When a fourteen year old Australian boy bought Marijuana from a dealer on a Bali beach he probably had no idea the storm of controversy he was about to unleash. His tender age brought appeals from Australia for mercy, because under harsh Indonesian drug laws he was facing a six year sentence in an adult gaol if convicted.
The Indonesian authorities have bent over backwards to make concessions because of his youth. He has been held in a police station instead of a gaol and his father has been allowed to share this accommodation to ease his anxiety. An initial hearing was removed from the gravity of a court - and rather incongruously - the office in which it was held was fitted with curtains bearing cartoon characters to lighten the mood.
The stage seems to be set for either a very light sentence - to be served by way of home detention in Australia, or for the charge to be dismissed on the basis of " time served " - and the boy deported.
Then - right out of left field - comes media reports that this boy's story has been the centre of a bidding war by the television industry - and that a deal has been done that will bestow a reward of somewhere between two hundred and three hundred thousand dollars for exclusive rights.
This can only sour the tolerance of the Indonesian judiciary. That sort of money is an absolute fortune in such a poor country and the thought that the prisoner will go home to a life of riches because of his crime will not go down well.
It also raises the question of whether " profit from crime " legislation in this country should be applied to confiscate this television fee. Those convicted of drug trafficking here are routinely financially assessed - and homes, expensive cars, boats, cash and expensive toys are seized by the Crown. Why should this be any different ?
There are people who think that the money is justified because it will help reimburse the legal fees incurred in his defence - but these were services provided by his parents and legally they have no claim on the money coming from the television appearances. The dispersal of that money could well become the subject of bitter legal wrangling further down the track.
This whole distasteful affair smacks of " cheque book journalism ". A crime is committed - and there is an unusual aspect to the criminal. In this case - a young age - that attracts media attention and creates an instant " celebrity " !
Just like a young man who held a party that attracted thousands - which wrecked his family's home a few years ago - the glare of publicity conferred celebrity status and allowed this person to bask in the limelight and draw money from appearances.
It seems that nothing is going to change anytime soon ! The public is fascinated by such stories - and the media is more than willing to pay to feed that interest !
Monday, 7 November 2011
Sunday, 6 November 2011
Postponing the inevitable !
It is hard not to feel sorry for Greek Prime Minister, George Papandreo. His decision to send the bail out plan to the Greek people by way of a referendum generated such fury from the leaders of France and Germany - and from the financial world - that he was forced into a humiliating retreat. He has since barely survived a vote of confidence in his own parliament and has been forced to start negotiations to form a new government of " national unity ".
It is said that those who fail to learn from history pay an even heavier price when they repeat their mistakes.
It is one thing to pass legislation to lower wages and pensions, gut the welfare state and fortify the tax regime. It is something else again to get the people to abide by those rules.
We could see a fairly predictable scenario develop in Greece. Disaffected people find ways to circumvent unpopular measures. A " Black market " develops, where a cash economy avoids taxes and resentment makes disobeying the government a way of life.
A little further down the track, we are back to square one. Greece is again on the brink of default - and another bailout is needed to avoid disaster. The question is - how long can this go on - and will the rest of the world continue to contribute ?
Perhaps we are going the wrong way. Perhaps what is needed is an orderly realignment of the European Union and it's Euro currency. Perhaps now is the time to correct the mistakes of the past.
When the EU was mooted it was a glorious dream of a united Europe, but distrust and suspicion prevented it's countries from progressing to political union, whereby there would be a true " United States of Europe ", with a central power regulating policy, finance - and defence.
The impetus was on expansion. Prudence was thrown to the wind - and yet we now have one of Europe's largest countries banging on the EU door - and being rejected and refused admission.
White - Christian Europe would dearly love to have the Turkish masses added as customers for EU manufactured goods, but they fear the effect of Muslim migration across EU's open borders if Turkey became a member.
World leaders fear the backlash if there is a default by a EU country. What would be more acceptable would be a formal restructuring of the European Union. It would be better to invite those who can not meet the EU requirements for finance to leave voluntarily - re-establish their own currencies - and come to terms with those to whom they owe money.
A smaller, tighter EU is the only hope of preserving some aspects of the EU dream. The bailout course is simply destined for disaster !
It is said that those who fail to learn from history pay an even heavier price when they repeat their mistakes.
It is one thing to pass legislation to lower wages and pensions, gut the welfare state and fortify the tax regime. It is something else again to get the people to abide by those rules.
We could see a fairly predictable scenario develop in Greece. Disaffected people find ways to circumvent unpopular measures. A " Black market " develops, where a cash economy avoids taxes and resentment makes disobeying the government a way of life.
A little further down the track, we are back to square one. Greece is again on the brink of default - and another bailout is needed to avoid disaster. The question is - how long can this go on - and will the rest of the world continue to contribute ?
Perhaps we are going the wrong way. Perhaps what is needed is an orderly realignment of the European Union and it's Euro currency. Perhaps now is the time to correct the mistakes of the past.
When the EU was mooted it was a glorious dream of a united Europe, but distrust and suspicion prevented it's countries from progressing to political union, whereby there would be a true " United States of Europe ", with a central power regulating policy, finance - and defence.
The impetus was on expansion. Prudence was thrown to the wind - and yet we now have one of Europe's largest countries banging on the EU door - and being rejected and refused admission.
White - Christian Europe would dearly love to have the Turkish masses added as customers for EU manufactured goods, but they fear the effect of Muslim migration across EU's open borders if Turkey became a member.
World leaders fear the backlash if there is a default by a EU country. What would be more acceptable would be a formal restructuring of the European Union. It would be better to invite those who can not meet the EU requirements for finance to leave voluntarily - re-establish their own currencies - and come to terms with those to whom they owe money.
A smaller, tighter EU is the only hope of preserving some aspects of the EU dream. The bailout course is simply destined for disaster !
Saturday, 5 November 2011
Gang warfare - and drugs !
The movie industry has made a lot of money out of the American era of prohibition - and with it characters like Al Capone and Elliot Ness. Gang warfare in the streets brought the advent of the " Tommy gun " - and this all seemed to be a way of life far removed from Australia.
Not any more ! Each day seems to bring a new case of Sydney or Melbourne homes being sprayed with gunfire - or of rival gangsters being cut down in a hail of bullets. In New South Wales the police are concerned that a burnt out car found near Macquarie Pass may be evidence of an underworld " hit ".
Gangster eras evolved around a common thread. Something was illegal - but desired by the public. There was money to be made by organising to create supply.
In early twentieth century America that illicit item was alcohol. Here in Australia - and in the rest of the world - the present incentive to organised crime - is drugs ! The drug epidemic permeates through every level of society. Some people create " drug labs " in the kitchen of their homes while others convert whole houses into hydroponic Marijuana " gardens ". Governments and police forces lose control of entire countries like Colombia and Mexico. We are now familiar with the phenomenon of the " Narco State ".
This world wide crime wave is dependent on one single aspect - there must be strong demand for it's product.
Perhaps the time has come to re-think the war on drugs. We have been fighting it for decades with little success. Countless villains have been arrested, convicted and jailed - but this has not put even a small dent in the availability of drugs on our streets.
The Americans learned a hard lesson. Their citizens were determined to drink alcohol - and so Congress repealed prohibition - and the guns fell silent. If citizens here are determined to smoke Marijuana, then maybe it is time to control this substance in the same way we control alcohol and tobacco.
Of course we know that drugs injure people's health and overindulgence causes death, but then so does alcohol and tobacco, but we have learned to live with that. That which is forbidden always has appeal. Creating legal supply under strict conditions would certainly spike the guns of the criminals, but it could also cause loss of interest once the " illegal " tag was removed.
We are certainly not winning the drugs war - and the way violent crime associated with it is increasing sends a message that now is the time to re-evaluate our thinking.
Not any more ! Each day seems to bring a new case of Sydney or Melbourne homes being sprayed with gunfire - or of rival gangsters being cut down in a hail of bullets. In New South Wales the police are concerned that a burnt out car found near Macquarie Pass may be evidence of an underworld " hit ".
Gangster eras evolved around a common thread. Something was illegal - but desired by the public. There was money to be made by organising to create supply.
In early twentieth century America that illicit item was alcohol. Here in Australia - and in the rest of the world - the present incentive to organised crime - is drugs ! The drug epidemic permeates through every level of society. Some people create " drug labs " in the kitchen of their homes while others convert whole houses into hydroponic Marijuana " gardens ". Governments and police forces lose control of entire countries like Colombia and Mexico. We are now familiar with the phenomenon of the " Narco State ".
This world wide crime wave is dependent on one single aspect - there must be strong demand for it's product.
Perhaps the time has come to re-think the war on drugs. We have been fighting it for decades with little success. Countless villains have been arrested, convicted and jailed - but this has not put even a small dent in the availability of drugs on our streets.
The Americans learned a hard lesson. Their citizens were determined to drink alcohol - and so Congress repealed prohibition - and the guns fell silent. If citizens here are determined to smoke Marijuana, then maybe it is time to control this substance in the same way we control alcohol and tobacco.
Of course we know that drugs injure people's health and overindulgence causes death, but then so does alcohol and tobacco, but we have learned to live with that. That which is forbidden always has appeal. Creating legal supply under strict conditions would certainly spike the guns of the criminals, but it could also cause loss of interest once the " illegal " tag was removed.
We are certainly not winning the drugs war - and the way violent crime associated with it is increasing sends a message that now is the time to re-evaluate our thinking.
Friday, 4 November 2011
A risky business !
The airline business in Australia has had a chancey history. Elderly people will remember the days when Australian skies were ruled by two airlines. Qantas flew overseas routes and domestic travel was provided by Australian National Airlines ( ANA ), a firm started by Sir Charles Kingsford Smith.
ANA failed financially and was taken over by a fledgling Ansett Airlines, and then the government stepped in and offered direct competition by starting TAA. There have since been a number of new competitors for Australian domestic air business - and some notable failures - which include East-West, Compass -Impulse - and most recently - the Ansett withdrawal.
It seems that starting an airline is risky business, but on November 15 Air Australia will take to the skies - and offer seats in what has become a crowded airline market.
This new airline is one hundred percent Australian owned and will use the Boomerang motif. It's colours will be green and gold, and it will be flying modern jet aircraft in the medium size range. What has caught attention is the marketing plan. It is not aiming to take passengers off Qantas and Jetstar on domestic routes, but instead intends to create new tourist destinations to the islands surrounding Australia - which are under serviced by existing air services.
It is a fact of life that customers who patronise cruise ships get to visit many destinations virtually ignored by the airline industry. There are plenty of seats to places like Fiji and Bali, but both the South Pacific and Indian oceans have a host of other destinations which are fast emerging as tourist destinations.
What this new airline is offering - is flexibility. It will work with island communities prepared to create the facilities for new tourist trades and offer a new experience for Australian travellers prepared to get off the beaten track.
It is certainly an innovative approach and it is coming at exactly the right time. The recent Qantas interruption to services has soured some customers and if Air Australia plays it's cards right it can gain a new customer base.
It will certainly be welcomes by those island communities trying to reinvent themselves into the ever expanding tourist industry !
ANA failed financially and was taken over by a fledgling Ansett Airlines, and then the government stepped in and offered direct competition by starting TAA. There have since been a number of new competitors for Australian domestic air business - and some notable failures - which include East-West, Compass -Impulse - and most recently - the Ansett withdrawal.
It seems that starting an airline is risky business, but on November 15 Air Australia will take to the skies - and offer seats in what has become a crowded airline market.
This new airline is one hundred percent Australian owned and will use the Boomerang motif. It's colours will be green and gold, and it will be flying modern jet aircraft in the medium size range. What has caught attention is the marketing plan. It is not aiming to take passengers off Qantas and Jetstar on domestic routes, but instead intends to create new tourist destinations to the islands surrounding Australia - which are under serviced by existing air services.
It is a fact of life that customers who patronise cruise ships get to visit many destinations virtually ignored by the airline industry. There are plenty of seats to places like Fiji and Bali, but both the South Pacific and Indian oceans have a host of other destinations which are fast emerging as tourist destinations.
What this new airline is offering - is flexibility. It will work with island communities prepared to create the facilities for new tourist trades and offer a new experience for Australian travellers prepared to get off the beaten track.
It is certainly an innovative approach and it is coming at exactly the right time. The recent Qantas interruption to services has soured some customers and if Air Australia plays it's cards right it can gain a new customer base.
It will certainly be welcomes by those island communities trying to reinvent themselves into the ever expanding tourist industry !
Thursday, 3 November 2011
High wire act - and no safety net !
Greek prime minister George Papandreou is a brave man. His decision to put the safety plan for his country to a referendum may decide the fate of the Euro, the European Union - and the entire western monetary system.
The offer cobbled together under the leadership of German Chancellor, Angela Merkel is a gift not easily refused. Fifty percent of Greece's massive debt will be forgiven - at great cost to the banks in a huge array of countries. In exchange, the citizens of Greece will be required to accept a harsh austerity programme that will see wages and pensions contract - and the tax system will be revamped to collect the taxes that citizens have dodged for years.
A sizeable proportion of the population has been demonstrating in the streets against the conditions set by the IMF and the World bank. Ancient Greece was the birth place of democracy, hence some will see it fitting that acceptance of this austerity programme will be the subject of a vote by the citizens of that country.
It is hoped that those about to vote have an understanding of what a rejection will set in motion. The finances of Greece are in such a parlous state that without this reduction in debt and implementation of reforms - default is inevitable - and Greece will become bankrupt.
Some may see this as a better option. If Greece becomes bankrupt that entire debt - not the fifty percent being forgiven - will be written off, but it will come at a cost. The country will no longer be able to use the Euro as it's currency - and it may be banished from membership of the EU. It will have to print it's own currency - and that money will be " non negotiable " - not accepted anywhere except within the country's borders. It's exchange rate will plummet - and the expectation is that inflation will sky rocket !
The main advantage is that holidays for tourists will become cheap because of the exchange rate, but the lack of hard currency to buy needed raw materials and finished goods from other countries will see the standard of living fall sharply. It is unlikely that the present welfare system within Greece could survive - nor could public services like health and education be maintained at their present level.
Greece would probably be thrust back into third world status - but there would be implications for the rest of the world if the vote was for rejection.
One of the main reasons that world bodies have bent over backwards to save Greece and keep it within the EU and the Euro zone is because of the " fear factor ". A Greek default could possibly tip Italy, Spain and Portugal over the edge - and bring on not just a repeat of the GFC - but a full scale world depression of the 1929 kind.
Let us hope that the Greek citizens think long and hard before putting pen to ballot paper - and fully understand all the issues involved before they make their choice !
The offer cobbled together under the leadership of German Chancellor, Angela Merkel is a gift not easily refused. Fifty percent of Greece's massive debt will be forgiven - at great cost to the banks in a huge array of countries. In exchange, the citizens of Greece will be required to accept a harsh austerity programme that will see wages and pensions contract - and the tax system will be revamped to collect the taxes that citizens have dodged for years.
A sizeable proportion of the population has been demonstrating in the streets against the conditions set by the IMF and the World bank. Ancient Greece was the birth place of democracy, hence some will see it fitting that acceptance of this austerity programme will be the subject of a vote by the citizens of that country.
It is hoped that those about to vote have an understanding of what a rejection will set in motion. The finances of Greece are in such a parlous state that without this reduction in debt and implementation of reforms - default is inevitable - and Greece will become bankrupt.
Some may see this as a better option. If Greece becomes bankrupt that entire debt - not the fifty percent being forgiven - will be written off, but it will come at a cost. The country will no longer be able to use the Euro as it's currency - and it may be banished from membership of the EU. It will have to print it's own currency - and that money will be " non negotiable " - not accepted anywhere except within the country's borders. It's exchange rate will plummet - and the expectation is that inflation will sky rocket !
The main advantage is that holidays for tourists will become cheap because of the exchange rate, but the lack of hard currency to buy needed raw materials and finished goods from other countries will see the standard of living fall sharply. It is unlikely that the present welfare system within Greece could survive - nor could public services like health and education be maintained at their present level.
Greece would probably be thrust back into third world status - but there would be implications for the rest of the world if the vote was for rejection.
One of the main reasons that world bodies have bent over backwards to save Greece and keep it within the EU and the Euro zone is because of the " fear factor ". A Greek default could possibly tip Italy, Spain and Portugal over the edge - and bring on not just a repeat of the GFC - but a full scale world depression of the 1929 kind.
Let us hope that the Greek citizens think long and hard before putting pen to ballot paper - and fully understand all the issues involved before they make their choice !
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Interesting times ahead !
Both the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory are known for thinking differently to the other Australian states, but until now the Federal government has always had the right to curb any legislative excesses - by disallowing any bill with which it disagrees.
That power vanished when the Green coalition forced a bill through the lower house to restrict Federal powers. Legislation can now only be struck down if that is the combined will of both houses of Federal parliament.
This opens the way for ground breaking change to emerge from either of the two territorial parliaments. In particular, three avenues of contention are sure to rise to the forefront. Euthanasia - Same sex marriage - and the legalisation of Marijuana all have adherents and it is inevitable that they will eventually be put to a vote.
All three have been dodged by both of the major political parties. Each side of politics have strident supporters and equally strident opponents and political leaders have avoided these subjects because of the perceived political damage that would emerge from open debate.
That option may soon be unavoidable. If one of the territories moves to make a law change there will be a flowon effect that can no longer be swept under the carpet. Each of these three subjects is now legal in some countries - and while illegal in many more - is common practice while being studiously ignored by church and state.
To many people this will be a sign of progress. We tend to cling to old shibboleths which have long passed their use by date because we fear change. We live in an ever changing world. It seems that this law change will simply move things along at a faster rate !
That power vanished when the Green coalition forced a bill through the lower house to restrict Federal powers. Legislation can now only be struck down if that is the combined will of both houses of Federal parliament.
This opens the way for ground breaking change to emerge from either of the two territorial parliaments. In particular, three avenues of contention are sure to rise to the forefront. Euthanasia - Same sex marriage - and the legalisation of Marijuana all have adherents and it is inevitable that they will eventually be put to a vote.
All three have been dodged by both of the major political parties. Each side of politics have strident supporters and equally strident opponents and political leaders have avoided these subjects because of the perceived political damage that would emerge from open debate.
That option may soon be unavoidable. If one of the territories moves to make a law change there will be a flowon effect that can no longer be swept under the carpet. Each of these three subjects is now legal in some countries - and while illegal in many more - is common practice while being studiously ignored by church and state.
To many people this will be a sign of progress. We tend to cling to old shibboleths which have long passed their use by date because we fear change. We live in an ever changing world. It seems that this law change will simply move things along at a faster rate !
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Decision time for power sale !
Yesterday an enquiry headed by a Supreme court judge handed down a decision on the $ 5.3 billion partial privatization of the electric power industry by the former state Labor government. At that time, the then Opposition described it as a " fire sale " and a " grab for cash ".
Judge Brian Tamberlin QC approved the partial sale - and suggested that there would be merit in proceeding with the sale of the remaining assets.
Despite this finding, there is no doubt that the removal of this state's electricity production into private hands does not meet the approval of the general public. It has resulted in sharp price rises for consumers, and if a further sale includes the poles and wires - and the Cobbera coal mine - which provides heavily subsidized coal for power generation - then further price increases are inevitable.
It seems that the average person in this state has expectations that the state government will provide a range of basic services - and that electric power is one of them. Originally, this power generating industry was created from scratch as a state government function, paid for by the taxes of state residents. When the previous government suggested selling the industry, there was bitter opposition and most people compared it to " selling off the family silver ".
Some people see logic in private partnership with the government to provide services that are otherwise financially out of reach - and the creation of toll roads and tunnels is often cited. The difference is that these are new services that did not previously exist. Electricity generation is already in place. It was in public ownership - bought and paid for by the people of this state.
There probably is no option than to go ahead and complete the electricity sale now that the industry is fragmented and only partially government owned, but what is nagging many people is the thought that other forms of public ownership may now be questioned.
Could we see the public hospital system pass into private hands - and what will be the future scenario for water, education, the railways - and even fire and police services.
We accept the principle that " user pays " -
but that acceptance was always on the condition that the government provided basic services at a subsidized cost as part of the return for the taxes we pay.
We still pay the taxes - but it now seems that basic services will cost " commercial rates " . The principle of
subsidized services is becoming a thing of the past !
Judge Brian Tamberlin QC approved the partial sale - and suggested that there would be merit in proceeding with the sale of the remaining assets.
Despite this finding, there is no doubt that the removal of this state's electricity production into private hands does not meet the approval of the general public. It has resulted in sharp price rises for consumers, and if a further sale includes the poles and wires - and the Cobbera coal mine - which provides heavily subsidized coal for power generation - then further price increases are inevitable.
It seems that the average person in this state has expectations that the state government will provide a range of basic services - and that electric power is one of them. Originally, this power generating industry was created from scratch as a state government function, paid for by the taxes of state residents. When the previous government suggested selling the industry, there was bitter opposition and most people compared it to " selling off the family silver ".
Some people see logic in private partnership with the government to provide services that are otherwise financially out of reach - and the creation of toll roads and tunnels is often cited. The difference is that these are new services that did not previously exist. Electricity generation is already in place. It was in public ownership - bought and paid for by the people of this state.
There probably is no option than to go ahead and complete the electricity sale now that the industry is fragmented and only partially government owned, but what is nagging many people is the thought that other forms of public ownership may now be questioned.
Could we see the public hospital system pass into private hands - and what will be the future scenario for water, education, the railways - and even fire and police services.
We accept the principle that " user pays " -
but that acceptance was always on the condition that the government provided basic services at a subsidized cost as part of the return for the taxes we pay.
We still pay the taxes - but it now seems that basic services will cost " commercial rates " . The principle of
subsidized services is becoming a thing of the past !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)