Macquarie street would probably top the list as the most opulent address in Sydney. Not only does it house the building where this state's parliament sits, but our most famous medical specialists proudly have their consulting rooms along this street - and upper crust apartments cost a fortune.
This week it also became the scene of a gun battle when a member of a leading crime family survived an assassination attempt by two gunmen. Several shots were fired and one bullet lodged in the victim's shoulder. He is being treated in hospital and the wound is not considered life threatening.
Hollywood made a fortune from the battles between Al Capone's gang and the Chicago police. Crime movies drew big audiences all through the "Depression "years, and they still do today. Only the villains change - to keep up with the times. "The Godfather "series portrayed the Mafia in America and today the genre has changed again - to terrorists.
What doesn't change is the ongoing battle to tear down and replace whoever is "King "of the city crime empire. In this city, that "Kingdom " revolves around Kings Cross and it's nightclubs and gambling joints. Sometimes the supremo is a single individual who has risen to the top of the heap, and at present it is a "family "whose head is ably supported by several brothers. Whenever they travel, they are usually surrounded by a posse of "minders "who serve as bodyguards.
Our chief gangster is also a celebrity. He is stalked by the media and he is usually on first name terms with senior police. Usually there is an "understanding " that the criminals will maintain a code of conduct when conducting their affairs so as to not alarm the public. Occasionally, excesses occur when less sophisticated rivals try their hand at violence - as evidenced by this unsuccessful attempted assassination.
Unfortunately, it is now inevitable that there will be retribution. This has been one of several similar attacks on the crime family presently controlling Kings Cross and it can not go unchallenged. Most likely the victim will maintain silence and give the police no help in identifying his attacker, but the "foot soldiers " will be tasked with delivering a message to those responsible. Most likely, the outcome will be a body on a street somewhere in this city.
From a policing point of view keeping the dialogue between law enforcement and crime on a civil level is very important. The city crime boss rules his troops with a rod of iron and the first aim of any criminal enterprise is to keep the profits rolling in without interruption. That is possible only if crime and policing exist within a tight framework of rules that both strictly obey.
One ambitious competitor to the crime crown has been smashed by police. This gang wore it's name on their T shirts and was open with it's ambitions. One by one it's members were taken down, but not before violence on a grand scale created newspaper headlines and alarmed the public. Now it seems that another competitor is seeking that elusive crown and we may again have a period of violence during the sorting out process.
There will always be crime in this city - and there will always be a strong person in charge of that crime. Crime is big business and we constantly see cash money amounting to millions changing hands - and buying favours that impede successful policing. The best we can hope for is that the balance can be maintained so that violence does not spill over and harm innocent people.
At present, the people in charge of crime here are relatively "civilized ". It is best if the police aim to keep it this way and keep violent competitors at bay.
Wednesday, 7 January 2015
Tuesday, 6 January 2015
That " Strike " Weapon !
There has been an aftermath to the funeral of slain Police officer Rafael Ramos in New York last week. Arrests have dropped by sixty-six percent and on the spot fines are not being issued for minor offences but which are vital for city finances. The Police are showing their displeasure at a remark made by Mayor Bill de Blasio when an assassin shot two Police officers dead in a revenge attack for Police shootings of unarmed black people.
The Mayor had called for an "emergency summit "with the five police unions which cover the city - and the cops bristled at the implied suggestion that some sort of change was needed. This goes to the heart of the problem which is poisoning relations between the police and citizens in America - and in many other parts of the world.
The police know that they are an essential service. They do a dangerous job and they refuse to concede that any change is necessary in the way they do their policing work. One union representing police sergeants has called for the Mayor to "humble himself " and there are demands that he "change his philosophical views on policing ". It seems that the police are implacably opposed to any review of police responsibilities.
Policing has come a long way since the days when the first police "Bobbies "walked the streets of London. A century ago, most police were unarmed, but today officers have access to personal side arms and heavier weapon backup - and many wear body armour. The biggest change is in the area of attitude. Where police were once there to "help "the public, now most consider they are there to "control " the public.
This manifests itself in attitudes. The police expect the public to obey their orders and some are accused of arrogance. " Power "is in their hands and they are quick to make that clear when they are dealing with the public. The suggestion that police wear cameras on their uniforms to provide independent verification of contact between police and the public does not find favour with police. They see that as a restriction on their right to control situations as they think fit. Most regard it as a move to reduce the powers of the police.
In some parts of the world the police are completely out of control - and little better than the gangs that maraud city underworlds. Often the interaction with residents is heavy handed and many citizens have good reason to fear any sort of contact with the police. That is not a situation that we would want to happen here in Australia.
Unfortunately, that same sort of division between the public and police power has been steadily eroding trust as we see instances of police excesses swept under the carpet and not adequately investigated - and in each case it is the threat of intervention from the police union that stifles proper investigations.
There has only ever been one police strike in Australia - and the memory of that puts fear into the heart of any government. In 1923 twenty-four constables at Melbourne's Russell street police headquarters refused duties and about half the state police walked off the job. Criminal elements in the city went on the rampage, rioting, breaking into shops and looting. The state government's call for the army to be sent in to restore order was rejected, and consequently five thousand "special constables " were recruited and sworn in - and armed with pick handles. Order was quickly restored.
From time to time acrimony between the government and the police here in New South Wales have seen the same tactics now being used in New York applied. The uniformed police presence remains, but they are on an unofficial work strike and have ceased handing our traffic fines or fines for other offences, crippling the cash flow to treasury. In a matter of days, the government caves in. Thus the threat of a police strike remains like the proverbial "Sword of Damocles " - hanging over the head of parliament.
Eventually, a situation will arise that forces the hand of the government. A police excess that is so blatant that it sends mutiny spreading through the public and makes confrontation between the judiciary, parliament and the police inevitable.
Every time controversy is swept under the carpet and not fully investigated, it brings that day closer.
The Mayor had called for an "emergency summit "with the five police unions which cover the city - and the cops bristled at the implied suggestion that some sort of change was needed. This goes to the heart of the problem which is poisoning relations between the police and citizens in America - and in many other parts of the world.
The police know that they are an essential service. They do a dangerous job and they refuse to concede that any change is necessary in the way they do their policing work. One union representing police sergeants has called for the Mayor to "humble himself " and there are demands that he "change his philosophical views on policing ". It seems that the police are implacably opposed to any review of police responsibilities.
Policing has come a long way since the days when the first police "Bobbies "walked the streets of London. A century ago, most police were unarmed, but today officers have access to personal side arms and heavier weapon backup - and many wear body armour. The biggest change is in the area of attitude. Where police were once there to "help "the public, now most consider they are there to "control " the public.
This manifests itself in attitudes. The police expect the public to obey their orders and some are accused of arrogance. " Power "is in their hands and they are quick to make that clear when they are dealing with the public. The suggestion that police wear cameras on their uniforms to provide independent verification of contact between police and the public does not find favour with police. They see that as a restriction on their right to control situations as they think fit. Most regard it as a move to reduce the powers of the police.
In some parts of the world the police are completely out of control - and little better than the gangs that maraud city underworlds. Often the interaction with residents is heavy handed and many citizens have good reason to fear any sort of contact with the police. That is not a situation that we would want to happen here in Australia.
Unfortunately, that same sort of division between the public and police power has been steadily eroding trust as we see instances of police excesses swept under the carpet and not adequately investigated - and in each case it is the threat of intervention from the police union that stifles proper investigations.
There has only ever been one police strike in Australia - and the memory of that puts fear into the heart of any government. In 1923 twenty-four constables at Melbourne's Russell street police headquarters refused duties and about half the state police walked off the job. Criminal elements in the city went on the rampage, rioting, breaking into shops and looting. The state government's call for the army to be sent in to restore order was rejected, and consequently five thousand "special constables " were recruited and sworn in - and armed with pick handles. Order was quickly restored.
From time to time acrimony between the government and the police here in New South Wales have seen the same tactics now being used in New York applied. The uniformed police presence remains, but they are on an unofficial work strike and have ceased handing our traffic fines or fines for other offences, crippling the cash flow to treasury. In a matter of days, the government caves in. Thus the threat of a police strike remains like the proverbial "Sword of Damocles " - hanging over the head of parliament.
Eventually, a situation will arise that forces the hand of the government. A police excess that is so blatant that it sends mutiny spreading through the public and makes confrontation between the judiciary, parliament and the police inevitable.
Every time controversy is swept under the carpet and not fully investigated, it brings that day closer.
Monday, 5 January 2015
A Legal " Question " ?
A new phenomenon has appeared on Facebook. A dedicated group of car enthusiasts are posting pictures under the "Block their Shot "heading, recording strategies used to prevent roadside speed camera cars from booking speeding motorists.
We now have 45 camera cars operating in New South Wales and they rotate between 640 sites supposedly chosen because of their poor accident records. They are usually SUV's and they are sign written, and they automatically record the speed of passing traffic and take a picture of any vehicle exceeding the posted speed limit. The owner then gets a speeding fine in the mail.
Warning requirements seem to vary. Sometimes there is a small sign on the roadside warning "Speed check ahead "- and sometimes a sign on the far side of the camera car warning "Speeds have been checked " - and sometimes there are no signs at all evident.
These "Block their Shot "fanatics park a vehicle close behind a camera car and often raise the hood, or sit under a beach umbrella and block the camera view of passing cars. They do this because they claim these speed checks are purely revenue raising and contribute little to road safety, but apparently they break no law and the government is considering passing legislation to make this a new offence.
That certainly raises some interesting questions. Many will remember the tactics used to get drivers to slow down decades ago. In those more primitive times the police used to set speed traps by timing passing cars between two spots of a measured distance. It was the practice of other motorists to flash their lights to give warning when they discovered one of these traps. Even today, some drivers still flash their lights to give warning to approaching cars that a police DUI checking station is operating nearby.
One of the weaknesses of camera cars is that they detect a speeding vehicle, but not the driver. It is up to the owner to nominate the person driving at the time of the offence. You can be sure that many a young person perilously close to license cancellation because of demerit points accumulation will pressure Mum to take the rap - and that is an offence that could lead to a prison sentence.
Psychologists generally agree that there is a more lasting reduction of speeding when a driver gets pulled over by a Highway Patrol police vehicle and a speeding fine is written. A traffic fine that arrives in the mail - often weeks after the event - lacks impact and most people believe that the revenue raising aspect is higher in contention than increasing road safety.
There is also a very different culture present in the way we now live. Some would call this the "Communication Age " and the development of apps such as Facebook and Twitter encourage people to compete for attention on the world stage. Anyone with a camera in their phone can snap a picture and have if seen by millions in a matter of seconds - and that to many brings the same lure of fame that once belonged to movie stars.
There is probably more a need for fame than mere altruism in saving people from traffic fines when those pictures of "Block their Shot "incidents appear on Facebook. Fame is measured by the number of people who post a "like " to what is posted and hence the incentive for action to become more outrageous and appealing. Naturally, the government protests on road safety grounds, but any reduction in revenue is treated seriously.
A warning has been given. Stop impeding camera cars or new legislation will be put in the pipeline to make this a legal offence. Of course, to some that will simply be a challenge to find new ways to overcome detection. Already, some camera cars have been put out of action by wet paper spread over their rear windows to block the camera view.
Unfortunately, this lure to fame draws some to undertake extremely dangerous stunts and there have been casualties. Such is the downside of opening the Internet to the masses. We are now at the mercy of whatever the human mind can envisage - to amuse others !
We now have 45 camera cars operating in New South Wales and they rotate between 640 sites supposedly chosen because of their poor accident records. They are usually SUV's and they are sign written, and they automatically record the speed of passing traffic and take a picture of any vehicle exceeding the posted speed limit. The owner then gets a speeding fine in the mail.
Warning requirements seem to vary. Sometimes there is a small sign on the roadside warning "Speed check ahead "- and sometimes a sign on the far side of the camera car warning "Speeds have been checked " - and sometimes there are no signs at all evident.
These "Block their Shot "fanatics park a vehicle close behind a camera car and often raise the hood, or sit under a beach umbrella and block the camera view of passing cars. They do this because they claim these speed checks are purely revenue raising and contribute little to road safety, but apparently they break no law and the government is considering passing legislation to make this a new offence.
That certainly raises some interesting questions. Many will remember the tactics used to get drivers to slow down decades ago. In those more primitive times the police used to set speed traps by timing passing cars between two spots of a measured distance. It was the practice of other motorists to flash their lights to give warning when they discovered one of these traps. Even today, some drivers still flash their lights to give warning to approaching cars that a police DUI checking station is operating nearby.
One of the weaknesses of camera cars is that they detect a speeding vehicle, but not the driver. It is up to the owner to nominate the person driving at the time of the offence. You can be sure that many a young person perilously close to license cancellation because of demerit points accumulation will pressure Mum to take the rap - and that is an offence that could lead to a prison sentence.
Psychologists generally agree that there is a more lasting reduction of speeding when a driver gets pulled over by a Highway Patrol police vehicle and a speeding fine is written. A traffic fine that arrives in the mail - often weeks after the event - lacks impact and most people believe that the revenue raising aspect is higher in contention than increasing road safety.
There is also a very different culture present in the way we now live. Some would call this the "Communication Age " and the development of apps such as Facebook and Twitter encourage people to compete for attention on the world stage. Anyone with a camera in their phone can snap a picture and have if seen by millions in a matter of seconds - and that to many brings the same lure of fame that once belonged to movie stars.
There is probably more a need for fame than mere altruism in saving people from traffic fines when those pictures of "Block their Shot "incidents appear on Facebook. Fame is measured by the number of people who post a "like " to what is posted and hence the incentive for action to become more outrageous and appealing. Naturally, the government protests on road safety grounds, but any reduction in revenue is treated seriously.
A warning has been given. Stop impeding camera cars or new legislation will be put in the pipeline to make this a legal offence. Of course, to some that will simply be a challenge to find new ways to overcome detection. Already, some camera cars have been put out of action by wet paper spread over their rear windows to block the camera view.
Unfortunately, this lure to fame draws some to undertake extremely dangerous stunts and there have been casualties. Such is the downside of opening the Internet to the masses. We are now at the mercy of whatever the human mind can envisage - to amuse others !
Sunday, 4 January 2015
A Double Edged Sword !
Scenario One. A business person is on a visit to another city to negotiate a deal and carries both a Smartphone and a tablet. This involves an overnight stay at a city hotel and while he is having a meal a thief breaks into his room and steal the tablet. This is a serious breach of his company's security because all the information he will need to negotiate a deal are in that tablet's memory. It contains the cost settings for the company's manufacturing - something that would be of great value to a competitor. This theft is little short of a disaster.
Scenario Two. A person who distributes illegal drugs is asleep in bed when the police kick in his front door and perform a raid. He runs a very careful distribution network and there are no drugs to be found in his home, but the police seize both his Smartphone and his tablet - and they contain incriminating information that the police know will result in a conviction when he is put before a court. This is the only form of evidence - and he knows that he faces a long period of incarceration.
Today - the relentless march of progress in electronics offers a solution to both of these problems. It is now possible to remotely wipe data from Smartphones and Tablets by reverting the device back to factory settings. This removes all photos, videos, texts, emails and notes - and returns the device to it's pristine state when it was first purchased from a store.
All that is required is for the Smartphone or Tablet to be able to receive a signal - and that opens up a wide range of moves and counter moves that will be brought into play by both sides of the legal divide.
To the dismay of the police, they are now finding that evidence locked away and awaiting court trial is mysteriously blank when it is contained in seized Tablets and Smartphones. In the past, such evidence was usually stored in "evidence rooms "within a police station and now they realise that they will need to invest in radio frequency shielded evidence bags to secure captured information from the instant of seizure. It will also be necessary to have shielded evidence rooms in which seized Tablets and Smartphones can be examined by the police to unravel the contained information, otherwise they will be prone to being wiped while in police hands. In many cases, court action will be abandoned because the evidence to obtain a conviction no longer exists.
This technology will be invaluable in the business world. Hackers are constantly attacking the computer records of large public companies despite extensive firewalls and multiple password protection. The fact that some sensitive information in mobile form has been needed by executives has increased the risk factor. The security firms that offer protection will be quick to see an opportunity here to offer their skills to make stolen electronic devices safe - if they are quickly advised of the theft.
No doubt that same solution will be sought by the underworld. No doubt we will see procedures put in place to send an alert to a security company when other than an authorised person seeks entry to a Smartphone or Tablet - and set in motion action to wipe it clean for security reasons. The wise would have duplicate information on another recording device locked away in a bank vault in another country - to later repair the damage.
It seems to be a fact of life that - whatever human ingenuity is able to create - other counter action by opposing human ingenuity is able to undo. There never will be a safe that a cracksman can not open and there never will be a place in cyberspace that hackers can not reach,
Welcome to the electronic world of the future - where the only place that secrets can be totally secure - is when they never leave the human mind !
Scenario Two. A person who distributes illegal drugs is asleep in bed when the police kick in his front door and perform a raid. He runs a very careful distribution network and there are no drugs to be found in his home, but the police seize both his Smartphone and his tablet - and they contain incriminating information that the police know will result in a conviction when he is put before a court. This is the only form of evidence - and he knows that he faces a long period of incarceration.
Today - the relentless march of progress in electronics offers a solution to both of these problems. It is now possible to remotely wipe data from Smartphones and Tablets by reverting the device back to factory settings. This removes all photos, videos, texts, emails and notes - and returns the device to it's pristine state when it was first purchased from a store.
All that is required is for the Smartphone or Tablet to be able to receive a signal - and that opens up a wide range of moves and counter moves that will be brought into play by both sides of the legal divide.
To the dismay of the police, they are now finding that evidence locked away and awaiting court trial is mysteriously blank when it is contained in seized Tablets and Smartphones. In the past, such evidence was usually stored in "evidence rooms "within a police station and now they realise that they will need to invest in radio frequency shielded evidence bags to secure captured information from the instant of seizure. It will also be necessary to have shielded evidence rooms in which seized Tablets and Smartphones can be examined by the police to unravel the contained information, otherwise they will be prone to being wiped while in police hands. In many cases, court action will be abandoned because the evidence to obtain a conviction no longer exists.
This technology will be invaluable in the business world. Hackers are constantly attacking the computer records of large public companies despite extensive firewalls and multiple password protection. The fact that some sensitive information in mobile form has been needed by executives has increased the risk factor. The security firms that offer protection will be quick to see an opportunity here to offer their skills to make stolen electronic devices safe - if they are quickly advised of the theft.
No doubt that same solution will be sought by the underworld. No doubt we will see procedures put in place to send an alert to a security company when other than an authorised person seeks entry to a Smartphone or Tablet - and set in motion action to wipe it clean for security reasons. The wise would have duplicate information on another recording device locked away in a bank vault in another country - to later repair the damage.
It seems to be a fact of life that - whatever human ingenuity is able to create - other counter action by opposing human ingenuity is able to undo. There never will be a safe that a cracksman can not open and there never will be a place in cyberspace that hackers can not reach,
Welcome to the electronic world of the future - where the only place that secrets can be totally secure - is when they never leave the human mind !
Saturday, 3 January 2015
The Fickle Finger of Fate !
Luck plays a big part in the outcome of many important events. The decisions we make in life are decided by which way fate intervenes at a critical moment. That intervention can bestow fame - or infamy ! Such was the fate of two men who had very different outcomes as a result of disobeying their orders.
Horatio Nelson was the commander of the British fleet at the start of the Napoleonic war of 1803-15. He knew he would be in charge at an inevitable battle between his ships and the combined navies of France and Spain, and wisely sent out spies to determine the strength of the enemy. He learned that the French ships were modern and had well trained crews, but that the Spanish navy was "run on the cheap ". Each month press gangs roamed the nation's jails and seemingly able prisoners were dragooned into serving their sentence in the navy.
They were chained below decks when the ships were in port to prevent escapes and the whip was applied generously during the training process. Their officers regarded them as scum and the food provided was the cheapest available in the markets. The spies estimated that the well trained British crews could fire, reload and fire several shots to each one the Spanish crews could manage.
Nelson devised his strategy accordingly. He abandoned the usual custom and split his force into two columns and "T boned "the enemy line, fragmenting their order and resulting in individual engagements - ship to ship. Soon many Spanish ships were on fire and a few disheartened enemy captains concluded that the battle was lost - and headed for home. This retreat became a rout - and Nelson scored a major victory.
Unfortunately, Nelson did not survive that battle. He was fatally shot by a sniper high amongst the top gallants of a French ship, but his grateful nation had a statue dedicated to his likeness elevated on a column in Trafalgar Square, in the centre of London.
The fact that he had disobeyed orders was tactfully forgotten. His superiors feared he would lose the battle to an enemy with greater ship numbers and signalled the recall. Nelson - blind in one eye - took the telescope from his signaller and put it to his blind eye - and famously said. " I see no such signal " - and continued the advance. Winning the battle was a great vindication, but had he lost there is no doubt that the entire blame would have been heaped on his shoulders !
George Armstrong Custer was the Colonel commanding the United States Seventh Cavalry division. The Indian tribes had been resisting the influx of settlers moving into the American west and Custer was ordered to advance to a position near the Little Bighorn and await reinforcement by another cavalry division. This did not suit his intentions. He planned to run for the US presidency and he needed a major victory to become a war hero. This reinforcing division was commanded by an officer of superior rank and when he arrived the force would fight under his name - and victory would be his victory - not Custers.
Custer thought his seven hundred men sufficient to beat warriors of the Cheyenne tribe. He was unaware that Chief Sitting Bull had mended relations between the Cheyenne and their bitter enemies the Lakota and these combined tribes were now waiting for him under the command of Chief Crazy Horse. He also expected the Indians to be predominantly armed with bows and arrows and a few ancient muzzle loading guns. During the American war of Independence the French had assisted the Americans and the British had taken the French outpost of Quebec in Canada - and had encouraged the Canadian Indian tribes to fight on their side. The Indians had demanded weapons and the British had supplied surplus army muskets, and many of these had trickled over the border and were now in American Indian hands.
Custer's attack failed and he and his men were wiped out. Instead of fame his name is often the butt of late night television comedian jokes - and the history books regard him unfavourably. His attack tactics were certainly questionable, but had luck been on his side there is every chance that his name would be listed amongst whose who once sat in the oval office.
So often making a decision is balanced on a knife edge. There always seem to be uncertainties hovering just beyond the field of knowledge - and the final outcome will be decided by the fickle finger of fate.
A point to ponder for those whose decisions decide the fate of nations !
Horatio Nelson was the commander of the British fleet at the start of the Napoleonic war of 1803-15. He knew he would be in charge at an inevitable battle between his ships and the combined navies of France and Spain, and wisely sent out spies to determine the strength of the enemy. He learned that the French ships were modern and had well trained crews, but that the Spanish navy was "run on the cheap ". Each month press gangs roamed the nation's jails and seemingly able prisoners were dragooned into serving their sentence in the navy.
They were chained below decks when the ships were in port to prevent escapes and the whip was applied generously during the training process. Their officers regarded them as scum and the food provided was the cheapest available in the markets. The spies estimated that the well trained British crews could fire, reload and fire several shots to each one the Spanish crews could manage.
Nelson devised his strategy accordingly. He abandoned the usual custom and split his force into two columns and "T boned "the enemy line, fragmenting their order and resulting in individual engagements - ship to ship. Soon many Spanish ships were on fire and a few disheartened enemy captains concluded that the battle was lost - and headed for home. This retreat became a rout - and Nelson scored a major victory.
Unfortunately, Nelson did not survive that battle. He was fatally shot by a sniper high amongst the top gallants of a French ship, but his grateful nation had a statue dedicated to his likeness elevated on a column in Trafalgar Square, in the centre of London.
The fact that he had disobeyed orders was tactfully forgotten. His superiors feared he would lose the battle to an enemy with greater ship numbers and signalled the recall. Nelson - blind in one eye - took the telescope from his signaller and put it to his blind eye - and famously said. " I see no such signal " - and continued the advance. Winning the battle was a great vindication, but had he lost there is no doubt that the entire blame would have been heaped on his shoulders !
George Armstrong Custer was the Colonel commanding the United States Seventh Cavalry division. The Indian tribes had been resisting the influx of settlers moving into the American west and Custer was ordered to advance to a position near the Little Bighorn and await reinforcement by another cavalry division. This did not suit his intentions. He planned to run for the US presidency and he needed a major victory to become a war hero. This reinforcing division was commanded by an officer of superior rank and when he arrived the force would fight under his name - and victory would be his victory - not Custers.
Custer thought his seven hundred men sufficient to beat warriors of the Cheyenne tribe. He was unaware that Chief Sitting Bull had mended relations between the Cheyenne and their bitter enemies the Lakota and these combined tribes were now waiting for him under the command of Chief Crazy Horse. He also expected the Indians to be predominantly armed with bows and arrows and a few ancient muzzle loading guns. During the American war of Independence the French had assisted the Americans and the British had taken the French outpost of Quebec in Canada - and had encouraged the Canadian Indian tribes to fight on their side. The Indians had demanded weapons and the British had supplied surplus army muskets, and many of these had trickled over the border and were now in American Indian hands.
Custer's attack failed and he and his men were wiped out. Instead of fame his name is often the butt of late night television comedian jokes - and the history books regard him unfavourably. His attack tactics were certainly questionable, but had luck been on his side there is every chance that his name would be listed amongst whose who once sat in the oval office.
So often making a decision is balanced on a knife edge. There always seem to be uncertainties hovering just beyond the field of knowledge - and the final outcome will be decided by the fickle finger of fate.
A point to ponder for those whose decisions decide the fate of nations !
Friday, 2 January 2015
Taming the " Franchise " Jungle !
The "Franchising " industry in Australia is big business. It employs about 460,000 people in about 88,000 small businesses and has a turnover of $ 144 billion, and until recently it was virtually unsupervised. New laws now bring it under the watchful control of the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission. ( ACCC ).
"Franchising "is really a way of making money by allowing others to piggyback on a bright idea someone has developed to provide a service by establishing a "name " that brings recognition in the eyes of the public. Usually, the owner of that named service extracts a fee from others for the right to trade under that name and enters into an arrangement to promote the service by way of national advertising to attract customers.
Franchising can cover a wide merchandising field - from simple tasks such as mowing lawns to running a chain of hot bread shops. In it's more advanced form, the owner of the franchise agreement sets up an enquiry hotline and distributes work to franchisees in the various local centres where franchises have been granted. The person holding the franchise is then provided with a steady source of income without the need to individually seek new business or engage in further advertising.
This can work well - when agreements are entered into in good faith and the rules that apply are clear and fully transparent. In the past, judgement usually became a matter for the courts and each case involved a complex determination of precisely what was meant in the wording and intent of the franchise agreement. Arguments were common because many agreements were short on precise details of what was fully intended - and in some cases ended in stalemate and the considerable loss of money for both parties.
The ACCC now had the power to adjudicate and award compensation for broken agreements in the range of up to $8,500 for companies and $ 1,700 for individuals. In the vast majority of cases, disagreements are over minor matters not fully spelt out in the franchise agreement and which can be quickly settled by the intervention of a totally independent umpire. It will be up to the ACCC to bring common sense into that decisive process.
There are indications that franchising is entering new territory and widening in scope. The "Uber "phenomenon of recruiting private car owners to provide an independent taxi service and the many schemes to make money by providing rooms or in some cases - entire homes for short periods - will see franchise numbers expand exponentially. It is essential that the legal framework of such franchising be tightened to ensure that it is workable.
The direction in which franchising is heading will also impose added responsibilities on the ACCC. Some of the new franchising areas emerging may be in conflict with licensing laws that apply to goods and services under either Federal or state law and the ACCC could find itself involved in legal battles that are not of it's choosing.
Those intending to buy into a franchise agreement would be well advised to do their sums carefully - and get competent legal advice before they sign on the dotted line. Like any successful business, it takes skill and the right attitude to combine with a practical business plan for the venture to prosper - and bring in a living. At least the ACCC is now involved in steering new entrants over the inevitable rough patches !
"Franchising "is really a way of making money by allowing others to piggyback on a bright idea someone has developed to provide a service by establishing a "name " that brings recognition in the eyes of the public. Usually, the owner of that named service extracts a fee from others for the right to trade under that name and enters into an arrangement to promote the service by way of national advertising to attract customers.
Franchising can cover a wide merchandising field - from simple tasks such as mowing lawns to running a chain of hot bread shops. In it's more advanced form, the owner of the franchise agreement sets up an enquiry hotline and distributes work to franchisees in the various local centres where franchises have been granted. The person holding the franchise is then provided with a steady source of income without the need to individually seek new business or engage in further advertising.
This can work well - when agreements are entered into in good faith and the rules that apply are clear and fully transparent. In the past, judgement usually became a matter for the courts and each case involved a complex determination of precisely what was meant in the wording and intent of the franchise agreement. Arguments were common because many agreements were short on precise details of what was fully intended - and in some cases ended in stalemate and the considerable loss of money for both parties.
The ACCC now had the power to adjudicate and award compensation for broken agreements in the range of up to $8,500 for companies and $ 1,700 for individuals. In the vast majority of cases, disagreements are over minor matters not fully spelt out in the franchise agreement and which can be quickly settled by the intervention of a totally independent umpire. It will be up to the ACCC to bring common sense into that decisive process.
There are indications that franchising is entering new territory and widening in scope. The "Uber "phenomenon of recruiting private car owners to provide an independent taxi service and the many schemes to make money by providing rooms or in some cases - entire homes for short periods - will see franchise numbers expand exponentially. It is essential that the legal framework of such franchising be tightened to ensure that it is workable.
The direction in which franchising is heading will also impose added responsibilities on the ACCC. Some of the new franchising areas emerging may be in conflict with licensing laws that apply to goods and services under either Federal or state law and the ACCC could find itself involved in legal battles that are not of it's choosing.
Those intending to buy into a franchise agreement would be well advised to do their sums carefully - and get competent legal advice before they sign on the dotted line. Like any successful business, it takes skill and the right attitude to combine with a practical business plan for the venture to prosper - and bring in a living. At least the ACCC is now involved in steering new entrants over the inevitable rough patches !
Thursday, 1 January 2015
What Went Wrong ?
2014 has not been a good year for the aviation industry. First there was the loss of Malaysian flight MH370 which mysteriously deviated off course and is presumed down somewhere in the vast Indian ocean. Millions have been spent searching for the wreckage - and this search is ongoing.
Malaysia had the misfortune to again lose an aircraft when flight MH17 was brought down by a missile over Ukraine.The passengers and crew became a victim of a war raging between separatists encouraged by Russia and the Ukrainian army - and both sides deny firing that fatal shot.
Right at years end an AsiaAir AirBus flying from Surabaya in Indonesia to Singapore goes missing over the Java sea. We know that plane encountered thunderstorms and the pilot asked to climb to thirty-eight thousand feet, but then silence until wreckage was seen in the water days later.
Todays modern aircraft are packed with features that ensure safety. It is possible for them to take off, fly the journey and land at the airport of destination without help from the pilots. In fact, once airborne the task of flying the plane is handed to the auto pilot and the human pilot simply guides the plane through the computer devised procedure at takeoff and landings.
Some aviation experts think that may be one of the problems. Perhaps the lack of actual "hands on " experience flying the plane has caused flight crews to become more "computer programmers "than pilots and in an emergency trying to correct a problem with the computer may be more dangerous than actually taking manual control. In such cases, pilots with thousands of hours of flight time would be even more removed and reluctant to go back to the basics. Perhaps passengers are safest flying with newly minted pilots who have just completed the rigorous training to qualify for their license.
Some aviation experts speculate that when that AsiaAir plane climbed to avoid a thunderstorm it would need to increase speed to compensate for the thinner air at that altitude decreasing "lift ". If it were flying too slowly, there is the possibility of going into a stall - and falling into the sea.
Perhaps the airline industry needs to revise it's training programmes to ensure senior pilots spend more time in those amazing flight simulators where they are required to correct all sorts of emergency situations with hands on control. Massive hours sitting in the pilot's seat do not sharpen wits as well as actually having to counter emergencies deliberately contrived in training sessions to test and enhance piloting skills.
These disasters also throw the spotlight on the "black box " flight data recorders. This is now old technology. The recorder is supposed to help locate the downed aircraft and it contains a "pinger " with a life of just thirty days. Cockpit conversations are recorded and all the technical information about the planes mechanical functions can usually be recovered.
There is no technical reason why the information stored in that "black box "can not be transmitted back to base the second it is being recorded, making the actual recovery of the black box less important - and amazing progress has been made with lithium-ion batteries and the processing of information in Smartphones. Surely the location time can be extended and the range increased to make use of global satellites to "triangulate "position, as is the procedure within the mobile phone industry.
Low cost airlines will certainly not welcome the added cost of an upgraded positioning device, but the technology already exists to improve on the existing system and it is probably a tribute to the safety of air travel that something that has remained unchanged for decades has been allowed to continue unchanged. It is only the nature and extent of these recent events that are highlighting their shortcomings.
The fact remains that we are far safer sitting in an airline seat that most other forms of travel. The airline industry spends incredible amounts of money investigating each and every disaster to find the cause - and implement a solution. What has happened in 2014 can only make future flying safer !
Malaysia had the misfortune to again lose an aircraft when flight MH17 was brought down by a missile over Ukraine.The passengers and crew became a victim of a war raging between separatists encouraged by Russia and the Ukrainian army - and both sides deny firing that fatal shot.
Right at years end an AsiaAir AirBus flying from Surabaya in Indonesia to Singapore goes missing over the Java sea. We know that plane encountered thunderstorms and the pilot asked to climb to thirty-eight thousand feet, but then silence until wreckage was seen in the water days later.
Todays modern aircraft are packed with features that ensure safety. It is possible for them to take off, fly the journey and land at the airport of destination without help from the pilots. In fact, once airborne the task of flying the plane is handed to the auto pilot and the human pilot simply guides the plane through the computer devised procedure at takeoff and landings.
Some aviation experts think that may be one of the problems. Perhaps the lack of actual "hands on " experience flying the plane has caused flight crews to become more "computer programmers "than pilots and in an emergency trying to correct a problem with the computer may be more dangerous than actually taking manual control. In such cases, pilots with thousands of hours of flight time would be even more removed and reluctant to go back to the basics. Perhaps passengers are safest flying with newly minted pilots who have just completed the rigorous training to qualify for their license.
Some aviation experts speculate that when that AsiaAir plane climbed to avoid a thunderstorm it would need to increase speed to compensate for the thinner air at that altitude decreasing "lift ". If it were flying too slowly, there is the possibility of going into a stall - and falling into the sea.
Perhaps the airline industry needs to revise it's training programmes to ensure senior pilots spend more time in those amazing flight simulators where they are required to correct all sorts of emergency situations with hands on control. Massive hours sitting in the pilot's seat do not sharpen wits as well as actually having to counter emergencies deliberately contrived in training sessions to test and enhance piloting skills.
These disasters also throw the spotlight on the "black box " flight data recorders. This is now old technology. The recorder is supposed to help locate the downed aircraft and it contains a "pinger " with a life of just thirty days. Cockpit conversations are recorded and all the technical information about the planes mechanical functions can usually be recovered.
There is no technical reason why the information stored in that "black box "can not be transmitted back to base the second it is being recorded, making the actual recovery of the black box less important - and amazing progress has been made with lithium-ion batteries and the processing of information in Smartphones. Surely the location time can be extended and the range increased to make use of global satellites to "triangulate "position, as is the procedure within the mobile phone industry.
Low cost airlines will certainly not welcome the added cost of an upgraded positioning device, but the technology already exists to improve on the existing system and it is probably a tribute to the safety of air travel that something that has remained unchanged for decades has been allowed to continue unchanged. It is only the nature and extent of these recent events that are highlighting their shortcomings.
The fact remains that we are far safer sitting in an airline seat that most other forms of travel. The airline industry spends incredible amounts of money investigating each and every disaster to find the cause - and implement a solution. What has happened in 2014 can only make future flying safer !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)