A ghost from the past !

Many people in Australia will remember Mahathir Mohamad, the former prime minister of Malaysia who was renowned for blaming all the ills of the world on the west - and in particular - his vitriolic spats with Australian prime ministers.

This man held office for twenty-two turbulent years and was a virtual dictator.  Malaysia was a difficult place to do business because of government interference in the courts and with the administration of the law system.   Long after his retirement and withdrawal from pubic life the spectre of corruption remains.  Opposition leaders find themselves in prison on trumped up charges and the legitimacy of elections could only be termed " opaque " !

Mahathir Mohamad has taken to the public stage to air his views on Flight MH370, which disappeared with 239 people on board and has been the subject of probably the biggest and most costly search in aviation history.   The plane was owned and operated by Malaysian Airlines, a Malaysian government instrumentality.

Without the slightest offer of any evidence, the former prime minister has stated that the blame for the accident should be sheeted home to Boeing, the manufacturer of the 777 aircraft.   He absolves Malaysian Airlines from any guilt, despite clear indications that identification was turned off during flight and the plane travelled for six hours far from it's intended course.   In true dictatorial style, he dismisses all local input and insists that these deaths are the result of inferior products from the countries of the west that he so roundly despises.

In most of the world, his rantings will be taken with a grain of salt.   Those who remember his exchanges with Paul Keating may even be amused  by the twisted logic applied to a tragic event, but the outburst will do little to help heal the feelings of the bereaved still mourning the loss of loved ones.

To say this statement is insensitive would be a gross understatement.   Boeing would have every reason to sue for defamation but most likely they will ignore the outburst.  The ex-prime minister is now a very old man and by  the very nature of the claim and it's lack of substance, it seems a sad reminder of how age decays the human mind.

" Switcheroo ! "

The drug companies are adept at juggling their drug presentations to the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme ( PBS ) to maintain high profit margins and some of these scams are costing taxpayers $ 200 million a year. In particular, drug combinations are a ruse that prevents the benefits of generic drug versions reaching the public.

Often a drug manufacturer will combine the benefits of two totally different drugs to create a single pill that serves both purposes.   While this drug is under patent protection profits from it's manufacture remain high, but when the patent expires competitors are free to make a copy and offer it as a generic alternative.   They know that the patent holder will undoubtedly drop the price sharply to try and maintain market share and hence the copy will be priced to just undercut that reduced price.

The PBS  compares the price of the patented drug with the price of the individual drugs that are combined in the new product and this becomes the base price mechanism.   The generic drug industry offers copies under a host of new names, and the comparison swings away from the ingredients as a price comparison - and simply compares the price of the range of generics offered.

One of the drugs widely proscribed in Australia is an anti blood clotting drug that contains both clopidogral and aspirin.   It's price structure is $ 15.02 more expensive than buying clopidogral and aspirin separately, because the price comparison no longer compares the base ingredients.   In this way, the price of the generics is artificially high.

Drug prices fluctuate widely when compared across a mix of world countries.   They are cheaper where the laws that govern prices are constantly reviewed and industry practice is taken into account.  The drug administration needs to keep on top of the game to ensure that the price of it's pharmaceuticals is not artificially high - and a drag on the public purse.

It seems that there is scope for improvement in the area of Australian generic drug pricing !

The " Au Pair " Solution !

It is a fact of life that many working women with a family can not find a vacancy in a child care facility and that costs are rising rapidly while wages remain stagnant.   For some strange reason, a solution that is common in Europe seems to be a lost opportunity in Australia.

Hiring an " Au Pair " delivers a benefit to both parties.   A young woman from a foreign country gets bed and board and pocket money in return for looking after a working woman's children and doing household chores. The usual arrangement is at least one full day off each week, hence there is a great opportunity to perfect use of the English language and see the sights and experience travel at low cost.

Young women looking for au pair work can gain entry to Australia by way of a " working holiday visa " and this is part of our youth exchange programme - but it is strictly limited to those under the age of thirty.  It is suggested that we should widen this opportunity to accept a " Granny Au Pair " answer by way of introducing an appropriate visa category.

Extension to mature age au pairs delivers many benefits.   They are less likely to want to " party " than young people and they bring a world of experience from rearing their own children - and retired people are equally keen to travel and experience the lifestyle of other countries.   There are certainly mutual benefits in opening child care to mature people who have the ability to deliver wisdom and experience, but who otherwise may not be able to afford the benefits of travel.

Not only would this ease pressure on child care places.   Many retirees are much more affluent than the young and we could expect their spending to improve our economy.   There seems no valid reason why it could not be used to resolve a problem that is denying many Australian women the opportunity to return to the workforce because of child care problems.

There will be the usual down side of those over staying visas and personality clashes, but it is a completely new concept to the Australian way of thinking.   We will solve the problems of the twenty-first century with new answers to old problems - and mature au pairs breaks new ground.   It certainly deserves at least a fair trial !

Common planning laws !

Sydney can be a frustrating place to get almost any sort of planning decision approved.   The problem is that the city is divided into a mix of individual councils and they all have their own laws and by-laws that are often in sharp contrast to one another.    Council decisions are needed to decide matters of transport policy, policing, economic development and housing standards - and what is permissible in one council area may be totally rejected in another - just a few streets away.

This situation is a hangover from the days when Sydney suburbs were little more than distant villages from the city centre.  It was the job of the local council to set aside somewhere for the locals to dump their rubbish, fix the pot holes in the street system - and before sewerage - organise the " night soil " removal.   Each council was a valuable source of jobs for their residents.

London had the same problem and fourteen years ago it concentrated decisive powers in what became the GLA - the Greater London Authority.  It was decided that if London was to be a world class capital it needed a degree of uniformity to replace the huge mish mash of rules and regulations that applied in each individual council area.   There is consensus that the GLA  has achieved that objective.

Now the same thinking is being focused on Sydney.   It is an idea that will not be universally popular with many residents.  It will mean a loss of identity - and sacrificing control of local decisions for the public good. Many restrictive by-laws intended to soothe local wishes will have to go and planning decisions on a city wide basis will introduce change that is not universally popular.    Such is the price of achieving an efficient planning regime.

If the introduction of a GSA - a Greater Sydney Authority - is to happen it will only be a continuation of the passage of power from councils to the state government that has been in progress for years. Both the Federal and state governments have turned councils into instrumentality's to process functions that they no longer wish to administer - and at the same time - remove council power from areas which governments consider " essential services ".

Council amalgamations have been a long term objective, usually against the wishes of ratepayers who fear loss of control input.   That same objection will cause many to oppose a GSA and it could become a pawn in the game of politics.

How this proceeds will depend on the skill with which it is " sold " to the public !

Sending a message !

Occasionally a film producer manages a great scene that sticks in the mind of viewers and becomes something of a legend.  Many regard the final scene from " Thelma and Louise " as such a classic, depicting Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis holding hands as they deliberately gun their car over the edge of the Grand Canyon and choose death rather than  prison.

Another classic generated a remark often quoted very tongue in cheek.   In " The Godfather ", Mafia boss Don Corleone is angered at the refusal of his request and suggests he will " make an offer he can't refuse ".   As a result, the offending person awakes to find the bloodied head of his champion racehorse sharing his bed.

The Sydney underworld either has a sense of humour - or someone is in very deep trouble.   A resident of the western suburbs was startled to hear noises outside his home in the wee small hours and went to investigate.    He found the windscreen and side windows of his vehicle smashed - and a bloodied horses head on the bonnet.

The police are investigating and media comment suggests that this may have been " a drug deal that went wrong ".   It is certainly symptomatic of the unrelenting wave of crime washing over the Sydney drug scene and the involvement of criminal bikie gangs.    The gun culture is very much alive and well in this twenty-first century and some compare it to the " bootlegger " days of Chicago during prohibition - back in the early days of the twentieth century.

Fortunately, the victims seem to be mainly mobsters eliminating competitors rather than members of the public suffering harm.   It seems that the supply of guns comes from both illegal imports - and local gun factories that are even churning out automatic weapons.    The problem is that drug profits are so huge that we are seeing the clash of virtual " armies " fighting for their share of the market.

Don't expect improvements anytime soon  !      The first rule of commerce applies.   Whenever their is demand, supply will inevitably follow.    It is a fact of life that huge numbers of otherwise honest citizens crave drugs - and are prepared to break the law to gain supply.

Perhaps the fact that the Americans closed down open gang warfare by repealing prohibition may be a point to ponder in tackling our crime problems !

Remembering " The Great War " !

A century ago events in Europe spun out of control and the first shots were fired in what was called " the First World War ".  It was a titanic clash that consumed millions - and it changed the world as we knew it.  Today, visitors to the battlefields are numbed by the sheer magnitude of war cemeteries that stretch for miles. This was a slaughter that caused some to refer to it as " the Great War " , while others thought it would be the " War to end Wars ".

It didn't !    Twenty years on, we were at it again.   This time we were more mechanised and far less men in uniform died, but war had moved onto a new front.  Civilians died in their thousands as cities on both sides became bombing targets.   Starvation became a weapon of war,  and unspeakable acts of savagery were common in the quest for victory.

The only conclusions that can be drawn is that civilization is no more advanced now than it was back in the " Dark Ages ".   When events lead to war, the veneer of reason and respectability peels away and we are capable of reverting to the baser instincts that some would describe as " savages ".

As we pause to remember the centenary of the Great War, events are inflicting death and destruction  between living human beings in countless bloody conflicts around the globe.   The killing is going on in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Sudan, Egypt - and the people of Ukraine are facing an army massing on their borders.

Many recent wars have concluded.   The Rwandan genocide has ended and that country is slowly reverting to normal.  Sri Lanka fought a war that lasted decades and the losers are still counting the cost - and leaving the country in droves to avoid reprisals.    Anyone who thinks the world is at peace - must be an optimist !

The question in many people minds - is what does the future hold ?   Australia is not looking to enlarge it's borders or seeking territorial conquest.   We are a peaceful nation and pose no threat to our neighbours - but we live in a dangerous world.

If war threatens Australia it will be from the aspirations of others.   A wise statesman once counselled that " if you hope for peace - prepare for war " - and that was sound advice.   A strong defence structure deters aggression by others.

That provides logic for spending billions of dollars to ensure that our fighter aircraft are at the cutting edge of the technology needed to defend this nation - and hopefully - make a potential enemy think twice !

Religious sensitivity !

Secular Australia is very open minded when it comes to matters of religion.  Many Christians openly wear a crucifix and Islamic head scarves are common sights on our streets.  It is not uncommon for Buddhist small businesses to have a religious offering displayed in their store.  This religious sensitivity is not always reciprocated overseas.

A British woman arriving in Sri Lanka was arrested as she went through customs because she had a tattoo of the Buddha seated on a Lotus leaf on her right arm.   Sri Lanka is a Buddhist country and they take their religion so seriously that this tattoo was considered an insult.   She was arrested - detained - and quickly deported.

Many Australians would consider such a tattoo as a normal form of adornment.  In fact, some would see it as a mark of respect rather than a hostile challenge, but religious sensitivity is very much in the eye of the beholder and what is acceptable in Australia could be totally unacceptable elsewhere.

Australians considering overseas travel would be well advised to learn a little about the laws and customs of the countries they intend to visit.   What is quite acceptable in Australia in the way of casual attire may be deemed insultingly immodest is many middle eastern countries and in many parts of the world a woman with uncovered hair breaks a local taboo.

It is far safer to " fit in " and observe local customs.  To be aware of what is required is to avoid problems that can quickly spin out of control in countries with religious tensions.  It requires sensitivity to judge that what is acceptable in the tourist district of some cities may not be so acceptable if that same tourist diverges into a visit to country regions.   In some areas, there are sharp differences in the lifestyles that are separated by very short distances.

Holiday travel can be one of life's pleasures, but the reverse applies if a tourist gets into trouble far from home and lacks an understanding of what has offended his or her hosts.  In most cases the problem could have been avoided by using sensitivity and common sense.    That old saying of " When in Rome, do as the Romans do " - certainly applies.

The " LMI " Impost !

The biggest financial transaction in most people's lives is the day they sign a mortgage and start the journey to home ownership.  Most people shop around looking for the cheapest interest rate and then comes the decision whether to leave that interest variable - or lock it in if that option is available.  There are a host of other matters to be considered.  In some instances, first home buyers will get government grants or exemption from that horror called " Stamp Duty ".   It is a time of very many decisions.

For the average home buyer an item called " LMI " tacked onto the bill of costs is something of a mystery.  It stands for  " Lender's Mortgage Insurance " and on a home in the $ 500,000 range if amounts to a cost of about $ 17,500.   Most people don't have spare cash to pay up front and consequently it gets lumped into the loan - and over a thirty year period it would end up costing an additional $ 24,000.

Amazingly, the lender is demanding that the person getting a loan takes out an insurance policy to reimburse the lender for non-repayments.    It seems that the big banks have all avenues covered.   Not only can they foreclose and take back the house if repayments fall into arrears, they have the integrity of the loan covered by insurance - and stick the struggling owner with the bill.

That happens in no other area of commerce.  Those selling any sort of merchandise face the usual risks when it comes to getting paid.  It is also an unusual fact that applying LMI seems to be selective.  It is not usually demanded from those from a select group of high income earners such as doctors, dentists, business owners or those heading corporations.    This insurance cover is aimed squarely at the people who hold down a weekly paid job in our society.

There is also another hidden trap.   Should a borrower find a better rate of interest and decide to switch the loan, the old LMI is often terminated - and a new LMI applied with a consequent new premium charged.  It seems that these LMI policies are not transportable from one loan to another.

It seems to be a matter of instigation.   The LMI is " owned " by the lender rather than being " owned " by the person paying the loan.   A little redefinition here could save the average person a lot of money.  There seems no reason why an LMI should not simply name the current holder of the mortgage as the beneficiary and therefore apply it to whatever loan applied - rather than to a specific lender.

A law change to ensure portability of LMI's would be a great benefit to the average person paying off a mortgage !

The " Security " problem !

When the first of August rolls around this year the custom of verifying credit or debit cards with a signature will end.   Card holders will have just two options.   Verify the card with a PIN - or adopt the " Tap and Go " system for purchases under a hundred dollars.

Modern cards are encrypted with a " chip " that can be read by the equipment on retailers counters.  The transaction is speeded up by the customer tapping the card against the reader - and having the balance instantly deducted.   The downside is that if the card is lost - or falls into the hands of a bandit - it is virtually identical to a banknote.

Those still using the old signature cards need to act promptly and upgrade to PIN before they become extinct in three months time, and for some the need to memorise a PIN will be a problem.   Those who find it difficult to retain a memory of numbers often find themselves standing at an ATM in total confusion and simply can not handle modern technology.

There is a clever way to circumvent that problem.  It is easier to remember a word than a number, and so if that person selects a ten letter word or phrase in which no letters appear twice it can become their " code breaker " to provide a link between letters and numbers.

Suppose the word chosen was PNEUMATICS.   Simply allocate 0 to 9 to each of the letters and select the correct letters to match the PIN numbers.    Those letters mean absolutely nothing to anyone else, but with a little mental gymnastics the person can recall the PIN - and activate the card.

Of course, you would need to keep your code word confidential, but the letters to translate from letters to numbers can be openly displayed - because they are meaningless without an observer being aware of the base  code word.

Even the problems of modern technology can be solved - with recourse to the methods of yesteryear !

Ever longer arm of the law !

A recent ruling in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal has given criminals a reason to fear inclusion in being photographed at social functions.  Pictures that appear in Facebook are now acceptable evidence of identification and can be used in prosecutions.

This case arose when a group barged into a house party uninvited and demanded money and drugs.  A fight erupted and one partygoer had his nose broken and another was stabbed in the leg.    The intruders were unknown to the victims, but a guest provided a positive identification of one to the police when she noticed his appearance in a Facebook photograph.

The case went to appeal when the convicted challenged this form of identification, but the ruling now opens the door to all forms of social media to be used as an identification base.  Many with an uneasy conscience will be trolling through their memories and trying to remember if they were ever part of friends photographs that might have appeared in Facebook.

The window of anonymity is closing.  The ever widening cctv network is enlarging the pool of street scene archives and face recognition software can now be merged with official records - such as the driving license records which contain a photograph of all holders of a driving license.   Now that social media has entered this pool - the chance of going undetected narrows sharply.

Those with criminal intent will probably become camera shy, but for most people that will be a case of closing the stable door long after the horse has bolted.  There must be few who have not attended a wedding or other social event at which pictures were taken and joyfully shown in some sort of social media, and the day is fast coming when face recognition will automatically scroll through a wide data base at the flick of a switch.

Hopefully, this may make society more law abiding.    The fear of being caught is the prime motivating factor in preventing crime but unfortunately many act first - and think later.   This will certainly make  career criminals give more thought to a disguise factor, but in reality Facebook has just become a new play on the chessboard of detection and criminality.

In this case, a new weapon will be of use in clearing up crimes that evaded detection because the means simply did not exist at that time !

Our Kiwi cousins !

The relationship between Australia and New Zealand is so close that some people almost regard them as the one country.   Subtle differences emerge when an event like the visit of future British monarchs - William and Kate - train the TV cameras on their visits to both sides of the Tasman.

The crowds lined the streets in New Zealand to welcome their royal guests - and many viewers here would have noticed that they were waving Union Jacks.   In sharp contrast, Australian crowds giving a similar welcome were waving the Australian flag.    This contrast underlines the two countries past emigration policies.   At the end of the second world war, the Kiwi's restricted migrants to those from the British Isles while Australia opened it's doors to the world.

This affinity to Britain shows in other ways.   We have several New Zealand police dramas showing on our television channels.   Many will note that the Kiwi police cars carry the identical colour code of the London Met.   In contrast, Australian police cars are similar to the colour code in use across America.

The sporting contests between the two countries are intense - but it is at it's height in sports that also resonate in Britain.   Ruby League and Rugby Union bring  big crowds to both side of the Tasman and the rivalry at cricket is legend.   It seems likely that Australian Rules is on the cusp of creating a New Zealand team to enter the national competition, something long overdue given the vast number of Kiwis already integrated in that code here.    Women's sports from both countries compete with one another at the apex of international rankings - and attract world attention.

New Zealand has an envied reputation for producing champion race horses.  It is not uncommon for New Zealand horses to scoop the pool at big money contests and Australian owners and trainers are very interested in bidding for stock at the yearling sales.

Decades ago, the Kiwi's were bemusing Australian visitors with the vintage car stock on their roads.  Sales tax on new vehicles was prohibitive and as a result the cars of yesteryear were patched up and kept running long after their counterparts were sent to the junk yard in Australia.    Those days are now long gone, and the Kiwi car culture is as modern as Australian.

Despite the differences, New Zealand is a cherished neighbour.   Apart from a slight accent difference, it is almost impossible to pick the two races apart and the integration between the two countries seems likely to move even closer.   It is doubtful if this close unity of thinking is more prevalent in any other two countries on this planet !

ICAC Power !

Barry O'Farrell's resignation as state premier this week illustrates the enormous pressure to conform to personal standards of integrity for those in public life.   Few believe O'Farrell is corrupt.  His downfall revolved around something as simple as a bottle of wine:  a gift given amid the celebrations when he first gained the position of this state's forty-third premier.

During ICAC proceedings this $ 3,000 bottle of Penfolds Grange got a mention - and O'Farrell did not remember receiving it.   ICAC pressed the issue and O'Farrell became emphatic that neither he nor his wife remembered receiving such a gift.    Some think it was an " ambush " when a " thank you " note in O'Farrell's handwriting was later produced.   The premier accepted that he must have received that gift - and therefore he had misled ICAC - and promptly resigned as state premier.

Sadly, Barry O'Farrell was a successful premier who was fast taking this state out of the morass of mismanagement that has persisted for years.   He will remain in the parliament as a backbencher and there is every chance that after the next election, he may return as a minister.  It would be a tragedy if his management skills were lost to New South Wales.

It is encouraging that within hours the Treasurer, Mike Baird was voted into office as O'Farrell's replacement. There was no factional bunfight and this forty-six year old got the job unopposed.  He has a Stirling record from his past business life and his work as this state's Treasurer is widely admired.  There is every expectation that the forward momentum propelling NSW will continue.

This convulsion has thrown the spotlight on ICAC.   It has now unseated two state premiers and there is a question over it's use of public hearings to spring unconnected questions - which raises the speculation that these are " ambush " tactics.   Witnesses are put on the spot and required to provide an instant answer in circumstances that many would prefer to give consideration at length.    Once answered - if that answer is found to be incorrect - it leads to a charge of " misleading ICAC " - with dire consequences.

ICAC was put in place to root out corruption at the highest levels.   One of the reasons that many people fear ICAC is the fact that it's hearings take place in full view of the media.   In many cases, it is not the findings of ICAC that do the damage, it is the conjecture of commentators that analyse and create their findings that leads public opinion.   We curb the media at our peril.

Now may be a very good time for some soul searching.   ICAC brought down a good premier, and yet it failed to uncover truly breath-taking scandals over the issuing of coal extraction licenses and other serious misdeeds which took place undiscovered in previous years.    It is now looking at this corruption - long after the horse has bolted !

Perhaps now would be a good time - to look more closely at ICAC. !

Continuing the price war !

Coles and Woolworths dominate grocery sales in Australia.  They are locked in a battle to compete in every suburb and existing stores are being enlarged and new stores regularly added to increase their marketing reach.  These two behemoths now share about eighty percent of the grocery market.

Both organizations have even wider aspirations beyond groceries.   They moved into the market for car fuels when they bought petrol stations and there has been a steady increase into other forms of merchandise.  Both now compete in the hardware field with separate giant trade centres and it is evident that the battle now includes selling insurance.   In particular, they are competing with low cost car insurance and the ever widening field of funeral insurance services.

Power begets power - and many deplore the methods used to monopolise the advantages they hold.   They have been accused of selling deliberately at below cost to force butcher and greengrocer competitors out of shopping centres and using petrol discounts to disadvantage other competitors in the petrol trade.

This " Petrol docket " war has waged for a very long time - and the discount had reached ridiculous levels which are impossible within the petroleum price structure.   The discount was geared to the value of grocery purchases and it became obvious that cross subsidies were involved.    Government regulators became concerned that this was causing retail prices for groceries to be unfairly levied on those not using the petrol discount scheme.

The government stepped in and entered into an " arrangement " with both Coles and Woolworths.   The maximum petrol discount would be pegged at 4 c a litre and it was accepted that this would be earned by a grocery purchase of $ 30.    It seemed that peace had returned to the petrol price wars.

It was short lived.    Coles stuck by this " gentleman's agreement "  but Woolworths added an addendum which increased the price offer to 8 c a litre.    The customers received 4 c a litre when they produced a sales receipt for $ 30 or more of grocery items - and a further 4 c a litre if they spent an additional $5 in the retail section of the petrol station.

It was a clever ploy.   Grocery items are subject to discounts but the offerings in service stations are usually from the " impulse " buy category - and attract a higher profit markup.   The government regulators called foul - and it was expected that this practice would cease.

A full page advertisement by Woolworths in daily newspapers this week seems to be a declaration of war.  The twin 4 c discounts and their continuation are the subject of this advertisement and it seems a challenge - both to Coles and the regulators that Woolworths will not be hampered by government diktat.

Clearly - a challenge has been issued.   Woolworths has both the will and the deep pockets to carry this all the way to the high court.   The ball is now back in the governments court !

The " Liability " issue !

The extension of insurance cover to the journey employees make from home to work - and from work to home at the end of each day was considered by many employers  to be an unjust impost - and in recent times there has been pressure for it's abolition.

A case that has just reached resolution in New South Wales will reinforce that attitude.  A seventy year old male on the availability list for casual teaching replacement jobs was offered work by the Education Departments Casual Direct agency.  The phone call came after 7-30 am and he was directed to a school which required an 8-30 am start.

This teacher claimed he was walking at about " three times his normal pace " to achieve this deadline when he stumbled on the uneven footpath.  The fall resulted in injuries to his head, shoulder and knees - and he later developed back pain.  He filed a compensation claim, and this was rejected, but court action resulted in him being awarded a weekly payment of $ 1391.44 from October 2012.    The cumulative payout will probably exceed $ 100,000.

Pointing the finger of responsibility for this injury opens an interesting can of worms.  The teacher says he was going to a " very strict school ", but surely his decision to walk at an unsafe pace was his alone. If he had been directed to a distant school and been driving, would reimbursement for a speeding ticket have been a legitimate claim under similar circumstances ?

The interpretation of what this form of insurance covers seems to be ever widening.  It seems that the courts are adopting a very benevolent attitude to claims and dismissing the obligation for claimants to adopt reasonable measures to protect their own safety.   It would be drawing a long bow to insist that the Casual Direct agency required accurate punctuality when calling in a casual at very short notice.  Filling a temporary vacancy is far different from the time factor required of permanent staff reporting for work.  To lay the blame at the door of the agency totally ignores all the extraneous factors involved in a short notice call up.

Employer organizations are groaning under the ever increasing premiums this insurance cover requires and as those premiums are directly related to the number of employees covered, it is a positive disincentive to hire more staff.   The problem is that so many benefits that sound quite reasonable at the time of conception, immediately take on a life of their own and morph into monsters when the legal fraternity extend the range of options by way of test cases.   Once a protocol is established in legal interpretation, the door is wide open.

It seems that we have reached an impasse where a lot of employers who would welcome an extended work force and a business expansion are backing away from hiring more people.  At the same time, a veritable army of unemployed are desperate for a job - and have little in the way of future prospects.

A little sanity in reforming the obstacles that stand in the way of employment and a transfer of responsibility back to the individual when it comes to personal safety - would go a long way to solving both problems !

The role of a " Public Broadcaster " !

A long time ago Australians were forced to pay for a license to watch television or listen to radio - and that was to fund the ABC.    " Aunty " was the epitome of rectitude.  It provided this nations premier news service.  It's shows ran precisely to their allotted time slots - and it's charter tried to bridge a gap between " educating " and " entertaining " it's audiences.

How times have changed  !   That TV license has long gone and now the ABC is funded by a billion dollars from the public purse - and standards have dropped to abysmal levels, judging by the flak directed at it's reporting bias and the type of shows it is putting to air.

Many people are bemused by the furore generated by what the ABC seems to think is it's attempt at sophisticated comedy.   " The Chaser "  has been an ongoing litany of sheer bad taste.  It has culminated in depicting a rival News Corp journalist having sex with a dog - and many consider on screen bestiality as crossing the line.

Finally, Mark Scott offered a public apology - and immediately the Chaser team re offended by running a new cartoon - this time depicting their boss in a similar position - with a Hampster.

The ABC audience encompasses the entire spectrum of Australian society.   There are certainly people who will find bestiality amusing, but there are others - particularly those with young children watching the show - who will be seriously offended.  It seems that the ABC now stoops to lows that the commercial channels would not dare cross for fear of losing ratings.

The same applies to the bias in news presentation.    It seems obvious that the ABC has developed a certain political outlook that colours the way stories are presented.   Good journalism achieves balance.   Both sides of the argument are presented - and the viewer is given all the information necessary to make a decision.  It seems obvious that facts that do not suit the presenter's opinion are omitted - and this perceived slant angers many people.

It seems that this is self perpetuating.   When a biased political view prevails amongst senior staff, new entrants will be carefully culled to maintain direction.   There is a danger that the public broadcaster will simply morph into the mouthpiece of a side of politics that is running it's own agenda.   That is not what is expected from a public broadcaster.

The problem is how to reintroduce balance into the ABC - and that will be difficult.   The present outlook is deeply entrenched and strong intervention could simply turn the sway in the opposite direction.    Probably the only way would be to gear the ABC funding to it's audience ratings, just as the commercial television field lives or dies by the advertising revenue that depends on drawing audience numbers.

If bad taste loses viewers - and that means a drop in operating revenue - we could expect a serious improvement in broadcast standards !

The " Counterfeit " risks !

A police and customs bust this week opened the door on a new scam from the ever present world of counterfeit goods.   Following a tip-off from Hong Kong police they seized a warehouse containing 3396 nine kilogram tubs of what looked like authentic OMO washing powder.

The Middle East crime squad arrested two importers and both were fined $ 25,000 when they appeared before a court.    The powder in the tubs was completely useless for washing clothes but the counterfeit tub branding looked the real McCoy.    These " bargains " were selling for $ 20 each at the markets and police estimate that the principals netted a profit of $ 32,000 before they were caught.

This is simply a new twist in the ongoing counterfeit saga.   We are used to being offered dud watches with a supposed elite brand name and women's apparel is a prime target for dodgy  labels on knockoffs from the famous fashion houses of the world.  That is something we would expect when we shop at cut price markets, but the practice has been spreading to the high end world of reputable fashion stores.

This counterfeit world is simply a money risk when the goods disappoint and fail to perform to the level we expect, but it takes on a much more sinister tone when the counterfeiters move into the realm of medicinal products - and that has been a growing end of the counterfeit trade.

A search of the Internet produces a litany of offers of cut price drugs that purport to be a generic copy of the real thing.   When the patent runs out on a drug developed by a reputable manufacturer it's competitors are free to manufacture that same formula and sell it at whatever price they wish - and we have become accustomed to this choice in our chemist shops.

Unfortunately, what is being offered on the Internet is completely unpoliced by any reputable  authority to ensure that it is a genuine copy of a legitimate medical product.    Like that counterfeit OMO washing powder, it can consist of entirely useless ingredients and it may be put together in someone's backyard with the sole intention of deceiving a gullible buyer.

Genuine medical products are usually expensive and the offer of a much cheaper alternative can be very tempting to those on limited incomes.  The danger is that ceasing to take the genuine ingredient in a prescribed drug can be fatal if that is essential to treating the medical condition that person is suffering.  The counterfeiter couldn't care less.    Their only incentive is to make money !

That old adage -  "  Buyer Beware "  - applies.     Watches and washing powder can only disappoint but in the essential world of medication - authentication is an essential far in excess of price !

Does not compute !

The long awaited Opal card is now fully integrated into the Sydney rail system and is fast expanding to the bus network.   The " tap on - tap off " payment for fares delivers huge savings to the government over the old paper issue ticket system and there is a small cost saving for those who make single, return or weekly journeys.

Unfortunately, the reverse applies for those accustomed to traveling on a monthly, quarterly or annual rail ticket from the far extremities of the Sydney rail system.   Amazingly, those who travel to Central from Gosford, Katoomba or Wollongong pay $ 2440 for an annual paper train pass - and are hiked to $ 2880 when they use the Opal card.    A fare increase of $ 440 a year is a big slug to the average traveler's budget.

It seems that this anomaly  is not intentional.   It is a software problem that the boffins have not been able to unscramble.   The computer has no problems charging the correct fare when a traveler signals a single journey using an Opal card, but gets totally confused when that same traveler has a mix of journeys from a range of different stations over the course of each day.   The computer is baffled by the need to differentiate that single journey that applies to a nominated discounted travel fare from other journeys the same traveler may make - on which the normal fare applies.

That is the very nature of accounting at which computers excel.    There seems an urgent need to develop software which can instantly recognise the traveler who is the holder of a seasonal ticket and match that to the nominated journey for which it is valid.    Obviously, such a ticket holder would automatically received the correct discount when the " tap on " occurred at Gosford, Katoomba or Wollongong - and the " tap off " registered at Central - and the reverse on the homeward journey.    Any additional public transport travel would be charged at the prevailing normal rate.

It is understandable that such hiccups occur when such a vast new system is being installed, but this anomaly needs fixing - fast.  The Opal card is intended to increase the popularity of train journeys and enhance public transport over car journeys.  A hike of $ 440 a year on distance travelers will do the opposite.

London has had it's " Oyster " card working for decades.  Now might be a good time to ask how they solved similar problems !

" Head of the queue " Law !

New South Wales is preparing legislation to implement a law change that will enrage many motorists.  From July 1 it will become legal for motorcycle riders to thread their way through cars stalled in traffic jams or waiting for a light change - and do that at a speed of thirty kilometres per hour.

This is known as " lane filtering " and at present it is illegal.  The government claims to have undertaken safety tests and believes that it can safely improve traffic flow.    That ignores the frustration many car drivers will feel to find motorcyclists bunching at the head of the queue rather than the traffic stream moving as a unit.

This law change will implement a hazard for pedestrians who often use stalled traffic as a safe way to cross the street.  Threading their way between stopped cars will expose them to motorcycles they do not expect to find and at thirty kilometres per hour, that impact could deliver serious injury - or even death.

The practice opens up a host of reasons for exchanges between motorists and cyclists.   The gap between cars is often very narrow and a bike trying to squeeze through runs the risk of dislodging wing mirrors or inflicting scratches on paintwork.   Road rage is an ever present hazard on our crowded roads and allowing " lane filtering " seems a sure way to send temper outbursts upscale !

The biggest danger of this new law is the inevitability of raising the conflict level between cars and bikes. The government has spent a lot of money using advertising to coax bikers into wearing reflective clothes and to remind motorists of the vulnerability of two wheeled transport in the road mix.   The vast majority of bike riders obey the same rules as car drivers - and peace reigns.

Nothing is more likely to destroy that unanimity than bikes roaring through the traffic - and in the eyes of motorists - jumping the queue.   It will be resented by many, and some will deliberately position their vehicle to make it impossible to pass.

This is a law change that will deliver few benefits - and will most likely increase the accident rate between cars and bikes !

When silence is golden !

The day of judgement for those who hold high public office comes after their term has ended.   How they performed in the cut and thrust of politics is of lessor importance to how they manage withdrawal from public life.   How they are seen in the public eye is the line that divides between " Statesman " - and  "just another politician."

Bob Carr's book released this week clearly shows which side of the divide he stands.  It was a spiteful book that broke most of the rules that apply to the high councils of state.  Carr was privileged to to sit at the table with kings, presidents and holders of high office from world countries.  Protocol demands that these conversations remain confidential.  Carr broke that rule with reckless gay abandon !

His moans and groans on the travails he suffered as this country's foreign minister denigrate Australia and make many Australians cringe.   Carping on the addition of MSG in the food served in Chinese restaurants and a rant about not being offered pyjamas when forced to travel in lowly " business " class seems a dig at Australia's  standing in world rankings.     Carr obviously felt that he  - and his wife who accompanied him on every overseas trip -  deserved first class because the representatives of other great powers had an entire private aircraft at their disposal.

We can probably heave a sigh of relief that Carr was only plucked out of retirement to serve the lesser post of foreign minister.   With Rudd becoming toxic to the Labor hope of reelection and Gillard's term in office disappearing down a giant black hole they may have been desperate enough to hand him the keys to the Lodge.

Sadly, Carr's book will probably be read by audiences outside Australia and they will wonder if he is trying to reestablish himself as a comedian - or if this is the level of public service that applies in this country.   It can hardly be written in the need to earn a living, considering that he not only draws the huge pension accorded a past state premier, but added to that is the superannuation for a past foreign minister.

The term - delusions of grandeur - comes to mind.   Perhaps he thinks Australia should honour him with a brass statue in a public place.    If so, the local pigeons will certainly shower him with the opinion many use to describe his book !

Asbestos compensation widens !

It looked like the worst was over back in 2006 when the battle for compensation over asbestos caused diseases resulted in a huge compensation fund being setup by James Hardie Industries.  At that time, it was assumed that the victims would be those who worked at the asbestos mine in Wittenoom in the West Australian Pilbarra and tradespeople who processed the asbestos products produced by the James Hardie factories.

The net widened when it became obvious that asbestos fibres on the clothes of workers could transfer to their wives and children in the home and when laundered. The product was banned in the 1980's but a steady stream of Mesothelioma cases kept claims ticking over and building authorities worried about the extent of asbestos remaining on the existing housing stock.   Just about every home in this country that had preceded the 1980's was riddled with asbestos products.

This week the asbestos claim format widened.   For the first time  a do-it-yourself home handyman renovating a pre-1980's house became a victim of Mesothelioma and sought compensation from the NSW Dust Diseases tribunal.   The granting of that claim has opened the door for an avalanche of actions as the housing industry goes into renovation mode.

Fortunately, legislation is already in place to reduce the risk when an older home is demolished to make way for a new structure.   The demolition permit requires all asbestos products to be stripped, wet down and bagged before further work proceeds and this is now carried out by licensed contractors with specialist training.

The danger is the vast array of existing homes that are going to get minor renovations by home handymen and handywomen.   Something as simple and minor as drilling a hole to run wires for an outside light can be deadly if the drill is biting into an asbestos sheet and ejects fibres into the air - to be breathed in by the person using the drill.

Unfortunately, many people are unaware of all the products that contain asbestos - and there is no safe limit below which exposure is harmless.   We have a ticking time bomb in the vast multitude of older homes that contain this product - and it seems that Mesothelioma may be with us for centuries to come.

A good reason any intending renovator should visit the local hardware store, explain in detail to one of the trained staff exactly what work is intended - and gain guidance about where to expect to encounter asbestos products.

That would be a truly life saving precaution !

Mining - or Agriculture ?

Yesterday a full page advertisement in national newspapers called for the government to consider the impact that a proposed new open cut coal mine in the Hunter Valley would have on the surrounding agricultural and industrial operations already in place.  This appeal was signed by twenty-nine of Australia's leading figures who represent horse racing and training, farming, wine growing and the vast chicken producing industry located in that area.

There is a proposal waiting ratification for the go ahead of the Anglo American Drayton South open cut coal mine which would be just five hundred metres from some of the finest breeding studs that produce Australia's horse racing champions.   It is contended that it is simply impossible to coexist horse breeding, wine growing, farming and chicken raising industries with an open cut coal mine.   Mining is a finite operation.  Once the coal is gone, the miners leave, but the agricultural industries have a lifetime measured in centuries.

Underground mining is less obtrusive, but open cut operations simply ravage the earth and gouge out great holes as they seek to get at the coal, and the overburden is set aside in huge mounds that create a visual moonscape.  These open cut operations charge the air with dust and divert aquifers.   At the end of mining operations, land rehabilitation in impossible and the miners usually just walk away.

The question revolves around the importance of sustaining an existing farming industry or sacrificing it to create more export dollars as we ship the coal to overseas countries to generate electricity - and increase global warming by releasing the carbon dioxide contained in this mineral.   Mining will create jobs, but this Drayton South mine will also destroy the jobs of those people with the skills to breed the best horses, grow our wine grape harvests and man the vast array of industries that can not exist alongside an open cut coal mine.

This is heading towards a classical tussle.  Big overseas money is behind this new coal mine venture and we certainly need jobs and to enhance our exports to create national income, but we also need to protect our precious agricultural land.   It is the usual question of the long term versus the short term.

A century from now we will have a planet with a vastly bigger population.  When the coal is mined out and the miners are gone, we will rue the day that we allowed prime agricultural land to be lost forever for short term gain.   The horse studs, vineyards and chicken raising industries located in the Hunter Valley because it was the best farming land - and once that is gone, it is gone forever !

" Serious Crime " charges !

New South Wales is considering changing the charging procedure for serious crimes such as murder, manslaughter and rape.   At present, it is the police who lay charges and put the offender before court for a bail hearing.   This proposal would make the Department of Public Prosecutions ( DPP ) responsible for deciding what charges would apply and this would be done in consultation with the police.

There is a tendency for the police to " overcharge " on the basis of covering all possible lines of defence. Most crimes can be described by a variety of crime categories and therefore it is possible to enter charges which the police know will not be pursued by the DPP - which is the party that will take over the case and present it in court.

It is this litany of charges that are brought to the attention of the media and they form the impression in the public mind of the degree of criminality involved.   Quite unfairly, a stigma can be attached to a charged person that is far less than the matter that is finally dealt with in court.   The severity of the charges laid also have a bearing on the granting or refusal of bail.

Basically, the police and the DPP have different objectives when considering charges.  The police are anxious to have a supposed criminal safely behind bars to give protection to the public.   The DPP have the task of deciding what they can lawfully put before a court to gain a conviction for whatever crime has been committed.

One of the reasons for the change is the hope of negotiating a guilty plea and saving court time and public expense.   Our law system has certainly developed into a system of " plea bargaining " and the time to do that is before charges are laid and made public.   It is the task of the DPP to process charges in court and they can realistically negotiate an outcome which satisfies both prosecution and defence.

The big difference is that this negotiation takes place before the matter is splashed across the media and opinions are formed.   Senior officers of the DPP and the police will liase so that the charges laid are those that will finally go to court - and not be seriously downgraded as the degree of " overcharge " is discarded.

It is hoped this will produce a faster, fairer court system !

Free Trade agreements !

A big posse of Australian government officials and leading business figures is in Japan trying to thrash out the details of a Free Trade agreement between the two countries.  The purpose of " Free Trade " is to remove barriers to trade and to achieve that both sides engage in " horse trading " to advantage the goods that each country produces.   In the case of Japan, that means cars, white goods and the vast array of electricals.   For Australia - the list runs across the mining and minerals spectrum - and farm products.

Asia has three giants trading with Australia - Japan, China and South Korea.  In recent times, the Japanese economy has been fairly stagnant and Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is desperate to revive the glory days of several decades past.  The main obstacle in his way is the heavily restricted agricultural market and it's protectionist ethos.   Any move to free up agricultural imports seems likely to bring that nation's farmers into open conflict with the government.

Japan and South Korea closely compete in the same lines of merchandise.   Both are leaders in car manufacturing, white goods and the vast electrical array, but the difference is that South Korea has a more open stance in accepting Australian farm products.  If Japan can not match that there is every chance that it will be South Korea that enjoys the more liberal terms of any agreements that are struck.

China is a behemoth that is far in excess of both it's neighbours in both populace and production output. It is fast moving into car manufacturing and while the Australian new car market is small by international standards, it is certainly worth concessions to gain a favourable share.   Australia would be wise to trade our new car market to whoever opens their agricultural needs to this country.

We already sell coal, iron ore and many other minerals to all three of our Asian neighbours.     We have the climate, the agricultural space and the farming know how to expand our agricultural industry and growing, harvesting, processing, packing and exporting food could be the industry that provides the jobs of the future in the Australian economy.

Opening that window of opportunity should be the lynch pin of Australia's insistence in cutting a trade deal in Asia !

Rent Cheats !

A lot of soul searching by the tenants in public housing in New South Wales.  A cunning move by the state government has left the proverbial sword of Damacles hanging over their heads - and the wise will surely avail themselves of what is offered.

The government is offering an amnesty to flush out the rent cheats.   Tenants in public housing in this state pay twenty-five percent of their income as rent and recent rent checks have disclosed many people who are seriously understating their income.   Many no longer qualify for public housing and some have others living in the house undeclared.

This amnesty ceases on May 31 and those that fess up will not be required to pay back rent, nor will they be prosecuted, but after the amnesty ends those discovered cheating the system will face prosecution, a demand for rent evaded - and eviction.   There will be no time limit on back rent - and that could run into thousands.

This is long overdue.   Rent rorts have been legend for years and obviously there will be an income checking blitz the moment the amnesty ends.   It is also a very clever move by the government.   Those that fess up will have the slate wiped clean, but from that point onward they will be charged the correct rent for their income level.

Some government planner has thought outside the proverbial nine dots.   Not only is an amnesty a form of mercy which shows that the government has a soft side,  it spikes the guns of the opposition when it comes to claims that the government is " picking on the poor ".   It is not asking for back rent, but it does ensure that government coffers will swell as the rent cheats are brought into line and start paying what is due.

There is a long waiting list for public housing and with better management it would be more efficient in serving that need.   The next target should be those whose needs have changed because the family has grown up and moved out - but who refuse to move to smaller and more appropriate accommodation.   Public housing stock should be on a " needs " basis to deliver the best public benefit !

The " e " Vote option !

Yesterday the citizens of Western Australia trooped to voting booths to elect their representatives in the Federal Senate - again  !    They first made their choice last September and the count was so close that a recount was ordered - and somewhere in the mass of paper to be sorted - 1370 votes went missing.

Many people will grumble at the need to go through the process of establishing their identity to election officials, wait in long queues to be processed - and indeed the outcome of this election will probably be different to the September result.

Voting by way of making one's mark on pieces of paper is very " last century ".   The vast array of financial services are now conducted by the tap of a key on some sort of electronic keyboard.  Most of us pay our bills via the Internet and if it is secure enough to safely handle our money, then surely it could record the intentions of citizens in making a voting choice.

Not only would " e " voting lower the cost of elections, but it would deliver the outcome mere moments after the polls close.  Computers and Smartphones place the means of electronic voting across the broad spectrum of citizens - and it's introduction in Australia seems to be inevitable.

The first country to switch to " e " voting was the Baltic state of Estonia back in 2007.   Voters were given the choice of recording their vote via the Internet or continuing the paper method by way of a visit to a voting booth - and just 3.4% chose electronic in that first year.    Four years later, the " e " option swelled to 25%.

That would be a timely choice for Australia.   There is no doubt that some people would be suspicious of the integrity of electronic voting and certainly there is a proportion of the population who still lack the ability to use an ATM, but that percentage shrinks each year as even Kindergarten children embrace the electronic age.

The determining factor in introducing " e " voting would seem to be a mutual agreement between the two major political parties.   It would be a fatal flaw to even think of it's introduction if it were favoured by one party and rejected by the other.    Many people are hostile to any form of change simply because they don't understand that changed times need new thinking and " e " voting would need to be politically neutral.

Judging by the present consensus in parliament,  " e " voting is unlikely to come to Australia in the foreseeable future !

The " Tackle " enigma !

Rugby League is a contact sport.   The purpose of the game is to prevent an opposition player gaining the ball and taking it to ground over the " try " line to add to the team's score.  The opposition players " tackle " whoever is holding the ball and seek to put him on the ground to neuter progress towards the scoring line.

Unfortunately, one of these tackles caused Alex McKinnon to suffer a broken neck and he may now be a paraplegic. This is a tragedy and an enquiry has been held to revise the rules to prevent further injuries of this nature.  Jordan McLean, the tackler in this incident, has been suspended from play for seven weeks as a penalty for his involvement.

Over many decades, freak accidents have injured players of rugby league games.  What was called the " Spear tackle " has been completely banned.   Now it is proposes that a similar ban apply to any tackle in which the tackled is lifted bodily off the ground.   The problem is that Rugby as a spectator sport may become little more than " touch " football if the physical aspect of the game is neutered.

Rugby League players tend to be very big men.   It takes a lot of force to stop a one hundred and fifty kilogram male running at full speed and often the tackle is the combined effort of several tacklers.   Such was the case with Alex McKinnon.   Viewers of the game would have seen this same scenario thousands of times over the games recent history.   The tacklers would bring the tackled parallel with the ground at waist height - and then put him on the ground safely.   In the McKinnon tackle, lack of coordination resulted in him going to the ground head down - with consequent neck injury.

There is absolutely no doubt that Jordan McLean intended no harm and it seems grossly unfair that he has been singled out for punishment when three players were involved in that tackle.   The enquiries finding of guilt will label him for life - and he will face the prospect of legal action for damages.

Rugby League will wrestle with many options to improve game safety.   Perhaps tackling needs to be restricted to one on one and the multi tackle by several players banned.   It would be hard to define a legal tackle which did not involve a degree of lift.  Putting a person on the ground requires conversion from the vertical to the horizontal - and somewhere in that equation the tackled's feet needs to leave the ground.

It would also be useful to consider the huge number of games played over the years and the fact that serious accidents are so rare.   It would be so easy to alter the rules in the interests of safety and in so doing emasculate the game to the point that it no longer interested either spectators or players.

It would be unfortunate if a freak accident resulted in rule changes that sent a much loved game into terminal decline !

A threat from within !

The news that BP will close it's Bulwer Island oil refinery in Brisbane next year is another nail in the coffin of Australia's ability to refine the oil we produce here into the petrol and diesel that keeps our transport systems rolling.   Jobs will shrink from the present 380 to about 25 as the terminal is converted into a storage and delivery centre for overseas refined oil products.

This BP closure follows the loss of ExxonMobil's closure of it's Port Stanvac facility in South Australia in 2003 and our own Caltex refinery in Kurnell in 2012.    We are reduced to just three Australian based oil refineries - BP's Kwinana in Western Australia,  Shell's Geelong refinery in Victoria and the ExxonMobil Altona plant, also in Victoria.

The writing is on the wall that our future seems certain to be reliant on overseas refineries for all our petroleum products.  There is no doubt that the huge refineries in low wage countries can refine oil more cheaply than the smaller capacity units here in Australia, but these steady closures leave us vulnerable to commercial disaster - and to the neutering of our defence forces.   Every aspect of our defence system relies on fuel.

On average, petrol stocks in the service station network averages about a week's supply.   We can only guess how many more weeks are stored in the distribution centres,  but in the event that the tankers bringing fuel to this country were disrupted - we would quickly grind to a halt.

We live in an uneasy world, and there are tensions to our north over islands in the South China sea.  In the event of a clash between the Chinese and American navies it would be easy to envisage an interruption to sea traffic and even in peacetime having an essential service in the hands of another country can lead to a form of backmail - as events between Ukraine and Russia with gas supplies has illustrated.

We allow the diminishing number of oil refineries to continue at our peril.   Perhaps it may lead to us paying a few cents more for each litre of petrol to keep refining oil in Australia, but that would be a small price for retaining our ability to keep this nation's commercial and defence networks running in a time of crisis.

The " Whale Meat " question !

Australia finally had a win when the International Court Of Justice ordered Japan to cease whaling in the Great Southern Ocean.   Japan has indicated that it will abide with the ruling and we will be unlikely to see further clashes there between the whaling fleet and the Sea Shepherd ships protecting the whales.

The court was not convinced by Japan's plea that it was necessary to kill whales for " scientific research " reasons.  It was clearly a commercial venture, but it also seems that the taste for whale meat in Japan is sharply waning.  The kill was seeking 1,300 whales a year and yet twice that quantity is sitting in cold storage in Japan - with less demand each year.

Japan is not the only nation still harvesting whales.  Nor is this ruling a blanket ban on the practice.  It simply orders whaling to cease in an area that Australia regards as a breeding protection zone and it is possible that Japan will continue to kill whales in the northern Pacific area.

This raises the question of why wales should be given protection that does not apply to other forms of seafood ?     In simple terms - whales are only " big fish " and we have no hesitation harvesting every other type of fish found in the world's oceans ?

In the past, we hunted them to near extinction and quotas have been applied to many other fish stocks to ensure their survival, but in the case of whales there seems no consensus.   The vast majority of people see them as " cute " and " friendly " and we are assured that they have huge brains and are able to communicate with each other over vast distances.   Few seem ready to accept anything less than a complete ban on them being regarded as a food source.

We delight when they enter and frolic in Sydney harbour, but we despair when they get entangled in shark nets or get hit by coastal shipping, and the harvesting ban will certainly see their numbers grow.  It is quite possible that in future years we may have a " whale problem " with these creatures in such abundance that they become a danger in coastal waterways.

In the distant past, a lot of native people hunted whales because they were a necessary component of their food supply.   It was dangerous work carried out by men with hand harpoons working from frail little boats and we are repulsed by the sight of  explosive tipped harpoons fired from steel ships and ending the life of whales in excruciating agony.

Strangely,  we condone casting a line with a baited hook designed to catch fish by ripping into their flesh when they seek a feed.   The very same people who are regular fisher folk are often the leading proponents of the " save the whale " movement.

Whales in the Great Southern Ocean have won a reprieve, but their fate as part of the world food supply remains unanswered.    Perhaps sometime in the future the growing number of humans on this planet will be the deciding factor that decides this question !

Rising insurance premiums !

On Sunday, Sydney had a storm that did a lot of damage.  What is unusual is the increasing number of storms each year - and the ferocity they cause.  Science puts this down to global warming and the weather people explain that hot air rises and when it meets cold upper air the two combine to form a storm cell of unusual intensity.

In the far distant past this phenomenon happened only occasionally - and when it did people described it as a " cloud burst ".    A huge amount of water dropped from the sky in a small area and over a very short period of time.  This overwhelmed the local drainage system, causing a flash flood that damaged both properties and cars.

The fact that this is now a common occurrence is starting to show up in increased insurance premiums.  It will probably result in the insurance industry redefining the policies they offer to allow a basic policy that gives cover against fire and theft, but introduces new rules on water damage - which has always been a point of contention anyway.    Many a heated battle has been waged over the difference between a " flood " and a " rain storm event ".

Unfortunately, this phenomenon is exacerbated by things like the progress in automobile design.  It is accepted that if the modern car is inundated with water - it is an insurance " write off ".  The technology involved is so intensive that repair and replacement is economically out of the question.

Even a few inches of water entering the average home will ruin floor coverings and destroy the electrics of refrigerators, washing machines and other appliances.   The cost of an average such water claim will run into thousands of dollars.

Modern trends in building design are not helpful.  The average new home sits on a concrete slab whereas in the past homes featured elevated foundations.   As a consequence, even a small rise in water levels will cause entry problems.

The insurance industry is not a benevolent society.  Insurance generally is a form of gambling.    It is a bet that the majority of items covered by insurance will not be damaged by the event that happens to some of them, and consequently the income from premiums will be greater than the out flow from claims.  As this outflow increases, premiums must rise to achieve balance.

Be prepared to see water damage in all it's forms treated as a separate insurance option in policies as this " cloud burst " phenomenon increases.  Drivers will certainly reconsider driving through floodwater if they know that their vehicle is not covered against water damage, and householders will give thought to house design and furnishings for a similar reason.

Otherwise, the day will come when insurance becomes beyond the ability for the average person to access.

A clash of wills !

The perennial battle between those who want to see Sydney city as the venue for bike traffic and those who demand priority for motor vehicles is about to take a new turn.   There are plans to create new bike paths in Liverpool street, between Day and Castelreagh streets, in Castelreagh street between Hay and King street - and in Park street between Elizabeth and Castelreagh.

This is the heart of the CBD and if implemented it will cause the city bus routes to be seriously disrupted. Inner city bus routes will have to be drastically changed to accommodate these bike paths and many people shudder at the prospect of all this coinciding with the installation of light rail into the city, further coagulating available road space as the work proceeds.

What galls many motorists is the existing network of bike paths - and the scarcity of seeing cyclists using them.   The environmental people use that time worn old mantra :   "  Build them - and the people will come " !    Unfortunately, that has not been borne out in fact.   This is just too big a city to consider riding a bike from the outer suburbs into the city - and it seems that the inner city residents are more comfortable either using their car or hopping on public transport.

There is another anomaly that needs clearing up.   What are called " shared paths " are an absolute disaster.
The thinking seems to be that both cyclists and pedestrians will be civilized people who defer to each other and get out of each others way.   Both are equally guilty of demanding right of way and this sharing option seems to have completely forgotten pedestrians pushing a kid in a stroller or walking a dog for exercise.
These shared paths are an ongoing battle of cuts and bruises, yelled abuse - and a legal no man's land !

Eventually, the CBD of a city like Sydney seems destined to become a huge pedestrian plaza, served by light rail from all it's perimeter.   It would require service traffic making deliveries and doing repairs to be restricted to a time frame in the early morning, before the shops open.   This is exactly how suburban shopping malls operate, except that it represents a larger size factor.

There is no point continuing with bike paths if they are not being used and now would be a very good time to settled the future of what Sydney looks like as a city as this century develops.  Settling on a plan will result in many crushed egos - but right now we are wasting a lot of money pandering to utopian dreams that will never eventuate.

Time for the city fathers to bite the bullet - and make some hard and fast decisions !