A Ghost - from the Past !

One of Australia's crime mysteries revealed hauntingly new detail that makes us wonder what happened to the victim's body.  In 2001 English tourists Peter Falconio and Joanne Lee were driving the Stuart Highway in central Australia when another car driver signalled for them to pull over near Barrow Creek.  Fearing something was wrong with their car, they complied and this other driver shot Peter Falconio in the head and imprisoned Joanne Lee using gaffer tape and cable ties, putting a sack over her head.  While he was preoccupied she managed to escape and hid in the bush all night, finally emerging to flag down a passing road train in the morning.

The police discovered a pool of Falconio's blood on the highway and despite a huge search his body was never discovered.  A man named Bradley Murdock became the main suspect.  He was known to have a fascination with guns and after a long circumstantial case he was convicted and is now serving a twenty-eight year non parole sentence in a Darwin prison.   It is a remaining mystery of where Peter Falconio's body has been buried.

In 2010 a contractor was pumping out one of the roadside toilets dotted about the Stuart highway for the comfort of travellers.  These are known as " long drop dunnies " because they consist of a deep bore and when the suction hose jammed the operator discovered that the cause was a metal object wrapped in cloth.  It turned out to be a 1858 model of a Remington .44 pistol that was a favourite weapon in the American civil war of the 1860's.  These did not use modern cartridge ammunition but were served by a percussion cap and black powder.   The police commented that it was the type of weapon favoured by Australia's famous bandit, Ned Kelly.

It is unlikely that this weapon was used to kill Falconio.  The police think that a lighter .22 was used because the bullet would have lodged in his skull and the resulting blood would have pooled on the road.  The heavier weapon would have destroyed bone and brains and scattered this type of evidence widely.

It is believed that Bradley Murdock owned several pistols and none of these were recovered when he was arrested.   To complicate the issue, this roadside toilet was not constructed until well after this murder on the Stuart highway, making the police believe that Murdock - discovering that Joanne Lees had escaped - probably hid his cache of weapons somewhere in the vast surrounding desert.  It is possible that a prospector fossicking for minerals came across the weapon and decided to dispose of it by dropping it down a public toilet.   There is no record of it's serial number ever being registered in Australia.

Bradley Murdock has never confessed and still vigorously claims to be innocent.  The Falconio murder is now part of Australian folklore.  It was a grisly event carried out in what to travellers must seem to be an endless panorama of inhospitable desert.   Somewhere out there the body of Peter Falconio awaits discovery, but that is unlikely to happen unless sheer luck enters the picture.

The emergence of that antique pistol adds conjecture to the mystery !

Competition !

Investors got an unpleasant shock this week when Woolworths announced a trading loss of $972 million for the past six months.  Shares in the company briefly touched a twenty dollar low with the realization that dividends are expected to be lower and this is about half from it's former glory days.  This will be sad news for institutional investors who regarded Woolies as a virtual blue chip stock.

The main cause of this near billion dollar loss was the disastrous intrusion into the home hardware and do-it-yourself market with Woolworths " Masters Hardware chain ".   Arch rival Coles was the first to invade the turf of the smaller hardware stores with it's " Bunnings " warehouses and this was brilliantly successful.   Somehow the Woolworths operation failed to fire, resulting in a $ 1.89 billion writedown that did the damage to the groups bottom, line.

In the past, Coles and Woolworths have marched in lockstep.  They invaded the petrol market and established chains of petrol sites linked to discounts offered on presentation of grocery receipts. They are big operatives in the sale of liquor with both stand alone brand retail outlets and liquor stores beside grocery operations.  They are fast becoming a presence in the insurance field and it was only natural that Woolworths would counter the Bunnings hardware operation with a brand of it's own.

It has long been rumoured that all was not well within the ranks of senior management and now a new CEO has been appointed.  Coles has certainly established an edge with grocery sales and Woolworths share of this market has slipped by 1.4%.   There are plans to rejuvenate staff morale and improve store facilities and it is likely that Woolworths will engage in a price cutting promotion to win back customers from it's Coles and Aldi competitors.

This debacle certainly highlights the risks associated with diversification and that comes as electronic retailer Dick Smith finally closes it's doors.  This was a Woolworths acquisition that also failed to fire and was consequently sold to an investment company, which took it public.  It's failure seems to be more a matter of bad timing. The purchasers of electronic goods seem to have moved to either buying from the Internet or from the big brand discounters and these stand alone stores have lost their allure. They became saddled with debt and with a declining clientele.

The pundits will certainly closely examine the tactical reasons why Woolworths hardware operation failed.  It was an exact copy of the Bunnings stores with vast, modern warehouses stocked with the complete range of hardware merchandise and it was extensively advertised, but it never attracted the through-put of customers that Bunnings achieved.   Some may argue that because hardware is a more restrictive market than groceries, perhaps there was not room for two operatives to share that more limited market - and Bunnings had the advantage of being the first to offer their services.

It also looks like the grocery market is shaping up to be much more competitive.  Coles and Woolworths have had the advantage of multi stores and a broad coverage of major suburbs in cities and country towns, but Aldi is expanding and a new German discounter is about to enter the fray. At the same time, the independents have put together a mutual buying operation and have emerged as a competitor with the capacity to take on the grocery chains.   Profit margins for all are now under pressure and this will become unrelenting.

The one certainty from this Masters hardware debacle is that the concept of blindly following any diversification by another competitor has ended.   Shareholders will be very suspicious of expansion plans that involve expertise that may be lacking and management will need to do an indepth investigation of all possible aspects before putting any expansion project to the directors for approval.

Secrets !

The right to privacy is determined by whatever laws are in place in the country in which we live, but basically the tax office has the right to snoop into our bank accounts to see if we are paying the correct tax and most regimes require the servers who channel our phone and email traffic to reveal " who we called " and " who called us "  !

Now a classic case is wending it's way through the justice system in the United States to determine if our last line of secrecy is to be broken.   An American court has ordered Apple to open the security device attached to the iPhone of Syed Farook who gunned down fourteen people in the San Bernadino massacre.  It is quite possible that this may reveal his links to other terrorists and be of help to the FBI in preventing further atrocities.

Tim Cook, CEO of Apple is between a rock and a hard place.  If he disobeys that order he may go to jail, but if he accedes he will have handed the government the means to access the contents of every iPhone on the planet.  Apple cleverly built into the iPhone a security system that wipes all internal data the moment ten unsuccessful attempts are made to access it by attempting an incorrect pin number.

Without that, the FBI can break the code by sheer brute force.  A super computer can bombard the phones security device with trillions of random numbers until it eventually cracks the code and opens access.  Apple - as the originator of that security device - is the body with the knowledge to get around it's setting, but in doing so it would create a key that creates what is termed a " back door " to break the security of all other iPhones.

That is the crux of this problem.  Up until now it has been assumed that we have the right to privacy in what we confide through our phone traffic.  That can range from the messages we send to a lover to the protected encryption of trade secrets in the commercial world.  The authorities make a compelling case for breaching this security when it comes to thwarting the deadly intent of terrorists, but once that access key exists, the use to which it may be put becomes an " unknown "  !

Basically, the experience of the world's espionage agencies reveals that all ciphers can ultimately be broken, but Apple has been fiendishly clever with this form of protection.   The interceptor has just ten chances - and then the treasure within is gone.  The memory has been wiped clean - and the opportunity has vanished !

Code breaking is usually something we think about as a war time activity.  The legendary Bletchley Park in Britain was instrumental in breaking the German Enigma code and Chester Nimitz's code-breakers in Hawaii were pivotal in Japan's defeat.  What has changed is that the technology that was once the prerogative of nation states is now in the hands of every man and woman who have chosen an iPhone as their personal means of communication.

If the US government wins and Tim Cook hands over that vital key to create a backdoor entry it is unlikely to matter to the average iPhone user, but it will matter greatly to people like investigative journalists and scientists working to create new drugs that have the potential to earn millions if they achieve patent protection.  What is at stake is the principle of personal privacy !

The Curse of " Passwords " !

The average computer user has to cope with the need to remember more than a dozen passwords to access companies they deal with on the Internet, and most of these are completely unnecessary. There is a definite need to establish recognition where financial matters are involved but that ubiquitous demand "enter login number and password " or  "enter email address and password " is now fast becoming a requirement for just about every entity that does business on the Internet.

Initially, many companies seemed to think that demanding this sort of information enabled them to compile a mailing list of email addresses to use to send Spam offers in the hope of enticing further business, but their customers email address is prominent whenever an email message arises.  The need for a password then becomes an impediment to further trade - if it becomes forgotten.

The Internet is fast becoming closed to what are best termed "casual shoppers "!   The moment you do business with an Internet company for the first time they insist on establishing a password and usually that is then a requirement before any further transactions are possible.  Just imagine if the big supermarket chains - Coles - Woolworths - Aldi -  required each customer to present their customer number and password before they could pass through the checkouts ?   Most have what they term a "Loyalty card ", but it's use is optional.

Shopping on the Internet should be equally available to the "casual shopper ".   It is hard to see where that "password "serves any useful purpose when access to the cashier requires the shopper to select a payment method and input the necessary card details to complete the purchase.  In many cases the need for a password actually deters customers from shopping on the Internet.

Typically, if someone buys a book for a friends birthday from an Internet bookstore and is required to establish a password it may be months or even years before they again make a purchase.  If that password has been forgotten or only partly remembered, it will entail the procedure of resetting a new password, usually by the receipt of a temporary code by email from the company involved.  That wastes time and can be an emotional drain on older people who lack advanced computer skills.

Password to block access seems to have established itself as a de facto requirement wherever trade by computer takes place, and it is very necessary where access to a persons finances are involved, but password are an unnecessary hindrance to trade in most other areas.  This is particularly so when the email address serves as the recognition point that should establish the caller as a former  customer and should a purchase take place exactly the same payment procedure will take place - as if access had been gained by way of password use.

It seems that the boffins who install computer programmes have a fixation with passwords and the retail world has not taken the trouble to think through the ramifications of demanding this form of recognition.  Just as the person who spends a dollar in any supermarket chain is free to do so without jumping through hoops, perhaps the Internet traders need to rethink what it needs to do to keep the customers happy.

 Good questions to ask are -  "What does this achieve ? " and  " Is it necessary ?

Selling the Farm !

Many people will be dismayed by the decision to approve the sale of Australia's biggest dairy company to a Chinese Investment company.  The fact that the 17,800 hectare Van Diemens Land company and it's milk production will in future be under foreign direction represents a lost opportunity.

For several years Australian parents have battled to buy infant formulae because the shelves of our supermarkets are often bare.  China has an insatiable demand for Australian and New Zealand baby formulae because the Chinese made product was discredited when local manufacturers substituted Melamin for milk to enhance profits - and as a result several babies died.

Chinese students studying in Australia are urged by their relatives to buy Antipodean baby formulae and ship it home, and in some instances this is on offer on the Chinese black market at astronomical prices.  We have been slow to ramp up production and take advantage of this great export opportunity, and now it seems that this market is slipping away.

A lot depends on what Moon Lake Investment Company, the new owner of the Van Diemens Land company decides to do with this new acquisition.  Investment companies are in the business of making profits and we could suffer a double whammy  if they decide to ship our milk to China and make baby formulae to satisfy this unmet demand - and deprive the local market of the milk we need to satisfy local demand.   If we have a milk shortage, it is inevitable that the price at the supermarket will rise !

Food security is very much on the mind of many other foreign governments.  The world population has ticked over seven billion and the estimates of future numbers is frightening. There is a doubt whether we will be able to adequately feed all these people and climate change is adding a new dimension because it will certainly change both crop viability and area suitability for agriculture.

Australia is lucky because we have the capacity to feed ourselves.  Many will remember the desperation of the second world war when Britain was dependent on those convoys to stave off starvation.  There are many world countries with big populations and small land areas that must rely on imports for food - and that situation will become more common in the future.

That raises the question of the wisdom of allowing foreign ownership of our agricultural land.  Some argue that ownership is not an issue because land can not be rolled up and shipped overseas.  That misses the point that control of what is done on that land is in the hands of other people and what is produced there will be determined in the interests of that owner, not necessarily in the interests of Australia.

Ideally, agricultural land should have it's title invested in an Australian public company listed on the stock exchange and subjected to a charter to determine that it's management remains within listed guidelines.  It's shares would be equally available to Australian and foreign investors, but with safeguards against investor action changing that public ownership charter.  Basically, land would be held in trust with investors trading shares on the basis of how successfully it operates and what dividends it pays - but without the ability to take the company out of public ownership.

It would take a law change to bring that into reality.  Food security may well become the major issue later in this century !

Reforming the Senate !

Casting a valid vote for the Senate baffled many people.  For a start, the voting paper was as big as a table cloth and the voter had the option of voting above or below " the line " !  That was a choice of selecting just one of the myriad political parties and having your vote distributed according to the horse trading arrangements in place worked out by the politicians standing for office - or voting for each and every individual politician listed below the line - in descending order of preference.  Make a single numerical number error of sequence - and your vote was invalid !

Of course the great majority of voters opted for the " above the line " option and the majority of Senate seats was distributed between the main parties - Liberal - Labor and the Greens, but the " quota "  system applicable to the Senate resulted in a number of individuals representing sometimes weirdly named parties gaining a seat.   In the present Senate, just eight Senators hold the balance of power.

This delivers great power and we have seen individuals virtually "blackmail " whoever holds government office into distributing millions in bribe money to that holder's state in exchange for their vote on essential legislation.   It is obvious that the election of these Senators is not the will of the people because they achieve office with a minuscule share of the vote.   Ricky Muir of the Motoring Party won office with just 479 votes cast in his favour.

We are seeing just how damaging this balance of power situation can be when the business of parliament is held to ransom by a handful of people seeking personal gain.  Vital legislation remains blocked indefinitely and the business of the nation grinds to a halt.  It seems that the combination of votes by the government and the Greens will be sufficient to reform the Senate voting process to remove this anomaly.

The sticking point was the distribution of preferences.  When a voter ticked a box above the line for one of the small independent parties the distribution of preferences that came into play once that quota had been achieved depended on the arrangements that the minor parties had decided amongst themselves - and that was an intricate game of Chess that had nothing to do with voter intentions. Computer algorithms directed the flow to achieve a measured result to frustrate the major parties.

The voter had to tick just one box above the line, and having done that the preferences that came into play delivered the result we have seen.  Now it will be required that the voter select six boxes above the line - in order of choice and therefore any party receiving scant support will be quickly eliminated and their vote distributed to the next preference that the voter has nominated.

There was a very real chance that the Australian parliament could have become similar to that of several European countries which for years have dissolved into an unworkable tribe of warring minor parties.  As a consequence, the popular vote scuppered any chance of vital tax measures being enacted and the financial affairs deteriorated until those countries became "basket cases " on the world scene.   The nightly news vividly depicts the misery their populations endue as the world imposes financial reforms that their governments failed to enact.

We are facing an election and this preference rort is long overdue for correction !

The " Grog " Issue !

This past weekend a hundred thousand people rallied through the heart of Sydney, noisily protesting for the repeal of the " Lockout " laws that apply to the serving of alcohol.  They were well equipped with signs and banners and it was clear that this was well organized to draw maximum media attention.  It would be interesting to learn who paid for those professionally crafted messages and who were it's main sponsors ?

The liquor industry is a vast conglomerate of companies which gather together various interests which make their profits in association with the sale of alcohol.  The owners of nightclubs put a form of entertainment at the top of their reason for attracting patrons and usually this includes the employment of musicians.  Each venue employs a lot of support staff, including bar people and security guards.  Basic economics apply.   The more liquor the customers can be induced to buy - the greater the profits !

There is no doubt that Sydney's Kings Cross reached crisis point in 2014 with drunken crowds roaming the streets and the night life running on a virtual twenty-four hour basis. Street brawls were common as drinkers moved from one venue to another - seeking to find the source of the " action " !  A number of unprovoked street deaths caused then premier Barry O'Farrell to call an emergency meeting of state parliament and impose draconian Lockout laws.

These were simply - and effective.  At 1-30 am patrons could remain and drink at any licensed venue, but should they leave they could not reenter. People arriving at Kings Cross after 1-30 am found all entertainment venues closed to new arrivals - and those in the streets had no other option than to go home.

It was amazingly effective.  The huge crowds on Friday and Saturday nights dwindled and soon many of the glitzy pleasure palaces closed their doors. Kings Cross became " civilized " and because these lockout laws selectively targetted only Kings Cross patrons drifted to other venues scattered across the city. Behaviour improved because Sydney nightlife was no longer concentrated in a few streets in one suburb, but scattered widely - and closer to home for many people.

There was another huge dividend.  The emergency department at St Vincents hospital, the hospital nearest Kings Cross - reported a vast decrease in patrons suffering injuries from brawls and collision with cars - and street deaths from what became known as the " Coward punch " - ceased !   In response to the Lockout rally, the medical profession closed ranks and appealed for the laws to be retained as a safety measure.

There is no doubt the powerful liquor industry wants these laws overturned and it is prepared to fund crowd sourced protests to get it's way. There are insinuations that NSW is becoming a " Nanny " state and will lose it's tourist allure, but reality reveals that the only real difference is that the night scene is now well dispersed and crowd numbers are more civilized.

These lockout laws tamed Kings Cross.  They were deliberately enacted on a flexible basis.  Should another suburb attract a concentration of night life that becomes a risk problem these laws can be instantly extended to curb crowd numbers.

It seems evident that in this instance the politicians made a wise decision !

An " Unpersuasive " Argument !

The basic thinking behind compulsory superannuation was the need to stem the tide of red ink that age pensions will eventually inflict on the economy.   The idea was based on both the employer and the employee contributing to each workers superannuation pot with the objective of cumulative interest reaching an achievable self funded retirement.

Now the government is considering freeing up that requirement by allowing the lowly paid to opt out of superannuation entirely - and virtually supplement their meagre earnings by what would amount to a sixty dollar a week pay increase for those earning less than $ 37,000 a year.

The rationale seems to be that the lowly paid will never accumulate a pension pot capable of sustaining them in old age and therefore the aged pension is a necessity that will need to be paid to a section of the community.  By returning that 9.5% superannuation charge to low paid workers pay packets each pay day they will be able to increase their standard of living and take pressure off the demand for pay increases.

This is a very unpersuasive  argument.  It virtually condems the lowly paid to be entirely reliant on the aged pension during their retirement years and this will be a form of poverty in comparison with others who have at least a small superannuation return to supplement the basic pension.  The age pension rules allow a pensioner to have reasonable assets or even hold a part time job without affecting the pension level.  There is a measurable benefit accruing from superannuation contributions even when the return only amounts to a small pension supplement during the retirement years.

It is doubtful that opting out of superannuation and delivering an extra sixty dollars a week to the lowly paid will ease pressure on basic pay levels.  The cost of many items is dictated by ability to pay and prices march in lockstep with that ability.  That extra sixty dollars a week will be quickly absorbed and in some cases may even result in pay rates decreasing.  There is mounting evidence that many casual jobs fail to deliver the level of pay that is legally required.

Unfortunately, compulsory superannuation was implemented badly and those constantly changing jobs fell through the net.  Huge amounts of money lay dormant in various funds simply because identification of the correct owner failed. Much of this is untraceable and if the scheme is to continue it badly needs revision.  To walk away from what was a promising idea is to simply abandon many to a miserable old age.

The government seems to accept that it will be necessary to fund the age pension into the future for at least the low paid of our society.  Initially, pensions were set at what some saw as the " survival " level and did not allow for much in the way of luxuries.  They have certainly improved, but any person living on the base pension is constrained to a frugal way of life.  An unexpected expense can be debilitating.

Under the present compulsory superannuation saving requirement the lowly paid may not accumulate a self funded retirement pot but they will certainly have sufficient to provide a supplement to move them above just the basic age pension.   If that is abandoned now it is certain that it will ensure that future governments will come under unrelenting pressure to increase basic pension rates that may be unsustainable !

A Puzzling Verdict !

Sydney road users shuddered in October 2013 when pictures flashed on television screens to record a road crash in the northern suburb of MonaVale.   A tanker containing 34,000 litres of unleaded petrol got out of control coming down a steep hill and crashed into a number of cars, before overturning and erupting into a fireball.  Dense black smoke could be seen for miles around and blazing petrol ran through the gutters and extended the blaze.

Two men managed to escape from their damaged car, but were engulfed by the fireball and incinerated.  Another man suffered serious burns, but eventually survived.  The driver of the crashed tanker escaped with only minor injuries.  The driver told police that the cause of the crash was brake failure.

This road horror caused police to order all tankers operated by the firm that owned the crashed tanker off the road for an immediate safety check. The vast majority were not legally roadworthy and the company was fined $500,000 and faced 255 individual charges processed through the courts.  This resulted in an ownership change and the promise that the incoming owner would make safety a priority and upgrade the ageing tanker fleet.

Due to the slow and ponderous nature of the courts the driver of the crashed tanker has just faced a judge and jury over the deaths caused in that accident.  Forensic evaluation of the crashed tanker revealed that ten of it's twelve brakes were defective.   It was simply an accident looking for a place to happen !  Surprisingly, the driver was found not guilty.

That is despite there being a sign on the steep hill the tanker was negotiating requiring heavy vehicles to engage low gear and that steep hill being a known black spot with a notorious accident record.  This verdict opens that interesting can of worms of where responsibility rests when it comes to those who are employed to drive vehicles that have defects which must be obvious to them ?

No doubt the unions will weigh in on the side of the drivers.  Those who earn their living by driving heavy vehicles are at the mercy of their employer.   Should they refuse to take the wheel on safety grounds they would obviously be dismissed, and in such an industry a reputation of having safety issues could make them unemployable.  On the other hand, knowingly taking a defective vehicle on the road is a crime that risks both that driver and other road users.  It is not helpful if the law is vague about the ultimate responsibility.

Cash strapped trucking companies are notorious for ignoring costly repairs and rely on the skill of their drivers to overcome these defects.  Recently a traffic jam on Genera Holmes Drive brought this driver skill question to the notice of the police.  A semi trailer with a load too high for the Boeing tunnel under the airport runway managed to stop in time, but it was found that the licensed driver lacked the skill to backup the vehicle - or even knew how to uncouple the prime mover from the trailer.  A more skilled driver had to be brought in to safely remove this rig - and it does raise questions about licensing standards.

Theoretically, unsafe heavy vehicles should be automatically weeded out by the checking stations they are required to pass through on all highways in and out of Sydney.  Each vehicle passes over the scales to determine that they are not overloaded and the drivers time record is checked to ensure he or she has had adequate rest time, but mechanics are on hand to check for defective faults if the truck examiners think this is necessary.   The only way defective trucks will be eliminated on our roads is if this check becomes automatic and owners know that defective vehicles will go no further than the first checking station they encounter.

That will come at a cost.  Freight costs will certainly rise as truck fleets need to be upgraded and many small and under capitalised outfits will be driven out of business.  It all depends if we are serious about implementing a safe road network !

Rule of Law !

When the second world war ended in 1945 the victors agreed that some form of International law was needed to settle disputes - and the United Nations was formed.  It became a forum for setting the rules by which the world is supposed to live and it has the power to raise a military force from it's members to enforce it's rulings - and did so when war erupted in Korea in 1950.

Unfortunately, the principle of equality between all member nations was disregarded when the then five nuclear armed nations were given the " veto " and allowed to refute examination on any matter that displeased them.  The world dissolved into power blocks and that " nuclear club " has extended to a greater number of nuclear armed countries - but the Veto remains restricted to that original five.

Now a new dispute has arisen that has the potential for the biggest clash of armed force since the Cuban missile crisis.  China has made claim to what amounts to atolls and rocks in the South China sea and has created new islands by excavating sand to build an above sea level permanent presence, despite claims of ownership by other surrounding nations.  What is alarming is that these new islands contain airstrips and ports which can easily and quickly be converted to military use.

In September, 2015 China's leader, Xi Jinping visited the White House and in a statement promised that his countrys claim to islands in the South China sea was peaceful - and there would be no military use, but China has refused to refer the ownership dispute to the United Nation's " Rule of the Sea " , which covers such matters.  China's claim is based on an old and vague map which extends Chinese sovereignty to the very shores of surrounding countries.

Now satellite coverage has disclosed that China has installed missile batteries and supporting radar on Woody island in the Paracels.  China claims that the air space above the South China sea requires commercial aircraft using it to check in with Chinese air traffic control and it would be unacceptable to world commerce is a similar demand was made on the passage of ships through this world trade route.

The missiles recorded on Woody island are probably the Chinese design known as HQ-9, and depending on the model would have either a range of 125 or 230 kilometres.  Now that Xi Jinping's promise has been broken, it is possible that similar batteries may be installed on other islands to create a coverage of the entire South China sea.   If so, one of the world's most important trade routes would become a " choke point " under Chinese military control.

There seems an eerie resemblance to the Cuban missile crisis when the US navy declared a Cuban blockade.  The US has already flown aircraft across the South China sea and ignored the Chinese demand that clearance be obtained and a naval ship has exercised the right of sea passage by steaming close to Chinese installations, but the presence of military weaponry certainly now ups the ante.

Just as the Russian military presence in Ukraine constitutes the de facto invasion of another country and the presence of the Islamic State caliphate in part of Syria and Iraq the creation of a rebel nation, this military presence in the South China sea is the imposition of the " Might is Right " aggression of conquest by stealth !

What remains to be seen is the longer term intentions of China's leaders and how they intend to live with the neighbours.   If they intend to impose trade restrictions - policed by their stranglehold on a vital trade route that will come into direct conflict with American naval power.

The world managed to exist with the long period of the cold war when America and Russia faced off and avoided nuclear conflict.  The difference today is that America and China have a mutual need of each other to avoid economic catastrophe.  Now it all depends on whether the economists or the military hawks dominate policy !

News - and Innuendo !

The ABC has slapped an edict on it's journalists requiring them to submit all controversial editorial matter to the ABC Director of Editorial Policies for clearance before publishing.  Expect a howl of rage and a charge that this is the imposition of that dreaded threat to press freedom - censorship !

Separating the news from what is otherwise just innuendo is important when the source is the public broadcaster.  The media generally reflects the bias of owner influence and chooses it's journalists accordingly, but the public expects strict neutrality in what is issued by a news source entirely funded from the public purse.  In an earlier age, the nightly ABC news broadcast was relayed to all regional broadcasting stations - and was the only news source for the majority of Australians.

In those earlier days, this ABC news had what can be termed " credibility ". Stories were carefully checked before they went to air and if there was the faintest doubt on their accuracy they were held over until a later time, when the facts could be checked and verified.  In particular, the ABC was very careful in how it presented " political " matter.

The " news " of today exists in a totally different format. An entire industry exists to present a point of view on world events that is calculated to swing public opinion - and in many cases the facts are twisted to present a very biased version of reality.  It is sheer human nature that a journalist will colour a news story he or she is preparing according to the personal outlook that person has of world  politics.

A recent story has generated intense controversy. A wide section of the public is opposed to asylum seekers being housed on the offshore island of Nauru and a baby was flown to Australia for hospital treatment after an accident with boiling water.  The hospital is refusing to release this child for return to Nauru because it claims an unacceptable risk factor and this stance has been supported by street demonstrations and intense political activity.   The government and people of Nauru claim that this is an insult to insist that their island is an unfit place to raise children.  Nauruan children live a perfectly normal, healthy life - and have done so for centuries.

The basis for this " risk factor " is a claim that a five year old child was raped on this island, and that story was widely reported by the ABC news service.  It seems to have originated from an " activist " and there is now a doubt about it's truth.  It is not unknown for activists to embellish reports to tarnish regimes to which they are opposed and there are misgivings that ABC journalists with a similar outlook are prone to sending them to air without making the intensive enquiries to ascertain that they are valid.

The ABC has been accused of bias in it's talk shows by " stacking " the forum and not providing a balance of opinion.   There appears to be a left wing outlook prevailing in the manner of presentation and it is quite likely that this editorial edict is aimed at subjecting this format and general news presentation to a balancing filter.

It is long overdue.  The ABC has been losing credulity with many people and viewed as just a left wing mouthpiece for propaganda and then there is always the risk of litigation.  There is little chance that stories will be pulled just because they are controversial, but a requirement that they contain an equal measure of balance will be welcomed.

That is the expectation of what should be delivered by the " public broadcaster "  !

" Proxy " Parenting !

It was probably inevitable but when " Nannies " became an allowable tax deduction because of the unavailability of places in kindergartens and early learning facilities the scope of their activities widened and then people who hired them applied new thinking to what they began to see as their " servant "  !

Welcome to the age of " Proxy Parenting ".   Today it is not unusual for Nannies to be called upon to supervise the children's homework assignments, take them to their sports and double for mother when she is rostered for canteen duty.   Doctors are often surprised when the children attend medical appointments accompanied by their Nanny rather than a parent, and teachers are even finding the Nannies filling in at parent/teachers meetings.

This seems more applicable when both parents hold higher level jobs.  They are used to having secretaries or personal assistants in the workforce to filter out wasteful intrusions on their valuable time and it is comparable reasoning to apply that thinking to the home scene.  It is a form of substitution that is now running into confidentiality problems.

Professional people are subjected to very strict laws on what information they may divulge to other than the parents of children in their charge.   Often the discussion involves permission for further action and acting on the approval of a subordinate poses a risk if a parent later lodges an objection. The Nanny may be there on the instruction of a parent, but whether that person has a legal right to approve decisions made is legally unclear.

We seem to be seeing parenting retracing the world of Edwardian England where the grand old traditional " English Nanny " was the institution that taught manners and virtually brought up the households children with little parental supervision.    The children of the household were often paraded before the parents for approval at long intervals, but otherwise were entirely under the control and direction of their Nanny.    That is very much a foreign innovation here in Australia.

It seems that the very English " class division " is threatening to intrude into the Australian way of life. There seems an ever widening of the pay differential with the upper bracket becoming extremely wealthy as opposed to general pay levels retreating.  We have an ever growing number of people who lack the educational level to rise to the demand for work skills that are required in this electronic age and who are perpetually under employed on a low paid casual basis.  Consistent work at this level no longer exists.

This " Nanny "  phenomenon is simply human nature adapting to a new reality.  That old maxim that " when one door closes, another door opens " applies.  Substituting for parents has become a necessity for many because of time demands on the jobs where both parents work and now that gap is being filled with people who have attained the skills to deliver the service required.  The pay is quite good and often the work delivers use of a car to transport the children as part of the job.  It is a new form of professional service which brings with it an expanding level of status with existing employment areas.

We probably need some sort of law change to allow parents to legally transfer to their nominee the right to receive confidential information and make decisions on the basis of such a document signed by the parent.   It seems that " proxy parenting " is now one of the realities of life and has a need for legal definition !

A " Desperation Measure " !

It is obvious that Australia needs a lot more money to fill it's Treasury pot and there is a desperate search for ways to fill that void.  Increasing the GST from the present ten percent to fifteen percent and applying it to food have been considered - and rejected.  Now we are looking at ending negative gearing.  It has been suggested that the retired be forced to mortgage their homes to become self funded.  Each and every suggestion causes the politicians to worry that it's implementation may be rejected - at the ballot box !

Of course the reason we have this money problem can be sheeted home to the ending of the resources boom.  When China had an insatiable demand for our iron ore and coal the Treasury flow was meeting our needs but now it seems the entire world has fallen on hard times. We are constantly looking for new export opportunities and urging industry to be more inventive but economic reality dictates that the only sure way to stem the flow of red ink is to implement a changed tax measure.

Now a new suggestion has been quietly introduced into this tax debate.   We have been called " the lucky country " and it is a fact of life that we have an entire continent at our disposal.  It is so vast that few ordinary citizens have ever visited other than it's main tourist attractions and this vastness brings with it opportunity.

The world has longed mulled over the problem of how and where to store radioactive waste.  We in Australia are still arguing over the minuscule radioactive waste generated by our reactor at Lucas Heights and the byproduct of radioactive isotopes used in the medical field.  The site for a permanent repository has eluded the politicians because public opinion constantly applies the NINBY opposition to all areas selected.

If we are to solve our money problem without inflicting some form of additional taxation on the long suffering public we need to embrace new thinking.  We have a continent with a lot of spare room and the world needs a storage facility for radioactive waste.  Trade is the exchange of favours for money and should we agree to accept the radioactive waste from other countries the fee for this service and the continuing site rental would more than cover the billions that we need.

The first reaction to that suggestion is probably a knee jerk rejection.  Radioactive waste is a dangerous substance that persists for many thousands of years, and yet we are probably looking at a site of no more than five square miles on which to build a repository to hold the world's radioactive waste.  This waste is stored in sealed drums and establishing a secure warehouse in a remote part of our outback would ensure a continual money flow that would avoid the necessity for all those unpleasant measures under consideration.

Basically, this is the difference between a country that used to earn it's living by mining and manufacturing, adopting to the provision of " services " in one form or another.  In this case it is using our remoteness and harnessing it to the need of other countries to store something they are prepared to pay big money to have serviced by a third party.   Such is the basis of all service industries.  The provider in this case is supplying a service not available elsewhere - and is charging a fee applicable to the inconvenience it will cause us.

Providing a remote storage site will create a new industry and with it - jobs.  The risks of storing radioactive waste are more an illusion than a reality.  The nuclear disasters in Chernobyl and in Japan were operating nuclear reactors. Radioactive waste held in numerous world countries has been entirely accident free and there is no reason that it should pose a risk if held in a remote site here in Australia.

This suggestion should be dispassionately and sensibly considered on it's merits.  We can virtually name our own price if we decide to provide such a service and with that free university education for all, the disability support scheme and the entire education revamp are within reach without the need for additional tax funding.

The exchange of money for a service always requires a cost to the provider.  It is just a matter of if this exchange is acceptable to the Australian public ?  Even as a suggestion it will certainly stir controversial debate !

The " Decision Makers " !

In both America and Australia the final say on approving or striking down a law is in the hands of that country's High Court.  The justices of the High Court are at the apex of the legal pyramid. Contentious cases move through the lower courts and those that fail to reach resolution there are destined to be examined by the men and women who have been nominated to hold this highest judicial office.  Their decision becomes the law of the land.

This week the makeup of the American High Court changed with the death of Antonin Scalia at 79.  Justice Scalia was a conservative appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1986 and finding a replacement seems certain to encounter difficulties.   The Republican party has a majority in both Congress and the Senate but the President is from the Democrats - and this is an election year.

It seems unlikely that any nominee put forward by a Democrat President will get approval from Republicans and it is possible that a replacement will be held over until the election and the country will wait to see which side of politics wins that office.  Choosing a pivotal High Court justice has the capacity to completely change the legal outlook of the entire American legal system.

One of the tipping points between Republican and Democrat thinking - is abortion !  In 1973 the American High Court considered the " Roe v Wade " case and by a 7/2 decision made abortion legal in the United States.  A change in the thinking of the Justices with a new appointee could reverse that decision.   This same High Court recently made a finding approving same sex marriage and that has also stirred conflicting emotions.  Selecting a replacement Justice will not be easy.

The protocol calls for a nominee to be put forward by the President and that person needs ratification by Congress and the Senate.  This examination deeply probes the nominees outlook on all manner of past decisions made when the nominee was sitting as a judge in various courts, and he or she will be directly questioned to gain a view on perspective  - whether there is a conservative or a liberal leaning.

In the past, these hearings have been deeply contentious.  Even innuendo about past sexual indiscretions can cause a nominee to withdraw and the selection process runs the gamut of all aspects of politics.  Both the Republicans and the Democrats are seeking a Justice who will favour their political thinking.

There is no doubt that finding a suitable applicant to sit on the High Court can have a profound influence on what sort of law applies in America.  The President, the members of Congress and those that sit in the Senate are all chosen by public ballot by the voters of America, but the members of the High Court go through a selection process that is little short of an inquisition !   These public hearings are of great public interest, but the final decision rests with the politicians and that will be served by political advantage.

Eventually, similar decisions will become necessary to find replacements for those sitting Justices which form the Australian High Court.   Mere mortals have a finite life span and Justices are subjected to a mandatory age retirement law.   When the time comes to select a new Justice it is certain that this decision will be of more than passing interest to the citizens of this country.
They are the tribunal that decides the law under which we all must live !

Equal Pay ?

As some wag would probably describe it, it seems that " CSI is on strike ! ".   In New South Wales the eight hundred  technicians in the Forensic Services Group that attend crime scenes to recover fingerprints are refusing to perform this function - because they demand equal pay with sworn uniformed police officers.   They - along with the rest of the public service - have had pay rises capped at 2.5%.

This is an indefinite strike and in addition to refusing to fingerprint crime scenes they will no longer provide expert evidence certification at criminal trials or coronial investigations.  As a result, uniformed police will undertake this workload which will decrease their availability to carry out general policing duties.

These forensic officers claim that they do the same work as police at crime scenes but are receiving significantly less pay.  That is a typical union " argy bargy " deception to cloud the issue and it is quite clear that forensic people carry none of the risks and responsibilities of wearing a police uniform.   The police are the first on any crime scene that poses a danger and forensics only attends when that danger has been removed.  That Lindt cafe siege would be a very good example.

When a gunman took hostages the police cleared the street and setup armed marksmen to cover the situation.  Negotiators moved in and the siege lasted for most of the day.  When the gunman killed a hostage the police had no other option than to put their lives at risk by bursting in to the cafe with the expectation that a bomb could be detonated and that they would come under fire.  There was a high expectation that there would be police casualties.

The gunman was taken down. Paramedics treated the wounded and when the cafe crime scene was made safe - forensics moved in.  At no stage were their lives at risk and it is hard to see where they can seriously claim to do the same work as uniformed police officers.    They are not identified - and at public risk - by the uniform they wear and they do not carry a firearm - and with that the risk of exchanging fire with bandits when armed robberies occur.

They are certainly skilled technicians and those skills must be recognised in their pay scale but they are civilian employees and not subjected to the demands imposed on a warranted officer in either the police force or the military.   Both of these services require those who choose these vocations to put their lives on the line.

The police are a first response unit.  Often they are faced with situations of a burning crashed car and the need to pull driver and passengers clear - at immense risk to their own lives.  Even attending a routine " domestic " is charged with danger and recently a senior police officer trying to defuse an emotional situation was killed in a knife attack.   This Islamic State jihad specifically urges the radicalized to attack and kill uniformed police officers.

This seems a senseless strike based on very shaky principles.  The longer it lasts the more danger it will deliver to the public because the " thin blue line " will be stretched even thinner as regular police time will be taken doing the functions normally performed by forensics.   In particular, it is quite likely that valuable clues may be missed because of this added time pressure and this strike will be a boon to any jihadist planning a terror attack in Sydney.

Police and forensics serve a complimentary function in keeping the city safe, but there is a vast gulf between the danger factor facing uniformed and civilian operatives !

Sharing the Blame !

Road death statistics bring out the worst in politicians.  They usually result in promised police blitzes on driver behaviour and of course that results in more fine revenue flowing into the Treasury. Cars are the perfect target.  They are clearly identified by the number plate they are required to display and the person driving them must produce a photo license.   Motorists are the " sitting ducks " when there are calls to reduce the road toll.

Road deaths fall into a variety of categories.  Driver.  Passenger. motorcyclist. pushbike rider - and finally - pedestrian.   It seems that all those categories have either plateaued or dropped - except " pedestrian deaths " which increased 25% last year.   Sixty-one people died as a result of some sort of collision when they were sharing the road with vehicles.

Now there are calls from the Pedestrian Council of Australia for a reduction of the speed limit in the Sydney CBD and other shopping precincts - to just thirty kph.   As usual, the blame is heaped entirely on the shoulders of cars and their drivers, and the actions of pedestrians that bring about their own deaths is totally ignored.

If a car driver dares to even touch a mobile phone while driving, he or she will be heavily fined and suffer a loss of demerit points, and yet pedestrians wend their way through traffic crossing roads with their eyes glued to that little screen - without penalty.  Many walk through traffic wearing ear plugs and listening to talk back radio or enjoying music, oblivious to the world around them.

We have road crossings controlled with safety lights and yet these are usually ignored by many pedestrians who continue to cross against the " red " and impatient people simply dodge through the car stream to cross the road wherever they choose.   Apart from the distraction of mobile phones and music devices some of these pedestrians are affected by alcohol or drugs.

For most of last century the speed limit was set at sixty kph on city streets.  Safety concerns saw it decrease to fifty kph and further restrictions to just forty kph now apply at the start and finish of the school day outside schools.  This call for a further reduction to just thirty kph is placing the blame for bad pedestrian behaviour firmly on the motoring public and avoiding any measures that would require pedestrians to accept a behavioral change for their own safety.

It would be helpful if the CBD installed barriers to prevent pedestrians from crossing streets except at designated, light controlled crossing points.  A lot of the CBD will be car free in future and given over to pedestrian use entirely, but where cars and pedestrians do share streets it is essential that both be subjected to safety rules that control an orderly flow wherever these streams converge.  Pedestrians need to be contained on the footpaths - except where a designated crossing allows a street to be crossed.

Months ago the police and the media drew attention to what are called " Jay walking laws " that make it illegal for a pedestrian to cross a street other than at a designated crossing point.   For several days the cops were accosting law breakers - sometimes issuing warnings and sometimes handing out fines.
It was purely a cosmetic exercise - and it soon ceased.

Once again the politicians are looking at the soft option.   Further reduce the speed limit and choke the traffic flow rather than implement the measures to force pedestrians to comply with safe street crossings.  Bad pedestrian behaviour ignored by the police is simply an invitation for further excess and if this thirty kph law is implemented you can be sure it will be rigidly enforced with draconian fines and loss of demerit points.

No prize for guessing which option the politicians choose to take !

A " New " Australia !

The Australian population is edging close to twenty-four million people but our growing numbers reflect immigration rather than the natural internal birth rate.  In fact our birth rate of just 1.79 is below replacement level.  If it were not for immigration we would actually be going backwards.

Since 1788 this has been the last continent virtually undiscovered and peopled by races from all over the world.  The first settlers were decidedly British, but the discovery of gold brought an influx of many other races and amongst these the Chinese predominated, resulting in the implementation of the " White Australia " policy.

The tragedy of two world wars cut a swathe through the ranks of this country's young men during the last century and this was compensated after 1945 when we opened our doors to the war weary of Europe.  This surge changed the mostly Protestant balance to a Protestant/Catholic mix but basically Australia was a Christian country located geographically in Asia.   Our Asian component arrived at the end of the Vietnam war and now we are a country of many religions and mixed ethnicity.

Once again the ethnic mix of this country is changing.  World events dictate migrant flows and war in the Middle East has seen a huge exodus, mainly to Europe but Australia is high on the sights of many because we are a rich country with a desirable lifestyle.  The religion of those presently knocking on our door is predominantly Muslim.

We are also seeing an influx from Pacific Island countries.  Global warming is causing sea levels to rise and this is causing many island people to look to Australia as a new home. Traditionally, the birth rate is above the Australian average, with Samoan women averaging 3.26 children.

Fertility and migration are factors that will change the nature of Australia.  It usually takes several generations for migrants to lose their close attachment to the customs and habits of their former  homeland and those seeking entry here have traditional birthrates much higher than out present 1.79 average.

Civil war and Islamic State have roiled the entire Middle East and the displaced have interesting birth statistics.  In Iraq it averages 2.8, Syria 3.38, Lebanon 4.03 and Pakistan 3.02.    These are the countries where we expect demand for placement in Australia to originate in the very foreseeable future.  We can expect those birth rates to become the usual statistic from those who settle in this country.

There is now the expectation that the demographics of Australia will substantially change by the end of this century.  It is quite possible that Christians may become the minority and Islam the predominate religion, but it is also realistic to see a drop in migrant birthrate as newcomers adjust to the need for a two income family to fund their adopted  lifestyle.  The impetus for many children was often based on child mortality rates and the hopes that sufficient would survive to care for the parents in old age.   When mortality rates fall, the emphasis changes and quality education and job prospects for a smaller number of offspring predominate.

That old adage of " populate or perish " still applies.   We were an anomaly - being a small Christian hub in a teeming Asia with Muslim Indonesia to our north and Hindu India next door.  If we can successfully integrate the various religions to live in harmony this could be the new world order.

The only thing that is absolutely certain - is that change is about to happen !

A " Life Saving " Option !

This week an inquest brought in a sad finding that a mother was apparently so distressed by the birth of her child that she abandoned it by digging a hole and burying it on a Sydney beach.  This topped the news cycle back in November of 2014 when children playing in the sand at Maroubra beach unearthed the badly decomposed  body of a tiny newborn baby.

The forensic people have concluded that this was probably a live birth and that the baby was certainly not born in a hospital.  They deduced that because the umbilical cord had been cut whereas hospital procedure is for it to be clamped and it is very likely that the infant went into the ground shortly after the woman's pregnancy ended.

Disposing of an unwanted baby is not entirely uncommon.  On the world scene live babies have been found in trash bins outside buildings and even left in the bowl of public toilets and obviously there must be some who do not come to public notice and simply disappear into a local landfill or are never discovered.

Pregnancy is a joy to many people, but for some it is the worst tragedy that can happen to a human being.  Some religions consider sex out of wedlock such a sin that a pregnant single woman is cast out from the flock and in some families it is regarded as an " honour " stigma that both the woman"s father and brothers are prepared to commit murder to remove the stain.   As a result, some women hide their pregnancy successfully - and after the birth have the need to dispose of their child.

Safeguards are in place to allow for a desperate mother to safely allow a newborn to be taken care of and live in many world countries.   In the United States this takes the form of a " safety box " at fire stations, while a similar arrangement exists at hospitals in Germany, Canada and the Czech republic. Because all those countries endure a frigid winter, these receptacles are heated and have a time delay alarm to alert staff that a baby has been deposited and yet allow the mother sufficient time to depart the scene without being discovered.

The choice of fire station or hospital is contingent on selecting a venue which is manned 24/7 and which has the capacity to take care of a baby.  That is obviously present at any hospital and firemen and women are trained to emergency medical aid standards.   These innovations deliver a small number of babies whose life would otherwise be in danger for care and adoption each year.

This Marourbra tragedy has raised the question of our lack of such a safeguard here in Australia.
The media are good at alerting those contemplating suicide that help is available and this same information source could be harnessed to offer women suffering an unwanted pregnancy a means of legally - and anonymously - making their distress someone else's joy !

It would probably be an over reaction to install such a safety box at every hospital or fire station, but if at least a well publicised facility was available in most major centres it could become a valuable part of the pre-planning for those to whom a pregnancy was a threat.   This woman who buried her baby on a beach was probably at a depth of despair and could see no other available option.

It is a low cost answer capable of delivering the dividend of at least some lives saved each year !

ABC - Running Scared !

There are many practices used by the commercial television channels that annoy viewers.  Station timing for programmes are a bit of a joke because they consistently over-run time slots to make it difficult for viewers to change channels and catch the start of a competing show.   That is all bout ratings achievement.  Advertising revenue lives or dies on those all important ratings and station bosses jockey to block another channels crowd pleasers by the clever placement of their own high end shows.   Viewers also complain about those interminably long advertisement breaks !

Then we have our two "public broadcasters " - the ABC and SBS.   The ABC is advertisement free, while SBS defrays it's cost on the public purse by a moderate selection of commercial advertising.  The ABC has been with us since the inception of radio and it's televised format while SBS was a newcomer intended to serve our multilingual  society as we opened our doors to the world.

It seems that the ABC is looking over it's shoulder and finding that SBS is morphing into a "general broadcaster " and is now attracting a greater viewing audience than it's left leaning counterpart.  SBS has shows such as "The Bridge " which attracts a cult following and it's world view programme "Dateline " is a ratings attraction.   The ABC has seen fit to move it's competing show "Foreign Correspondent "to the same time slot to mimic the commercial channels tactics to go head to head with the "opposition "!

A war of words has erupted with the ABC boss - Mark Scott - suggesting that Australia has no need of two public broadcasters and that SBS should be incorporated into the ABC.  Many people who enjoy the fresh, innovative style of SBS and it's balance in news reporting would think that exactly the opposite should apply - and that the ABC should be folded into the SBS format to give a new approach to public broadcasting.

That would certainly raise the perennial issue of funding.   The purists insist that the ABC must remain advertisement free, but that ignores the existing content of programme promotion and what really amounts to advertising of cultural events in which the ABC participates.  Few would welcome the intensity of advertising common on the commercial channels, but SBS seems to have achieved a nice balance and the public purse is struggling to adequately fund our needs for health and education in this welfare state.

There is no suggestion of shutting down either the ABC or SBS free to air television channels.  It seems more of a need to re-clarify the objectives of each entity.  SBS started life with a day mission to educate migrants struggling to learn the English language with news and entertainment in the language of their former country.   The purpose of the ABC is not so clear - and there is still a degree of uncertainty whether it is intended as a way of educating the masses - or is simply there to entertain !

For a very long time the ABC has been tainted by it's left wing bias.  SBS is a more " middle of the road "  broadcaster.  In a country as diverse as Australia there is clearly room for different points of view.   If SBS can take audiences away from the ABC it will be because it presents matter that appeals to that wider spectrum.   Rather than try and absorb a competitor endangering it's reason to exist, the ABC would be better advised to have a long look at it's faults - and rectify them !



What is clear is that the ABC intends to war with SBS as a competitor rather than as a complimentary broadcaster achieving a mutual purpose.   The fact that in future Dateline and Foreign Correspondent will face off in the same time slot will present viewers with a choice and the only reason seems to be some sort of moral victory when the ratings are disclosed.   It is a pertinent fact that it is the ABC who is moving it's programme rather than the other way around.  It is the ABC that feels threatened by SBS popularity.

Gift Card Restrictions !

A lot of people are left holding worthless Dick Smith gift cards as a result of that company going into receivership.   This specialist electronics retailer was started by the legendary Dick Smith decades ago and was acquired by Woolworths as part of their expansion into other merchandising than just groceries.  It fell on hard times and Woolies sold it to Anchor Capital Partners in 2012 for just $ 94 million.   Surprisingly, it was floated on the stock exchange the next year and attracted an input of $ 520 million, but the electronics market had moved from speciality stores to the big brand discounters and eventually it was forced to close it's doors.

Having the "Dick Smith "name probably convinced many shoppers to buy it's gift cards as Christmas presents for friends and family and the fact that the stores have closed and the cards can not now be redeemed is a normal business risk.  A few years previously, bookseller Angus and Robertson had a similar situation.   Honouring all manner of gift cards relies on the financial  strength of the retailer involved remaining solvent and so the decision to purchase is a risk that each customer makes when considering making that sort of purchase.

When gift cards first made an appearance they were a novelty way for the purchaser to avoid one of the risks of selecting a present for another person.  The gift card transferred the choice of gift to the receiver and dodged the hazard of picking the wrong colour or the wrong size - or even of selecting a totally inappropriate gift.   Basically, the gift card was simply money in a different form - for the receiver to spend as he or she wished at the store from which the card was issued.

For many years, gift cards were open ended.   There was no time limit on their validity because the store that issued them already had the face value of the card paid  into it's cash register.  That was before "third parties " started issuing gift cards which could be redeemed at a variety of accepting stores.   The focus changed.  The money was held by the issuing company and when the voucher came into the hands of a particular store it was exchanged with this holding company for the return of the cash value.

Suddenly - these gift cards began to acquire a time limit on their validity - and this was usually twelve months.  This does not seem to be sanctioned by law and it proved a bonanza for the companies issuing gift cards.  Many are never presented and thus deliver the face value as a gift to the card company, and many others still have a positive credit balance when the validity term expires. There is absolutely no reason that such a term should apply.   There is no term limit on the validity of banknotes - and virtually these gift cards are simply banknotes in a different form.

There is also a tendency for some retailers to impose further conditions on the use of gift cards.  It is not unusual for stores to claim that gift cards can not be used to purchase items marked down for sale clearance, or ban their presentation for payment during sales conducted within strict time limits.  Some stores have refused gift cards during their Boxing day sales extravaganza.

It seems that gift cards fall into a gray area as far as the law is concerned and it is time this was clearly spelt out with legislation.   There is absolutely no valid reason for imposing a time limit on gift cards.  There is no reason why any form of restriction should be imposed on the type of purchase that can be made.   The card issuing company is simply the "third party "holding the cash paid by the gift giver, awaiting it's transfer to the store in which the gift receiver has chosen to redeem the purchase.

The only remaining risk for the buyer of gift cards is the possibility of that third party company closing it's doors and filing for bankruptcy.   But then, every known commercial transaction comes with some sort of risk !

Jobs Going Begging !

At the height of the resources boom the mining companies were paying really big money for fly in - fly out workers to drive giant mining trucks and keep minerals flowing to the ships waiting for them in our ports.  At the same time, Australia's traditional rural industries were desperately scratching to find enough workers to keep our export industries alive.

The mining boom is over - for now - but the exports that earn us a living are still found in cattle, sheep and grain, and we are about to start importing workers from Pacific Island nations on work visas because many Australian's turn their noses up and simply refuse to work in rural industries. There is even a shortage of people to bring in seasonal crops and since 2012 the government has issued 8,600 visas on applications from seventy employers to provide a workforce of what are known as "fruit pickers "!

It is even worse in the wool industry.  We are not even training enough shearers to handle the massive numbers of sheep in this country and each year we recruit seasonal teams from New Zealand, Britain and Ireland.   Wool may have lost it's allure, but it is still a very important export that delivers much needed dollars to the national economy.

Australia is also one of the world's biggest exporters in the meat trade and that includes both live exports and meat in frozen form.  There are many jobs going unfulfilled on cattle and sheep stations and the trucking industry is short of drivers.   The entire rural sector has a labour shortage - and at the same time in the cities we have youth unemployment peaking at twenty percent !

It seems that what has changed is the way we look at jobs these days.  To many people, any job is rejected unless it is located a short bus ride away from where we live.  It seems preferable to just sit at home and watch TV and be sustained by the dole - than go to the trouble of travelling to where there is a labour shortage.

We have become very selective about how we earn a living.  Many undertake a university course and expect to join one of the professions, but we will always have great numbers of young people who need further training to fit in and learn new skills to fill their niche in the workforce.  Perhaps the time has come to make unemployment benefits unavailable to those not prepared to relocate to where jobs are available.

This also raises the vexing question of migrants.   Huge numbers are clamouring to gain access to this country and the numbers are far greater than the quota we admit annually.  Surely, preference should be given to those prepared to settle in rural areas with severe job shortages and it would be reasonable to expect a legal time tenure as part of that admittance contract.  Not only would that avoid the risk of new arrivals forming a city ghetto, it would also tend to ease the acceptance into citizenship that occurs more readily in a small community.

The big question revolves around the obligation that the nation has the right to impose on those claiming unemployment benefits and those seeking entry to this country have when it comes to gaining benefits from the public purse.  There is the expectation that at least the young and physically fit should be prepared to move to where work is available.

It is hard to justify importing what amounts to "guest workers " when we have a significant portion of the work force drawing unemployment benefits and refusing to take the steps necessary to secure the same work opportunities that are crippling our exports.

Earning a daily living comes under the heading of "mutual obligations " !

The " Death Penalty " Debate !

A century ago judges delivering a guilty verdict in sensational murder trials usually donned a piece of black cloth on their head and sentenced the murderer to the gallows.  Some sentences were commuted to life imprisonment, but hanging was the usual method of execution in all Australian states.  The last man hanged in Australia was Ronald Ryan and he died in Melbourne in 1967.

There has been relentless pressure to cease judicial executions on a world wide basis and now it remains on the books in just a few countries.  Here in Australia the penalty for most murders seems to be a de facto  twenty years imprisonment, usually commuted to parole after a period of good behaviour.

When the death penalty was taken off the books it was replaced with judges marking papers "Never to be released " for particularly abhorrent cases of murder.  This applied to Michael Murdock and John Travers, the ringleaders of the Anita Cobby murder, and to Alan Baker and Kevin Crump for the torture/rape slaying of Virginia Morse in 1973.   When a legal loophole emerged that could allow such sentences to be "reclassified " Labor Premier Bob Carr closed that loophole and ensured that those serving their sentence for the most heinous crimes - would die in prison !

Once again we have a parliamentary enquiry looking into the prison sentencing system and the above named prisoners have appealed that they have been served with a "cruel and unusual "punishment and are pleading to be given vocational training with the possibility of eventual release.  There is a school of thought prevailing in left wing minds that executions do not deter murder, resulting in a degree of pressure for sentencing reform.

That thinking could eventually allow Martin Bryant to again walk the streets of Hobart.  In 1996 he calmly and methodically stalked visitors to Tasmania's Port Arthur, killing thirty-five men, women and children and seriously wounding another twenty-three.  That was a crime that led to tightening of gun laws on a nation wide basis.

Perhaps it is time to rethink punishment.  These type or murderers are totally repugnant to other prisoners and need to be separated at all times.  They are under constant threat and live a lonely life, but this is a punishment they have inflicted on themselves by the nature of their actions.  Ending their life by way of execution would have at least been preferable to the miserable existence of living out their years as a "hermit " within the prison system, hated by both fellow prisoners and the guards tasked with tending their needs.

Our attitude to execution seems strangely selective.   The vast majority do not wish to return to the death penalty and yet we simply shrug our shoulders when we hear of refugees drowning at sea when they try to escape repression or religious wars maiming and killing civilians - for the crime of not following the creed demanded by their persecutors.   We are more concerned about the possibility of just several executions here a year, and oblivious to the death of hundreds of thousands who die an agonising death by starvation and privation in other countries.

Then there is the cost factor.  Keeping a notorious murderer safe in the prison system costs a vast multiple of ordinary prisoner costs.  We seem to be on the brink of jihad from religious radicalization which may take the form of bombings or street murders.  Those apprehended would need segregation and would likely retain their aim of waging war on all "infidels " - including guards and prisoners within the system.  This could easily turn our prisoners into hot beds of rebellion that can spin out of control.

We had no hesitation in putting spies before a firing squad during previous wars and those who used civilian attire to make armed intrusions suffered the same fate.  Islamic State has declared war on the rest of the world - and surely making war on Australian soil by radicalized civilians meets this same criteria.  It certainly falls within the guidelines of what are recognised as the " Rules of War " as practiced by civilized countries.

If we are not prepared to revisit the death penalty the only alternative is to accept that all and every crime must eventually result in the release of the perpetrator - because having a prisoner locked away until the end of their life is deemed to be a "cruel and unusual "punishment that does not meet the bounds of decency.

The only problem with that approach is that is so enrages victims of atrocious crimes that some seek to deliver their own versions of "justice " !     If jihad becomes a way of life in Australia, the appearance of right wing "Death Squads " could be an eventuality.

Newtons Law applies.   To every action, there is an immediate and opposite reaction !

Food Safety !

This is a civilized country and we expect strict hygiene to apply to all the food offered for sale, but it seems that the standard is not as high as we imagined.   On Australia Day the pork or chicken rolls from a bakery in Sylvania infected one hundred and seventy one patrons with Salmonella poisoning. Many required hospital treatment and it it simply fortunate that nobody died.  This was a well respected bakery that has traded successfully for many years - and the authorities are still trying to determine what went wrong to cause this disaster.

Then we had another Salmonella scare that became the main item on the nightly television news. Our two supermarket giants - Coles and Woolworths - pulled packs of ready to use salad ingredients off their shelves - and this was quickly followed by most other supermarkets with the warning that they may be tainted with Salmonella and they should not be eaten.  Customers were urged to return the packs for a credit.

What seemed amazing is that this involved dozens of brands with combinations of lettuce, spinach and similar "greens " washed and prepacked to simply be put on a dining plate.   It seems that it all came from one huge agricultural growing business located at Bacchus Marsh in Victoria.  The how and why this infection happened is still being investigated, but Salmonella poisoning can develop quickly - or in some cases it may take many days to appear - so we do not know what the final outcome will be.

These extreme cases make the headlines, but the New South Wales Food Authority has a shame file that names seven hundred and fifty businesses which it keeps under surveillance for dodgy health practices.   This includes restaurants which fail to keep raw materials refrigerated at the correct temperature to butchers who use sulphur dioxide to disguise old meat stock and make it appear fresh.

When we buy take away food or dine at a restaurant we usually take note of the appearance of the public area.   If it is sparkling clean we assume that similar conditions apply to the food preparation area, but unfortunately even the most fastidious kitchen can hide danger unless the staff working there maintain strict hygiene in their personal habits and stick rigidly to food preparation guidelines.

A careless employee who goes to the toilet and fails to wash hands before returning to food preparation or a person who mixes chicken and other meats on the same cutting board may set off a chain reaction - with disastrous results.   That is unlikely if the business employs trained chefs, but much of the food industry relies on casual staff and it is very important that whoever is in control lays down strict hygiene standards - and sees that these are met.

Food inspectors make regular calls and places with a bad reputation are kept under notice. Unfortunately, standards rely on the attitude of the proprietor.   In many instances the prevailing attitude is to make money and what is lacking is both the know-how to handle food safely and the dedication to deliver a safe product.   Many such businesses teeter on the very edge of legality and it is only the regular visits of inspectors that prevent them falling into the abyss.

No doubt this massive salad recall will put the spotlight on food standards.  The financial losses will be huge and new procedures will be required to ensure that it can not happen again.  It certainly delivered a clear warning that all is not well within the food chain that is essential to maintaining national food safety !

Vendetta !

It was a prosecution that intrigued the nation and it splashed across newspaper headlines all the way to the High Court of Australia.   This nation's top anti-corruption body accused one it's leading prosecutors of a crime and went relentlessly after her, despite a complete lack of evidence of guilt.

Margaret Cunneen emerged from the battle - victorious.   The finding of the High Court went her way and what surprises many people is that nothing has changed.   The people who run ICAC are still sitting at their desks in full control and many months later the only action seems to be a whimper.  ICAC will soon be required to face a Parliamentary Enquiry - to explain it's actions.

In government service, the maxim that the buck stops at the top is the usual credo.   It was quite clear that the pursuit of Margaret Cunneen was a personal vendetta and without substance.  It was quite clear that ICAC would not back off and it was money from the public purse that was being expended on what many saw as an ongoing vendetta.

Despite a High Court ruling that ICAC pay all of Margaret Cunneen's legal costs, ICAC seems to be backsliding and still carrying on that vendetta.  It is stubbornly refusing to cough up and settle the bill and it looks like Cunneen may have to go back to the High Court to get it's ruling enforced.

To most people, any sort of court action is a financial disaster.  The higher the court, the greater the costs and legal representation by a top silk can run to many hundreds of dollars a day.  Cunneen has presented ICAC with a bill for $ 230,000 and the crime fighting body is proposing to only remit $ 138,000 - despite it's own costs in the High Court action running to $ 183,000.

That is the absurdity of the "appeals "system.  Whatever type of win you achieve in any court seems open to challenge by way of appeal, and that means issues can go unresolved for years.  The whole system of law is based on a legal pyramid.   The decision of a lower court can be subjected to the findings of a higher - and supposedly - wiser court, but at the very apex of that pyramid is the High Court of Australia.

What ICAC has chosen to do is adopt a nit picking approach to costs that have already been the subject of a finding by that highest legal body.   There is every indication that trying to challenge every item contained in Cunneen's legal bill will entail an army of accountants making various interpretations, many of which involve the tactical strategies used by the various legal minds that were applied to the case.   It is absolutely certain that such a challenge to a legal bill will - in itself - generate - even more expense.

This is a case where the state government - which is the entity which created and controls ICAC - should step in and end this whole sorry mess.  ICAC messed up badly and made a very unwise decision to go after Cunneen on shaky ground.   It is sheer arrogance that the vendetta continues.

An apology would be in order - and that legal bill should be promptly paid without further question.
That still leaves the matter of what needs to be done to ensure that ICAC does not make the same sort of error in the future  !

Debt Collection !

The state premiers are keen to hike the GST from ten percent to fifteen percent to fill a gaping gap in their finances but it seems that there is a bonanza waiting to be collected by the State Debt Recovery office.   In New South Wales alone, outstanding debt owed to the Treasury amounts to $ 1.2 billion.

This debt covers a multitude of law breaches.  As to be expected, there are a plethora of unpaid traffic fines and many firms are delinquent in paying payroll tax.  Many wealthy properties owe the government for land tax - and then there are the fines for things like riding a train without buying a ticket - or the punishment fines that magistrates impose on offenders appearing in their courts.

The state Debt Recovery Office has written off $ 200 million on these fines as "uncollectable "!  Some people simply drop out of sight because they constantly change their address and then there are the "homeless ".  That old expression that you can not "get blood out of a stone "applies. In fact it is a waste of money serving notices and dragging them to court - for yet another demand for money they do not have.

This week this "uncollectable " situation was highlighted when a seventy-seven year old man failed to appear to answer charges of driving while disqualified - for his twenty-ninth offence.   His driving license has been cancelled until 2092 - and the magistrate issued an order for his arrest because of the "no show "!

No doubt he will eventually be dragged before a court and the magistrate will consider his or her options.  The chances are high that any new fine will go unpaid, and we have such an overcrowding problem in our prisons that we are now cramming three into cells designed for a single occupant - and it costs a small fortune to incarcerate each prisoner.   It is also obvious that this man has no intention of obeying the law and that further driving offences seem inevitable.

One of the options to force people to pay fines now implemented is the cancellation of both driving licenses and vehicle registration, but that simply imposes a new risk on a law abiding public. Driving an unlicensed and uninsured car negates the green slip protection for those injured in an accident. The need for a car as transport is considered so essential that many continue to drive despite license and registration cancellation.

The law allows money to be recovered by "garnishing " wages.  It is a lengthy legal process and a notice is served on an employer that requires a small percentage of the weekly wage to be set aside and paid to the Debt Recovery office - until the debt is extinguished.  In many cases, if that employee is on a casual basis his boss may consider this "garnishee "an imposition and let employment cease - or the employee simply walks away and finds another job.   Often, it costs more to implement than results in recovery.

Recovering money owed to the government seems to fall most heavily on "honest "taxpayers.  Those with a secure job and living at a fixed address are right in the sights of the Debt Recovery office and many become enrolled in "payment plans ".    The government is quite happy to recover money owed on the same basis as the commercial world.  Perhaps the debt is beyond the debtor's reach to satisfy as a lump sum, but it can be reduced steadily on the basis of small weekly or monthly payments.  These are negotiated between the Debt Recovery office and the debtor - and the terms are believed to be very "generous "!

Sadly, most of the money that could fix our roads and improve the quality of schools will remain an uncollected debt on the books of the Debt Recovery office.   Since the days of the Roman Empire getting the public to pay what they owe has been forever out of reach for whatever type of government holds office !

Playing by the Rules !

A lot of Australians got a very unpleasant shock when they read their morning paper this week. Centrelink has just trialled a plan to weed out welfare cheats by intensive scrutiny of Facebook entries and the result in the selected suburb in both Sydney and Melbourne delivered a bonanza of questionable claims.

It seems that gaming welfare seems to be a national pastime.  That ranges from downright fraud to just "bending the rules " a little.  A lot of beneficiaries are claiming at the single rate while they actually live with a partner and fail to declare this cohabitation.   Another dodge is hiding assets that would make a claim for a benefit ineligible.  The information that Centrelink uses to process a claim takes the form of a statutory declaration by the applicant - and knowingly providing false information is a criminal offence that can result in a term of imprisonment.

Some very bright bureaucrat hit on the idea of scrutinizing Facebook to unmask those who are cheating the welfare system, and now it looks like a careful analysis of what we disclose to friends and what boasts we make about how clever we are may come back to haunt us.  Centelink may roll out a person by person comparison of what we have revealed on Facebook with the official record we provided to justify whatever payment we are receiving from that agency.

No doubt many people will call foul and think that is unfair.  Some may even compare it to bugging our phones or intercepting our emails, but what we put on Facebook is very much "on the public record " and if we are putting our hand in the pocket of the Treasury and getting money we are not entitled to receive the Facebook investigators have a duty to plug that loss.

We are often lectured on the "ethics " that are an expected obligation of the average citizen.  We have laws that crack down on racist abuse and the "glass ceiling " that has impeded women from management opportunities is slowly shattering, but the rules are far from clear when it comes to high finance in the business world.

There seems to be a clash between "moral obligation " and " legal responsibility " when it comes to the management of companies - and the people that work for them.   The business world has always been a hazardous place for both shareholders and employees.  Demand for a product can fade away or someone else may invent a better product, but both management and workers are expected to do their best to maintain the viability of an enterprise for mutual gain.

The fact that a Queensland nickel mine has ceased production and two hundred and thirty seven miners are suddenly out of a job is sad news for the families involved.   To some degree, a slowdown in China has caused a drop in demand for most resorce stocks and the price of nickel has dropped sharply.   Many other mining companies in Australia are cutting back production and shedding staff.

What raises many eyebrows is that this mine is owned by a very colourful politician.  In fact, this politician is the leader of a flailing political party and it is revealed that he withdrew ten million dollars from the funding of that nickel mine to prop up political activities.

The man is extremely wealthy and was claimed to be a billionaire, although the recent downturn may have imposed limitations.  There seems no doubt that when a person owns money, he or she is legally entitled to move it about as per their will, but if removal of that capital leaves the company unable to pay the entitlements it's workers are awarded by law there is a severe clash of responsibility.

No doubt this legal aspect will be carefully scrutinized.  Often company ownership is obscured by using a mix of shell companies, but when the employees walk away without the entitlement protection provided by law simply because the company capital is immune to their claim - then exactly the same principle that applies to cheating the welfare system applies.

Both ends of town - are not playing by the rules !