This document is part of an archive of postings on Australian Politics, a blog hosted by Blogspot who are in turn owned by Google. The index to the archive is available here or here. Indexes to my other blogs can be located here or here. Archives do accompany my original postings but, given the animus towards conservative writing on Google and other internet institutions, their permanence is uncertain. These alternative archives help ensure a more permanent record of what I have written. My Home Page. My Recipes. My alternative Wikipedia. My Blogroll. Email me (John Ray) here. NOTE: The short comments that I have in the side column of the primary site for this blog are now given at the foot of this document.

Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?

****************************************************************************************



31 March, 2020

Coronavirus: Lockdown a blunt instrument with no guarantees

The Canberra Gallery has been caught in the grip of Labor’s cynicism, turning the Prime Minister’s daily press briefings nastier and more distracting than they should be.

The situation is fluid, and evidence-based economic modelling is in short supply. There is no precedent to follow, no off-the-peg solution and the antidote may be more than a year away. It is a time when wiser heads hedge their bets and prepare to alter their judgments as the facts alter, sometimes by the hour.

The noisier participants, however, have headed quickly in the opposite direction, seeking comfort in the certainty of fresh dogma. The word “lockdown” is their latest totem, just as “Gonski” and “Stop Adani” were not long ago. Once again they’ve responded to a complex challenge with a flight to simplicity, chaining themselves to a gate that long ago seemed to be coming off its hinges.

The lockdown non-solution is social distancing on steroids. We don’t yet know how good it is at separating people from stray coronavirus cells, and the evidence from locked-down nations like Italy, Spain and France looks worse by the day.

We do know that it separates people from jobs and businesses from customers to a far greater extent than intended. The interdependency of the global economy has passed beyond the point where it can be mapped. When you start pulling one thread out of the economy, the rest of it unravels.

On Friday, 17 days after 16 million people were locked down in northern Italy, the country recorded its highest number of deaths in a single day — 919.

Even allowing for the different circumstances in Australia, it is hard to imagine that an Italian-style nationwide lockdown heavily enforced would reduce the spread fast enough to stop our medical services being swamped.

This should come as no surprise to older practitioners in the field of public health.

The sharp reduction in the number of toddlers drowning in backyards in the 1980s and 1990s wasn’t achieved by banning domestic swimming pools.

Neither did we bring HIV/AIDS under control by placing advertisements in The Australian Women’s Weekly. It was controlled with a targeted, scary campaign, the memory of which causes many who watched in their teens and 20s to break out in a cold sweat even today.

Australia stopped toddlers drowning by enforcing the installation of fences and childproof gate locks combined with a strong public health message.

The approach that works, in other words, is to focus on saving the vulnerable, none of whom want to end up in a crowded intensive care unit facing a lonely death.

A poll on the weekend by Roy Morgan demonstrates that voluntary self-isolation is a feasible strategy, avoiding the need for the authoritarian approach some appear to prefer.

In the poll, 84 per cent of those over 65 years of age said they were already self-isolating. Pictures of a crowded beach, then, are an inadequate guide to public behaviour in this crisis.

Most people are relying on their own common sense. With clearer advice from public health officials and some assistance and community goodwill, we can ensure that most of those at risk sit out this pandemic in the comfort of their own homes.

Nobody knows if a full lockdown, the indiscriminate stopping of almost all human activity outside the home, will end the pandemic or how long these draconian measures will have to stay in place. We do know, however, that such measures will come at an enormous cost to employment, welfare and families.

We know, too, that some of the countries doing better in the face of the pandemic, such as Switzerland, Belgium and South Korea, have slowed the rate of infection and death to manageable levels while expressly rejecting this blunt-edged strategy. Circumstances vary so much between nations, however, that we are unlikely to find a universal policy solution until we get a vaccine.

In the meantime, Australia must devise its own solution, informed by the epidemiological data now emerging from the worst-hit countries, and tempered by our knowledge of what happens when sections of our interlocking economy shut down and the human misery that follows.

It seems the total lockdown strategy would damage the economy beyond all recognition if kept in place for very long. The price would be paid not just in jobs and wages, but in loneliness, mental illness, family violence and perhaps even suicide.

In a situation like this, the least-worse solution will always be the one that takes account of the welfare of people. We cannot yet say with any confidence when it will be safe for the elderly to leave their homes. We do know, however, that the view from the worst window of the worst home in Australia is better than the view of the ceiling seen through a ventilator.

SOURCE  






Coronavirus crisis: Food supplies in Australia

Australia is a major food-exporting country so there should be no overall shortage.  You might have to buyTasty cheese instead of Jarlsberg but you will survive

Authorities have moved to reassure Australians the country won't run short on food, despite the impact of the COVID-19 crisis on supply chains here and abroad.

Experts say food in Australia is in steady supply for now, but there are warnings that the longer-term supply chain will be affected as the COVID-19 lockdown continues.

Ports Australia says it will take all necessary measures to keep supply chains running while ensuring the protection of maritime workers.

"From ships arriving to unload at our ports, right through to trucks delivering much needed food and goods to the people stacking shelves at retail shops, an unbroken supply chain is critical for community confidence at this time," a spokesman said.

So far, no port staff member has been diagnosed with COVID-19 - a crucial concern for authorities in keeping trade flowing.

According to Dr Giovanni Di Lieto, from the Monash Business School, there will inevitably be an impact on products.

"I don't think essentials will be missing in Australia, even in the worst case scenario of a long-term lockdown, but having said that we need to consider that imports will be severely impacted," he told SBS News.

The impacts could ripple out and affect the supply of other critical goods like medical products, forcing authorities here to fire-up some neglected local industries.

"The silver lining will be that some new opportunities will arise in manufacturing industries that were once abandoned in Australia," Dr Di Lieto said.

As panic buying finally shows signs of abating in our supermarket aisles, Australians have been told they have nothing to fear when it comes to the supply of fresh produce.

But AusVeg communications manager Shaun Lindhe said he anticipates there could be short-term price hikes until supplies reach a level where they fully meet demand.

"We grow a vast majority of our fresh produce in many different growing regions so we are very fortunate that we are not at risk of running out of fresh produce," he said.

SOURCE  





CATHOLIC schools across Australia have committed to extending school fee relief for families facing financial hardship due to the COVID-19 pandemic

National Catholic Education executive director Jacinta Collins said Catholic schools have a long tradition of offering school fee relief and assistance to families facing financial difficulties.

“Catholic schools keep their fees as affordable as possible, but we know many families will be facing serious financial difficulties during this challenging time,” Ms Collins said.

“In each state and territory we are looking at ways to expand on the substantial fee relief arrangements already in place, to ease the financial strain on families, and to determine appropriate measures to best support the needs of families across the country.

“We saw recently through the bushfire season and ongoing drought, that some families are more affected than others, so we need to ensure that the right support and assistance goes to where it is most needed,” she said.

Queensland Catholic Education Commission’s executive director Dr Lee-Anne Perry urged families to come forward.

“Catholic schools are acutely aware of the hardships being experienced right across the community and are doing all they can to facilitate the ongoing education of all students,” Dr Perry said.

“I urge any family facing difficulty with tuition fees to contact their school to discuss their situation.”

Ms Collins said financial relief is immediately available to families impacted by the pandemic.

“If families are affected by job losses, business closures or other impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, we urge them to speak to their school as quickly as possible, to get immediate relief and determine the level of assistance needed ,” she said.

“We appreciate how difficult it is for parents to come forward with financial concerns, but our schools will ensure each case is handled with care and discretion.

“We understand that many families are already under great pressure and strain, and we do not want them to be further burdened by school fee payments.”

In South Australia, families in Catholic diocesan schools who have lost significant income due to COVID-19 will receive a total school fee remission effective immediately, for an initial period of three months.

Catholic Education South Australia director Dr Neil McGoran said for the state’s regional and rural communities, the COVID-19 pandemic comes amidst a range of other challenges such as bushfires, drought, loss of key industries and increasing unemployment.

“Amongst all the worries that we have at this time – worrying about the payment of school fees should not be one of those things,” Dr McGoran said.

“All Catholic schools in SA are providing fee remissions to families financially impacted by COVID-19 and we will continue to monitor and respond to the impact on our families and our schools.”

Catholic Schools New South Wales chief executive officer Dallas McInerney said it was critical for families in the state’s nearly 600 schools to have certainty.

“Now, more than ever, our families need certainty and support,” Mr McInerney said.

“Catholic Schools NSW is actively considering how best to financially support our families at this time.”

“We are firmly of the view that no child should miss out on a Catholic education because of financial stress; this includes families seeking enrolment for their children for the 2021 school year.”

Helping education: “All Catholic schools in SA are providing fee remissions to families financially impacted by COVID-19 and we will continue to monitor and respond to the impact on our families and our schools.” Photo: Flickr.
In Western Australia, Catholic schools families on a health care card will receive automatic fee concessions, and immediate support would also be available for those who do not qualify for a health care card.

“The health care card discount applies to all year levels from Kindergarten to Year 12, and additional financial considerations are also available depending on each family’s circumstance,” said Catholic Education Western Australia executive director Dr Debra Sayce.

“For parents who do not qualify for the health care card discount, but who are experiencing financial difficulties, arrangements can be made to provide immediate support to assist with tuition costs.”

Ms Collins said Catholic schools would offer a blend of onsite and remote learning arrangements next term.

“Subject to government advice, we anticipate that, by Term 2, Catholic schools will be offering a combination of onsite schooling for the children of essential service workers and remote learning for students at home.”

Nationally, Catholic schools educate more than 764,000 students – or one in five Australian students – in 1,746 schools, the vast majority of which are low-fee schools.

SOURCE  







Coronavirus: Qatar Airways increases flights to Australia

Qatar Airways is bucking the global air travel shutdown by increasing flights to Australia despite the coronavirus showing no sign of ending.

The Middle Eastern airline announced it has added 28 additional flights to Australia, equivalent to 48,000 additional seats, and launched its first route between Doha and Brisbane.

The carrier is now operating three flights a day from Doha to Sydney, two into Melbourne, two into Perth and one daily flight into Brisbane. Its Adelaide and Canberra routes remain suspended.

Qatar Airways chief executive Akbar Al Baker said the airline was continuing to serve Australians aiming to return home from overseas. "We know there are many people who want to be with their families and loved ones during this difficult time," he said. "We are thankful to the Australian Government, airports and staff for their support in helping us to add additional flights to get people home, and in particular, to bring flights to Brisbane.

Qatar said from March 1 to March 22, it flew 13,458 Australians home. Last week, the airline said it had flown more than 100,000 passengers, with 72 per cent of those flying on March 24 returning to their country of origin.

The Federal Government banned all international visitors from entering the country and all Australian citizens arriving must go into quarantine.

Qantas and Virgin Australia have suspended all international flights and slashed domestic capacity amid the pandemic.

SOURCE  




 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





30 March, 2020

Australia's coronavirus response is reasonable

While it is far too soon to get excited and there is still a long way to go, in the three days to Friday the increase in the number of new cases seemed to have slowed – although community transmission is still a major concern.

Infectious diseases physician and microbiologist Peter Collignon, a professor at the ANU Medical School, observed on Friday night: “Still early but epidemic curve looks like it’s falling. Hopefully that fall will continue and what we are doing now will cause it to keep on falling.”

Unfortunately the rates ticked back up again on Saturday but this is not a disaster as long as the increase can be kept in check and doesn’t explode exponentially as it did in the early days and weeks. This is known as flattening the curve and flattening the curve has been the government’s strategy all along.

University of Melbourne professor of epidemiology Tony Blakely has been explaining this process very clearly for days now – that the whole point is to slow the spread of the virus to manageable levels, not stop it altogether. That requires patience and calm, two qualities sorely lacking in the social media age.

“You don't go in too hard because you actually want the infection rate to pick up a bit and then hold,” he told the ABC.

Or as he explained it to the far funkier readers of news.com.au: “If we are going to ‘flatten the curve’ then we need to chill a bit.”

That’s a pretty simple message on the biggest news site in Australia from one of the top experts in the country. And yet panic merchants are still squealing that we need to shut everything down now because it’s trending on Twitter.

You also have to wonder how many of those calling for total and immediate nationwide lockdowns are spending their own in leafy suburban homes or stately Victorian terraces instead of sharehouses and studio apartments. You have to wonder if it’s their jobs that will be instantly terminated.

Because it’s easy to wish for a recession when you’re rich enough to ride it out. It’s not so easy when you’re a waiter who’s been wiped out or an aircraft engineer now stacking shelves at Woollies.

Of course everyone has the right to voice their opinion – and some of the contrarian views come from very smart minds.

But for others so sure that everything we’re doing is wrong here are two simple questions they might wish to ask themselves to bring the issue into sharp relief:

1. Am I as smart as Australia’s Chief Medical Officer?

2. Am I going to lose my job?

The hard truth is we are facing both a health crisis and an economic one. We have to do whatever it takes to stop the coronavirus from crashing our hospital system but we also have to do whatever it takes to stop it from crashing our economic system, because if the economy crashes, society crashes.

The cruellest part is that the restrictive approach needed to save our hospitals is the opposite of the expansive approach needed to save our economy. This is the great corona paradox.

We are balancing thousands of lives against hundreds of thousands of livelihoods and the threat of even further loss of life in the future as poverty and unemployment cuts people down. Every decision we take has to be measured against the impact it will have not just across society today but in the months and years ahead – and all of this with infinite uncertainty as to what that impact will be. It is an all but impossible needle to thread.

And so for my two cents, I reckon having graduated restrictions that can be escalated or eased as the situation requires – as opposed to the sledgehammer of universal lockdowns based on no medical evidence – seems like a pretty sensible way to go. And most of the people in charge seem to think that too because that’s exactly what we’re doing.

And if anyone thinks they have a better idea to stop a global pandemic while solving the most crippling economic crisis since the Great Depression then perhaps they should put it in an email.

SOURCE  






Rights groups in Australia alarmed at new coronavirus police powers

Rights groups have voiced concern about Australia's rollout of COVID-19 restrictions and how these are being policed.

This week, a number of states announced they were issuing on-the-spot fines for individuals and businesses flouting new COVID-19 rules.

Fines will be issued for not quarantining for 14 days after returning from overseas, attending or organising mass gatherings, and disobeying other government directions such as wedding and funeral sizes.

Depending on the state, individuals face $1,000-$13,345 fines and businesses can be fined up to $66,672.50.

While agreeing the crisis necessitates a strong government response to protect the community, rights groups said these heavy fines should be a "very last resort".

"Police should be trying to promote understanding of the new regulations and new restrictions and doing everything they can to get voluntary compliance," spokesperson for the NSW Council for Civil Liberties Stephen Blanks told SBS News.

"It shouldn't be a revenue-raising exercise for the government," Mr Blanks said.

"And it's so important that when restrictions are imposed, that proper notice is given to a community, that restrictions are clearly available on government websites. So people can see what it is that they are allowed and not allowed to do."

But he said in this instance, officials "have been struggling to achieve clarity". "This confusion makes it hard for members of the public to know what they are allowed to do," he said.

The Federal Government also announced the army has been brought in to make sure returned travellers isolate for 14 days.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison stressed on Friday that defence personnel would not have the power to issue fines, but would assist state and territory authorities.

Mr Blanks said the military's presence could add to the tension. "It's not a situation where you want to see members of the army on the streets with weapons."

The Human Rights Law Centre said civil liberties should not be forgotten in a crisis.

"As governments across Australia adopt emergency powers to lead us out of this crisis it is important that any response is transparent and proportionate," a spokesperson told SBS News in a statement.

"Any emergency powers or legislation passed in this time of crisis must be clearly expressed, narrowly confined to deal with the immediate public health issues, time limited, and independently reviewed on a continuing basis.

"This crisis must not be seen as an opportunity to advance the infringement of our democratic freedoms. We cannot allow a situation in which Australians emerge from this over-policed and under state surveillance with their democratic rights curtailed."

Associate professor of law at Flinders University Marinella Marmo researches human rights issues. With family members in virus-hit Italy, she is well-aware of how important a government response is to COVID-19. "Obviously, I am anxious but I also think that human rights are here to stay and we need to fight for them every single day," she said.

"Emergency measures [are] introduced quickly and this does not allow for a healthy debate on if and how they infringe civil liberties. Unfortunately, in the eye of the storm we lose track of these matters, but we need to remain vigilant.

"We now know that most emergency measures quickly introduced in the past by different governments around the world have not been withdrawn or completely withdrawn, see terrorist measures, for example.

"Any kind of COVID-19 emergency measure needs to be considered in light of ethical standards and human rights. And if now is not the time, as dismissively we may be told, then soon after the emergency is over."

In laying out the new measures, authorities have stressed that enforcing the rules will save lives.

On Saturday, Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said giving police the new powers was very important as cases continue to rise in the state. "Everyone's got to take this seriously," he said.

Victorian Police Minister Lisa Neville said "we sincerely hope that Victoria Police does not have to issue one of these fines, and people do the right thing".

While NSW Police Minister David Elliott told reporters on Saturday that "everything we have done over the course of the last couple of weeks has been to save lives". "Whether it be closing Bondi Beach, whether it be closing our pubs, these are there to stop people from transmitting disease.

"These rules and regulations are not there to punish anybody. They are not there to issue intermittent justice. They are there to protect lives, they are there to save lives."

SOURCE  






Australian Reporter Rita Panahi Takes the WHO, Chinese Regime to Task Over Coronavirus Lies

Australian reporter Rita Panahi slammed China's Communist Regime and the World Health Organization for their failures to prevent the spread of the Wuhan coronavirus outbreak. China was so worried about making sure they weren't blamed for the virus that they did everything in their power to keep whistleblowers quiet. Instead of sounding the alarm about the Wuhan coronavirus, the WHO parroted the regime's talking points, saying the virus wasn't transmitted through person-to-person contact. The organization also failed to recommend travel bans to China.

"I want to talk about China's culpability and conduct throughout the coronavirus crisis that began in Wuhan wet market. The Chinese Communist regime not only lied, destroyed evidence and allowed the virus to spread, but it arrested doctors who, back in December, tried to warn the world about what was happening in Wuhan," she explained. "Some of the whistleblowers arrested and accused of fabricating, disseminating, and spreading rumors have since died. Other domestic critics, from a property tycoon to video bloggers have vanished."

"China is not a regime that tolerates dissent," Panahi explained. "China's initial cover-up included destroying lab samples that established, in December, the cause of unexplained viral infections in the Hubei province. How many lives would have been saved if China had listened to experts instead of silencing them?"

A study carried out by the University of South Hampton showed that China could have prevented 95 percent of Wuhan coronavirus infections "if it would have implemented tough measures just three weeks earlier." Instead of being proactive, the regime waited another month before taking action.

"What's just as shocking is the World Health Organization's complicity in this global pandemic," she said. "From the start, the WHO has unequivocally praised China's response and pushed its absurd narratives while ignoring the regime's dishonesty and recklessness."

Panahi reminded viewers that back in January, the WHO shared a tweet citing Chinese health official's who claimed there was no evidence the virus transmitted through human-to-human contact.

"[The WHO] refused to declare a pandemic until March 11th. And, as late as February, it was parroting China in criticizing travel restrictions," she said. "Don't forget that when Scott Morrison and Donald Trump implemented travel bans against China in late January, they did so against WHO's advice."

Both China and the WHO deserve to be held accountable for this pandemic. They could have kept the Wuhan coronavirus from spreading around the world had they admitted the virus began in China and was being transmitted through human-to-human contact. Instead of giving other countries the heads up so they could prepare or make decisions to protect their citizens, China was radio silent and they punished those who spoke out.

Instead of calling it the World Health Organization, we should call it the Chinese Health Organization. At the end of the day, the organization is only concerned about how the Chinese regime looks to the rest of the world.

SOURCE  






Australian schools: Digital equity needed for success

For millions of young Australians, it’s home schooling from now on. As well as getting their heads around months of staying inside – often in small apartments with no easy access to big, green spaces – families urgently need to work out how to carry on with learning.

The Prime Minister and other leaders rightly point to the risks facing the educational progress of young Australians as the nation locks down. Given the data showing that many students are already up to three years behind their international peers in reading, mathematics and science, they cannot afford to miss a beat as they watch a very strange school year unfold.

The first of Australia’s two national goals for schooling refers to ‘excellence and equity’.  Excellence in education is already the subject of much debate, but the Covid-19 emergency will exacerbate equity issues, with no guarantee that all young learners can simply switch to high-quality online learning.

And school closures are happening at the same time as most businesses and organisations ramp up their technological capability to keep things going. This is potentially the greatest test of the $50+ billion national broadband network. Our average speeds have improved, but other countries are doing better, and this was probably a major factor for Japan and Hong Kong in their early decision to close all schools.

Ideally, for at least some part of each day, Australian students should be able to see and hear their teachers as well as their classmates. Schools will want to keep students connected and maintain a sense of belonging, otherwise motivation and achievement will go out the window.

But some schools are advising parents that live streaming of lessons cannot occur because of the variation in household internet services and devices.

Every child will need the right device and the necessary software. As in some universities, this might mean offering financial support to students who would otherwise depend on school computers, who cannot afford internet connection or who have a disability.

Enabling equitable access to smart digital technology would be an encouraging sign of the effectiveness of state and territory policies and funding strategies

Australia’s education ministers own Education Services Australia, a national company that claims a “unique combination of education and technology expertise to create and deliver solutions that can be used to improve student outcomes and enhance performance across all education sectors.” ESA built the Australian Curriculum website, among many other projects.

Never has there been a better time for that organisation to show what it can do.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




29 March 2020

Voting in Queensland. What are the challenges of holding elections in the midst of a coronavirus pandemic?

I observed early voting on Friday and saw long well-spaced queues being supervised by a cheerful electoral officer. 

On Saturday morning, on the main day to vote, one might have expected bigger queues but that is not what I encountered.  Where it was very busy last time, there were no queues at all

There were none of the usual leaflets handed out but there was plenty of signage so that was no problem.  That would certainly have reduced the litter problem

I got my hands sprayed with sanitizer and I used the pencil supplied to mark my ballot paper.

The big miss is that there were no charity stalls cooking sausages.  Election sausages are an appreciated part of Australian elections and, being something of a sausage freak, I certainly missed them.



There are as yet no figures on the turnout to vote but despite compulsory voting, turnout at municipal elections is always well down. From what I saw, it would have been really down in this election.  A lot of people probably saw coronavirus restrictions as a good excuse to skip voting this time.


Countries around the globe have postponed elections due to the coronavirus pandemic but in Queensland, top officials say you are more at risk in the supermarket aisle than the polling booth.

The State Government is pushing ahead with Saturday's planned local government elections and two state by-elections on the advice of its chief health officer.

Authorities said measures like physical distancing, plus a record number of pre-poll and postal votes, meant the risk was low compared to other day-to-day activities like grocery shopping.

The Electoral Commissioner flagged State Emergency Service (SES) volunteers could even be called upon to help maintain physical distancing at the booths during "these extraordinary times".

But the move to go ahead with the elections has baffled some doctors and scientists in the community who believe it is a gathering "we shouldn't have" and is inconsistent with other messages to stay home.

Hygiene concerns have also seen three Brisbane Catholic schools decide to pull out as polling booth venues.

There are around 3.3 million eligible voters across Queensland.

As of 6:30pm Thursday, more than 1 million people had cast their vote early, on top of another 570,000 who registered for a postal vote.

According to Queensland's chief health officer Jeannette Young, there is no risk in going to vote tomorrow with the safety measures in place.

The Electoral Commission Queensland (ECQ) is telling people to bring their own pen or pencil and stand 1.5 metres from others, while how-to-vote cards or election material won't be handed out.

Its website said hand sanitiser would be provided "where available" for voters and polling officials, and there would be extra cleaning to ensure surfaces were regularly disinfected.

SOURCE  






Coronavirus: Coles, Woolworths shelves fuller as customers reduce stockpiling

When I was in my local Woolworhs yesterday morning there was plenty of toilet paper on display and nobody hovering around

Panic buying is stripping the shelves of supermarkets and pharmacies with new drastic measures brought in to meet demands.

It would be a stretch to suggest supermarket shelves are back to normal levels, but the big players have said stock is flowing in plugging some of the gaps seen in the last few weeks following an outbreak of hoarding.

Woolworths chief executive officer Brad Banducci told ABC Radio today that, “I’d never thought I’d see the day where I thanked people for not buying things from us.”

Customers continued to purchase at “elevated levels” but the pandemic stocking up was going down which should lead to a dramatic improvement in store.

The Woolies boss said he was also hopeful online delivery, which has seen a surge in demand but has faced huge delays, should run more smoothly from next week.

Coles has told news.com.au that after “unprecedented busy times” there was more food on display.

Nonetheless, it could still be a while before stores are overflowing with toilet roll.

The stripping of some supermarket aisles has been one of the most notable reactions in Australia to the coronavirus pandemic.

The scenes were repeated in the US, Hong Kong and UK but in other countries, including the COVID-19 epicentre of Italy, the shelves have remained stocked.

Woolworths, IGA, Coles and Aldi have been forced to put strict buying limits on products across the store. First toilet paper and hand sanitiser, then pasta and rice and now almost everything in store bar fresh food, meat and drinks.

At one-point Woolworths said it was selling a week’s worth of toilet paper each day.

Social media posts have done the rounds showing Lindt bunnies and Easter eggs being move into the toilet roll aisle to fill the awkward gap. Easter confectionary is in abundance and you can gobble down as much as you want.

But recently, supermarket shelves have slowly begun to look a bit fuller.

Some IGA stores now feature pallets of pasta and tomato sauce in the middle of the store alongside massive bags of rice and flour.

The milk cabinet is stocked and eggs cartons are back in some sizes. Loaves of bread take up more space on the shelves, although often not all brands are in stock.

The supermarkets have consistently said there is no issue with supply and Australia produces three times the food it needs. The issue has been with customers buying far more than they need.

Doing the rounds on ABC TV and radio today, Woolies’ Mr Banducci said there was “plenty coming” into supermarkets

“Hopefully all of our customers are seeing every time they go into store, there is more there,” he said.

As much as ploughing more stock through the network was helping, it was also down to customers “moderating their demand” he said.

“I never thought I’d see the day where I thanked people for not buying things from us, but we do thank them so there’s enough to go around.”

A Coles spokeswoman told news.com.au that its stores were in better shape as well.

“Pleasingly, after unprecedented busy times, our stores now have more stock on display for customers and there are signs that the demand is beginning to slow.”

Coles said busier shelves was due to customers pulling back from over-purchasing as well as increased numbers of staff, suppliers pumping out more products, purchase limits, reducing opening hours and the relaxation of truck curfews on local streets.

SOURCE  







Coronavirus: It’s time for us to decide if the cure is worse than the disease

Janet Albrechtsen

In Letters to a Young Contrarian, Christopher Hitchens writes that the essence of the independent mind lies not in what it thinks but in how it thinks. It is ­intellectual curiosity that matters most. And right now we need more of this key ingredient. A healthy democracy does not die in a pandemic.

Let’s be clear. No one has the wisdom of Solomon or the prophetic powers of Apollo. But finally, this past week, many more people are publicly asking if the cure is worse than the disease. We need more of this intellectual curiosity instead of joining the cheer squad for the Morrison government or the more hysterical Canberra press bubble.

It means probing government decisions, checking herd mentalities, raising differences between expert advice, and understanding that bureaucrats advising governments about the current economic responses to COVID-19 never lose their jobs in a crisis. We should not accept medical advice as the sole source of truth either. Not only is it both contestable and contested, but doctors have a laser-like focus on medical issues and have little or no knowledge of, and sometimes not much interest in, the social, economic or cultural conse­quences of their advice.

A few weeks ago, Guardian Australia political editor Katharine Murphy wondered whether dealing with COVID-19 might be the revenge of the experts. Beware of those who assert that “experts” equal a consensus, or accepted wisdom, or settled orthodoxy. Remember Brexit? These phrases are often used by people who pretend to love a rollicking debate — but only when it suits them. On some matters, they claim consensus to shut people up.

As American intellectual Walter Lippmann once said: “Where all think alike, no one thinks very much.” And happily, not all people think alike. Consider the comments this week from newly appointed Deputy Chief Medical Officer Nick Coatsworth, an infectious diseases specialist at Canberra Hospital. In an interview on ABC radio on Thursday, Coatsworth said the effectiveness of imposing harsher rules around ­social isolation to deal with COVID-19 is “a contested point”.

Coatsworth also challenged the ABC’s message that the broadcaster’s medical reporter, Norman Swan, is the go-to guy on COVID-19. “I disagree with Norman when he thinks that this is going to be over in weeks if we go for harder and faster lockdowns,” Coatsworth said. “I don’t think they’ve thought through the impact on Australia and Australians of doing that.”

It is no bad thing to push back. John Ioannidis, a professor of medicine in epidemiology and co-director of Stanford’s Meta-­Research Innovation Centre in the US, questions the official death rate of 3.4 per cent put out by the World Health Organisation.

No one can accurately tally up unrecorded cases of COVID-19 and that single fact renders the modelling inaccurate. If the true fatality rate is closer to 1 per cent or even lower, Ioannidis says, then “locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be ­totally irrational”.

Veteran left-liberal commentator Thomas Friedman also has broken from the pack about this pandemic. Writing in The New York Times this week, Friedman is asking whether the cure is worse than the disease. Friedman spoke with David Katz, founding director of Yale University’s Yale-­Griffin Prevention Research Centre in the US, who questions the current “horizontal interdiction” — basically, shutting down commerce and limiting movement by large parts of the population.

Katz posits a more surgically targeted “vertical interdiction” strategy to sequester and protect the more vulnerable after a short, sharp period of lockdown of two weeks, rather than a longer, unsustainable and economically ruinous approach that will deliver its own devastating health costs.

Katz suggests that “the rejuvenating effect on spirits, and the economy, of knowing where there’s light at the end of this tunnel would be hard to overstate”.

“Risk will not be zero,” he told Friedman, “but the risk of some bad outcome for any of us on any given day is never zero.’’

Again, none of us has the perfect set of answers. And no leader should be demonised for changing tack. US President Donald Trump wants to reopen the US economy by Easter. It may not happen, but Trump offers hope instead of the dark, uncertain and confusing ­tunnels many of us face in other countries.

It was breathtaking to hear Anthony Albanese claim this week that the Morrison government needed to avoid a tension “between dealing with the health issues and dealing with the economic issues”. Is he kidding?

Was this brazen politics or reckless stupidity? There are devastating social costs arising directly from decisions to shut down businesses and shunt away people.

If Albanese cannot grapple with that, then he has no rightful claim to be the alternative prime minister.

The tensions are immense. Poverty kills people, too. Losing your job through no fault of your own is soul-destroying. Facing extended unemployment can wreck the prospects and futures of millions of people. People and families need to know how they will pay their bills and buy food.

Government Services Minister Stuart Robert assured me on ­Sunday evening that the myGov bureaucracy was primed for huge numbers of newly unemployed Australians desperately seeking help on Monday. It had already been road-tested by the bushfire crisis, he said.

This is not a time for cockiness. The system crashed the next day under the weight of demand. I had passed on the minister’s assur­ances to try to allay the concerns of hardworking decent people who lost their jobs on Sunday night.

Can Robert imagine what it is like to stand in a long line on a pavement during a pandemic to ask for money because a job has been taken from you overnight by a decision made by government?

The next day, Robert tried to wash the egg off his face by claiming there had been a cyber hack ­attack. It wasn’t true.

Robert still has his job.

We are tearing at the social fabric of communities, shutting down footy and pubs and church ser­vices. GPs tell me of their concerns about the devastating mental health consequences of enforced social dislocation. Are we potentially creating a powder keg that we will one day rue?

Being forced into lockdown in dysfunctional and even dangerous households doesn’t bear thinking about. But we must, surely, consider all these tensions as part of every single decision made to deal with COVID-19.

A woman who lives on South Australia’s Yorke Peninsula, 165km from Adelaide, was due to have a hysterectomy in Adelaide on Thursday. On Wednesday morning, she was told all elective surgeries were cancelled, effective immediately because of government directives. Early Wednesday afternoon, she was told her surgery would go ahead after a change to the rules. Later that day, she was told it was cancelled again. Her distress is immense.

At another Adelaide hospital, a nurse went to work on Monday, only to be told to stay home the next day because of new self-­isolation rules that applied to her after a trip to Sydney on the weekend. On Tuesday, she was asked to come to work after all. She was told that the rules about self-isolation applied only to people arriving after Tuesday 11am.

This confusion is across industries, across the country.

To be sure, leaders are doing their best in the most frightful circumstances. As the Prime Minister spoke to the nation on Tuesday evening following a meeting of the national cabinet, who could imagine telling the country that a ­funeral must have no more than 10 mourners, or that a big birthday party for a two-year old cannot go ahead in these times?

It is unthinkable. But that does not mean we must be unthinking.

SOURCE  






Coronavirus: Petulant pointscorers show their true colours in a crisis

Mainstream Australians are handling this coronavirus crisis far better than members of the political/media class who display their usual petulance, partisanship and ego-driven posturing — characteristics that apparently are immune even to the challenge of a deadly pandemic.

Despite lives being at risk and millions of compatriots facing dire economic prospects (let alone ­global ramifications that don’t bear thinking about), some politicians and journalists are more ­intent on game-playing than team-playing. Thankfully, the politicians who shoulder the burden of power — Scott Morrison, his senior ministers, and the state and territory leaders — are wearing their heavy responsibility well and acting accordingly, so far.

Along with Morrison, the Labor premiers — Daniel Andrews in Victoria and Annastacia Palaszczuk in Queensland — have stood out. But clearly all in the national cabinet are doing their bit.

The responses of these leaders cannot be perfect, simply by dint of the complexities they face; and for the same reasons, they won’t ­always agree. But the dedication, co-operation and steadfastness of the territory, state and federal leaders is encouraging.

Despite some exceptions — fruit-loops rumbling over toilet paper or people travelling while under a coronavirus cloud — most of our fellow citizens have been phlegmatic and organised. The fuss over Bondi Beach last Saturday came just a day after ­social distancing rules were toughened and looked like a final hot-weather fling before descent into a long, lonely winter. At shops, schools and workplaces, most people have calmly been preparing for isolation, helping out friends and sharing concerns. This sober behaviour in testing times stands in stark ­contrast to the attention-seeking and scaremongering among the media/political class.

Journalists whose job it is to clearly communicate news and information have been more intent on critiquing the government’s communications, second-guessing expert advice, nitpicking complex responses, overlooking per­sonal responsibility and raising fears. It is almost beyond belief that adults living through a worldwide dilemma as severe as this would spend more time sharing their top-of-mind views of government ­policy and mocking insignificant communications glitches or policy adjustments than attempting to explain public responsibilities and how to exercise them.

Their employers must wear some of the blame for not demanding better. Many of these journalists and commentators have been humiliated over their political predictions in recent years; they used the bushfires to try to exact revenge on Morrison and now seem to think it might be clever to try to pin the conse­quences of this crisis on his actions.

Just like the former firefighters who linked their climate alarmist points to the likelihood of summer bushfires at the height of a drought, these critics are on a safe bet because we all know the trauma will get worse and they will attempt to claim vindication.

People who said he went too far sending Australians evacuated from Wuhan to Christmas Island for quarantine now demand he shuts the country down harder and faster (it seems easier to call for an economic bloodbath when you have a permanent public sector salary or have never hired or fired anyone in your life).

When it comes to political consequences, these people are likely to be wrong again because the reason they have been so erroneous on border and climate policies, and on every election from Morrison’s to Donald Trump’s to Brexit, is because they underestimate the intelligence of the public. And they are doing that again.

But politics isn’t what matters. The scale of the human cost, medically and economically, dwarfs any of that, and the danger is that the political/media class will help to foster confusion and alarm.

At a time of unprecedented strains on our society, they could help foment unrest and division just when we need to be committed to a shared strategy for the common good.

Surely it is only hysterical journalists and partisan politicians who could get excited that a 30-minute time limit on haircuts was overturned because it was impractical; given what else was happening, most people would have just nodded their heads and moved on. Likewise hysteria about people lining up on arrival at Sydney airport — they had been crammed on planes for many hours, eating and sleeping cheek by jowl, and are required to go into 14 days of full isolation — but journalists went into overdrive, dress­­ing it up as a scandalous oversight. Perhaps the real stuff-up of the Ruby Princess is where their attention should have been focused, but that would have demanded concentration on one episode for more than 24 hours. We have often seen shrill media behaviour over much less weighty matters and wondered how they would handle a real crisis — now we know.

Anthony Albanese showed commendable and sensible bipartisanship early in the week when parliament sat, helping to pass the economic rescue package. But it was always going to be hard for Labor to resist joining the puerile criticism and putting itself in a position to benefit from future trauma — by Wednesday it had given in to that temptation.

Just walking the streets or driving around our cities now, we see it has changed in ways we thought we would never see. And it will be getting worse in coming weeks and months; we are about to be ­seriously tested. Friends, family and strangers out of work, broke and despondent; friends and relatives sick and worried; not being with the ones we love; not knowing what comes next. In these circumstances, people who have a voice in the public domain need to use it well; constructively for the common good.

No government should be free from scrutiny but there are ways to point out mistakes or make suggestions that are more useful than damaging. If Albanese watches Andrews and Palaszczuk, he will see how he can be constructive and grow in stature through this crisis, rather than be diminished.

In the mainstream, most of us are dramatically changing our lives with great trepidation but a minimum of fuss. Stocked up on essentials, households are switching to working from home, with children learning there too, while tens of thousands of others already are tossed out of work and methodically go through the frustrating process of applying for welfare.

This shouldn’t surprise us; our national character continues to evolve, but at its heart is the same spirit that has helped us through wars, bushfires, floods, droughts and recessions in the past. There are many reasons this COVID-19 pandemic will be more testing, but there are also reasons for medium-term optimism.

One reason this crisis is more challenging is because some of the attributes that have helped us weather earlier crises are weaknesses now. Our “she’ll be right” calmness, our communal spirit and our egalitarian gregariousness conflicts with the need to dramatically change our ways and keep our social distance.

Our habits and responses are not as compliant as those in other cultures or systems. The self-­reliance and autonomy that stood us in good stead during previous disasters can hinder our acceptance of orchestrated responses now. Our healthy scepticism towards authority needs to be shelved as we all learn to follow the rules. But we are doing it, and we will get there. Indeed, it strikes me that much of the public has been ahead of the government from the outset.

The hoarding of groceries began long before governments were talking about lockdowns. People had seen what happened in China and realised we could face periods of isolation, so they began preparing. This was all eminently ­rational, even if the focus on toilet paper, the selfishness of some hauls and the behaviour in some episodes was unedifying. Most people have made sure their pantries are full and their prescriptions are filled, and they have done it in an orderly manner, often ensuring that friends and family are taken care of too.

People discussing options, sharing items and ideas, and bunkering down for what they know will be an extremely tough period: this doesn’t generate media ­reports but it happens to be the ­reality around us. This is the history we need to forge — a stoic and innovative ­nation withstanding a crisis for the ages thanks to co-operative federal leadership and a cohesive ­society.

Let’s just hope it isn’t undermined by the delinquency of our political/media class.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





27 March 2020

Landlords won't be able to evict tenants struggling to pay rent due to COVID-19

So who is going to pay the landlords' bills?

Australian landlords won't be allowed to evict tenants as part of a rental rescue package aimed at protecting those struggling throughout the coronavirus crisis.

State governments are reportedly working on the interventions to protect the eight million people in rental homes.

The federal government is also reportedly considering income tax cuts for landlords who reduce the rental amount that tenants must pay.

The Australian Financial Review cited sources on Thursday as saying state and federal treasurers were discussing the idea as a way of providing relief for renters struggling financially amid the coronavirus outbreak.

The AFR reported that under the option property investors would need to waive or reduce rents and in turn pay less income tax.

A similar plan will likely be introduced to protect small business owners who cannot pay their rent due to forced closures under social distancing restrictions.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison discussed the measures in a national cabinet meeting with state and territory leaders on Wednesday night.

Tenants would need to prove they were suffering hardship as a direct result of the coronavirus crisis in order to avoid being evicted.

Hundreds of thousands of hardworking Australians have been left jobless as a result of Mr Morrison's tough stance on flattening the curve of the virus

On Wednesday alone, some 280,000 people indicated they would need financial assistance from Centrelink.

Pubs, bars, restaurants, cinemas and gyms earlier in the week before adding beauticians and food courts to the closures from Wednesday.

Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews said he understood the need to protect tenants during this difficult time - but didn't want to see landlords who still have to pay their mortgages suffer as a result.

SOURCE  






Qld.: Pupil free week from Monday so teachers can prepare for remote learning

QUEENSLAND will close schools from next week to all but the children of essential workers.

Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk announced schools would move to pupil-free days from next week, although anyone with a job would still be able to send their children to school.

“Next week Queensland schools will move to student free days ... schools will remain open to allow children of essential workers and vulnerable children to remain at school,” Ms Palaszczuk said.

The ruling applies to all schools, not just state schools.

It comes as independent schools had already moved online, with some bringing forward the end of term to offer alternative learning from home next week.

“Next week will give independent school staff valuable time to test and refine their alternative learning from home arrangements and undertake important preparations for what shape school education could take from Term 2. Independent School Queensland executive director David Robertson said.

He commended school principals and the dedication of all school staff in “working closely with their communities” and doing everything in their power to safeguard student and staff health and wellbeing and maintain learning.

The pupil-free days will allow teachers to remain at work and prepare future learning materials, Ms Palaszczuk said.

Education Minister Grace Grace said Queensland did have to “prepare for what the potential future may be”.

“So from Monday the 30th of March, we will be moving to student free days, but we do stress that schools will remain open for children of essential workers, that is those who are required in the workplace,” she said.

“It is vital we remain open for these workers because we don’t want to put pressure on the economy.”

“Schools are open for essential workers and workers required in the workplace ... and obviously vulnerable children will be catered for as well,” Ms Grace said.

“We are planning for all kind of scenarios... and that’s why next week is important for teachers to be given the time to plan the learning materials for what may be needed.”

Kindies will follow suit with pupil-free days next week so that teachers can prepare remote learning and activities for children as well.

Long daycare centres will be open but Education Minister Grace Grace asked parents to adhere to strict isolation requirements and that only the essential workers and workers required in their workplaces use daycare centres.

“Teachers will move to developing remote learning for students and all those learning materials for what may lie ahead,” Ms Grace said.

The Palaszczuk Government has until now maintained a national line that schools were safe to attend, although had told parents they may choose to keep their children at home this week if they were available to care for them there.

The Premier said the health advice that schools were safe had not changed.

“Let me give this very clear message to parents who will have their children at home next week: They should be learning from home, they should not be out in the shopping centres,” she said.

And she said they should not be visiting any grandparents with risk-factors for coronavirus.

When asked how long the measures would be in place and if they would continue after the term break, the Premier said they were preparing for “every scenario”.

Queensland chief health officer Dr Jeannette Young said she was happy with the decision.

“By reducing the numbers of children at school, we can make sure our older and vulnerable teachers aren’t in classrooms and increase the amount of social distancing in our schools, so it’s the perfect solution,” she said.

The Queensland Teachers’ Union also welcomed the decision for students to be given pupil-free days and to move Queensland schools from “business as usual”.

“Teachers will be engaged in preparation and planning in their schools around remote and flexible delivery into the future should schools close as a consequence of the national response to the pandemic,” QTU president Kevin Bates said.

“Schools will continue to provide supervision for children of essential services workers and vulnerable children including those in out of home care, students with disabilities who do not have medical complications and children for whom no other appropriate care arrangements are available - for example if both parents are working and their child could be at school and supervised.”

Health Minister Steven Miles said the state could have lost up to 30 per cent of its health staff if schools had completely closed. “It’s incredibly important that our health staff continue to be able to send their children to school,” he said.

“Modelling by our hospitals suggested if they had been unable to do that it would have potentially impacted on 30 per cent of our health workforce.

“We are already working on the basis that a proportion of our health workforce will get sick and that we will need to cover them.”

“We can also cover those that don’t have alternative arrangements for their children’s learning so it’s incredibly welcomed by our hospitals and our health staff that they will be able to continue to access schools.”

Dr Miles urged parents considering asking grandparents to look after children to consider the health of the elderly and those most vulnerable to the virus.

The pupil-free days ruling comes after the Department of Education issued all Queensland schools with two-weeks worth of school work that can be delivered online and via paper copy.

Two-week units of school work for Prep to Year 10 was made available to all Queensland schools on March 17, with subsequent rollouts of content.

Packs of school work are already available to parents and students with various activities in line with the national curriculum for each year level and answers available for parents to help them with their child’s learning.

SOURCE  






Qantas A380 makes historic direct flight from Australia to London

Qantas' A380 services to London usually fly via Singapore.
(CNN) — You might think the time for record-breaking flights is over, with airlines and airports across the world grinding to a halt due to the coronavirus pandemic.

But by a strange twist of fate, Qantas will -- for a matter of days -- be running the first-ever A380 passenger flight between Australia and London.

So how did this come about?

Qantas will be suspending all its international flights by the end of March, with its flagship QF1 "Kangaroo Route" from Sydney to London via Singapore making its last departure from Sydney on March 26, reports Executive Traveller.

However, Singapore Changi Airport will be banning transit passengers from March 24, leaving Qantas in a bit of a pickle.

So, in a switcheroo on the Kangaroo Route, Qantas will now be doing a 90-minute fuel stop at Darwin in Australia's Northern Territory instead, before flying the 16-plus hours on to London.

It's the first time that Darwin and London will be linked by a direct service -- but not the first time Darwin's been a stop on this prestigious route.

As chance would have it, Darwin was a stop on the original Kangaroo Route in the 1930s, which took 37 days and included 10 stops. "The return fare was about £400 -- the equivalent of two years' minimum wages, making the journey very much one reserved for the rich and famous," Geoffrey Thomas, editor-in-chief of AirlineRatings, told CNN Travel in 2017.

Darwin falls on the most direct path from Sydney to London, making it ideally positioned for the quick stopover before the 17-hour flight onwards to London.

Qantas' last fight on the returning QF2 flight from London to Sydney via Darwin will take off March 27, landing the next day.

Goodbye to the superjumbo. Qantas is grounding all 150 of its planes until at least the end of May, including their 12 A380s.
However, with Airbus ceasing production of the superjumbo by 2021, and airlines already retiring those in their fleet, it could well be the last chance for passengers to ride in one of Qantas' red-tailed A380s, notes the One Mile At A Time aviation website.

Although the double-decker megajet was a consumer favorite, "The 380 was a bad business decision in the first place," explains Kenneth Button, professor of public policy at George Mason University.

"Boeing had it right when it argued that more passengers wanted direct flights rather than going via large hubs linked by superjumbos and getting to/from the hubs by single-aisle planes -- which was what Airbus thought would happen.

"Hence the 787 with medium capacity, fuel economy and long-range (and ability to be used in a freighter context) triumphed," he tells CNN Travel.

Qantas has been involved in a few remarkable aviation moments in recent times. Last November, Flight QF7879 from London to SYDNEY became the world's longest passenger flight by a commercial airline both for distance, at 17,800 kilometers (about 11,060 miles), and for duration in the air, at 19 hours and 19 minutes.

While in March 2018, a Qantas jet made the first direct flight from Australia to the UK, a Boeing Dreamliner voyaging from PERTH to London.

These Darwin-London flights might not be such legendary aviation moments, but they are another strange twist in what is a very tumultuous time for the industry.

SOURCE  






Coronavirus: People being told to go against instincts

Boris Johnson’s bold but sombre, schoolmasterly instruction: go home and do as you’re told, is asking the British people to go against every instinct in their political culture.

The big Anglo-Saxon countries - the US, Britain, Australia - are encountering a distinctive set of problems coping with the COVID-19 crisis.

They are asking their populations to give up familiar freedoms for a civic purpose.

More than any other cultures on earth, the Anglo-Saxon cultures - perhaps now more accurately called the Anglomorph cultures, nations with the civic shape of their British/American heritage - prize freedom as their cardinal civic value.

They have fought bitter civil wars, and even more bitter world wars, to seize and preserve their freedoms.

Five minutes ago, Johnson himself led a brilliant Brexit campaign with the slogan: Take back control. Now his message is: Relinquish control!

Where Britain has gone in lockdown, Australia will surely follow in coming days.

In Britain, in the US and in Australia large numbers of people have point blank refused to take social distancing seriously.

Common sense has been abundantly absent, from Bondi Beach to Miami holiday celebrations to a thronging London bar and cafe scene up to a day or two ago.

The disarray in the US, with states all going their own way, state and federal governments in conflict, and partisan rancour so toxic that Congress cannot even pass a stimulus package, is truly shocking.

Donald Trump declaring flatly that he is going to re-open the economy soon undercuts the seriousness of the message that people need to practice social isolation if they’re going to stop the spread of coronavirus.

Singapore’s Prime Minister, Lee Hsein Loong, told me this week it was important for any government to go into a crisis “with some social capital”.

His people believe the mainstream media, trust the government in a crisis, believe their government tells the truth and generally obey government instructions.

In the Anglomorph cultures, none of that is true.

Maybe that’s sometimes a good thing. In this crisis, it’s absolutely deadly.

London and much of the UK are singularly ill suited to a home-based lockdown.

My wife and I lived in London for three months last year in a tiny flat in Barons Court, just beyond West Kensington.

It was the smallest space I’ve ever inhabited. The dining, living and kitchen space were about the size of a large ensuite bathroom in any self respecting McMansion and the bedroom required careful sliding around the edge of the bed.

But it was perfectly fine for a temporary stay partly because life in London is not lived at home. Walking 300m left or right took me to many tiny coffee bars, cafes, small super markets and pubs. You never had coffee at home because all these places functioned as your living room.

In Australia we drive to the super market and do a big shop once a week, or even less often, unless we particularly enjoy shopping. In Barons Court everyone it seemed went to the markets and food stores every day. Everyone went to the pubs every night. You watched the football in the pub, you read the newspaper in a cafe, you bought your supplies almost daily for those rare occasions when you ate at home.

Our refrigerator was the size of a few - very few - stacked shoe boxes. We backed on to a building site which was always noisy. None of this mattered because our time in the apartment was sparse.

Imagine being locked in full time, with the prospect that lock down might last weeks, months.

And our apartment, on the top floor, was very good by London standards. The people in the semi-basement ground floor at the front had their window open on to the building’s always full garbage bins. The apartment at the back opened onto the noisy, dust-generating building site.

Cabin fever would set in after about a day. Keeping symptom-free people, especially young people, confined in apartments like that, and there are many much smaller and more crowded all over London, will require the spirit of the blitz in an era of routine, narcissistic civil disobedience.

That’s very tough.

SOURCE
 
 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




26 March 2020

Smoke from Australia's bushfires killed far more people than the fires did, study says

Smoke is particulate pollution and the study below looked at a standard measure of that pollution: PM2.5. And there is a great deal of prior research on pollution of that sort. 

The conventional assumption is of course that inhaling such pollution is bad for you.  The Australian experience would however seem to show that is is NOT very bad for you.  Australians were not dying like flies while experiencing it. They seemed to be going about their business in their usual way, in fact.

So how have the authors below got their apparently alarming findings:

Modelling garbage.  They had no real data on the health of  Australians at the time at all. They just used conventional assumptions to estimate what the effects would have been. But the conventional assumptions are crap, to use a technical term.  The existing research on particulate air pollution (PM2.5.)shows effects that range between no effect and effects that are so weak that no confidence can be placed in them. See here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here

The conventional assumptions take the occasional tiny effects that turn up in some research to build a great castle on, if you will forgive my prepositional impropriety. So you get statements that pollution causes such and such an ailment, without mentioning the very fragile evidential basis for such a posited effect.

So after that useless modelling it will be interesting if the authors do something more useful in the future -- such as comparing actual recorded deaths and morbidity during the smoke affected period with the same period in the previous much clearer year.  My hypothesis -- based on the actual prior research -- is that deaths and disease in the same period of the two years will differ trivially, if at all.

The "study" is just a grab for government funding


Smoke pollution that blanketed Australia’s south-east for many months during the bushfire crisis may have killed more than 400 people, according to the first published estimate of the scale of health impacts – more than 10 times the number killed by the fires themselves.

The figures, published in the Medical Journal of Australia, are “definitely alarming”, according to Chris Migliaccio, who studies the long-term effects of wildfire smoke at the University of Montana in Missoula and was not involved in the research.

Lead author Fay Johnston, an epidemiologist at the University of Tasmania in Hobart, estimates 80% of Australia’s population of about 25 million was blanketed by smoke this summer.

“The fires were unprecedented in Australia’s history, in terms of vast amounts of smoke, the huge populations affected by the smoke and the long duration,” she said.

Sydney experienced 81 days of poor or hazardous air quality in 2019, more than the total of the previous 10 years combined.

“When you’re affecting millions of people in a small way, there are going to be enough people at high enough risk that you’re going to see really measurable rises in these health effects,” Johnston said.

As data on hospital admissions, deaths and ambulance callouts was not yet available to researchers, Johnston and her team instead modelled the likely medical consequences of the pollution, which is the “the only other way to get a quick ballpark idea of the health impacts,” she said.

To come up with a picture of the overall health burden of smoke exposure, they looked at existing data on death rates and hospital admissions to get a baseline. They then modelled how the known levels and extent of smoke exposure across the southeast, during the height of the crisis from 1 October to 10 February, would have affected these.

Their results estimate that over this period there were 417 premature deaths, 3,151 extra hospitalisations for cardiorespiratory problems and 1,305 additional attendances for asthma attacks. This compares to 33 who reportedly died as a direct result of the bushfires.

Many of the deaths and hospitalisations are likely to have been older patients with heart disease or lung problems, such as chronic bronchitis or emphysema – but severe asthma attacks will likely have resulted in deaths in younger people too, Johnston said.

In patients with pre-existing cardiorespiratory issues, smoke exposure promotes inflammation, stresses the body and makes blood more likely to clot, increasing the risk of a heart attack. “In someone at high risk, subtle changes due to stress … can be the precipitating factor for a very serious or terminal event,” she said.

Guy Marks, a respiratory physician and epidemiologist at the University of New South Wales in Sydney who was not involved in the research, said the findings “highlights the importance of the health consequences” and is useful in estimating fire-related deaths that may not have been recognised as the result of smoke exposure.

The findings concur with previous studies of the health consequences of wildfire smoke in North America, but the numbers “are more drastic, potentially as a result of the unprecedented nature of the exposure,” Migliaccio said. He added that while previous studies found increases in hospital visits, the addition of large numbers of premature deaths in the Australian study is significant and disturbing.

Migliaccio said that due to climate change increasing the frequency and severity of wildfires “these types of exposures are increasing in number and intensity, making this kind of research vital.”

To look into just such effects, a consortium of 10 air pollution researchers from across Australia, led by Marks and including Johnston, have already put up their hands for $3m in government funding, which became available in the wake of the crisis.

The research proposal, funding of which has yet to be confirmed, aims to plug significant gaps in knowledge about the health impacts of bushfire smoke and how these might be mitigated.

Marks says that questions he and his colleagues hope to address include whether there is anything unique about health effect of air pollution caused by bushfires, what the long-term effects of exposure are, and what the effects might be on newborn babies and pregnant women.

The researchers – all members of a collaborative consortium, The Centre for Air Pollution, Energy and Health Research (CAR), funded by Australia’s National Health and Medical Research Council – also hope to study whether it’s possible to filter air to make indoor refuges safe from pollution, and if public health advice can be improved.

SOURCE  






Coronavirus: How much of our village do we burn to contain this?

Australia is trapped in the ultimate vicious circle of the COVID-19 threat — governments are impos­ing a massive recession on the economy and liquidating jobs on a huge scale, with inevitable conflicts among political leaders about the depth of the pain they impose.

The core calculation is that the community is better off with mass job losses than seeing the hospital system in intolerable crisis. Put brutally, the calculation is that people are better off unemployed than sick or dead.

The reality, however, is these are different groups: it is the young and middle-aged who are losing their jobs, while those most likely to get sick are the retired elderly, often with existing health issues. The Morrison government’s fiscal measures so far are geared to small-business jobs and equity, with many vulnerable people getting­ job and income assistance.

That is essential. Australia is a far richer nation than in the 1930s, with the better-off able to cope for a long time by accessing their saving­s and wealth, a reality highlighting the need for the financially powerful — banks, landlords, cashed-up big companies — to meet their wider social responsib­ilities. The debate over equity and “who carries the burden” will be critical and dangerous.

Yet the events of the past several­ days expose the dilemma: this is not a crisis where the un­precedented action from the government and the Reserve Bank can restore confidence, as occurs in a purely economic or financial crisis. The total fiscal and monetary response from the authorities is greater than 10 per cent of GDP and will continue to grow. We have seen nothing like this intervention in our lifetimes. In an ortho­dox downturn it would have a dramatically beneficial impact.

Yet it is not enough. It cannot suffice. Nor will a third fiscal package suffice, despite its necessity. The packages are definitely worthwhile but economic instruments cannot beat a pandemic.

This is not to belittle the impressive bipartisan parliamentary session­ on Monday that passed an expanded $84bn stimulus support package — a tribute to both the Coalition and Labor — while the US congress was still squabbling over the scope of its package. Here is genuine good news: our parliament stood up. It offered an ­example to the nation, rare given its dismal efforts in recent years.

The agonising contradiction in our public policy can hardly be comprehended: the government is pumping money to sustain jobs and activity while its health measures throw demand off the cliff and keep consumers in home detention. The economic arm fights the health arm, a contradiction unavoidable yet deeply destructive.

The Morrison government and RBA interventions are essential yet markets will not stabilise, rising unemployment cannot be checked and falling demand cannot be reversed until progress is seen on the health front. This is the roadblock to the future. As Scott Morrison told parliament, the nation faces its gravest test since World War II.

Yet evidence of progress against the virus is limited. Infections nationwide exceed 2000, doubling every three or four days. There is growing evidence the health response — on which everything depends — has been inadequate. The next three weeks should offer a clearer judgment.

Defending the progress, Health Minister Greg Hunt said the nation­ has prevented “the onset of the spread”. The delay has bought time for the hospital and medical system to better prepare. The seven deaths in the first 1000 cases are fewer than in most other countries (the toll is now eight). Hunt said that with 147,000 tests our testing levels were high, and positive results, at only 1.2 per cent, compared with 13 per cent for the US and 5 per cent for Britain.

The fear, however, is that Australia’s response has been too late, too geared to mitigation not suppression, too focused on a strategy for the hospital system rather than a strategy to shock the public and force behavioural change. The government plan has been to slow the virus but keep the economy running. This policy spans a six-month timeline, yet it is fraying. What happened last Sunday was an outbreak of panic and urgency from Victoria and NSW with premiers Dan Andrews and Gladys Berejiklian lurching towards more radical economic shutdowns, despera­te to check the spiral of infections in their states. Morrison wound back some of their push that evening.

Two events symbolise the failure — the Bondi Beach fiasco and the Ruby Princess blunder when passengers, some sick, were allowe­d to disembark in Sydney, the upshot on Tuesday being 133 cases from the boat. The conclusion is that governments have not been sufficiently ruthless because the health advice was not suffic­iently forward leaning.

The national cabinet agreed on Sunday night on a stage-one nation­wide shutdown from Monda­y covering a range of non-essential services — clubs, pubs, restaur­ants, cafes, gyms. Non-essential­ travel should not occur. The AFL and NRL seasons are suspended. These collective decis­ions threw thousands out of work. This is not just a job crisis, it is a life crisis. Many people are losing the social reference points that sustained them. How much of our village­ do we burn to escape the virus?

The speed of the virus exceeds the speed of human decision-­making. Governments are like a retreating army, surrendering one fallback position after another. With each fallback, the economy shrinks further. The final retreat is social and economic lockdown. Talking with ministers on Monday they agreed the core economy — factories, construction, manufacturing, mining — must stay operational, there must be limits on how much of the economy is closed. Tougher action seemed certain to emerge from the national cabinet on Tuesday night. Stage two of the shutdown might be rolled out. Does it make sense to lock down the entire Australian economy? No, not yet. Morrison warns that decisions will have long-run consequences. One thing is obvious: the economy cannot be locked down for six months. The real issue the national cabinet should address is where to draw the line as measures are tightened.

Having blundered in his early response, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson has gone towards lockdown: Britons will only be allowe­d to leave their home for essential­ shopping, daily exercise, medical needs and limited work travel. This is an admission of earlier containment failure.

One task Australia needs to improve is dramatising the message. Forget the nonsense about putting a non-politician in charge to speak the truth. There is no such person and no such truth. Opposition health spokesman Chris Bowen said: “It is impossible to overreact to this crisis.” A better line, perhaps, is that “it is impossible to exaggerate the warnings”. And the warnings have not been strong enough.

On the economic side, the government knows another package is necessary, and probably soon. It needs to address larger business, that is, businesses with a turnover above $50m. These companies carry individual clout. If some fell over, the consequences would be dire. The government needs to think of measures that offer permanent tax relief and investment incentives for the companies that make a difference, and extend its concept of the bridge to a corporate tax policy that endures.

The final aspect of the vicious circle is that the longer the economy is put in the freezer, the more permanent damage will be done. There will be a recovery but it will take years. The US didn’t properly recover from the Great Depression until World War II. US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin warns unemployment there could hit 20 per cent. Josh Frydenberg said our Treasury has costed about a million Australians getting the new coronavirus supplement payment. Australia faces the grim prospect of a peak in unemployment over the past half century.

Don’t think politics has been suspended. On Monday Labor did two things — voted for the package but outlined a critique of the government, saying its measures were too slow, with too many gaps and needed to be implemented faster with guarantees for workers. This policy split will be pivotal at the next election.

SOURCE  






Outback bonanza on hold

MAJOR projects across out-back Queensland worth almost $3 billion — which could create jobs and change the fortunes of hard-hit country towns — are sitting on the drawing board, a major pipeline report has revealed. Outback Queensland covers two-thirds of the state but has just a few hundred million dollars of funded infrastructure projects, the annual report card by the Queensland Major Contractors Association and the Infrastructure Association of Queensland says.

But with the global heat on to move to renewables, outback Queensland and its 82,513 residents could be sitting on a new-age gold mine with "significant mineral resources and value-added processing which would support global efforts to move to a clean energy economy including bauxite/alumina/aluminium, nickel, copper, cobalt, silver, lead, zinc and rare earths metals, particularly in the North West Minerals Province centred around Mount Isa and Clon-curry", the report says.

It is also the site of some of the state's biggest planned renewable energy projects, including the Aldoga Solar Farm, worth $120 million. While the solar farm is funded, a long list of big projects are still on the drawing board, including the Kidston Solar Project Stage 2 ($140m), Kidston Transmission Project ($100m) and the Kidston Pumped Hydro Storage Project ($200m) along with the massive Copperstring Transmission Line worth $1.5 billion.

QMCA boss Jon Davies said a big impediment to developing the North West Minerals Province was the State Government-owned rail line which is susceptible to floods.

"There's big opportunities for developing the North West Minerals Province," he said. "There are plans to upgrade (the rail line). That is an area that the government could look at expediting."

Without government support, the huge swath of state remains captive to the mining and commodities market, with 94 per cent of projects unfunded. "In 2019-20 there is only $70m in funded activity, while $225m remains unfunded," the report says.

"Funded activity only peaks at $82m in 2022-23, supported by a section of the $238m Mount Isa to Rockhampton Corridor Upgrade and the $120m Aldoga Solar Farm,"

The report says the outback region has the lowest ratio of "funded to unfunded" major project work in Queensland. "Ninety-four per cent of activity in the pipeline is currently unfunded," it says. "The negative outlook ... is further highlighted by the proportion of unfunded project activity which is considered 'unlikely' — more than 50 per cent of the $3bn unfunded total."

From the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" of 22.3.20





I don't know if my granddaughter will remember me when this all ends

By Mick Barnes, a resident in a Sydney aged-care home.

Lockdown they call it. They could have said clink, the jug, stir, the slammer, nick, the calaboose, or any number of racy euphemisms. Or Lockup, because that’s what they’re doing, locking us up, without a trial, they’re taking away our liberty. They don’t even have to round us up to impound us. We were already there, captive but not yet prisoners.

OK, COVID-19 must be contained if it is to be beaten. But to find yourself locked up on your 84th birthday is deflating, humiliating, when you’ve done nothing more antisocial than hobble down the treacherous street, a hazard to younger pedestrians.

There are 200,000 of us in aged-care Lockdown. A lot of us take it personally. What will I do without my beautiful, endearing Veronica? She’s eight months old and we’re cut off by the curfew. She’s reached that fascinating stage ... she gives me a long steady stare when I come into view and gradually breaks into the most beatific smile, holding me in a state of suspended ecstasy, a state of shared love. Her tiny hand reaches out and grasps my finger.

We tried bonding at a distance yesterday. Her parents parked the car nearby and Veronica, in her capsule, locked her eyes on mine. The magic smile lingered, turned perplexed. Why didn’t I come closer? I don’t know when we’ll be within hugging distance again. Grandkids are barred entry and nobody has any idea how long Lockdown will last. I hope she remembers me when the virus mist lifts.

Inside prison, the sombre mood is tinged with anger; contempt for what’s happening outside. A lot of us are old enough to remember The War, remember how we pulled together to fight the common enemy. We remember when “a fair go” meant that for everyone; it was not a hollow catchcry of the political class.

We’re disgusted at the selfish greed the virus has exposed. The Dunny Wars over toilet paper, the rich who cleared out the supermarkets to stock their freezers. There’s loathing here for those cretins who posed as carers to crash the pensioner-only hour at supermarkets. I remember my aunt in World War II giving away her food ration coupons to a poor family over the road.

"What a miserable nation we’ve become," a frail little woman pushing her walker says. Nobody argues with her.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





25 March, 2020

BHP flags huge job offering for State

BHP will hire an estimated 1000 people in Queensland to support its mining operations across the state in response to the coronavirus pandemic. Nationally the mining giant plans to add 1500 to its work-force.

A spokesman said the vast majority of the jobs, an estimated 1000, would be in Queensland. The new jobs will be offered as six-month contracts and cover a range of skills needed by BHP operations in the short term.

The mining giant said it would also roll out a support program for its suppliers, including 600 small and indigenous businesses in Queensland.

The new jobs it has on offer include machinery and production operators, truck and ancillary equipment drivers, excavator operators, diesel mechanics, boilermakers, trades assistants, electricians, cleaners and warehousing roles across BHP's coal, iron ore and copper operations in Queensland, Western Austra-lia, NSW and South Australia. "These jobs will support and bolster our existing workforce during this difficult time;" the mining giant said.

The new positions will be offered through existing labour hire partners and BHP contracts in each state. Following the initial six-month contract, BHP said it would look to offer permanent roles for some of the jobs. BHP said it would continue to assess the program and may increase the number of jobs.

BHP acting minerals Australia president Edgar Basta also said as part of BHP's social distancing measures, it was introducing more small teams with critical skills to work "dynamically across different shifts". "We are stepping up and providing jobs and contracts," Mr Basto said.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 21.3.20






‘Closing Uluru climb was a mistake’, says ex-ranger

It was a decision that captivated the nation and brought thousands of people to the Red Centre for their final chance to climb Australia’s most iconic rock. And now the man who oversaw much of that says it was wrong.

Greg Elliot, until recently the head ranger at Uluru-Kata Tjuta National Park, personally supervised some of the last days of climbing. He shepherded scores of domestic and international visit­ors through the gates to march nose-to-tail to the top.

Mr Elliot worked in the park for seven years, two as head ranger, before retiring and leaving this week. He looks back on the World Heritage Listed landmark’s most controversial episode since the Chamberlain affair as a missed opportunity to help Aboriginal people and enhance tourism experiences.

“It’s a negative decision,” Mr Elliot said. “They should have changed it, made it a safer endeavour and then charged people for it.”

He envisions something akin to the Sydney Bridge Climb up Uluru’s flanks, a plan he says was at one point seriously considered.

Mr Elliot said rather than explore that, bureaucrats chose to manipulate the rock’s Aboriginal owners toward closing the climb, so they could remove their liability for its poor safety record while blaming someone else.

“The power of persuasion is a wonderful thing,” he said. “If enough people get told a story enough times, and that story has an element of truth to it, then they will change their opinion on that thing because they’ve heard it enough times … that happens all over the world, in every walk of life, and I’m convinced this is very strongly what aided and abetted this closing of the climb.”

Mr Elliot agrees the old climb was too dangerous. Among the absurd things he saw were parents carrying newborn babies in backpacks — “that guy slips, and that kid’s done” — and a bloke who lugged snow skis to the summit to take a photograph.

And although he would like to see Aboriginal cultural sites in the park better protected, he does not understand why progressively more of them have been declared off-limits. “How can something all of a sudden become sacred when it wasn’t sacred in the past? Or it wasn’t deemed to be as sac­red so no one could go there?

“The rock is the same rock. It hasn’t changed much, apart from the fact there’s a lighter stripe going up on the one face.”

Traditional owners have described feeling intimidated into keeping the climb open and ­said if the leaders who first allowed climbing had suspected hordes might follow, they would have stopped it.

A Parks Australia spokesperson said the climb’s closure was decided by the Aboriginal-majority park board of management, and the decision represented the fulfilment of Anangu’s long-held request for it to be closed and “this was evident in the public statements made by Anangu and the many celebrations Anangu held in Mutitjulu community and at Uluru to mark the climb closure”.

SOURCE  





Education experts say scrapped tests puts focus on future of schooling

NAPLAN testing has been scrapped for 2020, and new social distancing measures have cast doubt over how schools will continue amid the coronavirus pandemic.

The move came as Brisbane Girls Grammar School told parents it would deliver the final week of term remotely, as they prepare for the likelihood to do the same for all of Term 2.

In an extraordinary move the national benchmark test, NAPLAN, was yesterday cancelled by education ministers — for the first time since it began in 2008 — over fears of the extra anxiety caused by coronavirus and the stress it has already placed on schools.

State Education Minister Grace Grace said the current advice was that schools should remain open. "The valuable time of school leaders, teachers and support staff should be spent either providing continuity of learning for our students or preparing to deliver possible curriculum at home," she said.

Ms Grace also revealed school attendance had dropped 5-6 per cent compared to this time last year, blaming the reduction on children being sick (not corona-related) and parents needing to self isolate. Independent and Catholic education systems and unions advocating for teachers already swamped with work-load during the public health crisis supported the move.

And education experts have said the move brings the future of schooling into sharp focus with calls for non-essential education to be scrapped for the system already grappling with increased work-load, stress and panic of preparing for schools to close in the event of an outbreak.

OTU president Kevin Bates said cancelling NAPLAN was the right move given the massive disruption in the community and schools caused by COVID-19.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison yesterday said gatherings, not including schools, should limit crowds to one person per four square metres. Mr Bates said while the advice on social distancing had merit in the community, it would be impossible for schools to follow as they would need a school hall for each classroom. "It's another confusing message," he said.

QUT education curriculum and pedagogy expert Kelli McGraw said anyone who thought coronavirus would not disrupt learning was "kidding themselves" and more focus should be given to student well-being. An option would be to suspend a half-year report in schools which already "maxes out" teachers.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 21.3.20






War hero Ben Roberts-Smith interviewed by police over alleged killing

The Australian Federal Police has interviewed former SAS soldier Ben Roberts-Smith over allegations he kicked an Afghan prisoner off a cliff in a serious development in the long-running saga involving Australia’s most decorated Afghan veteran.

Legal sources confirmed that the federal police recently requested Mr Roberts-Smith to attend a formal interview to respond to allegations made by special forces insiders that he kicked a detainee off a cliff in September 2012.

Sources with knowledge of the situation say the Victoria Cross recipient recently attended a police interview in Canberra and, as is standard practice, was cautioned that what he said could be used against him if he was ever criminally prosecuted. While the AFP does not comment on investigations, requesting to interview a subject normally comes near the end of an exhaustive probe and after critical witness statements have been collected.

About 90 minutes after Mr Roberts-Smith's lawyer, Mark O'Brien, was contacted by The Age and Herald for comment, The Australian's defence writer Paul Maley quoted Mr Roberts-Smith confirming the police interview had taken place, and claiming he had volunteered for it.

In September, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald revealed that an AFP taskforce was investigating Mr Roberts-Smith over allegations he kicked a handcuffed and innocent detainee, Ali Jan, off a cliff in the village of Darwan in September 2012. The Darwan taskforce has obtained co-operation from SAS witnesses and support staff willing to testify on oath against the decorated soldier. A second police investigation is looking into allegations Mr Roberts-Smith is implicated in the summary execution of a man at a compound in southern Afghanistan in April 2009.

The Age and Herald are not suggesting Mr Roberts-Smith has been found guilty of any war crime, only that he is the subject of police probes sparked by allegations made by his SAS colleagues.

Mr Roberts-Smith is one of the most decorated veterans to have served with coalition forces in Afghanistan, has stridently denied all wrongdoing and has launched a defamation case against The Age and Herald for first uncovering and reporting the allegations made about him by his fellow soldiers.

While the AFP’s focus has for many months been on him, it is almost certainly going to open up a third probe into a different soldier from another SAS squadron. This follows the broadcast on the ABC’s Four Corners program of footage of an SAS 3 squadron soldier shooting an apparently unarmed and subdued Afghan in May 2012. That soldier was still active until last week, when he was stood down in the wake of that footage being aired.

Many more AFP probes could follow depending on the findings of a long-running military Inspector-General's inquiry into war crimes.

The organisation revealed in its recent annual report that Supreme Court of Appeal Judge Paul Brereton had, over four years, been probing multiple alleged executions involving SAS and Commandos.

Several of these cases are those reported over the last two years by The Age and Herald, according to defence personnel.

They include a case involving the confession of a Commando who admitted to personally executing an Afghan prisoner and also witnessing other executions. Another case involves claims made in 2019 by SAS medic Dusty Miller that an injured prisoner was taken from his care and allegedly executed in March 2012.

Defence sources said that for the past two years, the Inspector-General has focused on allegations of war crimes involved the SAS’s 2 squadron. Mr Roberts-Smith is one of the 2 squadron members under investigation.

The release of the vision on ABC’s Four Corners of an Afghan man being shot has spurred fresh inquires into the conduct of 3 squadron as well, according to defence sources. This has the potential to delay the imminent release of the Brereton report, despite increasing political pressure for the historic and likely damning inquiry to be completed.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





24 March, 2020

Coronavirus: Without the usual media scrutiny, the virus crisis is distracting us from all manner of evil

JENNIFER ORIEL

COVID-19 is a pandemic that is devastating countries around the world. The rapidly deteriorating global outlook is consuming the media as it seeks to satisfy the need for reliable news and analysis. In such a climate, people can behave badly without the usual degree of scrutiny.

Before COVID-19, the press might have scrutinised the Victorian Labor government for rejecting the royal commission into the bushfire disaster. The Greens might be criticised for demanding more welfare money after having rejected welfare that works. There would be more interest in the declining influence of independent MPs after years of minor players riding high on anti-establishment sentiment. And the Chinese Communist Party would not be enjoying praise for containing a virus with the same oppressive instruments that enabled it to spread — state and political correctness.

There is a pew in limbo reserved for journalists who write worthy stories; the articles that should be read but lack popular appeal. Like a toupeed widower on Tinder, worthy stories can sit on the periphery. And in this climate, a column without COVID-19 is very worthy indeed. The situation suits politicians who would ordinarily be held to account.

The CCP is brimming with such men of state. It is desperate for good PR after its central role in creating the pandemic was exposed. It is using classic propaganda techniques to redirect criticism and revise history. It is the bully that plays the victim to avoid accountability. CCP officials are sowing post-colonialist conspiracy theories to distract people from the party’s chief role in ­making COVID-19 global.

In Africa, it is creating a common enemy to keep the spotlight off China. The US is the CCP’s public enemy No 1. The party is manipulating public opinion through media channels whose affiliation with the Chinese government is not disclosed.

In recent weeks, the CCP has gone from denying the existence of the virus to rewriting history. In this parallel universe of CCP propaganda, it is the “victim of Western racism”, the target of a hostile press and the Mother Teresa of the COVID-afflicted world.

Yes, the communist state has been hit hard by the virus as a ­result of its party-before-people ethos and deep-rooted indifference to humanity. Rather than address root causes, it has launched a campaign to cover them up.

In Belt And Road News, the Chinese government was praised for bringing COVID-19 under control and showing “global responsibility”. Apparently, the CCP is sending “tonnes of medical supplies” and experts to Italy because “a friend in need, is a friend indeed”. Try not to laugh.

Italian virologist Giorgio Palu views the relationship rather differently. The former president of the European and Italian Society for Virology told CNN that political correctness played a role in the Italian disaster.

He said “a proposal to isolate people coming from the epicentre, coming from China” was framed as racism against Chinese people. The borders stayed open, the virus poured in, and it spread quickly.

The World Health Organisation is holding the PC line. It ­continues to lavish praise on the Chinese government and denounce valid criticism of the regime as stigmatising. It is a joint exercise in propaganda that ­offends common decency.

In recent days, the WHO has praised China for agreeing to supply face masks that are in short supply. So, is the CCP providing the face masks for free as a kind of reparation for its gross mishandling of the pandemic? Is it providing test kits to nations at no cost? Or are we witnessing the development of a truly obscene deal where the CCP could profit from the very pandemic it unleashed?

The Chinese government is not averse to turning a profit from problems of its own making. It is the worst greenhouse emitter in the world but demands billions in other nations’ money for supposed climate mitigation. It denounces the US for colonialism but is pioneering new forms of colonial power through the Belt and Road Initiative.

In the closed society of the CCP, there is no mechanism for people to hold politicians accountable. The one-party state denies the free press and suppresses political opposition.

It has sent US journalists in China packing because they ­revealed the CCP’s role in the COVID-19 outbreak. Yet it lectures other nations on solidarity, multilateralism and international co-operation.

Despite the CCP’s atrocious behaviour, Victoria’s socialist Labor government signed up to the Belt and Road Initiative. Premier Daniel Andrews ignored criticism from Labor and Coalition colleagues in Canberra. He dismissed federal government warnings about the national security threat posed by the BRI.

More recently, the Andrews government rejected the royal commission into natural disaster management. While Western Australian Labor Premier Mark McGowan and Queensland Labor Premier Annastacia Palaszczuk have agreed to participate in it, Andrews has opted out. Instead, he wants a Victorian inquiry, led by Inspector-General of Emergency Management Tony Pearce.

State Opposition Leader Michael O’Brien has questioned the inquiry’s independence. Speaking to The Australian’s Rachel Baxendale, he said Pearce’s advice had led to ­Andrews “walking away from the [last] bushfire royal commission’s targets on planned burning”. The green-left ducks for cover whenever accountability is on the agenda. Greens MPs continue to propose billion-dollar policies even as COVID-19 threatens to saddle the nation with intergenerational debt. They are demanding $1bn for a Save Creative Australia project. They want another $2bn for the not-for-profit and community sector.

Earlier this month, Greens leader Adam Bandt criticised Scott Morrison for “only pledging a third of the Rudd government’s $52bn stimulus”. Only?

Despite calling for solidarity amid the COVID-19 crisis, Greens politicians are making partisan politics of the global pandemic.

The party has accused the ­Coalition government of attacking healthcare and welfare “while propping up their big-business mates”. Who do the Greens think will pay for their totally righteous multibillion-dollar welfare plan, the freelance artists guild of “creative Australia”?

The COVID-19 panic is justified and understandable, but democracy will suffer if we stop speaking truth to power and holding the powerful to account.

SOURCE  






In these troubled days we need to cut red and green tape for the sake of the economy

PETER GLEESON

DESPERATE times call for desperate measures and we are indeed in uncharted waters as the coronavirus kills people and ruins the global economy. Now is not the time for the faint-hearted or weak, whether it be quarantining your family from the ravages of the virus or protecting your company, business or simply your job.

Bold, decisive leadership is not only required but mandatory. When it comes to conventional policy, at all levels of government, we need to throw the rule book out. We need to approve private investment and trust people to do the right thing.

This is real. This virus kills and unless we get it under control it has the potential to not only wipe out a lot of people, but torpedo wealth. The middle class will be no more.

 We can't die wondering. To ensure we don't finish up in a 1929-style Depression, Federal, State and local government needs to be bold, creative and innovative in their decision-making, starting today.

Big government infrastructure projects must be fast-tracked to keep people in jobs. There is only a certain amount to be gained from the generous Government stimulus packages. They are designed to protect businesses through the tough times, a bridge to ensure they come out of this nightmare with the capacity to continue.

Serious question marks will be placed on thousands of small businesses in coming days, weeks and months. Resilience is required.

There are obvious parallels with the challenges that occurred during wartime as the Government tries to keep society functioning. Within that context, and in the spirit of taking big and bold decisions to keep the economy afloat, it's time for a fundamental change to the way we approve development

There are hundreds of projects in Australia right now that are caught up in the green and red tape of bureaucracy. They are mired in red and green bureaucracy, either to keep some fat cat in a job or for political reasons.

We don't have the luxury right now to be playing politics on development. We can't be refusing cashed-up developers the opportunity to create jobs and sustainable long-term prosperity because some Greens or Labor hack are anti-development.

For example, why should a development company like the Walker Corporation be stopped from spending $2 billion on a massive project on Brisbane's bayside because a group of local greenies don't want it in their backyard?

That project has been on the Redlands council books since 2007. If we don't approve major develop-ments right now in this country, in six months time the developers may not be there to fund projects.

Local, state and federal Government should form a taskforce with the explicit aim of going through every medium to large project to streamline the process to get them approved. Some have battled environmental and planning road blocks for years, frustrating cashed-up developers ready to proceed. That doesn't mean giving developers the green light to ride roughshod over conservation and environmental protocols. If they break the law during construction, whack them with multi-million dollar fines.

But we need to trust them to get on with the job. The game has changed. Let's approve these projects now and get the ball rolling. Most developers want to do the right thing by the environment because it adds value to their project. Doing it the way we have always done it — forcing developers to go through an antiquated, protracted and costly Environmental Impact Assessment — is not the way to go forward in the New Coronavirus World.

There are dozens of developers in Australia with the cash to begin projects now and help us stave off double digit unemployment in coming months. It could provide an immediate $50 billion stimulus to the economy and keep tens of thousands of tradies working.

Deloittes boss Richard Deutsch appeared on my Sky News-Win show a few days ago and I asked him what was the most important thing for companies and business leaders as they ride out this unprecedented health and fiscal crisis.

"Keep the mechanics of your company going ... you have to keep the business afloat and that means doing everything possible to keep the fundamentals going," Deutsch, who has 11,000 staff, said.

Desperate times call for desperate measures. Every tier of government needs to take the hand brake off development projects. Now is the time to show some ticker and throw convention out the window. The country's future depends on it.

From the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" of 22.3.20






Coronavirus Australia school closures: What's happening in every state

Some Australians schools are closing early for the holidays, others are going online for a few weeks. Here’s what is happening in each state or territory.

States and territories around Australia have declared their varying stances on school closures despite Prime Minister Scott Morrison yesterday announcing “children should go to school”.

He said the health advice from the Australian Health Principal Protection Committee had not changed. “I do not want to see our children lose an entire year of their education,” Mr Morrison said.

He said “all leaders” had committed to reopening schools at the end of the school break, or Easter holidays, “subject to the advice” of the AHPPC.

“If parents choose to keep their children home from school, parents must be responsible for the conduct of the children and to ensure they adhere to the social distancing arrangements in place,” Mr Morrison said.

“Parents must be aware that while the majority of adults who contract COVID-19 have mild forms of the virus, the elderly or those with comorbidities can have more significant symptoms.”

NEW SOUTH WALES

In contrast to the prime minister's stance, NSW Premier Gladys Berejiklian on Monday morning urged parents to "keep their children at home".

She said 30 per cent of parents had already made the choice to keep their kids at home and the state government feels it is “the best course to follow” in regards to the state health advice.

Schools in NSW will be staying open from Tuesday for children of "parents who have no option".

“For practical reasons, in NSW we will be encouraging parents to keep their children at home,” Ms Berejiklian told reporters. “However I want to stress that for parents who have no option, for parents who are workers, that have no option, the schools will remain open. No child will be turned away from school.”

VICTORIA

Victoria has already acted, announcing it was bringing forward Easter holidays to Tuesday. Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews declared the state’s plan prior to Sunday night’s national cabinet meeting.

On Monday morning, he said term two is scheduled to begin on April 14, “unless I have medical advice not to proceed with term two at school”.

“I'm not making that announcement today," he said.

"We have taken the decision, and the Chief Health Officer of Victoria is completely comfortable and supportive of this, to bring forward the school holidays and to spend these precious days without kids at school to plan for remote, flexible, distance learning in the evident that we need to move to that way of teaching and learning."

This means by Monday afternoon, Victorian students will be on a three-week break.

QUEENSLAND

Queensland Education Minister Grace Grace said schools were open on Monday and "will remain open" until the last day of term on April 3.

But parents can choose "whether or not they wish to send their children to school".

She said if this decision is made, parents have three responsibilities – to advise the school their child or children won't be attending to ensure the wellbeing of students, to continue with online learning materials available on the education department's website, and to ensure the students practise social distancing.

"The responsibility for children not going to school will be solely with the parents and carers … and we ask that they adhere to these requests," she said.

She urged parents and children to stay off school grounds if they are sick.

AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY

ACT schools will close on Tuesday as teachers plan how to keep classes operating during the coronavirus pandemic.

But Chief Minister Andrew Barr today said they will remain open to students who "absolutely need to attend".

"What we are endeavouring to do is (see) the school population, the number of students who would physically need to go to school each day, would be considerably less so we can space them out more," he told ABC Radio.

Term two is due to commence on April 28.

SOUTH AUSTRALIA

South Australian schools are set to remain open for now with a view to helping slow the spread of the coronavirus.

Premier Steven Marshall said the message from health experts was very clear. “Send your children to school. If we do this we will slow the spread of the disease,” Mr Marshall told radio 5AA on Monday.

“But having said that, there are some parents who would like to have their children out of school.”

Mr Marshall said schools would also need to provide more flexible learning options for parents who believed they could supervise their children and look after them at home.

Term two is due to commence on April 27.

WESTERN AUSTRALIA

WA Premier Mark McGowan on Monday said schools will remain open until the end of term one, finishing April 9, but they will "relax the law and provide parents with choice" whether to send their children to school.

"I have always said that closing schools is a last resort but I understand many parents are concerned and want to keep their children home at this time," he said.

"It is for that reason that we will relax the law and provide parents with choice.

"If parents decide not to send their kids to school, we will not enforce the law that requires you to do so. But I stress, if parents do decide to keep their children home, parents must abide by all other laws and that includes all new social distance, social distancing rules that have been introduced."

Many non-government schools will provide access to online and distance learning while in the public system, parents and students will have access to resources to see out the remainder of the term.

Term two is due to commence on April 28.

NORTHERN TERRITORY

Territory schools will remain open for now until the school holidays, starting on Good Friday on April 10.

But Chief Minister Michael Gunner today said from Tuesday, “and for the rest of this term, the decision to send kids to school will be a choice for parents”.

“I know a lot of parents are feeling anxious right now during these times. I trust parents to know what is best for them and their kids,” he said.

“If you want to keep kids at home for the remainder of this term, that's okay. But they have to be at home.”

Term two is due to commence on April 20.

TASMANIA

In addressing the topic on Monday, Tasmanian Premier Peter Gutwein acknowledged "there has been much community angst" regarding schools.

"Tasmanian schools will remain open for the time being," he said.

"We recognise the incredibly important role that our schools play supporting the education and wellbeing of Tasmania's children and young people and the advice of the AHPPC is unchanged on this matter."

However, he said parents and carers can keep children at home from Wednesday, March 25 if they wish.

Term two is due to commence on April 27.

More HERE 







The soft power of education

Education has long been accepted as a way of building Australia’s soft power.

When we say soft power, we’re talking about the use of “positive attraction and persuasion to achieve foreign policy objectives” rather than the military and economic might of hard power. And education has “the ability to influence the behaviour or thinking of others through the power of attraction and ideas”.

In the 1950s, Australia made international education part of its foreign policy when, as part of the Colombo Plan, it funded scholarships to bring the future leaders of Asia to study in Australia.

The Australian government saw the benefit of “the body of people in Asian countries which is gradually built up with an intimate knowledge of Australia and, it may be hoped, some affection for this country”.

If we work on this criterion, the Colombo Plan can be considered a real success.

By 1985, the Colombo Plan had brought over 20,000 students to Australia — many of whom went on to work in key positions across Asia, giving Australia a soft power connection.

In Malaysia, alumni include a minister for trade, a chief minister and a renowned architect. A quarter of Mongolia’s current cabinet studied in Australia.

Australia’s Foreign Policy White Paper points to the soft power effects of study in Australia: “Many foreign government and business leaders, including heads of state, ministers and CEOs, have studied in Australia and understand our institutions, values and perspective on the world. This is a significant asset for Australia.”

It also outlines the efforts being put into an Australia Global Alumni program to leverage these connections.

But the picture is now more complex for at least four reasons.

* A smaller budget

First, Australia is no longer investing sufficiently in funded study to Australia to have large-scale impact.

The Colombo Plan’s successor, the Australia Awards, has become the victim of funding cuts. In 2016, it was reported that around 3500 scholarships, fellowships and short courses were funded.

Four years later, there are only 1982 Australia Awards.

Additionally, research tells us that Australia’s investment in diplomacy, development and trade is now at its lowest level ever.

On top of this, other countries have been investing more. In Laos, for example, Australia offers 30 scholarships, while China offers 1000.

* Self-funded student experience

International education is a significant business: it is now Australia’s third biggest export.

The vast majority of international students in Australia are fee-paying (which was true even during the Colombo Plan). In 2019, there were more than 750,000 international students in Australia including 25,000 secondary school students.

Whether these students add to Australia’s soft power depends crucially on whether they have a positive experience in Australia.

The worst-case scenario is that they speak mainly to other overseas students, don’t form friendships with Australians and leave having formed few connections or perhaps even negative views about Australia.

It’s up to schools and universities to be aware of this and work to ensure students feel welcome and at home during their time in Australia.

* Getting Australians into the region

Australia’s old model needs to be updated to take into account the effect of Australia’s new outbound program to take Australian students to the Indo-Pacific, known as the New Colombo Plan.

Launched in 2014 by then Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop as one of her signature initiatives, the New Colombo Plan aims to get young Australians to study and work in the region, rather than heading to traditional destinations like the US and Europe, as “a rite of passage to benefit us all”.

According to Julie Bishop: “Our country will benefit enormously from having young ambassadors from Australia who have an understanding of and an insight into the region that only comes from living, studying and working there.”

The New Colombo Plan takes Australian students to the Indo-Pacific region. Picture: Shutterstock
The scale of the New Colombo Plan — by the end of last year 60,000 young people had been funded to live and learn in 40 countries — suggest there is likely to be a significant soft power ripple effect.

Having thousands of young people serve as unofficial ambassadors for Australia in the region is likely to have a positive impact, particularly when the New Colombo Plan shows two of the hallmarks of best practice in public diplomacy: genuineness and mutuality.

* The global classroom

New technology means that coming to study in Australia isn’t the only way that education can have an effect.

Global organisations like ours are operating a number of intercultural learning programs, aiming to link our classrooms to the world.

The Asia Education Foundation’s school partnership program, Building Relationships through Intercultural Dialogue Growing Engagement or BRIDGE, has been operating for over ten years, establishing more than 500 school partnerships across 21 countries.

Funded by the Australian Government, it fosters these important people-to-people links through establishing relationships between students, teachers and school communities — helping teachers to open their classrooms to the world.

Intercultural learning lets us explore our differences and similarities through empathy and critical discussion.

It’s about relationships where both groups change and respond, forming cultural connections, rather than one-way transmission. It helps build global mindset and intercultural capabilities through learning together in a cross-cultural setting.

There are an estimated 750 million youth across Indo-Pacific aged 12 to 25, compared to 4.3 million young Australians. So, it’s essential that this generation must be able to develop deeper understandings of culture, communication, and connection.

The original Colombo Plan was small but precisely targeted and achieved the aim of creating significant long-term soft power benefit.

It provided a foundation for Australia to build rich contacts with the nations around us.

But today’s challenge is to update our model to include the many ways that education impacts on Australia’s image and influence in the region. And education remains one of the best ways to build soft power — creating bonds of affection as well as a deeper and more enriched intercultural understanding of the world.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






23 March, 2020  

Have busloads of hoarders from out of town actually been buying up in country towns?

The good old Guardian is once again fighting a straw man.  Shoppers are arriving in their own cars. There's no doubt about that. They don't need buses

Facebook feeds are full of stories about someone’s sister who saw a minibus pull up outside a grocer in Deniliquin, or Kyneton, or Gulgong, but no one has a photo to prove it. In the age of camera phones, we couldn’t find any credible photographs of this reported phenomenon anywhere.

Guardian Australia found one supermarket where a security guard had been employed to check shoppers were not from out of town, but no evidence of buses.

Some of the posts say the buses are full of “Asian” or “Chinese” passengers. “Every report I’ve seen said those on the buses were Chinese,” said one commenter. “Highly organised with different buses hitting different towns at the same time.”

The Daily Mail called it “tourist panic-shopping” and quoted “angry residents” on Facebook: “People from Sydney [are] packing cars to the brims. Our supermarkets don’t get enough supplies, only enough for our population let alone hoarders. It’s really sad and I think it needs to be policed from now.”

On Tuesday the claims were given credibility by a story in the Age headlined “Busloads of city dwellers stripping regional shelves bare”, although there was no racial element in the report.

“Regional towns are being swamped by busloads of panicked ‘Coles tourists’ who are driving from the city to strip supermarket shelves of basic supplies,” the report said.

“The Age has heard reports of city-dwellers rushing supermarkets in Gisborne, Kyneton, Romsey, Seymour, Woodend, Daylesford and even in towns as far away as Kerang and Deniliquin.”

While the paper said they’d “heard reports” there was little in the way of evidence to back it up and no photographic proof.

Guardian Australia contacted two of the supermarkets mentioned in the Age – the Romsey IGA and the Woodend Coles – and both stores denied busloads of people from other areas were shopping.

Guardian Australia spoke to management at Coles, Woolworths and Aldi who all said there had been no bus tours they were aware of. Coles and Woolies said they had contacted regional managers at many of the stores mentioned and none could back up the reports.

SOURCE  







Stopping bullying requires everyone to play a part

Preaching to bullies goes only so far. There comes a point where physical punishment alone will induce change

Finding out that their child is being bullied at school is a situation many parents dread, with good reason.

Decades of research has highlighted the profound effects of bullying, with children who are bullied in primary school at greater risk of experiencing serious mental health problems into adolescence and ongoing depression into adulthood. Tragically, as we all know, too many young Australians have taken their own lives as a result of the effects of bullying.

At the very least, bullied kids are more likely to miss school, disengage with their learning and suffer academically. And with one in four children in Australia reporting that they've been impacted by bullying, more needs to be done to deal with this complex and pervasive problem.

Under its cyberbullying reporting scheme, the office of Australia's eSafety Commissioner, has the power to order social media sites to take down harmful material and has successfully handled hundreds of complaints about cyberbullying on behalf of young Australians.

While it's reassuring to have a federal watchdog to help keep kids, and all Australians safe online, it's vital that we work together as a community to promote zero tolerance for bullying for the sake of this generation and future generations of young people.

There's no quick fix to solve the bullying issue, but a vital strategy involves educating children from a young age with the skills and attitudes to build and maintain healthy, respectful relationships with others.

At Life Education, three of our key programs — Cyberwise, Relate, Respect, Connect and Talk About It teach children about cyber ethics, responsible and respectful behaviour, strategies to deal with bullying and cyberbullying, and the role of bystanders.

And it's the bystander effect which is one of the keys to dealing with the bullying issue. Research shows peers are present as onlookers in 85 per cent of bullying interactions and play a central role in the bullying process, so we need to educate young people to call out bullying behaviour when they see it.

It's important they understand that it's not 'dobbing', but rather showing compassion for those who are being victimised. It's about sending a strong message that bullying,harassment  and violence are not acceptable at any time.

There are some good anti-bullying programs, including recent reforms, adopted by the State Government in the wake of the Queensland Anti-Cyberbullying Taskforce. Undoubtedly, tackling bullying requires a whole-of-community approach.

We know that online abuse and bullying of teachers and principals around the state is on the rise, with some parents restricted from entering school grounds. We can't expect children to learn about appropriate respectful behaviour, when some parents are role modelling aggression and hostility.

This year, Australia's largest anti-bullying event for schools, the National Day of Action against Bullying and Violence (NDA) has adopted the theme: Take Action Together and the message could not be more fitting. Schools, parents, teachers, specialist educators and students can all play a role in reducing bullying within schools.

The focus on prevention and education can go a long way to building respect and tolerance in our community, and that in turn, can only mean better mental health outcomes for our children and young people.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 19.3.20






Australian university orders return to face-to-face teaching amid coronavirus pandemic

A Queensland university prompted outrage by ordering its academics to scrap established plans for online teaching and return to face-to-face classes, a sign of the sector’s chaotic and disjointed response to the Covid-19 pandemic.

Universities across the country are still grappling with how to continue teaching during the crisis, after the federal government firmly advised them on Wednesday that “university and higher education should continue at this time with risk mitigation measures”.

The sector already faces a massive financial hit, with analysis in the very early stages of Covid-19 suggesting the top 10 universities would lose $1.2bn due to Chinese student travel bans alone. The situation has prompted serious concerns for the future of casual academic staff.

A host of universities – the University of Queensland, University of Melbourne, University of Adelaide, University of Wollongong and University of Technology Sydney, among others – are rushing to transition their courses online. The Australian National University is pausing its teaching for a week from Monday and says it is “stopping face-to-face teaching for lectures and moving to remote participation”.

The UQ vice-chancellor, Peter H?j, told students in an email late on Sunday that it would temporarily cancel all coursework after a fourth confirmed case on the campus. “This is a big call, and not one I have taken lightly,” H?j wrote to students.

The University of Sydney and Southern Cross University have each committed to delivering all of their classes remotely from Monday.

But others are pressing on with some form of face-to-face teaching of lectures and other classes, albeit with risk mitigation measures, including Monash University.

The University of Western Australia says on its website that it is continuing to “operate as normal and our academic calendar is unchanged”. It also announced it is moving all lectures and tutorials and, where possible, practical classes to online delivery mode until further notice from Monday.

The approach to staff leave has also been disjointed. Some universities are providing affected staff with special coronavirus leave, others are telling staff to use their existing personal and annual leave.

At the University of Sydney, Nick Riemer, a senior lecturer in English and linguistics, said teaching staff had found themselves rushing to prepare for online classes while also juggling the concerns of students. He said there was “widespread concern” across campus about the implications of the virus for teaching and professional staff long-term.

“It has been fairly chaotic and there are all these intense extra demands being placed on staff,” he said.

“This semester I have less than 80 students and there is still a quite significant extra time burden placed on my work [but] colleagues who are running much larger lecture programs have reported exponentially higher workload.”

Riemer also said he was concerned that “emergency measures” put in place during the crisis – including extra working from home demands – would become “normalised”, as well as fears for professional and casual staff at the university.

“There’s an enormous amount of concern about the implications for the amount of work available for those staff,” he said.

The response of the University of the Sunshine Coast, which had to conduct deep cleaning following a visit from the home affairs minister, Peter Dutton, two weeks ago, has prompted a particularly angry response from staff.

The university on Friday announced it would pause coursework teaching and assessments for a week from Monday, to give it time to redesign its courses to support online delivery and social distancing.

But earlier in the week, it told staff to reverse plans they had already developed to deliver the vast majority of their courses online.

On Wednesday, senior leadership at the university wrote to the school and ordered it to retract the plans and return to face-to-face teaching, citing the advice of the federal government.

The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) described the decision as “nuts” and deeply irresponsible.

“For the University of the Sunshine Coast to say we were ready to have online delivery for some of our subjects but actually we’re going to return to our normal timetabled operations, that is just nuts,” the union’s Queensland secretary, Michael McNally, told the Guardian.

“There’s no reason for that. Many universities are actively trying to put their stuff online, for the simple reason that even if universities aren’t closed, it reduces the risk to the community to deliver as much of the teaching as possible online.”

It also appears to run counter to the advice of the Australian Health Protection Principal Committee, which on Wednesday said it supported universities using as much online teaching as possible.

The University of the Sunshine Coast did not respond directly to the NTEU’s criticism. But a spokesman said the university was “working towards what is expected to be a government directive to suspend face-to-face teaching in the near future”.

“Much planning and work in recent weeks have gone into preparing the university for the delivery of online learning across all disciplines,” he said.

The university has cancelled graduations, is encouraging students to study online where possible, and is advising social distancing in other face-to-face classes.

Universities Australia chief executive, Catriona Jackson, acknowledged that the tertiary sector’s response to the virus had varied, but said all universities were adhering to advice from officials and praised the federal government for providing a “clear set of requirements”.

“These are prudent, measured steps designed to safeguard students, staff and their communities. At the same time, we are trying to minimise disruption to students’ education,” she said.

“Things are moving very quickly, and all universities have mobilised staff and students in what is a national effort.

“None of this is easy and we recognise the challenges faced by our students and staff. But it is vital that as individuals and institutions we work together to slow the spread of the Covid-19 virus and protect the community. People’s lives depend on how we respond now.”

SOURCE  





NAPLAN to be cancelled for 2020 due to COVID-19 disruption

Education ministers have cancelled this year's NAPLAN tests due to the coronavirus, saying it would put an unnecessary burden on already stressed schools. The national tests - sat annually by years 3, 5, 7 and 9 - will resume next year.

Schools, which are busily preparing remote learning materials in case they shut down, had been hoping the national assessment program - scheduled to be held between May 12 and 22 - would be scrapped, saying it would be unsafe for students to sit together for prolonged periods.

It came as Prime Minister Scott Morrison reiterated the importance of keeping schools open amid anxiety from teachers, who are concerned about the welfare of older staff and the difficulty of enforcing safe distances between children and teens.

Ministers met via video link on Friday morning to decide the fate of NAPLAN, which some modelling suggests would coincide with the peak of the virus and increased likelihood of school closures.

In a statement, they said, "The decision not to proceed with NAPLAN has been taken to assist school leaders, teachers and support staff to focus on the wellbeing of students and continuity of education, including potential online and remote learning.

"Further, the impact of responses to the COVID-19 virus may affect the delivery of NAPLAN testing, including the operation of centralised marking centres and the implications for nationally comparable data if an insufficient number of students are available to do the test."

The president of the Secondary Principals Council, Craig Petersen, said school leaders and teachers would welcome the "commonsense" announcement.

"Everyone is under lots of stress as a result of the corona anxiety," he said. "It will make a huge difference to morale, and it will let teachers focus on maximising the teaching and learning time they have with kids, rather than worrying about a test."

The government is also facing growing pressure from teachers’ unions, who say staff are at risk of infection and the information and resources available to schools are insufficient for them to observe social distancing and hygiene rules.

The Independent Education Union, representing staff in private and Catholic schools, has written to the Prime Minister, saying current preventative measures are "manifestly inadequate" and teachers are at "grave risk".

IEU federal secretary Chris Watt said many schools did not have sufficient resources to implement hand-washing and cleaning advice, while social distancing rules were not possible for children in packed school environments.

Mr Watt urged the government to release its medical advice "that is the purported basis for schools remaining open".

He also said at-risk employees and those with vulnerable relatives should immediately be allowed to work from home or go on leave.

The Australian Education Union, representing public school staff, has also written to Mr Morrison calling for additional advice and resources and rejecting "unrealistic" and inequitable online learning alternatives to schools staying open.

Federal Education Minister Dan Tehan and government medical officials will meet the unions next week to discuss their concerns.

On Friday, Mr Morrison said the government’s position on keeping schools closed had not changed.

"It is in the national interest that we keep schools open," he said.

National chief medical officer Brendan Murphy said the risk to children was low and data suggested that children were more likely to be infected by adults rather than vice-versa.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





22 March 2020

The stories of Australia's "Stolen Generations"

I note that this hoax is now in the plural: "Generations". It was originally singular.

I have no doubt that the experiences described below are largely true.  Many Aboriginal children were relocated from their homes and the experience was no doubt traumatic in many cases.

The big unsaid thing in the matter is WHY Australian governments for a time did such relocations.  From the article below you are left to assume that it was from evil impulses, "Racism" probably.

But it was nothing of the sort.  The removals were part of the normal child welfare practices of the time.  To this day Aboriginal men are very hard on their children, with even feeding them being haphazard.  And drunkenness in particular is  rife and generates a lot of physical conflict.

In short, the children were removed to protect them from abuse and sometines death. They were adopted into white families because safe black families were hard to find.  And it was felt that reorienting them to white culture while they were in an adoptive family would be advantageous to them

But personality is heavily hereditary so that was usually a doomed effort.  The children simply reinstated in their own lives the parental behaviour that had got them removed in the first place.  As the man below describes his life: "considerable time spent drinking heavily and living on the streets - including a few short stints in prison". Like father like son.


Melbourne, Australia - When Archie Roach speaks, his eyes close, deep in thought, as if taking on the countenance of an ancient, blind seer.

Reflecting on his life takes considerable courage; removed from his family as a child as part of Australia's Stolen Generations, Roach would experience alcoholism, homelessness and even a suicide attempt before sobering up and becoming the internationally-recognised singer-songwriter most know him as today.

His life story is now recounted in a new autobiography, Tell Me Why, which - like his music and lyrics - is written with passion, beauty and a hint of sadness.

"[Many people] hear about Stolen Generations but don't realise the journey that one makes, or takes, to find their way back - if they do at all," Roach said. "I wanted to write about that, and what I've learned through the years."

Now 64, Roach's love of music came from his adoptive father, a Scottish migrant who would sing the traditional songs of his homeland around the dinner table.

After being removed as part of Australia's policy to assimilate Indigenous children into white families, Roach was adopted into what he describes as a stable home.

It was during high school that he would receive a letter from his then unbeknownst older Indigenous sister that would set Roach on a remarkable journey to find his biological family.

After considerable time spent drinking heavily and living on the streets - including a few short stints in prison - Roach would eventually reconnect with his Aboriginal family.

Deep-seated trauma

Yet the trauma of his removal, and the impact it had had on his community, was deeply felt. He would begin to write songs about his, and his family's, experiences, and in 1991, rose to prominence with the song Took the Children Away.

Tell Me Why describes in considerable detail, the effect of his removal and separation would have, including on his own children and grandchildren.

"I explain to [my grandchildren] about being taken away and it's very confusing for them at first. And they get older and they think about it and it actually upsets them when you talk about it now. Because they are hurt, because their own grandfather was taken away from their family.

"They can't understand why that would have happened in the first place. And that's the question they ask too - 'why did they do that?' [And I have to say] 'I don't know. They probably thought we'd be better off.'"

Along with the emotional trauma, Roach said the removals had severe cultural implications. "You couldn't speak [Indigenous] language - they'd lock you up. You couldn't practise cultural practices - they'd lock you up or withhold rations.

"So we grew up and we weren't able to teach our children and grandchildren language, dance and things like that."

Roach said he was fortunate to eventually find his biological family, but acknowledged that there were many Indigenous children who did not.

He said he hopes that readers understand "that this happened, in this country. Not just to me but thousands of other children. And some of them never made it back. And some of us did, and were fortunate."

SOURCE  






Activist judges skip democracy

JAMES ALLAN

Last Monday on this page Professor George Williams, the dean of law at the University of NSW, discussed how High Court appointments ought to be made. His words seriously mischaracterise what his opponents are arguing, what is at stake in general terms, and what would be the effect of following his proposed prescriptions.

Williams was responding to the criticism of our High Court for its recent decision in the Love case that foreigners of Aboriginal des­cent could not be classified as aliens and were not subject to the Migratio­n Act. Voting 4-3, the High Court majority talked of “deeper truths”, “questions of other­ness” and “metaphysical constraints and connections” that purportedly amounted to some sort of higher and transcendent knowledge that flows to some humans­, not others, based on the happenstance of their genetic inheritance.

Using this sort of premise the majority held, in Williams’s words, “that Aboriginal people are not aliens under the Constitution”. More bluntly, though, what the High Court did was to remove from the elected parliament any ability to legislate to deport such people and did so in breach of the established federalist heads-of-powers jurisprudence.

For many, like me, this was judici­al activism writ large. And because three of the four judges in the majority were appointed by this Coalition government, we called for this government to start appointing constitutional conservatives to the top court.

Williams characterises our call as a desire to appoint “capital-C conservatives” to the court. The implication is that we want those with first-order conservative polit­ical inclinations. But that’s not the case. We seek the appointment of judges who will interpret the Constitutio­n in a non-activist way.

Given its myriad references to “until the parliament otherwise provides” and the clear intention of the framers to leave big decis­ions to the democratic process, what we want is the appointment of judges who do not — without clear and legitimate written authority for doing so, something patent­ly absent in Love — take things off the democratic table.

Before Love, nothing stopped parliament from legislating for the judicially imposed outcome in that case. Well, nothing but the fact that 90 per cent of voters would have been incensed. Williams, in effect, is arguing for a sort of judicia­l elite who can take things off the democratic table via the way they interpret our written Constitution — what is known as a “living constitution” interpretative approach, under which the document is interpreted in light of changing social values. (Or, to be accurate, in the light of what the top judges say are society’s social values, who decide by voting — four votes beats three, regardless of the quality of the judgments.)

I have consistently noted that Labor has recently picked better constit­utional conservative judges than the Liberals, with Patrick Keane the best of the lot.

Williams therefore turns what is an argument about the scope of democratic decision-making into one where people supposedly want appointees chosen “based on their political views”.

That’s wrong. We want people who interpret the Constitution the way it was intended — to leave these big-ticket issues to the elect­ed parliament. It’s the judges’ interpretative views that matter, not their political druthers. And those are totally legitimate views to consider when appointing them.

Williams talks as though caring specifically about this sort of inter­pretative restraint “would erode confidence in the judiciary”. Frank­ly, when top judges indulge in the decon­structionist mumbo jumbo (“otherness”, “deeper truths”, etc) to forbid elected parliaments from deporting only Aborig­inal-claiming criminals, those judges are doing a pretty good job of eroding confidence all by themselves.

Any Liberal government worth its salt, Labor ones in the mould of Bob Carr too, ought to have the interpretative views of its appointees in mind before it gives any of them the nod — or face heavy criticism. Williams’s attempt to portray such criticism as nothing more than party politics is a red herring.

He also urges us to go down the British route and enact a law that changes how judges are appointed. In Britain that means, in effect, that committees of top judges and lawyers make the calls. Yep, the lawyerly caste (which often does not share the voters’ values) picks its own successors on the courts.

That, too, removes all democratic checks and balances. It gives you the sort of judges who, in the two Gina Miller cases, decided to overturn centuries of precedents to make life harder on those in favour of Brexit.

That could be because­ all those top judges, so far as anyone could tell, were Remainers.

Merit may be in the eye of the beholder: if so, letting judges pick their own successors is an awful proposal.

It’s one Canada’s Justin Trudeau has shunned; one that has brought the British judges so low in the esteem of many that Boris Johnson is considering wide-ranging reforms.

Every time you criticise judges you are not asking for your own first-order political views to be advanced­.

The complaint here is a second-order issue: how properly to interpret our Constit­ution so its intended democratic outcomes stay put.

SOURCE  






A level playing field for schoolchildren?

Over 100 countries have closed schools impacting 850 million students. But Scott Morrison says there’s no need.

It started with a ban on large outdoor gatherings; no more football games, concerts, food festivals or street fairs. Now the libraries, museum­s and cinemas are closing, social and junior sport seasons have halted, fun runs and gym classes are out, even Friday prayers at mosques are a no-go.

Life as we know it has stopped in the aim of achieving “social distancin­g”, a term few of us except the most committed introverts would have heard until recently.

But not schools. Those institutions of learning — where hundreds of students, in many cases more than 1000, pile in five days a week, seated shoulder-to-shoulder in close quarters, sharing equip­ment and supplies, bumping into each other in the hallways and playing tag in the playground — have been advised to remain open.

It’s been a tough sell for the health experts and politicians charged with getting the message across. Unveiling tough new crowd-control measures on Wednesday, Scott Morrison pointed out that he was happy to comply with official advice. “As a father, I’m happy for my kids to go to school,” the Prime Minister said.

“There is only one reason your kids shouldn’t be going to school and that is if they are unwell.”

Yet schools across the country are reporting significantly reduced attendance as parents, fearing their children will catch the potentially deadly coronavirus if they continue to attend school, keep them at home.

Teachers are also anxious and many are angry. On social media, where teachers have a robust presence­, they vent about being used as babysitters, accusing the government of sacrificing them and their health for the nation’s economic interests.

As teachers unions have rightly pointed out, there is a contradiction between banning large public gatherings and insisting teachers and children mingle in close quarters for up to 30 hours a week.

Mass gatherings

NSW Teachers Federation president Angelo Gavrielatos estim­ates that 30 per cent of schools have more than 500 stud­ents, with the state’s largest public school having a population in exces­s of 2000 students.

“Schools have been told to implem­ent a range of social distancing measures, which include keeping a distance of 1.5m between persons and minimising physical contact where possible,” Mr Gavrielato­s said this week.

“However, the design of many of our schools and the size of our classrooms make this impossible.”

School administrators have been told they can help to minim­ise the risk of COVID-19 transmission by implementing strategies to restrict physical contact between staff and students. They’ve been told to cancel all non-essential activitie­s, including assemblies, excursions, camps, school sports, even parent-teacher interviews.

Playgrounds have been re­arranged, and recess and lunch times have been staggered to reduce­ large groups congregating.

It’s not been easy. As any prim­ary teacher will attest, small children love hugs. Plus, with their clumsy hands and roaming fingers­, they are still learning the basics of personal hygiene.

There have been reports of kids playing coronavirus-themed tag in the playground, while one ­Victorian secondary school had to sternly remind its students this week of acceptable behavioural standards after learning some old­er children had been deliberately coughing and spitting on others.

Rising anxiety

According to NSW Primary Principals Association president Phil Seymour, anxiety within schools is rising. Principals are being bombarded with questions and complaints from teachers and parents concerned that the virus could spread through the school; and that staff and children would ­become sick and infect those at home, including elderly and vulnera­ble family members.

“They feel like they’re being thrust on to the frontline of this thing,” Mr Seymour said

As the head of Sydney’s 150 Catholic schools pointed out on Tuesday — before apparently being pulled into line by the national­ Catholic schools body — many parents are ignoring the government’s advice and keeping their children at home.

More broadly, parents appear split. The Australian conducted a Facebook poll on Wednesday asking people if they felt comfortable with schools remaining open.

Although the poll continues, more than 3600 people have voted — 55 per cent say they are comfortable with schools remaining open and 45 per cent say they are not.

According to UNESCO, 102 countries have closed schools and educational institutions nationwide in response to this pandemic, impacting more than 849.4 million young people. Closures in Aust­ralia have been limited to a handful of schools that have reported COVID-19 cases, or close contact with cases, as well as a growing list of mainly metropolitan independ­ent schools that have the resources and capability to send students home to continue their learning online.

Digital classrooms

One of the latest to close its doors, Kambala girls school in Sydney’s affluent eastern suburbs, ­assured parents it was in the fortunate position of having “an effective learning management system” that would enable remote learning.

“This is not the first time the school has faced such issues,” it said, in a statement to parents, noting­ that the school closed for a period in 1919 to counter the influenza epidemic of the time.

“Necessity is the mother of invention­ and through the school’s remote learning systems we remain true to, and confident in, our vision of inspired learning, and empowering young women of integrity.”

While reports of COVID-19 transmission in schools remains low, there are social, educational and economic benefits to keeping schools open. The Australian Health Protection Principal Committee, whose membership ­includes chief health officers from the states and territories, met recently­ to consider school closures in relation to the community transmission of COVID-19. The committee’s most recent advice to government was that “pre-emptive school closures are not likely to be proportionate or effective as a public health intervention to prevent community transmission of COVID-19 at this time”.

As Victorian Chief Health Officer­ Brett Sutton says, for pre-emptive school closures to be effectiv­e, prolonged closure is required­ and “it would be unclear when they could be reopened”. “If there were still a large pool of susceptible students when schools are reopened, there would be likely to be re-emergence of transmission in the community,” he says.

Mr Morrison spelled this out on Wednesday. “Whatever we do, we have to do for at least six months. That means the disruption that would occur from the closure of schools around this country, make no mistake, would be severe,” he said.

High economic cost

A report on social distancing on the federal Health Department website makes clear that while school closure was “moderately effectiv­e” in reducing flu and delayin­g the peak of an epidemic, “this measure is associated with a very high economic cost and social impacts”. “School closures should therefore be considered only in a severe pandemic and for the shortest ­duration possible,” it says.

SOURCE  






State poised for power revolution

This is all theory with no consideration of cost or practicality

QUEENSLAND has the chance to shore up the 32,000 jobs that rely on mining and energy generation by digging up the ingredients for renewables, a report produced for the state's biggest construction and infrastructure companies says.

The 2020 Major Projects Pipeline Report released yesterday by the Queensland Major Contractors Association and the Infrastructure Association of Queensland warns changing global attitudes and climate change represents a risk to the state's biggest industries. But it also says Queensland is "extremely well-placed to benefit from movements towards environmental sustainability and a zero-carbon economy".

"Queensland can leverage from its own natural and comparative advantages in the green economy including its world leading solar resources, access to 'next generation' commodities including copper, lead, zinc, silver, phosphate and rare earths to build new industries that will help drive down carbon emissions, and the development of new 'green' energy from renewable sources including hydrogen.

"Supporting the global effort to reduce emissions will benefit very important industry sectors in Queensland tourism and agriculture —- which are highly susceptible to climate change impacts.

"Increasing climate activism, both in Australia and globally, presents structural risks to traditional Queensland industries such as coal mining and fossil fuel power generation which directly provide employment to up to 32,000 Queenslanders, particularly in regional towns."

Coal tips $4.2 billion a year into the Queensland Government coffers in royalties, the report says. "Environmental sustainability provides Queensland with a massive economic opportunity which is potentially far greater than the fossil fuel industry," the report says.

The Queensland Mayor Projects Pipeline 2020 report shows significant projects such as Inland Rail, Gold Coast Light Rail Stage 3, Cross River Rail, Brisbane Metro and upgrades to the MI, Bruce Highway and essential water infrastructure developments are all underway or close to starting, but private investment is badly lagging and with it the 6600 extra construction jobs riding on megaprojects.

The report says there are 222 projects worth at least $50 million each across the state, totalling $50.6 billion in the pipeline from 2019-20 to 2023-24.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 19.3.20

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







20 March 2020

Reserve bank to start printing money

When people can't spend, the government can -- mostly on bailouts of troubled businesses

Australia's central bank today announced it would use the full extent of its monetary policy powers to stem the economic fallout from COVID-19.

The Reserve Bank (RBA) announced on Thursday it would commence quantitative easing tomorrow, as well as cutting Australia's cash rate to a new record low of 0.25%.

It's the first time ever the RBA has cut rates twice in a month or implemented quantitative easing, after the Board scheduled an emergency board meeting on Monday, with an impending recession potentially looming.

The coronavirus has battered the Australian economy, with the government attempting to stop the spread of the virus by banning overseas travel and gatherings of over 100 people, decimating tourism and retail sectors.

In a statement, RBA Governor Philip Lowe announced a target for the yield on 3-year Australian Government bonds of around 0.25%.

"This will be achieved through purchases of Government bonds in the secondary market," Dr Lowe said.

"Purchases of Government bonds and semi-government securities across the yield curve will be conducted to help achieve this target as well as to address market dislocations.

Dr Lowe said the RBA's main goal was to support the Australian economy through these unprecedented times.

"The primary response to the virus is to manage the health of the population, but other arms of policy, including monetary and fiscal policy, play an important role in reducing the economic and financial disruption resulting from the virus," he said.

"At some point, the virus will be contained and the Australian economy will recover.

"In the interim, a priority for the Reserve Bank is to support jobs, incomes and businesses, so that when the health crisis recedes, the country is well placed to recover strongly."

The RBA also announced it would provide lenders with funding of at least $90 billion if they increase funding to small and medium-sized business, in an effort to keep this sector afloat throughout the pandemic.

What is quantitative easing?

Quantitative easing, also known as QE, is the process by which the RBA uses its cash reserves (aka printing money) to buy government bonds.

In some cases, the RBA can also buy private bonds, but has elected to not do so in the announced program.

The best way to think about QE is the RBA spends huge quantities of cash it has created to ease monetary policy.

But we'll get into the nitty gritty to really understand the concept.

Firstly, a government bond is a relatively low-risk investment product which essentially involves investors lending money to the government for a set period of time, at a predetermined rate of return, which is referred to as the yield or a bond's interest rate.

They're considered quite low risk, as it's considered highly unlikely the government will go broke and fail to repay this debt.

So with the RBA set to buy billions of dollars worth of government bonds, the government is given a lot more cash to spend and this extra money is flushed through the economy.

The RBA's purchase also raises the price of bonds and lowers bond yields, which in turn, lowers funding costs for lenders, allowing them to cut the interest rates on home loans and business loans.

Coupled with low-interest rates, banks are better off lending money than holding onto it.

So we arrive back at the beginning: the RBA spends huge quantities of cash it has created, to ease monetary policy.

Essentially, QE should have the same effect on rates as a rate cut would, but the RBA was all out of rope on rate cuts and had to turn to QE.

SOURCE  






Employment data very good for now but rocky road ahead

The Government is celebrating unexpectedly good employment figures released today, which show the number of Australians in work has exceeded 13 million people.

Employment Minister Michaelia Cash held a press conference to announce the data, saying there’s now a “record number” of people in work.

Senator Cash used the phrase “record number” several times, and in any other time it would be a momentous day for the Coalition Government. The coronavirus has changed everything.

Australia’s unemployment rate fell to 5.1 per cent for the month of February and the participation rate is at the highest point in almost 20 years.

But there’s a hidden detail in the result that paints a dire economic picture of the months ahead as the coronavirus crisis worsens.

The number of underemployed Australians – that is, people who are technically employed but don’t work enough hours to reasonably get by – has hit a record high of 1.18 million.

“Today’s labour force figures released by the Australian Bureau of Statistics are sobering, but just the beginning of what Australians are set to face,” Labor’s employment spokesman Brendan O’Connor said.

An indicator of the impact of coronavirus on employment is seen in the monthly hours worked data, Mr O’Connor said, which decreased by three million in February.

“Australians face difficult times ahead in terms of unemployment and underemployment, because of COVID 19,” he said.

Senator Cash conceded the strong figures don’t reflect the challenges currently being faced by many, particularly small businesses as a result of coronavirus.

“But what the figures do show – and the fact that we do have a record number of Australians in employment – is that we are facing this crisis and we come from a very good base,” she said.

SOURCE  






Alan Jones claims Australia’s response to coronavirus is worse than the virus

As Australians are warned to prepare for the “long haul” – with the possibility that extreme measures preventing a widespread coronavirus outbreak could stay in place for 18 months – radio shock jock Alan Jones has suggested that some Aussies’ response to the pandemic could be worse than the pandemic itself.

Six Australians have died as a result of the infection, and there are now 596 cases of the virus confirmed across the nation.

But, Mr Jones said on his radio show on Thursday morning, only one of these cases was “on the books” as what the World Health Organisation (WHO) would define as “serious”.

“There is another way of looking at this, which may provide some comfort,” the 78-year-old, who is broadcasting from his Fitzroy Falls home, said, after listing off a series of statistics relating to the number of worldwide cases, deaths and recovered patients.

“No one’s diminishing the significance of it, but we could just go on accurate figures.”

While the worldwide cases – a statistic he said he didn’t regard “as having a lot of significance” – had increased “slightly”, so too had the number of recovered cases.

“They’re at 84,314,” Mr Jones said, citing the latest statistics at the time of him going to air. “That is – they no longer have a problem.”

Mr Jones said that of the 170 countries in the world, 112 were yet to report any deaths.

And, per WHO statistics, he said that the total number of coronavirus cases in Australia per one million people was only 22.

After once again accusing the media of “alarmist” reporting and apocalyptic headlines, Mr Jones said that the information he provided on his show about the coronavirus outbreak was not going to be “elaborated, embellished or exaggerated”.

“You know, people don’t have an in-built mechanism to handle this sort of stuff,” he said, adding that people were “sick of this”.

“People are hearing this alarmism every day. It’s on the news, it’s in the papers, it’s on social media. It’s almost impossible for them to, on the one hand, be fully informed – they don’t the voracity or the truth of what they’re being told – and secondly, they can’t escape it.”

Earlier this week, Mr Jones expressed his concern for his listeners, stating that the media had done a “poor job” at informing, advising and not alarming them.

“The fact that people are fighting over toilet paper indicates the deep sense of alarm,” he said.

“Unless I’m moving in different circles, the almost universal reaction I am getting is that we have gone mad.”

Mr Jones said this morning that while supermarkets had tried to do the right thing by opening early for the elderly and the disabled, the question was no longer what the shops were doing but what Australians were doing, following news that police had been forced to stand guard in grocery stores to stop violence between stockpiling shoppers.

“What are we doing?” Mr Jones asked. “How has our behaviour reached this point? Are we a worse society than we were 20 years ago? I think we are.”

The Sky News host came under fire this week for reportedly claiming the concern around the coronavirus is “nothing more than hysteria”.

But, Mr Jones told Sky News on Wednesday night, he “never said the pandemic is hysteria”, saying that he has “persistently stuck to the facts” updated every day by the WHO.

“I have sought to dismantle the hysteria by sticking to the facts as know them today,” he said.

SOURCE  






There is no place for politics in the appointment of High Court judges

The High Court decision that Aboriginal people are not aliens under the Constitution has provoked calls for the appointment of “capital-C conservatives” to the bench. This could ensure that ­future High Court decisions are in line with conservative values on identity politics through to economic policy.

The idea is flawed and misguided, and it threatens to undermine public confidence in the courts, as well as damaging the ­independence of our judges.

Appointments to the High Court are the sole discretion of the federal government. The process is secretive, with no advertising or selection criteria. The Constitution merely states that the justices “shall be appointed by the Governor-General in Council”. In practice, this means that the ­governor-general makes the appointment on the advice of the prime minister and the cabinet. The public is told when the government has made up its mind.

In announcing a High Court judge, federal governments inevitably say that the selection is on merit. This obscures the fact that merit is in the eye of the beholder, and that in the absence of criteria the choice is open-ended between many candidates. Legal ability is one factor that is considered, but past choices have also been influenced by personal friendships, gender, the state a person comes from and guesses as to how the person might decide key controversies, especially those involving disputes between the states and the commonwealth.

References to merit hide the fact that the system of appointing High Court judges is highly political. This was a deliberate choice on the part of the framers of the Constitution, who followed the British method of appointing judges. It was felt that our elected representatives should act as a check on the High Court. Leaving the choice to the government creates a form of judicial accountability. But this method comes with costs. In deciding who to appoint, our politicians naturally look to political advantage, whether it be through patronage, public approval or favourable decisions.

This is why so many countries, including the UK, have introduced new systems for judicial appointment. These limit political discretion and instead favour independent processes that identify the finest candidates according to publicised selection criteria.

Australia’s system of appointing High Court judges has produced a succession of strong courts despite problems with the method of selection. This reflects admirable self-restraint on the part of our governments. There have certainly been questionable appointments, but these are exceptional. No government has ever sought to use its power to overtly “stack” the court. They have kept an eye on ensuring that the High Court includes people of the highest legal calibre.

This would change, and the frailties of the system exposed, if governments publicly sought to appoint judges based on their political views.

Australia has flirted with this in the past. In the late 1990s, the then deputy prime minister in the Howard Coalition government, Tim Fischer, called for the appointment of a capital-C conservative judge to the High Court. The government in 1998 selected Ian Callinan, who had sharply criticised High Court decisions such as Mabo. In 2003, Dyson Heydon was chosen after giving a well-publicised speech that attacked the “judicial activism” of the Mason era.

Fortunately, the government did not continue down this path. It found that it could appoint excellent judges from a range of backgrounds without calling attention to any perceived political leanings. The government no doubt also recognised the dangers in promoting the appointment of capital-C conservatives, and in being seen to appoint judges on that basis.

Choosing judges because of their politics would erode confidence in the judiciary. Once a judge has been labelled, rightly or wrongly, according to their politics, people will assume that the judge has a predetermined outlook. People will question whether the parties are receiving a fair hearing by an independent judge able to respond to the arguments with an open mind.

This scenario is not far-fetched. It is exactly the problem facing the US Supreme Court. Its judges are seen at appointment as being either conservative or progressive, Republican or Democrat. The result is a politicised court in which the judges often split along party lines. What is more often newsworthy in the US is when a judge is seen as having departed from their political typecasting. By contrast, it is rarely possible to tell on Australia’s High Court which government has appointed a judge.

Another consequence would be tit-for-tat appointments to the High Court. If the Coalition prioritised the appointment of capital-C conservatives, Labor would be compelled to respond. The court is too important an institution for ­either side of politics to abdicate to the other. No doubt Labor would come under intense pressure in government to appoint capital-P progressive judges, a term that is equally harmful and meaningless.

Australia should reform how we appoint High Court judges. We should bring more transparency to the process, along with a clearer sense of the qualities that make a good judge. These qualities should not focus on the judge’s political leanings, but on their legal skills and whether they have the intellect and independence to fairly resolve the most difficult legal questions. This is the direct opposite of the idea that the High Court should be stacked with conservative or progressive judges.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here









19 March 2020

Panic buying?

A reader writes:

Scott Morrison tells everyone to practice “social distancing” which means as much as possible keeping distance and avoiding crowds like shopping centres so as to minimise transmissions of infection, and then he reprimands and insults everyone for stocking up so that they don’t have to visit shopping centres so often.

That reminds me of thoughtless primary school teachers who so often tell children to hurry up and then yell at them to stop running.

Besides, most people are not panicking or panic buying. They are just stocking up, not because they think food will run out, but to reduce how often they have to go to the supermarkets.

Panic is hysterical uncontrolled action. What people are doing is controlled action in accordance with their concerns and best thinking.

It is insulting to tell Australian's they are panicking, or that they are behaving poorly. They are not. A few might be, but they always are. The bulk are acting well. Most Australians are a sensible people. The government and the press should treat us as such. 






We built this city

Bettina Arndt reports:

With all the dreadful news, I thought it might be nice to focus on something positive.

A man wrote to me the other day and reminded me of this wonderful 1932 poster, Lunch atop a Skyscraper.



My correspondent wanted to know if anything was planned to promote International Men’s Day, this year to be held on November 19, 2020. He suggested pairing this extraordinary poster with the slogan “We Built This City” – as a means of celebrating the men who “work in dangerous jobs to feed their families and build our civilisation.” 

I thought that was a great idea and was really happy when a little team of my supporters contacted me, volunteering to help bring people on board to make this happen. They are calling themselves the MensDay team. 

The idea is to make the day really positive. They suggest it should be a day to recognise the men around you at home and at work.  A day to celebrate the diversity of backgrounds, personalities, talents and experience they bring to tasks large and small, and to acknowledge men more widely as builders, providers, mentors and protectors.

Sound good? Well, to start with they want people everywhere to get to work, looking around them to see what local organisations, councils, workplaces were involved in International Women’s Day. And then start making careful, polite enquiries about whether these organisations would consider doing something to support IMD on November 19. They suggest you try to get a couple of people you know to work with you to start making these approaches, preferably including some women. Often having women make the case for doing something for men means organisations are more likely to take notice.

If you are willing to start working on this, contact the MensDay team so they can help coordinate activities. Eventually they will produce posters and flyers that could be used to advertise the event and also will circulate advice regarding possible activities. Write to MensDayPlan@gmail.com.

They would love more people to join the coordinating team so if you have time and skills to contribute please get in touch with them.

Bettina@bettinaarndt.com.au






Mr Morrison, and cut the red tape to set business free

The Germans have a long and clever word for what the Coalition government has lacked these past seven years: Vorsorgeprinzip. It means the foresight principle. Had the government shown more foresight, the economy might not need taxpayers to shell out billions to deal with the economic consequences of a spreading public health crisis.

With the serious effects from the coronavirus sinking in daily, the message is blunt and urgent: the Morrison government needs to apply better foresight so that regulation is aimed not just at the good times, but for the bad times too, to protect the economy from the next economic shock, whatever its derivations. What is clear right now is that good-time laws — the chief example of which are the poorly named “responsible lending” laws, but there are many others — do not serve us well when the economy heads south.

Serious leaders govern for the day when the health of the Australian economy is in decline. That day is here. More businesses will go bust in coming months. Thousands of Australians will likely lose their jobs. Consumers will suffer from both, and others too, as production lines come under pressure. It is time for the Morrison government to level with Australians, not just about the unfolding health crisis, but about the state of our economy.

The Treasurer cannot keep telling us the fundamentals are fine. The economy is facing a recession in GDP terms. If you count population growth, we have already hit a recessionary bottom.

Frankly, Australian governments have had it too damn good. After 29 consecutive years of economic growth, federal and state, Labor and Coalition governments this past decade have regulated for the good times, choosing Keynesian spending over structural reforms. Only now is it becoming evident just how badly they failed us, choosing more and more regulation of business, always claiming that each new layer will be good for consumers and the economy.

When the stuff hits the fan, as it has with COVID-19, it is dawning that all those years of cumulative regulation, adding layer upon layer of burdens on business, are very bad for consumers, not to mention employees and other stakeholders in a business.

The likely consequences of this downturn might be less severe had governments, both Labor and Coalition, regulated businesses and the economy to help the country avoid, or at least better survive, a recession, rather than over-regulating business in the good times just for the sake of “doing something”.

If the coronavirus is to have a silver lining, it will be the acceptance of this reality. And it has been made even more bleedingly obvious following the statement released on Monday by the Council of Financial Regulators. In a two-page statement in response to the COVID-19 emergency, the co-­ordinating body for Australia’s main financial regulators said, in effect, that regulators will offer regulatory relief and apply laws with a lighter touch to ensure that businesses can better serve their customers.

The council, chaired by the ­Reserve Bank of Australia, goes on to say: “For their part, APRA and ASIC will take account of the circumstances in which lenders, acting reasonably, are currently operating during the prevailing circumstances when administering their respective laws and regulations. Both agencies also stand ready to deal with problems firms may encounter in complying with the law due to the impact of COVID-19 through a facilitative and constructive approach. In particular, each agency will, where warranted, provide relief or waivers from regulatory requirements.”

This amounts to a series of damning admissions that regulatory requirements hinder business and hurt consumers. It is an admission that responsible lending laws (among other boom-time laws and regulations) are a disaster — drying up credit long before COVID-19 hit, and especially when credit is most needed. It is also an admission that we are far better relying on banks’ innate desire to avoid bad loans, and their hundreds of years of experience lending money.

There are multiple other examples. Laws facilitating green lawfare and a rapacious class action industry are killing projects we will need. The financial advisory industry is suffocating under the weight of Hayne-induced regulation, meaning financial advice is now unaffordable and not available to average Australians at the time they may most need it.

Some of Kenneth Hayne’s suggestions were long overdue, but others were overkill. The council’s call for more pragmatism from regulators is an admission there has not been enough pragmatism before. Without saying so explicitly, it is also an admission that governments have over-regulated businesses in the good times on the premise of protecting consumers, only to discover that, when economic fundamentals turn sour, those same regulatory burdens hurt consumers. In other words, the council’s statement amounts to a confession that nimble businesses, not hamstrung by heavy-handed and misguided regulation, are better placed to survive recessions, keeping people in jobs and serving customers.

This extraordinary statement from the Council of Financial Regulators raises some obvious questions. First, shouldn’t the Morrison government and Australia’s main financial regulators apply laws and regulations in a pragmatic way at all times, not just when a virus threatens the community? Put another way, the statement shows how far governments and regulators have drifted from regulating business through the full economic cycle, good and bad, not just for the peaks of economic good times. On that score, if this series of admissions does not put serious reform of over-regulation smack bang in the middle of the Treasurer’s desk, what will?

The statement should force some serious thinking within Treasury about its raison d’etre. Why, for example, has the government wasted time on secondary reforms such as banning cash transactions of more than $10,000 to catch a few crooks rather than reforming the regulatory system so business survives a recession? As straight-talking businessman Tony Shepherd put it last week: “A holiday from new business regulation at all levels of government would inspire confidence. A windback would be nirvana.”

Josh Frydenberg has the weight of expectation on him. He is as keen to emulate former Liberal treasurer Peter Costello as he is to avoid being another Wayne Swan by making promises he can’t keep. Frydenberg should remember Paul Keating too. He is the country’s finest role model of a treasurer, who levelled with the country when we faced the last recession. It’s worth repeating what he said in 1986: “If in the final analysis Australia is so undisciplined, so disinterested in its salvation and economic wellbeing that it doesn’t deal with … fundamental problems … then you are gone. You are a banana republic.”

This honesty about what Keating called Australia’s cargo cult mentality encouraged Australians to trust the Hawke-Keating government with structural reforms that altered the trajectory of this country for the better, helping to set up these 29 years of growth.

The next recession might be another one we have to have, if it shakes off the last vestiges of complacency stemming from Australia’s newest cargo cult mentality, brings an end to false narratives about the state of the economy, and inspires the government to ­finally front up to serious reform.

SOURCE  






Victoria lifts moratorium on onshore gas, but permanently bans fracking

The Andrews Labor government in Victoria has announced it will lift a moratorium on the exploration of onshore conventional gas reserves, but will enshrine a permanent ban on fracking and coal seam gas exploration in the state’s constitution.

The Victorian government will introduce two bills to parliament, with one effectively lifting a moratorium and allowing for a restart of onshore conventional gas exploration from 1 July 2021.

The second bill will seek to amend the Victorian state constitution, enshrining a permanent ban on fracking and coal seam gas exploration. Such amendments can be passed by the Victorian parliament, and it may not be necessary to be put to a vote by Victorian electors.

In lifting the moratorium, Victorian premier Daniel Andrews said his government is responding to scientific findings, as well as delivering on an election promise to include fracking ban into the state’s constitution.

“We’re backing the science to create jobs, boost energy supply and support regional communities across the state,” Andrews said in a statement.

“We promised to enshrine our historic ban on fracking in the constitution and we’re delivering – to protect farming communities, and our huge food and fibre sector.”

Adding to this, Victorian minister for resources Jaclyn Symes said that the decision had followed an evaluation of scientific research on the environmental impacts of gas exploration which confirmed the need to lock in a ban on fracking but supported a restart to conventional gas exploration.

“Three years of research shows securing local gas supply for Victorians will not come at the cost of the state’s groundwater supplies, agricultural industries or our farming’s clean and green reputation,” Smyes said.

The Victorian government placed a moratorium on fracking within the state in 2017, which has attracted criticism from Coalition governments at both State and Federal levels, which have advocated for a ramping-up of Australian gas exploration.

The announcement follows the release of findings from a three-year study into Victoria’s gas resources, which concluded that the recommencement of onshore conventional gas exploration would not have “any material impact on ground and surface water quality or quantity.”

Additionally, the report found that ” the minimum, low and medium scenarios” for gas development would “have no material impact on existing farm industries, food and biosecurity” but may have a slightly negative impact under a “high” gas development scenario.

The assessment completed by the Geological Survey of Victoria estimated 128 to 830 petajoules of onshore gas reserves have been identified across Victoria. The extraction of this gas would be expected to contribute an additional 0.1 to 0.3 per cent to Victoria’s greenhouse gas emissions, not accounting for emissions released through the use of the gas itself.

Federal energy minister Angus Taylor has said that a boost to Victoria’s gas production would be a core demand of any bilateral deal struck between the federal and Victorian governments on energy investment.

The NSW government has already struck such a deal, securing $1 billion in federal funding towards energy developments, and in return agreed to boost gas production by up to 90 petajoules a year.

“We would like to replicate [the NSW bilateral deal] in other states and Victoria is one we would like to do it with. I mean we’ve been very clear about the prerequisites for that but it is a deal we want to do. I’ve spoken with the Victorian Minister about it,” Taylor said.

“There’s been no secret that we want to see more gas in the system in Victoria.”

The lifting of Victoria’s moratorium on onshore conventional gas opens the door to Victoria striking a similar compromise with the federal government, which may see an increase in gas production facilitating federal government co-investment in clean energy projects.

The Energy Users Association of Australia welcomed the announcement and called on both the State and Federal governments to now boost the support of natural gas.

“While just supplying more gas isn’t a silver bullet that will solve all the issues in our gas markets, the increased competition and availability of supply is a critical step in the right direction,” EUAA CEO Andrew Richards said.

“State and Federal Governments must now move quickly to accelerate development of Victorian conventional gas reserves.  We encourage them to  work proactively together to ensure we not only get more gas flowing but enhance competition by supporting diversity if suppliers.”

The Victorian Greens labelled the decision to recommence onshore gas exploration as “disaster capitalism”, claiming that the Andrews government was using the coronavirus outbreak as an excuse to backtrack on the gas bans.

“It is truly appalling that the Victorian Labor Government is trying to pull the wool over our eyes by making this disastrous announcement in the middle of a pandemic. Opening up more drilling for gas is terrible for our farmers, environment and climate,” Victorian Greens environment spokesperson Ellen Sandell said.

“What kind of future is Dan Andrews planning for us?”

This was a criticism echoed by the Doctors for the Environment, who said that now was not the time to be rolling back environmental protections.

“As a health professional the timing of this announcement is entirely inappropriate. Gas is a polluting fossil fuel that puts Victorians’ health and safety at risk,” Doctors for the Environment spokesperson and GP Katherine Barraclough said.

“We’re facing an unprecedented health crisis at the moment with COVID-19, and the medical profession is stretched to the limit. Backpedalling on the onshore gas drilling ban at this time is an highly irresponsible move by the Andrews Government.”

Environmental groups likewise slammed the decision, saying that the lifting of the moratorium would work to undermine Victoria’s efforts to date to address climate change.

“Climate science makes it abundantly clear we need to keep most fossil fuels in the ground if we are to have a chance of avoiding dangerous climate change,” Friends of the Earth’s campaigns coordinator Cam Walker said.

“Today’s decision is a profound lapse of judgement by the Andrews government. One that undermines their other achievements on climate and energy policy”.

The moratorium was set to expire on 30 June of this year, and the Victorian government has said it will now commence work on the development of consultation guidelines and processes for the gas industry to engage with communities.

The Andrews government expects that the lifting of the moratorium could help generate more than $300 million in economic activity and support the creation of up to 6,400 jobs.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





18 March, 2020

No more quad bikes on Australian farms?

Rigid new safety laws to blame

For primary producers who have lost loved ones in quad bike accidents, the current situation is complicated.

The conflict lies between providing a safe workplace and the essential role of the vehicles.

Farmer and grazier Warren Jonsson from Ravenshoe in Far North Queensland tragically lost his father in a quad bike rollover in the late 1990s.

But he said the new mandatory factory-fitted roll bars had seen big manufacturers exiting the Australian market.

"They've got to modify their whole production line just to suit probably 2 per cent of the market," he said.

"They've opted to not send quads to Australia; they said 12 months ago they'd pull out, and that's exactly what's going to happen."

"There's got to be some waiver where you can put an aftermarket structure, roll bar on the bikes," he said. "People have got to be a bit accountable for their own doings."

Barcaldine grazier David Counsell said he was not surprised by the industry move, but admitted the safety measures were necessary.

"They're in some cases a necessary farm vehicle, but they've got a terrible track record for safety," he said.

"There's a significant liability there … big companies look at their risk and make according decisions."

He said he only used his quad bike a couple of days a year, mainly in wet conditions. "When I've really got to go down and have a look along a boggy creek for bogged sheep or something like that, I'm inherently aware of the risks this vehicle presents," he said.

Mr Counsell said there had been fatalities in the region and everyone he had spoken to had a story about the dangers they presented. "Where there's smoke there's fire," he said.

"It's not just the fatalities; there's a lot of situations where people end up in hospitals or really close calls."
Exiting the Australian industry

Supplier Polaris has confirmed it will stop selling quad bikes and All-Terrain Vehicles (ATV) in the Australian market this year.

Honda criticised the legislation and said it would force them to do the same in 2021, when the laws took full effect.

Polaris Australia's Alan Collins says safety measures will cause as many injuries as they save.

However, he said, it was not about the cost of fitting rollover safety measures. "We actually believe they cause as many injuries as they save," he said.

"There's no reliable science or data or evidence that we've seen that actually demonstrates that these devices offer any inherent safety value at all."

In October 2019, the Federal Government gave quad bike manufacturers two years to comply with new rollover protection legislation.

The safety standards required that manufacturers affix rollover safety stickers to new quad bikes within 12 months and install roll-over bars as standard within 24 months.

SOURCE  






Turn down tap on "environmental" water to save agriculture, say experts

Governments should slow down taking "environmental" water from the Murray-Darling Basin to save taxpayers $4bn and avoid further disrupting local communities, the head of a government-appointed panel says.

Farmer and agribusiness consultant Robbie Sefton said the inter-government agreement to take another massive slice of water from users to feed into the environment was beyond the ­capacity of local communities to absorb.

“If we slow it down, then communities can recover,” she said.

“Governments should match the pace of all further water recovery to the capacity of the system and basin communities to absorb and adjust to change.”

Ms Sefton said some scenarios modelled by experts appointed by the panel suggested a reduction in irrigation water usage could see dairy production in the southern basin decrease by 55 per cent, and rice fall by 32 per cent.

Her remarks came as Water Minister Keith Pitt released the panel’s draft report on social and economic conditions in the basin.

Ms Sefton’s views present a challenge to the government, which has until now said it wanted to proceed with all aspects of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan in time for completion in 2024.

The report says plans to take more water from users in the Murray-Darling Basin to restore to the environment should proceed only if local communities supported them. It also calls for more funds for research and development, warning that productivity in some sectors of agriculture was declining.

Last year, then water minister David Littleproud commissioned the panel following widespread anger over the adverse impact of the Murray-Darling Basin Plan.

Under the plan, the federal government has bought back water entitlements from irrigation farmers to restore to the environment, leading to a fall in agricultural production and causing economic decline in some towns.

An estimated 25 to 30 per cent has been taken from the available pool of water for irrigation.

The draft report, which followed extensive local meetings in the basin, found that current conditions were extremely challenging for many irrigation industries and dependent communities.

The report casts doubt on whether going forward with the plan would achieve its objectives.

“The panel considers there is insufficient evidence that future water recovery is being implemented to deliver water in the ­places needed to effectively achieve enhanced environmental outcomes, working river systems, and improved social wellbeing in the basin.

“There is growing recognition that the overall target for water recovery of 2750GL per year plus 450GL per year of efficiency measures cannot be achieved by 2024 without significant cost to the Australian taxpayer, and significant basin community dis­ruption,” the report says.

With the price of irrigation water very high, recovering the additional 250GL would cost more than $4bn, it says.

“We are certainly saying slow down the 450GL,” Ms Sefton said.

The report says there have been different social and economic outcomes across different parts of the basin. “Many smaller communities have less economic diversity and higher reliance on agriculture, and are more susceptible to shocks (such as drought) as a result,” it says.

Mr Pitt said while the government “remains committed to the Murray-Darling Basin Plan”, it would be “constantly monitored throughout its implementation”.

After seeking further input from interested parties, the panel will deliver its final report to Mr Pitt on April 30.

SOURCE  






Scott Morrison told to act on Greenie ‘lawfare’

The article below is one of many complaints about the costs and losses of Greenie activism in the courts.  Such activism goes on all the time and is huge in its financial impact.  You can hardly cut a tree down without being hit by an expensive lawsuit.

If a income-producing project is held up for some years in the courts, the income that might have been generated over that period is forever lost.  That is what economists call an opportunity cost. 

But there are large explicit costs too.  Very often the property will have to be maintained in some way during the waiting period and if it has been acquired with the aid of a bank loan, interest payments will have to be made during the period.  Those can be big costs. The article below estimates that projects worth about $65bn have been delayed since 2000 in Australia but that figure probably does not include the costs incurred before the project gets started.

So what to do about it all?  The article below puts forward a number of relatiely mild suggestions but the most effective measure would be to reinstate the old legal principle that the costs follow the verdict.  If you cause a person costs and losses by a lawsuit against him and you lose the lawsuit, you should have to pay the costs incurred by your target in defending himself.

For some reason that basic principle of natural justice usually seems to get lost in environmental lawsuits.  The righteousness of the litigant is somehow taken as insulating him from the costs of his actions.  That must stop.  Greenie donors have deep pockets but even they might think twice when asked to pay the lost income of a big mining project (for instance).

At the moment a lot of lawsuits are terminated by an agreed settlement and that settlement usually specifies that both parties will bear their own costs.  Corrective legislation would have to bar settlents from including such a clause.  Strict liability would have to be enforced where environmental lawsuits are concerned.


The shire of Broome is calling on Scott Morrison to crack down on activist charities that are “destroying existing industries” and blocking job-creating resources projects in Western Australia.

The council, which is located in the Kimberley region wants regulatory changes to give ­“accountability requirements” to charities that are using regulatory measures to delay or deter new projects.

Under the changes proposed by the council, activist charities that engage in misleading and deceptive conduct should either lose their charitable status or face being fined.

Charities would also be required to declare their expenditure on political activities; the remuneration of management; their top 20 donors; all government grants received; and any ­financial support given to other organisations involved in political advocacy.

The council passed the ­motion in late February, calling on its chief executive, Sam Mastrolembo, to make the demands in a letter to the Prime Minister.

“They are able to engage in unethical conduct because there is very little regulation holding them to account,” the council wrote in its draft letter.

“Should a public company or pastoralist act in the same manner and spread false information to the public, there would be considerable financial penalties and reputational damage. Not so for these charitable groups.”

The Australian revealed last week that “green” activists had used environmental laws to delay about $65bn worth of projects since 2000. The legal proceedings from conservation and green groups have forced companies into court for more than 10,000 days in the past 20 years.

In the past four years, the activist groups have used the federal environmental protection act to cause delays to seven major projects in regional areas, including the $16.5bn Adani coalmine in Queensland.

Resources Minister Keith Pitt told The Australian he would support any move to stop green groups using excessive legal claims to delay projects.

“People in regional areas are sick of seeing significant, job-­creating resources projects delayed by court action launched by activists with no connection to their area,” he said.

The development of the $31bn Browse Basin has faced delays for more than seven years after the Supreme Court of WA upheld legal protests from the Wilderness ­Society.

The development of the massive gas field is unlikely to start until 2021.

The council’s draft letter says activist charities are causing unemployment by “destroying legitimate industries that are the lifeblood of regional towns”.

“These activists are causing tax collection to decrease by destroying existing industries and preventing new tax-paying industries from being created,” the draft letter says.

“These groups are funded by faceless, unaccountable billionaires and millionaires, many of whom don’t live in Australia.

“Those whose livelihoods the activists destroy or disadvantage have no means to see who pulls the strings in the background.”

SOURCE  





A woman who decided to clean her Sydney train seat to protect herself from the coronavirus has shared the grim results – and it’s eye-opening

We’ve never been as aware of our surroundings as we are now. But in a bid to keep her personal space as germ free as possible amid the coronavirus panic, one woman has discovered just how filthy an everyday space really is.

Taking to Facebook, the woman explained she boarded a train from the Blue Mountains in NSW with a bottle of high-grade cleaner and decided to clean her seat,

The concerned woman didn’t stop at just one seat though, deciding to wipe down each of the cushioned seats in her carriage.

“I felt bad, just looking after my health. No one was around so I wiped every seat and handle on the upper deck of my carriage. Look at those seats shine,” she said.

However, it wasn’t her kind act that caught the attention of the members in the Mums Who Clean Facebook group – it was the “disgusting” state she found her cloths in after cleaning the chairs. Sharing a photo of her dirty cloth beside a clean one, people were horrified.

“I can’t believe they wouldn’t clean our trains properly, look at how dirty your cloth got,” one said.

“This post needs to be sent to the department that’s responsible for the cleaning of trains! Especially the comparison photo.” a concerned user declared.

“Yuk, yuk, yuk, this proves you shouldn’t catch public transport,” another said.

Others praised the woman for being so thoughtful during a time when others were being “selfish” and only thinking about themselves.

“This is exactly what the world needs to see, instead of being driven by fear, you lead with love. You might have saved a life today,” one said.

“Oh bless you that is so kind! another added.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here




17 March, 2020

Private schools cost taxpayers almost as much as public ones, report says

Different figures could no doubt have been produced by other researchers but that is not the main issue.  Choice is the issue.  Private schools give parents some choice of what sort of schooling they want for their kids.  They should be entitled to that. It's an important liberty.

Such schooling clearly saves the government on capital costs.  Governments don't build private schools. The school arrives at no cost to the taxpayer. State school building is a significant budget item for State governments.

How much it saves on running costs is only an issue for authoritarian Leftists who use the issue in an attempt to force all kids into one government-controlled mould:  Very Soviet


Governments would have been financially better off if all new enrolments since 2011 had gone to public schools, according to new research which questions the view that private schools lead to big taxpayer savings.

The paper debunks the oft-repeated claim that private schools save the public purse up to $8 billion a year, and argues the true figure is closer to $1 billion, and potentially less.

The School Money-go-round, by researcher and former principal Chris Bonnor and Sydney University academic Rachel Wilson, found the per-student taxpayer spend in some brackets of disadvantage is less at public than private schools.

"Since 2011, in fact, governments would have come out ahead [in terms of recurrent funding] if all new school enrolments had gone to public schools," Mr Bonnor said.
A new report says private schools save governments far less than most people think

A new report says private schools save governments far less than most people think Credit:Louie Douvis

The authors said the findings should lead to a national discussion over restructuring school funding, and prompt governments to make the non-government sector abide by the same rules as public schools. "They have no obligations to serve a wide variety of students," said Mr Bonnor.

Since the Gonski reforms, funding increases to private schools have outstripped those to public schools because the federal government, which provides most public funding to private schools, has met its targets faster than the states. States have a bigger cost because they are the majority funders of state schools, and there are two public schools for each private school.

By 2017 differences in per-student funding had narrowed to $13,300 in the public system, $11,500 for Catholic school students and $9600 in the independent sector on average, according to the most recent data from the My School website.

But the researchers argued those figures masked the fact that students in the public system were the most expensive to educate, because they had higher numbers of disadvantaged, Indigenous and disabled students.

When the authors - who also included the former principal of St Paul's Grammar, academic Paul Kidson - compared per-student spending on schools with similar students, the gap became much narrower.

Among disadvantaged schools, the median amount of per-student taxpayer money spent on Catholic students was highest at $14,350, followed by $13,850 in the independent sector and $13,450 in the government system.

When the researchers calculated the cost of funding all students at the same per-student cost of government students across all bands of disadvantage, they found the cost would be between $800 million and $1.1 billion.

"Advocates for school systems need to keep up to date with the changing financial situation," Mr Bonnor said. "Because non government schools charge fees, they are de facto selective schools on a socio-educational basis. In equivalent countries overseas, that doesn't happen."

Dr Wilson said there was increasing evidence that segregation eroded the quality of school systems. "Now is the time for a full, national discussion on this," she said. "There's a creeping awareness that across education we need some really bold reform.

"And these school funding arrangements would have to be central to how that would occur."

The chief executive of the Association of Independent Schools NSW, Geoff Newcombe, said one in three students attended private schools, and parents paid a third of the recurrent cost and 90 per cent of building costs.

"It is clear parents enrolling their children in non-government schools save taxpayers billions of dollars each year in recurrent and capital funding," he said. "Savings estimates will vary based on methodology.

Non-government schools are already required by governments to meet significant compliance obligations as part of their registration requirements. We welcome transparency and accountability."

A spokeswoman for the National Catholic Education Committee, said 2017 figures showed the Catholic system saved taxpayers $2.3 billion in savings from the amount deducted from the base level of government funding.

They also saved $1.3 billion in building costs. "Catholic schools funded 89 per cent of capital works with state and federal governments contributing only $152 million combined," she said. Private and public schools had different reporting requirements because they were different entities.

Peter Goss, the head of the school education program at the Grattan Institute, described the report as important, and said while the non-government sector would quibble over details, the central argument of the report was correct.

"Non-government schools no longer save taxpayers much at all," he said. "The sad reality is that unfairness is now baked into our school funding model.

"While Gonski 2.0 in 2017 was a big step forward, several policy decisions since then have taken us backwards. And we can’t even console ourselves by saying that we pay less tax because of it.”

SOURCE  






'Are they saying we're all paedophiles?' Fury as fire bosses are ordered to SACK nearly 10,000 hero firefighters who haven't applied for 'working with children' checks

Almost 10,000 firefighters face losing their jobs for refusing to get a Blue Card to work with children.

Queensland Fire and Emergency Services Minister Craig Crawford said 60 of 20,000 QFES staff and volunteers who applied for a Blue Card were denied - and warned those who do not obtain one by the end of the month will be sacked.

Blue Cards can be denied to people with a history of serious offences including selling drugs, rape, murder, child abuse and burglary.

Mr Crawford said the 60 refusals was 'powerful evidence of the need for a Blue Card', The Courier Mail reported. He said due to the nature of the work many firefighters have to come into contact with children. 

A QFES spokesman said only 58 per cent of staff and volunteers had applied for a Blue Card despite being ordered to apply by January 1. The deadline was extended until the end of March. 

'Those who choose not to obtain a Blue Card will be choosing not to continue their role with QFES,' the spokesman said.

Veteran firefighter Will Giumelli said many in the industry had taken offence to the demand and a petition has been launched objecting to the Blue Card order. 'Are they saying we’re all bloody paedophiles?’ he said.

Rural Fire Brigades Association general manager Justin Choveaux said the move could leave many communities with no one to defend them next bushfire season.

He said many long serving firefighters had already resigned after repeated phone calls from the QFES.

'Let’s make children safe, but let’s also make communities safe by not losing their volunteer fire brigades,' Mr Choveaux said.

He said the RFB still has 8,578 staff and volunteers still needing to apply for a Blue Card.

SOURCE  







Like polar bears, coral reefs are doing fine

Corals are animals, actually closely related to jelly fish but of course differing in that they have a limestone skeleton made up of calcium carbonate. Their growth rates can be studied to give us knowledge of the ocean and its sea level over thousands of years.

They have lived throughout the oceans of our planet for many thousand years. Over those many years they have experienced both much warmer and much colder periods of geologic time. The bleaching that they have experienced in the view of many climate alarmists is not a sign of their destruction or in fact ill health. It is not a sign that the end of the world as we know it is in sight,

The simple truth is that when a coral experiences any number of environmental changes which could be the chemistry of its surrounding water or its local temperature, the algae that inhabit and feed a coral are likely to find the environment less suitable and leave for greener pastures.

The change in color of the coral which alarmists call “bleaching “ is a result of one group of bacteria leaving and then another group of bacteria taking its place. When the first resident group is leaving the coral becomes whiter and as a new group moves in the coral takes on a new color. This new color is often mistaken as the corals death knell. The algae that moves in not only provides it a new color but is also the corals source of the food it needs to live.

While the Polar Bear has been the face of the global warming delusion, coral reefs have been close behind as an animal that will eventually go extinct if we do not stop using fossil fuels, emitting carbon dioxide and warming the planet, its atmosphere and its oceans. The reality is anything but that.

The Great Barrier Reef, stretching 1400 miles along the coast of Queensland, Australia is also a prominent “poster child “ for the supposed damage mankind is doing to our Earth. It is actually composed of nearly 3000 separate coral reefs, can be seen from space and is perhaps Australia’s greatest tourist attraction. It’s ultimate destruction by man-caused global warming (now called Climate Change of course), is used regularly to pull at the heartstrings of those who sadly buy into the delusion.

In fact, it is probable that no reef has received greater scrutiny, and been the subject of more research than the Great Barrier Reef (GBR), especially since the clamor to save it hit warp speed.

The late Robert M. Carter, Emeritus Fellow of the Australian Institute of Public Affairs, who was considered the world’s leading expert on the reef, wrote extensively about it in Climate Change Reconsidered II: Biological Impacts. He explained that to quantify the trend in live coral cover of the GBR between 1995 and 2009, which the International Panel on Climate Change contends was the warmest decade and a half experienced by the planet in the past thousand years, annual surveys were performed. Marine biologists surveyed coastal communities each year on 47 reefs in six latitudes across about 700 miles of the GBR. They took samples at varying depths between 20 and 30 feet.

They found that coral cover increased in about half the regions and decreased in the other half as one would expect when nature operates without human intervention. Overall they concluded that coral cover was stable and that there was no evidence of “consistent system-wide decline in coral cover since 1995”.

Other research throughout the world has confirmed that corals are capable of reproductive activities under extreme environmental conditions. There is now a growing body of evidence to support the notion that corals inhabiting more thermally unstable habitats outperform reefs characterized by more stable temperatures.

In sum and a little more erudite: coral bleaching is an adaptive strategy for shuffling symbiont genotypes to create associations better adapted to new environmental conditions, as opposed to a breakdown of stable relationships that serves as a symptom of degenerating environmental conditions.

In the words of the late Robert Carter “the Great Barrier Reef is in fine fettle”.

SOURCE 






Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews is baulking at the implications of the federal government’s royal commission into bushfires

The Victorian government is withholding support for Scott Morrison’s black summer bushfire royal commission, threatening the credibility of the inquiry and a nationally co-ordinated approach to natural disasters.

Constitutional lawyers said a refusal by a state to participate in the royal commission could prevent Air Chief Marshal Mark Binskin, who will lead the inquiry, from accessing that state’s documents and compelling high-level public servants to give evidence.

NSW and South Australia have already issued letters patent while Queensland and Western Australia have signed up and begun processes to deliver their letters patent as requested.

But Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews’s spokesman said: “We continue to consider Victoria’s involvement in the federal bushfire royal commission.”

Mr Andrews is concerned about the encroachment of commonwealth powers into areas of state responsibility.

Mr Morrison has asked the commission to look at whether the commonwealth should be able to declare a state of national emergency and be given clearer authority to take action.

He has also said hazard reduction, native vegetation management, building standards and planning laws should remain a state responsibility, but called for “national consistency” after the bushfires burned through states along the east coast.

Monash University constitutional law professor Luke Beck said the issuing of state letters patent meant the federal royal commission became a simultaneous state royal commission.

He said there was uncertainty over whether a federal royal commission could compel the handover of state documents and appearances of state witnesses without the letters patent being issued by all levels of government.

University of NSW constitutional law expert George Williams said it was likely Mr Morrison wanted the full co-operation of the states because a key component of the royal commission was looking into the responsibilities of and co-ordination between commonwealth, state, territory and local governments in preparing for and responding to bushfires.

“It’s hardly a good start if the states don’t sign on,” Professor Williams said.

“They (the federal government) don’t need (the states to sign on) to hold the royal commission, but they do need it if the commission wants to have credibility and to genuinely deliver a co-ordinated national plan or response.”

Mr Morrison took the unprecedented step of calling out 3000 ADF reservists on a compulsory basis to help the bushfire recovery in early January.

SOURCE  

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






16 March 2020

Morrison government quietly mothballs laws to protect gay students and teachers

The Morrison government has quietly mothballed an inquiry which would have paved the way for long-promised laws to protect gay students and teachers from being expelled or sacked from religious schools.

The Australian Law Reform Commission has not yet started work on the inquiry, which was first referred to it nearly a year ago. President Sarah Derrington requested the deadline be extended until 12 months after the government's Religious Discrimination Bill passes Parliament - which is not guaranteed - making it highly unlikely any recommendations will be legislated before the next federal election.

Attorney-General Christian Porter made the change on March 2 but it was not announced by the government. The amendment appeared on the relevant webpage on the ALRC website last week.

Mr Porter told The Sun-Herald and The Sunday Age the delay "makes good sense as it will enable the commission to take into account the extraordinarily far-reaching public consultation process we undertook in developing the Religious Discrimination Bill".

But Anna Brown, a lawyer and the chief executive of LGBTQ advocacy group Equality Australia, said it was "irresponsible" to make the inquiry contingent on the bill's passage. "This spells danger and discrimination for students at religious schools, whichever way you look at it," she said.

The ALRC's general counsel Matt Corrigan said the commission asked for an extension because it was impossible to conduct the inquiry while the Religious Discrimination Bill was being considered by Parliament.

"We will not be starting on this inquiry until either a bill is passed or a final decision is made by [the] government," he said. "The two are inexorably linked and it's not possible to look at them separately."

Mr Morrison's initial 2018 pledge to protect gay students from being expelled or turned away from religious schools followed public outcry over the recommendations of Philip Ruddock's review into religious freedom, which revealed freedoms few realised existed under the law.

But later in the year the government back-tracked on that promise and referred the matter to the ALRC for a review, after failing to agree on a deal with the Labor opposition led by Bill Shorten.

In 2019, the government amended the terms of reference of the review to remove the issues being dealt with by the Religious Discrimination Bill, leaving the ALRC to focus on LGBTQ teachers and students. It also delayed the reporting date to 12 December 2020, with a discussion paper to be released in "early 2020".

The review has now been delayed for a second time, with an indefinite deadline of "12 months from the date the Religious Discrimination Bill is passed by Parliament". That bill has itself been delayed and reviewed multiple times, with no guarantee it will ever pass. The discussion paper's due date is now "TBA".

Even if the Religious Discrimination Bill becomes law this year, if the ALRC reports by late 2021 it is highly unlikely its recommendations would be legislated before the next election, due in 2022.

Mr Porter said the government still expected the bill to pass the Parliament. "But let's not forget that it was the former Labor government that introduced the exemptions allowing schools to exclude gay students," he said.

"That decision could have been overturned in the last Parliament, but Bill Shorten refused to allow a conscience vote, effectively blocking attempts by the Coalition to change the law."

Ms Brown said many faith-based organisations did not want the exemptions they currently enjoy under the law, and it was "irresponsible" to make the ALRC's long-awaited inquiry contingent on a bill that was "deeply flawed" may not pass.

"In the instance where the strong and broad community opposition to the bill prevails and it doesn't pass, the Prime Minister's promise to protect kids in schools looks destined to remain unfulfilled," she said.

There are relatively few instances of LGBTQ teachers being sacked or forced out of schools, and fewer still cases of LGBTQ students being expelled or turned away. But religious schools retain this power to discirminate and some of the major churches have expressed a desire to keep it.

For example, Sydney Anglican Archbishop Glenn Davies apologised after a backlash to a letter he facilitated, signed by 34 church schools, which argued for the preservation of the schools' power to discriminate against gay students and teachers.

SOURCE  






Waverley's kids are reclaiming the streets from cars

Like most adults, Waverley Council's mayor Paula Masselos remembers playing in the street as a child. Concerned too few children today were playing outside with neighbours and spending too much time inside and online, Cr Masselos announced last month that four streets would close to cars on Sunday afternoons in a six-month trial of street play.

So many other residents expressed interest in street play that the council has opened applications – subject to approval from the council's traffic engineers – to any resident to apply to close their street for play for a few hours on any day of the week.

"People are very excited by this. They see it as important because it brings the community together," Cr Masselos said. "It's about reclaiming the streets, and bringing them back to the people."

During a visit to Cox Avenue, Bondi, last Sunday – a cul-de-sac participating in the pilot – a car revved by. "Slow down," yelled Cr Masselos who said there would always be some people who would ruin the experience of others.

Most people, though, were "pretty cool" with the closure, said local resident Alex Unsworth. Until Cr Masselos was appointed, locals from Cox Avenue had unsuccessfully applied to the council for permission to hold street parties. They went ahead anyway, said Mr Unsworth. Residents bought their own high-vis vests, a 'road closed' sign and red traffic cones, and learned how to politely usher cars in and out of the area.

"You've not been allowed to close the street for anything until now," Mr Unsworth said. Previously the street's application was treated the same as a big event like Sculpture by the Sea.

"We didn't have portable toilets, and an emergency evacuation plan, all that sort of stuff. So we kept on complaining and complaining. The reason we closed the street was that kids were playing and it was the only way to make it safe was to block traffic with the road closure sign," Mr Unsworth said. Residents didn't have insurance, and the pilot program by Waverley will provide that.

Older residents, neighbours without children and others have also joined in the street parties.

Patricia Puiu, whose children played on Cox Avenue after she moved there in December 1975, was "gratified" to see street play bringing people together. "It's a return to the old ways, the good ways, the civility, courtesies, and the children playing."

In a move unrelated to Waverley's trial, a group called Play Australia has received funding from Sport Australia to run a pilot program of street closures for children's play and community events in Perth, Melbourne and on the Gold Coast.

Play Australia's Barb Champion said street closures were as much about creating a sense of community as allowing children to play. "Over the past 20 to 30 years, people no longer know their neighbours. They don't get together, this is as much about community [connection] as it is about children's play."

SOURCE  






LNP gives Pauline poll lift

THE liberal National Party will tell its supporters to preference One Nation second in two upcoming state by-elections in a move that will add pressure to Labor's bid to hold on to Bundamba

LNP President announced the party would preference Labor last in the March 28 by-elections in Bundamba and Currumbin, but denied there was a deal with One Nation.

"There are no deals. Labor goes last; so other parties logically have to go before them," Mr Hutchinson said. "We'd rather not issue preferences at all, except that Labor has rigged the system to benefit themselves."

The move will deliver a boost to One Nation in the Ipswich-based seat of Bundamba, which was the centre of Pauline Hanson's political rise more than two decades ago.

Labor is likely to retain the seat vacated by rebel former MP Jo-Ann Miller, but the party also fears a surge in protest votes for One Nation.

Ms Miller held her electorate by a very safe margin of 21.55 per cent. Former LNP MP Jann Stuckey had a much slimmer hold on the seat of Currumbin, suggesting it could be a closer contest

One Nation operative James Ashby recently claimed the LNP planned to preference Labor ahead of the minor party and warned this would damage the Opposition's chances.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 14.3.20







Queensland bail houses are a failure

MORE than 80 per cent of young criminals who have been placed in the Palaszczuk Government's controversial bail houses have reoffended. The Courier-Mail can reveal that 121 of the 145 offenders who were part of the program between when it began in late 2017 and last month went on to commit more crime after leaving.

Slammed as "another complete failure" by the Opposition, the extraordinary revelation comes just a day after the government announced a crackdown on child criminals who are running riot and fuelling public anger across the state.

Minister for Child Safety, Youth and Women, Di Farmer, who has already committed to scrapping the program if it is found to not work, yesterday revealed the bail houses were now able to house homeless youths at risk of falling into a life of crime.

The change follows two reports released late last year highlighting problems with the Townsville, Logan and Carbrook centres, including that young offenders were not following house rules.

"We made a commitment to reevaluate the program at the end of this year and if Supervised Commmunity Accommodation is not proving to be successful after the implementation of reccommended  changes we will swcrap the program," Ms Farmer said.

Opposition Leader Deb Frecklington seized on the figures, slamming the houses as "another complete failure" while pledging to scrap them. "The LNP will shut the revolving door of justice by giving our police tough new laws and the resources they need to protect Queenslanders and their property," she said.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 12.3.20

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





15 March 2020

Rebuttals to climate skeptics

Every now and again some keen Warmist offers answers to climate skeptics.  I have commented on their arguments often over the years.  See here.  So I do not feel any pressure from the latest effort in that direction. 

The comments below are from a series of articles in news.com.au under the general heading "Time Is Now". The arguments presented are all rather old hat and deceptive but one of their arguments amused me.  Under the heading STARVING TO DEATH! we find the comment from Dr Perkins-Kirkpatrick reproduced below

But the comment is not right.  Lots of Greenies DO want to shut down the coal industry right away.  They are very vocal about it. Dr Perkins-Kirkpatrick does give herself an interesting "out" there however.  She speaks of "no reasonable person".  So by that criterion a lot of her fellow Greenies are not reasonable persons.  I must say I agree

And what she says should happen is as far as I can see exactly what the conservative Morrison government is proposing! It looks like Australia's Morrison government ARE reasonable persons in her book!

So she is a rather odd Greenie whom many other Greenies would disown.  She certainly does little to dent climate skepticism


“Firstly, no reasonable person is proposing we shut down the coal industry tomorrow and see what happens,” Dr Perkins-Kirkpatrick said.

Reducing humanity’s reliance on fossil fuels is a big part of the long-term solution to combat the dire consequences of a changing climate.

But no one’s expecting people to sit in the dark by candlelight or to watch the economy collapse.

“Change is slow and that’s OK. But it needs to happen,” she said.

A transition to renewables would be gradual and managed to limit the social and economic impacts, and it would provide a wealth of new opportunity.

“It will be possible in the future to run off renewables,” she said.

“The technology now means it’s reliable, increasingly affordable and widely available. And the tech is getting better.”

SOURCE  





Coronavirus: it’s fatalities that count, not the numbers infected

When the Japanese bombed Darwin­ in World War II, killing more than 240 people, the Curtin government kept the news quiet for as long as it could. How would panic in Sydney and Melbourne help the war effort?

Truth, they say, is the first casual­ty of war.

In the social-media age every new case of coronavirus, no matter how mild, is pored over with lurid fascination.

As the health and economic ­crisis precipitated by COVID-19 deepens, authorities need to tread a fine line between urging calm, remainin­g publicly optimistic and ensuring people comply with measures to contain the virus.

It might seem like it, but this isn’t the world’s first flu pandemic. In 2009 H1N1 — known as “swine flu” — infected 61 million people and killed about 590,000 globally, 80 per cent of whom were younger than 65.

In 1968, the H3N2 flu killed one million people, including 100,000 in the US, according to the Centres for Disease Control and Prevention.

About a decade before that, the H2N2 flu pandemic killed 1.1 million people.

None of the previous pandemics caused a recession, let alone a near 30 per cent drop in global stock prices.

This is, however, the first flu ­epidemic where everyone has a digital megaphone.

There’s no reason why this corona­virus should be far more deadly than those previous flu pandemics, provided the death rate ends up lower than feared.

On Friday, there were more than 47,000 people who had contracted COVID-19 outside China, including 128 in Australia.

If the number of infections grows at 15 per cent a day, more than 3.4 million people, including more than 9300 in Australia, will have the virus by Easter. If it grows at 20 per cent, about the average so far, it’ll be 12.6 million and 34,800, respectively. That’s still far fewer than caught swine flu in 2009.

It’s the apparent death rate, espec­ially in Italy, which has struck fear in the community.

The World Health Organisation’s official death rate of just less than 4 per cent for COVID-19 has naturally drawn comparisons with the devastating Spanish flu pandemic of 1918-19, which killed between­ 50 million and 100 million people globally.

But 3.6 per cent must be an overestimate. Logic dictates many thousands more people have been infected with COVID-19 than the 125,000 official cases. The disease is highly contagious. International travel has only very recently been curtailed.

Most of all, the incentive for someone to volunteer him or herself for testing is very weak. Even in victims, such as Melbourne doctor­ Chris Higgins, in his 70s, who controversially kept working, symptoms can be very mild.

While it might not be in the interest­s of public health for an individu­al with cold or flu-like symptoms, discreet recuperation in ignorance seems a better option than seeking a test.

Quite aside from the hassle and costs of getting a test, a positive finding would cause significant disruption, including potentially forced quarantine or even loss of job.

Telling friends you have a cold, rather than coronavirus, goes down much better at social events.

The number of deaths from COVID-19, more than 4700 glob­ally as of Friday, is therefore a far more reliable and relevant statistic than the number of infections. And this death toll, while sure to surge, is a long way from the millions killed by virulent flu outbursts in the 1950s and 60s, when the economy was booming.

Finally, populations today are far healthier and more resilient than in the aftermath of World War I, before antibiotics existed to cauterise the secondary infections that flu can induce.

“Extrapolating from the mortality­ rates reported for the Spanish flu to 2004, 96 per cent of the projected 50 million to 80 million fatalities worldwide might occur in developing countries,” writes Walter Scheidel in his 2017 economic history of war and disease­, The Great Leveller.

Researchers are much more likely to find a vaccine quickly in 2020 than 1920 too. But what if develop­ed countries can’t control the virus, as China, where infection rates have tapered off, appears to have done?

Health experts have criticised the US and Australia for doing too little too late, failing to cancel large gatherings, close schools, and compel workers to stay at home. “The US response has just been appalling,” says economist Saul Eslake.

“If we can believe the Chinese data, at some point people will draw sharp contrasts between China’s response and how the US has dealt with it, in ways that won’t be helpful to those who believe in the superiority of US-style ­democracy.”

Democracies can’t so easily compel their citizens to quarantine; governments with an eye to re-election want to upset as few voters as possible.

Indeed, large private companies, perhaps fearful of potential lawsuits, have been far stricter in their quarantine and precautionary policies than state and federal governments.

German Chancellor Angel Merkel reckons up to 70 per cent of her country will contract the virus.

Even if the mooted death rate proves an overestimate, widespread contraction of the COVID-19 will cause major economic and social disruption.

How much is impossible to predict­. Economic forecasts, includin­g the effectiveness of the so-called stimulus, are based on what’s happened in the past.

We don’t know household and business spending and investment patterns in the grip of a deadly viral pandemic.

As toilet-paper hoarding illustrates, herd mentality can erupt in unexpected ways.

It remains to be seen whether house prices, which have a much bigger effect on household confid­ence than shares, slump in sympathy with shares.

Central banks, with official rates already practically zero everywhere, are rapidly running out of ammunition to keep proppin­g up asset prices.

The US government, heavily indebted and already borrowing about $US1 trillion ($1.56 trillion) a year, has little scope to introduce a major stimulus package.

If 70 per cent of the over-80s contracted the coronavirus, even with a 2 per cent death rate, almost 14,000 would perish in Australia alone — an extraordinary tragedy. Health workers, hospitals and aged-care homes would come under severe strain.

Severe pandemics, argues Scheidel, for all their horror, have tended to improve income inequalit­y by creating a shortage of workers, increasing wages, while reducing the value of assets, which mainly hurts the rich.

Whatever its ultimate spread, COVID-19, which attacks largely the elderly, appears poised to ­deliver all of the horror and loss of wealth, with no increase in wages.

SOURCE  






University O-Week censors excel themselves

“Free speech crisis? What crisis?” Uttered in freaky unison, this frequen­t denial from university vice-chancellors has allowed them to resume normal programming.

That consists of VCs putting their heads in the sand rather than confronting those trying to nobble intellectual diversity on campus. It includes VCs sending long emails about how proud they are of their diversity programs, with no sense of the irony that diversity of opinion is not part of that program. And it means VCs devoting more energy to attracting foreign stud­ents than defending freedom of expression.

How much longer can univer­sity leaders ignore the accelerating rhythm to raids on free speech at Australian universities? Today, the most brazen opponents of free speech within universities are those who control student unions. Funded by other students’ money, the leaders of student unions use their union muscle to control what other students hear, read and learn. Not content with running social events, defending students’ rights or holding university management to account, a small group of students have assumed a new role as campus censor. And they imagine that if they provide a band and a BBQ, they can flex their polit­ical arm without reproach.

On Tuesday afternoon, the student association at Melbourne’s Monash University, which runs Orientation Week stalls, BBQs and other events aimed at offering students “a diverse introduction to Monash”, rejected an application from Generation Liberty to be part of the program’s activities.

Generation Liberty is a program run by the Institute of Public Affairs for young Australians, includi­ng university students, introduc­ing them to ideas, arguments, and perspectives that they may have missed at school or university. The program is a big hit; its growth, especially over the past 12 months, points to a real hunger for knowledge not addressed by schools and universities.

In an email, events officer Michel­e Fredregill from the Monash­ Student Association told fellow Monash student Luca Rossi, a Generation Liberty co-ordina­tor at the university: “We have carefully reviewed your booking request and discussed it internally. Regretfully we must decline your booking application on the basis of our terms and conditions. Generation Liberty’s positions on issues such as climate change do not align with MSA’s.”

This is what happens when zealotry is threatened by facts. There is nothing in the terms and conditions to justify denying Genera­tion Liberty’s application to be part of O-Week, which kicks off on Monday.

In any case, a student union, or any other body, cannot use “Ts & Cs” to contract out of obligations under Victoria’s Equal Opportunity Act 2010 not to discriminate against a person on the basis of their political beliefs or activities.

More sinister is MSA’s reference to not aligning with “Generation Liberty’s positions on issues such as climate change”. Neither Generation Liberty nor the IPA has a “position” on climate change. The 77-year-old research organisation and its younger offshoot, known as Gen Lib, produce research­ based on facts: the rest is left up to who is reading, listening or watching IPA papers, podcasts or YouTube videos.

Rossi, 19, has hit back at this MSA censorship. “As a student at Monash, it is insulting for your ­student association, who supposedly represents you, to basically say you can’t be trusted with your own thoughts, we have to think for you.”

The Monash law/arts student features in a series of Gen Lib YouTube videos launched late last year called What I Wasn’t Told.

At last count, What I Wasn’t Told … About Climate Change had attracted just shy of 200,000 views. The video includes links for the curious to read the research that justifies every statement.

Rossi says had Gen Lib been given the chance to join O-Week, “we would have set up a stall, handed out some stickers and badges, and if some students want to have a chat with us, then we give them the idea of freedom. And that’s it.”

What exactly are the officeholders of the student union at Monash afraid of? That some ­inquisitive students might grab a vegan burger from the MSA BBQ, then wander over to the Gen Lib stall and pick up a free sticker ­carrying the Jordan Peterson quote “In order to be able to think, you have to risk being offensive”?

Or maybe they fear the badge carrying these words from Ricky Gervais: “Just because you’re offended doesn’t mean you’re right.”

Another badge says: “Make ­Orwell Fiction Again.”

The only steadfast position taken by Gen Lib is a belief in open inquiry and students thinking for themselves. Clearly this belief in intellectual diversity does not align with the MSA.

Rossi, one of 16 Gen Lib campus co-ordinators at 15 Australian universities, is frustrated by the lack of transparency, too. “It’s shady,” he says, alluding to the decision by MSA president James McDonald to fob it off as an “operations issue” in answer to Rossi’s request for more details as to why the student union rejected Gen Lib’s application.

“It’s basically as little transpar­ency as possible: ‘You’re not allowed­ to be here because we don’t agree with your views. Now please go away’,” says Rossi.

Alas, passing the buck about incursio­ns into intellectual diversity happens at the highest levels about an issue that should be embedded in the DNA of every serious ­university.

When the student guild at the Queensland University of Technology refused Gen Lib’s applic­ation to be part of Market Week last month, vice-chancellor Margaret Sheil learned about it from the media and responded by ­saying QUT was committed to “a variety of contesting viewpoints”.

But when this asserted belief in contesting viewpoints has not filtere­d down to the student guild, it is clear that intellectual diversity is not embedded in QUT’s culture.

The dirty little secret is that stud­ent unions are baying campus censors, too. And it takes only a handful of students who control events such as Market Week at QUT and O-Week at Monash to undermine intellectual diversity for the rest of the student popul­ation. IPA research compiled last year revealed that 59 per cent of students believe they are sometimes prevented from voicing their opinions on controversial issues by other students.

For student unions, freedom of speech is a controversial issue.

It is a stark failure of logic and leadership when VCs try to dodge responsibility by saying stud­ent unions are “independent” from university administration. Student unions hold functions on campus, they are meant to represent other university students, and student unions are partly funded by ­compulsory student services and amenities fees paid by every stud­ent, except international ones.

Who then, if not university ­administrators, will hold these student censors to account?

It is not unreasonable for VCs, acting on behalf of all students, to require students within student unions or guilds to commit, in practice, to freedom of expression, open debate and intellectual diversity. That starts with O-Week ­activities.

Instead, there is a failure of accounta­bility right up and down the line. Just over a week ago, new Tasmanian Liberal senator Claire Chandler questioned professor Nick Saunders, chief commissioner of the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, the body charged with holding universities to their part of the funding deal — universities receiv­e federal funding from taxpayers in return for delivering intellec­tual inquiry on campus. Saunders said the regulatory body has no authority to rein in censorship by student unions.

Chandler tells Inquirer: “One of the real policy questions that has to be answered here is: does a university’s obligation to promote free speech on campus extend to student unions … given that these unions are getting funding from universities, through services and amenities fees that are compulsory?”

Of course it should. More than that, it is time to restart the battle over compulsory fees that prop up these student censors. Whereas the Coalition government abolished­ compulsory student unionism in 2005, the Gillard governmen­t reintroduced them in 2010 in the form of the services and amenities fee. Ten years later, stud­ent unions are using these compulsory fees to fund their censorship­ of ideas and people on campus.

Chandler, who is passionate about universities fostering ­genuine intellectual freedom to sharpen young students’ minds, says that if the model code recommended by former High Court chief justice Robert French in his review of free speech at Australian universities doesn’t capture oblig­ations of student unions to free speech, then this “gap” needs to be addressed.

Fill the gap, by all means, but a code will not necessarily change a culture.

I saw a similar problem up close as a member of the ABC board for five years. There was, and remains, a deeply embedded culture among journalists, producers and higher levels of the tax-funded media behemo­th opposed to the intellectual diversity that is explicitly requir­ed under its charter.

Internal codes which purported to commit the ABC to their legislative charter made no difference up against that culture. Instead­, even egregious cases of bias by journalists were routinely met with management claims that editorial policies are too vague, dodging any finding of a breach of the policy. Management would suggest the ABC board redraft the policies, a useless “make work” exercise­, to remove areas of grey.

When another glaringly obvious episode arose of bias, often from the same journalist — recidiv­ists were not hard to find — the board would receive the same response. It’s all rather grey so we can’t do anything. In other words: go away, our ABC culture trumps a code and even a legislative charter mandating intellectual diversity.

The same scenario will unfold across Australian universities. Even the most beautifully crafted free-speech code will count for nothing until there is meaningful cultural change.

And that will not happen until the Morrison government moves to reduce funding to universities that do not implement cultural change.

Over to Education Minister Dan Tehan to walk the talk, remembering too that academic freedom was thrown under the bus when James Cook University decided­ to sack professor Peter Ridd on a bogus code of conduct claim. JCU has committed to spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to defend that action in courts, rather than defend intellectual ­diversity.

In the meantime, we are left to ponder the state of a higher educatio­n where codes, laws, regul­ators and the media are needed to remind VCs and student union­s about the core business of a ­university.

SOURCE  






Passing the buck for out-of-control youth crime in Queensland

Do-gooder laws backfire

THE Palaszczuk Government has launched an extraordinary attack on the judiciary, blaming them, rather than its own laws, for out-of-control youth crime.

Announcing a $15 million "five-point plan" to deal with child criminals repeatedly flouting the law, Police Minister Mark Ryan gave a stinging rebuke to magistrates he said weren't keeping with the spirit of the new Youth Justice Act to maintain public safety and were letting too many "hardcore" offenders out on bail.

But Queensland Law Society president Luke Murphy said magistrates were simply following the laws. And the Opposition called for the same "catch-and-release" laws to be ripped up.

In his extraordinary broadside, Mr Ryan said the courts were not properly locking up child criminals, arguing the "intention" of the laws to protect public safety was clear. "The courts are not immune to criticism, and they should be called out when they get it wrong," he said.

"And quite frankly I think they have gotten it wrong in a number of instances recently. "They have to make decisions which fulfil the intention of the legislation and the intention of the legislation is clear — community safety comes first."

He gave an example of an 11-year-old boy who was only denied bail on his 11th offence. "Police have advised me they are aware of numerous examples where bail has been granted in circumstances that create concern for the community."

But Mr Ryan also admitted the Government was considering changing the laws again "if that intention is not clear to the courts".

"There is active consideration now about whether that intention is clear and what changes would need to be made to make that intention clear."

The Government's Youth Justice Act changes were clearly designed to ensure children must only be remanded to custody as a last resort. The Bill's explanatory notes said the legislation removed legislative barriers that were contributing to children being refused bail, breaching bail, or remaining in detention or on remand for extended periods.

And a statement issued by Youth Justice Minister Di Farmer at the time — entitled "New laws to help young people stay out of detention" — said police and judges would decide bail using their discretion to ensure community safety: "Whenever it is possible and safe to do so, we want young people out of detention, especially when they have not been convicted."

Mr Murphy  yesterday said Mr Ryan's attack was not justified and police had always had the power to appeal decisions if desired. "There is nothing to our knowledge that indicates any magistrate has incorrectly applied the Youth Justice Act since it was amended by the Palaszczuk Government last year," he said.

"Unless there is some dear indication that a magistrate has incorrectly applied the law, it is not appropriate to criticise them."

The Government yesterday confirmed its "five-point crackdown" on the 10 per cent of youth offenders who were committing half the crimes, as revealed in The Courier-Mail. It will see more police prosecutors put on to strengthen applications in which police oppose bail, and appeal decisions police disagree with.

On-Country rehabilitation will begin mid year in Townsville, Cairns and Mt Isa to help Indigenous offenders reconnect with society, school and employment and $2 million will be available to community organisations to devise local action plans.

A 24-7 Police Strike Team will include youth justice workers to case manage high-risk offenders into housing, school and employment.

Queensland Police Union president Ian Leavers said that the union would now lodge a submission with the Government on how it needed to strengthen the Youth Justice Act 'to ensure juvenile repeat offenders could be taken off the streets and kept off the streets".

The changes come after months of community anger over youth crime waves in Townsville, Cairns, the Gold Coast and Brisbane that have seen some children bailed multiple times, only to continue to reoffend

Deputy Leader Tim Mander said the only way to solve "Labor's crime crisis" was to change the government. "The youth justice laws need to be changed; breach of bail as an offence needs to be reintroduced and we need to scrap Labor's catch and release laws as well," he said.

Townsville cleaner Julie Bird will not let juvenile offenders rule her life after a vicious bag snatching incident. The 54-year-old, who works at Stoddand Shopping Centre, often sees the crimes in action but never thought she would become a victim.

The grandmother was reading a book outside her work when two juveniles ran towards her, snatched her handbag and ripped her off a seat in the process. Despite the terrifying incident, Ms Bird said that she was determined to not let the young thieves get to her. "You just have to move on and still go to work," she said.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 11/3/20

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






13 March 2019

English language takes a battering in pursuit of power

Graham Richardson

How is it possible that in a country as bold, big and beautiful as the US, there seems to be great difficulty in finding a leader who is ­literate, with Donald Trump continuing to wrestle with the ­language and fluff and flounder his way through his presidency?

The first George Bush had some idea of English but his son was an absolute shocker. Just how Americans feel when they hear their commander-in-chief fumble his words time after time I can only imagine. The American public, and Trump himself, obviously believed the transition from successful businessman to successful politician would be little trouble. They simply did not understand the skills required in each endeavour are very different.

Trump made his money as the deal-maker. When your life is consumed by the next deal, it is too easy to forget the welfare of all those who voted for you, those who voted against you and, the real majority in the US, those who did not vote at all.

Trump has the knack of knowing how to pitch an argument to the America many voters would like to see rather than the one it actually is; for example, “Make America Great Again”. He will never revive the smokestack cities Bruce Springsteen sings about, but he lets Americans dream that it might happen.

Meanwhile, back in the land down under, the advantages of ­incumbency are on display. Over the long summer break, MPs and senators continued to try to make their points to electors. The ­Coalition has more MPs than Labor so they have an automatic advantage, but the big head start they get comes from the ministerial offices. Chockers with staffers and hangers on, they continue to churn out propaganda.

I have never been too sure whether the majority of this stuff is ever read or merely tossed in the bin. I suspect the latter. Undeterred, the activists continue, oblivious as to whether anyone reads the stuff they are disseminating.

Last weekend, I was privileged to be allowed into the home of the leader of the Nationals, Michael McCormack. In the beautiful southern NSW town of Wagga Wagga, where he has spent his whole life, McCormack is happily ensconced with wife, Catherine, who is also a girl from Wagga.

McCormack has always had an interest in journalism and was the editor of the local Wagga paper at the tender ago of 27. My brief look at this other world showed me why people want to return to the bush. Clean air, spacious grounds with friendly, open neighbours.

Like so many people in the bush, he also believes that country racing is just as much about an ­opportunity for a family day out as it is about the races themselves.

When you get to know him, you can see he is bright, hard-working and diligent. Suffice to say he is safely entrenched in his rightful place.

SOURCE 





Fluorescent pink slug, unique to Australian mountaintop, survives bushfires



A fluorescent pink slug, found only on a single mountaintop in northern New South Wales, has survived the bushfires that burnt through much of its alpine habitat.

Around 60 of the brightly coloured Mount Kaputar slugs, which can grow to a size longer than a human hand, were spotted by National Parks and Wildlife Service rangers after recent rainfall in Mount Kaputar national park.

The Kaputar fire burnt through the area for more than six weeks from October to December 2019, affecting more than 18,000 hectares of land.

The mountain was formed by a now-extinct volcano, and is home to at least 20 species of snails and slugs found nowhere else in the world. The area has been identified as an endangered ecological community, the first of its kind in Australia.

Some of the fluorescent slugs would have managed to survive the fire because they had “retreated into rock crevices” in the heat, the Australian Museum malacologist Frank Köhler said.

But around 90% of the slug population, which also hibernates in bark and trees, would have been killed in the fire, he said.

Much of the slug’s food sources – fungi, moss and mould – would also have been burnt by the fire, but Köhler said these species should recover relatively quickly.

In coming months the slug might be at risk of being seen more easily in the burnt landscape by hungry birds and mammals, said Köhler, but the bright colour could also act as a warning to dissuade the predators.

The unmistakable slug is a “poster boy for snails and slugs” because of its distinctive colour, Köhler said, “but it comes with a number of other species that are similarly threatened by the fires that don’t get the same attention”.

SOURCE 






'Political correctness on steroids': Perth principal's birthday cupcake ban backfires

An attempt by a Perth primary school principal to ban cupcakes on birthdays has backfired after the state government stepped in to put the policy on hold in the wake of widespread outrage.

The move by Arbor Grove Primary School principal Glen Purdy was chided by both sides of politics, with WA Education Minister Sue Ellery voicing her support of birthday treats and Opposition Leader Liza Harvey labelling the move "political correctness on steroids".

The Ellenbrook school's note to parents raised eyebrows after telling them the school executive had been mindful of the increasing number of students with food allergies and intolerances, the cultural diversity of the school, and the beliefs and traditions of those cultures.

The note asked parents to no longer send students to school with cupcakes, lolly bags or other unhealthy options to share with their classmates when celebrating their birthdays.

If a student arrived with such items, teachers would no longer hand them out, instead returning them with the student at the end of the day.

"I acknowledge that this may not be a universally popular decision, however it does avoid the risk of a child suffering a potentially life-threatening health issue that may arise should they ingest an item they are allergic to, is respectful to the cultural diversity within the school maximising inclusivity, and supports the School and Education Department focus on healthy food choices for students," the note said.

But Ms Ellery said the move went too far, telling ABC Radio she was not aware of which "cultural sensitivities" there would be around cupcakes.

She told the Department of Education to ask the school to reconsider the policy, and in an updated notice to parents Mr Purdy said the school had put the new policy on hold, pending the outcome of a survey canvassing the school community.

"I will meet with members of the P&C and also provide the opportunity for all parents to have their say through an online survey," he wote.

Ms Ellery said ensuring parents were sensitive to students with allergeies was "perfectly reasonable and indeed appropriate".

"But banning cupcakes for cultural reasons is a bit beyond me," she said.

Ms Ellery said birthdays were important for students and was confident it was possible to find a way to celebrate birthdays with food "in a way that is safe and inclusive for all".

Opposition Leader Liza Harvey asked where common sense had gone.

"For goodness' sake. We shouldn't change our culture for other people's cultural reasons," she said.

A parent at the school told 6PR Radio her son had brought cookies for his kindergarten friends to enjoy on his birthday, but the following day the principal's decision was made public. She said parents were happy to work around allergies.

Mr Purdy told 6PR the school's focus was to put children's safety foremost and sharing food was not allowed. The issue of allergies and intolerances was a serious consideration.

"We do have a diverse culture clientele and some of our families do not have animal byproducts in their food offerings," he said.

"We have always as a school supported the celebration of birthdays and will continue to do so."

Western Australian Primary Principals’ Association president Ian Anderson said the majority of primary schools would have policies in place around students bringing cakes, treats and certain foods to schools due to allergy concerns and health issues.

“My understanding is that teachers will still celebrate birthdays in their classrooms and that the new policy is simply around bringing treats that could potentially develop an allergic reaction in a student," he said.

SOURCE 





The dark side of political correctness

“The PC movement is mad and dangerous,” says popular author and Australian Catholic University Fellow Kevin Donnelly.

“Instead of being able to discuss issues in a rational and impartial way, debate is shut down and reduced to ad hominem attacks based on emotion and politically correct groupthink.”

It’s a message he makes clear in his new book ‘A Politically Correct Dictionary and Guide.’

Though the book has a satirical nature and is accompanied with tongue-in-cheek cartoons by Johannes Leak, Donnelly highlights the underlying danger is kowtowing to political correctness.

“This is becoming a problem because it’s enforcing what I call ‘cultural left groupthink’, and cultural left language,” says Donnelly. “If you argue, for example, that multiculturalism isn’t the right thing, you’re attacked as xenophobic or racist.

“If you say a boy should be a boy, a girl should be a girl, if you’re against the whole LGBTQI transitioning movement, you’re attacked as homophobic or transphobic.

“There is a real problem I’d argue now in Australia in terms of the cultural left taking over institutions like schools and universities and enforcing this very strong ideological view of language and groupthink.”

A frequent writer for the Catholic Weekly’s comment pages, Kevin Donnelly has established a reputation as one of Australia’s leading conservative commentators and authors fighting against the cultural-left ideology and group think which many believe is poisoning society and stifling free and open debate.

Sky News commentator, journalist and former Chief of Staff to Tony Abbot, Peta Credlin describes Donnelly as “a rare and forthright warrior for common sense in a world where it’s more desperately needed than ever.”

“With his third book-length polemic against political correctness in just over a year, Dr Kevin Donnelly is on a veritable crusade against what he thinks is poisoning our teaching institutions, weakening our economy, and even sapping our ability to think clearly,” says Credlin.

“[His] latest work is full of telling examples of the cultural self-doubt that we need to recognise and resist.”

Donnelly remains optimistic, but is very aware of the potential dangers that can stem from political correctness. As he likes to quote from George Orwell’s 1984; “If thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.”

“It used to be I think, therefore I am,” says Donnelly. “Now it’s I feel, therefore I’m right. They’re not coming from a rational, critical aware point of view, it’s just emotion.

“And that’s the danger, once arguments are reduced to emotion, you’re on the short road to totalitarianism.”

SOURCE

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





12 March 2019

Unis must be brought to book on funding

For waste and perverse incentives it’s hard to go past the nation’s 39 universities, which, recent events notwithstanding, wallow in billions­ of taxpayer dollars.

As productivity growth and graduate starting salaries stagnate, it’s time to question whether reforms­ to higher education have worked in the interests of tax­payers and students.

They’ve certainly worked in the interests of universities, whose swol­len bureaucracies have be­come­ ground zero for highly paid BS jobs in “strategy, engagement, culture” et cetera. Almost 60 per cent of the 120,000 staff at our universities are administrators, rather than teachers or researchers.

Direct commonwealth funding for universities has more than doubled since 2009, when the Labor government removed a cap on publicly funded places, to about $9.8bn this financial year.

An even bigger problem is the surging take-up of Higher Educa­tion Loan Program loans, whose number exploded from 308,000 in 2010 to 522,000 in 2015. From 2010 to last year the stock of outstanding HELP loans soared from less than $20bn to more than $62bn.

Taxpayers are making huge losses on these loans — only $75 in every $100 is expected to be repaid. That means many graduates, who have to begin paying loans back when their incomes rise above about $46,000 a year, aren’t earning­ enough to do so.

The Parliamentary Budget Office­ warned in 2016 that the cost to the budget of these loans would rise to about $11bn a year by 2025 — more than double the budget surplus pencilled in for this financial year.

For all the deluge of public funds, little was done to ensure quality control. Many academics concede privately that standards have fallen — grade inflation is rife and there is pressure to pass stud­ents, especially from overseas.

That’s not surprising given more of the population is being pushed into university education, when the students and the economy might be ultimately better served by an alternative vocational career. Economist Andrew Stone offers­ two excellent ideas for improving value for money in his new book Restoring Hope, a must-read for anyone sick of hearing vague calls for “reform” without specifics.

Universities should have more skin in the game, he argues. At the moment they enjoy direct and indirec­t taxpayer funding, via HELP loans and grants to universities, without having to worry too much about whether students and taxpayers benefit.

If universities want to be “businesses”, they should have to accept risks like businesses do.

“The current financing system gives universities a large financial incentive to enrol students who academically ought not to be there, and by failing to impose any accountability for whether or not these students actually receive any benefit from their studies,” Stone writes.

Put unis themselves on the hook, in part, for students debts. HELP loans would become joint loans, under Stone’s plan. Universities would be required to pay an annual interest charge on loans that weren’t being repaid. This would focus the minds of univer­sity administrators on the quality of their courses and the wisdom of enrolling students who are likely to benefit little from them.

Second, the government should oversee a standard set of tests accessible to all that people could use to demonstrate their literac­y and numeracy to employers — and far more cheaply and quickly than slogging through a three-year arts degree.

University is mainly about signal­ling one’s ability to employers compared to others, and too often not about learning anything vocationally useful. Employers can’t simply ask job candidates how good they are.

Sure, students with degrees tend to earn more than those ­without them, but that has little to do with what they have actually been taught at university. Anyone can sit in university lectures, for free, and binge on knowledge for as long as they want. But without the piece of paper at the end, it’s all, vocationally speaking, a waste of time.

“Young people feel the need to obtain tertiary qualifications — potentially spending several years in further study, accruing sizeable debts and forgoing substantial earnings — even though the training they receive is of little or no value, either educationally or in terms of specific job skills ­acquired,” Stone says.

In economic language, a big chunk of university study is consumpt­ion, not investment.

Each year, samples of graduat­ing students from all 39 univer­sities should also be required to sit these new, standard tests, so university grades could be compared consistently. Public and private high schools are already subject to similar quality control through ­national standard tests.

Outside narrow disciplines such as medicine, it’s hard to see how much of what is taught at universi­ty today is useful for any occupation. The vast bulk of graduate jobs, which are typically white-collar, require skills that are learned on the job.

Universities, understandably, will recoil at these two ideas, but they are both very much in the interests of the broader community. Especially as the economy turns down, we can’t afford to keep mindless shovelling scarce resources — both money and people — at universities.

SOURCE 






NRL defends divisive new TV ad after fans slammed its 'politically correct' focus on Indigenous issues and gay marriage

The NRL has defended its controversial new TV campaign featuring Tina Turner after fans slammed the ad for its 'political correctness' and embarrassing blunders.

NRL chief commercial officer Andrew Abdo said the commercial is not intended to be political and showcases highlight moments for the game over the past 30 years.

The two minute ad divided rugby league fans and sent social media into meltdown when it aired for the first time on Monday night, 11 days out from the start of the season.

Fans criticised the ad for being too being politicised after scenes of Latrell Mitchell draped in an Aboriginal flag and the famous footage of women's State of Origin couple Karina Brown and Vanessa Foliaki kissing after a match last year.

US rapper Macklemore's pre-match tribute to same-sex marriage at the 2017 Grand Final is also featured - as fans criticised his inclusion given his tenuous association with rugby league.

Mr Abdo stood firm, telling the Sydney Morning Herald the campaign was a showcase of the code's proud history.

'We’re not forcing anyone to believe in one thing or another,' he said. 'Those events have happened. Latrell is a superstar for us, Macklemore performed at the grand final in a moment we were really proud of. That brought our fans together and his performance was great.

'This campaign is not intended to be political. It’s a showcase of our history; our people, our events that shaped where we are today. The intent of the campaign is to embrace what’s happened in the last 30 years, but also to give a nostalgic feeling for people who are new to the game to understand the moments that have mattered so they can feel part of it.'

SOURCE






Hydrogen test at Stanwell

This is a reasonable idea but cost is likely to be the killer

A SMALL-scale hydrogen power test station is on the cards for central Queensland to operate alongside one of the state's biggest existing power plants.

The Morrison Government will today announce $125 million to go towards a feasibility study for cutting edge renewable energy technology. It will go towards seeing if a hydrogen plant can operate alongside the Stanwell power station near Rockhampton and how it can benefit to the existing power grid.

The proposal would be the largest hydrogen electrolysis plant in Australia if it goes ahead.

Being located next to the power plant would allow it to  be ramped up to generate hydrogen at peak times when there's an excess of solar power being generated. It could then be used to pump power back into the tern when needed.

Energy Minister Angus Taylor said hydrogen production could be a job creator as well as helping with the power supply.

Australian Renewable Energy Agency CEO Darren Miller said if it was feasible it could lead to more hydrogen plants across the country. "This will create opportunities across the domestic economy and help to position Australia to become a major renewable energy exporter!"

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 11/3/20






Should the ABC sell news?

A digital news report last month by Brisbane-based ABC journalists Kate McKenna and George Roberts was disturbing reading.

It was also insightful, arguably a case of the national broadcaster working at its best, serving its audience just two days after deranged former rugby league player Rowan Baxter had murdered his family by dousing them with ­petrol and setting them alight.

With the nation still coming to terms with the horror of the crime, McKenna and Roberts pieced together Baxter’s abusive tactics leading up to the tragedy, based on witness accounts, and showed how a domestic violence order did not work.

Yet there was something seemingly unusual with this ABC story if readers stumbled across its ­publication on a news website called InQueensland.

At the top, next to the ABC’s story headline “Stalked and controlled: Hannah Clarke’s terrifying final days”, was a BMW advertisement. The sassy ad for the latest “Ultimate Driving Machine” urged readers to “Register your interest”. Immediately below was another ad for Griffith University, “rated in the top 2 per cent of universities worldwide”.

A quick scroll down revealed a third ad for Gadens law firm. Underneath the story appeared an ad for Q Super: “Welcome to Super without surprises.”

Could this be content from our taxpayer-funded, ad-free ABC? Is the public broadcaster’s news and current affairs up for sale — with advertisements? Apparently so.

This is not light infotainment, where it’s often hard to distinguish reportage from product placement, but the journalistic core of the ABC. And if this is creeping commercialism, it couldn’t come at a worse time.

Last week brought news of the closure of Australian Associated Press, the 85-year-old syndicated national newswire service that has been a staple back-up for media organisations around the country.

Its demise leaves a potentially huge gap in the impartial reporting of political, legal, sporting and other cultural life, and is a symptom of a wider problem for public interest journalism.

The rise of digital platforms such as Google and Facebook, enriched from exploitation of journalism painstakingly created by others, is destroying the commercial incentive to do the news and current affairs reporting vital for democracy.

The ABC’s recipient of its brand content, InQueensland, is a commercial website that offers free reader subscriptions while running paid ads. It was started on February 10 by media entrepreneur Eric Beecher and his business partner at Solstice Media, Paul Hamra, to cash in on a lucrative, untapped media market in the sunshine state.

As InQueensland’s publisher Peter Atkinson explains, there was room in Queensland’s market to appeal to the “AB demographic” of professionals, business leaders, public servants and other media consumers wanting “journalism with insights”.

Atkinson says the objective is not to compete directly with Brisbane’s The Courier-Mail — owned by News Corp Australia, publisher of this newspaper — but to fill a commercial niche. There are plans to sell off more than half of the Solstice-owned publication within 12 months.

On the same day InQueensland published the McKenna and Roberts bylined “Stalked and controlled” report, the ABC ran the same story by the same reporters in the same media market on its own domestic digital platform.

Atkinson says no extra taxpayer dollars were expended for InQueensland’s use of the ABC-branded content because it was pre-created. The McKenna-Roberts story led the InQld.com.au homepage because it was “breaking news” while other recent ABC reports on cyclone threats or a youth crime wave in far north Queensland had not featured so prominently, he said.

Loophole for ads

This duplication or multi-purposing of news is undeniably lawful under the ABC Act that regulates the national public broadcaster. It bans ads on the ABC (a taboo) but allows content sales with the loophole that ads can be wrapped around content originating from the taxpayer-funded public broadcaster, once it is sold to private interests. The ABC says it uses revenue generated from such sales — received outside its triennial $3.2bn budget allocation from the federal government — to “fund the production and promotion of ABC content”.

ABC chair Ita Buttrose told an annual “ABC Friends” dinner audience in September that she got angry at commercial colleagues sometimes claiming “the ABC has it easy — that we have guaranteed funding” when budget cuts meant that funding levels were not assured.

While accepting the ABC needed to meet its “charter” responsibilities, Buttrose said the organisation had to operate differently. “Things are evolving too quickly and, when faced with evolution, those who adapt survive,” she said.

Solstice’s Paul Hamra — who personally negotiated the InQueensland commercial agreement with Scott Kimpton, the ABC’s sales manager, current ­affairs, ABC content sales — told The Australian the arrangement was “transparent” and he understood it was one of many instances of the ABC syndicating news and other content to commercial third-party platforms over the past 15 years.

According to Hamra, he settled on a standard contract late last year with a monthly fee payable to the ABC for InQueensland to receive a “news feed” of approved content. The deal reached with Kimpton had to go “higher up” in the ABC organisation (it is not clear where) to gain a final sign-off.

Hamra takes the view that the ABC should broadcast or publish its content in as many places as possible.

With six permanent staff at InQueensland, including former News Corp journalists Sean Parnell, Dennis Atkins and Christine Jackman, he regards the ABC’s coverage, republished on his company’s site, as valuable in freeing up limited resources available so staff can focus on investigative and other reporting for the intended niche market.

“As a small operator, in addition to our reporting staff, we need syndication services that can contribute to resources. We are contracted out to AAP — and the ABC,” Hamra says.

Kimpton, the ABC’s content sales negotiator, declined to speak to The Australian, instead deferring to the broadcaster’s media team, which requested a list of questions.

An ABC spokeswoman said she could not comment on syndication matters that were “commercial in confidence” and reiterated, without going into any detail, that the ABC had provided syndicated content to commercial third parties for many years.

Can’t say too much

The ABC spokeswoman refused to answer some questions that did not seem to touch on commercial-in-confidence issues. They included basic detail of Hamra’s approach to Kimpton last year that Hamra was happy to confirm, and which ABC executive higher up the management chain (managing director David Anderson?) was responsible for final approval of the InQueensland syndication agreement and others.

The Australian asked for notable examples of agreements that were similar to InQueensland’s if, as the ABC claimed, syndication of news content was historical and commonplace. The ABC refused to provide any. Perhaps there is nothing directly comparable.

Much of what the ABC sells is not news but post-produced, post-aired drama and documentaries to overseas buyers.

One local news and current affairs example often quoted is the ABC deal struck with Yahoo7 in 2013. Yet this agreement, as a ­“content sharing” agreement for a joint online news operation, is not similar to InQueensland’s.

Several joint exercises in journalism between the ABC and the former Fairfax Media group, before the latter’s sale to Nine Entertainment, are also not comparable, although the ABC’s content engagement with a newspaper group that ran ads did raise some eyebrows. Advertising has also popped up next to the public broadcaster’s content on YouTube channels.

The New Daily, an online news site for which Hamra company Motion Publishing (owned by Solstice Media) is contracted to provide content, pays for video services from the ABC. It runs a special ABC-provided feed called “The News in 90 seconds” but has no agreement in place to run ABC-­syndicated content, as InQueensland does.

What will be made of the opportunity opened up by media outlets no longer having recourse to the quick, politically straight and plentiful news reports from the AAP wire?

It has already been suggested by Kevin Rudd, among others, that the ABC should fill the void. Yet to do so could impinge further on the ABC’s original non-commercial purpose and contradict its charter.

The ABC declined to comment on whether it was contemplating a future role in offering syndicated news content services to commercial media across the board. One senior source said it was “too early to say”.

With AAP’s pending closure, Hamra argues “someone” should keep funding this historically important wire service.

Guardian Australia editor Lenore Taylor, whose publication has used AAP to cover courts and events her publication cannot, was noncommittal when asked if she would consider approaching the ABC for a news syndication agreement to replace the closing wire service, but it appears options are under consideration.

“Some of the smaller media organisations are in discussions about how they might fill the gap,” Taylor told The Australian.

Beecher, a former editor of The Sydney Morning Herald in its 1980s heyday with a track record since as a successful media business entrepreneur, has been a fierce defender of independent media throughout his career.

As proprietor of his company, Private Media, which owns Crikey and The Mandarin, and as chairman of Solstice with a small shareholding, Beecher has also been a noted past critic of the ABC, even challenging its right to exist in 2014 for trying to compete against commercial media in areas “that are already well served”.

Beecher’s main beef, then, was that the ABC’s charter was a “fuzzy motherhood manifesto” unclear about priorities and open to interpretation by the managing ­director. He spoke at the time, with more than a hint of bitterness, about the ABC spending its vast budget regardless of the “commercial impact on independent media”.

Beecher also gave the ABC a big serve in 2010 about its venturing into commentary with The Drum. “Operating in the commercial space, we expect vigorous competition from other commercial publishers,” he told The Australian then.

“But to see the ABC roll up on our lawn was bewildering.”

The media businessman does not resile from these views, regardless of his company’s pragmatic decision to deal with the ABC now. But he says he supports the sale of ABC content and believes the broadcaster should do more in the area of selling news and current affairs, once created, to defray costs and help finance production.

Beecher sees no conflict between what is happening in news syndication and the ABC’s charter. Nor does he see a difference between ABC third-party sales to overseas markets of programs such as Four Corners or Foreign Correspondent, and the sale of ABC news stories into the home market where the ABC publishes the same material, even on the same day.

“As one of its 25 million owners, I’m a huge advocate of the ABC selling the content it has already created to generate revenue to improve its budget,” Beecher told The Australian.

“If that content appears on websites or screens that also, ­separately, carry ads — which are clearly not on the ABC’s own platforms — there’s no issue.

“I’d be fairly sure that my co-owners (of InQueensland) would agree with anything that enhances the ABC’s bottom line and retains the full integrity of the content.”

Don’t flog the news

A former senior ABC executive says he has no problems with the broadcaster’s sale of drama series and documentaries, or with foreign co-productions. But he draws the line at selling news and current affairs. “When I was there, I said ‘we’re not doing that’. He sees a risk to the ABC as an independent broadcaster from a blurring of the lines with the sale of news content.

“I thought there were problems with the ABC teaming up on stories with The Sydney Morning Herald, as a commercial operation.

“The ABC has always had syndication around the world, but it’s not with ads all around them.”

Former ABC TV news and current affairs host Quentin Dempster, also formerly a staff-elected ABC board member, says he accepts the ABC has sold news content lawfully for many years in return for a service fee, and websites do “wrap ads” around some ABC-supplied content. Nonetheless, ads wrapped around ABC content bother him. “It’s a worry,” Dempster says.

His main concern, he says, would be if news syndication deals enable the ABC to collect a proportion of the advertising revenue generated, saying it would be a “distortion” of the ABC charter’s clear non-commercial purpose and an entree to “dangerous commerciality”.

“Public broadcasting exists to treat its audiences as citizens in a democracy, and not as consumers to be aggregated and offered up to advertisers,” Dempster says.

“That’s for the private sector. Good luck to ’em.”

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





11 March 2019

Is the paper panic over?

I walked into my local Coles supermarket at about 10am yesterday morning to find myself face-to-face with two pallets of toilet paper.  There was nobody around it at all.  There were packs there for anybody who walked in.  Some people doing their shopping would add a pack to their basket but there was no suggestion of a shortage.

I think the one pack per person rule has probably worked its magic.  It was in any case just a minority of lamebrains who bought up trolley-loads of the stuff. Any unusual demand -- even demand emanating from a small minority -- will upset the supply chain and lead to shortages.  I am quite confident that most Australians kept their cool  -- JR.




Minding the carbon offset gap: bringing net emissions down to zero

Australia’s carbon offset industry will need to grow exponentially if the country is to reach a net zero emissions target, underscoring the challenge facing policymakers trying to weigh up achieving climate targets while also sustaining lucrative coal, oil and gas industries.

Data released by the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources and the Clean ­Energy Regulator last week shows the massive gulf that exists ­between the volume of carbon emitted by Australia and the amount captured through abatement measures.

Less than 3 per cent of the ­nation’s emissions are being offset under the federal government’s emissions reduction fund.

Labor has adopted a target of Australia becoming carbon-­neutral by 2050, with leader Anthony Albanese flagging that the coal industry could continue to exist under such a target because of offsets in the likes of forestry and agriculture.

But the latest data reveals the daunting scale of the task of relying on offsets to achieve the target, with the equivalent of 33 tonnes of CO2 emitted across Australia for every one tonne of CO2 captured through official offset programs.

The latest edition of the National Greenhouse Gas Inventory showed a slight fall in carbon emissions for the year to September last year, with the total falling 1.4 million tonnes, or 0.3 per cent, to 530.8 million tonnes.

That fall was achieved only as a result of the drought that crippled much of rural Australia last year, which reduced emissions by 4.1 million tonnes because of declines in livestock populations and a drop in fertiliser use.

Emissions linked to the oil and gas industry jumped significantly as new liquefied natural gas projects continued to ramp up.

The total emissions volumes dwarf the progress made under the federal government’s Emissions Reduction Fund, which Energy Minister Angus Taylor said this week had issued just under 15 million carbon credit units last year. Each credit is the equivalent of one tonne of offset carbon emissions.

Limited options

The carbon offset industry in Australia broadly revolves around planting trees and vegetation in areas degraded through historical agricultural practices, or preserving forest previously earmarked for clearing. Savanna fire management — in which areas of grassland are burnt off early in the dry season to avoid larger-scale fires from longer grass later in the season — also has become a significant area of activity. Offsets also involve investing in renewable ­energy projects.

Increasingly affordable renewable energy sources are forecast to make strong inroads into emissions associated with electricity generation — which is the largest single source of emissions in Australia, accounting for more than a third of all carbon pollution — in the years ahead.

But the path to offsetting the emissions of other sectors, such as the mining industry, oil and gas, transport and agriculture, is less apparent. Last Friday Taylor said the government would look at the “biological sequestration” techniques used in offsets as well as ­hydrogen, carbon capture and storage, lithium and livestock feed supplements as part of the government’s plans to reduce emissions.

While Taylor held fast against setting a 2050 emissions target, both the federal opposition and every state government have adopted net zero by 2050 policies.

And the Business Council of Australia, global mining giants BHP and Rio Tinto, and big oil and gas producer Woodside Petroleum have all put their support behind a ­target of net zero emissions by 2050.

The broadening support for a net zero emissions position means the role of carbon offsets is expected to grow significantly.

But the practice, which predominantly involves planting trees or preserving forests, has had a chequered history and has been a point of contention among environmental groups.

The Climate Council says “there is no room for carbon offsets” in meeting any net zero target, and instead says emissions need to be cut “deeply and rapidly at their source”.

Conservation Council of Western Australia executive director Piers Verstegen says scaling up the nation’s carbon ­offset industry to the level needed to offset large-scale emissions would be “problematic”.

Many of the easiest sources of abatement in Australia have already been tapped, he says, while looking overseas for offsets poses problems of transparency and credibility.

While Verstegen says an expanded carbon offset industry in Australia can be a big source of job creation and investment, the recent Black Summer bushfires showed the challenge of relying on planting trees to offset emissions.

“You can grow trees, but how can you guarantee they’re going to be there in five, 10, 20 or 50 years, particularly when we are facing changing climatic conditions and increasing bushfire risk which might make the offset impermanent?” he says.

No guarantees

Globally, the offset industry has been marred by problems of credibility and effectiveness.

US-based environmental advocacy group the Natural Resources Defence Council has warned of the perils of consumer-levels offset programs, noting there can be big differences in the quality of different offsets.

First, it says, the offset needs to be real, verified and enforceable — that the promised tree, for example, will actually be planted and that the company or individual responsible will be held accountable if it is not.

Even more difficult, the NRDC says, is ensuring the offset is permanent and additional. A tree that is cut down soon after it is planted is of limited value, as is any offset investment that was going to happen anyway.

Then there is the risk of “leakage” — paying an Amazonian farmer not to sell his plot to a logging company, the NRDC says, is cancelled out if the logging company just buys a different plot instead.

Room to expand

Looking overseas for offsets adds another layer of complexity, given the jurisdictional challenges of verifying them.

In Australia, the offset industry falls under the watch of the Clean Energy Regulator, which assesses the eligibility of projects and the methodology they use.

Brendan Foran, chief executive of established carbon offsets group Greening Australia, says there is enormous potential to expand the use of offsets in ­Australia.

There are 90 million hectares of cleared land across the country, he says, that could be tapped for offsets but the sector has been held back by constrained support. Foran says the industry typically has revolved around short-term funding and grants, which has limited its ability to ­execute the sorts of large-scale projects that would increase the amount of offsets and bring down their costs.

Foran is all too aware of the vast gap between emissions and offsets in Australia. “That’s basically the problem that I’m trying to solve at the moment,” he says.

He says he is starting to see some change because of moves in the corporate sector.

Last year Greening Australia struck a deal with Woodside, which has identified offsets as a key plank of its plans to be net zero by 2050.

That deal, Foran says, will see Woodside bring not only money but also the sort of large-scale project execution skills and data analysis needed to significantly expand Greening Australia’s operations and bring abatement costs down.

Globally, he says, there is a vast pool of money looking to invest in offset assets, but there is a shortage of suitable deals.

However, even with a significant growth in offsets, Foran says, there will need to be enormous cuts in the amount of emissions if the gap is to be narrowed.

“I’m not trying to create an impression here that planting native trees is the total answer. It’s just part of the answer,” he says.

“It’s not enough just to stop or reduce your emissions, we actually need to draw carbon out of the ­atmosphere as well.

“We need to do both.”

Foran also notes there is a wide range in the quality of offsets on the market. There is a big difference, for example, between simply planting one type of tree in continuous rows compared with Greening Australia’s approach of establishing biodiverse systems.

New technology

While the gap between offsets and emissions looks huge today, Bloomberg New Energy Finance analyst Leonard Quong says the world will be a very different place by 2050.

Factors such as the forecast improvement in offset technologies and processes, efficiencies in mining practices and the erosion of global demand for carbon-­intensive commodities such as coal mean offsets are likely to make larger inroads into the world’s emissions by 2050.

Big miners increasingly are looking towards solar and wind to power their operations, global coal demand is already starting to ease, and hydrogen fuel technology is gathering pace and could well be a reality in 30 years.

There’s also potential technological leaps — such as in direct air capture that strips carbon dioxide out of the air — and further refinement of carbon capture and storage systems that could occur in the coming decades.

Those sorts of factors, Quong says, mean the pool of emissions requiring offsets in 2050 will be a lot smaller than it is today.

“Can you get today’s economy completely offset with today’s offset systems and practices? Probably not. But we’re not trying to do that and I don’t think anyone would seriously consider that,” Quong says.

“It’s a factor of everything ­moving — the economy, society and politically — and the abatement technologies that we apply to that.”

SOURCE 






Should governments be able to raid journalists in an effort to trace "leaks"

No compromise agreed

PRESS freedom advocates have slammed a proposal asking journalists to hand over confidential documents to avoid police raids on their homes as "meaningless", "window dressing" and proof the Morrison Government "had not listened" to concerns about the public's right to know.

The new proposal, made by the Australian. Federal Police and Department of Home Affairs, would allow police  to request documents and the names of confidential sources from journalists without the use of force, and could allow news organisations to "challenge" requests.

But the new regime would be voluntary and, according to the proposal, would "not limit the ability (for police) to apply for a search warrant on a journalist or newsroom.

The submission to the parliamentary press freedom inquiry followed months of campaigning for the public's right to know and legal reform by media organisations, and came as the ABC slammed the raid on its newsroom last year as an assault on public-interest journalism.

The proposed new system, called a “Commonwealth Notice to Produce Framework,” could be written into the Crime Act, and used to request sensitive information from the media as part of police investigations.

“This would offer an alternative to executing a search warrant in person, give parties more flexibility to serve and produce material, and provide an opportunity for professional journalists and media organisations to put forward any strong, countervailing arguments not to produce material pursuant to such an Notice,” it read.

But News Corp Australia executive chairman Australasia Michael Miller said the proposal overlooked “genuine concerns held by all media over government overreach and secrecy,” misrepresented legal reforms sought by the industry, such as contestable search warrants, and came nine months after media raids.

“The Federal Government has made clear that its preference is to maintain the bad laws which enable governments to hide from Australians what they are doing,” Mr Miller said.

“The offer of a notice regime rather than contestable warrants offers no comfort and is nothing more than window dressing.

“If anything, it provides even more powers preventing journalists from telling Australians what their government is doing.”

SOURCE 






Brisbane teachers fail kids in maths

NEARLY three-quarters of students in years 8-10 were taught maths by teachers from outside the field, a survey of Brisbane students has found.

The revelation is in a survey by Australian Catholic University mathematics education lecturer Dr Michael Easey, who surveyed 423 students.

Having an out-of-field maths teacher made a staggering difference to which level of mathematics students chose to study in years 11 and 12. "From this study, it is very evident that if teachers are qualified to teach mathematics, students were more likely to select more mathematically demanding upper-secondary mathematics courses, mathematics B but especially mathematics C," Dr Easey said.

"In this study, some students choosing to study mathematics B or mathematics C provided written comments that suggested a feature of their experience of learning mathematics were teachers who were 'expert', 'enthusiastic', and `challenging'."

Of students surveyed, 274 identified which subject level they would choose, with 22 per cent opting for mathematics A, 30 per cent choosing mathematics B and only 12.5 per cent choosing mathematics C.

Students who had no, or only one, out-of-field mathematics teacher across years 8 to 10 were more than 20 times More likely to choose maths C over maths A in senior years. Students who had two out-of-field mathematics teachers were only three times more likely to choose mathematics C over mathematics A.

Data from the Australian Mathematical Sciences Institute (AMSI) shows one in three secondary mathematics classes is taught by an out-of-field teacher around Australia.

AMSI schools program manager Janine Sprakel said it was of great concern that the number of students choosing to study mathematics in senior secondary school and university was dropping. "Our future is STEM - that is well established," she said.

"It makes sense that the teachers who are trained in mathematics suggest to their students that they would be capable of undertaking mathematics at a higher level in Year 12 and in university."

She said while there were great teachers without a background in mathematics teaching, specialist teachers had a different level of understanding and enthusiasm.

Queensland Teachers' Union president Kevin Bates said there were shortages of specialist teachers, particularly in mathematics, sciences and information technology design, which increased workloads.

From the Brisbane "Sunday Mail" of 8.3.20

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





10 March, 2020

Senate motion condemning Bettina Arndt a 'complete freedom of speech violation'

Bettina Arndt is Australia's no. 1 critic of feminist hate.  Feminists are therefore out to shut her down in any way possible.  They got a big help with their campaign when she speculated why a dire murderer did what he did.  The man murdered his wife and children and then suicided.

And it wasn't even Bettina's own  speculation. She simply repeated a speculation from a cop on the case.

Bettina's big mistake was to take an interest in why the murderer did it.  Apparently you are not allowed to do that.  You are not allowed to ask what drove a man to a horrible crime

Why not?  I don't think there was any rational reason.  In such circumstances you are just supposed to emote.  Your emotions are all that is needed and anything more is dangerous

Like myself Bettina has qualifications in psychology and for both of us it is elementary to ask WHY a thing occurred. That is science. It is totally anti-intellectual to do otherwise.  But the Left are always the loudest voices so their purely emotional reaction was taken as the morally right one. So they "got" Bettina on a charge of inappropriate emotions.  That examining the facts might be by far the most useful thing to do was not considered

For the record I agree entirely with what Bettina said.  She was the only truth seeker in the whole affair.  Emotions are not enough

Those few who have defended Bettina normally disown what she said.  That is just a weak way out.  I challenge them to point out WHAT she said that was in any way wrong.  To some it was clearly wrong emotionally but surely we can do better than that

The headline above refers to the fact that the Australian Senate did a brainless emotional pile-on too.  It was good virtue signalling to condemn Bettina, apparently

I have put up my dissection of the motives of the murderer here.  Subsequent reports showing him to have been be aggressive from childhood on would seem to confirm my analysis


"Outsiders" host Rowan Dean says while he was "deeply disturbed" by Bettina Ardnt's comments on Hannah Clarke, he thinks the Senate motion to condemn her was a "complete violation" of freedom of speech.

Mr Dean said there was no “justification or excuse for the horrific terrifying murders committed by Rowan Baxter" and he did not support Ms Ardnt's comments but would defend her right to express her views.

"I don't support Bettina Arndt's comments, but I do defend her right to express them and for anyone else to express their opposition to them," he said.

Mr Dean said because the Senate decided to pass a motion condemning Ms Arndt for the controversial comments, it was “using the overwhelming power of government to crush one individual's reputation for expressing a point of view”.

“Only two senators were brave enough to vote against the motion - One Nation senators Pauline Hanson and Malcolm Roberts.

SOURCE 






ABC seeks extra $5m for cynical campaign on climate

The delinquency of the ABC on climate issues knows no bounds and we must continue to call it out because if we don’t, who will?

The annual expenditure of more than $1.5bn of taxpayers funds in public broadcasting ought to be used to inform the public rather than to try to deceive them and campaign against their interests.

Not content with repeatedly and dishonestly asserting that global warming was the critical factor in our summer of bushfires, the national broadcaster has now been ghoulish and crass enough to try to use the tragedy of those fires, together with their disingenuous spin on climate change, to demand even more taxpayer largesse.

“We estimate it’s going to cost an extra $5m per annum from next financial year, where we’re going to have to build up our capacity to respond — this being the new normal,” said ABC managing director David Anderson before Senate estimates.

That the government has neither condemned this tactic nor ruled out this request speaks volumes about the Coalition’s crisis of conviction. But let me unpack some of the travesties in this request.

First, there is the false assertion the bushfires were somehow different or worse than fires or other natural disasters we’ve seen before.

Second, there is the false assertion, linked to climate alarmism, that we can expect this annually from now on.

Third, there is the outrageous proposition that an organisation generously funded by taxpayers to cover news is suddenly complaining that, because it covered bushfire news this summer, it requires more money.

Fourth, there is the rank opportunism of using the damage and deaths of the nation’s worst bushfire season for a decade to bolster its bid for extra cash.

Frankly, the ABC should have $5m stripped from its funding as a punishment for this effort. Instead, Communications Minister Paul Fletcher has asked the ABC to detail its case.

But back on honesty in reporting, readers of The Australian or viewers of Sky News will be aware the CSIRO was caught out burying a significant fact when it comes to bushfires and climate change.

In a recent two-page document, The 2019-20 Bushfires: A CSIRO Explainer, the organisation outlined the impact of weather and vegetation on bushfire behaviour, the need to better plan and prepare for them and said climate change was already making fire seasons longer and more intense.

But it did not include important information contained in the CSIRO’s technical report, Climate Change in Australia. That document is more than 200 pages long and on page 51 talks about increases in fire weather conditions but noted: “However, no studies explicitly attributing the Australian increase in fire weather to climate change have been performed at this time.”

This has only come to light because of questioning by Senator Matt Canavan in an estimates committee hearing last week. The embarrassing pauses and jumbled explanations from the CSIRO representative made for excruciating theatre.

Yet the story was not covered by the ABC. This is par for the course — inconvenient facts are censored and only the alarmist line or information to support it will be ventilated by the national broadcaster.

Remember, the ABC has failed to report and analyse the scientific conclusions of Professor Andy Pitman, the director of the ARC Centre for Excellence on Climate Extremes at the University of NSW, when it comes to drought.

His conclusion that there is insufficient evidence to directly link the current (almost past) drought to climate change has been studiously ignored by the ABC — except for pathetic attempts by Media Watch host Paul Barry to pretend his detailed findings were turned on their head by the ex post facto inclusion of one word; “direct link” rather than “link”.

This is crucial because it has been the drought-induced drying of vegetation that has helped create the bad fire conditions, along with the weather which delivered record highs in some bushfire-affected areas in early summer.

The science on all this is highly relevant and deeply interesting. The most recent peer-reviewed research says observational data reflects a higher frequency of fire weather extremes, but that it is too early to separate natural variability from climate factors.

“Impacts of anthropogenic climate change on fire weather extremes and fire season length are projected to emerge above natural variability in the 2040s,” says ScienceBrief Review’s summary.

Against this backdrop the ABC last week conducted a fact check on a crucial point made by Liberal MP Craig Kelly when he was engaged in a slanging match on British television in January over our bushfires and whether climate change was to blame. Kelly insisted that “the first 20 years of this century we’ve had more rainfall in Australia than the first 20 years of the last century”.

To those who have read a bit on these issues, this will not have been a surprising claim but the ABC and its fact-check partners, Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology, decided to test it.

They shared Bureau of Meteorology records and a graph showing a long-term average increase in Australian rainfall.

“Data collected by the Bureau of Meteorology shows an increase in Australia’s annual average rainfall for the first two decades of this century compared to the years 1900 to 1919,” the fact-check article duly reported.

In other words, the assertion made by Kelly was 100 per cent accurate — no ifs, no buts, just demonstrably correct.

So, what was the ABC/RMIT fact-check verdict? “Mr Kelly’s claim is flawed,” it declared. I kid you not.  Flawed claim ... or flawed fact-checking?

This is how far from their charter the ABC has strayed; how far our universities have wandered from searching for truth.

These publicly funded institutions now demean the truth and seek to either hide it or mischaracterise it. They have arrived at a bad place and we all ought to be deeply concerned.

The justification for this “flawed” finding is that national rainfall averages, experts argue, are not the best way to measure climate effects because rainfall patterns vary region by region.

While the nation is receiving more rain, some parts are receiving less, others more, and others still, might be receiving less when they need and more when they don’t.

While these are facts — other facts and relevant facts — they don’t disprove, undermine or render “flawed” the empirical fact shared by Kelly. Introduce such facts into a debate to provide context or support your different conclusions, sure. But don’t pretend they render false or “flawed” other facts cited by others.

It is dishonest to take a known fact and pretend it is not correct. The only reason anyone would attempt to portray claims, data and facts in this way would be to deceive the public in pursuit of an ideological agenda.

Fact check that.

SOURCE 






Easier university admission for girls outrageous, says PLC principal Kate Hadwen



The principal of Australia’s largest private school for girls has ­described as “outrageous” the ­decision by the University of Technology Sydney to lower entry standards for female students who want to take STEM courses.

“We don’t need it, do we, girls? No,” said Kate Hadwen, head of Pymble Ladies College, one of the best-performing schools in the country.

The scheme, announced by the UTS for 2020, says girls can enter STEM courses with 10 fewer Australian Tertiary Admissions Rank points than boys.

The girls are then encouraged to aim at careers in science, engineering, IT and maths.

Dr Hadwen was asked for her opinion about the program by one of her students during a Women and Education event hosted by The Australian for International Women’s Day.

Dr Hadwen replied: “It’s outrageous. The thinking is to try and encourage girls into STEM. But I just think that it’s absolutely saying women need help. We don’t need help. We’re great as we are, thanks very much.”

Dr Hadwen said only 40 per cent of students used the ATAR to access university. “So 60 per cent of students will get a university placement through a portfolio and a multitude of other entries,” she said. “You have to earn your place there … I’m a believer in that.”

UTS declined to comment, saying it had nobody available to ­defend the “ATAR-adjustment” program for girls.

The university was criticised when the program was announced last year, prompting Verity Firth, director of UTS Centre for Social Justice and Inclusion, to say: ­“Reviews were oddly mixed. The word ‘merit’ was thrown around like a javelin.”

Women comprise half of all university students, but they don’t tend to do the courses that are still seen as “male” such as engineering, IT and building and construction. Men don’t do the courses seen as “female” either: arts and communications.

The federal government has several programs designed to ­encourage girls to study STEM subjects, such as Curious Minds for talented girls in Years 9 and 10.

Program manager Vanessa Kates said the program, delivered by the Australian Mathematics Trust and Australian Science ­Innovations, identified excellent candidates through a competition, “and the girls, when we contact them, often don’t realise how well they are performing”.

“Very often, they say: Are you sure you mean me? We say ‘Yes, we think you are talented, you are fabulous, you can do this’. And they are often surprised.”

She agreed “something needs to be done” to encourage girls “but I fear that it (ATAR adjustment) may entrench the prejudice against girls, if people are able to say, ‘Oh, you only got in because of the special credit they gave you’.

“The girls we see are … intelligent and have many options, and it’s up to us to say give it a crack, you’re actually excellent.”

The University of South Australia has a STEM Girls program, targeting Year 11 students, some of whom are thinking of dropping maths and science in favour of subjects thought to be “easier”.

“It’s because there is so much emphasis on the ATAR,” she said. “We hear things like: I don’t think I should do the harder subjects, or subjects that are perceived to be harder, like high-level mathematics, because then I won’t get the ATAR I need.

“But if you don’t go on with high enough level mathematics, you can’t actually get the STEM career you want.”

SOURCE 






Students’ reasons for right-wing ban ‘wrong’

A student guild was wrong to cite the non-alignment of values as a reason to veto participation in its Market Week by a right-wing youth group, a vice-chancellor says.

The Queensland University of Technology Student Guild ­refused to offer the group, Generation Liberty, a stall in Market Week, which is held the week after the university’s Orientation Week.

Vice-chancellor Margaret Sheil said on Friday that Market Week, which was run by the Student Guild, not the university, did not host stalls from any political group. “But Generation Liberty was wrongly advised that its ­application had been declined on the basis of its values,” Professor Sheil said.

The Student Guild had provided Generation Liberty “an ­incorrect reason for the decision”, she said.

Professor Sheil said her statement was intended to correct the record. “Any assertion that I or the university have exercised bias or failed to protect free speech are factually incorrect,” she said.

Professor Sheil was backed by Nicholas Saunders, chief commissioner of higher education regulator the Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency, who told a Senate estimates committee hearing on Thursday night that after investigating QUT’s ­actions, it considered the matter closed.

Professor Saunders told the committee that Professor Sheil had learnt through media reports of the Student Guild’s rejection of the Generation Liberty application for a stall.

“The vice-chancellor took immediate steps to remedy the matter by first informing the Student Guild that the university considered its response to Generation Liberty as inadequate, and it emphasised to the guild that it was expected to operate in ­accordance with the university’s commitment to academic freedom and freedom of expression,” Professor Saunders said.

“Secondly, the vice-chancellor invited Generation Liberty to participate in the university-run Orientation Week, which ­occurred in the week preceding Market Week. “I understand Generation ­Liberty did not accept the university’s offer.”

Professor Saunders said the QUT Student Guild was “quite separate from the ­university”. “It has its own legal status, it has its own governance and its own management. “It runs Market Week, not the university,” he told the Senate estimates hearing.

He said TEQSA was empowered to regulate universities, and did not regulate the QUT Student Guild.

But he said he had seen The Australian’s report that Generation Liberty, which is the youth arm of libertarian think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, had made a complaint to the Human Rights Commission alleging discriminatory behaviour by the QUT Student Guild.

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





9 March, 2020

Winston Peters and NZ's deportations row with Australia

It is something of a wonder that the NZ government is so furious at getting its own criminals back. We hear no such fury from other countries. Why does it think they are Australia's responsibility? They could have become Australian citizens but did not.

They say it is unjust because the criminals have often been here  for some years (attempting to exploit us, presumably). But Australia and NZ are very similar countries so it is absurd to say that the criminals will have difficulty fitting in back home.  And why should we care if they do?

I am afraid there is only one thing that makes sense of it all: Racism.  Most of the offenders are at least partly Maori and there is no doubt of the high level of criminality among the Maori.  New Zealand has one of the highest incarceration rates in the Western world, and more than half of the prison population is Maori, while Maori are only 16% of the overall population

I have had business dealings with some Maori myself and I repeatedly got the impression that their ethical system is very rudimentary.  It was not a happy experience.  I would much rather have had them in NZ than here

So Ms Ardern makes sense if you look at what is unsaid but she has no reasonable argument for lumbering us with her unwanted criminals

Mr Peters claims virtue by saying that NZ sends back far fewer people the other way. It is rare to deport Australians from NZ back to Australia.  If I may venture an obvious suggestion: That may be because it is much rarer for Australians to be criminal.  Australia's large ethnic minority is Chinese -- who are famously law-abiding.  So Mr Peters would  seem to be claiming a virtue he does not possess


Winston Peters has invoked the tragedy of the Christchurch massacre in blasting Australia’s policy of forced deportations of non-citizens, saying an Australian was charged with “the worst tragedy we’ve ever had”, and nobody “sought to abuse Australia about that”.

New Zealand’s deputy prime minister on Tuesday escalated Jacinda Ardern’s recent evisceration of Australia’s policy, telling the ABC the home affairs minister Peter Dutton had implemented deportations for political reasons and for personal ambition, and Australia should be “better than that”.

Peters told ABC radio that the man on trial for mass murder over the massacre had “come to this country from Australia”.

“Did we make a song and dance about Australia about that?”

“It was the worst tragedy we’ve ever had – 51 people lost their lives and scores and scores were damaged forever. It was far worse than Port Arthur, and no one in my country sought to abuse Australia about that.”

Forced deportations has been a point of friction in the bilateral relationship for several years, but has flared as New Zealand heads for the polls later this year. New Zealand police have said Australia’s policy is a significant factor behind a rise in domestic criminal gang activity.

Dutton said on Monday Ardern was accelerating criticism of the policy because of the looming election, and that was “regrettable”.

“New Zealand obviously is in an electoral cycle at the moment,” he told Sky News on Monday. “It is, I think, regrettable that she made the comments but that would have played well domestically for her.”

Peters rejected the commentary. He said the complaint from New Zealand was not about the election. “He’s wrong,” he said. Local police had raised the negative consequences of deportations of violent criminals because there was evidence of a growing problem. “We wouldn’t be saying it unless we had evidence.”

Peters argued Australia’s policy was fundamentally unfair: “You’ve sent thousands back to New Zealand and we’ve sent a handful back to you.”

During a visit to Australia last week, Ardern took her strongest stance yet opposing Australia’s policy of deporting New Zealand citizens, no matter how long they had spent in Australia, if they had committed a crime.

Morrison said Australia had no plans to abandon the policy. “The Australian government’s policy is very clear,” he said. “We deport non-citizens who have committed crimes in Australia against our community.

“This policy is applied not specific to one country, but to any country whose citizens are here. You commit a crime here, if convicted, once you have done your time, we send you home.”

SOURCE 





Green ‘lawfare’ a $65bn deal hit to projects

Green activists are using a back door on environmental laws to delay an estimated $65bn in projects­ ranging from dams to a salmon farm, with “lawfare” forcing companies into court for more than 10,000 days in total since 2000.

Conservation and green groups have used 11 new legal claims in the past four years to tie up seven projects in regional areas, including the $16.5bn Adani coalmine in Queensland, a new $140m port on Melville Island­ in the Northern Territory, Victorian government forestry and the $30m Tassal salmon farm in Tasmania.

The 11 new cases of environmental groups using secondary legislation since 2016 have resulte­d in seven major projects being delayed in court for a total of 2600 days, as business investment in Australia drops to its lowest level since the 1990s.

According to analysis from the free-market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, legal activism using the federal environmental protection act has put $65bn of investment at risk, with delays totalling more than 28 years in court.



The tactics of activist groups have delayed 28 projects between 2000 and 2019, with an estim­ated value of over $65bn.

The projects include six coal and iron ore mine projects, two dam construction projects, two dredging projects, forest and pest management, a tourism development, multiple road construction projects, the construction of a pulp mill, a desalination plant and a marine supply base.

After the election of the Morrison Coalition government, the Queensland Labor government fast-tracked final approval for the Adani coal project in the Galilee Basin, after a nine-year approval process and an extra 341 days in court after an Australian Conservation Foundation appeal started in 2016.

In 2017, a Bob Brown Found­ation challenge against a salmon farm in Tasmania, to protect the southern right whale, was dismissed after 237 days in court but an appeal meant another 349 days in court.

According to IPA research fellow Kurt Wallace: “A small group of green activists are using a special legal privilege to delay and disrupt $65bn of investment, which is disproportionately damaging regional Australia.”

He said the disruptive liti­gation from environmental groups using a section of the act allowing conservationists to take companies to court was not leading to substantial changes in ­environmental controls on the projects. “Disruptive lawfare has not led to environmental improvements,’’ Mr Wallace said.

“Of the cases under section 487, 94 per cent have failed to bring about a substantial change to the original project which had been approved by the commonwealth Environment Minister.

“Section 487 has allowed the courts to be used as a strategic tool for environmental activism.

“Green groups, such as the Australian Conservation Found­ation and Wilderness Society, are using legal challenges to delay and disrupt major projects with the goal of restricting investment in the resources sector by raising costs and uncertainty.

“Repealing section 487 would be a massive shot in the arm for investment in regional Australia and create an enduring stimulus for the Australian economy. (It) will not diminish the legal avenues available to farmers and private land owners who wish to take legal action against a mining project that could adversely affect their interests.’’

Disappointing news today. Equinor has announced that it won't be drilling for oil in the Bight. We desperately need to improve our oil security.

Former resources minister Matt Canavan said activists were exploiting environmental laws merely to delay projects.

“Every day that major projects are held up is another day that a desperate Australian family doesn’t have a job,’’ Senator Canavan said.

“Our environmental laws act as a big yellow light slowing everybody and everything down.

“We need laws that focus on protecting major environmental issues, not being an alternative avenue­ for radical green activists to pursue a political agenda.”

SOURCE 






Progressive warfare on economics

There’s a concerted effort to shift the focus of economics away from financial data towards social. Specifically, it’s argued that economic welfare would be better measured by our individual and collective ‘wellbeing’ than by the GDP (the value of goods and services produced in the economy).

Would-be Treasurer under a Labor government, Jim Chalmers, has thrown his support behind this idea, praising New Zealand’s ‘wellbeing budget’. He promises a two-pronged assault: first, to supplant GDP’s primacy with a more holistic measure of wellbeing; second, to weigh up budget decisions in terms of social objectives — rather than economic merits.

Chalmers argues that alternatives to GDP would instead “measure what matters” and “redefine what success means in terms of economic outcomes.”

To better measure a country’s progress, the Kiwis now monitor levels of (among others) loneliness, belonging, mental resilience, and digital inclusiveness — all supposedly more important than money. The marker of success for NZ, then, is moving the needle on these indicators, irrespective of the economics — implying that a happier society is better off than a more prosperous one.

Where this comes from is a pessimistic view that, despite nearly 30 years of economic growth, Australia supposedly hasn’t enjoyed social progress —we’re apparently all living miserably.

It’s important to understand this isn’t supported by the economic data or social indicators. First, as the Productivity Commission argued, income inequality has not significantly worsened in Australia.

Second, according to the OECD’s Better Life Index, Australia scores the second highest of any country in the world. And we are sixth on the UN’s Human Development Index — which includes both economic and other factors — and on an upward trend.

Not to forget that economic factors are themselves important indicators of the health of a society.

Indeed, focussing on social indicators rather than economic growth leads to policymakers treating the symptoms rather than the cause of social problems — many of which stem from, or are exacerbated by, adverse economic outcomes.

In short, healthy economies breed healthy societies — and the progressives are wrong about the direction of this causation.

Social progress and cohesion are important policy goals, but prioritising these over broader economic goals would be counterproductive. It also distorts fiscal policy decisions by evaluating spending proposals on the basis of their direct social impact; not financial prudence, or in context of the macroeconomic stability lever that has been the convention.

We can’t afford for economic priorities and progress to be derailed by progressive social policy — especially with the vulnerabilities of today’s economy.

SOURCE 






High drama and even higher stakes: it’s the moment of truth for George Pell

His Eminence was given no benefit of the doubt at all.  He was convicted for the sins of his church, not for anything he personally did

It is a measure of George Pell’s lot that he finds himself in notionally better surrounds but not necessarily better company.

The cardinal, still Australia’s most senior Catholic, will monitor next week’s High Court developments while in isolation in his ­relatively new home at Victoria’s maximum-security Barwon Prison, near Geelong.

Barwon is a hole that swallowed gangland murderer Carl Williams but it’s not quite as deep as Pell’s former holding cell in the centre of Melbourne.

Pell, 78, now has more room to move, with a more modern but still austere toilet, shower and general living facilities. He is served shoddy food and his main human contact is with the prison guards who bring him his medication for twin heart conditions.

It remains a life of deprivation.

Given his convictions, most people will be happy with Pell’s plight. For others who have followed the facts of the case closely, including the brightest minds in the law, next week’s High Court appeal will be a significant moment in Australian legal history.

There are deep divisions about whether Pell should even be in jail.

“If you look at all of the case law about unreasonable verdicts, it’s (the Pell convictions) right on the borderline of what’s reasonable and what isn’t,’’ Sydney University academic Andrew Dyer told ­Inquirer.

Dyer, who has co-authored a paper on the Pell case with the university’s Professor David Hamer, is not predicting in any way how the High Court will act. Nor is anyone else with any certainty.

But the paper, published in the Sydney Law Review, makes clear what many independent voices suspect: Pell’s convictions may be flawed.

Dyer and Hamer write that it appears open to the High Court to overturn the Pell verdicts on the basis of the cumulative effect of the evidence, but they doubt the court will make this finding.

They express concern about the impact that rejection of the Pell decision would have on the standing of juries.

Dyer and Hamer’s views are not black and white. They also make clear that the law allows for convictions based largely or solely on the complainant’s evidence and a different tack would “undermine the prohibition against child ­sexual assault’’.

This is a tick to the prosecution’s heavy reliance on the surviving choirboy, whose evidence was central to the Pell convictions.

In the paper, however, Dyer and Hamer note that key aspects of the evidence regarding Pell pointed to no opportunity to ­offend against A, the surviving ­victim, and B, another choirboy who died of a drug overdose.

“Once we also consider the ­inconsistencies in A’s account ­(however understandable), the unlikelihood that Pell would take such risks and B’s and Pell’s denials, it becomes apparent that a reasonable jury might not have convicted,’’ they write.

“Indeed, the case seems close to the borderline between one where the jury was entitled to return a guilty verdict, and one where it should have had a doubt.’’

On Wednesday, five or seven members of the High Court will gather in Canberra to decide Pell’s fate. Dyer thinks there will be seven but we probably won’t know until Tuesday afternoon.

The High Court will determine whether the Victorian Court of Appeal erred when it decided, 2:1 last year, that the County Court jury was within its rights to convict Pell of five sexual assault charges that occurred in the priests’ sacristy at Melbourne’s St Patrick’s Cathedral in 1996 and in a corridor in 1997.

Or whether there should have been a reasonable doubt.

Central to deliberations is whether belief in the complainant, now a family man in early middle age, could be used as a basis for eliminating doubt raised by other witnesses, several of whom were highly credible.

Pell’s submissions asked: “Was it open to the jury to find the ­offending proven beyond reasonable doubt?’’

As one well-informed observer noted this week, of all the charges that were filed against Pell, the ­cathedral claims were among the most difficult and even unlikely to have progressed to any court.

Those with deep understanding of the cathedral, Catholic rituals and Pell’s practices are incredulous that the archbishop could ever have been left alone for the five or six minutes upon which he was convicted of forced oral sex and other abuses.

It was not uncommon in that period for literally hundreds of people to gather after Solemn Mass, the numbers bolstered by busloads of Taiwanese tourists who swarmed into the cathedral.

Justice Mark Weinberg, the former Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions, was the dissenting voice at the Court of Appeal, arguing that aspects of A’s evidence lacked the necessary weight. But on A’s side were ­Justice Anne Ferguson and Justice Chris Maxwell, as were the County Court jury, Victoria Police and the prosecution.

Jeremy Gans, a professor of law at Melbourne University, said it would be most unlikely if any decision were to be made next week, with the court sitting on Wednesday and possibly Thursday.

There are four options for how the court hearings may unfold.

The court could decide not to hear the appeal and end Pell’s chances of being freed early. Special leave could be granted to hear the appeal and the appeal is rejected. And special leave could be granted and the appeal is allowed.

The fourth option is that special leave is granted and the case is sent back to the Court of Appeal with three different judges.

The latter would be awkward for all, but mostly Pell, who would have to wait months more to know whether freedom was a genuine prospect for him.

One technicality is over whether the Court of Appeal appropriately used video evidence to come to its conclusion. Gans believes the only way Pell would walk next week would be if the court ruled on the spot. Even so: “I still reckon they’d wait.’’

Mirko Bagaric, dean of law at Swinburne University, notes the difficulty in predictions but says the High Court may opt for a ­narrow, contained judgment.

“The court ultimately will have to grapple with the issue about whether or not the jury verdict was reasonable,’’ he said. “It’s impossible to anticipate.’’

The prosecution’s submissions are firm in their view that the jury decision should not be overturned. The first County Court jury failed to reach a verdict; the second convicted. In a submission lodged by Victorian Director of Public Prosecutions Kerri Judd, the prosecution argues: “It (the jury) is best placed to decide matters of credibility and reliability. The jury has the benefit of being able to deliberate as a group in private throughout the trial. And its decisions are subject to the discipline generated by the requirement of unanimity or a very high majority.’’

The prosecution also argues that Team Pell glosses over the quality of the evidence provided by A, who correctly identified the ­location of the first offending and correctly described the layout of the priests’ sacristy.

It calls into question the so-called “alibi’’ evidence provided by key witnesses. But overshadowing this is the fact that Weinberg, the legal expert on the Court of Appeal, effectively raised the spectre in his dissenting judgment of an innocent man having been wrongly convicted. Weinberg observed: “These convictions were based upon the jury’s assessment of the complainant as a witness and nothing more.’’

Further, he was damning of the conviction of Pell on the final charge, which was that in 1997 the then archbishop assaulted A in front of others, grabbing him on the testicles in front of dozens.

“I would have thought any prosecutor would be wary of bringing a charge of this gravity against anyone based upon the ­implausible notion that a sexual ­assault of this kind would take place in public and in the presence of numerous potential witnesses,’’ Weinberg ruled.

The final element of the High Court deliberations is expected to relate to the way the Court of ­Appeal assessed A’s evidence, which was videotaped.

The court, The Australian reported last month, was weighing the importance of viewing A’s testimony compared with reading the transcript.

A technical point is being considered by the High Court over what the Court of Appeal should have viewed by way of video evidence and whether, chiefly, the Court of Appeal should have strayed from the trial transcript.

Team Pell had argued that no matter how favourable the view was of A, it was not open to the jury to conclude the prosecution had eliminated all reasonable doubt. This is in the context of the combined effect of the unchallenged evidence of other witnesses.

While apparently a technical point, it could become significant if the High Court believes that the majority Court of Appeal judges went too far in their use of the video evidence.

Pell himself, meanwhile, will have no idea what is happening on Wednesday.

The proceedings will not be livestreamed outside the court and he will have to wait, probably until each night, when he may have the opportunity to telephone someone who was at the High Court for a briefing.

Maybe even his lead silk, Bret Walker, SC, depending on whether he is on the cardinal’s limited telephone list.

Regardless of the outcome, the assessment of Pell’s guilt or innocence will resonate for years.

His supporters and a fair slab of the legal community are questioning whether the jury and the ­majority on the Court of Appeal got it right.

Within sections of the Catholic Church there is a strong view that the maths don’t add up.

How could one of the busier parts of Melbourne on a Sunday morning be the site for such depraved acts? More broadly, if Pell is acquitted, it will provoke one of the ­fiercest debates in the history of Australian law and order, and ­religion.

The best hope is that the facts are allowed to tell the full story.

As we’ve been told repeatedly, it doesn’t matter what you might think of the man. But it matters if an innocent man has been jailed.

The Pell critics will get another chance to dance on his reputational grave after the High Court has finished.

That will come when the redacted sections of the sex abuse royal commission are finally released by the Morrison government.

Like so many pronouncements about Pell in recent years, they are unlikely to be kind.

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





8 March, 2020

Joe Hildebrand: The extraordinary scandal that nobody saw

Joe is right.  The BIG source of domestic violence in Australia is violence against Aboriginal women by Aboriginal men.  I have seen it myself.  It seems to be utterly instinctive.  There are always disagreements between men and women but among Aboriginals the disagreement is normally terminated by the man hitting the woman. And in drunken rages the men will often chase the women around.

There is no cure. To cure it you would have to impose white behaviour patterns on blacks and that is not going to happen.

But there is one thing that governments can do. Most black townships already have a police presence but it is not nearly enough.  To save black women from assault you have to provide a police post they can run to when in danger.  And that post has to have accommodation for them.  It's far from a perfect solution but it would save some lives

Joe is right in that no politicians have a remote clue about how to tackle the problem.  They will do anything rather than embrace the one thing that would help


This week, an incredible event that should have made us all pay attention took place in the nation’s capital – but no one noticed.

It happened in the middle of the national capital, in the middle of Parliament House, and still nobody noticed.

It was an event so bizarre and unprecedented that even that morning it would have been utterly unimaginable.

Indeed, 20 years ago it would have been front page news across the country.

And yet here it was happening right under the nose of our national leaders and the national press gallery and nobody noticed.

So for the benefit of history, what happened was this: A dozen Aboriginal women from rural Australia made the long and torturous journey to Canberra – many for the first time – in a desperate effort to tell our national leaders of the violence and dysfunction that was crippling their communities.

And to do so they reached out to the one politician they thought might actually listen to them: Pauline Hanson.

I have often said that there is a counterintuitive commonality between the far left and the far right. It now seems the same applies to the far black and the far white.

The phenomenon is the same. People who feel unheard by their community leaders will start looking in the opposite direction until they eventually meet up with another mob coming the other way.

Then, like with any other love-hate relationship, they either f**k or fight. Such is the angry and turbulent mood of the modern political age.

At any rate, this grassroots delegation was cobbled together by Josephine Cashman, a firebrand Indigenous lawyer who has become so frustrated and enraged by tokenistic platitudes and political cowardice in tackling Indigenous disadvantage that she has, for want of a better term, gone rogue.

Her message was basically this: Forget the endless debates about changing the date or the flag or the anthem; forget the limitless accusations of racism on all sides: Can we please just stop people dying in our communities?

These brave Aboriginal women came to Australia’s most progressive city and its most powerful institution in a month when politicians and pundits were bending over themselves to declare how dedicated they were to closing the gap, after yet another Closing the Gap report showed they were doing anything but.

They also came in a week when the whole nation was traumatised by the sickening murder of a mother and her three children at the hands of a monster and commentators vowed to do everything in their power to stop violence against women and children.

And here they were, survivors and witnesses of such violence from the places where it happened the most, and still nobody noticed.

And, in the irony to end all ironies, the one politician who met and stayed with them more than any other was the one being excoriated on that very day for her latest clumsy comments on this very issue.

A lot of people will ask, given Pauline Hanson’s long and infamous history of false and outrageous claims about Aboriginal people, how on earth a group of Aboriginal women could stand in the same room with her.

To that, I would offer a more telling question: How much must mainstream politicians have abandoned and condemned these women with their silence for them to see a maverick redneck senator as their only hope?

I am certainly no fan of Pauline Hanson. In my last column I detailed just some of her racist absurdities, including the disgraceful and discredited allegations of Aboriginal cannibalism in her first book.

Some might say she has softened since then, although even just this month she was singularly unsympathetic to the plight of our First Peoples, which she blamed almost entirely on themselves.

I vehemently disagree with that view. I have no doubt that much of the endemic disadvantage that seems to strangle Indigenous communities is an overhang of the disease, the grog, the killings and the kidnappings that we brought with us.

But I also vehemently disbelieve that any such attitudes and actions are the driving force behind Indigenous policy today. Any honest person working in this area knows that there is an abundance of goodwill on all sides of politics. The problem is there is an equally abundant amount of argument and confusion over what the way forward should be.

Clearly I am too pale and too bruised to offer my own solutions but it strikes me as a national outrage that women who are living through the worst of this disadvantage were almost entirely ignored when they tried to rise their voice.

Credit to the Indigenous Affairs Minister Ken Wyatt who did meet with them – even if it was apparently a bit underwhelming – and Senator Jim Molan who took them all to lunch – which was apparently a bit of a hit.

And yet Pauline, incredibly enough, was the biggest hit of all.

“They really liked her because she’s not a snob,” Cashman told me. “She’s open to listening.” Unfortunately the only press about Hanson that day was over her excruciatingly contorted comments on poor Hannah Clarke and her family, which are impossible to comprehend let alone defend.

But you have to wonder if we are all equally contorted by a modern political and media culture that is more outraged by words than deeds.

While the nation was rightly united in grief for the Clarke family, the same deadly epidemic continues to sweep through our most vulnerable communities every day yet is strangely invisible.

According to Cashman, in the small and mostly Indigenous town of Wilcannia, which is home to only 550 people, 10 people have died in just the last eight weeks. Some by suicide, some by violence, all bound by poverty.

I have no die in the ditch objection to changing the date of Australia Day, nor the national anthem, nor even the flag – all relatively recent constructions. But it’s hard to feel passionate about parlour room debates when the people we pretend we’re trying to defend are dying at our grandstanding feet.

So anyway, all of this happened this week.

It happened in our national capital, it happened at Parliament House and it’s happening all over the country.

And nobody told you about it, so I’m telling you now. What happens next is up to all of us.

SOURCE 






CSIRO omits a key finding which doesn't link bushfires to climate change

Senator Matt Canavan reveals during Senate Estimates that the CSIRO failed to include a finding that “there are no studies linking climate change to fire weather” in a bushfire ‘explainer document’.

During Senate estimates a CSIRO official failed to explain why a previous CSIRO finding which said there was no evidence to suggest a link between climate change and bushsfires was not found in the recent document explaining the “climate change and science about bushfires”.

Mr Canavan told Sky News host Paul Murray omitting such a finding is like “writing a report for a newspaper about a football match and not including the final score”.

Speaking about Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese’s net-zero emissions target by 2050, Mr Canavan said Mr Albanese “doesn’t understand what he’s signed up to will devastate Australian farming”.

This is unbelievable that a government or any opposition that’s going for election every three years would get away with making a promise that’s going to be at least ten elections away,” he said.

SOURCE 





Hit job on Bettina's qualifications fails

Bettina Arndt advises

Good news. Nina Funnell has failed in her malicious campaign alleging I am faking my qualifications. AHPRA, the organisation regulating psychologists, has announced they are taking no action against me despite Funnell’s efforts to have me punished for allegedly misrepresenting my clinical psychology qualifications.

Funnell, one of the activists responsible for bullying universities into setting up kangaroo courts, launched the first attacks on me after the announcement of my Honour award on Australia Day.

That weekend, writing in New Matilda, Funnell and her editor & co-writer, Chris Graham, revealed their results of a two-year investigation into my qualifications. I refuted their misleading allegations here.

Now AHPRA has determined Funnell’s hit job has no substance. Their letter to me suggests some minor changes in the language I use to refer to my clinical psychology background. So instead of speaking about my “training in clinical psychology” I will now just refer to the fact that I completed a Master of Clinical Psychology degree at UNSW. After AHPRA decided not to take action after the previous complaint about me late last year, I wrote to the organisation  explaining that I planned to use that reference to my training and asked them to clarify whether that was appropriate. I had no response. Clearly the organisation now feels the need to be more specific – which is fine by me.

They acknowledge the problem of controlling how the media labels me – amusingly, New Matilda referred to me as a “clinical psychologist” in the captions to their hit piece. But AHPRA advises every effort should be made to get that right and where possible to clarify descriptions in interviews shown on video and online, including descriptions on overseas editions of my books.  I am in the process of doing that now – not such an easy task. Currently google has over 2.3 million hits listed under my name.

Recently we saw the perfect illustration of my central argument that professional backgrounds are often included in descriptions well-known people use to describe themselves. This is common practice for doctors like Bob Brown, despite them no longer being in practice or registered.

At the first public hearing of the Family Law Inquiry at Canberra, Megan Mitchell, the National Children‘s Commissioner  introduced herself stating; “I’m a psychologist by trade”. She is not a registered psychologist. I don’t suppose Funnell will do a hit job on Mitchell.

SOURCE 






Only ‘limited’ evidence for trans kids’ medicine but inquiry too ‘dangerous’?

The evidence for life-altering medical intervention in youth gender clinics suffers from “gaps” and “limitations” but a national inquiry would be “dangerous”, federal Health Minister Greg Hunt has been told.

The inquiry urged by more than 200 doctors and clinicians “would further harm vulnerable patients and their families through increased media and public attention,” the Royal Australasian College of Physicians said in a letter to Mr Hunt on Friday.

In August, after this newspaper began reporting concerns about the safety and ethics of “transgender” medical treatments for vulnerable minors, Mr Hunt sought “urgent” advice from the college, which covers paediatricians.

It has since emerged the college had lobbied with paediatrician Michelle Telfer — whose Royal Children’s Hospital gender clinic in Melbourne spearheads the pro-trans “affirmative” treatment model in Australia — for easier and quicker underage access to hormones and less oversight by the Family Court.

On Friday, Mr Hunt’s spokesman said the minister would review the college’s advice and consider what might need to be done.

There is intensifying global debate about the reasons for an exponential rise in often already troubled teenagers, mostly girls, diagnosed with gender dysphoria (distress at being “born in the wrong body”) and asking for puberty blocker drugs, opposite-sex hormones and surgery such as mastectomy.

On Thursday, the former British minister for mental health and suicide prevention, Jackie Doyle-Price, called for “more control over gender treatment for children”, citing litigation involving a regretful “detransitioner”, Keira Bell, 23, who said the NHS Tavistock gender clinic in London “should have challenged me more” over medical transition.

“Puberty is not the time for anyone to consent to life-changing treatment,” Ms Doyle-Price said in a tweet.

This week brought the launch of a new global body, the Society for Evidence-Based Gender Medicine, which argues that the low quality of the evidence for the affirmative model has been obscured by dramatic but unsupported claims that young people are likely to kill themselves if denied hormones and surgery.

“Given the lack of evidence of benefits of these treatments on long-term mental health, and the evidence of alarmingly high rates of post-treatment suicide, the use of affirmative care outside of rigorously designed clinical trial settings is inconsistent with ethical medical practice,” the SEGM spokesman, US-based endocrinologist William Malone, said on Friday.

Before the rise of the affirmative model and teenage-onset dysphoria, the condition typically occurred in a small, stable percentage of pre-school boys, with the vast majority coming to accept their bodies as they matured and many emerging as gay or bisexual.

Philip Morris, president of the National Association of Practising Psychiatrists, which supports a national inquiry, said he found it “very surprising” for a medical college to claim it would be “dangerous” to hold “a balanced, comprehensive inquiry into the most effective and safe treatments for gender dysphoria”.

“An inquiry that comes up with consensus on the best treatments would give confidence and support to parents and children.”

Dr Morris said the health minister would be “very disappointed” with the college, having asked it for a verdict on what was “clinical best practice”.

“(The letter) gives him no advice about the competing merits of the affirmative approach versus supportive, more conservative treatments of children with gender dysphoria; it provides him with no information on the safety and effectiveness of puberty blockers and opposite-sex hormones in children and adolescents.”

Treatment side-effects include infertility, loss of sexual desire, cardiovascular problems, and possible cognitive impairment.

‘Validation’ for Dr Telfer

Friday’s letter from the college warning Mr Hunt not to hold a national inquiry was welcomed by the gender clinicians’ lobby AusPATH, and RCH chairman Rob Knowles and chief executive John Stanway.

RCH said the letter had “validated” Dr Telfer’s work, and backed the college’s appeal for more public funding to spread gender clinic services, especially in rural and regional areas.

In the letter, RACP president Mark Lane said young people with gender dysphoria suffered “extremely high” rates of self-harm and attempted suicide. The college did not supply any evidence when asked.

Canadian psychologist Ken Zucker, a world authority on gender dysphoria and editor of the journal Archives of Sexual Behavior, has dismissed as “pure dogma” the affirmative model line to parents hesitating on the brink of treatment for their child, “Do you want a live son or a dead daughter?”.

“If you are depressed, your suicidality risk is going to be elevated, but you see that in kids who are depressed but don’t have gender dysphoria,” Dr Zucker told The Australian last year.

“The idea that adolescents with gender dysphoria are at a higher risk of suicide per se is dogma — and I think it’s wrong.”

In his letter, Dr Lane said youth gender dysphoria was “an emerging area of healthcare”, and the evidence on treatment outcomes was “limited”, and this was similar to the state of affairs with conditions, such as rare cancers, affecting a small number of patients.

He suggested federal funding for long-term research; a new “national framework” for consistent, high quality care across the country; and new “evidence-based fact sheets” on treatment.

“To facilitate a high level of informed consent, patients and families must be provided with information about the limitations of available evidence regarding gender dysphoria,” he said. “For example, there should be an informed discussion of the burdens and benefits of treatment options in a way each child or adolescent can understand.”

‘No merit or courage’

Sydney clinical psychologist Dianna Kenny, a critic of the affirmative model, said the college’s statement was “so politically correct as to lack any scientific merit or moral courage”.

Professor of paediatrics John Whitehall, another critic, said it was odd for the college to not want “public attention” for the issue of medical transition of under-18s.

“I would have thought there is already a great deal of attention, though all one way (in favour of the affirmative model),” he said.

“The RACP boasts of interest in public health and that usually involves full and frank discussion of all side-effects as part of preventing harm. Here, it is essentially (saying), ‘Be quiet and accept the experimentation’.”

In a 2018 submission to the National Children’s Commissioner, which was reporting on progress under the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, the college said taxpayers should subsidise puberty blocker drugs (which cost $5000 a year for each trans youth) as well as trans surgery, while “gender identity” should be taught in schools and medical courses at university.

The college did not answer a question about whether its advice to Mr Hunt was affected by any conflict of interest.

SEGM’s Dr Malone said there were rare circumstances in which untested treatments might be used as a last resort but challenged the college’s comparison between gender dysphoria and cancer.

“Gender dysphoria is not a fatal disease: no single, quality study has demonstrated that gender dysphoria causes suicides in young people,” he said.

“Treatment with hormones and surgeries to halt puberty deny young people a chance for natural resolution of gender dysphoria.”

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






6 March, 2020

Study shows climate change link to devastating 2019/20 Australian bushfire season

There is no way these attribution studies can prove anything.  To make judgments of cause and effect you need the same events to be repeated several times but this never happen with climate.  It is always changing

One comment below is admirably frank:  "We found that climate models struggle to reproduce these extreme events and their trends realistically"

Need I say more?


This bushfire season has been the worst on record, but what elements of it are fact and what has been distorted by myth.
Climate change did play a part in Australia’s devastating 2019 bushfire season as it has increased the chances of extreme temperatures by at least 30 per cent, a new study shows.

The eight-week study from World Weather Attribution (WWA), an international collaboration that analyses the effect of climate change on extreme weather events, found a strong link between climate change and hotter-than-normal conditions in Australia during the time of the 2019/20 fires.

Last year was the warmest and driest year in Australia since temperature and rainfall records began in 1910 and 1900, and it follows two other dry years in large parts of the country.

According to the Bureau of Meteorology’s Annual Climate Statement 2019, these conditions contributed to a more widespread and intense fire season that started earlier in the season than usual. Other factors included a strong Indian Ocean Dipole and the Southern Annual Mode.

The WWA study looked at what caused the high temperatures and prolonged dry conditions between September to February, to see if they could be linked to climate change.

While they couldn’t link climate change to the drought, it did find a 30 per cent increase in the likelihood of high temperatures.

As climate-heating emissions continue to increase, “We will be facing these extreme conditions more often than in the past,” said Maarten van Aalst, a climate scientist and director of the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre. “Should we be worried about this? Yes, very,” he told journalists.

The study also suggested that scientific models may be vastly underestimating the impacts of rising temperatures.

“We found that climate models struggle to reproduce these extreme events and their trends realistically,” Professor Geert Jan van Oldenborgh of the Royal Netherlands Meteorological Institute said.

“However, they always underestimate the increase in chances for extreme fire risks such as Australia saw in the last few months.

“This means we know the effect is likely larger than 30 per cent increase lower bound, which is already a significant influence of global warming.”

The high temperatures and prolonged dry conditions resulted in unprecedented bushfire activity across the states of New South Wales, Victoria, Western Australia, Queensland, South Australia and in the Australian Capital Territory.

The 2019/20 bushfires burned more than 11 million hectares – an area larger than Ireland or South Korea – destroyed nearly 6000 buildings and killed at least 34 people and an estimated 1.5 billion animals.

The economic costs of the fires could reach $100 billion, according to separate analyses.

“Climate change is now part of Australia’s landscape,” Dr Sophie Lewis of the University of New South Wales said.

“Extreme heat is clearly influenced by human-caused climate change, which can influence fire conditions. There is evidence that Australian fire seasons have lengthened and become more intense, and extreme temperatures have played a role in this.

“Climate change contributed to the fires and extreme heat we lived through in southeastern Australia.”

A week of hot temperatures, like that experienced in southeast Australia in December 2019, was 10 times less likely in 1900 than it is now, while heatwaves like the one in Australia in 2019/20 are already hotter by 1-2°C than they were around 1900.

Dr Friederike Otto of Oxford University said the study was not an ultimate answer to the question of how climate change was impacting things like fire but did confirm it was an important driver locally.

“We need to continue to test our models in the real world to improve them so we can provide higher confidence risk information at the scales where people live and make decisions.”

Researchers from Australia, Europe and the United States carried out the analysis under the World Weather Attribution project, which provides rapid scientific evidence on how much climate change is fuelling extreme weather events.

The group has so far conducted more than 230 such studies, linking last year’s record-breaking heatwave in France and extreme rainfall during Tropical Storm Imelda in Texas, for instance, to climate change.

Not all the events analysed show a connection to global warming.

But the researchers said devastating fire seasons will be at least four times more common in Australia than they were in 1900 if global average temperatures rise 2C above pre-industrial times.

Temperatures have already heated up by a little over 1C, and the world is on track for at least 3C of warming even if all countries meet their commitments to cut emissions under the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change.

SOURCE 






Ballarat Christian College settles case with former teacher Rachel Colvin over same-sex beliefs

Ballarat Christian College has settled with a former teacher who claimed its teachings against same-sex marriage discriminated against her, with principal Ken Nuridin saying the case has taken an enormous toll on his small school.

Rachel Colvin’s case against the school has been held up by faith-based communities as a key example of the need for a religious discrimination act following the 2017 same-sex marriage post survey.

As a result of the settlement, Ballarat Christian College in Victoria will not have to change its Statement of Faith defining marriage as a union between a man and woman and it has made no concessions on those teachings.

The Australian understands Ms Colvin will receive an undisclosed amount for loss of income and damages and will receive a positive employment reference from Ballarat Christian College.

Scott Morrison’s religious discrimination bill is still to be tabled in parliament after drafts have come under sustained attacks from both faith-based and LGBTI groups.

Mr Nuridin told The Australian that the school would continue to stand by its teachings on marriage. Ballarat Christian College principal Ken Nuridin.
“Our College provides a high quality Christian education in accordance with our beliefs,” he said.

“The claim has taken an enormous cost in time and resources already – detracting from the ability of a small school like ours to focus on what is important, the education of our students”

Christian Schools Australia director of public policy Mark Spencer said the government needed to bring on its religious discrimination bill to protect schools like Ballarat Christian College.

“We are calling on the Commonwealth Government to ensure that the proposed Religious Discrimination Bill clearly protects Christian schools from these sort of claims,” he said.

“Christian and other faith-based schools must be able to engage staff who share their beliefs and are equipped to teach those beliefs” he said.

The Australian Christian Lobby said the case showed the need for increased protections for faith-based schools and ACL chief political officer Dan Flynn called on the government to bring forward its final bill.

“The sad reality for this school is that it took steadfast determination not to buckle under the pressure of a well-resourced legal attack,” he said.

“To the school’s credit, under great duress, they stood by their principles.”

“This case underlines how the religious freedom debate must make faith-based schools’ legal rights crystal clear.

“The ACL calls upon the government to ensure a case like Ballarat Christian College never happens again.”

Following same sex marriage being legalised in December 2017, the school amended its Statement of Faith through its constitution outlining its position on marriage.

The teacher formally notified the school of her objections to the statement in a letter on August 14, and was directed to meet with the chaplain and a female member of the school leadership to discuss her views.

The college indicated she was free to hold her views personally but was required to support and teach in accordance with the beliefs of the school, which Ms Colvin was allegedly unwilling to do.

As well as the positive reference for Mrs Colvin, the payout, and the school’s secured right to keep teaching against same-sex marriage; the parties will issue a statement of ‘mutual regret’. The Australian has contacted Ms Colvin’s lawyers Clayton Utz and LGBTI rights group Equality Australia, which backed the former teacher’s case.

SOURCE 






Olympic hero Tamsyn Lewis questions the fairness of transgender athletes competing in women's sports - and says many don't speak out because of political correctness

Three-time Australian Olympian Tamsyn Lewis has questioned the fairness of transgender athletes being allowed to compete in women's sport.

The 41-year-old said there are too many unknowns regarding transgender and transitioning athletes to create a level playing field in women's competition.

The three-time Commonwealth Games gold medallist told 2GB radio it was a politically charged and sensitive topic that many did not want to address. 'There's been a lot of people who are scared to come out and say anything because of political correctness,' she said.

The Tokyo 2020 Olympic games will see a number of transgender competitors, with the IOC rules forcing female competitors to remain below testosterone guidelines to compete as women.

Lewis believes the guidelines don't factor in the physical advantage of growing up and going through puberty as a male.

'If you've grown up a male and had testosterone your bone structure is different to the female, your upper body strength is going to remain, you've got greater lung capacity a larger heart size, there's too many unknowns about how much going through puberty and being born a male is going to effect your result,' she said.

New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard will compete at the Tokyo Olympics and was born a male named Gavin    +4
New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard will compete at the Tokyo Olympics and was born a male named Gavin

New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard and Brazilian volleyball player Tiffany Abreu will be among the transgender athletes to compete at Tokyo.

2GB host Ben Fordham argued Hubbard had an obvious physical advantage compared to the rest of her field, prompting Lewis to question whether the female category would remain fair with increasing transgender participants.

'If we don't take a stand, what's going to happen to the female category of sport?,' she said.

'You don't want to get to the point where we haven't tackled this issue head on and in a respectful manner, that in 20 years time we're seeing our kids grow up and compete in sports that they just actually can't win.'

SOURCE 






Senate overstepped its position with attack on Bettina Arndt

To describe Bettina Arndt’s comments about the murder of Hannah Clarke and her three children as abhorrent would be a grievous understatement. But it is hard not to feel uncomfortable about the Senate motion that called for the removal of her Order of Australia.

It is true that senator Jonathon Duniam, supporting the motion on behalf of the government senators, stressed the independence of the Council for the Order of Australia, and underlined that “it’s important that this motion is not seen as directing the council of the Order of Australia, whose independent deliberations must be ­respected”.

But it is undeniable that the motion’s purpose was precisely to urge the council to strip Arndt of the Order of Australia.

And it is equally undeniable that losing the Order of Australia is a severe and humiliating form of punishment that is typically inflicted by the council only when a member of the order has been found by a court to have committed a serious offence.

To that extent, the motion came perilously close, in spirit if not in legal effect, to a bill of attainder, seeking to impose, by legislative means, a punishment on a specified individual for an action committed in the past.

Bills of attainder are prohibited by the US constitution as an indefensible attack on individual liberties; and while the Australian Constitution lacks similar protections, the High Court found in Polyukhovich v Commonwealth (1991) that such a bill would contravene Chapter III of the Constitution, which requires judicial powers to be exercised by courts, and not by the legislature.

Arndt was not represented in the Senate when it debated and passed the motion; she was not given a reasonable opportunity to argue against the punishment with which she was being threatened. Nor did the Senate carefully consider the motion’s possible ­implications, instead falling into a troubling near-unanimity.

Proposed and accepted in the heat of the moment, the Senate process was far removed from any notion of prudent and responsible deliberation. The result is that the Senate has placed the Council for the Order of Australia in an extraordinarily difficult position: whatever decision it comes to will inevitably be tainted by the pressure that motion puts on it.

To make matters worse, Arndt’s offence was plainly that she expressed views that are widely (and rightly) considered to be appalling.

Now, there may be occasions on which it is appropriate for the Senate to condemn particular opinions; but very few decisions should be regarded with greater suspicion than those that use the machinery of parliament to brand individual citizens as heretics. Pushed, as they so readily are, to the point of making conformity with the opinions of the majority both a duty and a necessity, those decisions risk destroying that margin of freedom that gives democratic life its substance and its endless possibility for advance.

At a time when the true believers are everywhere on the march, demanding that any opposing ­voices be suppressed, one might have hoped a party that calls itself Liberal would, before setting so dangerous a precedent, remember the biblical admonition that the sword of power, once it is unleashed, “devours sometimes one way and sometimes another”.

That none of that seems to have troubled the overwhelming majority of senators merely highlights the deeply illiberal spirit of the age.

It was, after all, the great achievement of the Renaissance humanists, and of their successors in the Enlightenment, to take opinion, however despicable it may be, out of authority’s stifling clutches.

From Plato’s Republic, which distinguished mere belief from ortho doxa — correct opinion, elevated into an orthodoxy by the wise — to St Thomas Aquinas’s Summa Theologica, which concluded that opinion not sanctioned by the church was inherently corrupt, it had invariably been held that the only legitimate beliefs were those authority had endorsed, or at least not condemned.

It was therefore truly revolutionary when that logic was turned completely on its head. Immanuel Kant, in articulating his “principle of publicity”, expressed the change with considerable force: it was not authority, he argued, that determined which opinions had merit; on the contrary, it was the free play of opinions, expressed without fear or favour in the public sphere, that alone could determine whether particular ideas deserved being deemed authoritative.

As he put it in the Critique of Pure Reason: “The sole touchstone whereby we can decide whether our holding a thing to be true is conviction or mere persuasion is the possibility of communicating it to others and of finding it to be valid for all human reason.”

As a result, regardless of whether opinions are commendable or detestable, “the public use and expression of one’s reason must always be untrammelled, as it alone can bring about enlightenment among men”.

To instead allow authority to determine which opinions were acceptable, and which were not, forced society into a form of self-imposed immaturity, from which it could never grow up.

That immaturity might well be more tolerable than was the arbitrary rule of the ancient tyrants, but it was no less pernicious; by making it unnecessary for individuals to develop the courage to trust their own judgment — rather than relying on that of the state, their neighbours, or the crowd in the street — it was the means by which “despotism perpetuates ignorance and ignorance perpetuates despotism”.

To say that is not to imply that the Senate has opened the gates to a descent into despotism. But watching the mobs on the internet baying for Arndt’s blood, it was hard not to be reminded of Norbert Elias, the great scholar of late medieval civilisation, who wrote on the basis of his experience of inter-war Europe that while going from barbarism to civility takes centuries, it took only minutes to go the other way.

We expect the Senate to calm those passions, setting bounds on conflict and preventing the furies from getting out of hand. Today, however, our politics all too often does the opposite, transforming every issue into a morality play that invites posturing and rewards intransigence.

By descending into what amounts to public shaming and extrajudicial punishment, the ­Senate has exacerbated that trend, compromising both the Australian honours system and its own ­reputation.

Australia’s Senate is now among the world’s oldest. As public trust in our democratic institutions plummets, it would be a pity if Australians had to celebrate the Senate’s 120th anniversary by hurling at it the reproach Shakespeare’s fool hurls at King Lear: “Thou shouldst not have been old till thou hadst been wise.”

Unfortunately, after this week’s vote, they may have good reason to do exactly that.

SOURCE 






The great toilet paper crisis

Message from Woolworths -- email

I’d like to update you on the shortages we’re seeing in toilet paper and other essential items.

As you may have read, or seen for yourself, these are unusual and challenging times. We know it can be frustrating when we don’t have the products you need, or when delivery or Pick up windows are filled more than usual.

We’re working very closely with our suppliers to get products onto shelves as quickly as we can. The makers of Kleenex, Sorbent, Quilton and Woolworths own range of toilet paper have all increased their production to meet this very unusual demand.

For example, the makers of Kleenex are now manufacturing 24 hours, 7 days a week at their Millicent, SA factory, as are Sorbent in their NSW and Victorian facilities. And the makers of Quilton have tripled their normal production across their factories in Queensland, NSW and WA.

It’s worth noting that the vast majority of products aren’t affected and most stores aren’t seeing significant shortages. But to make sure everyone has access to essential items, we’ve introduced some common-sense limits to a few products. We’ve limited toilet paper to 4 packs per transaction and large packs of rice (2kg and over) to 1 per transaction. Where available, hand sanitiser is now at the Customer Service Desk and limited to 2 per transaction.

We’re constantly monitoring the situation and will do our best to keep all products freely available to everyone. However, if we see new shortages, we may introduce other limits. We’ll only do this if we think it’s absolutely necessary and to help make sure all customers can access the products they need. We’ll keep you updated in our stores and on our website as things change.

Our team members are doing the very best they can, so please support them, and each other.

Thank you for your patience and understanding as we work through this together.

Brad Banducci, CEO Woolworths Group

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here





2 March, 2020

Keyboard warriors walking a fine line online

The comment below is in response to a court judgment vindicating a principal -- Tracey Brose -- of a small country school who had been abused online. The accusations against her implied that she was: evil, nasty and horrible; had brought pain and stress on a woman’s family; had mistreated lower-performing children; and brought stress on students who did not achieve A grades.

What lies behind the controversy is that Ms Brose is a "no nonsense" principal who pushes students for good results.  And she gets them, making her very popular with most of the parents

Some parents of slower students, however, thought she was too hard on their offspring and made online comments abusing Ms Brose.  And they were aggressive comments, not polite disagreement. The attacks were what one might expect from people with dim offspring

Ms Brose was distressed by the comments but could not get a retraction so turned to the law of defamation to put a kink in her critics. Had the accused apologized at any point, no further action would have been needed.  But rather than apologize, the small minority of critics doubled down.

The judgement against them  has not diminished their rage but it may be a lesson to others.


CHARACTER assassination on social media needs to be kept in check by courts while still allowing "breathing space for expression", the judge who presided over the Tamborine Mountain case says. District Court Judge Catherine Muir noted in her 140-page decision that people had a right to use defamation laws to sue if they believed their reputation was hurt by untruths but that should not trample on freedom of speech.

Judge Muir said courts could only use "existing defamation" law to assess comments made online in a "growing" number of Facebook and other social media defamation lawsuits.

She noted that "considerable legislative focus and solution" was needed to look at complex defamation law issues in online forums.

Speaking after yesterday's decision, Derek Wilding of the Centre for Media Transition at the University of Technology Sydney said a joint effort by the Federal Government and the states and territories was exploring proposals to update defamation law. "But even if the law does change, people will still need to ask themselves whether their online comments might harm someone's reputation," he said.

Mr Wilding said internet users needed to be cautious about what they posted online. "If it's not Facebook that's being sued for defamation in Australia — it's the people who post comments and the people or organisations who own the pages," he said.

"Part of the problem is that we don't assume we're a 'publisher' when we post a comment, but the law sees it differently."

Law academic Michael Douglas said defamation law reform was likely to appear this year, but cases like this would still be in the courts and reforms may not help regular mums and dads sued for defamation. "Keyboard warriors should take a breath and go for a walk before writing something spicy on social media," he said.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 29/2/20





Celebrities have forgotten their place

A new lifeform has emerged on the global stage. Actually, it’s more of a mutation than a new species. This organism can only survive in the rarefied atmosphere of the public spotlight, and it has been part of everyday life, first in movies and then in television, for the better part of a century. It can now be found in sport, music, politics, fashion, royalty – and social media, where it goes by the name “influencer”.

I am talking about the celebrity. In the old days – prior to the 1980s, say – celebrities knew their place; their job was to look pretty, to exude wit and/or charm, to dress glamorously and to attract fans. But today’s celebrities have extended this brief to include the opportunistic promotion of a popular cause. And with the awards industry flourishing, there are any number of platforms that enable today’s celebrities to pout, preen and pose on a red carpet just as they have always done, but with the added opportunity of offering “spontaneous” advice to the non-celebrity world about their pet subject. Climate change is a favourite.

Never mind that the celebrity lifestyle involves private jets, multiple homes and a range of egregious consumption sins committed against the environment. The unstated logic among this new breed of Celebrity Moralisers is that, while they do indeed live these apparently wasteful lifestyles, the payback is that they command vast audiences so “an earnest word about carbon emissions” delivered at precisely the right moment can have the effect of modifying the behaviour of millions. Millions!

Plus, moralising even momentarily from a public pulpit effectively rebrands the celebrity as not just a pretty face but as someone who’s a bit of a thinker, an ethicist; someone who is deeply concerned about the great moral challenges of the day. I mean, a celebrity isn’t going to shout “remember to floss” from the stage (vital though that is to dental hygiene); they’re going to promote a cause that is prominent, that contributes to their brand, and that can never be measured. It’s a win-win.

So it’s OK for Celebrity Moralisers to fly about, but not for you and me, and that’s because their carbon emissions are offset by the impact they can have in “bravely speaking out” and reining in the errant behaviour of the masses. In fact, moralising to millions is a lot like buying carbon offsets. It legitimises the celebrity lifestyle, it promotes their brand and, best of all, the impact of their courageous words can’t be quantified. How many people were persuaded to reduce carbon emissions as a consequence of moral posturing? Or does the value that celebrities bring lie with their ability to change the vibe?

In many ways, the cult of the celebrity is like a modern aristocracy in which the resources of the many are marshalled to support the lifestyle of the few. And when celebrities stuck to their core business of promoting their work, we accepted their position of privilege. But less so today.

In today’s world business leaders, politicians and others are very much held to account for espousing one standard while living another. The modern world abhors hypocrisy, or so we would like to believe.

And yet I somehow think that next year’s awards season will be littered with more causes, more symbols of solidarity, more brave words of support, because despite the callouts, the spoofs and the protest, we’ll move on and allow the Celebrity Moraliser to re-emerge stronger and poutier than ever. Hmmm… perhaps we’re more tolerant of hypocrisy than we would like to believe.

SOURCE 





Our leaders open to ridicule in setting silly climate targets

We might like talking about polit­ical promises but let’s be frank: they have the half-life of a prawn salad. Our politicians have broken so many pledges they’ve made cynicism more contagious than the coronavirus.

Ruling out new taxes, heralding surpluses and guaranteeing stability — breaking these undertakings is the only thing that has united our major parties over the past decade. Crossing voters is an across-the-aisle conviction.

When core promises can last less than a year, try to imagine the voter buy-in for a pledge spanning 30 budgets and at least 10 elect­ions. Anthony Albanese says Labor will deliver a zero net carbon dioxide emissions target by 2050, without saying how it will be done or what it will cost.

If it happens, it will be achieved by a prime minister who is most likely not yet in the parliament and some of the people who will get to pass judgment on the outcome­ at the ballot box won’t be born for more than a decade. When we evaluate our 2050 performance, Albanese will be 86, Greta Thunberg will be 47 and Keith Richards will most likely still be confounding medics and turning 106.

If we cast our minds back an equivalent period, it was the delivery date for an infamous promise from former prime minister Bob Hawke. “By 1990, no child will be living in poverty,” he said in 1987. Despite manifestly failing on this, Hawke was re-elected for a fourth term in March 1990. Although the Silver Bodgie is no longer with us, children living in poverty are — as we were reminded­ this week with references to the Newstart Allowance and poverty on the NSW central coast.

If you can’t remember 1990, let me remind you: it was the year that Germany officially reunited, a year after the Berlin Wall came down, and Poland became the first Eastern bloc nation to begin to embrace capitalism; Tim Berners-Lee began work on creating the world wide web; the first digital camera was sold; and mobile phones were chunky things in fancy cars. Iraq invaded Kuwait and troops, including Australian sailors, blockaded Iraq in the lead-up to the first Gulf War; while the Rio Earth summit, which first drew global attention to global warming, was still two years away.

Supporters of zero net by 2050 argue that it is pointless discussing the cost because we have no idea about technological, industrial and economic settings that far in the future. Which is exactly the point: why promote the target when there is no way of knowing where we will be placed on clim­ate knowledge, technological ­advances, emissions reduction and economic settings even two years from now?

This target is virtue-signalling, pure and simple, which is why state governments and large corpor­ates sign up; they are eager to access subsidies and projects but are not responsible for delivering. In federal politics, where the rubber will hit the road, any party adopting the target surely is obliged to provide plans and costings for achieving it.

Labor wipes its hands but a study by the New Zealand Instit­ute of Economic Research costed scenarios and found zero net would cut GDP growth by 0.2 per cent. It said the higher the target, the higher the cost to households. Former resources minister Matt Canavan wrote in The Australian this week that the same formula would mean annual economic costs of $200bn to $400bn in Australia, with between 200,000 and 400,000 fewer jobs.

That estimates the pain, yet until we know what the rest of the world does, we cannot guess at any gain. If global emissions continue to rise — as they are forecast to do for at least a decade — all our costs will be for no discernible benefit. None of our politicians want to talk about cost/benefit analysis on climate action.

The evangelical enthusiasm for this target from green/left politicians­, activists and journalists is irrational, more emotion and gesture than reason and fact.

They boast of 80 nations already­ signed up to zero net but they seldom list those countries. Here are a few: Antigua and Barbuda­, Burkina Faso, Botswana, Cape Verde, Chad, Colombia, Cook Islands, Dominican ­Republic, Ethiopia, Ghana, ­Guyana, Lebanon, Mali, Nauru, Nicaragua, Pakistan, Panama, Rwanda, Samoa, Suriname, Uganda and Zambia.

One of the few signatories with a prospective economy is Norway­, but it gets almost all of its electricity from abundant hydro-electricity while exporting lucrative gas and oil. It has its cake and exports at the same time.

To be fair, proponents point to Britain but while it has dramatic­ally reduced emissions, it has fallen short of some targets, has already switched from coal to gas for cost reasons rather than clim­ate, and it gets about 20 per cent of its electricity from nuclear.

In Australia, added emissions reduction will be costly and difficult. Already our shift to about 23 per cent renewable power has helped double electricity costs and threaten energy security.

For just over a fortnight this month, South Australia faced an accidental experiment. Cut off from the Victorian intercon­nector because of storm damage, it was left as an island, reliant on its own generation, four years and $500m of government investment after its statewide blackout in 2016.

Saved by cool weather, the state just managed to scrape through, but only by relying on gas for 70 per cent of its electricity generation. The state’s much-vaunted 50 per cent renewable energy achievements fell by the wayside — the zeitgeist wasn’t blowing when required — and without coal-fired power from across the state border, it only got through by firing up every bit of gas it could.

If targets and subsidies force out more coal and gas power in Victoria and NSW, all this will get much worse. Battery storage is too expensive and too short-lived to play much of a role.

Writing in The Wall Street Journal in August, Mark P. Mills detailed the resources needed for expansion of wind farms and battery storage.

“Building one wind turbine requires 900 tons of steel, 2500 tons of concrete and 45 tons of plastic,” he outlined.

“The International Renewable Energy Agency calculates that solar goals for 2050 consistent with the Paris Accords will result in old-panel disposal constituting more than double the tonnage of all today’s global plastic waste.”

He points out that the manufacture of a single electric car battery­ demands the digging up and processing of 230,000kg of raw materials. For each car.

The mining growth required, especially for rare earths, would be extraordinary, expensive and energy intensive.

“Building enough wind turbines to supply half the world’s electricity would require nearly two billion tons of coal to produce concrete and steel, along with two billion barrels of oil to make the composite blades,” wrote Mills, confronting the reality of clean, green industries.

Our debate is dominated by unrealistic posturing rather than cold hard facts. Scott Morrison ought to stick to practical policies and dismiss the climate poseurs in his own ranks and in the state ­Liberal governments. Australia ought to either focus primarily on affordable and reliable power or, if we are serious about emissions reduction, consider solving our energy security, climate policy and submarine technology dilemmas through a pivot to nuclear technology.

Politicians must resist believing their own publicity. One of the greatest risks for the Coalition after winning last year’s election was believing that the result was all about its brilliance rather than being largely a consequence of Labor’s determination to make themselves unelectable.

With a thin reform agenda, fragile economy and underlying divisions in its ranks, it is vital that the Coalition governs compet­ently and embarks on a more ambitious program. It has been tardy on this front but, again, has been gifted a re-election strategy­ by a Labor Party addicted to radical, non-nuclear climate action as the learned helplessness of its electoral failure.

Morrison must oppose climate self-harm and fight for reliable, ­affordable electricity — coal-fired, gas-fired or nuclear. This contest will shape our economic future and crystallise his government’s reason for being.

SOURCE 




Dangerous leniency for youthful criminals

A TEENAGER accused of breaking into a woman's home and raping her yesterday morning was released on bail for sex offences allegedly committed just a month ago.

The 17-year-old was charged with various offences in Cooktown last month, including sexual assault and assault with intent to commit rape.

It is understood he was granted bail and ordered to live in Cairns and not return to Cooktown as one of the conditions of his bail.

LNP leader Deb Frecklington described yesterday's alleged incident at Edmonton as a "horrific, horrific case". She said the community was being put in danger by Labor's decision to scrap the breach of bail offence for juveniles and amendments to the Youth JuStice Act.

"Labor's 'catch and release' youth bail laws are putting the public at risk," she said. "There is a revolving door of yob  crime and the community has had enough."

A senior police officer who did not want to be named said current legislation "left a lot to be answered for". "It's absolutely outrageous and it's leaving the community at risk," he said.

The youth was also part of the bail hub program Operation Regenerate, which involves police on paid overtime taking youths on recreational outings. The operation was part of a $9.4 million statewide investment from the State Government to lower the number of children remanded in custody.

Cairns MP Michael Healy defended Labor's juvenile crime policies. "The Youth Justice Act is clear, a person can be remanded in custody to keep the community safe or to prevent them from offending," he said.. "Locking them up is not the simple solution ... the only way to address this problem is being hard and direct on the causes of crime."

The woman allegedly 'attacked by the teen is aged over 50. She called police and he was allegedly found naked soon after. The woman was treated in Cairns Hospital. It is understood the teen appeared in a closed court session late yesterday charged with, rape, assault. With intent to commit rape and enter dwelling with intent. He was remanded in custody with the case adjourned until May.

From the Brisbane "Courier Mail" of 29/2/20

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here






1 March, 2020

When a poet is a better prophet than the prophets

It would be difficult to be a worse prophet than the Greenies.  Starting from Paul Ehrlich, they repeatedly make these confident prophecies that in some number of years disasters will befall us unless we do something that they want. But it just doesn't happen.  When the prophesied year rolls around, life just goes on as usual.

During Australia's recent summer bushfire season, all sorts of Greenie-influenced people screeched that the fires were the result of global warming and unless we shut down our our entire electricity generation industry the fires would get worse. They were so shrill about their claims that PM Morrison came under great pressure to "do more" about global warming.

And then came something that no Greenie had prophesied -- showing how little they understood of the events concerned.  It rained. And DID it rain!  Concerns about fire were rapidly replaced with concerns about flooding. The Greenie prophecies that the fires would go on until we did something about global warming were thoroughly falsified.  The Greenies basically did not know anything about how Australia's climate worked.

But a poet did.  In 1908 Dorothea MacKellar described Australia's climate with limpid simplicity, as being "Droughts and flooding rains".  She knew how Australia's climate went even if the Greenies did not.  It happened this year exactly how she said it always does: Drought followed by flood.  She was a good observer.

The Greenies were no observers at all.  We were constantly regaled with assurances that the recent fires were the worst ever when in fact the 1974/75 fires consumed a much bigger area.  Lies on top of ideology were all the Greenies had to offer.

And there is no doubt that the drought contributed to the buildup of fuel in the forests and made the fires worse.  Dry vegetation burns well.  But what was the cause of the drought?  Was it simply a recurrent feature of the Australian climate?  No way! said the Greenies. It was caused  by global warming.

For instance we have the opening sentence from a recent rather emptyheaded article in a prestigious medical journal (JAMA) which says:  "There is increasing scientific consensus that climate change is the underlying cause of the prolonged dry and hot conditions that have increased the risk of extreme fire weather in Australia".

But that is magical thinking. Global warming would cause MORE rain, not less.  Warmer oceans would evaporate off more water vapour which would come down as more rain.  The temperature that causes drought is cooling, not warming.  So again the global warming faith flies in the face of the facts

Most global warming activism is purely political with agitators  such Thunberg and Occasio-Cortez knowing nothing of the detailed climate statistics. And it is mostly from them that the wild predictions come. Scientists  -- such as Ezekiel -- who do know the facts are much more cautious in their predictions.






Anthony Albanese’s clean-energy pitch to win rural votes

He's pushing the old "green jobs" promise -- but such jobs are mostly mythical -- and certainly don't replace the jobs in mining towns.  The people of the bush are unlikely to fall for it

Anthony Albanese will attack the Nationals over their “lazy cynicism” on climate change and launch a pitch to win back the trust of regional voters who abandoned Labor at last year’s election.

Delivering a speech in the NSW coalmining town of Singleton, in the heart of Labor’s Hunter Valley seats, the Opposition Leader will promote the benefits of a 21st-­century “clean energy economy”.

Addressing a Country Labor conference on Saturday, Mr Albanese will push a “clean energy jobs boom” in regional Australia and talk up opportunities in the carbon farming, forestry, hydrogen and rare earths sectors

“Just as coal and iron ore ­fuelled the industrial economies of the 20th century, they will fuel the clean energy economies of the 21st,” Mr Albanese will say. “If we leave it to the Nationals, we will drift back towards the 19th century. They would rather cling to yesterday and run scare campaigns­ than embrace the opportunities­ of tomorrow. This lazy cynicism is shameful. They sell out their own communities and our full potential as a nation.”

The Labor leader will say the Nationals have “let down regional Australia” and “drifted from the people they are meant to represent”, flagging an increased effort­ by Labor to focus on regional policies ahead of the next election.

“They’ve fallen a long way. Black Jack McEwen would never have let himself be pushed around by the Liberals like this,” he will say. “The Nationals talk the talk, but they don’t walk the walk.

“As a party proudly born in the bush, Labor has the plans that delive­r for regional Australia. And we can win back the trust of regional­ Australia.”

Talking up his target of zero net emissions by 2050, Mr Albanese accuses the Coalition of putting politics before science and “common­ sense”.

Speaking in front of regional Labor MPs, including Joel Fitzgibbon, Meryl Swanson and Justine Elliot, Mr Albanese will say there were “huge opportunities for ­regional areas to contribute via carbon farming” and expanded industri­es in aluminium, steel, silico­n and ammonia.

“Australia has the potential to capture one billion tonnes of carbon­ dioxide a year, generating a new source of income for our farmers in the process,” he will say.

“The forestry industry has a bright future as our economy changes. “We are also the second-largest producer of rare earth elements.”

Mr Albanese, a left-faction powerbroker, will say the demand for high-quality Australian coal will continue for “decades to come”. “Coal will remain an important­ part of the picture, but the Hunter doesn’t have all its eggs in the coal basket,” he will say.

“Contrary to Nationals’ rhetoric, regional Australia is more than resources alone.”

Promoting Labor as a centrist option, Mr Albanese will accuse the Nationals of saying “nothing needs to change ever” and the Greens of saying “everything has to change tomorrow”.

Mr Albanese will say his zero net emissions by 2050 target is not “radical” and that “newer and cleaner technologies” would “help keep the grid stable”.

“Big business including Qantas, Telstra, BP, the Commonwealth Bank and Santos, along with the influential Business Council of Australia, are aiming for it.

“Just this week, Rio Tinto ­announced it will invest $1.5bn in climate-related projects over the next five years as part of its 2050 pledge,” Mr Albanese will say.

SOURCE 






Revealed: One in three Australians think immigration is too high while most blame expensive housing for ruining their dreams

The two things are related.  All those immigrants have to be housed -- putting great pressure on the existing housing stocks

A third of Australians think the nation is too overcrowded while a majority blame unaffordable housing for killing their dreams, a survey has found.

Australia's net annual immigration rate with departures factored in stood at close to 300,000 last year - which included permanent arrivals and international students.

While it was below the record-high of 353,480 reached in the year to April 2009, it was still more than triple the 20th century average of 70,000.

The national population growth pace of 1.5 per cent is also almost double the rich-world average of 0.8 per cent.

With Sydney and Melbourne each home to more than 5million people, it seems overcrowding is an issue.

Almost a third, or 32.4 per cent of respondents, called for population control when asked about their wishes for Australia in the survey commissioned by Real Insurance.

The online survey of 5,000 people, by CoreData, also showed a majority to be concerned about expensive real estate, with 53.5 per cent describing affordability as the 'greatest barrier to them achieving their dreams'.

Sydney's median house price stood at $994,300 in January, CoreLogic data showed.

The Real Wishes Report, compiled late last year, showed 61 per cent of people were concerned about the effect of global uncertainty on Australia.

A similar proportion, or 60.7 per cent, wanted better employment opportunities.

The survey was taken in September, four months before Chinese authorities declared the first outbreak of coronavirus in the Chinese city of Wuhan.

Almost a third, or 31 per cent of respondents, believed Australia had worsened since the May election, which saw Prime Minister Scott Morrison's Coalition win a third consecutive term.

SOURCE 






Education policy rolls dice

“Both today and 20 years from now, I want Australians to be in control of their future.” At the very least,  Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s vision for the nation is ambitious.

Two decades from now, the children starting school this year will be 25, and their future is massively dependent on how well they are educated.  But the vision for education looks scarily like a roll of the dice.

The next 10 years will be guided by the Alice Springs (Mparntwe) Education Declaration, the fourth in a series of road maps signed off by the Federal Education Minister and all states and territories.

Some people will be happy with the Declaration’s recycled, globalist language and experimental proposals for improving student performance.

But statements like: “As the importance of a high quality education grows, so does the complexity of being an educator” offer little evidence of building on solid foundations.

Have quality and complexity only recently become the main game?

As Australian curriculum, assessment, teaching and other standards go steadily downhill, school education is now a $60 billion a year bet that pays off only for some.

Australian policymakers are embracing a 21st century learning agenda that paints the future as volatile, uncertain, complex and ambiguous (VUCA).

This VUCA world was part of the response by the US Army War College to the fall of the former Soviet Union and the end of the Cold War. The futurists love it, and various interpretations have been adopted enthusiastically by educators as they try to anticipate the needs of the children of the new millennium.

But it’s a dark and pessimistic outlook — fixated on jobs lost to artificial intelligence and other technological trends — and it permeates the work of organisations such as the OECD, whose Future of Education and Skills 2030 Project is influential.

What’s emerging is intellectually and pedagogically shallow, a wholesale shift towards a curriculum focusing on skills that — as per the Alice Springs document —  “support imagination, discovery, innovation, empathy and developing creative solutions to complex problems”… these allegedly being “central to contributing to Australia’s knowledge based economy.”

The vision does at least include the occasional reference to “development of deep knowledge within a discipline … appropriate to students’ phases of development.”

The visionaries cannot have it both ways. A sovereign nation must have an effective, efficient educational agenda.

It is time for our leaders to ensure that all Australian students will benefit from a sophisticated, rigorous education delivered by highly-trained subject experts.  That is what being in control looks like.

SOURCE 

 Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).    For a daily critique of Leftist activities,  see DISSECTING LEFTISM.  To keep up with attacks on free speech see Tongue Tied. Also, don't forget your daily roundup  of pro-environment but anti-Greenie  news and commentary at GREENIE WATCH .  Email me  here







Postings from Brisbane, Australia by John Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.) -- former member of the Australia-Soviet Friendship Society, former anarcho-capitalist and former member of the British Conservative party.





Most academics are lockstep Leftists so readers do sometimes doubt that I have the qualifications mentioned above. Photocopies of my academic and military certificates are however all viewable here


For overseas readers: The "ALP" is the Australian Labor Party -- Australia's major Leftist party. The "Liberal" party is Australia's major conservative political party.


In most Australian States there are two conservative political parties, the city-based Liberal party and the rural-based National party. But in Queensland those two parties are amalgamated as the LNP.


Again for overseas readers: Like the USA, Germany and India, Australia has State governments as well as the Federal government. So it may be useful to know the usual abbreviations for the Australian States: QLD (Queensland), NSW (New South Wales), WA (Western Australia), VIC (Victoria), TAS (Tasmania), SA (South Australia).


For American readers: A "pensioner" is a retired person living on Social Security


"Digger" is an honorific term for an Australian soldier


Another lesson in Australian: When an Australian calls someone a "big-noter", he is saying that the person is a chronic and rather pathetic seeker of admiration -- as in someone who often pulls out "big notes" (e.g. $100.00 bills) to pay for things, thus endeavouring to create the impression that he is rich. The term describes the mentality rather than the actual behavior with money and it aptly describes many Leftists. When they purport to show "compassion" by advocating things that cost themselves nothing (e.g. advocating more taxes on "the rich" to help "the poor"), an Australian might say that the Leftist is "big-noting himself". There is an example of the usage here. The term conveys contempt. There is a wise description of Australians generally here


Another bit of Australian: Any bad writing or messy anything was once often described as being "like a pakapoo ticket". In origin this phrase refers to a ticket written with Chinese characters - and thus inscrutably confusing to Western eyes. These tickets were part of a Chinese gambling game called "pakapoo".


Two of my ancestors were convicts so my family has been in Australia for a long time. As well as that, all four of my grandparents were born in the State where I was born and still live: Queensland. And I am even a member of the world's second-most condemned minority: WASPs (the most condemned is of course the Jews -- which may be why I tend to like Jews). So I think I am as Australian as you can get. I certainly feel that way. I like all things that are iconically Australian: meat pies, Vegemite, Henry Lawson etc. I particularly pride myself on my familiarity with the great Australian slanguage. I draw the line at Iced Vo-Vos and betting on the neddies, however. So if I cannot comment insightfully on Australian affairs, who could?



My son Joe


On all my blogs, I express my view of what is important primarily by the readings that I select for posting. I do however on occasions add personal comments in italicized form at the beginning of an article.


I am rather pleased to report that I am a lifelong conservative. Out of intellectual curiosity, I did in my youth join organizations from right across the political spectrum so I am certainly not closed-minded and am very familiar with the full spectrum of political thinking. Nonetheless, I did not have to undergo the lurch from Left to Right that so many people undergo. At age 13 I used my pocket-money to subscribe to the "Reader's Digest" -- the main conservative organ available in small town Australia of the 1950s. I have learnt much since but am pleased and amused to note that history has since confirmed most of what I thought at that early age.

I imagine that the the RD is still sending mailouts to my 1950s address!


I am an army man. Although my service in the Australian army was chiefly noted for its un-notability, I DID join voluntarily in the Vietnam era, I DID reach the rank of Sergeant, and I DID volunteer for a posting in Vietnam. So I think I may be forgiven for saying something that most army men think but which most don't say because they think it is too obvious: The profession of arms is the noblest profession of all because it is the only profession where you offer to lay down your life in performing your duties. Our men fought so that people could say and think what they like but I myself always treat military men with great respect -- respect which in my view is simply their due.


The kneejerk response of the Green/Left to people who challenge them is to say that the challenger is in the pay of "Big Oil", "Big Business", "Big Pharma", "Exxon-Mobil", "The Pioneer Fund" or some other entity that they see, in their childish way, as a boogeyman. So I think it might be useful for me to point out that I have NEVER received one cent from anybody by way of support for what I write. As a retired person, I live entirely on my own investments. I do not work for anybody and I am not beholden to anybody. And I have NO investments in oil companies or mining companies


Although I have been an atheist for all my adult life, I have no hesitation in saying that the single book which has influenced me most is the New Testament. And my Scripture blog will show that I know whereof I speak.


The Rt. Rev. Phil Case (Moderator of the Presbyterian church in Queensland) is a Pharisee, a hypocrite, an abomination and a "whited sepulchre".


English-born Australian novellist, Patrick White was a great favourite in literary circles. He even won a Nobel prize. But I and many others I have spoken to find his novels very turgid and boring. Despite my interest in history, I could only get through about a third of his historical novel Voss before I gave up. So why has he been so popular in literary circles? Easy. He was a miserable old Leftist coot, and, incidentally, a homosexual. And literary people are mostly Leftists with similar levels of anger and alienation from mainstream society. They enjoy his jaundiced outlook, his dissatisfaction, rage and anger.


A delightful story about a great Australian conservative


Would you believe that there once was a politician whose nickname was "Honest"?

"Honest" Frank Nicklin M.M. was a war hero, a banana farmer and later the conservative Premier of my home State of Queensland in the '60s. He was even popular with the bureaucracy and gave the State a remarkably tranquil 10 years during his time in office. Sad that there are so few like him.


A great Australian wit exemplified



An Australian Mona Lisa (Nikki Gogan)


Bureaucracy: "One of the constant laments of doctors and nurses working with NSW Health is the incredible and increasing bureaucracy," she said. "It is completely obstructive to providing a service."


Revered Labour Party leader Gough Whitlam was a very erudite man so he cannot have been unaware of the similarities of his famous phrase “the Party, the platform, the people” with an earlier slogan: "Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuehrer". It's basically the same slogan in reverse order.


Australia's original inhabitants were a race of pygmies, some of whom survived into modern times in the mountainous regions of the Atherton tableland in far North Queensland. See also here. Below is a picture of one of them taken in 2007, when she was 105 years old and 3'7" tall




Julia Gillard, a failed feminist flop. She was given the job of Prime Minister of Australia but her feminist preaching was so unpopular that she was booted out of the job by her own Leftist party. Her signature "achievements" were the carbon tax and the mining tax, both of which were repealed by the next government.


The "White Australia Policy: "The Immigration Restriction Act was not about white supremacy, racism, or the belief that whites were higher up the evolutionary tree than the coloured races. Rather, it was designed to STOP the racist exploitation of non-whites (all of whom would have been illiterate peasants practicing religions and cultures anathema to progressive democracy) being conscripted into a life of semi-slavery in a coolie-worked plantation economy for the benefit of the absolute monarchs, hereditary aristocracy and the super-wealthy companies and share-holders of the northern hemisphere.


A great little kid



In November 2007, a four-year-old boy was found playing in a croc-infested Territory creek after sneaking off pig hunting alone with four dogs and a puppy. The toddler was found five-and-a-half hours after he set off from his parents' house playing in a creek with the puppy. Amazingly, Daniel Woditj also swam two creeks known to be inhabited by crocs during his adventurous romp. Mr Knight said that after walking for several kilometres, Daniel came to a creek and swam across it. Four of his dogs "bailed up" at the creek but the youngster continued on undaunted with his puppy to a second creek. Mr Knight said Daniel swam the second croc-infested creek and walked on for several more kilometres. "Captain is a hard bushman and Daniel is following in his footsteps. They breed them tough out bush."


A great Australian: His eminence George Pell. Pictured in devout company before his elevation to Rome





MY OTHER SITES

Alternative (Monthly) archives for this blog



DETAILS OF REGULARLY UPDATED BLOGS BY JOHN RAY:

"Tongue Tied"
"Dissecting Leftism"
"Australian Politics"
"Education Watch International"
"Political Correctness Watch"
"Greenie Watch"
Western Heart


BLOGS OCCASIONALLY UPDATED:

"Marx & Engels in their own words"
"A scripture blog"
"Recipes"
"Some memoirs"
To be continued ....
Coral Reef Compendium
IQ Compendium
Queensland Police
Australian Police News
Paralipomena (3)
Of Interest
Dagmar Schellenberger
My alternative Wikipedia


BLOGS NO LONGER BEING UPDATED

"Food & Health Skeptic"
"Eye on Britain"
"Immigration Watch International".
"Leftists as Elitists"
Socialized Medicine
OF INTEREST (2)
QANTAS -- A dying octopus
BRIAN LEITER (Ladderman)
Obama Watch
Obama Watch (2)
Dissecting Leftism -- Large font site
Michael Darby
Paralipomena (2)
AGL -- A bumbling monster
Telstra/Bigpond follies
Optus bungling
Bank of Queensland blues


There are also two blogspot blogs which record what I think are my main recent articles here and here. Similar content can be more conveniently accessed via my subject-indexed list of short articles here or here (I rarely write long articles these days)


Alt archives
Longer Academic Papers
Johnray links
Academic home page
Academic Backup Page
General Backup
General Backup 2



Selected reading

MONOGRAPH ON LEFTISM

CONSERVATISM AS HERESY

Rightism defined
Leftist Churches
Leftist Racism
Fascism is Leftist
Hitler a socialist
What are Leftists
Psychology of Left
Status Quo?
Leftism is authoritarian
James on Leftism
Irbe on Leftism
Beltt on Leftism

Critiques
Lakoff
Van Hiel
Sidanius
Kruglanski
Pyszczynski et al.





Main academic menu
Menu of recent writings
basic home page
Pictorial Home Page
Selected pictures from blogs (Backup here)
Another picture page (Rarely updated)



Note: If the link to one of my articles is not working, the article concerned can generally be viewed by prefixing to the filename the following:
http://pandora.nla.gov.au/pan/42197/20151027-0014/jonjayray.com/

OR: (After 2015)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160322114550/http://jonjayray.com/