‘Sick of it’: Catholic women vent frustration over sex, power and abuse

Sometimes I regret being an academic with long experience in survey research. It means that much of what I read stinks of dishonesty. The survey reported below is a case in point. The originators of the survey say bluntly that "the survey does not claim to be representative of all Catholic women" yet you get no idea of that in the report below. You get the impression that what was found DID represent what Catholic women think.

But it is a basic axiom of survey research that to find out about a given population by survey research you have to draw the sample in such a way that it IS representative of the population you want to study, otherwise it could tell you all sorts of untrue things about the population concerned.

And sampling or the lack of it is not the only problem on this occasion. We read here that the questions in the survey were largely leading questions, not fair ones. So the survey tells us only what its authors wanted to hear. To be blunt about it, it is nothing more than Leftist propaganda. It tells us nothing truthful


The largest study of Catholic women in the church’s 2000-year history has found they are hungry for reform. They resent their lack of decision-making power, want to follow their consciences on sex and contraception, and think the church should be more inclusive of the diverse and the divorced.

Australian researchers led the global study, to be presented at the Vatican on International Women’s Day, which also found women want to be allowed to preach, dislike priests promoting political agendas, and are concerned about a lack of transparency in church governance.

Theologian and sociologist of religion at the University of Newcastle Tracy McEwan co-authored the study, which surveyed 17,200 women from 14 countries.
Theologian and sociologist of religion at the University of Newcastle Tracy McEwan co-authored the study, which surveyed 17,200 women from 14 countries.CREDIT:FLAVIO BRANCALEONE

“There was this underlying sense of hurt, and certainly this feeling of being voiceless and ignored,” said co-author Tracy McEwan, a theologian and sociologist of religion at the University of Newcastle. “These are not women on the edge. These are women in the church. Being Catholic is important to them, and they are struggling.”

The study, which surveyed 17,200 women from 140 countries, comes as Pope Francis leads the church in a discussion about whether women should have a greater role in its governance and ceremonies. He has ruled out female priests, but the deaconate – someone who assists priests during mass and can preach the homily – is a possibility.

McEwan will present the findings to female ambassadors to the Holy See on Wednesday. They will include Australia’s representative, Chiara Porro, who helped organise the presentation. The first woman ever to be allowed to vote with the Vatican’s synod of bishops, Xaviere sister Nathalie Becquart, has also been briefed on the research.

The survey results show 84 per cent of women supported reform in the church, and two-thirds wanted radical reform. Almost three in 10 said there would be no place for them without it. There was significant concern about abuses of power and spiritual harm, particularly by male clerics. “I cling on to the church by my fingernails,” said one respondent.

Almost eight in 10 agreed women should be fully included at all levels of church leadership, and more than three-quarters agreed that women should be able to give the homily, a commentary on the gospel during services. Two-thirds said women should be eligible for the priesthood. “I’m ashamed of my church when I see only men in procession,” said one respondent.

More than four in five said LGBTQ people should be included in all activities, and just over half strongly agreed same-sex couples were entitled to a religious marriage. Seven in 10 said remarriage should be allowed after civil divorce, and three-quarters agreed that women should have freedom of conscience on their sexual and reproductive decisions.

Some respondents pointed out that they do much of the work in the church, but get no recognition or say. “If every woman in every parish stopped cleaning, cooking, dusting, typing, directing ... for just one week, every parish would have to close,” said one. “Yet, why do women have so little real power?”

Co-author Kathleen McPhillips, a sociologist at the University of Newcastle, said she was surprised at the enthusiasm with which women embraced the survey. “What it showed is they’re really sick of it,” she said. “They want to be there, but they’re sick of not being able to contribute. In their secular lives, they can do so much more.

“It’s still the largest religion in the world. It’s hugely important we understand it. The church itself hasn’t been interested in studying its own population.”

The results varied between countries. Australia was more conservative than the global average on some of the indicators; 74 per cent of women said they wanted reform, compared with the global average of 84. Appetite for change was strongest in the Catholic strongholds of Ireland and Spain, as well as Germany.

But the tension has been evident in the Australian church and boiled over at a historic plenary council meeting last year, at which bishops failed to pass two motions aimed at empowering women in the church. About 60 delegates staged a silent protest. The motions were re-worded and passed.

Younger women were also more conservative than older ones, with the 18- to 25-year-old age group least likely to want reform, according to the survey, and the over 70-year-olds most likely. The eldest women were also more likely to support same-sex marriage and the homily being preached by women.

But even among conservative women, there was concern about having their contribution respected. “They were articulating the idea that you want women to be a certain way, that’s OK, but give us our due, give us our voice,” said McEwan.

The church is a hierarchical patriarchy, but McEwan hopes the results will get through to those who will ultimately make the decisions. “I’m hoping that presenting this major report to the women ambassadors and to the more senior women in the Vatican will have an impact, and it will feed through,” she said.

Catholicism is the largest religion in Australia. They make up 20 per cent of the population (women make up slightly more than half), and Sydney is its most Catholic city. The church is the country’s largest non-government provider of health care, education and welfare, and employs almost two per cent of the nation’s workers.

Archbishop of Sydney Anthony Fisher was contacted for comment, but a spokesman declined, saying he was in Rome.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/sick-of-it-catholic-women-vent-frustration-over-sex-power-and-abuse-20230303-p5cp6r.html

*************************************************

'Not suitable for treatment': FOI documents reveal Garran Surge Centre fears

Canberra's multi-million dollar pop-up emergency department set up in response to the pandemic was not suitable for treating infectious COVID patients, a damning review of the centre found.

Documents, released to The Canberra Times under freedom of information, show a review of the centre expressed concerns about ventilation and airflow.

Emails between health authorities show the centre was not suitable for infectious patients during the ACT's second lockdown "without significant work being carried out".

The pop-up hospital was designed based on guidelines developed for facilities in low- and middle-income countries and a review said it did not meet all national standards, documents also showed.

Both the government and Aspen Medical, the contractor which built the centre, have defended the venue, saying it was built during a medical emergency when global health systems were overwhelmed and the spread of COVID was thought to largely be from droplets.

The ACT government has said the emergency department, which was designed to have 50 beds including six resuscitation bays, was never designed to be a "ward area" for overnight patients.

A review conducted in October 2021 by consultants showed concerns about negative pressures in the centre, along with a lack of filtration and "non-compliant exhaust discharges".

"The facility is generally not suitable for treatment of COVID-19 infected patients as it is," the review said.

The review of the centre also found there was a fire risk if ventilators were used within the facility.

"The high use of ventilators that could be expected in a 'ward area' for COVID-19 patients the environment [sic] could be oxygen enriched increasing the fire risks and so places extra emphasis [on] fire related systems," the review said.

But a spokeswoman said this review was commissioned so health authorities could consider a "revised model of care", including whether the centre could be used to treat patients overnight.

"CHS consultants undertook an assessment of the building mechanical services infrastructure at the Garran Surge Centre in late 2021, as part of due diligence, to assess whether the scope of services within the building could be expanded for a short-term, revised model of care," a spokeswoman said

"The decision was made not to progress these works to avoid additional building changes. This did not affect the health, safety and wellbeing of staff and patients in the building for the services it was being used for.

"The facility was constructed in April 2020 and was not designed to be a ward area."

'Acting now to increase capacity of our health services'
The Garran Surge Centre, which only closed last week, was initially built to be an emergency department for COVID patients.

But it was never used for this purpose. Instead, it served as a vaccination centre, a testing centre and a COVID-specific walk-in centre.

It was initially expected to cost $23 million but only cost $14 million. It was built in just 37 days on Garran Oval in early 2020. It was built to specifically handle COVID patients in the scenario where existing emergency departments did not have enough capacity to meet demand.

When announcing the project in April 2020, ACT Chief Minister Andrew Barr said the project was aimed at preventing horror scenes overseas where authorities had to race to set up makeshift hospitals.

"We don't want to be in the sort of situation other cities around the world are currently in," he said.

"We are acting now to increase the capacity of our health services so we can continue to provide emergency care for Canberrans throughout this pandemic."

Authorities had hoped the hospital would never need to be used.

By the time the centre was completed in May 2020 the territory's first wave of COVID was largely finished. There was no community transmission in Canberra until August 2021, which plunged the ACT into a nine-week lockdown.

It was during this second wave that authorities started to consider whether it would need to be used to treat patients.

The government spokeswoman said the centre never had to be used as the demand on the emergency department was "manageable" as long as a range of hospital diversions were in place.

https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8106399/not-suitable-for-treatment-foi-documents-reveal-garran-surge-centre-fears/

*******************************************************

To defeat climate change, Australia must do the impossible

The argument between Labor and the Greens about new gas projects is strange and pointless. New projects must be included in the government’s emissions reduction target, which doesn’t change.

But it’s true that new mining and industrial projects of almost any sort will make it harder, and new fossil fuels will mean achieving that target goes from being almost impossible to impossible.

None of what the government has said about Australia’s latest plan to reduce emissions, or the media coverage of it, has properly conveyed its difficulty.

The politics has been all about the wonderful opportunity of the green energy economy, and how Australia is going to be a big winner.

This is mostly flim-flam, and sets the country up for a nasty shock.

Sure there will be opportunities – mainly digging up and shipping the lithium, copper and nickel needed for batteries, but we can’t make batteries here because of the carbon emissions that would cause, taking us over our limit.

But as hard as the emissions reduction task is going to be, it will have to be done. There is no choice, and it would be helpful if the government told the truth about it.

The plan is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 43 per cent from Australia’s 2005 level by 2030, and to net zero by 2050.

That was an exercise in split-the-difference back-engineering: 43 per cent was roughly halfway between the Coalition’s 28 per cent target and the Green’s 75 per cent, so they started with that number and worked backwards. Spreadsheet jockeys were paid to assure them, and us, that it could be done, no problem, which they duly did.

There’s no mention of “apart from new gas projects” in the fine print. It’s unconditional, and it looks like an election promise that can’t be broken … unlike those about taxes.

Much of the work of emissions reduction has to be done by the 215 firms that each belch more than 100,000 tonnes of carbon dioxide a year into the atmosphere and are responsible for 28 per cent of Australia’s emissions. They have to cut their total emissions by about a third over seven years, from this year’s estimated 143 million tonnes to 100 million.

Sitting comfortably atop that list of very anxious big emitters is Woodside’s North West Shelf gas project, at 6.78 million tonnes last year. The company’s huge, lucrative Scarborough project is due to come onstream in 2026. and Woodside has said its emissions will be 880 million tonnes over 30 years, or about 30 million a year, on average.

All going well, and assuming no other new projects, that 4.9 per cent a year legislated requirement will have reduced the emissions of the 215 to 117 million tonnes by 2026. But suddenly, thanks to Woodside and Scarborough, emissions are back to something like 147 million tonnes – and now with only four years to go!

That presumably means the task – for everyone – in the last four years between 2026 and 2030 is a 9 per cent reduction per year, not 4.9 per cent, which is hard enough.

Pressure to reduce production

It’s actually amazing that the other 214 big emitters haven’t already marched on Canberra to support the Greens’ demand for no new projects, although they’re probably more worried about their own gas supplies.

Commonwealth Bank commodities analyst Vivek Dhar has figured out that the businesses covered by the safeguard mechanism will need to reduce their production by an average of 0.3 per cent a year to meet the 4.9 per cent a year reduction.

Considering that executives are paid bonuses to increase production and launch new projects to satisfy shareholders, that is going to require a very big and unlikely change in corporate culture and remuneration.

It results from the collective need, if they don’t reduce production, also calculated by Vivek Dhar, to reduce emissions intensity – that is, carbon dioxide per unit of production – by 35 per cent by 2030.

The National Electricity Market (NEM) is an example of what can be done on this score. Thanks to a huge increase in renewable power generation, the NEM has cut its emissions intensity in the seven years from 2014 to 2021 – by 24 per cent.

So the 215 largest Australian emitters are being asked to do almost 50 per cent better than the NEM has done with all the renewable electricity that’s been added to its grid.

They won’t cut production and can’t cut emissions intensity that much, so they’ll buy lots of offsets to obey the law, or Australian carbon credit units (ACCUs) that are generated by planting trees or not cutting them down.

Anticipating massive demand for ACCUs leading to a brutal carbon tax, the government has said that the price will be capped at $75 a tonne and then increased by CPI plus 2 per cent per year after that.

But that’s not quite true. That’s just the price at which government itself will trade them, as buyer and seller of last resort. Others can buy and sell them for whatever price they want.

Trees, millions of trees

And if the non-government market price goes above $75, no one will want to sell to the government at $75. So how will Energy Minister Chris Bowen get hold of enough to satisfy what is likely to be enormous demand for cheap government ACCUs?

That’s not explained, but it looks like Mr Bowen will have to create them, like the Reserve Bank prints money, by planting trees! Presumably we’ll see harried public servants driving around in utes packed with seedlings and spades, planting trees on every spare bit of dirt they can find.

Without government forests springing up everywhere, it’s likely that two things will happen:

Companies in the safeguard mechanism will be forced to choose between cutting their production and losing market share to imports from countries with less rigorous climate change policies, or increasing their costs and prices by buying ACCUs

The non-government price of ACCUs will go very high indeed, which will be a new cost to businesses in the safeguard mechanism, or those that have voluntary committed to net zero by 2050 themselves, and have said they won’t engage in “greenwashing” by buying cheap, dodgy offsets from overseas.

Normally I’d say that when this rubber hits the road in five years’ time, and everyone realises how hard and expensive the carbon abatement task actually is, politicians will run a mile and the country will go off the whole idea and exhume Tony Abbott to repeal Labor’s legislation again.

Australia, and specifically the 215 hapless big emitters, will have to do the impossible, and the Prime Minister needs to start telling them and us that yesterday.

https://thenewdaily.com.au/opinion/2023/03/06/climate-carbon-target-kohler/

******************************************************

NSW Labor promises to slash $1.6bn from budget by cutting private labour hire

Wotta joke. They will use government employees instead? That will cost MORE

NSW opposition leader Chris Minns has vowed to cut the use of private external contractors by a quarter if Labor wins the state election in March. Photograph: Steven Saphore/AAP
New South Wales Labor says it will save the state’s budget $1.6bn by slashing the use of private labour hire, claiming government expenditure on third-party workers has grown more than $1bn over the past decade.

On Monday, opposition leader Chris Minns will announce Labor would cut the use of private external contractors by a quarter if it wins election later this month, vowing to reinvest the extra savings into health and education spending.

Labor said it had commissioned an analysis showing the use of contingent labour had grown by 19% a year since 2016, reaching as high as $1.8bn a year in the current financial year.

It said its own analysis showed labour hire costs would reach $2bn a year by 2025, after the NSW auditor general last week released a report which found $1bn had been spent on private consultants since 2017.

The auditor found in many cases departments did “not procure and manage” the cost of private consultants effectively, and most “do not have a strategic approach to using consultants, or systems for managing or evaluating their performance”.

During his campaign launch speech on Sunday, Minns also said he would cut back on the use of consulting firms.

“We’ll end that exorbitant waste, we’ll find savings to make sure our public services run better. The truth is it’s far too top heavy, and the money must be directed where it’s needed – to those who deliver the services,” he said.

Ahead in the polls less than three weeks out from the 25 March state election, Labor is seeking to paint the Coalition as reckless on spending. When Dominic Perrottet finally ruled out further privatisations after weeks of Labor pressure, the opposition accused the government of racking up billions in gross debt over its ambitious infrastructure pipeline.

Minns said while Labor “recognises that we will have to work with the private sector in government” he wanted to prioritise getting “the budget back under control while reinvesting the savings to repair our schools and hospitals”.

“We will only spend within our means, not make promises no one believes and government can’t keep,” he said.

The analysis on labour hire costs shows the use of third-party firms is predicted to hit about $2.1bn by 2025, up from about $700m in 2016.

The shadow treasurer, Daniel Mookhey, said the use of third-party labour had seen the public service “run by a shadow army of non-permanent workers”.

“With a severe shortage of critical workers across NSW, Mr Perrottet is spending an enormous amount of taxpayer money filling ICT and administrative tasks with temporary workers,” he said.

“The Public Service Commission said as early as 2017 that contingent labour should only be used when it is the most efficient and effective option available to respond to an agency’s business needs. It also recommended that agencies use contingent labour when informed by proper workforce planning.

“Premier Perrottet and his treasurer have not done the work to comply with these recommendations.”

The proposed $1.6bn saving would be used to fund previous Labor commitments to create 10,000 fixed teaching roles.

It comes after Labor announced a suite of measures aimed at public sector workers at its campaign launch on Sunday, including a$76m promise to encourage students into healthcare by offering $12,000 subsidies on university as well as a $93m commitment to hire 1,000 apprentices in government-owned entities like Sydney Water.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/mar/06/nsw-labor-promises-to-slash-16bn-from-budget-by-cutting-private-labour-hire

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***************************************

When hate speech is OK

When it emerged that a 2022 Sydney Festival dance production was being supported with a $20,000 grant from the Israeli embassy, more than two dozen performers boycotted the festival and demanded it be shut down for “normalising apartheid”.

When it was revealed that this month’s Adelaide Writers Week would feature authors who have published what reads like violent abuse towards supporters of Israel, mocked Jews over the Holocaust and expressed support for Vladimir Putin, the response from festival organisers and participants was of a different kind.

The show must go on.

In the past fortnight, Adelaide Writers Week has become a national flashpoint for those who believe that, far from being challenging spaces which invite the exchange of multiple ideas, arts festivals are now captive to fixed left-wing orthodoxies, including questioning whether the state of Israel has the right even to exist.

The furore invites broader questions. Are there limits to free speech? At what point does robust free speech descend into hate speech? Do the social media ramblings of a person count towards an assessment of their output and character?

Key Jewish-Australian organisation have been appalled by the conduct of Adelaide Writers Week and its director Louise Adler, the former chief executive of Melbourne University Publishing, in crafting a line-up which they say gives a platform to bigots.

Adler is curating her first Adelaide Writers Week under a three-year deal, having taking the reins from previous director Jo Dyer, who ran unsuccessfully as a teal candidate for the SA seat of Boothby at last year’s federal election.

Critics of AWW say that not only is the festival stacked in favour of the Palestinian cause, it has rolled out the red carpet to people they regard as extremists.

Their anger is shared by Australian Ukrainians, who in the lead-up to the first anniversary of Russia’s illegal invasion were dismayed to learn Adelaide was playing host to an author who believes the continuing war is the fault of the Ukrainian government and people.

The fallout so far has been significant – three authors have cancelled in protest, sponsors have threatened to pull funding, The Adelaide Advertiser has removed all its staff from the daily “Breakfast with Papers” program, and Premier Peter Malinauskas has been urged to intervene.

The two authors who sparked the dramas are Jerusalem-based Palestinian poet Mohammed El-Kurd and Palestinian-American author Susan Abulhawa.

Aged just 24, El-Kurd is hailed by his supporters as one of the most important new voices in Palestinian literature, his 2021 debut collection Rifqa credited with “laying bare the brutality of Israeli settler colonialism”. He also works as the Palestine correspondent for The Nation and in 2021 was named, with his twin sister Muna, as one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time Magazine.

El-Kurd’s grace as a poet is less evident in his tweeting, where he has described supporters of Israel as “sadistic barbaric neo-Nazi pigs” with an “unquenchable thirst for Palestinian blood”.

“I hope every one of them dies in the most torturous and slow ways,” he has tweeted. “I hope that they see their mothers suffering.”

He has ridiculed Jews for having to wear so much sunscreen – suggesting it proves they don’t belong in the Middle East – and made Holocaust references, including accusing Israel of “kristallnachting” the Palestinian people.

With this back catalogue of vitriol, it’s not surprising that the Anti-Defamation League and Executive Council of Australian Jewry have both written to the Adelaide Festival arguing that El-Kurd is not so much the Wordsworth of the West Bank but a peddler of anti-Semitic abuse.

His fellow author Abulhawa is also well regarded as a writer; her latest book Against the Loveless World lauded as a moving exploration of statelessness and resistance in the context of the Palestinian struggle.

But again, less elegant on Twitter, where she has written “It’s possible to be Jewish and a Nazi at the same time” and described Israel as “the only ‘nation’ that systematically kidnaps and tortures children daily”.

It is Abulhawa’s views on Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine that have caused the most blowback for AWW. In multiple tweets, Abulhawa has declared the war is Ukraine’s fault for trying to join NATO and parroted the Moscow line with a tweet which simply read: “Denazify Ukraine.”

She has described Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as “a depraved Zionist trying to ignite World War III” and said: “This man is no hero. He’s mad and far more dangerous than Putin.”

It was for this reason that three Ukrainian authors have withdrawn from the festival, all of them writing to Adler saying they would not share a platform with someone who peddled Russian propaganda in defence of genocide.

“I feel saddened that calls to be sensitive in relation to Ukrainians who have been attacked in this genocidal war and to not give a platform to voices that repeat Kremlin propaganda are not always heard,” author Olesya Khromeychuk wrote.

Fellow author Kateryna Babkina wrote to Adler: “I’m afraid I can’t participate in any kind of event that gives voice to the person considering Ukrainians should give up their right to decide what to do with their destiny and their independent country and just become a ‘neutral nation’ pleasing Russian ambitions in order not to be killed.”

The fallout from all this has been acute for the Adelaide Festival. Board members have been lobbied urging them to intervene; sponsors Minter Ellison, PwC and IT firm Capgemini have demanded their signage be removed as they weigh future support for the festival; Malinauskas vowed not to attend any sessions involving the offending authors, despite grudgingly honouring a pre-made commitment to speak at the opening of the event.

But Malinauskas, who has Lithuanian ancestry from his refugee grandfather, has made no secret of his concern at the presence of the pair on the AWW line-up.

“There is a distinction between provoking thought and facilitating the spreading of a message that simply does not accord with basic human values,” he said. “That is worthy of contemplation for Writers Week.”

Adler has now made several public statements saying authors at AWW have been reminded that hate speech or bigotry of any kind will not be tolerated.

But she is sticking to her guns with the line-up on free speech grounds, arguing that it is vital that different ideas be put forward and contested.

“I am interested in creating a context for courageous and brave spaces where we can have civil dialogue and discussion about ideas that we may not all agree on,” Adler said.

“If we all gather together just to agree with one another or with people who share our views, well some people might enjoy that, but I don’t think that’s the point of a literary festival.”

Adler’s detractors laugh at the assertion of diversity, with former federal Labor MP Jewish-Australian Michael Danby noting there are seven Palestinian authors and not one Israeli at the event.

A quick look at the AWW political line-up does little to bolster Adler’s claims to it being a freewheeling orgy of disagreement. From the world of politics, Liberal moderate Amanda Vanstone will be joined at AWW by Bob Carr, Wayne Swan, Bob Brown, Steve Bracks, Gareth Evans, Sarah Hanson-Young, Maxine McKew, along with ACTU secretary Sally McManus and teals founder and funder Simon Holmes a Court.

If this is diversity, it is a brand of diversity which extends all the way along the ideological spectrum from the rabidly left-wing to considerably left-wing to somewhat left-wing.

In defending the presence of El-Kurd and Abulhawa, Adler has tried to draw a distinction between their published works and their social media posts, as if the tweets can almost be expunged from the record.

“Twitter is more for succinct targeted polemic rather than nuanced discussion,” she told this newspaper.

It’s a defence which is rubbished by the third Ukrainian author to withdraw from the festival, Kharkiv-born Australian author Maria Tumarkin, who in a withering blogpost made it clear she regarded AWW as an intellectual indulgence while an actual war was going on.

“I’m a Ukrainian Jewish Australian, no hyphens or hyphens, I don’t care. My world (as I knew it) ended on February 24, 2022. I have no connection to any ‘interest groups’, ‘sponsorship money’, ‘Zionist lobby’, ‘pearl-clutching’ (snort!), ‘attempts to silence marginalised voices’, ‘propaganda’ propagation – what else have you got for me?

“I’d rather not be lectured on developing a higher tolerance for ‘confronting ideas’. All good on that front, thanks.

“In the last 12 months I’ve learned a lot and changed my mind a lot. Perhaps the most salient lesson is that anti-war can mean pro-genocide. It means pro-genocide right now in Ukraine.

“Statements in which Zelensky (who’s Jewish) is called a Nazi, fascist, someone responsible for Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and/or WWIII are not anti-Zelensky and/or pro-Putin. They are forms of genocide cheering (a step up from genocide apology). They do not exist in the space of discourse only and do not represent something that can be classified as merely a contentious political opinion. If only.

“And while we’re on the subject, I see no difference between Twitter feeds and books if tweets are pro-genocidal and knowingly so.”

Adler is the daughter of Holocaust survivors. As such, she invites a degree of awe with her bulletproof commitment to free speech principles. But she is clearly out of step with a great number of Jewish and Ukrainian people who regard this not as free speech but hate speech. And her promise of diverse speech is not backed up by the AWW program.

In the broader context of the cultural arc of these modern-day festivals, one wonders if he were alive today what kind of reception the Italian chemist and Auschwitz survivor Primo Levi would receive were he scheduled to appear in Adelaide this week at the Pioneer Women’s Memorial Garden.

Would If This is a Man be hailed for what it is, the definitive first-person chronicle of the high point of human evil, or a tendentious sob-story aimed at bolstering Israeli hegemony? The answer would probably be the latter, especially if the Israeli embassy dared sponsor Levi’s appearance.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/inquirer/when-does-robust-free-speech-descend-into-hate-speech/news-story/084b8243431b852d54c6fde5c1f6670a

**********************************************************

Youth crime epidemic in Queensland

There are many adjectives which Queenslanders have employed to describe Campbell Newman over the years but “fearful” is not among them.

Yet tonight, as a story in today’s Sunday Mail reveals, the former hard-nosed Queensland premier who began working life as an army engineer, and whose own political pugnaciousness unquestionably contributed to his downfall in 2015, admits freely that he is fearful, increasingly anxious and genuinely concerned for his own personal safety.

In a Sky News documentary screened tonight, the same Newman who launched a legislative assault on bikies and simply dismissed the threats and intimidation which followed reveals it is kids roaming the street outside his home that scare him.

He locks his bedroom door every night, horrified by recent events which include a stabbing murder only 1000m from his home.

“I’m ready for them to come through my back window,’’ he says.

Newman, more than eight years removed from high office, is not dissimilar to average folk with a limited ability to formulate public policy. He is now not a member of any political party.

And while his ideological affiliation with the conservative side of politics remains, his opinions are largely bipartisan in the sense they are being expressed in all quarters, right across this state.

His remarks will resonate with mums and dads who go to bed at night now wondering whether their car will be stolen. Youth crime is no urban myth, nor a media generated community panic. It’s now factored into our ordinary lives.

Those security cameras which only a few years ago were the sign of a wealthy homeowner living in a large compound are now winking at us as we knock on the door of ordinary Queensland suburban homes.

Queenslanders now sense that many of these youthful criminals have no framework of reference for ordinary behaviour – that they will, quite literally, kill you if you disturb them in their attempts at theft, and then have little capacity for self-reflection after the event.

That lack of a capacity to grasp the enormous damage they have caused to a fellow human being is noted by many youth workers who see, time and time again, how many of these serious offenders have been totally divorced from any sympathetic human connection almost from the day of their birth.

Newman, with an indisputable grasp of public policy stretching back 20 years to his days as Brisbane mayor, has some cutting criticisms to make of the Labor state government on this issue.

Queenslanders don’t want to play politics with this issue but they too are grappling with the same questions.

This government cannot deny, and will not deny, its policies on youth crime have been developed through a more academic prism which is opposed to incarceration as a method of rehabilitation and reflects criminal justice trends going back half a century.

But, as Newman points out in his blunt manner, that system hasn’t worked.

Newman sees a principal purpose of criminal justice as keeping people safe from violence. Yet he is against locking children up in detention centres.

Instead, he sees an answer in youth offenders being signed up to community service or being sent off to boot camps remote from our major population centres.

Many Queenslanders will now agree that anything is worth a try.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/editors-view-home-truths-cut-through-in-state-of-fear/news-story/2ab988e339babdb72d32ae5b5e72009e

***************************************************

International Women’s Day is a farce

Organisations such as Australia’s Workplace Gender Equality Agency add up all the salaries earned by men and women and then announce how much less in total women got paid. According to the agency’s latest calculations, it’s now 13.3 per cent less.

This is partly because there are female-dominated professions, such as nursing and teaching, that should be better paid. But even the agency admits it isn’t because women are paid less for doing the same job as a man.

So the persistent difference between men and women’s total earnings comes down to something more fundamental: personal choice. It’s important to recognise this to create better outcomes for women in later life.

Many men and women design their entire lives and career choices around a family unit which includes children. Divorce settlements, if it comes to that, need to account for that implicit deal. That includes asset-splitting. This would be the best way to support women who take jobs with less responsibility or fewer hours because they pragmatically realise that “having it all” is a furphy.

While we’re at it, “having it all” is another trope that should be cut from the International Women’s Day line-up. If a woman is “having it all” – that is, kids and a kick-arse career – chances are there’s both childcare involved and a nanny at home. That’s other women, for the most part. Why don’t they get to “have it all”?

And if we’re not “having it all”, for instance, because the desired family didn’t eventuate, or the career isn’t so stellar, the International Women’s Day “all” is an annual kick in the guts about what it takes to be complete as a woman.

Those women who aren’t being guilted into attending some patronising event, are spending International Women’s Day doing twice the work. For instance, the nannies, mentioned above.

And the ABC likes to celebrate by creating all-female line-ups on its flagship shows, presumably giving the chaps the opportunity to put their feet up. Meanwhile, Champions of Change (until recently known as Male Champions of Change) provides an opportunity for men to burnish their CVs by turning gender equality into a form of corporate charity.

All this dressed up in the blare of pink that adorns International Women’s Day. “CONGRATULATIONS, YOU’RE A GIRL,” it announces, like an annual late-life gender reveal.

Thanks, without your help, we’d never have figured it out.

******************************************************

Australia’s cultural treasure Trove hangs in the balance

Billions of stories held within the National Library of Australia’s online portal, Trove, are hanging in the balance as the federal government considers a funding plea to maintain the beloved platform.

The archive’s funding is due to expire on June 30 and chief executive of the Australian Library and Information Association, Cathie Warburton, said it would be disastrous if the resource was lost.

“Trove is the envy of the world,” she said. “Its international reputation as a keystone of Australia’s national research infrastructure with free access to digital sources is a credit to Australian librarianship. It would be an unmitigated tragedy if we lost it.”

The National Library has warned that without at least $7 million in additional government support in the May budget, the popular archive could cease operations from July.

The National Trusts of Australia is the latest organisation to call for urgent funding for the portal. Chairman Lachlan Molesworth described Trove as a national treasure.

“I would call Trove the single most important custodian of digital heritage in the country in the same way that we are probably the most important custodian of the physical cultural heritage in the country,” he said.

“Trove records the best and the worst part of this country’s history ... losing that is losing part of our cultural heritage.”

Arts Minister Tony Burke last month met leaders of eight national galleries and museums including the National Library, the National Gallery of Australia and the National Portrait Gallery.

The government’s own advisory body on national cultural policy has recommended arts and cultural organisations be exempt from efficiency dividends, a method by which cumulative cost-cutting is enforced.

Burke last week said no decision had been made on additional funding for Trove, but hinted Labor was favourable to funding what he described as an “incredibly important” resource.

“It is fair to say that Labor has always had a commitment to the cultural institutions,” he said.

Spanning some 6 billion items, Trove has an estimated 70,000 daily users.

It contains all manner of Australiana: advice on making wartime rations go further, a 1936 recipe for sliced heart and bananas fried in fat – and a map drawn in 1940 showing “the distribution of the Aboriginal tribes of Australia”.

Researching a bluestone fountain in the heart of Melbourne started Irene Kearsey’s journey into the ever-evolving database that is Trove.

Stanford Fountain, on Spring Street, was constructed in 1870 by Pentridge prisoner William Stanford of bluestone, the only material available to him. Stanford later succumbed of silicosis – then called “stonemasons’ disease” – literally dying for his art.

His story is just one of billions held within the portal, which holds digital copies of newspapers, government gazettes, maps, magazines, books, photographs, archived websites, music and interviews.

https://www.smh.com.au/national/australia-s-cultural-treasure-trove-hangs-in-the-balance-20230301-p5com5.html

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***************************************

The perennial Aborigine problem

When the Australian editorialises (24/02/23) that, ‘No one who has followed [its] reporting over decades could remain untouched by the misery afflicting many of our Indigenous communities’ (it means Aboriginal communities, but let that common error pass), it can so claim without fear of contradiction. Nor, it goes on, ‘would they question the vital need to solve the problems that underlie that misery’. True, but the issue has always been, and remains, how to do so?

For longer than I care to remember, well-meaning people like that editorial writer have said we ‘need to solve’ those problems. Program after program has been devised in efforts to do so, and billions upon billions of dollars provided by Australian taxpayers to finance those programs. Yet stubbornly, the problems remain. How can that be?

Some reasons, I suggest, are obvious. For example, when that same editorialist says that the Australian ‘has long been in favour of an acknowledgement [in our constitution] of the country’s first peoples’, does he or she really believe that such a development would have any positive influence on those unsolved problems? Of course it wouldn’t; so why do otherwise intelligent people continue to prattle on to the contrary?

(To digress for one moment, incidentally, there is no sustainable basis for Aboriginal ‘recognition’ in our constitution. As has been said, that document is a rule book, not a history book. It laid down the basis on which six British colonies agreed ‘to unite in one indissoluble Commonwealth under the Crown…’. It had nothing to say about the then inhabitants – non-Aboriginal or Aboriginal – of those colonies (thenceforth states). In 1999, John Howard (demonstrating that even great men can make fools of themselves) put forward a referendum to insert a ‘recognition’ statement via a new preamble to the constitution. The Australian electorate, wise in such matters, consigned it to the flames, with only 39 per cent in favour nationally, and defeating it in every state and territory.)

‘Most Australians’, as that editorial said, ‘bear enormous goodwill towards the first inhabitants of this continent…’. However, I greatly doubt that that goodwill springs, as the editorialist suggests, from ‘sharing a pride in their tens of thousands of years of culture’. Culture? What culture? The one that, as the late Tim Fischer once bravely pointed out, never even managed to invent the wheel? The one in which, as English soldiers observed in 1788, male Aborigines maltreated their women abominably? – as they continue to do today in so many parts of this country. The one in which superstition and retrograde concepts such as ‘payback’ are so firmly entrenched? The 1999 referendum proposed ‘honouring Aborigines… for their ancient and continuing cultures which enrich the life of our country’. Examples of that ‘enrichment’ have recently been manifesting themselves in no uncertain manner on the streets of Alice Springs.

Few topics in this country evoke so much emotion – and so much intellectual confusion – as the state of Aboriginal affairs. One major reason for this is that our ‘Aborigines’ in fact fall into two very different categories. The first category – the one in which Aboriginal culture still holds sway and those ‘problems’ remain so apparent – comprises the 60,000 to 70,000 whose ancestry is wholly Aboriginal. The second category – several times more numerous – consists of people of mixed ancestry, who have chosen to identify as ‘Aboriginal’, but who could equally (or even more accurately in many cases) identify with their Caucasian, Chinese, or other non-Aboriginal forebears. (Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price, whose outstanding qualities almost literally shine out of her, has actually taken this bull by the horns, referring to herself from time to time as ‘part-Aboriginal’.) These people live in the community side-by-side with their non-Aboriginal neighbours, go to work on a regular basis, send their children to school, take out mortgages, and so on. So why do governments include them in programs devised to deal with Aboriginal problems? Because, I suggest, the politicians leading those governments lack the intestinal fortitude to refuse to do so.

That is precisely the problem with the current controversy over the so-called Voice to parliament – the matter to which the editorial mentioned at the outset principally pertains. The undeniable fact is that this proposal seeks to insert into our constitution provisions endowing one set of Australians (Aborigines – however defined!) with rights not available to the rest of us. But as the Institute of Public Affairs, writing about this many months ago, said: ‘Race has no place in Australia’s Constitution.’ (It was not merely opposing the Voice on those grounds, but arguing for removal of the two existing race-based passages in that document.) This is so obvious that all the questions about how the Voice would work, were it to come to pass, are plainly irrelevant. Why then are our politicians? – particularly the leader of the opposition, Peter Dutton – so reluctant to say so?

I have read almost every issue of the Australian since its first day of publication in 1964. It is a great newspaper, towering over the pygmies otherwise littering the Australian media landscape. It has a claim, indeed, for inclusion among the ten (or even possibly the five) best newspapers in the world. Why then, in the face of all reason, does it continue to support the Voice? It is not the case that, ‘Lack of detail on voice risks losing nation’s goodwill’, as the headline to that editorial claimed. Nor is it the case that, as the subsidiary headline claimed, ‘Time is running out for the government to allay legitimate fears’. As noted, those fears are irrelevant. What does risk losing people’s goodwill is the unprincipled push to destroy the constitutional foundation whereby all Australians are equal. With all due respect to a great newspaper, when will reality break in?

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/03/australian-notes-328/

******************************************************

Nazi attitudes are alive and well right here in Australia

A Palestinian author appearing at Adelaide Writers Week has described a Jewish-American civilian murdered by terrorists in Israel this week as “human garbage” who deserves no sympathy.

The comments came as South Australian Premier Peter Malinauskas revealed he had considered axing funding for the writers’ week but did not want to set a precedent where governments determined who could speak.

Susan Abulhawa is one of two authors at Adelaide Writers Week who have been condemned by key Jewish and Ukrainian groups over a string of inflammatory remarks that have seen three writers pull out of the festival and sponsors threaten to withdraw funding.

Abulhawa’s latest comments involve the murder of Elan Gan­eles, a 26-year-old Jewish-American civilian ambushed and shot near the Dead Sea last Monday while visiting Israel for a friend’s wedding.

His death was labelled an act of terrorism by the Israeli Defence Forces, in which Ganeles had served as a computer programmer before returning home last year to Connecticut to finish his studies at Columbia University.

Ganeles was killed a day after two Israeli brothers were shot dead in a similar attack in the West Bank, the incident prompting a violent outbreak by hardline Israeli settlers who torched hundreds of Palestinian homes and vehicles in Nablus, with one Palestinian death confirmed and many people seriously injured.

Abulhawa took to Twitter this week to ridicule a eulogy for Ganeles posted by the Israeli ­consulate-general in New York that said Israelis were “shattered by his loss” and he had been a good man “who sought to better the world”.

“Privileged white man leaves US to violently colonise another people, gets killed by the people he’s robbing and oppressing,” ­Abulhawa said. “Simultaneously his coloniser friends go on a murderous rampage, committing a pogrom in Nablus. “And y’all are upset over this human garbage.”

The comments have been condemned by the Executive Council of Australian Jewry as another example of Abulhawa’s violent abuse towards Jewish people.

ECAJ co-chief executive Alex Ryvchin told The Australian ­Abulhawa’s latest tweet was “unstable and despicable”.

“I pity Susan Abulhawa,” he said. “It can’t be easy to live with such inhumanity as to mock and celebrate the murder of an innocent young man. The writers’ week director and any board members that still support her should feel deeply ashamed.”

Abulhawa’s comments about the death of Ganeles and subsequent attacks on Palestinians were made despite the IDF denouncing the anti-Palestinian ­violence and warning Israeli hardliners against vigilantism.

The Israeli general in charge of troops in the West Bank, Major General Yehuda Fuchs, described the attacks as a “pogrom” and admitted the IDF was unprepared for the scale of anti-Palestinian ­violence, accusing the Israeli settlers of “spreading terror”.

The participation of Abulhawa and fellow Palestinian author Mohammed El-Kurd has sparked outrage over Adelaide Writers Week and strong criticisms of its director, former Melbourne University Publishing chief Louise Adler.

Abulhawa is a fierce critic of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whom she has described as “a depraved Zionist trying to ignite World War III”. [Zelensky is Jewish]

She has written several tweets saying the war is Ukraine’s fault for trying to join NATO and has tweeted declaring “DeNazify Ukraine”, the line used by Moscow to defend the invasion.

She has also described Mr Zelensky as “mad and far more dangerous than (Vladimir) Putin” and written “It’s possible to be Jewish and a Nazi at the same time”.

El-Kurd has written scores of tweets that prompted the New York-based Anti-Defamation League and the ECAJ to write to Adelaide Festival organisers to say they were giving a platform to “unvarnished anti-Semitism”.

He has described Israel as “demonic”, “sadistic” and a “death cult”, labelled Zionists “barbaric neo-Nazi pigs” with a “lust” for Palestinian blood, and compared Israel with the Nazi regime whose genocide led to the creation of the Jewish state, ­including accusing Israel of ­“Kristallnachting” Palestinian people.

The Australians has approached Abulhawa and El Kurd for comment through AWW organisers but has had no reply.

Despite saying last week that he would boycott any writers week sessions featuring Abulhawa and El-Kurd, Mr Malinauskas on Thursday night honoured a commitment to launch AWW at the Adelaide Town Hall alongside its director, Ms Adler.

Mr Malinauskas used the launch to repeat his criticisms of the authors but said he did not want to set a precedent of a government deciding what could be said at a writers festival.

“I confess to contemplating removing government support for writers week,” he said. “And to be sure, this may have been a politically expedient action for the government to take.

“But as the holder of the highest elected office in our state, I can’t just be a politician looking to get a six-second grab up on the nightly news. “As Premier, I have the responsibility to actively contemplate all the consequences of each and every decision I make.

“If I was to unilaterally defund writers week on the basis of Susan Abulhawa’s views, what path does that take us down? “It’s a path to a future where politicians decide what is culturally appropriate.

“And at worst, it leads us to a future in which politicians can directly stifle events that are themselves predicated on freedom of speech and the expression of ideas … a path, in fact, that leads us into the territory of Putin’s ­Russia.”

Jewish Community Council of South Australia spokesman Norm Scheuler said Adelaide’s Jewish community “could not believe” that Mr Malinauskas honoured his commitment to open writers week, especially in light of Abulhawa’s latest tweets.

“Not only are we surprised, we are bitterly disappointed,” he said.

Asked about the latest Abulhawa tweet, Adelaide Festival chief executive Kath Mainland gave this statement: “Ms Abulhawa is one of 160 writers from 10 countries taking part in Adelaide Writers Week, which has a zero-tolerance policy to racist com­mentary at and during the event.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/books/terror-victim-was-human-garbage-says-adelaide-writers-week-author/news-story/4158211cc278b26f4dbfcf327391d963

****************************************************

Treasurer’s super raid could be a tax on young Australians

The great flaw in Jim Chalmers’ superannuation raid is that higher taxes will apply to more and more Australians every year because he will not adjust the $3m threshold above which higher taxes will apply. With inflation running at 8 per cent, $3m will soon not be what it is today.

Labor’s new tax is not a tax on the rich, it is a tax on young Australians because many of them will need $3m (or even more) by the time they retire.

The government’s proposal is to double the tax rate for those with superannuation balances of $3m or more. The government claims that this will affect fewer than 0.5 per cent of Australians. But that is just for today.

Some quick sums show that many more will be affected if the $3m threshold stays fixed. Take a 30-year-old today with a $200,000 superannuation balance.

Assuming that person earns $100,000 a year, and makes average returns on their superannuation, this person will have a superannuation balance of more than $3m by the time they are 62 years old. This is the power of compound interest.

Does the government think that someone on $100,000 a year is rich? The average full-time wage is now $94,000.

Say upon retirement at 65, this Australian plans to have their superannuation provide for them for another 20 years.

Thanks to Labor’s tax changes, they will now have $50,000 a year less to provide for themselves in retirement. Over their lifetime, they will pay $700,000 more in superannuation taxes.

Younger Australians are facing a much poorer and harsher
retirement if Labor’s tax changes are not stopped.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/matt-canavan-treasurers-super-raid-could-be-a-tax-on-young-australians/news-story/15d929533ccac2708cf7d2e396266c7b

*************************************************

China trade thaw as coal, cotton exports resume

A two-year freeze on coal and cotton exports to China appears to have thawed with a lift in the volume of goods being sent to Australia’s biggest trading partner, but the Albanese government remains cautious about proclaiming an end to Beijing’s unofficial ban.

The first shipments of Australian coking coal arrived in a southern Chinese port in early February, and ASX-listed, Chinese-owned coal company Yancoal confirmed this week it had sent two cargoes of coal to China this year.

Some 25 ships with a total of 2.5 million tonnes of Australian coal had sailed for China “since January”, commodity analyst S&P Global told the Australian.

Australian coal sales to China were cut back in 2019 and halted in 2020 by informal bans imposed as a result of political tensions. Two-way trade between Australia and China was worth $300bn last year.

The coal hiatus saw dozens of ships with Australian coal forced to moor off Chinese ports. As many as 80 shipments were believed to be affected.

Australian cotton sales to China had also resumed, with a shipment of several thousand tonnes of cotton arriving in the port of Qingdao “in recent days”, China’s Global Times reported.

Federal Trade Minister Don Farrell said the trade flows were positive for Australian companies but warned the full resumption of exports between the two countries could take some time.

“We welcome any step towards the full resumption of trade” with China, Senator Farrell said. “It is in both countries’ interest for trade impediments to be removed.”

But he warned that “the trade impediments didn’t occur overnight, and they won’t be resolved overnight”.

While more unofficial trade sanctions across a range of products are expected to be lifted this year, ending formal trade sanctions against Australian wine and barley will be more challenging, as both are subject to formal tariffs from China and a federal government appeal to the World Trade Organisation is on foot.

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/economics/china-trade-thaw-as-coal-cotton-exports-resume/news-story/564bcb7b20e16ac4c4bc7bd7577d9592

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

*****************************************

No jab, no transplant: Covid vaccine rules are heartless and senseless

Vicky Derderian is a fighter. For seven years her heart has struggled to pump blood around her body, stretching thinner and growing weaker, a condition called dilated cardiomyopathy. In 2020, she was fitted biventricular assist devices, implantable pumps that help both sides of her heart function while she awaits a transplant.

There’s only one obstacle. The Alfred Hospital in Melbourne insists she get a Covid vaccine even though Vicky has a permanent exemption provided by the Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation (ATAGI) because of the well-known risk that Covid vaccines can trigger heart inflammation.

Dr Peter McCullough, one of the most published cardiologists in the world, has been in Australia this month speaking at sold-out events about treating Covid. He says that under no circumstances should Vicky, or any heart transplant patient, get a Covid vaccine because of the damage it can do to the heart.

That’s what happened to Natalie Boyce. She was only 21 and a competitive netball player. Yet she died of heart failure at the Alfred in March 2022, six weeks after receiving a Moderna booster.

Natalie had been diagnosed with antiphospholipid syndrome (APS), an autoimmune disorder that can cause the body to make antibodies that attack the cells lining blood vessels causing blood clots. People with a history of autoimmune disorders were excluded from the Covid vaccine clinical trials because it was recognised the vaccine might trigger dangerous clotting. Sure enough, in March 2021, a 27-year-old woman with undiagnosed APS developed catastrophic clotting and kidney failure. She survived thanks to the expert care she received and her case was published in the Journal of Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology on 7 December 2021.

Tragically, the Therapeutic Goods Administration (TGA) failed to warn Australians of the risk Covid vaccines pose to people with APS. Three months later Natalie died after the Moderna booster triggered catastrophic clotting causing kidney and heart failure.

The TGA has also refused to warn Australians that the Pfizer Covid vaccine triggered fatal myocarditis in Roberto Garin, a healthy 52-year-old father of two who died a week after his first jab. The Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) accepted that Roberto’s death was caused by a Covid vaccine. It lists a total of 15 deaths in this category. The TGA only lists 14. The ABS explains the difference by noting that it accepts expert reports while waiting for a coronial finding, which can take years. Despite repeated approaches, the TGA refuses to explain, on the record, why it has not accepted the findings of the expert forensic pathologist Bernard l’Ons.

L’Ons found that Roberto had an undiagnosed sarcoidosis, a benign inflammatory condition affecting his heart. The heart also showed a clear transition from cardiac sarcoidosis to fulminating myocarditis, an inflammation of the heart muscle so rapid and severe that it is frequently fatal. Critically, l’Ons dates the time of transition to the time of Covid-19 vaccination.

So concerned was l’Ons that he suggested sarcoid patients receive an echocardiogram prior to a Pfizer Covid-19 vaccination to check whether the sarcoidosis affected their heart so that if it did, alternative vaccination types could be considered.

In the context of a pandemic caused by a novel pathogen and the use of novel vaccines which have only provisional approval, why is the TGA sitting on this vital information? Dr l’Ons’ warning is acutely important to Vicky. She has already been diagnosed with ‘chronic heart inflammation suggestive of untreated myocarditis’ and ‘likely cardiac sarcoidosis’. Dr McCullough says if Vicky’s heart sustains any more damage it is almost certainly going to be lethal.

Desperate to get the authorities to respect Vicky’s vaccine exemption, her husband John asked Victorian Senator Ralph Babet of the United Australia Party to raise her case in the Senate, which he did. It led to national television coverage. On the Today program Dr Nick Coatsworth, Australia’s former deputy chief medical officer, told Vicky she should get a Covid vaccine because if she got Covid after her transplant not only might she die, her transplanted heart would die with her.

This makes no sense. Everybody from Bill Gates to Albert Bourla has admitted that Covid vaccines don’t stop infection. More importantly, vaccination is more dangerous for Vicky than infection. This is because the vaccine is injected into the body and circulates in the blood stream where it can enter the cells of any tissue or organ in the body – including her heart – and create spike proteins which are always inflammatory.

A respiratory infection, on the other hand, starts in the mucous membranes of the nose, giving Vicky a chance to fight it off with her innate immune system aided by nasal sprays, antivirals and anti-inflammatory drugs before it gets into her lungs and from there into her blood stream.

It has also now been admitted, in a study published in the Lancet on 16 February and funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation no less, that vaccine immunity wanes far more rapidly than infection-acquired immunity. That is hardly surprising since it is true for every other infection yet this fact has been denied for most of the pandemic by US and Australian health authorities.

Not only does vaccine immunity wane rapidly, it isn’t triggered until the virus gets into the blood, whereas infection immunity kicks in in the nose. In addition, a study conducted in the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Freiburg and published in the peer-reviewed journal Pathogens this month shows that in heart transplant recipients natural infection gives superior immunity compared to vaccination.

A last problem for Vicky is that there are studies in corneal and lung transplantation which show that vaccination in either the donor or the recipient can increase the risk of organ rejection or failure. There is no data yet on heart transplants but in an ideal world, says Dr McCullough, it would be better to receive a donated organ from an unvaccinated person.

Nobody knows better than Vicky that this is not an ideal world as she battles on in search of doctors and regulators with a heart and a brain.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/no-jab-no-transplant/

*****************************************************

The iron triangle of energy realism

Possibly the most powerful argument against the quest for Net Zero can be briefly stated using the Iron Triangle of Power Supply, bearing in mind the logic of testing (or falsification, as Karl Popper called it).

The three aspects of the triangle are:

Continuous input of power to the grid. Adequate input is required all the time, not just most of the time or almost all the time.

Wind droughts and especially windless nights break the continuity of input from wind power when there is no solar.

There is effectively no storage to bridge the gaps (despite all the talk about batteries and pumped hydro).

Consequently, the proposition that the grid can run on wind and solar power is falsified (ruled out) and there is no justification for the decision to contaminate the grid with subsidised and mandated intermittent input from environmentally ruinous wind and solar facilities.

In defiance of the Iron Triangle, the official position is that we just need more installed wind and solar facilities, and more storage. That is stated by the Prime Minister, the Climate and Energy Minister, and the CEO of the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO). It is dutifully repeated by all the usual suspects in the ABC and the mainstream media, although over a hundred leading journalists have received the briefing notes from the Energy Realists of Australia over the last three years.

The briefing notes were compiled by an elite squad of almost-dead white males and Ben Beattie, recruited to work with The Energy Realists of Australia – joking, of course.

What is the point of more wind and solar capacity?

Wind and solar can displace coal (to a point that we have almost reached), but they can’t replace it.

The rate of exit from coal is not accelerated by increasing penetration on good wind and solar days, it is limited by the lowest level of output on nights with little or no wind, as a convoy travels at the speed of the slowest vessel, the water penetrates the levee at the lowest point, a chain is only as strong as the weakest link and stock get out of the yard through gaps in the fence even if the rest of the fence is built to the sky.

What storage?

Batteries can be dismissed very quickly by comparing the capacity of the biggest batteries in the world with the amount of power required to get through a windless night. Journalists don’t help by reporting the capacity of batteries in MW instead of MWh (megawatt hours). Scribes who report MW instead of MWh should be promptly escorted from the building with their personal effects thrown into the street after them.

More words are required to describe the inadequacy of pumped hydro because there are many large schemes around the world, and there are some small ones in Australia already. However, I am not aware of any large scheme that runs on wind and solar alone. The largest facility at Bath, Philadelphia (US), runs entirely on coal and nuclear power to enable those plants to run continuously at their optimum output.

Conclusion

We need to keep enough conventional power, mostly coal power, to meet the highest levels of demand at dinner times in high summer and deep winter, until we have nuclear power on deck.

A note on the logic of testing that was mentioned at the start of this piece. It has gone missing in science (on walkabout?) since it became generally accepted in the 1960s that Thomas Kuhn’s paradigm theory (science by consensus) had superseded Karl Popper’s critical approach (forming a preference after rigorous testing and comparison of rival theories.) That is an important topic for another day.

https://www.spectator.com.au/2023/02/the-iron-triangle-of-energy-realism/

*******************************************************

One in two companies found to overstate green credentials in ACCC review

More than one in two companies surveyed by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission were found to have overstated their clean or green credentials in a move which may expose them to legal action.

The ACCC said it was concerned at the level of greenwashing identified in a blitz of the advertising and packaging of 247 businesses.

The regulator found 57 per cent of the companies reviewed made inflated or wrong claims about their environmental impact, with the cosmetics, clothing, footwear, and food and drink industries the worst offenders.

ACCC deputy chair Catriona Lowe said these companies may find themselves the target of legal action or infringement notices to correct their statements or face fines.

Ms Lowe said the regulator would not tolerate greenwashing that wrongly gave the impression a product was more environmentally sensitive than it was.

“We’re seeing businesses not providing evidence of the claims they’re making,” she said.

“We are increasingly seeing consumers making their purchasing decision on the basis of the green credentials for their goods and services.”

Ms Lowe said the ACCC would not just stop at claims made on products, but would seek to scrutinise claims made by businesses around offsetting emissions or announcing environmental targets “without clear plans of how they’re going to achieve those goals”.

“It is possible of course that some of the claims that are being made are able to be verified but of course we’re standing in the shoes of the consumer,” she said.

The ACCC’s planned crackdown comes days after the Australian Securities and Investments Commission handed out court action against superannuation giant Mercer, over its green claims.

Australia's best business newsletter. Get the edge with AM and PM briefings, plus breaking news alerts in your inbox.

Ms Lowe said the ACCC would take a firm line on companies that misled or deceived consumers around their green credentials, warning fines could be levied into the millions.

“We will certainly be undertaking our assessment and thinking carefully about the impact on consumers and the gain that may have been obtained by making the false claims relative to the investment required to make the claim true,” she said.

A report by the ACCC notes the regulator will conduct further analysis of these issues and is planning to produce and release “economy-wide guidance material, as well as targeted guidance for specific sectors” outlining expectations around green claims.

Ms Lowe said the regulator was concerned about companies making claims packaging could be recycled when those products could not be accepted by most recyclers.

An ACCC spokeswoman said the regulator was engaging with “relevant industry participants” in a bid to ensure clarity and transparency about handling soft plastics recycling after the REDcycle scheme collapsed.

The NSW Supreme Court ordered on Monday to wind up the REDcycle company after finding it was hopelessly insolvent and failed to pay fees for storing thousands of tonnes of soft plastics around the country.

“The ACCC is conscious of the significant financial and environmental impacts if food and grocery suppliers were to dispose of existing packaging containing the REDcycle logo and Australasian Recycling Label (ARL) ‘return to store’ labelling in landfill,” the spokeswoman said.

“We have engaged with industry participants about taking all reasonable alternative steps to ensure that representations to consumers are accurate. For example, this could be achieved through information provided in their other advertising and marketing.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/companies/one-in-two-companies-found-to-overstate-green-credentials-in-accc-review/news-story/e28d321a98012a169b62c77441e178f9

***************************************************

Fossil fuel shift: Electrifying all households could cost more than $60bn

A move to electrify all Australian households could cost taxpayers more than $60bn, analysis from the national peak body for pipeline infrastructure has revealed, highlighting the challenges of paying for the country’s transition away from fossil fuels.

The Australian Pipelines and Gas Association chief executive Steve Davies said the “enormous price tag” of fully electrifying all homes had been “frequently downplayed”.

Mr Davies pointed to costings by the Parliamentary Budget Office for independent senator David Pocock that calculated it would cost $11.3m over the forwards to help a single ACT suburb electrify.

This figure was based on a model to give $13,000 a household to help 1000 homes in Canberra transition to be fully electric.

The taxpayer-funded subsidies would cover 50 per cent of the capital and installation costs for solar panels, electric reverse-cycle airconditioning and heat pump water heaters.

Mr Davies said the total price of electrifying all 5.1 million households across the nation currently on gas suggested the total taxpayer bill could exceed $66.3bn.

He said Australia’s transition towards renewables must be done with consideration given to the nation’s “cost-of-living” crisis. “Every change we make to decarbonise our country will come at a cost and the enormous price tag of fully electrifying Australian homes and business has been frequently downplayed,” he said.

“Each industry, including the gas infrastructure sector, has a responsibility to decarbonise and do so in a way that’s economical for households and businesses during this cost-of-living crisis.”

Under Senator Pocock’s model costed by the PBO, households would be expected to fund the other half of the transition through concessional loans from the government.

Senator Pocock is pushing for a national electrification program to accelerate emissions reductions and help reduce household energy bills.

In conjunction with Saul Griffith and Rewiring Australia, Senator Pocock said the cost of a nationwide rollout would be about $12bn, roughly equal to the government’s annual fossil fuel subsidies.

He has advocated for the ­government to develop a “demonstration project” in Canberra to create the world’s first fully electrified suburb, which would guarantee participating households a 20-25 per cent saving per annum on fuel and energy bills.

A spokeswoman for Senator Pocock said a pilot program would help identify obstacles and work through solutions. “It is about creating jobs, saving people money and ensuring we reap the benefits of the smart energy transition already under way,” she said.

“Australians clearly understand and appreciate the benefits of electrification as the world-leading adoption of rooftop solar shows, together with the rapid increase in the rate of uptake in electric vehicles.”

Energy and Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen isin talks with the Greens to develop an electrification package to help households and businesses transition off gas, after Labor struck a deal with the minor party to ensure passage of its $1.5bn energy support package in December.

The Australian understands negotiations are ongoing over what is included in the package and how it will be funded.

Greens leader Adam Bandt said it was time “coal and gas corporations paid their fair share of tax” to help households and businesses switch to clean power. “Greedy gas corporations have seen the writing on the wall and they’re desperate to eke out a few more years gouging customers and cooking the planet,” he said.

“What’s expensive is giving greedy gas corporations billions in public subsidies while they pay no tax and drive households and businesses into the ground with wartime profiteering.”

Deloitte Access Economics partner Pradeep Philip said electrification in the economy was a “no-brainer” but that governments should not be expected to pay for the whole transition to ­renewables.

“Governments can be catalytic in driving investment but they cannot be expected to do the lot,” Mr Philip said. “One reason is because you want markets to work and need competitive markets to be more efficient, and there are limits to government.

“The key is there is good commercial returns for Australian businesses as they electrify. Governments have to be prudent and invest budget dollars widely.”

Opposition climate change and energy spokesman Ted O’Brien said Australians would ultimately pay through higher energy bills or higher taxes if the government poured “billions” into electrification programs.

“If the government pours billions into new programs like this one, it’ll be the Australian people who ultimately pay through higher energy bills or higher taxes,” he said.

“Instead of reducing mounting cost-of-living pressures on households and businesses, the government keeps making the situation worse by doing deals with the Greens and with the ­independents.”

https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/fossil-fuel-shift-electrifying-all-households-could-cost-more-than-60bn/news-story/43e077a8db81c451fe0e7b0f3e56f4fb

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***************************************

Queensland Audit Office reveals huge spike in ambulance and specialist doctor wait times

More than 100,000 Queenslanders are waiting to see a specialist doctor — a surge of 80 per cent in seven years — and ambulance officers spent more than 134,000 hours in a year sitting with patients on ramps at emergency departments.

The concerning reality of the state’s health system has been laid bare in the latest Auditor General report, who also flagged delays to the delivery of critical hospital bed and budget blowouts.

In the 2021/22 financial year, the number of long waits for specialist outpatient services — which is patients waiting to see a specialist doctor — surged by 80 per cent to about 104,000 people.

The disturbing spike adds another layer of concern to the ballooning elective surgery wait list which The Courier-Mail revealed this week rose to nearly 60,000, given the more than 100,000 waiting to see a doctor could further squeeze surgery delays.

Queensland Health introduced a new strategy in 2015 to improve management processes and allow patients to access treatment within clinically recommended time.

But the Queensland Audit Office said the total number of patients waiting to see a specialist in the last financial year was “significantly higher” than when the department introduced the Specialist Outpatient Strategy in mid-2015.

“In 2021–22, the total number of long waits increased by 80 per cent due to Covid-19 impacts on system capacity,” Auditor-General Brendan Worrall wrote.

The delays have also caused a knock-on effect to the ultra-long waiting list — where patients have waited more than two years for an initial specialist outpatient appointment — which Mr Worrall said would grow further if the backlog of wait times more broadly was not improved.

“Ultra-long waits continued to decrease until 2019, but have increased again over the last three years,” the Auditor General wrote.

“Of the 2481 patients waiting more than two years for an appointment as of 1 July 2022, there were none for category 1; 634 for category 2; and 1847 for category 3.

“The large increase in long waits and reduced system capacity will place pressure on ultra-long waits if specialities are unable to clear the backlog of long waits quicker than when new referrals come in.”

Mr Worrall also noted the growing demand on the Queensland Ambulance Service (QAS), including for the most urgent of patients.

“The time it takes ambulance crews to transfer patients into the care of emergency departments increased significantly in 2021/22,” he wrote in his audit into health services in Queensland.

“If patient transfer takes longer than 30 minutes, the extra time is considered ‘lost’ time for QAS.

“In 2021/22, QAS lost approximately 134,155 hours – a 20 per cent increase compared to 2020–21.”

A performance target for patient off-stretcher time to have 90 per cent of patients transferred into emergency departments was not achieved in the past eight years.

“The percentage of patients transferred off stretchers in less than 30 minutes has shown a significant downward trend in the past five years,” Mr Worrall wrote, noting the further pressure placed on the system from the Covid-19 pandemic.

“Hospitals have adopted new infection control measures, such as social distancing and personal protective equipment, which have increased treatment time and affected patient flow.

“Several Queensland hospitals also provide Covid-19 fever clinics from their emergency departments.”

Health experts have warned authorities will struggle to improve ramping times and overstretched emergency departments without boosting the bed capacity in the system.

Mr Worrall said ageing health infrastructure needed to be replaced and expanded given the continual surge in the state’s population coupled with its ageing demographic.

But he warned the state government was unlikely to deliver on its commitments to deliver 2200 additional beds through building three new hospitals and expanding existing facilities, flagging delays and budget blowouts.

“The sector will face challenges in achieving the desired outcomes from the capital investment program, with current market conditions placing considerable pressure on costs and shortages in materials and labour creating risks around timing,” Mr Worrall wrote.

“Related operational costs will need to be included in future budgets to ensure these assets can be effectively and efficiently used.”

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/qld-politics/queensland-audit-office-reveals-huge-spike-in-ambulance-and-specialist-doctor-wait-times/news-story/a0d92021eeece153cd752c37d2341e91

********************************************************

Mandatory psychiatry training flagged for doctors

This sounds about right. 10 weeks should be enough to learn all there is to learn about psychiatry

Every doctor trained in Queensland would complete a mandatory placement in psychiatry within two years of graduating, under a bold plan to help junior doctors better deal with patients experiencing mental health issues.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is calling on the Queensland Government to introduce an eight- or 10-week psychiatry term in a bid to better support doctors who are already bearing the brunt of the woefully under-resourced mental health sector.

Today The Courier-Mail continues its series examining the state of Queensland’s health system, and with mental health accounting for a significant amount of all emergency department presentations and up to 70 per cent of all visits to the GP, it continues to be a major area of concern.

Patients who need to see a psychiatrist in Queensland can expect to wait between six and 12 months and the wait to see a child psychiatrist is at least 12 months.

Despite this doctors frequently report feeling underprepared to deal with mental illnesses with very little of their studies dedicated to the vital area.

The college’s Queensland branch chair Professor Brett Emmerson said mandatory training would go a long way to improving knowledge and confidence of people to be able to deal with mental health, as well as reducing the stigma of it.

The Courier-Mail understands the Department of Health has met with RANZCP to and is keen to consider the proposal.

Minister Health and Ambulance Services Yvette D’Ath said her government had the biggest investment in mental health Queensland had ever seen – $1.6 billion over five years.

“Our record investment in the budget delivers the funding over five years to improve mental health, alcohol and other drug services which means more beds, dedicated services, increased crisis responses, suicide prevention initiatives and a package dedicated toward First Nations peoples,” she said.

Research undertaken in 2018 by the Australasian College for Emergency Medicine found that mental health patients frequently waited longer than other patients with a similar severity of physical illness before being treated – often due to a lack of specialist mental health staff.

Professor Emmerson said the decision for mandatory postgraduate training for medicine graduates moving from one year to two years would give the time needed to introduce mandatory mental health terms.

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists is also creating a Diploma of Psychiatry that doctors could opt to complete, to broaden their knowledge.

The diploma would aim to help doctors assessed patients presenting with new mental health problems, manage risk in relation to patients who may harm themselves or others, start therapeutic care or prescribe appropriate medication.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/qld-politics/qld-health-crisis-mandatory-psychiatry-training-flagged-for-doctors/news-story/f0e58c0bd33e3fd42bc28a80c4bf05bf

***********************************************************

‘It’s lifesaving for men’: Why blokes need more mates

Men’s difficulty in forming friendships is at a crisis point and is contributing to a sense of social isolation and poor quality of life, experts say.

While women’s friendships tend to flourish throughout life, the struggle for men to form solid friends begins in adolescence and continues into adulthood, according to the head of youth mental health organisation Batyr, Nic Brown.

“If we look at male suicide, for every nine suicides that happen daily in Australia, seven are men, and a significant part of that is the inability to have important conversations early enough to avoid getting to that point,” Brown says.

“Less than 40 per cent of young men are reaching out for support. They so often don’t feel they have the friendships to have the conversations that are needed.”

The language around articulating feelings can also be part of the challenge for men, compared to women and girls who, Brown says, are more enabled to converse in that way.

“It’s the difference between being told to man up when you’re a boy and being asked what’s wrong when you’re a girl,” he says.

Clinical psychologist and Movember director of mental health training Zac Seidler says the research clearly shows men don’t prioritise social relationships, particularly after the age of 18.

“This is when women are forming and strengthening relationships but men, around the same time, go to university and focus on achieving to be a good provider, to find a mate as a reflection of self-worth,” Seidler says.

“Friendships, while important in high school, fall away at this point and continue on that path so you end up with a vacuum. So many men are reliant on their partner to tend to social relationships so, when that central relationship breaks down, there’s a serious breakdown in all the relationships for men.

“Friendship is fundamentally lifesaving for men. It has to be put front and centre because this is very serious and has been for a long time, but it requires a vulnerability for the man to say ‘I need you’.”

Male pride is more likely to prevent men from initiating contact or letting a friendship drop away if the invitations stop. “We need to find ways to encourage emotional disclosure among other men and this must start very early in life,” he says.

Happiness Institute psychologist Dr Tim Sharp says social isolation is an epidemic, particularly for men, and he believes we’re all part of the solution. “We’re not just dealing with men’s attitudes and may need to look at their partners or women around them and wider society,” Dr Sharp says.

“There are mixed messages. We’re trying to get the message out that it’s important for men to speak out. Just as we go to a mechanic when our car is in trouble, we need to seek help when we’re struggling emotionally, but there’s also a subtle message to stop complaining.

“The most important thing when it comes to health and wellbeing is to have at least one person you can be open with. This isn’t 100 Facebook friends. It’s the really intimate ones, we call them 3am friends where, if something goes wrong, you can call at any time of day and they’ll listen and offer constructive support.”

Psychologist Stephen Brown says friendship is just as important to men as a job and family in having stable mental health and a good quality of life.

“It’s what keeps men on the highway, not drifting off,” Brown says. “A male has to have his own interests and that needs to be encouraged. I don’t think men are being as encouraged to go out there and this leads to caution and a lack of confidence.”

Once part of a vibrant friendship circle, life circumstances, including a divorce and two moves interstate for work, left Guy Thompson with just a few friends he considers close enough to “have your back”.

But busy schedules for everyone means the group only get together every couple of months, leading Thompson to develop Crewmen, an app that matches men with others that share similar interests and encourages them to meet face-to-face to develop a sense of camaraderie and mateship.

“Everybody wants to do more things with their mates but, when you have only got a small pool of mates to catch up with, finding the right time is really hard,” he says.

“Having a wider circle means more opportunities for catch-ups with people that have the same hobbies and are on the same page.”

Thompson says surviving challenging times without a strong group of mates is tough, but sometimes it’s the happiest moments that can cause the greatest sense of loneliness.

“Having good mates allows you to celebrate achievements and milestones in your life,” he says.

“For me, it’s like what’s the point in achieving things if you don’t have anyone to celebrate with? Without that, those achievements can seem like they don’t even exist.”

https://www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/smart/its-lifesaving-for-men-why-blokes-need-more-mates/news-story/631e50e56535c92524438ef158870c10

**********************************************************

Wood veneer is both "Green" and attractive

It's common in cheap furniture but is probably the best when solid wood is too dear -- which it often is these days. I prefer laminated wood, which is something of a halfway house

The current Federal Government continues beating a path toward reducing carbon emissions, passing climate change bills as recently as September 2022.

The Australian emissions reduction target of 43 per cent and net zero emissions by 2050 is now enshrined in legislation, but the Architecture 2030 report found the built environment generates 40 per cent of annual global CO2 emissions, from construction elements such as steel, concrete, glass and plastics.

As we build or renovate our homes, we can all seek products that will help, not hinder a greener future – while naturally still looking drool-worthy.

Sometimes a bad reputation just clings to a product decades after its quality has improved beyond belief. An unfair rap has certainly proved hard for timber veneers to shake.

The word “veneer” itself suggests fakery, when in fact it is such a genuine material made from a natural, renewable resource – unlike laminates which are truly synthetic and arguably responsible for the unfair maligning of the real thing.

Melbourne-based architect with the award-winning sustainable architecture and design practice Breathe, Madeline Seawall is a strong advocate for using beautiful veneers at every opportunity. “Designing sustainably means choosing the material that is most suitable for every application,” Seawall says.

“We love using timber veneers instead of hardwood door panels for joinery because it is such an efficient use of a precious resource,” she says, urging Australian Forest Stewardship Council certified timber only.

Imagine sitting back in your lounge, looking at the finishes about you and delighting in the uniqueness. Those wormholes, swirls and burls all signify nature’s dateless design.

Ancient art

Veneers were originally the go-to material for furniture makers as a solution to expanding and contracting solid wood. The practice dates to Ancient Egypt, where wood was the same precious resource it is today.

Flash forward and the word veneer still has some people baulking, but here’s a reality check: timber veneers in 2023 are beautiful, sustainable, remarkably pliant and responsible for some of the best design breakthroughs this century.

Plus they’re made of actual timber, glued to inexpensive particle board backing. Wood slices for veneer use can be as thin as 0.5mm thickness. According to the Timber Veneer Association of Australia, one cubic metre of timber can generate 1000 sqm of veneer. If you had to buy 1000 sqm of solid Queensland red cedar, you’d have to sell the Bentley.

And if you’re looking for the newest products in the range, go to Elton Group and let your eyes dance across their range of WoodWall products – which can be applied as easily as wallpaper. Wow. If you do use veneers in your own home, not only are you smart, you’ll join the fine company of some of this country’s greatest designers.

Fine figures

Wood is an excellent sustainable building product that looks cool and contemporary while at the same time being warm and welcoming.Have you visited Sydney’s Qantas First Class Lounge? Well, neither have I (though I live in hope), but the pictures of it are fabulous.

How about the Margaret Court Arena? Sydney’s Knox Grammar? The Melbourne School of Design?

The range of available timbers boggles the mind. From imported ash styles to Australian Huon pine, there seems to be a “figure” (or surface pattern) that works for every design concept.

https://www.couriermail.com.au/lifestyle/home/fake-the-way-to-reducing-your-carbon-emissions/news-story/4c244ebd88d39f4a96f64f6eea47c192

************************************

Also see my other blogs. Main ones below:

http://dissectleft.blogspot.com (DISSECTING LEFTISM -- daily)

http://antigreen.blogspot.com (GREENIE WATCH)

http://pcwatch.blogspot.com (POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH)

http://edwatch.blogspot.com (EDUCATION WATCH)

http://snorphty.blogspot.com/ (TONGUE-TIED)

http://jonjayray.com/blogall.html More blogs

***************************************