A nasty fight is brewing because the National Assessment Survey of schools may result in a " League's table " of winners - and losers !
Teachers promise that if this happens as a result of this years survey, 70,000 teachers will walk out of their classrooms to ensure that it doesn't happen in further years.
Unfortunately, both sides of the argument have a point !
If schools are listed in order of merit, those at the top of the list will be rewarded by parent's competing to enrol their children - but the school's at the bottom will be avoided - and will have problems attracting gifted teachers.
But parents have a right to know how each school is performing when they face the choice of where to enrol their children !
Years ago they were denied that choice. The Education department allocated children to the school nearest their address - and that was the end of the matter. It was a long, hard fight to break that deadlock - and now a system that has worked well is being compromised by the suggestion of grading schools publicly.
Obviously a school located in an underprivileged area will not be likely to be as academically prominent as one in a rich suburb, but parents will also want to know if it has a full complement of teachers - and whether there are high truancy rates and any ongoing drug or violence problems.
The state of the school buildings will also be a measure of concern, and so far no indication has been given on exactly what criteria a listed evaluation of schools will provide.
The obvious outcome should be some sort of compromise. It may be unfair to list in order of academic excellence but parent's certainly have a right to some sort of evaluation on which to base their choice.
Unfortunately any negotiation is in the hands of three uncompromising entities. The teachers oppose any form of assessment - and on the other side of the argument there are differing requirements by the state and Federal government education departments.
It looks like the sort of argument where nobody wins !
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
Monday, 13 July 2009
The road to nowhere !
America had it's " Bridge to nowhere " - and now it seems that the Mandarins of the RTA have produced utter confusion in trying to impose an entrance to the Bulli Tops Information centre.
Traffic from Campbelltown and western Sydney will have to deviate onto the old Princes Highway, travel two kilometres back towards Sydney to access a U turn bay - and then drive another two kilometres to reach their destination.
Existing restaurant and hotel businesses that at present have right turn access will have that denied, and will encounter the same restriction on trade. To make matters worse, signs will ignore them because the RTA does not mention private businesses - but then gleefully promotes the restaurant and business complex that is the Bulli Tops Information centre.
The classic is the situation faced by northbound traffic that has undergone the further drive north, used the U turn and driven south to have a look at the information centre - and probably had a meal.
When they leave - they have no option other than to return to Wollongong via Bulli Pass or Mount Ousley - and then repeat this leg of their journey if their final destination is Sydney.
If that is the best the RTA is capable of producing then we can expect a rash of business failures at Bulli Tops because this is just too complex, time wasting - and utterly confusing to be accepted by motorists.
It seems to be a plan specifically designed to reduce interest in Wollongong as a tourist destination !
Traffic from Campbelltown and western Sydney will have to deviate onto the old Princes Highway, travel two kilometres back towards Sydney to access a U turn bay - and then drive another two kilometres to reach their destination.
Existing restaurant and hotel businesses that at present have right turn access will have that denied, and will encounter the same restriction on trade. To make matters worse, signs will ignore them because the RTA does not mention private businesses - but then gleefully promotes the restaurant and business complex that is the Bulli Tops Information centre.
The classic is the situation faced by northbound traffic that has undergone the further drive north, used the U turn and driven south to have a look at the information centre - and probably had a meal.
When they leave - they have no option other than to return to Wollongong via Bulli Pass or Mount Ousley - and then repeat this leg of their journey if their final destination is Sydney.
If that is the best the RTA is capable of producing then we can expect a rash of business failures at Bulli Tops because this is just too complex, time wasting - and utterly confusing to be accepted by motorists.
It seems to be a plan specifically designed to reduce interest in Wollongong as a tourist destination !
Sunday, 12 July 2009
Marriage - and the law !
The Liberal Party's Tony Abbott is suggesting that a more conservative approach could return to dissolving a failed marriage.
At present, separating couples can end a marriage on a " no fault " basis after just a twelve month separation.
Abbott is suggesting that those intending to marry should have the choice of subjecting their vows to either the present " no fault " regime, or to a return of the old " Matrimonial Clauses Act " in which a " guilty party " had to be identified - and punished !
Under that act the only reasons for dissolving a marriage were " Adultery, desertion, cruelty, habitual drunkenness, imprisonment, insanity - or a five year separation ".
Those with long memories would shudder at the rorts that passed through the courts prior to Lionel Murphy introducing " No Fault " divorce way back in 1975.
That was the era of " Peeping Tom " enquiry agents taking photographs through bedroom windows, people being paid to lie under oath and elaborate set-ups to brand the innocent as the guilty party. It was a cocktail of sleaze and deceit !
To return to that era would be a trap for the naive who have profound faith in their " love " and insist it will last forever. They would find themselves trapped in an oppressive legal system that insists on identifying a guilty party, and then proceeds to crucify the villain by way of the property settlement.
We have come a long way from the days when the churches imposed draconian and unrealistic moral laws that sought to identify and punish sinners. An era when an unmarried woman having a baby was such an abomination that no degree of cruelty was too much in tearing the child from the mother and consigning it to an orphanage - where in many cases it was abused by those same God fearing critics !
At a time when marriage itself is waning as an option by many people, this is certainly not the time to return to the dark ages.
What is next on the agenda ? A return to the " six O'clock swill with early closing time " ? No sport, cinemas or entertainment on Sundays ?
At present, separating couples can end a marriage on a " no fault " basis after just a twelve month separation.
Abbott is suggesting that those intending to marry should have the choice of subjecting their vows to either the present " no fault " regime, or to a return of the old " Matrimonial Clauses Act " in which a " guilty party " had to be identified - and punished !
Under that act the only reasons for dissolving a marriage were " Adultery, desertion, cruelty, habitual drunkenness, imprisonment, insanity - or a five year separation ".
Those with long memories would shudder at the rorts that passed through the courts prior to Lionel Murphy introducing " No Fault " divorce way back in 1975.
That was the era of " Peeping Tom " enquiry agents taking photographs through bedroom windows, people being paid to lie under oath and elaborate set-ups to brand the innocent as the guilty party. It was a cocktail of sleaze and deceit !
To return to that era would be a trap for the naive who have profound faith in their " love " and insist it will last forever. They would find themselves trapped in an oppressive legal system that insists on identifying a guilty party, and then proceeds to crucify the villain by way of the property settlement.
We have come a long way from the days when the churches imposed draconian and unrealistic moral laws that sought to identify and punish sinners. An era when an unmarried woman having a baby was such an abomination that no degree of cruelty was too much in tearing the child from the mother and consigning it to an orphanage - where in many cases it was abused by those same God fearing critics !
At a time when marriage itself is waning as an option by many people, this is certainly not the time to return to the dark ages.
What is next on the agenda ? A return to the " six O'clock swill with early closing time " ? No sport, cinemas or entertainment on Sundays ?
Saturday, 11 July 2009
Genetically modified food !
While world leaders are busy grappling with global warming another equally pressing issue is laying dormant - the problem of how to feed a rapidly expanding world population.
The planet seems to be split into two camps. The Europeans are totally opposed to the GM concept and have taken strident measures not only to reject GM crops, but to ban products that may be in their eyes tainted by containing ingredients derived from GM crops.
America - and most of Asia - is accepting the GM concept and bringing it into expanding use.
There is no doubt that GM brings with it benefits. Crops have been produced that withstand otherwise crippling diseases. Modification has allowed previously salt contaminated land to be used to produce food - and genetically modified strains have the ability to greatly expand the yield for any given area of crop land.
The objections of the nay sayers is that we can not predict the long term effect that GM may have on human health, or on the change that may occur to the soil and other living matter subjected to cross contamination.
Just as the industrial revolution and an improved way of life increased Co2 in the atmosphere and is fast creating global warming, the expanding world population is threatening our capacity to feed all these people.
It's a classical case of " cause and effect " !
There may be long term consequences of GM and some of it may be unpleaant, but so is the prospect of a world famine. Can we afford to ignore GM if the result is death by starvation for millions, plus the certainty of mass migration and likely wars as desperate people move and fight to survive ?
At the moment the full attention of the world is on global warming. Perhaps that should share equal place with ensuring an adequate food supply.
Both problems are capable of devastating this planet Earth !
The planet seems to be split into two camps. The Europeans are totally opposed to the GM concept and have taken strident measures not only to reject GM crops, but to ban products that may be in their eyes tainted by containing ingredients derived from GM crops.
America - and most of Asia - is accepting the GM concept and bringing it into expanding use.
There is no doubt that GM brings with it benefits. Crops have been produced that withstand otherwise crippling diseases. Modification has allowed previously salt contaminated land to be used to produce food - and genetically modified strains have the ability to greatly expand the yield for any given area of crop land.
The objections of the nay sayers is that we can not predict the long term effect that GM may have on human health, or on the change that may occur to the soil and other living matter subjected to cross contamination.
Just as the industrial revolution and an improved way of life increased Co2 in the atmosphere and is fast creating global warming, the expanding world population is threatening our capacity to feed all these people.
It's a classical case of " cause and effect " !
There may be long term consequences of GM and some of it may be unpleaant, but so is the prospect of a world famine. Can we afford to ignore GM if the result is death by starvation for millions, plus the certainty of mass migration and likely wars as desperate people move and fight to survive ?
At the moment the full attention of the world is on global warming. Perhaps that should share equal place with ensuring an adequate food supply.
Both problems are capable of devastating this planet Earth !
Friday, 10 July 2009
The oriental thought process !
The arrest of Australian national Stern Hu, representing mining giant Rio Tinto in Shanghai - and several of his Chinese associates on suspicion of espionage and obtaining " state secrets " illustrates the contradictions that plague the world's biggest country.
China is a Communist regime trying to equate the dogma of Communism - strict control - intolerance of any form of protest - an oppressive police force - with the financial success of embracing a capitalist economy and trade with the non-Communist world.
On the one hand China is notorious for using it's diaspora of citizens to attract commercial and military intelligence world wide - and on the other hand to be hugely sensitive to foreigners obtaining even the most mundane data freely available within the country.
Welcome to the free world of commerce - where information is power and the wheeling and dealing of negotiating price involves clandestine work obtaining secrets that enhance the holder's chances of success.
This arrest will probably be an embarrassment to the Chinese leadership, and most probably it is part of a knee jerk reaction to the failed bid by Chinalco to obtain a slice of the ownership of Australian Rio Tinto.
There are expectations that the arrest will be short lived. If it is not, then Australia has a trump card that it can most certainly play.
This recession will be short lived and China will need to be a big importer of thermal coal and iron ore to sustain it's industries - and it will be just one of several emerging economies competing for materials.
Australia controls 16% of the world coal supply - and a whopping 32% of iron ore.
A time - perhaps - to remind China that if it tries to impose Communist era conditions on the free market, then Australia might look less favourably on China as an export destination for these minerals.
Communist or capitalist - China's leaders have shown they are pragmatic - and most likely this arrest hic-cup stems from lower level decision makers yet to fully grasp the realities of world trade !
China is a Communist regime trying to equate the dogma of Communism - strict control - intolerance of any form of protest - an oppressive police force - with the financial success of embracing a capitalist economy and trade with the non-Communist world.
On the one hand China is notorious for using it's diaspora of citizens to attract commercial and military intelligence world wide - and on the other hand to be hugely sensitive to foreigners obtaining even the most mundane data freely available within the country.
Welcome to the free world of commerce - where information is power and the wheeling and dealing of negotiating price involves clandestine work obtaining secrets that enhance the holder's chances of success.
This arrest will probably be an embarrassment to the Chinese leadership, and most probably it is part of a knee jerk reaction to the failed bid by Chinalco to obtain a slice of the ownership of Australian Rio Tinto.
There are expectations that the arrest will be short lived. If it is not, then Australia has a trump card that it can most certainly play.
This recession will be short lived and China will need to be a big importer of thermal coal and iron ore to sustain it's industries - and it will be just one of several emerging economies competing for materials.
Australia controls 16% of the world coal supply - and a whopping 32% of iron ore.
A time - perhaps - to remind China that if it tries to impose Communist era conditions on the free market, then Australia might look less favourably on China as an export destination for these minerals.
Communist or capitalist - China's leaders have shown they are pragmatic - and most likely this arrest hic-cup stems from lower level decision makers yet to fully grasp the realities of world trade !
Thursday, 9 July 2009
Bottled water !
Bottled water must surely be the most brilliant marketing success in the history of commerce !
People have been persuaded to buy water - that stuff that comes free from the kitchen tap - when it is offered in a 600 ml bottle for a price of around one dollar.
We are assured that it is somehow superior. Better taste ! Pollution free ! From exotic and romantic regions !
Surely someone will take heed from this success and start to market air in a plastic bag. What can they say about that to get the suckers to buy ? Collected from a pristine mountain top ! Fart free perhaps !
Now a community of people have decided to do something about that bottled water scam !
The people of Bundanoon in the Southern Highlands have decided to ban the product. Shops will not longer offer it for sale, and the community will install taps and bubblers in the main street to encourage citizens to fill and refill reuseable containers.
And of course, politics has to muscle in on what must sound like a good idea that will be applauded by the people.
Premier Nathan Rees has jumped on the bandwagon and announced that he will impose an immediate ban on government departments and agencies from purchasing and supplying bottled water !
Unfortunately this will conflict with the policy of " do more with less " that is strangling our hospital system.
For countless decades each day nurses trundled huge carts through the hospital corridors, laden with green plastic jugs of water and green plastic drinking glasses. A jug and glass was deposited at each patient's bedside table.
These same nurses collected yesterdays jugs and glasses and trundle them off to some remote part of the hospital where they were - hopefully - cleaned and autoclaved - for re-use the following day.
Someone figured out that time and labour could be saved by issuing each patient with a 600 ml bottle of water in place of those jugs and glasses, and should the patient fully consume the contents, it can be refilled from the bathroom tap.
Disposal when finished was by way of the ward rubbish bin.
Now - in the name of politically correct thinking - we seem destined to force the hospitals to follow the Premier's directive and return to the time wasting era of those green plastic jugs and glasses.
Perhaps a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water !
People have been persuaded to buy water - that stuff that comes free from the kitchen tap - when it is offered in a 600 ml bottle for a price of around one dollar.
We are assured that it is somehow superior. Better taste ! Pollution free ! From exotic and romantic regions !
Surely someone will take heed from this success and start to market air in a plastic bag. What can they say about that to get the suckers to buy ? Collected from a pristine mountain top ! Fart free perhaps !
Now a community of people have decided to do something about that bottled water scam !
The people of Bundanoon in the Southern Highlands have decided to ban the product. Shops will not longer offer it for sale, and the community will install taps and bubblers in the main street to encourage citizens to fill and refill reuseable containers.
And of course, politics has to muscle in on what must sound like a good idea that will be applauded by the people.
Premier Nathan Rees has jumped on the bandwagon and announced that he will impose an immediate ban on government departments and agencies from purchasing and supplying bottled water !
Unfortunately this will conflict with the policy of " do more with less " that is strangling our hospital system.
For countless decades each day nurses trundled huge carts through the hospital corridors, laden with green plastic jugs of water and green plastic drinking glasses. A jug and glass was deposited at each patient's bedside table.
These same nurses collected yesterdays jugs and glasses and trundle them off to some remote part of the hospital where they were - hopefully - cleaned and autoclaved - for re-use the following day.
Someone figured out that time and labour could be saved by issuing each patient with a 600 ml bottle of water in place of those jugs and glasses, and should the patient fully consume the contents, it can be refilled from the bathroom tap.
Disposal when finished was by way of the ward rubbish bin.
Now - in the name of politically correct thinking - we seem destined to force the hospitals to follow the Premier's directive and return to the time wasting era of those green plastic jugs and glasses.
Perhaps a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water !
Wednesday, 8 July 2009
Selective tip charging.
Originally councils provided a tip where ratepayers could dispose of rubbish too large to fit into the weekly pickup bins. This was considered an essential council service - and it was free !
The inevitable march of progress saw fees applied, but these were applied selectively.
A trailer load of general rubbish attracted the highest fee, a trailer load of green waste a lower fee - because council processed that into mulch - and metal items were accepted free of charge - because they could be recycled.
Now that trailer load of general rubbish will still attract the general rubbish fee, but additional fees will be applied to selected items contained in the load.
For instance, if there is a TV that will be priced at an extra $ 30. A computer monitor will cost $25, a mattress $22, and car tyres $ 5 each.
The reason council gives for this policy change is sending these selective items away for recycling rather than allowing them to fill up valuable landfill space.
Once again we have double dipping !
The council will benefit from the recovery of valuable parts taken from these items or products such as children's playground soft-fall material made from tyres.
There is a danger that imposing steep selective charges on individual items within each trailer load will deter ratepayers from using the tip, and instead dump unwanted goods in the streets and parks to avoid the fees.
Perhaps now would be a good time for council to review the original reason for having a city council. Back at that time most considered that it's main purpose was to serve the ratepayers.
Today - it's main purpose seems to be to extract money from them !
The inevitable march of progress saw fees applied, but these were applied selectively.
A trailer load of general rubbish attracted the highest fee, a trailer load of green waste a lower fee - because council processed that into mulch - and metal items were accepted free of charge - because they could be recycled.
Now that trailer load of general rubbish will still attract the general rubbish fee, but additional fees will be applied to selected items contained in the load.
For instance, if there is a TV that will be priced at an extra $ 30. A computer monitor will cost $25, a mattress $22, and car tyres $ 5 each.
The reason council gives for this policy change is sending these selective items away for recycling rather than allowing them to fill up valuable landfill space.
Once again we have double dipping !
The council will benefit from the recovery of valuable parts taken from these items or products such as children's playground soft-fall material made from tyres.
There is a danger that imposing steep selective charges on individual items within each trailer load will deter ratepayers from using the tip, and instead dump unwanted goods in the streets and parks to avoid the fees.
Perhaps now would be a good time for council to review the original reason for having a city council. Back at that time most considered that it's main purpose was to serve the ratepayers.
Today - it's main purpose seems to be to extract money from them !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)