Is there no end to the ongoing litany of disgraceful behavior by drunken " sportsmen " ?
Nobody objects to a bit of harmless fun after a few drinks, but when the outcome is a glassing, or an all-in pub brawl - or a sordid episode of gang rape - it is time to draw a line.
It is quite clear that the present penalties are not working. Players have been suspended for a number of games. Both player and club have been levied heavy fines and some repeat offenders have been required to sign a ban on alcohol use - and none of these have solved the problem.
So - what is the problem ?
It seems that the problem is the move from sport being played by people who also hold down a day job to a professional clique who earn obscene amounts of money and are feted as Gods by the media. They feel that they exist in a rarefied world far beyond us mere mortals.
The only answer seems to be an understanding by all the sporting codes that a " three strikes and you are out " policy applies.
Two warnings - and on the third offence you are out for life - not just in your chosen sporting field - but from all aspects of competition in any sport.
The end of the big money. The end of adulation and fame. Enough to be taken seriously as the ultimate penalty.
Some people may object on the grounds that alcoholism is the root cause, and as such is not the fault of the player. That begs the question. Do we want alcoholics as our sporting hero's ?
It's time to get tough ! The game is bigger than any individual player !
Tuesday, 7 July 2009
Monday, 6 July 2009
The " entitlement " trap !
Politicians are forever seeking ways to improve their pay and conditions, and in the present economic circumstances it is not a good time to be asking for a salary increase.
So we are being courted with a smoke and mirrors approach. Those magic words " salary sacrifice " are being tossed around, with the suggestion that perhaps a small reduction in take home pay could be countered with an increase in entitlements - perhaps the provision of a car and it's running expenses at taxpayer's expense ?
This needs to be given very cautious consideration. The lower the actual pay the lower the amount the tax man levies, but those magic " entitlements " can very quickly become money eating monsters - as taxpayers in the United Kingdom have recently discovered.
The politicians there quickly devised schemes to rort their entitlements by duplication of homes subjected to subsidies and all manner of expenses - including cleaning of a moat - to pocket income that was not counted as salary.
Politicians already have their fingers in the " entitlements " bonanza with all manner of claims for things like printing, stamp allowances, communication costs - paid for by the taxpayer.
One thing is certain. If rorting is possible - it will be !
So we are being courted with a smoke and mirrors approach. Those magic words " salary sacrifice " are being tossed around, with the suggestion that perhaps a small reduction in take home pay could be countered with an increase in entitlements - perhaps the provision of a car and it's running expenses at taxpayer's expense ?
This needs to be given very cautious consideration. The lower the actual pay the lower the amount the tax man levies, but those magic " entitlements " can very quickly become money eating monsters - as taxpayers in the United Kingdom have recently discovered.
The politicians there quickly devised schemes to rort their entitlements by duplication of homes subjected to subsidies and all manner of expenses - including cleaning of a moat - to pocket income that was not counted as salary.
Politicians already have their fingers in the " entitlements " bonanza with all manner of claims for things like printing, stamp allowances, communication costs - paid for by the taxpayer.
One thing is certain. If rorting is possible - it will be !
Sunday, 5 July 2009
Patents !
For centuries we have been well served by our system of patent protection. If some scientist figures out that mixing Chemical A with Chemical B - and adding a dash of Chemical C - results in a brew that instantly abolishes headaches he can patent that combination and have the sole right to manufacture it for the next twenty years.
It's not all beer and skittles ! Before he starts making money he has to satisfy the health safety authorities by numerous tests and that could shave years of his time protection.
He also has to pay to promote and advertise his product. Just look how many headache mixtures are sitting on chemist's shelves - and remember that not all of them are best sellers - making money for their owner.
At the end of that twenty years the patent expires, and anybody can then use the formulae and produce an identical product. The price crashes - and the public has access to wonderful products that are now on the " cheap and cheerful " list.
But we have entered into a new era - the fascinating world of the human genome !
Science is now beginning to understand that we can manipulate the building blocks of the double helix that are our human bodies. Diseases may be prevented and life itself may be prolonged - but should that be available for patent protection ?
Should a big drug company have the right to control a manipulation of the human genome to bring about the control of an otherwise fatal disease - and demand a fee of their choosing to allow this life saving procedure to be carried out ?
Remember ! This is not mixing chemicals that may be derived from a plant, or extracted from a mineral. This is the body we inhabit, parts of which may become the property of somebody with a piece of paper that gives them the right to yea or nay our very existence.
Obviously nobody is going to spend billions to create cures using gene therapy unless they get a return on their money, but are we willing to hand the right to our genetic code away in exchange for cures that may only be available to those with the wealth to pay a fat fee ?
And is this acceptable - or not ?
Decision time on planet Earth !
It's not all beer and skittles ! Before he starts making money he has to satisfy the health safety authorities by numerous tests and that could shave years of his time protection.
He also has to pay to promote and advertise his product. Just look how many headache mixtures are sitting on chemist's shelves - and remember that not all of them are best sellers - making money for their owner.
At the end of that twenty years the patent expires, and anybody can then use the formulae and produce an identical product. The price crashes - and the public has access to wonderful products that are now on the " cheap and cheerful " list.
But we have entered into a new era - the fascinating world of the human genome !
Science is now beginning to understand that we can manipulate the building blocks of the double helix that are our human bodies. Diseases may be prevented and life itself may be prolonged - but should that be available for patent protection ?
Should a big drug company have the right to control a manipulation of the human genome to bring about the control of an otherwise fatal disease - and demand a fee of their choosing to allow this life saving procedure to be carried out ?
Remember ! This is not mixing chemicals that may be derived from a plant, or extracted from a mineral. This is the body we inhabit, parts of which may become the property of somebody with a piece of paper that gives them the right to yea or nay our very existence.
Obviously nobody is going to spend billions to create cures using gene therapy unless they get a return on their money, but are we willing to hand the right to our genetic code away in exchange for cures that may only be available to those with the wealth to pay a fat fee ?
And is this acceptable - or not ?
Decision time on planet Earth !
Saturday, 4 July 2009
Ethics in business.
In the last few days all those people who own IAG shares will have received a letter from Hassle Free Share Sales Pty. Ltd., offering to buy those shares.
IAG shares were offered to those who had business with the NRMA when that body demutualised several years ago, and for that reason owning shares was a first experience for many of those involved.
Unfortunately, this offer seriously under values the shares. The offer - at $ 1.51 a share contrasts with the share price listing of $ 3.51 a share on the stock exchange on the day most letters arrived.
There is nothing illegal about this offer. It is legitimate to make a bid for shares or any other asset at any price the potential buyer chooses - and it is the responsibility of the owner to make a decision on that offer.
It is mainly a matter of ethics. In the present troubled times naive people may be tempted to grab the money without knowing what their shares are really worth. Many do not buy a daily newspaper, and many others have no idea how to determine share value by using the stock report - or consulting a broker.
For the company making the offer there is a fat profit to be made. The differential of two dollars a share will probably rake in a fortune - and this will be at the expense of the unwise !
It represents a warning to family members to be alert and discuss matters such as share offers with the elderly - and those who are under financial pressure because of a job loss or other fiscal reverse.
A time to think - long and hard - before signing on the bottom line !
IAG shares were offered to those who had business with the NRMA when that body demutualised several years ago, and for that reason owning shares was a first experience for many of those involved.
Unfortunately, this offer seriously under values the shares. The offer - at $ 1.51 a share contrasts with the share price listing of $ 3.51 a share on the stock exchange on the day most letters arrived.
There is nothing illegal about this offer. It is legitimate to make a bid for shares or any other asset at any price the potential buyer chooses - and it is the responsibility of the owner to make a decision on that offer.
It is mainly a matter of ethics. In the present troubled times naive people may be tempted to grab the money without knowing what their shares are really worth. Many do not buy a daily newspaper, and many others have no idea how to determine share value by using the stock report - or consulting a broker.
For the company making the offer there is a fat profit to be made. The differential of two dollars a share will probably rake in a fortune - and this will be at the expense of the unwise !
It represents a warning to family members to be alert and discuss matters such as share offers with the elderly - and those who are under financial pressure because of a job loss or other fiscal reverse.
A time to think - long and hard - before signing on the bottom line !
Friday, 3 July 2009
The great train robber !
It is said that embarrassing the government is not a good idea ! Politicians carry grudges - and they have long memories - and they never forgive - and they never forget !
Such is the plight of Ronnie Biggs, the " Great Train Robber " who robbed a mail train in 1963 and made off with a then record amount of loot. Ronnie and other members of his gang were caught by the British police, put on trial - and Ronnie was sentenced to a thirty year prison term.
Apparently Ronnie was less than satisfied with the hospitality of the government - and did a bunk over the wall.
And that's where he became famous - almost an icon in criminal history. Ronnie successfully lived here in Australia for some years, before fleeing to Brazil where he married and fathered a child.
The British government went to extraordinary lengths to have him extradited, but to no avail. Ronnie was always one jump ahead, and the British government simply gnashed it's teeth in rage when it was reported that he had been guest of honour at a cocktail party held on a British warship in Rio.
Eventually, Ronnie became homesick. It is rumoured that he arranged a deal with the British government. He would return voluntarily in exchange for a short term in prison - and then an early release.
It seems that the British government reneged on this deal - and Ronnie has languished in a prison cell ever since. Now, the British parole board and the state medical team have approved his release because of deteriorating health. The plan was to move him - now aged 79 - to a nursing home for the final short life span remaining.
But that was dashed when the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw refused to sign the release document, and now it seems that a sick old man will end his days confined to a dank prison cell.
Which is a reminder that embarrassing a government is a sure way to extinguish any hope of mercy.
Such is the plight of Ronnie Biggs, the " Great Train Robber " who robbed a mail train in 1963 and made off with a then record amount of loot. Ronnie and other members of his gang were caught by the British police, put on trial - and Ronnie was sentenced to a thirty year prison term.
Apparently Ronnie was less than satisfied with the hospitality of the government - and did a bunk over the wall.
And that's where he became famous - almost an icon in criminal history. Ronnie successfully lived here in Australia for some years, before fleeing to Brazil where he married and fathered a child.
The British government went to extraordinary lengths to have him extradited, but to no avail. Ronnie was always one jump ahead, and the British government simply gnashed it's teeth in rage when it was reported that he had been guest of honour at a cocktail party held on a British warship in Rio.
Eventually, Ronnie became homesick. It is rumoured that he arranged a deal with the British government. He would return voluntarily in exchange for a short term in prison - and then an early release.
It seems that the British government reneged on this deal - and Ronnie has languished in a prison cell ever since. Now, the British parole board and the state medical team have approved his release because of deteriorating health. The plan was to move him - now aged 79 - to a nursing home for the final short life span remaining.
But that was dashed when the Justice Secretary, Jack Straw refused to sign the release document, and now it seems that a sick old man will end his days confined to a dank prison cell.
Which is a reminder that embarrassing a government is a sure way to extinguish any hope of mercy.
Thursday, 2 July 2009
Monopolies !
Many years ago the government became alarmed at the expansion of chemist chain Soul Pattinson. There seemed a chance that this expansion could lead to a monopoly, driving competitors to the wall because of it's bulk buying muscle and price cutting approach.
Legislation was enacted limiting the number of stores that it could own
Two huge companies now control eighty percent of all groceries sold in this country - and Coles and Woolworths are set to diversify into other sales areas other than food.
They already have a commanding presence selling petrol to motorists, and there has been pressure to allow them to establish full chemist services within their stores.
They are steadily expanding in the liquor market and have adopted the tactic of buying out competitors, and running those outlets under their former names to give the impression that competition exists.
The question that should be asked is whether the Australian public would be best served by allowing two giant behemoths to establish competing monopolies in so many aspects of retail spending ?
There is the danger in such a situation that an " understanding " could be reached which would see prices increase to such a level that it becomes highly profitable for these chains - and seriously disadvantages the wallets of shoppers.
Many would agree that it was a mistake to allow grocery chains to elbow their way into the petrol market and we are now paying the price of less competition.
Now would be a good time to have a long, hard look at what is happening - decide on a national policy - and put in place whatever safeguards and limits are deemed necessary to prevent the public being exploited.
Doing it tomorrow might be too late !
Legislation was enacted limiting the number of stores that it could own
Two huge companies now control eighty percent of all groceries sold in this country - and Coles and Woolworths are set to diversify into other sales areas other than food.
They already have a commanding presence selling petrol to motorists, and there has been pressure to allow them to establish full chemist services within their stores.
They are steadily expanding in the liquor market and have adopted the tactic of buying out competitors, and running those outlets under their former names to give the impression that competition exists.
The question that should be asked is whether the Australian public would be best served by allowing two giant behemoths to establish competing monopolies in so many aspects of retail spending ?
There is the danger in such a situation that an " understanding " could be reached which would see prices increase to such a level that it becomes highly profitable for these chains - and seriously disadvantages the wallets of shoppers.
Many would agree that it was a mistake to allow grocery chains to elbow their way into the petrol market and we are now paying the price of less competition.
Now would be a good time to have a long, hard look at what is happening - decide on a national policy - and put in place whatever safeguards and limits are deemed necessary to prevent the public being exploited.
Doing it tomorrow might be too late !
Wednesday, 1 July 2009
Health funding.
In the past week the emergency department at Wollongong hospital has again been a scene of complete chaos. The city's entire fleet of ambulances has queued for three hours, waiting to deliver emergency patients to a system in chronic overload.
The response by the state government is a promise of seven new beds and six new nursing positions to bring relief - but astonishingly - this will not happen until at least June next year - a whole twelve months away !
It doesn't take Einstein to figure out how to bring instant relief. This city used to have three emergency departments - Crown street, Bulli and Port Kembla.
The state government closed Port Kembla and is well on the way to closing Bulli. Ambulance crews must take all patients - irrespective of severity or need - to the one overcrowded emergency room in Crown street.
Simply reopen Bulli emergency - and let ambulance crews do triage. Crown street has the facilities to treat severe trauma, but Bulli could easily handle broken bones and minor injuries - and take pressure off Crown street.
But - this will not happen for the same reason that Crown street will wait a whole year for those additional beds and nursing positions.
The state government does not have the money to deliver a decent health system - and as long as it is in charge we will have third world facilities.
One of Kevin Rudd's promises before the last Federal election was a commitment to take over Australia's hospital system - if conditions had not improved by the middle of this year.
Times up, Prime Minister. The evil hour has arrived - and the hospital system is still suffering terminal illness.
The only form of government with the deep pockets to resuscitate health is the government that sits in Canberra - and now the people of Australia are waiting of Kevin07 to prove he is not just another lying politician !
Lets hope health does not join Fuel-watch and Grocery-watch as broken promises this Prime Minister has walked away from !
The response by the state government is a promise of seven new beds and six new nursing positions to bring relief - but astonishingly - this will not happen until at least June next year - a whole twelve months away !
It doesn't take Einstein to figure out how to bring instant relief. This city used to have three emergency departments - Crown street, Bulli and Port Kembla.
The state government closed Port Kembla and is well on the way to closing Bulli. Ambulance crews must take all patients - irrespective of severity or need - to the one overcrowded emergency room in Crown street.
Simply reopen Bulli emergency - and let ambulance crews do triage. Crown street has the facilities to treat severe trauma, but Bulli could easily handle broken bones and minor injuries - and take pressure off Crown street.
But - this will not happen for the same reason that Crown street will wait a whole year for those additional beds and nursing positions.
The state government does not have the money to deliver a decent health system - and as long as it is in charge we will have third world facilities.
One of Kevin Rudd's promises before the last Federal election was a commitment to take over Australia's hospital system - if conditions had not improved by the middle of this year.
Times up, Prime Minister. The evil hour has arrived - and the hospital system is still suffering terminal illness.
The only form of government with the deep pockets to resuscitate health is the government that sits in Canberra - and now the people of Australia are waiting of Kevin07 to prove he is not just another lying politician !
Lets hope health does not join Fuel-watch and Grocery-watch as broken promises this Prime Minister has walked away from !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)