November 17, 2005 | Graham

More Beattie bumbles



When my newsagent told me that they had been served with a resumption notice to allow for a new busway I assumed it was for a road widening and might involve some of their carpark. They are on Old Cleveland Road at Coorparoo, which is one of Brisbane’s major arterials. “No,” Chris told me, “it involves the whole of the shop. “This is at the rear of us.”
That couldn’t be a serious proposal I thought, as I paid the bill, and filed it to follow-up later. Well, apparently it is, as revealed in today’s Courier Mail. There are two options being considered. One of which involves resumption of hundreds of houses and some parkland, construction of tunnels and flyovers, and possibly the relocation of my local newsagents. If you have broadband, or are very patient, you can download the map from here (pdf 1.72mb).
The design looks like it is meant to work in with the designation in the South-East Queensland Regional Plan of the Coorparoo area where I live as a TOD (Transit Oriented Development), which is defined as “Mixed-use residential and commercial areas, designedto maximise the efficient use of land through high levels of access to public transport”.
That means that Coorparoo will become a high-density residential node, which will involve some high-rise apartment blocks, if the desired densities are to be reached.
All of this is quite problematic for the local Labor member Gary Fenlon, and hence for his boss, Peter Beattie.
Fenlon originally won the seat appealing to NIMBYs with a campaign on local traffic issues, which included retention of an archaic and dangerous railway level crossing. (Declaration: I was the Liberal candidate at the time.)
At the next election he held the seat, despite a transport issue involving making the local rail line dual-gauge to accommodate large interstate diesel trains.
This proposal is more disruptive than anything proposed before, and coupled with the TOD will make Coorparoo unrecognisable from what it is now.
Fenlon lost Greenslopes in 1995 when Wayne Goss was still popular and there were no substantial local issues. At the same election, Goss also lost some seats that were impacted by a traffic issue – the so-called “Koala Road”. (Declaration: I wasn’t the Liberal candidate that time – I was running the Liberal Party state campaign.)
These proposals have got to make Greenslopes a potential win for the Liberal Party. They could also have flow-on impacts on the neighbouring seat of South Brisbane, just as the Koala Road had some flow-on effects more broadly than just the affected seats.
Now would be a good time for the Liberals to preselect a candidate for Greenslopes – they should be able to attract a high calibre field with this issue in the open. (Declaration: I have no interest in the preselection!)



Posted by Graham at 4:07 pm | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 16, 2005 | Graham

Will there be enough water for us and our cars?



The latest fashionable scare is the idea that our cities will run out of water. I say “fashionable” not because I don’t think there is a genuine issue, but because I think it has been typically over-stated.
However, water may be at even more of a premium if the CSIRO is successful with one of its latest projects. This press release outlines how:

A team at CSIRO Manufacturing and Infrastructure Technology has developed a small device that can extract enough hydrogen per day from water to power a family car for up to150kms. This work is an important part of CSIRO’s Energy Transformed Flagship research program into positioning Australia for a future hydrogen economy.

The system currently works off mains power, but they are working to adapt it to use solar and wind power instead.
While the vision of our suburban houses sitting there with their roofs photosynthesising electricity from sunlight and turning it into hydrogen to fuel our cars is attractive to me, I can’t help think that solving one potential problem – a shortage of oil – might not exacerbate a present problem – there’s not as much water around as we might like.



Posted by Graham at 11:35 am | Comments (6) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 15, 2005 | Jeff Wall

Meddlesome backbenchers need to get out of the way



Before John Howard handed out $320 million of taxpayers money for a partial upgrade of the notorious Ipswich Motorway he should have done some homework to what the impact might be.
Had he done so, he would have kept the cheque in his pocket for seldom has such a significant handout attracted almost universal disapproval…even from his political friends and allies.
About the only person who is pleased is the Federal Liberal MP for Blair, Cameron Thompson, who has single-handedly run interference on the total upgrade of one of the most dangerous roads I have ever driven on…and I have driven on mountain “highways” in Papua New Guinea, and “freeways” in Egypt.
And John Howard would have been well advised as part of his homework exercise to have a talk to Rob Borbidge, or even Wayne Goss, distinguished former Premiers of Queensland. Or, better still, he might have really crossed the political divide and had a chat to Molly Robson, the former Labor MP for Springwood.
Had he done so, he would have realised that the “alternate proposal” being pushed by Thompson is fraught with political danger…the same “danger” that just about obliterated the Goss Government in 1995.
And if he had spoken with Rob Borbidge he would have been told in no uncertain terms that the upgrading of an existing motorway is not only more sensible politically, it is the best way to meet a major infrastructure need in the shortest possible time.
One of the best freeways in Australia today is the Gold Coast Motorway. It was started by the Borbidge Government and completed by the Beattie Government in what must have been record time.
And it was achieved by a widening and reconfiguration of the old Gold Coast Highway…the alternative being the Goss Government’s proposed entirely new highway that caused it so much political angst.
This time around, the political boot is on the other foot. It is the State Labor Government that is sensibly proposing a total widening and upgrade of the existing Ipswich Motorway, and a Federal Liberal-National Government that is considering some hair-brained alternative that bears a close resemblance to the “koala highway” that wiped out a group of State Labor MP’s a decade ago.
And the State Liberal and National Opposition is siding with the Beattie Government, as is the Liberal Lord Mayor of Brisbane.
How can it possibly be that one irrelevant Federal backbencher is able to single-handedly derail the much needed upgrade of a dangerous road that has already caused untold tragedy for too may families?
John Howard’s political antenna is one of the best in the business. The arrival of the new Airbus aircraft on Saturday morning must have caused it interference…there is no other possible explanation for a total political blunder.
Most of the Ipswich motorway is in the electorate of the Member for Oxley who has diligently fought for its upgrading.
But there will be a redistribution of Queensland Federal Seats in the coming months, and, given the growth occurring in the Springfield/Forest Lake areas, the Member for Blair might find himself representing significant more of the city of Ipswich, with the Member for Oxley representing the huge growth corridor that has to be seen to be fully appreciated.
If that happens, then the Member for Blair might find his folly leads to the same outcome Molly Robson achieved – political oblivion.
But if the Federal Government persists with this nonsense proposal he won’t be the only victim.
The inevitable consequence of a northern bypass road to supersede or supplement the Ipswich Motorway is a massive spill over of traffic into Brisbane’s western suburbs…and new pressure to build the politically hazardous western ring road.
That will present the Member for Ryan with a massive political headache. And it will be a political godsend for Peter Beattie and be a massive dent in the overconfidence of the State Liberal Party.
All because of one meddlesome backbencher who has inexplicably been allowed to hijack an issue that ought to be determined by a State Government negotiating with a Federal Government on the basis of what is best for motorists, and what is the most fiscally responsible way to achieve that.
And he is someone who should know better, for he was, after all, in the employ of the then Liberal Leader, Joan Sheldon, when she and Rob Borbidge reaped a political harvest from the Goss Government’s 1995 political blunder that bears eerie similarities to today’s events!



Posted by Jeff Wall at 10:10 am | Comments Off on Meddlesome backbenchers need to get out of the way |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 14, 2005 | Jeff Wall

Why Sir John Kerr was always a risky proposition as governor general



Last week’s debate about the dismissal of the Whitlam Government 30 years ago completely overlooked one critical aspect of the events leading up to 11 November 1975.
And that is simply this – the appointment of the Right Honourable Sir John Robert Kerr as Governor General of Australia by the Honourable Edward Gough Whitlam was a risky proposition, and a risk he had absolutely no need to take.
It was a risky proposition because John Kerr, at the time, was a frustrated politician, rather than a former politician, whose undoubted political ambitions had been thwarted by the great Labor split of the mid-1950’s.
In the post-war period, four former Australian politicians have held the office of Governor-General…Sir William McKell, The Lord Casey, Sir Paul Hasluck and William George Hayden.
All four held the Office with great distinction, and, in the case of McKell and Hasluck, oversaw changes of Government. And in both cases they enjoyed entirely proper relations with Prime Ministers with a different political “persuasion” to their own.
But back to John Kerr. I can recall talking to the late DLP Senator, Jack Kane, about him in the early 1970’s. At the time Kerr was conducting an Inquiry into the salaries and allowances of Federal Members and Senators, and did so in his capacity as a Judge of the Commonwealth Industrial Court, to which he was appointed by the Menzies Government in 1966.
My interest was raised by the fact that Kerr seemed to enjoy having lunches, and in some cases long lunches, with various Members and Senators at the Lobby restaurant, across the road from Parliament House.
I asked Jack Kane, who had been a key powerbroker in the NSW Labor Party at the time of the 1954-55 split, about Kerr. He offered the view that Kerr was one of the worst “frustrated politicians” he had ever come across.
Now Gough Whitlam should have realised the inherent risks in appointing a frustrated politician as Governor General in an environment in which he was already in serious conflict with the Opposition controlled Senate.
But there were other warning signs. Kerr was appointed to the Commonwealth Industrial Court by the Menzies Coalition Government, and, in 1972, he was appointed Chief Justice of NSW by the Askin-Cutler Coalition Government.
Robin William Askin was among the toughest politicians I ever met, and does anyone seriously believe he would appoint as Chief Justice someone who retained strong Labor sympathies?
Barely two years later, a Labor Prime Minister appointed Kerr as Governor General.
It is disingenuous for Gough Whitlam to now claim, as he did last week, that he appointed Kerr partly because he was on a “list” submitted by the outgoing Governor General, who was a former Liberal Minister.
The problem with this claim is that the late Whitlam Government Minister, James “Diamond Jim” McClelland, owned up to having recommended Kerr – who had been a lifelong friend – and having got it dreadfully wrong in doing so.
Kerr was a risky choice in a turbulent political environment…but he was Whitlam’s choice, and that must never be forgotten.
And Kerr was also one of the worst Governors General of them all, regardless of the events of 11 November 1975.
I remember as if it occurred yesterday being told by my then boss, the Queensland Attorney-General, William Edward Knox, that Kerr was a bad choice because he was, as the Attorney-General bluntly put it, a “pisspot”.
And perhaps the only worse Governor General was Viscount Dunrossil, who, as the Right Honourable William Morrison, had to be “removed” as Speaker of the House of Commons because of an interest he shared with John Kerr – a predilection to “strong drink”.
Kerr may be best remembered for the dismissal, but those who were around at the time will recall his truly shameful performance at the Melbourne Cup or when presenting the awards for the prize cattle at the Tamworth Show! He was a national embarrassment, and not because of the dismissal.
Malcolm Fraser could not get him out of office quickly enough…and not just because of his role in the events of 11 November 1975.
The reality is that Kerr was a risky proposition when he was appointed for a whole series of reasons, not the least being the reality that he was a frustrated politician.
Gough Whitlam needs to accept responsibility for appointing him, and for getting it very wrong by doing so. And why he refused to see the inherent risks in such an appointment.



Posted by Jeff Wall at 10:11 am | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Uncategorized

November 13, 2005 | Graham

Autistic state liberals offer little alternative



Premier Peter Beattie is showing signs of extreme hubris (that translates from the Greek as “big-headedness”). Our research says that one result of the health crisis is that voters see through his style. So they are not going to warm to his latest stunt – paid advertising of the government’s performance on crime statistics because, according to The Sunday Mail “the crime figures were ‘not as well covered as we would have liked’ by the media”. Stick by your dials for Radio Nova Pete.
He’s down, and the state opposition is in a position to capitalise on it, particularly the state Liberals. Except for their own ramshackle state and lack of competent leadership.
I went to the Liberal Party convention on the weekend for a couple of hours – the first time for a few years. The first thing that I noticed was how many faces I recognised, the second how grey we are all becoming, and the third, how few of us there are. There were some Young Liberals in the room, but I suspect that I was still below median, let alone mean, age. That’s not a good demographic profile for a “party of the future”.
My first conversation was with a senior parliamentarian. “What’s the public message out of this convention?” I asked. “I’m not sure,” he replied. Since 1981 or ’82 when Gary Neat became State Director the invariable rule with state conventions was that they would project a tailored public relations message. It was a good rule, but apparently holds true no longer.
But party conventions do project a message by default if not design. So the lack of a set-piece meant that Howard’s bungled announcement of a mere $320 million to solve one of the most intractible traffic problems in the south-east corner – the Ipswich Motorway – dominated. The money is insufficient, and worse, the announcement was made without any forewarwning of the local libs who were flung into damage control. Apparently the first they knew was when journalists called them for comment! Talk about traffic accidents.
The reason for the lack of public relations focus probably lies in the extreme autism of the state liberals. The sub-text of the convention was the struggle by out-going state president, and now state MLA, Michael Caltabiano to become Queensland’s first liberal premier.
The party organisation has been busy polling to gauge Michael’s public standing, compared to Bob Quinn’s. Why bother? As our WhatthePeopleWant research, done jointly with the local ABC shows for free, Caltabiano’s well ahead with the public. But so what, Quinn’s the leader at least until the next election, and will be unless the party room decides otherwise?
Which is why the real action wasn’t at the convention at all, but out in the branches where preselections will be determined. The story there appears to be that the joint pre-selection process agreed with the Nationals is a face-saving device. The deal has already been done to sacrifice three seats to the National Party and vice-versa, and the determinant of which seats to sacrifice for the Liberals is whether the likely Liberal candidates are Quinn or Caltabiano supporters. Because joint pre-selections are made up of small numbers of Liberal and National executive members, they are open to manipulation – one or two members defecting from either party can make the difference and as Caltabiano controls the executive, he also effectively controls these preselections.
The only really significant business contracted by the party over the weekend were changes to the constitution which would make it easier to discipline dissidents, and to determine who should, or should not, be allowed to even present to a preselection.
If Premier Pete can conquer his own bouts of self-obsession and concentrate on his opponents, despite their wins in two by-elections, the Liberals will still be playing with themselves in their own corner after the election, not occupying the treasury benches. Which is Caltabiano’s best chance of becoming premier eventually.



Posted by Graham at 9:35 pm | Comments (2) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 11, 2005 | Graham

November 11 still very important



November the 11th is an important day for me. It is Armistice Day, the day when the last great European War formally ended, and it is my oldest son’s birthday. It is also the anniversary of the sacking of the Whitlam Government, which compared to the other two is trivial.
I’ve been listening to the coverage of the 30th Anniversary of the dismissal this morning, and dreading the coming 35th, 40th and no doubt 45th and 50th anniversaries. I’m with Lindsay Tanner who said in The Australian yesterday that it is time to move on. That we still commemorate it is tribute to the determined tribalism of the Labor Party and its will to punish enemies over time and across generations. The style of the coverage is also a demonstration of the shallowness of much of the media. All the focus is on Kerr and Fraser, but none on Whitlam. If it was indeed a constitutional crisis (for my part the Kerr part of it seemed to work reasonably well) it was one caused by Fraser and Whitlam, particularly Whitlam’s imperial determination to govern without parliament, à la Charles II.
But the greatest pity of all of this is that at a time when national security is again a real issue, an opportunity to reflect on a real war, such as the Great War of 1914-18 is being obscured by reflections on the faux war of 1972-75. Inquiry into the former might help us understand the present, while reflection on the latter is really a retreat from the present.
But then, the most important thing today is, Happy Birthday Andrew.



Posted by Graham at 9:10 am | Comments (5) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 10, 2005 | Jeff Wall

Capital punishment – on our doorstep soon



I have no issue with political, religious, community and other leaders seeking clemency for the young Australian citizen having execution in Singapore…though I suspect the sum total of their efforts will lead to absolutely no change in the position of the Singapore Government.
However, we had better get used to capital punishment being applied by Governments in our region, and on our very doorstep.
The National Parliament of our closest neighbour, Papua New Guinea, some years ago passed an Act to introduce the death penalty for crimes such as murder and pack rape. It was passed with an overwhelming majority – enjoying both the support of the Government and the Opposition.
Even though the death penalty has been imposed in at least one case, it has not been carried out because the Government has yet to determine the method of execution and other “procedural” issues relating to capital punishment.
Today the Somare Government is under considerable political, media and community pressure to put in place the necessary procedures to enable capital punishment to be applied.
An editorial in the News Limited controlled Post Courier today is headed – “Finalise Execution Methods for PNG”. It calls on the Government to put in place the procedures, and the Judiciary to apply it where appropriate.
Also today, one of the nation’s most respected Police Commanders publicly called for the death penalty provisions to be implemented without delay.
There is little doubt that the death penalty enjoys massive community support in PNG. With National Elections to be held in the first half of 2007, pressure for capital punishment to be applied will grow in the coming months.
It is inevitable that the first execution in PNG is not far away. The Australian Government complained bitterly when the death penalty law was passed. That annoyed the PNG Government and many Members of Parliament.
No doubt we will complain when the first execution is carried out.
Our complaint will have absolutely ZERO impact in Papua New Guinea, except that it might possibly annoy the PNG Government, and put some temporary, and very minor “strain”, on the bilateral relationship.
Just as it will in Singapore in the weeks, or days, ahead.



Posted by Jeff Wall at 4:28 pm | Comments (3) |

November 09, 2005 | Graham

Beyond left and right



Jennifer Marohasy was at last night’s lecture by David McKnight about his new book “Beyond left and right”. So was I.
She appears to be confused about McKnight’s stance, so was I, and so, I think, was McKnight. It’s a pretty bleak time for the left, particularly when the Republicans can win four straight terms in the former citadel of US left politics – New York – as Michael Bloomberg has just done.
As this quote from the New York Times puts it:

“New Yorkers now vote for vision, ideas, and skills that bring the city together, and for leaders who appeal to our common public interest instead of the special interests,” said Dick Dadey, executive director of Citizens Union, a good-government group that supported the mayor. “That’s the appeal of Bloomberg; people believe he isn’t a typical politician, and that his only priority is a well-run city.”

Last night McKnight was only interested in cobbling together special interests, and he didn’t really care who. Imagine enlisting Cardinal George Pell in the “progressive” cause? Well McKnight can.



Posted by Graham at 9:20 pm | Comments (4) |

November 09, 2005 | Graham

Patel, Kaiser and Dylan all caught in one web.



Mike Kaiser is the former state secretary of the Queensland ALP, former member for Woodridge and current chief of staff to Morris Iemma, the Premier of NSW. As far as I know he has nothing to do with Jayant Patel, the so-called “Doctor Death”, who set-off the Bundaberg Hospital inquiry. The Kaiser my headline refers to is Kaiser Permanente, one of the largest Health Management Organisations in the US, which is the target of http://www.kaiserthrive.org/. This organisation employed Patel – Dr Death – before he came to Australia. This article from The Oregonian, reproduced on the website, suggests a cover-up of Patel’s misdemeanours by the HMO because he was so profitable – sound familiar?
Dylan refers to Bob Dylan, and yes, that is the Bob Dylan who we all know and love. This quote from the Orange County Weekly reveals his part in the saga:

If you thought there was a great hue-and-cry a year ago when Bob Dylan licensed his song “Love Sick” for a Victoria’s Secret commercial—he even appeared in one of the spots—then the hubbub over Dylan’s latest business venture is certain to raise an even bigger stink: “The Times They Are A-Changin’” used to push the utter fabulousness of Kaiser Permanente, one of the nation’s largest health maintenance organizations. Naturally, as an HMO with over 8 million members, Kaiser is a lightning rod for controversy. In June, the California Department of Managed Health Care fined Oakland-based Kaiser $200,000 for disclosing the private medical records of approximately 150 patients, which had been posted on a publicly viewable web site. In 1999, Kaiser was successfully sued by several groups over its “In the Hands of Doctors” advertising campaign, which gave the false impression that Kaiser doctors were in full control of patient health decisions, and not a Kaiser corporate boardroom. In 1997, a California Supreme Court investigation found Kaiser’s complex patient complaint procedure unfair, a ruling that stemmed from the case of Wilfredo Engalla, who claimed that Kaiser doctors misdiagnosed him with colds and allergies for years before finally informing him he had terminal lung cancer (Engalla died the day after the arbitration process was completed)…But it’s also a tough call as to what’s worse—that duplicity, or the fact that “The Times They Are A-Changin’”—pretty much the most defining song of the 1960s—is now a jingle?

Whose reputation is next? Premier Pete?



Posted by Graham at 8:52 pm | Comments (1) |
Filed under: Australian Politics

November 08, 2005 | Graham

Where can we play cricket now?



With the arrest of 17 people on terrorism charges none but the wilfully obtuse could claim that John Howard invented the whole terror threat so he could wedge the ALP and get his terror legislation up. It’s hard to believe in a conspiracy when the investigating authorities are the police forces of two Labor states.
Hopefully it will make more Australians realise exactly what the war on terror is. For a start, it is not optional, we’re all in this whether we like it or not. It’s also not something that can be cured by pulling out of Iraq. As the French riots are the latest evidence to show, Islamic unrest is a global phenomenon which is not coupled to any particular war. It’s viral, like bird flu, and while some specific events may have led to outbreaks, such as the invasion of Afghanistan or Iraq, or the very existence of Isreal, it was always going to break out, independent of specific events.
After the London bombings when Jason Gillespie suggested the Australian cricket team might not play there because it was too risky I suggested readers send him a white feather. I think Gillespie, and any others who think that way, now have a bigger problem than how to find a mattress big enough for all that down. That problem is, Where is it safe enough to play cricket?
For centuries Australia has relied on the tyranny of distance to keep us safe from our enemies. Now there is no distance, and it’s still a dangerous world.



Posted by Graham at 1:25 pm | Comments (8) |
Filed under: Australian Politics
« Newer PostsOlder Posts »