 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
||
|
Issue No. 141 | 21 June 2002 |
|
||
|
||
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||
|
Issue No. 141 | 21 June 2002 |
|
||
|
||
*******
There he was, splashed across the front of The Australian newspaper, setting forth on all the Labor Party needs to do to make itself re-electable again. Hello? Isn't this the man who was a member of the leadership circle through the last two terms of Opposition? Isn't this the guy who killed Kim Beazley's Knowledge Nation blueprint stone dead with his insistence on including the ridiculous Spaghetti and Meatballs Diagram in the final report? Isn't this the man who turned the 2000 Federal Conference into his own personal testimonial, as he was reluctantly shoe-horned out of the National Presidency?
Now he's back, setting himself up as the voice of Labor's future - not just making a submission to the Hawke-Wran Review, but leaking it to The Oz (there stories don't turn up on the front page of national newspapers by accident). This is not to say that parts of his submission are not typically incisive. Calls for an enunciation of Labor values over pragmatism would have been a nice touch during the last campaign; a resolve to take on unpopular issues if they are right; all good stuff. But a breath of fresh air rarely comes from a political corpse, and no matter how considered the message, Jones is no longer the man to be setting the course.
For a man who prides himself on original thought, his preparedness to toe the central line on union representation is an absolute travesty. Jones looks at core union numbers, without paying regard to the logistical and financial support unions provides the parties, nor the increasing public regard in which unions are held. The reality is that the ALP is currently in the midst of a struggle between the institution that founded it and the individuals who have climbed to the top of the heap on the coat-tails of the movement. Those in Canberra would prefer a quickie make-over, that maintains the on-the-ground support from unions while giving the impression that they are now at arms length. The alternative would be genuine branch reform which would undermine the myriad factional deals that have them all ensconced in their big white cars.
For six long, hard years Federal Labor has remained in the hands of the remnants of the Hawke-Keating ministers; a sort of government in exile, rather than a Party creating a new agenda for a new era. Jones was one of those who refused to leave the stage; clinging to the National Presidency. Barry, it's time to step back and let others exercise their brains - you got the standing ovation in Hobart last time around, you botched the gig as seer with Noodle Nation, now's the time to fade into the background.
In a stinging critique of the Knowledge Nation debacle, the SMH's Alan Ramsay had this to say: "... that was forever Jones's problem, of course, even as a Hawke government minister for seven years; despite his immense popularity in the wider community, he was always the rawest amateur when it came to practical politics, just as so many colleagues dismissed him as a likable but "insufferable know-all". As Bob Carr very publicly asserted in August 1994, when Jones was under pressure as Labor's Federal president, Barry was "a special kind of politician", a "Labor treasure" who brought "something very special to politics".
"Well, now Jones has brought "something very special" to Beazley's personal baby of Knowledge Nation, for two years the Labor leader's two-word mantra for everything bedevilling his refusal to make it clear what Labor under his leadership stands for. Jones and Beazley between them have blundered, grossly, and it's hard to see, in the few months between now and polling day, how there can be any comeback for Knowledge Nation." Ramsay could not have foreseen Tampa, but he's probably right that Beazley was dead even before the Howard Wedge was honed, killed by friendly fire.
It's why Jones self-resurrection is so astounding. Jones may well be a Labor Treasure, but maybe the time has come to stuff him and stick him behind some glass. The exhibit's title? Proof that Brains and Intelligence are not the same thing. We might even put in a diagram to prove it ....
In an effort to kick-start community debate on executive pay, NSW Labor Council secretary John Robertson says wage relativities are worth investigating.
Robertson says a national response is needed to address spiraling executive pay levels and will take the issue up with the ACTU.
"It's a complex issue that involves the mix between shareholders, wage-earners and executives," Robertson says. "But what is clear is that executive salaries are running rampant - often with no connection to the profitability of a company.
"We are seeing the debate run internationally, with some European nations calling for statutory limits; they're recognising that this is an area that might need some form of regulation.
"I think it would be useful to go a step further and actually link executive pay to wages - it would build in an inceptive for CEOs to actually increase wages rather than cut them."
The call follows a wave of CEO wage rises. Recent revelations include:
- Macquarie Bank CEO Allan Moss receiving a $1 million pay rise, taking his salary to $24,500 per day.
- news that NAB paid three executive of the failed HomeSide venture in the US a combined bonus in excess of $ 8million.
- a push by Treasurer Peter Costello to present foreign CEOs with a $50 million tax break. That move is being challenged by the Federal Opposition.
- new statistics from the USA showing the average CEO salary has risen from 45 times the average weekly wage in 1973 to 450 times the average today.
"Workers struggling to survive on average wages are dumbfounded at the multi-million pay-outs going to CEOs," Robertson says. "Any political party that came up with a response to this would be on electoral winner."
The CFMEU Construction Union is applying to the Federal Court for orders declaring Government’s National Construction Industry Code of Practice and associated guidelines in breach of the Workplace Relations Act.
These are the 'rules' Abbott attempted to impose on Commonwealth Games construction projects in Melbourne, leading to his withdrawal of funding for MCG renovations.
A preliminary hearing will take place in Melbourne on Monday, when the Court will determine applications to intervene by various State Labor Governments claiming an interest in this matter.
The CFMEU is arguing that the code and guidelines amount to:
· Unlawful coercion by threatening to ban builders from government jobs (if builders and unions enter enterprise agreements that are not to the government's liking),
· A breach of Freedom of Association laws by discriminating against union members and delegates over their union activities (eg. delegates are barred from doing site inductions).
The union also argues that:
· The Employment Advocate's role in policing the code and guidelines is beyond his powers under the Workplace Relations Act.
The matter is expected to come for a full hearing later this year.
"Tony Abbott's political brinkmanship at the MCG smacks of an attempt to keep a very firm grip on the market, despite all claims by the Liberals about free choice and free market economics," CFMEU national secretary John Sutton says.
"His threat to make all federal construction funding dependent on state governments implementing the federal government rules is an attempt to pressgang the states into joining his ideological crusade against the CFMEU and its members."
"The CFMEU will not stand by and allow the interests of our members to be jeopardised by this kind of government policy. We will follow the deliberations of the Federal Court on this matter with considerable interest."
Even more sensationally, state government safety officers shut down the adjoining site, also brought to Royal Commission notice by the CFMEU.
|
|
|
Flemington Development Facilities Photo by CFMEU |
Reacting to public pressure during the first week of hearings in Sydney, the Royal Commissioner, having attempted to remove safety from public hearings, requested that the union nominate sites he should inspect.
However, when the builder at 38 Marlborough St, Flemington, declined to co-operate Cole opted for a guided tour around Grocon's Manning House development in inner-city, Pitt St.
Sources said he was exposed to "Rolls Royce safety standards" on a heavily-unionised job.
Meanwhile, in Marlborough St, Flemington, where a handful of workers keep union membership under wraps for fear of repercussions, every-day reality escaped his gaze.
Between them, the builder and sub-contractors at 38 Marlborough St, attracted three prohibition notices, two improvement notices and two fines for occupational health and safety breaches.
It was worse next door at Number 40. Inspectors closed the job, giving notice of their intention to issue six improvement notices, four prohibition notices and level thousands of dollars in fines.
CFMEU organiser Serge Saliadarre called the conditions "disgraceful, but not unusual".
The organiser responsible for the city's inner and mid-western suburbs said he came across similar situations every day.
"If the Commissioner was interested, I could take him to 10 jobs in my area alone where health and safety standards are shithouse," he said.
Cole, who has subpoenaed workers and issued all-embracing discovery orders against their union, said he had no more right to enter a workplace than any member of the public.
To do so, without permission, would have made him guilty of trespass.
CFMEU state secretary, Andrew Ferguson, argued the Flemington sites had been so bad an open-minded observer wouldn't have needed to have physically entered the premises.
Disappointed, by the Commission's failure to follow up on the information it had requested, the CFMEU has formally asked that it subpoena documentation from the Flemington sites.
"The CFMEU seeks the Royal Commission subpoena all relevant documentation relating to payments to contractors on these site ie. contract payments, wage and time records, taxation and superannuation payments," Ferguson requests in a letter to Commission secretary, Colin Thatcher.
"In terms of safety, the CFMEU seeks that you subpoena footage from Channel Ten (not screened on TV) taken on Sunday June 16, 2002. This footage will verify to the Royal Commission the appalling safety standards on this site."
"The CFMEU seeks that the Royal Commission subpoena evidence in respect of industry and site specific Occupational Health and Safety inductions completed on this site. Also of value would be documentation in respect of OH&S memorandum, OH&S committee meetings and a copy of the site acccident report book.
"In addition you will, I assume, receive documentation from Workcover arising from their audit."
Ferguson is also urging the Commission to investigate Workers Compensation Certificates of Currency for the two jobs.
The CFMEU has long argued that building industry employers routinely engage in Workers Compensation fraud.
Seventy five Australian Workers Union members employed by Nonferral Pty Ltd, a division of Tri-Star Steering and Suspension are now gearing up for a test of new health and safety laws, claiming they've been vicitimised for raising safety issues.
AWU spokesman Matt Thistlewaite warned the dispute had the potential for serious escalation while the NSW Labor Council will back any prosecution that proceeds under the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Tri-Star bought Nonferral last year, using a device that saw it acquire machinery and workers but not the company. The clear inference being that it didn't want to shoulder Nonferral obligations, particular redundancy provisions.
Thistlewaite said worker fears had been heightened by the refusal of new owners to upgrade forklifts or negotiate new redundancy terms.
If the AWU takes proposed action against Nonferral it will be the first NSW prosecution under section 23 of the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
Section 23 states that an employer or industrial organisation must not victimise an employee, or potential employee, because of a complaint over workplace safety.
Speaking to Workers Online, Professor Fels helped clear the air on one of the biggest blocks to brand-busting – whether a consumer boycott is in breach of the trades Practices Act.
"It depends on the behaviour ... if you're just urging people don't buy, that's fine. There's nothing unlawful to urge people not buy products from countries exploiting Labor," Professor Fels says.
In the interview Professor Fels also revealed that he felt compelled to intervene in the MUA waterfront dispute before the Federal Parliament had only just passed legislation increasing the TRA provisions.
And he says the current campaign against the ACCC by big business is to be expected: "They laugh at regulators who aren't serious and they try to destroy regulators - like the ACCC - who seriously apply the law," he says. "Their complaints and campaign are a sign that we are doing our job protecting the community from monopolies and cartels of big business."
Unions Back ACCC
Meanwhile, unions have thrown their support behind the Australian Consumer and Competition Commission in the wake of a concerted campaign by big business.
The Labor Council of NSW last night passed a resolution opposing any moves to wind back the powers of the ACCC.
The resolution follows a series of negative comments about the ACCC by business leaders at a time when the Trade Practices Act is being reviewed.
Labor Council secretary John Robertson said it was important that those in the community who benefit from the regulation of big business, speak out and make a stand on behalf of the ACCC.
"The agenda driving the attack on the ACCC is coming from the same people who pushed for labour market deregulation," Mr Robertson said. "It is all about taking away barriers from big business."
"The Business Council of Australia would not be so foolish as to collude - but there certainly appears to be an orchestrated campaign against the ACCC at present.
"The Australian community should be very suspicious of any calls by business to wind back the powers of the ACCC or any other corporate regulator.
HIH, Ansett and OneTel have taught us the need for greater union oversight not less."
NSW Labor Council will participate in a rally outside the Korean Consulate this Thursday - part of an international campaign in support of Korean workers.
Dan Byong-ho, Korean Confederation of Trade Unionists president, is one of 31 active unionists still held in South Korean prisons. They are amongst the 730 trade unionists jailed since Kim Dae-jung came to power in Seoul in 1998.
Repressive laws allow police and courts to arrest and imprison workers for holding protest meetings or organising strikes.
Last year 3000 riot police stormed Daewoo Motors to crush a worker sit-in and, in another incident, launched a vicious baton charge against union members employed by the same company.
Korean workers are becoming increasingly visible on the Sydney's trade union scene, especially tilers who are active members of the CFMEU.
The Sydney protest, timed to coincide with the World Cup which is being co-hosted by South Korea, will be held at 12 noon on Thursday, outside the Martin Place consulate.
The Court overturned an appeal by Electrolux against an agreement struck with members of several unions, including the ETU and AWU that included provisions for the levying of service fees.
"The Full Bench of the Court has found that unions can pursue claims for bargaining fees including by industrial action," an ACTU spokesman says.
"The decision also clears the way for bargaining fees to be included in bargaining fees in agreements."
The ACTU spokesman says it's a good victory for the union who pursued the case and a slap in the face for the federal government's attempts to try and outlaw reasonable claims.
The zero tolerance campaign has become a key issue in on-going enterprise agreement negotiations between the LHMU Casino Union and Star City management.
"Our dealers have told us that having to put up with unruly, intoxicated players is a real issue," Tim Ferrari, LHMU Casino Union assistant national secretary say.
"It is a real problem when punters lose money and then take it out on the staff and nothing is done about it. The union has had to respond on many occasions with dealers in tears because of the atrocious behaviour of some patrons - and management not taking appropriate action."
The workers campaign will include flyers distributed as casino patrons arrive and notices which explain that Star City staff will not tolerate unacceptable behaviour.
Its effort to force inferior hours, overtime rates and conditions, including sick leave, onto the workers is being contested in the Australian Industrial Relations Commission (AIRC) where the union is arguing a transmission of business case.
The Queensland-based company is trying to move all workers onto an inferior agreement done with its yellow, in-house union. The push contravenes clear assurances it gave when purchasing GIO.
Mel Gatfield, FSU assistant state secretary, says GIO workers would no longer have any say in their hours of work and would be denied union right. The boss union deal even contains a provision for workers to arrive 30 minutes early, unpaid, to set up for the day.
"Suncorp/Metway is simply trying to circumvent these workers' legal entitlements. They are doing the same work as always and are still called GIO employees," he said.
The following is a potted chronology of the GIO takeover ...
- June, 2001, workers told AMP was selling GIO to Suncorp/Metway.
- December, 2001, workers assured AMP/GIO conditions would be retained.
- February, 2002 - Suncorp starts backtracking, refuses to reiterate previous assurances.
- March, 2002, branches closed and workers told to reapply for their own jobs.
- Allfinanz branches established with all jobs to be comvered by scab agreement.
- May, 2002, some workers apply attaching letters stating that they expect to retain union-negotiated conditions.
- May, 2002, those workers threatened that their applications will not be considered
- Today, some GIO staff are working 15 hours extra a week for the same money as before; have no enforceable redundancy entitlements; five days less sick leave a year; and can have their rosters changed without consultation.
Recruiters from the health department are understood to already be leaving for the UK, Ireland and Hong Kong where they will attempt to recruit more than 100 nurses.
The department is attempting to poach the nurses from countries already struggling with shortfalls of their own, promising them cheap airfares and cut-price accommodation.
NSW Nurses Association assistant secretary Brett Holmes says that while "each and every one of the nurses will be welcomed at hospital bedsides once they get here", the exercise will not solve the ongoing problems with the NSW system.
Currently a 15% wage claim is before the NSW Industrial Relations Commission, with hearing dates scheduled until October.
The Nurses Association hopes that success in the Commission will go some of the way in addressing the problem of nurses not feeling valued or adequately rewarded for the service they are providing.
He says the problem is largely caused by a global trend towards 'cost containment' in the health and medical fields. "This means more patients are released from the system quicker and sicker, placing more pressure on our nurses," Holmes says.
He adds that for an institution denying there is a nursing crisis, the department of health is taking "extraordinary steps" to contain the problem.
Meanwhile, in Queensland nurses have put to song their hopes of rebuilding nursing as an attractive career option.
While work bans continue around the state and nurses gear up for one of the most extensive strikes in Queensland history, their new theme song Worth Looking After has been put to disk and video clip.
The song is written and sung by nurse and Queensland Nurses Union information officer Jude Mullane
IEU delegate Jay Greenway is the head of stage technics at Ravenswood School for Girls. Her students - ranging from years 9 to 11- are the people in black who make sure everything runs smoothly behind the scenes on stage productions.
Working in the most dangerous areas of the theatre, it is not unusual for students to find themselves propped 10 metres above the stage in the course of a production. Also charged with sound engineering, lighting and electrical wiring, they face a multitude of hazards.
That and the fact that there is not already a formally established safety training course for stage technicians led Greenway to take up the Safety First kit on a trial basis.
During her years on the job Greenway has sustained skull fractures, had fingers severed and almost lost an arm.
Often using her own injuries to show students that accidents happen to 'real people', Greenway says Safety First helps students realise accidents are a risk to everyone.
One of the kit's activities uses the experiences of Paralympians to help students connect the reality of everyday hazards. Students are told how Paralympians sustained their injuries and asked how the accidents could have been avoided.
The kit also teaches them that constant monitoring is required for risks to be adequately managed. Immediately after Greenway completes each topic in the training kit she asks for feedback from her students. So far the response has been enthusiastic and Jay has been pleased with the practical nature of the lessons.
Greenway says the Safety First kit is an invaluable tool for teaching student safety because it instills good habits and a working knowledge of occupational health and safety issues from an early age.
For more information about the Safety First teacher training kit, visit LaborNET's YouthSafewebsite.
Driving to court at 15mph on his tractor, José Bové was followed by a long line of farm vehicles and police cars and flanked by cheering supporters, according to a report appearing in The Guardian.
It says that Bové chose to walk the last few hundred yards dressed like a convict and chained to nine other anti-globalisation protestors also convicted of vandalising the restaurant.
He missed his court appearance by several hours but arrived just in time for incarceration.
A divided Workers' Group at the International Labour Conference elected the Federation as an 'alternative worker delegate', prompting some union bodies to question whether the ILO is suffering from amnesia.
The International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers' Association (IUF) says it has been well known for decades that the ACFTU is a "component part of the Party/state structure in China".
It says the All-China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU) is well known to represent the State and to have the backing of police and military force in the nation.
Far from championing the rights of workers, the ACFTU exists to do little more than support the Chinese State's economic policy objectives, according to the IUF. It says the ACFTU continues to stand by Chinese workers are imprisoned for attempting to exercise their rights to protest.
The ACTFU has been pushing for some time to gain international legitimacy; a goal that appears to have been achieved in the eyes of the ILO if no one else.
To access the full article click here.
Sydney World Refugee Week Rally
Peaceful rally at Circular Quay and March to Hyde Park
11am Sunday 23 June 2002
Speakers include Tom Keneally, Neville Roach, Patrick Lee (IEU), Sheikh el Hilali (Mufti of Australia), Margaret Reynolds (National President, UN Association) and Nooria Wazifadost (Afghan refugee)
For more information call 0417 275 713 or 0408 057 779 or 0428 190 276
International Day of Action in support of imprisoned Korean Workers
Thursday 27 June 2002, 12:00 noon
Korean Consulate, 32 Martin Place, Sydney.
The President of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions has been imprisoned, along with 31 other trade unionists for organising strikes and protests against Korea's repressive anti labour laws. 3,000 riot police stormed striking unionists and their families at Daewoo Motors and women hotel workers. The International Metalworkers' Federation is using the media attention on South Korea during the World Cup to demonstrate international solidarity with Korean workers.
For more information contact Paul Bastian (AMWU) 02 9897 2011
***********
A TRIBUTE TO THE LIVES AND WORK OF BOB, EDGAR AND LLOYD ROSS
Sunday June 30, 2-5pm
PSU HOUSE, Level 7, 191 Thomas Street, Sydney (near Railway Square)
Speakers include Mark Hearn, Stephen Holt, John Shields.
Organised by the Sydney Branch, Australian Society for the Study of Labour History.
**************
Wednesday Politics at Berkelouw
Wednesday July 3 2002, 6.30 - 8.00 pm
Berkelouw Bookshop
70 Norton Street, Leichhardt
Citizen or Super Fund Capitalism?
NSW Fabian Society and the Pluto Institute debate with:
Professor John Piggott
Director of the Centre for Pensions and Superannuation, UNSW, International government advisor
Mark Latham MP
Assistant Shadow Treasurer and Shadow Minister for Economic
Susan Ryan AO
Former Minister in the Hawke Government and President of the Australian Institute of Superannuation Trustees.
Dr. Shann Turnbull
Author, Democratising the Wealth of Nations, past President Australian Employee Ownership Association.
Lynn Ralph (Chair)
Chief Executive, Investment & Financial Services Association
For more information contact Paul Smith mailto:pasmith@socialchange.net.au
Electronic Networks - Building Community Conference
July 3-5 2002
Melbourne
Conference topics will include: use of the Internet for advocacy and activism, community building, community service, small business online, community education, government and community relationships, rural and regional online issues and technical issues.
This conference, with over 65 presentations from Australian and international speakers, is supported by ISOC-AU as a practical exploration of the possibilities, successes and complications involved in implementing the slogan - the Internet is for everyone!
More details http://www.ccnr.net/2002
Crisis in Corporate Governance - Ansett, HIH, One.Tel
Sydney Politics in the Pub
26 July 2002, 6.00 pm
Gaelic Club, 64 Devonshire Street, Surry Hills
Hear Stephen Mayne, Publisher of www.crikey.com.au, discuss the crisis in Corporate Governance.
See http://www.politicsinthepub.org for more details.
Dear Editor
Is it any wonder people are cynical about the true motives of politicians, including those from the ALP?
MP for Sydney Tanya Plibersek is a relative newcomer to Labor's ranks in Canberra. But while she professes loudly and often to be part of the brave new way forward for Labor, she has been quick to resort to the sort of shameless self-promotion that would leave grocery king Big Kev gasping in admiration.
The May edition of Tanya's 'Sydneysider Community News' includes 21 photographs in total. Tanya, in her modesty and in line with the spirit of collectivism, has allowed herself to feature in just 17 of these images.
No doubt a little anxious after the big swing from Labor to the Greens in her seat at the last federal election, Tanya has quite sensibly decided to focus on the big issue of concern to her constituents. And that issue is Tanya Plibersek.
This approach might work for real estate agents like Elizabeth Shields, but is individualistic style over substance really the key to Labor's renewal?
Shaylee Roberts
Balmain
Dear Sir,
Constructive criticism is always a compliment and I believe, the exigent critique by Greg Pratt is no exception, so, not only do I thank him for his toil, I embrace the sincerity in which it was offered and in doing so, I while disagreeing in entirety, must acquiesce to his belief of his logic of speciality.
The only improvement I could have possibly suggested would have been for Greg to have had read the letter before commenting.
However, what can one reasonably expect, for when stripped of my flowery language all that is left is decrepit, autumnal and seedless pansy.
But none the less, be it as a Sweet William or as Wilted Willie , I am compelled to dissent with him on quantity of content, for not only did I attempt to make more than two points, and after a review of my contribution , post Greg's critique, I know I did.
Perhaps my obfuscatory syntax is in reality vociferously camouflaged rather than phlegmatically descriptive, or it may be that as a human being, rather than an imagined son of God, I have some physical, as well as character defects, like having my head stuck up my arse. Of course, in this changing world, the key word is flexibility, and my performance must be the ultimate display of flexibility for a biped...
Having said that; I must confess, that I do get a tad distressed, but this distress is solely related to the distribution of wealth. Which is vastly different from the growing inequality of wealth and income in Australia, and as a cautious individual who has experienced extreme deprivation, usually through my own wilfulness of character, I still attempt to live on less than the munificent payment of $180 a week, with any excess returned to the Commonwealth.
This being my contribution to reducing the overseas debt, and at times this is rather difficult without reducing my donations to charities for homeless peoples , creating a feeling of being a useless pratt.
Of course, if I chose to dine during the phases when my head was actually up my arse, I could save a considerable amount on food, while simultaneously preventing substantial damage to our fragile environment through the recycling of waste products.
With unloading my burdens , I must also confess, to the sin of envy; for when I see the freebies handed out at places like Woomera, Port Headland and Villawood ,these sinful feelings of envy overcome me , causing me great embarrassment while at daily confession , but not as much as having to beg from St.Vinnies for winter clothes .
As for Greg's demand for division on racial lines, this is an interesting feature, which some of my immediate culturally diverse family occasionally whip me with, but on this occasion was absent from my own commentary. Greg has arbitrarily added and without merit, a facet which reveals more about the author, than the actual words which were obviously intended to disparage. However, I am sure that he has valid reasons for these thoughts.
His clarion call to the "Lest we forget", foundation principle of Unionism, "An injury to one is an injury to all" is not only commendable, but something I can relate to when; during industrial battles, I found myself in a solitary solidarity position. Nevertheless, I do desperately try, even in my darkest hours to repeat this as my mantra, and believe me, after 45 minutes to an hour of prayerful chant, not only does my hunger subsides. However, as I feel the warm comforting glow come over my whole body, it is then, that I can briefly forget the lack of blankets on our beds and am thankful for all these blessings. For in what other country could the opportunity arise to be financially prudent by scavenging food from a Woolworth's Dumpster, with the money saved going toward the electric bill?
Greg, I am in your debt, if only for the lifting of the veil of ignorance from my eyes, enabling me to see the true state of the nation, with its overwhelmingly altruistic population, prepared to stand by one another in their hour of need.
Dear Comrade Pratt!
I am also in your debt, because you have exposed a perception of myopic condition. You have reminded me of Galileo's self-promotion through notoriety gained through association by his embrace of the Copernicus heresy and his pilfering of fame through assuming ownership and invention of the telescope. An invention of which there are records of a crude model built in the 1570s by Leonard and Thomas Digges of England, and a model made Hans Lipperhey , who had settled in Middelburg , the then capital of Zeeland. Lipperhey being a German refugee fleeing Antwerp a City, which had fallen to Spanish Globalisation.
In 1609, although a patent for the Telescope had been discussed in The Hague, but it was agreed that this invention would be too easy to copy, this decision later being verified by Galileo's later plagiarisms. You have also smashed the chains of paranoia that have bound my soul, since my last intimate dealings with close comrades in the Union movement.
God bless you comrade Pratt! Your insight and the expression of it, has released my Soul, I can now, rip these platted thorns from my head, discard my Cross, cast off my ashes and sackcloth and cease and desist my personal flagellation.
Nevertheless, I have my doubts; can I survive these personal sacrifices, and continue to shop in Oxford Street, only time will tell?
Tom Collins
Does the root canal therapy as suggested by Barry Jones, go far enough?
Is it possible, without appearing to delve into the in and outs of a cats rectum or in any way stretching the sphincter of political hyperbole, to query- "Is Democracy, Government for the people, and by the people, with this responsibility being entrusted to those whom we elect?"
As this was a rhetorical query, I will answer my own question!" Of course it is!", but our democracy has absolutely nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of any individual issues. In fact, it is only when and what the majority agree upon , that it is eventually established as justified, and this consensus tempered with a healthy tolerance given to the voices of dissent, is the method with which we have agreed to be governed, legislated and judged by.
Any dissent outside this consensus, by self-definition is anarchism. The path to peaceful and permanent changes can only be obtained through adherence to precedent verdicts on questions of governance.
As the only goal of the ALP and the Unions should be the return at the next election of a socialist government. It is then simple logic, that from any perspective, no matter how politically or socially perverse, to attain this goal, a majority of seats in the federal parliament must be won, be they appropriated or otherwise purloined, and by whatever means legally possible.
To do this in an 85% by 15% polarised society, the electoral appeal must be to the lowest common denominator, that is, unless the collective fringe groups have unconditionally guaranteed to support the ALP, now a party of squabblers who cannot even agree among its own members.
Unfortunately for us, even the initial veneer of solidarity displayed by the ALP and the Rhinoceros thick skin of Simon Crean, previously immune from the taunts of his opponents, is now peeling faster than are the shells of the free prawns at an RSL Smoko. In addition, the repeated policy rollbacks, have continually converted the opposition front bench into team of virtual Canvas Backs, with extended rest periods required after every knock down.
Is it possible that latest starters in the Canberra Stakes, "PBS" & "DSP" will be the only winners backed by the ALP in the parliamentary stakes this year, or will these two starters end up also being scratched by their owners in an attempt a face saving? Alternatively, will the ALP, back flip on this issue, once again betraying the very essence for the Genesis of the ALP, by refusing to put their money on the nose.
Can we put a stop to this constant flit by socialist politicians from illusory windmill to windmill attacking fabricated nebulous dreams, attempting to be "Ever the gentlemen of excellent parts", but never addressing domestic issues of importance to the increasingly marginalised Australian Battler?
Forever falsely focussing on issues that; to placate noisy and elitist SIGS , while appearing to be of high morality, are of little consequence to the legions of lost Labor voters and Union members in periphery of our cities and of even less importance to the rural community ,thereby treating them as if they were all clones of Dad and Dave.
Suicide is always a senseless act and only carried out while in a disturbed state of mind, and can be a messy business, but this lemming-like behaviour in federal parliament is the most futile and the biggest botched job I have ever seen, and it certainly rivals the Jonestown debacle in Guyana.
While I believe that, the "Border Protection legislation" is being utilised by Howard, as a wedge in exposing the hypocrisy of many of those elected under the banner of the ALP; it is only succeeding, because of its veracity. I refer to both the hypocrisy of the members and the acceptance of the legislation by the electorate.
It would be reasonable to assume that the majority of Australians believe that this legislation does not go far enough, and am I delighted to hear it constantly debated in parliament, why then is the ALP along with the loony tune Democrats opposing it. So, I cannot help wondering if the same cat ,previously referred to as avoiding receiving an endoscopy , has got the tongue of the ALP in relation to question time in the House. This being apparent by their avoiding the opportunity to attack the petty penny pinching Treasurer Costello, through this governments attempts at deprivation of the sick and vulnerable in our society.
On the other hand, what stark contrast is the NSW Parliament, with the aged but still affectedly effervescent Big Bad Bovver Boy Bob, confidently swaggering, but maintaining a cute urbanity while cutting a swathe through a spineless, faceless and hopeless opposition in comparison to the suicidal sycophantic hermaphrodite sucks on the opposition benches in federal parliament?
As a personal warning against negative thinking, in particular to our personal fears of another conservative government with a senate majority, it was Job who self prophesied his torment, and we are through procrastination slowly evolving ours -
"That what I feared most has come upon me" (A Liberal Majority in the Senate?)
Could it be, that what this Ship needs is a new Rudd. Err! Ruddock, Err! Rudder?
Oh! Back to Democracy: The majority have spoken in Unison!
"Support Border Protection"
Then, what would the majority know?
Tom Collins
by Peter Lewis
|
|
|
|
What do you see behind the current attack of the ACCC coming from the top end of town?
Firstly, they don't like the Trade Practices Act being applied seriously. They laugh at regulators who aren't serious and they try to destroy regulators - like the ACCC - who seriously apply the law. Their complaints and campaign are a sign that we are doing our job protecting the community from monopolies and cartels of big business.
The other point is that there's a review of the Trade Practices Act at present and we're proposing the possibility of jail sentences for big business price fixing and stronger protection for small business against big business. They are trying to divert the enquiry onto issues about our processes.
What are the particular actions that you've undertaken that you think have got up their noses?
In the last 10 years, we have uncovered many cartels, many secret price fixing agreements. For example between freight express players such as TNT and Mayne Nicholas - who got fined $16 million; between building companies such as CSR, Pioneer and Boral - who got fined $21 million between them; international vitamin companies got fined 26 million dollars; and power transformer companies recently got fined 20 million dollars. They don't like that.
The second thing is that big business does not like the stronger merger laws, that with union support, were introduced in 1993. We can now block mergers that unduly increase concentration in the Australian market, unless there is a justification. They don't like us blocking any mergers, although in reality we've blocked relatively few.
Thirdly, we have been taking more action against big business engaging in behaviour to illegitimately kill off small business, for example, through pricing - by setting prices well below costs temporarily in order to get a monopoly position ultimately. They don't like us applying the laws about misleading and deceptive conduct, for example false advertising. So there's a general reaction to us applying the law vigorously.
Do you see a link with other BCA agendas, such as the wholesale deregulation of the Labor Market?
Well, my perspective on the Business Council is that its members want competition for everyone else but not for themselves. There are major conflicts of interest between members of the Council except on having lower tax, on deregulating labor markets and on weakening competition law. Personally, I'm disappointed that they've not been prepared to push harder or some other reforms such as in energy and telecommunications where there could be more competition and better prices. Although many BCA members want these improvements, they're vetoed by some of the other members of the BCA, so they've got conflict of interests on a limited range of topics.
In terms of the big picture haven't you really got an impossible job, isn't the system inherently anti-competitive, isn't there a natural tendency toward monopoly?
Well, to a degree there is, but there's a couple of things that go the other way. One is that the merger law plays an extremely important role in slowing down that tendency. Another is that the economy is still growing, it's been growing since 1974 when the Act was introduced, and growth leads to there being new businesses. Now it's most unfortunate that the statistics that used to be published from many years ago about how concentrated each industry is, are no longer published or collected, just relying on subjective impressions. I myself don't think the economy in general is less competitive than it was 20 or 30 years ago.
Where I agree with your question is to the extent that there is a natural desire by competitors to agree on prices, to agree not to compete, to agree to merge to become monopolies. I believe that in a free market without a competition law your worst nightmares would come true, that everything would monopolised or be subject cartels, everything being monopolised or cartelised. But the Act does make a contribution to stopping this happening. Also it has to be acknowledged that opening up the economy to international trade has often led to there being more competition.
What about organised labour, how does that fit into the ACCC's view of the world? Isn't collective bargaining really a form of anti-competitive behaviour?
For many decades all around the world industrial relations has been recognised as different. On the product market side the aim has been to stop collective price fixing; where on the labour market side the aim of policy has been - at least until recent decades - to do the opposite and to encourage collective bargaining and collective wage setting.
Now when I lectured, 20 years I could justly make that statement, but the two policies have gone in different directions. Now 20 years later, one starts to see a lot more questioning, particularly by the Right, of collective bargaining. This is not to say that there's been anywhere, any adoption of the idea that competition law should apply to the labour market.
We get into a bit of fuzzy area though with the secondary boycott provisions that are now under the Trade Practices Act.
What has happened is that, if you think in terms of labour market policies to encourage bargaining and in product markets to discourage to collective price fitting, then it has to be recognised that there are some borderline problems. The question becomes: where do you draw the line? And secondary boycotts law in Australia has drawn the line at a certain point, it is certainly a point that is further into the labour market than most countries. The fact remains that the act has an exception for employees engaging in collective bargaining, and it is only in two areas that their activities are at risk. The first is uncontroversial in my opinion, if they happen to aid and abet big business in price fixing, then they're at risk. I can't recall us having a case there, although it occasionally happens in other countries.
The second is of course, more controversial - the secondary boycott laws, which have much more extensive applications to trade unions. Although I would comment that it is my impression that the changed structure of unions in recent years has been a factor in the reduction of the amount of secondary boycotts.
Are you comfortable as head of the ACCC, being brought in to industrial disputes? I know you came into the MUA at one point?
My most basic role is to apply the laws enacted by Parliament and therefore, although I did not enjoy being involved in that dispute, I felt it was my duty to apply the law without fear or favour. It was up to parliament to decide and in doing so I took account of the fact that the Parliament had just passed much stronger secondary boycott laws. It was not my job to overrule Parliament.
Now the other big problem about the secondary boycotts in the MUA dispute was that they differed in one major respect from employer behaviour in general. When employers collude they take great care and when they collude and break the Trade Practices Act they take great care to do so secretly, and our problem is to find evidence. Unfortunately secondary boycotts are very public. In the MUA dispute the whole population, every night of the week was treated to a display of secondary boycott behaviour that was hard to ignore. Anyway I'm pleased that the matter was eventually settled after extensive discussions with the MUA and the ACTU.
There's another issue with the Trade Practices Act which we often hit and maybe you could help explain it the people in the union movements. If there is a company that's shown to be treating their workers badly and they have a consumer outlet, the idea always comes up to call for a consumer boycott of this jean company or this soft drink company. The lawyers tell us, oh no you can't do that because you'll be in breach of the Trade Practices Act. Why shouldn't unions, groups of workers be able to call for a consumer boycott of a product or a company that is treating their workforce poorly?
Well, I've got a good answer to this. There's an exemption for consumer boycotts under the trade practices act, so the legal answer referred to that's incorrect. In general there's nothing wrong with consumer boycotts with the effect, if the dominant reason for the boycott is environmental protection or consumer protection, its ok.
But what about industrial protection?
As I said normal collective bargaining and strikes are exempt from the act, only secondary boycotts are covered. The provisions on secondary boycotts are complex, and at times far reaching, but it should be remembered that there's an exemption for secondary boycotts, where the dominant purpose of the conduct is related to the remuneration for conditions of the person engaged in the boycott.
But what if the people we're calling the boycott for are workers in a Malaysian sweatshop? And we're saying don't buy X jeans because they treat their workers badly overseas?
Well it depends on the behaviour, well if you're just urging people don't buy, that's fine. There's nothing unlawful to urge people not buy products from countries exploiting labour. If you use your industrial muscle to block the arrival in shops of these products it may or may not constitute a secondary boycott.
That's interesting, so to your knowledge there hasn't been any cases brought to you because of consumer boycotts by unions?
There's not and furthermore, although there've been quite a few secondary boycott cases, I can't remember any that have been about this overseas situation you are talking about.
Just going back to the general issues again, obviously the pressure will be building on the ACCC over the coming weeks, if there are working people who don't think its getting a fair go, what can they do to support the ACCC at the moment?
They should tell politicians, and they also speak up publicly. I have noticed in the last week or two that there is quite a lot of spontaneous letter writing to newspapers and calls to radio stations supporting the ACCC. These things make a difference that this is not an organised campaign, and in the sense that makes it more powerful, the fact there is quite a few callers to radio station suggest spontaneously support the ACCC.
|
|
|
|
*************
The question central to the haka - life or death - had been heard in the city before of course - at the SFS, the Showgrounds, even the Olympic Stadium. But never before had it stopped downtown traffic on a weekday afternoon.
But these warriors weren't footballers. They were working men in boots and swandris, drawn from building sites around the city, to mass six deep on the intersection of Goulburn and Castlereagh Streets and roar their defiance at a Royal Commission which continues to downplay workplace safety.
Amongst their number were families and friends of Selwyn Wano, Wally Treloar, Tom Pascoe and Mark Poi, Maori whose lives have been sacrificed to the Sydney skyline and employer greed.
Kaumatua, or elder, Wara Heremaia told the crowd Maori had gathered to celebrate the power of aroha, something akin to love, rather than anger.
"We know the power of aroha," he said. "We are here because of our aroha for our brothers in the building industry."
The protest pitched the Royal Commission into an international spotlight. Crews from both New Zealand's national television channels covered the event.
CFMEU organiser, Steve Keenan, himself a Maori, told viewers back home why his people had commandeered the streets of Sydney.
"We came here because we thought the building industry would provide a better way of life for us and our families. We didn't come here to die," he said.
To the best of his knowledge, he added, the industry had claimed 16 Maori lives since the 1960s.
But the protest involved more than Maori. The Aboriginal and Pacific Island communities, who have both lost sons to building site accidents in the city, were well represented.
Aboriginal dancers preceded the haka
Four coffins, draped in the Australian, New Zealand, Aboriginal and CFMEU flags, sat on the steps of the Family Court building in which the Commission is housed.
They had been delivered by marchers who started their journey outside the Darlinghurst site on which teenager, Wano, had been killed in 1994. They held a brief service there, unveiling a plaque in his memory, before walking through the city.
Outside the Commission building, CFMEU state secretary, Andrew Ferguson, made a presentation to Wano's father who, eight years ago, carried the teenager's body from the site.
The three communities made their stand the day after the Royal Commission declined to use its powers to insist on visiting unsafe sites nominated by the CFMEU.
The commission, which has subpoenaed workers and issued all-embracing discovery orders against their union, wrote to one nominated site at Flemington asking permission to attend. When the boss wouldn't play ball, it didn't push the issue.
After the dust settled and traffic began snarling its way through the intersection again, the memory of the haka remained. Not just the bulging eyes, swirling tongues and stamping feet, but its uncanny approriateness to situation in which building workers find themselves.
The haka tells the story of a warrior, battling the odds, facing defeat, who must decide whether or not to stand and fight. Inevitably, he does.
It is about his defiance and strength but it is also a formal challenge to the adversary. It is bad form, in the extreme, not to acknowlege the challenge and a weakness not to meet it.
The haka party has had its say. All eyes now are on Commissioner Cole.
***************
Tony Papa could have choked on his coffee when he opened the Sydney Morning Herald to see four years' hard slog written off as a bribe. The headline thundered - Paying For Peace: Meriton Accused.
Papa could hardly blame the Herald. It had merely reported the latest red herring spawned by the Royal Commission into the Building and Construction Industry.
Again it was one of the highly-paid Counsel Assisting, who had been fish farming.
In cross examination, Dr Matt Collins, had asserted Meriton had bought industrial peace by paying $2.25 million over the odds for a central city building owned by the CFMEU.
Denials from Meriton corporate counsel, Richard de Carvalho, couldn't dampen his enthusiasm.
The theory, truly Collins Class, went something like this:
- Meriton was traditionally anti-union and un-unionised
- In May, 1997, the CFMEU turned down an $8.25 million offer for its Kent St, Sydney, headquarters
- In 1998 Meriton wrote to Workplace Relations Minister Peter Reith and, in March 1999, to the Employment Advocate, complaining of running battles with the CFMEU
- In July, 1999, Meriton bought the CFMEU's Kent St property for $10.5 million
- In "late 2001" Meriton agreed to forward employees' union fees to the CFMEU
Ipso facto, the doctor insisted, Meriton had forked out $2.25 million for industrial peace.
Collins made no concession to Sydney's galloping inner-city property boom or the fact the CFMEU had turned down the $8.25 million offer, more than two years earlier, as inadequate.
Despite the Commission having 135 fulltime workers and being funded to the tune of $60 million Collins couldn't say whether or not, in the interim, the vendor had gained a development order, which would have substantially boosted the site's value. A bit of homework would have revealed it had.
Most importantly, he hadn't factored in Tony Papa, an old-school unionist with a modern approach.
Papa joined the CFMEU in October, 1998, after an acrimonious, gut-wrenching split from the Maritime Union in the wake of that year's waterfront dispute.
To do so, the then 48-year-old left behind the desk and salary of an assistant national secretary to recruit as a junior organiser.
"It wasn't easy," Papa admitted, "I went to sea when I was 16 in 1965 and had been involved in the maritime unions until I resigned in 1998. I'm still ringing seawater out of my socks.
"I could have stayed and drawn a wage out of union funds under false pretences but I would have lost my dignity."
Papa was offered work by employers and even thought about striking out as a consultant but those options vanished when he was offered a start with the CFMEU.
"It wasn't a blow to my ego. I saw it as a continuation of what I had believed in all my life, working for trade unions and the working class," he explained.
Another long-serving CFMEU official recalled new workmates thought Papa was "@#$ mad" when he put his hand up for the thankless task of organising Meriton sites.
The construction company was self-contained or, vertically integrated, as they say in the industry.
Owner, Harry Triguboff, had organised it so Meriton was entirely self-reliant. It bought its own land; was the principle builder on the 10-15 city sites it ran it any one time; sold its own apartments and even arranged, supplied and underwrote the finance buyers needed.
As far as most knew, none of its employees were union members. In truth, a handful were, but kept it quiet for fear of repercussions.
The general consensus around the movement was that Triguboff, besides being a multi-millionaire, was an anti-union bastard who needed a good kicking.
"That's bullshit, that's primitive thinking, mate," Papa reacts. "It's infantile thinking and it is one of our problems.
"If we don't change that mindset we won't survive.
"The days of no ticket no start are behind us. What we have to do today is win people's hearts and minds for trade unionism.
"If people don't think we are credible, we are pissing in the wind. Employers have a role to play and so do unions."
Papa took this approach onto Meriton sites. For months, even years, it was a frustrating exercise.
Basically, he says, he just kept turning up, building a rapport with workers, middle and senior managers alike.
One former Meriton employee recalls Papa arriving at the 1999 company Christmas Party in Pyrmont. He was uninvited and, worse still, wore a CFMEU t-shirt.
"You had to admire him," he said, "I remember this big bloke being amazed. He kept going up to him as though he didn't believe what he was seeing and saying - man, you've got some balls, coming down here on your own."
Papa laughs.
"I didn't want to intimidate anyone. I just wanted to see what happened at a Meriton Christmas Party," he said.
"I stayed a couple of hours, it wasn't bad."
But don't for one moment think we are talking yellow unionism.
Born in Greece and raised in an immigrant hostel, out of Wollongong, Papa had rejected those options by the time he left Port Kembla as a cabin boy. Trips to Asia and experiences on ships, convinced him of the need for strong, active trade unions.
As an Able Seaman he was almost invariably elected delegate on whatever ship he sailed. In 1986, he took his wife and three children to Melbourne to serve as Victorian branch secretary of the Seaman's Union.
They returned to Sydney so he could become assistant national secretary. Seafarers confirmed him in that position with the biggest vote in the organisation's history.
Inevitably, Papa says, there will be workplace conflicts - it's the nature of the relationship.
"But," he argues, "there should be a level of respect between the parties and after a stand-off it should be back to business. We shouldn't hold grudges, it's not personal."
Certainly, despite Collins' assertions, Merition has known what the Commission calls "disputation" since Papa's arrival.
Within minutes of his pay-for-peace claim, Dr Collins was grilling Meriton's counsel about three instances of "disputation" subsequent to the sale of the Kent St building.
Perhaps, the real source of his frustration is that CFMEU membership amongst direct Meriton employees is nearing 100 percent. Seven hundred took the union option last year and have been joined by dozens of subbies and contractors.
In testimony, de Carvalho, put it like this: "The CFMEU understands Meriton's role, they don't want Meriton to stop building, and Meriton understands the role of the union.
"So, we are not a pro-union company and we are now, I would say, not an anti-union company.
Papa says the new relationship reflects the way the CFMEU has adapted to changed circumstances and, more importantly, worker understanding that now, possibly more than ever, trade unions are important.
The bribe claim, he dismisses as "a joke - an insult to all of us".
|
|
|
|
***************
Oil workers in Colombia went on a 48-hour strike on Tuesday to complain about the latest killing of one of their union's officials. Cesar Blanco, an official of the union, was killed on his way home from work - and the government released a statement of condolence.
On the same day - half a world away - the Brussels-based International Confederation of Free Trade Unions issued their annual survey of violations of trade union rights.
The ICFTU survey noted that in 2001 there were 223 cases of murdered or 'disappeared' trade unionists - 201of these were in Colombia.
The ICFTU report said that that more than 80% of the Colombian cases were a direct result of the victim's union activities and noted that to just join a trade union in that country you had to be brave - that's why union membership in Colombia was down to almost nothing.
The Colombian oil workers' union responded to the government's sympathy when in statement they said:
" We don't want condolences from a government under whose rule the killing of union leaders has increased geometrically. We demand punishment for the killers of our colleague Cesar Blanco, and an end to crimes against those who fight for the people."
The ICFTU annual survey, which received quite a deal of publicity in Europe, argued that global liberalisation of trade and investment is directly linked to attacks on workers' rights and trade union repression.
The 223-page annual report catalogues abuse of union members in many different countries. And Australia does not escape its notice.
Worldwide more than 4,000 trade unionists were arrested last year, 1,000 injured and 10,000 sacked, according to the survey.
The ICFTU says autocratic governments in China, Burma, Belarus and elsewhere continue to repress workers and their trade unions.
The Cost Of The Struggle For Democracy
The Chinese trade unionist Yao Guisheng, sentenced to 15 years' forced labour based on totally false accusations, ended up losing his mind after having been beaten and confined to a cell. In China, any attempt to create a free trade union can be rewarded with huge prison sentences and even life-imprisonment, interspersed with unbearable conditions of detention. Burma, where independent unions are forced underground or else risk incurring heavy prison terms, and where the military junta sack, imprison or even torture protesters, is another blatant example of the clear link between increased violations of union rights and the fear of certain regimes of the key role unions can play in helping democracy take root.
Similarly, on the African continent, where there is a serious democratic deficit, the incipient war between the public authorities and the unions has also led to many arrests, intimidation and even the loss of lives. This has been the case in Zimbabwe where three strikers from a steel firm were murdered. But Swaziland is also in the running for the title of African champion of anti-union repression.
The situation has been comparable in Belarus, where President Lukashenko's consolidation of despotic methods has inevitably led to an aggravation of anti-union repression.
And then there are many countries where the unions are still totally banned, particularly in the Middle East.
The Cost of Accelerating Global Liberalisation
On 2 May 2001 in Bangladesh, the General Secretary of the Jatiyo Sramik union, Iqbal Majumber, was shot dead when leaving his office. He was a pioneer within the union movement in Bangladesh and at the forefront of the struggle against privatisation and deregulation.
Throughout the world, workers have been hit hard by the negative impact of the down-turn in the global economy coupled with structural adjustment measures, but where they have expressed their discontent governments have been quick to respond with repression. In Argentina, the "cocktail" of an acute economic crisis, privatisation of public services and unbridled flexibility has thrown thousands of workers onto the streets. The response has been a large increase in strikes and demonstrations, which have in turn led to many violent confrontations with the police.
In Colombia, where over 200 trade unionists were assassinated or reported missing in 2001, amounting to a 25% rise in murders and disappearances compared to 2000, unionists from the public services have been the hardest hit, suffering about 65% of the violations, particularly as a result of their determined stance in political talks on fiscal adaptations and privatisation. The report also condemns the impunity enjoyed by most of the authors of these crimes, as well as the serious flaws in protection programmes for Colombian trade unionists.
In Central and Eastern Europe, though the report notes some legislative improvements on core unions rights, privatisation and liberalisation are associated much too often with violation of union rights. In the Czech Republic, for instance, despite the coming into force of a new Labour Code there has been no let-up in anti-union discrimination. And, like others in the region, the country has had a good share of harassed, sacked, relocated or threatened trade unionists.
When Nothing Can Stop Employers...
When trying to set up a union in a textile factory in Pakistan in June 2001, Naddem Dar was intercepted by the owner of the factory. When he refused to give up his plans, despite being threatened at gunpoint, he was tortured. To force the other union leaders to resign, the management threatened to relocate the factory and to hire hit-men to deal with any "recalcitrant elements".
The report shows that the race for profits and the associated bitter competition on the global market have encouraged employers to disregard laws where possible and to use brutal force where necessary.
In Indonesia, the assistant manager of a car factory in Jakarta paid thugs armed with knives, iron bars and guns to break a strike conducted by 400 workers last March. The result was two deaths and ten people seriously wounded. In several Asian countries, employers have shown no scruples in hiring hit-men, often current or former members of the armed services, to repress or attack their workforce, particularly when the latter go on strike or hold a sit-in. This has been especially common in China, Indonesia and South Korea, a country where more than 200 union leaders were sentenced to prison terms and heavy fines in 2001 and where, at the end of the year, 50 were still languishing in jail.
In Latin America, which has been the deadliest region for trade unionists, some sectors have been particularly strong on anti-union repression. In Costa Rica and Guatemala, the situation is especially bad in the banana plantations (unionised workers have been sacked, harassed or blacklisted, thus losing their chances of future recruitment) and in export processing zones (EPZs). The report notes that the EPZs around the world, which are an advanced post of globalisation, are generally zones where workers have no rights.
When International Union Solidarity Makes A Difference...
In Central Africa the union leader Théophile Sony Colé (USTC) was arrested on 17 June 2001 at the airport, on his way back from a union meeting in Nairobi organised by ICFTU-AFRO. The regional organisation alerted a maximum number of regional and international leaders, and this eventually led to his release.
In El Salvador, thanks to the combined pressure of unions, the press and solidarity groups, the workers at the Taiwanese textile factory Tainan El Salvador S.A. managed to gain recognition for their union, the union of textile workers (STIT). This was a first in the country's EPZs, which are otherwise totally bereft of union rights.
Thailand, Ghana, Belize ...Various international campaigns, often orchestrated with other groups fighting for human rights, helped promote the release of imprisoned trade unionists in 2001, as well as the resolving of conflicts, the reinstatement of sacked trade unionists or the recognition of trade unions..
Australian Workers Rights To Collective Bargaining Undermined
In the five-page section on Australia the ICFTU annual report notes the way employers have used the Workplace Relations Act to undermine the right to collective bargaining and promote individual agreements.
The report looks at eight 2001 industrial disputes as case studies in how employers have become more militant in campaigning against their workforce.
The Australian case studies include:
· The BHP-Billiton attack on workers in the Pilbara region is highlighted;
· The union-busting tactics used during a lockout of LHMU members at the Mirotone company;
· Qantas' training off-shore of management staff in ground service work;
· The intransigence of the South African-owned Taubmans paint company;
· The use of police against LHMU cleaners employed at the Wonderland theme park;
· Telstra's anti-union email urging managers to favour workers on individual contracts and
· The Federal government's phone-tapping of MUA officials involved in the Tampa affair.
You can read all of the ICFTU Survey by going to: http://www.icftu.org/survey/
|
|
|
|
***************
Ten years ago when I first started researching the activities of Queensland's Aboriginal department I had several aims: to acquire for myself a knowledge of government operations during the twentieth century; to do a thorough job in accessing the widest possible range of information; and to come up with new ways of conceptualising practices such as exile to reserves, separation of children from their families, and forced labour. In particular, I wanted some sense of how Aboriginal families experienced these and other aspects of a century of 'care and protection'.
This talk today is about my journey of discovery. I started off as a middle-class middle-aged woman researching for a PhD thesis and ended up, after reading hundreds of files and thousands of documents, sitting in a room surrounded by paper and thinking: What if this had been me? How would I have coped? What does it mean that I now have this knowledge?
The complexity of this suffocating system of controls, the scope and depth of unbelievable deprivation, absolutely beggars belief. Here's a brief background.
Since the turn of the nineteenth century, in Queensland and around Australia, each state gave itself total power over Aboriginal lives. As settlement appropriated all the fertile land Aboriginal families were deported even from dry areas; it was claimed their presence near waterholes
or rivers frightened the cattle. Carted off to missions and settlements according to the provisions of carefully crafted 'protection' laws, people died of diseases and starvation because the institutions were invariably located on useless land and the government refused to provide funds sufficient for survival.
People who escaped to look for food and work were hunted down and returned in chains. On reserves work was compulsory and unpaid until the late 1960s, rations and housing condemned as pathologically substandard, and the whole sorry mess handed to Aboriginal community councils in the late 1980s. And now these conditions are largely blamed on poor council administration and misplaced ATSIC priorities.
Every employed Aboriginal in Queensland was contracted by the government for 51 weeks out of 52, with or without his or her family. To refuse such separation was to be beaten or banished, usually to Palm Island. Some never saw or heard from families again. On the backs of this workforce of between 4000 and 5000 men, women and children, the Queensland pastoral industry developed and prospered. Surveys showed that Aboriginal workers were often regarded as more skilled than whites, but a gentlemen's agreement struck in 1919 between government and pastoralists set Aboriginal pay at 66% the white rate for the next 50 years.
That was the stated procedure. But in some years workers actually received as little as 31%, and never, during its control of private wages that only ceased in 1970, never did the government ensure even this money was received by the worker.
The government maintained a system blighted by fraud; it extracted levies from pitiful earnings; it misused and mismanaged trust funds; it seized around 80% of private savings to generate revenue for the state on the facile pretext that the money was 'idle' and 'surplus to needs'. Account holders, some with considerable finances of which they were kept totally ignorant, lived, and died, in grinding poverty. Now we begin to understand the despair and destitution of today.
What most appalled me was the sheer bloody mindedness and perversity as decade after decade power compounded power, entrenching a punitive system for the sake of maintaining controls, in the face of mounting evidence of outcomes patently contrary to publicly stated aims. What I found most offensive was the realisation that during all of these years, when the causal factor was so clearly the pernicious system itself and the men who implemented it with such dogmatic determination, it was the people who were blamed, misrepresented, maligned and discounted as the root cause of their own damnable circumstances. As is still so often the case today.
If you are driven from country which has sustained you for generations, if you are denied access to rental housing or casual accommodation, if those of you in work are denied the cash you are earning, if you are thereby struggling in shanties without the clean water, sanitation, shelter, food, clothing and schooling that is mandated for all other Australians how does it feel to be told it is your failure to provide a good home environment that alerts authorities to the need to 'rescue' your children from your negligence. How does it feel to know, from experience, that you might never see your little ones again? To realise, from the cold hard facts of your position, that you can't afford to follow to be near them? To know, from bitter experience, that the authorities will neither listen to your protests nor respect your heartache?
What does it mean for ourselves as Australians to know now, as surely as I know from the evidence, that these children who were taken into government 'care and protection' and the adults they became were trapped, across many generations, in conditions as bad, and often worse, than those from which they were deemed to have been 'rescued'. Here are some sketches of conditions on government settlements. On Palm Island in the 1930s nearly every baby died who was not breastfed, because the only alternative was arrowroot and condensed milk. Here the doctor asked head office whether it was 'worth while trying to save them' by providing vitamin-enriched formula.
At Cherbourg, the government's showpiece institution, the walls of the dormitory were described as 'literally alive with bugs, beds, bed clothing, pillows and mattresses are all infested ... all pillows were filthy because the previous matron withheld pillowslips to save washing'. In the 1950s malnourished dormitory children succumbed to tuberculosis because, as the expert reported, they slept several to a bed in overcrowded and badly ventilated barracks. The government was warned that the encaging of large numbers of children and unmarried women behind barbed wire and locked doors was artificial, unnatural and pernicious, but dormitories continued to be used, even into the 1970s, as places of detention.
For around 70 years the Queensland government simply ignored its own law requiring every child be given a regular education. As early as 1905 the chief protector had obtained advice from the crown solicitor that Aboriginal children were not exempted from this basic right.
Yet the government had no intention of providing standard teachers, classrooms or learning resources for these wards of state. Until the 1950s lessons were limited to half a day so children could work in the afternoons; they had to make do with cast off and outdated materials from the white schools, with unpaid native monitors as teachers. Only in the last few decades has orthodox schooling been provided. Yet the public was told Aboriginal children were intellectually backward.
And in the wider community it was the atrocious conditions on the department 's own reserves, where basic amenities were deliberately vetoed on the grounds that they might encourage people to reside there, that were reported, time and time again, as the sole grounds that children were refused access to local schools.
The department even denied local councils permission to erect necessary amenities, and dismissed white lobbyists as socialist meddlers. From the 1960s, in the name of assimilation, it sanctioned the eviction of families and the destruction of their huts 'on health grounds' conditions for which the department was itself responsible when it knew no alternative accommodation was available.
In the 1970s, as federally-funded low-rent houses proliferated, families trying to help each other out risked eviction as departmental agents warned against overcrowding and 'unsuitable' visitors.
I am horrified and ashamed to read the machinations of this pitiless system. I am ashamed to know that many families with large bank accounts had to go cap in hand to ask permission to make small withdrawals, permission that was frequently refused. Shame turned to disgust now I know that the government knew of, was consistently warned of, widespread frauds by both employers and police, but always refused to implement the simplest check namely that people see some record of what was being done to their own savings.
Disgust turned to anger now I know that the government itself was taking money from savings for trust accounts it misused and purloined, it engineered 'consent' for deductions to pay for improvements on departmental reserves, it seized the bank interest, and, in the late 1950s, it simply wrote itself a regulation so it could invest hundreds of thousands of pounds of those savings in development projects of regional hospitals when Aboriginal patients were dying of cross infections in the under-resourced and inadequately staffed equivalents.
I am horrified and ashamed to have lived oblivious to such calculated inhumanity. I am also diminished. My sense of myself as a member of a just society is fractured as surely as if I had stepped on a landmine. I am horrified at how late it was in life that I came to learn the terrible realities endured by Aboriginal families at the hands of governments. And this knowledge is very confronting: because I'm one of the millions of Australians who have never gone hungry, I have never been cast adrift from my family, I have always had a roof over my head, a warm bed, my wages in my hand to spend on my needs.
It's not just a case of 'adding in' this untold history. This evidence cannot be characterised as a few awkward last pieces to be fitted in to an almost-completed national jigsaw as our prime minister seems to suggest.
This is not simply a matter of adjusting the colour and contrast of a two-dimensional representation of our 'development' from the primitive to the modern.
What this evidence reveals is a submerged operational dynamic within our national psyche. The diminishment and degradation of Aboriginal agency in Australian history is the diminishment and degradation of us all. Knowing only part of our history, our identity is open to manipulation and distortion.
Embracing the true content and outcomes of government management of Aboriginal lives will replace much of the 'whiteness' of our identity with the multi-colours of reality. White explorers did not, like conquering heroes, 'open up' the outback and pave the way for 'civilisation' ; they were watched, guided and often rescued by those whose country it was, those who knew it infinitely better, those who moved and endured lightly on the landscape.
White miners, stockmen and settlers did not 'pioneer' life in the bush; most remote properties and towns were dependent on the labour of thousands of Aboriginal men, women and children, more than 1000 working full time by 1880 in Queensland alone. Time and time again in the twentieth century pastoralists stated they could not survive without cheap black labour.
These facts are indicative of more than history untold; they also represent debts unpaid. Debts of acknowledgement, debts of regret, and, in practical, accountable terms, financial debts. In Queensland alone, calculations show Aboriginal labour, unpaid and underpaid in the pastoral industry and in developing the communities, to be more than a billion dollars in today's value, just calculating from the 1940s.
In Queensland today the state admits it has profited from this forced labour; but while this profit amounted to around half a million dollars annually the state is currently offering about $55 million, 'in the spirit of reconciliation' as they put it, 'so we can move on'. That's $4000 for some workers and half that for others. For decades of work.
But this is not some unfortunate blight on our past to be 'whited out' with an amount the departmental budget can comfortably accommodate. My argument is that their wages and savings, denied or missing or misappropriated, are their legal right; they are not within the province of the government to bestow 'in the spirit of reconciliation'. These workers helped build each state. Aboriginal workers, Aboriginal families, are integral to our nationhood, not a late addition.
It would seem, in our present political climate, that we have a fight on our hands to reclaim this dynamic our multi-coloured past and present. Well, so be it. History is far too important to leave to the whims of temporary politicians. And this is a good fight, a purifying fight, a fight to claim truth for our nation and our identity.
My personal belief is that it is also a unifying fight. We can stand together and work for truth in our history, for the expansion rather than the contraction of our knowledge, for the inclusion rather than the ostracism of our brothers and sisters. We can demand acknowledgement and dignity for those denied it by our forebears and, sadly, by many of our peers; we can be enriched by their stories, their experiences, their culture.
And I have found, without question, that I also am empowered through this fight to disseminate knowledge and to win justice.
I am still only 5' 1"; but I am taller, stronger, and richer through my friendships and this shared struggle.
I am fighting because to know is to be indelibly implicated: the choice is to walk away or to take action literally, for truth and justice.
My reward is to look my children and grandchildren in the eye and say Yes, I learned of it; Yes, I am ashamed and disgusted; and Yes, I am doing all in my power to change it.
This paper was first presented at the Unfinished Business Conference, Melbourne, June 2002
***********
When the Titanic hit its iceberg, Version 1.0 of radio went down with the ship. As sociologist Eszter Hargittai argues, radio turned out to be implicated in the disaster in ways that poisoned popular opinion against an unregulated, open system. A nearby ship could have saved passengers, for example, but its radio wasn't switched on. Worse, the babel of messages from amateurs produced conflicting news about whether the ship was safe. The resulting mood in the public and the press made it easy for the US government to regulate the airwaves. Once in place, this regulation enabled the development of commercial broadcast networks, which changed radio from point-to-point to broadcast technology.
When American Airlines Flight 11 and United Flight 175 hit the World Trade Centre on 11 September 2001, they may have been, among other things, the tip of the iceberg, of the Internet. As I write this six months later, it's still too early to see the long-term consequences for the Internet and the "War on Terrorism". But it doesn't look good. Here it all comes - real-time government interception of email. Police access to web surfing records without warrants. An end to privacy in favour of 'security". With liberty and wiretaps for all. Version 1.0 may be out of step with the times.
But Hang on; didn't we hear that the Net was indestructible? Didn't we hear it was beyond censorship, that it treated such interference as damage, and would 'route around' attempts to control or constrain it? Didn't we hear that the Net was somehow stronger and smarter than us? We sure did. But it's not true anymore, if it ever was. Perhaps it was all just technical determinism. Because as legal academic Lawrence Lessig shows in his book code, the Net can be censored, constrained and controlled only too easily. Not through the gesture politics of 'adult content' restrictions, but through remaking its infrastructure. Through changing the inbuilt politics of the Net.
MP3 files can be encoded to prevent their distribution. Software can be programmed to stop working if it's not registered to you. Websites can be configured to deny access to those who are not paying subscribers, or who don't have their browser cookies enabled, or whose machine otherwise identifies them as undesirable. None of these is sci-fi; all are with us already. And they could be just the start. Lessig describes' a future control in large part exercised by technologies of commerce, backed by the rule of law'. Business will continue to push for more Version 2.0 innovations, to make e-commerce easier to do and harder to avoid. Governments will back this, and will make use of the increased certification and credentialing necessary. To function online. On the Internet, said one dog to another in the legendary cartoon, nobody knows you're a dog. Not any more- on this Version 2.0 Net, not only will everybody know it's a dog, they'll have survey data on it favourite kind of dog food (and it won't get it without a credit card).
So-it was fun while it lasted, but perhaps it's time to log off and see what's on TV? Not so fast. Lessig concludes that all of us need to become active citizens of cyberspace- not just customers. If we decide we want a Version 2.0 closed system, with extra TV shows all round, then fine. So long as we decide this and don't have it decided for us. Attempting prophecy about technology is a loser's game - there's no future in it - but chances are that activism about the Internet is going to increase. Campaigns in support of the Net as an open system; against commercialisation, against censorship.
If the people interviewed in these pages have anything in common, it's that they're all very much active citizens of cyberspace. I said in the introduction that I never intended this book ti be the last word on any of this; it's only a contribution to an ongoing public conversation. To that end, I've tried to let the people involved in these campaigns speak for themselves as much as possible; to explain their own motivations and ideas. And I also want to give them the last word. While researching this book, I've asked those involved what advice they would give others who want to use the Net in trying to effect some kind of social, cultural or political change. I'll end the book with some of these responses. It is, I hope, a Version 1.0 ending.
Some like Esther Dyson, counsel optimism. 'Individuals and small business get access to a lot of information which empowers them,' she says. "The examples are in the lives of the millions of individuals using the Net, right now, to get what they want, to express themselves, to communicate with one another without a central intermediary. But because this power goes to millions of people individually (and is over their own lives and not over others' lives), each instance doesn't seem dramatic. It seems like lots of anecdotes - but they add up to a significant shift in power.'
"The web has created a space for people to experiment with new styles not motivated be sales,' says Matthew Arnison. 'When Indymedia has an audience of people energised by information, they don't wait for the experts to tell them what to do. They get in there and suggest things and then go out and do it themselves.'
Others, like McLibel defendant Dave Morris, are more cautious. "The Internet,' Morris says, 'like most supposedly "labour-saving" devices, takes up a lot of people's time and energy. It is a mixed blessing, like all technology. How much resources - materials, labour (often cheap in poor countries) and mental effort - are being sucked into the production of such technology? With half the world having never used a telephone, modern technological communications, especially the Internet, can easily be elitist, and at the same time provide an illusion of interaction between ordinary people in the same way cars seem to promote movement but actually inhibit it, technological communications are tendering to inhibit, sideline and replace face-to-face contacts and association, whether one-to-one or in communal spaces.'
But most offer a combination of optimistic encouragement and sober caveats. "I have the feeling that we are running out of time,' says Geert Lovink. "Soon the Net will be a closed mass medium with little or no room for new players. But we can then begin to build parallel networks, underground systems, somewhere in the margins. Wonderful subcultures will blossom, so please do not become depressed. There is still enough time to create parallel, independent infrastructure in which cyber culture can reinvent itself."
I've grouped the following selection of responses under headings which reflect recurring themes, Several say activists should think tactically; others advise a strategic take, particularly with regard to networking. Some point out that it's crucial to be clear about what you want to achieve. Most urge activist not to put too much faith in the Net; others encourage activists to have faith in themselves.
Act Tactically
Some advise a tactical approach - seizing unguarded moments. "The internet,' says Veran Matic of B92, ' is not a kind of Forbidden City, a ghetto for the sacred, but should be regarded as a kiosk full of various offers. It could be said that the Internet is the perfect guerrilla weapon. "Hit and Run" constitutes its main role'. 'Look for niches,' says Stefan Wray of the Electronic Disturbance Theatre,' opportunities to exploit in ways not thought of before.'
Others offer advice from their own very specific expertise. Frank Guerrro of ®ark, for instance, makes some points about cultural sabotage, "Don't let the legal thugs hired by corporations bully you around,' he says. 'Usually their letters are empty threats designed for intimidation. And if you are concerned about top tip #1 then register your domain under an assumed name - give a PO box address rather than your own, and set up a voicemail for phone. And learn to dance.'
Think Strategically
Complementing the tactical take on things, some stress the importance of long-term strategic goals, though obviously these vary. Here are three.
"I am on a crusade,' says Geert Lovnik, 'to increase what I call 'economic competence'. Any kind of business is a good one, because it will give you a good inside view on how big websites are being operated and what it means to get millions of clicks on your site each day. Economics is boring. I know. And I should reject it, being an anarchy-pragmatist. But I don't. If we still have the naïve idea that an open and diverse cyberculture can somewhat influence the course technology is taking, we now have to start up businesses and pollute the concepts used under the umbrella of the term "New Economy".'
'In the transitional societies,' says Veran Matic, 'the internet can really help to overcome the gap between developing and developed countries; to articulate and accept basic information of world progress more quickly. The Internet entirely changes one's life philosophy and culture. In a society full of illiterate people, where the cultural model is pretty closed, this is very important.'
"I think we have to learn from the ground,' says Ricardo Dominguez, of the Electronic Disturbance Theatre. "We have to go back to more traditional spaces. Especially off-grid spaces, people who are not connected, like the Zapatistas. They have no electricity, they have no computers. Because those populations, which are invisible, which are silent, are very easily left out from the connectivity of power, the grid. If we as activist and hackers only consider that which is on the grid as the valuable source, then I think we really lose that the Zapatistas have taught us about developing long-term political strategies. What we did is only a tactic - a simple tactic, a tactic that is effective on some occasions. But it has to be within, a larger strategy. And that can only come from depth of knowledge, depth of understanding, and, most importantly, out of what the Zapatistas call the encounter and the Dialogue. And you have to remember that from that encounter and that dialogue, what you want to accomplish may not come out. But something else might come out.'
Be clear about what you want
'Be strategic and pragmatic,' advises Zack Exley, of gwbush.com. 'In other words, work to get something done, not just to "do something".' 'Ground it in a real problem or issue you have in the community you have a stake in offline,' says Howard Rheingold. 'Use online media to organise and discuss, and disseminate information, within the framework of a well-considered political strategy.' Rheingold's final point may be the single most important one in the book - 'Don't' forget to get together in the physical world'.
It's very important,' says Ricardo Dominguez, "that one be very specific about what is the issue that you're working on. What is the singularity of the locale? Because the answers to how to use the thing have to come not from the networks outside, but from the specificity of what you are doing. The most important lesson to be learned from hacktivision is that it's a long-term thing - one hack does not an activist make, nor does it shift a government or anything\. Sometimes it takes ten years, twenty years, of very long-term depth of analysis. The action that you want to do may not fit, may not really help what it is you are trying to help. [The thing that does work] might be something that you hadn't thought of, because you were to hot to do this. All of a sudden you might have to analyse it, talk to the people that you're trying to have a dialogue with, and they might go, well, no. But out of the dialogue may come other action. So I think it's very important for young activists, hacktivists, to always make sure that they understand the specificity of what they're trying to articulate. And that they become aware not to have the media, or the medium, define the articulation. You have to have the local, the singularity, define the way the medium will play itself out. Or whether the medium will be used.'
Don't have to much faith in the Net.......
This is the single most common recurring theme. Almost everyone makes some version of this point, though with important variations. For some, 'don't rely on the Net' means being aware that many people aren't yet online. For others, it means remembering the importance of having an integrated media strategy.
"The trouble with the Net,' says Mongrel's Matthew Fuller, "is that people have to have a greater range of bullshit detectors than they have to use to deal with the main stream media. Learning how to put these [detectors] together from the massive amount of customisable pieces available - and also having to learn to train them on themselves - takes enough time. Once the denormaliser starts running though, there's no stopping it.'
'Be aware of the Net's limitations,' says Gabrielle Kuiper, of Sydney Indymedia and Active Sydney. 'Don't use it as your primary form of communication. If you are spending your whole day starring at a computer screen and not getting out there and having face-to-face conversations, then it is unlikely you are changing much. It is a valuable communications technology, but it is no substitute for in-the-flesh human communication in all its messy three-dimensional sight, sound, touch and smell interaction.'
Don't expect the Net to do more than it can,' says Eric Less, of LabourStart. 'No authoritarian regime has yet been toppled by a Java applet. It takes men and women engaged in real struggle - including strikes, boycotts, demonstrations, and so on - to change the world.'
'Be truly multimedia,' says Kalle Lasn, of Adbusters. 'I think if you want to launch successful social marketing campaigns, then you have to have radio, you have to have graphic material like print ads, or spoof ads, subvertisments or posters. You will need all that paraphernalia, right down to bumper stickers and whatnot. And then if you can afford it, you should get yourself some kind of TV spot that takes the very essence of your message and condenses it into 30 or 60 seconds. And then you have to start provoking the TV stations in your area to air it, and play that whole multimedia game as best you can. So that's my advice, not to expect the Internet by itself to pull off miracles, because it won't. We believe that activist of the future will be new media players. They will play the whole spectrum.'
.......But do have faith in yourselves
'Ground yourself in hope,' says Mitch Kapor, of Electronic Frontier Foundation. 'Keep your eyes wide open as to how things actually are and stick close to your own expertise.' 'Know and respect the rights of people you're organising or communicating to,' says Zack Exley. 'Make sure you are motivated primarily by a desire to make life better for the billions who are in agony, and not by ego.'
'If you have the arguments,' says Geert Lovink, 'if you've done the research, and if you've worked with people - if you are networked in communities and groups - that's the main thing, and the technology is secondary.'
'The Internet has got humans ringing like a bell,' says Matthew Arnison. 'Just like the success of the telephone, people want to be creative and communicate and tell stories as well as listen. Just because TV is successful doesn't mean that all we want to do is watch. And the evidence is that people are turning off the TV to spend time on the Net. Of course many corporations are trying to bend the Internet into a tool for consumption rather than creativity. But you can only bend human nature and technology so far. Very often these attempts fail miserably'.
'Use your brain and your imagination,' says Jessy, from McSpotlight, 'to come up with new ways of doing things faster, doing things funnier. Wit is one of the most important things. McSpotlight is not made with money - it's made with imagination, and that's why people go there and are interested in it. So the Internet is a level playing field in that sense. It's not just the boys with the most money who make the difference - it's the boys and girls with the most imagination.'
From Future Active: Media Activisim and the Internet by Graham Meikle (Pluto Press)
by Extracted from
|
|
|
|
Before a packed congregation of relatives and friends, the senior executive paid tribute to his mother through a series of bullet points, graphic charts and bold-font mission statements.
He spoke lovingly of his mother's varied passions and interests, represented clearly by an animated pie graph. The eulogy also included estimated projections showing where his mother would be positioned in 10 years' time, had she not been struck dead by lymphatic cancer.
In recognition of her momentous life, the son agreed to divide his oration into three different seminar sessions, titled Early Forecasts, Key Achievements and Growth Outlook.
Tea and coffee were served in between each eulogy session, allowing delegate mourners the chance to meet and chat, or just stretch their legs.
The bereaved executive son said afterwards he thought the presentation was well received, but that he was sorry the tender story of how his mother and father met had to be dropped from the eulogy, when his laptop froze, leaving a large