Eating large fish poisons young children?

The article below says it does. I guess we must not mention that tuna is a very large predatory fish, that the Japanese eats heaps of large tuna and that the Japanese have unusually long lifespans. Note that no actual harm was reported below -- just opinion

Parents have been warned against feeding large fish species such as swordfish, marlin and shark to young children because of the danger of mercury poisoning. High levels of mercury - linked to developmental delay and brain problems - have been found in three children in Sydney. Health officials said yesterday the children, aged 15 months to two years, had eaten fives times the recommended amount of fish. In all three cases, details of which were published in the Medical Journal of Australia, they were fed congee - a rice and fish porridge used in Asian communities as a weaning food.

Health experts yesterday said that "small children should eat small fish". NSW Health Minister Reba Meagher said too much of certain types of fish could be "detrimental to children's health". "Incorporating two to three serves of fish per week into kids' diets is a good thing, but some parents may be overdoing it with certain species known to be high in mercury," she said.

Study co-author Stephen Corbett, of the Sydney South West Area Health Service, said children should still have fish in their diets. "Including fish in an infant's diet has many health benefits including building a strong heart and nervous system," Dr Corbett said. "But some fish may also contain mercury which is not good for young, developing children. "It is important to be aware how children can enjoy the many important benefits of seafood while reducing exposure to mercury."

Acting Minister for Primary Industries Linda Burney said: "An easy rule ... is that when whole the fish should be the size of an average plate." Chief Scientist with the NSW Food Authority Lisa Szabo said most fish were low in mercury but longer-living predatory fish built up mercury levels. "These fish such as shark or flake, swordfish, marlin and broadbill should not be included in the diet of small children," Dr Szabo said. "If they are eaten they should be limited to one serve per fortnight with no other fish eaten that fortnight.

"Examples of low mercury fish commonly available are rainbow trout, ocean trout, flathead, kingfish and whiting - canned tuna and salmon are also good low mercury options." Processed fish products such as fish fingers, patties, cakes, balls and bakes are made from a variety of fish including species low in mercury such as hoki and hake.

Source

The following excerpt from Wikipedia gives some background on tuna

Due to their high position in the food chain and the subsequent accumulation of heavy metals from their diet, mercury levels can be relatively high in some of the larger species of tuna such as bluefin and albacore. As a result, in March 2004 the United States FDA issued guidelines recommending pregnant women, nursing mothers and children limit their intake of tuna and other types of predatory fish. However, most canned light tuna is skipjack tuna and is lower in mercury





Leftist apology inconsistency

Terrorism doesn't need to be apologized for but what your well-meaning grandparents did does!

Australia has a problem with apologies. On the one hand, there is increasing pressure on Prime Minister Kevin Rudd to say sorry to the nation's indigenous people for past wrongs and on the other there is the expectation David Hicks should apologise for his terrorist involvement. But there is also an inconsistency here. Why is it that the very people who are demanding an apology to Australia's indigenous people are strangely silent over Hicks? It would seem there is a clear division over what is appropriate.

The idea of saying sorry seemingly puts things right, at least for indigenous Australians, but for Hicks, this is not an expectation. Why? The left of politics has claimed the moral high ground over the need for an apology to indigenous Australians and in demanding Hicks be brought home. If you disagree with the need for an apology for indigenous Australians, you are marginalised as some kind of redneck, racist conservative, and if you are insistent on an apology from Hicks, well you're being a bit tough.

Do you think I'm wrong? Consider the facts. Aboriginal leader Noel Pearson, a man respected for his measured views, had this to say last month on the issue of an apology and what Mr Rudd faces: "He can deal with the apology in accordance with the cultural left's desire to reassert the left's position in the culture wars. "The problem with just managing the issue is that Labor and the left have made much of Howard's refusal to apologise -- they have used it as a cultural bludgeon -- and there will be extreme sensitivity to the manner in which Rudd chooses to deliver the apology."

Then there is the hardline view of Lowitja (formerly Lois) O'Donoghue, a patron of the Stolen Generation Alliance. "Don't use apology. We want sorry," Mrs O'Donoghue says. She wants the removal of children described as "evil" and "cruel".

While there is no insistence from the left on Hicks apologising, does he need to apologise at all? His father, Terry Hicks, doesn't think so. According to Hicks's father, he has done nothing wrong. On Hicks's release from prison, he father said: "What's he got to apologise for? He has done nothing wrong; he was in the wrong place at the wrong time."

Hicks was captured alongside Taliban fighters. The same enemy which is targeting Australians and an enemy which has taken four Australian soldiers' lives. But that's OK. Now if Mr Hicks's logic was applied to the people who are alleged to have taken part in the removal of Aboriginal children, could they not also argue of being in the wrong place at the wrong time?

The left would not accept that. Why then is it an acceptable defence for no apology from Hicks? As much as Mr Hicks may say of his son that "nothing has been proved", the reality is Hicks, by his own admission, was an al-Qaida true believer and provided material support for terrorism.

The Aboriginal community can demand an apology for deeds done in the past with no present-day participants being responsible. So, is it not then reasonable to ask Hicks if he has recanted from his previous terrorist sympathies?

Sometimes the truth comes from an unlikely source. The actor Charlton Heston was on the money when he said in 1999: "The most important thing a man can learn -- the importance of three little words, 'I was wrong'. These words will get you much further than 'I love you'."

Do the supporters of Hicks believe an apology is unwarranted? Hicks gave support to al-Qaida. He is also an avowed anti-Semitic. Hicks's supporters, in not asking for him to publicly declare his repugnance of terrorism, let alone reconsider his anti-Semitic views, implies complicity with an acceptance he does not need to show contrition, let alone the reassurance he has changed.

It defies credibility that Hicks, on leaving Yatala jail, did not want to talk as he may have compromised the plea bargain he struck to secure his release from Guantanamo Bay, That sounds just a bit too convenient, cute even. An apology, so Mrs O'Donoghue believes, is a short sentence: "Sorry."

It is disingenuous to insist on an apology for the Stolen Generations, but remain silent on a convicted terrorist supporter who would have put the interests of al-Qaida and the "lovely brother" Osama bin Laden before his compatriots. If Hicks doesn't get it, someone should tell him.

Source





Educators can also learn from what already works

As our approach to teaching embraces more traditional methods, the overseas experience can inform our choices. Looking back over the past 12 months, it is clear that 2007 was a watershed year for education. Much of what has been argued on these pages in terms of increased testing and more rigorous examinations, adopting a back-to-basics approach to curriculum, holding schools accountable and better rewarding teachers, is now mainstream in terms of the debate and is being advocated by ALP state and federal governments.

How can we ensure, though, that initiatives planned for 2008 and beyond will be effective in raising standards, better supporting teachers and schools and ensuring that students receive a well-balanced, academically sound and fulfilling educational experience? One approach is to learn from what is happening overseas, in addition to our own experience, and to evaluate classroom practice by what the research suggests works.

Ensuring that children are literate and numerate in the early years of primary school is critically important and there is an increasing consensus overseas about the best way to teach such skills. In Britain, the Rose report, in part based on the success of the Scottish school Clackmannanshire, recommends adopting a synthetic phonics approach to teaching reading, a recommendation the British Government has accepted. In opposition to the prevailing whole-language approach -- whereby, on the assumption that learning to read is as natural as learning to speak, children are taught to look and guess and memorise words by sight -- synthetic phonics "is a sounds-based approach that first teaches children the sounds of letters and how they blend into words, before moving to letter combinations that make up words".

Adopting a more structured approach to literacy and numeracy is also supported by the US research associated with Project Follow Through. The billion-dollar nationwide project evaluated different approaches to teaching and concluded that formal methods of classroom interaction, described as direct instruction, are more effective than the type of teaching associated with Australia's adoption of outcomes-based education. Summarising what we can learn from Project Follow Through, Australian mathematics researcher Rhonda Farkota noted: "Student-directed learning has consistently more negative outcomes than those achieved in traditional education ... On all measures of basic skills, cognitive development and self-esteem, it (student-centred learning) was shown to be vastly inferior to traditional education."

One of the most respected and influential international tests is the Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study, held three times since its inception in the mid-'90s, involving 46 countries and testing students at years 4, 8 and 12. On identifying the characteristics of education systems that achieve at the top of the table -- the results place Australia in the second 11 -- it is possible to identify what leads to success. Stronger performing systems place a greater emphasis on competitive examinations and testing (which are often used to stream students in terms of ability), give teachers clear and succinct road maps detailing what is to be taught, and expect students to master essential knowledge and understanding associated with the key disciplines at each year level.

Research carried out by German academic Ludger Woessmann also concludes that top-performing TIMSS countries have a robust non-government school sector, which leads to increased competition and pressure to do well, schools have autonomy over hiring, firing and rewarding successful teachers, and the influence of teacher unions is restricted.

While critics of George W. Bush's initiative No Child Left Behind -- whereby federal funding is linked to education systems setting clear objectives in terms of raising standards, students are regularly tested, classroom practice is based on what the research suggests works and there are consequences for underperformance -- argue that NCLB has failed, the evidence suggests otherwise. As noted by US Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings, setting performance targets, regularly testing students and holding schools accountable have raised standards, as reflected by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. She states: "According to NAEP, more reading progress was made by nine-year-olds from 1999 to 2004 than in the previous 28 years combined. Maths scores have reached record highs across the board."

Given that many overseas education systems have been implementing the types of initiatives on the agenda in Australia for 2008, such as moving to a national curriculum, increased testing and holding schools accountable, it is also vital that we learn from their mistakes. As argued by the conservative US think tank the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, too much testing, forcing teachers to focus on the basics and imposing a centralised, top-down approach that fails to recognise the unique quality of individual schools can be counterproductive.

Forcing unproven and faddish curriculum change on schools and making them conform to inflexible and intrusive accountability measures can also overwhelm and frustrate teachers, leading to the type of situation evident in Western Australia, where teachers are deserting classrooms and it is impossible to attract newcomers to the profession.

Source






A beacon in safe hands

By Christopher Pearson



JANUARY marks the departure of Paddy McGuinness from the editorship of Quadrant after 10 years in the chair. His term in office roughly coincided with John Howard's, and it came as no surprise that he should have decided a change of government and the end of an era was the right time to step down. As Keith Windschuttle, his successor, prepares to take up the reins, it's timely to consider the magazine's recent achievements and its role in the future.

The first thing to be said is that, under McGuinness, Quadrant has enjoyed a period of stability and widespread, steadily growing influence, a welcome development in a magazine once regarded as the in-house journal of the curmudgeonly Right. Because the editor had been an economic adviser to Bill Hayden, during his time as Gough Whitlam's treasurer, and worked before that for the Moscow Narodny Bank, thoughtful people of the Left could hardly write him off as a baleful reactionary, as they'd often done to his predecessors. When he took the job, one of the first things he did was to appoint Hayden chairman of the editorial advisory board, on which, for our sins, both The Australian's Imre Salusinszky and I also serve.

Past and present Labor luminaries, including the former federal finance minister, Peter Walsh, the former member for Adelaide, Bob Catley, the former Opposition leader, Mark Latham, and the present speaker of the South Australian parliament, Jack Snelling, have all been associated with Quadrant in one way or another and have written for it. The magazine has a settled policy of publishing people from across all the ideological divides, partly in the hope of attracting a broader readership and provoking debate but also in recognition of the cultural and political pluralism of the Australian polity.

McGuinness's guiding principle as an editor seems always to have been to "let a hundred flowers bloom", providing the authors could mount rational arguments. On occasion, this led to the publication of some very abstruse theoretical essays. I particularly remember one on the psychopathology of terrorism, and another on, of all things, the scriptural grounds for abstaining from alcohol. Because the editor was also "no respecter of persons", he was inclined to give good articles by relatively obscure writers a run. Just about the only excluded category was the semiotics industry, which he's always referred to as "the higher silliness" and which was in any event vastly over-represented in the rest of Australia's literary magazines and journals of cultural theory.

How McGuinness has managed to combine publishing such a diversity of newer talents with providing space for established writers who have been regular contributors to Quadrant, often for upwards of 30 years, I can't imagine. Although some older writers are a pleasure to deal with until the day they die, most tend to monomania. It must have been a delicate balancing act, and I imagine that he's much indebted to Les Murray, the country's pre-eminent poet, who serves as literary editor, and the deputy editor, George Thomas.

We can be confident that Windschuttle knows it will be a hard act to follow. I've recently had occasion to consider just how hard, because it's a job I expressed some interest in myself. That said, he's a worthy successor and a friend and, like most of Quadrant's supporters, I wish him well. He's urbane, funny, a great conversationalist, an eminent scholar and, through his publishing house, McLeay Press, a cultural entrepreneur in his own right. But he has an image problem which he will need to overcome early on in his editorship if he's to make the most of the opportunity.

Windschuttle's problem as editor is the flipside of his success as one of Quadrant's most effective contributors. It was his misfortune to stumble, much to his surprise, on the fact that an awful lot of Australian frontier history was based on outright lies and misrepresentations on the matter of alleged massacres of Aboriginal people. His essays and book-length work on the subject have acutely embarrassed some prominent first-contact historians, along with their friends and allies in other branches of the profession, and they hate him for it. Some, who could best be described as polemicists, have gone beyond reasoned argument and branded him a denialist, as though he were in the same category as the sceptical Holocaust historian David Irving.

Others have laboured, pretty much in vain, to question his grasp of the subject and scholarly methods. He has been vilified so routinely and for so long that most of the academic Left has made up its collective mind that he's beyond the pale, without even bothering to read him. Aboriginal issues are still totemic for large sections of the Left, in the sense that it's a subject where moral vanity and other passions run high, and to hell with the facts. The media especially take every opportunity to sneer at Windschuttle and question his credentials. Howard, a politician whose dry sense of humour has been widely underestimated, decided he was just the kind of battle-hardened dreadnought to appoint to the ABC's board. Unfortunately, it has only intensified the public perception problems he now has to address.

My advice, for what it's worth, is that he should by all means continue his Aboriginal history research, because it is important work, but decide not to print it in Quadrant. There's no shortage of other places for him to publish. He needs to establish in the public mind that his work as a scholar is distinct from his editing activities and that he is prepared to undertake a self-denying ordinance and maintain a structural separation of roles for the sake of the magazine. There may be a compelling case for deciding Aboriginal history is too contentious a subject for Quadrant to touch at the moment and that the best way to turn the situation around quickly is by a stream of dazzling issues focused on other subjects. If that seems too much like a surrender, other fine but less controversial historians such as Michael Connor, the author of The Invention of Terra Nullius, could surely be pressed into service.

Some will say this advice is completely at odds with the contrarian spirit that gives little magazines their identity. If the editor can't publish whatever he likes, including his own work, what's the point of the exercise? It's a position with which I have some sympathy. But there is a venerable tradition that holds that an editor is like the conductor of an orchestra, who already has enough to worry about and shouldn't try to be a soloist as well. Like McGuinness, over most of the 20-odd years that I edited The Adelaide Review, I deliberately avoided appearing in its columns except in editorials. Editors exercise quite enough power as it is, commissioning work and deciding what to print, and their hardest and most important task is helping writers shine, whatever one might think about the particular merits of their arguments.

There is another consideration worth pondering. Arguably the time has passed when small magazines could hope to survive on local sales and a little corporate support and advertising revenue. Big business has been increasingly reluctant to support independent magazines since the mid-1980s, especially when they're thought of as overly political or opinionated and likely to offend any group seen as stakeholders. Quadrant has more than pulled its weight in debates over economic and industrial reform over the years but some of the corporates have defended their failure to fund it, as opposed to local think-tanks, for example, by saying that it seemed "too doctrinaire".

Perhaps the solution lies in targeting privately owned, unlisted businesses that don't have to truckle to shareholders and can back their own judgment. Wherever it comes from, Quadrant badly needs seed funding for a couple of projects that could set it on a sounder footing. The first is a complete electronic edition and archived back issues, with the potential for paid subscriptions throughout the Anglosphere, supported by a decent marketing campaign.

The other obvious step is to pay two or three of the country's best essayists on any given month top rates to produce pieces that the magazine's existing audience and, with luck, a far wider audience will come to see as indispensable reading. It's in the nature of things at small magazines that there should be large disparities between the pay of regular contributors, who generally speaking already have a professional income, and emerging stars. Besides, a rising tide of sales and subscription revenue would lift everyone's pay rates.

The election of the Rudd Government and Labor's coast-to-coast ascendancy pose great challenges to Quadrant. Perhaps we've never been more in need of lively, independent magazines. For the next few years the commentariat may prove to be the de facto opposition. Forums where policy can be discussed in substantial 5000-word articles are likely to be one of the most important checks and balances on executive power. Yet the best chance of persuading the political class - as Quadrant showed in the way it conducted the debate on economic rationalism - is by remaining a broad church, above the fray of partisan politicking.

Source

Health and Child Safety bureaucracies protect their own "territory" rather than those they are supposed to help

RARELY has an issue progressed from tragedy to mystery to disgust and onward to public controversy with the rapidity of the death of a 10-year-old girl on Bribie Island last week. It began as a holiday eyebrow-raiser, assumed an added sadness when murder was revealed, took on an air of mystery when the child's father was found at Mt Glorious, became nauseatingly horrific when allegations of incestuous rape surfaced and turned into outrage when it became apparent the alleged killer had been released after being treated for mental illness.

Now we have an inquiry into why the system failed an innocent child and into an apparent failure of Queensland Health and the Department of Child Safety to communicate. Still, it took almost a week for Health Minister Stephen Robertson to cut the gordian knot and order his outfit to even start talking to Child Safety if kids are seen to be at risk.

Fortunately, genuine public interest - as opposed to public prurience - has ensured the issue will be investigated by the loftily named Health Quality Assurance Commission rather than disappearing into the mysterious caverns of in-house public service inquiry. Media coyness and legal skittishness have taken second place to common sense. Hopefully, the departments will be struck by the same blinding light rather than skulking behind the traditional wall of confidentiality.

While the underlying causes of the Bribie Island tragedy are probably complex, the events are simple. It seems the alleged perpetrator was a troubled man who stacked on such an act at a shopping centre that he was taken to Royal Brisbane Hospital and held for two weeks, a considerable time in a hard-pressed frontline facility. An involuntary treatment order is imposed only if there is an "imminent risk that a person may cause harm to himself or herself or someone else" yet he was released into a position of sole responsibility for four children.

It defies belief that during those crucial two weeks his family situation was not apparent. It doubly defies belief that Child Safety was not informed. That department, presumably, would have had at least a passing interest, as the children had been the subject of complaints. But maybe not, given that its "low level" categorisation of the problem was so catastrophically wrong.

When it comes to mental illness (still to be legally tested in this case) a public duty of care overrides fragile concepts of individual responsibility. Mental illness presents major difficulties in diagnosis and treatment. It is doubly difficult in a society cracking up under self-induced stress and in which facilities are disgracefully scarce. In this case, professionals made a bad call that led to Health making a fatal decision not to pass on the information to Child Safety. Mistakes happen and have to be forgiven. However, there can be no forgiveness if this child died simply because a dysfunctional department is bureaucratically eggbound.

It comes as no surprise that the Health Department is again at the centre of a human tragedy. Despite all the headline events of recent years it seems chronically incapable of operating sensibly, efficiently and humanely. Child Safety has such a disastrous record that its very title sometimes seems a cruel misnomer. The fact that 57 children known to the department died in one calendar year speaks for itself. Ironically, both departments are largely staffed by good, intelligent, well-trained and kind people. Yet, they let us down so badly and so regularly.

Successive ministers seem so overawed by the baffling complexities of the Health and Child Safety portfolios they are incapable of kicking bums and banging heads together. In this instance it was a simple case of making them talk to each other. Kindergarten stuff, really.

Source






Nurses turned off by disorganized government hospitals

A third of the experienced nurses lured back to NSW public hospitals under a Government program have left again. Three days after Premier Morris Iemma bragged about the recruitment of a record 1618 new registered nurses, internal government figures show Nursing Reconnect, which was designed to address a lack of experience, is floundering. The figures, obtained by the NSW Opposition under freedom of information laws, show 1647 nurses had returned to the public hospital system under the program since it began in 2002. But 479 of them subsequently left, for other employment or to take time out.

Opposition health spokeswoman Jillian Skinner said the Government had spent more than $6.5 million on Nursing Reconnect, meaning each returning nurse cost more than $4000 in refresher training and administration. "The Government spent $1.9 million recruiting people who subsequently left," Ms Skinner said. "Only 107 nurses have been recruited this year, compared to 807 in 2002. "The cost of Labor's recruitment program is rising while the number of nurses signing up is falling. Nurses won't want to come back to work while [Health Minister] Reba Meagher and the Iemma Government continue to mismanage our hospitals."

On Thursday, Ms Meagher announced the new recruits, saying that Nursing Reconnect had "attracted 1650 nurses back into the profession". But she failed to mention the high attrition rate. Yesterday Ms Meagher said the most common reasons why nurses had left were family commitments and to work elsewhere as nurses. The majority who had rejoined had stayed, she said.

NSW Nurses Association professional officer Annie Butler said improvements to conditions and pay were essential to retain nurses. Their workload had increased as ancillary positions were cut, and the frustration of seemingly minor challenges, like finding enough pillows, was immense.

Source






Hospitals serving junk food

This attack is crazy. People are not in hospital long-term. The important thing for hospital food is for it to be appetizing -- so that patients will eat it and keep their strength up

ARTERY-clogging junk food [Pure ignorance speaking there. Careful research has found NO EFFECT of dietary fat intake on cardiovascular disease] is widely available at hospitals across the state and Queensland Health has no plans to ban it. Despite implementing some of the toughest anti-smoking laws in the country, Queensland Health says it will not follow the lead of Western Australia, which last week moved to rid its hospitals of all unhealthy foods

Queensland's Chief Health Officer, Dr Jeannette Young, admitted serving up food with a low nutritional value at health-care facilities was sending the public the "wrong message". "It is about everything in moderation," Dr Young said. "The problem is we need to provide more alternatives (to calorie-dense, less nutritional foods)."

Under the WA initiative, all unhealthy food and drinks must be removed from hospital and clinic cafeterias and vending machines by January 1 next year. But there are no rules on what food can be sold at Queensland hospitals and some serve up exactly the kinds of food they warn their patients to avoid. Prince Charles Hospital, for example, is one of the top specialist coronary-care facilities in the country - but just 100m from the doors to the cardiac-care unit are artery-clogging snack foods sitting under heat lamps waiting to be eaten, The Sunday Mail discovered last week. Hot chips, burgers, chicken, pizza, various fried snacks and hot dogs were just a few items on the menu at the hospital's Breeze Cafe. A plated meal bought from there featuring a hamburger and fried chips carried hundreds of calories and levels of dangerous saturated fats far in excess of the recommended daily intake.

Ironically, the cafe raises money for medical research, including coronary care. It was a similar story at food outlets and vending machines at other Brisbane hospitals, including the Mater, Princess Alexandra, Prince Charles and the Royal Brisbane and Women's. While all had a healthy option on their menus, the fare on offer is dominated by fried foods and sugary snacks.

Dr Linda Selvey, population health senior director for Queensland Health, said the department would monitor the WA initiative, but would leave the Queensland public to make their own food choices. "Queensland Health has, at this stage, chosen to use a colour-code system as we believe that when Queenslanders are given access to healthy foods, they have shown they can make the correct choices," she said. Under the Queensland plan, all private, commercially-run food outlets in facilities operated by Queensland Health will be required to comply with the department's Better Choice strategy.

Greg Johnson of Diabetes Australia is surprised more is not being done to reduce the availability of unhealthy foods, particularly as it had been proven that obesity is a main factor in Type 2 diabetes. He said 60 per cent of adults and 30 per cent of children and adolescents in Australia were overweight or obese. "We're not a lucky country of healthy athletes," he said.

Source






Educational realism growing

The booming demand for tradesmen has accelerated a disturbing education trend, with the number of male school-leavers applying for university falling for the 10th year in a row. The latest tertiary admission figures reveal that just 38 per cent of university applicants are male, down from more than 42 per cent a decade ago. Pat Smith of the Queensland Tertiary Admissions Centre said the latest figures were worrying. "It's getting worse. It is a drain which is a concern for Queensland tertiary institutions," he said.

The overall number of applicants has also declined by about 1000, with 50,400 students applying for the 1400 courses on offer this year. The fall in male applications over the past few years averages 1355 students annually. Many of the male school-leavers not going on to uni have been lured by the big money on offer in the mining and building industries. Qualified tradesmen in some high-demand areas can earn more than $100,000 by the age of 21.

Gold Coast carpenter Kane Anderson, 18, who graduated from All Saints Anglican School, said he decided in Year 11 his best option was to take up an apprenticeship. "After three years' work, you can earn more than $100,000. Then you can start your own company and it just keeps growing and growing. "A lot of my friends are all doing different trades. Carpentry is one of the most popular. I'll be 21 when I finish, still young and earning good money."

But other young men who have decided against a degree in favour of a wage as an unskilled labourer have been urged by education authorities to reconsider and apply mid-year for university spots. The first round of university offers will be released on Thursday, with seven out of 10 applicants expected to get their first preference. The most popular courses this year are natural and physical sciences (up 16 per cent on last year), engineering (up 14 per cent) and architecture and building (up 8 per cent). Education (down 18 per cent) has experienced the biggest drop....

National Union of Students president Angus McFarland acknowledged school-leavers were faced with difficult decisions. University students could be left with a debt which ranged from $30,000 to $500,000, he said. "It's not surprising that a young man or woman who has the option of going to university and studying for four years or going into a trade and getting $100,000 will make that decision to work."

Source

Howard only 1.5% from being PM again

It felt like a Labor landslide. Yet John Howard and his Coalition government came within 1.5% of holding on to power at the recent federal election, final figures show. The Australian Electoral Commission says the Coalition ended up with 47.44% of the two-party vote after strongly outpolling Labor in the record 2.5 million postal, pre-poll and absentee votes counted after election night. The final count shows the election was closer than it appeared on election night. Not only did the Coalition haul back Labor's lead in overall votes, but the election outcome was decided in an extraordinary number of close seats that could have gone either way.

In the end, Labor won 83 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives, the Coalition 65 and independents two. But nine of Labor's 83 seats were won by margins of less than 1.5%. Had the Coalition won them, the seats would have been split 74-all, with two conservative independents holding the balance of power - and most likely using it to give John Howard a fifth term in office.

Labor's narrow wins included Maxine McKew's victory over Mr Howard in Bennelong (by 1.4%), the Victorian seats of Corangamite (0.85%) and Deakin (1.41%), and three seats won by tiny margins: Robertson (NSW, 0.11%), Flynn (Qld, 0.16%) and the Darwin seat of Solomon (0.19%). With just 320 more votes in the right places, the Coalition could have cut Labor's majority to just 10 seats, a less than commanding tally. With fewer than 6000 more votes in the right seats, it could have held onto government.

But there was even more luck on the Coalition's side. It won 13 of its 65 seats by less than 2%, five of them by less than 0.22%. They included the Melbourne fringe seat of McEwen, which former tourism minister Fran Bailey held by just 12 votes (0.01%), the Brisbane seat of Bowman, held by 64 votes (0.04%), the former Labor seat of Swan, won by 164 votes (0.11%), and the Queensland seats of Dickson (0.13%) and Herbert (0.21%). All told, the Coalition won half its seats - 32 out of 65 - by majorities of less than 6%. Labor won 25 of its 83 by the same margin, including the seat of Melbourne, where Finance Minister Lindsay Tanner beat the Greens' Adam Bandt by just 4.71%.

Most of the 57 MPs in marginal seats now face new uncertainties, with federal redistributions likely in every state except South Australia before the next federal election. The electoral commission has begun the process of redistributing the 15 electorates in Western Australia, and will begin redistributions in Tasmania and the Northern Territory later this year. Population shifts will also require it to once again carry out redistributions in Queensland and NSW in 2009, with Queensland gaining a seat and NSW losing one. By January 2010, it will be Victoria's turn.

Source





Don't rush back to unfair dismissal laws

By Barry Cohen, a former Labor environment minister

If the term mandate has any meaning at all, the Rudd Government has a mandate to repeal Work Choices. The Leader of the Opposition has indicated he accepts the voters' decision, so there shouldn't be a problem. If there is, there will be an early double dissolution and the Coalition will lose another 20 seats. Unquestionably, Labor can destroy Work Choices, but it would be wise to move slowly, particularly in dealing with unfair dismissal.

My opposition to unfair dismissal has been well documented in columns in The Australian, but if press reports are to be believed I am not alone. Apparently there are plenty in cabinet and caucus who aren't keen to return to the unfair dismissal rules of the Hawke-Keating era. The Howard government failed miserably in arguing its case against unfair dismissal. Ministers pointed out it was restricting employment, but they never explained how and why. There was considerable public debate about workers' rights but no mention of the rights of employers, and small-business employers in particular.

The term unfair dismissal slanted the debate one way right from the beginning. It implied that all dismissals were inherently unfair. No one favours unfair dismissal but fairness is in the eye of the beholder. No employee believes they were fairly dismissed. The definition of a small business varies but is generally accepted as being one with fewer than 20 employees. The Australian Chamber of Commerce suggests that there are approximately 1.9 million small businesses with 3.5 million employees. That's a fair slice of Australia's workforce.

Most business owners are former employees who have struck out on their own because they want to be independent. The risks are many and varied because of the variety of trades, professions and commercial activities that come under the small business umbrella. Many invest their life savings and mortgage their home and business while working and worrying around the clock.

Some succeed, but up to 70 per cent fail in the first three years. The majority is lucky to eke out a living, with many earning less than their employees and without any of their entitlements (holiday pay, sick leave, paid public holidays and so on). When there's a credit squeeze or recession, or they simply make mistakes, they ask themselves why they didn't let someone else do the worrying.

Are there bad employers? Of course, but most treat and pay their staff well, if only because it makes for a happy and productive workforce. No sane employer sacks staff that are doing a good job. Are there bad employees? It's a silly question because we all know the answer.

In recent discussions with a friend who was defending unfair dismissal, I recounted some misdemeanours committed by those I had employed during 50 years as an employer. They ranged from the perennially late to one who stole a fortune from the business, and another who regularly failed to show up after a heavy night out. My friend responded: "But they can be sacked under the soon to be reintroduced unfair dismissal legislation." Really?

The previous legislation required an employer to furnish three warning letters, but that didn't guarantee that the employer wouldn't be involved in protracted and costly negotiations with the Industrial Relations Commission. And even if they won the case, the employer was invited by the magistrate to provide some go-away money to the employee. The assumption was that anyone running a business could afford to pay. It was fine if you happened to be Woolworths, but not if you owned the corner shop. Faced with continued angst and legal costs, the employer invariably paid up.

The difficulty with unfair dismissal is prescribing in legislation the thousands of possible disagreements that can occur in the workplace. At present the legislation is loaded overwhelmingly in favour of the employee. With the assumption by many union officials that everyone in business is rolling in money, what's a few months' extra wages to the "rich" boss? And what of the employee who is doing a good job but the employer finds someone who can do it better? Unfair? No. Unlucky? Yes. An owner is entitled to make decisions that can mean the difference between success and failure. Providing the employee is given adequate notice and full entitlements, there should be no argument.

Reverse the situation and imagine the reaction if a long-term employee who has been paid and treated well for many years walks into the boss's office and says, "I've been offered a better job." Should the employee be penalised for unfair departure?

The tricky part for the Government is to draw a line between a small number of genuine unfair dismissals and the right of employers to hire whoever they wish to hire. If you think that's easy, try drawing up behavioral rules for married couples.

What the Government needs to turn its attention to is the Howard government's casualisation of the workforce. Genuine casual workers are easy to define. They are retirees, students, housewives and the like who only want a few hours' work a week. Increasingly, however, full-time workers are being designated as casuals and losing all their entitlements. They may receive a slightly higher rate of pay, but when business is slow they can be stood down or sacked without notice. Consequently their average take-home pay is much lower. It is reasonable for an employee to be given a three-month trial period as a casual, but after that any worker who works more than 25 hours a week should be considered permanent. If the Rudd Government wants to help low-income workers, this is the area in which it should concentrate.

Source






Woman hit by taxi says charges to be dropped

Cowardly Cowdery (notorious pro-criminal NSW DPP) at work again, by the looks of it



Jenny Franco says her worst fears have been realised after she was told that charges against the taxi driver accused of running her down will be dropped. Stuart Russell Graham, 55, was behind the wheel of a cab that allegedly struck the 23-year-old at Miranda, in Sydney's south, on February 20 last year. Ms Franco, who was dragged 150 metres along the road, lost her left eye and spent three months in hospital. Graham was charged with dangerous driving occasioning grievous bodily harm and with failing to stop and assist.

In November, the Downing Centre Local Court heard that Graham's lawyer, Brett Thomas, had asked the Director of Public Prosecutions to drop the charges against him. The court was told police investigations were continuing and the DPP was awaiting a psychiatric report while considering Mr Thomas's request. Yesterday, a spokeswoman for the DPP said she could not comment on whether the case against Graham would be dropped, as the matter was before the courts. Mr Thomas could not be reached for comment.

However, Ms Franco told Channel Seven the DPP had told her the charges against Graham would be dropped. She is reportedly due to meet the DPP on Monday, with the charges to be formally dropped during a court hearing on Tuesday. "It was actually my worst fear," she said. "It scares me to know that this accused taxi driver gets to walk scot-free, possibly return to his work and . possibly hurt someone else."

Ms Franco's mother, Ludy, said her daughter was too traumatised to go back to where the accident happened. She said her daughter had been living in an apartment in the city, away from the family's Miranda home and the scene of the accident.

Source





Australia still a magnet for British migrants

'Wanted Down Under' programme returns to British TV -- putting migration to Australia in the spotlight. As Britain fills up with blacks and Muslims, Australia fills up with Brits. I think it is clear which country has the better of the bargain

As the second series of 'Wanted Down Under' returns to the BBC, a new wave of families are shown sampling life in Australia with an eye to emigrating permanently. With the series documenting life on the Australian immigration fast track, the Australian Visa Bureau looks at the lessons other British migration hopefuls can take from the programme.

The immensely popular 'Wanted Down Under' sees presenter Nadia Sawalha joining a number British families as they're given a look at life in Australia ahead of possible migration. The series takes a realistic look at the reason why emigration has become such a popular option in recent years, as well as the very real demands that come with forging a new life in Australia.

Tom W. Blackett, Official Spokesperson of the Australian Visa Bureau comments: "Seeing 'Wanted Down Under' return to TV screens should be welcomed as essential viewing for any family considering permanent migration to Australia. The idea of moving Down Under to start anew is one that more and more people are considering, and it's important that we see getting an Australian visa as the very concrete reality it is, rather than an unattainable ambition."

"However, 'Wanted Down Under' doesn't shy away from showing the potential difficulties involved in pursuing Australian emigration. While you'll almost certainly be eligible for permanent residence if your job is listed on the Migration Occupations in Demand List (MODL), there are a number of unexpected pitfalls involved when navigating the legislative requirements alone. It can be a time-consuming process that we'd recommend assigning to a trained migration consultant, which can be done by completing an Australian visa application.

"However, the message the programme presents is still a valid one; if the job that you do is on the MODL list of those in short supply in Australia, you are under 45 and you are thinking of emigrating, then the Australian government will help to fast track you through the immigration procedure"

Australia needs skilled immigrants: Anyone applying for an Australian visa should begin by completing the Australian Visa Bureau's online Australian visa application to see if they meet the Australian visa requirements.

Source

More Muslim madness

No doubt the girl was threatening the a*hole's "honour" by showing a normal interest in boys

A TEENAGER was last night strangled by her father before he took his own life. Neighbours were alerted to the tragedy by the "howling screams" of the 14-year-old girl's mother, who made the gruesome discovery shortly after 6pm. Police and ambulance crews rushed to the Stevens St, Pennant Hills townhouse in Sydney's northwest, arriving to find the girl unconscious and her father dead.

Distraught neighbours last night said the evening calm was shattered by the mother's distraught screams. "The scream was heard down the street. It was horrible," one neighbour said. It is understood the family were originally from Iran and had signed a two-year lease on the property three months ago.

Paramedics desperately tried to revive the teenager but she was pronounced dead a short time later. Police said the girl had been strangled but did not reveal the father's age or cause of death. A police spokesman last night confirmed the deaths of the teen and her father were being investigated as a murder-suicide. "Investigators don't believe a third party is involved. The exact cause and nature of the deaths will be established in a post mortem," the spokesman said.

The officer-in charge of the investigation, Inspector Michael Begg last night declined to talk about the incident when contacted by The Daily Telegraph.

Source






NSW: 4200 nurses quit every year

What happens when you overwork nurses in order to employ more and more of those lovely bureaucrats

NURSES are leaving public hospitals faster than the Government can replace them despite a record 2368 graduates starting this year. The NSW health system is haemorrhaging nurses at a rate of 10 per cent - 4200 positions - a year, leaving existing staff overworked. Premier Morris Iemma yesterday admitted, while visiting Royal North Shore Hospital, that it was difficult to recruit and retain nurses.

However, embarrassingly for the Government, Mr Iemma also conceded in front of his embattled Health Minister Reba Meagher that Royal North Shore Hospital needed to return "to the forefront". Ms Meagher has been under siege over the hospital's performance, since staff and patients revealed a series of horror stories about the hospital's performance last year. Continually forced to defend the hospital, Ms Meagher yesterday looked on as Mr Iemma did the talking.

"I have taken a number of small steps to address the issue here at Royal North Shore Hospital," he said. ". . . to restore the reputation of the hospital as well as continue to improve the health services. "There are challenges, as there are in any hospital. "We are taking extra measures to address that." The hospital will be allocated 128 nurses at the end of this month, one of the largest intakes in the state. However, it still needs another 22 experienced nurses to fill the hospital's current shortfall. But difficulties remain as bullying and harassment of nurses has tainted RNSH. Long-serving staff have complained publicly of being intimidated by senior management.

Trying to soothe the hospital's bruised reputation, Mr Iemma assured new recruits: "I can promise the graduates that anyone who intimidates . . . will be dealt with, and dealt with very strongly. "I guarantee these graduates there is no place for bullying."

Despite the Government's recruitment push, a global shortage of nurses is placing strain on hospitals. NSW Nurses Association acting president Judith Kiejda said an ageing work force was having an impact on the health sector. "Some (nurses) do leave for overseas, career changes but a lot of the losses come down to retirement," she said. "There are a lot of nurses who are coming up to retirement far more than we are bring in the new ones."

New graduate, Emma Bowen, 20, said she was not put off by the negativity surrounding RNSH. "I did my practice here (at Royal North Shore) and really enjoyed it," she said. "I had excellent support."

Source






Your government will look after you (NOT)

Despite nine calls, no one came for dying man

THE family of a man bashed to death during a Christmas Day game of beach cricket called triple-0 six times but still had to drive the dying man to hospital themselves because neither the police nor ambulances arrived in time. Combined with three other direct calls to Geraldton police station, north of Perth, which raised concerns about the escalating violence at Sunset Beach that night, the family of William Rowe made a total of nine calls asking for police or medical assistance.

It is understood the quality of information in some of the calls may have been affected because the callers were under duress. But in the end no police or ambulance vehicles arrived at the beach, forcing the frantic family to drive an unconscious Mr Rowe to hospital with another family member who had been struck in the face with a bottle during an attack in the beach car park.

A man, 21, and a group of [black] teenagers have been charged over the attacks, which began while Mr Rowe, 49, a farmer, and his family were enjoying the game of beach cricket. In a written response to questions on the handling of the tragedy, the acting police commissioner Chris Dawson defended the inability of the police force to respond fast enough to calls for help.

He said that one of the four high-priority incidents that prevented officers from going to the beach was a home burglary. The others were a violent domestic argument and an incident involving a man armed with a knife. Mr Dawson continued to refuse to give specific times for those incidents.

Detailing the calls from Sunset Beach, he said police arrived about 21 minutes after the first of the calls, by which time the Rowe family was on its way to hospital and most of their alleged attackers had left. "On the information available to them at the time, I am satisfied Geraldton police made the right decisions," he said. He told The West Australian that of the six triple-0 calls made, five were made for ambulance and hospital assistance and one was to police, who had arrived at the empty beach car park by that stage. Mr Dawson said that he would wait for the State Coroner's findings into Mr Rowe's death. The findings could take more than two years to be handed down.

Source






Want to be a doctor? Try your luck

The usual Leftist hatred of merit -- and the examinations which detect it -- at work

The University of Sydney's medical school may turn its admissions process into a lucky dip and scrap applicant interviews in the biggest overhaul of its selection policy in 10 years. The proposals are among options being investigated by a working party to ensure admissions to the university's most prestigious course are fair and snare the best students. The dean of the school, Bruce Robinson, commissioned the review because he was concerned the current process failed to predict which applicants would succeed as students and doctors.

Students are selected through a combination of interviews, grade point average and performance in an exam known as the Graduate Australian Medical School Admissions Test, used by 11 universities. But the test had never been properly scrutinised, Professor Robinson said. An internal review had found no difference between students who scraped through and those who scored highly.

The working party is considering a ballot system used in the Netherlands, with each applicant's name put into a lottery. Outstanding HSC students would get more chances. "It may be just as reliable as anything else," Professor Robinson said. "I'm just not sure the way we're doing it at the moment is the best way or the fairest way. There is no perfect way."

The University of Queensland has eliminated interviews from its admissions system after a review cast doubt on their value. Kim Oates, who is reviewing the University of Sydney program with Kerry Goulston, said there was little evidence the interview system was valuable. "What's really interesting is that a few years after graduation most people working in hospitals can't tell what medical school the students have been to," Professor Oates said. "And I think that's because the hospital system moulds you as well."

However, the University of NSW says the attrition rate in its undergraduate program has been halved since interviews were added to the admissions process in 2002. In its own recent review, the body that developed the current exam, the Australian Council of Educational Research, concluded it was a good predictor of success. Marita MacMahon Ball, the general manager of higher education programs, said there was a correlation between students' results and their first-year exam results. [Is that all? And how big is the correlation?]

Source






Welfare reforms 'not enough'

DISABILITY pension recipients who are able to work at least part-time should be required to seek a job, according to the OECD. The Paris-based economic advisory body said the welfare to work reforms introduced by the Howard government last year did not go far enough to reduce Australia's $25 billion bill for disability and sickness benefits. In a major report on disability benefits, the OECD has urged the Rudd Government to embark on a fresh round of welfare reform that would also put pressure on employers to retain sick and disabled workers.

Employment Participation Minister Brendan O'Connor said any government response to the report would be made in consultation with people with disabilities, employers and experts. "The Rudd Government believes we can improve on the systems currently in place, and we intend to ensure that people with disabilities receive greater opportunities for education and training to ensure their job prospects are maximised," he said.

The report will put pressure on the Government to act because, from Opposition, Labor frequently used the authority of the OECD to attack the Coalition on issues ranging from infrastructure to industrial relations. The Coalition's welfare reforms, opposed by Labor and the disability lobby groups, imposed a work test on new applicants for the disability pension, but left the 700,000 existing beneficiaries untouched. The OECD says only 1per cent of people on a disability pension find work each year. It says the Howard government's welfare reforms created problems by forcing people eligible for the disability pension but with the ability to work part-time on to the Newstart unemployment benefit rather than the more generous disability pension. Not only is the unemployment benefit 20 per cent lower, it is taxed and is less flexible about how much work can be done before benefits are lost.

The OECD says the Government should revisit the welfare review led by Salvation Army chief Patrick McClure in 2000, which recommended a single working-age benefit for the unemployed, the disabled and sole parents. This would "simplify the system and avoid undesirable incentives to move from one benefit to another". As a first step, the OECD urged that younger disabled people who have been receiving the pension be required to seek work, later extending to all disabled people. It should also be easier for people on disability benefits to suspend their entitlement so they would not lose it if they found work for a period.

The OECD said the Government should require employers to put more effort into keeping on people with sickness or disability. More than a third of people applying for the disability pension were previously unemployed. It suggested this "could be related to the fact that sick employees can be fired relatively easily". Anti-discrimination laws did not provide sufficient protection for workers with disabilities. Employers were required to provide 10 days' sick leave, but had no obligation beyond that. The OECD said the Government should follow the example of other countries in mandating the minimum sick leave for a longer period.

Source

Public hospital negligence leads to tragedy again

A Traralgon couple is planning to sue the local hospital because their baby was born with severe brain damage after allegedly being deprived of oxygen. Tobias Vizard was not breathing at birth, but was resuscitated in a Latrobe Regional Hospital birthing room and spent two weeks on life support. His life expectancy is short, and his disabilities include cerebral palsy and possibly quadriplegia. Mum Julia Williams said she and her family pleaded for an emergency caesarean as her son's heart rate plummeted and he could not be pushed through the birth canal during labour on August 17 last year.

It was more than two hours after her waters broke that Tobias was delivered naturally but with a hypoxic brain injury, believed to be caused by a lack of oxygen. The pregnancy was in its 40th week and contractions started on Tobias's expected birth date, a fortnight after ultrasounds indicated there was nothing wrong. He is now living with brain damage more severe than that experienced by many very premature babies.

Tobias's father, Brian Vizard, is deaf and cannot hear his son struggling for air at night to know when his airways need to be cleared. However Ms Williams said they were determined to make the most of each day together. "He was dead when he was born. He was dolphin blue, and I didn't understand what was going on until I saw them resuscitating him in front of us," she said. "We don't ever wish this to happen to anyone. You don't know what it is like to have a newborn and they are saying he is not going to make it. "But he is beautiful to look at. He doesn't look handicapped, apart from the cerebral palsy in his hand."

The distressed parents are seeking legal advice from Maurice Blackburn lawyers. Latrobe Regional Hospital spokeswoman Jan Rees confirmed the hospital investigated the birth, but said she could not comment because legal action had started. The matter has also been referred to the Health Services Commissioner, but details of the investigation remain confidential. The commissioner can enforce a compensation payout following conciliation, provided that litigation does not proceed. The Royal Children's Hospital, which treated Tobias in the weeks after his birth, declined to comment because it did not want to influence potential legal action.

Source




Victorian government schools not so "free"

Government schools that have wrongly charged parents for voluntary fees will be forced to pay families back under a State Government crackdown. Exclusive figures seen by the Herald Sun reveal taxpayer-funded state schools netted a staggering $168 million in voluntary fees in 2006 alone. The total is more than three times as much as parents contributed in 2004.

Government documents, seen after a three-month wait under Freedom of Information laws, show four schools raised more than $1 million each. Another 45 schools raised more than $500,000 from their local communities in 2006 alone. Schools received an average of more than $106,000 each from voluntary fees, with some hitting parents for more than $300 per student. Select-entry Melbourne High School ($1.69 million) and Box Hill Senior Secondary College ($1.13 million) raised the most from voluntary fees in 2006. Schools in low socio-economic areas, such as Frankston High, Footscray City College and Narre Warren South P-12 College, were among schools that raised more than $500,000 from local parents.

When the Herald Sun anonymously rang Balwyn High School earlier in December, we were told parents must pay the voluntary fee of $345 per student. Swan Marsh Primary School, near Colac, received nothing in voluntary fees. Navarre Primary, west of Ballarat, received $20.

Non-compulsory fees vary between schools, but often run into hundreds of dollars. Welfare agencies are bracing themselves for an influx of calls from thousands of stressed families whose schools are bullying them into paying fees when first term starts on January 30. Some schools have banned students from attending camps, accessing the internet and taking woodwork projects home because their parents have not paid voluntary fees. Some schools have organised special payment plans if parents are unable to afford a lump-sum amount.

Department of Education and Early Childhood Development policy stipulates state schools must not force parents to pay optional fees. Education Minister Bronwyn Pike said at least 100 schools would be audited from March to ensure they are complying with fundraising guidelines. Ms Pike said schools must clearly state which items parents are expected to pay for, and which are voluntary financial contributions. Schools with a history of breaching the guidelines will be on the audit list while a small number will be selected randomly, she said. "Most of our schools do the right thing, but if we find schools who are over-charging parents they will have to pay the money back," Ms Pike said.

The Government rejected the Herald Sun's request for figures from 2007, claiming the data was not yet available. Opposition education spokesman Martin Dixon said the millions paid by parents proved the State Government was under-funding education. "Voluntary levies are fine for extras and schools are not relying on them to prop up budgets, but $168 million begs the question if schools are being funded properly -- and the answer is no."

Open Family youth worker Les Twentyman said more than 1000 families were expected to approach the service for help with fees in January. "It just makes me livid that schools are forcing parents who certainly can't afford it to pay, or they will withhold materials and resources from their kids," he said. "This is an outrageous situation." Victorian Council of Social Service deputy director Carolyn Atkins has previously told the Herald Sun voluntary fees caused heartache for some families. "Some students are being denied access to art or music, which really should be seen as core elements of an education," Ms Atkins said.

Source




A more realistic comment on the "risk" to corals

Corals may move from warming seas. A change from the garbage about corals dying out. Corals already have a huge North/South geographical range -- which means a huge range of temperature tolerance

If their watery world continues to warm as climate change scientists predict, Western Australia's corals may head south to cooler climes. That's the message from US and Australian researchers who compared the behaviour of the state's corals then and now. Since "then" was 125,000 years ago, University of Queensland paleoecologist John Pandolfi and geologist Benjamin Greenstein of Cornelle College in Iowa are confident their findings are not a short-term blip.

The implication is that conservation managers should help ensure that corals have an "escape route" beyond existing parks and protected areas, claimed Professor Pandolfi. "Paving the way to southern refugia is a step in the right direction for coral conservation," he argued. "These refugia could be very important for reseeding northern reefs if the environmental conditions return to a more favourable state."

According to their research _ reported in the journal Global Change Biology _ fast-growing branching corals, Acropora, will likely be the first to move, possibly as far south as Margaret River or even around the corner to Albany. "We've already seen some movement of the Acropora," said Professor Pandolfi, with UQ's Centre for Marine Studies. "Rottnest Island (off Perth) has Acropora coral and it didn't have any 20 years ago," he said.

Along with Professor Greenstein, Professor Pandolfi took advantage of Western Australia's "natural laboratory", a 1500-km-long stretch of living and fossil coral reefs. They paired five ancient and modern reefs: two at Ningaloo and Shark Bay in the north, two more in the Houtman-Abrolhos Islands and Geraldton-Leander Point and the most southerly site at Rottnest Island. They assessed the diversity and distribution of coral species living in the ancient and modern communities and then compared the data. The results suggested that coral diversity expands and contracts according to the water temperature.

While that gives hope that if reefs can shelter in cooler refugia they'll survive global warming, Professor Pandolfi said he and Professor Greenstein looked only at temperature. He claimed managers must work to protect reefs from human impacts like pollution, as sea and carbon dioxide levels rise and stress the coral. "The better the health of the reefs the better off they'll be in handling change," said Professor Pandolfi. "We have to keep an eye out and give them a chance to escape."

Source





Now councils are banning kites

Using "safety" to attack the recreations of normal people again



A [NSW] council has taken the crazy step of banning kites in a popular park, with the declaration of war on fun upsetting local families. Parents are outraged Shellharbour Council has moved to outlaw kite flying in a local community reserve, robbing children of a popular activity. The kite prohibition was listed among other banned activities such as carrying guns, lighting fires and horse riding.

Lincoln Steel regularly takes his children to Flinders Reserve, in the centre of Shellharbour, and is appalled his family now faces a $100 council-issued fine if they fly a kite. "How stupid is that. You can do just about everything else but you can't fly a kite," Mr Steel said. Mr Steel noticed the sign about four weeks ago but it emerged yesterday even the Council is having second thoughts about its tough stance on harmless fun.

When told of his Council's kite-flying ban, Mayor David Hamilton yesterday ordered a full investigation. He promised The Daily Telegraph that if investigators failed to find a serious safety reason for the ban, the sign would be torn down. "It will have to be a very good reason because that is what parks are for, parks are for kids to enjoy and families to enjoy," he said. "I've got grandkids myself and on numerous occasions I have taken my grandkids to fly kites, I am at a total loss to say why that sign is there."

The kite ban was only brought to Mr Hamilton's attention over the weekend. He said he had been unaware a sign had been posted at the reserve. Mr Hamilton said if a serious risk to children flying kites was found, such as overhead powerlines, he would take the ban seriously.

Deputy Mayor Michele Greig supported Mr Hamilton's investigation but she also said kite flying could be a dangerous activity. "Children's safety is the No. 1 priority," she said. "If it is a safety issue, I have no problem (with the ban). It is Council's role to make it a safe environment for people to use it."

Mr Hamilton said his investigation was taking extra time because of the long weekend but he hoped to resolve the issue as soon as possible.

Source






More bureaucratic contempt for the taxpayer

Public servants will be ordered to pay for their own massages after chalking up more than $200,000 in taxpayer-funded rub downs. The practice was widespread under the former Howard government, with the former prime minister's own department enjoying more than $6000 worth of back rubs at taxpayers' expense. Figures tabled in Federal Parliament show the government's total massage bill in 2004 topped $108,710 - the equivalent of about $200 worth of massages per public servant. In 2005, at least $89,000 was spent on publicly funded rub downs for the nation's bureaucrats.

Assistant Treasurer Chris Bowen has previously labelled the practice a "blatant waste of expenditure". Mr Bowen's spokesman this week said the minister would be advising his agency heads that massages were not an appropriate use of taxpayers' funds. Other ministers are expected to follow Mr Bowen's lead and ban taxpayer-funded massages as the Rudd administration moves to clamp down on government largesse and wastage. Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has already set up a razor gang to save taxpayers billions of dollars in wasted expenditure in order to take pressure off inflation and interest rates.

The Courier-Mail reported last week how Australian diplomats feared losing millions of dollars in taxpayer-funded perks in the drive to slash spending. Australian embassy staff enjoy some of the best perks in the public service, including access to 37 taxpayer-funded holiday houses.

The use of massages is common in the private sector to keep employees healthy and reduce sick leave levels. Some of the biggest users of massage services under the previous government included Australia Post, whose staff were treated to $55,000 worth of rub downs, the Australian Bureau of Statistics ($10,120) and Treasury ($17,000). The cost of the massages varied from $10.86 to $15 for 15 minutes. Public servants in the Industry, Tourism and Resources Department were entitled to spend up to $110 a year on massages by way of a "healthy living subsidy".

Source

Australian Jihadi is a misfit

It's only the opinion of a Leftist journalist but it sounds credible



The Fairfax journalist who met David Hicks after his release from jail says she believes he would find it hard to communicate with those who expect him to apologise for his actions. The journalist, Penelope Debelle, says the convicted terrorism supporter appears to have reflected on his actions during his time in detention and jail.

Mr Hicks had been expected to make an apology when he was released from Adelaide's Yatala prison on Saturday. However a statement read by his lawyer after the release thanked supporters, but added only that Mr Hicks was not strong enough to speak.

Ms Debelle says her brief meeting with Mr Hicks and his father Terry yesterday confirmed that Mr Hicks' re-adjustment to society would be a slow process. "Having met him, [it] is very obvious he's not a confident enough person, he's not socialised in an easy way," she said. "He's just not skilled enough - socially skilled enough - to deal with unwanted attention."

Source





Do the defence bureaucrats EVER get anything right?

Frigates 'can't go to war' despite $1.4bn upgrade

The navy's front-line fighting ships cannot defend themselves and are unable to be sent into battle, despite a $1.4 billion upgrade. A navy insider close to the 4000-tonne Adelaide Class Guided Missile Frigates has revealed the ships' complex electronic systems are not working properly. He told The Advertiser that sending the 1970s ships to war would be like sending a VK Commodore to race at Bathurst.

Senior officials now admit that the 1997 frigate upgrade project was a "debacle" created by the Howard Government's decision to maximise the sale price of the Sydney-based contractor, Australian Defence Industries, when it was sold to the French firm, Thales.

Defence Minister Joel Fitzgibbon described the upgrade as "another nightmare" Labor has inherited from the previous Coalition government. The project is four years late and includes four ships - not the original six.

The navy insider, who asked not to be named, said sailors were quitting because their ships could not be deployed to the Middle East or any conflict zone. Navy chief Vice-Admiral Russ Shalders last year refused to accept the first ship in the program, HMAS Sydney, for "operational release" as its fighting systems did not function properly.

The whistleblower said the ships' anti-missile and anti-torpedo systems could not be integrated. Their electronic support measures (eyes and ears for detecting incoming airborne threats) were "a joke". "That means they would be going into a war zone virtually blind," the sailor said. "The torpedo detection system cannot be integrated." The ships also are unable to us long-range chaff, which confuses enemy missiles and takes them from ships, link their helicopters to war-fighting data and integrate towed and on-board sonars to detect enemy torpedoes.

The sailor said what angered him and comrades was the gross waste of taxpayer funds when the navy could have bought virtually new and more capable U.S. Navy Kidd Class Destroyers in the late-1990s for a bargain price.

Mr Fitzgibbon said the upgrade was "another nightmare" Labor would have to manage. "We are, however, determined to deliver the level of capability required for our navy to operate safely in various areas around the world," he said. The best news from the project has been the integration of the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile for self-defence. That is not enough to send them to war.

The total cost of the upgrade is $1.46 billion, or $360 million per ship. Government auditors say up to 98 per cent of the money has been paid to Thales despite the project being four years late and not one ship being operational.

The officer who inherited what is widely regarded as the worst contract signed by the Commonwealth since the Collins "dud subs" submarines, Commodore Drew McKinnie, said that, despite all the problems, he was confident the project would deliver "significant improvements" to the ships. The head of Major Surface Ship Projects with the Defence Material Organisation said he was seeing "much improved performance" from radar sensors.

Source






More on Australia's proposed internet censorship

It sounds entirely defensible, at first: the Federal Government plans to protect unwary children by blocking violence and pornography on the internet. Yet this simple sounding initiative - barely discussed during the election - is riddled with technical, financial, moral and social complexities. The Government's plan, overseen by Telecommunications Minister Stephen Conroy, would require internet service providers (ISPs) to block undesirable sites on computers accessed by all Australians.

A seething Dr Roger Clarke, chair of the Australian Privacy Foundation, bluntly described the proposal as "stupid and inappropriate". He said not only was it unworkable, but it was a sinister blow to an individual's rights to use the internet without censorship. "Not only will it not work, it is quite dangerous to let the Government censor the net and take control out of the hands of parents,' Clarke said. "It is an inappropriate thing for them to be doing. Mr Conroy is like a schoolmaster playing God with the Australian population, all because of the dominance of a moral minority."

Conroy's view is that the legislation - compared by critics to Chinese-style internet censorship - will render unseen the most vile and extreme sites only. "Labor makes no apologies to those that argue that any regulation on the internet is like going down the Chinese road," Conroy said. "If people equate freedom of speech with watching child pornography, then the Rudd Labor Government is going to disagree."

One problem for the Government is that blocking child porn may unintentionally block acceptable sites. The history of the internet is full of such examples; one blogger found that, due to spamware set to block ads for sex drug Cialis, he was unable to publish the word "socialist".

Another problem, according to civil libertarians, is that policing the net should be left to parents - not a big brother-style bureaucracy. And, if it is disingenuous to compare Labor's policy to China's malevolent control over web access to its citizens, it is equally disingenuous of Rudd's Government to claim the issue simply relates to child pornography. There are genuine concerns that the Government - backed by morals groups such as Family First - will in time extend the powers outside of their intended target area.

Also of concern is that, under the Government's plan, users would be permitted to "opt out" of the scheme - and might therefore find themselves listed as possible deviants.

Service providers fear any legislation would be "the thin end of the wedge", heralding widespread censorship. Besides, what evidence is there that young children using the web are regularly stumbling across child pornography? Sites used by paedophiles are well hidden and frequently relocated to avoid detection.

On a practical level, ISPs fear the mass blocking of sites could slow internet speeds and cost millions of dollars to implement. Crucially, the Government has not explained how such a system would be paid for or who would monitor it. The truth is, despite the policy having been part of Labor's manifesto since 2005, and following claims the Government is "engaged constructively with the sector", no one has the faintest idea how such a system would work.

It is expected any future filtered feeds would be based on a current voluntary UK system operated by British Telecom. Sites identified by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (AMAC) would be "blacklisted" and then blocked by the servers. The ability for download speeds to be maintained would depend on the exact number of sites blocked - it is suspected around 2000 sites could cause problems. A user typing in the address would be sent to an error page or possibly - as in Scandinavia - redirected to a police page.

However, ISPs fear a system based on key indicator words could rapidly clog the system. In the UK the Internet Watch Foundation has its encrypted list of 1200 paedophile and race-hate sites updated twice a day. Even still, it is unlikely to deter computer savvy paedophiles here from simply relocating their sites or from swapping pictures on message boards or in forums, thus rendering any filter impotent.

So far the industry, although eager not to be seen to be dragging its feet on child pornography, has been noticeably reticent in its response to Labor's plans. Internet Industry Association spokesman Peter Coroneos was keen to emphasise the work already being done by service providers in supplying free filters. They are likely to clarify their position after ACMA runs simulated tests on a filtered network later this year. "We obviously want to know if this will have an impact on network performance," Coroneos said. "At the moment we don't know what the extent of it will be, what it will cost, and whether it will set a precedent for other changes. We just don't know if it is feasible."

Source




Leftist logic: If people are failing a test it must be a bad test

Some looniness from Australia's new Leftist government. I think the test could be better but the percentage who fail it is no evidence of that

The Federal Government will review the operation of the citizenship test after the release of figures that show more than a fifth of those sitting it are failing. Since the test was introduced in October 10,636 citizenship tests have been sat around the country, and 2311 were failed. Under laws introduced by the previous government anybody wanting to become an Australian citizen must now pass a 20-question, computer-based quiz on Australian history, "values" and way of life and demonstrate an adequate knowledge of English. Only residents who have lived here for four years can apply for citizenship. Those who fail to meet the 60 per cent pass mark can resit the test as often as they want until they get it right.

While in opposition, Kevin Rudd gave his backing to the scheme, as well as to plans to make new arrivals to the country sign a so-called values statement saying they agreed to abide by the Australian way of life. However, the new Immigration Minister, Chris Evans, confirmed yesterday that the Government would review the citizenship test in light of the poor test result returns and could make wholesale changes. The Government would assess the process to see whether improvements could be made, Senator Evans said. "The citizenship test should be about increasing awareness of citizen's responsibilities and of the Australian way of life," he said. Regardless of the problems, the minister encouraged people to continue sitting the test.

The former prime minister John Howard was directly involved in crafting the themes covered in the test. Despite the high failure rate, the test questions, which are drawn from a pool of 200, are comparatively simple and only need be answered in multiple-choice format. A sample question asks the applicant to say which one of three given values is important in modern Australia: that everyone has the same religion; that everyone has equality of opportunity; or that everyone belongs to the same political party.

Another asks which Australian was most famous for playing cricket: Rod Laver, Sir Donald Bradman or Sir Hubert Opperman. Others questions include the colours of the Aboriginal flag; the number of states and territories in Australia; and where the 1956 Olympics were held. All the answers are contained in a 46-page booklet that applicants can obtain free over the phone or the internet.

When the test was introduced the immigration minister Kevin Andrews denied it was racist or an election stunt, and said new immigrants needed to better integrate into the community. The test was opposed by the Liberal backbencher Petro Georgiou, who warned it would create unreasonable barriers for some people wanting to become citizens, especially those who could not speak English or read and write properly.

Source

I'm on the side of the African father in this one:

I never once laid a hand on my own son during his childhood but I did not have a son like this guy does

A TERRITORY father who allegedly held his 12-year-old son captive in dog chains and gave him a "flog" has been banned from seeing the boy.

The father made a nine-minute emotional speech to contest the no-contact order in the Darwin Magistrates Court on Friday, blaming his son's punishment on the "unprofessionalism" of NT police to control the boy. But Magistrate Greg Cavanagh said the African refugee was not to contact his son - who was now in the care of Family and Children Services - without supervision, as the boy had been allegedly found by police "tied by dog chains to his bed with other restraints to his ankles and hands". It was not revealed how long the boy had been tied up for.

The father, raising his voice to the magistrate, said he "did nothing wrong to my son" and was trying to discipline him for "running with gangs". "My son has been misbehaving in a way that you cannot support it," he said. "(He) tried to burn out the house that I'm renting (and) damaged the car of one of our relatives." He said his son was also planning to steal "people's bags" from a nearby supermarket. "What a shame," he told the court.

"We call police several times. They can't do anything. So I tried to discipline him in my own way. "Not to kill him, not to hurt him, not to do anything. I gave him a flog, that's what I do ... And I'm telling you that I use the (dog) chain to chain (him) so that he cannot run away."

The father said he was "a very responsible parent". "I'm not an alcoholic, I don't smoke, I don't take marijuana. I'm a Christian." He said he had been "the target of the Northern Territory police" and begged Mr Cavanagh to help him and his family flee Australia. I didn't come to Australia to get another war. I run from the war (in) my country," he said. "But I found another war in Australia from the NT police."

Source




Want to be as bigoted and as violent as you like? Become a Muslim!

That seems to be the Leftist gospel anyhow -- as we see from the Leftist love-affair with Australian terrorist David Hicks

According to Terry Hicks, his son David has no reason to apologise to anyone about anything. This explains why the anticipated apology was missing from David Hicks's statement, which was read to the media by the lawyer David McLeod after his client's release from Adelaide's Yatala prison last Saturday. The absence of an apology has been welcomed by members of David Hicks's fan club and the civil liberties lobby. Certainly no known supporter of Hicks has argued that he should be contrite for his past statements or deeds.

Yet there is no need to analyse the case against Hicks advanced by the United States and Australian governments and/or other agencies. The case against the self-confessed terrorist supporter is evident in the letters that he wrote to his family in Adelaide shortly before his capture by Northern Alliance forces in Afghanistan, who handed him over to US forces.

Some of this correspondence was released by Hicks's family and was cited in the Hicks-friendly documentary The President Versus David Hicks, which was directed by Curtis Levy and Bentley Dean and shown on SBS TV in 2004. Other Hicks letters were presented to the Federal Magistrates Court in December, during the Australian Federal Police's successful application for a control order with respect to Hicks that went into operation after his release from prison.

We know from Hicks's own hand that he (i) joined the Taliban in Afghanistan, (ii) trained with al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and personally met its leader, Osama bin Laden, on numerous occasions, (iii) attempted to kill (and maybe did kill) individuals on the Indian side of the Kashmir Line of Control, and (iv) advocated the overthrow of what he termed "Western-Jewish domination". We also know that Hicks expressed the view that "Western society is controlled by the Jews with music, TV, houses, cars [and] free sex". And we know that he praised Islamist beheadings for those who disagree with Muhammad, and proclaimed the benefits of "being martyred" and being "well trained for jihad".

The David Hicks fan club and its allies in the civil liberties lobby are engaged in an unpleasant double standard here. Just imagine what this lot would have said if the Reverend Fred Nile, the leader of the Christian Democratic Party in NSW, had claimed that "the Jews have complete financial and media control" in Australia. Or just imagine what would have been the response had Nile boasted that he had fought on the Indian side of the Line of Control and fired "rocket-propelled grenades 200 metres from a bunker" holding two soldiers of the Muslim faith.

Without question, in such a situation, a Christian like Nile would have been condemned as an anti-Semite and a Muslim killer. But a different standard applies when a Muslim convert like Hicks engages in anti-Semitism or admits to trying to kill Indian soldiers, of whatever faith.

Yet the response to Hicks from his supporters is a combination of gush and denial. Writing in the Adelaide Independent Weekly, Hendrik Gout described Hicks as an "idealistic and foolish would-be mercenary". Since when did support for the terrorist bin Laden and the murderous al-Qaeda group amount to idealism? Moreover, Hicks has never denied fighting with Lashkar-e-Taiba in Pakistan-controlled Kashmir and with the Taliban in Afghanistan. Nor has Hicks denied crossing back into Afghanistan from Pakistan after al-Qaeda's attacks on the US on September 11, 2001.

Writing in The Sunday Telegraph last weekend, the Democrat senator Natasha Stott Despoja criticised the Australian Federal Police for outlining "in excruciating detail everything they had on file about Hicks" to the Federal Magistrates Court. It seems she is in denial about his evident anti-Semitism and his past support for terrorism. Stott Despoja also criticised the fact that the Attorney-General, Robert McClelland, supported the AFP's application for a control order over Hicks - maintaining that the Rudd Labor Government "failed its first test on national security and has shown itself to be little more than a clone of its predecessor". In fact, the control order does little to inhibit Hicks's freedoms and makes sense in view of what he himself has said about his past association with terrorism.

Certainly, as the former foreign minister, Alexander Downer, has acknowledged, the US mishandled the Hicks case and was too slow in placing him before a military commission. I argued this, both publicly and privately, in the lead-up to Hicks's military commission last year. But the fact is that Hicks's legal team, in the US and Australia, erred in refusing to accept a plea bargain when it was available.

As Leigh Sales documented in her book Detainee 002: The Case Of David Hicks, "Hicks could have been back in Australia years ago, instead of sitting in Guantanamo Bay for several years" but for the stance taken by his friends. Sales was criticised in The Age by the academic lawyer Gerry Simpson for her "distracting insistence on balance and pragmatism". It was yet another example of a Hicks supporter wanting to avoid the facts.

In his statement Hicks maintained that his "readjustment will be a slow process and should involve a gentle transition away from the media spotlight". Right. Yet the David Hicks fan club is already talking up the prospect of his selling his story to the media. Many of its members are well-off professionals. If 500 of them contributed $1000 each to his rehabilitation, there would be a $500,000 fund for Hicks and no need for him to risk his health by moving back into the media spotlight. A good idea, to be sure. But don't bet on it. It's a lot easier to endorse moral stances than, as the saying goes, to tap the mat with hard cash.

Source




Opposition says rights fights 'to clog courts'

The Victorian Charter of Human Rights, which comes into force today, will allow disgruntled residents to bog down the Supreme Court, according to Opposition justice spokesman Robert Clark. He said the laws would be used by people trying to overturn the decisions of democratically elected bodies on policy issues, such as homework being imposed on children.

"It will be unlawful for any public authority to act in a way incompatible with a human right, as defined in the charter," he said. "As well, whenever an issue arises in a court about whether an existing law is compatible with a 'human right', either party can ask to have the issue referred to the Supreme Court. "Every time such an issue arises in Supreme Court or County Court proceedings, the parties must notify the Attorney-General, who has the right to intervene.

"However, the charter gives no rights to better services from the Brumby Government to citizens waiting months for pain-relieving surgery or those unable to squeeze on to overcrowded trains, or those struggling to get early intervention or respite care for their special-needs child."

Attorney-General Rob Hulls rejected the claims. "It is simply common sense that basic human rights such as freedom of expression, protection from torture, the right to vote and freedom from forced work be enshrined in a single piece of legislation," he said.

Source




Wicked waste because of "security" craziness

The bitch concerned needs to be found less demanding employment. Grange is virtually holy to most Australian wine-drinkers

A brewery executive was on the verge of tears when he had to smash two bottles of Australia's best known wine, worth $3000, at the airport. Neil Grant, the southern region general manager with Fosters Australia, ran foul of the tough security rules at Melbourne's Tullmarine airport as he was about to board an Emirates flight to the UK. "I was going to conferences in Scotland and Ireland, and grabbed a 1980 and an '82 Grange from my personal cellar," Mr Grant said. He estimated the two bottles were probably worth about $3000.

But he'd forgotten about the 100ml liquid rule applying to carry-on luggage, and although the precious Grange slipped through Customs he came unstuck at the final security check. "I had the lady from hell, who said 'No sir, this is going to be bloody destroyed' even though the Emirates people were happy to find my baggage and pack it for me," he said.

"I said 'this is like a work of art, it's irreplaceable, do you know what you're doing here'. "She had them in her office and I said I wanted to put them in the wheelie bin myself. "I was worried that they'd just go downstairs and someone would open the bin and there's two bottles of Grange, so I smashed them. "I thought if I'm not going to be able to drink them, nobody is. "I'm still in mourning over it."

Mr Grant said he wanted to take the Grange overseas to share with others at the conferences and show off some of Australia's best produce. "They were just totally inflexible about anything we suggested to get it fixed," he said. "I offered to open it there and then and let everyone have some, but they said 'No sir, you can't do that here'."

Source