Check out the latest from News Limited. A piece today is headed Labor MP Craig Thomson wanted to resign but party wouldn't allow him.
The first four paragraphs read;
THE Labor MP embroiled in the union credit card scandal told confidants he wanted to quit politics but the party wouldn't let him, sources claimed yesterday.
Close colleagues of former Health Services Union chief turned MP Craig Thomson said the scandal had all become too much for him, a source inside the party said.
"They have expressed the view he'd much prefer to go," the source said. "It would be a lot easier with his family life, but he's not allowed to."
However, Mr Thomson said last night: "That is completely and utterly untrue and I am not resigning."
The only attributed source is the person himself and he says it is not true.
Apart from all the journalistic integrity stuff about unnamed sources not really being sources, let's just remember how newspaper stories are written and read. Peole scan headlines to see stories they want to read. People read the first paragraph if their interest has been grabbed.
"Sources claim" is a weak selling point - it actually won't inspire many readers to follow through to read the rest of the story.
But I'm not going to blame the journalists - they get "measured" by the column inches and where in the paper they get run. It is logical in the culture of News Limited to write and submit this story. But where is the editorial standard that would print it.
I've twice recently blogged about the Mark Antony soliloquy nature of recent reporting.
Media Watch last night got stuck into the Milne story, but didn't really nail the whole trend for "no accusations about X are being made but it does raise the question of judgement". the same crap was used against Mike Quigley!
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
Monday, September 05, 2011
Incomprehensible twaddle
Wow. Crikey has posted this leaflet doing the rounds in Albo's electorate.
Cute that it looks to be unauthorised election material - but that's a minor issue.
The biggest rant is about the pay packets of MPs and their superannuation arrangements. The anonymous writer might like to note that Tony Abbott is on the same employment conditions as Albo. He might also like to know that the pollies - on the initiative of the ALP but implemented by Howard - terminated the lifelong pensions and moved to exactly the same kind of super scheme as everyone else.
It goes to the "incompetent administration" point - ignoring that the rest of the World thought our GFC response was exemplary. As I've blogged before the auditor found BER was effectively administered for what it tried to achieve, and the roof bats had less safety issues during the program than before!
As a nation we simply do not have "huge debt" (and writing in capitals makes it no bigger).
It is a pity that incomprehensible twaddle can be circulated like this.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Cute that it looks to be unauthorised election material - but that's a minor issue.
The biggest rant is about the pay packets of MPs and their superannuation arrangements. The anonymous writer might like to note that Tony Abbott is on the same employment conditions as Albo. He might also like to know that the pollies - on the initiative of the ALP but implemented by Howard - terminated the lifelong pensions and moved to exactly the same kind of super scheme as everyone else.
It goes to the "incompetent administration" point - ignoring that the rest of the World thought our GFC response was exemplary. As I've blogged before the auditor found BER was effectively administered for what it tried to achieve, and the roof bats had less safety issues during the program than before!
As a nation we simply do not have "huge debt" (and writing in capitals makes it no bigger).
It is a pity that incomprehensible twaddle can be circulated like this.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
sports anchor - here I come
Thanks to Crikey's video of the day for giving me hope I could still be a TV sports anchor
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Repeating myself on the ALP and Leadership
Ahh Joe Hildebrand, having spent weeks trying to make the Craig Thomson matter into a crisis that it is not, now blames Labor for its timidity. He seems to think they should launch a pre-emptive attack to make any election a carnage, or that it should surrender meekly.
More reasoned is the view coming from Malcolm Colless, that canvasses the options and considers that the only two credible strategies, Rudd and Smith, provide no real option.
Hildebrand in a fine piece of illogic says;
The impending death of the Labor Government is now an absolute certainty. There is no way on earth that the ALP will win the next election, if indeed it is able to make it that far in the first place.
I'm pretty sure that the next election will be either 2013 or the day that the ALP leader decides they no longer have the confidence of the Parliament and visits the GG and advises that the GG should call an election. The option of an early election rather than inviting Abbott to form Government would be presented to the GG as (1) able to better realign the next Reps and Senate election and (2) recognise that the Abbott minority Government would be even less able to secure its legislative program given the composition of the Senate. To the ALP it means that Abbott doesn't get the Fraser advantage of running the campaign from Government.
Given this fact, and given the likely outcomes for some of the independents, they will not be moving any time soon. (Also if the ALP faces a prospective losable by-election the PM should also recommend a full election).
That means the ALP should assume it has two more years.
The ALP has one option left to it - and that is the option that I think they thought they were pursuing in displacing Rudd. The Government has to stop being "Presidential". There is nothing more pathetic than the PM fronting press conferences with relevant Ministers on matters of policy. Let Ministers do that themselves.
The PM did not need to make the comments critical of the High Court, but not because they were an attack on the judiciary. But they gave the discussion more air.
The simple statement is "The Government is of course disappointed in the decision. Clearly we were not expecting it, our advice on these matters was different but wrong. This is an expression of how our system works and works well.
The Court's decision leaves no party in Australia with the ability to promote an offshore processing solution, be that Malaysia, PNG or Nauru.
We will continue to review options that will discourage people from making the expensive and dangerous journey to Australia by boat."
In particular get a core group up whose job it is to talk about all aspects of the Government.
A mini-reshuffle would help. Not to move Bowen in immigration he is doing OK and better than Burke, but Simon Crean and Jenny Macklin need to be retired. And Wayne Swan needs to be replaced as Treasurer, and as Deputy PM. Shorten as Treasurer - Rudd or Smith as Deputy PM.
Creating a diffuse target and not talking about the opposition will deprive Abbott of air.
I first wrote of this in May, and my views haven't changed.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
More reasoned is the view coming from Malcolm Colless, that canvasses the options and considers that the only two credible strategies, Rudd and Smith, provide no real option.
Hildebrand in a fine piece of illogic says;
The impending death of the Labor Government is now an absolute certainty. There is no way on earth that the ALP will win the next election, if indeed it is able to make it that far in the first place.
I'm pretty sure that the next election will be either 2013 or the day that the ALP leader decides they no longer have the confidence of the Parliament and visits the GG and advises that the GG should call an election. The option of an early election rather than inviting Abbott to form Government would be presented to the GG as (1) able to better realign the next Reps and Senate election and (2) recognise that the Abbott minority Government would be even less able to secure its legislative program given the composition of the Senate. To the ALP it means that Abbott doesn't get the Fraser advantage of running the campaign from Government.
Given this fact, and given the likely outcomes for some of the independents, they will not be moving any time soon. (Also if the ALP faces a prospective losable by-election the PM should also recommend a full election).
That means the ALP should assume it has two more years.
The ALP has one option left to it - and that is the option that I think they thought they were pursuing in displacing Rudd. The Government has to stop being "Presidential". There is nothing more pathetic than the PM fronting press conferences with relevant Ministers on matters of policy. Let Ministers do that themselves.
The PM did not need to make the comments critical of the High Court, but not because they were an attack on the judiciary. But they gave the discussion more air.
The simple statement is "The Government is of course disappointed in the decision. Clearly we were not expecting it, our advice on these matters was different but wrong. This is an expression of how our system works and works well.
The Court's decision leaves no party in Australia with the ability to promote an offshore processing solution, be that Malaysia, PNG or Nauru.
We will continue to review options that will discourage people from making the expensive and dangerous journey to Australia by boat."
In particular get a core group up whose job it is to talk about all aspects of the Government.
A mini-reshuffle would help. Not to move Bowen in immigration he is doing OK and better than Burke, but Simon Crean and Jenny Macklin need to be retired. And Wayne Swan needs to be replaced as Treasurer, and as Deputy PM. Shorten as Treasurer - Rudd or Smith as Deputy PM.
Creating a diffuse target and not talking about the opposition will deprive Abbott of air.
I first wrote of this in May, and my views haven't changed.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Communications and Stakeholders - Part 2
It was way back in 2003 that I think I first formally tried to catalogue a firm's stakeholder matrix and start capturing details of engagements and strategies.
I tried to maintain it as a Word table but it was unwieldy, hard to update, hard to extract from and hard to establish linkages (e.g. which stakeholders did other stakeholders listen to).
Simple CRM software would help a little, being a purpose configured database.
I'm fascinated to see the development of a number of specific tools such as StakeTracker, EngagementHQ, Stakeholder Circle, Consultation Manager, and Darzin.
Many of these are more designed for stakeholder engagement on particular projects - the field more technically known as community consultation.
There is even an The International Association for Public Participation - Australasia.
The relevance? Well as already noted here NBN Co has recognised its community consultation task. The reality is it has the same consultation task to face 100s of times over - the stakeholders will sometimes be local and sometimes regional, state or national.
But I continue to despair of whether "stakeholder" is defined broadly enough in the industry given the staff announcement issues at NBN Co and Intenode.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
I tried to maintain it as a Word table but it was unwieldy, hard to update, hard to extract from and hard to establish linkages (e.g. which stakeholders did other stakeholders listen to).
Simple CRM software would help a little, being a purpose configured database.
I'm fascinated to see the development of a number of specific tools such as StakeTracker, EngagementHQ, Stakeholder Circle, Consultation Manager, and Darzin.
Many of these are more designed for stakeholder engagement on particular projects - the field more technically known as community consultation.
There is even an The International Association for Public Participation - Australasia.
The relevance? Well as already noted here NBN Co has recognised its community consultation task. The reality is it has the same consultation task to face 100s of times over - the stakeholders will sometimes be local and sometimes regional, state or national.
But I continue to despair of whether "stakeholder" is defined broadly enough in the industry given the staff announcement issues at NBN Co and Intenode.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Communications and stakeholders
So soon after NBN Co bungled its restructure - leaving it to a leak of the internal e-mail - Internode has done the same thing.
Both share the position of not being listed and hence don't have the discipline of needing to inform equity markets in an orderly fashion. This is what results in a process at listed firms of major restructure communications being staged through notices provided to the stock exchange before or at opening and staff comms being triggered at the same time.
My only comparable experience was at Unwired/vividwireless. we didn't issue a release to announce the departure of David Spence. We did, however, have it fully drafted as a "today we confirmed" release and hit send as soon as the story got outside (took 3 days!).
Stuart Corner wrote;
It took Internode all day to respond. (We received its announcement at 17:49) and the company was ducking for cover. The statement opened by saying: "As this was a primarily internal change, this is the only public comment Internode will make about this restructure." ...
Tapper said "We have a vast amount of technical skill and knowledge at Internode, with many long-standing employees. It is very much full steam ahead at Internode."
After the way the company handled this, nobody is going to buy that line.
Elsewhere Stuart noted "Tapper was also reported to have alluded to "some very difficult times, especially over the last 12 months," on which he did not elaborate."
All the actions of a company are communicative - and they affect not just shareholders and current employees. They effect current customers, prospective customers and prospective employees.
It is something about the modern mindset of senior executives that they have forgotten all about "stakeholder theory".
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Both share the position of not being listed and hence don't have the discipline of needing to inform equity markets in an orderly fashion. This is what results in a process at listed firms of major restructure communications being staged through notices provided to the stock exchange before or at opening and staff comms being triggered at the same time.
My only comparable experience was at Unwired/vividwireless. we didn't issue a release to announce the departure of David Spence. We did, however, have it fully drafted as a "today we confirmed" release and hit send as soon as the story got outside (took 3 days!).
Stuart Corner wrote;
It took Internode all day to respond. (We received its announcement at 17:49) and the company was ducking for cover. The statement opened by saying: "As this was a primarily internal change, this is the only public comment Internode will make about this restructure." ...
Tapper said "We have a vast amount of technical skill and knowledge at Internode, with many long-standing employees. It is very much full steam ahead at Internode."
After the way the company handled this, nobody is going to buy that line.
Elsewhere Stuart noted "Tapper was also reported to have alluded to "some very difficult times, especially over the last 12 months," on which he did not elaborate."
All the actions of a company are communicative - and they affect not just shareholders and current employees. They effect current customers, prospective customers and prospective employees.
It is something about the modern mindset of senior executives that they have forgotten all about "stakeholder theory".
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
A cool rap - updated
A cool rap that tries to cover the difference between Keynseian intervention and Hayek's faith in markets.
The pity is that while it neatly outlines some of the differences it doesn't really get to the real point; this isn't either/or, they are both right.
The Keynseian approach fell apart in practice because Governments got addicted to intervention, there was too much perpetual pump priming. The free market fell apart from an artificial goal of keeping interest rates too low, creating Hayek's (and Minsky's) debt problem.
Update: Many thanks to reader Tim for alerting me to this piece from The Guardian that makes much the same point about the error in configuring the issues as a dichotomy between Keynesian and non-Keynesian views.
Interesting to note the emphasis on the "international" solutions. That is the case but there are a few European countries that haven't got a clue how to save themselves from their aging population and pension problems. Just how much we have to be thankful to the Hawke-Keating Government is really not realised. In this case it is what was achieved for national saving through compulsory superannuation.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The pity is that while it neatly outlines some of the differences it doesn't really get to the real point; this isn't either/or, they are both right.
The Keynseian approach fell apart in practice because Governments got addicted to intervention, there was too much perpetual pump priming. The free market fell apart from an artificial goal of keeping interest rates too low, creating Hayek's (and Minsky's) debt problem.
Update: Many thanks to reader Tim for alerting me to this piece from The Guardian that makes much the same point about the error in configuring the issues as a dichotomy between Keynesian and non-Keynesian views.
Interesting to note the emphasis on the "international" solutions. That is the case but there are a few European countries that haven't got a clue how to save themselves from their aging population and pension problems. Just how much we have to be thankful to the Hawke-Keating Government is really not realised. In this case it is what was achieved for national saving through compulsory superannuation.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Investing in education or the NBN?
Interesting but unsurprising piece of research spruiking the idea that investment in higher education will produce greater productivity improvement than investing in the NBN.
The summary comment by John Quiggin though says it all. Noting that precise estimates of GDP or productivity boost must be taken with a grain of salt, he said
the general point that improvements in education have a higher payoff than either investments in physical infrastructure or microeconomic reforms is a well-established finding in the literature on economic growth.
It is unfortunate that Australian policymakers are still obsessed with policy ideas from the 1980s (microeconomic reform) or even from the 1950s (physical infrastructure).
The issue for me is that the NBN is a different kind of "physical infrastructure." It is not a coal loader or a new road or rail link, it is not a new generation plant to sell cheap electricity for mineral processing.
It is an enabler of the information society a.k.a. the digital economy. It is in particular an enabler of getting more education output for less resource use. It is also a tremendous mechanism for conducting research and disseminating knowledge, which are the real benefits of higher education investment.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The summary comment by John Quiggin though says it all. Noting that precise estimates of GDP or productivity boost must be taken with a grain of salt, he said
the general point that improvements in education have a higher payoff than either investments in physical infrastructure or microeconomic reforms is a well-established finding in the literature on economic growth.
It is unfortunate that Australian policymakers are still obsessed with policy ideas from the 1980s (microeconomic reform) or even from the 1950s (physical infrastructure).
The issue for me is that the NBN is a different kind of "physical infrastructure." It is not a coal loader or a new road or rail link, it is not a new generation plant to sell cheap electricity for mineral processing.
It is an enabler of the information society a.k.a. the digital economy. It is in particular an enabler of getting more education output for less resource use. It is also a tremendous mechanism for conducting research and disseminating knowledge, which are the real benefits of higher education investment.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
HP and AAPT
Great Wall Street Journal report on the management issues behind the HP mess.
The pity is it reminds me of so many other companies - AAPT springs to mind.
PS Thanks to Josh Gans for tweeting the original.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The pity is it reminds me of so many other companies - AAPT springs to mind.
PS Thanks to Josh Gans for tweeting the original.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Thursday, September 01, 2011
Reframing
If Julia Gillard is to get out from the position Graeme Richardson describes her as being in she needs to do a lot more work in reframing discussion.
I gave one example of this yesterday in putting the mining tax into the context of supporting manufacturing.
The next challenge is what to do in response to the High Court decision on the "Malaysian solution."
The very first thing to do is to find language to describe and analyse the problem. The problem is not "asylum seekers" or "refugees", "Queue jumping" or even "boat people." Before we choose the words let's look at the issues.
The following propositions I believe would be supported by the vast majority of citizens.
A AUSTRALIAN ISSUES
1. Population targeting is an appropriate Government activity to ensure that the services and resources are available to meet the needs of people. How rapidly the population should grow, if at all, is a matter on which reasonable people can differ.
2. Immigration control is a part of population targeting. There are three basic groups of people we want to welcome to our country - skilled migrants, resettled refugees and family reunions. The mix between these three is part of population targeting. As a compassionate and humanitarian nation we will explicitly target a number of resettled refugees.
3. We want to welcome tourist and business visitors to the country both for social and economic reasons. Visitors should not overstay their welcome.
4. People who arrive in the country through "irregular means" (that is other than through immigration controls) and people who overstay their welcome should, in principle, be returned to where they came from, forcibly if necessary.
5. However, circumstances will arise where irregular arrivals and over-stayers cannot be returned as either their origin cannot be identified, they cannot physically be returned (their country won't permit them entry) or they justifiably fear for their safety if returned.
B GLOBAL ISSUES
1. Most refugees in the world have escaped from one country to a neighbouring country by land. Relatively few travel large distances seeking relocation. Many of these refugees do not want to be permanently resettled, they want to return home.
2. There are far more refugees in the world than countries willing to resettle them.
3. A trade has developed in selling transportation services to refugees. These services all charge excessive fees and place the refugees in danger.
POLICY OBJECTIVES FOR AUSTRALIA
1. To dissuade refugees from making unsafe sea voyages to Australia and from paying excessive fees.
2. To rapidly identify the correct treatment for any irregular arrival or over-stayer in Australia (that is whether they are a refugee for resettlement or a person to be returned/deported).
POINTS OF CONTENTION
1. How to dissuade people from getting on boats.
2. Whether people who can't be immediately returned should be permanently settled or only offered temporary settlement.
3. How people should be treated while we assess how they should be treated.
THOUGHTS
Arising from this it looks to me like more needs to be done to make being a boat operator an unviable occupation....is life imprisonment in Australia an option, or even a deterrent?
We need more flexibility in our ways of treating people. It would appear that the more co-operative the applicant is in helping us assess them the better the treatment would be a good idea. So, if someone has "papers" they should be a candidate for community release, a person with nothing and who offers nothing should be detained.
Detainees also need to be "separated". The detainees who are new arrivals or newly apprehended should be treated very differently to those that are getting closer to a deportation order.
We need to ensure that all the individuals are accorded the level of political and legal rights that we hold dear, but that at the same time rapid assessment is beneficial. Rather than the Howard-esque attempts to deny legal rights we should expedite them.
That doesn't get me to the end point of a reframing. But "unauthorised entrants" is probably a better term than refugees or asylum seekers - both of which pre-judge the individuals status.
Breaking the problem in to its components and not trying to use the processing mechanism as a deterrence from getting on a boat is another.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
I gave one example of this yesterday in putting the mining tax into the context of supporting manufacturing.
The next challenge is what to do in response to the High Court decision on the "Malaysian solution."
The very first thing to do is to find language to describe and analyse the problem. The problem is not "asylum seekers" or "refugees", "Queue jumping" or even "boat people." Before we choose the words let's look at the issues.
The following propositions I believe would be supported by the vast majority of citizens.
A AUSTRALIAN ISSUES
1. Population targeting is an appropriate Government activity to ensure that the services and resources are available to meet the needs of people. How rapidly the population should grow, if at all, is a matter on which reasonable people can differ.
2. Immigration control is a part of population targeting. There are three basic groups of people we want to welcome to our country - skilled migrants, resettled refugees and family reunions. The mix between these three is part of population targeting. As a compassionate and humanitarian nation we will explicitly target a number of resettled refugees.
3. We want to welcome tourist and business visitors to the country both for social and economic reasons. Visitors should not overstay their welcome.
4. People who arrive in the country through "irregular means" (that is other than through immigration controls) and people who overstay their welcome should, in principle, be returned to where they came from, forcibly if necessary.
5. However, circumstances will arise where irregular arrivals and over-stayers cannot be returned as either their origin cannot be identified, they cannot physically be returned (their country won't permit them entry) or they justifiably fear for their safety if returned.
B GLOBAL ISSUES
1. Most refugees in the world have escaped from one country to a neighbouring country by land. Relatively few travel large distances seeking relocation. Many of these refugees do not want to be permanently resettled, they want to return home.
2. There are far more refugees in the world than countries willing to resettle them.
3. A trade has developed in selling transportation services to refugees. These services all charge excessive fees and place the refugees in danger.
POLICY OBJECTIVES FOR AUSTRALIA
1. To dissuade refugees from making unsafe sea voyages to Australia and from paying excessive fees.
2. To rapidly identify the correct treatment for any irregular arrival or over-stayer in Australia (that is whether they are a refugee for resettlement or a person to be returned/deported).
POINTS OF CONTENTION
1. How to dissuade people from getting on boats.
2. Whether people who can't be immediately returned should be permanently settled or only offered temporary settlement.
3. How people should be treated while we assess how they should be treated.
THOUGHTS
Arising from this it looks to me like more needs to be done to make being a boat operator an unviable occupation....is life imprisonment in Australia an option, or even a deterrent?
We need more flexibility in our ways of treating people. It would appear that the more co-operative the applicant is in helping us assess them the better the treatment would be a good idea. So, if someone has "papers" they should be a candidate for community release, a person with nothing and who offers nothing should be detained.
Detainees also need to be "separated". The detainees who are new arrivals or newly apprehended should be treated very differently to those that are getting closer to a deportation order.
We need to ensure that all the individuals are accorded the level of political and legal rights that we hold dear, but that at the same time rapid assessment is beneficial. Rather than the Howard-esque attempts to deny legal rights we should expedite them.
That doesn't get me to the end point of a reframing. But "unauthorised entrants" is probably a better term than refugees or asylum seekers - both of which pre-judge the individuals status.
Breaking the problem in to its components and not trying to use the processing mechanism as a deterrence from getting on a boat is another.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Not blogging the bookshelf
A follower of this site is also the blogger of Blogging the Bookshelf
It is normally a relatively free flowing and eclectic collection of quotes lifted from various sources.
More recently he has been embedded in Ross McMullin's history of the ALP Light on the Hill. For something I am writing I went off in search of the book - I have borrowed it from Macquarie Uni but definitely will find my own copy now (Abe books have a few).
Two quotes of quotes I found interesting;
1. Quoting Henry Boote editor of the Australian Worker in 1905
The movement must become consciously socialistic ... It must drop all pretensions to be statesmanlike and continue to be agitative. Discontent is still the divine gospel; we are all doomed as soon as we congratulate ourselves.
(This was in the context of whether the ALP should seek to govern in coalitions. As stated though, especially the last sentence, it is very descriptive of the NSW Right.)
2. Chifley to the NSW Conference 10 June 1951, after expressing hope that the defeats of 1949 and 1951 had "not discouraged members of the Labor Movement from fighting for what they think is right, whether it brings victory to the Party or not." He accused some ALP members of
trying to get over as far as possible to the right without becoming opposed to the Labor Party ... we had examples in the past 15 months ... of people shifting their ground. No one has any admiration for people who shift ground ... You have to be quite clear about what you believe in, whether popular or unpopular, and you have to fight for it ... if I think a thing is worth fighting for, no matter what the penalty may be, I will fight for the right, and truth and justice will always prevail.>/em>
(The context was the decision of the Federal Executive to change its mind from opposition to support of the Communist Party Dissolution Bill. Chifley's and Evatt's opposition to the Bill was not formed on the basis of support for communism but for the process employed of declaration and the removal of political rights.
The quote is one the likes of Mark Arbib and Karl Bitar should pay attention to - look what the stance on the ETS did to the party!)
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
It is normally a relatively free flowing and eclectic collection of quotes lifted from various sources.
More recently he has been embedded in Ross McMullin's history of the ALP Light on the Hill. For something I am writing I went off in search of the book - I have borrowed it from Macquarie Uni but definitely will find my own copy now (Abe books have a few).
Two quotes of quotes I found interesting;
1. Quoting Henry Boote editor of the Australian Worker in 1905
The movement must become consciously socialistic ... It must drop all pretensions to be statesmanlike and continue to be agitative. Discontent is still the divine gospel; we are all doomed as soon as we congratulate ourselves.
(This was in the context of whether the ALP should seek to govern in coalitions. As stated though, especially the last sentence, it is very descriptive of the NSW Right.)
2. Chifley to the NSW Conference 10 June 1951, after expressing hope that the defeats of 1949 and 1951 had "not discouraged members of the Labor Movement from fighting for what they think is right, whether it brings victory to the Party or not." He accused some ALP members of
trying to get over as far as possible to the right without becoming opposed to the Labor Party ... we had examples in the past 15 months ... of people shifting their ground. No one has any admiration for people who shift ground ... You have to be quite clear about what you believe in, whether popular or unpopular, and you have to fight for it ... if I think a thing is worth fighting for, no matter what the penalty may be, I will fight for the right, and truth and justice will always prevail.>/em>
(The context was the decision of the Federal Executive to change its mind from opposition to support of the Communist Party Dissolution Bill. Chifley's and Evatt's opposition to the Bill was not formed on the basis of support for communism but for the process employed of declaration and the removal of political rights.
The quote is one the likes of Mark Arbib and Karl Bitar should pay attention to - look what the stance on the ETS did to the party!)
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
News Limited and a Media Inquiry
Suggestions for a "media inquiry" have arisen from the combined perception of the control of all print media in two camps, and the perception coming from overseas that the largest of these has institutionalised illegal practices and has been beyond scrutiny because of its own political power.
The most recent event in Australia has centred around The Australian and publication of a very meandering column and its retraction.
The PM has come out fighting, which News found disappointing. News seems to think it is okay just to apologise and move on.
This contrasts with the position of Andrew Bolt who has been unleashed and writes a snivelling little piece that suggests that the rehashing of the relationship between a young Ms Gillard and a union official is okay because "questions are raised about Gillard's judgment in having had this relationship".
So as far as the News bosses are concerned you make an error, apologise and move on. As far as Bolt is concerned your entire history must be blemish free.
The Bolt defence ignores the real problem with the stories - which is as I wrote before to act like Mark Antony's soliloquy and have the reader believe the things about which the article says "no accusation is being made."
Cabinet is considering what to do about News Ltd. It has to in any case since Bob Brown has already moved for one.
The challenge for the Government is what could productively come from a "media" inquiry. There is very little room to move on directly regulating content, both through a lack of Federal powers on print media and due to the implied free speech protections the High Court would find on any regulation that could be interpreted as limiting political commentary.
At the last print media inquiry News Ltd produced impressive arguments for why cities would in the future support only one print title. Thus far the market has reflected their forecast.
The two avenues that could be useful would be to formalise the alternative dispute resolution methodology that is the Press Council. Bolt's complaint that not everyone could ring John Hartigan to complain is reasonable. The response is to make it easier for everyone to complain, not make it reasonable to not respond to the PM.
The second would be to contemplate the extent to which the market power of the various news organisations extends vertically and horizontally. If I wanted to publish a new newspaper in, say, Adelaide, it would be far more viable if I could use News Ltd's printing and distribution facilities.
Cross media ownership restrictions will be reviewed by the Convergence Review. But these restrictions don't affect the growth of power through attrition.
So an inquiry could productively consider the possibility and benefits of an "access regime" and divestiture powers to ensure media diversity.
There is significant latitude as Bob Brown has only given notice that he will move "That the Senate establish an inquiry into media in Australia."
An inquiry focussed on complaint mechanism and market structure tools could indeed be productive.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The most recent event in Australia has centred around The Australian and publication of a very meandering column and its retraction.
The PM has come out fighting, which News found disappointing. News seems to think it is okay just to apologise and move on.
This contrasts with the position of Andrew Bolt who has been unleashed and writes a snivelling little piece that suggests that the rehashing of the relationship between a young Ms Gillard and a union official is okay because "questions are raised about Gillard's judgment in having had this relationship".
So as far as the News bosses are concerned you make an error, apologise and move on. As far as Bolt is concerned your entire history must be blemish free.
The Bolt defence ignores the real problem with the stories - which is as I wrote before to act like Mark Antony's soliloquy and have the reader believe the things about which the article says "no accusation is being made."
Cabinet is considering what to do about News Ltd. It has to in any case since Bob Brown has already moved for one.
The challenge for the Government is what could productively come from a "media" inquiry. There is very little room to move on directly regulating content, both through a lack of Federal powers on print media and due to the implied free speech protections the High Court would find on any regulation that could be interpreted as limiting political commentary.
At the last print media inquiry News Ltd produced impressive arguments for why cities would in the future support only one print title. Thus far the market has reflected their forecast.
The two avenues that could be useful would be to formalise the alternative dispute resolution methodology that is the Press Council. Bolt's complaint that not everyone could ring John Hartigan to complain is reasonable. The response is to make it easier for everyone to complain, not make it reasonable to not respond to the PM.
The second would be to contemplate the extent to which the market power of the various news organisations extends vertically and horizontally. If I wanted to publish a new newspaper in, say, Adelaide, it would be far more viable if I could use News Ltd's printing and distribution facilities.
Cross media ownership restrictions will be reviewed by the Convergence Review. But these restrictions don't affect the growth of power through attrition.
So an inquiry could productively consider the possibility and benefits of an "access regime" and divestiture powers to ensure media diversity.
There is significant latitude as Bob Brown has only given notice that he will move "That the Senate establish an inquiry into media in Australia."
An inquiry focussed on complaint mechanism and market structure tools could indeed be productive.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Manufacturing
Wow - both parties we are told are getting themselves into a lather on what to do about the decline of manufacturing.
Tony Abbott's flirtation with protectionism has senior Libs threatening leadership change.
Meanwhile the PM faces a revolt over her refusal to hold an inquiry into manufacturing.
The incredibly wise Ross Gittins rightly points out that we should think of the future not the past and propping up manufacturing is a bad move. One could add that we should be more concerned about the off-shoring of call centres and software jobs. These are "knowledge" jobs. A lot of that off-shoring is driven by labour force availability not simply wage differentials. (One could add that the NBN could significantly change some of the economics of these jobs as they are possible to do by "telework" from home).
Lenore Taylor writing under the headline "Talk's cheap but manufacturers want solutions" wrote;
POLITICIANS talk big about helping crisis-stricken manufacturers, but they can do relatively little, unless they are prepared to either contravene Australia's international trade obligations or spend a shed load of money.
This is the point at which I say enough is enough.
A simple solution that doesn't breach trade agreements or cost money would be to tax the super-profits of the mining industry more, and to use the proceeds to reduce the corporate tax rate on all businesses.
This benefits not just manufacturers, but also other distressed sectors like retail and tourism.
The Government doesn’t need to wait to consider this though – it is already their plan.
What kind of ineptitude doesn’t use the meeting held on Monday yesterday as a rallying point for what is already good and effective policy?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Tony Abbott's flirtation with protectionism has senior Libs threatening leadership change.
Meanwhile the PM faces a revolt over her refusal to hold an inquiry into manufacturing.
The incredibly wise Ross Gittins rightly points out that we should think of the future not the past and propping up manufacturing is a bad move. One could add that we should be more concerned about the off-shoring of call centres and software jobs. These are "knowledge" jobs. A lot of that off-shoring is driven by labour force availability not simply wage differentials. (One could add that the NBN could significantly change some of the economics of these jobs as they are possible to do by "telework" from home).
Lenore Taylor writing under the headline "Talk's cheap but manufacturers want solutions" wrote;
POLITICIANS talk big about helping crisis-stricken manufacturers, but they can do relatively little, unless they are prepared to either contravene Australia's international trade obligations or spend a shed load of money.
This is the point at which I say enough is enough.
A simple solution that doesn't breach trade agreements or cost money would be to tax the super-profits of the mining industry more, and to use the proceeds to reduce the corporate tax rate on all businesses.
This benefits not just manufacturers, but also other distressed sectors like retail and tourism.
The Government doesn’t need to wait to consider this though – it is already their plan.
What kind of ineptitude doesn’t use the meeting held on Monday yesterday as a rallying point for what is already good and effective policy?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
Digital Economy Round-Up - Issue 4
Malcolm Turnbull told the National Digital Inclusion Summit hosted by Huawei that income is the biggest barrier to bridging the digital divide.
He is, of course, using this to raise fears about the cost of broadband services under the NBN. That is a different conversation.
While the correlation between income and broadband adoption is well known, this does not mean that there needs to be a specific "broadband affordability" program. Incomes policy needs to be such that the individual consumer can afford to make the choice between having broadband or not. Broadband promotion campaigns need to convince the consumer to acquire broadband instead of, say, going to the pub.
Interestingly reports of a business group preparing to lobby the Treasurer for the first time has mentioned "The delegation is expected ... to canvass the opportunities for the digital economy to boost productivity." This is a good development given that the budget papers didn't make the connection.
The group involved is called The Global Foundation, and is a relatively high powered think tank structure I've not seen before.
But it might come as no surprise that the words above were actually sourced to Telstra's David Thodey who seems to be co-chairing their work on the "future economy".
Just as well given the demise of ATUG that at least someone in business is talking about the Digital Economy.
I've previously noted the Canadians Canada 3.0 event, which is an initiative of the Canadian Digital Media Network.
Interesting things are also happening in New Zealand. The new head of Alcatel-Lucent for the country has said "With New Zealand making an aggressive digital economy push, it's showing a belief in telecoms' potential to deliver growth."
That interest is being backed up by the Commerce Commission which has commenced a High Speed Broadband Services Demand Side Study.
Meanwhile in Australia people who do "economic development" for a living will be getting together at their annual National Economic Development Conference to discuss "Digital Economy - Future Economic Development Practices for Government, Business and Regional Organisations" in early October in Adelaide.
Meanwhile the Australian Information Industries Association (the AIIA) has rebranded itself as "the voice of the digital economy".
It seems to me we hear lots of supply side voices in this discussion, we hear a lot of government voices in this discussion - but in Australia very little from the demand side. ATUG had at least been trying through its Digital Economy Stakeholder's Forum but that is now no more.
The Internet Innovation Alliance in the US I referred to earlier has a membership of community and industry groups. However this seems more like the ACCAN meets AIIA than a genuine demand side group.
All we seem to have is our banks being unable to get their MAMBO project going. (See below)
From a 2009 report on MAMBO
The Me and My Bank Online proposal was floated by Bpay several years ago as a means of building on the member banks' successful platform for electronic bill payments.
But industry backers of the Bpay spin-off will need to demonstrate solid progress in opening the internet shopper payments market to competition before the board will withdraw its threat of regulation.
It is understood Mambo would allow individuals to register for their own Bpay codes, which they could use to enable personal online payments. So far, Bpay codes have been restricted to businesses and organisations.
The Mambo project stalled late last year following an assessment and a decision to halt funding.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
He is, of course, using this to raise fears about the cost of broadband services under the NBN. That is a different conversation.
While the correlation between income and broadband adoption is well known, this does not mean that there needs to be a specific "broadband affordability" program. Incomes policy needs to be such that the individual consumer can afford to make the choice between having broadband or not. Broadband promotion campaigns need to convince the consumer to acquire broadband instead of, say, going to the pub.
Interestingly reports of a business group preparing to lobby the Treasurer for the first time has mentioned "The delegation is expected ... to canvass the opportunities for the digital economy to boost productivity." This is a good development given that the budget papers didn't make the connection.
The group involved is called The Global Foundation, and is a relatively high powered think tank structure I've not seen before.
But it might come as no surprise that the words above were actually sourced to Telstra's David Thodey who seems to be co-chairing their work on the "future economy".
Just as well given the demise of ATUG that at least someone in business is talking about the Digital Economy.
I've previously noted the Canadians Canada 3.0 event, which is an initiative of the Canadian Digital Media Network.
Interesting things are also happening in New Zealand. The new head of Alcatel-Lucent for the country has said "With New Zealand making an aggressive digital economy push, it's showing a belief in telecoms' potential to deliver growth."
That interest is being backed up by the Commerce Commission which has commenced a High Speed Broadband Services Demand Side Study.
Meanwhile in Australia people who do "economic development" for a living will be getting together at their annual National Economic Development Conference to discuss "Digital Economy - Future Economic Development Practices for Government, Business and Regional Organisations" in early October in Adelaide.
Meanwhile the Australian Information Industries Association (the AIIA) has rebranded itself as "the voice of the digital economy".
It seems to me we hear lots of supply side voices in this discussion, we hear a lot of government voices in this discussion - but in Australia very little from the demand side. ATUG had at least been trying through its Digital Economy Stakeholder's Forum but that is now no more.
The Internet Innovation Alliance in the US I referred to earlier has a membership of community and industry groups. However this seems more like the ACCAN meets AIIA than a genuine demand side group.
All we seem to have is our banks being unable to get their MAMBO project going. (See below)
From a 2009 report on MAMBO
The Me and My Bank Online proposal was floated by Bpay several years ago as a means of building on the member banks' successful platform for electronic bill payments.
But industry backers of the Bpay spin-off will need to demonstrate solid progress in opening the internet shopper payments market to competition before the board will withdraw its threat of regulation.
It is understood Mambo would allow individuals to register for their own Bpay codes, which they could use to enable personal online payments. So far, Bpay codes have been restricted to businesses and organisations.
The Mambo project stalled late last year following an assessment and a decision to halt funding.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Market structures
The Federal Court decision in the case of the etcash acquisition of Franklins raises some interesting questions.
The first is to note that the judgement is based on the question of the ACCC's definition of a market and the court's decision that both Woolworths and Coles are actually involved in the wholesale market. It also hinged on the delightful thing called the "counterfactual" which is what is the likely outcome if the merger is not approved.
Counterfactuals are little more than modern day prophecies with economists and merchant bankers playing the role of soothsayers.
But the decision that the acquisition will not substantially lessen competition in the wholesale market does not mean that the merger improves competition.
Indeed as Heinz asserted today the home brand "revolution" is what is killing competition, and there is not a thing the ACCC can do about it.
From a technical point of view Coles and Woolies are using their market power in retail to exercise power in the upstream manufacturing market. Neither has enough market power to fall foul of the misuse of market power test.
The Competition and Consumer Act is fundamentally broken as a tool of economic policy. The concepts of "market" and "market power" and of "competition" embodied in it are sufficiently weak that any competent lawyer can steer their way around them.
The solution perhaps lies in a different set of laws that look more like the access regime laws under which the ACCC can declare certain things to be markets and to have specific characteristics. This could include simple things as specifying indices of concentration (such as the HHI)above which it would be determined a market is not effectively competitive.
In passing I will note however that vertical arrangements are not always bad. The move by AAP into telecommunications as AAPT was good, but the move by Telstra into media via Foxtel is less so. (Note that I worked for AAPT long after that, and I was up to my eyeballs in trying to make the Foxtel deal happen).
But talking of AAP provides an excuse to note the closure of its NZ counterpart the New Zealand Press association since their biggest market, Australian media, now owns the local media!
I will be speaking about competition policy for the digital economy at this year's Communications Policy and Research Forum. I will also be discussing the change in corporate Australia's relationship with competition policy in a column on ATUG..
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The first is to note that the judgement is based on the question of the ACCC's definition of a market and the court's decision that both Woolworths and Coles are actually involved in the wholesale market. It also hinged on the delightful thing called the "counterfactual" which is what is the likely outcome if the merger is not approved.
Counterfactuals are little more than modern day prophecies with economists and merchant bankers playing the role of soothsayers.
But the decision that the acquisition will not substantially lessen competition in the wholesale market does not mean that the merger improves competition.
Indeed as Heinz asserted today the home brand "revolution" is what is killing competition, and there is not a thing the ACCC can do about it.
From a technical point of view Coles and Woolies are using their market power in retail to exercise power in the upstream manufacturing market. Neither has enough market power to fall foul of the misuse of market power test.
The Competition and Consumer Act is fundamentally broken as a tool of economic policy. The concepts of "market" and "market power" and of "competition" embodied in it are sufficiently weak that any competent lawyer can steer their way around them.
The solution perhaps lies in a different set of laws that look more like the access regime laws under which the ACCC can declare certain things to be markets and to have specific characteristics. This could include simple things as specifying indices of concentration (such as the HHI)above which it would be determined a market is not effectively competitive.
In passing I will note however that vertical arrangements are not always bad. The move by AAP into telecommunications as AAPT was good, but the move by Telstra into media via Foxtel is less so. (Note that I worked for AAPT long after that, and I was up to my eyeballs in trying to make the Foxtel deal happen).
But talking of AAP provides an excuse to note the closure of its NZ counterpart the New Zealand Press association since their biggest market, Australian media, now owns the local media!
I will be speaking about competition policy for the digital economy at this year's Communications Policy and Research Forum. I will also be discussing the change in corporate Australia's relationship with competition policy in a column on ATUG..
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Broadband and jobs
I'm not a technological determinist. I don't believe that actions in the economy automatically follow from technology decisions.
It is a reason to be sceptical of cost-benefit analysis or any economic study that tries to imply that broadband or the internet "causes" certain economic benefits.
Equally any reasonable approach to economics recognises that the economy is not totally malleable - when you push into it at one point something will stick out somewhere else. So talking about "job creation" or "job losses" from one action is often stupid.
That said thanks to a retweet of a blog post by Kim McDonald today I stumbled on the Internet Innovation Alliance and their 10 facts about broadband and jobs and its associated press conference. They even have a state by state (USA) guide to the impact of broadband.
Interesting related work is a Deloitte report on the impact of 4G mobile on the US economy.
It is actually impossible to tie down direct future relationships between technology or investments and outcomes. If it were we wouldn't have Governments, just centralised economic planners.
What it is far easier to do is a "with and without" test. What are the prospects for a 21st century economy with ubiquitous high speed broadband and what are the prospects without? The short answer is that the former is clearly more adaptable and can adjust is production to match demands, the latter will be highly restricted in the opportunities it can pursue.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
It is a reason to be sceptical of cost-benefit analysis or any economic study that tries to imply that broadband or the internet "causes" certain economic benefits.
Equally any reasonable approach to economics recognises that the economy is not totally malleable - when you push into it at one point something will stick out somewhere else. So talking about "job creation" or "job losses" from one action is often stupid.
That said thanks to a retweet of a blog post by Kim McDonald today I stumbled on the Internet Innovation Alliance and their 10 facts about broadband and jobs and its associated press conference. They even have a state by state (USA) guide to the impact of broadband.
Interesting related work is a Deloitte report on the impact of 4G mobile on the US economy.
It is actually impossible to tie down direct future relationships between technology or investments and outcomes. If it were we wouldn't have Governments, just centralised economic planners.
What it is far easier to do is a "with and without" test. What are the prospects for a 21st century economy with ubiquitous high speed broadband and what are the prospects without? The short answer is that the former is clearly more adaptable and can adjust is production to match demands, the latter will be highly restricted in the opportunities it can pursue.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Monday, August 29, 2011
The NSW Right and the paucity of Ideas
I will elsewhere do a detailed analysis of the two "journals" of the ALP - Challenge and Voice.
Today I just want to focus on one section of the Winter 2011 issue of Voice - and in particular one sixth of that.
The section was headed "6 New Big Policy Ideas". They were,
1. Green Grid for Australia - an extension of the national transmission grid to connect renewable resources
2. A new City for the Pilbara - a revamped version of the Whitlamite RED scheme.
3. Private Capital to fund Social Programs - which sounds cool but is really just outsourcing
4.Free up water licencing for environmental and economic benefit - which is just a piece of neoclassical economic theory about price signals of water
5. Time for a National Compensation Scheme - see below
6. Enshrine Parramatta As Sydney's Second CBD - self-explanatory, but long on how not why
These "Policy Ideas" are neither Big nor New.
Even in the write up for the National Compensation Scheme author John Della Bosca noted the then current Productivity Commission inquiry. Since then the report has been released, the Government has commited to a scheme and the Government has enrolled the States.
But when you get to the fine detail nothing yet exists. Till today when Per Capita is reported to be proposing a $15/week tax levy to fund the scheme. What the?
Like the ALP really needs another new tax?
What's more as the story notes "The call for a levy stands in contrast to the commission's recommendation that a national disability insurance scheme be funded out of general revenue."
I guess the romantic notions of big rural centres, of markets not Governments, reflects the thoughts of a group descended from Santamaria's Movement.
Mind you the left is no better.....
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Today I just want to focus on one section of the Winter 2011 issue of Voice - and in particular one sixth of that.
The section was headed "6 New Big Policy Ideas". They were,
1. Green Grid for Australia - an extension of the national transmission grid to connect renewable resources
2. A new City for the Pilbara - a revamped version of the Whitlamite RED scheme.
3. Private Capital to fund Social Programs - which sounds cool but is really just outsourcing
4.Free up water licencing for environmental and economic benefit - which is just a piece of neoclassical economic theory about price signals of water
5. Time for a National Compensation Scheme - see below
6. Enshrine Parramatta As Sydney's Second CBD - self-explanatory, but long on how not why
These "Policy Ideas" are neither Big nor New.
Even in the write up for the National Compensation Scheme author John Della Bosca noted the then current Productivity Commission inquiry. Since then the report has been released, the Government has commited to a scheme and the Government has enrolled the States.
But when you get to the fine detail nothing yet exists. Till today when Per Capita is reported to be proposing a $15/week tax levy to fund the scheme. What the?
Like the ALP really needs another new tax?
What's more as the story notes "The call for a levy stands in contrast to the commission's recommendation that a national disability insurance scheme be funded out of general revenue."
I guess the romantic notions of big rural centres, of markets not Governments, reflects the thoughts of a group descended from Santamaria's Movement.
Mind you the left is no better.....
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Unions and the ALP, and the integrity of politicians - updated
There is an old adage that one should learn from one's mistakes.
The ALP, Federally and in NSW, needs to take the opportunity to do so. The nonsense about Craig Thomson and his credit card is now simply ludicrous.
I hope everyone realises that an employee misusing their employers credit card isn't normally a criminal offence. It is normally a civil matter that would involve dismissal and recompense. We still don't know what the expenditure on Craig Thomson's credit card was, it may have been legitimate "entertainment expenses" of other people. But even if it isn't legitimate the misuse isn't necessarily "criminal". There may be other bits I'm not aware of like the question of falsely swearing statements or some specific rules governing unions.
The Australian today withdrew a story filed by Glenn Milne that was grubby in the extreme. The story itself was triggered by a post on Andrew Bolt's blog in which some old well known matters are rehashed and dressed up as a "smoking gun" for the PM while wrapped up in suggestions that no suggestion of impropriety is being made. (see note).
The issue here is the damage being done to Labor by association with Unions that have become hot beds of intrigue, if not outright corruption. It is extraordinary for Milne to claim as he does that an outbreak of Union thuggery (the shovel incident) is evidence that the unions have given up on the Gillard government.
This is to ascribe to the unions a monolithic existence akin to descriptions of "the Left" or "The Right" used to join everyone associated with it into a single stance.
Bolt in his column on Saturday also referred to the theme of "cover-up". In it he also tried to harrangue the ALP for raising Senator Fisher's problems with the law. Tony Abbott has now defended the Senator because she has "serious mental health issues".
Both Abbott and Bolt miss the point of the PMs statement - which was that the standard in Australia is innocent until proven guilty. Accusations are not a reason to resign. Indeed the constitution is very clear, even guilt and imprisonment for less than a year is not a reason to resign.
The ALP is probably right not to ask Thomson to resign from the party. It wouldn't achieve much now.
And while there is some surprise that the PM is pursuing the role of a Parliamentary Integrity Commissioner the reality is that if such a position existed Mr Thomson's position would be likely to be more not less secure. The allegations have nothing to do with his integrity as an MP.
There has been a great history in the labour movement in general of concern about control from the outside. The party in the 20s and 30s struggled between communist influence and "tammany" - that is the exercise of power for the benefits it can deliver. The concern crystallised in the 40s with concerted efforts to reduce communist control in unions. But these efforts themselves became controlled from outside (by the Catholic Church based Movement).
It is time the ALP finally broke free from its industrial base and instead proudly exclaimed itself to be a democratic socialist party. In doing so it can distance itself from the grubby conduct that befalls it all too often.
Note: Mark Antony's famous soliloquy"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." is a classic speech in which the audience is meant to "decode" that when the speaker uses a negative it is indeed a hidden way of saying the positive.
News reports of the variety "It has been reported that John Smith brutally beat his wife. No accusation is being made that Mr Smith acted in any way other than as a caring and loving husband concerned for his life partner's well-being." clearly are designed for us to believe the first part. Why else would they be published?
Update: For a good explanation on the legal issues on Thomson and Parliament see this column by George Williams.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The ALP, Federally and in NSW, needs to take the opportunity to do so. The nonsense about Craig Thomson and his credit card is now simply ludicrous.
I hope everyone realises that an employee misusing their employers credit card isn't normally a criminal offence. It is normally a civil matter that would involve dismissal and recompense. We still don't know what the expenditure on Craig Thomson's credit card was, it may have been legitimate "entertainment expenses" of other people. But even if it isn't legitimate the misuse isn't necessarily "criminal". There may be other bits I'm not aware of like the question of falsely swearing statements or some specific rules governing unions.
The Australian today withdrew a story filed by Glenn Milne that was grubby in the extreme. The story itself was triggered by a post on Andrew Bolt's blog in which some old well known matters are rehashed and dressed up as a "smoking gun" for the PM while wrapped up in suggestions that no suggestion of impropriety is being made. (see note).
The issue here is the damage being done to Labor by association with Unions that have become hot beds of intrigue, if not outright corruption. It is extraordinary for Milne to claim as he does that an outbreak of Union thuggery (the shovel incident) is evidence that the unions have given up on the Gillard government.
This is to ascribe to the unions a monolithic existence akin to descriptions of "the Left" or "The Right" used to join everyone associated with it into a single stance.
Bolt in his column on Saturday also referred to the theme of "cover-up". In it he also tried to harrangue the ALP for raising Senator Fisher's problems with the law. Tony Abbott has now defended the Senator because she has "serious mental health issues".
Both Abbott and Bolt miss the point of the PMs statement - which was that the standard in Australia is innocent until proven guilty. Accusations are not a reason to resign. Indeed the constitution is very clear, even guilt and imprisonment for less than a year is not a reason to resign.
The ALP is probably right not to ask Thomson to resign from the party. It wouldn't achieve much now.
And while there is some surprise that the PM is pursuing the role of a Parliamentary Integrity Commissioner the reality is that if such a position existed Mr Thomson's position would be likely to be more not less secure. The allegations have nothing to do with his integrity as an MP.
There has been a great history in the labour movement in general of concern about control from the outside. The party in the 20s and 30s struggled between communist influence and "tammany" - that is the exercise of power for the benefits it can deliver. The concern crystallised in the 40s with concerted efforts to reduce communist control in unions. But these efforts themselves became controlled from outside (by the Catholic Church based Movement).
It is time the ALP finally broke free from its industrial base and instead proudly exclaimed itself to be a democratic socialist party. In doing so it can distance itself from the grubby conduct that befalls it all too often.
Note: Mark Antony's famous soliloquy"I come to bury Caesar, not to praise him." is a classic speech in which the audience is meant to "decode" that when the speaker uses a negative it is indeed a hidden way of saying the positive.
News reports of the variety "It has been reported that John Smith brutally beat his wife. No accusation is being made that Mr Smith acted in any way other than as a caring and loving husband concerned for his life partner's well-being." clearly are designed for us to believe the first part. Why else would they be published?
Update: For a good explanation on the legal issues on Thomson and Parliament see this column by George Williams.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Riots in London - lessons
Excellent item in The New Republic which analyses the response to the London riots.
The debate thus far is neatly summarised by a quote from Tony Blair "The left says they’re victims of social deprivation, the right says they need to take personal responsibility for their actions, both just miss the point."
The author, Geoffrey Wheatcroft, goes on to note that Blair then misses it as well.
After cataloguing the responses of both left and right, including some of the more extreme Tory versions, Wheatcroft offers the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself.
The implied critique - having detailed how much of the childhood of the rioters was spent under Labour rule - is that in all its years in power Labour did nothing to change the culture of British society.
The embrace by social democrats of "market capitalism" has resulted in them failing to recognise that the core tenet - efficiency - is anti-equity. And equity still resonates.
Take the results of a survey reported today. The survey finds Australians believe that richest 20% have 40% of the wealth, but believe they should only have 24 percent.
The actual extent of inequality is far higher - the wealthiest 20% have 60% of the wealth. The survey found that the wealthiest and the poorest were those with the least understanding of how the actual distribution looks.
The relationship between the actual, estimated and ideal wealth distribution is best shown using the Lorenz curve that graphs cumulative wealth against cumulative population. As a service to my readers I include it below.
The lesson from the two stories. Social democrats (what Americans call "liberal" and I prefer to call "democratic socialists") who want to promote greater equity, both because it is "right" and because it will reduce other societal issues, need to first explain the extent of dis-equity in our community.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
The debate thus far is neatly summarised by a quote from Tony Blair "The left says they’re victims of social deprivation, the right says they need to take personal responsibility for their actions, both just miss the point."
The author, Geoffrey Wheatcroft, goes on to note that Blair then misses it as well.
After cataloguing the responses of both left and right, including some of the more extreme Tory versions, Wheatcroft offers the words of Daniel Patrick Moynihan.
The central conservative truth is that it is culture, not politics, that determines the success of a society. The central liberal truth is that politics can change a culture and save it from itself.
The implied critique - having detailed how much of the childhood of the rioters was spent under Labour rule - is that in all its years in power Labour did nothing to change the culture of British society.
The embrace by social democrats of "market capitalism" has resulted in them failing to recognise that the core tenet - efficiency - is anti-equity. And equity still resonates.
Take the results of a survey reported today. The survey finds Australians believe that richest 20% have 40% of the wealth, but believe they should only have 24 percent.
The actual extent of inequality is far higher - the wealthiest 20% have 60% of the wealth. The survey found that the wealthiest and the poorest were those with the least understanding of how the actual distribution looks.
The relationship between the actual, estimated and ideal wealth distribution is best shown using the Lorenz curve that graphs cumulative wealth against cumulative population. As a service to my readers I include it below.
The lesson from the two stories. Social democrats (what Americans call "liberal" and I prefer to call "democratic socialists") who want to promote greater equity, both because it is "right" and because it will reduce other societal issues, need to first explain the extent of dis-equity in our community.
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Friday, August 26, 2011
NBN Co, community consultation and migration
Really good address to today's ACS-TSA SIG by NBN Co's Mike Kaiser on rewiring a nation.
Good explanation of the migration task and the associated communication task.
A lot of agreement that the ACCAN publication National Broadband Network: Guide for Consumers is the best explanatory document around. The document actually does address things like what speed do I need and what internal changes you might want to make to get the best use.
NBN Co will be moving into full scale deployment mode soon, where on a rolling three month basis they will outline the next twelve months of construction areas.
There looks to me to be a bigger win on Comms available from having a co-ordinated NBN Co/Govt/Consumer/SP comms process. At the moment there seems to be a separate Govt plan from NBN Co plan and that doesn't make sense.
Interesting comment from many present is that they don't have the simple communications tools on hand to help them explain what the NBN is and what it will mean to people.
Anyhow, it raises my own question. My telephone line is currently an aerial lead in - as is my Foxtel/Bigpond cable. Will NBN Co publish a guide so that I could instal my own duct that could be accessed to install the NBN when it gets to my house (in about nine years I reckon cause our BB is OK)?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Good explanation of the migration task and the associated communication task.
A lot of agreement that the ACCAN publication National Broadband Network: Guide for Consumers is the best explanatory document around. The document actually does address things like what speed do I need and what internal changes you might want to make to get the best use.
NBN Co will be moving into full scale deployment mode soon, where on a rolling three month basis they will outline the next twelve months of construction areas.
There looks to me to be a bigger win on Comms available from having a co-ordinated NBN Co/Govt/Consumer/SP comms process. At the moment there seems to be a separate Govt plan from NBN Co plan and that doesn't make sense.
Interesting comment from many present is that they don't have the simple communications tools on hand to help them explain what the NBN is and what it will mean to people.
Anyhow, it raises my own question. My telephone line is currently an aerial lead in - as is my Foxtel/Bigpond cable. Will NBN Co publish a guide so that I could instal my own duct that could be accessed to install the NBN when it gets to my house (in about nine years I reckon cause our BB is OK)?
Novae Meridianae Demetae Dexter delenda est
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)