The " protected tenant ".

There is no doubt that we are seeing an emerging housing crisis. Home ownership is slipping away from the reach of many - and rents are going through the roof as the supply of rental properties dwindles.
In recent days there have been alarming noises coming from Kevin Rudd's side of politics promising that if elected measures will be taken to protect the disadvantaged.
The nature of these measures has not been disclosed, but one possible aspect will certainly send a chill through the heart of any property owner. It could be that a socialist government would seek to reintroduce the concept of " the protected tenant ".
Back in the dark days of world war two a similar shortage of rental properties emerged. The government of the day could see a problem. Low income families could not afford soaring rents and there was the prospect of such people being evicted and replaced with the more affluent.
To counter this, the government instituted a rent freeze in the form of what it called " protected tenants ". The criteria covered those who had rented their property for a long period of time and were low income people. It was a war time measure - but was enacted without a sunset clause.
After the end of the war the issue of " protected tenants " became a political minefield that neither side of politics dared to engage - and so for decades we had the situation of smug protected tenants still paying rents frozen at levels of the 1940's - but enjoying the use of properties that would command rentals of much higher value in an era of increased prosperity and inflation.
The losers were the property owners. It was impossible to increase rents above the 1940's frozen levels or evict their tenants - but they were responsible for paying the rates and maintaining the property. Should a hot water service need replacing or a sewer attention to remove a blockage the owner had to foot the bill.
The crazy situation arose that owners were out of pocket by huge amounts a year in relation to the meagre rents that they were allowed. They could only reclaim their property if the person renting died - or failed to pay their rent - and protected tenants were very careful to never fall into arrears.
The property was virtually worthless. Nobody would buy while a protected tenant was in residence - except those willing to buy it for a song and wait out the longevity of the occupier.
It would be all too easy for a socialist government to revisit protected tenancies if the rental situation deteriorated. Basically, it would be a way of dumping public housing onto private enterprise - but surely the lessons learned after the last experience should preclude that course of action.
But - then again - those who ignore history are destined to repeat it !

Tree danger.

A decade ago, getting rid of a dangerous tree was almost an impossibility. Councils had a tree preservation order that placed trees at a higher level than human life - and getting permission to lop or remove was " mission impossible ".
One event changed that attitude - but at a terrible cost.
On July 29, 1998 a severe wind storm caused a thirty metre tree to crash through the roof of a Nowra home, killed the resident - Gordon Timbs - instantly.
Mr Timbs had repeatedly petitioned his local council for permission to remove this tree - and in each case he was refused.
The deceased family sued the council for damages - and that led to a long journey through the courts. The initial hearing found in favour of the council, but in April 2004 a victorious appeal resulted in an award of $ 750,000. However, the council's insurer launched another appeal - and the case was finally dismissed in favour of the family in March 2005.
The long battle caused a change of heart on the part of councils. This case established the responsibility of councils to consider and decide on safety issues relating to trees - rather than to just hide behind a tree preservation order and take no action.
It is now rare to have a council reject a tree removal request - but the battle is far from over. There are still " Greenies " amongst the public who value a tree above human life. This was demonstrated recently when the public demonstrated against the Roads and Traffic Authority ( RTA ) for removing dangerous trees lining a notoriously lethal section of a southern highlands road.
It will probably take future successful compensation litigation to move the state government to order a clear buffer zone of cleared trees beside all major roads.
Such a saver of lives is long overdue !

The poisoned chalice !

The public have every right to be mystified when a state premier - just fifty-two years old and seemingly at the height of a successful stewardship - suddenly gives the all too familiar " I want to spend more time with my family " excuse - and suddenly quits.
On the surface, Victorian premier Stephen Bracks has the world before him. Recently given another term in office with a hefty majority his state seems to be in good economic shape - and yet many will hark back to the experience of neighbouring state - New South Wales.
About two years ago there was a similar happening. Premier Bob Carr shocked the voters by suddenly handing in his crown - and quietly slipping into a new role with " the millionaire factory ".
The state then got a second surprise when Morris Iemma unexpectedly got handed the job - and many could be excused for thinking he got handed a poisoned chalice.
The state looked in good shape when Carr left, but it didn't take long for the land mines to start exploding under Iemma's feet.
First was the cross city tunnel fiasco. Then came the public anger at street closures designed to force drivers to use that tunnel and pay an exorbitant toll.
The housing market collapsed - and Iemma had to sacrifice stamp duty and land tax revenue to head off a disaster - and who can forget the ongoing catastrophe that is New South Wales rail.
Iemma has handled it well, but it is obvious that Carr realised what was heading down the pipeline - and decided to quite the scene before his reputation was shredded.
Many people in Victoria can be excused if they are looking into the crystal ball and wondering just what disasters Bracks has seen coming. One that might be a blip on the horizon is the state of the power supply. Could it be that this summer will see rolling blackouts in the southern state ? Or could there be bad news coming from the water crisis in the Murray/Darling system ?
It just doesn't seem to be human nature for a successful politician to pull the plug
when his family have passed the " little kids " stage. Children aged 20 - 17 and 13 are on the cusp of growing up.
Time will be the deciding factor in writing the history books on Brack's reign - but many can be excused for having misgivings !

Oops !

The investigation of Doctor Mohamed Haneef on suspected terrorist activity charges has come to a halt because the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions - Damian Bugg QC -has stated that " there is no prospect of a conviction on the available evidence ".
That is not a finding of innocence. It is simply a statement that the investigation so far has not revealed a connection between the doctor's two cousins - who were caught driving an explosive laden Jeep into a Scottish air terminal - and any terrorist activity by this doctor in Australia.
Australian security did precisely what our citizens would expect it to do when this family connection was revealed, supported by the fact that the doctor had closely associated with his cousins while in the UK - and followed by the facts that he had suddenly bought a one way ticket to his home country of India - and had disposed of a mobile phone SIM card - capable of triggering a bomb - to his terrorist cousins.
There will be criticism of our security forces by the media - who love a good story - and the moronic Greens - who seem to be opposed to any form of security measure on civil liberty grounds - but we should be extremely satisfied that our defences sprang into action quickly. Had Haneef been part of an attack plan here it would certainly have been thwarted.
It seems likely that the doctor just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time - and have an unfortunate family connection. If further investigations check out then we owe him an apology - and it would be reasonable to expect that we make good on some of the losses he has suffered.
The search of his flat made it uninhabitable. Because he was in detention he earned no salary - and no rent was paid. The Landlord has since cleared the flat of his belongings and it will need painting and repair to restore it to it's previous condition.
The Commonwealth should pick up the tab for this - and pay compensation for loss or damage to his property. It would be nice to offer him wages lost while in detention but this is not a criteria offered citizens on remand - but this is an unusual case and requires special consideration.
Then there is the matter of the cancelled visa. It will be interesting to see if Haneef wishes to continue working in Australia - and if the hospitals involved will still require his services.
When the investigation is finalised - and if he is fully cleared - besides an apology steps should be taken to remove the stain associated with his name and restore his status !

The impossible traffic mix.

When cycleways were first thought of they were a means of getting people out of cars and having them cycle to work. The rewards were many. Improved health because of the exercise involved. Less pollution because of fewer cars on the road - and the biggest plus of all - added road safety by separating cars and cycles on public roads.
But then political correctness got in the act. They were called " cycleways " but the authorities had a change of heart and decided they were for all the people - not just those riding bicycles.
And so today we have the situation that is causing cyclists to avoid these so-called cycleways and going back to dodging traffic on the nation's roads because of the congestion that makes them a greater hazard.
An amazing plethora of citizenry is now to be found parading the city cycleways - ranging from power walkers, mum's pushing strollers to mum's jogging with strollers, people exercising their dogs, the elderly using walking frames, groups out for a stroll in the sun, kids on skateboards and other kids on roller blades - all of which seem to deeply resent anybody having the temerity to want to ride a bicycle on these strips of concrete.
Cyclists get yelled at because other users see them as a safety hazard and demand that they ride at walking pace, ring a bell as they approach - and give right of way to the walkers.
From the cyclists point of view these are no longer speedy ways to get to and from work. Groups of people hog the concrete and decline to make way for riders - and dogs on a leash are little more than a death trap where cycles are concerned.
Perhaps the answer is to return cycleways to the purpose for which they were designed. After all, the nation has a system of walking trails that are specifically designed for pedestrians to use for exercise - be it walking or pushing a stroller - and are ideal for dog walking.
They are called foot paths !

The bail act.

It is clear that the bail act is a mystery to most people. There has been considerable anger that a twenty-five year old man has been freed on bail despite being charged with throwing a rock at a car which critically injured a twenty-two year old female passenger.
The government counters with the explanation that bail is not a form of punishment. The accused has the presumption of innocence - until convicted in a court.
Strangely, that gets turned on it's ear when bail is refused and an accused person - still rightfully claiming innocence until proved guilty - is placed on remand - and incarcerated in a gaol - locked in a cell - subjected to gaol discipline and given gaol food to eat - strip searched before and after each visit by friends and legal council - and deprived of all normal forms of family and social life.
So - why the distinction between those given bail - and those on remand ?
That is what mystifies most people. Bail should be denied if the alleged crime is so serious that there is a risk of the accused fleeing the jurisdiction of the court - or if there is reason to believe that further serious crime may be committed while on bail.
That's where reality slots in. We read in the papers of offenders on bail failing to appear in court and being rearrested for further crime - and then being given more bail.
We also read of criminals on serious charges - including murder - fleeing the country while on bail and taking up residence in countries where no extradition rights apply.
It seems that getting bail is a " luck lottery ". First, it helps if your legal council can get you before a magistrate with a serendipity attitude to life. It also helps if the gaol system is full to bursting and the judiciary are under pressure from the government to ease the pressure.
In fact, there is no rhyme or reason to the outcome of bail applications - and until the conditions for setting bail are set in clearly understandable criteria they will remain a joke in the eyes of the public !

Name and shame.

At long last the New South Wales government has adopted the practice of " name and shame " traders who rip off the public.
The first victim was a liquor retailer selling what was described as " a fine 40 percent by volume Scotch Whisky ". The only problem was that it wasn't Scotch - and it wasn't 40 percent. In addition to being named and shamed - there will also be the matter of a thousand dollar fine.
Hopefully this new approach will extend to food retailers who are found to have low health standards when preparing food. In the past, only those who managed to create a Salmonella outbreak got that treatment. The public has the right to expect that food offered for sale in a shop or restaurant will be prepared, stored and served under hygienic conditions.
Then there is the area of second hand goods - and that includes used car yards. From time to time the public learns of shady merchants winding back car odometers or selling re-birthed vehicles. The whole purpose of " name and shame " is to expose the shonks - and put them out of business.
The field for exposing bad practice is wide and all embracing. What about the real estate agents who misrepresent properties. In many cases prospective buyers spend their hard earned money prior to auctions getting property reports - only to find that the selling price is way above the level they have been led to believe.
Then there are the " bad tenant " embargoes - where vindictive and in some cases agents who are hopeless in keeping up to date book work - leave a family unable to rent because of a spurious black mark against their name.
" Name and shame " is a good policy that will go a long way towards improving business practices - provided vested interests do not succeed in having certain categories of trading excluded from it's reach.

Fanatical " tree huggers " !

Yesterday nearly two hundred people broke the law and demonstrated to try and stop Roads and Traffic Authority ( RTA ) work crews from making a notorious stretch of road safe.
This eight hundred metre section had an appalling crash history and death record because trees encroached on either side of the roadway. It was littered with the tokens grieving relatives leave to remind others that a death occurred at this spot.
There were arrests - but eventually sanity prevailed and trees were removed to make this section of road safer for the motoring public.
In recent years a " tree huggers " mentality has arisen that demands that no tree be cut down - nomatter what the circumstances or what danger it imposes.
To some extent this is connected with global warming. Trees are this planet's lungs and the more trees we have the more carbon dioxide is removed. Unfortunately, in some people's minds the saving of trees takes on an irrational momentum.
Home owners found it almost impossible to get council clearance to remove dangerous trees - until a spate of deaths from trees felled by storms resulted in litigation and damages against municipal authorities.
Suddenly, there was a change of heart. Now councils almost rush to sign a tree removal order to avoid possible court action.
The RTA action in clearing trees from a dangerous section of road in the southern highlands highlights the balance between the need for trees and the risk to human life. The number of people killed annually when cars run off a road and hit a tree can be sharply reduced should the RTA adopt a policy of a mandatory buffer zone between road carriageways and the nearest line of trees.
There was no problem in the horse and cart era - but as the motor car continued to evolve two things happened. The number of cars climbed astronomically - and the speed at which they travel increased.
Common sense dictates that where the life of a human or the life of a tree can not co-exist - loser has to be the tree. The tree huggers who can not get this point live in la-la land !

Artist's reward.

The composer, band and singers who delight us with music are entitled to a monetary reward every time that music is played. The Copyright Tribunal is the body empowered to set the rules and collect that money for distribution to them.
A row is developing over the fees to be charged at live music gigs in clubs and pubs.In some cases these bands and artists perform their own compositions, but the evening is usually a medley of popular music - and from the first of August the Copyright Tribunal has decreed that the charge for performing copyright material will increase from seven cents per patron - to a whopping One dollar and five cents.
Few would disagree that the people who originate the music we love are entitled to a reward for their work, but there will be a downside to this fee increase.
Having to charge an extra dollar per patron will cause some clubs and pubs to abandon live music and convert the performance area into an extra gaming venue complete with poker machines.
If this happens, the losers will be the emerging bands and artists striving to make their name in the entertainment world by way of gaining popularity at such live music gigs.
The imposition seems to be heavy handed and a " one size fits all " approach. There is a vast difference between a major concert where an audience numbered in the thousands gathers to hear a world famous artist perform - and a gig featuring a struggling new face performing to a hundred or so.
Maybe the Copyright Tribunal needs to put a floor which retains that seven cents a patron on gigs that attract an audience of only a hundred or so - and thus preserve the talent pool that emerges from such events.
A fable comes to mind - and it concerns killing a goose that laid golden eggs !

A police state ?

A bill will shortly go before the New South Wales parliament to increase police powers to demand a DNA sample from any person arrested - even if the cause of that arrest is trivial.
This bill will cause controversy from both sides of the law and order debate.
The civil liberties people will see it as another step towards a " police state " in which the citizenry are under the thumb of the authorities - and the collection of DNA is part of establishing a data base which includes all citizens.
The " law and order " people would prefer a system when the DNA of all babies was collected and recorded at birth - and all visitors to this country - whether migrants or visitors - were required to have their DNA recorded as a condition of entry.
There is no doubt that a universal DNA base would have merit. There would be no more unidentified murder victims. Rape cases would almost automatically be solved. Crime would fall dramatically across all segments - and maybe as a result we would become a safer and more pleasant society in which to live.
But - there would be a downside. If the police can collect DNA on what would legally become a whim - then we lose that important state of individuality that we cherish.
There is no doubt that a citizen can be arrested at the whim of a police officer. The oldest gag in the book is " on suspicion of having committed a crime ". The DNA is then collected - and the case proceeds no further - or is tossed out of court for lack of evidence.
The biggest problem with increasing police powers is the incremental use that occurs over a period of time. As the situation now stands a citizen can be arrested for a minor offence such as " Jay walking ", but if that leads to an appearance before a court - that is the end of the matter.
If such a minor arrest leads to a DNA record going to the archives then that person may be charged with past crimes committed - and with the DNA forever on file - with any crime in the distant future.
The other side of the coin is the ease with which an innocent person can be framed for a crime by his or her DNA being maliciously left at the crime scene.
This bill is being considered as another weapon in the fight against terrorism.No doubt it will pass in one form or another - but hopefully not before a meaningful debate on all the implications.
Otherwise - we may be heading for that dreaded " police state " where all forms of power are denied to the individual !

Dodgy game show winners !

The BBC is in the news again - for all the wrong reasons. It seems that the winning contestant on some game shows has been decided well in advance and contrived either by way of being secretly slipped the answers to the questions asked - or where winning is by viewer phone-in - by deliberately fudging the numbers.
Game shows are all about entertainment - and show organizers can achieve better ratings results by grooming a chosen contestant to appeal to the public.
As a result, many people wonder about Australian media content.
Game shows and contests are big business, but if subjected to analytical scrutiny some surprising findings show out.
Take the shows that invite the public to pick up the phone and vote to either retain - or evict - a contestant. The small print tells you that a call or an SMS will cost a nominated sum - usually about 50 c. A normal local phone call costs between 15 c to 20 c, depending on the call plan you have with your supplier.
So - what happens to that extra charge to register your vote ? Presumably it goes to the show organizers - so it is not really free to air television. You - the viewer - are actually funding the show you are watching.
In the case of the BBC it seems that where a reward is promised to one of those phoning in the announced winner may be a complete fake. Lets face it ! Suppose the presumed winner is a person you have never heard of from a town in another state which you have never visited - how would you know whether that was true or false ?
The entertainment industry has suffered many revelations that soured public opinion. Remember the " cash for comment " fiasco where radio shock jocks were being paid to polish the image of companies they had previously derided ?
As a result, when those same stars made future commendations the cynical comment
was " I wonder how much they were paid to say that ? ".
Maybe a similar line of thinking will now apply to game shows !

Crime and punishment.

It is doubtful if the offender and the offended will ever agree on what is just punishment for a crime committed, but a case in the local court illustrates the disparity in outcomes.
A twenty-six year old male engaged a cab to take him from a nightclub to his home in a nearby suburb. This young man was undoubtedly drunk from the amount of alcohol he freely admitted drinking.
At the termination of the journey he attacked the middle aged cabbie, resulting in an ambulance being called and the injured man taken to hospital. The injuries required fifteen stitches to his face and head, follow-up specialist attention for a shoulder injury - and fifteen days off work while he recovered from the attack.
The matter went to court - and the magistrate handed down a $ 1,000 fine.
That amounted to slightly less than two weeks pay for the offender.
The cabbie was not so lucky. He earned no income during the fifteen days he was off work, but he was still liable to pay for the rent on his cab during that time. He received an ambulance bill of $ 237 and there will be ongoing medical bills for specialist treatment to his shoulder injury.
The court simply shrugged it's shoulders - and ignored his financial plight !
The cabbie may pursue the matter through litigation in the civil courts, but that will be a long and tedious business which will cost legal fees - and more time off from earning a living while he attends court.
Wouldn't it be simpler if the initial court hearing dealing with the attack took into account the financial ramifications of that event - and made an on the spot compensation award ?
There is no justice in a court system that simply rewards the state government's coffers with a fat fine - and ignores the financial loss imposed on the victim.
The court system is supposed to dispense justice. It clearly does not do so in many such cases - and to achieve that the politicians need to bring the law into the twenty-first century.
There are no indications that this will happen - either now or at any time in the future !

This changing car market.

News that Ford intends to close it's Geelong engine plant in 2010 with the loss of six hundred jobs illustrates the changes that have occurred in the Australian car market.
This Ford plant produced the in-line six cylinder engine that powered the Ford Falcon - which, along with the Holden Commodore - used to dominate the family car market in this country. Conventional wisdom had it that these two cars would not only dominate the commercial market of company cars and taxi fleets - but also the cars Mum and Dad bought to accommodate the family needs.
Things have changed - and the sharp increase in petrol prices have seen a shift down to the four cylinder compact car for those concerned with economy - and a surprising shift up market by former Holden/Falcon buyers to big SUV vehicles as people movers.
More change is on the way. European car makers have developed the diesel engine to the point that it is now giving a good family car performance - and amazing economy.
Forecasting the future depends on a huge number of unknown factors. It is likely that the government will eventually legislate to make an ethanol mix compulsory and that the use of liquid auto-gas will continue to expand. We would be wise to embrace the diesel engine because in the event of a future oil shock this country is capable of producing a bio-diesel fuel to cushion cost/supply problems.
It is also time that local car manufacturers had a long, hard look at introducing an Australian made compact car to service the trend that has clearly emerged. If the day of the big six is coming to an end, then there needs to be a locally made replacement to both preserve our balance of payments - and at the same time retain jobs in the Australian car manufacturing industry.

The BBC blunders !

Red faces at that paragon of British virtue - the BBC. It seems that somebody thought it would lift the ratings by running a story about Queen Liz having a hissy fit and stalking off the stage when a producer asked her to dump her tiara. It seems that the whole affair was a non event - but it certainly damaged the image of the BBC in British eyes.
Australians are mostly mystified at the relationship between the BBC and the British public. Decades ago there was the war between the British government and commercial radio when Whitehall decided that the only radio British listeners would hear would be the state controlled BBC.
As a result, commercial radio had to " go pirate " and so came the era of " Radio Caroline ", a station on a ship broadcasting from outside the twelve mile limit and another station installed on a world war 11 radar platform off the coast.
The government tried to jam the signals, but the British public were enchanted at bright, modern music in contrast to the dirges favoured by the BBC - and in the end the government admitted defeat and now commercial and BBC share the airwaves in Britain.
Then there is the matter of radio and TV listeners licenses. We had them here at one time - with detector vans roaming the streets looking for unlicensed listeners - but Australia rebelled and such licenses have long been a thing of the past in this country.
Of course we still have a British flavour in the offerings of our ABC. Expatriate Poms living here could think they were still in the old country when they tune in to " The Bill " and other typical English fare - but if they want a touch of the continent - or the rest of the world for that matter - they would be wise to try SBS.
Occasionally they might find a programme in English - and the standards which include full frontal nudity and unmentionable subjects are a fresh change from the " Americanization " which pervades our commercial channels.
It seems the world is as close as the buttons on our remote controls !

Doctor safety !

The Federal government solved the problem of what to do with a foreign doctor suspected of having terrorist involvement by dumping him into the Villawood Detention centre.
Doctor Mohamed Haneef had spent twelve days in police custody and the investigators were running out of time options. The government simply revoked his 457 visa on " character grounds ". He will now stay on secured premises until the investigation is complete.
The idea of terrorism infiltrating our medical system represents a new and frightening danger, but it also raises the question as to why are we relying on foreign trained doctors to run our hospitals ?
Surely we are depriving emerging countries of their best people if we are poaching doctors rather than training our own ?
It is therefore a step in the right direction to see that moves are under way to rectify our doctor shortage. For the first time, the University of Wollongong is operating a school of medicine - and presently eighty first year medical students are in training. By the third year, these numbers will have increased to two hundred and forty students.
Hopefully, a similar situation will emerge in other Australian universities with the aim of being totally self sufficient in the medical field - with the further hope that this country may be an exporter of medical expertise.
It must be disheartening to countries like India to lose valuable trained medical personell simply because they can earn salaries undreamed of in their home country - but available in the developed world.
If we train our own, not only do we reduce the terrorism threat but we help the developing world by keeping their trainees where they belong - within their own medical systems !

Those terrorist charges !

There is something disturbing about the charges levied against Doctor Mohamed Haneef. After twelve days of imprisonment and intensive investigation he is charged with " Recklessly providing his mobile phone SIM card to terrorist suspects Sabeel and Kafeel Ahmed, his second cousins ".
The word " recklessly " hits a sour note. He is not charged with " maliciously " or " vindictively " allowing his SIM card to be used to trigger a bomb. In fact there is no mention of what part this SIM card played in the UK bombing attempt - but " recklessly " suggests more a degree of carelessness than evil intent.
The main suggestion of guilt seems to be the fact that he is related to the two attempted bombers and shared a house with them at one stage in London. Apart from that, the suggestion of guilt seems tenuous.
He attempted to flee to India on a one way ticket. Considering that his wife had just had a child such a visit would not be exceptional - and in these days of the Internet buying a return fare on the spot market would make fiscal sense.
Giving a relative a SIM card prior to leaving a foreign country ? Not a significant event if he was discontinuing a phone contract which would be hard to manage long distance and intending to obtain a new mobile phone in Australia.
To many people the charge seems to be one designed to serve several purposes.
After twelve days questioning there is a chance that a magistrate may be having second thoughts about granting a further extension. A " holding " charge eliminates this problem.
There may also be matters that have surfaced as a result of the investigation that the security people do not wish to reveal in a court appearance for fear of alerting other " sleeper " cells. In such a case, any sort of charge would suffice to keep the matter under wraps.
Hopefully, this entire matter will get a public airing and if Haneef is guilty of assisting terrorism he deserves whatever sentence is handed down.
But if he is innocent - and this charge is purely to suggest to the public that the security people are gung-ho and on the ball - then a grave miscarriage has occurred.
Haneef is finished as a doctor in this country. There is no chance of returning to his job as a registrar at the Gold Coast hospital if he is released. He will forever be known as " that terrorist bloke " by the Australian public - and few would feel comfortable under his care.
The investigation has a long way to go - but let us hope that it will be fair and honest - and that we will be told the truth when it finally ends !

The " safety " myth.

Many drivers will get an unpleasant surprise the next time they go to renew their compulsory third party " Greenslip " policy. If they have managed to accrue demerit points during the past year - the price asked will jump sharply. They will be hit with another " demerit " - a hit in the pocket for being classed an " unsafe driver ".
The crazy thing is that those demerit points can be earned for something as innocuous as pausing briefly on a bus stop to set down or pick up a passenger.
When demerit points were first introduced the aim was to discourage the rich from unsafe driving because they could afford to pay the fines. Rich or poor stood the same chance of losing their license for unsafe driving when such conduct earned demerit points.
But - politics got into the act. Politicians learned that they could earn brownie points with the voters by appearing to be leading a crackdown on unsafe driving. First came a doubling of demerit points on long weekends and other public holidays. Then came adding to the offences that would attract demerit points - until driving a car became something akin to negotiating a minefield.
Of course there is a downside to just about any piece of legislation that passes through the parliament. Have you noticed the sharp increase in unlicensed drivers in recent times ? For many people - and specially those living in Sydney's western suburbs - driving a car is almost the only way of getting the kids to school or the breadwinner to work. Take that license away - and you create a desperate citizen.
The whole idea of demerit points was to create a safer driving situation - and in most cases that was to control speeding. Demerit points have become a monster and now would be a good time for a complete review of the system to instill a little sanity. At the moment - demerit points are creating a reverse situation !

Union " bully boy " tactics.

Another battle in the never ending war between the unions and the rest of the world. Three organizers of the notoriously militant Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy union ( CFMEU ) were found guilty in the Federal court of breaches of the Trade Practices Act and the Workplace Relations act in September and October of 2003.
These organizers tried to intimidate a building company by insisting that all workers on the site must be members of a union. The demand was backed up with the threat that unless this was agreed the builder could expect " industrial action and general disruption ".
The builder stood his ground - and as a result the site was shut down on two occasions when one of the organisers parked his car to block site access.
The CFMEW disputes this claim and denies that it tried to make the site a " closed shop ". It further claims that the two shut downs were legitimate actions as a result of a safety issue.
The unions have never accepted the law that makes membership of a union a matter of choice for each individual. There have been countless cases of union muscle being invoked to force a " closed shop " union coverage of work sites - and to enforce this some draconian action has been used in past disputes. This has included a mass walkout in the middle of a concrete pour - often resulting in hundreds of thousands of dollars damages and massive delays to completion dates.
Building companies have good reason to fear a union sabotage campaign and in the past some old and highly respected contracting companies have been forced into bankruptcy by such tactics.
Where we go from here depends heavily on how the courts react when it comes to punishment. Should they impose a slap on the wrist the unions will be encouraged to dish out more of the same.
Should they come down heavily the unions will probably react by increasing their advertising campaign to try and tip the Federal government out of office and install Kevin Rudd as prime minister.
Union action at the present time is a two edged sword. Rudd is desperately trying to coax the unions to be peaceful prior to this election because he knows many people fear that a Labor government would be controlled by the unions,
If the unions go on the rampage that could be the welcome news that John Howard prays for !

The water question ?

Most people are convinced that the drought is over. Warragamba dam is filling nicely - and later this month it is expected to reach sixty percent capacity. Other smaller dams are full and overflowing.
This raises the question of what to do about water restrictions !
It is unlikely that we would - or should - go back to totally unrestricted use of water, given that two factors are converging on this country. Our population is steadily increasing - and we are entering a hotter world which is likely to result in less rainfall, in the future.
Half a century ago water was something that barely entered the average person's mind. It was an era when lawn sprinklers ran day and night in summer and excess water bills were something that only concerned industrial plants.
We have come a long way since then. People are now water conscious and a sustained economy campaign has seen low-flow shower heads in general use, dual flush toilets in most homes and washing machines labelled according to their water economy.
But - people expect some relief from draconian water restrictions. How this can be achieved will be an interesting exercise by the water management people. To be successful the new rules will need to be reasonable. There will need to be give and take if such a regime is to achieve wide acceptance.
Most will agree that hosing down paths and driveways is an unacceptable waste, but at the same time they will want the right to wash their cars restored. This is where compromise can play a part. Leaving a hose running while cleaning a car is wasteful. Using a spray head with trigger control is not.
Just as advertising induced people to change their shower heads and install dual flush toilets the right approach will get a positive result from water users - and compliance with reasonable restrictions.
The trick is to get the bureaucrats to think positively - and more importantly - to gauge their information sheets in language the public can understand and respond to.
Unfortunately much information from government is as incomprehensible as the instructions for operating a video recorder. Hopefully, we may now be entering the " information age ".

Desecration of war memorials.

Many people are outraged at the senseless desecration of war memorials which has been happening with increasing regularity in recent times. To some extent, this can be attributed to opposition to our involvement in the Iraq war. Some people see a relationship between a memorial to past dead and the present fighting - and attack cenotaphs because they consider them a monument to war.
The perpetrators seem to be a mixed bunch - and in one recent incident the attack was carried out by a group of teenage girls. In another, a group of teenagers of Turkish descent seemed intent of continuing the 1914-18 war. Quite often the damage has nothing to do with opposition to war or the feelings of ethnic members of our community - but is purely the drunken rampage of bored young people with nothing better to do with their time.
Unfortunately war memorials are sitting ducks for such damage. They are usually in town centres which are deserted at night - and when the pubs close and disgorge large numbers of young people it only takes a suggestion from a gang leader to set off the group mentality that takes control.
Penalties have been increased - and it seems certain that they will be increased again - but to little effect. Very few of these incidents would occur by way of a group of sane young people sitting down and discussing the coming nights activities soberly - and deciding to go and damage a war memorial.
It becomes a spur of the moment thing - usually fuelled by alcohol. There is no answer - but we can only hope that when these young people eventually grow up they will be ashamed to remember the stupidity of their actions !

The housing crisis.

There is no doubt that we have a housing crisis. On the one hand, many simply can not afford to buy a home because their income is insufficient to service the mortgage that would be necessary at today's prices.
On the other hand, rents have increased sharply and we now have many families unable to find adequate rental accommodation at the prices offering.
There are two schools of thought on the solution needed.
One is to release more land - but there are pros and cons. New housing estates need infrastructure such as roads, schools, hospitals and shopping centres. This is costly and the levees needed to provide them push up land prices - and as a result new homes built there. There is also the problem of sprawl - and the roads and transport structure needed to service such new suburbs.
The second school of thought suggests redeveloping existing suburbs - but that too has pros and cons. Redevelopment takes advantage of existing facilities such as roads, public transport, sewer, power and phone lines. Hooking up to existing services is obviously much cheaper than creating new ones - but the down side is that such development is only economical if it involves soaring towers containing units. These may be suitable for young unmarrieds and the aged - but not for families with children.
The need is for a mix of units and conventional housing - with a yard for children to play in. Common sense suggests that the best course of action is a blend of the two - but whatever decisions are finally made there is one factor that will be unchanged. The time of cheap housing is well and truly over !

Double whammy !

The collapse of investment companies Westpoint, Fincorp, Australian Capital Reserve - and now Bridgecorp has left many self funded retirees virtual paupers - but they will get no joy when they attend Cenrelink and apply for a pension.
The bureaucracy moves in mysterious ways and the logic of it's thinking follows no known formulae. As far as Centrelink is concerned - they have no money problem !
According to the thinking of the Mandarins - just because a firm has gone into receivership does not mean that investor's equity is lost. That will only occur when the receiver finally issues a finding - and with a company as big and complex as some of those involved - that will take at least two years - and probably longer.
This line of thinking also ignores the reality that during the review period no interest cheques will be forthcoming. Centrelink merely shrugs it's shoulders and chooses to ignore the reality of families left without money to pay for food, pay rates and utility bills - and virtually exist.
At best - it may grant a small, part pension.
It wouldn't take Einstein to figure out a solution to this dilemma - but then Einstein never worked for the public service.
All it would take would be for the legal people to draw up a document directing any money flow from a settlement - should the receivers manage to sell assets and pay a dividend of a few cents in the dollar - directly to Centrelink.
Centrelink would then be protected from the consequences of granting the former self funded retiree a pension.
Should there be no dividend from the receiver, then the pension would be fully justified.
Should there be some sort of dividend, that would be adjusted against the pension and any surplus owing refunded to the retiree.
Such would be a common sense solution - but - when did common sense play a part in the decisions of government agencies ?

Another corporate crash !

Once again a high flying corporate finance group has gone into receivership - leaving behind a litany of ruined retirees. New Zealand based Bridgecorp Property Group has joined Westpoint, Fincorp and Australian Capital Reserve in laying waste to the savings of mostly self funded retirees.
There is a common thread to these disasters. The investment companies are formed to finance high yield construction projects. They seeks investment not by offering a prospectus to financial advisers but by heavy advertising on TV and in the media - such as pensioner magazines - aimed at the retired.
Invariably the offer is of interest well above that offered by the banks and the conservative investment institutions. Bridgecorp attracted four hundred and thirty million dollars by offering interest of 11.9% per annum.
This return is possible - provided the market continues to expand, but at the first hint of trouble the scene is set for disaster. This does not stop the principals from continuing to draw astronomical salaries - and in the majority of cases these same people do not have substantial personal assets associated with the firms they manage.
Which raises a question ! Why does the Australian Securities and Investments Commission ( ASIC ) - which is supposed to monitor the integrity of investment companies - sit on it's hands and allow these disasters to happen with monotonous regularity ?
ASIC has the power to closely monitor the daily activities of such companies and it has the business experience to become aware when one is entering troubled waters. The purpose of ASIC is to guide such a company towards a safer business strategy - and to sound a warning to alert the investing community that all is not well.
Critics contend that if ASIC interferes then such a warning would shut down further investment and cause an immediate corporate collapse. Surely that would be better than allowing an ailing company to continue to heavily advertise - and draw in an even greater number of people to lose their savings ?
Now is the time for the government to have a long, hard look at the operations of ASIC and other corporate regulators with a view to providing greater powers - if these are deemed necessary - to stop investment companies operating way outside the genuine norms of business.
For a start, it would be a good idea to increase the personal responsibility of those who instigate and manage such firms so that a charge of " irresponsible management practice " could result in a substantial custodial sentence. It is a well known maxim of business that " Let the buyer beware ". Perhaps it is time for a new maxim for those managing such institutions. " Be ethical and prudent - or be prepared to lose your freedom ! "

Parking meter greed !

Over half a century ago an American invention - the parking meter - came to Australia. At the time, it sounded like a good idea. Cars were not as numerous in those days and for a few pennies the meters would regulate parking to make kerbside space a shared commodity for all users.
That outlook has fallen by the wayside with the coming of the twenty-first century.
Councils have realised that they have within their grasp a source of revenue that increases faster than the rates levied on homes. To some councils, parking meters have become a milch cow and they have employed a veritable army of zealous rangers to inflict fines and keep the cash flowing.
The figures are staggering. The city of Sydney made $ 58 million from parking meter revenue and fines last year, Waverley council netted $ 17 million and North Sydney $ 9 million.
But, there have been consequences. Some councils have been so aggressive that they have killed the goose that laid the golden eggs. Prime shopping locations have become a desert of boarded up shops when customers have buoy cotted shopping there because of mercenary practices. Now there are desperate plans to reintroduce limited free parking to try and rejuvenate business houses.
One of the biggest losers has been the family trip to the beach. Councils in beach suburbs have been merciless in gouging profits from parking meters and in some cases meters come on line from as early as seven in the morning.
The anti-car lobby suggests beachgoers use public transport, but this ignores the fact that most of western Sydney lacks adequate public transport facilities - and to take a young family - with picnic needs and water toys - on a multi-transport trip to the beach is little short of insanity.
Somewhere there must be a dividing line between the needs of the public to shop and enjoy a dip at the beach - and the needs of councils to regulate parking and make facilities available to all.
Unfortunately those needs have been pushed firmly into the background - and the prime concern of most councils now is revenue raising.
Sydney used to be a fun city ! A destination envied by our cousins in the colder part of this continent. It seems that the cold hearts and grasping talons of councils are fast obliterating that image and making this a city exclusively for the wealthy !

Prohibition !

The Federal government's decision to impose a six month alcohol ban on Aboriginal communities within the Northern Territory raises some interesting questions on the power of governments to regulate our lives.
The world's biggest imposition of state control occurred on October 28, 1919 when the United States congress passed the Volstead Act, bringing an era of prohibition - and with it an era of uncontrolled lawlessness as crime bosses and the public ignored this act.
In Australia we have had times of partial prohibition. In many states the law prohibited the sale or consumption of alcohol past six o'clock in the evening, leading to what became known as " the six o'clock swill ".
There were - and still are - restrictions on the age at which alcohol can be consumed. For many decades this was twenty-one. Conscription and the Vietnam war brought a rebellion by young people. If it was legal to conscript eighteen year olds and send them to war - then why was an eighteen year old considered to be too young and immature to be allowed to drink alcohol or vote for the government of their choice ? The age for both was reduced to eighteen !
Prohibition is not restricted to alcohol. The governments of the states prohibit the possession or use of various drugs including marijuana, cocaine and heroin.
These laws are not uniform and in the case of marijuana the penalties vary from a virtual slap on the wrist to a hefty term of imprisonment.
Few would deny that alcohol has become a scourge of the Aboriginal community and the source of much violence and misery - and yet once again the innocent are being punished along with the guilty.
Australians love their beer - and it is part of the lifestyle of many to enjoy a well earned beer after a hard days work. It seems that the powers that be are more and more intruding into our ranges of choice.
It is no longer legal or socially responsible to have a beer and drive a vehicle. We are increasingly being told when and where we can smoke a cigarette - which is still a perfectly legal product - and now whole communities in the Northern Territory will be " dry " by imposition of new laws.
Sadly - it seems that the concept of being responsible for our own actions is fast giving way to control by " big brother " !

Return of the SP bookmaker ?

Decades ago the only option for a punter wanting to legally have a bet on a horse was to attend a race meeting and bet with a bookie. There was no off-course betting permitted. This offered a lucrative trade for what became known as the " SP Bookie " - a freelance operator who took bets on races and offered starting price odds. Of course, this was totally illegal - but it was rare to find a pub or a club on a Saturday that did not have an SP Bookie operating in a quiet corner - and attracting a steady stream of customers.
The government objected because these people were part of " the black economy " and paid no tax. From time to time the police would conduct raids - but mysteriously there always seemed to be lesser people in charge - and the next week the SP bookie was back offering business as usual. Money changed hands to protect this lucrative trade and eventually the government decided it would be impossible to eradicate SP bookmaking by force.
So - they adopted the maxim - " If you can't beat them - join them "!
They formed the TAB - a legal off course betting organization that set up TAB betting shops in most suburbs - and produced a river of tax money for the state treasury.
The TAB was private enterprise owned by shareholders and some years later it got greedy. It found that it could reduce costs by closing TAB suburban agencies and transferring the business to clubs and pubs. These organizations welcomed facilities on their premises because it attracted new customers and improved general profits.
Now we are seeing another re-think. The TAB is reducing the number of outlets in clubs and pubs based on turnover. The idea seems to be to reduce costs by eliminating the gaming machine allocation to only large turnover sites.
There have been vigorous protests. The TAB facilities for smaller pubs and clubs have become an integral source of custom. They may not make much in the way of income, but they support beer and food sales and keep the establishment profitable.
If the move to disenfranchise smaller pubs and clubs goes unchecked there is a very real liklihood that we may see a return of the SP bookie.
Withdraw betting facilities and you open the door for the entrepreneur to step in and tap into the law of supply and demand - and as the government realised decades ago - law enforcement is no match for a popular service that is prepared to grease palms to stay in business.

The law of the sea.

The Pasha Bulker is no longer a tourist attraction on Nobby's beach, Newcastle. It took the efforts of three tugs, a salvage crew and a lot of good luck to drag it off the sand and into deep water - at a cost of many million dollars.
Many wonder how this beaching happened. The weather authorities were aware of the approaching storm and all shipping was warned to head out to sea to prevent such an event. Several ships ignored that warning and only narrowly escaped the fate of the Pasha Bulker.
What people fail to realise is the incredible power invested in a ship's captain. This has remained undiluted down the centuries from the early days when captains of sailing ships sailed unchartered seas in search of new lands to claim in the name of their sovereign. This was high risk with the chance of scurvy, shipwreck with no hope of returning home - and pirates. Often these forays lasted months and even years - and as a result the captains in command assumed the authority of a king or emperor. It was their sole discretion to impose justice on the high seas and in that role they had the power to conduct a marriage ceremony - and sentence a pirate to be hanged on the yardarm if captured.
This legendary power remains today, and as a consequence the warning to put to sea to avoid a storm is just that - a warning. Not a command. The decision as to what action will be taken remains solely with the ship's captain - but with it also goes the consequences of error.
In the case of the Pasha Bulker the retribution of the ship's owners will probably bring about the end of his command. Whatever the circumstances - and nomatter who else is involved - the buck stops with the captain.
That was illustrated recently when a British warship was holed on a well charted reef near Lord Howe island. The captain was ashore at the time - but the event led to his court martial and loss of further command.
It is said that being a ship's captain is a lonely command - and he sails upon a cruel sea. Many will review the Pasha Bulker saga with that well known observation - " There but for the grace of God - goes I ".

The new terrorist threat - health !

The news that the recent attempted terrorist bombings in the United Kingdom were the work of a group of Muslim doctors adds a new dimension to jihad. It seems that the only saving grace that prevented mass slaughter was the incompetence of the bomb maker.
Up until this stage the general view of Muslim bombers ranged from brain washed youths sucked into a culture of mayhem by fundamentalist preachers or poorly educated labourers seduced by the glory of martyrdom - and the rewards promised in paradise for holy warriors.
It seems inconceivable that Muslims who have the intelligence and integrity to train and become doctors would abandon the Hippocratic oath and accept that it is Allah's will that they inflict mass slaughter on those who are not of their faith.
What is more chilling is the thought that doctors of that persuasion may be working in Australian hospitals - as evidenced by the arrest of one doctor recruited from the UK on a 457 visa and working at a Gold Coast hospital - and another with a similar background being questioned by ASIO.
The idea of doctors being inducted into the ranks of jihadists opens a new dimension. Our past visions of terrorism have revolved around those wearing explosive vests detonating themselves in public places to sinister, bearded men loading vehicles with explosives and placing them where they will inflict the most casualties.
Doctors with murder on their minds are something else again. They have the opportunity to introduce diseases that range from a recently discovered form of tuberculosis - that resists all known treatment - to scourges such as Ebola - which has a diabolical rate of infection.
If terrorist groups such as al Qaeda are recruiting with advanced terrorism in mind then we have a problem that needs immediate attention. Unfortunately there is no way of accurately separating jihadists from the majority law abiding Muslims so the logical outcome will be a resistance by most hospital boards to consider any Muslim doctor - or any doctor who trained in a Muslim country - for appointment to a position in an Australian hospital.
This will be seen as discrimination by many Muslims - and Australia will be the poorer for losing the services of the many Muslim doctors who serve us so well within our medical system - but the risk is simply too great not to err on the side of caution.

Coles stays Australian.

A huge sigh of relief across Australia with the news that Wesfarmers has launched what appears to be a successful bid for the troubled Coles group of companies. Coles is the second biggest employer of people in Australia and it's range of interests is spread across the entire trading spectrum. It is also the second biggest grocery chain in the country - and has a huge impact on petrol sales.
Coles appeared to have lost focus in recent years. There was a perception that it had lost it's way and in the business jungle this made it susceptible to the attention of predators.
It was courted by an American equity company, known for trimming the fat from acquisitions - making them highly profitable - and then on-selling to a third party at a hefty premium. Shudders ran through the business community at a rumour that the end party interested in acquiring the Coles group was the giant American juggernaut - Wal Mart.
Wal Mart is probably the most efficient marketing organization in the world. Unfortunately, everywhere it sets up business it creates a surrounding desert as small business in competition is driven to bankruptcy. Wal Mart is into every form of business under the one roof - and there simply isn't room for anything from a hairdresser to a coffee shop to successfully compete.
The other negative is that if Wal Mart had swallowed Coles then the profits would not have remained in Australia - but would have flowed to America.
Wesfarmers is a much admired Australian institution. Little known in the eastern states until it's hardware chain - Bunnings - opened there and quickly dominated the market by way of savvy marketing and placing the right stores in the right places - it's $ 21 billion bid for Coles puts it in the major league.
Coles share price is currently at $ 16.12 while Wesfarmers is valued at $ 45.73.
There seems little doubt that a Wesfarmers takeover will rejuvenate Coles and promote the clash of titans with it's major competitor - Woolworths.
This is good news for the Australian public - and the profits will remain in this country !

Smokeless !

For nearly a quarter of the populations of New South Wales and Victoria today heralded a new era. It is no longer legal to light up a cigarette in any club or pub in those states.
The ban has been creeping into existence slowly. For the past year smoking has been restricted to a single area - and in most venues this has been associated with the TAB and gaming section. Now you can no longer sit at the bar, play a poker machine or have a flutter on the horses - and have a smoke at the same time.
The ban has been greeted with apprehension by most pub and club management with the expectation of a drop in trade - and therefore of profits.
Huge sums have been spent to provide an area where smokers can legally indulge. It took some time to get a definition of what constituted legal " open air " but in the end the definition became any area where twenty-five percent of the walls had no barrier. This definition aptly described any verandah - and that was what most venues settled on.
We are apt to see some strange sights. Those venues unable to adapt a smoking area will probably be likely to have a congregation of smokers in the street outside their front doors - having a few quick puffs before hurrying back to their poker machines of waiting ales.
The ban will probably influence a few to quit smoking and there will probably be a jump in bottle and can sales as some smokers relinquish licensed premises in favour of their own kitchen table.
In the short term there will be anguished complaints - and some will try and disregard the law - but six months down the track non smoking in clubs and pubs will be accepted as normal. Just as we no longer smoke in supermarkets, coffee shops, milk bars, banks - or doctor's waiting rooms - areas where in the long past communal ash trays were commonplace !

The dual-nationality cop-out !

During the early years of this country prospective new settlers were offered citizenship on the basis that they revoked allegiance to their country of birth.
Somewhere down the track this was softened. Dual nationality became an option and we now find this being taken up as a safety measure - a fall back situation in case something goes wrong with the other half of the equation.
Ten years ago many Hong Kong citizens were terrified at the prospect of the former Crown colony being handed back to China and coming under Communist rule. There was a rush of applicants - mainly wealthy property owners - to acquire Australian citizenship and the right to reside here.
Little changed in Hong Kong and the Communists honoured the " one country - two systems " arrangement. The fear abated - and the expected huge relocation to this country simply didn't happen.
Now there is a new avenue of Australian citizenship being used as a safety measure. Middle East citizens who temporarily move to Australia in order to gain citizenship - and then permanently move back to countries such as Lebanon - which is mired in civil war and terrorism.
What riles many people here is the moment something goes awry in their foreign homeland - civil war breaks out or they get arrested for supporting terrorism - they loudly claim to be Australians and demand that the Australian taxpayer fund a rescue effort to bring them home or provide consular support to get them out of prison.
Inevitably, when the danger passes - they revert to the foreign half of their citizenship and happily relocate back to their former country.
This is a cop-out that is being exploited with no gain for Australia. There is no shortage of refugees wanting to emigrate to Australia and we can pick and choose who we allow in to adopt our relaxed lifestyle.
Perhaps now would be a good time to discontinue dual-nationality as far as citizenship is concerned. If you want to come to this country and be an Australian
then say goodbye to your former life. If that is not acceptable - then do not bother to apply !