Inflation !

All levels of government constantly preach against the evils of inflation - and urge industry to exercise restraint and keep price increases to a minimum. It seems to be a case of " Do as I say - not do as I do ".

A litany of recent price increases are all associated with services provided by the government. Electricity is hiked miles above inflation, bus and train fares face a second big increase in just sixteen months - and just about every other fee and fine is showing an upwards trend.

Teachers in the TAFE system have called a strike - to protest at a nine percent increase in student's fess for the coming school year.

What an amazing example of creative thinking those who plan this price increase have shown. Unemployment generally is at a historic low but this is counter balanced by the highest youth unemployment in decades.

The country is desperately short of trades people - and yet the kids leaving school can't get a job - because they have no skills to offer.
So - what do we do ? We hike the cost of the very TAFE education that would provide those skills and for many - move it beyond their financial reach !

Governments throw subsidy money at all sorts of causes. Common sense would dictate that getting the kids into the workforce should be at the head of the list.
This is not the time to create further financial obstacles - but now would be a good time to completely abolish TAFE fees for a set period of time, expand the TAFE system to provide places for all who want to learn - and get the kids the skills they need to get a job and lift their self esteem.

The alternative is to leave them in the dole queue to settle into a life of idleness - and possibly crime - and become a lost generation !

Legal Eagles !

The legal profession has never been slow in maintaining high employment levels for it's practitioners. In the past half century the traditional avenues of opportunity have been shrinking.

In the 1970's the introduction of no-fault divorce and the family court saw a lucrative form of litigation wither and die. The family court was a lawyer free zone - and it's implementation also saw the demise of an army of private investigators who gathered evidence with lurid pictures snapped through bedroom windows. Suddenly divorce became an accepted separation without it's previous social stigma.

Personal damages litigation also faded from the legal scene with the introduction of " Green slip " mandatory insurance cover. No motor vehicle could be registered without this universal protection of those injured in an accident. It became an automatic process without the need for legal representation.

And so a new avenue opened. Lawyers began to advertise for the first time - inviting clients to consider suing for any number of reasons on a " no win - no fee " basis.
It sounded tempting. The prospect of a fat settlement without the disadvantage of paying a lawyer should the case fail. Few thought it through and realised that in a failed case there was the prospect of the court awarding the other party's costs to the claimant - and that those costs could run into a huge sum of money.

Now the flavour of the month is disputing wills. It seems that we have entered the age of a new social concience and the wishes of the deceased may safely be challenged. To this end, we now seem to have a number of judges who delight in playing Santa Claus with someone else's money !

The legal fraternity were once known for their conservative outlook. The winds of change have blown away that musty image and todays " Legal Eagles " have joined the entrepeneurs in aggressively touting for business and constantly reinventing themselves.

Prospective litigants should remember one never changing adage - Buyer beware !

The naysayers !

It seems that just about any proposal put before council will attract a mob of people intent on having the project refused.
This can range from something as simple as adding an upstairs to an existing cottage to building student accommodation to service our University.

The big issue at the moment is a plan to develop tourist lodges,a swimming pool and restaurants in Killalea state park near Shellharbour. The plan is for the facilities to be built by private enterprise on a fifty-two year lease - after which the development is returned to the state.

Killalea is iconic to surfers. It's two beaches are only accessible across farmland - which is now government owned - and this poses a problem for families with young children wishing to access it's beaches. It seems to be a case of denying the many to retain a privilege for the few !

Now the unions are getting into the act - and there have been suggestions that unless the government caves in the confrontation " will get physical ".

Everyone has a right to their opinion - and a right to express that opinion publicly and to be heard - but ultimately consent to developments must be in the hands of such governing factors as the elected state government and the local council.

If either the government or the council repeatedly goes against the wishes of the majority of it's citizens - retribution follows at the ballot box - and the people " throw the bums out " !

Anything less - by way of a physical confrontation - is simply anarchy !

The marketing mirage !

It is said that super salesmen can sell just about anything - including lawn mowers to Eskimos and surf board to Bedouins - but the industry selling bottled water must surely belong in that category.

We are having a drought in this country and water is scarce - but the kitchen taps are still running - and the water that flows from them is incredibly cheap.
To fill a glass would cost an almost unimaginable fraction of a cent - and yet we are happily buying exactly the same stuff in excess of a dollar a bottle!

It is hard to remember exactly how this started. Somewhere down the track teenagers decided it was " cool " to drink bottled water. With teenagers, fads start from a single source - and spread faster than Bubonic plague.

A tiny industry that supplied natural spring water to a small clientele saw opportunity - and expanded. Over just a few years hundreds of firms were stocking supermarket shelves with everything from personal size bottles of water to family size packs.

This is an unregulated industry. The product claims are not subject to scrutiny.
Water labelled " from a natural spring " can come from the same source as your kitchen tap - and with a light carbonation - be called a " health drink ".

And now - we are seeing a health risk emerging. The water from our kitchen tap contains a small amount of fluoride added to prevent tooth decay. This is not present in bottled water - and as a result we are seeing a huge jump in dental health problems after years of gains.
This is particularly prevalent in children because the bottled water fad is at it's most prevalent amongst young people.

Not only has a clever marketing campaign induced us to pay more for a readily available and cheap item, but it's use is having an adverse health effect.

It makes the lawnmower market for Eskimos look a lot more convincing !

The Mussolini excuse !

Rail users in New South Wales have just learned that train fares will increase by 5.9% from November 11. This follows an enquiry by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal ( IPRT ), a lap dog with no teeth that has never been known to knock back a government demand for a price increase - despite that increase far exceeding inflation.

The rail system in New South Wales is something of a joke. A crumbling mess of an outdated signalling system, trains that lack onboard toilets and a timetable that has reverted to the time when steam trains hauled carriages it has become an ongoing disaster for the state government.

Commuters well remember the much heralded salvation - the Millennium train. This state of the art train was supposed to be in place for the 2000 Olympics. It arrived years late - and with huge cost over runs - and it didn't work !
It was so full of whiz-bang technology that it was incompatible with the surrounding infrastructure - and had to be " dumbed down " to integrate.

The government took an axe to the system and discontinued hundreds of rail services. As a result, commuters and travellers who used off-peak travel were forced onto peak trains, further exacerbating chronic overcrowding. Basically, the rail system degenerated into the morning and evening peak with off-peak and weekend services slashed to the bone.

Rail users found they were experiencing employer block because the rail system simply could not deliver on time running - so the movers and shakers came up with a solution. Simply adjust the timetables backwards fifty years so the journeys took longer - and hence there was more chance that the trains would adhere to the schedule.

Since then government spin has concentrated on one thing - arrival times. From abysmal figures there have been improvements into the high ninety percents and these have been the subject of the government propaganda machine - to the exclusion of overcrowding, trains missing stations to remain on schedule and inter-city travel on trains lacking toilets.

Now we have a price rise because - and many shake their head in disbelief - the government claims it has earned a reward for improved service. A weekly ticket from Wollongong to Central in Sydney will rise by $ 3 to $ 54.
The most likely outcome will be more commuters travelling by car - particularly so when most people travelling to jobs in other parts of Sydney have to undertake a second rail journey from Central to connect with their employer. The car looks a better solution when two or more people share the ride.

It should be remembered that the Italian dictator - Mussolini - made a famous statement on his life achievement just before he was executed by the partisans.
He said - " At least I made the trains run on time ! "

Many might wish that those running our rail system suffer a similar fate !

Big brother is listening to you.

Changes to the police use of listening and tracking devices are going through the state parliament - and civil liberties people will be alarmed.

At present, police must apply to a court for a warrant to place each and every listening or tracking device they wish to install. This is time consuming and the new legislation allows a single warrant to authorise multiple numbers of such devices.

The present legislation requires that warrants be reapplied at the duration of twenty-one day periods. This will be extended to a ninety day time frame.

The new clause quietly inserted into the legislation removes the necessity for police to have a warrant at all within a five day initial period.
If this is approved the police will have absolute discretion to install listening devices and cameras in your home, your workplace or in your car and record your activities for five days.
What a wonderful opportunity for " fishing expeditions " in the hope of being able to lay a charge.

This legislation carries the usual response that it is necessary to assist our detection of terrorism - but there are no restrictions on it's use and therefore all citizens are fair game to be bugged by law enforcement.

It seems that the days of personal privacy are long gone. The concept of " innocent until proved guilty " has been modified to allow the most intimate surveillance of our living quarters - including the bedroom and bathroom - on the basis that we may be guilty of a crime - and that the police have the right to any personal information that may lead to a conviction.

The word " innocent " has been replaced by the terminology " suspect until confirmed to be innocent ".

Decriminalizing crime !

The New South Wales government has thought up a new way to decrease the workload of it's police force - and at the same time elevate crime to the status of revenue raising.

A whole range of crimes - which will include shop lifting to a value of under $ 300, fraud, possession of stolen goods, breaking into a vehicle and stealing, offensive conduct or language - and obstructing traffic - will now be subject to an on the spot fine.

No longer will police have to take the offender to the police station, fill out reams of paperwork - and then spent hours in court waiting to give evidence in the dock. The savings are estimated at 56,000 police hours a year.

The down side is that these on the spot crimes will not result in a criminal record. Basically, crime will be decriminalized and reduced to the same status as a speeding ticket. The offender will have twenty-one days to pay and the fines will range from $ 150 to $ 350 - putting a set value on various levels of crime.

It is a master stroke for state treasury. At present police dread the time and paperwork involved in charging an offender - and in many cases simply issue a caution to avoid this work load.
An on the spot fine is the easy way out - and without a doubt pressure will be applied to the police to zealously issue fines to improve revenue raising - in the same way that the use of speed cameras in police hands are being used to fund state coffers - all in the name of road safety !

The government and the police deny that there are quotas for officers to meet but any fool knows that an officer who returned from his shift with an empty charge book - because he was using cautions to educate drivers rather than fine them - would be accused of putting in his day on the beach or at the pub - and swiftly relegated to other duties.

Watch out for the cop on the beat with a desperate look in his eye and a need to write a few infringement notices before his shift ends.
It seems that this Criminal Infringement Notice System ( CINS ) is simply a new form of taxation.

A change of custom.

Visitors to this country have long been intrigued by a quaint Australian custom when it comes to paying for a round of drinks.
Customers in clubs and pubs pony up the money at the time the bar person sets the drinks in front of them.

In America, Britain and the countries of the European Union such drinks are entered onto a bar tab - and this tab is settled at the end of the drinking session.

It seems that such a system may be introduced here in an attempt to reduce the amount of money held in pubs and clubs and make them less inviting targets for armed holdups - but there will be many problems.

The idea is to encourage payment for meals, drinks and poker machine money to be made by some sort of credit card. Obviously, paying for each round of drinks individually with a credit card would be unworkable - hence the introduction of a drinks tab.

Presumably a credit card transaction would allow the selected wager to be credited to the chosen poker machine - and winnings would not be paid out in cash - but credited back to that credit card.
The down side of this idea is the probability of problem gamblers continuing to gamble and erode their credit - rather than cease when they ran out of cash money.
It will be fiercely opposed by the anti-gambling lobby.

There will also be problems with the introduction of bar tabs. These would be workable in areas of quiet trading, but pubs and clubs which draw huge crowds to gigs featuring popular bands would be faced with a nightmare. Apart from trying to keep track of individual tabs there would be those would did a runner when payment was due - plus the occasional happy drunk who waited till closing time to announce that his credit card was maxed out !

Psychologists may ponder why Australia chose cash with service rather than the American and European system, but this can probably be traced back to our early convict days.
Perhaps hoteliers were a mistrustful lot when it came to extending credit in those uncertain times - and so our " cash up front " custom became the norm.

A tale of two cities !

A recent survey has revealed that many Australian cities are headed to financial disaster. Such is the case with the two Illawarra cities of Wollongong and Shellharbour.

The difference is that disaster for Wollongong is imminent - while Shellharbour has a little breathing space before it strikes.
The reason is fairly obvious. Wollongong is an old city with very little expansion land left while Shellharbour only became a city in recent decades - and is fast expanding on what was once agricultural land.
The infrastructure of Wollongong is old - and that of Shellharbour is more recent - and therefore less in need of repair.

In the past council rates provided the income to maintain cities but in recent times more and more social services and other state and Federal services have been dumped on councils.
This follows a pattern. The provision of a service is made a council responsibility and is financed with funding - but that funding is on a renewable term. In most cases, when that term expires the funding is sharply reduced - and in many cases ceases completely - dropping the financial burden on council resources.

Councils are at the mercy of Federal and state treasuries - and hence grants to maintain services are subject to political whim. The time is now for councils to demand a better deal and the obvious source should be a fixed percentage of the Goods and Services tax ( GST ).

Two factors coincide to make this a practical reality. The GST is universal and applies to all citizens - and non-citizen visitors to this country. Council financing would be fair and equitable if a percentage of the GST collected was made available to councils on a per capita basis.

This would remove the political factor of councils presenting a begging bowl to state and Federal treasurers - and provide a predictable amount of income in addition to rates to plan their works programme.

Without change, disaster looms !

Double jeopardy !

Over eight hundred years ago a law was enacted in merry old England to bring fairness into court trials.
It was called " Double Jeopardy" and stipulated that no person could be tried twice for the same crime. In effect, the prosecution got only one bite at the cherry. If found not guilty - the prisoner was free for life.

That law found it's way into the law books of democracies around the world - including Australia - but now it is being called into question.
The world has turned a few times since the statute books were written and we now find ourselves confronted with scientific advances that were unheard of just a few years ago.

The question being asked - is it reasonable for a person to get away with a crime such as murder simply because the proof of guilt was not available at that time ?
A hundred years ago finger prints convicted many criminals - and today advances in DNA evidence would tip the balance in a great number of past trials.

There is logical argument on both sides of the divide. Should the abandonment of double jeopardy only relate to murder - or should it extent to all areas of crime ?
Should there be a statute of limitations clause as to how far into the past it applies ? Should there be a limit on the number of trials possible as new evidence is found ?

All the indications point to a change in the present position - but there is also a doubt that the law will be dumped absolutely. The most likely outcome is that a panel of senior judges will be given the power to set aside double jeopardy where certain circumstances apply. What those circumstances may be will be a decision that will be debated vigorously by both sides of parliament - and watched with interest by a large number of nervous criminals !

Speeding up the health system.

One of the problems with an item in short supply is the certainty that it's price will rise. That seems to be a deliberately created problem with medical specialists.

The various faculties of medical specialising control the number who train - and they therefore ensure that there is no over supply. As a result, seeing a specialist requires a referral from a General Practitioner - a long wait - and a large out of pocket expense because of the " gap " between the common fee and what the specialist chooses to charge.

One anomaly that exists is the inability of General Practitioner's to refer patients directly to have a Magnetic Resonance Image ( MRI ) scan. Referral for such a scan is restricted to specialists.

MRI is a relatively new - and very effective - means of detecting various medical conditions. There are now moves to drop the requirement for it to be ordered by specialist groups in favour of giving access to General Practitioners.

There will be several benefits. GP's will have the chance to eliminate various disorders as the cause of Patient's symptoms - and therefore save that patient a long wait and a large specialist's fee to reach the same result.
Having had the benefit of MRI to identify the problem the GP will then either refer the patient directly to the local hospital, or correctly identify the source of specialist treatment for the newly identified ailment.

The benefits will be reduced cost to the patient - and more importantly - less delay in having the disorder treated. Hopefully, this new procedure will be in place by early next year !

Psychology - and selling !

Recent price surveys of the three big supermarket chains in Australia - Woolworths, Coles and Aldi - left no doubt that Aldi was significantly cheaper than it's competitors. A family doing it's grocery shopping at Aldi could probably fuel the family car or run broadband Internet on the savings.

Many factors contribute to this advantage, but one glaring difference is worth noting. Shoppers at Woolworths and Coles have free access to shopping trolleys - and as a result they are abused - mishandled - stolen - and dumped in suburbs miles away.

Managing these shopping trolleys is a costly business. " Trolley minder " crews with a tractor and trailer collect them from the supermarket car park and return them to the store and a recovery programme offers a cash reward draw for shoppers who alert the company to trolleys left in public places.
Despite this, many trolleys end their days submerged in creeks, rusting in drains or broken apart to reappear as kid's billy carts.
Replacement costs per trolley run into hundreds of dollars.

This is not the case at Aldi. Trolleys are available - but require a $2 coin to be inserted to release them to the shopper.
This is where psychology makes it's grand entrance.
When the shopper has finished shopping there is an overwhelming urge to recover that $ 2 - and so the trolley is returned to the trolley rack at the store and the money returns to the shoppers pocket.

A simple test ? When did you last see an Aldi branded shopping trolley abandoned far away from the store ?
In the great majority of cases the answer will be - never !

It seems that psychology is lost on Woolworths and Coles. They simply add the cost of their trolley debacle onto the shelf prices of goods - and shrug their shoulders and ignore comparisons with a better managed supermarket.

Ultimately either shoppers will rebel at being slugged with higher prices or the government will get tough and implement laws requiring trolley reform - but in the interim many smart shoppers are saving money by patronising a store chain that employs leading edge thinking !

A predator calls !

In the next few days thousands of people in New South Wales will receive a letter from Share Buying Group Pty. Ltd. offering to buy their shares in Insurance Australia Group ( IAG ).

The offer will amount to $ 2.55 a share, but the seller will not have to pay brokerage or other costs. The only problem is that the offer represents about half what IAG shares would bring if sold through regular channels.

This is perfectly legal. Share Buying Group has every right to access the records of IAG and make an offer to buy to shareholders. It is the responsibility of the shareholder to be prudent and weight the offer against the listed price of the shares - and make a rational decision.

Some would consider making an offer of half of what shares are valued at as being predatory. Others would consider it a normal business ploy. Nobody is forced to sell - and some might welcome ridding themselves of shares in favour of some cash money.

Many people found themselves owning shares for the first time in their lives when the N.R.M.A demutualised. These shares pay regular - and handsome - dividends and these payments are franked, hence shareholders get an added benefit at tax time.

Average shareholdings mean that the offer from Share Buying Group represents cash money of about $ 1,600 per share allocation - and that could be very attractive to those with little knowledge of the stock market or the value of shares. There would be a temptation to take the money - and go buy a LCD or Plasma high definition TV set !

The best advice to those receiving such an offer would be to think long and hard before accepting and signing on the dotted line. Check the current price of IAG shares in the daily newspaper - and have a chat with a financial adviser or a stock broker !

The day of the diesel !

For the past hundred years the petrol powered internal combustion engine has been the driving force in the world's automobiles.
Now a new challenger is fast edging petrol aside - the diesel engine looks like becoming the force of the future !

Diesel is not new. It has been around as long as the petrol engine, but apart from it's predominance in heavy trucks few motorists favoured it in cars.
It was noisy - smelly - and women in particular disliked the protocol of firing up " glo-plugs " to bring it to life.

The biggest advantage of diesel engines was the long operating life. The average diesel engine would outlast two or three petrol engines, but when it finally needed repair it was cheaper to discard and buy a new one.

The diesel engines now appearing in cars are a vast improvement on the past. Sit next to a diesel powered car at the lights and you would not notice a difference to a petrol engine. No noxious clouds of fumes. No rattling sounds as it idles.
Power now compares with petrol engines - and for most people they would be unaware of what engine is powering their auto.

The biggest difference between diesel and petrol is the range of products that can power the former. The beauty of a diesel engine is that it can run safely on almost unprocessed crude - despite the oil companies presently pricing it at a premium over petrol - and it runs happily on any of the vegetable based oils which we can grow locally. It can even run on the cooking oil used by the local fish and chip shop.

As the percentage of diesel powered cars increases, so will our dependence on middle east oil decrease.
Diesel will find itself competing with the hybrid breeds emerging, but it is probable that it will eventually be the fuel engine mix in the hybrid equation.

The hydrogen cell may not be too far away, but in the shorter term the diesel engine looks like becoming king.

All aboard the Junket Express !

Twenty years ago " sister city " relationships were in vogue. The idea was to create a bond with a city in another part of the world - and we were assured this would lead to interesting cultural exchanges - and heaps and heaps of rewarding commercial activity.

Wollongong forged such a liaison with the Japanese city of Kawasaki and our council has approved expenditure of $ 50,000 to send a delegation to that city - and to fund a return delegation of Japanese to visit Wollongong.

Our delegation will include the Lord Mayor, Alex Darling, the deputy Lord Mayor Kiril Jonovski, CEO David Farmer - and an unnamed council officer.
It would be reasonable to ask - why four people ? Why both the mayor and the deputy mayor ? The obvious person would be the CEO - if trade deals are to be negotiated - and why a " council officer " ? Or is this to be a person drawn from a hat to be some sort of employment reward ?

The Wollongong delegation's visit will cost $ 28,900 - but we will also pay $ 20,400 for a Japanese party to visit our city. Why are we paying this bill ? Isn't a " sister city " thing a two way deal ? Is Kawasaki so impoverished that it can not - or more likely will not - pony up the cash to send it's elected representatives on such an obvious junket ? Why is Wollongong being the bunny ?

The big question is just what has this " sister city " relationship delivered by way of a benefit to Wollongong in it's twenty years duration ?
The answer would seem to be - zilch !

Times are tough and we are being asked to dig deeper to fix this ailing city's infrastructure. If there are commercials gains to be made then sending CEO David Farmer on a visit would be reasonable - but sending a pack of " junketeers " on a glorious holiday at civic expense is just not on.

Dump the relationship - and put the money to better use !

Trouble across the Tasman.

News that a group of people attended a terrorist training camp in New Zealand comes as something of a shock.
We tend to regard our neighbour across the Tasman in a similar light to Tasmania - a peaceful, slow pace of living place that is a few years behind the rest of the world.

It seems that the unrest is centred on the original inhabitants - the Maori tribes which have not yet fully integrated into white society, together with the usual mix of malcontents championing causes ranging from " save the whales " to the promotion of anarchy.

What is disturbing is that a cache of firearms was involved, and there are suggestions that a home made napalm bomb was tested. It is one thing to wave placards and hold public protests - but quite another when armed violence and terrorism is on the menu.

New Zealand has long been seen as an Antipodean extension of " England ". The population is of British descent and the country clings to so many English ways - even the police cars mimic the colours used in the UK. It would seem to be the last place on the planet prone to an outbreak of terrorism.

This problem should give Australia a reason to stop and think. We too have an indiginous population that is yet to be fully integrated into white society - and our past and present migration policies have resulted in ethnic groups with a past history of enmity towards each other.

Internal unrest is unavoidable in any such society, but keeping it under control is a problem that we will have to share with our New Zealand cousins. It would be unthinkable that the two best places in which to live on this planet could degenerate into armed insurrection and bomb throwing in public places.

If it takes a strong crackdown to keep the lid on that scenario - so be it !

Trouble across the Tasman.

The coming tribal event !

We Australians are a tribal people. The vast majority either belong to the Labor tribe or the Conservative tribe - and usually tribal allegiance is a matter of birth.
Few stray from their tribal upbringing. During the childhood years tribal philosophy is drilled into young minds and lasts a lifetime. Marriage brings a testing time when people of differing tribes tie the knot together.
Sometimes tribal allegiance remains steadfast and the partners record different votes, but usually the weaker partner is pressured to join the tribe of the stronger partner.

We are a curious nation - one of the few that demands that all the people of the various tribes put their mark on a piece of paper to select the chief who will rule.
Even that has latitude. The only demand is that we attend and have our name crossed off the list. We can do what we wish with the ballot paper - drop it unmarked in the bin - or write " none of the above " as so many of us do.

So when the day comes to elect a great chief to rule over us the decision will be made by just a few. There will be some who defect from one tribe to another, but the swinging vote that will decide will come from those who belong to no tribe and have no obligation to either.

To woo that swinging vote there will be bread and circuses - and huge promises will be made. The tribal people will ponder those promises and many will be dismissed as pie in the sky, not likely to survive beyond the counting of the vote.

And then it will be all over. A chief will be appointed - and we will go back to our tribal ways until the passage of time calls us to the next great tribal concave !

Those " illegal " fines !

A recent phenomenon that has exploded onto the commercial scene is the practice of merchants to impose a " fine " if you are late paying a bill.
It started with the banks. Be just a day late paying the minimum due on Visa or Mastercard and the banks slug you a fat fee.
Overdraw your account by the odd dollar and another fine pops up in the debit column next time you get a statement - and these are serious money fines - ranging from thirty five to fifty dollars in most cases.

Now this disease has spread to other avenues of commerce. If you do not pay the paper bill on time the local newsagent adds a five dollar fine to the next bill.
All sorts of trades have jumped on the bandwagon - the plumber, the electrician and even the people who mow lawns for a living.]

The question is - are these fines legal ?

This seems to be a moot point not yet addressed by the legal profession.
The short answer is that they probably are not. When you deal with a person or company providing services there is usually no agreement on the terms and conditions that apply.
That does not seem to be the case with banks, providers of telephone services and similar organizations who do ask you to agree to the terms under which they will trade with you.
Presumeably, somewhere in the fine print there is a right to apply excess fees in certain circumstances.

The great majority of trade with small business has no such agreement, and most likely deciding to add new terms and conditions would require the consent of both parties.
In such a case, those fines imposed without reference are simply a try on - and they are getting away with it because most people lack an adequate knowledge of the law - and few would go to the cost of challenging the validity in court.

An interesting thought to ponder ! Next time one of these fines appears - ask the merchant concerned what legal basis supports the claim ?

The mobile phone battle.

It was first mooted in a comic strip years ago. Dick Tracey had a mobile phone concealed in his shoe. Decades ago this became reality - although the first mobiles were big and clumbsy - had frequent drop outs - and cost an arm and a leg to use.

Today the mobile has evolved into a brilliant piece of technology, small enough to be hidden in the palm of the hand and delivering information, photography and the Internet as well as just phone calls.
It can be found in the pocket or purse of just about the entire population - including children - and it is fast delivering a death blow to the old fixed line home phone.

In this capacity it's range has expanded and " black spots " are becoming fewer. It is rare to drive on any major road and be out of sight of that ubiquitous mobile phone tower.
Until recently we accepted limitations. There were problems using mobile phones within buildings or where deep valleys reduced the signal, but today we demand that our mobiles can serve us anywhere at anytime without limitation !

And that brings us into conflict with a section of the population concerned about the potential dangers of EME and EMR - Electro Magnetic Energy - and Electro Magnetic Radiation.

The problem is that so far science has not proven that EME and EMR pose any danger to the public in the levels involved in mobile phone transponder towers - but equally so - science has not proven them entirely safe.

There is evidence that EMR produced by the proximity to high voltage power cables may have a hand in some forms of disease such as Leukemia, but this is at output levels sky high in comparison to mobile phones.

The quandary is - that to improve mobile coverage and eliminate black spots - it is necessary to increase the number of phone towers and that these will need to be in high density areas of the population. Such transponders will be located near sporting fields, shopping centres and schools - and generally wherever there are large numbers of people needing to use mobile phones.

It seems we have a choice. Either accept that science considers EME and EMR harmless in the levels of mobile phone outlet - or learn to live without this modern means of communication !

It seems that at present we have a bit of each option. When a new tower is proposed we picket and protest - and loudly complain.
And when the protest is dismissed and the tower is put in place - we go back to " business as usual " - and happily continue our love affair with our mobile phones !

The Aboriginal question !

Prime Minister John Howard has promised that - if he retains office - he will implement a referendum within eighteen months to alter the constitution to recognise that Aborigines and Torres Strait Islanders were " the first Australians ".

The cost will run into millions and it seems an awful lot of money to waste to put into writing something that we have known all of our lives - that the Aboriginal people were here when the first fleet arrived !

Somehow there seems to be a feeling amongst some white people that we should apologise - simply for being here ! There is a tendency to use the social rules of the present and try to demonise the first settlers for adopting the rules of behaviour that existed at that time.

It might be as well to remember that in 1788 slavery was still an accepted institution and that it was not until the 1860's that the Americans fought a bitter civil war to end it in their country. Despite this, our early settlers did not clap Aborigines in chains and put them to work as slaves.

We hear moans of anguish about white/Aboriginal relations in the early days - but not a peep about the harsh laws of jolly old England - that condoned thrashing of prisoners with the " cat of nine tails " and sentenced starving men trying to feed their families by stealing a loaf of bread - to transportation for life !

One thing is certain. Australia would be occupied by a European power because in those days it was accepted that whatever explorer first set foot in a new land, the flag of his country would be planted on the beach - and that country claimed for his king.

That being the case, our Aborigines probably lived better under the English than they may have under some other rulers. It is time to stop looking back into the past and concentrating on the present.

What is needed is less recrimination - and more effort to provide health care and education to our Aboriginal communities to ensure that they merge with mainstream Australia - and take their place as citizens of equal opportunity in this prosperous country !

Retirement options.

Alarm expressed by many at the proposal that the retirement age be lifted from the present sixty-five to sixty-seven.
It sounds draconian, but a little careful thought reveals that there are possible benefits to both the retiree - and the country.

When the present retirement age was set the life expectancy was much lower and many people only lived less than five years on the pension. Today those retiring at sixty-five can expect to still be drawing the pension twenty years later.

Australia is facing a shortage of people to fill jobs. The number of children per family has been steadily dropping and the shortfall is being made up by migration.
With greater life expectancy those approaching sixty-five have a great store of skill and knowledge that can be put to good use. Employers are starting to see the wisdom of hanging on to older workers whose dedication and punctuality is legendary. Many hate the thought of compulsory retirement - and would gladly extend their working life by several years.

The tax office needs to have a long, hard look at what is involved in a longer period of employment. Workers who remain on the job past sixty-five do not draw the pension - and that saves the government money.
At the same time, they remain taxpayers - and that contribution is massive as most are on senior salaries and many are in management positions. It would be fair if these contributions were rewarded.

A scheme is in place where those who do not retire - and do not draw the pension - get a solid cash bonus when they do finally retire. This is not taxable - but it was full of inequities. For instance, if a person died before reaching the nominated new retirement age this bonus was not passed on to the spouse or family - and was simply confiscated by the tax office.
The scheme needs a thorough review to attain the element of fairness - without which it will be rejected by retirees.

Most people would reject a plan to make the pension unattainable until sixty-seven. Many will not have sufficient health to keep working beyond sixty-five but with goodwill on both sides it is possible to craft a scheme that suits those who are happy to continue working, and at the same time save the government a mint of money.

If such a scheme is to work it must be rewarding to both sides. It will fail if from the government view it is all " take ". If a retiree continues to work and save the government pension money - and at the same time remain a taxpayer - there must be a guaranteed reward to make that worthwhile.
Anything less is doomed to failure !

Our expanded naval forces.

Tenders have been let for two super ships to be built for the Royal Australian navy. HMAS Canberra and HMAS Adelaide will be a new breed, weighing in at 27,000 tonnes and capable of each carrying a thousand fully equipped troops with helicopter support, vehicles, artillery and all the necessary fuel and supplies to support them in the field.
They will also have a floating dock accommodating four watercraft for landing purposes - and each ship will have a fully equipped hospital with two operating theatres. The cost will run to $ 3.1 billion.

Those who oppose any form of military spending will be critical, but we live in a fast changing world and these new additions - due in 2013 - will give added capacity to project power beyond our shores.
It is obvious that the design of the new vessels is aimed at being able to put a military force ashore and maintain them under combat conditions. Critics will argue that we face no discernible military threat - so why the expenditure of such a huge sum ?

There is no imminent threat of invasion on the horizon, but there is every chance that we will be called upon to intervene as our near neighbours degenerate into failing states.
This has already happened in the case of the Solomon Islands and East Timor. Small, island economies which were once colonies of the great powers are finding it hard to create a vibrant economy without industries or raw materials. In most cases they have looked to tourism but this has failed due to lack of funds to develop the necessary infrastructure.

As their economies wind down to subsistence level there is a chance that for sheer survival they may turn to drug cultivation - or fall victim to the enticement of terrorist groups who offer support in exchange for a secure base for their operations.

Australia does not look to become the policeman of the southern Pacific, but we would be wise to have the infrastructure in place to offer help when one of the neighbouring island communities asks for it. In that respect, these two ships are a step in the right direction !

Parking meters for Wollongong ?

Wollongong is a city masquerading as a big, comfortable country town. It doesn't have Sydney type traffic jams - the pace of life is less frenetic - and it doesn't have parking meters.

That is about to change ! Councillors claim parking meters will be " revenue neutral ", but in fact they will fractionally reduce the amount of street parking available and drive the majority to shun the CBD in favour of the free parking at regional shopping centres.
If parking meters are installed each space will be calculated to accommodate one of the biggest cars made - the Ford Fairlane or the Holden Caprice. More smaller, compact cars can shuffle into existing kerb space.

We already have controlled parking in this city. Kerbside parking is regulated by time restrictions and an army of rangers issues fines for those who overstay.
The same army of rangers would be needed to monitor parking meters - and write ticket fines for those who offend.
The only difference is that kerbside parking is presently free - and metered slots would reap a bonanza of cash from that same space. So much for the claim that meters would be revenue neutral !

The proposal includes meters for the CBD shopping precinct - and meters at every beach and tourist destination. It seems we are intending to impose the " Sydney disease " on Wollongong - where hopping in the car and taking Mum and the kids to the beach for a swim is fast fading into an impossible dream.
Not only are the meters rapacious in the rate of charge per hour, but there is the misery of trekking back and forth to feed money into the hungry monsters !

Hopefully wise heads will think long and hard before making a final decision.
Wollongong has it all when it comes to life style. If access to the shopping precinct at the CBD is the aim a better result would come from a park and ride scheme to allow cars to stay out of the CBD - and remove any hassle of finding a parking space.

It would also be the cheapest option !

The scales of justice.

A change of court procedure may please many and concern others. It is proposed that judges have the discretion to disallow the cross examination of victims when giving evidence in rape and other sexual assault cases.
The move is aimed at curbing the practice of counsel harassing and humiliating victims by asking for minute detail in open court and constantly interrupting the evidence flow.
Under the new rules victims evidence would be given in " narrative " form without interruption.

The intent is commendable. Children who have suffered sexual assault and women seeking justice in rape cases have in the past been subjected to ordeals in the witness box by barristers who have mastered the art of using innuendo to add " spin " during cross examination.
In most cases it is not a fair contest when a person with no court experience - and under extreme emotional duress - is faced with a professional debater whose job is to convince the jury that the story is untruthful.

Sometimes efforts to offer protection tilt the scales of justice . The accused in any matter before a court is entitled to the notion of " innocent until proved guilty " - and one of the tenets of law is the ability to question the evidence presented to prove that guilt.

It is not unknown for false charges of a malicious nature to be levelled. It will depend on how judges interpret their new powers as to whether this law change is reasonable or not.
There should be no objection to a witness giving evidence in narrative style, uninterrupted - provided that at the conclusion the defence is entitled to confront that evidence and subject it to examination.
Should there be no questions allowed the victim's evidence could form a statement of fact in the minds of jurors - and run the risk of the accused being falsely convicted.

Justice is a two way street. The lawmakers must be diligent in ensuring that the protection of the innocent does not imbalance the rights of the accused.
In this instance, that will depend on how the judiciary use their new powers !

The doctor " stretch ".

There is no doubt that this country is short of doctors. The shortage is so chronic that some country towns are without the services of a general practitioner - and even in the larger centres some doctors are so overworked that they have closed their books to new patients.
The only places that this does not apply is in affluent suburbs of the major cities, where doctors tend to congregate because the living is good and they command high salaries.
A solution to the problem has appeared, but as usual the medical profession is closing ranks and gearing up for a turf fight. The idea is to relegate some of the duties performed by general practitioners to clinical nurses working side by side with the doctor.
Many doctors are opposed because they believe that the only source of medical advice and treatment should come from a doctor, but common sense delivers a very different story.

How often does a patient attend a doctor simply to get scripts renewed ? How many times does a patient only need a referral renewal to the specialist they are attending ?
How many times is the visit to get the annual flu jab ?
None of these are either brain surgery or rocket science - and yet many doctors insist that they - and they alone - will attend to these patients.

If doctors would only come down off their high horse and work with a clinical nurse their practice would be more efficient and could handle a greater number of patients.
Nurses have the skill to recognise instances when a patient making a routine call needs to see the doctor - and insist on this happening.

The amazing thing is that nurses perform more of a doctor's function in public hospitals simple because the doctor numbers are not there, but use of their skills in general practice is being resisted.
The suggestion is that there should be one clinical nurse for each general practitioner - and if that was to happen doctor's would be relieved of nearly seventy percent of their work load.

Anything that improves the present chronic doctor shortage is worth serious consideration !

Name and shame !

A spirited debate is inevitable over a proposal to remove the suppression on naming offenders under eighteen when they appear before a court.
The civil liberties people are aghast and suggest that naming young offenders subject them to perpetual vilification that removes any chance of rehabilitation.
The victims of crime counter that with the nonchalance young offenders exhibit when they walk away from court - masked from any form of identification - with a mere slap on the wrist.

There is no doubt that punishment handed out to those under eighteen is mild compared to older offenders. Supposedly, under eighteens are not fully developed emotionally and are prone to actions that the more mature would resist. Despite this, the result of their crimes inflicts the same financial, property and trauma damage to their victims despite the age difference.

There is also the unfair situation that when a group is involved and one of that group is under eighteen the suppression order covers all - in case publishing the names of the over eighteen offenders would also identify the juvenile. As a result, wise gang members tend to keep a juvenile in their ranks as safety measure.

There are legal measures in place which allows the judiciary to waive the suppression order in some instances. The problem is that use of this is capricious. The odds are in favour of a juvenile and the suppression creates a public impression that justice is not being done - and that young people are immune from the punishment of crime.

The answer is probably a compromise. It would be reasonable to allow a first offence to be subject to suppression because anyone can make a mistake - and most people would think it reasonable to offer an opportunity to learn from that mistake.
What is unreasonable is to allow a hardened criminal - who has a rap sheet that would take an hour to read in court - to hide behind the protection of age.
We have young criminals under the age of eighteen who use the court as a revolving door and thumb their nose at the bail system.
Fairness requires that if such a person has rejected the opportunities of rehabilitation then the public has a right to know - and to be able to identify by way of pictures published in the media - those people who are likely to cause them harm and who represent a threat to their person and property.

Protection - is a two way street !

The road to Hell !

Yesterday two great ships sailed into Port Kembla harbour, the first of many that will deliver this state's car imports to the newly refurbished $ 167 million port facility.
The Tarago - of 67,000 tonnes - and the Taipan of 57,000 tonnes are much larger than the usual shipping using this port. They are welcome because they will rejuvenate an ageing port and bring many new jobs to the region - but they will also deliver an overload to this city's road system.

There are predictions that Port Kembla will handle somewhere near half a million new cars a year. Very few will be moved by rail because the rail system is presently overloaded moving coal and commuter traffic.
The new cars will be moved by road and that means a huge increase in car transporter trucks.
To exit Wollongong these vehicles will have to navigate the long, hard slog up Mt Ousley road and merge with the existing heavy commercial traffic. Many will continue along the F-6 and either use the Heathcote road to western Sydney or fight their way through the congestion by way of General Holmes drive.

There is another option that seems to have been overlooked. Many of these new cars will be destined for towns south of Sydney and even more will be headed to Sydney's west - and to achieve that will be routed along Appin road.

Appin road has an appalling death toll because it simply is not designed for the volume of traffic it presently moves. It services several major coal mines and hence carries a mix of coal miners driving to work and coal trucks moving the results of their labour. The addition of new fleets of car transporters will be a toxic increase to an already grossly overloaded and dangerous road.

Unfortunately there is no chance of any relief any time soon. The state government has initiated an enquiry into completing the abandoned Maldon-Dombarton rail link to western Sydney, but this will be years in the planning and construction stage if it is approved - and there are absolutely no plans for a road upgrade to relieve this additional traffic.

Once again the state government has solved one of it's problems by creating a major headache for the citizens of this area - and then walked away without offering any funds to resolve the problem !

Our failing hospitals !

A recent emergency department disaster - and the plethora of unpaid bills that have caused local product suppliers to cease supply to Wollongong hospital has raised the question of what form of administration would resolve these crises.
There have been suggestions of a return to the past when a local hospital board was in charge. This had the advantage of bringing the decision making process to a local level, but the disadvantage was that such boards were stuffed with stooges by whatever political persuasion was in office at that time.

The problem comes down to one simple basic. All our hospitals are grossly underfunded - and they will continue to suffer logistic and staff problems until that problem is rectified.

The cause of the problem is simple. There are two distinctly different sources of funds that sustain our hospitals. Money comes from the state government - who own and run the hospitals - and from the Federal government who provide tax money to support the health system.
As a result, we see a classical example of buck passing. Both levels of government blame the other for lack of adequate money to run the health system.

There will never be a solution to this problem until a single entity has the responsibility of both running and financing our hospital system, and for that to happen - one of two choices will have to be made.

One option would be for the Federal government to take full responsibility for the Australian hospital system, removing it from state control and therefore achieving uniformity rather than differing state standards of care.
This would be a divisive approach that would split public opinion, but it is an option that should be widely debated - and possibly decided by a referendum.

The other option would be to return personal income taxing power to the states. At present, taxation is solely administered by the Federal government, giving rise to state claims that each state is short funded. The Goods and Services tax ( GST ) was an attempt to reimburse the states by a new tax imposed on a national basis and distributed in it's entirety to the states - and this has done nothing to reduce their claim of still being short funded.

More than a century ago the states and the Federal government both levied an income tax. The re-imposition of a state income tax would allow the Federal tax to be lowered and applied to Federal functions - while the states would have to accept responsibility for hospitals and schools as purely state functions - and face their taxpayers when setting the level at which that tax would be applied.

Services like hospitals are a need that should not be provided by way of a joint responsibility. If they are under the control - and financing - of a single entity then there is no excuse for failure - and the taxation level to provide that service is open to public scrutiny - and either acceptance or rejection by the voting public !

The battle for Burma.

Once again armed troops are beating monks and ordinary citizens to contain unrest in Burma. This deeply religious Buddhist country has suffered forty five years of iron rule by it's military.
The generals applied the classical formulae for suppression when they gained power from a coup. They enlarged the army and made sure it and their supporters were well paid and had access to the best consumer goods to ensure loyalty. The rest of the citizenry faced deteriorating conditions as misrule saw prices rise and incomes dwindle.

The junta surprised the world some years ago when they allowed a vote to elect a parliament. Legendary leader Suu Kyi's NLD party won in a landslide. The generals simply ignored the result and Suu Kyi has remained under house arrest ever since.
In 1988 things boiled over and there was an uprising, suppressed by the military with brutality that led to the deaths of thousands.

And so we have Burma today. Simmering and on the edge of revolt with the nation's Buddhist monks leading the movement for change. This time the military are more cautious. They can no longer seal off the country from the rest of the world, thanks to mobile camera phones and the Internet - and so far they have avoided mass confrontations that would result in the massacre of thousands of people.

This is the very situation the United Nations was formed to settle peacefully - and as usual the UN has failed dismally.
The key in this instance is China - which shares a border with Burma - and is it's biggest ally and trading partner.
Burma is blessed with two major assets - gem stones - and oil !
China covets Burma's potential oil reserves and will do nothing to dislodge the junta from power while ever it grants China access to that bounty.
The fly in the ointment is the coming 08 Olympic games in Beijing. The last thing China wants is unrest on it's border during this opportunity to showcase itself to the world - and that brings with it the best opportunity for the world to press China to use it's influence to moderate the Burmese military.
As usual the UN will divide into two camps. Those that support China - and those on the other side of the political divide. Hopefully, world anger at the brutality and suppression in Burma may be enough to move the Chinese to pressure the junta into reform - but it is unlikely that democracy will come to that unfortunate country anytime soon !

The arsonist danger.

The combination of the start of the fire season on the Australian east coast and a long weekend saw three major outbreaks in New South Wales.
Two homes were destroyed north of Newcastle and there were fires in the national parks north and south of Sydney - and the cause of all three fires is highly suspicious.
One natural cause of bush fires is lightning strikes, but in the preceding forty-eight hours there were no dry lightning storms - and in the case of the fire that destroyed homes there were numerous ignition points. The overwhelming verdict from the fire fighters is that this was arson.

Our fire fighting defences have been strengthened in recent years. Fire bombing helicopters have been added to the arsenal and money has been spent on upgrading vehicles and equipment, but the biggest asset is the army of volunteers who give up their time to save lives and property - and their employers who willingly accept their absence from work to provide this valuable service.

The big question is how do we stop people deliberately lighting fires in the bush ?
Penalties have been increased - and if there is a death from a deliberately lit fire the offender could face a murder charge.
There is no obvious remedy that will stop teenagers looking for excitement or the mentally ill with a grievance against society from dropping a match and starting a fire. Unfortunately, many of these people are cunning and have devised instruments that will lay dormant and only ignite long after they have left the scene..

The only defence is to be able to react quickly and extinguish the fire before it becomes a major event - and to do that we need adequate fire trails to get fire crews to the scene quickly.
That seems to run contrary to the policies of the Greens. For some reason their philosophy is to obstruct any action that entails cutting back the bush to make a fire trail navigable - despite the fact that fires damage and destroy the very vegetation they are dedicated to protect.
It is impossible to have a logical argument with people of that persuasion. They have closed minds - and logic does not prevail.
What is needed is for government to be strong minded and ensure that legislation is in place to allow fire trails to be maintained without hindrance by Greenies who set up blockades or resort to delaying legal action.
Just as the strong arm of the law should descend on any arsonists caught, so it should be equally strong on anyone obstructing the fire services from protecting lives and property !

Fooling the public.

The New South Wales government is indulging in a smoke and mirrors attempt to fool the public that it has implemented a " get tough on crime " policy. A new law is passing through parliament that is supposed to introduce " mandatory minimum " sentences for an array of crimes.
To most people, " mandatory minimum " means an automatic prison sentence for the crimes listed. That is not the case. The new sentencing will apply to those who plead " not guilty " , but are found guilty at trial. For those who plead guilty the sentence will still be decided by the judge.

The list of proscribed crimes is an interesting mix that range from twenty five years prison for murder of a child, to civil offences such as malicious wounding, malicious grievous bodily harm - down to car rebirthing, cultivating prohibited plants and finally illegal possession of a firearm. These latter offences are supposed to attract a mandatory sentence of between three and ten years.

The legislation draws attention to the " one size fits all " attempt to bypass the wisdom of judges and magistrates to rule on the severity of a particular crime. Few would disagree with a harsh prison sentence for the murder of a child, but then there is the supposedly automatic three
year gaol term for being in posession of an unregistered firearm.
There are hundreds - and perhaps thousands - of farmers and rural folk who have unregistered shot guns and rifles - and have had them for generations - for the purpose of safely killing snakes that threaten their family or for mercifully killing terminal livestock. Do we seriously want to lockup such people who have committed no crime other than not having got around to complying with a law designed to remove guns from the cities ?
Wouldn't it be reasonable for a judge to vary the sentence between such a farmer - and a city criminal who used such a gun to holdup a TAB ?

The problem with passing harsh laws is that they usually bring unintended consequences. Knee jerk reactions intended to create brownie points with the public are virtually assured of creating a negative response somewhere down the track. They should be approached - with caution !