Archive for January 2013
Old events in new costumes
Posted on: 31 January 2013
- In: ACT OPINIONS | Entertainment | Tourism
- 6 Comments
Old events in new costumes
If the organisers hoped the Centenary celebrations would create the impression of Canberra as the Capital of Progress, Innovation, Culture and the Arts I think they will be disappointed. How on earth can this impression be created when many programmed events are old events dressed in new costumes?
In the same way as many programmes on our new TV channels are repeats of programmes as old as Canberra’s main demographic, the Centenary is taking the old saying ‘everything old is new again’ to new heights.
Although I might be growing long in the tooth I have fond memories of birthday parties made exciting and entertaining spontaneously. As I grew older and my tastes changed so did parties. But one thing didn’t change: my hope that the parties would still be exciting and entertaining.
To digress, having worked for decades in the local tourism industry which is hoping the Centenary will fill beds and rattle tills, I trawled the Centenary website hoping to see messages that substantiate the industry’s hopes. I was looking for messages designed to stir the latent jingoism in Australians that would encourage them to cancel an already planned overseas visit for a trip to Canberra.
Sad to say, the messages on the website did little to suggest they would encourage such a thought. Bear in mind that prospective tourists, Australian and overseas, will look at the same site. One hopes they don’t reach the same conclusion as me.
In terms of infrastructure and physicality Canberra is a young city yet the website seems designed to appeal more to an ageing demographic. And so I ask: where are the ideas from young people that some of an older demographic will think zany? They may be there, but if they are they are not obvious, so why expect young people to visit?
This is not to say the photographs on the website are not useful, but I have to say that during my sixteen and twenty five years age span, it was not that I didn’t enjoy some moments of cultural appreciation but in the main my mind was focused elsewhere. I suspect that in this regard things are still the same.
Don Allan
dca@netspeed.com.au blog: Allan Takes Aim; web: donallan.wordpress.com
The ACT Government needs courage and new ideas
The start of the ACT’s new four years of political fray is now upon us. I live in hope that the start of every new Government heralds a new state of political honesty and the discarding of the usual words of denigration that politicians throw at each other in parliaments.
I hoped also that the incoming Labor/Green Government at the start of its new contract with ACT voters would wish to give them hope that things have changed. Unfortunately, indications are that they haven’t.
Already rumours are rife that Liberal Zed Seselja is moving on the Senate seat held by fellow Liberal Gary Humphries. In all honesty I think that’s more a rumour created by Labor to counter the rumours of unease within Labor, than it is true. But true or false, what it indicates is that things will go on in the same way for the next four years as they did in the previous four.
That apart, what do we mean by honesty in politics? It’s a wonderful idea, but what does it mean? Does it mean we always want our politicians to tell the truth no matter what the truth is, or does it mean something else? Talking to people I get the impression they think that “honesty in politics” means they want people in politics to think the same as they do and deviation from that path means they are dishonest.
Much as most say otherwise I suggest the real truth is that we want are politicians who will confirm our prejudices or, better still, give us good news. Politicians who give bad news are, as Sir Humphrey would say, “courageous.” Sad to say examining the record of the last ACT Government shows that it had few courageous politicians.
For forty years of my forty four years in Australia I’ve enjoyed living in Canberra and for twenty five of those years I enjoyed the benefit of Canberra being subsidised by the rest of Australia.
That subsidy gave my family access to a health system, arguably the best in the world; an education system envied not only by many other countries but also other Australian States; a relatively unpolluted environment; world class sport and recreational facilities that were more generous than in Australian cities with a population size comparable or larger, and better than in cities with seven or eight times the population size in other developed countries; a first class road and transport system; superb cultural facilities; and virtually no unemployment.
In some respects Canberra could be likened to the dream city of “Utopia” described by Sir Thomas More in his 1516 book of the same name as “a seat of perfection in moral, social and political life.” Sadly, however, and much as we all would like our dreams to continue, they fade. Eventually we wake up to be faced with the harsh realities of life.
Canberra was suddenly wakened to the harsh realities of life when self-government was introduced in 1989. Fortunately for Canberra, the infrastructure of the dream remained; unfortunately, the money needed to maintain and grow it, did not.
At last Canberrans were faced with the reality that to maintain their dream city, they would have to put up most of the money because the subsidy from fellow Australians would decrease. Unfortunately since self-government, while most ACT Governments talked of the new reality they continued to hope that Canberra would continue to be treated as dream city.
The first and only Chief Minister to face up to reality was Liberal Kate Carnell. Unfortunately at the moment I cannot support Chief Minister Katy Gallagher because, unlike Kate Carnell, she seems unwilling to be honest with voters by telling them their dream city could become nightmare city unless they change their attitude. To do this she might have to risk unpopularity by doling out doses of strong political medicine.
But perhaps she prefers celebrity to courage?
Blog: Allan Takes Aim; web: donallan.wordpress.com; e: dca@netspeed.com.au
Communications special
Posted on: 26 January 2013
Important announcement
to all readers of Blog – Allan Takes Aim
I am loathe to take the following action but, but to help reduce the volume of spam on the site, as from February 1, only people registered and logged on to donallan.wordpress.com will be able access and comment on the blog.
Those who do not wish to make their comments privately can contact me direct at: dca@netspeed.com.au
Let me restate that this site was not established as a means of free advertising under the umbrella of another site, but for the purpose of promulgating the exchange of ideas and t Bloghe promotion of free speech.
And people whose first language is not English should not shy away from making comment: most people will understand what you have to say.
Let me thank you in advance for your co-operation.
Yours sincerely,
Don Allan OAM
- In: ACT OPINIONS | Politics
- 10 Comments
The day is getting close when few executives in a company can expect to stay on forever. The terms might vary but today the expectations are geared to between five and eight years particularly in the top job. This was brought to mind by a TV news report of the rumour that Andrew Scipione, Chief Commissioner of the New South Wales Police Force would soon be leaving the job.
Adding substance to the rumour were his words during a fairly recent interview when he said that though his contract still had two years to run, having served six years in the position, his use by date was approaching. This is happening more frequently in the world of big business as experienced executives move from one company to another and in doing so gave support to the old adage that ‘a change is as good as a rest.’
After moving I doubt the executives will need to change their management skills. In all probability these skills will improve with the change of business scenery. They might also regain their capacity for invention and innovation and also develop new skills.
If you don’t think this is true an examination of the employment background of many executives (including CEOs) in Australia’s major companies will display a background that shows lack of experience in the field which the company they are employed is operating. And while I won’t go as far as to say that the company they left and the company they work for now will have benefitted from the change, I think it more than likely.
This is not to say there are no exceptions to my theory. Some small self-owned and self- managed businesses are unlikely to benefit from change if only because customers like dealing with familiar owners and managers.Unfortunately however, that is changing, as small businesses get gobbled up by big business and the familiar is replaced by the unfamiliar.
Perhaps we think this is a new and undesirable chapter in the life of business but the fact is history will show that this was ever so. Since the start of commerce the same process has occurred time and time again because the wheel of life has never stopped turning. In a sense and though it applies to other than human and/or animal life, the process is Darwin’s theory of evolution writ large.
Unfortunately, one business that should have changed but hasn’t is politics. The West endorses democracy as the system in the wheel of life that will cure life’s inherent problems. Despite centuries having passed since the idea of democracy made its first appearance, ambitious people have used the idea to enhance their life at the expense of others.
Which brings me to political wars and the election of politicians: in reality, politicians are business executives because government is big business. Unfortunately unlike business, where executives can be sacked because of incompetence, politicians manage to escape that possibility even if after being elected it becomes apparent they don’t measure up to the CV presented to voters. (Think Thomson and Slipper)
Why should this be the case? After all billion dollar businesses carry on even when executives get sacked.
So let me suggest that in the same way as business organisation use technology to advance their business, why, on a regular half yearly basis, can’t voters use technology to advise a Government’s Managing Director of their satisfaction or dissatisfaction with their government’s business management They would also be able to suggest as to which politicians should get the chop because their performance is below par.
Such an idea might be too revolutionary for politicians but I think voters would l welcome it.
Some politicians will say the idea is daft but, following 508-507 BCE when Cleisthenes established what is generally held to be the first democracy, democaracy would undergo many adaptations before our current system was accepted. And so I ask: is the proposed idea daft? Some politicians I know think this is the future of democracy beyond tomorrow or the next election and that eventually it will come.
At the same time I think politicians should not be allowed to serve more than two parliamentary terms thus avoiding the current system which encourages politicians to think a seat in government is a sinecure. Importantly, such a system would refresh government and keep politicians on their toes. Also they would have to keep close to the electorate to find out first – hand what voters in their electorate thought important not what biased staff thought.
But that’s enough for today and perhaps to your relief, tomorrow I shall be silent.
Blog: Allan Takes Aim; web: donallan@wordpress.com; e: dca@netspeed.com.au
- In: ACT OPINIONS | Politics
- 7 Comments
Every time I see the word Directorate being applied to the work of an ACT Government Department my blood races and my heart beast so loudly that if standing within walking distance and hadn’t already started screaming in terror, you’d probably need to wear ear plugs. Apart from that Directorate seems an odd word to use to describe a cohort of bureaucrats who so often seem to lack direction. But that’s Canberra.
No doubt the word is meant to suggest that Canberra’s progress is under control and being well directed even if a majority of Canberrans seem to think the opposite. Indeed, some think Directorates have been established to discourage people from being able to direct questions to the people with overall control of Canberra’s progress.
The word Directorate also takes me back many years to the time when directorates formed the bureaucracy of Soviet Russia, a practice followed by many other countries in the Soviet Bloc whose opponents, including Australia, for many years did their utmost to undermine.
These Bloc countries are now Independent and their Directorates gone. However, it seems some policy wonks in ACT Labor still think Directorates are the ACT Government’s best control mechanism.
Mind you to put residents’ minds at rest that Directorates are not a strategy designed to keep them from complaining, each Drectorate has a ‘complaint or compliment’ section where complainers, who might become complainants at a later stage, can vent their spleen about the Government’s action or lack of it. On the other hand they can lavishly compliment the Government about the actions that caused the complainers to vent their spleen.
All of the information about the structure of the Directorates is available on the ACT Government website which people can Google up. Googling seems an unfortunate description of the method used to gain information because, some older residents without computers who are cricket enthusiasts are still wondering how googlies got into politics.
However, if you don’t have a computer and even if you have but can’t afford the internet, the workings of the Government will remain mysterious because decisions had been made about issues you weren’t even aware had been discussed.
The alternative: you could listen for reports about these issues on radio or TV. Indeed, once upon a time, you could be sure of getting your 8 cents a day worth of balanced news from your ABC. Sadly I have to say that the more the ABC has progressed the more its radio and TV broadcasts seem out of balance.
Of course, you could try either the commercial alternatives and get different programmes of unbalanced news or you could buy the Times. On the newspaper front however, it has to be said many people are now of the view that as it has progressed, the quality of its news has declined in inverse proportion to its increase in price.
I am in no doubt that many people in Canberra do not share my opinions. Let me say that if you do or don’t I invite you to let Canberrans know what you think either by replying in the comment section at the end of this blog or by sending me a 500-700 word article for publishing by e-mail saying why you do or you don’t.
Blog: Don Allan Takes Aim; web: https://donallan.wordpress.com; e-mail: dca@netspeed.com.au
ACT Opinions
Posted on: 8 January 2013
- In: ACT OPINIONS | ACT Politics | Community | Global Warming | Politics
- 6 Comments
When will Australia learn?
No doubt you’ve found yourself in the same position as I did when I sat down to write the first of the political articles I promised in my blog of 3 January. Usually there’s no dearth of political items to write about in January particularly issues raised by politicians who rarely ever get media coverage.
But this January, not only have these politicians but also better known ones been pushed off the front pages of newspapers they have all but disappeared from the electronic media. Their places in the media have been taken by stories of the horrendous fires in Tasmania that, as I write, have wiped at least 100 houses, scores of local businesses and farm properties off the map which, when they die out will leave a landscape indistinguishable from the lunar landscape and unlikely ever again come to life. One hopes not many people will become part of that landscape.
Unfortunately many people will lose treasured possessions that tell their life story and the interwoven life story of their families. In a sense they also lose their life. Fortunately unlike much of the landscape they will recover and, albeit with sadness, start recreating a new life for themselves
Equally fortunately, the stories of the people who saved their own lives and helped save the lives of others in their community have replaced politicians whose time in the media is usually spent castigating opponents as moral frauds and themselves as the opposite. By doing so the hope the impression created makes them certain of being re-elected.
That apart and ever ready to seize the chance of showing sympathy with those who have suffered, politicians are sizing their limited opportunities for publicity by donning the mantle of care for people affected by despair, grief and sadness brought by the bushfires. At the same time some politicians have conflated the cause of bushfires to climate change to help push their own agendas. That said I find it strange that so many politicians seem to have acquired a degree in climate science since being elected.
A case in point is the story (“PM visits burnt ruin, gives grim warning” CT page 2 NEWS, 2/113) by Andrew Darby –“And while you would not put any one event down to climate change…we do know that, over time as a result of climate change. We are going to see more extreme weather events.” Later in the report Ms Gillard said” But the worst thing is if human lives are lost” so setting the stage for an even more horrendous scene that, in effect is all due to climate change.
Naturally she gives people the assurance that everything will be done to help fix any problems.
Now I know PM Gillard is a lawyer but by her collective “we” she makes the assumption as lots of lawyers do that the people at large, in this case the Taswegians affected by the bushfires agree with her. But do they? At times of great emotional distress people often rush to judgment and at the time agree with ideas they do not support.
No doubt zealots of the Climate Change church will use these statements to help lay the blame on dissenters to their climate change liturgy for not changing the world into what they think it should be. I can see it now, a world populated with signs saying: windturbines in opeartion- no low flying plane, model planes and kites allowed in this area’ or: no bathing between the flags due to wind turbines and wave motion machines in operation.
On the assurance side, let me remind people briefly about the Canberra bushfires of 2003 when the loss of four lives was attributed to the fire while just over 400 plus houses were burned to the ground. The ACT Government and senior bureaucrats were castigated in inquiries about the management of the fire fighting operation. Indeed, many bushfire victims were so outraged by the results of the inquiries they took the matters to courts.
While both Government and bureaucrats were found to be negligent many survivors still think they were not punished severely enough for their poor management skills so much so that arguments about blame for the deaths and fire are still alive.
And then take Black Saturday in Victoria 2009 when bushfires cause 173 deaths and destroyed around 2,100 houses and 2,000 other buildings. That resulted in another major inquiry with its attendant solutions. Unfortunately that did not prevent the Tasmanian fire.
Let me end with question. When will we learn that Australia as a country owes much of its prosperity to places where bushfires occur that to help ensure that prosperity continues it must deal with bushfires on a national basis?
Blog: Allan takes aim; web: https://donallan.wordpress.com; e:dca@netspeed.com.au
Blog programme for 2013
Posted on: 3 January 2013
What I am about to write is not a blog although some may think it so. It is merely a setting out of my blogging programme for year 2013.
But first let me say thank you not only to all who patiently followed my weekly ramblings in the Chronicle Canberra pre September 2011 on various subjects (many of which were either about the local political scene in Canberra or the National political scene) but also helped support me financially.
And let me say also to those readers from far beyond Australia’s shores who have since logged on to https://donallan.wordpress.com and commented. Your contributions are much appreciated.
IMPORTANT: READERCONTRIBUTIONS OF 500-700 WORDS ACCEPTED ON A NON PAYMENT BASIS
Let me make one further observation: your comments and observations are of more value to me when you do them through the comment section at the end of the blog or by e-mail directly to me at: dca@netspeed.com.au.
In an effort to give some order to the blog I am setting a programme that gives certainty to what you might expect in the blog during the year.
And so starting next Tuesday 8 January and on every Tuesday during 2013 I will publish a blog on political issues that pertain either to the actions of the ACT Legislative Assembly or Australia’s Federal Government.
On the other days of the week, but not on every day other than Tuesday, although that might sometimes be the case, I will blog about a wide range of issues or give my opinions of people who always think themselves right. Opinionated as I am, not even I think that.
At the same time if and when you make a comment, remember this is a blog site that supports free speech. However, writing racist free speech is not open slather and so racist, homophobic and religious insults are not allowed. Indeed those who write such remarks will be banned from the site.
Let me say to everyone: for most of my life I have been involved in arguments about race, homosexuality and religion and have managed to make my point without swearing or the use of vulgar language.
And let me disabuse if you’re thinking I’ve led a sheltered life. Let me assure you that when and if my memoir Scallywag – tentative title – is published you will see that my life has been anything but sheltered.
That said let me end by saying make 2013 a year to remember with pleasure.
Blog: Allan Takes Aim; web:http://donallqan.wordpress.com; e-mail: dca@netspeed.com.au
Allan Takes Aim Blog 