Where Is The Enemy ?

One of the biggest ticket items of the Australian economy is " defence " and yet just who we are defending against is not perfectly clear.  The world's biggest military powers are the United States, Russia and China.  We are in alliance with one of these and the government does not believe either of the other two are planning an invasion of this country.

Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull has said " there is no country in the region that shows any hostile intent towards Australia, other than North Korea ".   Foreign Minister, Julie Bishop confirmed that view when she told Sky news " we do not see Russia or China as posing a military threat to Australia.

The bogey of " Communism "  seems to have evaporated.  There is no doubt the old Soviet Union intended to force this type of government on the world and did not shrink from doing so with military force, but that regime has faded  into a semi democratic kleptocracy and we have learned to live with a Communist ruled Cuba, Vietnam and Cambodia.

That leaves China as the enigma.  Apart from tidying up their borders in places like Nepal and Tibet the Middle Kingdom seems to have its hands full creating an export economy to keep its huge population from becoming restive.  China's Communist party brooks no form of dissent and Xi Jinping is ever tightening that form of control. The worry is that " Nationalism "  is being enhanced by the central government and should the economy falter that can become a convenient way of placing the blame on a distant enemy.

Perhaps for Australia the risk factor is closer to home.  We have seen the damage that can be done when religions clash.  Much of the fighting in the Middle East is that ongoing shism between Shia and Sunni Islam.  We are seeing genocide is Myanmar when " ethnic cleansing " is forcing a religious minority out of the country.

To our immediate north, Indonesia is the worlds most populous Islamic nation.   It has a secular constitution and until recently religious diversity has been tolerated.  Now a hard line element is introducing religion into politics and that tolerance is vanishing.   There is an evident danger that the next election may see religion play a major part in putting a hard line president in office if the electorate can be manipulated into voting on religious lines.

When Indonesia emerged from Dutch colonial rule its first president  - " Bung " Sukarno - was openly hostile to Australia and claimed that Indonesia would eventually invade and reclaim what he termed its " lost property ".   Indonesia went through a revolution when Sukarno backed a Communist uprising and a firm secular president then held a virtual dictatorship for many years.  It now has an active " Islamic State " element that is proclaiming holy war against western targets. What sort of regime eventually emerges in Indonesia will dictate the relationship we have with that country.

Defence is very reliant on the economic clout of the nation to be defended.  We have a small population by world standards - and therefore a small tax base from which to finance our defence forces.   They are certainly adequate to counter any immediate threat but we would need our alliance with others if a new world war emerged.

Anybody suggesting we should reduce our defence spending to save money is an optimist.   The very fact that we have adequate defences in place is the main reason that we are not facing a threat from our neighbours - and we would be wise to keep it that way !

An Australian Arms Industry ?

The closure of the last car manufacturing plant in Australia dealt a damaging blow to the production industry that supplied a wide variety of parts that applied to automobile manufacturing..  It is now suggested that this expertise be redirected and we should seek a toe hold in the giant arms export industry.

As things stand, our armed forces are a customer of this world industry when it comes to big ticket items.  Our fighter jets are designed and produced in the United States and we recently called tenders for a new fleet of conventional submarines. It is not suggested that we try to compete in this sophisticated field of design and technology advancement which absorbs multi billion research budgets annually.

We do have a nascent arms industry that is a supplier to the Australian defence forces but production runs are meagre and an expansion would deliver badly needed jobs and technical advances.  It is suggested that this expansion be supported with a $3.8 billion injection of taxpayers funds in the way of seed money.

Supporters of this plan point to our success with the Bushmaster armoured patrol vehicle.  This Australian built troop carrier has proven simply better than competing vehicles from other countries and it has found a ready market amongst our allies, including Japan.   We  need to be selective in directing research to where improvements are possible without the enormous cost of bringing new technology to market.

Entry into the world arms bazaar would also need to go hand in hand with an expanded consular engagement with other countries.  At present, the world arms trade is heavily influenced by the United States, Russia, Britain and France. By its very nature, much of the arms trade is influenced by treaties and embargoes imposed by these giants in trade deals.

Just as Australian industry learned to compete successfully with car parts that met the standards, quality and price demanded by the world car manufacturers and gained input into cars made here for export to world markets, there is no reason that these same manufacturers can not turn their skills towards the world arms trade.

What is important is to select production targets that are attainable and not blocked off by technology secrets that will not be available to us. It would be helpful if Australia developed an integrated and specialised sales organization to develop the contacts and skill to present Australian arms products to this world market, reducing the cost to individual manufacturers.

This is a plan that has great potential, but it also has risks.  Once of those risks is the failure to recognise limitations.  If we are careful in selecting avenues of production that are open to us we can readily duplicate things like that Bushmaster success !

Reconciliation !

This Australia day brought contrasting sights in many cities.  Indigenous people in ceremonial dress performed " smoking ceremonies " to bless recognition of the arrival of Europeans here in 1788 and others marched in protest at the same event, which they called " Invasion day ".

There is pressure to abandon January twenty-six because many Indigenous Australians claim they can not celebrate the loss of  the land beneath their feet - which a foreign country annexed without their permission.   This rejection takes many forms.   The moderates demand recognition as the previous owners of Australia and the more extreme want white Australia  returned to from whence they came.

There seems to be universal acclamation that this great land mass was not claimed by a number of European countries and divided into separate colonies with fixed borders and individual languages - as happened in Africa.  A lot of wrongs have been righted and Australia's Indigenous people are now equal citizens in this prosperous country but many still need to adapt to the benefits that this nation has to offer.

We live in a dangerous world.  The creation of " empires " is still valid in some minds and we are small in numbers on the verge of vastly overcrowded Asia.  It seems certain that we face internal change in the years ahead, and discarding the monarchy for a Republican form of government is already under discussion.  When - and if - that happens it will require a new flag to identify us in the world.   That could present an opportunity to formerly recognise our Indigenous brothers and sisters in a meaningful way.   If we simple replaced the Union Jack in the upper right corner of our flag with the Aboriginal flag this combination would recognise those who were here before 1788 and those who came after that date.by the stars of the Southern Cross and the Federation star.

It seems inevitable that in the years ahead there will be a close mingling of Indigenous Australians in all walks of life.  The key will be education standards that enable a choice between a lifestyle that remains close to traditional culture or integration in the commercial world that delivers the style of living most take for granted.  Each generation will have the opportunity to make that choice.

There is a danger that this cultural bridge between Indigenous people who have embraced the opportunities of our commercial culture and achieved a rewarding lifestyle and those still clinging to a traditional life may become impossible to join together.  There is an anger and a rejection that has found a home with many non Indigenous citizens and this was illustrated by the crowds noisily protesting on Australia day.

Reconciliation between these two great groupings will be a slow progress as educated children find their place in society and permeate all professional levels.   What is encouraging is the ready acceptance of  " smoking ceremonies " to add an Indigenous aspect to most civic events.  It seems that the bridging of Indigenous and non-Indigenous is well under way !

A Merciful Death !

In just a few days a range of pain medication containing opioids will disappear from chemists shelves.  On February 1, a law change will prevent the sale of such familiar brand names as Nurofen Plus without a doctors prescription.  It is hoped that this move will prevent Australia from becoming engulfed in the opioid death cycle that is ravaging America.

Unfortunately, the unnecessary use of opioids has been growing.  Because they have been freely available without a prescription some people have been using them long term for minor pain without realising their addictive properties.  The death toll here is estimated at about 2700 in the past five years.

 Now there are moves to limit the right of General Practitioners to write scripts for these drugs.  There is concern that people who already have an opioid addiction will react to the withdrawal by seeking prescriptions and that many doctors will be brow beaten into complying with those requests. We could see the supply of all opioids restricted to the dispensing power of specialists and palliative clinics.

There is a very real danger here that we may be condemning those on the fringe of society to a very panful death, and such a restriction would be an insult to the many GP's who treat the dying in their homes because they have a fear of death in the unfamiliar and unsympathetic ward of a general hospital.  That is of particular concern in country areas, where suitable hospital care is a long way from home and caring loved ones.

We all must eventually die and the termination of life is often accompanied by one or more of the diseases that deliver excruciating pain in its final stages.  It is evident from research that most people would prefer to die at home and that is also often the wish of relatives attending them.  Such a death should not be panful and many GP's are the attending doctor who prescribes appropriate pain relief to ease their passing.   To remove prescribing rights would disarm doctors from this function, which many years of training has equipped them to deliver.

The vast majority of GP's are very responsible people and they will treat prescribing opioids with care, but in any profession there is an unfortunate element that is only concerned with personal  wealth and has little concern for professional ethics.  Such people may willingly write scripts and it may be necessary to monitor their practice accordingly.

All scripts are processed through the Medicare system and an excess of prescriptions against any particular doctor should trigger an alarm.   Selective withdrawal of opioid prescription rights would be a far better option that a general ban on GP's.

Opioids are addictive, but they have a place in modern medicine and there are circumstances where they are the right treatment at the right stage of the progress of a disease - or to ease the end of life. We need to be careful that we do not over react -  or we simple deliver unintended misery!

Releasing Dangerous Prisoners !

The ideal concept of sentencing someone to a term in prison is the hope that they may be rehabilitated and not continue to offend when they are released.  The judge hearing the case has the difficult task of fitting the time to be served to the criminality of the offence for which the prisoner is before the court.   Automatic remissions for good behaviour apply and in most cases the convicted do not serve the entire sentence.

There is an obvious problem when a prisoner is nearing the end of the prison term and showing no remorse or any attempt to mend their ways.  It may be that it involves a psychiatric problem, but it is evident to the staff guarding such a prisoner that he will quickly reoffend after release.

Just such a problem is facing those responsible for holding " Simon ", a 51 year old male prisoner who is serving a maximum twelve year sentence imposed in 2009 for aggravate sexual intercourse without consent.  It was a particularly brutal rape.  His time behind bars has been marred by repeated attacks on prison staff and he has threatened to rape the wife of one of his guards.

Simon first came under consideration for parole in 2015 and again in 2016 but was deemed unsuitable.  He is now due for release between January 20 and February 6 but Corrective Services has appealed to have his release revoked on the grounds that he " is unable to adapt to normal lawful community life ".   That appeal has been rejected.

When Simon walks to freedom he will be subjected to strict supervision and this will include fitting an electronic tracking bracelet.  He will be required to live at an approved address and will not be allowed to visit Randwick, Waverley or Woollahra until his sentence fully expires in April, 2020.

The New South Wales prison system is under space pressure.  Early release is essential to make room for newly convicted felons and parole can be an important bargaining chip in imposing safety restrictions while easing prisoners back into society.   Those that are refused parole will re-enter society on their own terms when they fully serve their sentence.

That is the limitation of our justice system.  Prisoners only serve a sentence for the particular crime for which they have been convicted.  We can not extend their time behind bars, for crimes we know they are gong to commit in the future.   Even the most violent and worst criminal must walk free when the full length of their sentence has been served.

It was not always that way. In the distant past people who the authorities considered a " nuisance " were jailed indefinitely, and many simply died in prison.  Today, we strictly enforce a penal code that enhances the " rights " of the prisoner.  Even when a crime results in a " life " sentence marked " never to be released " even that is now subject to review.

It is inevitable that shortly Simon will again walk the streets of Sydney - and no doubt we will hear of him again - in a lurid news story where his freedom has resulted in a personal disaster for some other member of the public.     It seems that " freedom "  delivers many outcomes, depending on who is the perpetrator and who is the victim !

Essential Services !

The right to disagree over what we are paid comes with a number of options in Australia.  The obvious one is to quit and go and find another job which offers better money.  Joining a union delivers the safety of " Collective Bargaining " when it comes to negotiating pay and that brings with it the option of strike action if agreement can not be reached.

There are some professions that are deemed to be " essential services " and for which the strike option is unthinkable.  That certainly includes the armed forces that protect this country from external threats and the police services which maintain civil order.  Many people would also apply that term to the doctors and nurses who staff our hospitals and the fire service responders.

We were about to experience a complete shutdown of the New South Wales train system because the people who drive the trains have rejected a pay offer but that has now been deferred to March by way of a "no strike " order from the Fair Work Commission. It seems that negotiations between the union and the government reached a settlement that the union approved and this was put to the 6,100 members involved for decision by way of a text message on their mobile hones.  It is believed that this message asked for a return verdict if the pay offer was approved, but left the option of a rejection open.

Just 362 members bothered to respond in the affirmative.  We are unaware how many sent a negative reply, but the union took the stance that all unanswered messages were automatically a denial of the offer.  This strike would cost the NSW economy more than a hundred million dollars and many low income casual workers will lose a days pay.  Perhaps it is time our transport system received essential service status.

The only way essential services pay can be insulated from the dickering between the unions and government is to place its decision in the hands of a respected third body - and the High Court of Australia is such a trusted institution.   We accept the verdict of the High Court on matters that divide politics and sometimes intrude on the basics of religion and making it the arbiter of pay levels for essential services would seem to deliver a degree of fairness.

Train drivers are demanding a pay increase of six percent a year over each of the next four years and this contrasts with the government offer of a 2.5% increase.   Train drivers are skilled people and most receive in excess of $100,000 a year.   A demand for a twenty-five percent increase over four years would imbalance other public service pay, and this pay agreement accepted by the union - and rejected by the drivers - was for just a small increase on that original 2.5% offer.

The danger is that militant essential service workers using the strike weapon to force excessive pay increases may force the railways to adopt driverless trains as a necessity, before all safety aspects are fully evaluated. This will eventually be inevitable, but the human element is still the safest option as technology develops and most passengers feel safer knowing that a human is controlling the train.

In this instance, the union is being reasonable and it is the rank and file exhibiting greed.  Our economy is now so finely balanced that a  to return to the industrial chaos that was so prevalent in yesteryear is unthinkable !

The Electric Car Option !

At the moment, the electric car is a miniscule percentage of the Australian car fleet, but there is the expectation that it will grow exponentially in the years ahead.  The factors making the average motorist reluctant to make the change include price, distance delivered by a full battery charge and the scarcity of re-charging points.

Some overseas countries have announced that they will force their citizens to drive electric cars by simply banning the production or import  of new vehicles powered by petrol or diesel internal combustion engines.   Britain and France will implement this law from 2040 and Norway and the Netherlands from 2025.  Pressure is building for Australia to adopt a similar stance.

We would be wise to adopt the " softly-Softly " approach because Europe is composed of many countries with very large populations, occupying a land mass far less than a typical small Australian state.  As a result, their citizens are concentrated in cities and driving distances covered are much shorter than in this country.

There is the expectation that electric cars will soon drop in price to parity with petrol and diesel cars and battery range is ever extending.  The expectation of electric cars becoming a trend is causing investors to finance a sharp rise in re-charging stations which will eventually become as common as petrol reselling stations are now.  There is no doubt that we are on the cusp of the electric car age.

The difference between Australia and Europe is the concentration of people in small countries compared to Australians spread over a very big continent.  It is obvious that the electric car will first find favour with people in our major cities and this seems set to coincide with the advent of the self driving car becoming legal.

It is likely that petrol and diesel will persist for a long time in rural Australia  because of the vast distances involved.  Just as the four wheel drive initially became an icon of the " bush " it seems that electric cars will predominate as city transport. We would be wise to let this develop at its own pace.

Perhaps the biggest issue not yet addressed is taxation.  A huge proportion of the price we pay for petrol and diesel is tax and both the Commonwealth and State will have no option than to try and recover that component of their income stream.  There are tentative plans to adopt a " distance driven "  tax measure and obviously that would include the toll system to calculate the charge.   Those expecting electric to lower motoring costs are likely to be disappointed.

There is also the question of subsidies to get people to make the move to electric.  That needs a degree of caution.  People who have outlaid a lot of money on an existing high end petrol vehicle may resent its resale price drop caused by new vehicle subsidies - and refusing to move to electric can quickly become a cult following.

The electric car needs to establish itself in users minds by overcoming initial objections progressively. Many will find satisfaction from contributing to lower emissions delivering a healthier planet but we humans tend to get ornery if we feel pressured.    Forcing electric cars on people is likely to create a backlash !

A New " Atrocity " !

The United Nations was supposed to be the world body with the power to stop wars and provide the impartial judgement to settle disputes.  Perhaps its finest hour was its intervention in the war when North Korea invaded its southern neighbour in 1950.  Troops of many nations fought under the United Nations banner to repel that invasion.  Now a new atrocity is happening before the eyes of the world and the UN seems to be impotent.

A million Rohingya refugees have fled across the border from Rakhine state in Myanmar and are sheltering in squalid camps in Bangladesh.  They are unwanted in either country and now an agreement has been signed to allow them to return to the very people who burned their villages and committed a massacre that forced them out of that country.

This agreement seems to be steeped in bad faith.  Myanmar is a predominently Buddhist country and the Rohingya are Muslim.  They have lived in what was then Burma for many generation when they were imported to solve a labour shortage, but they have never been accepted as citizens.  They are denied the vote or access to passports and over the years there have been repeated pogroms that made their life miserable.

Recently, a militant element emerged in Rohingya ranks and this resulted in an armed attack on a police post.  The response from the Myanmar army was swift - and deadly.  They unleashed a terror attack, burning villages and indiscriminately shooting men, women and children.  Rape was common, and widespread.  About a million Rohingya fled across the border with just the clothes on their backs.

Myanmar is a country emerging from as military dictatorship. Aung San Suu Kyi heads a civilian government but power remains in the hands of the army and it seems that the Buddhist majority are complicit in forcing the Rohingya to leave.  Myanmar has come under heavy world criticism and it seems to be reluctantly bowing to world pressure in allowing this return agreement.

But the Rohingya will return - to what ?  Their villages are burned to the ground. They crops and farm animals are gone and whatever industries that delivered a living have been destroyed.  They will not even be returning to their former " place of origin ", but to new refugee camps in other regions.

This is not a plan to allow them to peacefully resettle.  The intent seems to be to herd them into uncomfortable and dangerous refugee camps in the hope that privation will cause them to migrate elsewhere - and solve the problem for Myanmar.

There is a remarkable resemblance here to the Palestinian problem in Israel, and it might have a similar outcome.  We might see the emergence of a simmering civil war like the Intafada that delivers terror attacks - and their consequent reprisals.  An unhappy people who are impossible to govern does not auger well for a prosperous future for Myanmar.

Unfortunately, it seems that the UNHCR will simply stand aside as an interested observer and let this happen !

A Looming Storm Danger !

Most Sydney residents have a very good reason to remember June of 2016.   A severe low pressure system formed off the New South Wales coast, causing massive waves to crash against the shoreline and vivid television pictures showed the damage being caused to homes in Pittwater road, Collaroy.

That storm surge devastated homes fronting the beach.  The sand on the beach disappeared and the wave action eroded inland until it was washing under the foundations of homes and causing them to collapse.   Most striking was the sight of an entire in-ground swimming pool which was displaced and left in the beach shallows when the water finally receded.

Eighteen months later and those same residents are still fighting to get council approval to construct a seawall to protect their properties.   The Northern Beaches Council requires a development application to be processed through the bureaucracy before any work can begin and this has developed into a fight between what the residents want and what the council demands.

Homeowners affected are prepared to spend $150,000 each  on a seawall construction to protect their property but what the council demands may run to hundreds of thousands of dollars, and many think the council is shifting the protection for both neighbouring properties and the public beach by demanding a seawall that will achieve that protection - at their expense.

What is causing residents ire is the contradictions of council decisions.  Valuable hotel properties damaged by the storm were ordered to carry out repairs while reasonable plans for their own property protection are being blocked.

This situation  must chill the hearts of many people living near a beach.   At any time the weather may repeat that high wave phenomenon and it may be another suburb that suffers similar damage. That all depends on the storm intensity and the direction from which it arrives.  It also raises the issue of rising sea levels caused by global warming.

That presents both a short and a long term problem.  The type of seawall residents propose in Collaroy will offer protection for perhaps the next twenty or thirty years, but in more than a hundred years many Sydney suburbs may be more like Holland, below the natural sea level and in need of protection by dykes.

Some council planners think we would be wise to abandon beach front properties and force residents to live on higher ground inland, and with that in mind propose to reject plans for rebuilding or renovation of existing beach front homes.  That thinking claims seawalls are a waste of money and we should bow to the inevitable.

Building approvals are being rejected for land that is obviously prone to tidal surges but existing property owners have the right to try and protect their investment in at least the short term.  The fact that these properties which received damage eighteen months ago can still not get seawall approval is simply a disgrace.  The decision on the viability of any proposed seawall needs to be taken from council hands and decided by independent engineers.

It is unreasonable to expect owners of beachfront property to walk away from their valuable property and make no effort to protect their investment.  Even a modest seawall will extend the life of the property while this global warming and rising sea level debate reaches a conclusion.

Ending the " Pet " Dog Trade !

It seems that many councils are refusing a permit to allow home owners to legally breed puppies because of publicity given to what are termed " puppy farms " -  where unscrupulous people churn out endless numbers of litters from exhausted mothers, often in overcrowded and filthy conditions. These unvaccinated pups are then sold through pet shops.

Buying a pet dog from a recognised breeder with the authenticity guaranteed by the accompanying registration with the Kennel Control Council of Australia can cost you hundreds - and even thousands of dollars.  The KCC scrupulously monitors the number of litters permitted each breeding cycle.  Such breeders specialise in a particular species of canine and duly registered thoroughbreds compete in competitions for " best of breed " recognition, which impresses buyers.

There is a growing movement to stamp out these legitimate breeders and make the supply of pets through pet shops entirely reliant on dogs turned in at animal shelters.  These come in all shapes and sizes and within a wide age range.  Each has been checked out, wormed and vaccinated, but is rarely a true copy of the precise breed the buyer is seeking.  This movement is seeking to see Greyhounds that have been rejected for racing channelled through pet shops to provide them with a good home.

A pet dog was thought to be an attribute to most families.  Apart from the companionship, many people found that taking the dog for a walk was a way of gaining exercise and losing weight.  The family dog being taken for a walk was a familiar sight in most suburbs, but that practice is now dwindling.

Land scarcity has resulted in more apartment living and this has resulted in the smaller breeds becoming the most popular pets - and we are now seeing demand for a mix of breeds.  One of the most popular couplings is a mix of a Cavalier King Charles spaniel and a Poodle, resulting in what is called a " Cavoodle  ".  The end result is a small, curly haired dog with a very good temperament, tolerance for children and an affinity for apartment living.

This may soon become an officially registered breed recognised by the KCC, but the whole structure of pure bred dogs being legitimately bred by industry specialists is under threat from a hostile element which seems determined to make pets only available from the rejects that are processed through animal shelters.   Legitimate requests for dog breeding approvals are being rejected and any such proposal is being treated as a " puppy farm ".

It is a fact of life that where these puppy farms exist they are rarely registered with any council.  It is usually a criminal element operation being run under cover and the pups sold to pet shops are on a cash basis to avid taxation.  Discovery is usually through the complaints of neighbours, complaining about the smell or the constant barking of a mass of dogs kept in close confinement.

If legitimate breeders are forced out of business the only dogs available to the public will be by nature mixed breeds, and with that will go the temperaments that make us favour the type of dog we want for a pet in the first place.

The " Greed " Factor !

We have a one day train strike looming in just over a week in New South Wales.   The economists predict that if it happens it will come with a cost of a hundred million dollars simply because the normal activity of people getting to work will be disrupted and consequently the usual commercial activity that puts money in cash registers - and wages in peoples pockets - will come to a halt for a day.

Of course, it is not quite that simple.   The vast majority of people who work in some sort of government job will still get paid as usual and so will those working in private industry on a " salary basis " as opposed to those engaged at a hourly rate and who punch a bundy clock to record their starting and finishing times.

Many of those " salaried " people will find some sort of business activity to do at home when the strike prevents them reaching the office, but the main loser will be their employer.  There will not be so many customers in the shops that remain open and the coffee shops and restaurants that open will expect a very slow day.  Few businesses are going to show a profit on the day of the strike.

The main people who will be seriously out of pocket will be the huge army of " casuals "  who now make up a big segment of the work force, and they are the people who can least afford the loss of a days pay.

This one day train drivers strike just seems to be a return to the bad old days of union bosses flexing their muscles and making outrageous demands.   It is a long time sine we last had a transport strike - or the petrol tanker drivers ceased making deliveries to service stations.  Many industrial agreements of today outlaw strike action.

The train drivers - who earn in excess of $100,000 a year - are demanding a six percent pay rise each year for the next four years.  The government has set a cap of 2.5% as the maximum pay increase across all government workers and should this 6% rise succeed it would spark an immediate demand for parity from police, fire brigade workers, hospital workers and the entire government spectrum.  There would be no option other than price increases to fund the increase and it would set off an inflationary spiral that would harm our export competiveness and flow across the private sector.

Many people will wonder if this sudden demand from train drivers is sourced by the expansion of the Sydney rail network to accommodate an eleven percent increase in passenger numbers, causing driver overtime becoming essential, or whether this strike is a return to politics intruding on industrial harmony for political gain.

A lot depends on how the public view this strike.   A demand for a 24% increase in pay over four years from those presently earning more than a hundred thousand dollars would not get support from many people, but others may blame the state government.  Hopefully, cool heads may prevail and the trains may keep running next Monday.

A " Lifestyle " Decision !

It has become government policy to avoid the concentration of government departments in Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra.  There are many advantages in relocating to a regional city for both the lifestyle of the staff concerned and to avoid the pressures on homes and public transport that is crippling the capital cities.

Just such a move is proposed for the Australian Pesticide and Veterinary Medicines Authority which will move from Canberra to Armidale.  That is a proposal which will cause consternation in most affected families and a form of compensation is being developed to coax staff to agree to the switch.

For a start, APVMA will pay travel and accommodation costs for staff to visit Armidale for a three day inspection of what that city and the surrounding New England district has to offer.  No doubt they will investigate the availability and cost of housing and ponder the advantages - and disadvantages - of life in a rural community.

The move will be sweetened with an offer of up to $55,000 per family, plus a one thousand dollar " disturbance " cost and a $ 1500 payment if they have a dependent child, and $500 more for each other additional children. That should work out at about six percent of their normal income.

If the APVMA pays this moving cost it will be conditional on the family remaining in Armidale for two years after the move.  Should that person terminate their employment, the compensation package would be reclaimed on a pro rata rate for each month short of that two year period.

Some of the advantages are obvious.  House prices are much lower in the country than the bubble that exists in Sydney, Melbourne and Canberra, and that long morning commute in heavy traffic will become a thing of the past.

It will become necessary for any children to change schools - and perhaps factor in the cost of new uniforms - and the move will sever links with close friends and relatives.  There is also the problem of one spouse having to find a new job and work may not be so readily available in a country area.

Then there is the long term effect.  When children finish their education there is the matter of university study to consider, and the availability of career opportunities.  It is likely that attaining a desired career may make family separation inevitable.

Career prospects for the person working within APVMA are likely to be enhanced because the work of the authority is concentrated on farm needs and in Armidale its staff will be fully exposed to interaction with surrounding rural industry.   Opportunities for promotional enhancement are likely to improve in such an environment.

All this is very much in line with commercial industry.  There is the expectation of removal costs if a firm moves a person for company reasons and this applies equally to government departments.  It will not suit every family, but for those who take the plunge it is likely that it will improve their standing on the promotional ladder !

A Legal Change to Gift Cards.

The wise avoid gift choices when the recipient is a teenager.  It is better to give money because we rarely get the choice of either music or clothing right and that can be embarrassing for both parties. Unfortunately, for some strange reason handing actual cash as a gift to a close adult friend or relative is seen as socially gauche.  For that reason, it is usually disguised by being in the form of a gift card.

Unfortunately, the statistics on gift cards are not promising.  A significant number get tucked away and forgotten - and are never used.  Many of the ones that are used have a few dollars left as a credit balance that is not reclaimed.  Many merchants impose unreasonable use restrictions on gift cards that do not correspond with government trading laws, and in recent years most gift cards have had a twelve month time expiry imposed.

A gift card is merely a substitute for cash.   The buyer lodges the cash with a third party and when the card is presented in a shop, the merchants is reimbursed in full for whatever goods were chosen by the recipient. There is no legal right to impose restrictions on their use.

Some stores claim that gift cards can not be used to purchase items already price reduced in a sale, but this contradicts trading laws - and is a sheer bluff.  Fortunately, the New South Wales government has revised the laws that apply to gift cards and one of the main impediments to their use has been extinguished.  That twelve month expiry date has been broadened - to a full three years from date of issue.

That applies to all and any cards issued after March 31 of this year, consequently cards that may have been gifted this past Christmas and which have a twelve month expiry date will not be affected by this law change.

Some consumer groups are calling for a more extensive revision of gift card use to be written into law.  It is suggested that when a purchase leaves a few dollars remaining on the card balance that this be reimbursed in cash rather than require another purchase for elimination.   In many cases the shop offers nothing near that value and to reclaim the balance the customer must make a significant other purchase with their own money.  It is suggested that amounts less than ten percent of the card value be treated in this way.

Another anomaly is where the gift card only applies to a particular merchant.  Most cards are " open " and can be used anywhere while others apply to a selected range of stores, but those with heavy use restrictions lose their purchasing value if that particular store closes and ceases trading.   This was illustrated when the Dick Smith electronic stores went into receivership and the receiver refused to honour gift cards.

This law change is heading in the right direction, but has a long way to go.  When a gift card fails to get presented and its value reclaimed that money becomes a gift to the card company that issued the card.  There seems no reason why the person receiving such a card as a gift could not reclaim that gift in cash from the card company, because it is simply a gift in a different form to cash.

The opportunity exists to clear away this mess.  It seems that shops have imposed their own rules on gift card use and the card companies imposition of an expiry date has been a recent measure.  A law change to clear away all impediments to use would be helpful.

Interest Rate Boondoggle !

"  Honest " marketing seems to be a thing of the past.  Most people are getting phone calls from overseas telemarketing sources trying to persuade them to change their electricity supply provider.  The incentive is usually a very tempting discount but what is left unsaid is that this is an " introductory offer " - and the bill will revert to normal rates after a short period of time.

It seems that this dishonest tactic has spread to the banking world.  Interest rates on deposits are historically low but many people who take the trouble to analyse their statements will find that some have shrunk to less than one percent.

The banks very quietly introduced a " base rate " change which applied to  the interest they pay to long term customers while introducing " introductory " interest rates to attract new depositors.  These higher rates only apply for the first three to five months after that new account is opened.

This  tactic was put in place just as the mortgage market eased.  The banks no longer need to aggressively chase domestic savings which is their usual source of funding.  The bigger the gap between what they pay in interest for deposits - and what they charge to borrower is reflected on what profit they declare at the end of each financial year - and today our " Big Four " report profit in billions.

This entire money market - banks, building societies and credit unions - have put a cap on the interest they pay to small accounts.  Deposits ranging from $ 2,000 to $ 5,000 get no interest at all.   Of course this vast accumulation of the modest savings of pensioners and those on low wages is used to finance mortgages and overdrafts at normal commercial rates and returns handsome profits to the banks - but not to their depositors.

It seems that to get even a low rate of interest bank customers need to apply the tactics now prevalent in the electricity industry.  Sign up and enjoy those low rates for as long as they last, and then quickly take up the next tempting offer.   There is no joy in being a " loyal " customer because in today's world loyalty rewards are just a myth.

The customer with a long term, modest savings balance getting either low or no interest and being confronted with a sudden expense - such as the need to finance a funeral because of a partners death - can expect no mercy from the banks.  An application for a loan is usually rejected, and sometimes the applicant is offered a MasterCard or Visa account, with interest rates of twenty percent.  At least that seems preferable to forcing them into the hands of the " until payday " lending industry, which is usually the only other option.

Retirees taking a lump sum superannuation payment need a safe investment that pays a decent rate of interest to make their nest egg cover living expenses.  It is not helpful that the banks are now deliberately confusing the terms that apply to serve their own interests.

For far too long the banks have been allowed to formulate banking practice in-house and with very little interference from the government supervising agencies.   The calls for a Royal Commission are growing louder and the more that these scams become common practice the surer that they will eventually be publicly examined.

The banking industry is an integral part of the economy and good ethics are essential !

Because They Can !

It looks lie Sydney rail commuters are going to face a miserable bout of industrial action that will see some train services cancelled and others running well behind their normal time schedules.  The militant Rail Tram and Bus Union ( RTBU} is demanding a six percent pay increase for each of the next four years and this collides with the 2.5% cap imposed on public sector wages by the government.

Last year rail passenger patronage increased by eleven percent and the government increased train movements to meet that demand. Additional train services brought the ageing system close to its capacity and seriously reduced the ability to cope with break downs or accidents.   The whole thing broke apart when one of Sydney's electrical storms delivered lightning strikes and at the same time seventy drivers called in sick.

That is where this new schedule of increased train numbers has a fatal weakness.  We have about four hundred train drivers and overtime is essential to make the system work.  More drivers are being trained, but it takes time to get them to the required standard and safety issues mean that this can not be rushed.

This has delivered a huge advantage to the RTBU.   A vote at a meeting of drivers approved industrial action in support of that pay increase, but the union  is legally required to give advance notice of disruptive tactics.  The stage seems set for a cat-and-mouse game with the unfortunate rail commuters stuck in the middle.

The entry level wage for a train driver starts at $ 75,000 a year, but most experienced drivers earn well in excess of $ 100,000.  It can be argued that they share a responsibility similar to an airline pilot. A large number of passengers rely on their skill to arrive safely at their destination and this requires them to correctly evaluate the signals and traffic they encounter on the journey.

To most rail passengers that demand for a six percent raise each year for the next four years contrasts with the wage stagnation they face in their own lives.  In particular, retail workers are barely achieving increases that match inflation and many are actually going backwards.  Rail is an essential service and this demand seems sheer greed.

In the short term, some of those new services will be cancelled to reintroduce a little " elbow room " into the system but refusal of both scheduled and gap filling overtime will play havoc with schedules.  All this is to start the day before Australia day - and if we get the usual Sydney summer afternoon lightning storms chaos seems inevitable.

Realists know that the drivers will not achieve  that six percent increase.   When the horse trading ends their wages will increase somewhere above the government 2.5% cap, but well short of the six percent demand.  The union is simply taking advantage of a situation that enhances their bargaining power to extort an increase they can not achieve by any other means.

Sadly, a lot of unfortunate commuters are going to be late for work and many will face a long, tiring day before they make it home to their families, and if it becomes protracted the government will probably have to offer some sort of Opal fare concession to ease the pain.

The union will justify this chaos on the grounds that they are looking after the interests of their members and need this action to achieve the pay rewards to which they are entitled.   In reality - it is because a situation has arisen - where they can !

When the damage is Done !

There is probably nothing more threatening to the human race than a catastrophe that devastates the world food supply.  Whenever there are food shortages caused by weather conditions the result is spread unevenly.   The rich countries wail because the price rises, but the poor countries simply go hungry because ability to pay becomes the deciding factor.

World agriculture is dependent on bees.   These busy little honey makers go from plant to plant in their quest for nectar and perform the important function of transforming the interchange of male to female genetics.   Like us humans, the flowers on trees and other plants are either male or female and they need to get together to produce offspring.

The bees perform this service unknowingly.  In their search for nectar,male pollen collects on their feet and is transferred when they visit a female flower.  Because bees are the most consistent insect with a need for nectar their service is essential to create bountiful crops - year after year.

In recent times there has been a problem.  Hives of bees have been mysteriously dieing.  Bee farming is now closely integrated with agriculture.   The bee industry moves hives according to a pattern to ensure that the bees are active and ready to pollinate each blossom season and the type of flower being serviced gives both taste and characteristic to the honey they produce.

This death spiral in hives is becoming a serious problem and in some areas there are simply not enough surviving bees to ensure that adequate servicing will occur.  So far, the precise reason why hives are suffering this fate is unknown, but the use of insecticide is thought to play a major part.

Here in Australia Bunnings have just removed a pesticide from sale because of fear that it may be the cause of hive death.   This product is known as a " neonicotinoid " and works very differently to other pest control measures.   It is absorbed by the plant rather than coating its surface and is not washed off by rain.   The plant itself becomes the source of the poison and most likely the feet of the bees become contaminated when they touch the surface in their search for pollen.   In this way, the insecticide is carried back to the hive.

This should be ringing alarm bells at the highest pinnacle of world government.  The firms that produce insecticides employ gifted scientists in their laboratories and have extensive research budgets.  Their task is to develop products that will make wealth for their employer and this may not be adequately researched to discover other unintended consequences.  It is important that such peer review be undertaken before such new products are approved for market release.

If this neonicotinoid managed to make it to market without its ability to kill bees being discovered it reveals a gaping gap in our safety regimen.  The companies that supply agricultural needs are world companies and a promising product will be quickly marketed internationally.   There is the potential for a massive catastrophe if safeguards are not in place.

Just how close we came to killing off the entire bee population is unknown, and what genetic effects may still be laying dormant in hives is also unknown.  When it comes to the world food supply, that is something we leave to chance - at our peril.

The " Food " Conundrum !

When we order Crayfish in a restaurant - or Lobster as other nationalities call them - the cooking and preparation of the meal is mercifully performed out of sight in the kitchen, but the traditional way involves dropping this live creature into a vat of boiling water.

That is coming to an end in Switzerland.  The government has decreed that this practice is barbaric and it is now outlawed, but the law is vague about what alternative should be used, and this has created a new controversy.  A commercial device has been invented that zaps the lobster with electricity and some chefs are simply making a brain incision with a sharp knife do the job.  The unsolved question is whether Lobsters have the ability to feel pain.

Scientific opinion is divided.  Lobsters lack the brain geography that handles pain in the human brain but when under attack they are capable of sacrificing a claw to gain an escape.  They continue to twitch when their arms have been ripped off, but it is unclear whether this is because of unpleasant sensations or a programmed reflex.

We are fast heading into a more merciful attitude to the death of those animals that form the human food chain, but a visit to any abattoir is enough to turn most stomachs.  Death - as part of the way animals make their way to the butcher shops and supermarkets - is neither fast or pleasant.

We only need to observe pens of sheep or cattle waiting their turn to be herded onto the killing floor to see the distress.  What they see and what they can smell brings an awareness of what is to come. Hunters claim this is why hunted animals have more tender meat.  They have no idea a bullet is heading their way and their bodies are not tensed with fear.  That sounds a very reasonable contention.

There is widespread revulsion of the use of battery hens in egg production and this production method is being fazed out, but the conditions that apply to " free range " are usually a lot less than customers imagine.  We have images of chooks wandering grassy paddocks but this is not commercially rewarding.  Usually, the only thing missing is the wire cages and the poultry are herded together in great numbers - and expected to lay an egg a day - or be sentenced to become chicken meat in a fast food restaurant.

It has been proven that land use to raise animals for human consumption is less efficient than pure agriculture and with our growing numbers that will have to change.  Science is well on the way to " growing "  a substance that has all the properties of " meat " and this is fast evolving into commercial practice.   The boffins are cleverly getting the texture and delivery of mineral content right - but still have a way to go to replicate that elusive element we call " taste ".

Perhaps the day is fast coming when we will all be vegetarian - not by choice - but simply because that is the what is offered at the food stores and it is a mysterious combination of commercial laboratories blending together all the nutriments our bodies need with the protein derived from the insect world, supplemented by the bulk of vegetable matter the world's farms struggle to grow to sustain the world population.

Perhaps that is the day when a cow or sheep are a rareity to be viwed on an excursion to a model " farm " that reminds people how we lived back in the dark ages.  Perhaps by then the " blandness " of what we eat will have become an acquired taste !

Enemy of the State !

The world is getting an ongoing lesson on exactly what is involved when an individual citizen of any nationality draws the ire of the United States of America - and one citizen in particular happens to be Australian.

Julian Assange embarrassed the United States when a serving member of that county's defence force introduced blank discs into the transmission equipment he was using and scooped up secrets that were released to the world  by WikiLeaks, Assange's news service.  The matter revealed was extremely embarrassing to the United States government.

Assange travelled the world as an international celebrity, ever looking over his shoulder for CIA intervention.  In Sweden he was accused of possible rape by two young women of his acquaintance and the Swedish government demanded he come to Sweden to answer this charge.   He ignored this demand,  believing the moment he stepped on Swedish soil the US would issue a deportation arrest warrant and drag him before an American court.

In London, he was served with a deportation order by Sweden and went through all legal channels to avoid arrest. He skipped bail and was given sanctuary by the embassy of Ecuador which sheltered him under its immunity in its London embassy, where he has remained since mid 2012.

The British government has spent millions of pounds ringing that embassy with police to guard against Assange's escape.  That has become an event that draws tourist crowds when Assange regularly appears on a balcony - just a metre from watching police - and makes public statements. These Swedish rape charges have been long dropped, but the Brits maintain this costly siege on the laughable grounds of that skipped bail incident.

Now the matter has notched up the diplomatic ladder with Ecuador granting Assange citizenship and proposing to install him in a diplomatic role.  Embassy staff enjoy immunity from arrest and this would allow him to legally leave Britain, but the Brits have put obstacles in the way.  New diplomats must first present their credentials to their host government and Assange would not be officially recognised until that happens - and he would be arrested the moment he leaves the embassy to comply.

Such is the power of the United States to force independent nations to comply with its wishes.  Those women in Sweden were surprised to find that a casual enquiry morphed into an international rape charge at US instigation and Britain is pursuing a mundane bail matter with the zeal which would normally apply to the apprehension of a mass murderer.

Strangely, the military person who actually stole America's secrets has faced court, served prison time and been released - and is now pardoned and has undergone a sex change.  In her new role as a civilian woman she is fast becoming a celebrity.

The US is determined to make Assange pay a price for revealing events that caused them embarrassment, and the time factor is unlimited.  This harks back to the days of the cold war when a Catholic priest was given many years of sanctuary in an American embassy to prevent arrest by a vengeful soviet government.

This reads like an ongoing spy novel.  The only difference is that we read the next chapter in the news sector of our daily newspaper !

The Opioid Crisis.

The coming removal of pain medication containing Opioids from over-the-counter sales and making it a prescription only item is a necessary step if we are to prevent addiction rates rising to the calamitous levels now prevalent in the United States.

One of the earlier hopes to thwart those who crushed the drug for the purpose of either injecting or snorting the resulting powder has made little impression on usage.   The tablets had a polymer added that made them incredibly hard and plastic like.   There was also an additive that made them resist  being dissolved in water, resulting in an unappealing thick gel being the result.

It took a long time to sink in but the main reason we have an opioid problem is because this is a very effective method of pain control and it has been widely advertised by the pharmaceutical companies that compete for its sale.   Because it is addictive, even short time users are quickly in its grip.

From February 1 - when it disappears from chemists shelves - there is the expectation that many users will visit their doctor and ask for a prescription.  It is quite likely that many people are mildly addicted without their knowledge because they have used this form of pain relief intermittently over a long period of time.   Some will be quite surprised when their addiction cravings start to appear.

We are assured that adequate pain relief is available from non opioid drugs and it will be very important that the medical profession stands firm and resists requests for opioids where non addictive alternatives can do an equally effective form of relief.   Some patients can be very demanding and opioid refusal can lead to serious confrontations in some cases.

In the past, the belief that some people hold that antibiotics can cure the common cold resulted in many patients demanding a script for this medication.  Unfortunately, some doctors caved in and simply wrote such a script - with the result that overuse has now degraded the effectiveness of most antibiotics because the bugs they treat have gained immunity.

That same sort of attitude could do irreparable harm to moving opioids from general sale to prescription only if scripts are too freely granted.  Unfortunately, there always seem to be a small number of doctors who readily accede to patients wishes.

It would be a wise move to use the PBS network to keep track of the scripts for opioids handed to chemists and for any imbalance arising from any individual doctor to automatically be investigated.  Without a valid explanation, the right to prescribe opioids by that doctor would be heavily restricted.

Opioids will still be trafficked by the illegal drug traders and they are unlikely to disappear from the black market, but the main aim of this move to prescription only supply is to shield the public from becoming unknowingly hooked on a substance that has hidden addictive properties.

That will only be effective if the medical profession is diligent in steering patients away from opioids and on to safer medication !

When Power - is Power !

There is a very good chance that homes and businesses in northern Sydney, The Hunter, Newcastle and the Central Coast will experience power blackouts when hot weather strikes in February.  The three thousand workers of Ausgrid are threatening industrial action if their pay claim is not settled before that time.

That is not an idle threat.  The generation and distribution of electricity has been balanced on a knife edge when we recently had a forty-seven degree day and historically February usually delivers an end of summer burst of heat.   These three thousand workers are the people who control and maintain the electricity distribution network that flows through poles and wires to our homes.   Any sort of industrial action, including  stoppages and call outs would be critical at times of high demand.

The unions are taking advantage of the crisis situation that delivers power to their hands and they have suffered a pay freeze for three long years.  Their original work agreement expired in December, 2014, when Ausgrid was owned by the NSW State government.  It has since been acquired by a consortium of Superannuation funds, IFM investors and AustralianSuper.

Negotiations have been grinding on endlessly, with the workers claiming to have delivered a productivity increase of  6.4 percent and have asked for a three percent pay rise.  Ausgrid is offering 2.5 percent over the next two years and 2 percent in the third year, supported by a $ 1000 bonus payment for each employee.

The union is holding out for that full three percent over the whole period and a vote by union members resulted in 93% opting for industrial action unless this pay claim reached finality.

Of course, Ausgrid is just one of the several individual companies that control electricity distribution in New South Wales and it is virtually certain that whatever is decided in the Ausgrid case will quickly flow on across the industry.

Fortunately, the pay discrepancy is very small and this gap may be negotiated without the unions resorting to industrial action because the outcome of rolling power blackouts is just too horrible to contemplate.  We are a society that has developed around a continuous electricity supply and blackouts would create the spectre of third world conditions.  In some forms of continuous supply manufacturing the damage to plant and machinery could run into millions of dollars.

The inconvenience of householders sitting in the dark is nothing compared to the damage even a small power interruption would cause to small business.  In the heat, most food would spoil very quickly, and the loss of refrigeration would compound that loss enormously.  That income loss would spread across all sections of society.

The danger exists more widely that this pay dispute. There is a doubt that our generating capacity is up to the job in very hot weather and commercial decisions are influencing outcomes in new plant to replace old coal fired generators.  It is quite possible that generation may fall short  if we experience a run of unusually hot weather.

A continuous electricity supply is probably the measure of our capacity as a twenty-first century society.  Its about time we got serious about making the right decisions to ensure uninterrupted supply !

But is it " Justice " ?

We have a vastly overloaded court system in New South Wales and most prisoners face endless delays before they face a judge and jury.  Even when the evidence against them is overwhelming they usually plead " not guilty " in the hope that their lawyer will pull some legal rabbit out of his hat that grants them freedom.

In many cases, this before trial period is spent on remand which means they are actually behind bars in the same manner of those convicted and sentenced because bail has been refused, and in some cases the time spent on remand is greater than the usual prison term that applies to the offence with which they are charged.

The legal system is a well known lottery in which lawyers game the system to try and get their clients to appear before selected judges. The judiciary are known for their " hard "or " soft " attitude in sentencing and getting a case on an individual judges docket is all a matter of timing.

One of the peculiarities of our legal system is the custom of granting a twenty-five percent reduction in the time to be served to those who enter a " guilty " plea.  This has led to an overwhelming change of plea to " guilty " at the last moment, just as the prisoner is finally having his or her case brought to trial.

Now a new approach is delivering results claimed to be " spectacular ".   From March 2015 District Court judge Ian McClintock presided over a " rolling list " court where dedicated teams of prosecution and defence lawyers appeared before him alone, rather than returning to other judges after adjournments.   With the inducement to try and get the case before another individual judge gone, the ratio of " guilty pleas " in this rolling list court jumped from the average of twenty-two percent in the ordinary court system to a much faster forty percent.

It seems that placing senior lawyers in both teams of defence and prosecution to negotiate the terms of the charge and sentence allowed these issues to be settled much more quickly, freeing up the entire court system.   It is now proposed that cases be randomly allocated between regular lists and Judge McClintocks rolling list because his cases progress from committal hearing to trial forty percent faster.

Some may see this as a hidden threat.  Don't waste the courts time with defences that must clearly fail or you will lost the discount for an early guilty plea.  It is quite possible some innocent people will accept this " deal " just to end the time they are spending in a threatening environment on remand, virtually serving a sentence that has not been sanctioned by a court.   Remand was supposed to contain only those deemed a threat to society but bail conditions have hardened and today many more languish on remand for other reasons.

It would be unfortunate if we lose the reason why the " innocent until proven guilty "  maxim applies to our court system.  Many prosecution cases fail on a technicality or the evidence submitted is not convincing, but this rolling list court seems more disposed to deliver speed by using the reduced sentence inducement to encourage a guilty plea.

The wheels of justice were said to grind slowly.  Perhaps justice in overdrive - is no longer justice  !

Negative Gearing !

The ABC has used " freedom of information " laws to obtain a Treasury report on Labor's plan to drastically alter the " negative gearing " arrangement that allows investors to write off many of the costs of buying homes and putting them on the market as rental properties when these are accepted for tax purposes as a deduction against other income.

This Treasury report delivers a finding that is directly opposite to the claim the government made when Labor put negative gearing reductions as its policy at the 2016 election.  The government claimed that this would put a " sledgehammer " through the housing market and bring the economy to a " shuddering halt ".

The Treasury people concluded that this plan would deliver an increase in taxation on rental property that would have a modest  downturn impact on property prices.  It was noted that the proposal would " grandfather " existing investments and have no impact on owner/occupier housing.  Labor is now claiming that the government lied to the people because it ignored this Treasury report.

Of course this assumes that Treasury reports are always one hundred percent accurate and the people who predict how the public will react have the uncanny power to look into peoples minds.  They are simply statistical researchers.  Perhaps the government was closer to the minds of the very people who use negative gearing to ease their taxation load and at the same time accumulate family wealth as a retirement fund.  This has been accentuated by the world wide bubble in housing prices.

Labor's policy initiative would have ceased negative gearing to all new property transactions and increased the Capital Gains Tax ( CGT ) from twenty-five percent to fifty percent on investment property sales.  That would probably stop the purchase of rental properties dead in its tracks - with a consequent reduction in rental availability in the years ahead.

Buying an investment property is attractive to high income earners at present because interest rates are historically at their lowest point for years, but that will change.  The interest rate cycle seems about to rise and there is uncertainty about where house prices are heading.  We are seeing the first price reductions after decades of constant rises.

A lot depends on what Labor hoped to achieve.  A lot has been said about first home buyers being priced out of the market, but a big drop in house prices would deliver financial annihilation to thousands struggling with big mortgages and that could throw the economy into recession.  It seems to be a case of being very careful about what we wish for.

The " Fear Factor " !

When that Euthanasia law was voted down by a single vote in the New South Wales parliament many people with terminal diseases despaired of achieving a painless end to their lives.  The lucky ones hoped that a bed might be found for them in palliative care, where the objective is to go further with pain relief than is usually provided in the general hospital system.

Much media attention was focused on a custom that has prevailed for a very long time. Some humanitarian doctors believe that pain relief is more important that a few extra hours of life and deliver an opiate dose that both eases the suffering and lets life slip away.  This is illegal and the practice is tending to cease as public debate causes those with objector views to report such instances to the authorities.

Australians will be dismayed to learn that a recent report found that errors in opiate use were three times higher than in other healthcare settings.  The researchers had looked at opioid errors in three inpatient palliative care services in metropolitan NSW.   In forty-two percent of these cases the patient received a lesser dose than was initially ordered., with more than half of them requiring additional treatment as a direct consequence of this opioid error.

It seems that many who hoped for a pain free death are not getting their expectation and the most likely case is the " fear factor " that this euthanasia debate has generated in individual minds. Those tasked with delivering opioid doses can not be sure that a colleague may have an anti-Euthanasia mindset and question the validity of the measure delivered.  They could be dragged before a coronial enquiry and stripped of their medical license if found guilty.

Significantly, the majority of patients examined had terminal cancer and were aged in their seventies. This was the very people that Euthanasia law was intended to serve, allowing them to avoid the painful end that many cancers deliver by choosing the timing of their individual deaths.  Instead, they are put at the mercy of others and we now find that this same fear factor is diluting the legal dose they are entitled to receive.   Some are experiencing an unnecessarily painful death in the very institution designed to prevent this happening.

Perhaps we need to review that very complex law that got voted down.  It required the patient to make arrangements well in advance and be examined by a psychiatrist.  There were age restrictions and to be mercifully terminated  the patient had to jump through all the hoops the politicians thought necessary to placate opposing religions.

Really, this is something that very properly belongs in confidence between the patient and their attending doctor.   If a terminal patient is in extreme pain and asks his or her doctor to end it - that should be where the decision is made - and exactly where it rightfully should be made.

Strangely, if those with the care of an animal allowed it to suffer the agony some patients faced before death we would prosecute them and deliver punishment in a court, and yet that is the kind of mercy we deny humankind !

The " Cannabis Oil " Fiasco !

Our courageous politicians have decided that medicinal cannabis will now be a permitted export to cash in on growing world demand for this product.  The only problem is that they have failed to make it legally available for the Australian users who are still forced to break the law and obtain their supples from criminal elements.

What many will find even more farcial.   To enable competitive pricing, cannabis oil will also be a permitted import into Australia.   So we expect to make money from the booming European, Canadian and US medical markets, but this same product can not be legally prescribed by doctors in this country.

Cannabis oil has been a proven relief for treating chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, chronic non-cancer pain and palliative care.  Numerous tests have proven its worth and yet political foot dragging has prevented it emerging as a legal drug accepted by the Therapeutic Goods Administration. ( TGA).

The main problem is that the politicians are spooked by the cannabis oil link to Marijuana. For decades we have had implacable opposition to all forms of addictive drugs and there is a fear that politicians who vote for legalization will be tainted with a " soft on drugs " reason to repel voters.

Marijuana was perfectly legal in Australia until it got scooped up in a drug panic in the 1950's.  Youth elements world wide started experimenting with substances that delivered a " high " and this included LSD.   Heroin use became popular and suddenly we were in a drug frenzy that has outgrown law enforcements ability to control.

Marijuana is no more addictive than alcohol, and it is fast gaining legality in many parts of the world.  In America there is the situation that it remains an illegal product under Federal law and has become a legal product under state law in many areas.  As a result, banks are reluctant to extend banking services to Marijuana shops and proprietors need to enable their own money security.  The trend to legality is spreading to a host of countries.

President Trump urgently needs a distraction to draw public attention away from the investigation into his election tactics and it seems likely he will force Federal authorities to crack down on state Marijuana sales.  As a consequence, the use of medicinal cannabis in the United States may be a unforseen casualty.

The fact that medical cannabis remains in a legal vacuum here in Australia is a disgrace.  Both Federal and state politicians are guilty of paying lip service to the need to confer legality - but at the same time moving at glacial speed to actually enact the laws that will make that happen.

Protecting Strata Unit Buyers !

The New South Wales government is busily wording a new law to protect home buyers from shonky building firms that build substandard buildings. The present law is hopelessly inadequate and leaves many owners locked in battle with the people who built apartment complexes to have defects fixed.   These industry people have deep pockets and repeatedly take matters to appeal to delay an outcome.

This new law will require developers to lodge a 2 percent bond with NSW Fair Trading when the construction contract is signed.  The safety aspect revolves around two inspections,  the first of which will take place between 15 and 18 months after completion.  The final inspection happens between 21 and 24 months and the bond will not be released until there are no defects remaining after that  inspection gives the all clear.

Industry insiders warn that a two percent bond will be inadequate to cover rectification of defects and a five percent bond should be written into the law.  Anecdotal evidence also indicated that the timing of those inspections cannot hope to disclose defects that are not immediately evident.  Many building shortcuts lay dormant for years and only appear as the building ages.  The purchase of any sort of dwelling is usually the biggest money transaction that the average person makes in a lifetime.  The integrity of what is purchased is of critical importance.

There are also loop holes in this new law.  It only applies to buildings that are intended to become strata buildings on completion.   A building intended to become an office block can be converted for home strata use if demand for office space dwindles - and so avoid the rectification onus of this act. It would not be unreasonable to require this guarantee of structural integrity to apply to every new building, irrespective of its intended purpose.

The other anomaly is the restriction of what amounts to a guarantee of work compliance to just two years - and only applies to buildings under construction. It is not uncommon for existing older buildings to be converted into modern apartments and it seems that such conversions are not covered by this new safety law.

Both the legal industry and the entire construction spectrum seem to be whistling in the dark over another aspect of building safety that remains unresolved.  In June of this year London had a tragic fire when Grenfell Tower's burning transfixed viewers on television screens and scores lost their lives.

This building was owned by a council and had been recently renovated, but the cladding on the exterior violated the law because it was flammable.  This enabled an easily contained unit fire to escape and move up the outer face of the building, until it became  a blazing torch.  To our consternation, we find that tis same flammable material is present on many high rise buildings here in Australia.

Half a year later - and nothing has changed.  We have scores of buildings capable of replicating that Grenfell Tower fire and work should be processing in removing that fatal cladding and installing a safe replacement - but that is not happening.

The " Who pays " issue is the impediment, and that remains to be decided in a court.  It is complex.  This material is not legal and yet councils have signed off on the work, compounding their share of the blame.  Many of the building firms that installed the material lack the financial strength to survive rectification cost, and blame may also spread to the importers who brought this problem into Australia.

Perhaps a very good time to go back to the drawing board and plan a comprehensive  responsibility regimen that covers both construction and renovation for the lifetime of apartment buildings.  This new proposal falls a long way short of that objective !

Rewriting the Classics !

It seems that the mood to make the world " politically correct " has now moved to altering the finality of opera stories.  The talented people who wrote the music and story of so many operas that we love were telling tales without regard to the ethics that apply to women today.

When Georges Bizet wrote " Carmen "  his finale had the Gypsy heroine stabbed to death by her discarded lover.    An Italian musical foundation has rewritten this opera to completely alter the ending.  Instead of being stabbed to death, Carmen produces a pistol and shoots the man who has done her wrong.

The Foundation head justifies this on the grounds that the change delivers a " more modern meaning ".   At a time when our society is having to confront the murder of women, how can we dare to applaud the killing of a woman.

Many opera lovers will despair - but where does it end ?   We revere Shakespeare but many of his stories would attract criticism from the women's movement of today. The " Taming of the Shrew  "  would have many feminists in a frenzy, but it is hard to see how this play could possibly be relevant with a different ending.

If morality is to be the new measure in entertainment, we may have to go back and do a remake of " Gone with the Wind ".  That rejection scene where Rhett Butler delivers his " I don't give a damn "  line would be rejected - and replaced with a long winded explanation to satisfy the whims of today.

Strangely, in this new version of " Carmen "  there is no outcry from men that one of their gender dies from a pistol shot.  We are not seeing a movement to exclude all forms of violence from entertainment, because that would make the genre boring - to the point of being unwatchable.  It seems to be just the female gender that is getting prickly about the reality scenes being portrayed on stage or on screen.

Over the years many operas have been revised to make them appealing to different - sometimes younger - audiences.   A new version of" Carmen " titled  "  Carmen Jones "  simply changed the scene from bull fighters to boxers and street gangs, but with the same music and updated lyrics.  It was evident that it did not do anything to replace the original as a popular taste.

This revised version of " Carmen "  will probably suffer the same fate.  The " difference " aspect will draw some people to opera for the first time but across the world where Carmen is performed it is Bizet's original that will play to audiences.

Reducing the violence faced by women is mainly a matter of education.  It will not be achieved by denigrating the brilliance of the old masters by destroying their story lines !

Taxing " Grog " !

A long time ago - when Bob Hawke was prime minister - the government decided to decrease the alcohol content to create a choice of full strength or " light " beer.  The  excise tax remained the same and so the price of either was unchanged - either over the bar or in the bottle shop.

Bob Hawke tried to convince us that the alcohol strength was not the reason we drank beer.  It was the refreshing taste and we should accept the equal price for both full strength and the light product. That argument went down like a lead balloon and was compounded by a Hawke gaffe while electioneering in a country town.

He proposed a round of drinks with several fellows in a pub - and put a five dollar bill on the bar to pay for the round..  It seems that prime ministers have little call on pocket change and he was obviously out of touch with the cost of a schooner in that day and age.  The government caved in and instituted a lower excise tax on light beer.

Now the anti-alcohol lobby is trying to do away with heavily discounted cans and bottles sold in bottle shops and the " Happy Hour " so popular in many pubs on Friday and Saturday night.  Their argument is that " a beer is a beer - is a beer " and the tax should apply equally irrespective of what form it comes in.

That ties in with the proposal to institute a floor price on all forms of alcohol.  At present, the tax differs depending on whether the alcohol is beer, spirits or wine - and how it is packaged.  The anti-alcohol lobby wants any form of alcoholic drink to have a minimum price component to eliminate " cheap " products which they say encourages binge drinking.

The main target seems to be cask wine.  A five litre cask often sells for as low as ten dollars and this proposal would push the price to forty-five dollars.   The excise on all alcohol would rise by ten percent and both cheap drinks over the bar and buying a carton of cans or bottles from the bottle  shop would reflect that base price per drink.   It is estimated that this would increase the governments excise tax dividend by another $ 2.9 billion a year.

Typical of anti-alcohol lobby thinking, this proposal is being offered to the government as a revenue increase.  The excise hike would cost taxpayers $ 2.9 billion and only $ 27.5 million would be ploughed back in preventive health spending, with the balance going into government coffers.  That is tempting to any Treasurer.

There is a lesson to be learned here from what happened when the government decided to tackle another health problem.   We hiked the cost of cigarettes in the hope that a dollar a smoke would see many smokers quit.  Some did, but the price delivered an opportunity to the black economy and we are awash with smuggled tobacco pouring in through our opaque customs control.

The " law of supply and demand " applies.   We Australians love our grog and if the government puts it out of economic reach the black economy will fill that need.   All it takes is the legitimate price to rise to a level where the smuggler can make a profit.

Wishful Thinking !

The news that Sydney house prices have ceased their ever upward trend and actually reversed has the economists whistling in the dark.  That phenomenon of prices doubling every ten years was simply unsustainable without a surge in inflation and a steady matching increase in wages and salaries - and that was not happening !

The pundits are bleating that this is only a " correction " and will not prove to be catastrophic but in August the median selling price in Sydney reached $ 909,914 and now that same home is only attracting bids of $ 895,342 - a ten percent drop which wipes  $ 90,000 off the value of individual homes.

The people who will be in trouble are the buyers who jumped into the market with a minimum deposit and a massive mortgage that they can barely afford,  feeling safe because if the pressure got too great they could slap the property back on the market - and make a profit.   In many cases, that minimum deposit was a gift or a loan from the  bank of  " Mum and Dad ".

What the market gurus are spouting is more wishful thinking because the outcome of this price drop is an unknown factor.  All it will take is a surge of " For Sale " signs on front lawns to create a price panic as buyers desert the market.   We would do well to remember what happened in the 2008 recession when the banks began enthusiastically to repossess after even small repayment arrears.

When the banks repossessed a home their lack of Real Estate  expertise became painfully apparent.  They made no attempt to maintain the properties and keep them attractive for buyers and many suburbs became a vista of unmown lawns and neglected gardens.  Despite an ongoing rental shortage, no attempt was made to claw back income by putting these properties on the rental market.

We were lucky in that drop in house prices was short lived, but it is the price of homes that has gone against the trend of most other market commodities   In 2012 the median house price in Sydney was  $ 520,000.   If prices retreated back to that level it would represent a decrease of close to 42 percent. That is unlikely, but the price of any item is entirely governed by what the buyers are prepared to pay

Most people will watch the house market change with trepidation.. It is a major factor in the retirement plans of many families.  They plan to sell a high priced city home to move to a lower priced retirement venue and a house price crash will wreck those plans.  Even those with property that is mortgage free will be seriously affected by such price instability.

At this stage, it is impossible to determine a precise cause for this price decline.  In recent weeks auction clearances have dropped and general sales volumes have eased.  Sellers who expected a quick sale eased their expectations  - and the rumour spread that prices were falling.  From there the rumour mill went into overdrive.

Just where this ends up is entirely in the lap of the Gods.    Whether it becomes a rout or a mere hiccup will depend on the evaluation put by individual minds and the action that follows. We would be wise to buckle our safety belts.  We may be heading for a rough ride !

An Australian Republic ?

With Queen Elizabeth aged ninety-one it is inevitable that the issue of Australia becoming a republic will rise front and centre again in the near future.  Affection for the Queen has put this issue on the backburner but this Turnbull/Keating debate is giving it new life.

Australia rejected a referendum that proposed appointing a president selected by a joint sitting of both houses of parliament delivering a two thirds majority to the person selected by the politicians.  John Howard was prime minister at that time and he is an avowed monarchist.

If we do become a Republic the Australian public will not settle for less than a popular vote to elect the man or woman who will preside in this country.  The politicians rejected this on the grounds that we might not pick someone who is deemed " suitable " !

That does raise an interesting question. " Republics " come in several shapes and sizes.  The American system delivers almost unlimited power to the person in the Oval officer, but in other countries the president is a mere figurehead - and power remains in the hands of a prime minister.

The thinking at the time of the referendum was to simply replace the monarchy and its figurehead role with what the politicians hoped would be a tame cat figure with very limited power.  There was danger that if a strong personality won office it might result in a constitutional battle between the President and the prime minister for control of the levers of power.

The election of Donald Trump to the American presidency probably closed the door on conversion to an American style presidency here.  Electing an Australian president with exactly the same powers as the present monarchy would present the least disruption to our way of life - and deliver the prime objective of having an Australian as head of state.

We would be wise to think long and hard on the conditions we would apply to any presidential hopeful.  The American founding fathers insisted that their president must be over twenty-five years old - and born in the United States.   That seems a slap in the face to many in a country founded by migrants.  We have just gone through constitutional confusion because our constitution bars those with dual nationalities from sitting in parliament.  Hopefully, the only requirement of an Australian presidential contender would be that he or she holds valid citizenship in this country.

That last republic referendum was simply designed to fail and given the Queen's extreme age the issue may be revisited very abruptly.  It would be an important status change and making a decision with an non compulsory postal vote would be an insult to the Australian people.  Exactly what sort of republic should be spelt out in detail and that needs the same sort of elective vote that we demand for parliamentary elections.

Both Turnbull and Keating are doing the nation a favour in raising the republic issue for general debate.  We need to consider the implications before the pressure of a decisive campaign which will require us to put pen to paper in a vote.  Without doubt, this is an emerging issue that will probably burst on the scene and divide the nation.  We would do well to think through the implications before the real issue becomes submerged in political in-fighting.

An Alternative Prosecution Strategy !

Justice in the United States is not certain when a police officer shoots a civilian.   The powerful police unions obstruct both the investigation and the outcome and rarely does the offender face a court.   It is nearing six months since Australian woman Justine Damond called the police to investigate suspicious noises behind her Minneapolis home.  A police car with two officers responded, and when - dressed in her pyjamas - she approached to speak to the police, one of them inexplicably fired his weapon and shot her dead.

The prosecutor has complained that " the investigation has not been done to his satisfaction or even to the expected levels of accuracy"  and there is yet no basis for a prosecution.  The officer who fired the shot has invoked the fifth amendment and refuses to be interviewed and his partner in the car was not being helpful.   Neither had activated their body cameras to record the event.  The Minneapolis police chief has resigned over this matter.

This clearly seems to be a case of stone walling.  The investigation is going slowly and it seems unlikely to reach a conclusion.  The officer who fired the shot is protected by his right to the fifth amendment and may remain silent indefinitely.  Without a conclusion to the investigation, the prosecutor will be unable to lay a charge and put the matter to a court for resolution.

Perhaps the prosecution is approaching this from the wrong angle.  The bullet has been recovered from the deceased's  body and matched to the police officers weapon.   The way is open for the prosecutor to lay a charge of  " feloniously discharging a firearm that caused a death ".

Clearly, this is not a murder case.  The deceased and the police officer are strangers to one another and the reason the officer fired  a shot is as yet unknown, but by laying this charge the culprit is obliged to present a defence to a judge and jury because there is clear evidence that it was a bullet from his weapon that caused a death.

No matter whether it is a police officer or a civilian, when a firearm is discharged that causes a death the person who discharged that firearm has a case to answer.  If there are mitigating circumstances that will be taken into consideration in evaluating both the criminality - and the punishment.

This police officer was issued with a firearm which remained in his care, and that firearm brought about the death of another person.  If that firearm was in the possession of another person at that time the name of that person must be revealed and the reason for that possession stated.  The onus of proof is clearly on the person with control of the weapon to explain its use.

The protection of the fifth amendment remains, but instead of the prosecution needing to prove guilt, the defence now has to prove either innocence, or a reason for pulling that trigger.  The sheer logic of such a prosecution is that it eliminates the human factor in evidence evaluation to shield a guilty colleague.

That is perhaps the only way this particular case will reach resolution !

Codeine Withdrawn From Sale !

Expect to see empty shelves in the painkiller aisle of most chemists this new year.  From February 1, a new law comes into effect which will require a doctors prescription for products which contain Codeine.  Until now, these have been freely available over the counter and this law change is expected to generate a rush to stockpile by many users.

This will come as a shock to many people. Familiar names such as Panadeine and Nurafen Plus are as freely bought for those suffering pain just  as Vegemite is regarded on supermarket shelves.  In the eyes of many, it it completely harmless, and yet there has been growing concern in medical circles that constant use is leading to Codeine addiction.

Those same medical circles advise that Codeine should be restricted to no more than three days use in a row but so many people have a nagging injury that causes them to use a hundred tablets a day, bought from various pharmacies. Codeine is often used because it is a familiar brand and other drugs that do not contain Codeine do exactly the same job of pain relief.  It is used not only in tablet form, but is present in many cough mixtures and flu medications.

Adding to the alarm,  in the illicit drug scene teenagers have discovered that Codeine can produce that desired " high " and as a result quantity limitations have been put in place to restrict over the counter sales.   It is hoped that requiring a doctors prescription will put a dent in the illicit drug scene and steer many pain sufferers onto safer medication.

Long term Codeine abuse can cause liver damage, induce stomach perforation and internal bleeding, kidney failure, heart attacks and hyperventilation.   Many who overuse Codeine do not realise that this addiction has taken hold until they suffer withdrawal symptoms that appear when use is discontinued.

Products affected by the change include popular pain killers Panadeine and Nurafen Plus,  Mersyndol and cough and flu products under the brands Demazin and Codral.   Precisely the remedies we reach for each winter when the flu season strikes.

From February 1 those in need of pain relief will still have access to products containing paracetamol and ibuprofen and it is likely that with the withdrawal of Codeine drug companies will reformulate their products to meet this new law.  The medical people assure us that these alternatives are equally effective in managing pain but are no longer addictive.

There is an added bonus.  Those who have been taking Codeine long term and suffer withdrawal symptoms may be induced to consult a doctor seeking a Codeine script.  Often, the cause of pain is not being treated and is simple masked by the use of pain killers.  With proper treatment of the cause, in many cases the need for pain relief is terminated or sharply reduced.

The Therapeutic Goods Association has taken this action by compelling evidence of the harm caused by overuse and abuse.  A lot of familiar brands will disappear from Chemists shelves, but the relief of pain will not have been compromised.  Products that do the job as well as Codeine are still available, but without the addiction risk.