Ex-Premier of New South Wales Morris Iemma has been tarred with the brush of incompetence - but at least he made one wise decision when he started to dismantle the troika of rescue services that have long wasted state funds.
There is simply no justification for having independent rescue services controlled by the police, the fire brigades - and the ambulance services.
Each rescue service has a pool of trained personnel and maintains a fleet of special emergency vehicles and a huge array of rescue equipment. This duplication wastes precious funds and means that in any emergency two thirds of the rescue teams sit idle while one third performs the necessary duty.
It is now claimed that each group provides specialist skills not matched by the other groups - hence in an emergency the first response team must evaluate the need - and draw in those who can meet it - with a consequent loss of time which is so vital in an emergency.
The ambulance rescue has been stood down and it's duties allocated to the fire brigade. Common sense dictates that the same fate should visit the police rescue organization.
In most countries the fire service is the provider of rescue facilities - and the only reason we have three competing services here is sheer ego. Rescue is a glamour occupation. The TV cameras roll - and the chiefs of the three services revel in the publicity received - and fight tooth and nail to preserve their little kingdoms.
The finances of this state are parlous and bad times are ahead. Now is the time to cut waste - and reducing to a single, well maintained and well funded rescue organization would be a sound move !
Sunday, 7 September 2008
Saturday, 6 September 2008
A fragile future !
Residents of New South Wales have every reason to view the future with alarm. Yesterdays dramatic events - which saw Morris Iemma resign as premier and abandon his future in politics - presents a grim future scenario.
Iemma's fate was sealed when he failed to get the numbers to sell off the state electricity system. He wanted to make a new start by sacking incompetent ministers but the power brokers refused and left him no option than to step aside.
His replacement is an unknown. Nathan Rees is serving his first term in parliament, having won a seat at the last election. More significantly, Rees is from the left faction of Labor politics - and his endorsement as premier came from the powerful right wing. Many will wonder what strings are attached to this unusual move and what future policy directions will be involved.
It is evident that this state is in dire financial stress. The writing is on the wall with the credit agencies reviewing our AAA credit rating. There is simply not enough money to keep health, transport and education on a reasonable level, let alone fund the promises that this government has been making.
Selling electricity was the last roll of the dice. Not only would it rid the government of a utility about to suffer a huge price hike but it would be the only way funds could be injected from it's sale to try and bring other services up to scratch - and restore Labor credibility.
Nathan Rees will have a hard job ahead of him and it looks like he is stuck with the same bunch of incompetent ministers with big ego's who are clinging to their jobs and enjoying the gravy train.
Labor party insiders have been warning that the government - and the state - are heading for a train wreck. Hopefully, Rees has qualities unknown to the public and may be able to pull a rabbit or two out of his hat. If that isn't the case then this state is heading into bad times - with crumbling infrastructure and it's finances in a hole.
The dimensions of possible disaster will be made clear on Monday when the new Premier selects his ministerial cabinet !
Iemma's fate was sealed when he failed to get the numbers to sell off the state electricity system. He wanted to make a new start by sacking incompetent ministers but the power brokers refused and left him no option than to step aside.
His replacement is an unknown. Nathan Rees is serving his first term in parliament, having won a seat at the last election. More significantly, Rees is from the left faction of Labor politics - and his endorsement as premier came from the powerful right wing. Many will wonder what strings are attached to this unusual move and what future policy directions will be involved.
It is evident that this state is in dire financial stress. The writing is on the wall with the credit agencies reviewing our AAA credit rating. There is simply not enough money to keep health, transport and education on a reasonable level, let alone fund the promises that this government has been making.
Selling electricity was the last roll of the dice. Not only would it rid the government of a utility about to suffer a huge price hike but it would be the only way funds could be injected from it's sale to try and bring other services up to scratch - and restore Labor credibility.
Nathan Rees will have a hard job ahead of him and it looks like he is stuck with the same bunch of incompetent ministers with big ego's who are clinging to their jobs and enjoying the gravy train.
Labor party insiders have been warning that the government - and the state - are heading for a train wreck. Hopefully, Rees has qualities unknown to the public and may be able to pull a rabbit or two out of his hat. If that isn't the case then this state is heading into bad times - with crumbling infrastructure and it's finances in a hole.
The dimensions of possible disaster will be made clear on Monday when the new Premier selects his ministerial cabinet !
Friday, 5 September 2008
Legal costs.
Illawarra residents have every reason to be concerned at the legal costs being run up by councils in their name.
Shellharbour council decided to pursue independent councillors over a confidential information issue. This was obviously a vendetta by the Labor majority seeking to damage opponents. It quickly degenerated into farce and the outcome was a legal bill for ratepayers in the vicinity of a million dollars - and there may be more to come if the case goes to appeal. It was one of the reasons the council was dismissed and administrators appointed.
Now we learn that Wollongong council took legal action against a farmer for what it termed " illegal land clearing ". The farmer contended that what occurred was normal farm maintenance - and this was accepted by the court. Once again the ratepayers will be faced with legal costs running into hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The problem is that when councillors decide to seek legal action they face no personal responsibility for costs. It is therefore an opportunity to play politics and use the courts to pursue a political agenda. There is also the vexing question of personal attitudes to issues taking precedence over legalities.
The law absolves councillors from personal responsibility on the basis that they are acting for the public good. Otherwise there would be few people of substance seeking public office for fear of financial ruin, but we obviously need some sort of filter to stop dubious cases going to court.
The answer may be the appointment of a retired judge to review all proposed council legal action. Hopefully such a person would be above politics and would certainly have the legal experience to know whether a case had the prospect of success.
It would remove the decision to go to court action at the time of heated debate and provide a cooling off period in which facts would need to be collected for presentation to the umpire for decision.
The cost involved would certainly be justified if even a fraction of the court fees presently descending upon ratepayers shoulders could be prevented !
Shellharbour council decided to pursue independent councillors over a confidential information issue. This was obviously a vendetta by the Labor majority seeking to damage opponents. It quickly degenerated into farce and the outcome was a legal bill for ratepayers in the vicinity of a million dollars - and there may be more to come if the case goes to appeal. It was one of the reasons the council was dismissed and administrators appointed.
Now we learn that Wollongong council took legal action against a farmer for what it termed " illegal land clearing ". The farmer contended that what occurred was normal farm maintenance - and this was accepted by the court. Once again the ratepayers will be faced with legal costs running into hundreds of thousands of dollars.
The problem is that when councillors decide to seek legal action they face no personal responsibility for costs. It is therefore an opportunity to play politics and use the courts to pursue a political agenda. There is also the vexing question of personal attitudes to issues taking precedence over legalities.
The law absolves councillors from personal responsibility on the basis that they are acting for the public good. Otherwise there would be few people of substance seeking public office for fear of financial ruin, but we obviously need some sort of filter to stop dubious cases going to court.
The answer may be the appointment of a retired judge to review all proposed council legal action. Hopefully such a person would be above politics and would certainly have the legal experience to know whether a case had the prospect of success.
It would remove the decision to go to court action at the time of heated debate and provide a cooling off period in which facts would need to be collected for presentation to the umpire for decision.
The cost involved would certainly be justified if even a fraction of the court fees presently descending upon ratepayers shoulders could be prevented !
Thursday, 4 September 2008
Safe - and sure !
During a recent visit to this country the Pope apologised to victims of sexual abuse by priests. It seem that this problem is never ending. We now learn that one hundred and twenty eight charges have been made against a Catholic priest working at a Bathurst college and that a web of paedophiles was involved.
Sooner or later the Catholic church will need to address it's celibacy demand on the priesthood.
It is a simple fact of life that male human beings are not designed or wired to be celibate. Many priests manage to uphold their vows to the church, but sadly others are unable to resist their natural urges - and some are drawn to paedophilia.
A life in the priesthood is a calling that requires sacrifice. Those answering the call forsake many of life's pleasures and embrace a vow of poverty and chastity. Perhaps a further sacrifice may enable the ranks of priests to achieve absolute purity.
Maybe the church should consider the option of asking those ending the long process of training for the priesthood to consider the surgical removal of testicles before ordination.
This would indeed be a huge act of faith, but then again - it would enhance the vow of celibacy to remove body parts that have no further function in that person's life.
It is an option that would remove doubt from the minds of the congregation. A priest would be a person of complete trust. On the other hand - it would certainly reduce the number of young men seeking holy orders - but the church would be the better for quality over quantity.
The other option is to remove the vow of celibacy and embrace the notion of married priests.
The Catholic church will face ongoing sexual misconduct until it bites the bullet and makes a decision !
Sooner or later the Catholic church will need to address it's celibacy demand on the priesthood.
It is a simple fact of life that male human beings are not designed or wired to be celibate. Many priests manage to uphold their vows to the church, but sadly others are unable to resist their natural urges - and some are drawn to paedophilia.
A life in the priesthood is a calling that requires sacrifice. Those answering the call forsake many of life's pleasures and embrace a vow of poverty and chastity. Perhaps a further sacrifice may enable the ranks of priests to achieve absolute purity.
Maybe the church should consider the option of asking those ending the long process of training for the priesthood to consider the surgical removal of testicles before ordination.
This would indeed be a huge act of faith, but then again - it would enhance the vow of celibacy to remove body parts that have no further function in that person's life.
It is an option that would remove doubt from the minds of the congregation. A priest would be a person of complete trust. On the other hand - it would certainly reduce the number of young men seeking holy orders - but the church would be the better for quality over quantity.
The other option is to remove the vow of celibacy and embrace the notion of married priests.
The Catholic church will face ongoing sexual misconduct until it bites the bullet and makes a decision !
Wednesday, 3 September 2008
Proof on line !
One of things most people hate is getting notice of a fine in the mail - often weeks or even months after the supposed offence occurred.
Up until now the only recourse was to request a copy of the photographic evidence - and pay a fat fee for that service.
Now drivers can view photographs of vehicles incurring speed or red light camera offences on line - for free.
You will need to have the penalty notice to enable it's identification number to be entered - and match this with the registration number of your car to satisfy privacy concerns - and for some unknown reason you will also be asked to repeat a six digit random code, although what this is supposed to achieve is a moot point !
It will be a boon to families where a car is shared amongst members. Who was driving at the time the offence occurred ? Is the identification of the vehicle correct - or did the public servant responsible for identification from the photograph have a moment on inattention - or a hangover ?
It will certainly prove responsibility - something that may escape a driver's notice at the time because a camera is remorselessly snapping away without warning and with a long time interval before the fine arrives.
It will also cause a drop in contested court cases - freeing up court time and saving both parties money. It is a sensible move - long overdue - for which the Roads and Traffic Authority should be commended.
Up until now the only recourse was to request a copy of the photographic evidence - and pay a fat fee for that service.
Now drivers can view photographs of vehicles incurring speed or red light camera offences on line - for free.
You will need to have the penalty notice to enable it's identification number to be entered - and match this with the registration number of your car to satisfy privacy concerns - and for some unknown reason you will also be asked to repeat a six digit random code, although what this is supposed to achieve is a moot point !
It will be a boon to families where a car is shared amongst members. Who was driving at the time the offence occurred ? Is the identification of the vehicle correct - or did the public servant responsible for identification from the photograph have a moment on inattention - or a hangover ?
It will certainly prove responsibility - something that may escape a driver's notice at the time because a camera is remorselessly snapping away without warning and with a long time interval before the fine arrives.
It will also cause a drop in contested court cases - freeing up court time and saving both parties money. It is a sensible move - long overdue - for which the Roads and Traffic Authority should be commended.
Tuesday, 2 September 2008
The churches - and money !
In a gentler, more gracious age clergymen saw their jobs differently. As well as officiating at Sunday services - and giving long and boring sermons - it was part of their duties to marry people, welcome new born's with christenings - and bury the dead. At none of these was it etiquette to mention money !
There was a delightful protocol about delivering a reward. When a wedding ceremony ended the best man discreetly handed over an envelope. It contained money - and the amount depended on circumstances. If it was a rich family the honorarium might be substantial. Lesser budgets produced lesser amounts - and in some cases the very poor may only have included a note of thanks - but no person was refused service because of inability to pay.
How things have changed. Approach a Priest, Minister of Rabbi today and you will very firmly be advised of " the fee " ! In some cases, that will be required " up front " before the ceremony and any form of haggling is looked upon with contempt.
The church has become a " business " and today clergymen are becoming adept at maximising returns. There are now a range of " extras " that can accompany the basic service and all of these carry a premium.
Clergymen will point out the rising cost of living, but it must be remembered that the church is exempt from council rates and charges - and it's activities are tax free. Churches are an enterprise that would have most business people salivating.
Perhaps hiked fees are one of the reasons many people have opted out and engaged the services of a celebrant - although in this commercial age it seems that the fees of both celebrants and the clergy bear a striking similarity.
It seems to illustrate the truth of that adage which proclaims " there is no such thing as a free lunch ! "
There was a delightful protocol about delivering a reward. When a wedding ceremony ended the best man discreetly handed over an envelope. It contained money - and the amount depended on circumstances. If it was a rich family the honorarium might be substantial. Lesser budgets produced lesser amounts - and in some cases the very poor may only have included a note of thanks - but no person was refused service because of inability to pay.
How things have changed. Approach a Priest, Minister of Rabbi today and you will very firmly be advised of " the fee " ! In some cases, that will be required " up front " before the ceremony and any form of haggling is looked upon with contempt.
The church has become a " business " and today clergymen are becoming adept at maximising returns. There are now a range of " extras " that can accompany the basic service and all of these carry a premium.
Clergymen will point out the rising cost of living, but it must be remembered that the church is exempt from council rates and charges - and it's activities are tax free. Churches are an enterprise that would have most business people salivating.
Perhaps hiked fees are one of the reasons many people have opted out and engaged the services of a celebrant - although in this commercial age it seems that the fees of both celebrants and the clergy bear a striking similarity.
It seems to illustrate the truth of that adage which proclaims " there is no such thing as a free lunch ! "
Monday, 1 September 2008
An insult to valour !
Decades ago Australia engaged in an unpopular war. Our troops were sent to fight in Vietnam and support at home was less than enthusiastic.
On August 18, 1966 an Australian force was patrolling when it encountered a formation of over 2,500 regular Viet Cong infantry. Vastly outnumbered, a firefight ensued and resulted in eighteen of our soldiers killed and twenty-four wounded. When the Viet Cong withdrew they left behind 245 dead and an unknown number wounded. It was a classical victory of tactics and courage overcoming superior numbers.
For unknown reasons the Australian government chose to downplay this engagement. Despite it being an outstanding victory the army was ordered to release few details - and despite numerous recommendations for valour to be recognised few medals were awarded.
This has been an omission that has rankled the defence forces for decades. Repeated requests for the omissions to be addressed have been ignored - until recently !
The government has finally conceded that the battle of Long Tan was a classical action that belongs alongside similar famous battles from both world wars - and that medals won and not awarded should at last be recognised.
But this change of heart seems to have a grudging aspect - because the government has announced that the men who won those medals will be required to pay twelve dollars each to defray the cost of producing them.
What sort of message does that deliver ? In the long history of the Australian defence forces medals have been bestowed by a grateful nation - in many cases posthumously. Are we now entering an era where the relatives of the dead are to be asked to honour their sons and daughters by paying for their sacrifice ?
This act of bastardry will no doubt be promptly rescinded, but it shows that there are still bean counters who deny history in their attempt to portray the past as the way they would like it to be - rather than the way it is.
On August 18, 1966 an Australian force was patrolling when it encountered a formation of over 2,500 regular Viet Cong infantry. Vastly outnumbered, a firefight ensued and resulted in eighteen of our soldiers killed and twenty-four wounded. When the Viet Cong withdrew they left behind 245 dead and an unknown number wounded. It was a classical victory of tactics and courage overcoming superior numbers.
For unknown reasons the Australian government chose to downplay this engagement. Despite it being an outstanding victory the army was ordered to release few details - and despite numerous recommendations for valour to be recognised few medals were awarded.
This has been an omission that has rankled the defence forces for decades. Repeated requests for the omissions to be addressed have been ignored - until recently !
The government has finally conceded that the battle of Long Tan was a classical action that belongs alongside similar famous battles from both world wars - and that medals won and not awarded should at last be recognised.
But this change of heart seems to have a grudging aspect - because the government has announced that the men who won those medals will be required to pay twelve dollars each to defray the cost of producing them.
What sort of message does that deliver ? In the long history of the Australian defence forces medals have been bestowed by a grateful nation - in many cases posthumously. Are we now entering an era where the relatives of the dead are to be asked to honour their sons and daughters by paying for their sacrifice ?
This act of bastardry will no doubt be promptly rescinded, but it shows that there are still bean counters who deny history in their attempt to portray the past as the way they would like it to be - rather than the way it is.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)