Rapist doctor to practise again

Your regulators will protect you -- NOT. They say he is OK to work again because he is only dangerous when he goes mad, which he periodically does. Follow that logic!



A rapist doctor banned indefinitely amid public outcry over his serial misconduct has won the right to treat patients again, despite a history of relapses. Dr Sabi Lal, 49, can work in Victorian clinics or hospitals, even though the Medical Practitioners Board opposed his return and considers him unfit to practise. A tribunal ruled this month the GP be reinstated to the medical register, overturning the board's decision that Dr Lal should remain struck off.

The suburban doctor, who suffers obsessive compulsive disorder, was struck off in December 2003 for assaulting two female drug company representatives. Dr Lal was also convicted and given a suspended jail term in Victoria's County Court in 2002 for digitally raping a patient.

The Medical Practitioners Board had previously found him guilty of more than 40 misconduct offences involving seven women. The board strongly opposed Dr Lal being allowed to work again and fought his appeal to VCAT last month. But a three-member Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal panel ruled this month that Dr Lal could resume seeing patients, subject to strict conditions. He is not allowed to treat females or children under 16 and must be strictly supervised and monitored. Lawyers for the Medical Practitioners Board argued that the need to impose such strict conditions indicated Dr Lal was unfit to work.

The Fijian-born doctor had previously been subject to similar conditions and offended again within a year of them being lifted. The VCAT panel noted in its ruling on October 10 that Dr Lal's rehabilitation was "less than complete". They noted there was a risk he might have a relapse of mental illness, which could result in aggressive and inappropriate behaviour towards women. "We acknowledge Mr Lal's character flaws . . . but in our view these can be addressed by the imposition of a range of conditions on his registration," the panel said.

The panel -- which comprised tribunal vice-president Judge Iain Ross and members Dr Elaine Fabris and Dr Dorothy Burge - noted Dr Lal's previous offences were "very serious". "The serious nature of the offences and the limited extent of Mr Lal's rehabilitation would ordinarily warrant findings that . . . it is not in the public interest to allow the applicant to practise," they said. But Dr Lal's culpability was reduced because he suffered a mental illness at the time of the offences, they said. "We are not persuaded that Mr Lal's suitability to practise is likely to be affected because of the offences of which he has been found guilty," they said.

Experts told the hearing Dr Lal's obsessive compulsive disorder appeared to have subsided, but there was dispute about the risk of relapse. VCAT heard the GP previously suffered relapses of the disorder, with symptoms including sexual obsessions, compulsive counting of money and an obsession with "lucky" numbers.

Experts told the VCAT hearing the GP continued to display a lack of empathy and remorse for his past actions and denied the factual basis of some offences. The panel said: "Mr Lal's deficits in terms of empathy and remorse are troubling. But they must be viewed in the context of the evidence as a whole." The tribunal heard Dr Lal had "significant community involvement" and had made a pro bono contribution to the training of overseas doctors.

Members of the Medical Practitioners Board are privately concerned that Dr Lal is able to practise again, but are unable to do anything further. Board spokeswoman Nicole Newton said yesterday: "The board has reviewed the tribunal's decision closely and does not believe there are grounds for appeal. As such, the board accepts the VCAT decision."

Lawyers for Dr Lal argued he had attended treatment sessions diligently and was engaged in every aspect of his treatment. He sold his Boronia practice, but is listed as the director of a company called Lal Medical Pty Ltd. A man who answered the door at the GP's Doncaster address yesterday said "yes" when asked if he was Dr Lal. But when asked for comment about the case, the man said, "Oh, he is not here" and shut the door.

Source






Another Labor party loss: In the Australian Capital Territory

For American readers, the ACT is equivalent to D.C.

The Greens have snatched a fourth seat as vote counting ended for last weekend's ACT election, surprising even themselves. The final results from the election have been posted, with Greens' candidate Caroline Le Couteur winning a seat from the Liberals on preferences. Ms Le Couteur, who kept a low profile during the campaign and was not expected to win a seat, has won the final seat in the Molonglo electorate. The ACT has multi-member seats.

The final make-up of the territory's 17-member Assembly is 7 Labor, 6 Liberals and 4 Greens. It is a surprise result for the Greens, who went into the election with just one MLA and were expecting to win a total of two or three seats. The Greens will now decide whether to form government with Labor or the Liberals. Winning the fourth seat gives them more weight in the ACT Legislative Assembly and makes it more likely they will hold one - or even two - ministries. The Greens last week discussed with both major parties the possibility of forming government in talks which are set to continue this week.

The final result from the election is bad news for both Labor - who previously held an outright majority under Chief Minister Jon Stanhope - and the Liberals, who have dropped one seat.

Source






Stupid Leftist school "discipline" system a failure

All they do is nag misbehaving kids

A battle is brewing to contain a 26 per cent spike in students being suspended from Queensland schools over the past three years. The alarming wave of aggressive and disrespectful behaviour from southeast and north Queensland students comes as the Government pours another $28.6 million into "positive behaviour strategies" this financial year.

Education Queensland's prolonged trial of the Schoolwide Positive Behaviour Support program now runs in one in six of Queensland's 1250 state schools. But an arsenal of strategies including the costly SWPBS appears to have done little yet to curb problem behaviour. Brisbane and Sunshine Coast schools issued 31 per cent more suspensions and 11 per cent more expulsions in 2007-08 than in 2005-06. During the same period, suspensions rose 25 per cent at Gold Coast and Ipswich region schools, and 22 per cent in and around Townsville.

Last week, The Courier-Mail received a flood of messages from readers concerned about "soft" disciplinary codes, particularly the inability of teachers to use the threat of force, or simple punishments to exert control. The Responsible Thinking Classrooms approach was criticised. This is where bullies and other troublemakers go for "time out" after being asked a series of questions.

In such scenarios troublemakers are asked: "What are you doing? What are the rules? What happens when you break the rules? Is that what you want to happen? What do you want now? What will happen if you disrupt again?". The effectiveness of Positive Learning Centres, where suspended students undergo behaviour programs at one of 14 non-school facilities, also came under fire. The new SWPBS program includes the RTC time-out approach but academics, psychologists and politicians yesterday said it did not work in many instances.

While Griffith University school of education's Fiona Bryer backed the latest schoolwide approach for being evidence-based, she questioned the use of RTCs. "If this is repeated and there's no change in student behaviour then the student definitely wins," Dr Bryer said. The education behavioural specialist said she was "definitely anti-punishment" but said errant students needed clearly defined consequences. Dr Bryer said parents and teachers needed to be trained in proven behavioural techniques and it was critical the Government shared and acted on the data collated from SWPBS.

Psychologist Michael Carr-Greg said time-outs and talks might work for some, but it was important to get a primary schooler's behaviour corrected before high school.

A spokeswoman for Education Minister Rod Welford said positive results had been gleaned from the SWPBS trials. "Data shows that the program helps reduce problem behaviour and increases academic performance," she said.

Opposition education spokesman John-Paul Langbroek said the statistics on suspensions called for change. "What's happening at the moment isn't working," he said. Mr Langbroek said if elected the state Liberal National Party would employ 50 new teachers trained in behaviour management at a cost of $16 million over four years, to combat the problem.

Source






THE GREENIE NONSENSE GRUMBLES ON

Three current articles below

Carbon tax is just tilting at windmills

By Gary Johns (Gary Johns was a minister in the Keating Labor Party government)

The one certainty of climate change (anthropogenic or not) is that it is unstoppable. Government advertisements suggest worst-case scenarios but they do not concede that these are no less likely should Australia cut its carbon dioxide output. Whether or not you believe in man-made climate change, it's out of our control. More significantly, it is out of the control of every political leader. There is no prospect that nations will agree on global action sufficient to reduce the total level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

At some point, probably about the time the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill - a carbon tax - comes before parliament and in the lead-up to the next election, the electorate will realise they are being asked to pay for something they cannot have: a guarantee against climate change.

What they can have is a plan to adapt to climate change, as and when it occurs. This plan is not much in evidence. The politics of such a plan are easy: do not waste money on a carbon tax. What is the betting that in the political void created by the realisation that resistance to climate change is futile, a No Carbon Tax Party will emerge?

The world will agree to do no more than slow the rate of increase of carbon emissions a head. At best, the West will decrease its total output a little and the rest will increase their output a little more slowly than would otherwise be the case. The rate of population increase and industrial development will ensure an overall increase. In other words, there is no chance of capping the global output of carbon dioxide, much less reducing it. But the major Australian political parties and for different reasons the Greens will continue to talk of carbon reduction as if it will stop climate change.

The question is not which country will be last to sign up to a new climate change agreement, but which will be first to call a stop to the attempt. The key policy question is how Australia can waste the least amount of money avoiding the unavoidable. Every dollar saved on not proceeding with the carbon tax can be devoted to adapting to climate change as and when it occurs.

The real response to climate change is straightforward. The Queensland Government's response to the five-year drought, perhaps the most important risk of climate change, in southeast Queensland is a good example. Wisely, the Queensland Government decided it could not stop the drought (climate change) and it did not try. Instead, it responded to the needs of citizens for water by restricting water use and spending $9 billion drought-proofing the economy. It is building a new dam, thereby spreading the area of rainfall capture, connecting the dams to enable water to be pumped around in response to rainfall change, recycling water and building a desalination plant. Broadly, these are the only responses a government could make.

As the dams have filled and the alternative sources of water come nearer to completion, the Government is seeking an exit strategy from drought restrictions. Life in southeast Queensland will return to normal despite the drought, and the region will have adapted, as rich economies can and do. Southeast Queensland water users will pay the price, indeed are probably happy to, given the insignificant cost of water compared to its immense significance to everyday life. This is the real climate change debate. If the electorate sees it and tastes it, it will pay the bill. By contrast, the carbon tax looks like tilting at windmills.

The carbon tax will not stop the need for climate adaption. Even under the Greens' scenario for a carbon-free economy, climate change will occur but the economy would be less able to afford to adjust.

Within a generation, the main polluters will be the likes of China and India. These countries will want specific climate deals to suit their needs. They may berate Australia for being a higher per capita polluter, but China will want all of the liquid natural gas, and India will want all of the uranium we can sell. By contrast, international agreements to restrain carbon dioxide output will be so much hot air.

The electorate would like its leaders to fix the problem, but if it dawns on voters that there is no "stop climate change" option, they will be angry at the consequent underspend on adaption. What chance a No Carbon Tax senator or two by 2010?

Source

Warmist laws to hit West Australia's economy

Western Australia's Government says Kevin Rudd's emissions trading scheme is a "half-baked" plan that threatens the state's economy. Treasurer Troy Buswell yesterday called for the 2010 start date to be deferred until a raft of problems were resolved. Business leaders have asked for the start to be delayed because of the downturn threatening to plunge the world into recession. Mr Buswell said the federal Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in its present form risked driving major industries overseas, as well as causing investment in the west to slow to a trickle, with "untold implications" for jobs and families.

Releasing the state's submission to the CPRS green paper, Mr Buswell said he supported national action to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but much more work was needed to make the present concept workable. "Rather than reducing greenhouse, the outcome from imposing a half-baked scheme in Australia could in fact be a rise in overall global emissions should industries move away to locations with fewer environmental rules and lower costs," he said.

The Government's submission says Western Australia is the most trade-exposed economy in the nation and would suffer the negative economic effects of carbon leakage more than any other jurisdiction. Almost 47 per cent of the state's income is derived from exports, compared with about 20 per cent of the national income. "Based on the preliminary analysis ... alumina is the only commodity in the state's top 10 exports by value that would be eligible for compensation, exposing the remaining $51.6 billion of export value to the full effect of the carbon price," the submission says. "A considerable portion of this value is derived from products for which the price is set internationally and for which it will be difficult to pass on the carbon price."

It says commodities that would be affected include gold, petroleum and oil, nickel and copper ore and other base metal ores. More work was needed to improve the compensation formula, which should be changed to better reflect the effect of the carbon price on the operating margin of individual companies.

Consideration should also be given to a sliding scale to allow compensation to be targeted to activities where the likelihood of carbon leakage was greatest, to overcome the arbitrariness of hard thresholds. There was particular concern about the impact on the liquefied natural gas industry and the prospect that new projects planned for Western Australia could be shelved, leading to future shortages of domestic gas. "Much of Western Australia's new domestic gas supply depends on applying the state's domestic reservation gas policy to new LNG developments," the submission says.

Mr Buswell said the 2010 start gave insufficient lead time for companies to make changes. The submission notes the Howard government had been considering 2012 and questioned the switch by Mr Rudd. "It is unclear how the acceleration of the start date for the CPRS has been accommodated without compromising the quality of the final design and the level of preparedness of liable parties," it says.

Source

Farmers angry at laws to "save" Barrier Reef

This is just the usual Green/Left hatred of business. That farm runoff has a significant impact on the reef is just theory. No double-blind studies have been done

FARMERS' fears have been realised as the State Government moves to introduce land run-off regulations to reduce pollution on the Barrier Reef. Premier Anna Bligh made the announcement at yesterday's Reef Summit in Brisbane, calling on assembled groups to help formulate a workable framework, targets and a timeframe.

Ms Bligh said research had shown five years of voluntary adoption of land management practices under the 2003 10-year Reef Water Quality Action Plan had not worked. She said it was time to ensure all farmers were using best practices to control use of fertilisers, pesticides and run-off to improve water quality and the Reef's resistance to climate change.

"The science is absolutely clear ... we continue to see unacceptably high levels of damaging nutrients on the Reef," she said. "We know that there are many contributing factors to the water quality of reef, and we're already addressing a number of those (but) science is telling us that the highest levels of damaging chemicals and nutrients are in those areas that have intense farming activities." Ms Bligh pledged a "significant" increase of the current $25 million funding a year and said she hoped to have the regulations in place "sometime in 2009".

Queensland Farmers' Federation CEO John Cherry said regulation would undermine any goodwill built up with farmers in the last decade and the $200 million Reef Rescue Plan, an industry-conservation-Federal Government partnership. "Landholders will be very disappointed. We've had a 20 per cent reduction in fertiliser application rates and we think we can reduce by another 20-25 per cent over the next decade with meaningful support from the Reef Rescue Plan and the State Government," he said. "But you pick a fight, you destroy goodwill and those sorts of achievements are less achievable."

Canegrowers CEO Ian Ballantyne said farmers were not "happy polluters" but were committed to adopting best practice to maximise the benefits of fertilisers to their farms. Mr Ballantyne said while the federal Reef Rescue Plan would support farmers to adopt best practice, the state had moved to undermine it. "Regulation tends to mean one size fits all, regulation has to be prescriptive and it has to apply to each and every farm, and it has to be overly administered," he said.

World Wide Fund for Nature's Nick Heath said they were cautiously optimistic about the planned regulation but were waiting to see the detail before celebrating.

Source