The coming White Paper on the possible " Reform of Federation " opens a Pandora's Box of possibilities. At the heart of the matter is how the states and the Commonwealth will share the tax pie - and indeed it seems that all the options of how that " pie " is formulated looks like being dissected - and possibly rehashed !
It is quite evident that the states are falling short in their need to finance both health and education under the present tax regime. The Feds are passing the finance buck back to the states by cutting grants and that seems to encourage state Treasurers to think of an increase in the rate and a broadening of the base of the Goods and Services tax. ( GST ).
Queensland Premier, Campbell Newman has raised the issue of allowing the states to impose a state income tax. In simple terms, this would run in tandem with the present Federal income tax regime - with the state tax collected by the Feds on each state's behalf. It is proposed that each state should set it's own tax level and therefore use state income tax as an inducement to attract both residents and industry. It could also trigger a " race to the bottom " - with tax level incentives used to get industries to relocate on a " beggar my neighbour " basis.
The average taxpayer will not be fooled by the " Reform of Federation " label. The intention of this white paper is clearly to devise a mechanism to extract more money from the purse or wallet of Australian citizens to fund the shortfall that is crippling state services. The only question - is the mechanism that will achieve that purpose.
It would suit the Commonwealth government to have the states petition for an increase in the GST and/or a broadening of the base because that would be an unpopular move that would then rest on state shoulders.
The GST has remained at 10% since it's inception on July 1, 2000, and that is unusual because other countries have hiked the rate of their GST or VAT taxes and many are at 20% or even higher. From a tax point of view, the GST is a marvellous tax because it is hard to dodge. No matter where the money comes from, the tax man has a grab whenever it is spent - and some see that as fairly distributing the tax load.
A hoary old chestnut is being dragged out to justify the state income tax idea. It is proposed that such a state tax would see inefficient existing state taxes - such as stamp duty and payroll tax - abolished to bring in a fairer tax regime. When the GST was proposed, exactly the same deal was part of the arrangement with the states and they were allowed several years of grace before this abolishment was to occur. When that time came, all the states reneged - and we now have those same inefficient taxes and the GST running in tandem. That old saying - Once bitten - twice shy comes to mind.
Unfortunately, by it's very nature politics will play a big part in the coming discussion. Whatever is proposed will have an upside - and a down side, and because of the adversarial system of party politics each will be enhanced by opposite sides of the parliament.
The only thing that is absolutely certain - is that there is a problem that has to be fixed if we are to maintain the way of life that makes Australia such a pleasant and comfortable country. We will all have to pony up a little more money to make up the shortfall. How that will be achieved is the only thing to be decided !
Monday 30 June 2014
Sunday 29 June 2014
Greedy !
Horse racing is an industry that employs about thirty thousand people in New South Wales. It is fast being eclipsed by it's counterparts in Victoria and Queensland and turf interests are desperate to get the NSW government to invest in it's expansion with rich prize events that attract overseas horses.
The Melbourne Cup is an iconic event that attracts world wide attention. The NSW racing industry has a dream of staging a similar event and money has been spent on upgrading Randwick to world standards. We already lag far behind Melbourne in the size of race fields, and now we face a challenge from Queensland. The Queensland government has cut racing taxes from twenty percent to fourteen percent - and that extra money will go into the prize pool to improve competition numbers.
Comparing race fields in Melbourne and Sydney tells a sad story. The eight event programmes this weekend had a telling numbers disparity, despite Sydney offering an average $5,000 extra prize money for each race. Melbourne offers two $ 100,000 dollar events at the top of it's Saturday calendar, compared with a single $ 100,000 race in Sydney. The numbers were as follows:
Starters: Sydney. Melbourne.
7 16
8 13
10 20
11 16
10 12
10 16
12 14
15 15
Taxing horse racing is seen as a " sin tax " in some circles. The more the state takes from the betting pool. the less there is to finance racing - and the lesser dividend returned to those who bet on events. The tax take from the three states varies widely.
Queensland takes just 82 c from each $ 100 wagered. Victoria subtracts $ 1.28 - and New South Wales is by far the most voracious - with a take of $ 3.22. It is not hard to see why horse racing in this state is stagnating.
That tax level is myopic. The racing industry provides jobs across a wide spectrum, from those that service the crowds at racing events to those who participate in the actual races - to those who work in the breeding and training industry scattered across the entire spectrum of country towns. A healthy and expanding industry generates more jobs - and more indirect taxes. It makes sense to spend seed money to aid that expansion - and gain across the wider tax spectrum.
The ball is in the New South Wales government's court. The statistics are clear. Racing in this state has been overtaken by both Victoria and Queensland and that can only deteriorate unless positive steps are taken to improve it's finances. Whether that is by way of a racing tax review - or help with staging premium racing events is a matter for Treasury !
The Melbourne Cup is an iconic event that attracts world wide attention. The NSW racing industry has a dream of staging a similar event and money has been spent on upgrading Randwick to world standards. We already lag far behind Melbourne in the size of race fields, and now we face a challenge from Queensland. The Queensland government has cut racing taxes from twenty percent to fourteen percent - and that extra money will go into the prize pool to improve competition numbers.
Comparing race fields in Melbourne and Sydney tells a sad story. The eight event programmes this weekend had a telling numbers disparity, despite Sydney offering an average $5,000 extra prize money for each race. Melbourne offers two $ 100,000 dollar events at the top of it's Saturday calendar, compared with a single $ 100,000 race in Sydney. The numbers were as follows:
Starters: Sydney. Melbourne.
7 16
8 13
10 20
11 16
10 12
10 16
12 14
15 15
Taxing horse racing is seen as a " sin tax " in some circles. The more the state takes from the betting pool. the less there is to finance racing - and the lesser dividend returned to those who bet on events. The tax take from the three states varies widely.
Queensland takes just 82 c from each $ 100 wagered. Victoria subtracts $ 1.28 - and New South Wales is by far the most voracious - with a take of $ 3.22. It is not hard to see why horse racing in this state is stagnating.
That tax level is myopic. The racing industry provides jobs across a wide spectrum, from those that service the crowds at racing events to those who participate in the actual races - to those who work in the breeding and training industry scattered across the entire spectrum of country towns. A healthy and expanding industry generates more jobs - and more indirect taxes. It makes sense to spend seed money to aid that expansion - and gain across the wider tax spectrum.
The ball is in the New South Wales government's court. The statistics are clear. Racing in this state has been overtaken by both Victoria and Queensland and that can only deteriorate unless positive steps are taken to improve it's finances. Whether that is by way of a racing tax review - or help with staging premium racing events is a matter for Treasury !
Saturday 28 June 2014
Silencing the Messenger !
Controlling the news flow has been the aim of repressive governments in many parts of the world. The former Soviet Union installed radio transmitters to scramble incoming western radio programmes and prevent it's citizens accessing free world news broadcasts. In particular, this blocking action was aimed at both the BBC World Service and Voice of America.
Eventually, satellites overcame the sheer logistics of blocked signals and in today's world the task of excluding news has got harder. China remains a last bastion of attempts to control what it's citizens see and hear - and even social media is censored. Attempts to access historical events in Tienanmen Square fifty years ago are swiftly blocked by the " media police ".
The world is shocked by a prison sentence handed down to three Al Jazeera journalists by an Egyptian court this week. Award winning Australian journalist Peter Greste and two of his companions, Mohamed Fahmy and Baher Mohamed were sentenced to seven and ten year periods of incarceration. They were found guilty of assisting the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and broadcasting false information.
Egypt is undergoing vast domestic change. An uprising removed a dictator and a following election installed Mohamed Morsi as the new president. Unfortunately, he tried to turn the country into a hardline Islamic state against the wishes of many of his subjects and this led to a coup which saw him replaced by Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, the former commander of the Egyptian army.
The Middle East is the scene of conflict between the Sunni and Sh'ite followers of Islam and the Al Jazeera television network is located in Qatar, which is opposed to the El-Sisi regime in Cairo. It seems that the prison term imposed on the Al Jazeera journalists is simply a pay-back against that channel - and a warning to other news organizations that a similar fate awaits them unless they are discreet in the way they report events.
This new Egyptian government made a bad miscalculation when they allows the trial to be held in open court. The transparency of the evidence was clear to all. Endless delays in the proceedings and the fact that the prosecution made no attempt to present anything bearing even a shred of fact made the entire trial nothing but a bad joke. When the chief judge handed down a " guilty " verdict and imposed a harsh sentence the intention of the government to use a " show trial " to gain it's ends was exposed.
Now Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi has painted himself into a corner. He has stated that he will not interfere in the court process and hand out a Presidential pardon, but this trashing of justice is not going to go away. The world news scene has taken up it's cause and this will be relentlessly pursued by the full rescources of the richly endowed Qatar government. When a government imprisons journalists for doing their job it affronts the world wide media - and they will be relentless in keeping this issue at the forefront.
The last thing Egypt needs is this " unfair trial " burr under it's saddlecloth as the new president tries to settle things down and gain legitimacy for his imposed regime. It sounds as if the military are tending to install a strict regime of control over all aspects of civilian life - and take a heavy hand to controlling what Egyptians see and hear on their television screens.
Those days are long gone - as even the Chinese are finding. The electronic age has opened the world of communications and those who take the suppression road - do so at their peril. The sooner the new Egyptian president realises that using the courts as a weapon was a bad mistake - and takes action to free the imprisoned journalists - the sooner his regime will have a hope of settling peacefully into place.
The solutions that were common in solving problems last century - no longer work today !
Eventually, satellites overcame the sheer logistics of blocked signals and in today's world the task of excluding news has got harder. China remains a last bastion of attempts to control what it's citizens see and hear - and even social media is censored. Attempts to access historical events in Tienanmen Square fifty years ago are swiftly blocked by the " media police ".
The world is shocked by a prison sentence handed down to three Al Jazeera journalists by an Egyptian court this week. Award winning Australian journalist Peter Greste and two of his companions, Mohamed Fahmy and Baher Mohamed were sentenced to seven and ten year periods of incarceration. They were found guilty of assisting the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood and broadcasting false information.
Egypt is undergoing vast domestic change. An uprising removed a dictator and a following election installed Mohamed Morsi as the new president. Unfortunately, he tried to turn the country into a hardline Islamic state against the wishes of many of his subjects and this led to a coup which saw him replaced by Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi, the former commander of the Egyptian army.
The Middle East is the scene of conflict between the Sunni and Sh'ite followers of Islam and the Al Jazeera television network is located in Qatar, which is opposed to the El-Sisi regime in Cairo. It seems that the prison term imposed on the Al Jazeera journalists is simply a pay-back against that channel - and a warning to other news organizations that a similar fate awaits them unless they are discreet in the way they report events.
This new Egyptian government made a bad miscalculation when they allows the trial to be held in open court. The transparency of the evidence was clear to all. Endless delays in the proceedings and the fact that the prosecution made no attempt to present anything bearing even a shred of fact made the entire trial nothing but a bad joke. When the chief judge handed down a " guilty " verdict and imposed a harsh sentence the intention of the government to use a " show trial " to gain it's ends was exposed.
Now Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi has painted himself into a corner. He has stated that he will not interfere in the court process and hand out a Presidential pardon, but this trashing of justice is not going to go away. The world news scene has taken up it's cause and this will be relentlessly pursued by the full rescources of the richly endowed Qatar government. When a government imprisons journalists for doing their job it affronts the world wide media - and they will be relentless in keeping this issue at the forefront.
The last thing Egypt needs is this " unfair trial " burr under it's saddlecloth as the new president tries to settle things down and gain legitimacy for his imposed regime. It sounds as if the military are tending to install a strict regime of control over all aspects of civilian life - and take a heavy hand to controlling what Egyptians see and hear on their television screens.
Those days are long gone - as even the Chinese are finding. The electronic age has opened the world of communications and those who take the suppression road - do so at their peril. The sooner the new Egyptian president realises that using the courts as a weapon was a bad mistake - and takes action to free the imprisoned journalists - the sooner his regime will have a hope of settling peacefully into place.
The solutions that were common in solving problems last century - no longer work today !
Friday 27 June 2014
A " Middle " Course !
Australia has waited with trepidation to see how Clive Palmer and his PUP party would react when they assume the balance of power pivot in the Senate on July 1. This week he strode into the limelight - accompanied by climate change guru Al Gore - and announced a totally new line of approach which left the government, the opposition - and even the Greens - totally gobsmacked !
PUP will vote to abolish the carbon tax - and tack on several amendments to the bill that may be negotiable with all sides of parliament. Clive Palmer insists that the carbon tax be replaced by an Emissions Trading Scheme ( ETS ) with a carbon price set at - zero.
This innovative approach means that Australian industry will remain competitive with the rest of the world - until the US, China, Korea, Japan and Europe adopt a similar scheme and a common price for carbon comes into play. In effect, Australia will move in lockstep with the rest of the world in reducing carbon emissions but not go it alone and suffer unsustainable damage to our export industries.
Palmer also demands that we retain the $ 10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Renewable energy target. Few will argue with that because both are practical measures to develop less polluting energy sources - which is a point of general agreement. He also insists that savings from the repeal of the carbon tax be specifically directed at the electricity and gas bills of Australian consumers - and that will certainly get immense public support.
Most Australians will greet this policy statement with a sigh of relief. The direction that PUP would take on passing or blocking bills was a complete mystery. This was a political party that burst on the scene without a shred of policy and it looked like decisions would be made on the run. It was possible that PUP would develop into something akin to the Greens, obstinate and with an obsession with issues of the ecology that clashed with job creation and this country's financial welfare.
It is early days - and this first policy decision may not herald a general tone of moderation and reason, but it is certainly an impressive start. What we obviously need is a " middle course " that threads between the implacable divisions of the Conservatives and Labor - and which can become a mutually acceptable position if both sides are prepared to negotiate in good faith.
If PUP takes that middle road, there is every chance that it may quickly replace the Greens as the alternative for those who no longer support the two major political parties !
PUP will vote to abolish the carbon tax - and tack on several amendments to the bill that may be negotiable with all sides of parliament. Clive Palmer insists that the carbon tax be replaced by an Emissions Trading Scheme ( ETS ) with a carbon price set at - zero.
This innovative approach means that Australian industry will remain competitive with the rest of the world - until the US, China, Korea, Japan and Europe adopt a similar scheme and a common price for carbon comes into play. In effect, Australia will move in lockstep with the rest of the world in reducing carbon emissions but not go it alone and suffer unsustainable damage to our export industries.
Palmer also demands that we retain the $ 10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Renewable energy target. Few will argue with that because both are practical measures to develop less polluting energy sources - which is a point of general agreement. He also insists that savings from the repeal of the carbon tax be specifically directed at the electricity and gas bills of Australian consumers - and that will certainly get immense public support.
Most Australians will greet this policy statement with a sigh of relief. The direction that PUP would take on passing or blocking bills was a complete mystery. This was a political party that burst on the scene without a shred of policy and it looked like decisions would be made on the run. It was possible that PUP would develop into something akin to the Greens, obstinate and with an obsession with issues of the ecology that clashed with job creation and this country's financial welfare.
It is early days - and this first policy decision may not herald a general tone of moderation and reason, but it is certainly an impressive start. What we obviously need is a " middle course " that threads between the implacable divisions of the Conservatives and Labor - and which can become a mutually acceptable position if both sides are prepared to negotiate in good faith.
If PUP takes that middle road, there is every chance that it may quickly replace the Greens as the alternative for those who no longer support the two major political parties !
Thursday 26 June 2014
Still " Ducking and Weaving " !
The Roman Catholic church has come a long way from it's days of silence over the issue of paedophile priests. It has opened it's coffers and made restitution but there remains a doubt about exactly what the church intends as far as policy goes in respect to submitting offenders to the legal authorities to allow the law to run it's course.
The law in Australian states requires that a person with knowledge of a crime is committing an offence if they remain silent and do not submit a report to law enforcement - and there is scant knowledge that this is being obeyed.
The Royal Commission into " Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse " heard evidence from Father Brian Lucas, a member of the Church's " Special Issues Committee " which seems to have been tasked with investigating matters of paedophilia. Father Lucas explained that he took no notes when discussing this subject with priests accused of abusing children - because it was supposed to be a " frank and open " discussion and taking notes would inhibit such frankness.
In the past, it has been suggested that when errant priests discussed this matter with their superiors, the content of the discussions were protected by "confessional secrecy ". This seems to draw a long bow and would need to be tested in court to determine precisely where the legal interpretation of the start and end of a confessional session exists. It was certainly not claimed that this applied to the discussions that Father Lucas had in carrying out his duties.
For some strange reason, paedophilia seems to fall into a special category in the thinking and actions of the church. There is no question that if a priest murdered a member of the congregation he would be immediately reported, arrested and put before a court to answer for his crime. A similar fate would await a priest who blatantly stole church funds. It seems that only paedophilia is regarded as an " internal matter " to be discreetly handled in secrecy.
The public will not be convinced that the Roman Catholic church has fully and openly allowed the stain of paedophile priests to be treated for what it is - a crime punishable by law - until it clearly states that all such reports will be immediately reported to police - to allow the law to run it's course.
Whenever this question is openly asked - the answers seem evasive - and full of " if's - buts - and maybes " !
The law in Australian states requires that a person with knowledge of a crime is committing an offence if they remain silent and do not submit a report to law enforcement - and there is scant knowledge that this is being obeyed.
The Royal Commission into " Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse " heard evidence from Father Brian Lucas, a member of the Church's " Special Issues Committee " which seems to have been tasked with investigating matters of paedophilia. Father Lucas explained that he took no notes when discussing this subject with priests accused of abusing children - because it was supposed to be a " frank and open " discussion and taking notes would inhibit such frankness.
In the past, it has been suggested that when errant priests discussed this matter with their superiors, the content of the discussions were protected by "confessional secrecy ". This seems to draw a long bow and would need to be tested in court to determine precisely where the legal interpretation of the start and end of a confessional session exists. It was certainly not claimed that this applied to the discussions that Father Lucas had in carrying out his duties.
For some strange reason, paedophilia seems to fall into a special category in the thinking and actions of the church. There is no question that if a priest murdered a member of the congregation he would be immediately reported, arrested and put before a court to answer for his crime. A similar fate would await a priest who blatantly stole church funds. It seems that only paedophilia is regarded as an " internal matter " to be discreetly handled in secrecy.
The public will not be convinced that the Roman Catholic church has fully and openly allowed the stain of paedophile priests to be treated for what it is - a crime punishable by law - until it clearly states that all such reports will be immediately reported to police - to allow the law to run it's course.
Whenever this question is openly asked - the answers seem evasive - and full of " if's - buts - and maybes " !
Wednesday 25 June 2014
An Australian CIA ?
There will be howls of rage from the usual pink tinged spectrum of Australian politics, but there is no doubt that this country faces a threat from International terrorism operating under the black flag of Islamic jihad. The suggestion that we need to upgrade our security forces and stiffen the overseas capacity for intelligence gathering raises the spectre of an Australian " Spooks " outfit, similar to the American CIA.
We already have two intelligence gathering organizations tasked with keeping an eye on threats within and without this country. ASIO keeps watch over internal subversion and it's sister ASIS works within our embassy networks to keep an eye on foreign threats that emerge and have the capacity to breach our borders.
Both of these work within fairly restrictive guidelines. The civil liberties people are quick to condemn the tapping of phones or other means of electronic eavesdropping and our spy network is prevented from working closely with the various police forces because of concern that evidence gathering may cross judicial lines. Presenting evidence in open court can alert those under watch to the tactics being employed - and give the game away.
What served our interests in keeping this nation safe in the past - is no longer relevant to the threats we face today. The cold war was a fairly civilized face off between the Communist states and the west and both sides were careful to keep the " spy dramas " well out of sight. In contrast, the jihad movement openly seeks public spectacle. They crave banner headlines and breaking news on television and the greater the carnage on an unsuspecting public - the greater the impact on garnering support from the young and impressionable.
The type of people who slaughtered over three thousand people when they flew hijacked airplanes into the World Trade centre would have no compunction in carrying out a similar atrocity in an Australian city. Nor would they have qualms about a similar attack to the Bali bombing on Australian holiday makers at another of the world's pleasure centres.
Both of those events were a wakeup call - and it is noticeable that in the US the jihadists have been unable to repeat their 9/11 success. The public grumble about security delays at airports, but security has been tightened and we need to take similar measures here if Australia is not to become an " open target " in the sights of those who wish to do us harm.
Perhaps both ASIO and ASIS might broaden into something that resembles an Australian Central Intelligence Agency - but if that stops battle hardened jihadists returning to this country to launch attacks and winkles out home grown terror networks before they can launch their schemes, it will be well worth the inconvenience caused.
To do nothing - on the grounds that it might prejudice our vaunted civil liberties - is something that we might come to bitterly regret. We face a cunning foe - completely devoid of mercy !
We already have two intelligence gathering organizations tasked with keeping an eye on threats within and without this country. ASIO keeps watch over internal subversion and it's sister ASIS works within our embassy networks to keep an eye on foreign threats that emerge and have the capacity to breach our borders.
Both of these work within fairly restrictive guidelines. The civil liberties people are quick to condemn the tapping of phones or other means of electronic eavesdropping and our spy network is prevented from working closely with the various police forces because of concern that evidence gathering may cross judicial lines. Presenting evidence in open court can alert those under watch to the tactics being employed - and give the game away.
What served our interests in keeping this nation safe in the past - is no longer relevant to the threats we face today. The cold war was a fairly civilized face off between the Communist states and the west and both sides were careful to keep the " spy dramas " well out of sight. In contrast, the jihad movement openly seeks public spectacle. They crave banner headlines and breaking news on television and the greater the carnage on an unsuspecting public - the greater the impact on garnering support from the young and impressionable.
The type of people who slaughtered over three thousand people when they flew hijacked airplanes into the World Trade centre would have no compunction in carrying out a similar atrocity in an Australian city. Nor would they have qualms about a similar attack to the Bali bombing on Australian holiday makers at another of the world's pleasure centres.
Both of those events were a wakeup call - and it is noticeable that in the US the jihadists have been unable to repeat their 9/11 success. The public grumble about security delays at airports, but security has been tightened and we need to take similar measures here if Australia is not to become an " open target " in the sights of those who wish to do us harm.
Perhaps both ASIO and ASIS might broaden into something that resembles an Australian Central Intelligence Agency - but if that stops battle hardened jihadists returning to this country to launch attacks and winkles out home grown terror networks before they can launch their schemes, it will be well worth the inconvenience caused.
To do nothing - on the grounds that it might prejudice our vaunted civil liberties - is something that we might come to bitterly regret. We face a cunning foe - completely devoid of mercy !
Tuesday 24 June 2014
A " New Deal " needed !
A lot of things simply don't add up when it comes to interest rates - and credit cards. The cash rate in Australia is at a historic low of 2.5%, and yet the holders of " Plastic " have seen interest charged rise from 17.08% to 17.43% in the past year - and annual charges jump from $98 to $ 108.
The banks that issue these credit cards are quick to claim that they are loaning money on the basis of " unsecured credit ". If the person issued a credit card fails to pay the bank has limited options for recovering the money. That is the reason that interest rates are so much higher than on a house mortgage - because that is a " secured " loan where recovery of the debt is guaranteed.
In recent times, there has been a trend away from credit cards to the use of debit cards, in which the card simply transfers the nominated amount from the account of the buyer to the account of the seller. No " credit " is involved. The customer is simply withdrawing from his or her own account - and that will only happen if the balance in that account exceeds the withdrawal amount.
It seems that a golden opportunity exists for a " secured " credit card which is linked to assets such as the equity in a home or shares lodged with a bank. As things stand, all users of credit cards are pooled together as " unsecured borrowers " - and charged an accordingly high interest rate. The principle of negotiating a lower interest loan by way of providing security is totally ignored in the credit card industry.
The industry figures on credit cards are interesting. Last year the amount transacted on credit cards was $ 49.8 billion - and of that $ 34.7 billion was not repaid by the due date and incurred interest. It seems that a sizeable portion of the public promptly repay and avoid interest entirely and the only advantage to the banks is the annual card fee. Most likely having a substantial line of credit available is seen as a handy safeguard in the event that they wish to make an unusually heavy purchase.
The banks were quick to recognise that premium brands have social appeal to high end customers. Strangely, interest rates on such cards are usually even higher than on low grade cards - and the annual fees skyrocket to levels above $ 375 annually. Often, these cards are geared to " rewards " for attaining high levels of use and this softens the impact of the interest rates charged.
There is little chance of change while banking business in Australia is shared by " the big four " - and they are perfectly happy with the profits the present arrangements generate. Gearing interest to the risk level involved is the essence of the money lending trade - and the banks are primarily money lenders.
Separating the wheat from the chaff would seem to be the first consideration in allocating credit - and this is entirely missing in our credit card regime. Nothing will change - until the market broadens and a wider lending range of institutions has access to the Australian money market - and competition sharpens the deals offering !
The banks that issue these credit cards are quick to claim that they are loaning money on the basis of " unsecured credit ". If the person issued a credit card fails to pay the bank has limited options for recovering the money. That is the reason that interest rates are so much higher than on a house mortgage - because that is a " secured " loan where recovery of the debt is guaranteed.
In recent times, there has been a trend away from credit cards to the use of debit cards, in which the card simply transfers the nominated amount from the account of the buyer to the account of the seller. No " credit " is involved. The customer is simply withdrawing from his or her own account - and that will only happen if the balance in that account exceeds the withdrawal amount.
It seems that a golden opportunity exists for a " secured " credit card which is linked to assets such as the equity in a home or shares lodged with a bank. As things stand, all users of credit cards are pooled together as " unsecured borrowers " - and charged an accordingly high interest rate. The principle of negotiating a lower interest loan by way of providing security is totally ignored in the credit card industry.
The industry figures on credit cards are interesting. Last year the amount transacted on credit cards was $ 49.8 billion - and of that $ 34.7 billion was not repaid by the due date and incurred interest. It seems that a sizeable portion of the public promptly repay and avoid interest entirely and the only advantage to the banks is the annual card fee. Most likely having a substantial line of credit available is seen as a handy safeguard in the event that they wish to make an unusually heavy purchase.
The banks were quick to recognise that premium brands have social appeal to high end customers. Strangely, interest rates on such cards are usually even higher than on low grade cards - and the annual fees skyrocket to levels above $ 375 annually. Often, these cards are geared to " rewards " for attaining high levels of use and this softens the impact of the interest rates charged.
There is little chance of change while banking business in Australia is shared by " the big four " - and they are perfectly happy with the profits the present arrangements generate. Gearing interest to the risk level involved is the essence of the money lending trade - and the banks are primarily money lenders.
Separating the wheat from the chaff would seem to be the first consideration in allocating credit - and this is entirely missing in our credit card regime. Nothing will change - until the market broadens and a wider lending range of institutions has access to the Australian money market - and competition sharpens the deals offering !
Monday 23 June 2014
Holy War !
There is well founded concern that Australian jihadists fighting in Middle East conflicts may unleash the tactics they have learned in training camps if they manage to return to this country. Australia could be a fertile breeding ground for recruitment amongst young men disenchanted by lack of job opportunities and enamoured by prospect of becoming " holy warriors ". There is direct evidence of this having happened in both London and Madrid - and in both instances it resulted in carnage against totally innocent people going about their normal daily businesses.
All forms of religion are capable of distorting the norms of civilized behaviour when adherents are goaded by religious leaders. The history of this world contains a litany of conflicts of almost unbelievable savagery that encompass the full spectrum of religious observance. In some cases the conflict has involved civil war within a particular religion. In others it is a quest for domination - seeking to impose a particular religion by force of arms on others.
In many instances this call to arms does not originate with the traditional religious leaders. Firebrands emerge with a compelling case to make war in the name of their religion and one of these was Osama bin Laden. His dream was a world caliphate in which the Sunni branch of Islam reigned supreme, and he was prepared to dispense death to all who opposed his message. Bin Laden no longer exists, but his ideas have spawned copyists who project needless cruelty far beyond even his standards - and who are now rejected by his true followers. " No quarter " is the message these new religious leaders give to the world.
Unfortunately, this Islamic awakening is spreading across the entire Islamic world. The " Islamic Spring " is deposing dictators - but often replacing them with religious fanatics - to the horror of secular followers of Islam who took part in rebellions in the hope of creating a secular country that could live in peace with it's neighbours - and with it's internal mix of citizens.
It seems inevitable that religious intolerance will continue to grow in Australia, irrespective of whether we can contain the jihadists from returning to this country. The seeds of jihad are now firmly planted in Australian soil and they will be constantly nourished by the events happening in other parts of the world. It is clear that Islam is on the rise. Jihad is raging across Africa and the old dynasties of the Middle East seem incapable of change - and are under increasing threat.
There are some here in Australia who constantly preach the message of jihad - and there are those that will heed that call. It is most likely that most Australian Muslims will ignore that message, but it is also almost inevitable that from time to time this religious fervour will result in incidents, and some of them may be of an extremity that results in loss of life - or at least severe injury.
Religeous extremism is a world problem and Australia can not expect to be exempted. Most people will counter it with common sense and the agencies tasked with protecting us will no doubt take measures to keep it in check. Unfortunately, experience in other places show that legality is not always observed and such battles have their dark side.
This is the price we have to pay for adopting a secular society and allowing the complete freedom of religeous observance by all. What is seen as " freedom " by some people - is seen as a " challenge " by others.
Fortunately, it will be the relatively " few " trying to impose their will on the " many " that will bring this disruption to Australian society !
All forms of religion are capable of distorting the norms of civilized behaviour when adherents are goaded by religious leaders. The history of this world contains a litany of conflicts of almost unbelievable savagery that encompass the full spectrum of religious observance. In some cases the conflict has involved civil war within a particular religion. In others it is a quest for domination - seeking to impose a particular religion by force of arms on others.
In many instances this call to arms does not originate with the traditional religious leaders. Firebrands emerge with a compelling case to make war in the name of their religion and one of these was Osama bin Laden. His dream was a world caliphate in which the Sunni branch of Islam reigned supreme, and he was prepared to dispense death to all who opposed his message. Bin Laden no longer exists, but his ideas have spawned copyists who project needless cruelty far beyond even his standards - and who are now rejected by his true followers. " No quarter " is the message these new religious leaders give to the world.
Unfortunately, this Islamic awakening is spreading across the entire Islamic world. The " Islamic Spring " is deposing dictators - but often replacing them with religious fanatics - to the horror of secular followers of Islam who took part in rebellions in the hope of creating a secular country that could live in peace with it's neighbours - and with it's internal mix of citizens.
It seems inevitable that religious intolerance will continue to grow in Australia, irrespective of whether we can contain the jihadists from returning to this country. The seeds of jihad are now firmly planted in Australian soil and they will be constantly nourished by the events happening in other parts of the world. It is clear that Islam is on the rise. Jihad is raging across Africa and the old dynasties of the Middle East seem incapable of change - and are under increasing threat.
There are some here in Australia who constantly preach the message of jihad - and there are those that will heed that call. It is most likely that most Australian Muslims will ignore that message, but it is also almost inevitable that from time to time this religious fervour will result in incidents, and some of them may be of an extremity that results in loss of life - or at least severe injury.
Religeous extremism is a world problem and Australia can not expect to be exempted. Most people will counter it with common sense and the agencies tasked with protecting us will no doubt take measures to keep it in check. Unfortunately, experience in other places show that legality is not always observed and such battles have their dark side.
This is the price we have to pay for adopting a secular society and allowing the complete freedom of religeous observance by all. What is seen as " freedom " by some people - is seen as a " challenge " by others.
Fortunately, it will be the relatively " few " trying to impose their will on the " many " that will bring this disruption to Australian society !
Sunday 22 June 2014
Financial Advice - with " Integrity " !
Every wage earner eventually arrives at their " last pay day " - when they walk out the door for the last time and become a " retired person ". Most do so with a very large superannuation cheque in their pocket, and the most important task of their lives waiting for a decision - choosing the financial adviser who will help make that money last them for the rest of their days.
Financial advice is a regulated industry and unfortunately there are no guarantees attached to the results. Investment options vary widely and individual skills play a big part in the plans consultants may suggest. Usually these involve a mix of investment categories to spread the risk and range from shares, property and interest bearing deposits - with perhaps a small foray into highly speculative but potentially high return options.
This is an industry which has delivered catastrophe to some retirees. The " Storm " debacle wiped out the prospect of a comfortable retirement for some people and various other schemes have appeared to be little more than an illusion - to syphon invested money into off-shore tax havens from which it simply disappears without trace. There have been " get rich quick " schemes that involve growing trees and harvesting the timber, and all sorts of scams have plagued the unwary who have trusted their financial adviser to guide them through the investment minefield - and take care of their money.
The previous Federal government imposed rules which some believe encompass investment advice in a " straightjacket " that impedes wise advice. There are plans to loosen these provisions, but doing so raises concern that it may bring a return " of the bad old days " when some investment advisers were more interested in their achievement bonuses - than the security of their customers funds.
It is essential that the guidelines that apply to investment advice impose strict integrity that ensures that the benefit to the customer applies at all times. It needs to forbid any sort of commission or other forms of incentive payment to the person giving that advice to steer investment from whence this reward is forthcoming. In the vast majority of cases where investor funds were lost in shonky schemes, there is at least suspicion that rewards played a part in those debacles.
The investment advice industry is an essential part of the finance industry in Australia and it needs oversight to ensure integrity. Gaining and holding the appropriate license should be subjected to regular review and the emergence of opulent lifestyles viewed with suspicion.
The people who trust financial advisers with their money have a right to expect that the government scrutineers who control this industry are there to ensure that their best interests are served at all times !
Financial advice is a regulated industry and unfortunately there are no guarantees attached to the results. Investment options vary widely and individual skills play a big part in the plans consultants may suggest. Usually these involve a mix of investment categories to spread the risk and range from shares, property and interest bearing deposits - with perhaps a small foray into highly speculative but potentially high return options.
This is an industry which has delivered catastrophe to some retirees. The " Storm " debacle wiped out the prospect of a comfortable retirement for some people and various other schemes have appeared to be little more than an illusion - to syphon invested money into off-shore tax havens from which it simply disappears without trace. There have been " get rich quick " schemes that involve growing trees and harvesting the timber, and all sorts of scams have plagued the unwary who have trusted their financial adviser to guide them through the investment minefield - and take care of their money.
The previous Federal government imposed rules which some believe encompass investment advice in a " straightjacket " that impedes wise advice. There are plans to loosen these provisions, but doing so raises concern that it may bring a return " of the bad old days " when some investment advisers were more interested in their achievement bonuses - than the security of their customers funds.
It is essential that the guidelines that apply to investment advice impose strict integrity that ensures that the benefit to the customer applies at all times. It needs to forbid any sort of commission or other forms of incentive payment to the person giving that advice to steer investment from whence this reward is forthcoming. In the vast majority of cases where investor funds were lost in shonky schemes, there is at least suspicion that rewards played a part in those debacles.
The investment advice industry is an essential part of the finance industry in Australia and it needs oversight to ensure integrity. Gaining and holding the appropriate license should be subjected to regular review and the emergence of opulent lifestyles viewed with suspicion.
The people who trust financial advisers with their money have a right to expect that the government scrutineers who control this industry are there to ensure that their best interests are served at all times !
Saturday 21 June 2014
The smiling Assassin !
Everyone known that Heroin is a dangerous drug. We are accustomed to reading about users dieing from an overdose, but it is the sort of thing that can only be obtained by going to a drug pusher - and it certainly 'isnt something to be found in the average family home.
Unfortunately, there is a common drug that is probably represented in every medicine chest in every Australian home that is just as dangerous, and statistics show that it poisons eight thousand citizens a year - at a rate of one hundred and fifty a week. It could be termed " The Smiling Assassin " because it's something we buy at the supermarket - so how could something openly on the shelves at Coles and Woolworths be capable of killing ?
Like most " silent killers ", the danger lurks in the way we use the product. When taken occasionally and in small quantities it is harmless - and in fact it delivers relief from headaches and the usual litany of aches and pains. Problems start to multiply with overuse - and people suffering from things like migraine and arthritis can quickly slip into the habit of " popping a pill " to try and get sustainable relief.
The product that is ringing alarm bells in the medical fraternity - is Paracetamol. In particular, the " modified release " variety that claims to extend pain relief over a longer period of time. If this is taken too frequently it causes a concentration in the body which eventually reaches the level of an overdose - and unless an antidote is given within eight hours - critical liver failure can be the outcome.
Liver inflammation is the first sign of trouble and it is essential that this receives medical attention. It can progress to total liver failure - and unfortunately that is a particularly agonizing death. Moves are underway to restrict pack sizes sold in supermarkets and to ensure that when a large pack is sought at a pharmacy, the buyer is advised of the danger by the pharmacist.
No doubt warning labels on the product will be enhanced but the biggest danger will be to those people who suffer a pain related disease and see no other option than increased doses of pain killers to lower their suffering. Paracetamol is relatively harmless, taken in appropriate quantities. When the dosage moves out of control - it can quickly become a lethal assassin !
Unfortunately, there is a common drug that is probably represented in every medicine chest in every Australian home that is just as dangerous, and statistics show that it poisons eight thousand citizens a year - at a rate of one hundred and fifty a week. It could be termed " The Smiling Assassin " because it's something we buy at the supermarket - so how could something openly on the shelves at Coles and Woolworths be capable of killing ?
Like most " silent killers ", the danger lurks in the way we use the product. When taken occasionally and in small quantities it is harmless - and in fact it delivers relief from headaches and the usual litany of aches and pains. Problems start to multiply with overuse - and people suffering from things like migraine and arthritis can quickly slip into the habit of " popping a pill " to try and get sustainable relief.
The product that is ringing alarm bells in the medical fraternity - is Paracetamol. In particular, the " modified release " variety that claims to extend pain relief over a longer period of time. If this is taken too frequently it causes a concentration in the body which eventually reaches the level of an overdose - and unless an antidote is given within eight hours - critical liver failure can be the outcome.
Liver inflammation is the first sign of trouble and it is essential that this receives medical attention. It can progress to total liver failure - and unfortunately that is a particularly agonizing death. Moves are underway to restrict pack sizes sold in supermarkets and to ensure that when a large pack is sought at a pharmacy, the buyer is advised of the danger by the pharmacist.
No doubt warning labels on the product will be enhanced but the biggest danger will be to those people who suffer a pain related disease and see no other option than increased doses of pain killers to lower their suffering. Paracetamol is relatively harmless, taken in appropriate quantities. When the dosage moves out of control - it can quickly become a lethal assassin !
Friday 20 June 2014
Sydney's gun factories !
Not all the guns arming underworld figures are smuggled into Australia from overseas. Police have been aware of a thriving production culture developing in Sydney suburbs and intelligence work resulted in raids on three homes this week that netted ten firearms, gun making equipment and 2,200 rounds of ammunition.
It seems that all it takes is very ordinary metal working skill to fashion at least a crude pistol and the machinery to achieve that purpose is readily available from hardware suppliers - and it raises no eyebrows because of the multi use applications that apply. What is needed to produce a handgun is the type of hardware found in most mechanical handyman's tool kit.
This hand gun epidemic is a relatively new phenomenon. Guns were a minor part of the Australian crime scene a few decades ago, but since we have had an influx of migrants from the world's troubled spots, many are accustomed to defending their turf with guns and they brought this gun culture with them. In double quick time, to get peer respect a new entrant on the crime scene needed to display fire power.
Many of today's citizens are alarmed to see our police decked out in body armour, brandishing assault weapons and backed up by what can only be described as a " light tank " with a machine gun mounted in a turret top. Armed police first appeared in Sydney and Melbourne, but now law enforcement in all the states is caught in an arms race. It is a sheer matter of survival. When police are tasked with raiding gang premises they do so with a credible risk of death or injury because there is the prospect of armed resistance from hardened criminals.
All crime is a matter of weighing risks with rewards. The courts are getting tough on the drug trade and a serious drug importer can expect a long prison term. It seems that those with the skill to produce at least a crude pistol can see a better return with a lesser risk factor in churning out some sort of weapon. A few hours work will supply a ready market - and deliver the exchange of at least five thousand dollars cash money as the reward.
The danger is that those with more advanced skills are now looking to new horizons and the grade of weapons is fast moving to locally designed machine guns. As the sophistication and fire power increases, so do the rewards and now people with advanced metal skills see an opportunity to become crime's armourers. Why work in a traditional industry for mere wages, when they can become self employed - and make a fortune ?
Once again, that risk to reward ratio needs a re-determination. If we are serious in trying to stamp out the local gun manufacturing trade, then the penalty for getting caught must be raised to reflect it's major crime status. Not only must the legislation reflect the crime, it would need the judiciary to impose stiff upper level sentencing - and not deliver the present slap-on-the-wrist penalties that are now common.
As usual, dealing with an emerging crime trend becomes a priority battle between law enforcement and the legislators !
It seems that all it takes is very ordinary metal working skill to fashion at least a crude pistol and the machinery to achieve that purpose is readily available from hardware suppliers - and it raises no eyebrows because of the multi use applications that apply. What is needed to produce a handgun is the type of hardware found in most mechanical handyman's tool kit.
This hand gun epidemic is a relatively new phenomenon. Guns were a minor part of the Australian crime scene a few decades ago, but since we have had an influx of migrants from the world's troubled spots, many are accustomed to defending their turf with guns and they brought this gun culture with them. In double quick time, to get peer respect a new entrant on the crime scene needed to display fire power.
Many of today's citizens are alarmed to see our police decked out in body armour, brandishing assault weapons and backed up by what can only be described as a " light tank " with a machine gun mounted in a turret top. Armed police first appeared in Sydney and Melbourne, but now law enforcement in all the states is caught in an arms race. It is a sheer matter of survival. When police are tasked with raiding gang premises they do so with a credible risk of death or injury because there is the prospect of armed resistance from hardened criminals.
All crime is a matter of weighing risks with rewards. The courts are getting tough on the drug trade and a serious drug importer can expect a long prison term. It seems that those with the skill to produce at least a crude pistol can see a better return with a lesser risk factor in churning out some sort of weapon. A few hours work will supply a ready market - and deliver the exchange of at least five thousand dollars cash money as the reward.
The danger is that those with more advanced skills are now looking to new horizons and the grade of weapons is fast moving to locally designed machine guns. As the sophistication and fire power increases, so do the rewards and now people with advanced metal skills see an opportunity to become crime's armourers. Why work in a traditional industry for mere wages, when they can become self employed - and make a fortune ?
Once again, that risk to reward ratio needs a re-determination. If we are serious in trying to stamp out the local gun manufacturing trade, then the penalty for getting caught must be raised to reflect it's major crime status. Not only must the legislation reflect the crime, it would need the judiciary to impose stiff upper level sentencing - and not deliver the present slap-on-the-wrist penalties that are now common.
As usual, dealing with an emerging crime trend becomes a priority battle between law enforcement and the legislators !
Thursday 19 June 2014
Creating financial obstacles !
Research shows that eighty-six percent of Australian families could save money simply by moving from the present supplier of financial or utility services and taking up the offers of their competitors. It seems that most " just can't be bothered " and industry is fast erecting obstacles to increase the difficulty.
We are constantly urged to " shop around " and seek a better deal on our house mortgage and banking arrangements. The wise will have a close look at what " exit fees " apply when it comes to a mortgage switch - and changing banks means contacting all those suppliers who are paid by a monthly bank account debit - and rearranging new payment procedures with your new bank account. The banks have no protocol to transfer regular payment regimes between banks at their customer's request.
Suppliers of services such as gas and electricity - and mobile and fixed line phones - usually tie new customers into a fixed term arrangement with a penalty for early cancellation. Few seem to remember the starting date of this contract - and the providers are careful to make no mention of the remaining period on their bills or literature. As a result, uncertainty is the reason few make the switch.
Now a new " lock in " tactic is being employed by the direct supply magazine companies and this is fast spreading to the suppliers of services - such as those providing security screening to our computer traffic.
When the present contract supply period is about to end you get an offer with a nice little discount - if you renew with your credit card number and agree to " automatic renewal " in the following year.
This is a definite " game changer ". You no longer need to make a choice. A few days before renewal is due, you get a notice advising that renewal is now under way - and should you wish to cancel - the onus is now on you to make contact and ensure that this is made clear to the company. Once again, the inertia that stops most people switching accounts kicks in - and that automatic renewal proceeds unchecked.
It is noticeable that this reluctance to make change has produced a new crop of service providers who are offering to do the spadework for the family struggling with bills. Television advertising is now rife with offers from companies who will gladly seek out the best deal in all manner of service categories - funeral insurance, gas or electricity supply, car insurance, green slip insurance - and take care of the paperwork involved in getting new arrangements under way - and saving you money !
The only problem is that such companies usually have a vested interest in steering enquirers to a supplier of their choice, and often there is a financial reward involved if they do so. The savings are on a more reliable basis for those who take the trouble to do their own research - and take the trouble to carry through with the effort necessary to tie up the loose ends and paperwork to their own satisfaction.
When it comes to saving money, self interest is the best judge in comparing what is offering !
We are constantly urged to " shop around " and seek a better deal on our house mortgage and banking arrangements. The wise will have a close look at what " exit fees " apply when it comes to a mortgage switch - and changing banks means contacting all those suppliers who are paid by a monthly bank account debit - and rearranging new payment procedures with your new bank account. The banks have no protocol to transfer regular payment regimes between banks at their customer's request.
Suppliers of services such as gas and electricity - and mobile and fixed line phones - usually tie new customers into a fixed term arrangement with a penalty for early cancellation. Few seem to remember the starting date of this contract - and the providers are careful to make no mention of the remaining period on their bills or literature. As a result, uncertainty is the reason few make the switch.
Now a new " lock in " tactic is being employed by the direct supply magazine companies and this is fast spreading to the suppliers of services - such as those providing security screening to our computer traffic.
When the present contract supply period is about to end you get an offer with a nice little discount - if you renew with your credit card number and agree to " automatic renewal " in the following year.
This is a definite " game changer ". You no longer need to make a choice. A few days before renewal is due, you get a notice advising that renewal is now under way - and should you wish to cancel - the onus is now on you to make contact and ensure that this is made clear to the company. Once again, the inertia that stops most people switching accounts kicks in - and that automatic renewal proceeds unchecked.
It is noticeable that this reluctance to make change has produced a new crop of service providers who are offering to do the spadework for the family struggling with bills. Television advertising is now rife with offers from companies who will gladly seek out the best deal in all manner of service categories - funeral insurance, gas or electricity supply, car insurance, green slip insurance - and take care of the paperwork involved in getting new arrangements under way - and saving you money !
The only problem is that such companies usually have a vested interest in steering enquirers to a supplier of their choice, and often there is a financial reward involved if they do so. The savings are on a more reliable basis for those who take the trouble to do their own research - and take the trouble to carry through with the effort necessary to tie up the loose ends and paperwork to their own satisfaction.
When it comes to saving money, self interest is the best judge in comparing what is offering !
Wednesday 18 June 2014
Political parties - and their policies !
It is a sad fact of life that the vast majority of Australians usually cast their vote on ideological grounds. They are either of a " Conservative " frame of mind and support the Liberal/Nationals, or they have a " Socialist " outlook espoused by Labor and it's union allies. Few have bothered to actually read the policy documents that are the manifesto of either political movement - and therefore the image of both parties is slanted by the opinions on issues presented by the media.
The reigns of government are regularly exchanged between the Conservatives and the Socialists as a portion of " swing voters " tip the balance according to what some see as the " election cycle ". Whoever is in power gradually loses focus and achievement slips - until it becomes time to " give those other blokes a go ". In recent times, whoever holds power in the lower house is prevented from implementing the issues taken to the last election by a consortium of " independents " who hold the balance of power in the Senate.
A " third force " entered the fray when the " Greenie " movement blossomed out of the woodwork over a proposed dam on a river in Tasmania. The Greens have a list of convictions on matters they are against - but precious few on items that they are " for " - and hence their stance can be contradictory - and usually unhelpful when national matters are involved.
Now an entirely new political party has burst onto the scene - and like the Greens - it concentrates it's power in the Senate. It is entirely the creation of an Australian mining billionaire - Clive Palmer - and it sprung to life as a result of his personal protest when both the Federal government and the state government of maverick Queensland thwarted several of his business proposals.
Clive Palmer's " Palmer United Party " must be given full credit for an innovative and bold approach that garnered sufficient votes to establish a Senate presence, and then cobble together a few other orphan representatives of weird one issue parties that thrive under our complicated Senate voting system. From " out of nowhere " - it now has a legitimate lock on the balance of power and will have an influence on the legislation that will govern this country - and that is way out of balance with it's share of the vote.
What must alarm many people - is the fact that this is a political party without even a shred of a policy. It seems that it's decisions will revolve around the personal whims and fancies of Clive Palmer - and those will be heavily influenced by how his fortunes interact with the mix of business and legislation that applies to his mining interests.
We seem to be heading into a style of politics that has bedevilled many sovereign countries of the old world. Instead of power rotating between two major political blocks the balance has shifted to short lived coalitions of minor parties which form strange alliances , squabble ceaselessly - and lack the will to achieve major reform - or deliver good government.
It seems that the splintering of governments is becoming a world wide phenomenon. Discipline was once the cement that held the major parties together and strong leaders would brook no revolt from amongst their rank and file. Today, the media extols the virtues of those who break ranks and it seems that the views of major commentators hold equal sway to that of party leaders.
We have only to look at the mess that exists in some parts of the world where government has clearly failed to take the measures necessary to trim their spending to match their income. The outcome for ordinary people is huge unemployment and the failure of government services as the money pool runs dry.
Could this be the fate of Australia ? The immediate prospects seems ominous !
The reigns of government are regularly exchanged between the Conservatives and the Socialists as a portion of " swing voters " tip the balance according to what some see as the " election cycle ". Whoever is in power gradually loses focus and achievement slips - until it becomes time to " give those other blokes a go ". In recent times, whoever holds power in the lower house is prevented from implementing the issues taken to the last election by a consortium of " independents " who hold the balance of power in the Senate.
A " third force " entered the fray when the " Greenie " movement blossomed out of the woodwork over a proposed dam on a river in Tasmania. The Greens have a list of convictions on matters they are against - but precious few on items that they are " for " - and hence their stance can be contradictory - and usually unhelpful when national matters are involved.
Now an entirely new political party has burst onto the scene - and like the Greens - it concentrates it's power in the Senate. It is entirely the creation of an Australian mining billionaire - Clive Palmer - and it sprung to life as a result of his personal protest when both the Federal government and the state government of maverick Queensland thwarted several of his business proposals.
Clive Palmer's " Palmer United Party " must be given full credit for an innovative and bold approach that garnered sufficient votes to establish a Senate presence, and then cobble together a few other orphan representatives of weird one issue parties that thrive under our complicated Senate voting system. From " out of nowhere " - it now has a legitimate lock on the balance of power and will have an influence on the legislation that will govern this country - and that is way out of balance with it's share of the vote.
What must alarm many people - is the fact that this is a political party without even a shred of a policy. It seems that it's decisions will revolve around the personal whims and fancies of Clive Palmer - and those will be heavily influenced by how his fortunes interact with the mix of business and legislation that applies to his mining interests.
We seem to be heading into a style of politics that has bedevilled many sovereign countries of the old world. Instead of power rotating between two major political blocks the balance has shifted to short lived coalitions of minor parties which form strange alliances , squabble ceaselessly - and lack the will to achieve major reform - or deliver good government.
It seems that the splintering of governments is becoming a world wide phenomenon. Discipline was once the cement that held the major parties together and strong leaders would brook no revolt from amongst their rank and file. Today, the media extols the virtues of those who break ranks and it seems that the views of major commentators hold equal sway to that of party leaders.
We have only to look at the mess that exists in some parts of the world where government has clearly failed to take the measures necessary to trim their spending to match their income. The outcome for ordinary people is huge unemployment and the failure of government services as the money pool runs dry.
Could this be the fate of Australia ? The immediate prospects seems ominous !
Tuesday 17 June 2014
Travel ban trap !
Most people agree that " Deadbeat Dads " should be pursued vigorously to recover dodged child support payments, but it seems that a legal loophole allows " double dipping " that can prevent a visiting overseas parent from returning to their country - and becoming a virtual prisoner in Australia.
It seems that our Department of Human Services Child Support programme does not recognise overseas court decisions which settle child support in divorce cases. Different laws apply and in some instances the share of mutual assets is the basis of settlement and that can become the factor that compensates in child support matters.
In one recent instance, a couple who divorced in England arrived at an amicable settlement and some time later the wife remarried and moved to Australia with her new husband. She then applied to the Australian Human Services department for child support - and this was granted against her former husband.
When this man visited Australia to maintain contact with his children he was presented at the airport with a " no fly " ban issued by this department - for non payment of child support in Australia, despite his English divorce having already settled that matter to that courts satisfaction.
Basically, he became a prisoner in this country, prevented from returning to his job, home and new family on the other side of the world by what he must surely have thought was an act of treachery. It seems a legal position in one country can be arbitrarily overturned in a foreign jurisdiction - and this order required him to remain here until the money was forthcoming.
It seems that this is becoming a familiar problem between jurisdictions in Britain and New Zealand - and former partners that now either live in Australia, or visit Australia on access visits to maintain contact with their children.
We obviously need a law change to sort this matter out. The obvious solution would be an agreement between the governments involved to accept as final the decisions of each countries divorce courts on child support matters. Divorce is an unfortunate reality, but when a court applies finality that should be the end of the matter as far as future liability is concerned - and both parties should be free to get on with their life without the threat of " unexpected consequences " !
It seems that our Department of Human Services Child Support programme does not recognise overseas court decisions which settle child support in divorce cases. Different laws apply and in some instances the share of mutual assets is the basis of settlement and that can become the factor that compensates in child support matters.
In one recent instance, a couple who divorced in England arrived at an amicable settlement and some time later the wife remarried and moved to Australia with her new husband. She then applied to the Australian Human Services department for child support - and this was granted against her former husband.
When this man visited Australia to maintain contact with his children he was presented at the airport with a " no fly " ban issued by this department - for non payment of child support in Australia, despite his English divorce having already settled that matter to that courts satisfaction.
Basically, he became a prisoner in this country, prevented from returning to his job, home and new family on the other side of the world by what he must surely have thought was an act of treachery. It seems a legal position in one country can be arbitrarily overturned in a foreign jurisdiction - and this order required him to remain here until the money was forthcoming.
It seems that this is becoming a familiar problem between jurisdictions in Britain and New Zealand - and former partners that now either live in Australia, or visit Australia on access visits to maintain contact with their children.
We obviously need a law change to sort this matter out. The obvious solution would be an agreement between the governments involved to accept as final the decisions of each countries divorce courts on child support matters. Divorce is an unfortunate reality, but when a court applies finality that should be the end of the matter as far as future liability is concerned - and both parties should be free to get on with their life without the threat of " unexpected consequences " !
Monday 16 June 2014
The " Will " to fight !
If Iraq has taught the West anything, it must surely be the futility of standing between two sides in a religious war. Despite a mounting death toll from a wide range of countries and the sacrifice of trillions of dollars over a decade of trying to mould Iraq into a democratic country, at the first challenge - it has fallen apart.
The worst fanatics of the Sunni led Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant ( ISIL ) have poured out of the Syrian civil war and carved a victorious path towards the capital. Major cities such as Mosul and Tikrit have fallen without a shot being fired and the Iraqi army - so carefully trained and equipped with modern weapons - has shed it's uniforms and fled in terror before it's enemy.
Barak Obama has wisely decreed that there will not be a return of American boots on the ground.. If the squabbling Iraqi government succeeds in whipping together some sort of civilian defence of Baghdad there may be some degree of air cover and possibly the use of drones to hold back the enemy, but first the Iraqi people have to demonstrate that they have the " will " to save their own lives.
The future scenario is unclear. Saudi Arabia backs the Sunni side. Iran backs the Sh'ites, and there is a very real chance that Iraq may be divided into Sunni, Sh'ite and Kurdish zones with both men and military equipment pouring in from sponsor countries.
The real losers will be the Iraqi people with moderate religious views. ISIL represents the worst elements of religious persecution and deploys a form of Islam that demands total obedience. It's fighters dish out summary punishment that includes amputations and be-headings - and living under their rule is tantamount to a return to the dark ages.
We can expect to see countless numbers of refugees pouring over the borders to seek refuge in other countries, and adding to those that have fled the war in Syria, the world is facing a refugee problem well beyond it's capacity to cope. The countries of the west - and that includes Australia - are likely to see added pressure from those seeking asylum.
These events point the finger at what is likely to befall Afghanistan when the last of it's western defenders leave. Once again, it will be the clash of two great religious divides that will decide the outcome - and the most likely prospect is a repeat of the events happening in Iraq.
Perhaps the only saving grace from this debacle may be a lesson learned - at great cost. It is not possible to impose peace on people whose religious inclination is to make war on one another. Such outcomes will only be settled when both exhaust each other - to the point of mutual settlement.
A wise observation that the west should ponder when next religious hostilities commence somewhere in the world !
The worst fanatics of the Sunni led Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant ( ISIL ) have poured out of the Syrian civil war and carved a victorious path towards the capital. Major cities such as Mosul and Tikrit have fallen without a shot being fired and the Iraqi army - so carefully trained and equipped with modern weapons - has shed it's uniforms and fled in terror before it's enemy.
Barak Obama has wisely decreed that there will not be a return of American boots on the ground.. If the squabbling Iraqi government succeeds in whipping together some sort of civilian defence of Baghdad there may be some degree of air cover and possibly the use of drones to hold back the enemy, but first the Iraqi people have to demonstrate that they have the " will " to save their own lives.
The future scenario is unclear. Saudi Arabia backs the Sunni side. Iran backs the Sh'ites, and there is a very real chance that Iraq may be divided into Sunni, Sh'ite and Kurdish zones with both men and military equipment pouring in from sponsor countries.
The real losers will be the Iraqi people with moderate religious views. ISIL represents the worst elements of religious persecution and deploys a form of Islam that demands total obedience. It's fighters dish out summary punishment that includes amputations and be-headings - and living under their rule is tantamount to a return to the dark ages.
We can expect to see countless numbers of refugees pouring over the borders to seek refuge in other countries, and adding to those that have fled the war in Syria, the world is facing a refugee problem well beyond it's capacity to cope. The countries of the west - and that includes Australia - are likely to see added pressure from those seeking asylum.
These events point the finger at what is likely to befall Afghanistan when the last of it's western defenders leave. Once again, it will be the clash of two great religious divides that will decide the outcome - and the most likely prospect is a repeat of the events happening in Iraq.
Perhaps the only saving grace from this debacle may be a lesson learned - at great cost. It is not possible to impose peace on people whose religious inclination is to make war on one another. Such outcomes will only be settled when both exhaust each other - to the point of mutual settlement.
A wise observation that the west should ponder when next religious hostilities commence somewhere in the world !
Sunday 15 June 2014
Home Security threat !
In the distant past, burglary was the crime that most home owners feared, but at least in the vast majority of cases the burglar chose to break into an empty house. The risk of burglary increased when the home owner was away on holiday - or when the house was unattended if the family worked.
Today's thieves embrace an entirely new culture. It is called "home invasion " - and it takes many forms. In one instance a burglar posed as a flower delivery man - with a genuine bunch of flowers in his hand - and told the two resident sisters that this was a delivery to celebrate their attainment of the HSC. He asked to enter and arrange the flowers in a vase, and once inside, tied up the girls, ransacked the house and made off with cash, jewellery and other valuables.
Bogus tradesmen are another lurk. In some cases they promise incredibly cheap work - and then ask to enter the house to use the toilet. A need to use the phone is another ploy - and we are seeing increasing incidences where damage to the house is deliberately caused, followed by an approach to quote repairs.
In many cases, the culprit has taken the trouble to do research on the resident. In the flower delivery scam, the sisters had just completed their HSC and the bandit had somehow obtained this information. It seems that the site of each robbery is no longer random. The home to be raided has been selected on the basis that it will probably contain the type of valuables the thief finds attractive.
A captured resident is now considered an added bonus. Most people have cash in their purse of wallet, plus credit and debit cards that they can be persuaded to reveal the PIN numbers. The march of modern technology now ensures that many homes contain a multitude of expensive - and highly portable - items such as tablets and smartphones and high end photographic equipment. The bandit no longer needs a " fence " to move the loot. The anonymity of internet marketing serves that purpose.
It is likely that these tactical changes will increase the attraction of " gated " communities - as is happening in many other countries. Home security is becoming a growing concern and it can be comforting to know that all visitors to a gated estate must first pass through a security check and that a patrol can be summonsed at the press of an alarm button.
It seems that the " ordinary " householder needs to beef up security to lower the risk factor. Perhaps the most basic need would be to ensure that there is a high quality and fully locked metal security door between the resident and the possible thief whenever the front door is opened to respond to a call.
Both the police and the home services providers urge residents to be vigilant and demand to see identification when approached by an unknown person claiming to represent a company or an authority. It is not unreasonable to ask that person to wait while a phone check is made to establish validity - and under no circumstances should such a visitor be permitted entry to the house until that has been concluded.
Such is the threat that comes with living in the twenty-first century !
Today's thieves embrace an entirely new culture. It is called "home invasion " - and it takes many forms. In one instance a burglar posed as a flower delivery man - with a genuine bunch of flowers in his hand - and told the two resident sisters that this was a delivery to celebrate their attainment of the HSC. He asked to enter and arrange the flowers in a vase, and once inside, tied up the girls, ransacked the house and made off with cash, jewellery and other valuables.
Bogus tradesmen are another lurk. In some cases they promise incredibly cheap work - and then ask to enter the house to use the toilet. A need to use the phone is another ploy - and we are seeing increasing incidences where damage to the house is deliberately caused, followed by an approach to quote repairs.
In many cases, the culprit has taken the trouble to do research on the resident. In the flower delivery scam, the sisters had just completed their HSC and the bandit had somehow obtained this information. It seems that the site of each robbery is no longer random. The home to be raided has been selected on the basis that it will probably contain the type of valuables the thief finds attractive.
A captured resident is now considered an added bonus. Most people have cash in their purse of wallet, plus credit and debit cards that they can be persuaded to reveal the PIN numbers. The march of modern technology now ensures that many homes contain a multitude of expensive - and highly portable - items such as tablets and smartphones and high end photographic equipment. The bandit no longer needs a " fence " to move the loot. The anonymity of internet marketing serves that purpose.
It is likely that these tactical changes will increase the attraction of " gated " communities - as is happening in many other countries. Home security is becoming a growing concern and it can be comforting to know that all visitors to a gated estate must first pass through a security check and that a patrol can be summonsed at the press of an alarm button.
It seems that the " ordinary " householder needs to beef up security to lower the risk factor. Perhaps the most basic need would be to ensure that there is a high quality and fully locked metal security door between the resident and the possible thief whenever the front door is opened to respond to a call.
Both the police and the home services providers urge residents to be vigilant and demand to see identification when approached by an unknown person claiming to represent a company or an authority. It is not unreasonable to ask that person to wait while a phone check is made to establish validity - and under no circumstances should such a visitor be permitted entry to the house until that has been concluded.
Such is the threat that comes with living in the twenty-first century !
Saturday 14 June 2014
Taxi Industry revolt !
We live in an age when someones bright idea can make them a billionaire - and usually the wizardry of communications has a role in the plan. What is called the " Uber " method of obtaining a taxi has burst on the world scene and is now operating in 128 cities in 37 countries - and it is causing huge protests from conventional cab companies.
It revolves around installing the Uber app on customer's smartphones. When they need a taxi this app directs the call to the nearest private car owner who is willing to use his or her car as a private taxi. The customer nominates the destination and tracking technology determines the distance travelled and calculates the fare at a much lesser rate than that charged by the traditional cab fleets. At journeys end, the app simply extracts the fare from the customers bank account.
The " Uber " method is now operating in London, Paris, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin, Rome, Milan - and fast spreading to other cities. It walks a legal tightrope because in most countries the taxi industry is strictly controlled. Obtaining a cab license is costly and drivers must undergo security checks and in many instances, pass a knowledge exam on city streets. They are also required to wear a uniform and obey a code of conduct. None of these things apply to private cars and drivers taking fares from the legitimate taxi industry.
The big draw card for many people is the lower cost cab fare. Another is the ease of having a cab arrive without the hassle of waiting at a cab rank at peak times when there are long delays. But this also comes at a price. When calling for a conventional cab there is the expectation that the vehicle will be a colour coded vehicle of a model used in taxi work and that it will be driven by a company employee who has been checked for driving skill and city knowledge. It is expected that this cab will be both clean - and safe !
The conventional taxi industry tends to refer to the Uber competition as either " Pirate " or " Gypsy " cabs. They will be a mix of all kinds of vehicles of any age and condition. There is no guarantee that they are in safe working condition, nor that the person driving has the skills to navigate busy city roads. Most conventional cabs require a photo identification of the driver to be on display. The age, sex and skill of the person driving a Uber cab is a complete mystery.
The Uber revolution is fast reaching a turning point. There is no doubt that it is taking an increasing share of business from the conventional taxi companies and if this continues we will see these fleets diminish. If we move to a deregulated industry the certainty of cab fleets will be replaced by the whim of independents who chose to work, probably only at times when the pickings are greatest.
Then there is the safety aspect. Many young women will be hesitant to get into a car with an unknown driver late at night. It stands to reason that sex deviates will see this emerging industry as " opportunity " , specially when the ease of phone hacking can allow a call intercept to reach the customer first - and impersonate the real Uber cab.
It is unlikely that both the vast conventional cab fleets and the Uber revolution can survive side by side - unchanged. Both city and state gain revenue from their charges for cab licenses and fees and in exchange they provide security of tenure - which is now being invaded. It seems inevitable that some sort of vehicle and driver registration will be imposed - and there will be a need for vehicle inspections to bring Uber vehicles to an acceptable standard.
It is surprising that the Uber concept has got this far. The main danger to it's existence is the fact that it evades a lucrative form of taxation by way of licensing of conventional taxi fleets - and those that come between governments and their sources of income - do so at their peril !
It revolves around installing the Uber app on customer's smartphones. When they need a taxi this app directs the call to the nearest private car owner who is willing to use his or her car as a private taxi. The customer nominates the destination and tracking technology determines the distance travelled and calculates the fare at a much lesser rate than that charged by the traditional cab fleets. At journeys end, the app simply extracts the fare from the customers bank account.
The " Uber " method is now operating in London, Paris, Madrid, Barcelona, Berlin, Rome, Milan - and fast spreading to other cities. It walks a legal tightrope because in most countries the taxi industry is strictly controlled. Obtaining a cab license is costly and drivers must undergo security checks and in many instances, pass a knowledge exam on city streets. They are also required to wear a uniform and obey a code of conduct. None of these things apply to private cars and drivers taking fares from the legitimate taxi industry.
The big draw card for many people is the lower cost cab fare. Another is the ease of having a cab arrive without the hassle of waiting at a cab rank at peak times when there are long delays. But this also comes at a price. When calling for a conventional cab there is the expectation that the vehicle will be a colour coded vehicle of a model used in taxi work and that it will be driven by a company employee who has been checked for driving skill and city knowledge. It is expected that this cab will be both clean - and safe !
The conventional taxi industry tends to refer to the Uber competition as either " Pirate " or " Gypsy " cabs. They will be a mix of all kinds of vehicles of any age and condition. There is no guarantee that they are in safe working condition, nor that the person driving has the skills to navigate busy city roads. Most conventional cabs require a photo identification of the driver to be on display. The age, sex and skill of the person driving a Uber cab is a complete mystery.
The Uber revolution is fast reaching a turning point. There is no doubt that it is taking an increasing share of business from the conventional taxi companies and if this continues we will see these fleets diminish. If we move to a deregulated industry the certainty of cab fleets will be replaced by the whim of independents who chose to work, probably only at times when the pickings are greatest.
Then there is the safety aspect. Many young women will be hesitant to get into a car with an unknown driver late at night. It stands to reason that sex deviates will see this emerging industry as " opportunity " , specially when the ease of phone hacking can allow a call intercept to reach the customer first - and impersonate the real Uber cab.
It is unlikely that both the vast conventional cab fleets and the Uber revolution can survive side by side - unchanged. Both city and state gain revenue from their charges for cab licenses and fees and in exchange they provide security of tenure - which is now being invaded. It seems inevitable that some sort of vehicle and driver registration will be imposed - and there will be a need for vehicle inspections to bring Uber vehicles to an acceptable standard.
It is surprising that the Uber concept has got this far. The main danger to it's existence is the fact that it evades a lucrative form of taxation by way of licensing of conventional taxi fleets - and those that come between governments and their sources of income - do so at their peril !
Friday 13 June 2014
The new bank bandits !
Some people are getting a nasty shock when they try to access money they have saved " for a rainy day " - tucked away in a savings account in a bank, building society or credit union. Unless you have made a deposit or withdrawn from it in the past three years there is every chance that the Australian Securities and Investment Commission ( ASIC ) has cleaned out your bank account and transferred your funds to the Federal government's " Consolidated Revenue " account - and they are now spending your money !
ASIC can do that because of a legal change that deems your account as " inactive ". Many years ago the Feds decided that they needed to " protect absent minded people " who simply forgot that they had money and take it into care until someone came forward and claimed it. Seven years was the point when an untouched account became " inactive ".
In 2012 the government was desperate to fill a financial black hole and Treasurer Wayne Swan quietly dropped that seven year time frame - to just three years. As a result, ASIC has been on the rampage and there is now a whopping $ 1.2 billion sitting in Consolidated Revenue - being used interest free without the knowledge of it's former owners.
Of course you do have the right to demand that the government return your funds, but now the onus is on you to prove that you are the true owner - and that these funds are legally yours and not the proceeds of some sort of crime - and it will be a long and tedious process that may take a lot of time and effort - and probably extend for weeks - or even months, and when the money is returned - it is without any interest payments for the time it has been in government hands.
Many people are affronted that the banks do little to warn them that their account is being raided. That seems to be a grey area that depends on the outlook of individual managers but the media has been giving clear warnings that those with a little used deposit need to activate the account - perhaps a diary entry to make at least a one dollar deposit once a year.
We live in a " money hungry " world with ever tightening rules. It is noticeable that the " onus of proof " is subtly changing with the onset of " proceeds of crime " legislation seeking to fill government coffers. In the dim past, it was the task of law enforcement to prove that money in our possession was dishonestly obtained. Today, we need to be able to justify any funds in our purse or wallet as legitimately obtained - or it can be seized and it becomes our responsibility to go to court and sue for it's return.
Even a win in a lottery now has fresh hazards. Formerly, a misplaced ticket could still claim the prize if it surfaced after a long period of time. Today - it disappears into the hungry maw of consolidated revenue with the claim period reduced to just twelve months - and that even applies to winning bets on horse racing events.
These days the bank bandits are not the guys wearing a mask and carrying a gun. They wear business suits and carry a brief case - and they are usually servants of the government !
ASIC can do that because of a legal change that deems your account as " inactive ". Many years ago the Feds decided that they needed to " protect absent minded people " who simply forgot that they had money and take it into care until someone came forward and claimed it. Seven years was the point when an untouched account became " inactive ".
In 2012 the government was desperate to fill a financial black hole and Treasurer Wayne Swan quietly dropped that seven year time frame - to just three years. As a result, ASIC has been on the rampage and there is now a whopping $ 1.2 billion sitting in Consolidated Revenue - being used interest free without the knowledge of it's former owners.
Of course you do have the right to demand that the government return your funds, but now the onus is on you to prove that you are the true owner - and that these funds are legally yours and not the proceeds of some sort of crime - and it will be a long and tedious process that may take a lot of time and effort - and probably extend for weeks - or even months, and when the money is returned - it is without any interest payments for the time it has been in government hands.
Many people are affronted that the banks do little to warn them that their account is being raided. That seems to be a grey area that depends on the outlook of individual managers but the media has been giving clear warnings that those with a little used deposit need to activate the account - perhaps a diary entry to make at least a one dollar deposit once a year.
We live in a " money hungry " world with ever tightening rules. It is noticeable that the " onus of proof " is subtly changing with the onset of " proceeds of crime " legislation seeking to fill government coffers. In the dim past, it was the task of law enforcement to prove that money in our possession was dishonestly obtained. Today, we need to be able to justify any funds in our purse or wallet as legitimately obtained - or it can be seized and it becomes our responsibility to go to court and sue for it's return.
Even a win in a lottery now has fresh hazards. Formerly, a misplaced ticket could still claim the prize if it surfaced after a long period of time. Today - it disappears into the hungry maw of consolidated revenue with the claim period reduced to just twelve months - and that even applies to winning bets on horse racing events.
These days the bank bandits are not the guys wearing a mask and carrying a gun. They wear business suits and carry a brief case - and they are usually servants of the government !
Thursday 12 June 2014
Revenge !
What a curious little story is playing out on social media ! It all started when a wronged husband offered his ex-wife's wedding dress for sale on Online market place - Gumtree. It was a bitter/sweet act of vengeance and he claimed that his marriage ended when he discovered that his wife had been sleeping with his best friend. It certainly attracted plenty of attention - and there were over 120,000 hits in the first few days of it's appearance - and several offers for the dress.
Now the story has taken a new twist. An offer to buy has been refused because it came from what is described as an " Infidelity website ". It seems that in this modern day and age we actually have a registered business which offers to train people in how to have the " perfect undiscovered affair ".
The owner of this business wanted to put the dress on display in the foyer to remind customers of the possible outcome - from which he could save them by careful training to avoid their affairs being discovered.
Presumably this is a unisex offer. This firm will accept money from both men and women who want to satisfy their sexual needs outside of their permanent relationships and do it with the utmost discretion. There is no clue to the length of time this training will take, nor the amount of money involved. It is hardly the type of course that ends with the award of some sort of diploma - but the fact that it exists is certainly a testament to the changed mores of the twenty-first century.
It is a far cry from the puritanical days when every bride going down the aisle was automatically thought to be a " virgin " and no divorce was possible without at least one party publicly branded as the " offender " who destroyed the marriage. In fact, the very idea of marriage is now sees as a " curiosity " by many people. It is often undertaken simply to collate financial affairs under a legal umbrella that has yet to be revised to accommodate Gay unions.
Perhaps the most obvious relaxation of the marriage bond is the withdrawal from the custom of the woman automatically taking her partner's surname. The transition from " Miss " to " Mrs " was completely one sided - and today most married women retain their so called " maiden name " indefinitely. Families with only daughters who rued the fact that there were no sons to carry on the family name are now well served by daughters carving out illustrious careers - and doing so under the name bestowed when they were born.
Sex is no longer the bogey it was many decades ago and the fact that an entrepreneur exists - making a living teaching people how to cheat on their partner - is surely a sign of the times. The fact that some people actually pay money to cover their tracks also tells a story. Those with a propensity to " wander " still value the fidelity of their partner, hence this resort to subterfuge.
It also illustrates the business acumen present in this twenty-first century. Wherever need exists - supply will inevitably follow !
Now the story has taken a new twist. An offer to buy has been refused because it came from what is described as an " Infidelity website ". It seems that in this modern day and age we actually have a registered business which offers to train people in how to have the " perfect undiscovered affair ".
The owner of this business wanted to put the dress on display in the foyer to remind customers of the possible outcome - from which he could save them by careful training to avoid their affairs being discovered.
Presumably this is a unisex offer. This firm will accept money from both men and women who want to satisfy their sexual needs outside of their permanent relationships and do it with the utmost discretion. There is no clue to the length of time this training will take, nor the amount of money involved. It is hardly the type of course that ends with the award of some sort of diploma - but the fact that it exists is certainly a testament to the changed mores of the twenty-first century.
It is a far cry from the puritanical days when every bride going down the aisle was automatically thought to be a " virgin " and no divorce was possible without at least one party publicly branded as the " offender " who destroyed the marriage. In fact, the very idea of marriage is now sees as a " curiosity " by many people. It is often undertaken simply to collate financial affairs under a legal umbrella that has yet to be revised to accommodate Gay unions.
Perhaps the most obvious relaxation of the marriage bond is the withdrawal from the custom of the woman automatically taking her partner's surname. The transition from " Miss " to " Mrs " was completely one sided - and today most married women retain their so called " maiden name " indefinitely. Families with only daughters who rued the fact that there were no sons to carry on the family name are now well served by daughters carving out illustrious careers - and doing so under the name bestowed when they were born.
Sex is no longer the bogey it was many decades ago and the fact that an entrepreneur exists - making a living teaching people how to cheat on their partner - is surely a sign of the times. The fact that some people actually pay money to cover their tracks also tells a story. Those with a propensity to " wander " still value the fidelity of their partner, hence this resort to subterfuge.
It also illustrates the business acumen present in this twenty-first century. Wherever need exists - supply will inevitably follow !
Wednesday 11 June 2014
The charge of the Light Brigade !
Big - Public - Essential ! Those three words would sum up a fair description of the New South Wales electricity industry. It also explains why the electricity unions succeed in getting pay awards and working conditions that would be nothing short of a dream in most other industries. They hold the power to turn the lights off in New South Wales, and that frightens governments of both political persuasions to accede to their demands.
It looks like the issue of selling off " poles and wires " is fast degenerating into a fight between the state government and the union supportive opposition Labor party. Labor is controlled by the unions - and they are not going to give up their gravy train without a massive fight. What is at stake is the inroads into living costs that power bills are imposing on the average family income.
Victoria has privatized it's electricity industry, and costs comparisons reveal that the running costs in Victoria are now less than half those of New South Wales. If the Victorian costs applied to this state, the average power bill would be $ 256 a year lower.
It is not hard to see why ! NSW electricity runs a 65 car fleet for every 100 people it employs - and employees are permitted to take their car anywhere in Australia when they take their long service leave - with the fuel paid for by a company provided fuel credit card.
This litany of " lurks and perks " includes double pay and shift allowances for night work, four hours minimum pay for each hour worked on call outs, two minutes pay for each kilometre travelled on jobs - and a whopping 15% to 26 % loading on superannuation payments.
This would be completely unsustainable in any industry in a competitive situation, but like most government utilities, electricity makes it's own rules because it is an essential service protected by a government mandate. No matter how unreasonable it's cost structure, the burden is simply added to each customer's power bill.
It is likely that this will be one of the main agenda items for next March's state election and New South Wales voters will face the usual political bias in the way the issues are presented. One side will decry the selling off of a state asset. The other side will point to the savings on power bills. It is worth remembering that industry also pays for electricity, and if the charge in this state is higher than competition allows, it is a big incentive to move to where power costs less - and that means jobs.
Both sides of politics are capable of producing compelling arguments to reinforce their point of view. How the cost of producing and distributing electricity is settled will have a major effect on the standard of living and job prospects of this state's residents. Voters would be wise to reject glib promises - and carefully evaluate all the issues before making a decision !
It looks like the issue of selling off " poles and wires " is fast degenerating into a fight between the state government and the union supportive opposition Labor party. Labor is controlled by the unions - and they are not going to give up their gravy train without a massive fight. What is at stake is the inroads into living costs that power bills are imposing on the average family income.
Victoria has privatized it's electricity industry, and costs comparisons reveal that the running costs in Victoria are now less than half those of New South Wales. If the Victorian costs applied to this state, the average power bill would be $ 256 a year lower.
It is not hard to see why ! NSW electricity runs a 65 car fleet for every 100 people it employs - and employees are permitted to take their car anywhere in Australia when they take their long service leave - with the fuel paid for by a company provided fuel credit card.
This litany of " lurks and perks " includes double pay and shift allowances for night work, four hours minimum pay for each hour worked on call outs, two minutes pay for each kilometre travelled on jobs - and a whopping 15% to 26 % loading on superannuation payments.
This would be completely unsustainable in any industry in a competitive situation, but like most government utilities, electricity makes it's own rules because it is an essential service protected by a government mandate. No matter how unreasonable it's cost structure, the burden is simply added to each customer's power bill.
It is likely that this will be one of the main agenda items for next March's state election and New South Wales voters will face the usual political bias in the way the issues are presented. One side will decry the selling off of a state asset. The other side will point to the savings on power bills. It is worth remembering that industry also pays for electricity, and if the charge in this state is higher than competition allows, it is a big incentive to move to where power costs less - and that means jobs.
Both sides of politics are capable of producing compelling arguments to reinforce their point of view. How the cost of producing and distributing electricity is settled will have a major effect on the standard of living and job prospects of this state's residents. Voters would be wise to reject glib promises - and carefully evaluate all the issues before making a decision !
Tuesday 10 June 2014
Return of the " Disinfranchised " !
The city of Sydney is the business heart of Australia and many people are bemused that Clover Moore - an avowed " Greenie " - seems to have an iron grip on the job as the Lord Mayor. As a result, anti-business policies that reduce kerbside parking and restrict the traffic flow by mandating bicycle lanes encroaching on city streets continues to flourish - despite being virtually unused by cyclists.
It seems that this anomaly is a simple gerrymander. The business community have been locked out of their right to vote in Sydney council elections. It is estimated that 50,000 business owners are eligible to cast a vote and yet less than 2,000 dropped their vote in the ballot box at the 2012 election. These are the very same people who contribute seventy percent of the city rate revenue, and yet they are disenfranchised when it comes to having a say on council policies.
All this came about years ago when it was determined that the electoral roll was in need of an upgrade. It was decided to call a rescission of the non residential roll and make those eligible reapply - and few business people bothered to do so. In most cases, our business leaders do not live in the city of Sydney and reside in leafy suburbs of other municipalities. There is no absentee voting in council elections, hence such people were forced to make an unwelcome trip into the city on a weekend Saturday to cast their vote, and that was a positive disincentive to apply for entry on the roll.
Change is in the air. The Shooters Party will introduce a private members bill in August to compile a new electoral roll of eligible business people and they will be subjected to the same obligations that apply to resident citizens. By law, they will be required to cast a vote of face a fine, and that is likely to completely recast the framework of Sydney city council - including the position of Lord Mayor.
No longer will the inner city vote be dictated by the " Greenie " element living in heritage housing in Paddington. A wider vote will certainly mean a broader outlook and it is expected that many of the niggling bylaws that delay project approval will be swept away. With the shackles removed, Australia's biggest city should be reinvigorated to retain it's title of " the gateway to Australia ".
It seems that this anomaly is a simple gerrymander. The business community have been locked out of their right to vote in Sydney council elections. It is estimated that 50,000 business owners are eligible to cast a vote and yet less than 2,000 dropped their vote in the ballot box at the 2012 election. These are the very same people who contribute seventy percent of the city rate revenue, and yet they are disenfranchised when it comes to having a say on council policies.
All this came about years ago when it was determined that the electoral roll was in need of an upgrade. It was decided to call a rescission of the non residential roll and make those eligible reapply - and few business people bothered to do so. In most cases, our business leaders do not live in the city of Sydney and reside in leafy suburbs of other municipalities. There is no absentee voting in council elections, hence such people were forced to make an unwelcome trip into the city on a weekend Saturday to cast their vote, and that was a positive disincentive to apply for entry on the roll.
Change is in the air. The Shooters Party will introduce a private members bill in August to compile a new electoral roll of eligible business people and they will be subjected to the same obligations that apply to resident citizens. By law, they will be required to cast a vote of face a fine, and that is likely to completely recast the framework of Sydney city council - including the position of Lord Mayor.
No longer will the inner city vote be dictated by the " Greenie " element living in heritage housing in Paddington. A wider vote will certainly mean a broader outlook and it is expected that many of the niggling bylaws that delay project approval will be swept away. With the shackles removed, Australia's biggest city should be reinvigorated to retain it's title of " the gateway to Australia ".
Monday 9 June 2014
The ongoing Tobacco " War " !
Anti smoking measures are slowly winning the Tobacco " War " ! Smoking rates are declining nationally and have retreated from 22.5% of the population in 2002 - to just 14.7% in 2011. Big Tobacco is determined to retain it's grip on market share and has dropped the price of it's cheaper brands to just $ 13 for a packet of 25.
Australia instituted a world first when it legislated to force tobacco packaging to show lurid images of tobacco caused diseases and hide tobacco products out of sight on shopkeepers shelves. The impact of these changes has now worn off and pressure is building to bring in a floor price which applies to each individual cigarette offered for sale. This would go hand in hand with an increase in tobacco excise over each of the next four years - which aims to increase the price of a pack of 25 cigarettes to between $ 20 and $ 25.
It is proven that increasing prices is the main incentive causing smokers to quit. Unfortunately, Newton's Law also applies. The higher the price for legal cigarettes, the greater the sales opportunity for the smugglers who are flooding the country with " chop/chop " - loose bulk tobacco from which smokers are encouraged to " roll their own " smokes.
The government is stuck on the horns of a dilemma. Whatever it does to impede the sale of tobacco by the big national tobacco companies forces their compliance because they are legitimately registered businesses and therefore subject to Australian law, but such measures make tobacco smuggling more attractive - and lucrative - to the very people who are experienced hands at smuggling drugs into this country. Getting caught smuggling tobacco involves a far lesser penalty than smuggling drugs.
Putting a floor price on legitimate cigarettes would simply amplify the savings that can be made by switching to chop/chop - and the drug trade has clearly shown that it can run rings around law enforcement. Despite some astonishing drug busts when it comes to volume and value, even that has not even put a dent in the drug availability - or the profits that go with it.
It seems that the only recourse is to keep on with the relentless tobacco war and grind the number smoking ever lower - until they reach a low when making tobacco an illegal product can be seriously considered.
That would probably put the proverbial nail in the coffin lid for many people. It is one thing to buy a legal product from a legitimate shop, even if the price is becoming prohibitive. It is quite another to seek out a drug pusher to supply your habit, with the sure knowledge you can be charged for simply having tobacco in your possession.
That seems to be the way the tobacco war is heading. It is a moot point where the numbers still smoking will enable whoever is in government to bite the bullet - and take a final step to outlaw tobacco as a legal product - and add it to the array of illegals which form part of another " unwinnable war " !
Australia instituted a world first when it legislated to force tobacco packaging to show lurid images of tobacco caused diseases and hide tobacco products out of sight on shopkeepers shelves. The impact of these changes has now worn off and pressure is building to bring in a floor price which applies to each individual cigarette offered for sale. This would go hand in hand with an increase in tobacco excise over each of the next four years - which aims to increase the price of a pack of 25 cigarettes to between $ 20 and $ 25.
It is proven that increasing prices is the main incentive causing smokers to quit. Unfortunately, Newton's Law also applies. The higher the price for legal cigarettes, the greater the sales opportunity for the smugglers who are flooding the country with " chop/chop " - loose bulk tobacco from which smokers are encouraged to " roll their own " smokes.
The government is stuck on the horns of a dilemma. Whatever it does to impede the sale of tobacco by the big national tobacco companies forces their compliance because they are legitimately registered businesses and therefore subject to Australian law, but such measures make tobacco smuggling more attractive - and lucrative - to the very people who are experienced hands at smuggling drugs into this country. Getting caught smuggling tobacco involves a far lesser penalty than smuggling drugs.
Putting a floor price on legitimate cigarettes would simply amplify the savings that can be made by switching to chop/chop - and the drug trade has clearly shown that it can run rings around law enforcement. Despite some astonishing drug busts when it comes to volume and value, even that has not even put a dent in the drug availability - or the profits that go with it.
It seems that the only recourse is to keep on with the relentless tobacco war and grind the number smoking ever lower - until they reach a low when making tobacco an illegal product can be seriously considered.
That would probably put the proverbial nail in the coffin lid for many people. It is one thing to buy a legal product from a legitimate shop, even if the price is becoming prohibitive. It is quite another to seek out a drug pusher to supply your habit, with the sure knowledge you can be charged for simply having tobacco in your possession.
That seems to be the way the tobacco war is heading. It is a moot point where the numbers still smoking will enable whoever is in government to bite the bullet - and take a final step to outlaw tobacco as a legal product - and add it to the array of illegals which form part of another " unwinnable war " !
Sunday 8 June 2014
Value for Money !
Howls of rage from the Union movement because Australian shipyards have been excluded from the tender process to build two new 20,000 tonne supply ships for the Royal Australian navy. The time has arrived to replace both HMAS Success and HMAS Sirius and the front runners are both Korean shipyards.
Past performance is coming home to roost and our local ship builders have a lot to answer for. They performed disgracefully when awarded the contracts for the $ 8.5 billion Air Warfare Destroyers. These ships were grossly over budget and far below contract requirements - and as a consequence of bad workmanship and total indifference - their builders have not been invited to submit a price for the new supply ships.
For a long time the unions had a stranglehold on defence contracts. It seems that the push to fill local jobs came a long way ahead of the need to get value for money - and this was money that was coming directly from the pockets of Australian taxpayers. Russia was having exactly the same problem, and it shocked it's own local shipbuilders when it contracted France to build two huge helicopter docking platforms for it's navy. On a world wide basis - the practice of waving the flag and accepting union rorts in defence work is fast being replaced with " Value for money " as the main criteria.
That is the only way we will get Australian shipyards to lift their game. Without the comfy assumption that defence work will be placed locally the entire structure has to abandon work practices that belong in a past age. Defence work has been the last bastion of resistance to multi skilling and as a result we can not match the speed and skill with which overseas yards can commission a new ship.
Waiting in the wings is a new contract to build twenty new Pacific patrol boats to replace the ageing craft now guarding our northern waters. The proverbial " Sword of Damocles " is hanging over the heads of our ship building industry. If they are to get the chance to claim this contract, they need to convince the defence people that they have turned over a new leaf and are now running a " cleaner and meaner " operation - that can compete on a world basis.
If ship building is not prepared to reform itself, then it has no place as a future Australian industry !
Past performance is coming home to roost and our local ship builders have a lot to answer for. They performed disgracefully when awarded the contracts for the $ 8.5 billion Air Warfare Destroyers. These ships were grossly over budget and far below contract requirements - and as a consequence of bad workmanship and total indifference - their builders have not been invited to submit a price for the new supply ships.
For a long time the unions had a stranglehold on defence contracts. It seems that the push to fill local jobs came a long way ahead of the need to get value for money - and this was money that was coming directly from the pockets of Australian taxpayers. Russia was having exactly the same problem, and it shocked it's own local shipbuilders when it contracted France to build two huge helicopter docking platforms for it's navy. On a world wide basis - the practice of waving the flag and accepting union rorts in defence work is fast being replaced with " Value for money " as the main criteria.
That is the only way we will get Australian shipyards to lift their game. Without the comfy assumption that defence work will be placed locally the entire structure has to abandon work practices that belong in a past age. Defence work has been the last bastion of resistance to multi skilling and as a result we can not match the speed and skill with which overseas yards can commission a new ship.
Waiting in the wings is a new contract to build twenty new Pacific patrol boats to replace the ageing craft now guarding our northern waters. The proverbial " Sword of Damocles " is hanging over the heads of our ship building industry. If they are to get the chance to claim this contract, they need to convince the defence people that they have turned over a new leaf and are now running a " cleaner and meaner " operation - that can compete on a world basis.
If ship building is not prepared to reform itself, then it has no place as a future Australian industry !
Saturday 7 June 2014
Greed takes many forms !
People attending the " Vivid " light show in Sydney were bemused to find what appeared to be Buddhist monks circulating in the crowd, aggressively seeking donations of money. They are attired in the robes seen in most Asian cities but this appears to be a scam designed to rip off an unsuspecting public. The Buddhist religion looks to the generosity of the common people to provide it's monks with food and the necessities of life, but they are traditionally a most peaceful religion and retreat from violence - in their search for " Nirvana ".
These " monks " are very different. Those who offer a pittance - or politely refuse to make any sort of donation - can expect a religious tirade and an increase in pressure. They have perfected a plausible line of " religious babbling " and they consistently refuse to take no for an answer. In past decades Sydney was plagued by several pseudo religious cults who specialised in begging on city streets. It seems that the wheel turns full circle.
In Victoria a woman has just been convicted of murdering her daughter in law by bashing her to death with a hammer. She had been hounding her son to divorce his partner to no avail - and her motive was sheer greed. The son had " permanent Australian residency " and the woman knew that the family could extract hundreds of thousands of dollars from people in China desperate to get a foothold in Australia and overcome our immigration laws.
The plan was to offer marriage to her permanently resident titled son to a Chinese woman which would see her gain similar status - in exchange for a vast sum of money. In some cases, these marriages only last the time demanded by immigration for authentication - and then proceed to divorce, but allow the new resident to use family reunification rules to bring others to this country. In this case, the presence of an inconvenient wife thwarting a money bonanza was solved by a grisly murder.
Many people despair at the endless incidents of greed and deception that constantly roil the political arena. The Victorian parliament is close to collapse because a politician accused of rorting his car and petrol allowance has the balance of power and objects to being called to account for his actions. In New South Wales a Royal Commission has delivered a corruption finding that may see several leading politicians face court. Across the entire Australian political spectrum, politicians are accused of jockeying for position and being disloyal in their quest for a leadership role. The aim of personal gain seems to take precedence over the common good !
It seems that avarice is a basic component of the human psyche. One of life's aims is self betterment - and we commend that as a worthy objective. It is just that a fine line divides methods we use to achieve our rewards. On which side of that line we step - depends on our personal moral compass !
These " monks " are very different. Those who offer a pittance - or politely refuse to make any sort of donation - can expect a religious tirade and an increase in pressure. They have perfected a plausible line of " religious babbling " and they consistently refuse to take no for an answer. In past decades Sydney was plagued by several pseudo religious cults who specialised in begging on city streets. It seems that the wheel turns full circle.
In Victoria a woman has just been convicted of murdering her daughter in law by bashing her to death with a hammer. She had been hounding her son to divorce his partner to no avail - and her motive was sheer greed. The son had " permanent Australian residency " and the woman knew that the family could extract hundreds of thousands of dollars from people in China desperate to get a foothold in Australia and overcome our immigration laws.
The plan was to offer marriage to her permanently resident titled son to a Chinese woman which would see her gain similar status - in exchange for a vast sum of money. In some cases, these marriages only last the time demanded by immigration for authentication - and then proceed to divorce, but allow the new resident to use family reunification rules to bring others to this country. In this case, the presence of an inconvenient wife thwarting a money bonanza was solved by a grisly murder.
Many people despair at the endless incidents of greed and deception that constantly roil the political arena. The Victorian parliament is close to collapse because a politician accused of rorting his car and petrol allowance has the balance of power and objects to being called to account for his actions. In New South Wales a Royal Commission has delivered a corruption finding that may see several leading politicians face court. Across the entire Australian political spectrum, politicians are accused of jockeying for position and being disloyal in their quest for a leadership role. The aim of personal gain seems to take precedence over the common good !
It seems that avarice is a basic component of the human psyche. One of life's aims is self betterment - and we commend that as a worthy objective. It is just that a fine line divides methods we use to achieve our rewards. On which side of that line we step - depends on our personal moral compass !
Friday 6 June 2014
" Consorting Law " Enigma !
Surprise in legal circles when the Australian Human Rights Commission sought leave to join a High Court action next Tuesday in which the Nomads bikie club is challenging consorting laws introduced by the New South Wales government. This law is being assessed by the governments of other states and if it survives this High Court challenge there is every chance that it will be adopted on a national basis.
The Australian Human Rights Commission thinks this legislation may contravene the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights. It is sufficiently concerned to present it's view in this challenge and this is causing dismay in police circles. The police see the new consorting law as a means of breaking up street gangs and bikie groups who are fast beckoning a new form of " organized crime ".
These consorting laws make it an offence for people with a criminal record to meet together on a social basis. It would ban bikie groups of more than three people from riding together on the roads, and even a birthday celebration to mark a birthday could lead to arrests if several guests were unknown to one another, but had criminal records.
It would be a handy policing tool. It would introduce a new hazard to those seeking to plan a criminal event and allow law enforcement to break up criminal groups and harass and disorganize the tight knit circles that feature prominently in the drug trade. Unfortunately, some civil liberties groups think it breaches the fundamental rights we all enjoy as Australian citizens.
The problem could be the " degree of application " of consorting laws. The intention is to target the notorious criminals who are at the centre of most crime, but once a law is in place it's reach is at the discretion of both the police and the judiciary. Do we need a law that makes it illegal for any two people - who may each have faced a minor court charge many years ago - to be arrested for consorting if they take their wives to dinner at the same restaurant ? The police would scoff and claim such an example to be ridiculous - but once a law exists - it is open to " unintended consequences " !
Purists may recall the promises made when the police were seeking to be equipped with Taser high voltage stun guns. We were told that these would only be used where they were a less lethal option than firing a police hand gun - and precisely the same review procedure as a police gun firing would follow. That hardly meshes with the experience of a drug affected student running amok on a Sydney street - who was Tasered fourteen times - and died at the scene. Many people now consider that the use of Tasers has become a preferred option to physically restraining an offender.
The fact that the Australian Human Rights Commission has elected to intervene in this High Court challenge is a sure indication that people with advanced knowledge of the law are concerned at the possible misuse of this new legislation. By voicing their concern, there is every chance that the law will be struck down, or at least codified to make sure that it does not become an instrument of oppression that strays far from it's intended targets.
By all means " Get the bad guys " ! But make sure that " checks and balances " keep " the good guys honest " !
The Australian Human Rights Commission thinks this legislation may contravene the International Covenant on Civil and Political rights. It is sufficiently concerned to present it's view in this challenge and this is causing dismay in police circles. The police see the new consorting law as a means of breaking up street gangs and bikie groups who are fast beckoning a new form of " organized crime ".
These consorting laws make it an offence for people with a criminal record to meet together on a social basis. It would ban bikie groups of more than three people from riding together on the roads, and even a birthday celebration to mark a birthday could lead to arrests if several guests were unknown to one another, but had criminal records.
It would be a handy policing tool. It would introduce a new hazard to those seeking to plan a criminal event and allow law enforcement to break up criminal groups and harass and disorganize the tight knit circles that feature prominently in the drug trade. Unfortunately, some civil liberties groups think it breaches the fundamental rights we all enjoy as Australian citizens.
The problem could be the " degree of application " of consorting laws. The intention is to target the notorious criminals who are at the centre of most crime, but once a law is in place it's reach is at the discretion of both the police and the judiciary. Do we need a law that makes it illegal for any two people - who may each have faced a minor court charge many years ago - to be arrested for consorting if they take their wives to dinner at the same restaurant ? The police would scoff and claim such an example to be ridiculous - but once a law exists - it is open to " unintended consequences " !
Purists may recall the promises made when the police were seeking to be equipped with Taser high voltage stun guns. We were told that these would only be used where they were a less lethal option than firing a police hand gun - and precisely the same review procedure as a police gun firing would follow. That hardly meshes with the experience of a drug affected student running amok on a Sydney street - who was Tasered fourteen times - and died at the scene. Many people now consider that the use of Tasers has become a preferred option to physically restraining an offender.
The fact that the Australian Human Rights Commission has elected to intervene in this High Court challenge is a sure indication that people with advanced knowledge of the law are concerned at the possible misuse of this new legislation. By voicing their concern, there is every chance that the law will be struck down, or at least codified to make sure that it does not become an instrument of oppression that strays far from it's intended targets.
By all means " Get the bad guys " ! But make sure that " checks and balances " keep " the good guys honest " !
Thursday 5 June 2014
Debit Card humiliation !
Debit cards have become a popular way of accessing a bank customer's own money and they are welcomed by all merchants because they ensure the immediate transfer of funds from the account of the buyer into the account of the seller. Unlike accepting a cheque, they are " no risk " and allow the flow of commerce over periods when the banks are closed.
This past weekend, many holders of NAB Visa debit cards were left both embarrassed and humiliated at shops and petrol stations when their cards were refused, despite having adequate funds available in their accounts. It seems that a computer glitch at the bank duplicated the monetary value of any transaction made, resulting in some cards being refused on the grounds of " insufficient funds " !
The bank has apologised and offered temporary overdraft facilities to cover shortfalls, and promised that any overdrawn fees charged will be promptly refunded, but that does nothing to pacify the customers who found themselves stranded at the counter of a petrol outlet, trying to explain to the cashier that their card had adequate funds, but was being refused by the bank - and they were unable to pay for the petrol now sitting in the tank of their car at the bowser.
It also raises the question of regular payments automatically falling due on the days of this malfunction - and which attract a non payment fee or a late payment fine if not paid on time. Such fines have a nasty habit of scoring a black mark on people's credit ratings - and having that rescinded is a long and delicate process.
Obviously, the bank is also humiliated by this SNAFU which has affected many of it's customers, but merely a shrug of the shoulders and an offer to waive any resulting bank charges is not sufficient to restore confidence. Customer credit ratings have been put in question. How will the customer be received the next time he or she needs to fill the car's tank at the petrol station where this mishap occurred - and what public humiliation was played out before other people in negotiating that debt outcome ?
At the very least, the bank needs to write and explain the reason for the late payment to any periodic payment authority - and if they decline to waive their late payment fee - refund that amount to their customer. Should this result in a black mark on the customer's credit rating it should be the bank's responsibility to see that a correction is made.
Computer systems that handle our money are complex and provide an admirable record of reliability, but they are also essential to maintaining customer integrity in the market place. The banks make great profits from handling and disbursing other people's money and with that comes the responsibility of making good when their system fails.
This past weekend, many holders of NAB Visa debit cards were left both embarrassed and humiliated at shops and petrol stations when their cards were refused, despite having adequate funds available in their accounts. It seems that a computer glitch at the bank duplicated the monetary value of any transaction made, resulting in some cards being refused on the grounds of " insufficient funds " !
The bank has apologised and offered temporary overdraft facilities to cover shortfalls, and promised that any overdrawn fees charged will be promptly refunded, but that does nothing to pacify the customers who found themselves stranded at the counter of a petrol outlet, trying to explain to the cashier that their card had adequate funds, but was being refused by the bank - and they were unable to pay for the petrol now sitting in the tank of their car at the bowser.
It also raises the question of regular payments automatically falling due on the days of this malfunction - and which attract a non payment fee or a late payment fine if not paid on time. Such fines have a nasty habit of scoring a black mark on people's credit ratings - and having that rescinded is a long and delicate process.
Obviously, the bank is also humiliated by this SNAFU which has affected many of it's customers, but merely a shrug of the shoulders and an offer to waive any resulting bank charges is not sufficient to restore confidence. Customer credit ratings have been put in question. How will the customer be received the next time he or she needs to fill the car's tank at the petrol station where this mishap occurred - and what public humiliation was played out before other people in negotiating that debt outcome ?
At the very least, the bank needs to write and explain the reason for the late payment to any periodic payment authority - and if they decline to waive their late payment fee - refund that amount to their customer. Should this result in a black mark on the customer's credit rating it should be the bank's responsibility to see that a correction is made.
Computer systems that handle our money are complex and provide an admirable record of reliability, but they are also essential to maintaining customer integrity in the market place. The banks make great profits from handling and disbursing other people's money and with that comes the responsibility of making good when their system fails.
Wednesday 4 June 2014
Tiananmen Square revisited !
A quarter of a century ago a Communist party visionary from it's top echelon could see disaster for China unless it adopted a degree of moderation. Hu Yaobang was not seeking revolution but merely relaxation on the suppression of free speech and the certainty of rule of law. With his encouragement, students massed in Tiananmen Square and peacefully demanded change.
China's leaders panicked - and the world saw live footage of tanks rolling into the square and troops shooting unarmed youths to maintain the state's stranglehold on every aspect of life for citizens of the Communist state. The events of June 3, 1989 are now expunged from newspapers and the general media - and even social media has a form of censorship that disallows search engines to access that subject. Hu Yaobang was gently eased from the inner circle - and died in obscurity.
The danger he foresaw is now becoming real. China has taken long strides on the world stage and a vast segment of it's people have made the change from subsistence peasants to a wealthy middle class supplying the world's needs. This " great leap forward " was fuelled by cheap labour attracting factories to churn out goods but now pay packets are rising - and the world is turning to other nations that can meet demand - at a lower unit cost.
So far the masses have been tolerant of China's iron grip on their lives. They are aware that their leaders are personally corrupt and the leading families enjoy immense wealth and the legal system simply rubber stamps the wishes of the inner circle. The danger is the possibility that the " good times " may slow. If competition from other low wage countries puts Chinese workers out of a job this complacency and tolerance will evaporate - and the people will demand change - and that frightens the Communist party elite to take desperate measures.
A time honoured distraction to internal worries has been to beat the war drums of nationalism. If people can be convinced that their country faces a threat all manner of privations are accepted as the price they must pay for security - and now China is rattling sabres and threatening action against it's neighbours in both of the South and East China seas.
The People's Liberation Army ( PLO ) and it's air and naval arms is by far the strongest military force in the Asian area and it dwarfs the defences of Korea, Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines. It seems to be betting it's judgement that it can push to the limits without provoking the immense American war machine into intervening. The danger is that a miss step on either side could plunge the world into a dangerous Asian war.
Hu Yaobang could see the coming aftermath of endless repression twenty-five years ago and tried to influence a gradual softening to turn China into a civilized nation. That opportunity was lost in the carnage of Tiananmen Square. The expression of " having a Tiger by the tail " seems to neatly sum up the position China's leaders now find themselves in !
China's leaders panicked - and the world saw live footage of tanks rolling into the square and troops shooting unarmed youths to maintain the state's stranglehold on every aspect of life for citizens of the Communist state. The events of June 3, 1989 are now expunged from newspapers and the general media - and even social media has a form of censorship that disallows search engines to access that subject. Hu Yaobang was gently eased from the inner circle - and died in obscurity.
The danger he foresaw is now becoming real. China has taken long strides on the world stage and a vast segment of it's people have made the change from subsistence peasants to a wealthy middle class supplying the world's needs. This " great leap forward " was fuelled by cheap labour attracting factories to churn out goods but now pay packets are rising - and the world is turning to other nations that can meet demand - at a lower unit cost.
So far the masses have been tolerant of China's iron grip on their lives. They are aware that their leaders are personally corrupt and the leading families enjoy immense wealth and the legal system simply rubber stamps the wishes of the inner circle. The danger is the possibility that the " good times " may slow. If competition from other low wage countries puts Chinese workers out of a job this complacency and tolerance will evaporate - and the people will demand change - and that frightens the Communist party elite to take desperate measures.
A time honoured distraction to internal worries has been to beat the war drums of nationalism. If people can be convinced that their country faces a threat all manner of privations are accepted as the price they must pay for security - and now China is rattling sabres and threatening action against it's neighbours in both of the South and East China seas.
The People's Liberation Army ( PLO ) and it's air and naval arms is by far the strongest military force in the Asian area and it dwarfs the defences of Korea, Vietnam, Japan and the Philippines. It seems to be betting it's judgement that it can push to the limits without provoking the immense American war machine into intervening. The danger is that a miss step on either side could plunge the world into a dangerous Asian war.
Hu Yaobang could see the coming aftermath of endless repression twenty-five years ago and tried to influence a gradual softening to turn China into a civilized nation. That opportunity was lost in the carnage of Tiananmen Square. The expression of " having a Tiger by the tail " seems to neatly sum up the position China's leaders now find themselves in !
Tuesday 3 June 2014
The " Poles and Wires " Conundrum !
The people of New South Wales go to the polls next March and one of the major political issues that will be before them for decision is the option of selling the poles and wires that convey electricity to our homes and businesses - which will result is a thirty billion dollar bonanza to fix the road, rail and hospital problems that plague this state.
Snap media polls indicate the idea has 35% approval, 47% disapproval - and 18% still have not made up their mind. So far, the public has not been given a firm plan on which to base a conclusion and three options are under consideration. The first is an outright sale of these assets. The fall back position is to offer them for either a fifty - or a ninety nine year lease.
The sale of poles and wires has been a knotty conundrum that has bedevilled governments of both political persuasions for many years. The sticking point in some taxpayers minds is that this is an asset wholly owned by the state and it has been paid for out of the taxes of it's citizens for well over a century. To some, that sounds like "pawning the family silver " !
It is very tempting to think of the improvements to our crumbling road system, need for more rail lines to service ever growing outer Sydney - and barely functioning hospitals that an injection of thirty billion dollars would bring. The down side is that selling this asset will probably be at the expense of an increase in our electricity bills.
Nobody is going to buy or lease our poles and wires unless they figure they can make a profit out of the deal. This raises the usual argument that private enterprise achieves outcomes more efficiently - and at much lower cost - than bloated and bumbling government instrumentality's. That may be so, but these same poles and wires are an absolutely essential cornerstone of the system that makes life and business liveable in this state. We would want to be sure the successful tenderer was up to the job.
It is also easy to forget that we are talking about the poles and wires system that not only delivers electricity in the major cities, but also does the job in every town, village and farm spread across a vast amount of territory. It would be counter productive to isolate this sale to city precincts, because the government would need to maintain people and plant to service the rest of the state - a costly duplication.
This sales concept is not limited to New South Wales. It has been put into practice in other countries - and in some other Australian states and we would do well to have a long, hard look at the outcomes before we make a final decision. Unfortunately, when such a matter coincides with an election, politics weighs heavily in the manner that content will be presented. If such a decision is proposed by one side of politics and opposed by the other, then most of the arguments presented for public discussion can be taken with the proverbial " grain of salt " !
Once again, the controversy that has dogged this issue for decades looks destined to go another round !
Snap media polls indicate the idea has 35% approval, 47% disapproval - and 18% still have not made up their mind. So far, the public has not been given a firm plan on which to base a conclusion and three options are under consideration. The first is an outright sale of these assets. The fall back position is to offer them for either a fifty - or a ninety nine year lease.
The sale of poles and wires has been a knotty conundrum that has bedevilled governments of both political persuasions for many years. The sticking point in some taxpayers minds is that this is an asset wholly owned by the state and it has been paid for out of the taxes of it's citizens for well over a century. To some, that sounds like "pawning the family silver " !
It is very tempting to think of the improvements to our crumbling road system, need for more rail lines to service ever growing outer Sydney - and barely functioning hospitals that an injection of thirty billion dollars would bring. The down side is that selling this asset will probably be at the expense of an increase in our electricity bills.
Nobody is going to buy or lease our poles and wires unless they figure they can make a profit out of the deal. This raises the usual argument that private enterprise achieves outcomes more efficiently - and at much lower cost - than bloated and bumbling government instrumentality's. That may be so, but these same poles and wires are an absolutely essential cornerstone of the system that makes life and business liveable in this state. We would want to be sure the successful tenderer was up to the job.
It is also easy to forget that we are talking about the poles and wires system that not only delivers electricity in the major cities, but also does the job in every town, village and farm spread across a vast amount of territory. It would be counter productive to isolate this sale to city precincts, because the government would need to maintain people and plant to service the rest of the state - a costly duplication.
This sales concept is not limited to New South Wales. It has been put into practice in other countries - and in some other Australian states and we would do well to have a long, hard look at the outcomes before we make a final decision. Unfortunately, when such a matter coincides with an election, politics weighs heavily in the manner that content will be presented. If such a decision is proposed by one side of politics and opposed by the other, then most of the arguments presented for public discussion can be taken with the proverbial " grain of salt " !
Once again, the controversy that has dogged this issue for decades looks destined to go another round !
Monday 2 June 2014
A biased view of " Aboriginality " !
This weekend SBS showed a film named " Utopia " by veteran journalist John Pilger. It could be said that Pilger has an intense dislike of all things " British " and his film sought to lump all the disabilities suffered by Australia's indigenous people on the first white settlers and the following self governing administrations.
It is an indisputable fact of life that our Aboriginal people have a far shorter life span than Australia's white population and they suffer a range of medical problems from diabetes to glaucoma that are under better control in the more established communities. They are over represented in our prison population - and they suffer a heavy handed approach from law enforcement and the various agencies tasked with delivering Aboriginal services.
There are things in our past that we should be ashamed of having committed, and Aboriginals living on tribal land often live in " third world " conditions. Many of the events which are now regarded as atrocities - and the " Stolen Generation " fits that mould - were actually genuine attempts to improve the Aboriginal lot and rescue young children from a life of poverty and discrimination. They failed miserably, because of a total disconnect between the western mind and that of a tribal people living an entirely unfamiliar way of life - to a new tribe of people of a different colour.
Pilger sought to highlight the deplorable state of Aboriginal housing, and the home he showed near Uluru was illustrative of what white Australia has long thought Aboriginal people needed. It was the type of home we would expect to see in a nice, white suburb. Kitchen - bathroom - living areas, suitable for a family of two adults and several kids.
Aboriginal culture doesn't work that way. They are tribal people and friends and relatives expect to be accommodated when one of the tribe scores a home. The resident admitted that perhaps twenty or more people lived in that house - and the filming clearly showed the result of that overcrowding. Mattresses on the floor. Lack of furniture. A very crappy toilet. In fact, the place was filthy.
Another fact that perplexed earlier housing providers. Aboriginal lore dictates that when a person dies their place of abode is abandoned. Not a problem when that place is a humpy on the bank of a creek, but earlier administrations simply could not understand homes standing empty - and in many cases being stripped of timber to fuel camp fires. It was simply a clash of Aboriginal and white culture - and it still exists today.
The problem seems to be one of " understanding " ! The people who make the decisions are usually white politicians who live in the city and have a total lack of the culture that dictates the Aboriginal mind, and they try and impose the concept of " suburbia " on a people who move from place to place to mesh with the seasons and their concept of lifestyle.
Pilger likes to play the " blame game " - and that is probably a good thing because city folk need to understand that we have a problem that is stunting the life opportunities of the people who were here long before white settlement. How we fix this problem - is a very good question !
The issue of who owns Australia is a divisive part of the equation. Certainly the Aboriginal people had centuries of tenure before 1788, but modern Australia can not be ignored - and the only practical solution is compromise. A similar conflict exists in other lands - and it might take centuries before the mix of people coalesces into a common stock. It is worth noting that " white Australia " is a meld of most races of planet earth - and each generation sheds a portion of past heritages.
The last thing we need is a " them " and " us " culture to flourish. We can not impose a white lifestyle on the Aboriginal people, but equally they need to accept that they are now part of a major world nation that is not going to pack it's bags - and go home !
A film like Utopia serves the purpose of setting out the problems that remain unfixed. Fixing them will only be achieved when black and white minds agree on a common purpose of action !
It is an indisputable fact of life that our Aboriginal people have a far shorter life span than Australia's white population and they suffer a range of medical problems from diabetes to glaucoma that are under better control in the more established communities. They are over represented in our prison population - and they suffer a heavy handed approach from law enforcement and the various agencies tasked with delivering Aboriginal services.
There are things in our past that we should be ashamed of having committed, and Aboriginals living on tribal land often live in " third world " conditions. Many of the events which are now regarded as atrocities - and the " Stolen Generation " fits that mould - were actually genuine attempts to improve the Aboriginal lot and rescue young children from a life of poverty and discrimination. They failed miserably, because of a total disconnect between the western mind and that of a tribal people living an entirely unfamiliar way of life - to a new tribe of people of a different colour.
Pilger sought to highlight the deplorable state of Aboriginal housing, and the home he showed near Uluru was illustrative of what white Australia has long thought Aboriginal people needed. It was the type of home we would expect to see in a nice, white suburb. Kitchen - bathroom - living areas, suitable for a family of two adults and several kids.
Aboriginal culture doesn't work that way. They are tribal people and friends and relatives expect to be accommodated when one of the tribe scores a home. The resident admitted that perhaps twenty or more people lived in that house - and the filming clearly showed the result of that overcrowding. Mattresses on the floor. Lack of furniture. A very crappy toilet. In fact, the place was filthy.
Another fact that perplexed earlier housing providers. Aboriginal lore dictates that when a person dies their place of abode is abandoned. Not a problem when that place is a humpy on the bank of a creek, but earlier administrations simply could not understand homes standing empty - and in many cases being stripped of timber to fuel camp fires. It was simply a clash of Aboriginal and white culture - and it still exists today.
The problem seems to be one of " understanding " ! The people who make the decisions are usually white politicians who live in the city and have a total lack of the culture that dictates the Aboriginal mind, and they try and impose the concept of " suburbia " on a people who move from place to place to mesh with the seasons and their concept of lifestyle.
Pilger likes to play the " blame game " - and that is probably a good thing because city folk need to understand that we have a problem that is stunting the life opportunities of the people who were here long before white settlement. How we fix this problem - is a very good question !
The issue of who owns Australia is a divisive part of the equation. Certainly the Aboriginal people had centuries of tenure before 1788, but modern Australia can not be ignored - and the only practical solution is compromise. A similar conflict exists in other lands - and it might take centuries before the mix of people coalesces into a common stock. It is worth noting that " white Australia " is a meld of most races of planet earth - and each generation sheds a portion of past heritages.
The last thing we need is a " them " and " us " culture to flourish. We can not impose a white lifestyle on the Aboriginal people, but equally they need to accept that they are now part of a major world nation that is not going to pack it's bags - and go home !
A film like Utopia serves the purpose of setting out the problems that remain unfixed. Fixing them will only be achieved when black and white minds agree on a common purpose of action !
Sunday 1 June 2014
Getting tough on debts !
The New South Wales Office of State Revenue ( OSR ) has 129,000 interstate drivers on it's books owing over $ 30 million for unpaid parking and traffic fines. Fines that remain unpaid after sixty days will now be put in the hands of debt collection agencies - and there are plans to withdraw the right to drive in this state which usually applies to all who hold a valid driving license in their home state.
This opens an interesting can of worms in the legal world. It will be necessary to serve a notice of license cancellation to the address of the interstate license holder and warn of the legal consequences of driving unlicensed in this state. Driving unlicensed involves cancelling most forms of insurance cover, hence those who have an accident could well find themselves with crippling debts as a consequence. Some of these debts go back years and the only information available to OSR is the data recorded at the time the offence was committed.
In tough times, all government agencies are looking to tap revenue sources to help their bottom line. Treasurer Joe Hockey created a storm when he mused that the Feds might use more muscle in reigning in unpaid HECS debts by graduates who move overseas to work - and escape the reach of the Australian tax office. HECS was introduced in 1989 to allow students to attend university and defer paying tuition fees until they graduated - and attained an income level at which repayments would commence. Unpaid HECS amount to $ 450 million - and it continues to rise sharply.
It was inferred that debt recovery could take the form of legal action in overseas courts or the negotiation of tax agreements with foreign governments to reclaim monies owing - and pursuing such debts on the estate of a deceased debtor was not entirely dismissed. It was later advised that this course of action was not under consideration.
We seem to have a strange divergence of responsibility when it comes to debt. We accept that we have both a moral and a legal obligation to promptly repay installments on items such as a home mortgage or a bank loan, but when it comes to debts to what is some form of " the Government " our attitude changes completely.
We are a nation of " tax dodgers " and this carries over to any form of government charge - and many attending university think that all forms of education should be free. It doesn't seem to bother them that the reason they chose to go to university was to gain a piece of paper that would be useful in getting a better than average income - and the elevated lifestyle that goes with wealth.
Somewhere in the logic - the term " them " comes to mean a remote entity that is rolling in money and who we resent for imposing conditions that should apply to others - but not to ourselves. We find it hard to relate this mythical " them " to what it really means - and that is " us " !
Collectively, we are all responsible for the debts that are made in the name of the government of Australia. Every Australian child born in this country - and automatically becoming an Australian citizen - becomes liable for the national debt the moment he or she takes their first breath. There is no citizen of this country that can claim to be entirely " debt free ".
It is a sad fact of life that when one citizen manages to avoid paying what they owe, that same amount is added to the load that must be shared by the rest of the community. In tough times, the collection net closes inevitably tighter !
This opens an interesting can of worms in the legal world. It will be necessary to serve a notice of license cancellation to the address of the interstate license holder and warn of the legal consequences of driving unlicensed in this state. Driving unlicensed involves cancelling most forms of insurance cover, hence those who have an accident could well find themselves with crippling debts as a consequence. Some of these debts go back years and the only information available to OSR is the data recorded at the time the offence was committed.
In tough times, all government agencies are looking to tap revenue sources to help their bottom line. Treasurer Joe Hockey created a storm when he mused that the Feds might use more muscle in reigning in unpaid HECS debts by graduates who move overseas to work - and escape the reach of the Australian tax office. HECS was introduced in 1989 to allow students to attend university and defer paying tuition fees until they graduated - and attained an income level at which repayments would commence. Unpaid HECS amount to $ 450 million - and it continues to rise sharply.
It was inferred that debt recovery could take the form of legal action in overseas courts or the negotiation of tax agreements with foreign governments to reclaim monies owing - and pursuing such debts on the estate of a deceased debtor was not entirely dismissed. It was later advised that this course of action was not under consideration.
We seem to have a strange divergence of responsibility when it comes to debt. We accept that we have both a moral and a legal obligation to promptly repay installments on items such as a home mortgage or a bank loan, but when it comes to debts to what is some form of " the Government " our attitude changes completely.
We are a nation of " tax dodgers " and this carries over to any form of government charge - and many attending university think that all forms of education should be free. It doesn't seem to bother them that the reason they chose to go to university was to gain a piece of paper that would be useful in getting a better than average income - and the elevated lifestyle that goes with wealth.
Somewhere in the logic - the term " them " comes to mean a remote entity that is rolling in money and who we resent for imposing conditions that should apply to others - but not to ourselves. We find it hard to relate this mythical " them " to what it really means - and that is " us " !
Collectively, we are all responsible for the debts that are made in the name of the government of Australia. Every Australian child born in this country - and automatically becoming an Australian citizen - becomes liable for the national debt the moment he or she takes their first breath. There is no citizen of this country that can claim to be entirely " debt free ".
It is a sad fact of life that when one citizen manages to avoid paying what they owe, that same amount is added to the load that must be shared by the rest of the community. In tough times, the collection net closes inevitably tighter !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)