Rudd's blurred vision
Australia's probable next Prime Minister seems to have a very shaky grasp of economics
WITH Kevin Rudd poised in the polls to become our next prime minister, an examination of the philosophy underpinning his policy positions is long overdue. Rudd says he's a social conservative and economic liberal, but he's neither. He's really a moderate social progressive and an economic recidivist. Rudd's very smart, but Ruddonomics is badly compromised by the influences of ideological bias and vested interests. His budding social aspirations appeal, but they'd bloom better if he'd discard the economic blinkers.
Rudd paints John Howard as a social conservative and economic neo-liberal. He claims neo-liberals push economic reform too far - beyond where his definition of a liberal would go - at the expense of the social institutions Howard professes to value, such as the family. Howard certainly is socially conservative, but he falls well short on the economic reform front and Rudd would take us even further away from the economic liberalism we so sorely need.
The best glimpses of Rudd's philosophy are contained in a couple of articles he wrote in The Monthly last year before becoming Opposition Leader. His social aspirations - and genuine passion about them - are admirable, although not ambitious enough. But his economic philosophy, or lack thereof, is worrying. The ideologically driven uni-dimensional view of the world outlined in the essays prevents him from entertaining the thought that freer markets could help him better achieve his social aspirations. Rudd depicts the "real battle of ideas in Australian politics" as the "battle between free market fundamentalism and the social-democratic belief that individual reward can be balanced with social responsibility". This depiction - replete with false mutual exclusivities (free market v social responsibility) and put-down labels (free market fundamentalism) - implies that anyone who supports free markets must be a selfish bastard who doesn't care about social goals. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Rudd confuses three crucial concepts: values, goals and means. The values and individual preferences of any community's citizens should drive the goals that its government seeks to achieve; government should choose the best means to achieve these goals. Rudd puts the cart before the horse. His attack on free marketeers is entirely values-based, a tirade against what he sees - incorrectly and, quite frankly, offensively - as their values. This reflects Rudd's misunderstanding of what economics is all about. It's about means; specifically, the best means to achieve whatever goals a community's citizens, collectively and individually, want to achieve. Markets and governments are merely two means that may help (or hinder) us in meeting these ends.
Let's examine Rudd's values and goals first, then his case against free market economics. That will put us in a better position to examine how freer markets can help. Rudd offers us "an enlarging vision that sees Australia taking the lead on global climate change ... (that) leads by example in dealing with the chronic poverty in our own region ... that becomes a leader ... in the redesign of the rules of the international order ... to render future genocides ... impossible and ... an Australia (that) takes the values of decency, fairness and compassion that are still etched deep in our national soul ... not limited by the narrowest of definitions of our national self-interest ... guided by a new principle that encompasses not only what Australia can do for itself but also what Australia can do for the world". This vision encompasses values (decency, fairness, compassion) and social goals (dealing with climate change and human suffering). Elsewhere, Rudd adds to his lists of values (family, community service, social justice) and goals (improving education, health care and industrial relations).
As Labor prides itself on social progressiveness and Rudd's goals sound progressive, his self-description as a "modern conservative in social policy" is surprising. The conservative claim reflects his view that the underlying values are traditionally Australian. It's hard to argue with those values. Who would say they're against decency, fairness or compassion?
One may wonder why some other values aren't there, such as freedom of choice for citizens. While Rudd stresses the need for greater inclusiveness, nailing his colours to the "social conservative" mast contradicts this. Emphasising conservative values (really institutions) such as family and his own Christian faith serves to disenfranchise many citizens such as single people, gay couples, people of other faiths and non-religious citizens. It deflates their hopes that Labor will take steps to give them the same rights, opportunities and respect as other citizens, and puts them off engaging in the community stuff that Rudd says is so important.
But my bigger beef is economics. Rudd describes his approach as "liberalisation in economic policy". Yet, with few exceptions (emissions trading and the recently announced partial deregulation of wheat export marketing), his economic policies don't liberalise markets at all, and many (including IR and industry policy) constrain them. Since becoming Opposition Leader, he's frequently described himself as an economic conservative, but that's in terms of fiscal policy, to head off the Howard tax-and-spending scare campaign. In terms of attitudes to markets, he thinks he's a liberal.
This startling claim is couched entirely in terms of values. Rudd fixates on the extreme polar case of economic liberalism, to which he assigns various labels: "brutopia" of "unchecked market forces", "market fundamentalism", "neo-liberalism" and "unrestrained market capitalism". He argues that this extreme case is inconsistent with his values. Yet not a single credible economic liberal advocates it. Rudd argues that his economic policies are based on the view that "the market is designed for human beings, not vice versa, and this remains the fundamental premise that separates social democrats from neo-liberals". Not a single credible economic liberal holds the premise that Rudd implies.
The essence of liberalism - following John Stuart Mill in On Liberty (1859) - is the belief that citizens should be free to do whatever they wish, provided they don't hurt anyone else. Liberals naturally tend to like markets because market participation is voluntary; citizens will participate only if they gain by doing so. Mill's broader definition of liberalism derives from Adam Smith's description of free markets, in Wealth of Nations (1776) - as allowing all citizens to pursue their "own interest" in their "own way, upon the liberal plan of equality, liberty, and justice". The last bit caused Smith and all economic liberals, even Rudd's favourite whipping boy Friedrich Hayek, to favour some checks on markets.
Rudd attacks "market fundamentalists", a label he liberally attaches to Hayek and modern economic liberals, for believing that humans are "almost exclusively self-regarding" and for holding self-regarding values themselves. He contrasts this with "other-regarding values of equity, solidarity and sustainability" of social democrats such as him. Ironically, he claims fundamentalists "distort Smith, adopting his Wealth of Nations while ignoring ... his The Theory of Moral Sentiments". I can't believe that an intelligent, reflective man such as Rudd has read either book. If he had, he would not have drawn this conclusion. It is a gross distortion....
Free marketeers have just as strong social consciences as other citizens. In fact, they're often free marketeers because they care. In 18th-century Britain, Smith advocated universal government-financed education and "just and equitable" government action to reduce poverty and "support the workman". Edmund Burke, also lauded by Rudd (and, ironically, Hayek's hero), campaigned against the persecution of Catholics in Ireland and the East India Company's widespread human rights abuses throughout Asia. Mill advocated the full rights of women in 1869. All advocated assistance to those in need. Rudd's lauding of them for advocating some taming of markets leads him to his breathtaking conclusion that he's an economic liberal. The illogicality of this claim is highlighted by reducing it to a syllogism: those liberals advocated taming markets, I advocate taming markets, therefore I'm an economic liberal. That's as logical as saying you're a lion tamer because you own a whip and a pussycat.....
Nevertheless, Rudd still has room to distinguish himself through real social and economic liberalism. Modern Australia's great reformers have generally been Laborites. Gough Whitlam launched a social revolution after years of repressive, paternalistic conservative rule. Bob Hawke and Paul Keating drove a vital economic revolution, so sorely needed following their predecessors' moribund conservative nothingness. After another 11 years of stifling conservative rule, we need a government that is progressive on both the social and economic fronts. We can only hope that, like Hawke and Keating, Rudd surprises us.
Much more here
Just "ticketing" minor crime is little deterrent
First we talked to a young thief who backed Premier Morris Iemma's plan to allow criminals to buy their way out of jail - now red-faced police are hunting for their own patrol car after an unmarked Drug Squad vehicle was stolen in Sydney's northwest. Officers were this morning warned to be on the lookout for the black SV6 Holden Commodore stolen from a Richmond address. Police Minister David Campbell today said there was nothing "particularly sensitive" in the vehicle. "There was some police equipment (inside)," Mr Campbell said. "I understand there was a police radio in the vehicle but it has been disabled."
The latest police debacle comes as delinquent Eric said Mr Iemma's bid to replace law and order with token fines held one message for him and his mates: "Go and shoplift." Eric, 17, has appeared in court twice on shoplifting charges and admitted yesterday to stealing Game Boys, DVD players, expensive clothes and mobile phones. The teenager, from St Marys, told The Daily Telegraph he would spread word of the Premier's surrender to thieves to his mates - and predicted a shoplifting bonanza. "Put it this way, my mates all wouldn't really give a f. . . about the fines, they'll just shoplift and they'll come back and do it again," said Eric, whose last name cannot be published for legal reasons. "Basically it says, 'Go and shoplift' - it is an easy way out. "If we are not getting charged for it, let's go and do it. I guarantee it is going to increase and increase and increase. I'll spread the message to my mates."
Luckily for Mr Iemma, Eric will be old enough to vote at the next state election in 2011. It can be revealed that the State Government's move to replace some criminal prosecutions with on the spot fines - dubbed Criminal Infringement Notices - has increased petty crime in several areas and failed to achieve any overall reduction in minor offences. And, in a further demonstration of the laws' absurdity, people will now receive a bigger fine for swearing at a RailCorp transit officer than for swearing at a police officer....
Figures obtained by The Daily Telegraph show that 10 of the areas where the CINs have been trialled have actually seen an overall increase in petty crime. Bureau of Crime Statistics figures from the two years to June 2007, beginning three years after the introduction of the trial, show offensive conduct was up in Bankstown, Gosford-Wyong and Sutherland Shire, while theft from a motor vehicle was up in Blacktown, Parramatta and City Central. The only areas to experience a reduction in any category of minor offences were City Central, where offensive language and "other theft" went down, and Parramatta, where miscellaneous theft also dropped. Every other area of crime was stable.
Police Minister David Campbell argued that petty crime may have risen in those areas because more criminals were being caught, but it was hoped serious offences had been reduced.
Shoplifter Eric had some extra advice for Mr Iemma, telling the Premier that most people who steal and commit other offences that attract CINs will simply ignore them. "Most of the people from around here wouldn't be able to pay fines. As well as their kids, they're stealing to support drug habits - I could go on and on," he said.
Police Commissioner Andrew Scipione conceded that the fines, if paid within 21 days, would be recorded like a traffic offence rather than as part of a person's criminal history. "If you pay the fine we will still have that record (but) it's not being deemed as part of the criminal history," he said. Eric said arresting shoplifters and forcing them to face court was the only way to "snap a shoplifter out of it".
Source
Anger over butcher doctor's green light
SENIOR doctors at a private hospital are alarmed that a controversial obesity surgeon being pursued over a patient's death has been given the green light by Queensland's newly boosted Medical Board to continue doing the operations. Russell Broadbent, who has strenuously defended his surgical conduct and disputed mounting claims of wrongdoing -- allegedly leading to at least six deaths and dozens of serious complications -- has booked a patient, 24, for an obesity-related procedure on Monday at the Gold Coast's Allamanda Private Hospital.
The hospital's operators, publicly listed company Healthscope, are opposed to the procedure -- a limited part of the radical biliary pancreatic diversion operations which Dr Broadbent has been banned from performing since a damning 2004 internal audit. However, the Medical Board of Queensland has given its blessing.
The position of the board, which this week initiated action on a complaint against Dr Broadbent in the Health Practitioners Tribunal, has surprised surgeons at the hospital and prompted a written plea for further clarification. "The Medical Board has received new information from various sources today and we will be holding a meeting on the weekend to consider the information," said board executive officer Kaye Pulsford.
The board imposed conditions on Dr Broadbent last month after receiving an independent expert's report, which is understood to be highly critical, but the conditions do not extend to preventing him performing obesity-related surgery. Numerous patients who have undergone Dr Broadbent's surgery have come forward since patients and experts in The Weekend Australian and on the Nine Network's 60 Minutes highlighted the risks.
It is understood the Medical Board of Queensland has received a dossier of names of patients who claim to have suffered life-threatening complications, while other patients have reported massive weight loss and a positive outcome.
The procedure still being done by Dr Broadbent, known as a tube gastrectomy, will make the full-blown BPD operation with the removal of about 70per cent of the stomach inevitable. Hospital staff describe the tube gastrectomy as "BPD by stealth". Dr Broadbent declined to comment yesterday, telling The Weekend Australian: "I'm not going to talk about it." His staff and several of his patients, infuriated by the complaints against him and an ongoing investigation, describe him as a saviour.
Healthscope's chief medical officer, Michael Coglin, confirmed yesterday his staff had expressed concern that the procedure booked for Monday would inevitably require a second operation, and that the method was circumventing the hospital's embargo on BPD. It is understood that Healthscope, which has been accused by Dr Broadbent of acting in bad faith for not showing him its confidential audit and not letting him do the full BPD operations, has written to the Medical Board of Queensland with its concerns.
Source
THE PUBLIC HOSPITAL DRAMAS CONTINUE
We have been hearing mostly about disasters in the NSW hospitals lately but the Qld. hospitals are still worthy contenders for the booby prize. Three current articles below.
Hospital expert gets sarcastic with Qld. State government
FORMER health commissioner Tony Morris, QC, has lampooned the Bligh Government's health reforms for setting up the boss of the besieged Princess Alexandra Hospital to fail. The attack came as Premier Anna Bligh yesterday refused to say whether the management at the Brisbane hospital was pressured to clear waiting list backlogs.
Mr Morris said senior doctors such as PA clinical chief executive David Theile still did not have enough funds to cope with huge workloads. The Courier-Mail reported this week that the PA's overspending by 2.1 per cent had actually achieved a 7.8 per cent increase in clinical services. The budget blowout in the first quarter, which was initially blamed on management, forced the closure of 60 beds and resulted in a 10 per cent cut in waiting lists.
Mr Morris headed the 2005 Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, one of two inquiries that resulted in sweeping reforms including having doctors in charge of public hospitals instead of bureaucrats. "Theile's appointment has proved to be the complete disaster that the Charlotte St mandarins (at Queensland Health) would have predicted: A doctor (who) is likely to focus on trivia such as reducing waiting lists, increasing surgical throughput," Mr Morris said. "And while he is enmeshed in such trifles, who is going to concentrate on the really important issues, like whether or not . . . to send the administrative director to a conference in Acapulco? "Dr Theile was set up to fail. They put a man in charge who didn't have enough funding in the right area of clinical services."
His comments came as Ms Bligh refused to deny accusations from the Australian Medical Association that the Government pressured management to clear waiting lists more quickly without realising the extra costs involved. "I can only repeat what I have already said on this: The PA is one of our great hospitals," Ms Bligh said. "We're seeing some really terrific things happening at this hospital."
But Opposition health spokesman John-Paul Langbroek called for the Premier to immediately reopen all available hospital beds at the PA. "Hospitals are meant to treat sick people," Mr Langbroek said. "If the Bligh Government is going to make cuts to public hospitals they should focus on the non-patient areas." [i.e. the bureaucracy]
Source
Major Queensland hospital is "broke"
As time goes by the hospital's service gets worse and worse -- as the ever-growing cancer of bureaucracy strangles it. Money to pay clerks and "administrators" MUST be found. Their pay packets never miss a beat. Too bad about the patients who have insufficient doctors and nurses to see to them
A LACK of money has forced Princess Alexandra Hospital to turn away sick people for only the third time in more than half a century - and more waiting list cancellations are on the way. The eight-hour "bypass" at the major Brisbane public hospital on Wednesday night was on the agenda at a heated meeting between furious senior management last night.
Clinical chief executive officer David Theile was yesterday forced to cancel another 17 operating theatre waiting lists from next week, taking the total cut to 20 per cent of the hospital's roster with as many as six people on each list. About 30 of the 60 beds that were closed earlier this week are expected to reopen from the weekend. PA visiting medical officer Dr Ross Cartmill yesterday said the closure of the emergency department, linked to the cutbacks, was only the third time since 1956. The PA, one of the state's biggest public hospitals, normally handles overflow from other nearby hospitals. "We can't get patients into the beds because the beds just aren't there," Dr Cartmill said.
While Queensland Health has claimed demand has "diminished" this week, hospital sources say that is only relative to peak work levels at the weekend. Premier Anna Bligh has refused extra funding for the hospital, saying it should be able to manage on a record $33 million boost this year. The Courier-Mail reported this week that while the hospital was 2.1 per cent over budget for the first quarter, it had performed 7.8 per cent more work.
Dr Cartmill yesterday said the only meaning of a hospital being efficient and over budget was that it was underfunded. "We clinicians believe we should be service-orientated - not budget-driven," said Dr Cartmill, who is also the Queensland president of the Australian Medical Association.
Acting Health Minister Rod Welford denied the bypass was linked to the bed cutbacks, saying "it can happen regardless of cutbacks". "This was utterly exceptional circumstances (on the southside, with the Mater Hospital also on bypass) and the hospitals do co-operate so if they go bypass the people are moved to another hospital," Mr Welford said.
But the State Opposition is demanding the Bligh Government reach into to its budget surpluses and find some money. Opposition Leader Jeff Seeney called for extra financial support to stop the situation getting worse. "Closing beds in a hospital that has achieved that sort of result seems incomprehensible to me," Mr Seeney said. "It is an intolerable situation."
Source
Crazy government hospital provision in all Australian States
With the unbelievable cutbacks in available beds, it is no wonder that waiting lists are so long. As the bureaucracy has ballooned, the number of available beds has drastically shrunk: Socialism at work. Quite insane.
PUBLIC hospitals throughout the country are failing to achieve essential performance standards, the Australian Medical Association (AMA) says. AMA president Rosanna Capalingua, who will release a report card comparing the performance of public hospitals, says there has been a persistent deterioration in the ability of public hospitals to cope with demand.
"Their capacity has gone down," Dr Capalingua said on ABC radio today. "In fact, would you believe that we have a statistic that there are 67 per cent fewer beds in public hospitals across Australia compared to 20 years ago, remembering the increase in population and increase in age of population we've had in that time in Australia, for the increase in demand."
Dr Capalingua said all jurisdictions had serious problems. "Across the board, all states and territories failed to come up to the benchmarks and standards that we would expect public hospitals to deliver to the Australian public," she said. "In the Australian Healthcare Agreements, we need a top-up of $2 to $3 billion to start off with and then we need an indexation increase."
Source
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment