OECD study puts Australian education policy in perspective

By Jennifer Buckingham

This week, the OECD released its annual Education At A Glance report which provides country comparisons of spending, participation, completion, performance and various other aspects of education. At 475 pages, it contains much useful information, but for those who can’t bring themselves to read the whole report, here are some highlights.

As usual, Australia is ranked fairly close to the OECD average in terms of overall spending on education with the exception of pre-primary education, where we are right at the bottom.

The federal government has chosen to blow steam about this figure out of the thousands of possible figures, but this report suffers from the same flaw as all other OECD publications on early childhood education and care. The expenditure figure is misleading because it only includes direct spending on pre-school education and government programs and administration. It does not include the enormous household subsidies for child care in this country, which form a large part of the early childhood education sector.

There are some interesting figures relating to school education. Although public spending on school education is below OECD average, private investment in school education in Australia as a percentage of GDP is exceeded by only two other countries – Korea and Chile. [i.e. LOTS of Australian families send their kids to private schools -- especially for High School]

Australia is among the countries with the highest number of instruction hours, with an average of 962 hours a year for 12 to 14 year olds. This compares with an OECD average of 892 hours per year. The countries that outperform us in the PISA literacy, numeracy and science assessments have much fewer instruction hours per year– Sweden (741), South Korea ( 867) and Finland (777) – but devote proportionally more compulsory instruction time to these core subjects. Australia only devotes 13% of compulsory instruction time to reading, writing and literature, which is the lowest in the OECD.

New analyses of the 2006 PISA results show that socioeconomic disadvantage has a relatively low impact on performance in Australia compared with most other OECD countries. In the science component of PISA 2006, 39.4% of ‘strong’ performers (with scores in the top two performance bands) were students with a socioeconomic status index below the national average.

Figures provided in OECD publications are often accepted as Gospel, but they should always be viewed with caution and considered in light of each country’s policy context. The above figures, while interesting and informative, are no exception.

The above is part of a press release dated Sept. 11 from the Centre for Independent Studies. Enquiries to cis@cis.org.au. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590. Telephone ph: +61 2 9438 4377 or fax: +61 2 9439 7310






A school run by castrati

But they have not been physically unmanned. They have been castrated by Left-inspired anti-discipline laws. Once upon a time a 10 year old waving a small stick would have GOT the stick and that would have been the end of it. Now they have to call police

ANOTHER Ipswich school has been placed into lockdown, after a 10-year-old boy carrying a stick threatened the safety of staff and students. Police were called to Churchill State School yesterday morning after a young student began abusing classmates and teachers before picking up a stick and threatening to attack staff. The boy's parents picked him up before police arrived and no one was hurt during the incident.

The parents of a student at the school said their child also saw the boy hitting classroom windows with his scooter. “My kids said he was rolling along on his scooter and then using it to try and break windows,” a parent said.

The Ipswich Child Protection Investigation Unit said the child lashed out because he did not like being told what to do. Police later spoke to the boy and warned him about his aggressive behaviour.

The lockdown, which lasted for 10 minutes, was the third time an Ipswich school had been closed due to the threat of violence in the past 12 days. Ipswich State High School was in lockdown for an hour late last month after a gang of females invaded the site, threatening students and staff. Brassall State School was placed in lockdown the next day when an Ipswich State High student was chased from that site into the primary school across the road. The fleeing teenage student had to hide in Brassall State School's administration office while police were called.

Education Queensland (EQ) said the incident at Churchill State School was handled swiftly. “The acting principal acted calmly and professionally. The lockdown was put in place as a precautionary measure and it proceeded smoothly and without incident,” an EQ spokesman said. “A student became aggressive towards staff and students on the school oval. The student picked up a small stick and made general threats.”

When a school is in lockdown, students must remain on the ground while all classroom doors are locked and a bell is sounded. After the incident, Churchill State School teachers handed students a letter to pass to their parents explaining what had happened.

A parent who spoke to The Queensland Times said the lockdown was excessive. “I think it was over the top,” the parent said. “You would imagine a 10-year-old kid with a stick could be handled by teachers.”

Education Queensland said lockdowns were necessary for a wide range of incidents. “Lockdowns can be used in any situation that may threaten the safety of staff and students. This can include gas leaks near the school, external police operations or on-site altercations,” an EQ spokesman said.

Most parents The Queensland Times spoke to said the school looked after their children well and the site had not been on lockdown before. “It's a good school, my kids don't cop much stick from other students,” a parent said.

SOURCE






The brainless Qld. Ambulance bureaucracy does it again

Paramedics get TVs, not life-saving equipment. The entire management should be fired

QUEENSLAND Ambulance Service has splashed out on big-screen TVs, sound systems and expensive lounges while paramedics go without critical equipment. Hundreds of thousands of dollars were spent on the entertainment systems for ambulance stations at the end of last financial year despite a desperate need for GPS devices, training defibrillators and replacement uniforms. The splurge has infuriated paramedics forced to cope with broken or dodgy equipment.

In at least three cases exposed by The Courier-Mail, people have died after paramedics lost their way in ambulances lacking GPS or missing a defibrillator which had been removed for training.

The QAS has refused to reveal how much it has spent on TVs, Blu-ray disc players and sound systems over the past two years, but staff estimate it could top $1 million. The QAS strongly defended its spending, claiming the items were for "training". "Education and training is essential to the development of paramedics and QAS employees and the purchase of equipment for training and development such as televisions, DVDs, and lounges in rest areas does not impact on the provision of other essential equipment," it said in a statement. {Really??}

But Brisbane student paramedic Zac Damelian, who had to buy his own GPS for work, said the $12,000 he estimated was spent on his station was over the top. "It's just ridiculous what they spend money on," Mr Damelian said. "Televisions aren't going to bring back the poor old lady (cardiac) arresting down the road." He said the entertainment systems at his station were "hardly ever used for training". "It is for recreation between jobs," he said.

Mr Damelian wasn't against paramedics having comforts, but not at the expense of essential equipment. Lifepak 12 defibrillators are "constantly in and out of service", blood glucose readers, batteries and stretchers needed replacement, and paramedics struggled to get replacement uniforms, he said. Paramedics who want to train on Lifepak 12 defibrillators at their stations must remove units from ambulances, a risky decision.

Some stations now have up to three LCD televisions and two DVD players. The Emergency Medical Service Protection Association, which represents hundreds of paramedics and ambulance staff, said it disagreed with the wasting of public money. "In times of financial crisis . . . there are more pressing priorities," vice-president Jock Ruthven said.

QAS documents obtained by The Courier-Mail under Right to Information showed a Gold Coast child who died after having a seizure was attended to by paramedics who did not have a defibrillator because it had been removed for training. Two Mackay men died of cardiac arrest after waiting more than 40 minutes for lost ambulances which didn't have GPS.

Opposition emergency services spokesman Ted Malone said money should first be spent making sure there was enough staff and essential equipment, including back-up gear, and uniforms.

SOURCE







Fewer lunches for Sir Lunchalot and a new minister for police



Two very desirable changes in NSW. Though I suppose there's not much hope that the new bosses will be any better than the old. Sir Lunchalot above. Background on him here

Tony Kelly has been dumped as the NSW Police Minister after criticism that he mishandled a police pay dispute and was devoting more time to campaigning for a leadership challenge. Ian Macdonald [Sir Lunchalot] loses his energy portfolio, but remains Minister for Primary Industries.

Premier Nathan Rees announced a cabinet reshuffle this afternoon after John Della Bosca quit the cabinet over an affair. Mr Rees said the reshuffle was about loyalty and discipline, indicating that he had punished Mr Kelly and Mr Macdonald for working behind the scenes against him.

The NSW Deputy Premier, Carmel Tebbutt, has taken over as the state's new Health Minister. Ms Tebbutt, from the Labor Left, has been the environment minister for the past year. Michael Daley will become the new Minister for Police....

Mr Della Bosca quit the ministry last week after admitting to the affair with 26-year-old Kate Neill.....

Three recent former health ministers have become political casualties, with two quitting Parliament and one now relegated to the back bench. Former premier Morris Iemma was health minister in 2005, followed by Attorney-General John Hatzistergos in 2006/07, Reba Meagher in 2007/08 and Mr Della Bosca took on the job a year ago. Mr Hatzistergos took over the portfolio for about a week after Mr Della Bosca resigned.

More HERE

NSW Labor government moves to lift ban on publication of school information

Conservative support for the ban was brainless and unprincipled opportunism. They are a disgrace

THE NSW government is seeking legal advice as to whether the law banning the publication of league tables is unconstitutional. The move came as Premier Nathan Rees yesterday condemned the opposition and the Greens for supporting the ban, saying they were "undermining democracy".

The government failed in its attempt to overturn the Coalition-backed law, which makes it a criminal offence for newspapers to republish information already publicly available, in particular the results of national literacy and numeracy tests, after the Coalition, Greens and Shooters Party voted against its repeal.

The Australian understands that the NSW government is requesting legal advice about the law and whether it breaches the Constitution, which would enable a legal challenge in the High Court to have the law repealed.

At the opening of the Pan Pacific newspaper conference in Sydney yesterday, Mr Rees described the actions by the Coalition and Greens in supporting the amendment as the "greatest assault on press freedom in Australia in 50 years". Mr Rees likened the amendment banning league tables to moves by former NSW attorney-general Bill Sheahan to compel newspapers to disclose their sources when reporting allegations of corruption. "It was an attempt by an Australian government to gag the press," he said. "Today, no government in Australia would dare bring in a measure like the Disclosure of Allegations Bill. Governments, no; the NSW Coalition and Greens, yes."

Mr Rees said the amendment passed by the Greens and Coalition, which they voted against repealing on Wednesday night in the NSW upper house, "undermines the capacity of our democracy to engage in healthy public debate". "It strikes at the very right of journalists and newspapers to report public issues without fear or favour," he added.

Liberal MP Peter Debnam yesterday urged the government to broker a voluntary code of conduct against compiling simplistic league tables, for which he has the in-principle support of newspaper editors.

The Australian's editor-in-chief, Chris Mitchell, questioned the effectiveness of the ban, saying the newspaper had published two tables of school results, in the electorates of Mr Rees and Opposition Leader Barry O'Farrell, and had heard nothing from the opposition or the Greens about legal action. Mr Mitchell said he was willing to discuss a voluntary code of conduct, as is the editor of The Daily Telegraph, Garry Linnell. "The Daily Telegraph opposes the archaic legislation currently in place in NSW and strongly supports the right of parents to know how their school performs, as long as this is done fairly and in full context," he said.

SOURCE





Rudd gives a very skewed account of history

Truth and accuracy has always been a low priority for Leftists. Kevin Rudd said recently that Labor was largely responsible for economic reform in Australia and described the Howard government as "indolent". John Howard gives the facts below

LET'S start with some facts. As the 1980s began Australia needed five major economic reforms to ensure success in a rapidly globalising world economy. They were financial deregulation, fundamental taxation reform, dismantling of high tariff protection, privatisation of government-owned commercial bodies and a freer labour market.

The blueprint for financial reform came from the Campbell inquiry, set up by me, as treasurer. The reform process here started with the Fraser government, through the introduction of a tender system for the sale of Treasury notes and Treasury bonds, described by the former Reserve Bank Governor Ian Macfarlane, in his 2006 Boyer lectures, as "second only in importance to the float of the Australian dollar in 1983". The Fraser government also began the politically difficult task of deregulating interest rates, by removing all interest-rate ceilings on bank deposits.

Reversing Labor's pre-1983 opposition to financial deregulation, the Hawke government floated the dollar, admitted foreign banks and otherwise broadly implemented Campbell's recommendations. The float of the dollar was driven by Bob Hawke as prime minister and the then governor of the Reserve Bank, Bob Johnston. Treasury, at that time, opposed the float.

After a number of false starts fundamental taxation reform, involving as it had to the introduction of a broad based goods and services tax, was finally achieved by the Howard government in 2000.

The Hawke government, with Paul Keating as treasurer, was responsible for largely dismantling Australia's system of protective tariffs. The Keating government privatised Qantas and commenced the privatisation of the Commonwealth Bank. The Howard government privatised Telstra.

In the early 1990s the Keating government introduced a limited form of enterprise bargaining. I say limited because under these changes an enterprise agreement concluded between an employer and its non-union workforce still had to run the gauntlet of the Industrial Relations Commission, where any union having coverage in the relevant workforce area could oppose the agreement, even if none of its members were parties to the agreement. The legislation giving effect to this change also introduced the unfair dismissal law, constantly criticised by small businesses in Australia.

The Howard government greatly expanded deregulation of the labour market; first through the introduction of Australian Workplace Agreements in 1996, and in 2005 with the removal of unfair dismissal entitlements affecting firms employing fewer than 100 people and the streamlining of the agreement making process. Importantly, in 1996 it restored Sections 45D and E to the Trade Practices Act. These provided protection to businesses against predatory secondary-boycott union behaviour.

The Rudd government has not only overturned the Howard government's industrial relations changes (excepting the restoration of Sections 45D and E), but has also imposed a further level of regulation, taking our workplace relations system back to the late 1980s.

The other highly relevant fact, in this almost 30-year reform process, was the different responses of the two sides of politics when they were in opposition. The Liberal and National parties supported the reforms initiated by the Hawke and Keating governments. When the dollar was floated, I, as opposition treasury spokesman, described that decision as "correct and courageous". The then opposition strongly supported the Hawke government's tariff reduction program. As prime minister I would, from time to time, praise what the Hawke government had done with financial deregulation and tariff reform.

Privatisation of Qantas and the Commonwealth Bank became Coalition policy in the mid 1980s, and, as both Keating and Kim Beazley will know, the legislation privatising the bank would not have passed through the Senate in 1995 without Coalition support. By contrast the Labor Party, in opposition, fought tooth and nail against the reform attempts of the Coalition. Kevin Rudd called the introduction of the GST a "day of fundamental injustice".

Having promoted the privatisation of Qantas and the Commonwealth Bank in government, Labor in opposition consistently opposed the privatisation of Telstra, which was not finally achieved until after the Coalition won control of the Senate following the 2004 election. Predictably, Labor opposed all of the Coalition's industrial relations changes.

Labor negativity in opposition was not confined to the five major reforms I have cited. It also tried to thwart the fiscal consolidation process, commenced in Peter Costello's first budget in 1996. That budget, the best and most courageous in a generation, imposed real reductions in government spending. Opportunistically, Labor opposed most of these measures. That fiscal consolidation process, which totally eliminated net Commonwealth debt and produced a string of budget surpluses, has proved critical to Australia escaping the worst effects of the global financial plunge.

Surely not even Rudd will dispute that he inherited from the former government a fiscal position and a framework for prudential regulation of the banking system second to none in the western world.

It is tempting for a political leader such as Rudd to highlight his party's virtues and ignore those of other parties. Last Monday, however, the Prime Minister carried political mendacity to new heights, when he launched Paul Kelly's book The March of Patriots. His analysis of the economic reform process in Australia since 1980 was partisan, inaccurate and lacked any semblance of objectivity.

In one fashion or another we are all political warriors, but we have a superior obligation to the national interest. That obligation obtains in opposition as well as in government. No side of Australian politics has a monopoly of either virtue or merit. Each according to its own value system has attempted to improve the lot of Australians. In failing to acknowledge this last Monday, my successor diminished himself, and not the Liberal and National Parties.

SOURCE






Rudd has put power back in the destructive hands of unions

KEVIN Rudd has declared himself the only true inheritor of the Hawke-Keating economic reforms and the only national leader who can carry forward what he calls the great project of economic modernisation for Australia. It is a remarkably brazen claim for a Prime Minister who is presiding over the effective kneecapping of labour market modernisation in this country through his government's Fair Work Act, which came into force on July 1.

The modern era of deregulated Australian labour markets began three decades ago. And it started not with the Hawke-Keating government in Canberra but on the iron ore fields of Western Australia. It began in July 1986, when the chief executive of Peko-Wallsend Limited, Charles Copeman, decided to sort out the union-dominated Robe River joint venture in which Peko had become the majority shareholder.

Copeman had to bear the brunt of a remarkable and at times literally violent onslaught by the unions, the ACTU, the WA state government, the state industrial tribunal, the Industrial Relations Club and prime minister Bob Hawke, who was in the unions' corner. He had little support from other Australian business "leaders" or Liberal politicians, who failed to see the importance of what he was doing.

Copeman's objective was to restore management's right to manage and to deal directly with its workers, instead of having Peko's business run and its profitability, or rather lack of it, determined by unions and their allies in industrial tribunals. Other mining companies, starting with Hamersley, followed.

Importantly, CRA, now Rio Tinto, successfully spread the battle to deal directly with its workforce to its operations across Australia, despite vigorous opposition from Bill Kelty at the ACTU and the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. This was extremely important as Australia expanded its role as a minerals and energy exporter. And through the movement of former Rio Tinto industrial relations negotiators into other areas including telecommunications, banking and manufacturing, what Melbourne industrial relations barrister Stuart Wood calls the "Rio Tinto diaspora" spread more widely.

There were, of course, other important influences at work: globalisation; the dismantling of Australia's tariff walls and the floating of the exchange rate by the Hawke-Keating government and Keating's introduction, after initially opposing it, of enterprise bargaining; the introduction of individual workplace agreements by the Court government in WA and Australian workplace agreements by the Howard government.

Unions and their tactics also had little appeal to a new generation of employees. As a result of all these influences the role of unions and their collaborators in industrial tribunals diminished substantially and was on a path to well-deserved irrelevance. This is now being reversed by the substantial reregulation of labour markets being imposed by Julia Gillard's Fair Work legislation, which restores the role of unions, industrial tribunals and awards. Her supposed contribution to a modern labour market, her so-called award modernisation exercise, was never credible and is now degenerating into a destructive farce even the unions are beginning to whinge about.

But there is another section of her Fair Work Australia legislation that is only just beginning to attract some public attention: Division 8 of the act, which covers good faith bargaining. Over the next few years it will substantially expand the role of unions and the Fair Work Tribunal that replaces the Australian Industrial Relations Commission. Along with other provisions of the Fair Work Act it gives the unions the key to the door of businesses large and small, and a rapidly growing number are finding the unions on their doorstep demanding the right to recruit members and engage in good faith bargaining.

Already Gillard's tribunal commissars are telling companies they cannot deal directly with their workforce, and much worse is to come. This much is clear from the experience of the US with good faith bargaining. Wood, mentioned earlier, and Henry Skene, head of Arnold Bloch Leibler's workplace advisory practice, recently went to have a look at the US experience and it wasn't encouraging. If this is the future, it doesn't work.

Yet it is clear that Gillard's legislation has opened the way for that experience to influence decisions by Fair Work Australia on good faith bargaining matters. Wood believes the legislation heralds a fundamental change in the way industrial relations have been practised over the last 20 years.

The key section of the Australian act, Section 228(1)(e), provides among other things that parties to good faith bargaining refrain from capricious or unfair conduct that undermines freedom of association or collective bargaining. According to Wood, this opens the door for a large body of US and international law to apply here, including a US prohibition on refusing to bargain. And despite a provision in the Gillard act that it does not require parties to good faith bargaining to make concessions, US experience makes it clear that firms will be forced to bargain with unions.

US experience also suggests good faith bargaining will reverse the switch over the past 20 years to firms bargaining directly with their employees outlined earlier, and this is already happening. Good faith bargaining was introduced by president Franklin D. Roosevelt in the US in the 1930s, but in 1947 the legislation was amended to allow US states to opt out. At the last count 22 states had done so, and been rewarded with a significant shift of industries from the states with good faith bargaining to those without it.

In Australia, companies will have nowhere to go, and the discretion provided to Fair Work Australia commissioners under the good faith provisions is huge, a virtually open-ended power. The history of arbitration in this country tells us that over time this will allow Fair Work Australia and the unions to expand their power and influence in ways that take us back to an earlier era.

Steve Knott, chief executive of the Australian Mining and Metals Association, which covers the industry where the modernisation of the Australian labour market began, described the Rudd government's industrial relations legislation to The Australian as the biggest increase in union power since Federation. Even if you think this an exaggeration, Rudd's approach to the labour market hardly suggests he is the safest pair of hands in which to place the great project of the economic modernisation of Australia. If he were serious, he wouldn't have a 652-page act to reregulate the labor market.

SOURCE





Nasty NSW cops again

Publicity seems however to be working its usual magic, with the wallopers being told from on high to mend their ways. The problem seems mainly to be the work of the woman's immediate boss: A bitchy dickless Tracy. It takes a woman to really tear another woman down. Lesbians often rise in the ranks of police forces, with Britain's aptly named but bungling Cressida Dick being a well known example, so I suspect lesbian attitudes being at work in this matter too

A WOMAN employed by the police force was forced to work overtime for every minute she spent expressing breastmilk for her child. The police intelligence analyst, who can only be identified as Sarah for security reasons, was also banned from using morning and afternoon tea breaks because they were "discretionary" and she was denied the use of accumulated leave.

Complaint documents obtained by The Daily Telegraph claim Sarah's repeated requests for hours that suited her childcare needs were rejected and she had to record the time spent expressing milk at work on her timesheet. She was refused a private room and instead was made to use either an unlockable and "unclean" interview room - where she was interrupted by police officers - or a toilet cubicle. Eventually she had no choice but to express milk in her car in the carpark, but because of her "great embarrassment" she drove home and fed the baby. When she returned she was made to work for the time she had been gone.

The Public Service Association claimed yesterday the woman is one of thousands of new mothers in the public service who are being denied proper facilities for breastfeeding in violation of the Government's own policy. The Association will launch action in the industrial court today demanding that the Government finally uphold the policy.

More than 12 years after then-premier Bob Carr announced the new policy recommending private rooms and paid breastfeeding time, only a handful of government workplaces have applied it. Another woman working in the Government's own headquarters - Governor Macquarie Tower, the same building as the Premier - was also made to use a cubicle.

According to the PSA only Parliament House and the Department of Commerce have the appropriate facilities and procedures in place, while Health is working on some arrangements. It raised Sarah's concerns with Commissioner Andrew Scipione, who passed them on to assistant commissioner Mark Jenkins.

Mr Jenkins said NSW Police first had to check with the Department of Premier and Cabinet about the policy and then said such family friendly measures as a private room and paid lactation breaks were "suggestive". He said: "Commanders /Managers and employees need to negotiate these arrangements, taking a commonsense and flexible approach and reaching an agreement that both ensures the health and safety of employees and does not interfere with operational or service delivery needs." Mr Jenkins said that "appropriate background and industrial/policy advice was provided to the Command".

He said the force would discuss Sarah's request to reinstate the time she was docked with the local area command. He also said police were working on a new breastfeeding policy.

The Australian Breastfeeding Association's Katrina Dorrough said Sarah was one of countless women being mistreated. "These are the stories we hear commonly, would you believe," she said. "Women don't often complain about it but I've almost been in tears listening to some people working in the public service who have similar stories."

SOURCE. Story (with picture) about another bitchy dickless Tracy in NSW here.

Insane politically correct Federal prosecutors finally see reason and drop oppressive case

"Baby swinging video" charges dropped. More idiotic "child protection" while kids who are REALLY at risk are ignored. "Attack the innocent" seems to be the motto of child protection agencies worldwide. Anything else is too difficult, apparently. But with the prospect of a jury trial they knew that they could't win this one. The publicity probably freaked them too. The children of the light love the light and the children of the darkness love the darkness (John 3: 19-20)

COMMONWEALTH prosecutors have dropped charges against a man accused of transmitting child abuse material by sharing a video on the internet of a man swinging a baby. Christopher Charles Illingworth, a 60-year-old freelance journalist from Maroochydore on Queensland's Sunshine Coast, was charged with two counts of using a carriage service to transmit child abuse material after he shared the video using the website Liveleak.

The video features a nine-month-old baby continually being swung around by its limbs, for about three and a half minutes, sometimes completing 360 degree loops over the man's head.

The video originated from either Russia or Ukraine and was traced to Illingworth's home, which was subsequently raided in November 2008 by police officers from Task Force Argos, which targets child pornography and abuse.

His lawyer argued in court that under Commonwealth law the video could not be deemed as torture, cruelty or physical abuse because it appeared the baby had not been harmed. A Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions spokeswoman today said the charges had been dropped. "This prosecution was discontinued ... after the matter was reviewed by the CDPP in accordance with the prosecution policy of the Commonwealth taking into account all the circumstances involved including the classification given to the material by the Classification Board," she said.

Mr Illingworth, a father of four, had argued the video simply showed a Russian circus family undertaking training, and said the charges were ridiculous. "My name and health has been damaged - I'm going to do something about this," he said. "If anything, I want this to go to trial by jury - 12 adults, 12 parents are going to see the stupidity of this. "Bring it on, bring it on with all your might." He said supporters had raised around $500,000 to cover his legal costs.

SOURCE






Another NSW government school destroyed because of ban on effective discipline

BALACLAVA-clad students jeered as frightened children stood outside the gates of their government high school yesterday with signs reading "Stop the violence". School bullying has become so rampant that parents fearing another Jai Morcom-style death threatened to remove their children from school.

Police have charged two 15-year-old boys with assault and affray after an alleged serious attack on students at Airds High, near Campbelltown in Sydney's southwest. Two students were suspended for 10 days and two others for four days after a brawl that left three teens injured - one with a broken nose.

Yesterday, protesting students shielded their faces with placards. Students worried about bullying plan a mass walkout tomorrow. Parents said the death of 15-year-old Jai Morcom after a schoolyard fight at Mullumbimby on August 29 was a chilling reminder of the potential dangers children faced.

Yesterday, Airds High students said they were "living in constant fear of being next". "All it takes is just looking at someone the wrong way and then you're hit," one student, too frightened to give his name, said.

Students leaving the school yesterday told of a "vicious" culture of bullying at the school. They said the bullying was indiscriminate, with victims targetted regardless of age, race or religion. "It's pretty vicious - people bash each other and call each other names," one Year 7 student said. "The bullies target anyone they think they can get to - they don't hurt people because of race. "But there are always people getting hurt in the playground."

Tracey Ross said she feared sending her son Jacob to school each morning after he was severely bullied by a group of older students. "I was told . . . that not one of these kids is safe between school hours," she said. "Jacob is in Year 8 but the students who were picking on him are in Year 10 . . . he was physically and emotionally bullied so badly that he was removed from school for six weeks."

Rebecca Hoffman said she often felt "scared" for her daughter Danielle in Year 9. "When I saw the (Mullumbimy High) incident on TV I was very worried," she said.

The two 15-year-olds charged after the incident on September 3 will appear in Campbelltown Children's Court on September 28. A Department of Education and Training spokesman said they would be placed on probation on their return to school. [Meaning what? More empty talk]

SOURCE







Another public transport outrage

Another example of how governments get people out of their cars. Driver couldn't change $20 so leaves schoolboy behind on the road. How odd that so many drivers don't know of a government "policy" that says they must not do that? Is it a policy mentioned only in hushed whispers or in fine print? Any wonder why I drove my son to school when he was a kid?

A 14-YEAR-OLD schoolboy has been left behind on a semi-rural road by a Brisbane bus because the driver refused to break a $20 note. The incident was the second serious case in a month for Brisbane Transport after a 10-year-old girl was left stranded in Mt Gravatt.

The boy's father, Nick Smith, told The Courier-Mail he had dropped his son Joshua off on Meadowlands Rd at Carina early last month, with a $20 note to pay for his week of bus trips to school. But the boy, who was dressed in school uniform, was told by the driver he would have to leave the bus because there was not enough spare change to break the note.

"He had a $20 note and then the driver said to him that he couldn't change the note and that he had to get off the bus," Mr Smith said. "I had to pick him up and then take him down to Cannon Hills bus terminal ... but where he was on Meadowlands Rd there are no shops or things close to hand for him to get change. "Being in full school uniform, showing his ID and being of a relatively minor age, I felt it was extremely disappointing that the decision was made not to let him on, given the problems that we have had in the past."

Both TransLink and Brisbane City Council have a "no child left behind" policy, which states that children of school-age or younger cannot be left behind by buses regardless of whether they are carrying the sufficient fare.

Mr Smith said his wife had rung TransLink to complain, and was told the driver had the right to refuse entry if passengers were not carrying the correct fare. "Initially when we complained, my wife actually rang them and they said, 'Look, passengers do have to tender the right change – there is a sign on the bus'," he said.

"If it was an adult, or if he was abusive or the behaviour was not appropriate you would understand but he did nothing wrong, he was very upset, very shaken and quite disappointed that he wasn't allowed to get on the bus."

A spokesman for TransLink said yesterday incidents of children being left behind were "very serious" and the driver had been disciplined but not sacked. "In this instance, following a thorough investigation by Brisbane Transport and TransLink, the driver involved has been disciplined and counselled and an apology has been issued to the child's parent," he said.

Public and Active Transport chair Jane Prentice said a memo had been sent to council drivers, reminding them of the "no child left behind policy". "I understand the latest incident was after we sent the alert but the bottom line is that it is not acceptable behaviour."

SOURCE






AUSTRALIAN PUBLIC HOSPITAL MAYHEM

Three current articles below

Alarming wait for urgent medical procedures in NSW government hospitals

WAITING lists for urgent operations such as heart bypasses and cancer surgery have blown out dramatically this financial year, with the number of operations performed statewide falling by 5260 to 32,913 in July compared to the same month last year - a 14 per cent slump. The Health Minister, John Hatzistergos, released figures on Tuesday showing an improvement in elective surgery waiting times in the March to June quarter. But surgeons said administrators had approved extra surgery during this period to meet performance benchmarks, only to slash it subsequently.

''On July 1 they took the foot off the accelerator,'' said Patrick Cregan, the chairman of NSW Health's Surgical Services Taskforce. ''There's been an enormous blowout since then.'' While this was partly attributable to the swine flu epidemic, which reduced the number of beds available for surgical patients, ''the vast bulk of it is that we've got a budget problem'', Dr Cregan said. Fully staffed operating theatres were going unused, he said, as surgery was cancelled. ''It's an enormous waste of operating capacity,'' Dr Cregan said.

Another taskforce member, Brian McCaughan, said that at the end of July, 227 people who needed urgent operations such as heart, cancer or brain surgery were still on the waiting list beyond the 30 days recommended maximum, and more than 3000 others had waited too long for less urgent operations. This was in addition to patients who finally received their operation in July after waiting longer than benchmark times.

Professor McCaughan said the swine flu outbreak affected only operations where high-level care was needed afterwards. ''We did fewer hearts, but [the epidemic] doesn't impact on colons, hernias, gall bladders or breasts'', for which waiting lists had also increased. Budget allocations presented by NSW Health to area health services show the number of operations that can be performed statewide this year will be capped at 255,000, with hospital managers financially penalised if they deviate by more than 5 per cent from the targets.

NSW Health's acting deputy director-general for health system performance, Nigel Lyons, said the figures had not been finalised but were ''indicative''. Allocations had been calculated to allow 100 per cent of patients to be treated within recommended times, he said. Western Sydney hospitals will be allowed to perform less than two-thirds the number of operations allocated to eastern Sydney region under the new budgeting method - which awards money for actual ''episodes of care'', rather than allowing area bosses to distribute funds as they see fit.

Despite their similar catchment populations of just over a million each, Sydney West Area Health Service can perform only 30,812 operations, against South Eastern Sydney Area Health Service's 48,853. Dr Lyons and the NSW Health director-general, Debora Picone, would visit Nepean Hospital today to discuss doctors' concerns about the new formula, which the chairman of the hospital's medical staff council, Peter Flynn, said illustrated ''ingrained inequity''.

He said doctors would insist the department commit to 9000 extra operations a year in western Sydney by 2011, as facilities were opened or expanded.

SOURCE

Another overstetched public hospital doctor speaks out in Queensland

I WORK at one of Brisbane's largest hospitals as a surgical registrar. I have been very close to writing this letter many times in recent years but thought it would fall on deaf ears. I often have to work several months straight. That is, leaving my home at 6.30am every day and returning at 9pm or 10pm – often later, in the early hours of the morning, to have a few hours sleep and do it again.

There have been occasions over the years where I have been so fatigued I have fallen asleep while performing surgery, literally slumping forward while standing over the patient's open body on the operating table. On other occasions, I've seen my senior consultants fall asleep while operating, such was their exhaustion. It is terrifying to watch. Imagine if the patient knew the risk they were in.

We are meant to work 38-40 hour weeks. I will often do those many hours in a single weekend on call. My true hours are 50-70 hours per week. I have done over 100 at times. In addition to this, we're supposed to have four days off for every 14 days of work and, if you looked at the roster, it would seem as though they have allowed for this. But there is also an "unspoken" roster that has meant most of us only get about two to three days for every 30 days of work.

Surgery staff don't get time in lieu. If there's no one else to do it, you just have to work. If there's no one else to cover the ward on a weekend, you just have to do it. It doesn't matter to Queensland Health that you have just worked 30 days straight and haven't seen your spouse or kids in a fortnight.

Fatigue pay is what you get when you have worked your "rostered" hours for the day (7.30am-4.30pm). But you have to do so much overtime that your next "rostered" day starts before you get a chance to have an eight-hour break. We're supposed to have eight hours (of every 24 hours) not working. Fatigue pay kicks in when you have to return to work before having eight hours off (often we don't "return" as we haven't even had a chance to leave from the previous day).

If you complain about the hours and workload, you simply will not be able to progress in your career. If you want to get on to a competitive training program, your reference "scores" might be affected and you will not be able to specialise. It sounds crazy, with such a shortage of specialists, but as I have been told many times over: "you have to play the game" if you want to get into your chosen field.

The only problem is – without any exaggeration – the "game" maims and kills patients. It destroys doctors' health, marriages and relationships with their children. In addition to this, think of patient safety – you couldn't drive a car after such long hours of work, so why are we expected to perform surgery?

Most of us are extremely disillusioned, exhausted and in fear of our jobs if we speak about it, even among ourselves. Yes, we need more doctors. We're training more at uni than ever, so we will definitely have the graduates in coming years. But we need the specialty colleges to create the training positions and the hospitals to create the training-approved positions to accommodate these doctors until they become fully qualified (which can be five to 10 years after they finish medical school).

And there are simple short-term solutions at hand that everyone in the hospital system knows about but are too afraid to talk about to the media. At the hospital I work at, there are spare operating theatres that go unused. If they were to open these theatres and have them all fully functioning for urgent cases, we could get the elective lists completed during working hours.

Most doctors I know no longer enjoy what they do. Many have dropped out of surgery. Often our patients, who we sacrifice our family time to help, simply refuse to help themselves and we know we are just beating our heads against a brick wall trying to assist them in medical intervention when they'll just go back to the same habits or self-abuse.

Forget about the pay. Most of us didn't get into the industry for money. Many years out of medical school, I am still paying off my degree. Money doesn't buy you sleep. It doesn't buy you good health or lower stress levels. It doesn't buy you a place on a training program. Nor does it save your marriage. Money doesn't even give you a chance to have dinner with your family or tuck your kids into bed – not even one night a week.

Doctors should not have to put up with these conditions. The Government must step up. There is so much that could be done to help the situation and not all involve multibillion dollar budgets. It just needs some common sense. We need some action. People are literally dying for it.

SOURCE

Study slams jargon in public hospital consent forms

MORE than 80 per cent of the consent forms patients are asked to sign before having an operation are incomprehensible to anyone without specialist medical knowledge. Ninety per cent of the forms do not make clear the purpose of the planned operation, and 95 per cent of them do not list the relevant risks to the patient, research by Australian experts suggests.

The experts, from an Adelaide hospital, reviewed hundreds of consent documents given to patients to sign since 2005, and found one in 15 did not use a single word to describe the procedure that could be understood by looking it up in a standard English dictionary.

Far from being isolated cases, they say such language is typical of consent documents used nationwide, and that such use of jargon is "unacceptable", particularly given that many patients are elderly and in frail health.

The authors of the research, published today in the Medical Journal of Australia, suggest mandatory standards should be introduced to ensure patients are better informed. Lead researcher Mark Siddins, director of the urology unit at Adelaide's Repatriation General Hospital, said many doctors appeared to think the point of consent forms was to protect them from being sued, rather than to help the patient make the right treatment choice. He said while hospital technology had been transformed in the last 20 years, the way doctors interacted with patients had changed little. "We are surprised indemnity insurers don't require that doctors give (understandable) consent information."

SOURCE

The woman below is a black



Don't believe your lying eyes, will you? She is law academic Nicole Watson. A story about her here. Australia has lots of "blacks" like her -- even natural blonds. I actually have a niece who is also black, even though her skin is the whitest white. That's Australia's politically correct but quite insane law for you. Any amount of indigenous ancestry qualifies you as black and you get all the special deals that go with that -- JR





Lebanese Muslims again

Pack attacks are their style and calling in large numbers of "reinforcements" in attempts to thwart law enforcement is part of that. The fact that there is a special Middle Eastern Organised Crime squad to deal with them tells what a problem population they are. They would turn their suburbs into corrupt and criminal-dominated mini-Beiruts if they could

RIOT police have been sent in to break up a crowd that gathered in western Sydney following police raids on a number of homes in the area. Detectives from the Middle Eastern Organised Crime squad stormed three residences in Cumberland Road and one home in Normanby Street, in Auburn, about 6pm (AEST) yesterday. Stun guns, cannabis, ecstasy, pills, a large sum of cash and a handgun and ammunition were seized from the properties, police said.

One officer was struck in the face during the operation and suffered a cut nose.

A short time later, groups of men began congregating in the area in a threatening manner. After the crowd had swelled to an estimated 150 people, police confronted several groups of men, urging them to leave.

The Daily Telegraph reports officers were forced to use capsicum spray to subdue the angry crowd, with the PolAir helicopter and the riot squad called in to help. The crowd dispersed about 10pm.

The injured officer was taken to hospital to have the wound stitched and was released.

A 25-year-old man, a 17-year-old boy and a woman aged in her 20s were arrested. The man was charged with one count of wounding a police officer and two counts of assaulting police and obstructing police in their duty. He was refused bail and is due to appear in Burwood Local Court today.

The boy was charged with assaulting police, resisting arrest and hindering police. He was granted conditional bail and will appear in Parramatta Children's Court on September 29. The woman was questioned by investigators and released, with charges expected to be laid.

SOURCE

Update:

More details here.





Literacy hit squads for schools

Trying to pick up the literacy wreckage caused by disastrous and long-disproved Leftist theories that demonize phonics. The "whole word" madness goes back to the psychology laboratory of Wilhelm Wundt in 19th century Germany, would you believe?

And mathematics results are poor because many of those teaching it have no expertise or interest in it. The small number of people who are good at mathematics and who choose to teach it mostly do so in private schools rather than in chaotic government schools. My mathematician son was inspired to a career in mathematics by good mathematics teachers in his private school

FLYING squads of specialist teachers will swoop into 300 Queensland schools next year under a plan to boost literacy and numeracy results. The so-called Turnaround Teams will be deployed to low-performing schools to identify why their results are below average and develop strategies to improve literacy and numeracy levels.

``Some schools may have problems with truancy or behaviour management, others may need extra help with early childhood learning or teaching science for instance,'' Premier Anna Bligh said today.

The teams are part of the State Government's three-year bid to turn around poor results in Queensland schools and will cost $9 million. The program will be trialled at 10 schools in the Wide Bay/Burnett region later this year before being rolled out to the other schools next year.

The 2008 NAPLAN tests _ National Assessment Program - Literacy and Numeracy _ were an embarrassment for Queensland, with the state's students coming second-last, overall, nationally.

SOURCE






More government medical madness

New immigration regulations forcing top US surgeon out -- but publicity seems to have produced some backpedalling. Mackay hospital has had big problems. They badly need all the expertise they can get. A system that takes expertise away from them is insane.



A WORLD-famous US surgeon pulled out of retirement to fill in at a regional hospital for 12 years has been forced to sell his house and abandon Australia in an "appalling" visa bungle. Dr Frank Trost, 77, a globally recognised orthopedic surgeon, has been locked in a bitter six-month wrangle over his visa status amid new restrictions on foreign-trained doctors. Yet, despite the dire shortage of doctors in regional hospitals, Queensland Health and the Immigration Department have refused to budge.

"I feel badly used," Dr Trost said yesterday. "If I'd not gone back to work, I'd be happily retired and still living the dream. We don't want to go. This is our home. But we have no choice."

Fellow surgeons, locals and patients are outraged at the "appalling" treatment of the specialist, who will be forced to return to the US. "He has been used and abused," said Dr Don Pitchford, chairman of the International Medical Graduates Committee. "They took their pound of flesh, now they've kicked him in the guts, tossed him on the scrapheap, and told him, 'You're too old, get out of the country'. It is a disgrace."

Dr Pitchford, director of orthopedics at Gold Coast Hospital, said one solution would be to give Dr Trost an honorary medical fellowship, or to simply give him back his original retirement visa. "If this is the sort of citizen we are kicking out, we should all hang our heads in shame," he said.

Dr Trost and his wife Nancy came to Australia from the US on a retirement visa in 1996 to live by the beach in Mackay. But once word got out of his international stature as a surgeon and expert in amputations, he was asked to join the understaffed Mackay Base Hospital. Then at 65, he did so, sharing his skills and knowledge, administrating his department for more than a decade after stopping surgery because of age restrictions. Dr Trost had the added comfort of a personal letter from the then federal immigration minister reassuring him he would be allowed to go back on to his retirement visa once he finished work.

"I didn't come here to get a job," said Dr Trost, who is now on a temporary 457 work visa. "But when duty called, I felt I had a responsibility to help my fellow man. It has been nerve-racking, very stressful and strenuous, being in limbo for so long." Dr Frost said he and his wife could not get permanent residency because of new rules against foreign-trained doctors over the age of 45.

Two weeks ago, the couple sold their beachside home and are "mentally packing" to leave to start a new life near San Diego, California. He is today in his last week of work at Mackay Base Hospital after resigning in protest over a series of conditions imposed on his work. One included sitting a multiple-choice Australian Medical Council exam this month before spending two years in the wards as an intern, he said.

Mackay Mayor Col Meng said he sympathised with the highly respected medico. "He's 77 years old, they've been using him, but it shows you've got to play by the rules," he said.

An Immigration Department spokesman confirmed the couple's status was in limbo. "He's not being kicked out. No decision has been made," the spokesman said. "We've been in touch with him, we're still processing it." Mackay Health District chief executive Kerry McGovern said Queensland Health had no control over visa conditions. "The responsibility for meeting those requirements rests with the doctor, not the employer," he said. [They really sound as if they care, don't they? They are one of Australia's most malign bureaucracies]

SOURCE

Tourists use Ayers rock as a toilet

I am inclined to see this as an appropriate response to the politically correct restrictions on access to the site. Political correctness as a whole needs to be shat upon in my view. I think that imposing Aboriginal superstitions on the rest of Australia is just as offensive as what is described below



TOURISTS are using the top of Uluru as a toilet, says the head of a Central Australian tour company. Andrew Simpson, general manager of the Aboriginal-owned Anangu Waai tour company, said many tourists took a toilet roll with them when they climbed the rock, reports the Northern Territory News. The claims could be another blow to chances of the rock staying open to climbers.

Mr Simpson said if tourists needed to go they found somewhere before making the half-hour descent. "That's been going on for years," he said. "When people climb up the top of the rock there's no toilet facilities up there. "They're sh**ting on a sacred site."

Uluru is sacred for the Anangu people, to whom the land was handed back in 1985. Traditional owners have complained rubbish and human waste has been making its way down from the top into a sacred pool.

Mr Simpson's claims are in a submission on the draft Uluru-Kata Tjuta national park management plan, which includes the proposal to ban climbing on the rock.

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd said he believed the climb should not be closed. But Mr Garrett said he would deal with the recommendations when he saw them. "I will give proper consideration to what the board brings forward," he said. It is not likely Mr Garrett will announce his decision this year.

SOURCE





"Green jobs"? In China

Sun sets on Australian Solar Systems company despite funding promises. A big British windmill factory has just shut up shop too. But I hear that Chinese factories are doing well

AUSTRALIA'S leading solar energy company was placed into the hands of voluntary administrators yesterday and almost all of its 150 staff stood down pending a review to see if the business can be salvaged. PricewaterhouseCoopers partners Stephen Longley and David McEvoy were appointed voluntary administrators of Solar Systems Pty Ltd and two of its subsidiaries just two weeks after 20 per cent stakeholder, the Victorian power utility TRUenergy, wrote down its entire $53 million investment.

Solar Systems had received promises of $129m in funding from federal and state governments to build Australia's first large scale solar power station, a $420m project near Mildura in Victoria. It also had ambitions for 1000MW of large-scale solar installations in Asia, using its unique solar dish technology, at an estimated cost of more than $3 billion, and to become one of the top five global solar energy companies over the next five years.

However, despite mandating Morgan Stanley to seek new funds and bring in new strategic or financial partners, it was unable to attract new finance and TRUenergy decided to cut its losses. It is understood the decision to appoint administrators came after the late withdrawal of two international parties -- one private equity -- from talks about an equity injection of around $50m to $100m.

Mr Longley said he would assess the company's financial and operations position with a view to continuing operations on a reduced scale over the next three months to provide sufficient time to restructure and sell the business as a going concern. He said staff would be advised of their future by the end of the week and a meeting of creditors would be held on September 17.

It is understood Solar Systems has around $56m of secured debt mostly held through some of its shareholders, including TRUenergy, the British financier and founder of Australian Wildlife Conservancy, Martin Copley, and Graeme Morgan, the founder and former owner of financial planning group Sealcorp. Solar Systems' annual report shows that Morgan was the largest shareholder with 30.3million shares, while Copley held 5.5 million. Options given to executives had an exercise price of more than $3 a share. Both are directors of the company. The annual accounts show the company had revenue of just $2.9m, but losses of $21.3m in 2007-08, taking its accumulated losses to $74m.

The recently completed manufacturing facility in Abbotsford, Victoria, which had the capacity to build 500MW of solar PV installations a year, is now on care and maintenance. Development of the Mildura power station, which was not due to begin construction for another 12 months, will also be put on hold.

It is not clear whether any new owner would qualify for the state and federal funding that had been previously committed.

SOURCE






Obnoxious Queensland Health manages to sink even lower: Tired doctors told to drink more coffee



SIX cups of coffee - that's the State Government antidote to sleep-deprived doctors killing and harming their patients in a haze of exhaustion. The astonishing remedy forms part of Queensland Health's new doctor fatigue policy, currently being rolled out in public hospitals, The Courier-Mail reports.

The Courier-Mail yesterday reported the confessions of junior surgeons and medics whose exhaustion-induced errors had killed or hurt patients during "on-call" shifts of 30 to 80 hours.

But a guidelines document underpinning QH's Fatigue Risk Management System claims "solutions such as 'we need more staff' might not be achievable or effective in managing a fatigue risk." Instead, the 102-page document deems the "strategic use of caffeine . . . to be beneficial" as a fatigue fighter for doctors on marathon duties. "The recommended dosage for a prolonged and significant reduction in sleepiness during a night without sleep has been suggested at 400mg of caffeine . . . equivalent to about five to six cups of coffee," the document states.

As this coffee intake is "not always feasible or realistic", QH proposes caffeine tablets as an alternative. Energy drinks also are recommended. "Compared with other psychoactive drugs, for example, modafinil (a prescription-only narcolepsy treatment), caffeine is supported in its use as it is more readily available and less expensive," the document says.

World-renowned addictions physician John Saunders slammed the advice, saying it would turn doctors into addicts. He said caffeine addiction became clinically significant at 600mg a day. But some people would be addicted, or on the threshold of dependence, at 400mg daily. "They're suggesting 400mg is a perfectly fine dose? I would absolutely dispute that," said Professor Saunders, the Pine Rivers Private Hospital alcohol and drug program director. "For a health department to suggest that doctors use caffeine like this is the height of irresponsibility."

Prof Saunders said acute effects of 400mg of caffeine a day were heart palpitations, raised blood pressure, dizziness, anxiety and hand tremors. Doctors caught between caffeine fixes might suffer serious withdrawal consequences. "These will include headache, depressed mood, blurred vision and maybe some degree of confused thinking," Prof Saunders said.

He said the spectrum of side-effects could mean a doctor hooked on caffeine posed a greater threat than a tired colleague who did not use the substance. "I think it certainly could lead doctors to make potentially bad decisions when they are managing patients," Prof Saunders said.

Organisations Systems Professor Peter Smith said fostering caffeine use among doctors was "inappropriate". "It would seem to me to be a strange way of managing long-term fatigue," Prof Smith, of Central Queensland University, said. "(Queensland Health) might be aware that nicotine enhances alertness but they probably wouldn't be promoting that. It's the same with amphetamines."

The $3.6 million FRMS is a key plank of QH human resources policy, aiming to drop the risk of patient harm from doctor fatigue to "as low as reasonably practicable". Its overarching framework involves a suite of fatigue-reduction modules, strategies, education programs and auditing measures. [What a lot of crap! They just need more doctors]

Each hospital is directed to use the guidelines document, or "resource pack," to help tailor a site-specific plan. More than three pages of the document are dedicated to the case for caffeine in an appendix titled "Fatigue Countermeasures". The central nervous system stimulant is extolled for "increasing alertness, sustaining wakefulness and delaying sleep onset". "Caffeine use has been associated with (an) increase in cognitive performance such as sustained vigilance, reaction time, memory and mood."

SOURCE








Vaues and evidence both matter

I RECENTLY had the privilege of listening to a senior government minister speak on the subject of evidence-based policy. My immediate reaction was to be reminded of Rossini's famous quip on Wagner's opera Lohengrin, about which he said: "One cannot judge Lohengrin from a first hearing and I certainly do not intend to hear it a second time."

But history teaches us that you cannot keep a bad idea down. So I want to start by disposing of the myth that evidence-based policy is good policy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The value of public policy does not depend on whether it rests on evidence but on whether it seeks goals that are worth pursuing.....

The lesson is simple; evidence is perhaps a necessary condition for sound policy, but it is far from being sufficient. We need to ask not merely whether policy does what it claims to do but whether what it does is worth doing. Have we learned that lesson? I fear not. Already in the Howard government's third term the rot had set in. Since then it has spread, with the contrast between the rhetoric of evidence-based policy and the reality becoming ever more glaring.

Consider infrastructure policy, where more than $60 billion in taxpayers' funds has been committed in the space of 12 months. Yet staggeringly large decisions, such as the decision to build a national broadband network, have been made without any cost-benefit analysis at all. What is the objective the NBN intended to achieve? It is the objective of having an NBN. Why? As Kylie Mole said: "Cos."

Or consider climate change and greenhouse gas abatement, where the policy response will have far-reaching consequences for our economic and social future. The government's approach, we are told, is based on detailed and comprehensive modelling. But the model itself is confidential and all attempts to secure its public release have failed. I accept that, to some, sceptic is a term of abuse. But, at least in the Western intellectual tradition, evidence is only as good as the tests to which it has been put.

Then there are the schemes such as FuelWatch, the education revolution and the car plan that, rather than lack evidence, wantonly contradict it. Perhaps there lurks among these exotic birds an instance of evidence-based policy; but, so far, every attempt at exhibiting such a specimen has failed, with all those captured having to be declared unsatisfactory and released into the wild after careful examination.

When challenged on these grounds, governments typically respond as if they are in the position that Pius IX enjoyed when the doctrine of papal infallibility was being enunciated. He could say, incontrovertibly, that "before I was Pope, I believed he was infallible; now that I am Pope, I can feel it". Yet however well suited infallibility may be to matters of divinity, it appears to perform less well in the governance of ordinary mortals.

Of course, analysis of evidence has not completely disappeared. The tax review is, by all reports, doing an excellent job. In social policy, too, there is increased interest in careful analysis of data and in experimentation. But tax reform is an area where many interests are diffuse, rather than powerful and concentrated.

As for indigenous Australians, welfare recipients and the mentally ill, they are among the weakest constituencies in the country. Could it be that we are willing to carefully analyse our policies for the weak but would rather buy silence, cut deals, trade favours with the strong? A policy of being strong with the weak and weak with the strong is a recipe for inefficiency and inequity.

Ultimately, hypocrisy is the highest homage that virtue can be paid by vice. Statements of devotion to evidence are no substitute for policy based on sound principle, clear goals and careful consideration of options, and that is not merely open to independent scrutiny but genuinely invites it, especially for decisions where powerful interests are at stake. That is hardly the easy or always popular road; but as all the evidence shows, the alternative brings only ultimate failure, with much needless pain along the way.

More HERE

Dangerous bureaucratic secrecy

THE revelation that Anthony Albanese, as an opposition frontbencher with a keen interest in Sydney airport, apparently ignored former Customs officer Allan Kessing's legitimate and serious concerns over security flaws at the nation's busiest airport highlights the inadequacy of the Rudd government's proposed whistleblower reforms. In particular, it demonstrates that making federal MPs authorised recipients of public interest disclosures by public servants is no substitute for extending legal protection to whistleblowers, who draw serious examples of maladministration to public attention.

Before drawing up legislation, Special Minister of State Joe Ludwig is considering the report of the House of Representatives legal and constitutional affairs committee, chaired by government backbencher Mark Dreyfus QC. The report recommends an elaborate new system for handling whistleblowers' complaints inside the public sector. Complainants would be protected from prosecution only if their complaints were directed to their own public service agency, to an outside public agency such as the Ombudsman or Public Service Commissioner, or to federal members of parliament.

Unless they were exposing an immediate and serious threat to public health or safety, public servants leaking to journalists would remain liable for criminal prosecution and up to two years' jail under the notorious section 70 of the Commonwealth Crimes Act. The section provides no defences, even if the information made public is in the public interest.

Mr Kessing, a former member of Sydney airport's border security team, received a criminal record under section 70 after being convicted of leaking reports outlining lax airport security. He has consistently asserted his innocence. The publication of the reports, in The Australian in May 2005, led to the Wheeler review, which confirmed the parlous state of security at our major airports.

One of the most worrying aspects of the issue is that while the documents at the heart of the affair remained inside the Customs bureaucracy, nothing was done to address the problems. Once the documents were published, however, the Howard government spent $200 million trying to fix the problems, although a brawl between two bikie gangs at Sydney's domestic terminal in March suggested much remains to be done.

Mr Kessing approached Mr Albanese two months before the reports appeared in The Australian out of frustration that the Customs bureaucracy had suppressed and ignored the issue. His disclosure today to legal affairs editor Chris Merritt about approaching Mr Albanese in vain drives home a vital point that apparently escaped the Dreyfus committee. That is, politicians, like Customs officials, are prone to human frailty and do not automatically respond to every issue in the public interest, even in the face of serious disclosures by public servants. But they would be far more likely to address incidents of maladministration if legal structures encouraged them to do so.

Allowing politicians, senior bureaucrats or anyone else to ignore maladministration and remain safe in the knowledge that the law imposes criminal penalties on those who reveal their inaction to the media is a recipe for cover-ups and inertia. That, however, is precisely what will be encouraged if the federal government turns the Dreyfus committee's recommendations into law. It is also a concern that the government's shield laws for journalists fall short of protecting confidential sources, as the public interest requires.

Mr Kessing's disclosures are credible and all the more compelling because he has nothing to gain and everything to lose - including a second prosecution under section 70 - by going public now. For his part, Mr Albanese owes the travelling public, and his electorate of Grayndler, which borders Sydney airport, a detailed explanation of why he failed to act on Mr Kessing's information in 2005. At that time, Mr Albanese was a senior member of the opposition team, and the material provided revealed a serious problem in a key area of national security. Mr Albanese has been a strident critic of decisions about Sydney airport. In his maiden speech in 1996, he attacked the Hawke government's approval of the third runway, which increased aircraft noise for his constituents.

Aside from the questions Mr Albanese must answer, the wider issue this revelation has raised involves the public's right to know about issues of major importance, and the media's right to inform them. Until public sector whistleblowers are free to approach the media on serious matters of incompetence or corruption, the public interest will suffer.

SOURCE




Australia's Federal environmental protection laws have increased costs but delivered little benefit

Environmental regulation should be left to the States

THE centrepiece of Australia's environmental law largely duplicates existing regulations, provides little extra protection and has added more than $820 million in additional costs to business since it came into force nine years ago, an Australian National University survey shows. The ANU Centre for Environmental Law surveyed 155 individuals and companies that had been subject to the approvals processes of the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. It found that rather than leading to improved outcomes, the EPBC regime had left project proponents saddled with up to $2.2m in costs.

The government has made much of its decision to cut business red tape and encourage major projects, yet the survey found the EPBC regime has hit "major infrastructure, mining and urban development activities, the environmental impacts of which are already regulated under other regimes".

The EPBC legislation was designed to create a national scheme of environment, heritage and threatened species protection. It gives the states responsibility for matters of state and local significance, but allows the commonwealth to intervene in matters of national significance. The survey found that "where actions have been regulated, there is evidence the regime is not adding significant environmental value. "The concentration of the environmental impact assessment regime on large infrastructure, oil, gas, mining and urban development projects has stunted its capacity to generate significant environmental gains. "These types of activity are already subject to other federal, state and territory regulatory processes."

The survey said the average cost of the environmental impact process to project proponents varied between $660,000 and $2.2m. "The inability to identify clear environmental benefits from the environmental impact assessment regime has led to questions being raised about its cost effectiveness." Industry groups have already claimed the commonwealth role had added little to the environmental protection achieved through existing processes, but instead burdened business and taxpayers with significant compliance costs.

Australian Chamber of Commerce & Industry director Greg Evans said the survey showed more needed to be done to reduce state and federal overlap. He called on the commonwealth government to restrict its role to "strategic national significance issues", making sure Australia conformed with its international obligations: "There's an issue of whether the commonwealth needs to get involved in a project by project basis."

Environment Minister Peter Garrett referred to the complexities of the act on several occasions while finalising his decision to approve the giant Gorgon gas project off Western Australia last month. A review of the legislation headed by former Department of Defence chief Allan Hawke is due by the end of next month.

A spokesman for Mr Garrett said yesterday most of the study related to how the environmental impact assessment process had been implemented in the Howard years. He pointed to the signing of bilateral agreements with the states for environmental assessments. "Assessments conducted under bilateral agreements cut out unnecessary duplication and are a more efficient way of ensuring we uphold important state and commonwealth environmental protection," he said.

Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt said the Coalition strongly supported further simplification. "Many of the states duplicate the federal process," he said. "We will be working towards a single national approvals process covering matters under the federal jurisdiction."

SOURCE





Queensland's brainless medical bureaucracy

One heroic doctor worked 168 days straight. We're killing people, say tired doctors. The tales of incompetence and bureaucratic bloodymindedness from Queensland Health are legion but the disastrous hours many doctors are asked to work is something that has been going on for decades so is probably Queensland Health's worst bureaucratic excess. The EU now stipulates that no doctor may work for more than 48 hours per week. When will Australia catch up?

ANDREW Reedy's devotion to duty is legendary in rural doctor circles. Even his weary colleagues, beat after days and days without a break, say they can't match the man in Millmerran. Dr Reedy said he worked almost six months without a day off in the Darling Downs town in southeast Queensland. He counts them off – 168 days between October 2005 and March 2006. And he wasn't sitting around checking runny noses and writing referrals.

Dr Reedy was on call, meaning he could never be more than 15 minutes away from Millmerran's 15-bed hospital in case of an emergency. Queensland Health did not have a doctor to replace him. So the father of four young children, married to a modern version of Superwoman, ploughed on and on and on.

How did he feel towards the end of the marathon? "Tired, fed up, isolated, questioning my marriage stability," Dr Reedy said. "If I wanted a day off, I would have had to walk away and the town would not have had a doctor. "Queensland Health banks significantly on the goodwill of their employees. They know we won't walk away."

There have been times when Dr Reedy has shivered with sickness. But still he has been called in to the hospital. On one occasion, he stood in the waiting room, produced a thermometer and told the gathered patients that if they could top his fever, he would see them immediately. If they could not, they should go home, take Panadol and come back the next day. No one beat Dr Reedy's mark of 39.9 degrees.

Millmerran now has two doctors, enabling Dr Reedy more family time. But it's not much more time. And the fatigue that has bedevilled the minds of Dr Reedy and many of his colleagues remains one of the key issues for the doctors demanding better conditions from Queensland Health.

Dr Reedy can recall the murkiness when his memory has fizzled. And he admits that he has made mistakes. "There have been times when I've had two to three hours' sleep in four days. I've written incorrect drug orders. I've written incorrect drug amounts. Instead of writing 20mg, I've written 20g," Dr Reedy said. "This is why I rely on my nursing staff. I say that I need them to be checking everything that I do."

Wouldn't it be much easier for him to pack it in, head for a bigger place and revel in a cosier private practice? "If I didn't love my job and I didn't care about the people I treated, I would have left long ago," he said.

Dr Reedy's passion for his career extends to his demands for a fair deal as doctors fight for better conditions. "This is not about the monetary value. It's ensuring that we get what we are entitled to. It's about the conditions," he said. "There are some days when they could offer me an extra $10,000 to work for a day and I would say I would rather have my day off."

SOURCE






Law backs breastfeeding mothers

I think a lot of anti-discrimination legislation is oppressive and wrong but I like this bit

REFUSING a woman the right to breastfeed in public is against the law in Queensland, according to the state's Anti-Discrimination Commissioner Susan Booth.

Last week The Sunday Mail revealed one in four people believed breastfeeding in public was unacceptable. But Ms Booth said women had the right to breastfeed their children in public places. "Queensland's anti-discrimination laws protected their right to do so," she said. "Mothers who breastfeed their babies at work, in education and in cafes, restaurants and shops and public buildings are protected from discrimination under section seven of the Queensland Anti-Discrimination Act 1991."

Ms Booth said each year the Commission received several complaints from people about women breastfeeding in public. "Often the complaints are about women breastfeeding in restaurants. Apparently they don't like watching a baby feed when they are eating." she said.

Ms Booth said the Newspoll survey revealed an unacceptable double standard. "There is general consensus amongst health professionals that breast is best for babies."

SOURCE

A True Tale of Two Houses

By Sara Hudson

Once upon a time in a community called Baniyala, the houses were old, there weren't enough houses, and there was no house for the school teacher. However, the community didn't have very much money and they didn't know very much about building houses.

So they spoke to someone who knew about building houses to see if he could help them build one. He could, and with the help of his friends, he managed to raise enough money to buy some materials and talked some people into giving materials cheaply. The people in the community helped build the house because they knew if they didn't, it wouldn't get built. The house only cost around $250,000 to build because most of the labour was voluntary.

Meanwhile in another community, people were waiting for the government to build them houses under the new Strategic Indigenous Housing and Infrastructure Program. They didn't consider building the houses themselves because the government had always done everything for them. The government wouldn't build the houses without the community giving them some land.

After lots of meetings, the community agreed to lease some land. Now the government had to find the people to build the houses. This took a while. Finally, they found three organisations to be part of their Alliance. These partners were keen to start building, but the government couldn't decide who was in charge and how much it would cost to build the houses. They argued for a while and then got someone else to manage the program.

By now, there were six layers of managers and $45.54 million spent but not one house had been built. The community was unhappy. Lots of people had come and talked to them about the sort of houses they would like, but no building had started. The government wrote a paper saying they were three months behind but would catch up and build the houses for $450,000 each.

And then the wet season started.

Moral: People should not wait for the government to do something.

Note: In the Northern Territory, people living on communally owned land cannot borrow money from banks to build their own homes because they do not have individual title over the land. Individual 99-year leases would solve this, but they also could raise the money independently of banks and build their own houses. Except they have been led to believe that the government is responsible for housing and that private homeownership is not for them.

The above is part of a press release dated Sept. 4 from the Centre for Independent Studies. Enquiries to cis@cis.org.au. Snail mail: PO Box 92, St Leonards, NSW, Australia 1590. Telephone ph: +61 2 9438 4377 or fax: +61 2 9439 7310






A cloud of unnecessary debt hangs heavy over Australia

By Joe Hockey, the federal shadow treasurer, who says that the Rudd Government must recalibrate its spending, or Australia's future is gloomy

ONE of the biggest mistakes a government can make is to stubbornly continue with a policy that is no longer necessary or beneficial for the nation. This is the position that the Rudd Government finds itself in with its overblown response to the global financial crisis – a multibillion-dollar economic stimulus that is being financed with borrowed money.

The latest national accounts show the Australian economy grew in the second quarter of the year by 0.6 per cent. Let's not forget that many factors contributed to getting Australia through this downturn in good shape.

Australia had a strong and well-regulated financial system, largely due to financial reforms undertaken by the Howard government. Our banks were well-capitalised with relatively low exposure to subprime loans. The depreciation of the Australian dollar in the second half of last year helped keep our exports competitive on world markets. China's solid growth continued to support demand for Australian resources and the large and rapid reduction in interest rates boosted household and business spending power.

Most importantly, the Coalition's sound financial management during its 11 years in government left the country with a world-leading balance sheet: no net debt and money in the bank. We entered the global financial crisis as the envy of the developed world. In less than 18 months, the Rudd Government has managed to turn Australia's strong fiscal position upside-down.

From the outset, the Coalition has argued that the Government was spending too much. In what can only be described as a massive over-reaction to events offshore, the Government whipped out the national credit card, announced to the markets that it was increasing its credit limit and committed taxpayers to more than $52 billion in "stimulus" spending and at least another $50 billion increase in spending over four years.

Treasurer Wayne Swan and Prime Minister Kevin Rudd are always quick to talk up the effects of their stimulus package, but at the same time as the Government was pushing the pedal to the metal in its spending, the Reserve Bank was doing likewise with monetary policy. Interest rates dropped, with home borrowers receiving most of the benefits, although small business received only minor rate reductions.

In recent weeks the Reserve Bank has been sending clear signals to the Government that it would soon increase interest rates. Some economists predict a rate rise as early as next month. The Treasurer has said on many occasions that monetary and fiscal policy must work in tandem. Yet now we face the imminent prospect of the two major levers of economic policy heading off in opposite directions.

The Government's stubborn refusal to change the course of its own spending policy has thrown the recalibration burden squarely on to the Reserve Bank. This will mean higher mortgage interest rates. Some financial commentators are forecasting the RBA's cash rate to hit 5.5 per cent to 6 per cent by the end of 2011. If the rate rises are passed on by the banks, it means an interest cost increase of $9000 a year on a $300,000 mortgage – an out-of-pocket expense of up to $175 a week for working families.

The increased cost of rate rises on overdrafts may force some small business owners to let staff go. Undoubtedly it will hinder their ability to hire staff as the economy continues to recover. In the face of an improving global and domestic economy, the Government must recalibrate its spending and allow fiscal policy to work in tandem with monetary policy as the economy recovers. The alternative is clearly higher interest rates and higher taxes to pay off the massive debt.

The refusal of the Prime Minister and Treasurer to do so reveals its spending motives as purely political and not in the best economic interests of the nation. The blame for any interest rate rise will therefore lie squarely with the Rudd Government. Its inability to make tough decisions will pose the greatest threat to Australia's recovery.

SOURCE







Biased Leftist researchers can't see Leftist bias

Anybody who thinks the ABC is right wing lives in cloud-cuckoo land. This study just shows how far Left ANU academics are -- which is also no surprise

Newspapers are left wing, television is right wing, and the media as a whole tends to favour the Coalition. And surprisingly, according to researchers from the Australian National University, the ABC Television news is the most pro-Coalition of them all.

Former Liberal prime minister John Howard railed against the alleged left-wing bias of the ABC, but the researchers found Aunty was more likely to favour his side. Researchers pored over news stories from 1996 to 2007 to establish if the media was biased. The results, released today, point to the media being generally middle-of-the-road, with the Coalition tending to win out.

Researchers found journalists were "a centrist bunch". The exception was ABC TV news, which "had a significant slant towards the Coalition". Newspapers were more pro-Labor, while talkback radio and television were more pro-Coalition. Melbourne's The Age newspaper had the most "slanted" pro-Labor headlines. [That bit is correct]

When it came to editorial slant and donations by the media to political parties, the Coalition was laughing all the way to the polls. More than three-quarters of newspaper editorials endorsed the Coalition. The Herald Sun and The West Australian newspapers endorsed them 100 per cent of the time.

Media companies donated significantly more money - 39 per cent more - to the Coalition than to Labor. Every media company that donated favoured the Coalition. Of course, the Coalition was in power for the period studied.

The researchers found that the more a political party spent on advertising with a media outlet, the more favourable the media coverage. "It is consistent with the simple notion that advertising dollars may be an explicit or implicit payment to proprietors for favourable coverage," the study said. But it said the link could also be explained by political parties advertising with media outlets that were slanted in their favour.

Study author and ANU economist Andrew Leigh concluded that journalists were centrists, but editors were "more likely to take a party line". The study suggested "slant is determined at an editorial level rather than through pressure or article selection by journalists".

The researchers measured bias by counting the number of mentions of left-leaning or right-leaning intellectuals. They also rated the "slant" of front-page election stories and headlines, counted electoral endorsements and tallied political donations. The ABC's Radio National was the only media outlet to score dead even when it came to favouring left-leaning or right-leaning intellectuals.

SOURCE






A great way to get people out of their cars

Bus driver suspended after being caught reading while driving. But how long had this been going on? This is just another reason why people feel safer in their cars. And when the drivers concerned get let off with a slap on the wrist, we see how uninterested governments are in protecting the public. It's only their own long lunches that they care about. All the rest is puffery

A SYDNEY bus driver has been suspended without pay after being filmed by a terrified passenger reading a magazine at the wheel, occasionally glancing at the road. The mobile phone footage - taken on the 4am Westbus service from Toongabbie to Parramatta - shows the driver holding the magazine and turning its pages whilst glancing up at the road.

A Westbus spokeswoman said the company was "alarmed'' when it was shown the mobile phone footage, The Daily Telegraph reports. "We immediately downloaded our CCTV footage from that bus,'' she said. "Westbus takes very seriously any compromise to the safety of passengers, drivers and other road users. "We have tried various means to contact the driver today but have been unsuccessful. "We must speak with him prior to resolving this matter, but in the meantime, he has been stood down without pay effective immediately.''

The news comes after The Daily Telegraph revealed last month that a State Transit Authority bus driver reading a book while driving a packed peak-hour service in May was let off with a warning. A passenger who boarded the bus on William St watched as the driver sat stationary - despite having a green traffic light - because he was so enthralled in the novel.

The passenger, who did not want to be named, then photographed the driver for the next 10 minutes as he crawled along Elizabeth St barely looking up from the novel on the steering wheel.

SOURCE






Right to reject medical care upheld

DOCTORS and paramedics must withhold life-saving medical care if a patient has previously made a ''living will'' that clearly states they do not want a specific treatment, such as kidney dialysis or a blood transfusion. A landmark NSW Supreme Court decision has upheld the right to refuse medical treatment, even if the decision was made only in anticipation, and well before treatment was needed.

Doctors' groups have welcomed the decision, saying it allows them to respect a patient's wishes without fear of prosecution or litigation by relatives. In fact doctors and paramedics who treat a patient against their expressed refusal could be charged with assault and battery or be sued for providing unwanted treatment.

The case concerned Mr A, a Jehovah's Witness, who had been admitted to an emergency department in a critical state on July 1. He subsequently developed renal failure and went into a coma, kept alive only by mechanical ventilation and dialysis. On July 14 the hospital discovered that almost a year earlier Mr A had prepared an advanced care directive that specifically refused dialysis. Aware that stopping the treatment would bring on death, the Hunter New England Area Health Service sought an urgent hearing to determine if the directive was valid.

Justice McDougall said that while there was no legislation covering the issue, the common law right to refuse treatment stood - regardless of its basis on religious, social or moral grounds, and whether or not it was a sensible, rational decision based on the relative risks and benefits.

Furthermore, the directive is still valid despite patients not being informed at the time of writing of the consequences of their decision. ''If an advanced care directive is made by a capable adult, and is clear and unambiguous, and extends to the situation at hand, it must be respected,'' he said. ''What my orders did was recognise his right to make that decision … it is no recognition of a 'right to die'.'' An exception could be made if a pregnant woman's refusal of treatment would result in the death of her unborn child.

If a doctor suspected that a directive was made under duress, or the person was incapable of making such a decision, health authorities should ask the court to decide if the directive was valid but administer life-saving treatment in the meantime, he said.

The director of medico-legal relations at the Australian Medical Association (NSW), Sarah Dahlenburg, said doctors faced a stressful dilemma when faced with an advanced care directive, especially when relatives wanted treatment to continue. ''A doctor can now feel comfortable telling the family that they are abiding by the wishes of the patient, and if the family wants to do something about it it's them who should take up the legal case,'' she said.

But a partner at TressCox Lawyers, Don Munro, said hospitals should be reluctant to rely on the Mr A judgement. It would be safer to get an urgent declaration from a judge on each case. ''The legal costs involved would be nothing compared a lawsuit from an aggrieved relative,'' he said.

NSW Health said advanced care directives were legally binding and could not be overruled by family members. But they could not contain instructions for euthanasia or assisted suicide.

SOURCE