When 2UE signed Price to take on Alan Jones in the battle for Struggle Street they were looking for a brash headline grabber. But if Price's behaviour in the courts is anything to go by, they have scored themselves little more than a shrinking violet.
Price's lawyers this week moved to freeze the personal assets of the wife of Crikey.com founder and corporate crusader Stephen Mayne, after the couple sold their home to clear debts associated with the running of Mayne's independent website. It was the latest salvo in a long-running defamation battle after Crikey posted a media release issued by a third party containing a number allegations against Price.
Now we have our differences with Mayne, a former Kennett spin-doctor who's not averse to a little union-bashing from time to time. And regular readers of Crikey will know that he publishes unsubstantiated rumours and allegations all the time; indeed, his editorial policy is: publish and be damned and if I'm wrong I'll issue a groveling apology later. But this aside, what is an established media figure like Price going after a minnow like Mayne for? Either he has a very thin skin or a deep streak of vengeance.
As Mayne points out, the article subject to the legal action was downloaded just 435 times in 27 hours by 320 different people. The offending material was way down the page, so what fraction of this fraction of the population finally read the piece is unclear. What is clear is that Price is a serial litigant, with at least four cases in the past ten years, including former AFL start Kevin Bartlett for questioning his knowledge of the code, The Fat's Dr Turf and trade mag Adnews We're being careful to ensure we're not added to the list, but we wouldn't put it past him.
Our question is: why should a bloke who makes his living peddling his opinions take legal action against others who peddle their's? Defamation laws should be there for those without a voice in the media to redress injustices that they do not have the means to answer themselves. The idea of highly paid media personalities accessing the courts to manage their media crises is a joke.
The spectre of journalists suing other journalists is the sort of caper that gives us all a bad name. I mean, do we really need to see Richard Carelton break down in the courts to accept his sincerity as a reporter and a human being? Wouldn't a well-choreographed noddy do the trick? And why couldn't Price respond to his perceived injustice by attacking Mayne on air, eating up some of the thousands of hours he'll be paid so well to fill up with his bile, rather than taking the poor fella to the brink of bankruptcy? I'm sure Mayne wouldn't sue.
By taking on Mayne and his personal finances, Price has elevated this defamation case into an issue of freedom of speech. In the media of the 21st century, we have the technology for a diversity of opinions to undermine the authority of the centre. It's just that the law hasn't caught up. One thing's for sure, the media needs a lot more Stephen Maynes and a lot fewer Steve Prices.
Traditionally, the ABS released both surveys simultaneously but under Peter Reith and now Tony Abbott, the figures on pay have been delayed.
An ACTU spokesman says it's a case of political interference designed to hide the benefits of union membership.
"The statistics clearly show union members receive more pay," he says. "There is an obvious political advantage in separating this from the statistics on union membership."
Big Gains in NSW
The ABS data showed the number of union members rose marginally to 1,902,700 from 1,901,800, with an overall union density rate of 24.5%.
Of all the states, NSW had the biggest increase, picking up some 23,000 new members in the 12 month period - increasing the density from 25.7 per cent to 26.4 per cent.
"This is an encouraging sign for NSW," Labor Council secretary John Robertson says. "The increase correlates with Labor Council's commitment to pursuing an organising agenda.
"Over the coming months we will be conducting research to further grow the movement through strategically targeting large workplaces with low union density.
National Numbers Up for Second Year Running
Nationally, the slight gain in members to more than 1.9 million people reflected increases in union density rates in both the public and private sectors, ACTU President Sharan Burrow says.
"We are particularly heartened by the increase in both net membership and density rates in key growth areas of the economy like accommodation, cafes, restaurants, transport, storage and communications and recreation, cultural and personal services."
"Significant growth in both membership and density rates has also been achieved among the growing proportion of casual and part-time employees in the workforce. A welcome increase is also recorded in the number of women union members.
"The long term trend of declining union membership appears to have stabilised, with two years of net growth for the first time in more than a decade and increases in union density in key sectors of the economy," Ms Burrow said.
The membership growth follows an increased focus by the ACTU and many unions on grass roots workplace activity and organisation in accordance with the unions@work strategy launched by ACTU Secretary Greg Combet in 1999.
Workers at BHP's Wingfield Service Centre in South Australia vowed to continue their strike after walking off the job last week.
The dispute has the potential to spread to the South Australian car industry, which relies on Wingfield for steel for car panels.
The action, part of a broader dispute over enterprise bargaining, follows BHP Billiton attempts to outsource in-house superannuation arrangements to a private operator rather than an industry super fund.
Australian Workers Union national secretary Bill Shorten says superannuation is a major issue for workers, who are also in dispute over pay, company EBA proposals to allow forced redundancies and introduce a no-strike clause.
BHP Billiton revealed last October it intended to outsource its employees' superannuation arrangements to Total Risk Management, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Towers Perrin, and Russell Investment Management.
The AWU has endorsed an industry superannuation fund, Superannuation Trust of Australia, as its preferred option. Shorten has called on BHP to have the two options independently assessed.
He says the STA proposal is the superior option because it has lower total fees, the same investment structure as the existing BHP Billiton Superannuation Fund, cheaper insurance cover for death and disability and employee representation on its board.
Shorten says a major shortcoming of the company-endorsed proposal is that it does not allow full employee and union representation.
BHP Billiton deferred a decision on which superannuation option to pursue until next month.
While business, politicians and media commentators bemoan the airline�s demise, Transport Workers Union secretary Tony Sheldon, points out there is an upside.
While he agrees the company's failure is a "national disgrace" he argues commentators shouldn't overlook the gains wrung out of politicians and business by committed rank-and-file unionists.
At least 2000 regional jobs were saved by the sale of WA-based Sky West and the fact Kendall and Hazelton continue to trade. All three subsidiaries had been earmarked for closure by the original Ansett administrators.
On top, Sheldon says, every Australian whose company goes to the wall in the future will be in a better position because Government was forced to move employees up the creditors' list, and sign-off on the eight-week "community standard" redundancy entitlement.
"These workers, along with National Textiles, managed to improve the entitlements situation for everyone in the country," he said.
"When a company goes bust entitlements are now at the top of the list, redundancy and outstanding wages are guaranteed and there is improved access to long service and annual leave entitlements.
"We are not where we should be but we are better off than we were five-and-a-half months ago thanks to strong rank and file leadership and the backing of good, strong unionists."
Alternative Jobs
Ansett unions are now concentrating their efforts on winning alternative jobs for members who battled so hard for survival.
The TWU has written agreements with Virgin, Qantas, Australian Air Express and airport-based labour hire firms, Blue Collar and Workforce, that displaced
Ansett staff will have an "absolute preference" on new positions.
Representatives are meeting with the Sydney Airport Corporation today in a bid to extend that agreement.
Ansett delegates, Don Cameron and Dave Lupton, told Labor Council yesterday how they had battled to keep the airline flying.
They and their workmates took wage cuts and worked 12, 18 then 32-hour weeks in efforts to turn the operation around.
Short weeks gave them the opportunity to hound John Howard and John Anderson during the federal election campaign, forcing entitlements up the political agenda.
"We spent two weeks in a caravan outside Kirribilli House. We badgered John Howard every morning when he went for his walks," Lupton said.
Both delegates singled out the MUA and CFMEU for the consistent support, physical and financial, they provided over the duration of the dispute.
Personal Cost
Meanwhile, HT Lee reports that flight attendant Samantha Eberzy was one of those devastated by Ansett's failure.
The woman, featured on ABC's Compas program and the CFMEU's journal Unity in the build-up to last year's election, said this week the news had left her 'shattered'.
I was told in January that if I did not take the redundancy package, I might get an offer in the second or third intake," she said.
Eberzy was witha friend when she heard the news; her friend had gone athrough all the training ready to reurn to work. She was devatasted by the announcement. Most of her former workmates are still in shock.
"They are in self-denial at the monment. The news hasn't really hit home yet. Our futures are very bleak."
Eberzy blames the collapse of the deal on both the Tesna syndicate and the Hoeward Government.
Ansett Crash Sparks Re-regulation Calls
Meanwhile, Labor Council is calling for the re-regulation of key sectors of the economy in the wake of Ansett's demise.
The airline's failure, coming on top of the HIH collapse, has shone light on Government's hands-off approach to protecting the interests of workers, consumers and investors.
The TWU has been hammering away at the issue, including making submissions to the ACCC, since Ansett's problems became apparent six months ago.
Labor Council assistant secretary, Mark Lennon, says it is "irresponsible" of Government to let market forces determine the shape of key Australian services.
"There is no doubt that a country like this, with its vast distances and dependence on air transport, needs an efficient, competitive airline industry.
"It is a key role of Government to ensure that is provided, in everybody's interests," Lennon says.
Premier Bob Carr made the announcement after being embarrassed by a report that three employees had been suspended for 18 months and their cases had still not been dealt with.
While condemning the transmission of pornography over the Net, Labor Council secretary John Robertson says the issue is broader and needs to be dealt with in that way.
"We have a report from the NSW Law Reform Commission on the issue that has been gathering dust for nearly 12 months," Robertson says.
"If the government is serious about wiping out these practices it needs to address them through a broader privacy policy that makes it clear pornography is not acceptable."
The Law reform Commission report called for a ban on covert surveillance of workplace emails and web usage.
Knee-Jerk Announcement
Public Service Association general secretary Maurie O'Sullivan says the Premier's stand-down announcement is a knee-jerk denial of natural justice.
O'Sullivan says there are "many and divided opinions as to what constitutes pornography".
"Recently some public sector employees who had been dismissed for allegedly transmitting pornography were reinstated to their jobs because of the failure of their Department to quickly investigate and resolve the issue.
"The present situation in DOCS commenced in May, 2000, and investigations began in September, 2000. It is ridiculous, absolutely infuriatingly ridiculous, for investigations to take so long and for people to be kept in abeyance for such a cruel and protracted period."
Organisers describe the Abbott effigy as "a very lean version of Friar Tuck, with a strong influence of Mr Byrnes from the Simpsons, rosary beads, sack cloth and ashes".
ACTU President Sharan Burrow will join unionists from across the movement, with the backing of the MUA, AMWU, CFMEU, IEU, NSW Teachers, CPSU, PSA, LHMU, FSU, NSW Nurses, AMIEU(meat workers), FAAA, NTEU and the NSW Labor Council.
Union marchers are asking the major political parties to reflect on their sins of omission - including failures to amend superannuation legislation and ensure full protection of entitlements - and sins of commission such as the demonisation of victims of aggression, refugees and the introduction of legislation to further erode workers' rights.
Red will be used as a unifying theme, because it signifies political challenge to the orthodoxy of conservatism.
Original music will be provided by Sydney band, Elefant Traks, and will have a political edge.
"The reasons the regime have given for buying the reactor are ridiculous. This military regime cannot even manage to feed or look after the basic health needs of its own people - yet they want to spend millions of dollars on a reactor," Bo Mya said.
He predicts environmental disaster for the region if the purchase went ahead..
"Considering their long history of economic incompetence how do they intend to maintain the safe operation of the nuclear reactor and where will they dispose of the deadly nuclear waste?" he asked.
Bo Mya also said, given the regime's record on human rights abuses, there were no guarantees the reactor would not be used for military purposes against Burma's neighbours.
"There are more questions than answers. Burma should listen to the concerns of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) who recently said Burma failed to meet the minimum safety standards needed to operate a nuclear reactor."
Bo Mya urged all countries in the region to oppose in the strongest terms this serious security, environmental and health risk to the peoples of South East Asia.
The NCUB is a broad-based alliance of democratic and ethnic forces opposed to the Burmese military.
If you want to get involved or make a donation to help the Burmese people contact the Australian trade union movement's humanitarian aid agency, APHEDA, on: (02) 9264 9343.
ILO Officials Banned From meeting
Revelations of the nuclear plans came as the ruling military blocked an International Labour Organisation (ILO) delegation investigating forced labor from meeting pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi.
The Monday move followed criticism of the junta by ILO officials meeting in neighboring Thailand, who said Myanmar was doing too little to curb use of forced labor.
The four-member ILO delegation's car was turned away from a checkpoint outside Suu Kyi's residence in Yangon, where the Nobel peace laureate has been under house arrest for more than a year, witnesses said.
Burma's ruling generals, eager for international legitimacy which could bring more aid, trade and investment, passed a decree in 2000 abolishing forced labor.
But an ILO report last year said the Myanmar army was still forcing villagers to farm, and work on infrastructure projects or as porters, especially in areas near the Thai border where it was fighting with ethnic minority armies.
Many Western countries, including the European Union and the United States, which maintain aid and trade sanctions on Myanmar, say they would soften their stances if the ruling generals improve their human rights record and move towards democracy.
MUA Shipping co-ordinator Sean Chaffer says government's own guidelines provide for the permit of any ship under investigation by the Australian Transport and Safety Bureau to be revoked.
"The question," Mr Chafer says, "is why government is in breach of its own guidelines."
The CSL Pacific is at the heart of a dispute over the replacement of Australian crews, by guest labour, on ships exclusively on the Australian coast.
Shipping is the only domestic industry in the country where government actively encourages the importation of guest workers. It is achieved by shippers exploiting the government's single and continual voyage permit system to use cheap, often substandard foreign vessels to carry cargo on the coast.
Unions complain this system is blatantly unfair to Australian workers, reducing employment opportunities whilst paving the way for lowered safety, environmental and wage standards.
Last year CSL used the permit system to reflag and rename the Australian registered and crewed River Torrens and bring it back to the coast as the CSL Pacific. Now maritime unions are in dispute with CSL over plans to do the same with the Australian crewed and flagged CSL Yarra. The matter goes back to the Federal Court in April.
The Municipal Employees Union, confronted with contracting out and job cuts at Sartor's Sydney base, has dropped its traditional support for mergers, adding its weight to escalating resident resistance.
A meeting of more than 500 council workers this week endorsed MEU opposition to proposed boundary changes.
Secretary Brian Harris urged the State Labor Government to "urgently" amend the Local Government Act to insert employee protections, similar to the three-year job security guarantee proclaimed when Canada Bay emerged from the Concorde-Drummoyne amalgamation.
"We are not conservatives who oppose change for the sake of it," Harris said. "Our members have recently backed the proposed Strathfield-Burwood amalgamation and supported boundary changes throughout regional NSW.
"However, this whole exercise is a Frank Sartor push to expand his council. There are no positives for the wider community. Indeed, there are several negative outcomes likely for ratepayers and workers."
The MEU has run a year-long campaign against a Sydney City contracting out program, based on fewer workers and lower wages.
"Attacks on job security are inevitable if these boundary changes go through," Harris warned.
Three Queensland unions - the ASU, AMWU and CEPU - have this week advocated the so-called 'freeloader' issue and say they will attempt to change both state and federal ALP platforms.
Advocates say proposed changes would commit ALP governments to ensuring non-unionists did not benefit free of charge, through improved wages and conditions, from the efforts of unionists.
The call was raised by the ASU Services executive last week, picked up by other unions, will be referred to a meeting of unions affiliated to the ALP.
Sick of Freeloaders
ASU-Services Queensland secretary, David Smith, says union members are getting sick of freeloaders who benefit from union efforts, yet make no contribution to the cost of getting those benefits.
"Under current state and federal industrial relations legislation the concept of Fair Share Representation fees has been ruled out," he says.
"This means we now have to get legislative change to overcome the injustice of people getting something for nothing, while work colleagues in the union meet all the costs of negotiations and industrial commission hearings.
"In its federal platform, the ALP claims credit for developing the idea of mutual obligation, especially as it applies to the social security system. It is time for the ALP to extend the idea to the industrial relations system and ensure those who benefit contribute to the costs incurred by unionists."
Last week, Star City announced a record half-year profit (before interest and tax) of $77.9 million, up 60.4% from the same time last year - with a full year profit of $225 million predicted for Star City's owners.
"Star City Casino has bucked the hard times which have hit some other Australian casinos. The more than 3000 workers at the casino helped its owner, Tabcorp, to win out. They deserve a share of the excellent profit growth, " LHMU Casino Union NSW secretary, Annie Owens said.
" Since Star City opened in 1995 it has become one of the biggest employers in the city. By paying improved wages it will set a responsible standard and help improve the economy of this great city."
Ky LHMU claims for a new enterprise agreement include:
� Wage increases of 10 per cent per year;
� A reward for continuity of service of $10 per week for each year;
� Employee share scheme - shares worth at least $500 per year;
� 50% weekend loading from 4pm Friday to 6am Monday;
� 2% additional superannuation;
� Optional Hepatitis B vaccinations for at risk workers;
� Independent ergonomic study of work functions for dealers suffering back, neck, arm and wrist pain;
� Parental leave of 14 weeks
Apart from improving wages union members have called on Star City to do something about improving safety and transport.
Threats of violence from patrons
" Our members report that there has been a steady increase in threats of physical violence from unhappy patrons and they want the company to take these concerns seriously.
" The union is concerned for the safety of casino workers at Star City and is not willing to wait until threats escalate further and result in serious injury or death," Annie Owens said.
" A recent survey at Star City showed that just under half of the workforce had been threatened with physical violence by a customer during the last twelve months.
" The threats included verbal threats to workers families, instances of physical abuse, and death threats such as: 'If I had a gun, I'd kill you now' or 'I'll be waiting for you at 4am'."
Union members met with the NSW Minister for Gaming and Racing late last year about these threats and have gathered information to demonstrate new walk-through recognition equipment to identify the presence of weapons was necessary to create a safer workplace.
Casino workers are thoroughly screened to ascertain their eligibility to work at Star City, and they have to accept regular bag and locker searches - but there is little or no screening of Star City patrons who are able to enter the casino with knives and guns.
Nearly six million people visited Star City over the last year. The current threatening environment calls for the operators to enhance their security measures along the same lines as the improvements now being installed by other tourism industry operators.
The popularity of the Darling Harbour area and a growing local population has made it difficult for workers, finishing at all hours, to access transport
The LHMU Casino Union has been at the forefront of international campaigns to ban smoking at Casinos.
The implementation of this policy would remove risks associated with environmental tobacco smoke. Casino dealers at Star City Casino were the first to gain a smoke free workplace.
" This has been a long running campaign by the LHMU Casino Union, at the moment there are still some areas remaining where smoking is permitted - we are committed to bringing this to an end," Owens said.
Beer Cold and Prawns Peeled
Tops are being knocked off cold ones at the Austbelt Splicing Services employees social club in Brisbane as former workmate, Allan Gabel, is welcomed back after winning an unfair dismissal case.
Gabel was sacked last July for selling second-hand conveyor belt to raise $400 for social club funds. The second-hand belt is of no use to the company but finds a market amongst people who use it to line utilities or make mudflaps.
Austbelt had known that Gabel and other workers had, for years, swapped useless belt for cash, beer or prawns which all went into building up the workers' social club.
The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) found the sacking of the AMWU member had been "harsh, unjust and unreasonable". It ordered his reinstatement with full back pay to July 31, 2001.
"Mr Gabel and other Austbelt employees were not making personal gain, they were building up their social club. I would have thought that was good for morale and the company would have encouraged their initiative," AMWU Queensland secretary, David Harrison, said.
"This decision highlights the importance of strong unfair dismissal laws and shows how easily workers can have their lives turned upside down for the simplest things. All workers need protection from companies acting in this way, not matter how big or small the business is."
Harrison pointed out the Federal Government was trying to remove this protection, presumably with the support of National Party Member for Hinkler, Paul Neville.
The AMWU called on Neville to support working people in his electorate by voting against the Tony Abbott legislation when it comes before parliament.
Capacity was stretched in Adelaide earlier this week because of the Queen's visit, while Brisbane (CHOGM); Sydney (the Mardi Gras) and Melbourne (the Grand Prix) are under extreme pressure this weekend..
"The AHA's timing is impeccable," LHMU Hotels Division assistant national secretary, Tim Ferrari said of the AHA announcement it would seek a wage freeze during Living Wage Case hearings before the Australian Industrial Relations Commission.
The AHA made the statement on behalf of the big, often foreign-owned, four and five star hotels they represent in the Industrial Relations Commission hearings.
" While the AHA has run to the Industrial Relations Commission crying poor most major hotel chains are reporting they have weathered the storm of September 11, and are now telling shareholders they believe they are in a lift-off stage," Ferrari says.
Real People Suffer
" The real people suffering are our members. We will give evidence to the Living Wage Case of hotel workers working 38 hour weeks, but barely bringing home enough to pay the bills.
" Many of our members have to find second jobs to make ends meet. Meanwhile Sydney hotels have positioned themselves very well to become the number one convention city in the world.
" Brisbane hotels have reported a robust recovery since September with occupancy rates exceeding 80 per cent for the first time in years.
" Australia's third largest hotel owner - Thakral Holdings - reported this week that its operating profits to December 31, 2001, would exceed $22 million.
" While this is a reduction on the previous year, it is a long way short of the 'very serious or extreme economic adversity' that must be proved to justify a postponement of a Living Wage increase.
It came about after union members released a survey in January showing Sydney Airport lagging behind other airports," Annie Owens, LHMU Airport Security NSW secretary said. "Our members have been campaigning, for more than two years, to have all screeners and security guards at Sydney Airport put through this course. "Even after September 11 union screeners were still waiting to be put through the course."
The LHMU Airport Security Union is calling for national uniform security and training standards on all Australian flights as part of their Securing Our Airports campaign.
" When we released the report in January we were met with much huffing and puffing and denials - but now nearly 300 Sydney airport screeners have done the course," Owens said.
The Securing Our Airports campaign - which was launched late last year - also calls on airport authorities, airlines and security companies to work with the union to improve the standing of airport screeners.
The union would like to hear your views on the Securing Our Airports campaign
Join the discussion in our Airport Security forum by clicking here.< p> Here is the earlier LHMU Airport Security Union story about the lack of dangerous goods training
National survey shows patchy dangerous goods training at airports
Joon, the co-ordinator of the Korean Resource Centre, was presented the award in recognition of his efforts in helping hundreds of Korean workers.
He has worked tirelessly to help migrant workers overcome barriers placed before them. His hard work has resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars owed to workers being recovered.
Joon has operated in an area populated by unscrupulous employers with an antagonistic approach to the union. He has fought these battles and organised workers using methods previously unfamiliar to them.
CFMEU state secretary Andrew Ferguson says the Scroll of
Honour wis "just recognition" for Joon's contribution to the Labour movement.
"Joon has been relentless in pursuit of justice for vulnerable Korean workers. We are lucky to have activists of this calibre prepared to build unionism in their communities," Ferguson said.
The TWU executive voted to do "whatever is required" after being addressed by Fijian trade union leader, Felix Anthony.
Anthony says other meetings with Sydney-based unions had produced pledges of financial support and, should it be necessary, industrial action.
"There has always been a good rapport between Fijian aviation workers and their Australian counterparts," Anthony says.
"I found Australian union leaders already knew of our problems and were disgusted with the treatment of Fijian airport workers."
Anthony accused the Qarase Government of ignoring the rule of law.
Since May, 2000, the Fijian administration has been trying to eliminate Fiji Public Service Association influence at Airports Fiji Ltd. The union has traditionally covered all AFL workers at the airport.
Attempts to remove Public Service Association coverage at Nadi International Airport have spearheaded the campaign.
The TWU has written to AFL and the Fijian Government, expressing concern at developments, and warning the issue will go before membership meetings if it is not speedily resolved.
TWU secretary Tony Sheldon says Australian unionists will not sit "idly by" and watch the Fijian Government demolish worker organisations.
"The situation in Fiji is appalling. Our people are prepared to assist if it does not improve."
Gabel was sacked last July for selling second-hand conveyor belt to raise $400 for social club funds. The second-hand belts are of no use to the company but find a market amongst people who use them to line utilities or make mudflaps.
Austbelt had known that Gabel and other workers had, for years, swapped useless belt for cash, beer or prawns which all went into building up the workers' social club.
The Queensland Industrial Relations Commission (QIRC) found the sacking of the AMWU member had been "harsh, unjust and unreasonable". It ordered his reinstatement with full back pay to July 31, 2001.
"Mr Gabel and other Austbelt employees were not making personal gain, they were building up their social club. I would have thought that was good for morale and the company would have encouraged their initiative," AMWU Queensland secretary, David Harrison, said.
"This decision highlights the importance of strong unfair dismissal laws and shows how easily workers can have their lives turned upside down for the simplest things. All workers need protection from companies acting in this way, not matter how big or small the business is."
Harrison pointed out the Federal Government was trying to remove this protection, presumably with the support of National Party Member for Hinkler, Paul Neville.
The AMWU called on Neville to support working people in his electorate by voting against the Tony Abbott legislation when it comes before parliament.
Plam Sunday Peace March for a Compassionate Refugee Policy
Sunday, March 24
Assemble midday, Belmore Park Central.
*************
International Womens Day Breakfast & March.
Breakfast is on at the Convention Centre, 8.30am on Saturday 9th March at Darling Harbour.
The march starts at 11.30am at Town Hall Square. We will have a lovely new women in unions banner this year. As always we are asking women unionists to march as a group. contact Alison Peters [email protected]
Susan Sheather, Organising Assistant ,Labor Council of NSW
Telephone: 02 9286-1614 (direct)
Mobile: 0402 422 383
Fax: 02 9261-1478 (direct)
*****************
'WAR ON TERRORISM' AUSTRALIA'S INVOLVEMENT
There's been little public debate on Australia's role in the 'war on terrorism'. Pluto Institute has brought together a distinguished panel of speakers to address this issue - the first seminar in the Pluto series at Berkelouw Books this year.
WEDNESDAY MARCH 13 at 6.30PM
Berkelouw Books 70 Norton Street, Leichhardt
Speakers:
Duncan Kerr MHR
ALP member for Denison
Kerry Nettle
Greens Senator-elect for NSW
David McKnight
Senior lecturer, Humanities, UTS
Brian Goddard
Peace activist and photo-journalist
Ahmed Shboul
Arabic & Islamic Studies
Sydney University
Venue: Upstairs, Berkelouw Books 70 Norton Street, Leichhardt - 6 . 00 PM Wednesday March 13
Admission $10 and $5
Bookings: Email [email protected]
NSW Fabians Present: THE DEATH OF LIBERALISM:
WEDNESDAY MARCH 27
There are many who hold that liberalism is now dead in Australia. Join this provocative and lively discussion.
The Death of Liberalism with the NSW Fabian Society:
Hon W.C . Wentworth, Former Federal Liberal Minister
Greg Barns, Chair, Australian Republican Movement
Former Liberal Party candidate
John Roskam, Executive Director, Menzies Research Centre
Venue: Upstairs, Berkelouw Books 70 Norton Street, Leichhardt 6.30PM
Admission: $15 and $5 (Concession and Fabian Members)
Bookings: Email: [email protected]
Photo Exhibition
The Alliance and the Walkley Foundation will again host the annual photographers slide night in the Alliance's Sydney courtyard, 245 Chalmers St Redfern, on Friday 1 March, 2002. The event will showcase the work of some of Australia's top photographers including Glen Campbell, Phillip Gostelow, Jon Reid, Tamara Dean, Fiona Morris, Paul Jones, Tony Reddrop and Marko Bok.
This year's event will also include a special series of photographs of the Sydney bushfires including pictures from Walkley Award finalists Dean Sewell and Sean Davey, and Nick Moir and Adam Hollingsworth from Fairfax.
The slide show will start from 8pm with welcome drinks from 7.30pm, the night is open to all and is free of charge. Please rsvp to Amanda Hendry from the Walkley Foundation on 02 9333 0918 or via email to [email protected]
**************
Asylum Seekers - Let The Children Go To School
Media Conference, 11am Monday 4 March, Press Gallery Conference, Parliament House, Macquarie Street Sydney
Speakers: Justice Marcus Einfeld, Junie Ong - ChillOut, Maree O'Halloran - NSWTF
**************
ChillOut SAD Rally
5.30 p.m - 7.00p.m Thursday 7 March
Martin Place Amphitheatre
For further information please contact
Maree O'Halloran, President NSWTF on 9217 2350 or 0417 672104
Junie Ong, ChillOut on 9365 2659 or 0412 397788
John Hughes, Media Officer NSWTF on 9217 2347 or 0418 423834.
Harry Bridges was a great fighter for US workers, and this naturally made him very unpopular with US governments and security agencies. During WWII he was directly accused of sabotaging the war effort because of his communism (even at the time the Soviet Union was facing the might of Nazi forces). The US had been trying to deport Harry for years before this.
Harry eventually came to an agreement with authorities on the war effort, as detailed in the biography by Charles P. Larrowe (New York: Lawrence Hill, 1972)
A bit more about how this agreement came about is in Alexander Cockburn and Jeff St Clair's White Out: the CIA, Drugs and the Press (Verso, 1998). The book details the leading role the CIA has played in the increase in illicit drug trading throughout the world since WWII. Harry was hit in the early stages of US intelligence agencies hooking up with the worst elements of any society to further their version of "the national interest."
The US was concerned about sabotage on the docks during the war, and immigrant labourers were suspected of assisting the Germans and the Italians with information about ship movements. At the time Lucky Luciano was a resident of a high security US prison, and the Office of Naval Intelligence (ONA) had the bright idea of using him to stop the sabotage.
Whilst Lucky was still in prison, he still controlled a large chunk of US organised crime, which at the time was extending the drug business. Luciano had made three attempts to win clemency up to 1942, but he got the word out that he was willing to help the ONI. This bore fruit and he was moved to a lower security prison where he was regularly visited by his trusted lieutenants Meyer Lansky and Joey Lanza and they worked out how to handle the docks. Many other Mafia commanders made the trip to his prison "so that the inmate might assist the war effort" as the commissioner of prisons put it.
The navy was worried not just about sabotage, but about more traditional US administration concerns - strikes and organising efforts on the docks that Harry was co-ordinating. Harry was "encouraging dockworkers to leave the mob-infested International Longshoremen's Association and join his International Longshoremen and Warehousemen's Union.
The ONI and the Mob knew Harry as Brooklyn Bridge. A taped conversation between Lanza and Haffenden (from ONI).
Haffenden: How about the Brooklyn Bridge thing?
Lanza: Nothing on that
Haffenden: I don't want any trouble on the waterfront during the crucial times.
Lanza: You won't have any. I'll see to that. I'll give you a ring. We'll get together.
Harry's strike was duly broken by the Mob. When Harry came to an organising rally in New York City shortly after, Lanza handled matters personally. "I had a fight with him, I belted him, and that was that."
"Between 1942 and 1946 there were 26 unsolved murders of labour organisers and dockworkers, presumed murdered and dumped in the river by the Mafia, working in collusion with Naval Intelligence.
The eventual outcome of Luciano's support for the war effort was his return to Sicily to take control of the whole island pretty much after World War II, with US backing, again to stop post-war communism, and thus ensuring the mafia kept control and expanded the drug trade and other illegal activities. Cockburn and St Clair outline this, as does Peter Robb in his terrific Midnight in Sicily (Duffy & Snellgrove, 1998). Of course, some of the main targets of Luciano's associates in Sicily were communist organisers who were trying get land reform and improve the lot of peasants in Sicily.
Harry was criticised by dockers for his compromises on conditions for workers during the war. Being a committed communist, his approach followed the fortunes of the Soviet Union, and thus was a wholehearted supporter of war against the Nazis after the invasion. This was not a popular position when he was arguing for an increase in productivity without an appropriate pay increase. However, being a communist in the US didn't any easier. His major efforts were on the Pacific Coast of the US, where despite his support of productivity surges, he was always seen as a communist first and foremost, not a patriot.
Neale Towart
Editor
I write to congratulate Labour Council Officer Mark Morey on the recent Cultural Diversity conference.
The standard of research presented at the conference was excellent and a tribute to the organiser.
Mark and Labor Council are to be congratulated for this important initiative.
Phil Davey.
Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it Santayana
The above photo was taken at Dachau Concentration Camp in the 1940's where an inmate realising the futility of his incarceration ends it all by throwing himself on the wires is and is automatically shot.
This is the constitutional monarchy of Australia (then again we could be the 51st State of America) in the year, 2002.
Refugees (they come seeking refuge/safe haven) are demonised and dehumanised before being transported everywhere but their chosen destination:
Papua New Guinea - Malaria
Christmas Island and Port Hedland Cyclone Chris
Woomera extremes of heat and isolation.
Tampa
The ship's master was only upholding maritime tradition and international law in rescuing people at sea after being requested by the Australian Government to do so.
We use sledgehammers to crack walnuts:
Boatloads of commandos pirating the Tampa against unarmed people.
Shots are fired across the bow of an unarmed vessel.
An Hazara man has thrown himself on razor wire to draw attention to the plight of his sister and her 5 children.
This is what he thought he must do in Australia to try to unite his nephews and nieces and sister with their father /husband. The father arrived earlier and has been processed as a genuine refugee.
The robotic RUDDOCK's official answer to this was "family members who arrive seperately are assessed seperately and not all relatives suffer persecution.
The hazara are an ethnic and religious minority dating back before the time of the Taliban and have faced near genocide at the hands of the Taliban.
Honest John is transformed into Mushroom John (keep him in the corner and feed him bull---t), and blames incompetent officials. Commonwealth Public Servants and defence forces are having their reputations sullied and tainted by Government Ministers and their minders. A retiring Reith was always going to be the logical scapegoat.
It is fitting that a woman Carmen Lawrence shows moral leadership whilst her party doesn't, these refugees as women and children have been incarcerated against all known conventions. These unarmed refugees are portrayed as terrorists or their men are portrayed as having no respect for women. More demonisation and dehumanisation. What civilisation has not discriminated against women??
The election of a government that could have spoken and negotiated with Indonesia would have saved the enormous expense ($500 million at last count) of transporting refugees to all parts surrounding Australia.
Howard flipflops back and forth between the greatest republic (the United States of America run by republicans) and Mother England. Two years ago he spoke against becoming a Republic. The queen arrives again soon so we will definitely be a Constitutional Monarchy once again for a short period. Australians could not be blamed for being schizoid with visionless government like this. The authoritarian figure ever trying to please the mythical mother.
Refugees breakaway from Oppression with courage to start again in a new land. They remove themselves from their motherland. These are independent qualities that we as Australians lack.
Lord Archer is in jail for several years, in England for perjury and perverting the course of justice.
In Australia guided by the Westminster system also, the incumbent government wins an election by lying and the GovernorGeneral still retains office even though he perverted the course of justice to Australian children.
Hollingsworth protects the abuser and turns his back on the abused, turns his back on the children of Oz
Once again Australian law is seen as being not impervious to privilege.
Do you think Equal Employment Opportunity applied to all other parties (other than the Coalition at the last Federal election)??? Was it a level playing field??
I'm stunned by the one-sided "Australian Story where the G-G. sympathetically packaged his response to recent allegations. Hopefully the ABC will give equal time to the abused/aggrieved to give a more balanced program.
Is this the price of having a heavily politicised ABC Board??
Why are do-gooders denigrated in the Australian press?
Welcome to another day in Paradise.
Mike Hudson
PSA Delegate
by Peter Lewis
Susan Ryan |
How significant is a decision by CALPERS to pull out of South East Asia for super funds in Australia?
Well super funds in Australia are paying a lot of attention to those sorts of decisions. There's a trend now in the US, Canada, UK and Europe with big funds refusing to invest in national economies that fall short of proper standards. Now, that hasn't happened in Australia yet, but obviously because Australian super funds also invest in an international environment, in a global environment, they are paying increasing attention to these sorts of decisions.
On the American example, who sets the standards, what are they and who's call is it that they've been breached?
Well, there is a Council of Institution Investors in the United States of which Calpers is a member along with other big pension funds. They conduct research nationally and globally about individual companies and about national economies and they make that research available to the members of the Council. So Calpers would get that research, Calpers' own trustee board would make that decision and that would be the situation in Australia. Any investment decision is the responsibility of the particular trustee board.
Now we have several thousand medium to large size super funds so each trustee board is ultimately responsible for its own decision and at this stage, super funds in Australia haven't combined or acted together in relation to what we might call "social issues".
What barriers legal or otherwise, to go down this track?
Well, individual trustees who are members of trustee boards are very conscious of their legal responsibilities and they are very conscious that they can only make a decision regarding their super fund if that decision meets the 'sole purpose test'. And the sole purpose test is that every investment decision must be made solely for the purpose of earning income for the members.
So they're very cautious in bringing other than financial performance criteria into the decision. But some funds have responded to the desire of their members to be socially responsible investors so a number of the big funds now are looking at social criteria when they make investments. But they have to look at them secondarily, if I can put it that way.
So does that mean it's basically illegal to pull your money out of a company that's going to make heaps of profit but rapes the environment and exploit it's workers?
No, it doesn't mean that. No.
So where is the line drawn?
Well, that's really for the trustee. The trustee's job is to find the variety of investments that produce income for members. Now if they can find investments that produce income and are also socially responsible, then that's a good outcome. Now many trustees, even without an official policy, are responsible investors and that they do find out a bit about the companies they are investing in. They are not obliged to invest in any particular company, but they are obliged to have that sole purpose at the front of their minds and they are obliged also legally to have a range of investments.
There is fledgling ethical investment movement in Australia, there seems to be a few funds that go along this course, but how successful are they being at the moment?
The particular year that we're in is not a good year for any investment returns. A number of funds that have, what they call "socially responsible investment choices" for members, have reported that they do get similar results as they do from investments that are not filtered to the socially responsible criteria.
So it's a fledgling movement but it is growing. I've seen it grow in the last three years. There's a council of superannuation investors that was established about a year ago and that has a number of the big industry super funds and some of the public sector funds involved and they're in the process of researching the corporate governance performance of Australian companies in which they're likely to invest. But when they get the results of that research, each trustee board will make its own decisions, whether to take it into account or not.
Is there a coordinated strategy from union reps on the industry super funds to, for instance, get labour standards better recognised by super funds making investment decisions?
I'm not aware of any coordinated effort. Labour standards haven't been on the radar in the past, but in the amendments to the Financial Services re-format that went through Parliament just before the election , a number of new social criteria were included. The Labor opposition made an amendment to include Labour standards. Now at the moment the regulators in the industry are looking at how that will be applied.
I should say that those amendments require super funds to report to their members whether or not they take these criteria into account. They don't have to take them into account but they have to let their members know that they are taking them into account and how they have done that. So it's very early days, but that was the first time that Labour standards in this context appeared in superannuation regulatory environment.
On a more general frame, is there legislative change that could actually facilitate more ethical investment through super funds?
I believe that these new amendments to the Financial Services re-format will do that or they will have the capacity to do that and we'll see that working out over the next couple of years.
A lot of Australian workers would like to think their pension savings were being invested with a view to good causes. What can individuals do if they want to have some sort of influence on where their pensions are going?
They all have trustees representing them, they can certainly let their trustees know that they want this sort of information and that they have views about what kind of companies should get the benefit of their savings invested in them.
Some funds, for example HESTA, has had for a couple of years now an eco choice. If you're a member of Hester you can opt to have some or all of your savings put into their eco fund. And now a number of other funds are following suit. ARF for example, another big industry super fund is going to offer such a eco choice for their members.
So do you see this as a real development or just a bit of tilting at windmill?
I see it as a real development but one that is moving extremely slowly in Australia. The trustees themselves have quite a lot of caution and members of funds need to know more about the issue. The big industry funds all have websites and a lot of this information can be found on them so workers who have access to the internet could have a look at their fund and see what the fund says about in relation to socially responsible investment.
Finally, what do you see as the big push required to get this moving along?
I think it will come down to the members. Members of the fund will start to demand information about the kinds of investments to be sure they're not investing with companies with the really bad track record in the environment or labour standards. I think the pressure in the end will come from the members and the trustees will respond to that pressure.
Susan Ryan is president of the Australia Institute of Superannuation Trustees
by Andrew Casey
|
The California Public Employees Retirement Scheme (CALPERS) - worth $A 300 billion - has announced they will no more invest in countries where they are concerned about child labour, forced labour, union rights and discrimination.
CALPERS' actions are predicted to be a trailblazer with commentators suggesting other, smaller, employee pension funds in America, especially public employee funds, will now follow and adopt similar social issues and human rights criteria for their investment policies.
Using the financial muscle of growing pension employment funds to promote labour rights has been an issue, which has slowly crept up the political agenda of trade unions in the USA - and Australia.
At the last ACTU Congress discussion was opened up about how employee reps on industry superannuation funds should start asking hard questions about investments in companies and countries with dubious labour rights records.
However employee reps on Australian superannuation funds are hedged in by legislation, which seems to severely restrict their ability to direct funds to invest purely on ethical, social criteria.
If the CALPERS decision spreads throughout America to Europe and to Australia it could send financial shock waves through many countries with poor labour standards.
As soon as the CALPERS announcement was made about the first four Asian countries where they will begin to disinvest - Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Thailand - the local stock exchanges recorded immediate ructions.
The PM of Malaysia attempted to brush aside the CALPERS decision but both his political opponents and local civil rights activists warned him not to ignore this new trend - and praised CALPERS support for their struggles.
Last year the California employee pension fund approved a $A 2 million contract with two outside consulting firms - Oxford Analytica and Verite - to set up their progressive socially aware investment criteria which included factors such as civil liberties, freedom of the press, ethnic tensions, governmental corruption and respect for human rights.
Dan Viderman from the New Hampshire-based consultancy Verite told the BBC's World Business Report that the criteria used was similar to those used by so-called ethical investment funds.
" We looked at the laws, the institutional capacity to implement the laws and then we looked at what was really happening on the ground - child labour, forced labour, freedom of association and discrimination," Mr Viderman said.
Other countries where CALPERS will now not invest any more, based on this new criteria, include China, Pakistan,Colombia, Venezuela, Sri Lanka, Jordan, Egypt and Russia.
The California State Treasurer, Phil Angelides, who is on the board of CALPERS, and voted for the new policy, told the San Fransisco Chronicle, that the strategy could also signal unstable and repressive regimes that they needed to clean up their act if they wanted to attract investors.
" This is the first time in this country that a major institutional investor said it wants to improve its results in foreign investment by investing in countries that are making progress toward becoming stable democracies," Phil Angelides told the SF Chronicle.
While CALPERS has drawn up a list of countries they will not invest in their ethical consultants also drew up a list of ' acceptable' countries - these include Argentina, Hungary, Chile, Poland, Israel, Czech Republic, South Africa, Brazil, Mexico and Turkey.
Ansett Gone Forever? |
When John Anderson coldly called Ansett a carcass, they were there saying 'We are the heartbeat.'
In the first few weeks of the election campaign, with John Howard shrilly declaring 'It's about refugees', they were there shouting 'It's about jobs and security'.
While the corporate heavies were doing the deals in the smoke filled back rooms they kept the airline flying with a warmth and efficiency it was a privilege to be on the end of.
When the commentators with axes to grind and agendas to push penned 'let it die', they came back with 16,000 reasons why it should live.
In the end the forces were too great. Wily and 'Wise' blinked and it was all over, no doubt to the delight of the masters of cynicism who now lord over our degraded political landscape.
It can sound corny and cliched for labour activists to champion a group of workers who put up a fight as heroes, but these Ansett workers are the real McCoy.
In the surreal and reactionary place and time that present day Australia has become, they have stood out as a beacon of decency and commitment, as they gave it a go to save not only their jobs but an institution of social as well as economic value.
ACTU President Sharan Burrow says she has total admiration for the Ansett staff after sharing their experiences of the past months.
'They did not take Ansett's misfortune lying down. They turned up en masse at both creditors meetings determined to be a player in the company's destiny. They rallied far and wide standing up for their rights and garnering support. They went to the suburbs and the regions, stood on soapboxes and knocked on doors, never left an opportunity slip to push their case. They stood toe to toe with Abbott, Anderson and Howard and with flair and forceful argument demolished their hypocritical positions. They've been loyal to the very end, they've been wonderful, and they deserve better than this,' she says.
Machiavellian and Malevolent
The role of the Howard Government in the Ansett endgame is still to be revealed. In the murky and deceitful world of contemporary Australian politics, only time will tell. What is clear is the evidence that the Howard Government did not act in the interests of the Ansett staff or the airline industry:
� The Howard Government was warned months before the collapse in September by Ansett management of the company's problems They had refused to support for a rescue bid by Singapore Airlines several months before without any explanation. This bid could have saved the original Ansett and thousands of jobs.
� John Anderson's heartless description of Ansett as a carcass was an insight into the Government's preference for immediate liquidation after Ansett's collapse in September.
� Government documents released by the Federal Court in October which revealed Government attempts to tie the administrators hands over employee entitlements and drive the company towards liquidation
� The tardiness of the Government-owned Sydney Airport Corporation to sign over leases to the Ansett terminals exacerbated the fragility of Ansett in the dying days of the attempted sale
� The value of the terminals to the Government in the soon-to-be realised privatisation if Ansett died
� After the collapse of the Tesna bid and the obligatory shedding of crocodile tears for the Ansett staff, Howard shows his real preference for Ansett's destiny to lie in the hands of anti-union champ Chris Corrigan.
Fox and Lew, too, have more than a few questions to answer in the Ansett fallout as ACTU Secretary Greg Combet was quick to point out.
'They owe Ansett staff an explanation as to why they have reneged on their commitment and walked away,' he said.
Frank Stillwell |
**************
Are we becoming a nation of shareholders? In broad terms, the proportion of Australian households owning shares has increased from about one in five two decades ago to about one in two today. This is a prodigious rate of growth. The lion's share of shareownership remains concentrated in relatively few hands, including the major institutional investors, but more and more 'mum and dad' shareholders have been drawn into having a direct stake in Australian industries.
Buying shares in partially privatised enterprises like Telstra, QANTAS and the Commonwealth Bank has been a principal means through which this broadening of shareownership has occurred. Many middle-income earners have perceived shares to offer a better rate of return on their personal savings than, say, fixed term deposits in banks: indeed, during the boom years of the 1990's, this was typically the case. Meanwhile, demutualisations, such as those of the NRMA and the AMP, have spread the net wider still, some people who had voted 'no' on principle having since become reluctant shareholders.
Is this broadening of share ownership socially desirable? Some advocates of the 'third way' see it as a welcome development. Maverick ALP backbencher Mark Latham, for example, argues that it is part of the process whereby more Australians become direct stakeholders in the economy.1 'People's capitalism', traditionally supported by the political right as a means of inculcating working people with conservative values, is now getting broader support, it seems.
It is possible to make the case on equity grounds. Thus, one might argue that, if more and more people have income from both capital and labour, the class division in capitalist society is apparently eroded. However, the overall distribution of income is not necessarily made more equitable as a result. A contrary tendency may well prevail, as the gulf widens between those with regular income from both capital and labour and those with regular income from neither. One of the features of the increased income inequalities over the last decade is the 'great divide' between households with two or more working adults and those with none. As the former also become shareholders this division becomes further accentuated.
There are other grounds for concern. One relates directly to the economic risks involved in private share ownership. For small investors, who cannot afford a large share portfolio in which the risks are spread, this is particularly problematic. Capital appreciation and regular dividends may have looked easy to achieve in the 'nineties, but this is a more difficult decade, with major corporate collapses, like those of HIH and OneTel, and growing fears of a major economic recession emanating from the US economy. Workers and retirees stand to lose their lifetime savings.
The social consequences of shareholding are also problematic. As a shareholder one may have an interest in corporate profitability even when it comes at the expense of other people's jobs or of environmental decay. Awkward personal dilemmas arise where corporate rationalisations, or higher rates of exploitation of labour or nature, add to shareholder value. As a shareholder one may have a stake in corporate activities that, as a citizen, one may deplore. The growth of 'ethical investment' funds is one response to this conundrum, but the tension between individual self-interest and collective concerns remains deeply embedded in the nature of capitalism.
The tension has broader ideological and political implications. The comparison between share ownership and home ownership springs to mind in this context. Mark Latham sees this in a positive light, comparing the case for promoting broader share ownership to the successful promotion of individual home ownership by Prime Minister Bob Menzies during the 1950's and 1960's. Indeed, the latter was a remarkably successful policy. It raised home ownership rates over the two decades from around 50 per cent of households to around 70 per cent. Politically, it also had the effect of creating a more conservative populace. Part of Menzies' intention was to use the home ownership policy as a means of building 'bulwarks against bolshevism' giving Australian families a perceived stake in the status quo and thereby rendering them less likely to embrace politically dissident perspectives.2 In the case of share ownership the inculcation of capitalist value is yet more explicit. Mark Latham's advocacy of a 'first share-owners' scheme, comparable to 'first home-owners' schemes needs to be considered in this context. Whatever his personal intentions, the effect is likely to run counter to the longer term political interests of Labor.
The dangers of extending share ownership - economic risk, social division, and political atomisation - are not necessarily arguments for simply leaving capital to the capitalists. The extension of workers' ownership and control over capital has always been a central aim of politics on the left. The key issue is whether the ownership and control should be individual or collective. Traditionally, the aspirations for collective ownership and control have focussed on the extension of public enterprise to more industry sectors, beyond the 'basics' such as electricity, gas, water and other infrastructure provision. Successive privatisations of those public enterprises have been a major setback to these aspirations over the last two decades. The development of cooperatives has been a supplementary concern for the left, but this too is a process forced into reverse by the neo-liberal ascendancy.
Meanwhile, a different form of collective involvement in the ownership of capital has been proceeding apace. This is the massive extension of occupational superannuation schemes. At first sight it sits uneasily with the more traditional left agenda. It is essentially a form of individual share ownership, albeit usually with a good spread of investments which minimise personal risk. The various fund managers typically allocate their members' savings according to primarily capitalist criteria. Shares feature prominently alongside a mixture of securities and property investments in the holdings of the superannuation funds. On average about a fifth of the money is invested overseas. The dominant concern of the superannuation fund managers is with getting the maximum rate of return, consistent with maintaining a sufficiently diversified portfolio.
The focus of these investments tends to be more short-term than is socially warranted because, where workers face a choice of superannuation funds (which is a declared aim of government policy), the funds compete according to the annual returns on capital they advertise themselves as having achieved on a year-by-year basis.
Herein lie substantial inequities too. Not all Australians are in superannuation schemes. Those who are enjoy tax advantages not available to those with their savings in other forms. In effect, the inequalities during people's working lives become perpetuated and magnified in their retirement years. Thus, the extension of occupational superannuation schemes constitutes a 'privatisation of pensions'. As such, it sits uncomfortably with the egalitarian principles of concern to the political left.
Two changes could help to reduce, if not eradicate, these tensions. One involves the elimination of the tax advantages and the use of the extra revenues thereby generated to improve state-provided retirement incomes. Getting the employers' contributions is surely sufficient incentive for an individual to have superannuation, without the need for extra tax breaks. Most employees have no option but to be in some scheme or other anyway.
The other change would inject a more collectivist element into the investment process. The most obvious means of doing this would be through the coordination of the numerous existing superannuation funds into a national scheme, with a substantial proportion of the pooled savings being directed into a National Investment Program to finance the development of Australian industries.
The latter policy would link the spread of ownership of capital with more collective control over its disposition. Workers' capital could then be invested with a view to longer term goals, acting as an instrument for the development of a more actively interventionist industry policy. Priority could be given to investment in restructuring for ecologically sustainability, for example, boosting industries like solar power production where there is a major potential to take a leading role, particularly now that the Kyoto agreement is starting to pressure countries to adopt more sustainable energy policies.
A carefully constructed industry policy, embracing broader social and environmental goals alongside economic goals, could become a real possibility if it were linked to a National Investment Program. The steering of the workers' savings into this channel need involve no sacrifice in terms of retirement income levels. On the contrary, to the extent that industry policies promote more balanced and sustainable development, the economic yield, as well as the social and environmental benefits, could be positive in the long term. Retirees would share in its fruits. They would also bequeath to their children an improved array of economic opportunities and hopefully, a less degraded environment.
The procedures for control and accountability over any such National Investment Program would need careful consideration, of course. There is a case for having representatives of consumer and environmental groups, as well as workers and retirees, involved in the superannuation/investment management process. Supporting economic expertise would be essential but, given the vast amount of human resources currently involved in portfolio management in the various superannuation funds, this would not seem to be a significant constraint. Indeed, combining that expertise into a collective process would seem to be more sensible than continuing to dissipate it in a competitive process that has the characteristics of a zero-sum game.
These considerations of superannuation and industry policy may seem rather distant from the more immediate concern with individual share ownership. However, they are interconnected issues. The essential point in this argument is that the ownership of capital by a broader array of households is not in itself the problem. Rather, the problem is the prevailing emphasis on individual rather than collective ownership of capital. A restructuring of superannuation, linked to investment and industry policies, provides an alternative response.
In an ideal world one might prefer to emphasise public ownership or the development of cooperatives. Pragmatically, judgements have to be made about effective political options in the more immediate future. The prodigious volume of savings going into the superannuation funds makes this a growth area. Bringing it under more effective social control is a necessary reform. It is not inconsistent with the defence and promotion of other forms of public ownership.
The long term challenge is to engineer means of establishing more collective control of capital. There is growing interest in this issue among some trade unions: it remains to be seen if a future Labor government is prepared to take the issue on. It would be politically courageous to do so, but would signal a sharp break with the neo-liberal principles and practices that have dominated economic and social policies in recent years. Otherwise, the interests of private shareholders, big and small, can be expected to further prioritise the interests of capital over labour.
This article was originally published in Arena
by Neale Towart
|
Unions have been involved in action on rights for gay and lesbian workers since the mid 1970s (in positive and negative ways), and unionists have been a part of the great celebration that is Mardi Gras from its inception.
Shane Ostenfeld argued a few years ago that unions have proved responsive to the needs of gay and lesbian workers, largely through the efforts of white-collar and left-wing unions. This is despite the best efforts of some union officials to ignore or discourage discussion and activism on gay and lesbian issues.
However research still shows very high levels of discrimination and harassment of openly gay, lesbian and transgender people in their workplaces. The study, The Pink Ceiling Is Too Low, was conducted by the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby Group (GLRL) and the Australian Centre for Lesbian and Gay research. Jennie George, then President of the ACTU, Launched the report and GLRL announced at the time a commitment to working with unions on the issues raised.
Mardi Gras is the public celebration of sexuality in Sydney, and also a strong statement of the rights of gay, homosexual, transgender and queer identified people to live free of discrimination, harassment and victimisation based on sexuality.
As the statement from the First World Conference of Lesbian and Gay Trade Unionists, held in Amsterdam in 1998 put it, quoting the Vienna Declaration and program of Action "human rights and fundamental freedoms are the birthright of all human beings".
Claiming those rights has not been easy, and battling union prejudices has been a double burden for many. Karen Askew notes, in a Lesbian perspective on Mardi Gras and unions, that lesbians are in all workplaces, but "the culture of the closet still exists." Lesbian membership of unions was hidden, but the "philosophy and ideals of unions offered the only possible protection" from discrimination against lesbians at work.
Shane Ostenfeld notes that union policy of gay and lesbian issues first developed in social worker and teacher unions, who were affiliated to the ACTU and the Australian Council of Salaried and Professional Associations (ACSAPA) who later merged with the ACTU. A third national federation, the Council of Australian Government Employees Organisations (CAGEO) (who also later merged with the ACTU) also developed polices. A 1975 grant of $40,000 made to ACSPA to set up a working women's centre was the initial impetus. This led to the development of the first Working Women's Charter. This directly addressed discrimination issues.
Askew says that it "was no historical accident that many of the initial meetings and discussions of the first Mardi Gras parades revolved around venues such as the Trade union Club, Stella Maressa's Sussex Hotel which was around the corner from Sydney's trades Hall, and the offices of the Campaign Against Moral Persecution (CAMP) which shared floor space with the former Theatrical Employees' Union".
Ostenfeld charts the rocky history of the relationship between gay and lesbian activists, but as he and Askew point out, it was an ongoing relationship despite fierce hostility from some unions and union officials.
Nevertheless, "the first Mardi Gras created an uncomfortable wedge between unions and the lesbian and gay community by drawing attention to unionism's neglect of lesbian and gay issues. The arrested paraders who lost employment requested their unions' involvement. They were disappointed by their unions' inaction, but not surprised."
Parades for many years after this had no official union sanction, although many participants were loyal and active unionists and carried banners proclaiming this. The workers parade, May Day, in 1980, had a section organised by the Sisters of Perpetual Indulgence, which was not received well by some in the union hierarchy.
The advent of HIV/AIDS and its impact on the lesbian and gay community brought a new approach to discrimination issues, particularly after 1982 amendments to NSW discrimination legislation. Issues began to be heard in Equal Opportunity Tribunals, rather than Industrial courts, and new approaches to discrimination issues flowed into workplaces. Unions had to take a more active stance, although of course general attitudes in unions reflected pretty much society wide attitudes.
Union (as opposed to union member) participation in Mardi Gras had begun as the Australian Clerical Officers Association (ACOA) float, in 1994 after activists in that union got issues around work and family, and superannuation for lesbians and gays taken up by state secretary Vicki Telfer. Peter Sams, then secretary of the Labor Council of NSW supported the union float. By then it had become the Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU). This was a difficult position for Telfer and Sams, as the society wide prejudice came out in hate mail and phone calls, and campaigns against their leadership.
Superannuation rights of gay partners is an ongoing concern of the Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby see their website at http://www.glrl.org.au/html/frameset.htm for this and other campaign information.
Despite this, support for the union participation grew and by 1997 a cross-union committee was formed to organise union involvement in the parade. Union participation has developed since then. Gail Gregory, then a senior industrial officer at Labor Council, was a major organiser and marshall for the entire parade one year. The 2000 parade saw a wonderful big puppet of Jennie George as the centre of the union float, surrounded by conniving Peter Reiths.
There are no restrictions on who can participate in and on the union float. Robin Fortescue asks if this sort of action helps break down homophobia in trade unions? She answers in the affirmative. Request for funding on Mardi Gras generate discussion of issues concerning gay and lesbian workers. It may cause internal friction but attitudes do shift.
"Mardi Gras is not just about what happens on the night of the parade. Its impact derives from the organization, debates, and material support that must go on beforehand in order for this participation to occur. Let's make Mardi Gras the biggest labour festival of the year."
Workers Out, the second World Conference of Lesbian and Gay Trade Unionists is being held in Sydney from the 31st October to 2nd November, to coincide with the Gay Games. So while Mardi Gras may be the biggest ongoing Labour Festival, lets hope the conference is also a great occasion for celebration and discussion. For more information on the conference go to http://www.workersout.com
Further information in and at:
Shane Ostenfeld. Identity Politics and Trade Unions: the case of sexual minorities in Australia. http://www.mngt.waikato.ac.nz/depts/sml/airaanz/conferce/wgtn1998/PDF/ostenfeld.pdf
Robin Fortescue. Mardi Gras: the Biggest Labour Festival of the Year. (HECATE; vol. 26, no. 2, 2000)
Kate Askew. Trade Union Involvement in the Sydney Gay and Lesbian Mardi Gras: a Lesbian Perspective. (HECATE; vol. 26, no. 2, 2000)
Jude Irwin. The Pink Ceiling is Too Low: Workplace Experiences of Lesbians, Gay Men and Transgender People. (Sydney: NSW Gay and Lesbian Rights Lobby and Australian Centre for Lesbian and Gay Research)
1998 Conference on Trade Unions, Homosexuality and Work Closing document.
http://www.workersout.com/history.htm
|
***********
More than 100,000 workers in the gas, rail and electricity industries went out on strike this week - to demand the government stop privatisation, and introduce a shorter working week.
Many Korean workers, both in the public and private sector, currently work a six-day week with long working hours.
Government promises to introduce a five day working week have been held up by employer lobby groups threatening doom and gloom.
The Korean Government has hit back with threats to arrest all union strike leaders. Prosecutors have already issued arrest warrants for 36 union leaders.
With more than 400,000 visitors expected strikes during the World Cup in June could scupper the government's hopes of using the tournament to improve its image and help the re-election campaign of President Kim.
Industrial action close to June's local election, or December's presidential election, could reduce support for the ruling party, increasing pressure on the government to delay privatisation
Union Theatrics
The theatrics of Korean industrial disputes are awe-inspiring for unionists who are used to the more placid Anglo-Celtic union culture of Australia, the UK, Canada or the USA.
On Sunday, Monday and Tuesday the two national trade union centers - the KCTU and the FKTU - choreographed massive colourful flag waving, chanting demonstrations of 100,000 or more workers.
Around ten thousand blue-collar workers from the railway unions, seeking to avoid police arrests, staged sit-ins at Seoul's two elite universities where they chanted slogans and wore bandanas calling on students to back them.
The railway workers were supplied with sleeping bags by their unions so they could sleep on the library and chancellery steps while riot police surrounded the universities threatening to storm the campuses.
Cathedral Refuge
Meanwhile the key leaders of the public sector unions hid out at one of the major Roman Catholic Cathedrals in Seoul, demanding traditional christian refuge from the priests.
Until recently the Myongdong Cathedral has been sympathetic to union leaders trying to avoid violent arrest and jailings - but this time the priests told Korean media they didn't want the union leaders in their Cathedral. However the priests' pleas, to date, have been ignored.
The public sector workers showed they were not isolated from the mainstream in their anti-privatisation and shorter working week campaign.
Union colleagues in the private sector - especially car industry workers at Hyundai and Kia - backed the public sector campaign with four-hour solidarity stoppages in their industries.
By Wednesday morning the railway workers had called off their stoppage after winning major concessions from the government over both privatisation and working hours.
Meanwhile the strike at the state-owned electricity power company continues into its fourth day.
Face-Saving Rail Accord
The accord between the rail unions and the rail enterprises provided a face-saving formula for the government to continue insisting it will not change its policy on privatization.
With the national election less than a year away President Kim wants to continue to insist he is pushing ahead with his privatisation program.
But the accord virtually put the government program on hold by opening the way for the union to intervene in layoffs needed to pave the way for a sell-off.
The state railway company Korea National Railroad (KNR) has also agreed to re-employ hundreds of militant rail union activists who they had sacked because of their anti-privatisation campaigning.
KNR also agreed to cut working hours without a cut in pay or staff.
The power workers are continuing marathon talks, that started Tuesday, demanding that management drop the privatisation plan to sell five power plants to foreign investors, while insisting on the reinstatement of militant workers.
In support of the power workers, about 1,000 workers affiliated with the Korean Confederation of Transportation, Public & Social Services Workers' Unions held a street rally on Thursday and marched to Seoul's Myongdong Catholic Cathedral where they joined a rally in support of the power workers' union leaders who are claiming Christian refuge.
You can read more articles about the Korean anti-privatisation dispute by visiting LabourStart's Korean page click here.
|
*****************
The only time I have ever slept in the same room as someone who kept a submachine gun under the bed, and a large pistol under the pillow, was on my first night in the Pensi�n La Plata. It had been a very long day. After settling affairs with Don Jos�, I went to meet Victor Oliva, who had a flat near the Plaza de la Trinidad, only a few hundred metres away. Victor was a shortish, swarthy , friendly man, with a head of black hair that looked like a thick little rug. His fair-haired wife, Maria, who answered the door, spoke only Spanish, but Victor maintained a fairly rapid flow of English, delivered self-consciously in such a thick and mumbled granadino accent that some of it was lost on me (you can only ask people to repeat themselves so often, and anyway, he was doing far far better in my language than I could do in his).
Yes, Victor would be glad to offer me some English classes at Idiomas when teaching began in September - he had been taking the English classes himself, and was delighted to be presented with a native speaker. There wouldn't be enough work for me to live on - not at first, anyway - but Granada was a small place, word would get around fast, and no doubt I would soon pick up enough private lessons to get by. He already had two French speakers helping him out. One was Claude, who had left France in a hurry, Victor told me with a slight smile, because of certain activities he had engaged in during the Second World War. The other - Marie No�lle le Pape, a postgraduate student working on Federico Garcia Lorca - was a guest in their flat but was out with a friend at the moment. Maria, Victor explained, was a Fern�ndez Montesinos, and thus related to the Garc�a Lorcas. The poet's mother and one of his sisters were back living in their farmhouse, the Huerta San Vicente, just outside the city - I would be taken to meet them when I had settled in. One of Maria's uncles, a member of the Socialist Party, (the PSOE) had been mayor of Granada in July 1936, and was executed, like the poet, who was his brother-in-law, and a great many others, when the local garrison rose and took the city over. Victor came from a conservative family, I believe, but had been a student in Madrid when the Civil War broke out, and fought for the Republic. He had spent two years in a camp after the Nationalist victory. Things could have been worse; many were being executed. It helped to have a family on the winning side.
This was a remarkable conversation for a first meeting. I had taken a liking to Victor and Maria from the moment I saw them; they must have sensed this, and responded immediately with warmth and trust. It was not rare, nor is it rare now, to meet Spaniards almost in passing, and feel an instant two-way charge of understanding and good fellowship that can pass unexpectedly through even the most forbidding of barriers.
My first memories are of a childhood in a Newcastle dotted with makeshift camps for the unemployed. Nearly every day my mother made sandwiches to give to the men who came to the door asking if we had any odd jobs, for we were amongst the lucky ones, and could spare food. My father was employed by the Railways Department, and was never out of work, though for quite some time he worked only three days a week. The walk to Cook's Hill Primary School took me past a huge tine shed, known as the Diggers' Camp, outside which the returned soldiers who lived there smoked and chatted around the open fire while they boiled their billies. There was a slogan painted in white on a concrete bridge over a canal nearby: 'Land of Soap and Dope'.
When I went to the pictures, there were always two newsreels, and current affairs documentaries, including a series called The March of Time. Sitting there in the dark waiting for the big picture to come on (The Lives of a Bengal Lancer, Beau Geste, Under Two Flags, A Tale of Two Cities The Road to Glory, The Dawn Patrol, The Last Train from Madrid), patrons caught flashes of the real world: Italian planes bombing Abyssinians, as Ethiopians were then known; huge torchlight processions by night in Germany, and by day, rank after rank of singing Brownshirts marching with shovels over their shoulders ('They'll be rifles before long', my father would say); Russian parachute troops jumping from huge planes; Japanese bombers over Shanghai; crowds cheering the German Army as it marched into the Rhineland; barricades in Spanish streets, and shells bursting in the centre of Madrid; the bristling guns of the steel-turreted Maginot Line. In 1939, the disasters, from the point of view of those like my father who believed that we were heading for another world war, came one after the other in ominous succession - the collapse of Republican Spain, the dismemberment of Czechoslovakia, the growing tension in Eastern Europe. One of my last memories of primary school is of a group of us gathering in the playground around Mr Bartholomew, a very dashing and popular young teacher. Poland was under attack, war had been declared, and we had just heard that Mr Bartholomew had volunteered for the Air Force. It was scary, yet thrilling - Cook's Hill Primary boys had their own Errol Flynn, and dreamed of glory.
In 1940,. ith the war almost into its sixth month, the train ride from Wickham out to Newcastle Boys' High School at Waratah took you past the railway yards at Broadmeadow, where alongside the line there still stood a settlement of neat little corrugated-iron huts with names like 'Emoh Ruo' painted near the door, and tiny hardens bordered by whitewashed stones. These had survived from the Depression, which had given Newcastle a higher unemployment rate than Germany had suffered before Hitler's rise to power. My father was very far from being alone when he used to say that if we won this war, we must never go back to the world we had known before it. But his opinion was by no means universal - the United Australia Party was still in power in Canberra; and the Prime Minister was still Robert Gordon Menzies, until his government fell in August 1941.
By 1944, we were living in another world. Terrible things had been done since 1939, and were still being done in that sixth year of the war, as we all knew, though there were still many terrible things that we did not know of, and there were more yet to be committed. I found it painful to go to the cinema and endure the cheery triumphal patter of the commentary from the screen as we were shown yet more footage of bombs falling away from a Lancaster or a Flying Fortress, and we blew yet another European city to smithereens, just as the Germans had done only a few years before to Guernica, Warsaw, Rotterdam and Coventry. If so much bombing of cities had to be done to beat Hitler, as it was argued at the time, it was nothing to crow about.
It was a time of hope, too, with the end of the war in Europe now in sight, victory certain, and concrete plans emerging for reconstruction that would avoid the worst blunders of the years that followed the end of the First World War. And that last year of high school was an intellectual and emotional delight. On the staff at Newcastle Boys' High there were men of all persuasions, and several of them joined final year students after school hours for debates on current affairs. There were two from Catholic Action, and two from the Communist Party. One of the latter was Bill Gollan. He taught History, and whatever I thought or came to think of Stalinism and the Communist Party, I never lost my respect for him. For me, he remains the archetype of the honest, dedicated believer in what he imagines to be a doctrine of universal liberation. Deceived, and perhaps self-deceived, like a great many other decent people, he was an intellectual victim of that deadly mythologising of Marx by a messianic party that turned the multifarious and often stimulating writings of an economist, political analyst, historian, sociologist and philosopher into a religion, with its pope, priests, and inquisitors. But many who opposed the Communists both then and later did no better. Some, like Bob Santamaria, later to split the Australian Labor Party on the issue of anti-communism, were already thoroughly at home in the tradition of pope, priests, and inquisitors.
Then there were the liberals, like the calm, reasonable and caring Fred Hyland, another history teacher, and Jock Anderson, who took us for Economics, and told us something about JM Keynes, though he wasn't on the syllabus. Ron Holland, an Andersonian, who took 5A for English honours, introduced us to Gerard Manly Hopkins, Ezra Pound, TS Eliot, and Auden and James Joyce, and brought in his contraband copy of Ulysses. He loved poetry, and encouraged us to write it, introduced us to Meanjin, and was delighted when two of us got a couple of things published in a little magazine called Barjai. We were invited to attend several sessions at the Workers Educational Association, already run by Harry Eddy, another Andersonian, although I don't remember actually meeting Eddy until a couple of years later, when I was on visits to Newcastle from Sydney. All in all, it was a lucky education.
At the turn of 1945 I could scarcely wait to get to Sydney and into Arts I. When the Leaving Certificate results were published, I was earning some money picking oranges in an orchard near Gosford. The boss let me off early, and I rushed into town to send Norma Brigden a telegram that read 'Le jour de gliore est arriv�'. The post office clerk was puzzled, but when I explained what it was about, he smiled, to my great embarrassment, congratulated me, and sent it off.
It all turned to ashes when I was informed that I had matriculated for Economics only, but I was determined to go to Sydney. On the train from Newcastle just before first term began, I had a sort of epiphany: whatever it took, I would hold onto all the things I wanted to do, and do all I could to remain, or to fashion myself into, the sort of person I wanted to be. If this meant disappointment for my parents, I was sorry for them, but that's how it was. The essential thing was to be free, and to be as creative as one could with whatever talent one had. Whatever happened in the future, no matter how tough or how unpleasant, would all be experience, and it would be up to me to make something of it.
It was a fusion of all these elements that brought me to Granada. I had been interested in Spain for years. I had liked the Spaniards I met when I was passing through on the way to England in 1952, and the very look of the country fascinated me. Spaniards had to endure the Franco regime whatever they thought of it - why6 shouldn't I put myself in their position for a while? go through what they were going through? find out what it was like to live and work within a totally different culture, one that had fallen under a police state? Of course my position could not really be the same as theirs, for most Spaniards had no choice in the matter in those days, while I was a volunteer, so to speak, with a foreign passport. But there was much to be learnt for all that, and I was eager to learn it.
When I left the Olivas, there was not the slightest problem in deciding what had to be done next - within an hour or so a letter to Darcy had disappeared into the foreign mail box at the post office. Back in my room at La Plata, a thorough search of every possible nesting place in my clothes and haversack for funds that I might have overlooked failed to turn up anything but a little French and British shrapnel that was useless in Spain. In those days of controlled exchange rates, the Australian pound was worth three-quarters of the pound sterling. A pound sterling brought about 120 pesetas in London, but the rate in Spain was fixed at about 100. Pesetas came in notes of 1000 (a million pesetas was known as a kilo, because that was the weight of a million in 1000 peseta notes), 100, 50, 25, 5 and 1. The one-peseta note carried a portrait of Don Quixote looking extremely dejected, as well he might, for these little notes were nearly always so filthy that one would have preferred to handle them only with tongs. There was also a brown one-peseta coin, known popularly as a castana (a chestnut). The peseta was divided into 100 centimos, and these came in coins of 50, which had a hole in the centre; 10, made of aluminium, bearing on one side the copy of an ancient inscription showing an Hispanic auxiliary cavalryman, and known as the perra gorda (the fat bitch); and 5, similar to the 10, but smaller, and known as the perra chica (the little bitch). My collection of Don Quixotes, chestnuts, and bitches of assorted sizes was worth about 10 pesetas all told.
I fought hard to stay awake for dinner than night. They didn't start serving it till about 9.30p.m., the normal time in Spain. I don't remember what I ate, but I do remember nearly losing my front teeth. It was a very hot night. There was drinking water on every table, but it came in a large earthenware pot called a pipote, which had a curved handle over the top, a largish opening at one side through which it was filled, and a spout on the other. This vessel held about 4 litres when full, and was very heavy. My fellow diners simply lifted it up high with a confident swing, tilted it sharply, and allowed a jet of cool water to bounce down their throats. When they had had enough, the pipote was given a practised jerk that cut the stream of water dead, and was placed back on the table. No mouth ever touched the clay spout. Not a drop of water was spilt. On the trains, fellow passengers had taught me how to do this with a small leather wine bottle, a bota, and by the time I reached Granada I had acquired a certain degree of expertise, though at some cost - my clothes must have reeked like the Market Street entrance to the Queen Victoria Building in the days when Penfolds stored their fortified wines in the basement below it. Anxious to blend in with the locals, I swung the pipote into the air, came within a hair's breadth of dental disaster, and poured about a litre of water over my head, a performance that attracted a certain amount of attention. Don Jos� hastened across with a dry cloth and condolences, then dashed out to the kitchen, and came back with a glass. I never did succeed in mastering the pipote, but this perilous artefact has long vanished from Spanish restaurant tables, anyway. Even then, it was only to be seen in establishments that catered for clients on a very tight budget, though all open-air workers used it, and many still do.
Dinner over, I staggered up the stairs to bed, dragged by clothes off, and was probably unconscious before my head hit the pillow. The next thing I knew, I was emerging from sleep as though from a powerful anaesthetic, and there seemed to be loud noises in my head. But no, they were coming from the door, and they were getting louder. I went to the door, and opened it a crack. There was Don Jos�, an anxious and apologetic expression on his face, and he launched forth instantly into a speech that I could not follow at all. Next to him stood a heavily built character wearing the dark green uniform, black cross-belts, and shiny patent-leather helmet of the Civil Guard, a large holster at his hip, a Schmeisser submachine gun on a sling over one shoulder, and a bag of some kind at his feet. He gazed at me with interest while Don Jos� gestured and shouted in an effort to make me understand what was required.
When my landlord pointed at his companion, put his hands together under his head as he leaned that to one side, and made snoring noises, it dawned on me that I was going to have company. There is nothing that makes you feel so vulnerable as standing there in a situation like this with nothing on, so, making friendly signs, I got back into bed, said 'Beunas noches', and pretended to close my eyes. Don Jos� vanished, and the Civil Guard entered, disrobed, put on some pyjamas, propped his Schmeisser carefully up against the wall near the door, then thought better of it and placed it under his bed. He hung his holster up, slid the pistol out, and put that under his pillow. Then he switched off the light, and climbed into his bed with a great sigh and a murmured "Buenas noches'. When I awoke the next morning, he had gone, and gone for good. I never did find out why he had spent the night there, though I am sure it had nothing to do with me. The Civil Guard always operated in pairs - if you saw one on horseback out in the country, or standing guard near a highway, you could be certain that the other was close by, even if you couldn't see him. Perhaps my room companion had an offsider sharing another room in La Plata.
by The Chaser
The Chaser |
The comments came after it was revealed that Dr Hollingworth had continued to employ a bishop following admissions that he sexually abused a 14-year-old girl under his care.
The Prime Minister has come out in support of Dr Hollingworth's decision not to sack someone from their employment despite enormous impropriety. "Right now, that's the kind of trait I need in a Governor-General," said Mr Howard.
In a further defence of the Governor-General, Mr Howard said said he personally had no problems whatsoever with cover-ups about children. He also said he admired Dr Hollingworth's decision yesterday to express his regret, but not say sorry.
Dr Hollingworth has claimed that at all times he had acted in
accordance with his Christian duties. "The Bible says 'suffer the little children', and no one can say that I haven't been making that a reality," said Hollingworth.
He strongly argued that as a believer in outdated chauvinist views, he was still the perfect person to represent the Royal Family in Australia.
Late yesterday, former Governor-General Sir William Deane broke his silence on this delicate issue to stand by his predecessor. "I rather like him," he said. "Because his performance makes my own at the Opening Ceremony now seem not quite s-s-s-s-s-s-so bad."
The "GG" |
***************
Dear Mother, I trust that the corgis are well,
My husband and I think the food here excels,
And when I walk by some folk bow or ring bells,
It's very quaint here in Australia.
Dear Mother, I met two men dressed in regalia -
Both seem to think that they run South Australia.
It seems that they want all the paraphernalia,
It's very quaint here in Australia.
Dear Mother, the GG here seems very tense,
He wants to stay on, says he's made no offense -
I think that our daughter's GGs have more sense!
It's very quaint here in Australia.
Dear Mother, Janette wants a journalist chap
To apologise as he'd not checked on his facts;
I'm pleased it's not John she expects to retract,
It's very quaint here in Australia.
Dear Mother, I think I'll be glad on the day
When we finally give these ex-convicts away,
They don't know when to go, have no clue what to say,
And they all think they run South Australia.
David Peetz
Brisbane
But even if sprouts didn't turn my stomach, the message would: for beyond the stereotype that older Australian are cute and dopey, is an even uglier sub-text, we need to squeeze our money for every cent it is worth.
Smart money management, so the accepted wisdom goes, is about allowing funds to invest our money in all manner of environmental and ethical dubious ventures in order to squeeze a couple of extra cent in the dollar.
We get a few extra sprouts and never ask a question about where they came from - which is invariably off the back of some exploited residents of the third world, an ecological disaster or the shedding a local workforce. Close the eyes and eat the sprouts.
But the lack of control over our retirement savings doesn't have to be. With union input in industry super funds there is the potential to place some ground rules around the investment of workers' savings.
And as the decision by giant US super fund Calpers pulling out of four south-East Asian nations because of their human rights records shows, pension funds can make an ethical stand.
There are several barriers to this policy being taken up by Australian funds, not the least their conservative interpretative that funds invest with the 'sole purpose' of maximizing profits.
But beyond the law, there is the inherent caution of fund trustees. On one level there is justification in prudence - workers don't want their savings frittered away on marginal ventures.
But at the same time, many would be appalled to find their funds pressuring management to maximise profits in a way that, for instance, led to their own job being cut.
Funds offering eco-choice packages to members in an important first step, maybe followed by labour-choice where trustees would also pay regard to the employment practices of companies they invest in.
Other funds are considering going further, screening all investments to meet a socially responsible test, deeming that any investment that is not ethical is not sustainable.
As Susan Ryan points out, the change is slow and will only occur if driven by individual fund members placing pressure on their trustees.
The decision by BHP workers to take a stand over their employers' push to transfer their super fund to a private outfit with no employee representation, is a step in the right direction.
We need to recognise that our super doesn't just give us financial security, but also a stake in the global economy. If we don't like the way it operates, we have the right - as stakeholders - to ensure that we don't retire on a pile of blood money.
I don't want sprouts, I just want to know that my savings are being invested in a socially responsible and ethical way.
Peter Lewis
Editor
Padraic P. McGuinness |
*********
One of the curious features of public intellectual life in the English-speaking world is that many leading voices of the Right began their political and intellectual engagement on the Left.
David Horowitz in the US and Paul Johnson in the UK are perhaps the two best known, but Australia seems particularly generously endowed with this type. Names like Padraic P. McGuinness, Keith Windschuttle, Piers Akerman, Ross Terrill, Bob Catley, Bettina Arndt, Michael Thompson, Christopher Pearson, Michael Duffy and Max Teichmann come readily to mind.
All have followed much the same trajectory, with a few minor wobbles. All began, in the 1960s and 1970s (occasionally the 1950s), as enthusiasts for the whole panoply of New Left politics: socialism (usually of some revolutionary sort); militant unionism; opposition to the Vietnam War, US imperialism and most things American; armed national liberation movements in the Third World; new social movements in the West such as student power, feminism, anti-racism, environmentalism, gay liberation, and so forth. Yet all, over the past couple of decades, have renounced the canon of the New Left for that of the New Right: neo-liberal economics and a labour market "freed" by deunionisation; neo-conservative kulturkampf against feminists, greenies, queers and republicans, enthusiasm for American military assertion and Australia's US alliance, opposition to multiculturalism and reconciliation with indigenous Australians, and barracking for the Howard government.
So is there anything wrong with this? People change, and so do their opinions. Rational people revise their views in the light of deeper reflection on an issue, or new information which warrants a change of mind. However, most of the people I've mentioned haven't simply changed their mind on this or that issue in the light of deeper thinking and fresh facts. They have reversed their entire political outlook, renounced the worldview they promulgated through the first two or three decades of their adult political and professional lives, and embraced its diametric opposite. And there are a number of things to question about this.
Firstly, it is not a trivial matter to reverse one's position on even one of the big issues in public intellectual life, let alone all of them. Renouncing a deep commitment to socialism for an equally ardent advocacy of neo-liberalism is something a wise person would only do after much reading, deep thinking, intense discussions and significant experiences. Ditto for renouncing feminism and queer liberation for the traditional family, secular liberalism for Christian conservatism, indigenous self-determination for Howard-style assimilationism, pacifism for the Cold War and the War on Terror. Yet our ex-leftists of the New Right have swung about face on all these questions, and more, in a matter of a few years. One can't help wondering whether these conversions could really have been preceded by the deep thinking the issues deserve, or whether their original positions were all that well informed and carefully considered in the first place. I wonder about both.
The scope of our ex-leftists' recantation has other implications. If someone decides that the beliefs they have lived by (and usually lived off) for twenty or thirty years are not merely amiss, but entirely wrong, the first lesson they should draw from this is that they are capable of error. And if they are wise they would accept that their capacity for error has probably not been exhausted in their youthful excesses; that the change in what they believe must be accompanied by a change in how they believe; and that their public intellectual engagement, if it continues, should henceforth be more modest, less dogmatic, less triumphal, more open-minded and, above all, more generous and respectful to opposing views - which will often be views they once held. Yet how often do Australia's ex-leftist brigade achieve any such civility and equanimity in their contemporary interventions?
To take the point further. When McGuinness, Windschuttle, Arndt, Akerman, etc., contest left-liberal or radical positions on current issues, their arguments are always accompanied by the imputation of evil motives to proponents of those positions, most often pursuit of a self-interested hidden agenda of the "chattering classes". Thus environmentalism is a plot by the "new class" to enrich themselves and extend their control over the economy, feminism is a Trojan Horse for family breakdown, rising crime and "chardonnay set" capture of the Labor Party, reconciliation has a hidden agenda of territorially fragmenting Australia, and all critics of the US and Australian response to September 11 are traitors.
The question this begs is: what motivated our ex-leftists to propound these and similar positions in the recent past? Was it the same greed, power-lust, nihilism and treachery which they impute to the current generation of leftists? If so, then why should we credit the innocence of their motives now? Did their proneness to moral turpitude vanish as miraculously as their capacity for intellectual error when they turned Right? Or were they well-meaning dupes of the real powers behind the New Left agenda? If so, how can we have confidence that they are less easily fooled, or not being used, today? Especially when the vested financial and political interests with which their current views converge are more obvious than the "new class" interests which are supposedly served by, for instance, reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Perhaps we are asked to accept that the ex-leftists were, in their day, both propelled by virtuous motives and steered by sound judgement in their advocacy of socialism, pacifism, Third World revolution, feminism, Aboriginal rights, etc.; and that it was only after their own turn Right that their erstwhile views became the preserve of traitors, wreckers, grafters and totalitarians. Apart from the problem that our ex-leftists didn't all roll over at the same time (meaning at least some must have stayed Left when it became morally suspect), this view also entails accepting that barrackers for Chairman Mao and Pol Pot in the 1970s had purer motives and sounder judgement than supporters of asylum seekers in 2002. For these and other reasons, it is a very silly argument, and it seems much more sensible to accept that those left-wing positions which could be held by people of good judgment and good faith in the 1970s (whether one agreed with them or not) continued to be so in the 1990s and into the new millennium, and ought to be debated as such without the name-calling and conspiracy theories.
The irony is that for all their conspicuous apostasy, in one crucial respect the beliefs of our grumpy old men of the Right (plus Bettina) remain unchanged from then they were angry young men of the Left (plus Bettina). Earlier I suggested that each of the big issues of public intellectual life can be considered sui generis, and that the linkages between them can be thought through likewise rather than following automatically, and being able to be read off, from some master narrative such as Marxism-Leninism. To use some post-structuralist language, the connections a left-libertarian like myself might make between unionism, feminism, environmentalism and so forth are contingent articulations between distinct discourses. None of these discourses necessarily implies any of the others, and different connections and combinations thereof can be and have been made by thoughtful people of various persuasions.
This was not so for your typical New Leftist, and is still not so for contemporary Marxist-Leninists and Trotskyists, for whom all of these commitments can be justified and their connections explained within a totalising (usually Leninist) ideology, and in no other way; and invariably in combination with an indulgent attitude towards some version of "actually existing socialism", a romanticisation of armed Third World revolutionaries, and an obsessive dislike of "actually existing Zionism" (i.e. Israel). This ironclad linking of ideas which don't have any necessary logical association is called a "chain of equivalence" in discourse theory. The "chain" metaphor is apt, both because "chains of equivalence" are often intellectually binding, and because if a member of a group bound by such a chain has any doubts about a single one of the beliefs thus connected, they may find their comrades telling them: "You are the weakest link. Goodbye!" I can vouch for this, having twice been sent to coventry by the sectarian marxist Left for being "soft on the bloody Zionists".
And it is the New Left chain of discursive equivalence (with the odd kink) which the ex-leftist brigade has dragged along behind them when they defected to the New Right; allowing them to link together anti-feminism, anti-anti-capitalism, anti-anti-racism, etc., into a chain of authoritarian, totalising anti-leftism mirroring the authoritarian romantic leftism of their youth. This is the real significance of Robert Manne's ousting as Quadrant editor, supported and applauded by the ex-leftist gang, over his editorial sympathy for the Stolen Generations. According to one defender of the New Right faith from Manne's heresy, Quadrant was not founded just to oppose totalitarianism, but to fight all manifestations of the "Jacobin temptation", one of which, it seems, is reconciliation with indigenous Australians. Over two decades of impeccable anti-communist conservative commitment could not save Manne from being purged as a traitor to the Right. One doubts that the current ex-leftist management of Quadrant would even publish, let alone civilly discuss, such unseasonal thoughts by the journal's Cold War stalwarts as Frank Knopfelmacher's support for feminism, Bob Santamaria's anti-capitalism, James Macauley's concern for the environment or Greg Sheridan's anti-racist compassion for asylum seekers.
Finally, the reference to concern for the Stolen Generations as a Jacobin outrage should remind us that the modern ex-leftist gang lacks even the saving grace of novelty. Early in the Cold War a group of communist literati, who had reacted to the horrors of Stalinism by becoming anti-communists, released a collection of confessional essays titled The God That Failed. This book was incisively reviewed by maverick Marxist Isaac Deutscher in his essay "The Ex-Communists' Conscience". Deutscher's analysis will surprise nobody who has read this far:
As a rule the intellectual ex-communist ceases to oppose capitalism. Often he (sic) rallies to its defence, and he brings to this job the lack of scruple, the narrow-mindedness, the disregard for truth, and the intense hatred with which stalinism has imbued him. He remains a sectarian. He is an inverted stalinist. He continues to see the world in white and black, but now the colours are differently distributed. . . he denounces even the mildest brand of the 'welfare state' as 'legislative bolshevism'. . . Having once been caught by the 'greatest illusion', he is now obsessed by the greatest disillusionment of our time. (Deutscher, 1957 in Mills, 1963:346)
And, as Deutscher showed, the ex-communists of the 1950s were themselves repeating the history of those liberal European intellectuals of the late 18th and early 19th century who had initially welcomed the French Revolution, but were driven by Jacobin excesses to become embittered, tragicomic opponents not just of the Revolution, but of liberalism in general, and of the entire project of democratic modernity. Thus the liberal pro-Jacobin English poet Samuel Taylor Coleridge became a reactionary member of the House of Commons who opposed each and every democratic reform, and in his most memorable monent denounced as "the strongest instance of legislative jacobinism" a bill for - wait for it - the prevention of cruelty to animals!
That's something to bear in mind the next time Paddy McGuinness compares the Human Rights & Equal Opportunity Commission to the KGB - or, indeed, when one of his Quadrant contributors denounces sympathy for stolen Aboriginal children as a case of succumbing to "the Jacobin temptation".
Reference: Deutscher, I. (1957), "The Ex-Communist's Conscience" in C. Wright Mills (1963, ed.), The Marxists, Penguin: Hammondsworth/New York.
Thisarticle first appeared on Online Opinion
by Neale Towart
Tom Wills |
***************
Martin Flanagan unearthed his story in his novel, The Call, a few years ago. Tom Wills' sporting prowess and his relationship with Aboriginal people can show us that our current bigotry and racism were not inevitable developments of our history. The prevailing ideologies of race worked against his position in the cricket world of Melbourne, and contributed to his tragic death. More like him and the racial horror that is the history of black-white relations in Australia would be a happier one.
"The game which every newspaper in the colony now instructs me is necessary to the moral health of our young men was a noisy mobile collision lasting several hours. For the whole of that time, young Mr Wills was in the thick of the action, grabbing the ball and passing it out, calling, 'keep it moving! keep it moving!'. [could be one of the Ellas on the job here]. He says needless injuries occur if the ball remains trapped too long in one place."
According to Martin Flanagan, these were Dr John Bromfield's comments on Tom Wills, recently returned from Rugby School in England under Arnold, and his impact on the way rugby was played in Australia. His impact spread to the development of Aussie Rules, and he made Victoria into the leading cricketing colony. He also organised the first Aboriginal team to play a World team in Melbourne, and was behind the first tour of the UK by an Aboriginal team (although he had fallen foul of cricket authorities by this time and wasn't allowed to accompany them), mainly drawn from people from around Lake Wallace, Victoria, where he had grown up and leant a lot about cricket and the form of football that became Aussie Rules. He played this game with the Aboriginal kids around his father's station in Western Victoria.
Wills family history was a maze that Flanagan skilfully traces in this novel, based on many facts about Tom and his father. We learn of apparent harmony between the Wills family and the Djabwurrung people in Western Victoria. Tom spent much of his childhood with the Djabwurrung and spoke their language.
The half truths and family legends that develop around the station and the sport are emphasised by Flanagan as he gradually peels back the story. An manuscript from around 1920 purports to recount the family history with "gifts of good food and flour, a sympathetic womanly heart, and uniform kind but firm treatment by the master brought about a mutual feeling of goodwill and trust enabling the onerous work of the run to progress.... Playing the games and singing the songs of the younger gnomes of the forest, little Tommy steadily imbibed the language and learnt the tricks and forest lore of his wonderful playmates. Even so, who would have dreamt that in manhood's prime he would lead a band his playmates of the forest to green cricket swards where they would defeat on level terms a representative team of players from the conquering white race in the presence of Royalty?!"
Flanagan points out that Tom didn't play. This letdown for the reader begins the unveiling of many of the family myths. His father was supposed to have been captive on a Pacific Island and have made a daring escape. He moved with his family later down from Molongolo to Western Victoria and hostilities were fatal, to many Blacks. Friendly relations were achieved by this initial slaughter. Later having sold out and moved to Geelong and Tom having come back from Rugby, played cricket and football, they decamped to Western Queensland, where the fathers confidence in his relations with Aborigines lead to tragic consequences fore himself and his squatting party, and later to much more savage reprisals against the Aboriginal people west of Rockhampton.
Tom urged his father to arm the party of squatters as they moved further into western Qld, but his father refused, feeling he had no problems with the blacks. While Tom was away to get other stock, his father and the rest of the party were killed. We learn the Aboriginal people were the ones retaliating, after another squatter who dressed like Mr Wills had killed a number of Aboriginal people for supposedly stealing sheep (they hadn't). Some would question Tom's affinity for blacks when he was the one who wanted weapons, but Flanagan says it was because he was capable of seeing the world as they did. He knew that going into that part of the country was a warlike situation and he knew the Aboriginal people would see it that way. The attitude to Aboriginal people current at the time was that they were an inferior race. Flanagan says that Tom never expressed this idea and would have seen it as superfluous to the world he knew. Bonicelli asked Wills about the indolence of Aborigines and the problems this would cause in coaching. Wills reply was to the contrary. Bonicelli thought Wills meant "whereas we Britons will combine for a great cause or if there is a prize to be won, with the blacks it was the natural way."
Tom's self-confidence, evident on his return from Rugby at first helped in the world of Melbourne cricket, but his larrikin streak eventually was his undoing as the authorities gradually turned against him, no matter that he was still regarded as the beat cricketer in the country (apart from his Aboriginal friend, Johnny Mullagh).
The football connection is made clear after the great Victorian cricket victory over NSW in 1859. Alfred Bonicelli in the Melbourne Illustrated News wrote that "Wills called getting drunk having a bushfire ('Burn off the old growth')...but on the night in... Sydney he threatened to blaze out of control. It began with him sitting in the middle of the room, cross-legged and bare-footed, clacking a hairbrush against a hearth broom, and accompanying the racket with a flat nasal chant...After perhaps twenty minutes of this...he sprang to his feet and stamped about the room, fingers pointed in front of his face like a mask he was peering through...he brought the room to total silence by dropping to his knees and emitting a strange piercing howl.
Catching the eye of one of his fellow players, William Tennant [who, we later learn, clearly never forgot Wills and put the boot in when he got the chance], he said 'you should be glad I made that sound, Tennant, because one day it won't be heard. Dingoes are vermin, you know - they have to be killed.'
He declared a game of native football would be played forthwith, and to this end, commandeered a settee cushion and organised two teams, the Romans and the Greeks. Of course, no-one could better Mr Wills at the game, which he insisted on playing bare-foot. He had an extravagant leap which he would employ to balance himself momentarily on the back or shoulders of an opponent and thereby increase his upward reach."
Skills he learned from his Aboriginal friends came through. His attitude to unnecessary injury was one reason he and his cousin Colden Harrison developed Australian Rules. He felt the grounds in Australia were too hard for Rugby as played on soft English grounds.
Flanagan gets to the crux on Aussie Rules: "Whose game is it, you ask? The blackfellas say it's theirs. The Irish claim they invented it and poor old H.C.A. Harrison went to his grave swearing it was British. If you want my opinion, it's a bastard of a game - swift, bold and beautiful - for a bastard of a people. If it has a white father he wasn't a cautious, calculating fellow like Colden Harrison. He was a reckless young dandy capable of dismissed the suggestion of an English school game English game with the merest shake of his curly brown head, saying, No we'll have a game of our own. There were other ways of playing football. He'd seen one as a boy, a game of style and grace played for appreciative audiences. The old men sang the cockatoo Dreaming songs before the young men went out and competed to see who could fly the highest."
The story of a forgotten Australian whose story has the capacity to teach and inspire us all. As Flanagan calls at the end Tom Wills leapt from this land and almost caught the sun.
Martin Flanagan. The Call (Allen & Unwin, 1998) It should still be around in the bookshops (although things get pulled off the shelves pretty quickly these days. Ask for it.
******************
Decades ago Australian Governments had fingers in more pies than you could shake a stick at. Then, fired by the prescriptions of Milton Freidman, Roger Douglas, Margaret Thatcher et al, states went on starvation diets. As events this week show, public transport, is just one issue causing a re-think.
Ansett Grounded, Qantas Shares Fly
Workers and consumers are big losers as the Tesna Syndicate pulls the plug on dreams of an ongoing Ansett presence in Australian skies. Principles Solomon Lew and Lindsay Fox hint strongly that a lack of Federal Government support, heightened by its interest in maximising return from the sale of Sydney Airport, was the final bullet in their fuselage.
Receivers and the ACTU are stunned by the millionaires' about-face. Three thousand jobs go down the gurgler and doubts hover over the likelihood of worker entitlements being met in full.
Consumer spokespeople warn Qantas will gouge the market, raising questions over the wisdom of ever privatising a player that could use decades of public investment as a war chest to shaft competitors, and the public, on behalf of private shareholders.
Maritime Jobs Shipped Off-shore
Another Ship of Shame sails its sorry way into Port Melbourne. MUA officials invite media and pollies aboard to see first-hand the reality of exporting jobs to lines using flags of convenience.
This particular example, the ANL Progress, had just escaped New Zealand where the ITF won an order preventing owners sacking three Filipino seamen who had complained over being cheated on wages, fed fish heads, and being stood over.
ANL, of course, was owned by the Australian Government until being sold off soon after the Howard Government gained power.
Maritime unions are seeking Industrial Relations Commission sanction for their campaign against further jobs being knocked down to the lowest bidder. They are trying to prevent owners of the CSL Yarra selling the ship to an off-shore subsidiary, a stroke used less than two years ago with the CSL Pacific, now back in Australian waters with a Bermudan flag and Ukranian crew.
Since John Anderson became Transport Minister he has presided over a 350 percent increase in the number of foreign vessels permitted to work the Australian coast.
Sydney Faces $20b Rail Price Tag
Sydney commuters are pulled up short by news that only a $20 billion upgrade will save their city's rail system from "strangulation". There is immediate speculation that only Public-Private Partnerships will be able to foot the bill.
Trouble is, a growing body of evidence suggests private enterprise will only become genuinely interested when workers and consumers are prepared to lie back and think of England.
PPP takes many forms, from contracting out construction to handing over the whole shebang under contracts loaded in favour of new operators. State Government dabbling in this field has already seen motorists herded onto toll roads, courtesy of alternatives being closed, or tollbooths magically springing up on previously-constructed sections of freeway as demanded by the operator of the city's M4 western link.
Generally, it seems, entrepreneurs in these ventures are prepared to dine out on cream but loathe to shoulder risk
Sydney's airport link fits the profile. The conglomerate in charge, apparently surprised by the unwillingness of locals to fork out $10.60 for a one-way trip that would cost $2.60 on a publicly-owned section of the system, are talking legal action against the State Government, aka taxpayers.
Civil War in UK
Britain's Labour movement goes to war over Tony Blair's commitment to Public Private Partnerships. Blair labels opponents within the party "wreckers" and the largest union affiliate, Unison, withholds more than $2 million in subs.
Blair's commitment is not derailed by serious problems in health, education and transport.
As part of its justification, his Government argued public service over-runs averaged 12 percent per project. Then privately-owned Railtrack handed in a seven billion pound bill for redevelopment of the country's main west coast line for which it had budgeted three billion, rather shading the 12 percent problem. Railtrack has since gone belly-up leaving taxpayers with the shortfall. London Underground, split amongst several bidders, has been reduced to a shambles, provoking warnings on safety and compatability.
Operators of the first 14 privately-financed hospitals under the scheme got their cash but delivered 33 percent fewer beds than agreed.
Just this week, the Sydney Morning Herald reported that a 640km air corridor, between the UK and Denmark, had been closed on consecutive nights because Nats, the slimmed-down, privatised air traffic control system, couldn't cover illnesses.
More Lib Fibs
Remember former Health Minister Michael Wooldridge's assertion that prices would be held, "you might even see a slight fall", in the wake of his Government's lifetime healthcare bribe? Well, guess what? The election's gone and Government has given the nation's largest fund, Medicare Private, the thumbs-up for an average nine percent hike in levies. Some policy holders face jumps of 16 percent.
The problem, according to Government and Medibank Private spokespeople, is that - wait for it - Australians make claims on their policies. The increases add $130 million to the multi-billion dollar public subsidy for private health insurance.
Vics in Transport Bail-Out
The Victorian Government announces its will bail-out privatised tram and bus operators to the tune of $100 million.
Train and bus businesses were sold to predominantly British and French investors by the former Kennett Government less than three years ago under a model current Transport Minister, Peter Batchelor, described as "flawed".
Victorian taxpayers will cough up a one-off $27 million payment; another $30-40 million over the life of the businesses, and make a $42 million settlement on $110 million in contractual claims lodged by the companies.
Economic rationalism in crisis? Food for thought, at least.
Search All Issues | Latest Issue | Previous Issues | Print Latest Issue |
© 1999-2002 Workers Online |
|