Internet banking risks.

Yesterday, a Wollongong man sat down at his computer and started to pay a few bills using internet banking.   He encountered a request for a " Netcode " - which he thought was rather odd - and contacted his bank, to find that scammers had his identification number and password - and were in the process of cleaning out his bank account.

That request for a Netcode was part of the bank's defensive mechanism, when they receive an instruction to transfer a significant sum of money to an " unfamiliar " account.

This customer was totally unaware that scammers had penetrated his computers defences when he had inadvertently downloaded " malicious software " contained in a contaminated email or some other innocent appearing item.   This contamination allowed the scanners to eavesdrop on every keystroke he made - garnering in account numbers and passwords.

It costs money to install a decent security system, but the risk of not doing so is enormous.  Once scammers have your vital details they can clean out not just your bank accounts, but have the information to use any credit cards registered in your name - and run up bills that you may be forced to pay.

At this stage, all the banks are making good on fraudulent loss caused by such scammers, but under the law they are not obliged to do so.   It is simply a matter of balance.  At this stage, the losses are far less than the huge profits the banks make from transaction fees - and the banks are simply protecting their own bottom line.

The biggest problem for those using internet banking is the uncertainty of just how advanced scammer technology may become in the immediate future.   We are seeing the development of sophisticated hacking gangs and should these manage a scam that produces losses running into big money there is a chance the banks may renege - and drop the losses back onto the scammed customers.

People would be wise to adopt internet banking only after they have given the risk long and hard consideration - and they would be equally wise to install top grade security software on their computer. Otherwise - their financial health is at risk !

Beach culture - and parking meters !

The relentless imposition of parking meters has made a day at the beach an expensive option in Sydney, and now the  Illawarra Chamber of Commerce is proposing that meters be installed at iconic Austinmer beach.

Austinmer is popular with the residents of western Sydney.  It is one of their nearest beaches and access is a pleasant drive on good roads.  Some locals complain that such visitors bring little commercial gain to the area, but leave behind a vast amount of rubbish that costs council money to remove.

On the one hand,  Wollongong is trying to develop it's tourist industry.  We have spent millions building a failed tourist attraction at Bulli Tops, and there are proposals for another at Bald Hill at Stanwell Tops, and yet this parking meter proposal seems certain to curtail the numbers already visiting this area.

The Chamber of Commerce suggests that local residents would not be penalised.  They would be issued with an identification car sticker which would absolve them from parking meter fees, but it is unclear if that applies to those living in the immediate vicinity of Austinmer beach - or to the wider population of Wollongong city.

In some respects, making non-ratepayers contribute to the cost of cleaning and maintaining the facilities they enjoy has merit, but it is also the thin end of a very wide wedge.

Residents complain that because of the limited amount of beachside parking, visitor parking has been encroaching steadily in nearby streets.    If we install parking meters, it is inevitable that those who dislike paying for parking will extend further away from the beaches to save a little money - and then it seems inevitable that those same parking meters will follow them into the surrounding streets.

Will beachside parking meters only demand money in the summer peak ?    What will be the situation in winter - when the beaches are deserted ?    And what level of charges will have to apply to make policing use of the meters worthwhile ?

The commercial shops that service beach trade do a roaring business during the short summer period.  They must make a years money while the sun shines, and if we set out to make our beaches less attractive to visitors - there will be consequences.

Surely the experience of city traders when the past city administrators imposed parking meters on this city should sound a warning.

We are getting summer visitors from western Sydney - because this is a pleasant place to visit.   Lets keep it that way !

Oops !

Politics is supposed to be a subtle art form.  The aim is to make your party look good in the eyes of the voters - and to make those opposing you look bad.   In that context, the old expression that " All is fair in love and war " - includes " and politics ".

It went horribly wrong on Australia day.   One of Prime Minister Julia Gillard's bright young press secretary's decided to use his initiative to show leader of the opposition, Tony Abbott in a bad light.   He called an official of the trade union movement - who happened to be of Aboriginal heritage - and informed her that Abbott was attending a function at a restaurant a few hundred metres away from the " Aboriginal Embassy " - on the lawns outside old parliament house.

It seems that an innocent remark made by Abbott about the age of this tent embassy was construed into a claim that Abbott was demanding that it be torn down - and this was the message delivered to the activists on site for an Australia day demonstration against what they term " Invasion day ".

From there, things got completely out of hand.   An angry mob descended on the restaurant and this was far beyond that press secretary's expectations.   Both he and his boss - the prime minister - were trapped along with Mr Abbott inside the building and there was a real danger of injury.   The security people reacted - resulting in an unflattering photo of Julia Gillard being half dragged, half carried - with one shoe missing - to be dumped in her car and removed from risk.

That photo has been shown on world news services - and it is destined to reappear in the run up to the next election - time and time again !

The press secretary has fallen on his sword and resigned.   What must have seemed to him as using his initiative to create favourable publicity for his political party badly misfired - but it didn't stop there.  The next day those same Aboriginal activists who caused this trouble not only refused to apologise - they burned an Australian flag outside parliament house.

For the Labor government this has been a disaster.   The look of sheer terror on our prime minister's face has been shown around the world, and much support for Aboriginal reconciliation has withered away with that disgusting scene of flag burning.

This " Australia day " is not a day to be remembered with pride !

A great idea - that failed !

The United Nations - and before that, the old League of Nations - was supposed to be the answer to world problems.   Some people hoped that it would lead to some form of world government while others had more modest ambitions.   Rather than resolving differences by way of war it was hoped that nations could argue their case before a world body - and accept it's findings.

That did happen - on a very few occasions.  Mostly the United Nations split along ideological lines and divided into " blocks " which opposed one another as a matter of principle.  It dissolved into a talk fest more interested in point scoring than taking action.

A recent event illustrates just what happens when a sovereign country runs out of options.

Michael Somare, the prime minister of Papua NewGuinea, was absent from his country for a long time while seeking urgent medical attention.   The parliament decided to replace him, and appointed  Peter O'Neill in his place.    Michael Somare returned and took the matter to his country's Supreme court - which ruled that O'Neill's elevation was not legal and that Somare was still the legitimate prime minister.

This resulted in a " Mexican standoff ".   The parliament backed O'Neill - and the Supreme court backed Somare.   The two major institutions in this small, Pacific ocean country were in deadlock - and this resulted in a Colonel in the nation's defence force gathering his men and storming Taurama barracks and backing Somare.

No guns have been fired - and nobody has been killed and it seems likely that this whole mess will be peacefully resolved.   There is talk of charges of treason and counter talk of pardons being issued, but so far no binding decision of which is the higher authority - the parliament or the Supreme court.

Surely this is precisely the type of problem that should have been settled by the world body ?   What seems to be in doubt is the priority of the Papua NewGuinea constitution when such a challenge to authority arises - and that needs an independent arbitrator to hand down a decision.

In other parts of the world guns are being fired - and people are dying because of what amounts to civil war in some countries.   The United Nations has intervened with a " peace keeping " force in some places, and in others action has been blocked by the stubborn refusal of those with " political objectives " to grant approval.

And here in our own backyard a situation similar to Papua NewGuinea continues to fester.    The Islands of Fiji are now governed by a military junta.    A military dictator has used the army to grab control - and civil liberties have been abolished - and this is a situation that the United Nations studiously ignores !

The day " Aboriginality " disgraced itself !

Yesterday, in a mood of consensus - the Prime Minister of Australia and the leader of the Opposition attended an Australia Day medals ceremony in a restaurant in Canberra.   A bunch of " activists " from the so-called " Aboriginal Embassy " outside old parliament house objected and a crowd of about two hundred people started banging on the plate glass windows and shouting " Shame " and " Racist ".   There was a real danger of damage and injury, and this country's two leading politicians were hustled away by police and security people.

It is not politically correct to take Aboriginal people to task for their conduct.  In this instance no arrests were made, but overseas news people have noted that no water cannon was directed at the rioters, nor were they driven back by savage guard dogs or subjected to rubber bullets.

It is one of the delights of Australian life that the people who rule this country are comfortable mixing with the masses.  In many parts of the world the leaders shelter behind bullet proof glass, or only accept visitors within the fortresses of government offices - and that is not the Australian way.

Yesterdays display of intolerance and sheer bastardy will reduce sympathy for the Aboriginal cause in many people's minds.   There are twenty-two million people in this country, and the vast majority of them are not Aboriginal.  At some stage, just about every country on this planet found itself invaded by another race who had developed superior skills of transport, weaponry and commerce.   For sheer survival, the original inhabitants either assimilated and learned these new skills - or perished !

Australia's Aboriginal residents still have a long way to go because of distance and a resources gap - and the reluctance of some to send their children to school to learn life skills is not helping.   Incidents like yesterday will not  convince many uncommitted Australians to dig deep and try to bridge that cultural gap.

The Aboriginal Embassy in Canberra has existed for forty years.  It seems to be manned by " activists " who have certain  characteristics in common.   They are unemployed.  They live on welfare - and they oppose every aspect of the life other Australian citizens lead.

The nucleus of activist thinking seems strangely allied with the " black flag " anarchist movement that roiled across Europe nearly a century ago.

There is an old saying that warns to " be careful about what you wish for ! "

Like the proverbial boomerang, days like yesterday have a nasty habit of coming full circle and hitting the thrower behind the ear  !

A " Dollars and Cents " decision !

BlueScope Steel is close to making a decision on selling it's thirty year old sea transport - the Iron Monarch - and using rail to haul 650,000 tonnes of hot rolled coil from Port Kembla to Western Port in Victoria each year.

There will certainly be employment consequences.   Iron Monarch rotates two seventeen person crews and there will most likely be further retrenchments amongst wharf staff at Port Kembla.  A freight volume of this nature will mean more trains, and therefore more rail employment - but overall it will represent a jobs reduction.

What it all boils down to is a cost saving when the two methods of transport are compared - and that cost saving comes in at a whopping one million dollars per month.

There will be howls of protest if this proposal becomes reality, but it is precisely the type of fine tuning that Australian industry needs to make if it is going to survive in this cut throat competitive world - and it may cause a chain reaction of decisions further down the track.

One of those could be the completion of the half built Maldon-Dombarton rail link between the Illawarra and western Sydney.   The existing main line - constructed in the pick and shovel, horse and cart era is struggling to accommodate the mix of commuter and freight traffic and it is hard to see how it can handle further enlargement.

The only way to free up space for passenger traffic is to decrease freight traffic, and to do that we need an alternative line to Sydney.   Perhaps that hot rolled coil inclusion is just the ticket to tip Maldon-Dombarton into economic reality.

It is easy to lament what we seem to be losing, without taking into account what we stand a chance of gaining.    Any business that has the opportunity to cut a million dollars a month from outgoing expenses and fails to do so - is not really in the business of surviving !

Shock tactics !

One thing the advertising industry can teach us is that if we are going to keep the public's attention we need to present our message in new ways.   Unfortunately, creative thinking is not a strong suite of those in government.

Years ago some genius came up with the bright idea of doubling demerit points over public holidays and during long weekends.   Statistics showed that road crashes increased in direct ratio to the numbers of cars on the road, and obviously holiday movement was greater than the volume on normal days - so the police launched a blitz on speeding - and soon this was extended to seat belt use.

It was initially quite successful.  When it was first imposed it was a form of shock tactics, but it has been all downhill from there.   The main problem is the imposition of a ridiculous time factor.

This year, Australia day falls on a Thursday.   Double demerit points started at midnight last night - hence it will run from Wednesday until midnight on Sunday, a period of five days - which includes a normal working day this Friday in the mix.

The shock tactics have been diluted because double demerit points have lost their zing and become just another hazard to be faced by car drivers.    They may indeed be increasing the road trauma by tipping some drivers into license loss - and thereby adding to the number of people who continue to drive unlicensed, which negates their green slip insurance cover.

There is another howler coming into force in the middle of this ridiculously extended double demerit period.

Restricted school hours come into force this Friday, despite the fact that just about every school in this state will not be accepting pupils until Monday.    The same thing happens each year when the school year ends.   For some unaccountable reason the restrictive period continues for at least one or two days after the school gates are closed and locked for the holidays - and that too makes absolutely no sense.

Even parents of school children are bemused to find they are committing a speeding offence - and in a double demerit points period at that - when they know that their kids are still enjoying the last day of their holidays on Friday.

To be effective a law must at least be credible.   It seems that demerit points and school time speed restrictions both come into that category - provided the timing does not slip into the fantasy world.

A re-think may restore some credibility !

Time for a safety check !

Just over a week ago three thousand passengers from a variety of countries embarked on the Costa Concordia to cruise the smooth waters of the Mediterranean.    They had every expectation that the ship was under the command of a competent captain and that he had a well trained crew, willing and able to handle any emergency.   The ship was in perfect condition - and there seems to be no reasonable excuse for the disaster that unfolded.

Eventually, an enquiry will probe the events that followed when the ship deviated from it's course and hit a rock close to Giglio island.   What is perfectly clear is from that moment chaos reigned and all the rules of good seamanship went out the window.   The passengers were assured that the event that plunged the ship into darkness was a minor electrical fault - and they were disastrously told to return to their cabins.  The Coast Guard was assured there was no emergency, and hence no rescue operation was mounted.  It seems that many of the crew had not the slightest idea how to lower the lifeboats and the ship was listing disastrously before the order to abandon ship was given.

Fortunately - someone had the good sense to steer this mortally wounded vessel directly to the shore - where she was run aground.   Had she remained in deep water, the loss of just thirteen lives - with another twenty-four people still " missing " - could have run into thousands.    The conduct of the captain leaves a lot to be explained and no doubt  this will feature heavily when the enquiry eventually gets under way.

Luxury cruise liners are a familiar sight in Australian ports and cruising the Pacific is a favourite holiday destination for citizens of this country.    The passengers of the Costa Concordia though they were in good hands.   How safe are we on the ships servicing the Australian trade ?

It seems to be a grey area.   These are ships registered in a foreign country and subject to an array of rules and laws of the sea.   A captain of such a ship has extraordinary powers - many of which hark back to the days of sail - and include the right to conduct both marriage and burial ceremonies.  It is thought that these old laws confer the right for a ship's master to execute pirates by hanging them from the yardarm - if ships still have a yardarm in their rigging.

What is not clear is just what standards of crew training exist when it comes to abandoning a ship at sea - and what avenues Australian authorities have in insisting that such training is up to scratch.

Cruise ships in Australian waters have an enviable safety record, but then it takes an event like the Costa Concordia disaster to highlight any deficiencies.

Now would be a good time for Australia to ask probing questions - and demand positive answers - to be certain that the cruise ships using our ports - and carrying Australian passengers - are meeting the required safety standards !

Privacy laws !

Each Australian state enacts it's own version of privacy laws - and they are woefully inconsistent.  How often do we read in the newspapers the details of some awful crime, followed by the words " the name of the offender can not be released " ?

The names of juvenile offenders are universally suppressed and there is some merit to be gained. It prevents matters of " youthful indiscretion " from blocking rehabilitation, but privacy is a two edged sword and it should never be used to block the flow of information that protects ordinary citizens from harm from criminals.,

A case in point.   Privacy laws block the exchange of information between the immigration people handling those travelling between Australia and New Zealand.     Those entering Australia from across the Tasman merely tick a box that attests that they do not have a criminal record - nor have they been gaoled for any period in excess of one year.

One person who made such a claim had a long history of embezzlement and subsequently gained a job in a sensitive area of finance in this country - that led to the loss of sixteen million dollars from a state government department.

A reverse situation follows when we deport a New Zealand citizen for crimes committed here. Privacy laws in some Australian states prevent immigration advising their New Zealand counterparts of the crime details that led to that deportation - and that makes absolutely no sense.

The legal system insists that if we are charged with a crime, guilt or innocence is determined by appearance before a court.   The notion that whatever transpires in that court is open to public scrutiny is the cornerstone of public accountability.    Justice should not only be done - but be seen to be done.   That concept fails when privacy laws decline the public's " right to know ! "

Privacy seems to have been a " creeping concept ".   Each year the range and scope of matters being drawn behind the veil increases.     Perhaps the time has come to reinstate the basic privacy law to make it clear precisely what is public property - and do away with the clutter of " if's - but's - and maybe's ! "

Strike two !

If the old " Three strikes and you are out " adage applies, Julia Gillard's first strike was when she went to an election on a " No Emissions tax " promise - and promptly broke it when holding onto power was only possible in coalition with the Greens.

She also needed the votes of all the independents, and each extracted a firm promise in exchange for their support.   Andrew Wilkie was an anti-gambling fanatic, and he demanded a complex pre-commitment scheme on poker machines and gained the prime minister's handshake that this would be implemented by May of this year.

Strike two !     Gillard has walked away from that commitment - now that a Labor speaker has been consigned to the backbench to gain a critical vote.   In place she has suggested a watered down version that will have a test run only in the Australian Capital Territory - and not even start until 2013.    It will include a $ 250 daily limit on withdrawals from ATM's in gaming venues -and a ban on live odds being featured in sporting coverage.   Strangely, this latter inclusion was not part of Wilkie's demand - and it's addition is a mystery.

Andrew Wilkie has withdrawn his support for Labor.   He upheld his part of the deal and voted with the government when that vote was crucial in getting legislation passed.   He has every right to question the integrity of this country's prime minister.   Trust was once a matter of a handshake sealing a deal.

Two strikes down.   Is there a third to come ?

Some people will be suspicious that there is more than meets the eye in that move on live odds.   The anti-gambling lobby have long held the view that giving odds on events is an inducement to gamble - because it illustrates just how much can be won if a long odds bet comes home.

Just imagine if - somewhere down the track - events force this prime minister to appease the anti-gambling lobby because their support is essential to holding onto office.   Could we see the odds on horse races disappear from the sporting pages - and the ultimate horror - could the field  for the Melbourne Cup be simply a list of the runners - with any mention of the prospects of each horse being banned by law ?

On past performance, even a promise by the prime minister that such an event will never happen would be treated with great suspicion by many people.

As Andrew Wilkie would attest -  It seems that firm commitments are always " negotiable ! "

The right to silence !

In various parts of the world the criminal fraternity impose a death sentence on any of their own who do not observe the code of silence when approached by the police.  It seems that this custom is being observed here by both the bikie criminal gangs and the illicit drug industry - and there are moves to introduce legislation to comply suspects to talk.

We are entering very dangerous territory.   The very basis of law requires the prosecution to prove guilt - rather than the accused to prove innocence.    Each arrested person is warned that " anything that they say may be used in evidence against them. "    The legal fraternity advise them to be silent - until they have received confidential legal advice as to what they may or may not disclose to those seeking answers to questions.

Just to clarify that right of silence, when a person is called before a Royal Commission enquiry they are required to answer any question asked under threat of a prison term for refusal - but their evidence can not be used in any other court action that follows that Royal Commission.    In effect, they have an indemnity that protects them from incriminating themselves.

What has sparked this demand for a law change to force suspects to answer police questions is the spate of gun play on our streets as criminals fight one another  for territorial sovereignty.   Innocent citizens are having their homes sprayed with bullets and the code of silence is frustrating police efforts to end these rampages.

Most people would agree that justice is being thwarted by the code of silence, but at the same time it would be so easy to transform the checks and balances that apply to our legal system into something that we dread - the imposition of a " police state " - which is what applies in some of the countries from which our boat people are fleeing.

Just as the Mafia are finding in Italy, patient police work eventually breaks any code of silence and while justice may seem slow - it eventually achieves success.   

Convicting criminals will never be acceptable - if it comes at the price of civil liberties being trashed by an all powerful police bureaucracy !

Shark nets - and shark attacks !

Thirty years ago the death of a swimmer killed by a shark would ensure banner headlines in every newspaper in Australia.   Today, this would be reported on a lesser page because shark attacks have become more common - and are less newsworthy.

It is still relatively unusual for a person to be killed by a shark, but the incidence of sharks having a " taste " seems to occur on an almost daily basis.  On Wednesday, a swimmer suffered shark bite injuries off Redhead beach near Newcastle, and yesterday another needed hospital attention in the north-west of Western Australia.   The list seems endless.

Australia has an ever growing population and there are more of us in the water each summer.  Now the effectiveness of shark nets off our beaches - which have been in place since 1937 - is being questioned.  Proponents point out that there has only been a single shark attack fatality at a netted beach in all that time, but those opposed claim the nets kill a huge toll of dolphins, turtles and other passive sea creatures - and call for them to be removed.

If nothing else, nets bring " psychological comfort " to beachgoers and those who tend the nets regularly remove the bodies of entangled sharks which might otherwise have contemplated giving a passing swimmer a " nibble ".

The statistician gives comfort with the revelation that we are much more likely to die of a bee sting - or being struck by lightning - than in a shark attack, and we can further reduce those odds by using a little common sense.   It is certainly unwise to swim after dark - when the fish are most active at finding their meals - and there seems to be an added danger in the early morning and later afternoon periods, specially on overcast days.

No doubt the fate of the shark nets will be decided by political factors.   Getting rid of them will save a lot of money - and that is always a big incentive for a political decision, but that decision will be weighed against political backlash.

It would be a good idea to make a lot of noise and let your preference be known.

And it would be a good idea - either way - to use a little common sense about the time you go for a swim - and remember that the old adage about " safety in numbers " holds true.   

Sharks rarely seem to trouble groups of people.  The lone swimmer is most at risk !

Economics versus living standards.

For the past thirty years the quarry at Bass Point, to the south of Wollongong has lived comfortably with the citizens of this city.  Each year it creates an ever deepening hole as it crushes rock to supply the Sydney building industry with aggregate, screenings and sand.   Eventually, this mine will reach the end of it's life - and that enormous hole will come in very handy to be refilled with waste when we need a new landfill.

The quarry is awaiting permission to expand.   There are two plans being considered - one increasing output from the present 1.5 million tonnes a year to 2.4 million tonnes - and the other to a massive 4 million tonnes.     Either will be warmly welcomed by the Sydney building industry, and the expansion will create more jobs here in Wollongong.

The sticking point is the increase in truck movements.  Expanding the Bass Point quarry will result in truck movements on our roads increasing to a rate of sixty-two per hour, and these will be big trucks which will have to join the queue grinding slowly up Mt Ousley road - which is already near capacity.

Until recently the products from Bass Point were moved by ship.  A  jetty and loading pipeline already exist, but it seems that the ship was fast reaching the end of it's productive life and a decision was made not to spend the huge amount necessary to replace it - so production was switched to road transport.

Economists claim road transport has advantages over shipping, because the trucks can deliver their load directly to where it is needed.   The ship must dock in Sydney and there are unloading costs as the aggregate is transferred to trucks for the short, local delivery.

A different style of thinking needs to apply here.   It seems to be a matter of economics versus living standards - and if the truck option gets the nod - the people of Wollongong will suffer a drop in living standards because of the added traffic problems.

Approval of this quarry expansion should be on the basis of output reverting to ship movement.   The product of this quarry is in short supply nationally, and if it costs a few cents a tonne more to move it in a more friendly manner - then that is the price industry needs to pay to contribute to national living standards.

It seems that the movers and shakers completely ignore living standards in their quest to make profits and lower costs.     This ignorance is like a boomerang.   It has a habit of coming full circle - and hitting the person throwing it behind the ear.

If Bass Point gets it's way and it's product travels by road, further down the track the economy will have to shell out more to widen or duplicate roads.    The right decision now - can pay future dividends !

Will not compute !

There have been a host of hostile rants in the local newspaper about the rubbish dumped in local streets and site owners have been withdrawing permission for charity bins on their property because of the rubbish that accumulates in guise of  useful donations.

No wonder the citizens are confused, because the policies on tip charges by Wollongong Council make absolutely no sense.    In " computerise " - " they do not compute ! "

Lets take a simple example and follow it through the two courses open to Wollongong ratepayers.

Suppose a family buys a new double bed mattress and base.  The supplier delivers it, but it is up to the family to dispose of the old mattress - and the family has a trailer.    They take it to the tip at Whyte's Gully - and find that there is a tip fee of $ 23 for the mattress, but the base is treated differently.   The base is weighed - and charged at the rate of $ 21 for each hundred kilos - or part thereof.   On average, the family pays $ 44 to legally dispose of an unwanted mattress and base.

On the other hand, the family can contact council and arrange for a kerbside pickup of that mattress and base - for free.   Every ratepayer is entitled to two such pickups each calendar year, and this is in addition to the wheelie bins, which are charged for under the general council rates.   These kerbside pickups are there to handle items too large or bulky to fit in the wheelie bin system.

One would wonder how a system evolved that penalises a ratepayer who saves the council time and money in providing a free pickup by taking their own rubbish to the tip - and this all comes back to a charge the government imposed to reduce the amount of rubbish going to landfill.  

According to some government whiz kid, councils are charged $ 78.60 a tonne for all rubbish going to landfill because the government hopes this will encourage councils to adopt more recycling and make the tip space last longer.

The end result of this exercise in futility is that disposing of the same mattress and base can either cost you $ 44  - or nothing !

If the citizens are still dumping  rubbish roadside, then it is a sure indictment that the council have not done a good job of getting the message out that they will pick it up for free.

And the mind boggles to find that we have reached the stage when " big brother " will impose a heavy fine on those with public spirit - who seek to bestow savings on the public purse by taking their own rubbish to the tip.

Feed that conundrum into a computer - and expect a terse "  Will not compute " !

" Activists " or " Terrorists " ?

In all probability, if the killing of whales was put to a referendum vote in Australia the result would be an overwhelming rejection.   If that same referendum canvassed the option of declaring war on Japan to stop that whale hunt - that would also be rejected as a vast over-reaction.

There seems to be a fine line between what we tolerate by those who have strong feelings on a range of subjects, from animal welfare to that old perennial - religion.   Just where does an " activist " cross that line and become a " terrorist " ?

Three Australian men went to the trouble of putting to sea off the West Australian coast to stage a night raid on the Japanese whaling escort ship - Shonan Maru 2.    They managed to get aboard, despite barbed wire protection at entry points and were promptly discovered and locked away by the ship's crew.

This led to diplomatic dialogue between Australia and Japan.  Legally, the Japanese had every right to hold these men until the ship eventually ended it's voyage and returned to Japan.   They could have been charged with a variety of offences - and would probably have faced at least some time in a Japanese prison.      Instead, the Japanese agreed to hand them over to Australian authorities and the customs ship " Ocean Protector " sailed into the southern ocean and collected them.    This cost the Australian taxpayer hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Once back on Australian soil, two of these men were released without charge while the third was sent to prison because he had broken bail conditions on repaying fines for previous " activist " activities.   If he manages to settle these fines, he will also be released without further penalty.

This affair tends to highlight the separation that the law makes between " activism "and " terrorism. "   Had these men taken a bomb aboard with the intention of  damaging the ships engine to stop it taking part in the whale hunt they could have been held on charges of piracy or terrorism.

What they did seems to be just one act in a long series of " activist incidents " designed to create publicity for the causes they hold dear.   They skirt the edge of the lawful definitions - which crossed - could see them face very serious gaol time in either Australia or in a foreign gaol.

At best, they could be described as a "nuisance factor ".   They rely on their activism getting mild public support because they choose popular issues as their targets, but this is at cost to the Australian taxpayer to the tune of huge sums of money.

Surely willingly and knowingly taking an action that will end up costing the public purse should be unlawful - and should attract an automatic penalty ?

If we do not have such a law on the books - then perhaps it is time the lawmaker's framed and passed one !

An inevitable outcome !

The great " Poker machine debate " is headed towards an inevitable outcome.   The plan to make players register and receive a " license " to play the machines in exchange for making a pre-commitment on how much they were prepared to lose is simply dead in the water.  It will not pass the lower house of parliament.

Independent Andrew Wilkie made support for the Labor government of Julia Gillard conditional on his plan to curb problem gambling becoming reality.   A " smoke and mirrors " deal in the selection of the house speaker has given the government a small degree of latitude in the numbers game - and now Wilkie has to bow to the inevitable.

A one dollar limit on each bet allowed on poker machines will probably appease all the combatants.  The clubs will still grumble that it is an unnecessary imposition, but it will impose a minor adjustment to each machine compared to the bureaucratic nightmare of setting up player registration and the army of people needed to enforce playing conditions.

Wilkie will be able to claim that he has fulfilled his promise to stop punters from gambling away their family fortune in just a few wheel spins.   Julia Gillard will pass a sigh of relief that a damaging crisis has been averted, and Tony Abbot will be able to claim victory in saving the junior sporting bodies that the clubs support.

In some ways, a one dollar per spin gambling limit has merit in that it curbs enthusiasm for increasing the bet size after each loss - on the basis that a winning combination must surely follow,  but it does nothing to address the gambling options that are opening in Australia.

A small percentage of gamblers are drawn to ever bigger wagers - and we still have casinos to service that urge.    There are no limits on the size of bets that can be wagered at the TAB - or with bookmakers, and now the internet is providing " virtual casinos " that can be accessed by sitting at home in front of our computers.

The obvious answer would be to ban all forms of betting, but fortunately nobody has been so stupid as to suggest that course of action.   It is in the Australian psyche to have a bet - and a ban would simply drive the industry underground, just as SP bookmakers flourished in every pub before the time of the TAB.

The " Wowsers " would probably like to ban alcohol - along with gambling - but then the Americans tried that way back in the 1920's - with disastrous results.

Be thankful for small mercies.    A year after it comes into effect, few will remember anything different when poker machines limit play to just one dollar !

Where are our " G Men " ?

There was something familiar about a funeral in Sydney yesterday.    The deceased was laid to rest in a gold plated coffin, borne to the funeral in traditional bikie style on a Harley Davidson sidecar - and the cortege was followed by a huge array of Lone Wolf members decked out in their " colours ".   Legend has it that this ostentatious coffin was paid for with thick bundles of cash money.

The deceased - Neal Todorovski was shot in the head in a street in Sans Souci and this seems connected to almost daily incidents where gunfire sprays houses across a wide swathe of western Sydney.  It is said that there is a bikie war in progress to divide up the lucrative returns from the drug trade - and establish just who will be the boss of bosses within the criminal fraternity.

What is so familiar is the notion that we have seen all of this before - at the movies !

Hollywood grew rich depicting the life and times of characters like Al Capone and John Dillinger in the " roaring twenties ", when America embraced prohibition and the streets were filled with mobsters toting " Tommy guns ".   Events like the " Valentine's day massacre " consumed headlines and the public became fascinated following swaggering gangsters having their day in court - supported by highly paid lawyers and gun toting goons.

Those familiar with this genre will remember that the gangster era spawned the creation of super crime fighting agencies - the " G Men " so beloved of countless television series.   People like Elliot Ness and his " Untouchables " battled these criminals - with both guns and ingenuity.

It seems a reasonable question to ask - where are the G Men of Australia ?    We have the Federal police force, but this seems to be strangely missing when it comes to closing down the bikie gangs that are terrorising the public across state lines.  " The Feds " seem to be leaving all the action to state police forces - and what seems to be missing is the seal of authority that allowed the American FBI to become the prime agency fighting crime - across all divisions.

Nobody - except perhaps a comedian - would seriously suggest that our Federal police force is anything but a pale shadow of the might and power of the FBI, and yet that is what we obviously need to carry the fight to this well organised enemy - which is constantly growing in strength and becoming more violent.

The time has come for the Federal and state governments to get together and devolve power to create a Federal entity that can do the job.   Either reinforce the existing Federal police with new powers and much more money - or create something new - along the lines of the FBI.

National crime empires are simply too big to be contained by state police forces !

The " Public Housing " question !

The Western world  has come a long way since the days when public housing was strictly quarantined a long way away from where the rest of the community lived.   Vast estates were built without thought for the facilities needed and as a consequence they were often denied schools, public transport, shops and telephones - until many years later.

There has always been a stigma attached to public housing, despite the fact that the vast majority of public housing tenants are decent people who look after their homes and have nice, well tended gardens.  The problem is the small minority who are nothing better than urban outlaws - who break all the rules and try to intimidate their neighbours.

Then there is the tendency of public housing administration to try and localise bad tenants by grouping them in a small cluster of streets.   This thinking works on the basis that it is better to have a " problem cluster " than to have them spread more evenly where they will give whole suburbs a " bad name ".

The real problem was the reluctance of public housing authorities to implement the rules that were in place to discipline bad tenants.  In the past, it was almost impossible to evict a tenant who refused to pay the rent,  turned the yard of a home unto something resembling the local tip, or who was either a convicted, habitual criminal - or an alcoholic or a drug addict - and sometimes - both !

Times have changed.   Slowly - and very reluctantly - the laws are being implemented.   Those that try to terrorise their neighbours are being given their marching orders - and for the first time this is influencing others to mend their ways.  New thinking is being applied to the location of public housing and  new estate planning is on a " PPP " basis - a " Public/Private/Partnership ".

Where a new suburb is planned the mix of private and public housing will be on at least a 70/30 basis and it is expected that this mix will result in a lift in standards.   At the same time, the design of public housing has moved away from the dreary little three bedroom box to something that fits in well with it's private home surroundings.

Perhaps the greatest change is one of thinking.    In the past, many people saw public housing as a " right " - and acted accordingly.    That seems to have changed to one of both parties now having " mutual obligations " -  and the housing authorities have the " teeth " to ensure that those obligations are met.

Perhaps the day is fast arriving when it will be impossible to distinguish between public and private housing in our new suburbs.

The Australian car industry enigma !

By world standards, the Australia car industry is small.   We produce about 250,000 Australian made cars annually and these support about 50,000 Australian jobs - and this entire industry is concentrated in Victoria and South Australia.

The problem is that what we produce is now not what the Australian public is buying.   As recently as a couple of decades ago most Australian families made the decision to buy either a Holden Commodore or a Ford Falcon.    The big six cylinder car was king because it suited the size of the average Australian family, and it had the power to pull a caravan or a boat on the holiday scene.

Sales of these two icons have dropped and most car brands have added smaller - and cheaper - cars to their range of products - and these are made in either Korea or India.   We are seeing new brands emerging from both Korea and China and these are competing across all aspects of both the size and model range.    The buying public have a huge spectrum of opportunity offering when making a decision to purchase - and this will widen further with the inclusion of electric cars - and the widening choice between petrol or diesel engines,

The Australian car industry has seen  industry contractions as iconic brands have ceased manufacturing  and relied on imports, and now big decisions are facing those that are left in this field. The entire world car industry relies on financial help from host governments and if Australia is still going to manufacture cars - the taxpayer will need to shell out to keep the industry solvent.

The question is - can we compete in this fast changing world market ?

There is no doubt that the end of car manufacturing in Australia would be a crushing blow to our national pride.   It would reinforce the idea that Australia has allowed itself to be transformed from a vibrant manufacturing economy - to the world's quarry !     It would probably doom whoever was in political power in Canberra to certain defeat at the next election.

As the remaining car industry in this country ponders the local product question, the economists in Canberra will need to figure whether the jobs are worth saving in relation to what it will cost the economy to keep this industry running.

And the even bigger question.   If we abandon car manufacturing as a lost cause, what other source of employment can we lure here to give those fifty thousand Australian workers a new pay packet ?

A threat to our flag !

The British government has agreed to let Scotland hold a referendum on breaking away from the three hundred year old amalgamation of England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales that became the United Kingdom.   It seems likely that this referendum will take place in 2014.

The polls indicate that about 54% of Scots oppose the move, but that is before debate begins and a lot will depend on what happens to the United Kingdom economy - and how the Economic Union Euro crisis evolves - before the people put pen to paper.

Should the referendum succeed - and Scotland leave the UK to become an independent country, it will be necessary for a new flag to replace the Union Jack.    This old flag is an amalgamation of the crosses of the four constituents of the union, and without Scotland the flag will be missing the " blue " of the " red, white and blue ".

That would certainly create a problem for Australia, and all those other parts of the world that incorporate the Union Jack in their national flag,

One option would be for Australia to do nothing - and just retain the old Union Jack in the upper left corner as a symbol of from whence this new nation emerged.  To many, it would seem odd to retain a flag that no longer applies to the country in which our head of state resides - and it would certainly re-energise the republican debate across Australia.

The issue of becoming a republic seems to have been set aside until the present Queen dies.  Considering her age, it may well be that this referendum and that event coincide, hence the question of what flag flies over this country needs consideration now.

Looking back into the distant past, flags originated as heraldic devices that were supposed to carry a message.    Our flag contained the Union Jack as a symbol of our origin, and the stars of the Southern Cross and the Federation star represented who we are - and where we are located.

Perhaps if a referendum on the other side of the world dictates a need to change our flag, we should consider a change of message.  In recent times we have sought reconciliation with the people who lived here before that first fleet dropped anchor in 1788.

A simple solution to the flag problem would be to replace the Union Jack with the Aboriginal flag.  In this way we would recognise the Aboriginal people who were here before 1788, and retain the blue background, stars of the Southern Cross and Federation star - to represent those who followed to become  citizens of this country.

That could become the ultimate act of conciliation, binding together all the citizens - past and present - of this country we call home.

This " Politically Correct " era !

Opposition Citizenship spokeswoman Teresa Gambaro has received a wall of flak for daring to suggest that people migrating to this country should be taught " lifestyle education " to allow them to fit seamlessly into our communities.

It seems to cross the line of being " politically correct " to even suggest that those who desire to live amongst us should in any way deviate from the customs they normally follow.   We once desired all newcomers to learn English so that Australian's would share a common language, but now we have " multiculturalism " - and to make sure there is no need to go to that bother we pay taxes to provide the SBS network giving news and cultural programmes in a full range of languages.

One local custom that works for us is the habit of forming a queue when we need a taxi or expect to board a bus.   It simply rewards the first people there to be first in line, but this is totally unknown in some Asian countries.   Migrants - or even visiting tourists - who try and rush to the head of the line attract a volley of verbal abuse - and in some cases this can lead to "biffo".    Surely, making them aware that there is a cultural difference here would be a way to harmony !

Ms Gambaro was harshly criticised for suggesting that migrants adopt the Australian trend to use underarm deoderant.   Older Australians will smile and remember the first wave of European migration after the end of the second world war - when many from both England and Europe were accustomed to a " weekly bath " - which was common in that colder climate - and didn't make the grade in Australia's hot and humid summers.    Many of today's migrants come from places where even drinking water is rationed - and body washing is an almost unheard of luxury.

It seems that " political correctness " now extends to judging the events of 1788 by the values that apply to these early years of the twenty-first century.   Even suggesting that people change their living habits to somehow conform to an Australian standard is considered so offensive as to bring instant abuse.

And yet so many of those who arrive on our shores with no knowledge of the Australian lifestyle are dismayed when - by ignorance - they offend because they are totally unaware of customs which do not apply from whence they came.

Those who stick to the sheer insanity of political correctness should remember that the greatest gift we can bestow on a newcomer - is the knowledge they need to be comfortably accepted in their new homeland !

The " Unwanted " !

A case making newspaper headlines tends to illustrate the conflict between what the law requires and what the community expects when it concerns the release from prison of an offender who has served time for the murder of a child.

A man was released in December of 2009 after serving sixteen years for the brutal murder of a young boy.  At the time there was an outcry from those connected with the victim and strict parole conditions applied.   One of those conditions stipulated that the released offender must not have a close relationship or have any form of control over other children.

The parolee settled in a country town far removed from the crime scene and changed his name.  We can presume that he was under some sort of supervision from the parole authorities, and yet somewhere along the line he established a relationship with a young woman - and eventually moved in with her.  The sticking point was - this woman had two young children from a previous relationship, and he did not disclose to her the fact that he was a former notorious murderer of a child.

When this information surfaced he was immediately arrested, and he will face court for breaching a child protection order.   He may face a short term in prison, but inevitably he will again be released - and it will be impossible for him to return to that country town now that he is known by his new name and all the facts have been disclosed.

It raises the question of just what should happen to those who commit a horrible crime, serve their time - and are then returned to the community !

The law states that when a court delivers a verdict, the sentence must be served - and the person is then released to start a new chapter in their life.   Conditions apply, but as we well know integrating anyone guilty of a child crime back into the community can be almost impossible.  Public hysteria can lead to vigilante action.

In this case, we are dealing with the unknown.  It is quite possible that this man may have become a valued step-father and these two children might have grown to maturity in safety - but it is also possible that the liaison could have led to tragedy.     The law required him to walk away from that liaison as soon as he became aware that children were involved,  but that is a lot to ask a lonely man trying to establish a new life - and a new relationship.

Fortunately this conflict between the law and society only applies to those who harm children - and such cases are in the minority.   Ordinary criminals - and there are plenty of them - ease back into society seamlessly because a different set of standards apply.

It seems that child murder is a crime with a similar ending to the fable of the ghost ship - " The Flying Dutchman " - destined to sail the world's seas indefinitely.

Like that ship - the perpetrators are destined to wander society - unwanted - for an eternity !

The " tactical " retail war !

The " bricks and mortar " retailers are taking a pasting from the online crowd because of issues like the GST - and ever rising council rates, electricity charges.   Without these overhead costs it is easy to undercut traditional shop prices.

Desperate times lead to desperate measures.  In trying to claw back lost sales one big retail chain adopted an unfair tactic that brought a $ 750,000 fine from a regulatory authority.   It's national advertising gave the impression that a discounted item was available in all it's many stores - but the fine print restricted availability to just one obscure outlet - in a remote suburb.

A similar tactic was recently tried by a national liquor retailer.   A brand of cask wine was advertised at a cheap price in national newspapers, but once again the small print revealed that the offer only applied to a single store.   So far, no official action has been forthcoming.

One of the biggest advantages the bricks and mortar people have is the ability for the customer to see and physically handle the offered item.    The big disadvantage of online selling is the necessity of buying off a catalogue.   What you see is often not what you get.   Being able to feel the fabric of a garment or to work the mechanism of a mechanical item goes a long way to delivering a buying decision.

We are probably well on the way to seeing the bricks and mortar people establishing their own online operations, and using their retail stores as the delivery point for online purchases.   Not only does this eliminate individual freight delivery charges - which often make online purchases less  attractive - but it inspires confidence that warranty claims will be hassle free.

There is another huge advantage that the bricks and mortar crowd need to embrace.   Online shopping can not individually fit items to each customers needs, nor can it physically show and instruct a customer on how to operate a complex item.    Some items lend themselves well to unseen purchases, but others do not and the retail shops would be wise to selectively cater to that segment of the market.

Just as supermarkets evolved by convincing shoppers to wheel a trolley around their aisles and pack their own groceries,  retailing in the twenty-first century is undergoing change - and the ones who survive will be those who grasp the advantages that both online and retail stores offer - and combine those benefits.

Savvy customers are there to be wooed.   It is just a matter of " thinking outside the nine dots " to win the sale !

KISS. Keep it simple - Stupid !

Sixty years ago " Marketing " was the buzz word for aspiring executives making their mark in the commercial world and a leading Guru coined the " KISS " phrase to warn against the trend to obfuscation when explaining how a system works.

Unfortunately obfuscation seems to have developed into an art form, specially when it comes to implementing government policy.  The moment somebody dreams up a new plan to be foisted on the nation - a veritable army of movers and shakers crawls out of the woodwork and begins to implement rules and regulations - that even Einstein would have difficulty following.

So it is with the very well intentioned " Tele-Health " initiative !

The idea was to simplify the process of country GP's getting their patients a consultation with specialists.   As things stood, the country patients usually had to make a long journey to the city and suffer both inconvenience and expense.    It seemed less wasteful to set up a tele-conference in which the patient and his or her GP spoke directly to the specialist from the GP's consulting rooms.   The GP could order any tests required by the specialist at the local hospital and perform physical testing as the specialist watched.

The Federal government has spent $ 7.2 million to get this scheme up and running, and 1200 country GP's have each applied for $ 6,000 grants to buy the software deemed necessary by the bureaucrats to access the scheme.

The problem is that this software is so complex that many doctors have been forced to undertake further IT training to be able to navigate through the system - and many have found that a better way already exists.

The commercial world produced SKYPE - and this fits neatly into the " Keep it simple - Stupid " paradigm.      All the GP's and the specialists have to do is download the free SKPE software onto their computers and they are ready for those tele-conferences that connect their patients with advanced medical help.

All that is needed is a computer with both a camera and sound system -  and the Tele-Health system is up and running.

It seems to be a fact of life that anything the government plans seems to get bogged down in complexity and endless rules and regulations.   Unfortunately, there are many in the bureaucracy who think they have to justify their existence by taking the longest journey between any two points - as seems to be the case with the official version of Tele-Health.

Perhaps what is needed is a placard nailed to the wall above every government employee's desk - asking -  "  Does it meet the KISS standard ? "

It could be a way to solving our budget deficit problem !

Arrival of the " E-Cigarette " !

We have come a long way in the war against cigarette smoking.  Older folk will remember the days when people smoked in the supermarkets and even doctor's waiting rooms had ash trays.   Slowly and surely the net has been closing and each year smoking options become fewer.

It was probably inevitable that someone would design and produce a cigarette that does not contain nicotine, and which supposedly meets all health guidelines - and yet it will attract hostility from the anti-smoking establishment, despite needing no  approval from the New South Wales Health and Therapeutic Goods Administration ( TGA ).

It really is a clever diversion from the traditional cigarette that not only affects the health of the smoker, but spreads a toxic cloud of sidestream smoke that will shorten the life of innocent people in the vicinity of the smoker.

The E-Cigarette is a two piece system.  It consists of what many years ago would have been described as a " cigarette holder " - a reusable item that holds a rechargeable battery that serves a small heating coil.    The " smoker " inserts a tube that looks similar to a conventional cigarette, but which contains  vegetable glycerine and propylene glycol - which when heated by that coil - gives off  a vapour which is pleasing to the user's taste buds.

The big difference is that this " emission " takes place directly into the user's mouth, unlike conventional cigarettes which emit harmful smoke into the atmosphere.

Some in the medical profession welcome this innovation as a tool to banish nicotine.  They are sending patients to the point of sale because it is less harmful than conventional cigarettes and therefore a better option when use of nicotine replacement patches have failed to satisfy cravings.

It will be interesting to see the public reaction when E-Cigarette users " lightup " in a pub, club or restaurant.    The sticking point may be the fact that this new innovation still looks like a cigarette, despite it emitting no smoke cloud and only serving the user's taste buds in a similar manner to a piece of confectionery.

It seems inevitable that there will be an outcry from the usual anti-tobacco fanatics and calls to have E-Cigarettes banned.

It would be a pity if a clever innovation that has real hope of weaning some hopelessly addicted  smokers from the evil weed was removed as an option - purely because the sight of a pseudo-cigarette offended the do-gooder fraternity.

The anti-nicotine lobby has been baying for so long that it has lost sight of the final objective !

A " Ransom " nightmare !

An Australian man faces a ransom demand from his captors that seems well beyond his capacity to pay.    Warren Rodwell ran a small village shop with his Philippina wife on the restive Philippines island of Mindanao.  On December 5, a Muslim separationist group kidnapped him at gun point and now demands almost two million Australian dollars ranson in exchange for his release.

All sides of Australian politics agree that under no circumstances should we agree to pay ransom demands.  It would be the first step on a very slippery slope, and criminal elements would immediately target Australians as a way to extort money.   We have had a practical example of how this works off the Horn of Africa, where piracy has increased dramatically since ship owners started paying ransoms to free their hijacked ships.

Two million dollars seems an impossible demand for a small shopkeeper.   How would the average Australian fare here in Australia trying to raise that sort of money if a relative was facing death overseas unless such a ransom was paid ?  

Basically, the kidnappers are Muslim terrorists and if this money is paid it will be used to finance death and destruction in their quest to force Sharia law onto all residents of the Philipinnes.   They are obviously a well organised group because they have provided a " proof of life " video, which shows a distressed Mr Rodwell pleading for the ransom to be paid to secure his release.

There are probably behind the scenes negotiations going on between the terrorists and people from government agencies from both countries, and it is possible that the terrorists may be convinced that their demands are hopelessly beyond the victim's ability to pay - and settle for a more modest amount.
Unfortunately, that is no guarantee of a successful release.   These terrorists have shown no compunction when it comes to killing - and once the money is paid they may or may not complete their part of the transaction.

Warren Rodwell's life hangs in the balance.    Becoming a ransom victim seems to be a possible fate that awaits any Australian living in a foreign country with an insurgency problem.   Even visiting such a place as a tourist raises the risk factor.    It is certainly something about which we should think - long and hard - before finalising any overseas holiday plans !

A recipe for murder !

Yesterday, two people died from poisoning in a leading Sydney hospital.   The cream of Australia's medical science knew exactly what form of poison was circulating in their systems, but were not able to save them.  There simply is no antidote for this poison.

The victims cooked and shared a meal of mushrooms on New Year's eve.   It seems evident that this meal was from what they supposed was " field mushrooms " growing in the Australian Capital Territory.   What they ate were " Death Cap " mushrooms, almost identical in every way to field mushrooms, but fairly common in the ACT in areas that also contain oak trees.   They have also been reported in isolation in Victoria and South Australia.

Identifying the Death Cap mushroom requires specialist knowledge that is beyond the average person.  Long time residents of the ACT are usually aware that this fatal mushroom - considered the most poisonous fungi in the world - grows in their area and take precautions, but there is concern that the influx of tourists, particularly Asians who feature mushrooms in their cooking - will become future victims.

The deaths have attracted media coverage and hopefully this will put people on their guard to be wary of any mushroom growing wild.    Field mushrooms sprout from the ground after summer rain in most parts of Australia, but knowing that there is even a remote possibility that they may be of the Death Cap variety is a very good reason for giving them a miss.   It is better to be sure than sorry - or dead !

Unfortunately, there is another side to this publicity.   We have just informed those with murder in mind that a mushroom exists that is hard to detect, and that if it is eaten by an unwary victim it will bring death within a matter of days with absolute certainty.  We have delivered  a way of retribution for those with a cheating spouse - or the way to hasten a rich relative to a more conveniently timed death.

It is said that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing !    How convenient would it be to make a gift of a delicacy such as supposed field mushrooms to a victim, knowing that intent would be impossible to prove because of the similarity of field mushrooms and Death Caps ?

Obviously, those with enemies would be wise to keep that in mind when planning meals - and receiving gifts !

A " Second chance " !

" Welfare Mums " is a derogatory term used to describe teenage girls who get pregnant, drop out of school and fail to achieve their Higher School Certificate qualification - condemning them  to a life of low paid jobs and welfare dependency.

A scheme has been devised to get them back into the classroom and motivate them to have a second try at achieving that year 12 HSC, opening the door to better jobs and breaking the welfare cycle.

It is very much a " carrot and stick " approach.  Young women already on welfare will be required to attend a Centrelink interview when their child reaches six months age, and if they join the scheme - it will commence when their baby is one year old.

Special benefits will ease their way back into the learning cycle.  They will receive free childcare and be referred to " special services " by Centrelink, with one on one counselling - and a  " parenting payment " of $ 320 a week.

Obviously some will fail.   Once the " learning cycle " of school routine has been discontinued it is hard to  reattain, but Centrelink will lean over backwards to be supportive.  A lot will depend on the individual.  Those with the foresight to see a better life ahead and a wish to avoid the misery of welfare dependency will make the effort - and succeed.

This is a gender selective Centrelink initiative.    The statistics on children who drop out of school before attempting to sit for their HSC shows that 17% are girls - and a whopping 27% are boys.

The equal opportunities people will obviously be waiting to see what special initiative Centrelink is planning to reign in males who leave with insufficient job qualifications.

The " Foreclosure " epidemic !

The saddest calamity that can happen to any family is to lose the roof over their heads.  In the past year the issue of foreclosure notices has reached epidemic proportions - an increase of 22.5%.

In the ten months to November 2011, the Supreme court of New South Wales issued 2466 writs of possession to allow mortgagees to take control of homes with mortgage arrears.    The residents are forced to vacate - sometimes forcibly assisted by the Sheriff.   It is chilling for people to find themselves homeless - with their possessions dumped beside the road - and with nowhere to go.

The reason families find themselves in trouble are varied, but high on the list are job losses.   We live in uncertain economic times and even " safe " jobs can suddenly disappear.   Illness is another prominent reason, and relationship breakups obviously divide the numbers contributing to keeping the loan afloat.

Saddest of all is how this affects little kids.  In one moment the safety of living in a nice home with a caring mum and dad is shattered - and life suddenly becomes a nightmare of short stays with relatives or friends, and the inevitable gaps when the family is living in homeless refuges.

Foreclosures have always been with us, but the chaotic state of world finances is putting added pressure on the industries we rely on for jobs, and there are no indications that this will start to improve anytime soon.  Now is a good time to take stock of the options - and to deal with a mortgage crisis in a calm and professional way.

The greatest mistake those slipping into mortgage arrears make - is to ignore it.  Some do this in the hope that it will miraculously " go away ", but of course it doesn't.     The wise will immediately seek out the bank or building society and be frank about their situation.     Lenders are emphatic that foreclosure is their absolutely last choice.   In most cases, the problem causing the loss of funds is only temporary, hence some sort of bridging arrangement will tide the borrower over - and the crisis will be averted.

In many cases the mortgagee will alter the loan terms to reduce payments to an affordable level.  Often all that will be required for a period of time will be the payment of interest, while the repayment of capital will be deferred until a later time by extending the loan period.

Most people have scrimped and saved to find the deposit to allow them to buy a home.  It is usually the biggest financial transaction they will make in their entire lifetime.   Not only will foreclosure deny them an asset to fund their retirement and pass on to their children, it will damage their credit rating and reduce their chance of recovery - and again buying a home - when conditions improve.

The best advice anyone can give to those with a mortgage payment problem is to immediately go and talk to the mortgage holder.   To do so greatly enhances the chances of surviving the crisis - and keeping your most valuable asset intact !

The " Stay at School " allowance !

Decades ago, it was the common perception that when a child turned sixteen - that was when they finished school and went and got a job and started to contribute to family finances. This was specially true of children from low income families.

Times have changed. That piece of paper with a " Higher School Certificate " label on it is now essential to enter most professions. Without it - you can forget nursing, becoming a school teacher - or entering university for further avenues of study and qualification.

What most low income families dreaded was that sixteenth birthday - because that was the start of the government withdrawing a tax benefit that for many meant the difference of making ends meet - or sinking further below the poverty line.

In poor families there was no question of the son or daughter remaining at school. They could not afford the loss of income from the withdrawal of a tax benefit, and so it became a matter of getting a job or getting a job search subsidy as a replacement.

In this bright new year that has changed. Families with a son or daughter aged sixteen to nineteen are eligible for a payment of $ 4200 a year - provided that they remain at school.

It helps alleviate the burden of teenager costs in low income families, and at the same time increases the opportunity for their children to achieve the education standards that are the passport to a better life.

It is a step in the right direction, establishing a more level playing field in the combative area of job opportunities.

What this bright New Year brings !

At the stroke of midnight six million dollars worth of fireworks lit up the Sydney sky, bringing in the year two thousand and twelve. Some people made new year resolutions, but what this new year delivers seems to be set in stone.

The old year saw three hundred and seventy four residents of this state die in road accidents - and a whopping eighteen thousand three hundred suffered serious injury. Despite the best efforts of the police and those tasked with road safety, there is no reason to believe that the figures will be greatly changed this time next year.

We have had the coolest start to summer in fifty years, and yet the combination of a mild winter and copious rain has greatly increased the fuel load surrounding our cities and towns. If the anticipated very hot conditions arrive and bring with them north westerly winds, there is every chance that this late summer will see the worst cyclical fire storms in decades.

There will be the usual inevitable increase in the prices charged for electricity, gas and water, and at the same time the lowest paid in the workforce will drop about $ 30,000 from their superannuation payout when they retire - because of money saving changes to the rules. At the same time, economists expect the stock market will surge as we begin a new cycle, helping to widen the gap between the rich and the poor.

Few will be surprised to learn that dishonest politicians charged with a crime are expecting taxpayers to pick up the tab for their legal costs. They will naturally hire the most experienced - and most expensive - lawyers and we will be treated to the " theatre " that passes for justice in this unequal world.

Those found guilty will be severely punished and lambasted by the judge, but an appeal will be lodged - to be heard long after the matter has faded from the news. Inevitably - this appeal will result in the sentence being drastically reduced or even waived - and the legal bill will again be sheeted home to the taxpayers.

We live in a world of " bread and circuses " - where that old adage - " The more things change, the more they stay the same " still rings true !