The shifting pattern of broken promises and unlikely alliances that holds together Federal parliament is at crisis point. The balance of power is on a knife edge and the fate of the government rests on the outcome of criminal investigations - and the mind set that finally prevails for certain individuals.
What will amuse many people is the clear spectacle of " the chickens coming home to roost" that is afflicting the Prime Minister's negotiations with Andrew Wilkie.
They remember the days of horse trading when the voter's delivered a hung parliament and Labor commenced making " deals " with the Greens and the independents to secure a paper thin majority. It was an unsavoury business. Labor caved in to the Greens demand for a carbon tax that had been a pivot point in the pre-election promises to the electorate - and a firm promise was blatantly broken to gain power.
The independents acted like a pack of bandits, demanding outrageous amounts of money be spent in their electorates as the " thirty pieces of silver " to pay for their capitulation. In the case of Tasmanian Andrew Wilkie, the Prime Minister gave a promise to implement a draconian form of poker machine control to protect problem gamblers from self harm.
It was all downhill from that point. Accusations of illicit union spending on prostitutes tainted one sitting member and Labor launched an ingenious coup when it coaxed a dissident Liberal to take the speakers chair. It was painfully obvious that the public disapproved of the shambles that passed for government policy - and then came a challenge from ousted former Prime Minister Kevin Rudd, who sought to wrest back his former position.
The opinion polls are recording a government so on the nose with voters that all the independents are having second thoughts, and the backbenchers are starting to panic after the massacre that wipecd out Labor in the recent Queensland state election.
It is rumoured that the Prime Minister is demanding that Andrew Wilkie give her his promise that under no circumstances will he vote with the opposition in the event of a move to block supply - or a loss of confidence issue. It seems that we are back to horse trading - and on the table is a fabulous amount of money to upgrade the Tasmanian health system.
Some will wonder just what value is placed on these sort of promises, given that the Prime Minister's original promise on poker machine reform was so blatantly broken when the appointment of a Liberal speaker gave her a cushion of reprieve on the tight numbers situation.
And many will wonder what happened to " principle " when it became an issue of exchanging money for votes !
Sunday 29 April 2012
Saturday 28 April 2012
Train our own people first !
Mining giant Rio Tinto has a shortfall of six thousand skilled jobs to expand new mining operations in Australia. This is in addition to the worker needs of several other big mining expansions that are under way by it's competitors. There are calls to relax restrictions on the issue of temporary visas so that guest workers can be brought into this country to relieve this skills shortage.
That is absolutely the wrong thinking when Australia has 5.2% of the national workforce unemployed and desperately seeking work.
Fitting these people to the jobs offering requires one imperative - and that is training. No temporary visa should be offered for any job that could be filled by an existing Australian if the necessary skills could be learned in a three month intensive training period. Such visas should only apply to skills with a lead time that is measured in years.
Skills Minister Chris Evans points to the Westrac National Skills Training Centre of Excellence which has four hundred and twenty people undergoing training. That is a good start, but 420 pales into insignificance when measured against a need of 6,000 needed people at Rio Tinto alone.
Bringing in guest workers on temporary visas is the " easy way " for both Rio Tinto and the Federal government, but it leaves the breadwinner of numerous Australian families still struggling to put food on the table within the limitations of the dole.
Putting Australians back to work by giving them the necessary training should take preference over this artificial drive to deliver a budget surplus. Education is a Federal government responsibility when it is coupled with shortening the dole queues, and it delivers a bigger dividend eventually - to both the unemployed and the Treasury. Skilled workers get big pay packets - and they consequently pay higher taxes as a result. The nation gains a benefit from moving the unskilled unemployed into a skilled - and better paid - section of the workforce, and their families benefit by an elevated standard of living.
It's a win - win - win situation all around, but it will take resolve to put it into practise. The first step should be to disallow temporary visas for any job skill that can be filled by short term training - and the implementation of training facilities to provide that skill.
It is unlikely that the slothful bureaucracy is capable of meeting such needs within a meaningful time frame. The time has come to " think outside the nine dots " and appoint a person with the drive and ability to implement what is needed - and to deliver the authority to bring it to fruition.
Unfortunately, that is not the way of governments in this " politically correct " age !
That is absolutely the wrong thinking when Australia has 5.2% of the national workforce unemployed and desperately seeking work.
Fitting these people to the jobs offering requires one imperative - and that is training. No temporary visa should be offered for any job that could be filled by an existing Australian if the necessary skills could be learned in a three month intensive training period. Such visas should only apply to skills with a lead time that is measured in years.
Skills Minister Chris Evans points to the Westrac National Skills Training Centre of Excellence which has four hundred and twenty people undergoing training. That is a good start, but 420 pales into insignificance when measured against a need of 6,000 needed people at Rio Tinto alone.
Bringing in guest workers on temporary visas is the " easy way " for both Rio Tinto and the Federal government, but it leaves the breadwinner of numerous Australian families still struggling to put food on the table within the limitations of the dole.
Putting Australians back to work by giving them the necessary training should take preference over this artificial drive to deliver a budget surplus. Education is a Federal government responsibility when it is coupled with shortening the dole queues, and it delivers a bigger dividend eventually - to both the unemployed and the Treasury. Skilled workers get big pay packets - and they consequently pay higher taxes as a result. The nation gains a benefit from moving the unskilled unemployed into a skilled - and better paid - section of the workforce, and their families benefit by an elevated standard of living.
It's a win - win - win situation all around, but it will take resolve to put it into practise. The first step should be to disallow temporary visas for any job skill that can be filled by short term training - and the implementation of training facilities to provide that skill.
It is unlikely that the slothful bureaucracy is capable of meeting such needs within a meaningful time frame. The time has come to " think outside the nine dots " and appoint a person with the drive and ability to implement what is needed - and to deliver the authority to bring it to fruition.
Unfortunately, that is not the way of governments in this " politically correct " age !
Friday 27 April 2012
The power of the Press !
First it was Indian students being racially abused in Melbourne. Now it is Chinese students being attacked on a train in Sydney. When these events make the news stands in their home countries the repercussions are out of all proportion to what the statistics show.
In the Sydney incident, two Chinese students were physically and verbally attacked by a teenage gang of boys and girls ranging from fourteen to nineteen years old. It is reported that this gang tried to rob passengers on a late night train and one victim - who had obvious racist tendencies - suggested they rob the Chinese students instead - " because they have lots of money ".
It would be interesting to learn just how many other robberies took place on trains on that particular night. This incident made headline news - here and in China - simply because it followed racist incidents in Melbourne which are no longer news. Enterprising reporters are always looking for a good story - and perhaps it was a slow day in the news room - but that story did a lot of damage to Australia's reputation in China.
The Indian incidents saw a sharp decline in Indian student numbers heading to Australian universities, and it is possible that some Chinese families will have second thoughts about sending their sons and daughters here as a result.
Unfortunately the publicity is likely to inspire further attacks because of the " copycat appeal " that attracts some people to feed their need for fame. They get their kicks about reading reports in the media - about the crimes they have committed. This manifests itself in arsonists who light bushfires and gloat over the damage caused, and in a more minor way - by graffiti people who deface property and enjoy the howls of public indignation that result.
There is no doubt that a percentage of the Australian population has racist tendencies. Chinese student leaders in Australia comment that it is not unusual for people with obvious Chinese features to get the odd disparaging remark, but they agree that physical violence is unusual - and when it happens it is usually a matter of " being in the wrong place at the wrong time ".
Australia has no defence against incidents of this kind. There will always be drunken, out of control youths and racially embittered older people who will offend. The best we can do is to thoroughly investigate each and every incident - and make sure the perpetrators get appropriate punishment.
The good news is that student leaders recognise that the odd racist incident is inevitable when they visit a foreign country - but concede that Australia is still one of the safest countries in the world for foreign students to attend university !
In the Sydney incident, two Chinese students were physically and verbally attacked by a teenage gang of boys and girls ranging from fourteen to nineteen years old. It is reported that this gang tried to rob passengers on a late night train and one victim - who had obvious racist tendencies - suggested they rob the Chinese students instead - " because they have lots of money ".
It would be interesting to learn just how many other robberies took place on trains on that particular night. This incident made headline news - here and in China - simply because it followed racist incidents in Melbourne which are no longer news. Enterprising reporters are always looking for a good story - and perhaps it was a slow day in the news room - but that story did a lot of damage to Australia's reputation in China.
The Indian incidents saw a sharp decline in Indian student numbers heading to Australian universities, and it is possible that some Chinese families will have second thoughts about sending their sons and daughters here as a result.
Unfortunately the publicity is likely to inspire further attacks because of the " copycat appeal " that attracts some people to feed their need for fame. They get their kicks about reading reports in the media - about the crimes they have committed. This manifests itself in arsonists who light bushfires and gloat over the damage caused, and in a more minor way - by graffiti people who deface property and enjoy the howls of public indignation that result.
There is no doubt that a percentage of the Australian population has racist tendencies. Chinese student leaders in Australia comment that it is not unusual for people with obvious Chinese features to get the odd disparaging remark, but they agree that physical violence is unusual - and when it happens it is usually a matter of " being in the wrong place at the wrong time ".
Australia has no defence against incidents of this kind. There will always be drunken, out of control youths and racially embittered older people who will offend. The best we can do is to thoroughly investigate each and every incident - and make sure the perpetrators get appropriate punishment.
The good news is that student leaders recognise that the odd racist incident is inevitable when they visit a foreign country - but concede that Australia is still one of the safest countries in the world for foreign students to attend university !
Thursday 26 April 2012
A " One Way" deal !
Many citizens will be angered by a decision reached by the United Nations Human Rights Committee on our deportation rights. Fortunately this is non binding - and Australia chooses to ignore the ruling.
The case concerns a person who migrated here from Sweden when he was just twenty-seven days old. He never bothered to take out Australian citizenship, and now - thirty six years later - we have deported him back to Sweden because of a long criminal history.
The UN Human Rights Committee has ruled that despite this deportation being consistent with international law, we must bend the rules and take him back !
It seems to many that the UN attitude to citizenship seems to be a " one way " deal, with all the rights conferred onto the deportee - and none available to Australia.
The reason this man was deported was because he chose to live a life of crime. His rap sheet includes the rape of a ten year old boy and over eighty other offences, ranging from arson, armed robbery, theft and drug offences. Surely these provide a valid reason for the deportation ?
We accept that as a nation we are stuck with those criminals that were born in this country. That confers immediate citizenship status, but those that choose to come here and do not bother to apply and receive legal citizenship status have no such protection.
This also raises the question of " mutual obligations " !
When we offer citizenship to an immigrant we - as a nation - promise all the rights and benefits that apply to our naturally born citizens, and the applicant makes a sworn declaration to obey the laws of this country.
How often do we find that - having been granted citizenship - the new citizen breaks that oath and refuses to submit to our laws and instead claims that his or her religious laws take precedence ?
Once again, this " one way deal " thinking comes into force. The oath of obedience to our laws is dismissed by the United Nations but the rights of the person having citizenship is upheld. Surely justice demands that both parties meet their obligations ?
Maybe it's time for a " new deal " ! Citizenship to be granted on a " provisional " basis - subject to clearly stated " mutual obligations " !
The case concerns a person who migrated here from Sweden when he was just twenty-seven days old. He never bothered to take out Australian citizenship, and now - thirty six years later - we have deported him back to Sweden because of a long criminal history.
The UN Human Rights Committee has ruled that despite this deportation being consistent with international law, we must bend the rules and take him back !
It seems to many that the UN attitude to citizenship seems to be a " one way " deal, with all the rights conferred onto the deportee - and none available to Australia.
The reason this man was deported was because he chose to live a life of crime. His rap sheet includes the rape of a ten year old boy and over eighty other offences, ranging from arson, armed robbery, theft and drug offences. Surely these provide a valid reason for the deportation ?
We accept that as a nation we are stuck with those criminals that were born in this country. That confers immediate citizenship status, but those that choose to come here and do not bother to apply and receive legal citizenship status have no such protection.
This also raises the question of " mutual obligations " !
When we offer citizenship to an immigrant we - as a nation - promise all the rights and benefits that apply to our naturally born citizens, and the applicant makes a sworn declaration to obey the laws of this country.
How often do we find that - having been granted citizenship - the new citizen breaks that oath and refuses to submit to our laws and instead claims that his or her religious laws take precedence ?
Once again, this " one way deal " thinking comes into force. The oath of obedience to our laws is dismissed by the United Nations but the rights of the person having citizenship is upheld. Surely justice demands that both parties meet their obligations ?
Maybe it's time for a " new deal " ! Citizenship to be granted on a " provisional " basis - subject to clearly stated " mutual obligations " !
Wednesday 25 April 2012
Advertising - and ethics !
The news that celebrities are being paid to make comments on Twitter to advertise Kangaroo island in South Australia raises the question of ethics. South Australia's Tourism Commission claims that it is a " legitimate marketing tool ", but it obviously fails the " truth in advertising " test !
$ 10,000 is being spent on such celebrity tweets - and that delivers a bonus of about $ 750 a tweet - and we are assured that obligations to the GST will be scrupulously met. What is not clear is whether these celebrities have ever visited Kangaroo island, or whether they will do so as part of this promotion.
Two issues seem to be involved. When we see an advertisement depicting a well known person cooking a meal on TV we accept that the person is doing a paid actor's job. They are going through the motions for the camera - and that is quite acceptable.
The whole " Twitter " experience is to recruit " followers " who attach themselves to the prime Twitter character and tend to hang on every word uttered. This seems to involve " friendship ", and yet this Kangaroo island campaign seems to be a con to persuade these " friends " that their hero has intimate knowledge of the joys that await them if they include this island in their next holiday.
It seems to be just another step along the way of combining commerce with our circle of friends and acquaintances in the name of enhancing our bank balance. Some might compare it to inviting people to a " party " - which turns out to be an evening when a slick presenter does a hard sell on goods ranging from pots and pans to electrical appliances - and that the " hostess " not only gets a cut on the sales made, but gets a " present " for setting up her friends.
Most of us are well aware of the danger of opening an unsigned email which appears to have come from a friend. It usually contains an attachment - and the message reads as if a friend was directing our attention to something previously discussed. It sounds enticing, but it can be a " Trojan Horse " containing a malicious virus.
The old saying is " that all is fair in love and war " - and perhaps " advertising " should be added.
It does tend to create a degree of cynicism. Just as we no longer assume that conversations on our mobile phone are free from any form of hacking, we no longer accept that the motives of friends and family are free of any commercial incentives.
It seems that all we see and hear on Facebook and Twitter - are wisely taken with the proverbial grain of salt !
$ 10,000 is being spent on such celebrity tweets - and that delivers a bonus of about $ 750 a tweet - and we are assured that obligations to the GST will be scrupulously met. What is not clear is whether these celebrities have ever visited Kangaroo island, or whether they will do so as part of this promotion.
Two issues seem to be involved. When we see an advertisement depicting a well known person cooking a meal on TV we accept that the person is doing a paid actor's job. They are going through the motions for the camera - and that is quite acceptable.
The whole " Twitter " experience is to recruit " followers " who attach themselves to the prime Twitter character and tend to hang on every word uttered. This seems to involve " friendship ", and yet this Kangaroo island campaign seems to be a con to persuade these " friends " that their hero has intimate knowledge of the joys that await them if they include this island in their next holiday.
It seems to be just another step along the way of combining commerce with our circle of friends and acquaintances in the name of enhancing our bank balance. Some might compare it to inviting people to a " party " - which turns out to be an evening when a slick presenter does a hard sell on goods ranging from pots and pans to electrical appliances - and that the " hostess " not only gets a cut on the sales made, but gets a " present " for setting up her friends.
Most of us are well aware of the danger of opening an unsigned email which appears to have come from a friend. It usually contains an attachment - and the message reads as if a friend was directing our attention to something previously discussed. It sounds enticing, but it can be a " Trojan Horse " containing a malicious virus.
The old saying is " that all is fair in love and war " - and perhaps " advertising " should be added.
It does tend to create a degree of cynicism. Just as we no longer assume that conversations on our mobile phone are free from any form of hacking, we no longer accept that the motives of friends and family are free of any commercial incentives.
It seems that all we see and hear on Facebook and Twitter - are wisely taken with the proverbial grain of salt !
Tuesday 24 April 2012
An opportunity knocking !
Ask any mother with school age children for one of her major problems - and she will probably name head lice ! Wherever there are a mix of schools and children, there will be regular outbreaks of head lice and they seem impossible to eradicate.
Numerous insecticides and chemical treatments promise relief, but not only are they expensive - the lice quickly develop immunity, and the only really effective way of reducing the problem seems to be a time consuming application of a fine tooth comb. A daily session with this comb seems to be a part of life that mother's dread.
An enterprising woman in Wollongong researched the lice problem and found that the University of Utah in the United States had developed a machine that offered promise. This machine passed hot air through the child's hair follicles and this resolved one of the defences that Mother Nature had bestowed on the louse - to guarantee that it would regenerate and go on to create the next generation of nits.
When the louse lays it's eggs it uses a powerful glue to fix them to hair follicles. This enables enough to escape that fine tooth comb to sire the next generation. The passage of hot air softens this glue and breaks the cycle, enabling treatment to result in a louse free child.
The woman who did this research imported a machine, and now runs a salon delivering a hair delousing service. Schools have just returned after the holiday break, and the salon is doing maximum business. Her operators use hot air and fine tooth combs to deliver lice free children - to very happy mothers.
The first rule of starting a new business is to find a need that is not being serviced - and then fill that gap !
It seems that opportunity is knocking in every town and village in this country. By acquiring an inexpensive piece of equipment, the way is open to set up a business delivering a much needed service. It would be a welcome adjunct to any existing hair salon looking to increase patronage, or it could be a welcome home industry for an enterprising person seeking additional income.
It would certainly appeal to those bright people who are more interested in creating a job - rather than the mundane " search for employment ".
Numerous insecticides and chemical treatments promise relief, but not only are they expensive - the lice quickly develop immunity, and the only really effective way of reducing the problem seems to be a time consuming application of a fine tooth comb. A daily session with this comb seems to be a part of life that mother's dread.
An enterprising woman in Wollongong researched the lice problem and found that the University of Utah in the United States had developed a machine that offered promise. This machine passed hot air through the child's hair follicles and this resolved one of the defences that Mother Nature had bestowed on the louse - to guarantee that it would regenerate and go on to create the next generation of nits.
When the louse lays it's eggs it uses a powerful glue to fix them to hair follicles. This enables enough to escape that fine tooth comb to sire the next generation. The passage of hot air softens this glue and breaks the cycle, enabling treatment to result in a louse free child.
The woman who did this research imported a machine, and now runs a salon delivering a hair delousing service. Schools have just returned after the holiday break, and the salon is doing maximum business. Her operators use hot air and fine tooth combs to deliver lice free children - to very happy mothers.
The first rule of starting a new business is to find a need that is not being serviced - and then fill that gap !
It seems that opportunity is knocking in every town and village in this country. By acquiring an inexpensive piece of equipment, the way is open to set up a business delivering a much needed service. It would be a welcome adjunct to any existing hair salon looking to increase patronage, or it could be a welcome home industry for an enterprising person seeking additional income.
It would certainly appeal to those bright people who are more interested in creating a job - rather than the mundane " search for employment ".
Monday 23 April 2012
The age of the camera
On Saturday the police opened fire on a stolen car that was mowing down pedestrians as it tried to escape apprehension. Few would have been surprised when - hours later - graphic film footage started to appear in the media, showing in great detail those events and the arrests that followed.
Not only does cctv cameras cover the street scene, we also have " SafetyCam " recording the passage of every vehicle on the nation's highways. Whenever we stop for a snack or to buy petrol, we can be assured that the security cameras at those businesses record our purchase and keep an identity check record. We are probably photographed many times each day as we go about our business.
In recent years the camera in our mobile phone has upgraded from a low pixel instrument to a high end product, capable of delivering high quality still photography - and video. The advent of the " smart phone " has brought another inevitable improvement in technology - and it seems that these days there are few people without a mobile phone in their purse or pocket.
It is both a curse - and a blessing. Ambulance crews, police, SES personnel - all can be sure that their work is likely to be recorded and therefore their actions must be correct and " by the book " at all times. A slight relapse under provocation - will be the main story in next days news !
The criminal element has a big new worry. Crime flourishes when the criminal remains anonymous, but try passing a fake banknote or mug an old lady for her handbag - and there is a good chance that some camera has recorded the event.
Car crashes, industrial accidents - all manner of mundane events seem to attract people to record scenes on their mobile cameras, and for some that could bring a rich reward. We will probably see a sharp increase in advertisements calling for witnesses to events likely to come before the courts to come forward - and litigants willing to pay for evidence that would prove their innocence.
Love it - or hate it - the camera is here to stay, and whatever we do and wherever we go will probably be recorded somewhere - and could reappear when we least expect it.
Not only does cctv cameras cover the street scene, we also have " SafetyCam " recording the passage of every vehicle on the nation's highways. Whenever we stop for a snack or to buy petrol, we can be assured that the security cameras at those businesses record our purchase and keep an identity check record. We are probably photographed many times each day as we go about our business.
In recent years the camera in our mobile phone has upgraded from a low pixel instrument to a high end product, capable of delivering high quality still photography - and video. The advent of the " smart phone " has brought another inevitable improvement in technology - and it seems that these days there are few people without a mobile phone in their purse or pocket.
It is both a curse - and a blessing. Ambulance crews, police, SES personnel - all can be sure that their work is likely to be recorded and therefore their actions must be correct and " by the book " at all times. A slight relapse under provocation - will be the main story in next days news !
The criminal element has a big new worry. Crime flourishes when the criminal remains anonymous, but try passing a fake banknote or mug an old lady for her handbag - and there is a good chance that some camera has recorded the event.
Car crashes, industrial accidents - all manner of mundane events seem to attract people to record scenes on their mobile cameras, and for some that could bring a rich reward. We will probably see a sharp increase in advertisements calling for witnesses to events likely to come before the courts to come forward - and litigants willing to pay for evidence that would prove their innocence.
Love it - or hate it - the camera is here to stay, and whatever we do and wherever we go will probably be recorded somewhere - and could reappear when we least expect it.
Sunday 22 April 2012
The " Compensation " game !
New South Wales taxpayers are facing a voracious monster that is five billion dollars in debt. It is called " Workcover " - and unless it is tamed it will continue to bleed the tax system and reduce funds for other essential services.
When a person is injured at work, Workcover springs into action and provides both immediate sustenance to get the injury healed - and that person back into the work force. It is also responsible for supplying compensation when the injury leaves permanent damage. Workcover has an annual budget cost of $ 13 billion - and serviced 28,000 injured workers in the past financial year.
The government is looking at restructuring the scheme, and this will not be popular with many people. Lump sum compensation is likely to be scrapped in favour of regular monthly payments, and restrictions will apply by way of a time frame. There will be a cut off point at which payments cease, except for those that are totally and permanently incapacitated.
It sounds harsh, but then all compensation schemes are prone to rorts and in a time when jobs are hard to find there is a tendency for people to prolong recovery and extend the time they take while receiving compensation payments. The emphasis of Workcover will change from merely paying sustenance - to giving the injured training to learn new skills and re-enter the workforce in a new job where that old injury is no longer a handicap.
One of the problems with lump sum compensation payments in the past has been the ability of receipients to manage the money. Money that is supposed to last a lifetime can be easily squandered if it is not invested wisely, Regular payments remove this hazard, and they can be indexed for inflation.
There seems no doubt that a revamped Workcover will be less generous than the old scheme, but the present system is unsustainable, and if left unchecked it will continue to accumulate debt until sheer necessity forces drastic change.
Few would object to realistic rules to cover worker's compensation, provided that the guidelines that apply are crystal clear - and fair. Hopefully, this new approach will remove the " lottery " mode that exists at present, when similar cases deliver very different outcomes because of the skill of the lawyers presenting each case - and the attitudes of different judges.
Certainty in compensation would be a welcome factor !
When a person is injured at work, Workcover springs into action and provides both immediate sustenance to get the injury healed - and that person back into the work force. It is also responsible for supplying compensation when the injury leaves permanent damage. Workcover has an annual budget cost of $ 13 billion - and serviced 28,000 injured workers in the past financial year.
The government is looking at restructuring the scheme, and this will not be popular with many people. Lump sum compensation is likely to be scrapped in favour of regular monthly payments, and restrictions will apply by way of a time frame. There will be a cut off point at which payments cease, except for those that are totally and permanently incapacitated.
It sounds harsh, but then all compensation schemes are prone to rorts and in a time when jobs are hard to find there is a tendency for people to prolong recovery and extend the time they take while receiving compensation payments. The emphasis of Workcover will change from merely paying sustenance - to giving the injured training to learn new skills and re-enter the workforce in a new job where that old injury is no longer a handicap.
One of the problems with lump sum compensation payments in the past has been the ability of receipients to manage the money. Money that is supposed to last a lifetime can be easily squandered if it is not invested wisely, Regular payments remove this hazard, and they can be indexed for inflation.
There seems no doubt that a revamped Workcover will be less generous than the old scheme, but the present system is unsustainable, and if left unchecked it will continue to accumulate debt until sheer necessity forces drastic change.
Few would object to realistic rules to cover worker's compensation, provided that the guidelines that apply are crystal clear - and fair. Hopefully, this new approach will remove the " lottery " mode that exists at present, when similar cases deliver very different outcomes because of the skill of the lawyers presenting each case - and the attitudes of different judges.
Certainty in compensation would be a welcome factor !
Saturday 21 April 2012
Piracy - at a price !
It seems that the owners of intellectual property are on a losing streak when it comes to protecting their investment from piracy. Yesterday the High Court of Australia rejected an appeal to stop file sharing company iiNet allowing it's customers to download movies and TV programmes for free - because doing so infringes copyright.
This comes hard on the heels of a decision to allow customers of a mobile phone company to download sporting coverage with just a few seconds delay, on the basis that it's customers were actually doing the same as when they used a home recorder to capture images for their own entertainment. Once again, it was the principle of copyright that was the loser.
The sticking point is a rejection of the right of whoever owns that copyright to make a profit by asking a fee for it's use. The makers of movies recoup their production costs and make a profit when we pay money to see the film in a movie theatre. The sporting industry gets it's money when spectators fill grandstands to watch sport - and when they auction television and radio replay rights - for a fee.
In more recent times, viewing movies and watching sport has been extended to the Internet and the plethora of innovations - I-Pads, Smart phones - that make mobile viewing possible. Court decisions no longer seem to uphold the right of the copyright owner to charge a fee and govern who will - and who will not - be permitted use of this intellectual property.
These decisions will be applauded by some " free spirit " people, but they will come at a price. If this sort of piracy becomes legal, then the entire sporting/entertainment structure as we know it will come crashing down. We will have removed the " profit incentive " that underpins the entertainment industry.
Making a movie costs big money. It is a risky business. The investors hope for a " hit " that will bring rich rewards, but some fail to even make their production costs. If piracy is allowed to circulate the finished product for free, then finding people to invest in movie production will wither away - and far fewer productions will result.
The entire rationale of all the sporting codes revolves around viewing fees financing competitions. One source of finance is bums on seats in stadiums, but another is the exclusive deal with television networks which return the money to keep top players in the team - and it is these megastars that the viewers pay to watch.
Someone once famously said that " there is no such thing as a free lunch ".
If High court decisions continue to destroy intellectual property rights, then the days when we enjoy movies and watch our favourite team play sport may be numbered.
Once the profit motive is gone - so is the entertainment !.
This comes hard on the heels of a decision to allow customers of a mobile phone company to download sporting coverage with just a few seconds delay, on the basis that it's customers were actually doing the same as when they used a home recorder to capture images for their own entertainment. Once again, it was the principle of copyright that was the loser.
The sticking point is a rejection of the right of whoever owns that copyright to make a profit by asking a fee for it's use. The makers of movies recoup their production costs and make a profit when we pay money to see the film in a movie theatre. The sporting industry gets it's money when spectators fill grandstands to watch sport - and when they auction television and radio replay rights - for a fee.
In more recent times, viewing movies and watching sport has been extended to the Internet and the plethora of innovations - I-Pads, Smart phones - that make mobile viewing possible. Court decisions no longer seem to uphold the right of the copyright owner to charge a fee and govern who will - and who will not - be permitted use of this intellectual property.
These decisions will be applauded by some " free spirit " people, but they will come at a price. If this sort of piracy becomes legal, then the entire sporting/entertainment structure as we know it will come crashing down. We will have removed the " profit incentive " that underpins the entertainment industry.
Making a movie costs big money. It is a risky business. The investors hope for a " hit " that will bring rich rewards, but some fail to even make their production costs. If piracy is allowed to circulate the finished product for free, then finding people to invest in movie production will wither away - and far fewer productions will result.
The entire rationale of all the sporting codes revolves around viewing fees financing competitions. One source of finance is bums on seats in stadiums, but another is the exclusive deal with television networks which return the money to keep top players in the team - and it is these megastars that the viewers pay to watch.
Someone once famously said that " there is no such thing as a free lunch ".
If High court decisions continue to destroy intellectual property rights, then the days when we enjoy movies and watch our favourite team play sport may be numbered.
Once the profit motive is gone - so is the entertainment !.
Friday 20 April 2012
Electricity - the " control " option !
AUSGRID is suggesting that the future supply of electricity will be controlled by new " smart " meters which will allow electricity suppliers to isolate and switch off " power guzzlers " at the time of peak loads, and will allow consumers to make savings by applying a price/time scale to billing.
These are options that are being considered as the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal ( IPART ) moves towards the next round of price increases.
One of the problems facing those tasked with generating electricity is the cost of having equipment on standby to cover the usage peaks that only occur in exceptional weather conditions, and usually only last for a short period of time. If power usage can be managed to decrease these peaks, massive cost savings are possible.
The new smart meters would allow the power generating authority to simply shut down items such a swimming pool pumps, laundry clothes dryers and air conditioners to lower demand on the grid when demand is nearing capacity. This option would be in the hands of the electricity supplier, not the electricity customer.
Smart meters would extend the present benefits of " off peak " power to cover a much wider scale. It is proposed that the price of electricity would vary - according to the hours of the day and the demand on the grid. For instance, a family with a load of washing could elect not to turn on the machine during a peak period, but wait until that has passed and make a saving by purchasing the power needed at a much lower rate.
This option certainly makes sense. As things now stand, the price of electricity is constant throughout the day and night, with the exception of those who have a separate off peak hot water heater. Given a choice of times and prices, it would be possible to heat the house in winter before the morning peak, and distribute other heavy load uses to a better pricing time.
It would put price management back into the hands of the consumer and allow genuine savings by making a careful plan to select the best times to use heavy load electricity.
It seems to offer the best of both worlds. The electricity generating people benefit by avoiding the need to construct rarely used generating capacity, and consumers gain by off peak rates becoming extended to a wider section of the day and night.
One of the instances where advances in technology solves mutual problems !
These are options that are being considered as the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal ( IPART ) moves towards the next round of price increases.
One of the problems facing those tasked with generating electricity is the cost of having equipment on standby to cover the usage peaks that only occur in exceptional weather conditions, and usually only last for a short period of time. If power usage can be managed to decrease these peaks, massive cost savings are possible.
The new smart meters would allow the power generating authority to simply shut down items such a swimming pool pumps, laundry clothes dryers and air conditioners to lower demand on the grid when demand is nearing capacity. This option would be in the hands of the electricity supplier, not the electricity customer.
Smart meters would extend the present benefits of " off peak " power to cover a much wider scale. It is proposed that the price of electricity would vary - according to the hours of the day and the demand on the grid. For instance, a family with a load of washing could elect not to turn on the machine during a peak period, but wait until that has passed and make a saving by purchasing the power needed at a much lower rate.
This option certainly makes sense. As things now stand, the price of electricity is constant throughout the day and night, with the exception of those who have a separate off peak hot water heater. Given a choice of times and prices, it would be possible to heat the house in winter before the morning peak, and distribute other heavy load uses to a better pricing time.
It would put price management back into the hands of the consumer and allow genuine savings by making a careful plan to select the best times to use heavy load electricity.
It seems to offer the best of both worlds. The electricity generating people benefit by avoiding the need to construct rarely used generating capacity, and consumers gain by off peak rates becoming extended to a wider section of the day and night.
One of the instances where advances in technology solves mutual problems !
Thursday 19 April 2012
The " Swings and the Roundabouts " !
Treasurer Wayne Swan has announced a new scheme to encourage employers to have another look at those over fifty years of age. From July 1, a bonus will apply for hiring the over fifties - and keeping them employed for three months. At $ 1000 per head, it is a powerful incentive, but there is a limit. A cap has been set at ten thousand employees.
Most unemployed people are very much aware of how age damages their chances of getting a regular pay packet. In many industries, forty-five seems to be the critical age when job applications cease to draw interest, and for most over fifties anything more than a temporary job is only a distant dream.
We have an employment problem at both ends of the age barrier. The older unemployed can not get work because they are labelled as " too old " and young people miss out on employment because they are considered " too young ".
Obviously, this bonus scheme will not please everyone. It will certainly result in some older people gaining paid work, but those jobs will be at the expense of opportunities which might have gone to the young unemployed. Wage rates for young people are less than those for mature aged workers, hence that bonus balances up the difference.
Schemes such as this are really just tinkering around the edges. The real reason employers are reluctant to hire is because of the " job security " measures that make dispensing with an employee both difficult - and expensive.
Governments live in an unreal world when it comes to commerce. The backbone of any successful business is the right to " hire and fire " as circumstances demand. When business is good - you hire more people and expand. When a recession takes hold you retrench and produce to the level of demand. That is the way business has been conducted since the days that camels carried traded goods along the length of the silk road.
Today's laws have created an imbalance. There are no problems with hiring - but firing is entirely a different matter. An employer can be hauled before a court of enquiry and made to give detailed reasons for his or her action, and if the judging tribunal disagrees - can be saddled with a demand that the employee be reinstated, despite that employee being surplus to the needs of the business.
That costs dollars. Lots and lots of dollars ! And it is one of the reasons that many employers are not persuaded to increase their workforce in good times. They prefer to work a smaller number of people overtime, rather than take the risk of litigation when trade slows - and retrenchments are necessary.
It all comes down to a balance between the right of an employer to reduce staff when that becomes necessary, and the rights of those employed to get a fair deal by way of fair pay and job security. Until we get that right - there will be unemployed at both age ends of the work force.
Tinkering with employment by way of artificial bonus schemes merely distributes jobs by the vagaries of " the swings and the roundabouts ". Some win. Some lose - but the problem remains !
Most unemployed people are very much aware of how age damages their chances of getting a regular pay packet. In many industries, forty-five seems to be the critical age when job applications cease to draw interest, and for most over fifties anything more than a temporary job is only a distant dream.
We have an employment problem at both ends of the age barrier. The older unemployed can not get work because they are labelled as " too old " and young people miss out on employment because they are considered " too young ".
Obviously, this bonus scheme will not please everyone. It will certainly result in some older people gaining paid work, but those jobs will be at the expense of opportunities which might have gone to the young unemployed. Wage rates for young people are less than those for mature aged workers, hence that bonus balances up the difference.
Schemes such as this are really just tinkering around the edges. The real reason employers are reluctant to hire is because of the " job security " measures that make dispensing with an employee both difficult - and expensive.
Governments live in an unreal world when it comes to commerce. The backbone of any successful business is the right to " hire and fire " as circumstances demand. When business is good - you hire more people and expand. When a recession takes hold you retrench and produce to the level of demand. That is the way business has been conducted since the days that camels carried traded goods along the length of the silk road.
Today's laws have created an imbalance. There are no problems with hiring - but firing is entirely a different matter. An employer can be hauled before a court of enquiry and made to give detailed reasons for his or her action, and if the judging tribunal disagrees - can be saddled with a demand that the employee be reinstated, despite that employee being surplus to the needs of the business.
That costs dollars. Lots and lots of dollars ! And it is one of the reasons that many employers are not persuaded to increase their workforce in good times. They prefer to work a smaller number of people overtime, rather than take the risk of litigation when trade slows - and retrenchments are necessary.
It all comes down to a balance between the right of an employer to reduce staff when that becomes necessary, and the rights of those employed to get a fair deal by way of fair pay and job security. Until we get that right - there will be unemployed at both age ends of the work force.
Tinkering with employment by way of artificial bonus schemes merely distributes jobs by the vagaries of " the swings and the roundabouts ". Some win. Some lose - but the problem remains !
Wednesday 18 April 2012
Thespian Councillors ?
Wollongong council seems likely to turn down a proposal to stream council meetings live on the Internet. This is a new innovation, recently adopted by Shellharbour - but there is a doubt that public interest would warrant the cost of setting up and running such a service..
Public funds would need to find $ 57,000 for set up costs, and it would cost a further $ 21,000 a year to maintain this service, and enquiries reveal that Shellharbour council meetings attract an average viewing audience of between thirty and forty people per session.
Shakespeare once said that " All the world's a stage " and putting people before cameras seems certain to bring out the Thespian instinct in many. Do we really need councillors hamming it up for possible viewer appeal - and do we need " Dorothy Dix " questions to set the stage for long and boring political replies ?
There is also a concern that live broadcasts will result in a surge of defamation cases, although it is hard to see why this should happen, given that the media give council matters close coverage and any acrimony is the spice that makes reports interesting reading.
Proponents claim that putting cameras in council meetings enhances the " transparency " that many of those seeking office proposed, but cynics would argue that it would merely extend the farce of the ABC's telecast of " Question Time " from Federal parliament. Why risk denigrating council meetings by depicting a " pack of clowns " acting disgracefully in public view ?
There are valid arguments for and against, but the real issue is cost. There is certainly not strong public demand for such a service and most likely the only time it would attract viewers is when a contentious issue is being decided - and that is something that usually brings the public into the viewing gallery in big numbers.
This city is scratching the bottom of the finance barrel to provide essential services such as footpaths and roads without pot holes. It would be hard to justify setting up a Webcan coverage of council meetings as having priority in the allocation of council funds.
A thumb's down would be a sensible decision !
Public funds would need to find $ 57,000 for set up costs, and it would cost a further $ 21,000 a year to maintain this service, and enquiries reveal that Shellharbour council meetings attract an average viewing audience of between thirty and forty people per session.
Shakespeare once said that " All the world's a stage " and putting people before cameras seems certain to bring out the Thespian instinct in many. Do we really need councillors hamming it up for possible viewer appeal - and do we need " Dorothy Dix " questions to set the stage for long and boring political replies ?
There is also a concern that live broadcasts will result in a surge of defamation cases, although it is hard to see why this should happen, given that the media give council matters close coverage and any acrimony is the spice that makes reports interesting reading.
Proponents claim that putting cameras in council meetings enhances the " transparency " that many of those seeking office proposed, but cynics would argue that it would merely extend the farce of the ABC's telecast of " Question Time " from Federal parliament. Why risk denigrating council meetings by depicting a " pack of clowns " acting disgracefully in public view ?
There are valid arguments for and against, but the real issue is cost. There is certainly not strong public demand for such a service and most likely the only time it would attract viewers is when a contentious issue is being decided - and that is something that usually brings the public into the viewing gallery in big numbers.
This city is scratching the bottom of the finance barrel to provide essential services such as footpaths and roads without pot holes. It would be hard to justify setting up a Webcan coverage of council meetings as having priority in the allocation of council funds.
A thumb's down would be a sensible decision !
Tuesday 17 April 2012
Delivering " Bad news " !
In January, Toyota announced that because of falling car sales and the high Australian dollar it would need to cull it's Altona workforce by ten percent. Yesterday, the chopper fell on three hundred and fifty jobs !
Terminating employees - or " the sack " as it is called - is never a pleasant experience for either party. There is no " perfect way " to deliver bad news, but many people would think that Toyota took a better course than simply handing out pink slips to those selected to go at the end of a work shift.
The employees selected for termination were taken by bus to a reception centre in the suburbs and handed a folder that contained information on how the terminated had been selected. Factors were represented by points allocated, and these covered attendance records, holding Toyota values - and safety ! There is criticism that security guards were present at this meeting.
Those ending their employment at Toyota claim that union shop stewards, health and safety representatives, and those on Workcover were unfairly selected for removal. There is the prospect that eighty of the disgruntled may go to court to challenge their dismissal.
This seems to come down to a tussle between the rights of an employer to take factors such as work attendance and number of sick days taken, and general attitude - as demonstrated by leadership of a militant union - into consideration when making a selection.
Unions usually embrace the concept of " last one employed equals first one dismissed " as a tactic of selecting those to be terminated. That simply elevates length of service over the value that employee may be capable of delivering.
In recent times, the GFC has accelerated instances where big employment numbers have to be culled and employers have learned a lot from outcomes. Sackings can become highly emotional and in some cases this emotion has erupted into riots and sit ins.
At least yesterdays event spared those selected for termination to be humiliated by receiving the bad news in the presence of their work mates, who will continue employment, and the method used is far preferable than to be told by a letter in the mail, an email - or worst of all - a SMS suddenly appearing on a mobile phone.
No matter how it is delivered, the unalterable fact is that bad news - is still " bad news " !
Terminating employees - or " the sack " as it is called - is never a pleasant experience for either party. There is no " perfect way " to deliver bad news, but many people would think that Toyota took a better course than simply handing out pink slips to those selected to go at the end of a work shift.
The employees selected for termination were taken by bus to a reception centre in the suburbs and handed a folder that contained information on how the terminated had been selected. Factors were represented by points allocated, and these covered attendance records, holding Toyota values - and safety ! There is criticism that security guards were present at this meeting.
Those ending their employment at Toyota claim that union shop stewards, health and safety representatives, and those on Workcover were unfairly selected for removal. There is the prospect that eighty of the disgruntled may go to court to challenge their dismissal.
This seems to come down to a tussle between the rights of an employer to take factors such as work attendance and number of sick days taken, and general attitude - as demonstrated by leadership of a militant union - into consideration when making a selection.
Unions usually embrace the concept of " last one employed equals first one dismissed " as a tactic of selecting those to be terminated. That simply elevates length of service over the value that employee may be capable of delivering.
In recent times, the GFC has accelerated instances where big employment numbers have to be culled and employers have learned a lot from outcomes. Sackings can become highly emotional and in some cases this emotion has erupted into riots and sit ins.
At least yesterdays event spared those selected for termination to be humiliated by receiving the bad news in the presence of their work mates, who will continue employment, and the method used is far preferable than to be told by a letter in the mail, an email - or worst of all - a SMS suddenly appearing on a mobile phone.
No matter how it is delivered, the unalterable fact is that bad news - is still " bad news " !
Monday 16 April 2012
Boxing day trading ?
There seems to be two clearly defined issues involved in the controversy over Boxing day trading. One concerns the present ridiculous situation where shops may open in Shellharbour - but not in Wollongong, and the other is whether all retail employees should have a family day off to get over Christmas day.
The legislation being proposed will open the flood gates to an open slather, but subjected to penalty rates to reimburse those who choose to come in to work. That " choice " is very tongue in cheek. In this time of tight employment, who in their right mind would stand out as a dissident by refusing ?
The legislation looks like being rejected because it will hinge on the minor parties and they are expressing doubts. Probably the fairest outcome would be a total ban on department stores opening on Boxing day, with no exemptions for the phony " tourist area " divide that now exists.
If parliament bites the bullet and bans Boxing day trading right across the state, do not automatically expect that it means people in retail will get a day off. What it really means is that the traditional Boxing day sales will take place on the next trading day - and staff will need to prepare the store for when the doors open and the public rush to get the promised bargains.
As things now stand, those stores that do trade on Boxing day require staff to come to work in the wee small hours prior to opening time to restore order from the Christmas eve shutdown, get the sale stock in place and fix the price tickets and advertising material that is relevant to the Boxing day sales, and of course the cleaning staff will be required to get the store ship shape and Bristol fashion - and ready to trade.
It is a fact of life that in many big department stores staff work on Christmas day to prepare for the Boxing day sales. Not all staff, but usually department heads and a few key staff are " invited " to participate. That seems to be just part of the work custom that prevails - just as newspaper people work on Christmas day - because of the need to prepare the next day's paper.
In reality, the issues covered by this legislation are more theoretical than practical. Whenever legal trading is permitted to start, store people will need to have the store ready - and that means some staff will be required to work on the previous day - be it Christmas day or Boxing day - to have that happen.
It simply reinforces that old saying. " The more things change, the more they stay the same ! "
The legislation being proposed will open the flood gates to an open slather, but subjected to penalty rates to reimburse those who choose to come in to work. That " choice " is very tongue in cheek. In this time of tight employment, who in their right mind would stand out as a dissident by refusing ?
The legislation looks like being rejected because it will hinge on the minor parties and they are expressing doubts. Probably the fairest outcome would be a total ban on department stores opening on Boxing day, with no exemptions for the phony " tourist area " divide that now exists.
If parliament bites the bullet and bans Boxing day trading right across the state, do not automatically expect that it means people in retail will get a day off. What it really means is that the traditional Boxing day sales will take place on the next trading day - and staff will need to prepare the store for when the doors open and the public rush to get the promised bargains.
As things now stand, those stores that do trade on Boxing day require staff to come to work in the wee small hours prior to opening time to restore order from the Christmas eve shutdown, get the sale stock in place and fix the price tickets and advertising material that is relevant to the Boxing day sales, and of course the cleaning staff will be required to get the store ship shape and Bristol fashion - and ready to trade.
It is a fact of life that in many big department stores staff work on Christmas day to prepare for the Boxing day sales. Not all staff, but usually department heads and a few key staff are " invited " to participate. That seems to be just part of the work custom that prevails - just as newspaper people work on Christmas day - because of the need to prepare the next day's paper.
In reality, the issues covered by this legislation are more theoretical than practical. Whenever legal trading is permitted to start, store people will need to have the store ready - and that means some staff will be required to work on the previous day - be it Christmas day or Boxing day - to have that happen.
It simply reinforces that old saying. " The more things change, the more they stay the same ! "
Sunday 15 April 2012
The " Dementia " question ?
The Federal Treasurer has a desperate need to bring down a " surplus " budget to save the governments bacon, but at the same time the health people are predicting an alarming increase in the number of Dementia patients in this country - and that calls for an actual spending increase.
One way of saving money is to keep more of those suffering Alzheimer disease in their own homes instead of the more costly nursing home option. There has been an increase in services in recent years and as a result those needing care can have their homes cleaned, meals provided and assistance with showering and dressing provided by trained people at highly subsidized cost.
The nursing home industry is concerned that the government is looking at cutting back the numbers receiving " high care " status in nursing homes. Dementia patients in high care need a much higher staff to patient ratio and that part of the building has security entrance and exit provisions. As a consequence, it's cost structure is much higher than conventional nursing home arrangements.
One of the dangers of Dementia is the unpredictability of patients. It is not unusual for some people to decide to return to their old homes, despite their brain deterioration making them forget where that home was located. They have been known to wander away - and become lost - sometimes with fatal results.
If cost savings bring about changes that see some Dementia patients housed in non-security nursing homes it will require a totally new approach to security, and that may not be acceptable to family and friends. One approach would be to fit each patient with a self positioning bracelet which could not be removed. In that way, the patients location would always be known with the push of a button and emergency services would be able to instantly recover a person who had wandered away.
Many would find this solution distasteful, bearing in mind that it is used to keep track of criminals on parole. It is important that dignity and respect does not become a victim of the equally important need to provide those with an age related mental health problem with personal security.
Health scientists warn that as medical advances extend the human life span, Dementia cases will become an expanding segment of health care in the near future, and consequently it will eat up a bigger slice of the health budget.
It is important that we make the right decisions on how to handle this coming epidemic. Unfortunately, the aged are not at the forefront of politician's minds when the " razor gang " is making budget cuts !
One way of saving money is to keep more of those suffering Alzheimer disease in their own homes instead of the more costly nursing home option. There has been an increase in services in recent years and as a result those needing care can have their homes cleaned, meals provided and assistance with showering and dressing provided by trained people at highly subsidized cost.
The nursing home industry is concerned that the government is looking at cutting back the numbers receiving " high care " status in nursing homes. Dementia patients in high care need a much higher staff to patient ratio and that part of the building has security entrance and exit provisions. As a consequence, it's cost structure is much higher than conventional nursing home arrangements.
One of the dangers of Dementia is the unpredictability of patients. It is not unusual for some people to decide to return to their old homes, despite their brain deterioration making them forget where that home was located. They have been known to wander away - and become lost - sometimes with fatal results.
If cost savings bring about changes that see some Dementia patients housed in non-security nursing homes it will require a totally new approach to security, and that may not be acceptable to family and friends. One approach would be to fit each patient with a self positioning bracelet which could not be removed. In that way, the patients location would always be known with the push of a button and emergency services would be able to instantly recover a person who had wandered away.
Many would find this solution distasteful, bearing in mind that it is used to keep track of criminals on parole. It is important that dignity and respect does not become a victim of the equally important need to provide those with an age related mental health problem with personal security.
Health scientists warn that as medical advances extend the human life span, Dementia cases will become an expanding segment of health care in the near future, and consequently it will eat up a bigger slice of the health budget.
It is important that we make the right decisions on how to handle this coming epidemic. Unfortunately, the aged are not at the forefront of politician's minds when the " razor gang " is making budget cuts !
Saturday 14 April 2012
A new tribe - the " Unemployables " !
This sad old world is facing a new challenge that may forever change the society we know and love. There is a distinct possibility that the legions of unemployed under the age of twenty-five may morph into an underclass that will never hold a paying job.
The society we know puts great hope into the education system that progresses young people through an ever increasing arc of knowledge until it reaches the apex - of walking out that school door holding a piece of paper called the " Higher School Certificate ". At that stage, the student stream divides. Some go directly into the work force, while others seek even further knowledge by attending university.
What is absolutely frightening is the change that has occurred since the GFC hit our economic world in 2008. In many parts of the world, the job market collapsed, and first in line to be refused work were the young people seeking their first job.
Since then, the young and jobless keep ever peaking upwards. Greece and Spain now have youth unemployment at above fifty percent, Italy is over thirty-one percent, the UK at twenty-two percent and the United States has reached sixteen percent.
Every year that a young person spends without employment brings them that much closer to the definition of being " unemployable ". It is not a static market place. Skill needs change at a remarkable speed, and the terminology is changing so fast that even those in employment are battling to keep relevant. As the gap widens, crossing that chasm becomes a bridge too far - and in many cases - the incentive to even try evaporates.
A wise person once said that " nature abhors a vacuum ". If we create a vacuum in the lives of young people by this lack of employment, then we can be sure that it will be filled - and that may be by activities that we do not like. We could see a return to " tribalism " as the young unemployed find activities to occupy their minds and bodies.
It could take the form of a radical outlook towards tearing down the social system and replacing it with something more to their liking. We have already seen governments overthrown by social unrest and the formidable strength of people power. In most cases these were oppressive, but oppression is what is in the eye of the beholder - and even a democracy can not be immune to a fast developing mood of change - and that has been evident even here - as elections have shown.
Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to the question of how we get our young people back to work, but what is clear is the inevitability that if unemployment continues at the present ever growing level, it will result in social change that will roil the world
How it all works out - will be something to ponder in future history books !
The society we know puts great hope into the education system that progresses young people through an ever increasing arc of knowledge until it reaches the apex - of walking out that school door holding a piece of paper called the " Higher School Certificate ". At that stage, the student stream divides. Some go directly into the work force, while others seek even further knowledge by attending university.
What is absolutely frightening is the change that has occurred since the GFC hit our economic world in 2008. In many parts of the world, the job market collapsed, and first in line to be refused work were the young people seeking their first job.
Since then, the young and jobless keep ever peaking upwards. Greece and Spain now have youth unemployment at above fifty percent, Italy is over thirty-one percent, the UK at twenty-two percent and the United States has reached sixteen percent.
Every year that a young person spends without employment brings them that much closer to the definition of being " unemployable ". It is not a static market place. Skill needs change at a remarkable speed, and the terminology is changing so fast that even those in employment are battling to keep relevant. As the gap widens, crossing that chasm becomes a bridge too far - and in many cases - the incentive to even try evaporates.
A wise person once said that " nature abhors a vacuum ". If we create a vacuum in the lives of young people by this lack of employment, then we can be sure that it will be filled - and that may be by activities that we do not like. We could see a return to " tribalism " as the young unemployed find activities to occupy their minds and bodies.
It could take the form of a radical outlook towards tearing down the social system and replacing it with something more to their liking. We have already seen governments overthrown by social unrest and the formidable strength of people power. In most cases these were oppressive, but oppression is what is in the eye of the beholder - and even a democracy can not be immune to a fast developing mood of change - and that has been evident even here - as elections have shown.
Unfortunately, there is no clear answer to the question of how we get our young people back to work, but what is clear is the inevitability that if unemployment continues at the present ever growing level, it will result in social change that will roil the world
How it all works out - will be something to ponder in future history books !
Friday 13 April 2012
Spending your taxes !
We have just been told that science has developed a new drug that is delivering almost instant cures for Melanoma - and Australia is the Melanoma capital of the world. Unfortunately, few Australians will be able to benefit from it, because the Australian government is refusing to list it under the Pharmaceutical Benefits scheme. The reason is - cost ! A treatment cycle will require either the patient - or the PBS - to shell out a whopping $ 120,000.
It would be nice to think that our government was careful with the money it spends - because that is our tax money and most people would think that high on the list of priorities would be saving Australian lives. Health care bites deeply into the national budget - and it will distress many people to know that some will be left to die a painful death simply because we can't afford to offer them an expensive treatment that would extend their life span.
It comes as a bit of a shock to learn that our Foreign minister, Bob Carr - has just given away a million dollars to the small nation states that are our neighbours in the Pacific ocean area - to fund them sending representatives to Rio+20, a talk fest to be held in Brazil on the subject of " how to sustainably manage the world's oceans ".
We are well aware that global warming is causing ocean levels to rise and that the amount of carbon in the air is causing the oceans to become more acidic, but it is hard to understand what these tiny little island states could possibly do to change that situation. In reality, some lucky person from their government will have a nice holiday at Australia's expense, sit and listen to a regurgitation of what is already known - and come back and write a report on what he or she learned.
No doubt it will make some people in Australia feel good. We are not ignoring our nice little neighbours and their problems of rising seas. At least we are enabling them to sit down alongside the big and powerful nations and voice their concern. As usual, the outcome will be a lack of pledges to take any meaningful action, but it will have been a nice courtesy - and anyway - what's a million dollars between friends ?
It could have funded eight Australians to be treated - and saved - from death from Melanoma. It is all a matter of priorities. Paying for people to attend that conference would have value - if it delivered some sort of improvement to the problem - then it would be a reasonable outcome, but if it was simply a wasted effort, then the money could have been better spent.
Some of the people facing death from Melanoma would probably agree with that thought !
It would be nice to think that our government was careful with the money it spends - because that is our tax money and most people would think that high on the list of priorities would be saving Australian lives. Health care bites deeply into the national budget - and it will distress many people to know that some will be left to die a painful death simply because we can't afford to offer them an expensive treatment that would extend their life span.
It comes as a bit of a shock to learn that our Foreign minister, Bob Carr - has just given away a million dollars to the small nation states that are our neighbours in the Pacific ocean area - to fund them sending representatives to Rio+20, a talk fest to be held in Brazil on the subject of " how to sustainably manage the world's oceans ".
We are well aware that global warming is causing ocean levels to rise and that the amount of carbon in the air is causing the oceans to become more acidic, but it is hard to understand what these tiny little island states could possibly do to change that situation. In reality, some lucky person from their government will have a nice holiday at Australia's expense, sit and listen to a regurgitation of what is already known - and come back and write a report on what he or she learned.
No doubt it will make some people in Australia feel good. We are not ignoring our nice little neighbours and their problems of rising seas. At least we are enabling them to sit down alongside the big and powerful nations and voice their concern. As usual, the outcome will be a lack of pledges to take any meaningful action, but it will have been a nice courtesy - and anyway - what's a million dollars between friends ?
It could have funded eight Australians to be treated - and saved - from death from Melanoma. It is all a matter of priorities. Paying for people to attend that conference would have value - if it delivered some sort of improvement to the problem - then it would be a reasonable outcome, but if it was simply a wasted effort, then the money could have been better spent.
Some of the people facing death from Melanoma would probably agree with that thought !
Thursday 12 April 2012
The " Spooks " are watching !
Bob Brown of the " Greens " thinks it is " intolerable " that the Australian Security and Intelligence Organization ( ASIO ) is using surveillance to keep an eye on conservation groups. He misses the point. The purpose of a defence mechanism such as ASIO is to keep watch and detect the tendency for groups with conservation issues to move from peaceful protest - to the dark world of terrorism in pursuing their aims.
A case in point. This week those who seek to close this nation's coal mines and cease all coal exports launched a graffiti attack on the home of Gujarat NRE Coking coal. They defaced a wall with slogans, resulting in a police investigation. The job of ASIO is to be watchful in case a more radical element within this group resorts to extreme methods to further their aims.
So far, our " Spooks " have done a good job keeping Australia safe from internal terrorism. Compared with comparable countries, we have escaped any major incidents and planning by some with evil in mind has been nipped in the bud - and the perpetraters dealt with in the courts.
The attitude of the Greens must be of concern to our security people. In a democratic country, our security services make regular reports to parliament and it would be disastrous if left leaning politicians " leaked " details of operational matters to the very people under covert investigation.
In a perfect world, the members of the government and the state security people would work together to achieve national security. There is always a danger that when politics enters the equation, the need for secrecy will undermine reporting honesty - and that leads to the shadowy world of James Bond novels.
Honest people who intend to remain within the law have nothing to fear. So far the ASIO track record delivers Australia as a safe country. Let's hope it stays that way !
A case in point. This week those who seek to close this nation's coal mines and cease all coal exports launched a graffiti attack on the home of Gujarat NRE Coking coal. They defaced a wall with slogans, resulting in a police investigation. The job of ASIO is to be watchful in case a more radical element within this group resorts to extreme methods to further their aims.
So far, our " Spooks " have done a good job keeping Australia safe from internal terrorism. Compared with comparable countries, we have escaped any major incidents and planning by some with evil in mind has been nipped in the bud - and the perpetraters dealt with in the courts.
The attitude of the Greens must be of concern to our security people. In a democratic country, our security services make regular reports to parliament and it would be disastrous if left leaning politicians " leaked " details of operational matters to the very people under covert investigation.
In a perfect world, the members of the government and the state security people would work together to achieve national security. There is always a danger that when politics enters the equation, the need for secrecy will undermine reporting honesty - and that leads to the shadowy world of James Bond novels.
Honest people who intend to remain within the law have nothing to fear. So far the ASIO track record delivers Australia as a safe country. Let's hope it stays that way !
Wednesday 11 April 2012
Syria - an unhappy ending !
The world looks on in dismay as another proposed cease fire in Syria passes it's deadline with the shooting still raging. Once again the Syrian president - Bashar Assad - has given promises he had no intention of keeping. The people of Syria saw the " Arab Spring " unseat dictators in Tunisia, Libya and Egypt and tried to bring democracy to their own land - only to become victims of greed and posturing in the United Nations security council when Russia and China used their veto to stifle all forms of assistance.
World opinion is horrified by scenes on TV that show Assad's well equipped army using heavy weapons to massacre women and children in towns and cities that oppose his cruel rule. So far - over nine thousand civilians have been slaughtered as the Syrian military seeks to crush all forms of resistance.
Efforts by the UN Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan to broker a cease fire looked promising. Assad signed an agreement to withdraw his army from it's perimeter attacking cities, but at the last moment he introduced new demands - and if anything, the ferocity of the onslaught actually increased.
Now we are seeing a new factor emerging. Terrified Syrian citizens are pouring over the borders in to Turkey and Lebanon to seek sanctuary in tent cities, but now the Syrian army is pursuing them - and shooting into neutral territory. The double dealing and perfidy of Assad is making even China and Russia uncomfortable. The support voiced by their ambassadors is declining and it looks like Assad has overplayed his hand. There is still incredibly brave resistance to his despotic rule and it seems that many of his citizens are going to accept death rather than concede defeat.
The key to what happens next is undoubtedly Turkey. It shares a border with Syria and it will not tolerate the Syrian army raiding refugee camps in it's territory. It is likely that the Turkish army may cross the border and set up a security enclave on Syrian soil - and from there anything is possible.
As usual in the Middle East, this is another religious war. The mix of Sh'ite and Sunni populations in various countries dictate the alliances that support or oppose the Assad regime. The best hope for peace seems to be the degree of world opinion that is fast forming, causing the leaders of these two religious factions to have second thoughts against joining in to what could become a civil war fought over religious borders.
There would be no winners in that - and only certain losers. It seems that Assad has bet his future on a last roll of the dice - and he may have underestimated the degree of resistance to his rule !
World opinion is horrified by scenes on TV that show Assad's well equipped army using heavy weapons to massacre women and children in towns and cities that oppose his cruel rule. So far - over nine thousand civilians have been slaughtered as the Syrian military seeks to crush all forms of resistance.
Efforts by the UN Arab League envoy, Kofi Annan to broker a cease fire looked promising. Assad signed an agreement to withdraw his army from it's perimeter attacking cities, but at the last moment he introduced new demands - and if anything, the ferocity of the onslaught actually increased.
Now we are seeing a new factor emerging. Terrified Syrian citizens are pouring over the borders in to Turkey and Lebanon to seek sanctuary in tent cities, but now the Syrian army is pursuing them - and shooting into neutral territory. The double dealing and perfidy of Assad is making even China and Russia uncomfortable. The support voiced by their ambassadors is declining and it looks like Assad has overplayed his hand. There is still incredibly brave resistance to his despotic rule and it seems that many of his citizens are going to accept death rather than concede defeat.
The key to what happens next is undoubtedly Turkey. It shares a border with Syria and it will not tolerate the Syrian army raiding refugee camps in it's territory. It is likely that the Turkish army may cross the border and set up a security enclave on Syrian soil - and from there anything is possible.
As usual in the Middle East, this is another religious war. The mix of Sh'ite and Sunni populations in various countries dictate the alliances that support or oppose the Assad regime. The best hope for peace seems to be the degree of world opinion that is fast forming, causing the leaders of these two religious factions to have second thoughts against joining in to what could become a civil war fought over religious borders.
There would be no winners in that - and only certain losers. It seems that Assad has bet his future on a last roll of the dice - and he may have underestimated the degree of resistance to his rule !
Tuesday 10 April 2012
Intimidation tactics !
Australia has always been seen as a safe place to be a holder of public office. Many people disagree with the stance that some of our politicians take, but apart from making angry phone calls or writing a rude letter to the local newspaper - violence has not been an option.
In many ways, local government decisions seem more personal. The issues that go before council to be decided affect where we live and the facilities our families enjoy. Sometimes these " bread and butter " issues create more heat than the more abstract and arcane deliberations of state and Federal parliament.
It is an ominous sign of change creeping into the affairs of local government when a Wollongong city councillor has to ask council to deploy a security guard to protect his home against attempts of intimidation.
Greg Petty was recently elected to council as an independent and as such some of his voting decisions have been pivotal when issues have divided along political lines. It seems that someone is showing displeasure by attempting to intimidate. A trailer load of asbestos was recently dumped in his drive and a car belonging to a member of his family was vandalised at his home.
Clearly, someone is intent on " delivering a message " and the implication is that worse could possibly follow if this councillor continues to offend the person responsible. No doubt the police will investigate. Hopefully, the matter will end with the perpetrator being hauled before a court, but it is alarming that a threat of violence has entered the area of council decision making for the first time.
There are countries in this world where people serve in public office at their peril. Assassination is an ever present threat and office holders at all levels of government live in fortified houses, surrounded by armed guards. We hope that this never becomes the norm here.
It is important that this intimidation threat be taken seriously, and properly investigated. It is a new tactic that could quickly take hold if it is not nipped in the bud promptly - and it certainly will cause future candidates for public office to think long and hard - before subjecting their families to possible harm !
In many ways, local government decisions seem more personal. The issues that go before council to be decided affect where we live and the facilities our families enjoy. Sometimes these " bread and butter " issues create more heat than the more abstract and arcane deliberations of state and Federal parliament.
It is an ominous sign of change creeping into the affairs of local government when a Wollongong city councillor has to ask council to deploy a security guard to protect his home against attempts of intimidation.
Greg Petty was recently elected to council as an independent and as such some of his voting decisions have been pivotal when issues have divided along political lines. It seems that someone is showing displeasure by attempting to intimidate. A trailer load of asbestos was recently dumped in his drive and a car belonging to a member of his family was vandalised at his home.
Clearly, someone is intent on " delivering a message " and the implication is that worse could possibly follow if this councillor continues to offend the person responsible. No doubt the police will investigate. Hopefully, the matter will end with the perpetrator being hauled before a court, but it is alarming that a threat of violence has entered the area of council decision making for the first time.
There are countries in this world where people serve in public office at their peril. Assassination is an ever present threat and office holders at all levels of government live in fortified houses, surrounded by armed guards. We hope that this never becomes the norm here.
It is important that this intimidation threat be taken seriously, and properly investigated. It is a new tactic that could quickly take hold if it is not nipped in the bud promptly - and it certainly will cause future candidates for public office to think long and hard - before subjecting their families to possible harm !
Monday 9 April 2012
What is " Elitism " ?
Many people will be bemused by the actions of an Australian expat in London, who deliberately swam in the river Thames to disrupt the annual boat race between Oxford and Cambridge universities. He claimed that it was a demonstration against " Elitism" - and went on to say that " Elitism leads to tyranny ".
It seems that slapping tags on various things with which we disagree has become the art of the " professional demonstrator ". It could be suggested that this character is something on an " elite "himself , because he is on the other side of the world - and studying of all things - " Contemporary Urbanism " at the London School of Economics.
Have we reached the stage when anyone not just leaving school and getting a job is classed as " Elite " if they have higher education in mind and go on to university ? Are we now grading universities, to the extent that those in the lower scale of popularity are reserved for the " peasants " and only the " elite " will gain entrance to the hallowed halls of privilege ?
Certainly, universities with famous pedigrees set their entrance standards higher and students from privileged, high income homes have a better chance of qualifying because of money spent on tutors, but the sons and daughters of the less affluent still manage to gain entrance - by the sheer power of determination to succeed.
The twentieth century became a great leveller when it came to privilege. Education became universal and with education came opportunity. The arrival of the twenty-first century is seeing schools spread to third world countries - and inevitably - universities will follow.
That does not mean that the world will do away with all forms of elitism. It simply means that it takes a new form - and we see that happening before our eyes right now. Anyone developing even a rudimentary skill in kicking a ball, playing some sort of musical instrument - or even singing a song can become one of the new elite - showered with fame and money, venerated by young and old fans - and treated as some sort of God.
Unfortunately, such is the nature of fame and fortune, these people are usually also badly behaved. It is the new rich and famous that trash hotel rooms, indulge in offensive behaviour and take an excess of drugs and alcohol - and mostly earn far more than they are really worth.
Perhaps that guy in London needs to spend more time studying and less time demonstrating. Then - just maybe - he might figure out what " contemporary urbanism " really means !
It seems that slapping tags on various things with which we disagree has become the art of the " professional demonstrator ". It could be suggested that this character is something on an " elite "himself , because he is on the other side of the world - and studying of all things - " Contemporary Urbanism " at the London School of Economics.
Have we reached the stage when anyone not just leaving school and getting a job is classed as " Elite " if they have higher education in mind and go on to university ? Are we now grading universities, to the extent that those in the lower scale of popularity are reserved for the " peasants " and only the " elite " will gain entrance to the hallowed halls of privilege ?
Certainly, universities with famous pedigrees set their entrance standards higher and students from privileged, high income homes have a better chance of qualifying because of money spent on tutors, but the sons and daughters of the less affluent still manage to gain entrance - by the sheer power of determination to succeed.
The twentieth century became a great leveller when it came to privilege. Education became universal and with education came opportunity. The arrival of the twenty-first century is seeing schools spread to third world countries - and inevitably - universities will follow.
That does not mean that the world will do away with all forms of elitism. It simply means that it takes a new form - and we see that happening before our eyes right now. Anyone developing even a rudimentary skill in kicking a ball, playing some sort of musical instrument - or even singing a song can become one of the new elite - showered with fame and money, venerated by young and old fans - and treated as some sort of God.
Unfortunately, such is the nature of fame and fortune, these people are usually also badly behaved. It is the new rich and famous that trash hotel rooms, indulge in offensive behaviour and take an excess of drugs and alcohol - and mostly earn far more than they are really worth.
Perhaps that guy in London needs to spend more time studying and less time demonstrating. Then - just maybe - he might figure out what " contemporary urbanism " really means !
Sunday 8 April 2012
An Airport ? But where ?
Sydney has a problem ! Kingsford Smith Airport at Botany is running out of room and in about ten years there will be serious restrictions on the movement of aircraft. It is the main gateway to Australia, and limitations will certainly restrict our tourist trade.
The logical answer to the problem is fairly simple. Build another airport ! The only question seems to be - where ?
The state government has rejected the only two possible options within the Sydney basin, Badgery's Creek and Wilton. The Premier makes a very reasonable suggestion that a lot of money could be saved by simply making Canberra our new main airport - and using the saved money to build a high speed train to connect it with Sydney. That would be in keeping with the practice in many other overseas countries. Sydney is unique in having it's airport just a hop, skip and jump away from the city CBD - and we do have a consequent noise problem.
Canberra would need a space upgrade to handle the Sydney traffic, but this would be a lot cheaper than building a new airport from scratch. There would also be a bonus in getting the first stage of a very fast train link started between Canberra and Sydney, and possibly leading to it being extended to the dream of such a service linking Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney and Brisbane.
The danger to decision making will be - politics ! Different political ideologies are in place in state and Federal politics and this could easily develop into a standoff in which a final decision is constantly deferred. That would be a disaster. The writing is on the wall that Kingsford Smith has a coping time factor and even planning a new airport would take several years before the bulldozers got to work to make it reality.
We do not have that time cushion ! Both the state and Federal economies will start to suffer unless we have sufficient airport space to handle both the business and tourist flows in and out of Sydney, It would be ideal if the matter was settled by the end of this year - but that is unlikely.
If this develops into a typical " Mexican Standoff ", both state and Federal governments will equally share the blame for the lack of jobs and commercial malaise that will descend on both the state and the nation because they took dogmatic attitudes and refused to compromise.
Even tossing a coin to resolve the matter would be a pragmatic possibility !
The logical answer to the problem is fairly simple. Build another airport ! The only question seems to be - where ?
The state government has rejected the only two possible options within the Sydney basin, Badgery's Creek and Wilton. The Premier makes a very reasonable suggestion that a lot of money could be saved by simply making Canberra our new main airport - and using the saved money to build a high speed train to connect it with Sydney. That would be in keeping with the practice in many other overseas countries. Sydney is unique in having it's airport just a hop, skip and jump away from the city CBD - and we do have a consequent noise problem.
Canberra would need a space upgrade to handle the Sydney traffic, but this would be a lot cheaper than building a new airport from scratch. There would also be a bonus in getting the first stage of a very fast train link started between Canberra and Sydney, and possibly leading to it being extended to the dream of such a service linking Melbourne - Canberra - Sydney and Brisbane.
The danger to decision making will be - politics ! Different political ideologies are in place in state and Federal politics and this could easily develop into a standoff in which a final decision is constantly deferred. That would be a disaster. The writing is on the wall that Kingsford Smith has a coping time factor and even planning a new airport would take several years before the bulldozers got to work to make it reality.
We do not have that time cushion ! Both the state and Federal economies will start to suffer unless we have sufficient airport space to handle both the business and tourist flows in and out of Sydney, It would be ideal if the matter was settled by the end of this year - but that is unlikely.
If this develops into a typical " Mexican Standoff ", both state and Federal governments will equally share the blame for the lack of jobs and commercial malaise that will descend on both the state and the nation because they took dogmatic attitudes and refused to compromise.
Even tossing a coin to resolve the matter would be a pragmatic possibility !
Saturday 7 April 2012
A dangerous " Fun Thing " !
A Wollongong churchman used his Easter message to warn of the danger of " character assassination " posed by Internet activities such as Twitter and Facebook. Twitter limits comments to just 140 characters, but that's all it takes to brand another person with character insinuations that are not required to be proven - and which may even be a form of bullying.
When the Internet burst onto the scene it did not take very long for innovative minds to discover the social possibilities. It became a huge social meeting place, and those with a computer or even a mobile phone began to band together to share views, comments - and even gossip. It became the custom to invite friends to become " followers " - and in a way that many people did not realise - to start what in another age would have been regarded as " a gang ".
If a number of people regularly engage with one another in cyberspace - what is the difference between that and a neighbourhood " gang " that meets to undertake anti-social habits ? If someone in that gang developers a " hate " for another acquaintance, it is just so easy to promote that displeasure to the rest of the company - and create a formidable enemy for that person.
We already have a problem with school kids using the Internet to bully others at their school. It is probably a natural progression that adults will vent their spleen at people who earn their displeasure, but there is also a tendency to disparage a person who suggests an idea with which we disagree. We transfer our rejection of that idea into an attack on the character of the person who had the temerity to voice an opinion.
The Internet is a potential legal mine field. Once you tap those cyber keyes the message you have entered is there for eternity. You may delete it from your computer memory, bit it remains locked away in the hard drive - and it is forever available to those who chose to record it for posterity.
Facebook and Twitter were supposed to be a " fun thing " and a way of bringing social mobility to those who had problems mixing with others. One of the great advantages was anonymity. Those with social inhibitions were neither a face nor a voice - simply a mind that communicated with others by tapping keyboard keyes.
Users need to think before they act. The legal profession is always looking for new markets and it is inevitable that sooner or later seeking redress for what has appeared on the Internet will find it's way into the court rooms.
The great thing about the Internet - is that it is free ! But beware - anything that involves the legal system is far from free !
When the Internet burst onto the scene it did not take very long for innovative minds to discover the social possibilities. It became a huge social meeting place, and those with a computer or even a mobile phone began to band together to share views, comments - and even gossip. It became the custom to invite friends to become " followers " - and in a way that many people did not realise - to start what in another age would have been regarded as " a gang ".
If a number of people regularly engage with one another in cyberspace - what is the difference between that and a neighbourhood " gang " that meets to undertake anti-social habits ? If someone in that gang developers a " hate " for another acquaintance, it is just so easy to promote that displeasure to the rest of the company - and create a formidable enemy for that person.
We already have a problem with school kids using the Internet to bully others at their school. It is probably a natural progression that adults will vent their spleen at people who earn their displeasure, but there is also a tendency to disparage a person who suggests an idea with which we disagree. We transfer our rejection of that idea into an attack on the character of the person who had the temerity to voice an opinion.
The Internet is a potential legal mine field. Once you tap those cyber keyes the message you have entered is there for eternity. You may delete it from your computer memory, bit it remains locked away in the hard drive - and it is forever available to those who chose to record it for posterity.
Facebook and Twitter were supposed to be a " fun thing " and a way of bringing social mobility to those who had problems mixing with others. One of the great advantages was anonymity. Those with social inhibitions were neither a face nor a voice - simply a mind that communicated with others by tapping keyboard keyes.
Users need to think before they act. The legal profession is always looking for new markets and it is inevitable that sooner or later seeking redress for what has appeared on the Internet will find it's way into the court rooms.
The great thing about the Internet - is that it is free ! But beware - anything that involves the legal system is far from free !
Friday 6 April 2012
Taking the " game " out of sport !
The New South Wales government has started an enquiry to report on the merit of requiring all the sporting codes to play matches at several central sporting stadiums. If that plan was adopted, the use of regional sporting facilities would be abandoned, saving the funds needed to constantly upgrade them to a required elevated standard.
It seems to be a case of economics coming into conflict with the very reason that various sports started in the first place.
NRL, AFL, Soccer - all started when a few locals started kicking a ball around and formed a team, and then challenged a similar group in the next suburb. Family and friends formed the original club supporters, and these games were usually played on a bare paddock with very few facilities.
Numbers grew - and chook raffles and local fund raising added a grandstand and change rooms, and bit by bit the iconic teams that we follow today emerged and those local games became a national competition. But when it came to basics, each team had a local identity. They represented the suburb where they started - and support was both parochial - and intense. The team name had a strong local connection - hence " The Dragons ", " The Tigers ", " The Sea Eagles " - preceded by the name of the originating suburb.
Today, those local teams have become a billion dollar business. Maybe they have out grown the small playing fields in the suburbs which are their home base. Maybe the time is approaching when all games should be concentrated in a stadium providing massive seating for spectators - and that is usually in a central part of a capital city.
It would mean the end of both Kogarah oval and Wollongong's WIN Stadium for the St George Illawarra Dragons, and with that loss would go the local identity that drew fans to the game in the first place.
Wollongong is a separate city. It is not Sydney, and if all Dragons games were to be played in a central Sydney stadium there is a very good chance that bums on stadium seats would translate into bums on living room chairs watching the game on television. It would be a further extension of the dilution of local character that has plagued regional sport.
Wollongong once fielded it's own team - " The Steelers " in the national NRL competition. Pressure to reduce the numbers and enhance size saw that team forcibly merged with the Sydney St George Dragons, and playing venues were equally divided between Kogarah oval in Sydney and WIN Stadium in Wollongong. Now it is possible that both will be abandoned - in favour of a ultra large central Sydney stadium.
There is a certain logic in concentrating money to provide a small number of mega venues to accommodate big fan numbers and this seems to be the way sport is going in overseas competitions, but it comes at a price.
Once local identity is lost, then so too goes the spirit that draws spectators to home grounds on days of pouring rain and howling cold winds. Cost saving is a two edged sword. Some people want to site the Olympics on a never changing venue to spare individual world cities the crippling costs of holding the games.
That may happen - and Australian sport may lose it's local identity if this plan comes to fruition - but if so the old games that we knew and loved will be replaced by new competitions where distance makes television the prime watching medium !
It seems to be a case of economics coming into conflict with the very reason that various sports started in the first place.
NRL, AFL, Soccer - all started when a few locals started kicking a ball around and formed a team, and then challenged a similar group in the next suburb. Family and friends formed the original club supporters, and these games were usually played on a bare paddock with very few facilities.
Numbers grew - and chook raffles and local fund raising added a grandstand and change rooms, and bit by bit the iconic teams that we follow today emerged and those local games became a national competition. But when it came to basics, each team had a local identity. They represented the suburb where they started - and support was both parochial - and intense. The team name had a strong local connection - hence " The Dragons ", " The Tigers ", " The Sea Eagles " - preceded by the name of the originating suburb.
Today, those local teams have become a billion dollar business. Maybe they have out grown the small playing fields in the suburbs which are their home base. Maybe the time is approaching when all games should be concentrated in a stadium providing massive seating for spectators - and that is usually in a central part of a capital city.
It would mean the end of both Kogarah oval and Wollongong's WIN Stadium for the St George Illawarra Dragons, and with that loss would go the local identity that drew fans to the game in the first place.
Wollongong is a separate city. It is not Sydney, and if all Dragons games were to be played in a central Sydney stadium there is a very good chance that bums on stadium seats would translate into bums on living room chairs watching the game on television. It would be a further extension of the dilution of local character that has plagued regional sport.
Wollongong once fielded it's own team - " The Steelers " in the national NRL competition. Pressure to reduce the numbers and enhance size saw that team forcibly merged with the Sydney St George Dragons, and playing venues were equally divided between Kogarah oval in Sydney and WIN Stadium in Wollongong. Now it is possible that both will be abandoned - in favour of a ultra large central Sydney stadium.
There is a certain logic in concentrating money to provide a small number of mega venues to accommodate big fan numbers and this seems to be the way sport is going in overseas competitions, but it comes at a price.
Once local identity is lost, then so too goes the spirit that draws spectators to home grounds on days of pouring rain and howling cold winds. Cost saving is a two edged sword. Some people want to site the Olympics on a never changing venue to spare individual world cities the crippling costs of holding the games.
That may happen - and Australian sport may lose it's local identity if this plan comes to fruition - but if so the old games that we knew and loved will be replaced by new competitions where distance makes television the prime watching medium !
Thursday 5 April 2012
Fee for service !
The ski season is just months away and most footwear stores are gearing up for the annual onslaught of Internet buyers who will want to try on ski boots for size in their stores - and then make the purchase on-line at a cheaper price.
It is essential that those who intend to spent time on the slopes have boots that fit precisely if they are going to safely - and comfortably - enjoy their sport, and that is something that doesn't work well if guesswork is involved.
Last year it was suggested that some retail outlets would impose an up-front charge for trying on high priced footwear, fully refundable if the customer proceeded to purchase. That was a very reasonable suggestion, but there would be problems. Some customers would object and refuse to pay when the service had been provided, and that raised the question of whether such a charge was a legally enforceable debt.
The bricks and mortar retail shoe industry is likely to be under even more pressure as the Internet companies are moving towards a new sales tactic. You may notice that advertising for all kinds of merchandise are being offered on a time basis - often only available at a special price for a twenty-four hour period.
By this method, the seller knows precisely what size of buying order to place on the supplier, and can use pressure to force an even lower price. If that supplier refuses to budge, it is simply a matter of emailing the retailer customers to renege on the sale - with an apology that events beyond their control caused the cancellation.
Perhaps the greatest sales weapon remaining in the bricks and mortar stores arsenal - is after sales service. That is something that is hard for In-Line suppliers to provide. If you have a problem, it is far easier settled by having a conversation face to face with the person who made the sale - then trying to negotiate by endless e-mails.
The Internet supply stores seem solely trying to attract sales by using the price weapon. Canny bricks and mortar suppliers need to re-think their retail approach to enhance the benefits that person to person contact offers. The customer can walk out of the store with the goods there and then - assured that he or she has the right fit - and that the merchandise is what they expected - not merely what they have viewed on a monitor screen.
Two different selling approaches - both of which will attract a share of customers !
It is essential that those who intend to spent time on the slopes have boots that fit precisely if they are going to safely - and comfortably - enjoy their sport, and that is something that doesn't work well if guesswork is involved.
Last year it was suggested that some retail outlets would impose an up-front charge for trying on high priced footwear, fully refundable if the customer proceeded to purchase. That was a very reasonable suggestion, but there would be problems. Some customers would object and refuse to pay when the service had been provided, and that raised the question of whether such a charge was a legally enforceable debt.
The bricks and mortar retail shoe industry is likely to be under even more pressure as the Internet companies are moving towards a new sales tactic. You may notice that advertising for all kinds of merchandise are being offered on a time basis - often only available at a special price for a twenty-four hour period.
By this method, the seller knows precisely what size of buying order to place on the supplier, and can use pressure to force an even lower price. If that supplier refuses to budge, it is simply a matter of emailing the retailer customers to renege on the sale - with an apology that events beyond their control caused the cancellation.
Perhaps the greatest sales weapon remaining in the bricks and mortar stores arsenal - is after sales service. That is something that is hard for In-Line suppliers to provide. If you have a problem, it is far easier settled by having a conversation face to face with the person who made the sale - then trying to negotiate by endless e-mails.
The Internet supply stores seem solely trying to attract sales by using the price weapon. Canny bricks and mortar suppliers need to re-think their retail approach to enhance the benefits that person to person contact offers. The customer can walk out of the store with the goods there and then - assured that he or she has the right fit - and that the merchandise is what they expected - not merely what they have viewed on a monitor screen.
Two different selling approaches - both of which will attract a share of customers !
Wednesday 4 April 2012
The drug debate - again !
The never ending debate on decriminalising drugs has gained two key supporters. Former New South Wales Premier Bob Carr, now this country's foreign minister, and the former director of public prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery have both thrown their weight behind the suggestion of " legalising, legislating, controlling - and taxing " - the illicit drug industry.
The suggestion has been summarily rejected by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and there seems little prospect of it being seriously examined as a Federal initiative. Who could blame a prime minister who is hanging over a political precipice by her fingernails from jumping into a debate on what would surely be a hugely contentious issue for all sections of the public.
About the only thing that most people would agree is that the war on drugs has failed. Despite billions of dollars spent on law enforcement, filling the prisons with drug offenders - drugs are still freely available on our streets - and that is because their is a willing market for their purchase.
The other contradiction is the mish mash of control features and outcomes between the Federal and state spheres, resulting in a varied outcome when an offender is stopped by the police or put before a court. There is no consistency. In some jurisdictions the police will issue a caution for Marijuana possession, while in others the possession of a small quantity will see the offender spend a night in the cells. An appearance before a magistrate results in a similar unpredictable outcome.
One rather interesting fact has emerged from this debate. It seems that ten years ago Portugal bit the bullet and did precisely what Carr and Cowdery are suggesting. Drugs in that country are legal - and heavily taxed, much the same as tobacco and alcohol.
What we need is an unbiased report on how that legislative change turned out. Ten years is a fair period for the issue to have settled down and we could learn if it is a practical idea - and very importantly - what are the down sides of making such a change.
It seems that Attorney General Nicola Roxon has already dismissed the scheme operating in Portugal because there is " insufficient evidence " to try it here. That is plainly rubbish - because so far nothing has been put before the Australian public to allow them to make a decision.
Both sides of politics - both state and Federal - will treat this subject with great caution. It could either be an election winner - or it could see those giving it support suffer a huge backlash. It would be ideal if a trusted person with widespread respect could be tasked to examine the issue in Portugal - and report back directly to the Australian people.
Once all the facts are on the table, such a basic change might even need a referendum to become law !
The suggestion has been summarily rejected by Prime Minister Julia Gillard and there seems little prospect of it being seriously examined as a Federal initiative. Who could blame a prime minister who is hanging over a political precipice by her fingernails from jumping into a debate on what would surely be a hugely contentious issue for all sections of the public.
About the only thing that most people would agree is that the war on drugs has failed. Despite billions of dollars spent on law enforcement, filling the prisons with drug offenders - drugs are still freely available on our streets - and that is because their is a willing market for their purchase.
The other contradiction is the mish mash of control features and outcomes between the Federal and state spheres, resulting in a varied outcome when an offender is stopped by the police or put before a court. There is no consistency. In some jurisdictions the police will issue a caution for Marijuana possession, while in others the possession of a small quantity will see the offender spend a night in the cells. An appearance before a magistrate results in a similar unpredictable outcome.
One rather interesting fact has emerged from this debate. It seems that ten years ago Portugal bit the bullet and did precisely what Carr and Cowdery are suggesting. Drugs in that country are legal - and heavily taxed, much the same as tobacco and alcohol.
What we need is an unbiased report on how that legislative change turned out. Ten years is a fair period for the issue to have settled down and we could learn if it is a practical idea - and very importantly - what are the down sides of making such a change.
It seems that Attorney General Nicola Roxon has already dismissed the scheme operating in Portugal because there is " insufficient evidence " to try it here. That is plainly rubbish - because so far nothing has been put before the Australian public to allow them to make a decision.
Both sides of politics - both state and Federal - will treat this subject with great caution. It could either be an election winner - or it could see those giving it support suffer a huge backlash. It would be ideal if a trusted person with widespread respect could be tasked to examine the issue in Portugal - and report back directly to the Australian people.
Once all the facts are on the table, such a basic change might even need a referendum to become law !
Tuesday 3 April 2012
Fuel price fiasco !
Easter is just a few days away and - surprise - surprise - petrol prices have suddenly climbed to this year's high. We are asked to pay just over $ 1.50 a litre to fill the car.
Of course, those who avidly watch the world price of a barrel of oil on the nightly news will note that the price has been dropping while that is happening, but then oil prices and petrol prices do not really share any sort of common relationship. There is usually a gap of months between what comes out of the ground today - and what you pay at the petrol pump tomorrow !
All this is explained by what the experts call " the fuel cycle " ! The problem is that nobody has yet managed to present any sort of coherent formula that a mathematician could understand to explain the vast vagaries that exist between logic and practice.
Perhaps a better explanation would be : " At any time of high demand, the oil companies in collusion with other interested parties - hike the price to inflate their profits ! "
Which raises another interesting phenomenon. The " Grocery price twin bandits " who control a high percentage of the petrol sold in this country - are offering 20 c a litre discount if you present a receipt for a purchase of $ 150 or more from their stores at their service stations.
Now you do not need to be as clever as Einstein or have the forecasting powers of Nostradamus to see that there is an inevitable connection between these events.
When petrol reaches a historical high and is then subjected to an unusually big discount offer, the price the customer pays is actually about where it would be if the price hike had not occurred, and just the normal 4 c discount was in place.
But of course, the customer has been stampeded into making a bigger grocery purchase to reach that required $ 150 total on the receipt to gain that illusionary saving.
Magicians have a term to describe it. Smoke and mirrors !
Of course, those who avidly watch the world price of a barrel of oil on the nightly news will note that the price has been dropping while that is happening, but then oil prices and petrol prices do not really share any sort of common relationship. There is usually a gap of months between what comes out of the ground today - and what you pay at the petrol pump tomorrow !
All this is explained by what the experts call " the fuel cycle " ! The problem is that nobody has yet managed to present any sort of coherent formula that a mathematician could understand to explain the vast vagaries that exist between logic and practice.
Perhaps a better explanation would be : " At any time of high demand, the oil companies in collusion with other interested parties - hike the price to inflate their profits ! "
Which raises another interesting phenomenon. The " Grocery price twin bandits " who control a high percentage of the petrol sold in this country - are offering 20 c a litre discount if you present a receipt for a purchase of $ 150 or more from their stores at their service stations.
Now you do not need to be as clever as Einstein or have the forecasting powers of Nostradamus to see that there is an inevitable connection between these events.
When petrol reaches a historical high and is then subjected to an unusually big discount offer, the price the customer pays is actually about where it would be if the price hike had not occurred, and just the normal 4 c discount was in place.
But of course, the customer has been stampeded into making a bigger grocery purchase to reach that required $ 150 total on the receipt to gain that illusionary saving.
Magicians have a term to describe it. Smoke and mirrors !
Monday 2 April 2012
The " Public Housing " enigma !
The wait to reach the head of the queue to get into public housing is at least ten years, and yet few people really understand the philosophy that underpins this public service.
The original idea was to provide low cost housing for people earning low wages. The rent was calculated as a percentage of the wage that each tenant earned - and this would be regularly reviewed and adjusted upward as that person moved into a higher wage bracket.
It was never intended as " lifetime housing " once a person settled in !
Housing needs change dramatically over the average lifetime. People start life as a single and then develop a partnership with another. Usually there are kids and this couple becomes a family, until eventually the kids move on and that couple become elders seeing out their final years. It is not reasonable to expect the same dwelling to cover all those changing eras.
In an ideal world, public housing would move that person through life - from a flat to accommodate a single lifestyle, then onward to a three bedroom home for the family period - and finally to a retirement villa for the final years - but that rarely seems to happen.
One of the problems is that tenants tend to resist being moved. They become accustomed to and like the suburb in which they are living, and usually a move is dictated by where other suitable accommodation becomes available.
Then there is the problem of " public housing eligibility ". When the income level changes upward the rent is supposed to move in tandem, but surely there must be a limit where such a person no longer qualifies for public housing assistance. Public housing was supposed to be a transition - helping the lowly paid until such time as they could afford the private rental market - or were able to make the move to home owners !
What we are now seeing is a move to " squatters rights ". The original tenant either has middle aged kids still living at home, or because of the GFC, offspring have been priced out of the private rental market and have moved in with Mum and Dad. In some cases, the combined income in that home is way above what the Housing Commission is showing on it's books.
Getting Housing Commission accommodation is a valued prize and tenants have become adept at working the system to stay within the rules - and resisting all attempts to free up the availability by moving them on.
Perhaps what it most needed is a clear statement of public housing philosophy - and then the determination to stick to those rules and make the system work by moving tenants according to their needs - and as a final step - assisting those who have achieved a higher income level into become home owners !
The original idea was to provide low cost housing for people earning low wages. The rent was calculated as a percentage of the wage that each tenant earned - and this would be regularly reviewed and adjusted upward as that person moved into a higher wage bracket.
It was never intended as " lifetime housing " once a person settled in !
Housing needs change dramatically over the average lifetime. People start life as a single and then develop a partnership with another. Usually there are kids and this couple becomes a family, until eventually the kids move on and that couple become elders seeing out their final years. It is not reasonable to expect the same dwelling to cover all those changing eras.
In an ideal world, public housing would move that person through life - from a flat to accommodate a single lifestyle, then onward to a three bedroom home for the family period - and finally to a retirement villa for the final years - but that rarely seems to happen.
One of the problems is that tenants tend to resist being moved. They become accustomed to and like the suburb in which they are living, and usually a move is dictated by where other suitable accommodation becomes available.
Then there is the problem of " public housing eligibility ". When the income level changes upward the rent is supposed to move in tandem, but surely there must be a limit where such a person no longer qualifies for public housing assistance. Public housing was supposed to be a transition - helping the lowly paid until such time as they could afford the private rental market - or were able to make the move to home owners !
What we are now seeing is a move to " squatters rights ". The original tenant either has middle aged kids still living at home, or because of the GFC, offspring have been priced out of the private rental market and have moved in with Mum and Dad. In some cases, the combined income in that home is way above what the Housing Commission is showing on it's books.
Getting Housing Commission accommodation is a valued prize and tenants have become adept at working the system to stay within the rules - and resisting all attempts to free up the availability by moving them on.
Perhaps what it most needed is a clear statement of public housing philosophy - and then the determination to stick to those rules and make the system work by moving tenants according to their needs - and as a final step - assisting those who have achieved a higher income level into become home owners !
Sunday 1 April 2012
A new Falklands war ?
Our troubled world is already facing the prospect of civil war in the Middle East as the " Arab Spring " churns restless nations to depose dictators, and now there are fresh rumblings from Argentina over what they term the Malvinas islands.
Britain calls them the Falklands and they had a chequered history, dating back to a time when the Europeans held the belief that their explorers had every right to discover new lands, plant a flag on the beach - and claim each new discovery for their own country.
These remote islands were claimed and settled by Spain, France and Argentina at various times, before the British included them in the British Empire in 1833.
Argentina launched a surprise attack and invaded in April, 1982 and a short, sharp war followed, with Britain becoming the victor. Now Argentina is again making angry noises and claiming that that these islands must revert to Argentinian sovereignty.
It seems that there are two main reasons for stoking the fires of war. The Argentine economy is in deep trouble because the GFC of 2008 has sent unemployment to critical levels - and now there is the prospect that there may be a vast oil field under the sea surrounding these islands.
Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner needs a distraction to draw public attention away from the economic crisis - and she has reverted to nationalism. The public is being goaded to march in the streets and the latent cause of reclaiming the Malvinas has seen Falkland ships denied access to Argentinian ports and air services to the islands being cut.
All this would probably subside if the Argentine economy improved - and if the exploratory wells being drilled around the islands failed to find oil, but there is also the danger that once provoked - nationalism can get out of hand. It can not be turned on and off like a tap.
Fortunately, a shooting war is unlikely. The last invasion was probably more a result of British incompetence in having a garrison of only about a dozen men and withdrawing it's only naval ship stationed in the Falklands. The islands now boast a more substantial defence presence.
The big problem would arise if there was a big oil strike that saw the surrounding sea area develop in a similar manner to the North sea oil fields of Europe. There would be claims that the islands were part of the Argentinian land mass and that could develop into the friction that existed between Australia and East Timor when oil was discovered between those two countries.
Unfortunately, since the 08 GFC every country in the world is having money problems. The issue of the Falklands/Malvinas will remain an irritant between Argentina and Britain - but probably remain fairly dormant - as long as an oil strike does not catapult it into a new financial " El Dorado ".
If that happens - all bets are off !
Britain calls them the Falklands and they had a chequered history, dating back to a time when the Europeans held the belief that their explorers had every right to discover new lands, plant a flag on the beach - and claim each new discovery for their own country.
These remote islands were claimed and settled by Spain, France and Argentina at various times, before the British included them in the British Empire in 1833.
Argentina launched a surprise attack and invaded in April, 1982 and a short, sharp war followed, with Britain becoming the victor. Now Argentina is again making angry noises and claiming that that these islands must revert to Argentinian sovereignty.
It seems that there are two main reasons for stoking the fires of war. The Argentine economy is in deep trouble because the GFC of 2008 has sent unemployment to critical levels - and now there is the prospect that there may be a vast oil field under the sea surrounding these islands.
Argentine president Cristina Fernandez de Kirchner needs a distraction to draw public attention away from the economic crisis - and she has reverted to nationalism. The public is being goaded to march in the streets and the latent cause of reclaiming the Malvinas has seen Falkland ships denied access to Argentinian ports and air services to the islands being cut.
All this would probably subside if the Argentine economy improved - and if the exploratory wells being drilled around the islands failed to find oil, but there is also the danger that once provoked - nationalism can get out of hand. It can not be turned on and off like a tap.
Fortunately, a shooting war is unlikely. The last invasion was probably more a result of British incompetence in having a garrison of only about a dozen men and withdrawing it's only naval ship stationed in the Falklands. The islands now boast a more substantial defence presence.
The big problem would arise if there was a big oil strike that saw the surrounding sea area develop in a similar manner to the North sea oil fields of Europe. There would be claims that the islands were part of the Argentinian land mass and that could develop into the friction that existed between Australia and East Timor when oil was discovered between those two countries.
Unfortunately, since the 08 GFC every country in the world is having money problems. The issue of the Falklands/Malvinas will remain an irritant between Argentina and Britain - but probably remain fairly dormant - as long as an oil strike does not catapult it into a new financial " El Dorado ".
If that happens - all bets are off !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)