Australians are unusually happy with their country

They have a lot to be happy about. Any country that has conservative governments regardless of which party is in power has only minor problems. The Australian Labor party is nothing like the assemblage of hate-filled cretins and opportunists that constitute the U.S. Democratic party

Another of the foundations of our national self-image is crumbling: the tall poppy syndrome. Australians like to think of themselves as a cynical bunch, viewing politicians and authority figures as crooks, liars, hypocrites or lazy bastards. The attitude is a remnant of the convict days, we say proudly, when we knew the people pushing us around were no better than we were, so we'd take any opportunity to cut them down to size.

But a survey of 3902 adults just published by the Centre for Social Research at the Australian National University suggests we may not be not so tough-minded after all. Compared with other western nations, we're actually rather idealistic, even enthusiastic about the people who organise our lives.

Last week we reported that the survey, published in a book called Australian Social Attitudes 2: Citizenship, Work and Aspirations (UNSW Press) showed surprising support for trade unions and for taxation, while 61 per cent agreed with the statement "The government doesn't care what people like me think" and 62 per cent said "Political parties do not give voters real policy choices".

But this doesn't mean we are more cynical about political institutions than other countries. An even higher percentage of the population think the government doesn't care in Poland, Japan, Germany, Belgium, the Czech Republic, and Hungary.

Shown the statement "Most of the time we can trust people in government to do what is right", only 40 per cent of Australians agree. But in Japan, only 9 per cent agree. In Germany, it's 10 per cent, in France 22 per cent, in Britain 29 per cent and in the United States 31 percent. The only nations that trust their governments more than we do are Denmark, Finland and Switzerland.

Asked how widespread is corruption in the public service, 80 per cent of Poles, 63 per cent of Israelis, 42 per cent of Japanese, 30 per cent of Americans, and 16 per cent of Australians answered "A lot of people" or "Almost everyone".

Asked about their fellow citizens, 58 per cent of Australians say other people can "almost always" or "usually" be trusted, while that is said by only 15 per cent of Chileans, 26 per cent of Japanese, and 46 per cent of Britons and Americans.

The researchers conclude that when our attitudes are "examined in a cross-national perspective, Australians' assessments of democracy appear rather optimistic. Compared to other rich democracies, Australia experiences high levels of trust in government, a public very approving of how well democracy is working, high levels of personal (internal) efficiency, and very low levels of perceived political corruption. Australians also place more value on obeying laws, honesty in tax payments, and voting than citizens of most other nations examined here ... while Australians can be negative about politics, they remain among the most trusting citizens, both interpersonally and politically, of the world's democracies."

Source





Your bureaucrats will protect you (NOT)

Why does anybody feed these useless know-nothings?

A senior bureaucrat in the Australian Quarantine and Inspection Service yesterday denied the existence of a culture in the organisation more focused on producing corporate strategies and business plans than in actually fulfilling their responsibility to keep Australia free of disease. Under sustained cross-examination for most of the day at the government inquiry into the equine influenza outbreak, NSW assistant regional manager for AQIS Julie Sims was repeatedly forced to admit that she had little practical knowledge of on-the-ground operations. Ms Sims, effectively second in command in NSW since 1996, is responsible for the Eastern Creek quarantine station, which has been named as a potential source of the outbreak of equine influenza.

She acknowledged she had not seen the horse stable area for several years, had not read the specific work instructions on the importation of horses and did not know whether they had been implemented in NSW. Nor did she know the exact work roles of the staff. She also acknowledged that she had received no training in regard to risk assessment and had not read a leading author in the field.

While saying there had been a general concern within AQIS for a number of years over a lack of resources and staff, Ms Sims struggled to name the specific aspects of the operation that were being affected by the shortage and also admitted she could not find any documents to demonstrate that she had expressed any concern over a lack of resources at the station.

Counsel for the Australian Racing Board Garry Rich asked Ms Sims: "How can you make sensible decisions ... if you do not know what staff are required to do on a daily basis? You don't think that it is helpful to know what the staff have to do?" Ms Sims replied: "It is not my responsibility to know what the staff have to do." She said the question of what skills were required by staff would be handled by the station's manager.

Ms Sims was also forced to admit that she did not know there was a requirement to inform visitors to the quarantine station of quarantine procedures. She also acknowledged that she was not aware of the procedures for truck drivers and grooms when horses arrived at the airport.

But Ms Sims disagreed with a statement put to her by Mr Rich that there was "a cultural problem with your department that the senior managerial staff are more concerned about their managerial functions, that is, proposing business plans and corporate objective statements," rather than their job of keeping animal diseases out of Australia. "No, I don't agree with that," she said.

Source




THE NSW HEALTH DEPT. STORY

Three current stories below:

Barely-disguised corruption from a State government

Labor push to gag hospital inquiry

The NSW Labor Government has moved to shut down a parliamentary inquiry into Royal North Shore Hospital before it hears more damning evidence of malpractice. The Weekend Australian can reveal Labor used its numbers on the inquiry committee to vote down a proposal by Coalition members, at a closed meeting on Wednesday evening, that would have extended the inquiry's reporting deadline past December 14 and also put aside extra days for public hearings.

The cave-in preceded a direct plea to the inquiry yesterday by the couple whose tragedy at RNSH led to the inquiry being established. Mark Dreyer, whose wife Jana Horska miscarried in a toilet adjacent to the hospital's emergency unit on September 25, begged committee chairman Fred Nile to extend the committee's deadline in order to do a thorough job. "There is no deadline that applies to our ongoing grief," Mr Dreyer said.

Asked by Mr Nile what he hoped for from the committee, he replied: "I hope you give this inquiry the necessary time it needs and not be pressured to finish it off by the recommended time of December -- that's what I'd like to say to you personally. "You are a man of high moral standards so I've got some trust in you to carry out what's required." Mr Dreyer added it was important to allow anybody with a story ample time to bring it to the inquiry. "We certainly won't fail you," said Mr Nile, fully aware the committee had already done so.

Informed of the secret committee vote last night, Mr Dreyer said: "This was always my fear, based on the track record of this Government. I put a challenge out to Nile today to show his supposed impartiality. "If this is going to be the case and we don't get the extension we desperately need, we have an inquiry that is doing half the job. Why bother?"

In an emotional 30 minutes of testimony, Mr Dreyer and Ms Horska both wept as, speaking on his wife's behalf, Mr Dreyer described the nursing care she received at RNSH as cold, robotic and mechanical. "There was no comfort, no reassurance to either of us ... in the darkest hour of this ordeal -- there was nothing," he said. He said his pleas and those of Ms Horska, who was in agony, to nursing staff for assistance were "like talking to the wall". "It was urgent to us but not to them," he said.

In further shocking testimony, he said that after her miscarriage Ms Horska was placed on a trolley and left for an hour with her dead baby between her legs. He described as "unbelievable" the insensitivity of NSW Premier Morris Iemma in expecting the couple to provide evidence to a committee of senior doctors during the same week they received pathology results confirming their baby was a boy.

He said that on the morning after the miscarriage, his wife received a visit from a hospital bureaucrat engaged in "damage control" before she was allowed to see a gynaecologist. Earlier, RNSH's director of medical services revealed the hospital relied on charity for basic equipment such as lasers and specialist operating tables. Sharon Miskell told the inquiry that only the skill of the hospital's surgeons had prevented "adverse outcomes" resulting from broken or decaying equipment.

Source

NSW: Fix the hospital or we'll quit, warn doctors

SENIOR surgeons are threatening to resign if the Government does not restore Royal North Shore Hospital to its former glory. Their warning came as the couple who sparked the latest inquiry, Mark Dreyer and Jana Horska, broke down as they relived their ordeal of her miscarrying in the hospital's toilet.

Silence fell over the room as Mr Dreyer detailed the night his wife lost their unborn child on September 25, when Ms Horska was 14weeks pregnant. "There is no deadline to our ongoing grief and suffering," Mr Dreyer said. "It has cost both of us terrible grief and we will always be wondering if the outcome would have been different if we had been treated as a priority."

Christian Democrats' leader Fred Nile, the parliamentary inquiry committee's chairman, promised the couple "the inquiry won't fail you". Mr Dreyer said he had no faith in the Government for implementing change. "I think people would have had a lot more respect for (Premier) Morris Iemma to come out and take the politics out of it, take away the political spin which has been very hurtful for us," he said. "The insensitivity has just been unbelievable, they don't understand the pain they cause with this rubbish they peddle."

There is only one more day of public hearings, on Monday, before the committee retires to consider its recommendations. But it has been swamped with damning complaints which doctors from the hospital have said are an embarrassment. The inquiry was told equipment was so inadequate that only the competence of surgeons had prevented harm coming to patients. Director of medical services Dr Sharon Miskell said there had been instances where equipment was broken, inadequate or non-existent. "We are unable to perform surgery, we are delaying surgery," she said.

Three of the hospital's senior surgeons spoke of their embarrassment at the gradual decay of the once marquee hospital. Area director of intensive and critical care Professor Malcolm Fisher warned he was on the brink of quitting. "The findings of this committee and the response of the health department are crucial," he said. "They will determine if we give this a go or walk." Other doctors described the health department's "inept system" as failing patients as well as being the cause of the hospital's loss of staff. Intensive care director Dr Ray Raper said he was embarrassed this week at a patient's recount of a hospital stay. "My colleagues have been telling me for a long time they are embarrassed of the conditions of the hospital," he said.

Source

Oppressive health bureaucracy defeated in court

Angry obstetricians have demanded an apology from a regional health service after a judge last week threw out its attempt to sue one of its own doctors to claw back part of a $7.5 million negligence payout. Birth specialists condemned the case brought by the Greater Southern Area Health Service in southern NSW as a waste of taxpayers' money and "a disgraceful attack" on Wagga Wagga obstetrician George Angus. The GSAHS had claimed Angus should be jointly liable to pay $7.5 million awarded in respect of a birth at the Wagga Wagga Base Hospital in 1995 -- even though he was merely the senior obstetrician on-call and denied ever being consulted about the case.

During the birth the baby's shoulders became stuck and the baby's brain was deprived of oxygen for several minutes. The child has cerebral palsy, epilepsy and moderate intellectual disabilities. The health service admitted liability in the negligence claim brought on behalf of the family, and it was settled in May 2003. The GSAHS's subsequent move to sue Angus sparked alarm among obstetricians throughout NSW.

Justice Michael Adams in the NSW Supreme Court rejected the health service's case, ruling that a more junior doctor did not consult Angus on whether a drug to increase contractions should be given to the mother during labour. The judge also ruled there was nothing to suggest Angus acted in a way that was medically inapppropriate on the basis of the knowledge he had at the time. Adams ordered the health service to pay Angus's costs. Megan Keaney, head of claims in NSW for Angus's insurer, Avant, said she was "confident" total costs for both sides would exceed $500,000.

"The fundamental reason that he (Angus) won was that the court confirmed that he had not seen the patient," Keaney told Weekend Health. "It was the hospital's case that he had. It was always our view that the evidence to support that assertion was very slim. "There's no doubt that this has created a lot of ill-will between obstetricians in rural south-western NSW and NSW Health. That's quite understandable, given their (GSAHS's) approach to this claim."

Christine Tippett, president of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, said had the case gone the other way the "implications for doctors on call would have been very serious". "What it would have meant was that any doctor on-call for a public hospital could have been called as a co-defendant on a claim, even if they had not been called (for advice) or provided any service for the patient," Tippett said. "That's quite untenable. We consider that Angus should receive an apology for the distress that this case has caused him."

Albury-Wodonga obstetrician Pieter Mourik, who was previously the representative for the Wagga region on the RANZCOG council, said the case was a "tragedy" and the GSAHS should "hang its head in shame" for bringing the action. While he welcomed the outcome, he said the "damage has already been done" as Wagga's three obstetricians were no longer working at the Base hospital, now served by locums and overseas-trained doctors.

"The NSW Department of Health is also responsible for this disgraceful attack on a capable, rural obstetrician," Mourik said. Angus told Weekend Health the outcome was anticlimactic "because I didn't think they had a case in the first place".

"To be dragged through the court for 10 days, for something I know nothing about, and didn't know anything about -- and then to be told you're not guilty of something that I was not guilty of in the first place -- it was a bit of a hollow victory," Angus said. "The sad thing about this is the fact that all this public money on a court case that had no merit. (Other doctors) are very suspicious of the health service now -- the GSAHS has done itself a disservice."

After the case GSAHS chief executive Heather Gray declined to say if an apology would be forthcoming. A GSAHS spokesman this week declined to add to her comments. "The Greater Southern Area Health Service and NSW Health is still to review in detail the judgment handed down," Gray said in a statement. "The costs are yet to be determined. GSAHS is making no further comment on the matter at this time."

Source