Once again an elderly person has been discovered deceased in rental accommodation - undiscovered for several weeks. This is not uncommon and there have been instances when tenants of Housing Commission accommodation have been reduced to a skeleton remains years after their death.
Such discoveries result in a flurry of activity designed to prevent such happenings. Unfortunately, we live in an age when few know the names of their neighbours - and even fewer take the trouble to see to their well being !
It is evident that protocols that should draw attention to a person who has dropped off the scene are failing. Elderly people on a pension are clients of Centrelink and that agency applies regular checks and balances to determine changes of income and circumstances.
Housing Commission tenants are subject to at least an annual inspection of the premises, and a deceased person obviously does not pay rent. It is inconceivable that the Commission would fail to make an inspection and ignore unpaid rent for years.
Then there is the matter of mail. It would be reasonable for the post person to issue a report if mail remains uncollected for a period of time.
All these factors, plus the scrutiny of those living nearby should be a factor in observing a change that might indicate that all was not well with a person living in the community. The problem is that these days the stress of modern living has removed the duty of care that once existed.
There are so many in the community who have outlived their relatives, or lost touch with their children or other loved ones - or who because of mental illness have become withdrawn - living like hermits amongst the hustle and bustle of modern life.
Welfare agencies have repeatedly implored citizens to spare a thought for those living around them, to observe and watch for the signs that indicate there is a problem - and then to do something about it - from knocking on that persons door to alerting the authorities.
We are usually receptive to such messages - and full of goodwill - but with the stress of modern living the thought fades until we once again read of such a horror in the daily press. Such is life in the twenty-first century !
Tuesday, 6 March 2007
Monday, 5 March 2007
The " Reverse Mortgage " trap.
Debt consultants are concerned at the growing number of retirees who are failing to adapt to living on reduced income. Some are steadily accumulating massive debt as they try to continue their former lifestyle - and in some cases this has led to suicide from despair.
The finance industry has offered a scheme labelled " Reverse Mortgages " to cater for those who are asset rich - but cash poor. Basically, this enables the owners of high value property such as the family home to borrow against that asset to provide cash to supplement superannuation or pension payments.
It is often referred to as a " loan without repayments ". That is true in the essence that the financier calculates that - due to the age of the borrowers - if financial conditions do not change there is enough equity to sustain the cash flow until the borrower is deceased. At that time, the financier recoups the loan money - plus the interest that has accumulated over the life of the loan.
And thereby lies the danger.
If Australia encountered a sharp rise in inflation and as a result interest rates rose to the level of a decade or so ago - somewhere near 17% - the sustainability of the asset to support the level of debt could quickly reverse - and the borrowers could find themselves without both the home and the flow of supporting cash.
Reverse Mortgages are an idea that could be appropriate in some cases, but borrowers considering them would be well advised to consult a good financial adviser and have the small print explained. Like all things financial, it is a good idea to fully understand what is involved before jumping in the deep end.
The finance industry has offered a scheme labelled " Reverse Mortgages " to cater for those who are asset rich - but cash poor. Basically, this enables the owners of high value property such as the family home to borrow against that asset to provide cash to supplement superannuation or pension payments.
It is often referred to as a " loan without repayments ". That is true in the essence that the financier calculates that - due to the age of the borrowers - if financial conditions do not change there is enough equity to sustain the cash flow until the borrower is deceased. At that time, the financier recoups the loan money - plus the interest that has accumulated over the life of the loan.
And thereby lies the danger.
If Australia encountered a sharp rise in inflation and as a result interest rates rose to the level of a decade or so ago - somewhere near 17% - the sustainability of the asset to support the level of debt could quickly reverse - and the borrowers could find themselves without both the home and the flow of supporting cash.
Reverse Mortgages are an idea that could be appropriate in some cases, but borrowers considering them would be well advised to consult a good financial adviser and have the small print explained. Like all things financial, it is a good idea to fully understand what is involved before jumping in the deep end.
Sunday, 4 March 2007
Calamity overtakes Kevin Rudd.
Just when the Australian Labor Party ( ALP ) finally elected a leader with the flair and charisma to have a hope of being the next prime minister a ghost from his past entered centre stage.
Kevin Rudd was riding high in the opinion polls with poll results indicating the ALP was ahead of the government on preferences - and Rudd was even ahead of John Howard as preferred prime minister.
And then thunderclouds from the west rained on his parade !
Rudd had three meetings with disgraced former West Australian premier Brian Burke, who was a convicted felon who has served time in prison and is now peddling influence from his government contacts, resulting in an investigation by an anti-corruption body. The West Australian government has banned all contact with Burke - and three of it's ministers have been sacked for defying that ban.
The Federal government has gloried in the opportunity to crucify Rudd in the parliament. Rudd apologises and admits that the contact was a poor choice of judgement, but refuses to step down as leader.
He refuses to divulge the reason for the meetings, but there is likely conjecture that they were to garner support at the time he was planning a move to unseat then leader Kim Beazley. His suggestion that he was a mere visitor at a dinner, attended as a guest of his friend Julian Grill - exploded when printed invitations emerged naming Rudd as the honoured guest and reason for the event.
Now a new factor has emerged. Human Services Minister Ian Campbell has come forward and admitted that he also had a meeting with Brian Burke. This happened when Burke attended a meeting - standing in for Grill - to decide future plans for a sports ground in Perth. Campbell offered his resignation - for the good of the party - and prime minister Howard reluctantly accepted it.
This changes the whole context of the situation - and puts Rudd in an impossible situation. If he stands firm and bluffs it out his credibility will be badly damaged. He met with a notoriously crooked ex-politician and this was enough for three Western Australian ministers to be sacked - and a sitting Liberal minister to voluntarily fall on his sword - and yet Rudd refuses to accept punishment.
He may survive - just. But his credibility will be badly damaged - and for him the " honeymoon " would seem to be over.
The ALP has little option than to bluff it out and take flak. Should Rudd do the right thing and stand down - the Labor party would be - if you will permit the pun - left Rudderless. There simply isn't anyone else suited to be leader, much less in an election year.
Kevin Rudd must be wondering what he did to enrage the Gods of politics !
Kevin Rudd was riding high in the opinion polls with poll results indicating the ALP was ahead of the government on preferences - and Rudd was even ahead of John Howard as preferred prime minister.
And then thunderclouds from the west rained on his parade !
Rudd had three meetings with disgraced former West Australian premier Brian Burke, who was a convicted felon who has served time in prison and is now peddling influence from his government contacts, resulting in an investigation by an anti-corruption body. The West Australian government has banned all contact with Burke - and three of it's ministers have been sacked for defying that ban.
The Federal government has gloried in the opportunity to crucify Rudd in the parliament. Rudd apologises and admits that the contact was a poor choice of judgement, but refuses to step down as leader.
He refuses to divulge the reason for the meetings, but there is likely conjecture that they were to garner support at the time he was planning a move to unseat then leader Kim Beazley. His suggestion that he was a mere visitor at a dinner, attended as a guest of his friend Julian Grill - exploded when printed invitations emerged naming Rudd as the honoured guest and reason for the event.
Now a new factor has emerged. Human Services Minister Ian Campbell has come forward and admitted that he also had a meeting with Brian Burke. This happened when Burke attended a meeting - standing in for Grill - to decide future plans for a sports ground in Perth. Campbell offered his resignation - for the good of the party - and prime minister Howard reluctantly accepted it.
This changes the whole context of the situation - and puts Rudd in an impossible situation. If he stands firm and bluffs it out his credibility will be badly damaged. He met with a notoriously crooked ex-politician and this was enough for three Western Australian ministers to be sacked - and a sitting Liberal minister to voluntarily fall on his sword - and yet Rudd refuses to accept punishment.
He may survive - just. But his credibility will be badly damaged - and for him the " honeymoon " would seem to be over.
The ALP has little option than to bluff it out and take flak. Should Rudd do the right thing and stand down - the Labor party would be - if you will permit the pun - left Rudderless. There simply isn't anyone else suited to be leader, much less in an election year.
Kevin Rudd must be wondering what he did to enrage the Gods of politics !
Saturday, 3 March 2007
The lure of wealth.
Sometimes a triumphant news story has the opposite effect of what was intended. This week the media splashed an account of a hugely successful police operation that nabbed a group of drug dealers. The highlight of this story was the discovery and confiscation of over eleven million dollars in illicit profits. The story went on to describe the confiscation of a veritable Aladdin's cave of jet skis, jewellery, luxury motor vehicles - and an incredible gold plated hand gun.
The cameras concentrated on the image of a vast pile of money discovered in the roof cavity of a house in Wollongong. Bundle after bundle of $ 100 and $ 50 dollar notes, neatly wrapped in plastic and amounting to over ten million dollars.
All of this the profit from drug dealing ! How many people in the community will lust after this type of reward - and with it the luxury lifestyle revealed by all those items of such a lifestyle seized by the police ? Even bigger and better than a major win in Lotto ! The crazy thing is that the money discovered in a house roof cavity was funds the dealers simply didn't know what to do with. They had their lifestyle - and the money in the roof was merely surplus funds - waiting until they figured out how to launder it !
Within days a second story followed. This concerned a soldier in the Australian Defence Force who was caught selling five hundred Ecstacy tablets to undercover cops for $ 2500. A search of his premises discovered $ 44,585 in profits stashed away in a cupboard.
These stories are going to tempt many to consider drug trading as a way of getting incredibly rich. There are disincentives in the form of gaol time - but to many the lure of incredible wealth will overcome any scruples about what danger to others is involved in drugs and the risk of incarceration " goes with the territory " as many criminals believe !
Perhaps such stories of police success are not a deterrent when at the same time they reveal the lifestyle that goes with being clever and avoiding detection. For many, a few years living the ultra good life would be ample compensation for a further few years in the prison system.
Time will tell, but this news story is less likely to bring about a reduction in drug dealing !
The cameras concentrated on the image of a vast pile of money discovered in the roof cavity of a house in Wollongong. Bundle after bundle of $ 100 and $ 50 dollar notes, neatly wrapped in plastic and amounting to over ten million dollars.
All of this the profit from drug dealing ! How many people in the community will lust after this type of reward - and with it the luxury lifestyle revealed by all those items of such a lifestyle seized by the police ? Even bigger and better than a major win in Lotto ! The crazy thing is that the money discovered in a house roof cavity was funds the dealers simply didn't know what to do with. They had their lifestyle - and the money in the roof was merely surplus funds - waiting until they figured out how to launder it !
Within days a second story followed. This concerned a soldier in the Australian Defence Force who was caught selling five hundred Ecstacy tablets to undercover cops for $ 2500. A search of his premises discovered $ 44,585 in profits stashed away in a cupboard.
These stories are going to tempt many to consider drug trading as a way of getting incredibly rich. There are disincentives in the form of gaol time - but to many the lure of incredible wealth will overcome any scruples about what danger to others is involved in drugs and the risk of incarceration " goes with the territory " as many criminals believe !
Perhaps such stories of police success are not a deterrent when at the same time they reveal the lifestyle that goes with being clever and avoiding detection. For many, a few years living the ultra good life would be ample compensation for a further few years in the prison system.
Time will tell, but this news story is less likely to bring about a reduction in drug dealing !
The lure of wealth.
Sometimes a triumphant news story has the opposite effect of what was intended. This week the media splashed an account of a hugely successful police operation that nabbed a group of drug dealers. The highlight of this story was the discovery and confiscation of over eleven million dollars in illicit profits. The story went on to describe the confiscation of a veritable Aladdin's cave of jet skis, jewellery, luxury motor vehicles - and an incredible gold plated hand gun.
The cameras concentrated on the image of a vast pile of money discovered in the roof cavity of a house in Wollongong. Bundle after bundle of $ 100 and $ 50 dollar notes, neatly wrapped in plastic and amounting to over ten million dollars.
All of this the profit from drug dealing ! How many people in the community will lust after this type of reward - and with it the luxury lifestyle revealed by all those items of such a lifestyle seized by the police ? Even bigger and better than a major win in Lotto ! The crazy thing is that the money discovered in a house roof cavity was funds the dealers simply didn't know what to do with. They had their lifestyle - and the money in the roof was merely surplus funds - waiting until they figured out how to launder it !
Within days a second story followed. This concerned a soldier in the Australian Defence Force who was caught selling five hundred Ecstacy tablets to undercover cops for $ 2500. A search of his premises discovered $ 44,585 in profits stashed away in a cupboard.
These stories are going to tempt many to consider drug trading as a way of getting incredibly rich. There are disincentives in the form of gaol time - but to many the lure of incredible wealth will overcome any scruples about what danger to others is involved in drugs and the risk of incarceration " goes with the territory " as many criminals believe !
Perhaps such stories of police success are not a deterrent when at the same time they reveal the lifestyle that goes with being clever and avoiding detection. For many, a few years living the ultra good life would be ample compensation for a further few years in the prison system.
Time will tell, but this news story is less likely to bring about a reduction in drug dealing !
The cameras concentrated on the image of a vast pile of money discovered in the roof cavity of a house in Wollongong. Bundle after bundle of $ 100 and $ 50 dollar notes, neatly wrapped in plastic and amounting to over ten million dollars.
All of this the profit from drug dealing ! How many people in the community will lust after this type of reward - and with it the luxury lifestyle revealed by all those items of such a lifestyle seized by the police ? Even bigger and better than a major win in Lotto ! The crazy thing is that the money discovered in a house roof cavity was funds the dealers simply didn't know what to do with. They had their lifestyle - and the money in the roof was merely surplus funds - waiting until they figured out how to launder it !
Within days a second story followed. This concerned a soldier in the Australian Defence Force who was caught selling five hundred Ecstacy tablets to undercover cops for $ 2500. A search of his premises discovered $ 44,585 in profits stashed away in a cupboard.
These stories are going to tempt many to consider drug trading as a way of getting incredibly rich. There are disincentives in the form of gaol time - but to many the lure of incredible wealth will overcome any scruples about what danger to others is involved in drugs and the risk of incarceration " goes with the territory " as many criminals believe !
Perhaps such stories of police success are not a deterrent when at the same time they reveal the lifestyle that goes with being clever and avoiding detection. For many, a few years living the ultra good life would be ample compensation for a further few years in the prison system.
Time will tell, but this news story is less likely to bring about a reduction in drug dealing !
Friday, 2 March 2007
A common education policy.
A rare concurrence is occurring in Australian politics. Both the Federal government and the Federal Opposition agree that this country needs a common education policy !
In a hangover from the early days of Federation when the colonies reluctantly agreed to form a new nation - but each clung desperately to state powers - education became a state preserve - and as a consequence we have the ridiculous situation where six State and two Territory regimes support huge bureaucracies planning and implementing education regimes.
These regimes bear no relation to each other. Even the selection of books as required reading - and on which exams are held - have no common basis.
People with children who change state face a nightmare as bewildered children find themselves facing an education regime totally different from the system they are used to - and as a consequence many bright pupils find themselves disadvantaged.
The suggestion of a common education policy has brought howls of denial from the states and territories. All claim that the system they have in place is far superior - and any change to a common policy would mean " dumbing down " to something inferior.
The real reason for the objections are more personal. Egos are at stake - and so are jobs. If a common education policy is to come into effect the state and territory education regimes will need to be dismantled in favour of a new Federal planning body - which will be formed by representatives from those bodies involved. Obviously this will see a big reduction in the education planning staff in each state and territory - and for the education unions that is anathema.
The fact that both sides of politics agree is an omen that this long awaited benefit will happen - although there will be tough talk ahead to overcome objections from the regimes involved. Australia will certainly benefit from a common education policy in all parts of the country. After all, we are one nation. Why would we need multiple and disconnected education policies ? For once, common sense seems set to prevail !
In a hangover from the early days of Federation when the colonies reluctantly agreed to form a new nation - but each clung desperately to state powers - education became a state preserve - and as a consequence we have the ridiculous situation where six State and two Territory regimes support huge bureaucracies planning and implementing education regimes.
These regimes bear no relation to each other. Even the selection of books as required reading - and on which exams are held - have no common basis.
People with children who change state face a nightmare as bewildered children find themselves facing an education regime totally different from the system they are used to - and as a consequence many bright pupils find themselves disadvantaged.
The suggestion of a common education policy has brought howls of denial from the states and territories. All claim that the system they have in place is far superior - and any change to a common policy would mean " dumbing down " to something inferior.
The real reason for the objections are more personal. Egos are at stake - and so are jobs. If a common education policy is to come into effect the state and territory education regimes will need to be dismantled in favour of a new Federal planning body - which will be formed by representatives from those bodies involved. Obviously this will see a big reduction in the education planning staff in each state and territory - and for the education unions that is anathema.
The fact that both sides of politics agree is an omen that this long awaited benefit will happen - although there will be tough talk ahead to overcome objections from the regimes involved. Australia will certainly benefit from a common education policy in all parts of the country. After all, we are one nation. Why would we need multiple and disconnected education policies ? For once, common sense seems set to prevail !
Thursday, 1 March 2007
The language obstacle to safety !
A man is in gaol, three people are dead and fourteen are injured because of an accident that should not have happened.
On September 5, 2005 a twenty-four seat Hino bus carrying twenty-one Taiwanese passengers attempted to travel the notorious and highly dangerous Jamberoo Valley road . The driver, Hua Chun ( 45 ) had held an Australian driving license for less than three months - and a heavy vehicle driving license for less than five weeks. This driver did not speak or understand English !
The bus crashed at the bottom of a steep grade when it's brakes burnt out. This was because the driver failed to engage low gear or operate the exhaust braking system, required by law when heavy vehicles encounter steep descents. The bus hit the guard rail, toppled over and rolled into the valley below - resulting in death and injuries.
The entrance to the Jamberoo Valley road is well served by signs warning of danger and requiring car drivers to use caution. These signs clearly indicate that the road should not be used by coaches, caravans or heavy vehicles. Because this Chinese driver did not speak or understand English these signs failed to make him aware of the danger he was facing.
Now the question must be asked. Is it reasonable that a person who does not understand English be issued with a driving license - much less a license to drive a heavy vehicle ?
Consensus is that a driving license is reasonable because it relates to a car. Many people with no knowledge of English drive cars in Australia and Australians touring Europe have no problem with the road system - although it should be noted that because English is a universal language many European countries use bilingual road and destination signs.
The sticking point is the issue of a heavy vehicle license. Driving a heavy vehicle is akin to operating a battering ram - and that license also permits a non-English speaking person to drive a coach with many passengers.
The danger is just too great if a driver of a coach or other heavy vehicle is in unfamiliar territory and is unable to be warned of danger because of lack of knowledge of the English language.
It would not be unreasonable to expect a person who wishes to hold such a license to accept that as well as the training to operate such a vehicle a course to become proficient in English would also be a requirement.
Hopefully, this tragedy should cause a rethink of the relevant legislation to ensure that there is no repetition !
On September 5, 2005 a twenty-four seat Hino bus carrying twenty-one Taiwanese passengers attempted to travel the notorious and highly dangerous Jamberoo Valley road . The driver, Hua Chun ( 45 ) had held an Australian driving license for less than three months - and a heavy vehicle driving license for less than five weeks. This driver did not speak or understand English !
The bus crashed at the bottom of a steep grade when it's brakes burnt out. This was because the driver failed to engage low gear or operate the exhaust braking system, required by law when heavy vehicles encounter steep descents. The bus hit the guard rail, toppled over and rolled into the valley below - resulting in death and injuries.
The entrance to the Jamberoo Valley road is well served by signs warning of danger and requiring car drivers to use caution. These signs clearly indicate that the road should not be used by coaches, caravans or heavy vehicles. Because this Chinese driver did not speak or understand English these signs failed to make him aware of the danger he was facing.
Now the question must be asked. Is it reasonable that a person who does not understand English be issued with a driving license - much less a license to drive a heavy vehicle ?
Consensus is that a driving license is reasonable because it relates to a car. Many people with no knowledge of English drive cars in Australia and Australians touring Europe have no problem with the road system - although it should be noted that because English is a universal language many European countries use bilingual road and destination signs.
The sticking point is the issue of a heavy vehicle license. Driving a heavy vehicle is akin to operating a battering ram - and that license also permits a non-English speaking person to drive a coach with many passengers.
The danger is just too great if a driver of a coach or other heavy vehicle is in unfamiliar territory and is unable to be warned of danger because of lack of knowledge of the English language.
It would not be unreasonable to expect a person who wishes to hold such a license to accept that as well as the training to operate such a vehicle a course to become proficient in English would also be a requirement.
Hopefully, this tragedy should cause a rethink of the relevant legislation to ensure that there is no repetition !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)