Extending Federal Powers !

The Australian Constitution is very clear on the separation of power between the Commonwealth and the States.  The Founding Fathers drew a demarcation line between the responsibilities of the police and that of the Australian army.  The police are under the command of the various state governments while the army is controlled by whoever is in power in Canberra.

We have just had a situation where these control lines were put to a test.  A combination of drought and enhanced temperatures caused bushfires to rage out of control in four of the adjoining Australian states.  Bringing them under control was handled by volunteer rural fire services in each state and the situation was complex because the fires constantly crossed state borders.

Eventually, the prime minister ordered the deployment of our armed services to supply both the numbers and the specialised equipment needed to not only fight the fires but to recue people stranded on beaches when the encircling fire threatened their lives.  This did not happen sooner because the Federal government does not have the power to issue that command unless it has been requested by the relevant state government.

In the aftermath of the fires, the prime minister is suggesting that the Commonwealth needs executive power to declare a national state of emergency with clear authority and appropriate safeguards for Commonwealth action  on the prime ministers initiative , including the deployment of our defence forces.

For that to happen we would need a change in the Constitution, and that can be achieved by either a referendum or a negotiated agreement with all the state and Territory governments.  The states may be reticent in giving away that protection even though a compelling case can be constructed for its need.

During the Sydney Lindt café siege both ASIO and the army snipers were unused and the siege dragged on for many hours because of uncertainty on the legal position if they were deployed.
Exhaustion became a factor as police stood ready hour after hour and eventually a police detachment from Queensland was flown in despite the army being ready and standing by in Sydney.   This was criticised at a later Royal Commission.

It is quite possible we are in the early stages of a world pandemic with this coronavirus raging in China  and spreading worldwide.  The medical authorities are hopeful that they may quickly develop a vaccine and if that happens it is the armed forces that have the means of transport and the numbers to supply and issue it nationwide.  It seems that this safeguard embodied in the Constitution prevents the use of our armed forces in a national emergency.

The Founding Fathers inserted that separated provision for a very valid reason.  Control of the people is the responsibility of state police and should a prime minister assume dictatorial powers the Constitution prevents the use of the army being superimposed to assume state powers.   That has happened in other world countries when a leader voted into office has refused to relinquish power when the term expires.

Perhaps a good reason to consider any extension of Commonwealth power with caution  !

Legal Aid !

It is the right of every Australian in every state to be represented by a lawyer should they be charged with a serious offence and face a court.  The law is very explicit.  Should they be unable to fund a lawyer of their choice, one will be appointed and paid from public funds.

While Legal Aid NSW's in-house lawyers provide free legal help to the most disadvantaged over seventy percent of legal aid work is farmed out to  private lawyers.  When a newly minted lawyer is admitted to the bar it is with the understanding that they will accept their fair share of legal aid cases.

In some cases a person charged may have the good luck to draw a lawyer who is famous in his or her field and who usually appears for the rich and famous, but more often this duty falls to someone entering the profession and lacking court experience.   That is simply the luck of the draw and all who can legally call themselves a lawyer have the training to appear and argue a case in a courtroom.

The problem has been the rates of pay that apply.  The legal profession complains that rewards for legal aid cases are so low that lawyers doing this work earn less than the legal minimum wage when actual working hours and overheads are taken into account.

The NSW government has agreed to an $88 million  funding boost for Legal Aid and the base hourly rate for private solicitors of $150 per hour will increase by $10 from July 1 and further increase to $ 195 a hour by 2023/4.   A new alternative is now in place where Legal Aid lawyers are rewarded with a lump sum for taking on Legal Aid cases. and this is intended to cover representation for less serious criminal cases in the local and children's courts.This lump sum is intended to cover all preparation and hearing time, excluding prison visits and further funding will only be available in " the most extraordinary cases ".

That lump sum scale has been set at $1100  and many lawyers comment that this will actually be a fee reduction in all but the most minor and non-contentious cases.  The legal work often entails finding missing witnesses and building a compelling case for a non guilty verdict.  This lump sum puts a severe limitation on what research is possible.

Of course there is a very big difference in representing a person who has been wrongly charged and needs to prove innocence, and representing  those " guilty as charged.".   Good tactical advice will often see an early guilty plea result in some charges dropped and a more lenient prison outcome, but each case is different and that lump sum does dictate the extent of work possible.

The main point of Legal Aid is to ensure that those totally ignorant of the law gets some degree of professional advice and guidance in how they present their defence.  The law has vey much devolved into what is termed " plea bargaining " and a trained lawyer can be the intermediary between the accused and the prosecution in negotiating an acceptable mix of charges and pleas.

At best, Legal Aid is the difference between all the power being in the hands of the prosecution and the accused being well advised on how or what defence would best suits their needs.  It ensures that both side in the courtroom proceed according to the procedure of the law and the accused is not disadvantaged by his or her ignorance of the law.

Changes In Air Travel !

In the period between the two world wars the Atlantic crossing was dominated by steam ships.  France built the Normandie and the Brits competed with the Queen Mary and the Queen Elizabeth. The aim was to complete the journey in under five days and the cost of travelling first class made travel the domain of the rich and famous.

The airplane originally catered for travel short distances between cities, and it was the arrival of the Douglas DC3 in 1938 that changed everything. Here was a plane with a noise insulated cabin in which every passenger had a comfortable armchair like seat and the journey was attended by an air hostess who could heat a baby's bottle and provide drinks and snacks.

The era of air travel expanded into linking continents of the world and after world war two ended those propeller driven planes were replaced with jet aircraft, and the arrival of Being's 707 changed everything again..  Here was a bigger aircraft with over double the seating capacity of its predecessors and suddenly air travel was within the financial reach of the masses.

For a while it looked like the next big break through would be speed.  The world airplane manufacturers looked at the prospect of new aircraft travelling faster than the speed of sound, and quickly discovered that this was commercially noneconomic.  Only France and Britain persisted, and that gave us the Concorde.  A brilliant aircraft, but it only seated a hundred passengers and in its twenty year lifetime it never delivered a profit.  Its travel cost was subsidized on the altar of national pride.

In place of speed the aircraft industry concentrated on size and seating capacity, and that gave us the jumbo jet.  Air travel costs plummeted and are enthusiastically enjoyed by all segments of society.  The tourist industry became the mainstay of the world economy and that is now threatened by the pollution jet airplanes inflict on a warming world.

There simply is no alternative to air travel to deliver journey speed and sustain that world tourist industry which is the lifeblood of many nations.  The airplane industry is shared between the American Boeing and the European Airbus manufacturing companies.  Airbus developed a double decker model that packed in more seating, but it proved unpopular and production has been discontinued.

Both manufacturers are racing to solve that pollution problem and seem to be thinking along similar lines.  Long distance travel has been the province of four engine jet planes.  The new models coming on stream achieve the same distance with just two engines and it is hoped that this may halve the pollution problem.

Airbus recently released their A350-1000 model which seats about 360 passengers and Boeing has test flown its new 777X, both of which feature just two newly developed but more powerful engines which might be the answer to sustaining the jet age.

It looks like we will continue to see those contrails in the sky when passenger jets pass overhead.  Unless science develops a personal " transporter " as was featured in the television series" Startrek "
?   But until the phrase " Beam me up, Scotty " has relevance in the real world we seem to be stuck with the jet plane  !

Defence !

One of the biggest items of expenditure in the national budget is what we spend under the title of " Defence ".  Broadly speaking, that is the money we spend on the army, the navy and the air force in both salaries and the purchasing of the expensive equipment they need to be ready to resist invasion if we are ever attacked.

We are termed a " middling world power " which means we need to have the support of a super power to ensure our safety.  In the distant past we looked to Britain in that role during the years of the British Empire, but that changed to America during the second world war.  Our relation with America has been cordial and we have sheltered under that country's nuclear umbrella and not developed our own nuclear weapons.

America is fast retreating from world military dominance and China is the new rising world power.  These countries clash on economic policy and China's  virtual annexation of the South China sea makes a military clash almost inevitable. If and when that happens we will be judged on which side we support.

The safest option would be Australian neutrality, but that is unlikely to be a choice available to us.  Both China and America are important trade customers underpinning the Australian economy and we will have to make a choice. That choice will be critical to our place in the rest of the world.

It is interesting to compare our position with that of New Zealand.  Our neighbour recently reached the conclusion that maintaining a credible defence force was beyond the financial capacity of its small population.  It virtually abolished its air force, stopped its navy updating its fleet and reduced the army to a strength only capable of undertaking its United Nations obligations.   In essence, New Zealand became an undefended nation.

The Kiwi's do have a valid point.  To try and defend a country with an inferior defence establishment is to  ensure a humiliating defeat with heavy loss of life.  New Zealand relies on the goodwill of the world and its economy is relieved of the onerous defence burden.

That is not an option that would be considered in this country.  Australia has long remained the dominant military power in the lower South Pacific and has the strength to resist invasion from any of its near neighbours.  Our population growth ensures an adequate defence budget to meet those needs.  There is no discernible threat to Australia at present on our defence horizon.

What is important is that we accurately evaluate emerging trends.  It seems that NATO is losing cohesion and a new alliance in possible in Europe.  India - with its huge population - is fast emerging as a new power in Asia and America is an enigma as its internal politics evolve in new directions. Despite the Communist party's relentless hold on power in China there are signs of popular unrest in that country as a vast middle class emerges. The power of the Communist party seems absolute, but that may be more illusion than reality.  The regime may pay a heavy price for opening its doors and letting its citizens travel the world.

This is a time we need to read the tea leaves and discern the future - and how we place our bets will determine how we stand in a changing world. The chess board of power is ever in play and the outcome is not obvious.  A skilful diplomatic corps  goes hand in hand with a contemporary defence establishment  !

Spreading The Risk !

It seems inevitable that the premiums we pay for house insurance will increase sharply when the annual renewal falls due.  The insurance industry has taken a walloping on a world wide basis from out of control fires in many countries and from  hail and storm damage that has cost them billions

Insurance companies are in business to make a profit and their shareholders expect dividends. They spread their risk load by buying what is called " reinsurance " whereby they accept a share of damage claims in other countries.  There is safety in spreading the load because rarely do many countries suffer the same storm event at the same time.

The basis of insurance is that the premiums of the many cover the loss of the few.  Every time a number of policyholders fail to renew that pool grows smaller and premiums have to rise, and this is at a time when the house price bubble continues to rise and wages remain static.  It seems inevitable that more people will claim that their insurance premium is unaffordable - and drop their cover.

This enigma falls more heavily on those entering the home ownership market.   Usually they have secured their home with the minimum deposit and consequently they are struggling to meet the mortgage repayments.  It is a loan requirement that the loan is secured by the integrity of the house being covered by insurance and paying this is the responsibility of the new owner.

When an owner is faced with the prospect of defaulting on either the mortgage payment or the insurance renewal, the choice is obvious.  Should we encounter even a small economic recession a huge number of mortgages will be pushed over the economic edge, resulting in repossession.  That could trigger a calamitous drop in home values across the board and bring many mortgages above the value of the property market.

There could be no greater damage to the Australian economy than the collapse of  property prices.  The home we own underpins the wealth of the average family and is probably the most valued asset they will ever own.  As we learned at the 2008 recession, a house is only worth what someone else is prepared to pay for it and when it is a " buyers market " that price drops significantly.

The statistics on house fires in the past was fairly static. Thanks to an efficient fire brigade few house fires are a total loss but we now have a hotter, drier planet and fires may now encroach right into the city perimeter. An ember attack can burn homes well ahead of the fire front.

Sadly, the funds that underpin fire fighting services rely on a tax that applies to insurance premiums. The uninsured are getting the services of city fire brigades and the heroic volunteers who give untold time and effort to fire control by the RFS without making any financial contribution.

If the government chose to spread that load by dropping the tax on insurance premiums and adding it to property rates and taxes it would make fire insurance cheaper and attract more customers.  The way fire services are funded at present is inequitable.  The fire services respond to all callouts without discrimination and it would be fair if that cost was shared by every household, not just the households with an insurance policy.

Anything that encourages homeowners to insure helps spread the load  !

Flying the " Swastika " !

Late last year the residents of a home in the Victorian town of Beulah began to daily fly the old Nazi Swastika flag from a flag pole on their property.  That caused immense distress to other residents, but Australia does not have a law that bans this practice.

The Swastika became the national flag of Germany after Adolph Hitler came to power in 1933.  When Germany invaded and conquered most of Europe its Nazi government implemented a deliberate plan to exterminate its Jewish population.   Jews were rounded up and sent to concentration camps where they were systematically gassed and their bodies cremated.   Over six million men, women and children suffered this fate.

When the war ended, leaders responsible for this atrocity were tried and executed, and a remorseful German state imposes heavy penalties for displaying the Swastika.  Despite this, a new neo-Nazi political party has emerged in Germany and actually won several seats in the national parliament.  Across the world a movement to the political right is gaining confidence.  This manifests itself in attacks on Jewish cemeteries and hateful anti-Jewish propaganda directed at the Jewish state created by the United Nations in the Middle East.

Australia has many survivors of the Holocaust still alive in this country and their children are very aware of the immense death toll that took place under that Swastika.  That has caused the Australian Governor General to warn of the rising tide of anti -Semitism and call for the Swastika in any form to be banned in this country.

Where the Swastika is banned it usually results in a crudely drawn symbol with unmistakable  intent taking its place.  For many centuries the Jewish people and their religion have suffered pogroms and harsh treatment from the denizens of other races.  It was hoped that disgust at the excesses of the Nazi era had eradicated that bias, but memories fade and many countries are falling under the control of leaders with far right undemocratic policies.   The plight of Palestinians pushed aside by the creation of the Jewish state of Israel is a common reason to explain this anti-Semitism.

That Swastika being flown in Beulah does serve to deliver a public warning that people with Nazi sympathies live in that town.   If we ban the flag, we drive that movement underground.  When they fly the flag they announce their anti-Semitism clearly and that can be a good reason for many people to avoid the movement.  Banning the Swastika runs counter to the Australian tradition of  freedom to follow both the religion of choice and allegiance to a political party.

If National Socialism is stirring in Australia it is better out in the open than festering in dark places. We should remember that a plebiscite to ban the Communist party in Australia once failed.  That lack of Communist progress in Australia illustrates the wisdom of keeping political movements open for public viewing and discussion.   That Swastika would be an automatic turnoff for most people !

Spreading Relief Widely !

 The loss of a massive waterbomber and its crew underlines the intense risk to life involved in fighting bush fires.  The men and women on the ground are in danger from falling trees and sudden wind changes that can bring the fire back on them with little warning.  All the training in the world will not protect them from the unexpected.

Water bombers are a relatively new concept.  To be effective these giant airplanes need to come in low - and slow.  They are flying through smoke that lowers visibility and there are giant thermals rising from the fire below to be taken into account by the pilots.   Flying a plane in those conditions is similar to a war experience.

What is exceptional is the generosity across the nation as people have put their hands in their pockets and made donations to relief funds. Many millions of dollars are now in the hands of welfare agencies who have the responsibility to make the best use of the money in payments to victims.   As always, there will be harsh criticism on whatever formulae is applied to how this money is distributed.

One of the absolute necessities is getting those sites cleared to enable the ground to be ready for rebuilding.  Where the home was not insured that becomes the responsibility of the owner and this is work that can come at a high cost.  It is certain that the debris will contain asbestos and various rules and regulations will come into force over its disposal.  A lot of individual councils will be involved and it would be helpful if common landfill arrangements were put in place to safely dispose of this waste at minimum cost.

It is dispiriting to hear the management of those donated funds claiming that it will be years before the last of that money reaches the people in need.  It is all too easy for a bureaucracy to emerge that so slows the distribution of aid that applicants encounter a thicket of rules and regulations - and their interpretation - that not only defies logic but requires the courts to make the final decisions.

The donors of that money did so in the expectation that fire victims would get quick help in making a recovery, and the needs of individuals will be wide and varied.  Just getting clothes and household goods will be the first need of many.   Finding alternative accommodation will be high on the list for others and in some cases that will entail buying a caravan and returning to the block of land they own.

It would be unfortunate if rules and regulations imposed to safeguard the money simply prevented the innovative from accessing help.   The loss of a home is an absolute disaster for most families and a little money at the right time can help them find solutions that suit their individual needs.   That was the thought in mind by the people who donated the money.

The law will crack down hard on obvious scammers, but this is a time to be innovative and listen attentively to where assistance can relieve distress.  It is often the case where a little money at the right time can go a very long way !