It seems state premier Nathan Rees may have been too quick on the draw when he sacked Tony Stewart.
On the surface, it looked cut and dried. A staffer complained that she had been verbally abused by her minister - and that he had put his hand on her leg to stop her leaving the table while this tirade happened.
The premier appointed a barrister to conduct an investigation - and the finding was that the staffer was believed in contrast to the evidence of the ex-minister - and that's where the wheels fell of this whole affair !
The barrister concerned happened to be a woman with strong feminist views who didn't bother to interview other people at that table when this alleged event took place. Those sitting close to the minister and his staffer have since reported that they neither saw nor heard anything that would support the staffer's claim.
Then it appears that this staffer was not as " saintly pure " as previously portrayed. It seems that she made a suspiciously similar claim against an academic at her workplace in England - and that individual was forced to resign as a result.
It has also been revealed that the CV that supported her job application had claims of qualifications that were untrue - and she is subject to a AVO for an alleged assault.
Now the premier is stuck in an awkward stance. He will have egg on his face is he back tracks and reinstates Stewart - and his standing with the public is already on the nose. He tried hard to give the impression of being tough on ministers who fail to maintain standards - but it looks evident that fairness was not an issue in this sacking.
It looks likely that the matter will result in the worst possible outcome. It will be ignored - in the vain hope that it will somehow go away !
Sunday, 31 May 2009
Saturday, 30 May 2009
Insurance shonks !
It is said that Leopards don't change their spots ! An insurance company is refusing claims over the recent heavy rain that deluged Coffs Harbour, and - surprise - surprise - it is the same insurance company that reneged on claims from the 1998 rainstorm that hit Wollongong.
At that time three standouts left policy holders without cover by claiming a " rain storm " as a " flood ", despite the rest of the insurance industry meeting these claims.
It is time the government passed legislation to clearup these anomalies. At present the only form of redress is court action by the policy holder, and that can be expensive and time protracted.
The simple solution would be for the government to appoint an insurance ombudsman to make decisions on these type of issues. At the same time, it would be a good idea to legislate to insist that every insurance company include with their policy document a simple checklist of what is covered.
The vast majority of insurance companies are both fair and honest, but inevitably there are shonky operators and a pressing need to drag them kicking and screaming into the light of day.
And that is why we have an elected government with the responsibility to " keep the bastards honest ! "
At that time three standouts left policy holders without cover by claiming a " rain storm " as a " flood ", despite the rest of the insurance industry meeting these claims.
It is time the government passed legislation to clearup these anomalies. At present the only form of redress is court action by the policy holder, and that can be expensive and time protracted.
The simple solution would be for the government to appoint an insurance ombudsman to make decisions on these type of issues. At the same time, it would be a good idea to legislate to insist that every insurance company include with their policy document a simple checklist of what is covered.
The vast majority of insurance companies are both fair and honest, but inevitably there are shonky operators and a pressing need to drag them kicking and screaming into the light of day.
And that is why we have an elected government with the responsibility to " keep the bastards honest ! "
Friday, 29 May 2009
A declaration of war !
North Korea is playing a dangerous game. By declaring that is is renouncing the armistice of 1953 that terminated the Korean war - it is assuming that conflict with the United Nations forces and South Korea is to continue.
It's reclusive leader may need to create bold scenarios to preserve his crumbling leadership and whip his restive generals into line, but he may also accidentally bite off far more than he can comfortably chew.
This is not the same world as in 1953. The cold war is over. China is no longer a belligerent supporter of anyone rebelling against the west - and all world leaders are desperately trying to hose down a huge financial recession.
The United States has it's hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan - and it could value the 28,500 troops facing off with North Korea across the 38''th parallel for other duties.
The most likely flash points will be in the disputed Yellow sea area, scene of earlier naval clashes and the probable scene of confrontation if shipping is searched for illegal weapons.
North Korea is now in a different league from the 1950's. It is a proven nuclear nation with a supply of bombs and the means of delivering them. It is quite possible that for once China, Russia and the United States may reach agreement that the last thing the world needs is a maniacal tin pot dictator upsetting world peace and threatening it's neighbours.
If North Korea over reaches - and uses one of it's nuclear weapons in a show of strength - the response could be the total elimination of that nation by consensus by the " big three ".
President Kim's desperation may have led him to make a very unwise decision !
It's reclusive leader may need to create bold scenarios to preserve his crumbling leadership and whip his restive generals into line, but he may also accidentally bite off far more than he can comfortably chew.
This is not the same world as in 1953. The cold war is over. China is no longer a belligerent supporter of anyone rebelling against the west - and all world leaders are desperately trying to hose down a huge financial recession.
The United States has it's hands full in Iraq and Afghanistan - and it could value the 28,500 troops facing off with North Korea across the 38''th parallel for other duties.
The most likely flash points will be in the disputed Yellow sea area, scene of earlier naval clashes and the probable scene of confrontation if shipping is searched for illegal weapons.
North Korea is now in a different league from the 1950's. It is a proven nuclear nation with a supply of bombs and the means of delivering them. It is quite possible that for once China, Russia and the United States may reach agreement that the last thing the world needs is a maniacal tin pot dictator upsetting world peace and threatening it's neighbours.
If North Korea over reaches - and uses one of it's nuclear weapons in a show of strength - the response could be the total elimination of that nation by consensus by the " big three ".
President Kim's desperation may have led him to make a very unwise decision !
Thursday, 28 May 2009
Petrol monopoly !
The news that Caltex is to buy 302 Mobil petrol stations is not good news for motorists. It signals the start of a near monopoly.
The acquisition will reduce the major players to just four - Caltex, BP , Woolworths and Wesfarmers/Coles. Three if you consider the present Caltex/Woolworths an already lockstep combination.
The independents are already under pressure. The existing grocery chain people use their gigantic buying power to negotiate a petrol price that allows them to undercut competition - and they use this buying power to funnel car customers into their grocery stores.
The independents are the successors to what used to be called " the corner store ". They sell petrol and " convenience items " - which are mainly groceries that people need in a hurry.
Many years ago grocery shops, butchers, bakers and all manner of food stores only opened 9 am to 6 pm and 9 am to 12 noon Saturday. Outside these hours the only option was the " convenience store ! "
Now the big supermarket chains are open all hours - and all weekend - and some trade 24/7. It is in their interest to drive the 7/11 and 8/11 type operators out of business, because it drives custom back to their stores. An ideal way to do that is to deny them petrol business !
Caltex says that the Mobil move will merely increase their market share from 16% to 22%, but the increase in number from 296 outlets to 598 - taken in combination with the existing Woolworths/Caltex outlets - will increase market share to 44% - and that is enough to give motorists nighmares !
The regulatory authorities will need to think long and hard before they approve that deal. The price of petrol is already being manipulated with totally unwarranted price rises occurring without warning - and without rhyme or reason - and a further contraction of the big players will see more of the same.
And a thought to make car owners stop and shudder ! It's many years since we have had a petrol strike ! Just think what sort of chaos will erupt if the independents are driven from the market and supply is in the hands of the " big three " when that inevitability happens again ?
The acquisition will reduce the major players to just four - Caltex, BP , Woolworths and Wesfarmers/Coles. Three if you consider the present Caltex/Woolworths an already lockstep combination.
The independents are already under pressure. The existing grocery chain people use their gigantic buying power to negotiate a petrol price that allows them to undercut competition - and they use this buying power to funnel car customers into their grocery stores.
The independents are the successors to what used to be called " the corner store ". They sell petrol and " convenience items " - which are mainly groceries that people need in a hurry.
Many years ago grocery shops, butchers, bakers and all manner of food stores only opened 9 am to 6 pm and 9 am to 12 noon Saturday. Outside these hours the only option was the " convenience store ! "
Now the big supermarket chains are open all hours - and all weekend - and some trade 24/7. It is in their interest to drive the 7/11 and 8/11 type operators out of business, because it drives custom back to their stores. An ideal way to do that is to deny them petrol business !
Caltex says that the Mobil move will merely increase their market share from 16% to 22%, but the increase in number from 296 outlets to 598 - taken in combination with the existing Woolworths/Caltex outlets - will increase market share to 44% - and that is enough to give motorists nighmares !
The regulatory authorities will need to think long and hard before they approve that deal. The price of petrol is already being manipulated with totally unwarranted price rises occurring without warning - and without rhyme or reason - and a further contraction of the big players will see more of the same.
And a thought to make car owners stop and shudder ! It's many years since we have had a petrol strike ! Just think what sort of chaos will erupt if the independents are driven from the market and supply is in the hands of the " big three " when that inevitability happens again ?
Wednesday, 27 May 2009
Future migration question.
A recent current affairs programme had a look at the Maldives, a series of islands in the Indian ocean that seem certain to disappear because of increasing sea levels.
The question asked was where would the Maldivians go when this happened. The answer was - Australia !
This is a question that we may hear more often fifty years from now, and we had better give it some thought and have an action plan for when it happens.
It would seem a reasonable proposition to the people of the Maldives. Australia is a continent with a small population. Surely there would be room for a mere 83,000 new citizens, given that we are a country that welcomes an annual migrant intake ?
A lot depends on what the Maldive people have in mind. If their plan is to seek entry as migrants, seek Australian citizenship and abide by Australian laws that should not be a problem, although the fact that their religion is Sunni Muslim would cause some people to hesitate.
Should they wish to either buy or be given space in Australia in which to transfer their nationhood - that would be entirely different . Few would countenance parting with Australian territory to create a new nation - and given the number of displaced nations likely to be inundated - we could end up like Africa - a maize of boundaries, laws, languages, currencies - and confusion.
We are a generous nation and global warming is certainly going to visit hardship in many parts of the world. The question of relocating to Australia is going to arise many times in the future - because we are an attractive place to live - and because we are one of the few places left on the planet with a large, unused land area.
Now would be a good time to set policy and let the world know what we are and are not prepared to consider. It would resolve and defuse many arguments and aspirations which are certain to arise in the lifetime of our children and grand children !
The question asked was where would the Maldivians go when this happened. The answer was - Australia !
This is a question that we may hear more often fifty years from now, and we had better give it some thought and have an action plan for when it happens.
It would seem a reasonable proposition to the people of the Maldives. Australia is a continent with a small population. Surely there would be room for a mere 83,000 new citizens, given that we are a country that welcomes an annual migrant intake ?
A lot depends on what the Maldive people have in mind. If their plan is to seek entry as migrants, seek Australian citizenship and abide by Australian laws that should not be a problem, although the fact that their religion is Sunni Muslim would cause some people to hesitate.
Should they wish to either buy or be given space in Australia in which to transfer their nationhood - that would be entirely different . Few would countenance parting with Australian territory to create a new nation - and given the number of displaced nations likely to be inundated - we could end up like Africa - a maize of boundaries, laws, languages, currencies - and confusion.
We are a generous nation and global warming is certainly going to visit hardship in many parts of the world. The question of relocating to Australia is going to arise many times in the future - because we are an attractive place to live - and because we are one of the few places left on the planet with a large, unused land area.
Now would be a good time to set policy and let the world know what we are and are not prepared to consider. It would resolve and defuse many arguments and aspirations which are certain to arise in the lifetime of our children and grand children !
Tuesday, 26 May 2009
Our amazing inland desert !
Recent television news items have changed the perception of inland Australia. Many thought the Australian centre was useless, arid desert - incapable of any form of production.
Flood rains in the north of the country months ago charged parts of the inland river system and this is now starting to fill Lake Eyre in South Australia. Along the way, the water flow caused the supposed " desert " to green and spring to life, attracting a vast array of bird life from Whistler ducks to Pelicans.
The centre of Australia is a valuable piece of real estate in what is becoming an over populated world with global warming about to reduce the existing land mass. Rising sea levels will inundate parts of many countries and some island nations will disappear.
Equally importantly, we will soon face the problem of providing sufficient agricultural space to feed the extra teeming billions that will call this planet home !
Our desert is sending us a signal. It is ready to become productive - if only we supply it with it's need for water !
We are a dry continent as far as natural rainfall is concerned, but there is no shortage of water. We are surrounded by vast oceans of the stuff - and the technology exists to make that desert bloom into the world's food basket.
Australia has about a third of the world's uranium and this could fuel nuclear power generators to run desalination plants to supply the water to transform the desert to farmland. That water would need to be piped inland to decrease evaporation and used sparingly along the lines of drip feed irrigation - as used by the Israeli's to farm their desert.
Many will scoff and declare such a project beyond the recourse's of this country - with a small population of just twenty-two million. Australia would be justified in putting it's hand out to the world and requiring the United Nations to levy it's members to supply the necessary funds. It is worthy of being a world project !
There are already food shortages in many parts of the world and a project to bring an immense continent into food production could be a matter of life or death for future generations.
Mother Nature is sending us a message ! We would be wise to give it thought !
Flood rains in the north of the country months ago charged parts of the inland river system and this is now starting to fill Lake Eyre in South Australia. Along the way, the water flow caused the supposed " desert " to green and spring to life, attracting a vast array of bird life from Whistler ducks to Pelicans.
The centre of Australia is a valuable piece of real estate in what is becoming an over populated world with global warming about to reduce the existing land mass. Rising sea levels will inundate parts of many countries and some island nations will disappear.
Equally importantly, we will soon face the problem of providing sufficient agricultural space to feed the extra teeming billions that will call this planet home !
Our desert is sending us a signal. It is ready to become productive - if only we supply it with it's need for water !
We are a dry continent as far as natural rainfall is concerned, but there is no shortage of water. We are surrounded by vast oceans of the stuff - and the technology exists to make that desert bloom into the world's food basket.
Australia has about a third of the world's uranium and this could fuel nuclear power generators to run desalination plants to supply the water to transform the desert to farmland. That water would need to be piped inland to decrease evaporation and used sparingly along the lines of drip feed irrigation - as used by the Israeli's to farm their desert.
Many will scoff and declare such a project beyond the recourse's of this country - with a small population of just twenty-two million. Australia would be justified in putting it's hand out to the world and requiring the United Nations to levy it's members to supply the necessary funds. It is worthy of being a world project !
There are already food shortages in many parts of the world and a project to bring an immense continent into food production could be a matter of life or death for future generations.
Mother Nature is sending us a message ! We would be wise to give it thought !
Monday, 25 May 2009
Flood insurance !
In light of the flood disaster in Queensland and on the New South Wales north coast, a lot of people will be asking a very important question. Is flood damage covered in their home insurance policies ?
In 1998 we had a massive rain storm hit Wollongong and in the days that followed that same question got conflicting answers. Initially most insurance companies refused claims - but that changed under public pressure and in the end most policies were honoured.
Three insurance companies dug their toes in and their policy holders have never had claims accepted. There were farcial situations where different people occupying the same building but with different insurers received totally opposing outcomes.
At present a major insurance company running television advertisements specifically claims that flood damage is covered in their policies - and goes on to list other water hazards ranging from burst pipes to tsunamis.
The problem is there seems no clear definition of what is and what is not covered where water damage is concerned as far as the legal situation is concerned. Following that massive Wollongong rain storm back in 1989 it seems that acceptance or rejection is still at the discretion of each individual insurance company.
That is an intolerable situation - and a disgrace that the Insurance Council should immediately remedy.
The state government should insist that the Insurance Council require it's member companies to state their policy on water damage - and publish the names of those companies who do offer automatic cover - and those who do not !
The insurance industry has long had a shonky reputation when it comes to honouring claims. It is time it was dragged kicking and screaming into the open and prospective insurers were able to know what they are buying without the gobbldygook of small print " if's, but's and maybe's " in most policies.
A home is the greatest asset most people own in a lifetime. There should be no question of what cover is provided !
In 1998 we had a massive rain storm hit Wollongong and in the days that followed that same question got conflicting answers. Initially most insurance companies refused claims - but that changed under public pressure and in the end most policies were honoured.
Three insurance companies dug their toes in and their policy holders have never had claims accepted. There were farcial situations where different people occupying the same building but with different insurers received totally opposing outcomes.
At present a major insurance company running television advertisements specifically claims that flood damage is covered in their policies - and goes on to list other water hazards ranging from burst pipes to tsunamis.
The problem is there seems no clear definition of what is and what is not covered where water damage is concerned as far as the legal situation is concerned. Following that massive Wollongong rain storm back in 1989 it seems that acceptance or rejection is still at the discretion of each individual insurance company.
That is an intolerable situation - and a disgrace that the Insurance Council should immediately remedy.
The state government should insist that the Insurance Council require it's member companies to state their policy on water damage - and publish the names of those companies who do offer automatic cover - and those who do not !
The insurance industry has long had a shonky reputation when it comes to honouring claims. It is time it was dragged kicking and screaming into the open and prospective insurers were able to know what they are buying without the gobbldygook of small print " if's, but's and maybe's " in most policies.
A home is the greatest asset most people own in a lifetime. There should be no question of what cover is provided !
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)