Sometimes the aims of different people collide through no fault of their own. Such seems to be the situation in the heated argument between prominent horse trainer, Gai Waterhouse, her bookmaker son Tom, and a high profile celebrity who owns a champion race horse.
The purpose of a horse trainer is to manage other people's horses and bring them to top condition to win races. This requires a careful exercise regimen, a good diet and the selection of a jockey who will mix well with that horses individual temperament.
A bookmaker needs to craft odds that attract punters but which carefully measure the returns on each runner to ensure that if a favourite wins, the payout is more than covered by wagers on other losing horses in that field. To do that, knowledge of the exact condition of all the runners in that race is necessary.
The owner/punter is the person paying for the care and training of a champion horse and expects to be kept fully aware of all conditions prevailing. This knowledge is essential in making decisions to wager a bet on that horse - and whether such an investment results in gain or loss.
Unfortunately, the aims of both the owner/punter and the bookmaker are diametrically opposed. Both expect to make money, but any gain for one must be at a loss for the other. This invites conflict when there is a close relationship between the three people involved.
Ideally, such relationships should be at arms length, but that becomes impossible when family connections are involved and when a long and profitable relationship has evolved between an owner of many horses and a prominent trainer. Suspicions arises when a horse does not perform to expectations.
The racing industry has always had a " raffish " reputation and the media delights in any argument between high profile celebrities. Those are the stories that sell newspapers and glue viewers to television screens. This dispute will be exploited to the full by racing writers.
Unfortunately, it will not help the industry to have " dirty linen " aired in public. A lot will depend on whether this is settled by a shake of hands - or whether it progresses to messy court action. Any protracted publicity will play into the hands of the anti-gambling lobby !
Tuesday 30 April 2013
Monday 29 April 2013
Hiking the price !
We are certainly paying much higher prices here than the same items offered on the American market when it comes to the field of electronics and music, but that differential is even more glaring when applies to automobiles.
At the lower end of the car market, a Nissan Pulsar sells here at $ 19,990, but it's American price is just $ 16,140. The gap widens as it applies to high end luxury cars. The BMW 320i will set us back $ 58,600 and yet the American price sticker is just $ 35,805. At the top of the market, the Mercedes C class has a differential of $ 67,900 to $ 35,350.
The car industry blythely tells us that price difference is relative to our laws that stipulate that cars drive on the left side of the road. Most of the rest of the world drives on the right side of the road and it is more costly to produce vehicles in smaller productions runs for our market.
That doesn't seem to add up. General Motors Australian plants have produced cars for export - and of course these have had to be in left hand drive mode for both the American and European markets. Despite the transport costs of sending them overseas, they retailed at a cheaper price than their right hand drive equivalent here in Australia. These export cars represented a smaller production run than those made for sale in this country.
For a very long time, hiking the price in Australia has been a cozy little scam that was masked by a sharp difference in the trading value between the American and Australian dollars. When the Australian dollar fell to an exchange of about seventy cents some years ago, most people accepted price variations without checking too further. Today - with the values almost even - that mask of deception has been torn away.
The real reason we have a price differential - is " Because they can " !
" Take it - or leave it ! " is the buy option that applies. The price of foreign made cars in Australia has been falling as both the Australian dollar strengthens and the competition hots up. The entry of both South Korea and China into the new car market has forced prices downward - at the same time that it has forced car makers to add refinements at no extra cost. Few cars today come without power steering, safer brakes, air conditioning - and a five star crash rating.
Makers will find it harder to explain away the price discrepancy in electronics and music. Few of these items are actually produced in America. Manufacturing is tasked to sweat shops in China - and there is no left hand - right hand drive excuses for these items.
We have just seen a colossal battle between two electronic giants over patent protection. Expect more of that in the future as new players enter the field - and countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia use their low cost labour force to become players.
It seems that an overwhelming force is moving towards price parity !
At the lower end of the car market, a Nissan Pulsar sells here at $ 19,990, but it's American price is just $ 16,140. The gap widens as it applies to high end luxury cars. The BMW 320i will set us back $ 58,600 and yet the American price sticker is just $ 35,805. At the top of the market, the Mercedes C class has a differential of $ 67,900 to $ 35,350.
The car industry blythely tells us that price difference is relative to our laws that stipulate that cars drive on the left side of the road. Most of the rest of the world drives on the right side of the road and it is more costly to produce vehicles in smaller productions runs for our market.
That doesn't seem to add up. General Motors Australian plants have produced cars for export - and of course these have had to be in left hand drive mode for both the American and European markets. Despite the transport costs of sending them overseas, they retailed at a cheaper price than their right hand drive equivalent here in Australia. These export cars represented a smaller production run than those made for sale in this country.
For a very long time, hiking the price in Australia has been a cozy little scam that was masked by a sharp difference in the trading value between the American and Australian dollars. When the Australian dollar fell to an exchange of about seventy cents some years ago, most people accepted price variations without checking too further. Today - with the values almost even - that mask of deception has been torn away.
The real reason we have a price differential - is " Because they can " !
" Take it - or leave it ! " is the buy option that applies. The price of foreign made cars in Australia has been falling as both the Australian dollar strengthens and the competition hots up. The entry of both South Korea and China into the new car market has forced prices downward - at the same time that it has forced car makers to add refinements at no extra cost. Few cars today come without power steering, safer brakes, air conditioning - and a five star crash rating.
Makers will find it harder to explain away the price discrepancy in electronics and music. Few of these items are actually produced in America. Manufacturing is tasked to sweat shops in China - and there is no left hand - right hand drive excuses for these items.
We have just seen a colossal battle between two electronic giants over patent protection. Expect more of that in the future as new players enter the field - and countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Indonesia use their low cost labour force to become players.
It seems that an overwhelming force is moving towards price parity !
Sunday 28 April 2013
Fragmented government !
Australia has prospered from the regular exchanges between Labor and the Liberal Coalition gaining the numbers to form government. Sometimes neither party has the control of both houses, and usually the Senate contains several maverick " independents " and this tends to curb excess legislation.
The important thing is to have a united group of people delivering government under the banner of one of the traditional political parties. We have just seen the mess that results when we get a " hung " parliament and achieving government depends on cobbling together an alliance with another political party with a vastly different platform and opposing views.
It seems that we are heading for a more splintered political choice at this coming election. Not only will there be independents contesting just about every seat, there will most likely be three minor parties throwing their hats into the ring and appealing for votes.
The Greens have a definite following at both state and Federal level and their extreme socialism will appeal to some supporters. It seems that at this election we will see both Bob Katter's Australia party and newcomer Clive Palmer's yet to be registered United Australia Party join the hustings.
We need to look to Europe to see what happens when the voters desert the main streams of politics and disenfranchise themselves by supporting a plethora of minor parties. Countries like Israel and Italy have a history of short lived amalgamations of unlikely bed fellows which disintegrate and reform without ever having the strength to deal with national issues.
Love them or hate them, both of the traditional political parties deliver stability when they have the numbers to govern. The history of Australian politics mirrors most stable world democracies and delivers a regular exchange between a party with socialist roots and a party with conservative values. Both are prevented from legislating to excess by the need to keep the voters feeling comfortable with the directions taken - and this is kept to public attention by a free press.
We have seen small single purpose political parties rise and fall in the past. Pauline Hanson's " One Nation " burst onto the scene and hitched it's star to a contentious issue that was consuming public opinion. It soared in the support stakes - and then faded into oblivion.
The danger is that Katter and Palmer may bring a host of other single issue parties out of the woodwork, to the detriment of stable government by syphoning support from both the major parties.
It seems to be a case of being very careful of what we wish for !
The important thing is to have a united group of people delivering government under the banner of one of the traditional political parties. We have just seen the mess that results when we get a " hung " parliament and achieving government depends on cobbling together an alliance with another political party with a vastly different platform and opposing views.
It seems that we are heading for a more splintered political choice at this coming election. Not only will there be independents contesting just about every seat, there will most likely be three minor parties throwing their hats into the ring and appealing for votes.
The Greens have a definite following at both state and Federal level and their extreme socialism will appeal to some supporters. It seems that at this election we will see both Bob Katter's Australia party and newcomer Clive Palmer's yet to be registered United Australia Party join the hustings.
We need to look to Europe to see what happens when the voters desert the main streams of politics and disenfranchise themselves by supporting a plethora of minor parties. Countries like Israel and Italy have a history of short lived amalgamations of unlikely bed fellows which disintegrate and reform without ever having the strength to deal with national issues.
Love them or hate them, both of the traditional political parties deliver stability when they have the numbers to govern. The history of Australian politics mirrors most stable world democracies and delivers a regular exchange between a party with socialist roots and a party with conservative values. Both are prevented from legislating to excess by the need to keep the voters feeling comfortable with the directions taken - and this is kept to public attention by a free press.
We have seen small single purpose political parties rise and fall in the past. Pauline Hanson's " One Nation " burst onto the scene and hitched it's star to a contentious issue that was consuming public opinion. It soared in the support stakes - and then faded into oblivion.
The danger is that Katter and Palmer may bring a host of other single issue parties out of the woodwork, to the detriment of stable government by syphoning support from both the major parties.
It seems to be a case of being very careful of what we wish for !
Saturday 27 April 2013
Putting the " bite " on business !
It is a curious fact of life that all forms of government have the notion that anyone who runs their own business is " rich ". The provision of basic services are divided into two important categories - " Domestic " and " Commercial " - and both are charged at very different rates.
Ask any owner of a small shop about electricity bills, water rates, any of the services that are a necessity in this modern world and you will find a very different charge is applied to what confronts the ordinary householder. This is based on an assumed " ability to pay ".
Unfortunately, this mind set knows no boundaries. The same thinking applies to a major industry that employs thousands and spreads over acres of land - and a tiny little operation in which a sole trader is trying to make a crust to support his or her family. It is a positive disincentive for bright people to think outside the nine dots and create their own business in a world of scarce employment opportunities.
The opportunity to inflict higher charges on small business depended on that business having the use of premises. The mobile trader who supplied services from a vehicle escapes because the facilities of his or her home fall under the " Domestic " category. They were not claimed as a business expense.
So great is the need for more funds that some councils are pushing new horizons, and one council is seeking to license and charge dog walkers - for the use of their parks. They reason that personal trainers who take their clients to a park for work outs are taxed for the privilege - so why not dog walkers ?
Dog walking is a new and expanding industry. Many people find it hard to fit care of a family pet with heavy work requirements and depend on this new service to keep their animal fit and healthy. It is also a boon to those with time limitations - such as single mothers with primary school age children - who can fit this activity into the days schedule and earn a little extra funding.
The obvious outcome of imposing a charge on the use of parks - is dog walkers avoiding such places and exercising their charges on public streets - and nature strips. There remains the possibility of council rangers stopping any person walking a string of dogs and demanding to see some sort of license registration - but that opens up another deep pit of legal contention.
The fact remains that those who try to establish their own business are clearly in the cross hairs of all levels of government - who see them as " rich " and desperately seek to impose an elevated level of fees to satisfy their endless need for more funds.
The dog walking industry is the latest to feel the " bite " !
Ask any owner of a small shop about electricity bills, water rates, any of the services that are a necessity in this modern world and you will find a very different charge is applied to what confronts the ordinary householder. This is based on an assumed " ability to pay ".
Unfortunately, this mind set knows no boundaries. The same thinking applies to a major industry that employs thousands and spreads over acres of land - and a tiny little operation in which a sole trader is trying to make a crust to support his or her family. It is a positive disincentive for bright people to think outside the nine dots and create their own business in a world of scarce employment opportunities.
The opportunity to inflict higher charges on small business depended on that business having the use of premises. The mobile trader who supplied services from a vehicle escapes because the facilities of his or her home fall under the " Domestic " category. They were not claimed as a business expense.
So great is the need for more funds that some councils are pushing new horizons, and one council is seeking to license and charge dog walkers - for the use of their parks. They reason that personal trainers who take their clients to a park for work outs are taxed for the privilege - so why not dog walkers ?
Dog walking is a new and expanding industry. Many people find it hard to fit care of a family pet with heavy work requirements and depend on this new service to keep their animal fit and healthy. It is also a boon to those with time limitations - such as single mothers with primary school age children - who can fit this activity into the days schedule and earn a little extra funding.
The obvious outcome of imposing a charge on the use of parks - is dog walkers avoiding such places and exercising their charges on public streets - and nature strips. There remains the possibility of council rangers stopping any person walking a string of dogs and demanding to see some sort of license registration - but that opens up another deep pit of legal contention.
The fact remains that those who try to establish their own business are clearly in the cross hairs of all levels of government - who see them as " rich " and desperately seek to impose an elevated level of fees to satisfy their endless need for more funds.
The dog walking industry is the latest to feel the " bite " !
Friday 26 April 2013
The " Hacker " Menace !
The computer - and it's by-product, the " Internet " have changed the world in a few decades. It is so entrenched in our lives now that if it suddenly ceased to function our world would come crashing down. It runs the traffic lights that allow us to drive safely. It is the only means of pricing goods we buy at the supermarkets. It runs the delivery systems that provide electricity and gas to our homes - and without computers our news services and all forms of communications would go silent.
It is also a vengeful weapon in the hands of those who bear us ill will. We live in the age of the " Hacker " - and the recent actions of just one person led to the loss of $ 136 billion on the United States stock market.
This person hacked into the website of respected news source Associated Press and issued a bogus news item that claimed that two bombs had exploded at the White House , and that President Barak Obama had been injured.
The Dow Jones immediately plunged a hundred points on the expectation that such bad news would bring a stock market negative reaction. Those same computers are geared to make massive transaction moves in mini seconds and they react automatically to pre-set instructions monitoring price movements. The losses incurred will be keenly felt by investment houses that manage the superannuation of millions of ordinary people.
There is no doubt that the computer and the systems it controls has emerged as a weapon of war. It can be used to cripple an opposing country's military defence systems and throw all forms of commerce into total disarray. Government sponsored hackers work to improve their skills and practice by invading the communications and commercial networks of target nations. The " spy game " has developed into a move and counter move to protect the functions of commerce and government.
Here in Australia, a 24 year old hacker was caught breaking into a government website and unlawfully modifying data. That offence carries a maximum twelve years gaol term - and it will be interesting to see how seriously a court treats a hacking case if he is convicted at trial.
It is thought that this hacker is a member of an organization named Lulzsec, composed of freelance hackers who are part of the international " Anonymous " hacking syndicate that carries out audacious hacking raids in support of it's agenda to implement social change.
It seems that our way of life is vulnerable to attacks on the very systems that deliver the benefits that computers and the communications age has bestowed on the world. Each year our reliance on the computer reaches new bounds. It is a worrying thought that if any nation's computer system was shut down by an attack by another country - or a very clever malignant individual - the victim country would be plunged back into the dark ages.
Unfortunately, that is a risk that we must take. There is simply no alternative !
It is also a vengeful weapon in the hands of those who bear us ill will. We live in the age of the " Hacker " - and the recent actions of just one person led to the loss of $ 136 billion on the United States stock market.
This person hacked into the website of respected news source Associated Press and issued a bogus news item that claimed that two bombs had exploded at the White House , and that President Barak Obama had been injured.
The Dow Jones immediately plunged a hundred points on the expectation that such bad news would bring a stock market negative reaction. Those same computers are geared to make massive transaction moves in mini seconds and they react automatically to pre-set instructions monitoring price movements. The losses incurred will be keenly felt by investment houses that manage the superannuation of millions of ordinary people.
There is no doubt that the computer and the systems it controls has emerged as a weapon of war. It can be used to cripple an opposing country's military defence systems and throw all forms of commerce into total disarray. Government sponsored hackers work to improve their skills and practice by invading the communications and commercial networks of target nations. The " spy game " has developed into a move and counter move to protect the functions of commerce and government.
Here in Australia, a 24 year old hacker was caught breaking into a government website and unlawfully modifying data. That offence carries a maximum twelve years gaol term - and it will be interesting to see how seriously a court treats a hacking case if he is convicted at trial.
It is thought that this hacker is a member of an organization named Lulzsec, composed of freelance hackers who are part of the international " Anonymous " hacking syndicate that carries out audacious hacking raids in support of it's agenda to implement social change.
It seems that our way of life is vulnerable to attacks on the very systems that deliver the benefits that computers and the communications age has bestowed on the world. Each year our reliance on the computer reaches new bounds. It is a worrying thought that if any nation's computer system was shut down by an attack by another country - or a very clever malignant individual - the victim country would be plunged back into the dark ages.
Unfortunately, that is a risk that we must take. There is simply no alternative !
Thursday 25 April 2013
Populate - or perish !
We have just ticked over to twenty-three million people who call Australia home. That will spark an interesting debate between people who think we must continue to grow our numbers and those who think we are already over populated. Entrepreneur Dick Smith claims that our present population exceeds the capacity of this country to host even the present numbers.
When the second world war engulfed Australia we were a perilously small number of people living in a vast continent. At the end of that war, the motto " Populate or perish " was in the ascendancy and we opened our doors to the people wishing to exit the devastation that was Europe. Looking back now, this was a successful melding of many cultures, religions and languages. The original settlers from that time are now in their twilight years, but their children - and their children's children - are unmistakably - Australian !
Those wishing to lock Australia into a no further growth culture would be wise to expand their thinking and view the world scene. Planet earth has over seven billion people calling it home, and that number is rising steadily with little sign of change to come. There is another portend for the future happening on our doorstep. War - religious intolerance - shortage of food and shelter - and a host of other grievances has the tribes of planet Earth on the move. We call them " refugees " They cross national borders like a plague of locusts - looking for food and shelter - and survival !
Our reputation precedes us. This is " the Lucky country ". This is where the people live the " good life " - and it has become the Mecca for those prepared to sell everything to pay people smugglers for their journey here. Some drown along the way. Some are looted and murdered by pirates. Those that arrive are not greeted with enthusiasm - and many are turned away after their circumstances are investigated.
We are a country that successfully absorbs people of different cultures and melds them into what it takes to be " Australian " ! If we managed to stop our numbers growing by reducing both our birth rate and our acceptance of new settlers, we would contract into the dangerous statistic of a small population occupying a huge land mass - in a vastly overpopulated world.
Further down the track it would be inevitable that the need for living space would see our borders face an unstoppable inflow of desperate people, far beyond our ability to absorb into our Australian culture. It would be the culture of these invaders that would prevail, simply because they would eventually outnumber us.
It is one of the laws of nature that this " nature abhors a vacuum ". We would be creating that vacuum if we were stupid enough to think we could isolate the Australian continent from the expansion needs of a world whose numbers are spinning out of control.
The only way Australia can survive and maintain it's present culture is to steadily increase it's population by absorbing a stream of new settlers and do what we do best - have them distance themselves from their former life and embrace the Australian culture.
To do otherwise, is to ignore that " Populate or perish " warning !
When the second world war engulfed Australia we were a perilously small number of people living in a vast continent. At the end of that war, the motto " Populate or perish " was in the ascendancy and we opened our doors to the people wishing to exit the devastation that was Europe. Looking back now, this was a successful melding of many cultures, religions and languages. The original settlers from that time are now in their twilight years, but their children - and their children's children - are unmistakably - Australian !
Those wishing to lock Australia into a no further growth culture would be wise to expand their thinking and view the world scene. Planet earth has over seven billion people calling it home, and that number is rising steadily with little sign of change to come. There is another portend for the future happening on our doorstep. War - religious intolerance - shortage of food and shelter - and a host of other grievances has the tribes of planet Earth on the move. We call them " refugees " They cross national borders like a plague of locusts - looking for food and shelter - and survival !
Our reputation precedes us. This is " the Lucky country ". This is where the people live the " good life " - and it has become the Mecca for those prepared to sell everything to pay people smugglers for their journey here. Some drown along the way. Some are looted and murdered by pirates. Those that arrive are not greeted with enthusiasm - and many are turned away after their circumstances are investigated.
We are a country that successfully absorbs people of different cultures and melds them into what it takes to be " Australian " ! If we managed to stop our numbers growing by reducing both our birth rate and our acceptance of new settlers, we would contract into the dangerous statistic of a small population occupying a huge land mass - in a vastly overpopulated world.
Further down the track it would be inevitable that the need for living space would see our borders face an unstoppable inflow of desperate people, far beyond our ability to absorb into our Australian culture. It would be the culture of these invaders that would prevail, simply because they would eventually outnumber us.
It is one of the laws of nature that this " nature abhors a vacuum ". We would be creating that vacuum if we were stupid enough to think we could isolate the Australian continent from the expansion needs of a world whose numbers are spinning out of control.
The only way Australia can survive and maintain it's present culture is to steadily increase it's population by absorbing a stream of new settlers and do what we do best - have them distance themselves from their former life and embrace the Australian culture.
To do otherwise, is to ignore that " Populate or perish " warning !
Wednesday 24 April 2013
Incentives !
No doubt a plan put in place by the ANZ bank to reward it's top performers with a luxury trip to Disneyland will bring a spray of protest from those members of the public who disagree with incentives for merit. Those will be the same people who disagree that employees who use their brains to deliver a better service to customers are worth more money than drones who contribute little.
In particular, the ANZ bank will stir the ire of many because it has just announced a profit of $ 1.53 billion for the past three months trading, and because of that some people think that profits should be redirected into lowering interest rates.
This tends to miss the point of why banks like ANZ exist. They are a public institution which is owned by ordinary people by way of buying shares. Profits are distributed by paying dividends to the holders of those shares, but trading in shares is also a risky business. Share prices rise and fall at the whim of the market - and that dividend depends on the level of prosperity achieved. It is the objective of the bank to make as much profit as possible to satisfy it's shareholders.
Within the banking structure, reward is needed to focus attention on refining the services offered and creating new areas of trading to enhance profits. It is inevitable that some employees will have outstanding aptitude to these tasks, and they will become prime targets for poaching by rival trading organizations. It is essential if the organization is to continue to expand that talented staff be retained and wise management ensures that rewards are commensurate with the value of those employees.
That brings salaries into the equation. The best and brightest deserve more money that those who contribute less to the company, but it is also wise to look beyond mere money and remember that exemplary service also infringes on family time and quality of life. The wise ensure that this is catered for in the reward package.
ANZ bank has selected it's best and brightest - and their spouses - to fly with Qantas for a four night trip to the United States - with all expenses paid. This will cost $ 11,000 per couple and will include a day at Disneyland. The group will be drawn from fourteen countries - and thirty-five of them will be Australian.
While this rewards ANZ people for their outstanding contribution to excellent trading results, it also delivers a reward to the bank. It creates a bond to discourage key employees from offering their services on the general market and leaving the bank. It recognises that a happy family environment plays a big part in worker satisfaction.
The grumbles from the public are the usual pangs of jealousy from workers who contribute little to the advancement of their employer. That old adage that " you need to give - to receive " holds true. Bringing interest rates into the question is simply a furphy. The events that govern interest rates are deep and complex, and governed by a host of external factors.
Love them - or hate them ! There is a lot to be thankful for when we see evidence that one of our key financial pillars has the good sense to guard it's trove of most valued employees - with adequate incentives.
The economy may look grim - but at least some of our national institutions are in good hands !
In particular, the ANZ bank will stir the ire of many because it has just announced a profit of $ 1.53 billion for the past three months trading, and because of that some people think that profits should be redirected into lowering interest rates.
This tends to miss the point of why banks like ANZ exist. They are a public institution which is owned by ordinary people by way of buying shares. Profits are distributed by paying dividends to the holders of those shares, but trading in shares is also a risky business. Share prices rise and fall at the whim of the market - and that dividend depends on the level of prosperity achieved. It is the objective of the bank to make as much profit as possible to satisfy it's shareholders.
Within the banking structure, reward is needed to focus attention on refining the services offered and creating new areas of trading to enhance profits. It is inevitable that some employees will have outstanding aptitude to these tasks, and they will become prime targets for poaching by rival trading organizations. It is essential if the organization is to continue to expand that talented staff be retained and wise management ensures that rewards are commensurate with the value of those employees.
That brings salaries into the equation. The best and brightest deserve more money that those who contribute less to the company, but it is also wise to look beyond mere money and remember that exemplary service also infringes on family time and quality of life. The wise ensure that this is catered for in the reward package.
ANZ bank has selected it's best and brightest - and their spouses - to fly with Qantas for a four night trip to the United States - with all expenses paid. This will cost $ 11,000 per couple and will include a day at Disneyland. The group will be drawn from fourteen countries - and thirty-five of them will be Australian.
While this rewards ANZ people for their outstanding contribution to excellent trading results, it also delivers a reward to the bank. It creates a bond to discourage key employees from offering their services on the general market and leaving the bank. It recognises that a happy family environment plays a big part in worker satisfaction.
The grumbles from the public are the usual pangs of jealousy from workers who contribute little to the advancement of their employer. That old adage that " you need to give - to receive " holds true. Bringing interest rates into the question is simply a furphy. The events that govern interest rates are deep and complex, and governed by a host of external factors.
Love them - or hate them ! There is a lot to be thankful for when we see evidence that one of our key financial pillars has the good sense to guard it's trove of most valued employees - with adequate incentives.
The economy may look grim - but at least some of our national institutions are in good hands !
Tuesday 23 April 2013
Fare evaders !
Driving a bus in Sydney is a challenging job. Not only do drivers have to cope with the city's traffic snarls but they also have the responsibility of checking that passengers have the correct ticket for the intended journey - and that can lead to physical assault.
Fare evasion has been a long running problem on Sydney trains, buses and ferries. The relentless need to cut costs has seen a depletion in the number of State Transit Authority inspectors tasked with keeping fare evasion to a minimum. At present, just seven inspectors are expected to cover the fifteen thousand daily city services.
It has become a no win situation for drivers. Statistics show that 41% of driver assaults originated from a demand to check the validity of a ticket, and pre-paid tickets headed the list of arguments between drivers and passengers.
There seems to be an evolving answer to this ticket problem, but it has been making slow progress in application. We are heading towards a replication of London's very successful " Oyster " card ticket system and this is being introduced selectively on ferries. Hopefully, it will extend to all trains and buses - but don't hold your breath waiting !
Paying cash when you board a bus simply adds to journey time and the need for speed ushered in the pre-paid ticket. The great benefit of the Oyster card system is that it can electronically deduct the fare from the passengers card balance and this happens when it is swiped over a card reader. Future driver/passenger fare arguments will occur when a passenger's card lacks the balance to meet the fare, or when they ignore the need to swipe their card over the reader.
In the past, fare evasion became almost an art form. Evaders gave false names and addresses and the debt recovery office has a deficit running into millions in unpaid fines. Transit officers lacked arrest powers or the authority to demand evidence of identity - and this was exploited ruthlessly by hordes of people who believed that public transport should be free.
Now that Transit Officers are replaced by police and we live in an electronic age, new ways of solving this problem are at hand. Along with the Oyster card, bringing fare evasion into the twenty-first century moves the offence higher if it is considered an economic crime - and punished accordingly.
A driver should not have the task of facing down a passenger who fails to pay a fare. Our buses already have a radio link and it should be a simple matter of activating a " fare evaded " signal to alert the police control room - and start a signal light flashing on the bus roof.
The government would expect police to treat fare evasion seriously. It is as assault on state revenue - and it is a crime. If fare evaders could expect the nearest police car to pull the bus over, board it and arrest the culprit - fare evasion would drop dramatically.
It would also enhance driver safety. Navigating the Sydney traffic maize is a difficult enough job without adding fighting passengers for the correct fare to complicate that job !
Fare evasion has been a long running problem on Sydney trains, buses and ferries. The relentless need to cut costs has seen a depletion in the number of State Transit Authority inspectors tasked with keeping fare evasion to a minimum. At present, just seven inspectors are expected to cover the fifteen thousand daily city services.
It has become a no win situation for drivers. Statistics show that 41% of driver assaults originated from a demand to check the validity of a ticket, and pre-paid tickets headed the list of arguments between drivers and passengers.
There seems to be an evolving answer to this ticket problem, but it has been making slow progress in application. We are heading towards a replication of London's very successful " Oyster " card ticket system and this is being introduced selectively on ferries. Hopefully, it will extend to all trains and buses - but don't hold your breath waiting !
Paying cash when you board a bus simply adds to journey time and the need for speed ushered in the pre-paid ticket. The great benefit of the Oyster card system is that it can electronically deduct the fare from the passengers card balance and this happens when it is swiped over a card reader. Future driver/passenger fare arguments will occur when a passenger's card lacks the balance to meet the fare, or when they ignore the need to swipe their card over the reader.
In the past, fare evasion became almost an art form. Evaders gave false names and addresses and the debt recovery office has a deficit running into millions in unpaid fines. Transit officers lacked arrest powers or the authority to demand evidence of identity - and this was exploited ruthlessly by hordes of people who believed that public transport should be free.
Now that Transit Officers are replaced by police and we live in an electronic age, new ways of solving this problem are at hand. Along with the Oyster card, bringing fare evasion into the twenty-first century moves the offence higher if it is considered an economic crime - and punished accordingly.
A driver should not have the task of facing down a passenger who fails to pay a fare. Our buses already have a radio link and it should be a simple matter of activating a " fare evaded " signal to alert the police control room - and start a signal light flashing on the bus roof.
The government would expect police to treat fare evasion seriously. It is as assault on state revenue - and it is a crime. If fare evaders could expect the nearest police car to pull the bus over, board it and arrest the culprit - fare evasion would drop dramatically.
It would also enhance driver safety. Navigating the Sydney traffic maize is a difficult enough job without adding fighting passengers for the correct fare to complicate that job !
Monday 22 April 2013
Why ?
The question that can never be fully answered is why two promising young men would build bombs and take the lives of people who were complete strangers. One is dead and the other in custody, but the question of why the Boston marathon was subjected to jihad will be impossible to explain.
Two Checken brothers left their ethnically troubled country for a better life in America. The elder - Tamertan Ysarnaev ( 26 ) became a promising amateur boxer and had prospects of competing at the next Olympics. It appeared that he had settled into a suburban American lifestyle because he married a wife who converted to Islam, and together they had a young daughter. The only clue seems to be a statement he made, declaring that he had " no American friends, because he didn't understand them ".
His younger brother, Dzhokhar ( 19 ) was enrolled in the prestigious MIT as a student. It seems that when his brother became radicalized he was swept along and it appears there was an Australian connection. Tamertan posted the fiery sermons of Australian based Sheik Feiz Mohammed on his website.
This bomb attack was not a spur of the moment thing. The means of turning a pressure cooker into an explosive device is clearly identified on al Qaeda sites on the Internet, but it requires research to collect the necessary parts and the bombs were carried in backpacks - one each by the two brothers. Both clearly set out to inflict carnage on others.
A common thread in attacks that seem to have a " revenge against society " objective and range from mass shootings without apparent cause to a bombing of the Boston marathon nature - is the " loner " description that is applied to a person responsible. Tamertan fitted that description. Perhaps his failure to integrate with others drew him to become radicalized as he replaced personal family affections with what he saw as the vengeance requirement of his religion. This zeal was then transferred to his younger sibling - who capitulated and joined in jihad.
It seems that there is no clear defence against this sort of madness. From time to time seemingly normal people go berserk with a weapon and kill others at random. The fact that we have some Muslim clerics openly calling for jihad from followers of Islam in western countries - which we allow under the " free speech " rules that apply - enhances the chances of home grown radicalism.
There are no winners in such situations. Several people died and many were crippled in the marathon bombing. One of the perpetrators is dead and the other faces either life in prison - or execution. Nothing tangible was achieved, but the bombers immediate families will be scarred for life by their association with the two people who caused world headlines.
Hopefully, it may play a part in helping others under pressure to reject similar attempts to radicalise them.
Two Checken brothers left their ethnically troubled country for a better life in America. The elder - Tamertan Ysarnaev ( 26 ) became a promising amateur boxer and had prospects of competing at the next Olympics. It appeared that he had settled into a suburban American lifestyle because he married a wife who converted to Islam, and together they had a young daughter. The only clue seems to be a statement he made, declaring that he had " no American friends, because he didn't understand them ".
His younger brother, Dzhokhar ( 19 ) was enrolled in the prestigious MIT as a student. It seems that when his brother became radicalized he was swept along and it appears there was an Australian connection. Tamertan posted the fiery sermons of Australian based Sheik Feiz Mohammed on his website.
This bomb attack was not a spur of the moment thing. The means of turning a pressure cooker into an explosive device is clearly identified on al Qaeda sites on the Internet, but it requires research to collect the necessary parts and the bombs were carried in backpacks - one each by the two brothers. Both clearly set out to inflict carnage on others.
A common thread in attacks that seem to have a " revenge against society " objective and range from mass shootings without apparent cause to a bombing of the Boston marathon nature - is the " loner " description that is applied to a person responsible. Tamertan fitted that description. Perhaps his failure to integrate with others drew him to become radicalized as he replaced personal family affections with what he saw as the vengeance requirement of his religion. This zeal was then transferred to his younger sibling - who capitulated and joined in jihad.
It seems that there is no clear defence against this sort of madness. From time to time seemingly normal people go berserk with a weapon and kill others at random. The fact that we have some Muslim clerics openly calling for jihad from followers of Islam in western countries - which we allow under the " free speech " rules that apply - enhances the chances of home grown radicalism.
There are no winners in such situations. Several people died and many were crippled in the marathon bombing. One of the perpetrators is dead and the other faces either life in prison - or execution. Nothing tangible was achieved, but the bombers immediate families will be scarred for life by their association with the two people who caused world headlines.
Hopefully, it may play a part in helping others under pressure to reject similar attempts to radicalise them.
Sunday 21 April 2013
A disaster waiting to happen ?
One thing recent events in Texas highlight is the danger of allowing a housing suburb to be established alongside an explosives factory. In the case of the town of West, the explosives factory came first and lax building laws allowed homes, schools, even a nursing home - to surround the factory building.
When that factory caught fire and then exploded the blast registered over 2 on the Richter scale - which measures earthquakes. The dead are still being counted and the damage to the surrounding suburb is near total, and it is not the first time that Texas has suffered death and destruction from an industrial explosion.
Back in 1947 a ship was being unloaded in the Port of Texas city. It was carrying a cargo of 2,300 tonnes of ammonium nitrate and when it exploded it wrecked most of that city - and caused the death of 581 people. Ammonium nitrate is both a farm fertiliser - and the main ingredient of commercial explosives.
This industrial accident at the town of West will result in a mammoth investigation and already there are suggestions that safety rules had been breached in the past and required inspections had not taken place over several years. This seems to be a common factor when disaster strikes, There are probably thousands of unsafe situations where disaster is waiting to happen - but sheer good luck has allowed that day of judgement to stay it's hand. It is so easy to be wise - after the event !
Here in Australia, that Texas explosion should serve as a wakeup call. We manufacture explosives in this country and one of the main plants is located on Kooragang island - in the port of Newcastle. Now would be a very good time to take stock of what quantities of substances such as ammonium nitrate are held ready for processing - and how many people live within what would be considered a blast zone for that amount of explosives.
Unfortunately, Safety usually comes into collision with politics when a danger is revealed. Logic suggests that a dangerous plant should move to where it can safely continue to manufacture, but that brings costs into the equation - and then there is the emotive subject of job losses. Forcing a manufacturer to close a factory and relocate often means that relocation will be in another country with a lower wage structure. The usual response is to do as little as possible, but to claim that new safety regulations apply that eliminate - or at least reduce - the danger of a catastrophe.
At least the danger is clearly on the wall. Explosive manufacturing plants do explode - and we have one located in close proximity to other industries - and also close to a community where people live. We can take a chance - cross our fingers and hope that Lady Luck smiles benevolently - or we can bite the bullet and do a proper investigation of the risks involved.
The odds are that a proper investigation will not deliver good news !
When that factory caught fire and then exploded the blast registered over 2 on the Richter scale - which measures earthquakes. The dead are still being counted and the damage to the surrounding suburb is near total, and it is not the first time that Texas has suffered death and destruction from an industrial explosion.
Back in 1947 a ship was being unloaded in the Port of Texas city. It was carrying a cargo of 2,300 tonnes of ammonium nitrate and when it exploded it wrecked most of that city - and caused the death of 581 people. Ammonium nitrate is both a farm fertiliser - and the main ingredient of commercial explosives.
This industrial accident at the town of West will result in a mammoth investigation and already there are suggestions that safety rules had been breached in the past and required inspections had not taken place over several years. This seems to be a common factor when disaster strikes, There are probably thousands of unsafe situations where disaster is waiting to happen - but sheer good luck has allowed that day of judgement to stay it's hand. It is so easy to be wise - after the event !
Here in Australia, that Texas explosion should serve as a wakeup call. We manufacture explosives in this country and one of the main plants is located on Kooragang island - in the port of Newcastle. Now would be a very good time to take stock of what quantities of substances such as ammonium nitrate are held ready for processing - and how many people live within what would be considered a blast zone for that amount of explosives.
Unfortunately, Safety usually comes into collision with politics when a danger is revealed. Logic suggests that a dangerous plant should move to where it can safely continue to manufacture, but that brings costs into the equation - and then there is the emotive subject of job losses. Forcing a manufacturer to close a factory and relocate often means that relocation will be in another country with a lower wage structure. The usual response is to do as little as possible, but to claim that new safety regulations apply that eliminate - or at least reduce - the danger of a catastrophe.
At least the danger is clearly on the wall. Explosive manufacturing plants do explode - and we have one located in close proximity to other industries - and also close to a community where people live. We can take a chance - cross our fingers and hope that Lady Luck smiles benevolently - or we can bite the bullet and do a proper investigation of the risks involved.
The odds are that a proper investigation will not deliver good news !
Saturday 20 April 2013
Same sex marriages !
There is a certain inevitability about same sex marriages becoming law in Australia. The fact that New Zealand has just passed that recognition into law will certainly see a stream of same sex couples crossing the Tasman to legally tie the knot - but when they return to Australia the union will not be legally recognised.
Getting a piece of paper that can be called a " Marriage Certificate " is just a matter of principle to some people while the legal status it confers is the really important issue to others. Any two people of either gender can live together as a married couple without question in this country - but that same piece of paper has a dramatic effect on what happens if and when one of them dies.
Inheritance laws ignore relationships that are outside the legal framework of " marriage " and this extends throughout the tax code. A couple who take the traditional path get benefits that those who have a same sex relationship are denied. In some countries, special legislation has removed this anomaly without venturing into an area where angels fear to tread - calling that union a " Marriage ". It seems that making that step is a huge abyss for those with a conservative outlook on the meaning of that word.
It is interesting to look back and see the changes that have occurred in the area of personal relationships since Federation on January twenty-six, 1901. At that time, any person convicted of homosexuality could expect to serve a long period in prison. It was also illegal for people of colour and people with a white skin to cohabitate, much less " Marry ".
We have just got through apologising to the thousands of unwed mothers who had their child forcibly taken and given away for adoption as recently as thirty years ago - simply because in the eyes of society - having that child unwed - was a " sin " !
Dissolving a marriage was also fraught with shame. One of the parties needed to be judged the " guilty " one responsible for the marriage breakup - and this involved third parties peeping through bedroom windows to obtain " evidence ". The " guilty " were punished with unfair property settlement - and disgrace in the court of public opinion. Eventually, a " no fault " regime swept away this era of corruption and accepted that some unions inevitably fail by natural causes.
Many couples today live together without the blessing of a marriage certificate. We live in a " try before you buy " age and such arrangements are readily accepted. It seems that the lingering longing for a way of life that has virtually vanished is stiffening the resistance to changing the last bulwark to life as it used to be. We accept that same sex couples have a right to their relationships - just so long as they don't call it a " marriage ".
The majority of Australians seem ready to take that final step, but the politicians are nervous and fear a backlash from those with conservative views on morality. France is on the cusp of acceptance and New Zealand has taken that step. It is just a matter of time before the inevitable happens in this country !
Getting a piece of paper that can be called a " Marriage Certificate " is just a matter of principle to some people while the legal status it confers is the really important issue to others. Any two people of either gender can live together as a married couple without question in this country - but that same piece of paper has a dramatic effect on what happens if and when one of them dies.
Inheritance laws ignore relationships that are outside the legal framework of " marriage " and this extends throughout the tax code. A couple who take the traditional path get benefits that those who have a same sex relationship are denied. In some countries, special legislation has removed this anomaly without venturing into an area where angels fear to tread - calling that union a " Marriage ". It seems that making that step is a huge abyss for those with a conservative outlook on the meaning of that word.
It is interesting to look back and see the changes that have occurred in the area of personal relationships since Federation on January twenty-six, 1901. At that time, any person convicted of homosexuality could expect to serve a long period in prison. It was also illegal for people of colour and people with a white skin to cohabitate, much less " Marry ".
We have just got through apologising to the thousands of unwed mothers who had their child forcibly taken and given away for adoption as recently as thirty years ago - simply because in the eyes of society - having that child unwed - was a " sin " !
Dissolving a marriage was also fraught with shame. One of the parties needed to be judged the " guilty " one responsible for the marriage breakup - and this involved third parties peeping through bedroom windows to obtain " evidence ". The " guilty " were punished with unfair property settlement - and disgrace in the court of public opinion. Eventually, a " no fault " regime swept away this era of corruption and accepted that some unions inevitably fail by natural causes.
Many couples today live together without the blessing of a marriage certificate. We live in a " try before you buy " age and such arrangements are readily accepted. It seems that the lingering longing for a way of life that has virtually vanished is stiffening the resistance to changing the last bulwark to life as it used to be. We accept that same sex couples have a right to their relationships - just so long as they don't call it a " marriage ".
The majority of Australians seem ready to take that final step, but the politicians are nervous and fear a backlash from those with conservative views on morality. France is on the cusp of acceptance and New Zealand has taken that step. It is just a matter of time before the inevitable happens in this country !
Friday 19 April 2013
Time for a re-think !
From the start, the very idea of a " Carbon tax " was very " iffy " ! The basic principle was to increase the cost of creating pollution so that the polluter would have an incentive to move to a less polluting way of doing business. It was a typical " carrot and stick " approach.
It might have worked if the entire world had adopted this strategy, but the biggest polluters - The United States, India and China - opted out. Australia - and a handful of lesser economies - decided to push on with the scheme and this did a great deal of harm to their economic competitiveness.
Now the rationale that would make the scheme work has collapsed into a giant black hole. It was projected that carbon credits would be priced at about $ 29 a tonne but across Europe this has reached just $ 3 a tonne. For Australia, it is a wrecking ball hitting the Federal budget which will leave a budget gap of near $ 7 billion.
That leaves in it's wake - an unholy mess ! The carbon tax implementation pushed up electricity and gas prices and the public received compensation to the tune of $ 14.9 billion. If we dump this carbon tax, will these price surges return to previous levels ? And will the government claw back the compensation already delivered ? What happens to the industries that simply faded out of existence because the tax made them uncompetitive ?
It looks like we are facing an unpleasant budget revision to try and plug that gaping big black hole - and this is happening at a time when the commodity prices on which Australia relies for revenue are starting to slip. We no longer have a wide manufacturing base to spread the load. It seems that there are tough times ahead.
Hopefully, this may be the incentive to make Australia a competitive nation again. It certainly is not the time to force industry to cut back research and development work - because it will not be an allowable tax deduction. R & D is the backbone of innovation - and it is innovation that delivers new industries - and jobs !
It is also time to re-think the "loadings" that apply to working hours outside that old nine to five way of thinking. The world has evolved into a 24/7 economy and we can not be competitive if we continue to cling to the past. It is not a case of cutting wages. It is simply being reasonable and spreading the jobs over a time period which makes industries viable.
If Australia is to survive the damage that the carbon tax has inflicted, a lot of old union shibboleths are going to have to go out of the window. We badly need to drag our economy into the twenty-first century - and hard times are the incentives that make it possible !
It might have worked if the entire world had adopted this strategy, but the biggest polluters - The United States, India and China - opted out. Australia - and a handful of lesser economies - decided to push on with the scheme and this did a great deal of harm to their economic competitiveness.
Now the rationale that would make the scheme work has collapsed into a giant black hole. It was projected that carbon credits would be priced at about $ 29 a tonne but across Europe this has reached just $ 3 a tonne. For Australia, it is a wrecking ball hitting the Federal budget which will leave a budget gap of near $ 7 billion.
That leaves in it's wake - an unholy mess ! The carbon tax implementation pushed up electricity and gas prices and the public received compensation to the tune of $ 14.9 billion. If we dump this carbon tax, will these price surges return to previous levels ? And will the government claw back the compensation already delivered ? What happens to the industries that simply faded out of existence because the tax made them uncompetitive ?
It looks like we are facing an unpleasant budget revision to try and plug that gaping big black hole - and this is happening at a time when the commodity prices on which Australia relies for revenue are starting to slip. We no longer have a wide manufacturing base to spread the load. It seems that there are tough times ahead.
Hopefully, this may be the incentive to make Australia a competitive nation again. It certainly is not the time to force industry to cut back research and development work - because it will not be an allowable tax deduction. R & D is the backbone of innovation - and it is innovation that delivers new industries - and jobs !
It is also time to re-think the "loadings" that apply to working hours outside that old nine to five way of thinking. The world has evolved into a 24/7 economy and we can not be competitive if we continue to cling to the past. It is not a case of cutting wages. It is simply being reasonable and spreading the jobs over a time period which makes industries viable.
If Australia is to survive the damage that the carbon tax has inflicted, a lot of old union shibboleths are going to have to go out of the window. We badly need to drag our economy into the twenty-first century - and hard times are the incentives that make it possible !
Thursday 18 April 2013
Sydney's Shame !
An event happened earlier this month that sent a lot of people away with unhappy memories of their visit to Sydney. One of the many cruise ships that visit this port had the unpleasant experience of choosing Sunday as the day of a visit and for a few glorious hours hordes of international tourists came ashore with brimming wallets - to experience the joy of this " world city " !
What they found was a vista of shuttered restaurants and closed shops. The fact that our employment laws are still stuck in the distant 1950's is causing the Sydney scene to retreat. The fact that employees working weekend hours have to be paid a loading of twenty-five percent on Saturdays - and fifty percent on Sundays - simply makes opening the doors unprofitable.
We are a land of powerful trade unions who have a big influence on government policies - and clearly the unions just don't get it ! Penalty rates belong to an era when the laws prevented supermarkets selling red meat on Sundays. The reason was that it was considered unfair competition with butchers shops - which only traded on a five and a half day week. The absurdity of the situation was that chicken could be freely sold - and the ban only applied to red meat.
No hardware could be legally sold on a Sunday either, but such a raft of stupidity has long gone - and yet we are still stuck with these crazy wage loadings despite the world having evolved into a 24/7 trading mode.
The sad thing is that we have an unemployment rate of about 5.6% and vast numbers of people are being offered far less hours than they need to earn a decent living. Dump those loadings and there would be an incentive for longer trading hours and a lot more jobs offering. We actually have restrictive legislation preventing employers from giving jobs to the people who would gladly accept them.
We spend public money advertising Australia to people overseas as a nice place to visit - and then we send home a whole ship load of tourists to spread the word that Sydney is a " Hick town " that closes the shutters on weekends.
It seems that the unions are the obstacle. They stand squarely between the people who want to run a flourishing business and make money - and a vast number of people who need a job and would be quite willing to work for ordinary rates of pay during weekends.
To Sydney's shame - our " world city " status is on the line !
What they found was a vista of shuttered restaurants and closed shops. The fact that our employment laws are still stuck in the distant 1950's is causing the Sydney scene to retreat. The fact that employees working weekend hours have to be paid a loading of twenty-five percent on Saturdays - and fifty percent on Sundays - simply makes opening the doors unprofitable.
We are a land of powerful trade unions who have a big influence on government policies - and clearly the unions just don't get it ! Penalty rates belong to an era when the laws prevented supermarkets selling red meat on Sundays. The reason was that it was considered unfair competition with butchers shops - which only traded on a five and a half day week. The absurdity of the situation was that chicken could be freely sold - and the ban only applied to red meat.
No hardware could be legally sold on a Sunday either, but such a raft of stupidity has long gone - and yet we are still stuck with these crazy wage loadings despite the world having evolved into a 24/7 trading mode.
The sad thing is that we have an unemployment rate of about 5.6% and vast numbers of people are being offered far less hours than they need to earn a decent living. Dump those loadings and there would be an incentive for longer trading hours and a lot more jobs offering. We actually have restrictive legislation preventing employers from giving jobs to the people who would gladly accept them.
We spend public money advertising Australia to people overseas as a nice place to visit - and then we send home a whole ship load of tourists to spread the word that Sydney is a " Hick town " that closes the shutters on weekends.
It seems that the unions are the obstacle. They stand squarely between the people who want to run a flourishing business and make money - and a vast number of people who need a job and would be quite willing to work for ordinary rates of pay during weekends.
To Sydney's shame - our " world city " status is on the line !
Wednesday 17 April 2013
Kiwi exodus !
Every time a new refugee boat arrives at Christmas island it sparks a huge cost to the Australian community. The processing of asylum claims is a long and tedious process and in the interim the new arrivals need to be fed and housed. Our reception facilities are bursting at the seams - and this procession of new arrivals seems endless !
What is surprising is that we have a similar flow of new arrivals setting foot on our shores - from across the Tasman - and this passes virtually unnoticed !
New Zealand is a country of just 4.4 million people - and about fifteen percent of them live permanently in Australia. It is a fact of life that we do not consider Kiwi's as foreigners. They speak the same language. They look remarkably the same as Australian citizens, and the ties between the two countries are so strong that they are welcome guests.
While stringent plans are being put in place to stem the arrival of " boat people " to our north, there are no moves to even slow the arrival of New Zealand citizens looking for a better life in this country. In many cases, these " economic migrants " are the very people that New Zealand needs to inject the skills to improve that country's economy. New Zealand's loss is very much our gain.
It seems to be a matter of " economy of scale. ". New Zealand is deemed to be a " low wage country " because it's smaller population can not support the type of industries common in Australia. The average New Zealand salary is just $ 47,000 and a high proportion of that is necessary to provide housing in that country.
At the time of Federation, New Zealand seriously considered joining Australia to bring together a union of eight states. The Kiwi's decided to remain independent and the migration policies of the two nations diverged. New Zealand welcomed settlers from Britain long after Australia opened it's doors to refugees from Europe after the end of the second world war. As a result, Australia became a more " multicultural "country - with a rapidly expanding population.
It seems inevitable that this affinity that exists between the people who live on either side of the Tasman will continue - and that in all but a legal sense - they have become one country. The freedom of entry and exit is more like the customs that prevail between Australian states than a relationship between nations - and any sort of change is unlikely.
In all probability we may see a reverse flow of citizens develop as Australians discover that New Zealand offers a tranquil place for retirees to settle, far away from the clamour of big city life. The advantages of two countries that share a common language and customs is yet to be fully exploited !
What is surprising is that we have a similar flow of new arrivals setting foot on our shores - from across the Tasman - and this passes virtually unnoticed !
New Zealand is a country of just 4.4 million people - and about fifteen percent of them live permanently in Australia. It is a fact of life that we do not consider Kiwi's as foreigners. They speak the same language. They look remarkably the same as Australian citizens, and the ties between the two countries are so strong that they are welcome guests.
While stringent plans are being put in place to stem the arrival of " boat people " to our north, there are no moves to even slow the arrival of New Zealand citizens looking for a better life in this country. In many cases, these " economic migrants " are the very people that New Zealand needs to inject the skills to improve that country's economy. New Zealand's loss is very much our gain.
It seems to be a matter of " economy of scale. ". New Zealand is deemed to be a " low wage country " because it's smaller population can not support the type of industries common in Australia. The average New Zealand salary is just $ 47,000 and a high proportion of that is necessary to provide housing in that country.
At the time of Federation, New Zealand seriously considered joining Australia to bring together a union of eight states. The Kiwi's decided to remain independent and the migration policies of the two nations diverged. New Zealand welcomed settlers from Britain long after Australia opened it's doors to refugees from Europe after the end of the second world war. As a result, Australia became a more " multicultural "country - with a rapidly expanding population.
It seems inevitable that this affinity that exists between the people who live on either side of the Tasman will continue - and that in all but a legal sense - they have become one country. The freedom of entry and exit is more like the customs that prevail between Australian states than a relationship between nations - and any sort of change is unlikely.
In all probability we may see a reverse flow of citizens develop as Australians discover that New Zealand offers a tranquil place for retirees to settle, far away from the clamour of big city life. The advantages of two countries that share a common language and customs is yet to be fully exploited !
Tuesday 16 April 2013
Gonski !
Few would disagree that our school system is badly in need of improvement. The Gonski report laid out a framework of what needs to be done - and that involves a massive injection of money. The suggested formulae is for the states to match each two dollars provided from Canberra with a dollar contribution from their own state resources.
The plan under consideration is less than Gonski requested, but it is still an injection of $ 14.5 billion over six years, and would deliver $ 9271 in education expenses for every primary student and $ 12,193 for each student enrolled in a High school.
The aim is wonderful. This money is designed to attract better teachers and provide the support needed to lift challenged students to a higher level. If it meets it's objectives, all students will leave school having attained acceptable literary and numeracy standards to equip them for their passage through life.
The sticking point for many - is the fact that this massive amount of money will be under the control of the government - and governments do not have an admirable track record of spending money wisely. There is a very real danger that six years down the track very little will have changed in school results. The money will have been frittered away by an army of experts pushing their own ideological barrows - and like many previous government seemingly bright ideas - lack of objectivity and discipline will have allowed results to stray way off course.
The cynical will remember the " school buildings " revolution - and the disaster when a government plan sought to provide roof insulation across Australian homes. In both cases, lack of commercial experience sent both projects awry - and delivered " unintended consequences ".
One of the aims of the Gonski mission is to lift students with speech impediments by providing " speech therapists ". Once money becomes available for an approved function, there will be a tendency for the numbers to grow and it would not be surprising if many such support functions did not quickly spin out of control. Such is the danger of trying to embrace reform with a wide brush.
Teaching skill upgrades are another source of danger. The militant teachers union will try and have a very big say in what changes are implemented, and the focus of unions is more on the benefits that accrue to members than the outcome that awaits students. A lot will depend on how seriously the governments implementing of Gonski will demand change. Not all Gonski aims will meet teacher union approval - and that sort of change is critical to a successful outcome.
Implementing Gonski is going to draw money away from a lot of Federal and State government instrumentality's. It will be worth it - if they get it right !
The big question is whether the government has both the skill and the determination to achieve what it promises !
The plan under consideration is less than Gonski requested, but it is still an injection of $ 14.5 billion over six years, and would deliver $ 9271 in education expenses for every primary student and $ 12,193 for each student enrolled in a High school.
The aim is wonderful. This money is designed to attract better teachers and provide the support needed to lift challenged students to a higher level. If it meets it's objectives, all students will leave school having attained acceptable literary and numeracy standards to equip them for their passage through life.
The sticking point for many - is the fact that this massive amount of money will be under the control of the government - and governments do not have an admirable track record of spending money wisely. There is a very real danger that six years down the track very little will have changed in school results. The money will have been frittered away by an army of experts pushing their own ideological barrows - and like many previous government seemingly bright ideas - lack of objectivity and discipline will have allowed results to stray way off course.
The cynical will remember the " school buildings " revolution - and the disaster when a government plan sought to provide roof insulation across Australian homes. In both cases, lack of commercial experience sent both projects awry - and delivered " unintended consequences ".
One of the aims of the Gonski mission is to lift students with speech impediments by providing " speech therapists ". Once money becomes available for an approved function, there will be a tendency for the numbers to grow and it would not be surprising if many such support functions did not quickly spin out of control. Such is the danger of trying to embrace reform with a wide brush.
Teaching skill upgrades are another source of danger. The militant teachers union will try and have a very big say in what changes are implemented, and the focus of unions is more on the benefits that accrue to members than the outcome that awaits students. A lot will depend on how seriously the governments implementing of Gonski will demand change. Not all Gonski aims will meet teacher union approval - and that sort of change is critical to a successful outcome.
Implementing Gonski is going to draw money away from a lot of Federal and State government instrumentality's. It will be worth it - if they get it right !
The big question is whether the government has both the skill and the determination to achieve what it promises !
Monday 15 April 2013
Dumbing down !
What a strange way of solving the " education " problem. To implement " Gonski " requires a whole lot more money to be spent on primary and secondary schools, so to provide some of that the government has decided to rip funds out of the universities.
Not so long ago we were told that Australia's future depended on equipping our best and brightest with the skills to meet a competitive world of innovation. It seems we are now about to destroy many of the measures designed to increase tertiary education levels. The term " Robbing Peter to pay Paul " comes to mind !
Australian universities will face a $ 2.8 billion hit ! Few factors will escape this funds drought. It is highly likely that the end result of this financial assault will bring future years saddled with " unintended consequences. "
The government has decided to discontinue offering a ten percent discount to families that pay their HECS fees " up-front ". It is not hard to see the consequences. Less money flowing into university coffers at the start of term - and more pressure on universities to enhance places for full fee paying overseas students.
Anguish from those who were lucky enough to go to university under a " Start up " scholarship. The government has reneged - and will start clawing back funds by requiring those students to repay what will now be termed " loans " !
Universities will lose $ 900 million in grants. That is simply a demand that they implement unstated " efficiencies " and it will be up to individual chancellors how they spread the load across services - but obviously it will mean that some subjects will be dropped and class numbers expanded.
Perhaps the cruelest cut of all - is the capping of tax deductions for self improvement education - to just $ 2,000 per person each year. The low paid who struggled to drag themselves into a better paying job by increasing their skills have been dealt a body blow. Paying self education fees was previously encouraged by favourable tax treatment. The government is signalling that self education is not high on their priorities. Those that have completed their schooling are dumped in favour of better education for primary school kids !
In many ways this seems to be a retreat under a " class war " scenario. The government seems to be treating those with university aspirations as " Silvertails " ! It is a complete reversal of the previous trend to upgrade our educational standards to achieve a population with higher qualifications to make Australia a more competitive country.
What we see now -is a " dumbing down " scenario !
Not so long ago we were told that Australia's future depended on equipping our best and brightest with the skills to meet a competitive world of innovation. It seems we are now about to destroy many of the measures designed to increase tertiary education levels. The term " Robbing Peter to pay Paul " comes to mind !
Australian universities will face a $ 2.8 billion hit ! Few factors will escape this funds drought. It is highly likely that the end result of this financial assault will bring future years saddled with " unintended consequences. "
The government has decided to discontinue offering a ten percent discount to families that pay their HECS fees " up-front ". It is not hard to see the consequences. Less money flowing into university coffers at the start of term - and more pressure on universities to enhance places for full fee paying overseas students.
Anguish from those who were lucky enough to go to university under a " Start up " scholarship. The government has reneged - and will start clawing back funds by requiring those students to repay what will now be termed " loans " !
Universities will lose $ 900 million in grants. That is simply a demand that they implement unstated " efficiencies " and it will be up to individual chancellors how they spread the load across services - but obviously it will mean that some subjects will be dropped and class numbers expanded.
Perhaps the cruelest cut of all - is the capping of tax deductions for self improvement education - to just $ 2,000 per person each year. The low paid who struggled to drag themselves into a better paying job by increasing their skills have been dealt a body blow. Paying self education fees was previously encouraged by favourable tax treatment. The government is signalling that self education is not high on their priorities. Those that have completed their schooling are dumped in favour of better education for primary school kids !
In many ways this seems to be a retreat under a " class war " scenario. The government seems to be treating those with university aspirations as " Silvertails " ! It is a complete reversal of the previous trend to upgrade our educational standards to achieve a population with higher qualifications to make Australia a more competitive country.
What we see now -is a " dumbing down " scenario !
Sunday 14 April 2013
The " Fun Police " swoop !
Out there in the business world, it's a tough place to make a buck ! Business people use up a lot of time and energy making sure their service stands out from competitors and in the ladies hairdressing sector a trend has emerged that meets customer approval.
Salons need the latest equipment and deliver an up-market service, but some hairdressers are greeting customers with a complimentary glass of Champagne. Getting your hair styled has advanced from a utilitarian function - to a visit where you will be luxuriantly pampered - and that glass of Champagne upon arrival is a civilizing factor.
Alas - it is also illegal !
The " Fun Police " are chiding salon owners who thought that they were well within the law because that glass of Champagne was a free gift. It seems that the law regards it as " providing alcohol as ancillary to a paid service " - and to do that you need a liquor license. Not only do you need to have that license, but your staff needs to have completed a course and also hold a " responsible serving of alcohol " certificate.
All that - for one lousy little glass of Champagne to illustrate that your customers are " special " and their patronage " valued " !
One salon owner who did the right thing and sorted out the paperwork, commented that it involved " reams and reams " of paper, a whole lot of time - and a fee of $ 200. No comment on how the staff felt about having to sit lectures and an exam to get a piece of paper that enabled them to legally pour that glass of Champagne.
It seems that the business world is still hampered by legions of bureaucrats who administer the labyrinth of red tape that strangles innovation. The " herd mentality " still prevails, and anyone thinking outside the " nine dots " will be ruthlessly punished - and forced to conform.
That seems to be a factor that never changes !
Salons need the latest equipment and deliver an up-market service, but some hairdressers are greeting customers with a complimentary glass of Champagne. Getting your hair styled has advanced from a utilitarian function - to a visit where you will be luxuriantly pampered - and that glass of Champagne upon arrival is a civilizing factor.
Alas - it is also illegal !
The " Fun Police " are chiding salon owners who thought that they were well within the law because that glass of Champagne was a free gift. It seems that the law regards it as " providing alcohol as ancillary to a paid service " - and to do that you need a liquor license. Not only do you need to have that license, but your staff needs to have completed a course and also hold a " responsible serving of alcohol " certificate.
All that - for one lousy little glass of Champagne to illustrate that your customers are " special " and their patronage " valued " !
One salon owner who did the right thing and sorted out the paperwork, commented that it involved " reams and reams " of paper, a whole lot of time - and a fee of $ 200. No comment on how the staff felt about having to sit lectures and an exam to get a piece of paper that enabled them to legally pour that glass of Champagne.
It seems that the business world is still hampered by legions of bureaucrats who administer the labyrinth of red tape that strangles innovation. The " herd mentality " still prevails, and anyone thinking outside the " nine dots " will be ruthlessly punished - and forced to conform.
That seems to be a factor that never changes !
Saturday 13 April 2013
Vindication !
There is something surreal in the scenes that followed the announcement that Baroness Margaret Thatcher ( 87 ), a former British prime minister had died of a stroke. The news cameras showed people dancing in the streets in some parts of Britain, lighting bonfires and waving signs that denigrated this woman in the strongest terms. It is likely that there will be similar protests when her body is taken through the streets of London on a gun carriage. She has been granted a public funeral - which will be attended by the Queen - at a cost of $ 20 million to the public purse.
Margaret Thatcher was certainly a very tough lady. She took the country to war when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and during her term as prime minister she orchestrated vast changes to the way Britain worked and lived. In particular, she was confronted with hundreds of small and inefficient coal mines from a previous century which provided work for thousands of miners in areas of the country that offered few other jobs. She was quite ruthless in battling the unions head on and closing these pits, and as a consequence she presided over a huge spike in unemployment. She also cut back on the welfare state, resulting in lasting fury from those with left wing political views.
As is usual in politics, the results of her decisions will be viewed differently by different people. Most - however grudgingly - will concede that Britain was in a parlous financial state when she came to power. She earned the sobriquet of " the iron lady " by implementing policies that past prime ministers had consigned to the " too hard basket ". She completely revised the coal industry in Britain and put the economy on a firm footing. She did this at the expense of great pain and dislocation for many ordinary people - and it is for this that some refuse to grant her pardon.
Perhaps the ultimate vindication came long after her term ended, when Labor swept to power under prime minister Tony Blair. It called itself " New Labor " - and if did absolutely nothing to reverse the decisions that Margaret Thatcher had imposed on the nation. Both sides of politics - excluding the " Looney Left " - conceded that she had done what was necessary to save Britain from oblivion as a world class country. The present British prime minister concedes that she " saved Britain " !
That will do nothing to still the rage that will impel some people to demonstrate as her gun carriage rolls through British streets, but those with broader thinking minds will look to other countries that failed to produce a leader with the courage to tackle the unpopular problems that were taking their economies ever downward.
There - but for Margaret Thatcher - would have been a Britain joining the likes of Greece, Spain and Portugal in the dismal conditions their populations are facing today !
Margaret Thatcher was certainly a very tough lady. She took the country to war when Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands and during her term as prime minister she orchestrated vast changes to the way Britain worked and lived. In particular, she was confronted with hundreds of small and inefficient coal mines from a previous century which provided work for thousands of miners in areas of the country that offered few other jobs. She was quite ruthless in battling the unions head on and closing these pits, and as a consequence she presided over a huge spike in unemployment. She also cut back on the welfare state, resulting in lasting fury from those with left wing political views.
As is usual in politics, the results of her decisions will be viewed differently by different people. Most - however grudgingly - will concede that Britain was in a parlous financial state when she came to power. She earned the sobriquet of " the iron lady " by implementing policies that past prime ministers had consigned to the " too hard basket ". She completely revised the coal industry in Britain and put the economy on a firm footing. She did this at the expense of great pain and dislocation for many ordinary people - and it is for this that some refuse to grant her pardon.
Perhaps the ultimate vindication came long after her term ended, when Labor swept to power under prime minister Tony Blair. It called itself " New Labor " - and if did absolutely nothing to reverse the decisions that Margaret Thatcher had imposed on the nation. Both sides of politics - excluding the " Looney Left " - conceded that she had done what was necessary to save Britain from oblivion as a world class country. The present British prime minister concedes that she " saved Britain " !
That will do nothing to still the rage that will impel some people to demonstrate as her gun carriage rolls through British streets, but those with broader thinking minds will look to other countries that failed to produce a leader with the courage to tackle the unpopular problems that were taking their economies ever downward.
There - but for Margaret Thatcher - would have been a Britain joining the likes of Greece, Spain and Portugal in the dismal conditions their populations are facing today !
Friday 12 April 2013
Fiscal prudence ! Fiscal priorities !
That hoary old chestnut - a " Bullet train " connecting Melbourne/Sydney/Brisbane has again raised it's head - with a suggested price tag of a whopping $ 114 billion. Most people sadly shake their head and regard that as " pie in the sky " - way out of reach of this country's finances.
It all depends on whether we do our planning sums right. We would need to borrow money to bring that rail dream to fruition, but there is opportunity knocking on the door to rearrange our spending plans - if we have a clear idea of where we want this country to go.
We are about to reach a decision on the cost of the NBN rollout. If we take the connection to every home in every street it will cost $ 44 billion. If we accept a lesser speed and connect to a " node " and use the existing copper wire for the final connection, it will cost $ 29 billion - delivering a saving of $ 15 billion. That would be a healthy contribution to that fast train project.
Sydney badly needs a second airport - and a decision to build one is pressing. The Sydney/Melbourne air corridor is the third busiest city connection in the world. Obviously, a rail connection that could deliver people between those cities in two hours and forty-four minutes would go a long way towards lowering Sydney air traffic. How many billions will that new airport cost ?
A long time ago the way people connected between home and work involved daily trips on trams. As the major cities grew, rail replaced trams and now we have a rail network that connects the far suburbs to the city hub, but the work situation now includes people who live in the cities and towns that stretch between our state capitals - and neither air services or the existing slow train network can bridge their needs.
The majority of the Australian population is concentrated in the eastern coast of this continent. It is a case of " connecting the dots " to create the unified work opportunities that a high speed rail connection would achieve. In particular, it would ease pressure on the three great cities that are bursting at the seams because they represent the job opportunities that people seek. Fast travel would make it possible to live far from a common workplace - and yet commute within a reasonable fare structure, and that is something that airlines will never be able to fully provide.
Providing the finance to make high speed rail a reality is simply a matter of deciding priorities. If that's what we want, then we need to put it at the top of the list of things to do - and make the necessary spending adjustments to meet the cost.
It all depends if the outcome is worth the financial pain !
It all depends on whether we do our planning sums right. We would need to borrow money to bring that rail dream to fruition, but there is opportunity knocking on the door to rearrange our spending plans - if we have a clear idea of where we want this country to go.
We are about to reach a decision on the cost of the NBN rollout. If we take the connection to every home in every street it will cost $ 44 billion. If we accept a lesser speed and connect to a " node " and use the existing copper wire for the final connection, it will cost $ 29 billion - delivering a saving of $ 15 billion. That would be a healthy contribution to that fast train project.
Sydney badly needs a second airport - and a decision to build one is pressing. The Sydney/Melbourne air corridor is the third busiest city connection in the world. Obviously, a rail connection that could deliver people between those cities in two hours and forty-four minutes would go a long way towards lowering Sydney air traffic. How many billions will that new airport cost ?
A long time ago the way people connected between home and work involved daily trips on trams. As the major cities grew, rail replaced trams and now we have a rail network that connects the far suburbs to the city hub, but the work situation now includes people who live in the cities and towns that stretch between our state capitals - and neither air services or the existing slow train network can bridge their needs.
The majority of the Australian population is concentrated in the eastern coast of this continent. It is a case of " connecting the dots " to create the unified work opportunities that a high speed rail connection would achieve. In particular, it would ease pressure on the three great cities that are bursting at the seams because they represent the job opportunities that people seek. Fast travel would make it possible to live far from a common workplace - and yet commute within a reasonable fare structure, and that is something that airlines will never be able to fully provide.
Providing the finance to make high speed rail a reality is simply a matter of deciding priorities. If that's what we want, then we need to put it at the top of the list of things to do - and make the necessary spending adjustments to meet the cost.
It all depends if the outcome is worth the financial pain !
Thursday 11 April 2013
The NBN Question ?
The opposition has revealed it's alternative to Labor's NBN rollout. Labor will spend $ 44 billion to run a connection directly to all home addresses in Australian cities and towns. The opposition will spend $ 29 billion to run that connection to a " node " - a junction box in each street, from which the connection to individual homes will be by the existing Telstra copper wires that presently connect our phone system.
Using the copper wires will slow the delivery of Broadband, but it will be hugely higher than what we are presently getting, and the contention is that the service will meet most people's needs. The higher speeds are needed by business users and a direct connection will be provided where needed in business centres throughout the country.
This is a money saving compromise. There are other imperatives waiting for money to be available and this includes the disability scheme and Gonski. Where the present NBN rollout has occurred, the takeup by residents has certainly not been universal. Providing a high speed connection to each and every home is perhaps setting the benchmark too high. We might be better off with a scheme that improves business efficiency to world standards, lifts individual home speeds to a higher standard - and can be extended to individual homes direct connections when demand requires.
Detractors use scare tactics against using the copper wire system and suggest it will cost individuals $ 5000 to get a connection upgrade. Such upgrades will probably follow a similar scenario to the supply of piped gas. The gas lines do not run in every street and the gas provider usually required twenty percent of residents to request a gas connection before work would commence on extending the supply. Monthly fees for copper wire service will be lower, hence when the direct connection is made it will simply be a matter of paying a monthly fee increase for an improved service.
One of the biggest benefits of using the " node " system - is getting the NBN connected to Australian homes years earlier than by the individual connection that now applies. Many critics expect that the $ 44 billion price tag will end up costing much more - and getting the NBN underway is way behind schedule at even this stage. Money saved would be far better spent on other critical needs. The sheer economy of scale makes a lot of sense.
Both sides of politics will state their case - and then it will be up to the voters. Whichever way the decision goes, we are certain to get an upgrade in Broadband speeds - and that is an improvement on where we are now !
Using the copper wires will slow the delivery of Broadband, but it will be hugely higher than what we are presently getting, and the contention is that the service will meet most people's needs. The higher speeds are needed by business users and a direct connection will be provided where needed in business centres throughout the country.
This is a money saving compromise. There are other imperatives waiting for money to be available and this includes the disability scheme and Gonski. Where the present NBN rollout has occurred, the takeup by residents has certainly not been universal. Providing a high speed connection to each and every home is perhaps setting the benchmark too high. We might be better off with a scheme that improves business efficiency to world standards, lifts individual home speeds to a higher standard - and can be extended to individual homes direct connections when demand requires.
Detractors use scare tactics against using the copper wire system and suggest it will cost individuals $ 5000 to get a connection upgrade. Such upgrades will probably follow a similar scenario to the supply of piped gas. The gas lines do not run in every street and the gas provider usually required twenty percent of residents to request a gas connection before work would commence on extending the supply. Monthly fees for copper wire service will be lower, hence when the direct connection is made it will simply be a matter of paying a monthly fee increase for an improved service.
One of the biggest benefits of using the " node " system - is getting the NBN connected to Australian homes years earlier than by the individual connection that now applies. Many critics expect that the $ 44 billion price tag will end up costing much more - and getting the NBN underway is way behind schedule at even this stage. Money saved would be far better spent on other critical needs. The sheer economy of scale makes a lot of sense.
Both sides of politics will state their case - and then it will be up to the voters. Whichever way the decision goes, we are certain to get an upgrade in Broadband speeds - and that is an improvement on where we are now !
Wednesday 10 April 2013
Head trauma !
The death of a fifteen year old boy playing Rugby League as a school sport has shocked many parents. It brings home the fact that head trauma can happen so innocently - and the results can be both catastrophic and sudden. In this case, a tackle brought contact between his head and another player's knee - and seconds later irreparable damage had occurred. Resuscitation was immediately applied and the boy was taken to hospital, but in the end the only alternative was to discontinue his life support system.
This death has caused all the sporting codes to have a re-think on safety measures. High on the list is a proposal to make a safety helmet compulsory for all forms of contact sport. The medical profession is suggesting that more thought be given to grading the weight and size of players to achieve a common factor. Most competitions use age as a demarcation, but the size of growing kids varies widely and it is common for any team to include someone who is big for his age - and someone who is precisely the opposite.
Fortunately, death on a sporting field is rare. Unfortunately, death from head trauma is very common. It usually only comes to our attention when it receives media attention. Many people were aghast to learn that a drug intoxicated bully king hit an innocent young man having a night out in King's Cross - and that when he fell, the contact between his head and the footpath inflicted terminal brain damage. The sheer brutality of that attack illustrated the vulnerability of the human head.
This vulnerability caused legislation to force riders of bicycles and motorbikes to wear head protection. That requirement does not extend to car drivers, and yet in a car crash it is often head trauma that is the ultimate cause of death. Forcing car drivers to wear helmets was considered too great an intrusion - and as an alternative, all modern cars now have air bags fitted to lessen head impact in a crash.
So - we are ever slowly moving towards measures to provide head protection. No doubt this death will tighten the sporting codes and the car industry has safety as one of it's biggest selling points, but the average persons unprotected head remains vulnerable. Simple slips and falls can inflict brain damage and the danger increases substantially if our social scene includes venues where alcohol is served. Head trauma is so often the outcome when a drunken brawl erupts.
If nothing else, the tragic events that happened to this young man may cause some people to rethink the risks involved. The human head is the brain centre that controls the entire body. The loss of various other body parts can usually be accommodated with difficulty, but if the head function is lost - life is extinguished.
Perhaps a good reason to treat it with care !
This death has caused all the sporting codes to have a re-think on safety measures. High on the list is a proposal to make a safety helmet compulsory for all forms of contact sport. The medical profession is suggesting that more thought be given to grading the weight and size of players to achieve a common factor. Most competitions use age as a demarcation, but the size of growing kids varies widely and it is common for any team to include someone who is big for his age - and someone who is precisely the opposite.
Fortunately, death on a sporting field is rare. Unfortunately, death from head trauma is very common. It usually only comes to our attention when it receives media attention. Many people were aghast to learn that a drug intoxicated bully king hit an innocent young man having a night out in King's Cross - and that when he fell, the contact between his head and the footpath inflicted terminal brain damage. The sheer brutality of that attack illustrated the vulnerability of the human head.
This vulnerability caused legislation to force riders of bicycles and motorbikes to wear head protection. That requirement does not extend to car drivers, and yet in a car crash it is often head trauma that is the ultimate cause of death. Forcing car drivers to wear helmets was considered too great an intrusion - and as an alternative, all modern cars now have air bags fitted to lessen head impact in a crash.
So - we are ever slowly moving towards measures to provide head protection. No doubt this death will tighten the sporting codes and the car industry has safety as one of it's biggest selling points, but the average persons unprotected head remains vulnerable. Simple slips and falls can inflict brain damage and the danger increases substantially if our social scene includes venues where alcohol is served. Head trauma is so often the outcome when a drunken brawl erupts.
If nothing else, the tragic events that happened to this young man may cause some people to rethink the risks involved. The human head is the brain centre that controls the entire body. The loss of various other body parts can usually be accommodated with difficulty, but if the head function is lost - life is extinguished.
Perhaps a good reason to treat it with care !
Tuesday 9 April 2013
A successful outcome !
When it was proposed to sink an old warship off the central coast of New South Wales to create a " dive wreck " , a whole bunch of vocal opponents crawled out of the woodwork. Rallies were held and impassioned speeches made. Petitions were signed and the sinking process was seriously delayed, costing the Australian taxpayer several million dollars. Eventually, HMAS Adelaide was towed into position, scuttling charges fired and this old warship settled successfully onto the seabed.
Located just 1500 metres offshore from Avoca Beach and at a depth of thirty-two metres, the ship gets regular visits from the diving fraternity. It is a popular place to visit and this is reflected in the tourist activities which bring financial health to the local business community. It is noticeable that those who so bitterly opposed the creation of a diving wreck are conspicuous in their silence now !
Unfortunately, this very success has created a new problem. It has long been known that artificial reefs and wrecked ships attract fish and in the short time it has been on the seabed, HMAS Adelaide has created a marine world containing huge numbers of fish - and many of these are prized varieties such as Kingfish, Snapper and Yellowtail.
As a designated " Dive Wreck ", this site is closed to all forms of fishing. It is an offence to drop a line within two hundred metres of the wreck, or even to be in that area in a boat containing fishing tackle. Such an offence delivers a $ 500 on the spot fine, and there is a lit warning buoy with a sign over the ship.
It seems that the known presence of so many fish is a huge attraction to many people who break the law and fish illegally. Obviously, lines containing hooks are a huge danger to those diving on the wreck and the water police have been tasked with ensuring that this law is obeyed. Night diving is a common practice, hence there is an even greater danger if the area is fished under the cover of darkness.
It will be interesting to see if a wave of protest erupts the next time one of our warships reaches the end of it's service life and pressure grows to create another dive wreck venture. There is already pressure from the fishing fraternity to use old motor tyres to create artificial reefs to attract fish - and to serve the needs of fisher people - and exclude divers.
In the event of the Adelaide dive wreck, it seems that only one outcome is possible, and as that is for recreational diving - those wishing to fish must be excluded.
Located just 1500 metres offshore from Avoca Beach and at a depth of thirty-two metres, the ship gets regular visits from the diving fraternity. It is a popular place to visit and this is reflected in the tourist activities which bring financial health to the local business community. It is noticeable that those who so bitterly opposed the creation of a diving wreck are conspicuous in their silence now !
Unfortunately, this very success has created a new problem. It has long been known that artificial reefs and wrecked ships attract fish and in the short time it has been on the seabed, HMAS Adelaide has created a marine world containing huge numbers of fish - and many of these are prized varieties such as Kingfish, Snapper and Yellowtail.
As a designated " Dive Wreck ", this site is closed to all forms of fishing. It is an offence to drop a line within two hundred metres of the wreck, or even to be in that area in a boat containing fishing tackle. Such an offence delivers a $ 500 on the spot fine, and there is a lit warning buoy with a sign over the ship.
It seems that the known presence of so many fish is a huge attraction to many people who break the law and fish illegally. Obviously, lines containing hooks are a huge danger to those diving on the wreck and the water police have been tasked with ensuring that this law is obeyed. Night diving is a common practice, hence there is an even greater danger if the area is fished under the cover of darkness.
It will be interesting to see if a wave of protest erupts the next time one of our warships reaches the end of it's service life and pressure grows to create another dive wreck venture. There is already pressure from the fishing fraternity to use old motor tyres to create artificial reefs to attract fish - and to serve the needs of fisher people - and exclude divers.
In the event of the Adelaide dive wreck, it seems that only one outcome is possible, and as that is for recreational diving - those wishing to fish must be excluded.
Monday 8 April 2013
Facing " Medical " reality !
It is an absolute shame that well over a thousand Australians are in desperate need of a kidney transplant and at the same time we are incinerating or burying in the ground an almost unlimited supply of these organs.
Vast numbers of people sign consent forms to be an organ donor when they die, but somehow this does not transpose into reality.
Health Minister Tanya Plibersek is proposing to offer a bonus of $ 3600 to " living donors " of kidneys - those who willingly sacrifice one of their kidneys to save the life of another person. Usually, this is an in-family act of love, but it does involve a medical risk and there is a recovery period. This suggestion offers compensation at the rate of the average wage - $ 606.40 - during that six week recovery period.
Perhaps we are approaching this problem from the wrong end. The reason that most organ donations die along with the donor is the practice of asking permission from relatives before harvesting can begin. For cultural or religious reasons, consent is often refused. The wishes of the most important person in this scenario - the donor - is then ignored !
We seem to have a squeamish attitude to money and body parts ! Out there in the real world we accept reality. If we have an older model car and we need spares, we pay a visit to the motor wreckers. Everything in this world has a price and that needs to apply to keeping ailing human beings in the land of the living.
Human body parts that are suitable for transplant are very valuable indeed. To get the needed supply, we need to have a change of attitude - and one of the biggest incentives to make that happen - in monetary reward. Suppose that promised reward of $ 3600 for a kidney applied to the relatives of the deceased. In all probability, that would ensure a remarkable change of attitude to relatives consent !
There would need to be safeguards. Paying for parts harvested would only apply to those who had taken the trouble to clearly indicate their wish to be a donor and the right of relatives to refuse consent would still apply, but it would give the average person an opportunity to leave an estate for their family.
Logically, this should apply to all those body parts that are needed for transplant surgery, and hence at the end of life the average person would be in a position to bequeath what would really amount to a " death bequest " to take care of their loved ones needs. At the same time, waiting lists for transplant parts would probably vanish. In reality, the medical profession would probably be able to choose to harvest from the most healthy specimens because of enhanced availability.
Obviously, paying for body parts would horrify some people, but we live in the real world and keeping people alive is the pinnacle of medical achievement. It seems unreasonable that the only obstacles to restoring the health of many patients is availability, but could become readily attainable - if sanity about money prevailed !
Health costs are a huge part of national budgets. We pay billions of dollars for the finest medical equipment. Surely it is not too large a step to put monetary value on and offer a reward for the items that are most needed - to preserve the life of others ?
Vast numbers of people sign consent forms to be an organ donor when they die, but somehow this does not transpose into reality.
Health Minister Tanya Plibersek is proposing to offer a bonus of $ 3600 to " living donors " of kidneys - those who willingly sacrifice one of their kidneys to save the life of another person. Usually, this is an in-family act of love, but it does involve a medical risk and there is a recovery period. This suggestion offers compensation at the rate of the average wage - $ 606.40 - during that six week recovery period.
Perhaps we are approaching this problem from the wrong end. The reason that most organ donations die along with the donor is the practice of asking permission from relatives before harvesting can begin. For cultural or religious reasons, consent is often refused. The wishes of the most important person in this scenario - the donor - is then ignored !
We seem to have a squeamish attitude to money and body parts ! Out there in the real world we accept reality. If we have an older model car and we need spares, we pay a visit to the motor wreckers. Everything in this world has a price and that needs to apply to keeping ailing human beings in the land of the living.
Human body parts that are suitable for transplant are very valuable indeed. To get the needed supply, we need to have a change of attitude - and one of the biggest incentives to make that happen - in monetary reward. Suppose that promised reward of $ 3600 for a kidney applied to the relatives of the deceased. In all probability, that would ensure a remarkable change of attitude to relatives consent !
There would need to be safeguards. Paying for parts harvested would only apply to those who had taken the trouble to clearly indicate their wish to be a donor and the right of relatives to refuse consent would still apply, but it would give the average person an opportunity to leave an estate for their family.
Logically, this should apply to all those body parts that are needed for transplant surgery, and hence at the end of life the average person would be in a position to bequeath what would really amount to a " death bequest " to take care of their loved ones needs. At the same time, waiting lists for transplant parts would probably vanish. In reality, the medical profession would probably be able to choose to harvest from the most healthy specimens because of enhanced availability.
Obviously, paying for body parts would horrify some people, but we live in the real world and keeping people alive is the pinnacle of medical achievement. It seems unreasonable that the only obstacles to restoring the health of many patients is availability, but could become readily attainable - if sanity about money prevailed !
Health costs are a huge part of national budgets. We pay billions of dollars for the finest medical equipment. Surely it is not too large a step to put monetary value on and offer a reward for the items that are most needed - to preserve the life of others ?
Sunday 7 April 2013
A looming disaster !
It has been a long time since a major Pandemic swept through the world and decimated millions of people. Back in the Middle Ages the " Black Death " plague cut a swathe throughout Europe and just after the end of the first world war a Pneumonia epidemic sent healthy young people to an early grave. The law of probabilities indicates that sooner or later we will again get a visit from such a pestilence.
Science has long been worried about the mutations of various diseases that have been vaguely determined under the heading " Bird Flu ". Mysterious strains of deadly viruses circulate around and between this world's bird species and in particular - seem prevalent in poultry, and that is where the transmission from bird to humans seems most likely.
Poultry forms a big part of the human diet in many parts of the world, and in particular - in teeming Asia poultry and it's owners tend to live in close proximity to one another. There have been several scares, but fortunately this disease has not managed to make the leap to human to human transfer - and rapid action by the health authorities has kept it under control.
Now we have a new strain making an appearance. H7N9 is a variation that has infected 14 people in China - and killed five of them. Already mass killing of poultry is under way. It has become a battle between the disease and science to gain understanding about just what is involved - and what action can be taken to prevent it moving to the Pandemic stage.
One day we may not be so lucky ! In past centuries isolation was a mitigating factor. Cities simply closed their gates and refused to admit travellers. Travel between centres was by horse transport and between countries involved a sea journey. Today's airline industry moves people around the globe in a matter of hours. Quarantine is not an option.
This risk is exacerbated by stockpiles of biological weapons fuelling the arms race. Disease can be a weapon of war and probably as much research has been aimed at spreading disease as stopping a natural spread. The risk of a laboratory " accident " is always present.
The only saving grace seems to be the protection that Mother Nature has built into the human genome. In any group of people there always seems to be a number who are immune to whatever disease is ravaging society. So it was with the " Black Death " and the " Flu Pandemic " of 1918. Many people died in both events, but the human race survived.
That is a comforting thought as science battles with new diseases that threaten to unleash another Pandemic on the world !
Science has long been worried about the mutations of various diseases that have been vaguely determined under the heading " Bird Flu ". Mysterious strains of deadly viruses circulate around and between this world's bird species and in particular - seem prevalent in poultry, and that is where the transmission from bird to humans seems most likely.
Poultry forms a big part of the human diet in many parts of the world, and in particular - in teeming Asia poultry and it's owners tend to live in close proximity to one another. There have been several scares, but fortunately this disease has not managed to make the leap to human to human transfer - and rapid action by the health authorities has kept it under control.
Now we have a new strain making an appearance. H7N9 is a variation that has infected 14 people in China - and killed five of them. Already mass killing of poultry is under way. It has become a battle between the disease and science to gain understanding about just what is involved - and what action can be taken to prevent it moving to the Pandemic stage.
One day we may not be so lucky ! In past centuries isolation was a mitigating factor. Cities simply closed their gates and refused to admit travellers. Travel between centres was by horse transport and between countries involved a sea journey. Today's airline industry moves people around the globe in a matter of hours. Quarantine is not an option.
This risk is exacerbated by stockpiles of biological weapons fuelling the arms race. Disease can be a weapon of war and probably as much research has been aimed at spreading disease as stopping a natural spread. The risk of a laboratory " accident " is always present.
The only saving grace seems to be the protection that Mother Nature has built into the human genome. In any group of people there always seems to be a number who are immune to whatever disease is ravaging society. So it was with the " Black Death " and the " Flu Pandemic " of 1918. Many people died in both events, but the human race survived.
That is a comforting thought as science battles with new diseases that threaten to unleash another Pandemic on the world !
Saturday 6 April 2013
That " Pork " ban !
No doubt there will be howls of protest from some quarters following the Qantas decision to eliminate pork from it's in-flight menus accessing Europe through Dubai. Qantas is in partnership with Emirates and adopting a menu that is acceptable to Muslims is simply good sense when flying to an Arab destination.
This is purely a menu decision that only applies to this particular route. Australia has a growing Muslim population and passengers transiting through Dubai can be expected to include Muslims travelling to other Middle East destinations. All Qantas meals are prepared under Halal accreditation and removing pork on a route expected to include many Muslim passengers is a logical way of avoiding " mistakes " !
Pork and alcohol are forbidden to Muslims by the laws of Islam and Qantas does not have pork on menu's in it's planes flying to Indonesia. Indonesia is heavily Muslim and this is a logical menu balance to take local custom into consideration when planning meals.
Alcohol will still be available on Middle East flights. This obviously caters for the expected mix of passengers and accommodates individuals choice. Those that prefer a glass of wine with their meal make an individual decision, as do those with an opposite belief. The choice rests with each individual passenger.
Qantas has also adopted the custom of following Dubai in-flight announcements in English with an interpretation in Arabic. Many airlines follow a similar custom. French airlines usually announce passenger information in both French and English, and some airlines duplicate the language of their nation with the language of the destination to which they are flying. This is simply a matter of good manners - and an example of a nice custom to ensure understanding.
International travel is a phenomenon that has embraced a more affluent world serviced by wide bodied jets that have dropped seat prices sensationally. It stands to reason that airlines need to study the mix of passengers using their airline and tailor the service offered more accurately to their needs. It is a competitive market - and the winners will be those that fill their seats by providing the services that gain the approval of the flying public.
This is purely a menu decision that only applies to this particular route. Australia has a growing Muslim population and passengers transiting through Dubai can be expected to include Muslims travelling to other Middle East destinations. All Qantas meals are prepared under Halal accreditation and removing pork on a route expected to include many Muslim passengers is a logical way of avoiding " mistakes " !
Pork and alcohol are forbidden to Muslims by the laws of Islam and Qantas does not have pork on menu's in it's planes flying to Indonesia. Indonesia is heavily Muslim and this is a logical menu balance to take local custom into consideration when planning meals.
Alcohol will still be available on Middle East flights. This obviously caters for the expected mix of passengers and accommodates individuals choice. Those that prefer a glass of wine with their meal make an individual decision, as do those with an opposite belief. The choice rests with each individual passenger.
Qantas has also adopted the custom of following Dubai in-flight announcements in English with an interpretation in Arabic. Many airlines follow a similar custom. French airlines usually announce passenger information in both French and English, and some airlines duplicate the language of their nation with the language of the destination to which they are flying. This is simply a matter of good manners - and an example of a nice custom to ensure understanding.
International travel is a phenomenon that has embraced a more affluent world serviced by wide bodied jets that have dropped seat prices sensationally. It stands to reason that airlines need to study the mix of passengers using their airline and tailor the service offered more accurately to their needs. It is a competitive market - and the winners will be those that fill their seats by providing the services that gain the approval of the flying public.
Friday 5 April 2013
Great Expectations !
The Royal Commission into " Institutionalised Sex Abuse " is now under way, headed by Justice Peter McClellan. It will have a staff of one hundred and twelve people. A budget of $ 22 million - and it is anticipated that it will hand down it's first report in June, 2014.
Unfortunately, it will not satisfy the expectations of many of the people who will look to it for justice. This is not a court of law tasked with allocating monetary compensation and dispensing punishment to the guilty. It is mainly " an enquiry " that will compile evidence of crimes that have been swept under the carpet for centuries. The oppressed, who were disbelieved and virtually ignored will at last have the chance to tell their stories and gain release from the shame and hurt that has blighted so many lives.
For many this will be a mixed blessing. Some may find relief in finally being able to bring into the open that which has been hidden, but to others public disclosure will be painful and this enquiry has the option of taking evidence in private. The Commission has a term of three years, but judging by the numbers coming forward it is likely that this will be extended. Such was the case where similar enquiries were conducted in other countries.
When this Royal Commission does end, it is likely that many expectations will be unfulfilled. The Commission will have the option of handing matters disclosed to the police for further investigation, but prosecution will depend on whether a case that may satisfy a court still exists, and in most cases the perpetrators may be old and senile. Awful decisions will be inflicted on police prosecutors. Even more will be faced by judges where cases do go to court and a person is convicted.
Perhaps the salient objective of this enquiry is to bring relief to those who have suffered in silence by bringing this whole issue of the sexual abuse of children into the open - and deny the superiors of those that transgressed from claiming that it didn't happen - and to face the reality of their actions allowing it to continue.
We can not undo the past - but we can create a future where society does not choose to look the other way and protect the good name of churches and institutions when a person of authority takes sexual advantage of those under care.
The best hope is that this Royal Commission delivers a change of thinking that sweeps through not only the administration of churches and institutions, but all strata's of society that needs to act to stop the sexual abuse of children. If it sheds light where darkness has prevailed - then it will have done it's job !
Unfortunately, it will not satisfy the expectations of many of the people who will look to it for justice. This is not a court of law tasked with allocating monetary compensation and dispensing punishment to the guilty. It is mainly " an enquiry " that will compile evidence of crimes that have been swept under the carpet for centuries. The oppressed, who were disbelieved and virtually ignored will at last have the chance to tell their stories and gain release from the shame and hurt that has blighted so many lives.
For many this will be a mixed blessing. Some may find relief in finally being able to bring into the open that which has been hidden, but to others public disclosure will be painful and this enquiry has the option of taking evidence in private. The Commission has a term of three years, but judging by the numbers coming forward it is likely that this will be extended. Such was the case where similar enquiries were conducted in other countries.
When this Royal Commission does end, it is likely that many expectations will be unfulfilled. The Commission will have the option of handing matters disclosed to the police for further investigation, but prosecution will depend on whether a case that may satisfy a court still exists, and in most cases the perpetrators may be old and senile. Awful decisions will be inflicted on police prosecutors. Even more will be faced by judges where cases do go to court and a person is convicted.
Perhaps the salient objective of this enquiry is to bring relief to those who have suffered in silence by bringing this whole issue of the sexual abuse of children into the open - and deny the superiors of those that transgressed from claiming that it didn't happen - and to face the reality of their actions allowing it to continue.
We can not undo the past - but we can create a future where society does not choose to look the other way and protect the good name of churches and institutions when a person of authority takes sexual advantage of those under care.
The best hope is that this Royal Commission delivers a change of thinking that sweeps through not only the administration of churches and institutions, but all strata's of society that needs to act to stop the sexual abuse of children. If it sheds light where darkness has prevailed - then it will have done it's job !
Thursday 4 April 2013
Cab fares !
An NRMA report has raised an interesting subject. The way cab fares continue to increase when the vehicle gets stuck in one of Sydney's famous traffic jams !
It's something that regular cab users must face from time to time. Most people have an estimate of what they expect it will cost to travel by taxi from point A to point B. The taxi meter takes into account two factors - distance travelled - and time elapsed. When the vehicle remains stationery - that " time elapsed " continues to tick away, and if the delay is extended it can reach a frightening amount.
The NRMA complains that cab companies fail to make use of the extensive road reports that are available to avoid road congestion and rely on the comments radioed in by drivers - who usually are already snared in traffic and are not moving.
The problem raises a host of options that regular cab users would be wise to consider. One of these would be to cut your losses, pay the driver for the amount owing and leave the stalled cab and find another way to get to your destination. Of course, reaching that decision relies on a whole bunch of other factors - such as precisely where you are at that time. That strategy would not work if you find yourself stalled in the middle of the tunnel under the harbour !
It could be the solution if the jam is right in the city centre. Walk a few blocks and you may have by-passed the cause of the problem and there is always the alternative of accessing the rail system to complete your journey. The amount of money you have available to pay an extended fare will also dictate the options,
Perhaps the best way to avoid a horrendous bill would be to negotiate with the driver. You certainly have the right to pay what is owing and cancel the journey, but then the cab and it's driver will remain stuck until the traffic clears. Most reasonable people can reach an " arrangement " that suits both parties. Particularly so, when it involves a " loss " negotiated to suit the circumstances prevailing.
In some overseas cities cab fares are not based on meters but involve a " negotiated price " between the driver and passenger. A passenger may approach several vacant cabs, announce the intended destination - and await competitive price offers to transport that journey. That seems to come into play here, on peak demand times such as just after midnight on New Year's eve. On those occasions it is " reverse bidding ". Passengers are increasing their fare offer to gain the use of a depleted number of available cabs.
It all seems a strange mix of transport philosophy. When all forms of traffic comes to a stop, passengers on public transport are not asked to pay an additional fare, but they may be made to wait a very long time to continue their journey. Hiring a private conveyance brings time/distance into the price equation, which may be terminated at any time. The wise traveller would have in mind the various options before the start of the journey - and act swiftly to achieve the best results !
It's something that regular cab users must face from time to time. Most people have an estimate of what they expect it will cost to travel by taxi from point A to point B. The taxi meter takes into account two factors - distance travelled - and time elapsed. When the vehicle remains stationery - that " time elapsed " continues to tick away, and if the delay is extended it can reach a frightening amount.
The NRMA complains that cab companies fail to make use of the extensive road reports that are available to avoid road congestion and rely on the comments radioed in by drivers - who usually are already snared in traffic and are not moving.
The problem raises a host of options that regular cab users would be wise to consider. One of these would be to cut your losses, pay the driver for the amount owing and leave the stalled cab and find another way to get to your destination. Of course, reaching that decision relies on a whole bunch of other factors - such as precisely where you are at that time. That strategy would not work if you find yourself stalled in the middle of the tunnel under the harbour !
It could be the solution if the jam is right in the city centre. Walk a few blocks and you may have by-passed the cause of the problem and there is always the alternative of accessing the rail system to complete your journey. The amount of money you have available to pay an extended fare will also dictate the options,
Perhaps the best way to avoid a horrendous bill would be to negotiate with the driver. You certainly have the right to pay what is owing and cancel the journey, but then the cab and it's driver will remain stuck until the traffic clears. Most reasonable people can reach an " arrangement " that suits both parties. Particularly so, when it involves a " loss " negotiated to suit the circumstances prevailing.
In some overseas cities cab fares are not based on meters but involve a " negotiated price " between the driver and passenger. A passenger may approach several vacant cabs, announce the intended destination - and await competitive price offers to transport that journey. That seems to come into play here, on peak demand times such as just after midnight on New Year's eve. On those occasions it is " reverse bidding ". Passengers are increasing their fare offer to gain the use of a depleted number of available cabs.
It all seems a strange mix of transport philosophy. When all forms of traffic comes to a stop, passengers on public transport are not asked to pay an additional fare, but they may be made to wait a very long time to continue their journey. Hiring a private conveyance brings time/distance into the price equation, which may be terminated at any time. The wise traveller would have in mind the various options before the start of the journey - and act swiftly to achieve the best results !
Wednesday 3 April 2013
" Significant Investor " Visas !
It seems that you can " buy " your way into Australia. The government is prepared to issue a speedy approval of entry visas to those who pledge to spend $ 5 million in Australian investments, and insist that this must include at least $ 1.5 million in " Waratah " bonds. These bonds appear to be the main funding source for major road projects, such as the Westconnex motorway.
These " Significant Investor " visas are not country sensitive, but the main source of interest is currently coming from China. As the development of Chinese industry churns out freshly minted millionaires, many are suspicious of the long term tax intentions of their government and are looking to find a bolthole elsewhere in the world - and Australia is a favoured destination.
This is nothing new. In the past, the moneyed people buying their way into Australia came from Europe. In the days of the " Cold War " it seemed prudent to have sanctuary waiting on the other side of the world in case the worst happened - and Europe descended into another round of it's old ways.
This tends to illustrate the fact that Australia is a country of migrants. Apart from the Indigenous people, everyone else originally migrated from somewhere else in the world, and that flow has never ceased. Those people born here have roots that go a long way back to just about every other country in the world, with a predominance from the British Isles because they were the original settlers.
We have created a society that is the envy of other parts of the world. Perhaps it is the remoteness of Australia, tucked away " down under " that has caused newcomers to abandon their old nationality and in a single generation become " Australian " in identity. That was not common in Europe. Families tended to live for centuries in countries far from their original homes, but to maintain their language and old nationality - and in many cases this is still the root cause of disharmony and friction. We have seen a new phenomenon - Racial Cleansing " - tearing communities asunder and leading to mass murder.
Some will complain that " Significant Investor " visas are simply a favoured form of economic refugees and that the people who risk their lives in leaky boats to get to our shores have exactly the same objectives. That is true, but economic progress must be a factor in making this land habitable for an ever growing population, and that inflow of funds goes a long way into providing new infrastructure - and delivering much needed new jobs.
In a perfect world we would achieve equality for all. Such a world has never existed, and probably never will. What we have works well because we have learned to live with it's inequalities - and why others beat a path to our door !
These " Significant Investor " visas are not country sensitive, but the main source of interest is currently coming from China. As the development of Chinese industry churns out freshly minted millionaires, many are suspicious of the long term tax intentions of their government and are looking to find a bolthole elsewhere in the world - and Australia is a favoured destination.
This is nothing new. In the past, the moneyed people buying their way into Australia came from Europe. In the days of the " Cold War " it seemed prudent to have sanctuary waiting on the other side of the world in case the worst happened - and Europe descended into another round of it's old ways.
This tends to illustrate the fact that Australia is a country of migrants. Apart from the Indigenous people, everyone else originally migrated from somewhere else in the world, and that flow has never ceased. Those people born here have roots that go a long way back to just about every other country in the world, with a predominance from the British Isles because they were the original settlers.
We have created a society that is the envy of other parts of the world. Perhaps it is the remoteness of Australia, tucked away " down under " that has caused newcomers to abandon their old nationality and in a single generation become " Australian " in identity. That was not common in Europe. Families tended to live for centuries in countries far from their original homes, but to maintain their language and old nationality - and in many cases this is still the root cause of disharmony and friction. We have seen a new phenomenon - Racial Cleansing " - tearing communities asunder and leading to mass murder.
Some will complain that " Significant Investor " visas are simply a favoured form of economic refugees and that the people who risk their lives in leaky boats to get to our shores have exactly the same objectives. That is true, but economic progress must be a factor in making this land habitable for an ever growing population, and that inflow of funds goes a long way into providing new infrastructure - and delivering much needed new jobs.
In a perfect world we would achieve equality for all. Such a world has never existed, and probably never will. What we have works well because we have learned to live with it's inequalities - and why others beat a path to our door !
Tuesday 2 April 2013
Animal rights militancy !
Most people agree that animals should be protected from cruel practices, but there seems an ever widening gulf between the demands of militant "animals rights" warriors and the Australian farming industry. The battle has raged over eggs produced by " battery hens " and shoppers are now confused by claims that some eggs come from " free range " operations, while others are produced by hens which live in " barns ".
Strangely, today's eggs also seem to have brown shells, despite the majority of laying stock being " white " birds. Research has shown that customers seem to think brown shelled eggs come from plump " Red " hens, which they envisage happily scratching in the dirt in wide fields. In reality, white hens are fed a mix of dye that colours shells brown - and that seems to keep everyone happy !
The really strange attitude comes when " animal liberationists " counter the fur trade. Women wearing expensive fur coats to social events have been confronted and have had paint thrown over them and their garments. Stores that sell fur have been picketed and it seems that there is a total rejection of fur as a fashion item in some quarters. This is despite the fact that fur bearing animals are " farmed " in similar fashion to sheep and cows. They have expensive pelts and farmers maintain them humanely to provide a form of clothing that has been fashionable since the time of the Pyramids.
Now it seems that a new phase of the farm wars is about to evolve. There are demands that sheep and cattle dogs be banned from herding animals, or if farmers persist - that they only do so wearing muzzles.
This ignores the fact that well trained dogs are invaluable in working with a farmer. Occasionally they encounter a renegade animal and deliver a light nip at it's heels to persuade it to cooperate. This draws the ire of the eco-warriors.
Animal rights militancy has adopted guerilla tactics to gain evidence of what they consider animal cruelty. Deception is used to smuggle hidden cameras onto farms and processing factories, and now their attention is being turned onto the wide open spaces of the farming community. It is proposed that camera equipped drones will be used to overfly areas where animals are farmed to keep up visual inspections. This raises the issues of privacy - and the risk of collision with aircraft and helicopters used in the farming industry.
It also tends to bring into focus the divergence of views between city based animal liberationists and a practical farmer on farm practices. We have recently had a bushfire season that has left many animals critically burned. Farmers dispense mercy with a rifle. It is a quick and humane method of putting a suffering animal out of it's misery, but that could be unacceptable to some animal rights people. We could see a demand that rifle euthanasia be banned and replaced with a veterinary person with a needle.
Animal husbandry has evolved over centuries and running a successful farm requires farmers to keep their stock healthy and in good condition. That is a constant battle with nature. Mother Nature regularly dispenses fires and floods, and famines exist in that cycle. There is no point animal liberationists demanding that animals be fed if no food exists and the farmer is unable to buy food. The only options are to sell the animals - or put them down. If no buyers are offering, that choice constricts to a single option. The choice of timing is up to the farmer - and he will delay as long as possible in the hope of a miracle.
The animal liberation industry is capable of generating a lot of noise in the media and politicians can then be persuaded to pass silly laws. It seems that some people who lack the faintest clue on how farming works are inclined to demand that animals be treated as human beings - and that legislation be passed to bring this into law.
It is just so easy for what seems to be a good idea to morph into an impractical crusade !
Strangely, today's eggs also seem to have brown shells, despite the majority of laying stock being " white " birds. Research has shown that customers seem to think brown shelled eggs come from plump " Red " hens, which they envisage happily scratching in the dirt in wide fields. In reality, white hens are fed a mix of dye that colours shells brown - and that seems to keep everyone happy !
The really strange attitude comes when " animal liberationists " counter the fur trade. Women wearing expensive fur coats to social events have been confronted and have had paint thrown over them and their garments. Stores that sell fur have been picketed and it seems that there is a total rejection of fur as a fashion item in some quarters. This is despite the fact that fur bearing animals are " farmed " in similar fashion to sheep and cows. They have expensive pelts and farmers maintain them humanely to provide a form of clothing that has been fashionable since the time of the Pyramids.
Now it seems that a new phase of the farm wars is about to evolve. There are demands that sheep and cattle dogs be banned from herding animals, or if farmers persist - that they only do so wearing muzzles.
This ignores the fact that well trained dogs are invaluable in working with a farmer. Occasionally they encounter a renegade animal and deliver a light nip at it's heels to persuade it to cooperate. This draws the ire of the eco-warriors.
Animal rights militancy has adopted guerilla tactics to gain evidence of what they consider animal cruelty. Deception is used to smuggle hidden cameras onto farms and processing factories, and now their attention is being turned onto the wide open spaces of the farming community. It is proposed that camera equipped drones will be used to overfly areas where animals are farmed to keep up visual inspections. This raises the issues of privacy - and the risk of collision with aircraft and helicopters used in the farming industry.
It also tends to bring into focus the divergence of views between city based animal liberationists and a practical farmer on farm practices. We have recently had a bushfire season that has left many animals critically burned. Farmers dispense mercy with a rifle. It is a quick and humane method of putting a suffering animal out of it's misery, but that could be unacceptable to some animal rights people. We could see a demand that rifle euthanasia be banned and replaced with a veterinary person with a needle.
Animal husbandry has evolved over centuries and running a successful farm requires farmers to keep their stock healthy and in good condition. That is a constant battle with nature. Mother Nature regularly dispenses fires and floods, and famines exist in that cycle. There is no point animal liberationists demanding that animals be fed if no food exists and the farmer is unable to buy food. The only options are to sell the animals - or put them down. If no buyers are offering, that choice constricts to a single option. The choice of timing is up to the farmer - and he will delay as long as possible in the hope of a miracle.
The animal liberation industry is capable of generating a lot of noise in the media and politicians can then be persuaded to pass silly laws. It seems that some people who lack the faintest clue on how farming works are inclined to demand that animals be treated as human beings - and that legislation be passed to bring this into law.
It is just so easy for what seems to be a good idea to morph into an impractical crusade !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)