglo File this week.

“First of all, they had an amazing increase in aliyah of almost 50 percent between 2009 and 2010,” he said in reference to the jump in immigration to Israel. “Secondly, in Australia we have a unique partnership with the Zionist Federation. We work hand in hand in the encouragement of aliyah and [other activities].”

Last month, a Jewish Agency spokesman told Anglo File there no longer would be in Australia a designated immigration emissary, known as an aliyah shaliach. “It doesn’t make sense anymore, from our perspective, that one shaliach offers educational programs and a different shaliach works on aliyah,” he had said, before learning of a special agreement the Australian Zionist Federation had made with the agency.

The venerable institution recently embarked on a new strategic plan that shifts its focus from promoting immigration to strengthening Jewish identity, including replacing aliyah shlichim with “multifunctional” emissaries.

“From many years of experience, we have found that dedicated aliyah shlichim make a big difference in not just making the aliyah preparation much easier, but also in promoting aliyah, establishing aliyah groups in the Zionist youth movements and giving people the confidence to take the very big step of moving to Israel,” AZF President Philip Chester told Anglo File this week. The Agency’s new strategic plan aside, “all of our [Agency] shlichim have plenty to do with their own movements, communities, etc. without also having to be responsible for aliyah,” he said.

SOURCE





Greens leader reprimands Green Senator for Israel boycott stance

She's a nasty old Trot (Trotskyite; Marxist; middle-class hater) from way back. Bob Brown thinks that the media should not have mentioned her hatred of Israel. They actually went easy on her. There's lots more they could have told about her



Greens leader Bob Brown has reprimanded fellow Green and Senator-elect, Lee Rhiannon, for advocating a trade boycott against Israel. He said the NSW Greens lost votes in the recent NSW election by not concentrating on the basic issues of transport, education, health and renewable energy.

The Greens were hoping to win up to three Lower House seats and gain the balance of power in the Upper House, but have fallen far short of that. They are likely to win only Balmain in the Legislative Assembly and retain four seats in the Legislative Council.

Senator Brown also accused the Australian newspaper - which he described as the "hate media" - as having an anti-Green agenda by "playing the issue up". The newspaper said Ms Rhiannon had "expressed regret" that the Greens did not campaign harder on the Israel boycott.

"The NSW Greens have taken to having their own shade of foreign policy - that's up to them. It was a mistake. I differ with Lee on that and she knows that," Senator Brown said. "I think the policy deliberations by [the NSW Greens] were wrong - and they know that."

He said the Greens recognise the right to sovereignty of both Israel and Palestinian territories - a mainstream position.

"It was damaging to the Greens campaign and the hate media was able to play this issue up," Senator Brown said. "I've had a good, robust discussion with Lee. "She and I, not for the first time, have engaged in a very frank discussion about the way the NSW election went."

Ms Rhiannon will take up her seat in the Senate on July 1.

SOURCE






Tony Abbott calls for welfare crackdown

YOUNG people who stay unemployed when jobs are available should be denied the dole, Opposition Leader Tony Abbott today argues in a major policy outline.

The long-term unemployed should have their $244 weekly unemployment benefits quarantined to ensure it was spent on essentials as part of a national program.

Mr Abbott today said most people on the dole spend 90 to 100 per cent of their benefits on essentials, but "occasionally people aren't fair dinkum, can't manage their income".

An Abbott government also would push more people with lower-level disabilities into jobs and make it compulsory for the under-50 unemployed under tightened welfare laws.

Mr Abbott today insisted his proposals were not "a radical right wing solution" but made it clear he wanted to put pressure on Prime Minister Julia Gillard to move further to the right than she might want.

The Government will use the May Budget to introduce its own welfare-to-work programs and Mr Abbott is getting in first to establish a policy contrast, and to push the Government towards tougher restrictions.

"The government vowed to retain Work for the Dole at the 2007 election but has since deliberately allowed it to decay," said Mr Abbott in a speech prepared for today.

"Since its introduction in 1997, more than 600,000 people have participated in Work for the Dole gaining the discipline and dignity of performing useful work while developing the life skills so critical to obtaining and keeping a real job.

"Since 2007, Work for the Dole participation has fallen by 60 per cent to less than 10,000.

"Work for the Dole should be the default option for everyone under 50 who has been on unemployment benefits for more than six months. Reasonably fit working age people should be working, preferably for a wage but if not, for the dole."

He says the quarantining of welfare income was a justified interference in people’s lives because taxpayers had a right to insist that their money was not wasted.

"I originally proposed this while Shadow Minister for Family and Community Services in May 2008," said Mr Abbott.

"Last year, as part of normalizing the intervention, the government introduced automatic welfare quarantine for all long-term unemployment beneficiaries in the Northern Territory.

"This is right in the Territory so can hardly be wrong elsewhere.

"Ensuring that at least 50 per cent of welfare income is spent on the necessities of life should be a help rather than a hindrance for unemployed people. It would also have the advantage of discouraging people who might be 'working the system'."

Mr Abbott says the hung Parliament of Britain had not stopped the UK Government from reforming the disability pension with a more targeted payment for people whose disabilities might not be permanent.

"Australian disability pension numbers are set to pass 800,000 this year at an annual cost of $13 billion," he says.

"That’s about 220,000 more working age people on the disability pension than on unemployment benefits. With just over one per cent of disability pensioners moving back into the workforce every year and with nearly 60 per cent of recipients having potentially treatable mental health or muscular-skeletal conditions, a reform of this type should be considered here.

"What’s needed is a more sophisticated benefit structure that distinguishes between disabilities that are likely to be lasting and those that could be temporary and that provides more encouragement for people with some capacity for work.

"Better directing disability payments could help to part-fund much greater assistance to people with very serious disabilities as proposed in the Productivity Commission’s recent draft report into disability care."

SOURCE





Coalition seeks debate on Industrial Relations laws

THE Coalition is pushing for a renewed debate on workplace reform after government business adviser and Australia Industry Group chief, Heather Ridout, called for an overhaul of the Fair Work Act.

Ms Ridout ran through the failings of the current workplace laws in a comprehensive speech yesterday in which she called for changes to drive productivity and workplace flexibility.

Opposition workplace relations spokesman Senator Eric Abetz seized upon the critique today, calling for a broader political debate on Labor's industrial relations laws.

"I agree with Heather Ridout that there needs to be a sensible debate about productivity and whether or not Labor's workplace laws are delivering to the Australian people what Julia Gillard and Labor promised," he told The Australian Online.

"This is a startling admission when Labor's key industrial relations and business adviser says Labor's Fair Work Laws don't increase productivity, particularly in circumstances where the Australian public was told that the cornerstone of Labor's new IR laws was to increase productivity."

Opposition Tony Abbott has previously asked business to lead the way on making the case for industrial relations changes before the Coalition would take up the fight.

South Australian Liberal MP Jamie Briggs said Ms Ridout's comments changed the tenor of the debate on workplace reform and were evidence that businesses believed Julia Gillard's reforms had gone too far. He backed Senator Abetz's call for a debate.

"She (Ms Ridout) has been closely associated with the changes and she did work with Julia Gillard closely," he said.

"So, for her to now comment like this is extremely significant. It's a massive change in her perspective. And a massive change in this debate.

"Julia Gillard's laws are significantly flawed and they are going to cause real damage to our economy if they're not fixed.

"They hand far too much power to unelected third parties in the bargaining process and they risk, at a time of Labor shortages, forcing up wage based inflation and putting increased pressure on interest rates."

In her speech, Ms Ridout called for the industrial relations debate to move beyond recriminations over the Howard government's Work Choices legislation.

She said there were many positive aspects of the Howard government's workplace relations laws retained by Labor, and it was unreasonable to characterise them as wholly unfair.

She identified problem areas with the Far Work system introduced by Ms Gillard.

"On the basis of the accumulating anecdotal evidence from our membership, there is a very strong case to suggest that the Fair Work Act is not encouraging productivity improvements and is hampering the ability of companies to restructure and to maintain flexible workforces," she said.

A spokesman for the Workplace Relations Minister Chris Evans said the government would continue to work with unions and industry to drive productivity growth.

"Published data indicates that the Fair Work Act is working well and delivering record levels of agreement making, moderate wages growth, low unemployment; and low levels of industrial disputation," he said.

SOURCE





Note: I have two other blogs covering Australian news. They are more specialized so are not updated daily but there are updates on both most weeks. See QANTAS/Jetstar for news on Qantas failings and Australian police news for news on police misbehaviour. Quite a bit up recently








Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.


Most academics are lockstep Leftists so readers do sometimes doubt that I have the qualifications mentioned above. Photocopies of my academic and military certificates are however all viewable here


For overseas readers: The "ALP" is the Australian Labor Party -- Australia's major Leftist party. The "Liberal" party is Australia's major conservative political party.


Again for overseas readers: Like the USA, Germany and India, Australia has State governments as well as the Federal government. So it may be useful to know the usual abbreviations for the Australian States: QLD (Queensland), NSW (New South Wales), WA (Western Australia), VIC (Victoria), TAS (Tasmania), SA (South Australia).


For American readers: A "pensioner" is a retired person living on Social Security


Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?


On all my blogs, I express my view of what is important primarily by the readings that I select for posting. I do however on occasions add personal comments in italicized form at the beginning of an article.


I am rather pleased to report that I am a lifelong conservative. Out of intellectual curiosity, I did in my youth join organizations from right across the political spectrum so I am certainly not closed-minded and am very familiar with the full spectrum of political thinking. Nonetheless, I did not have to undergo the lurch from Left to Right that so many people undergo. At age 13 I used my pocket-money to subscribe to the "Reader's Digest" -- the main conservative organ available in small town Australia of the 1950s. I have learnt much since but am pleased and amused to note that history has since confirmed most of what I thought at that early age.

I imagine that the the RD is still sending mailouts to my 1950s address!


I am an army man. Although my service in the Australian army was chiefly noted for its un-notability, I DID join voluntarily in the Vietnam era, I DID reach the rank of Sergeant, and I DID volunteer for a posting in Vietnam. So I think I may be forgiven for saying something that most army men think but which most don't say because they think it is too obvious: The profession of arms is the noblest profession of all because it is the only profession where you offer to lay down your life in performing your duties. Our men fought so that people could say and think what they like but I myself always treat military men with great respect -- respect which in my view is simply their due.


The kneejerk response of the Green/Left to people who challenge them is to say that the challenger is in the pay of "Big Oil", "Big Business", "Big Pharma", "Exxon-Mobil", "The Pioneer Fund" or some other entity that they see, in their childish way, as a boogeyman. So I think it might be useful for me to point out that I have NEVER received one cent from anybody by way of support for what I write. As a retired person, I live entirely on my own investments. I do not work for anybody and I am not beholden to anybody. And I have NO investments in oil companies, mining companies or "Big Pharma"


UPDATE: Despite my (statistical) aversion to mining stocks, I have recently bought a few shares in BHP -- the world's biggest miner, I gather. I run the grave risk of becoming a speaker of famous last words for saying this but I suspect that BHP is now so big as to be largely immune from the risks that plague most mining companies. I also know of no issue affecting BHP where my writings would have any relevance. The Left seem to have a visceral hatred of miners. I have never quite figured out why.


Although I have been an atheist for all my adult life, I have no hesitation in saying that the single book which has influenced me most is the New Testament. And my Scripture blog will show that I know whereof I speak.


A delightful story about a great Australian conservative