Private Schools Just A Political Pawn

Yesterday, Federal Education Minister, Jilia Gillard, called on the Opposition to pass legislation in the Senate regarding funding for private schools in 2009. As with so much legislation now, from both the former Howard Government, and the current Rudd Government, the legislation is not free-standing. Embedded in much of Howard’s legislation, and now Rudd’s, is the sub-agenda. In this case, the funding is tied to delivery of a “new” national curriculum. The Liberal/National Opposition doesn’t like it, saying it lacks flexibility. 

Yet in October 2006, then (Liberal) Education Minister Julie Bishop said: “We need to take school curriculum out of the hands of the ideologues in the state and territory education bureaucracies and give it to a national board of studies”. Again, in February 2007, Ms Bishop used an ACER report to ague for a national curriculum. In 2008, in Opposition as Shadow Treasurer, she opposes it.

Following publicly-reported statements from the head of the Independent Schools Council of Australia, Bill Daniels,  and the National Catholic Education Commission’s chief, Bill Griffiths, the Opposition back-flipped, and allowed the Schools Assistance Bill to be passed.

It’s sad, really, that schools have become a political pawn for both sides: Labor to push through requirements for a national curriculum; and for the Opposition to use to try to score cheap political points, even abandoning their previous position to do so.

 John

Posted under Australian, Education, Politics

This post was written by John Harris on December 4, 2008

Tags: ,

An Education Revolution?

It’s been a busy time. I’ve been busy - so busy I haven’t had time to post recently. NSW Premier Nathan Rees has been busy slashing - there has been a min-budget for NSW; and Kevin Rudd has been busy - overseas and at home. He even missed a fundraising dinner to celebrate his first year in office, because of the terrorism in Mumbai, India. Yesterday came the feelgood press spin - sorry, “press release” - about the $15b for states over 4 years from the COAG meeting. NSW gets $5 billion, over 4 years, in particular for health and education. It includes Kevin Rudd’s promised “education revolution” for computer availability for students in Yrs 9-12.

NSW Premier Nathan Rees announced that the Department (of Education & Training) IT section had developed a 3/4 size laptop model for computers. It could be similar in concept to Asus Eee-PC’s. They are tough and light, and more than adequate for “office” application and Internet use by students.  School students, though, will not like them - they will no good for the games they stereotypically like, and their specifications are not “cool”. Nathan Rees has promised wireless access for all public schools; and that students will be allowed to keep their laptops at the end of Yr 12 - for laptops such as I have described, it is likely that the recovery, preparation & sale would cost more than the likely return from sale.

An education revolution? Spin, more likely.

John

 

Posted under Education, NSW, Politics

This post was written by John Harris on November 30, 2008

Tags:

NSW Government Woes Continue

Back in February, I wrote that NSW Labor was set to supernova. (http://truepolitik.blogspot.com/2008/02/nsw-labor-set-to-supernova.html) Their problems included: asset sales; corruption (at Wollongong, and potentially within the government); lack of investment in infrastructure; health, especially hospitals.

The only thing that has changed, with Nathan Rees as new Premier, is that the problems have grown. Premier Rees has had to sack several new Ministers, including Matt Brown and Tony Stewart for inappropriate behaviour. Tuesday’s mini-budget has divided Sydney north & south / Liberal & Labor seats, public transport gets another kick in the teeth, created voter and media backlash, and Nathan Rees’s own Labor politicians are bordering on revolt. Rees intends to sell NSW Lotteries, an income generating asset, and revelations of the political machinations of parachuting Reba Meagher into the seat of Cabramatta, within hours of then member John Newman’s assassination in 1994. All these reflect a party that is dysfunctional, driven by self-interest, controlled by Treasury officials reluctant to release 10-years’ worth of surplus, and with internal government and party fractures.

There appears no way for NSW Labor to win the next election in 2011.

John

 

Posted under NSW, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on November 15, 2008

Tags:

Obama’s Challenges

The world is recovering from Barack Obama’s historic win as US President-elect. As the first black man elected to govern from the White House, and first Democratic President (to be) since Bill Clinton he carries the hopes and dreams of many of his citizens, and, indeed, of many in the world.

Euphoria is an emotion that lasts such a short time - and it’s hard landing when it wears off. Obama had sufficient wisdom to tell people this when he reminded them that the US still has a President, George W Bush, and will do, until his inauguration on 20 January 2009. He has also moved to hose down expectations of rapid change - has asked to be judged on his first 1000 days, not the usual 100 days.

His challenges include:

  • the US economy, which has suffered the after effects of George Bush’s “laissez-faire” economic policies that verged on economic nihilism: there is no right or wrong, “the market” will fix itself. Of course, when the self-inflicted financial crisis hit, Wall St socialism became the philosophy of choice. President Bush was forced, basically, to pump public money into institutions which had based their financial decisions on “greed is good”, while abandoning financial prudence in their lending practices. As he did so, almost every Congress member and Senator due for election wanted money for their electorate, and the initial 3-page bill became more than 500 pages. Domestic financial and prudential reform will be a slow, difficult process, as will economic recovery.
  • George W Bush’s wars, especially those in Iraq and, to a lesser extent, Afghanistan, are unpopular. They are seen as unwinnable by many ordinary Americans, and their death toll on US service people are unacceptable to them. Bush’s advice that Iraq could become the USA’s next “Vietnam” - advice he ignored - is a popular perception. Determining if, when and how to withdraw will be a significant hurdle for Obama, and his military advisers.
  • global warming is still an international issue, even though it’s been pushed off the news headlines
  • domestic health changes, including a universal health scheme were among his election policies. Many were ashamed when the world was shown images of aid organisations providing free medical and dental services in tents to US citizens in “middle America”; basic health services that ought to have been available to them.
  • the political revolving door- political appointments and the relationship with (wealthy) lobbyists is something he will have to tackle earliest. If he doesn’t take measures before and immediatly upon his inauguration, the gravy train wil roll on, and on, and on.

Despite the expectations born of euphoria, Barack Obama’s performance will not be radical change, but will likely be measured, and slower than many expect. That’s as it should be.

John

Posted under International, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on November 8, 2008

Tags:

Rudd Canes Rees Over NSW Economy

Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has given a verbal slap to his Labor colleague, NSW Premier Nathan Rees. Mr Rudd has committed to pumping more than $10 Billion into the economy, including cash handouts to some just before Christmas. He knows it’s a short-term band-aid, but that it will mostly be spent over Christmas, helping to sustain at least the retail sector.

Nathan Rees, as Premier of NSW, is planning to significantly cut State expenditure in a mini-budget expected next week. Mr Rudd, is reported in the Sun-Herald to have said:

“On the state of NSW, I will say it in loud and clear terms: the Government of NSW has to radically lift its game. … It is necessary not just for the people of NSW but for the national economy.” 

A significant reduction in NSW Government spending will only exacerbate the NSW economy, and therefore the national economy. What Mr Rudd didn’t say, and I will, is that:

  • NSW has had 12 successive budget surpluses, totalling more than $4 Billion. The money has been closeted in NSW Treasury.
  • While some of the surpluses were used to slightly reduce NSW net debt, it is entirely appropriate for NSW to draw down some of those surpluses, or even to borrow, to support the NSW budget over the next 2 fiscal years.

Such use will doubtless upset some Treasury officials - those who are economic rationalists who believe the money belongs to Treasury. It doesn’t, it belongs to the people of NSW, and the NSW Government ought to use it appropriately during economic slowdowns such as this.

NSW has also asked the Federal Government for $Billions to help fund infrastructure programs. Assuming it receives some extra Federal grants, Nathan Rees has an opportunity to use some of Treasury’s reserves, and Federal Government money, to benefit the people of NSW.

That would beat any glossy press release, or press conference full of image and no substance. It would also be a nice change.

John

 

Posted under Australian, Economy, NSW, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on November 2, 2008

Tags: , ,

Bali Bombers & The Death Penalty

Much of Australia, & other parts of the world, awaits the impending execution of the Bali bombers. Amrozi,  Mukhlas and Imam Samudra remain unrepentant for the 202 innocent people they killed by bomb in 2002. 88 of those were Australian.

Australia has maintined its fundamental opposition to the death penalty, and its policy of non-interference where Australians are not involved. Many Australians, particularly friends, family, community support the death penalty imposed on these three men.

 The following arguments are used to justify a death penalty:

  1. deterrence: the concept that having such a severe penalty will make criminals think twice before acting.
  2. retribution: society’s version of “an eye for an eye”.

It is entirely possible that neither of these is justifiable. I suspect that few criminals consider the likely consequences of their actions. Retribution, or punishment, might satisfy society’s, and individuals’ need fo revenge. Revenge is a very human emotion, often driven by anger. But is an argument driven by heated emotion a valid reason to impose a death penalty?

Nevertheless, with certainty of guilt and extreme effects on society, punishment by death could still be acceptable to some. Others will include the need for “civilized” humanity & the sanctity of human life to argue against the death penalty. I believe that, in cases like this, it is reasonable to argue “death as a penalty”.

See also: http://deathpenaltycurriculum.org/teacher/c/about/arguments/contents.htm  

So, what’s your position - death penalty or no?

John

Posted under Society

This post was written by John Harris on November 1, 2008

Tags: , ,

NSW Nats Delusional

The NSW National Party is spinning its head over the recent by-election for the NSW seat of Port Macquarie. The Nationals’ Leslie Williams increased her vote by 14%, after the Independent, (& former National Party member) Rob Oakeshott quit, to run for Federal Parliament. Such a swing is common when personally popular Independents resign or retire from their seat. Christine Ferguson, from the NSW branch complained in a letter to the Sydney Morning Herald (Letters 24/10/08) that the Nats didn’t lose the seat, because they didn’t hold it. True. But they expected to win, and they didn’t win; so they lost. Don’t you love political word games!

Further exacerbating the Nationals’ glum mood was the fact that Liberal Alby Shultz, (Liberal member for the Federal seat of Hume) supported Peter Besseling as an Independent. He won; the Nats lost. Shultz also believes the Nats should be merged with the Liberal Party. Remeber the Borg from Star Trek?  “Resistance is Futile”: that’s how some in the Liberal Party view the proposed “merger”. NSW Nats Parliamentary leader Andrew Stoner had a hissy fit about Shultz, and wanted to “take him out the back and shoot him”. Stoner later tried to brush off the comment as a joke. Nats MLC Duncan Gay waded in with “he’s no longer a member of the Coalition” - Shultz will ignore it as the ranting, personal comment that it is.

In all, the Nats are showing just how delusional and ineffective they are in NSW.

John

 

 

Posted under Australian, NSW, Politics

This post was written by John Harris on October 24, 2008

Tags: , , ,

NSW Labor Savaged In By-Elections

The NSW Labor Government has been sa,vaged by voters in four by-elections yesterday. Ryde, formerly held by John Watkins, is now held by the Liberal Party. Ryde and Cabramatta recorded swings of about 22%; and ex-Premier Morris Iemma’s seat of Lakemba recorded a swing of about 13% against Labor. The ALP did not contest the seat of Port Macquarie, but it has been taken by a new Independent, much to the disappointment of teh National Party.

While the Labor Party has been sent a clear message about its unpopularity, Federally, the ALP, and Kevin rudd, remain popular. the challenge for the NSW Labor Government, led by Premier Nathan Rees, is to be reverse the decline in infrastructure, promote public transport, restore adequate funding for NSW hospitals and schools, while managing a budget which will have declining income in the current economic climate.

The only sources of funds for him will be: the Federal Government’s promised early infrastructure funds, increased State taxes, and borrowing. All are likely to feature in November’s mini-budget. Nathan Rees just hopes that voters will be happy that the “message” has been sent in 2008, and not repeat it in the state election in 2011. So will Kevin Rudd.

John

Posted under NSW, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on October 19, 2008

Tags: , , , , , ,

Rudd Trumps Turnbull On Deposits

Priime Minister Kevin Rudd today announced that the Australian Government is guaranteeing all deposits in Australian banks, credit unions and building societies for 3 years. Reports value this guarantee at about A$700 Billion. The guarantee is irrespective of the size of individual deposits.

Financially, this guarantee will help ensure that financial institutions continue to have a significant deposit base, desirable from a prudential perspective; that they can continue to meet the prudential regulations, and can lend to each other with more confidence. This inter-bank lending is important for fiancial institutions - it enables them to continue to lend to customers - and will help to maintain the economy.

The politics of this are:

  • Other governments, including the USA, Britain, European countries, and Iceland have already made similar guarantees. It ensures that Australian deposits will remain in Australia.
  • Last week, Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull was spruiking “his” idea of guarantees on bank deposits up to A$100,000. From a a free-market  investment banker, it was pure political populism. Kevin Rudd’s proposal means that he has not only trumped the Opposition  by including credit unions and building societies; but also ensures that he cannot be out-trumped on the $-amount. Late this afternoon, Mr Turnbull said that “Mr Rudd and I are very much of the one mind on these measures“. This is just a “me, too” statement: he knows Kevin Rudd out-flanked him on this issue, and doesn’t want to be left behind.
  • Prime Minister Rudd is also seen to be taking decisive action to protect Australians’ savings.

All in all, this deposit guarantee is a good move for financial institutions, with a side serving of political advantage for Kevin Rudd.

John 

 

Posted under Australian, Economy, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on October 12, 2008

Tags:

Banks, CEO’s & Politicians

Today (7-Oct) the RBA lowered the Australian cash rate by 1%. Late today, the 4 main banks indicated they would lower interest rates by 0.8%. The main focus of the media, and politicians, has been on mortgage interest rates. It remains to be sen whether the banks lower personal loan rates, and especially credit card interest rates. The Australian Stock exchange finished higher, rising rapidly after the announcement.

Meanwhile the Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and Treasurer Wayne Swan have been rather defensive of how much of the rate cut should/could be passed on by the banks, but still roll out the spin about “working families” and “good for business” - they could be Howard clones! The Oppsition, led by Malcolm Turnbull and Shadow Treasurer Julie Bishop can indulge in populist press releases calling for the “full interest rate cut” to be passed on to consumers. They don’t have to be responsible, and seem willing to abandon economic responsibility for a quick, populist, tabloid headline. Labor also did as much when in Opposition.

Australia’s “big-four” banks - CBA, NAB, Westpac & ANZ - are 4 of the 18 worldwide banks that have a AA credit rating. They have good market capitalisation & deposits, and so are well-placed to weather the global financial crisis. But they are not immune, and yet Malcolm Turnbull has called on the banks’ CEO’s to justify why they won’t pass on the full rate cut. As a former investment banker, he knows that is an unreasonable request, and that the banks and the Government  can be painted as the “bad boys” when they don’t. Financial journalists, of course, have better understanding and report that banks have had to pay 0.75% more for money in the last 3-4 weeks - banks don’t want to lend to each other, or can’t because of they are overseas banks in parlous circumstances. They have previously been lending to Australian consumers at full rates money that they borrowed from overseas at minimal rates.

Don’t feel too much sympathy, though. They recorded record profits this year, except for the ANZ, which recorded a loss after writing down subprime securities, and they increased rates by 0.5% or more than the rises from the Reserve Bank. Thy will still make a significant profit, and their CEO’s will still put out their hands for a substantial bonus!

John

Posted under Australian, Economy, Politics, Uncategorized

This post was written by John Harris on October 7, 2008