Last weekend’s Upper House election result has armed the ruling Liberal Democratic Party with the parliamentary numbers needed to bring about controversial changes to the Japanese constitution. It does not mean the dropping of the constitution’s war-renouncing Article 9 is imminent or inevitable, but in parliamentary terms for the first time it has become possible. (more…)
This tribute is being published as a foreword to the book ‘Not just for this life’. Wendy Guest has put together all the tributes paid to Gough Whitlam in the House and the Senate in October 2014. This tribute to Gough Whitlam will be published by the UNSW Press.
Something very special and wonderful happened in Parliament House, Canberra, in the last week of October 2014. It began as a conventional condolence motion for a former Prime Minister – Gough Whitlam, who had died on 21 October, aged 98. It became a celebration of the political life of the nation. (more…)
It is well known that our population is living longer. But has our health system adapted to this ageing population? Do the elderly fit into the construct of a single diagnosis? Can we identify those who are coming to the end of their life? Do we ask them if they would prefer to spend the last few months of life in hospitals? What is the impact of the increasing number of medications that they are taking? What is the impact of modern medicine on age related deterioration? (more…)
Some right leaning Christian politicians and commentators were not satisfied when a wise man told them you should love your neighbour as yourself. “And who is my neighbour,” they asked. The wise man replied:
A conservative Member of Parliament was walking back home from church and fell into the hands of brigands; they took all he had, and then began beating him to within an inch of his life. Now it happened that a fellow conservative was travelling nearby, but when he saw the man and the brigands he pretended as if not to see and drove straight by. Then another devout church-goer came upon the commotion, but he too ‘turned the other cheek’ and continued on his way. But a Muslim man – a doctor – who came upon the scene was moved with compassion. He stopped his car causing the brigands to flee. He then took out his First Aid kit and proceeded to bandage the man’s wounds, comforting him with words of kindness. He then gently lifted the man into his car, laid him on the back seat, and took him to a nearby hospital. “Look after him,” he said to the medical registrar; “he has received an awful beating. I will stop by tomorrow to see if he is alright.”
“Which of these three do you think proved himself a neighbour to the man who fell into the brigands’ hands?” asked the wise man. “The one who took pity on him,” they replied. “Go and do the same yourself.”
____________________________
The parable of the Good Samaritan is far more than a nice story about human kindness. Rather, it is a sobering challenge to people who should know better: our lives must not be governed by the cultural or religious constraints of our peers – of “my tribe”; of “my nation”.
In today’s fractured political and social climate we must be very wary of fear-mongers who invoke tribalism. Such leadership only provides fertile ground for brigands and cowards. Citizens start to feel threatened and panic sets in as people compete for a dominant identity: it us versus them, me versus you.
Not One Nation, but rather a divided nation.
Peter Day is a Catholic Priest in Canberra.
In July 2005, Robert Manne in The Monthly Essays, outlined Rupert Murdoch’s role and that of some of his senior journalists in support of the invasion of Iraq. Robert Manne notes that ‘of the 175 Murdoch owned newspapers worldwide, all supported the invasion’. The opponents of the war were described in Murdoch’s newspapers as ‘the coalition of the whining’. See transcript below of Robert’s Manne’s revelations about how monopoly press power is abused. John Menadue
Tony Blair is the most flamboyant and contentious of the trio who took the coalition of the willing into war in Iraq.
Attention focuses on what the Chilcot enquiry has concluded about his role, and equally importantly on what are the lessons, which it promised from the outset it would draw.
The British enquiry naturally wished to protect the confidences of Blair’s co-conspirators, who have managed, unlike Blair, to preserve an image of dignified statesmanship and confident resignation that they did, properly, what had to be done. (more…)
Pearls and Irritations has carried many articles about the exaggerated claims for free trade agreements. That exaggeration continued during the election campaign. One of the five pillars of Malcolm Turnbull’s ‘plan for jobs and growth’ was the alleged benefits of recently negotiated FTAs.
An increasing feature of the most recently negotiated FTAs is that Australia’s hard-won labour standards are being negotiated away through 457 visas in return for access to overseas markets and particularly China.
Peter Martin in the SMH of July 7 highlights how little has been delivered through FTAs. See link below.
The Chilcot Report on the UK involvement in the invasion of Iraq has just been released. In a commentary on the report, Paul McGeough in the SMH refers to John Howard as the ‘patsy from Down Under’.
The Chilcot Report concurs with the widespread view that the invasion of Iraq set in hand the awful devastation and death that we now see continuing in the Middle East. the rise of ISIS can be attributed to the dreadful mistakes of Bush, Blair and Howard.
For Paul McGeough’s commentary on the Chilcot Report, see link below.
In the next few days, we will be carrying i Pearls and Irritations, further commentaries on the Chilcot Report and implications for Australia. John Menadue
On Saturday, Australia’s political system crossed a line. From the normal messiness of democracy into fragmented incoherence. From voter unrest to potential revolt.
The implications are clear for anyone who wants to see. Instability is no longer a one-off in Australian politics but a pattern. Out-of-touch political leadership is no longer an individual failing but systemic.
The enemies of the major parties may no longer be each other. Their principal enemy is fast becoming the ballot box. (more…)
While the final outcome of the 2016 election will have to wait for a few days, a Hung Parliament or a Government with a narrow majority seems likely. The outcome for the Senate will take longer but will be even more remarkable with approx. 19 Senators not representing the major parties: nine Greens and 10 others. Probably 30 Senatorial seats will go to the Coalition and 27 to the ALP. The purpose of the Double Dissolution was to reform the Senate voting system and then pass legislation that was blocked by the Cross Benches. Not only will this be unlikely now but a Coalition Government would be hard put to get much of its legislative program through the Senate. (more…)
If revenge is a dish best served cold then surely schadenfreude is best when tasted hot and fresh. As when viewing the tattered remnants of the Turnbull camp following Saturday’s election. (more…)
The increasing vitriol between the Boomers and (mostly) Gen Y has singed more than a few nose hairs in recent years. You’d be well advised to approach any discussion between active combatants with full hazmat gear. And now the #Brexit has brought matters to a head. (more…)
Global Problem
Alcohol, drugs and driving simply do not go together. Driving requires a person’s attentiveness and the ability to make quick decisions on the road, to react to changes in the environment and execute specific, often difficult maneuvers behind the wheel. When drinking alcohol, using drugs, or being distracted for any reason, driving becomes dangerous – and potentially lethal![1] (more…)
In the Financial Times, Martin Wolf says that the fearmongering and outright lies of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Nigel Farage, The Sun and the Daily Mail have won. (more…)
An important new study in the United States has found doctors who receive just one cheap meal from a drug company tend to prescribe a lot more of that company’s products. The damming findings demonstrate the value of new transparency laws in the US, and remind Australians we’re still very much in the dark about what our doctors get up to behind closed doors.
Just published in the leading Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) Internal Medicine, this study is well worth a look for anyone interested in the hidden influences on how doctors prescribe.
Together with a host of other recent work, it adds to the growing mountain of evidence suggesting doctors who expose themselves to marketing strategies – from seeing attractive drug reps to attending sponsored “education” – are doing patients and the wider public a grave disservice.
The new study took advantage of a new government-run and publicly available databasewhich discloses all drug company payments to doctors. Researchers looked at how often doctors prescribed four popular brand-name drugs, and linked prescribing rates to how often those doctors received meals from the drugs’ manufacturer.
They found that receiving just one company-funded meal was associated with a 20% increase in prescribing of Astra Zeneca’s cholesterol-lowering statin, Crestor, compared to other drugs in the same class.
For two other heart drugs, the increase was in the order of 50%. For Pfizer’s anti-depressant Pristiq, taking one free meal was linked to a 100% increase, or a doubling of the rate of prescriptions.
The average cost of the meals drug companies gave these doctors was between US$12 (A$16) and US$18 ($A24).
And when doctors ate sponsored meals on more than four occasions, their prescribing of the brand-name drugs rose dramatically. Perhaps unsurprisingly, doctors who got more expensive meals tended to have bigger prescribing increases.
Perhaps the most important caveat, as the study’s authors stressed, is that “the findings represent an association – not a cause and effect relationship”. Nevertheless, the results reinforce similar findings from recent studies also using the new transparency data in the US.
In March investigative journalists at ProPublica found doctors who received drug company payments or gifts – mostly free meals – wrote scripts for brand-name drugs at much higher rates compared to doctors who didn’t take industry money.
In May, in the journal PLOS One, researchers found almost half of the 700,000 doctors in the US had received payments from drug companies. Specialties receiving the highest industry payments had the highest prescribing costs per patient.
And also in May, the JAMA Internal Medicine published a small study from the state of Massachusetts, similarly uncovering an association between payments from industry and modest increases in rates of prescribing brand-name statins (cholesterol-lowering medication).
The main concern in all the recent US studies is the unnecessary cost to patients and the health system when brand-name drugs are prescribed instead of cheaper generic alternatives.
But perhaps the more serious concern is the danger of doctors prescribing under the influence of drug company marketing – which always favours the latest new drug, rather than what’s in the patient’s best interest.
As The Conversation has covered recently, newer and aggressively promoted drugs can have very limited advantages over older ones, if any, and sometimes carry very serious side effects – particularly for the elderly.
There is already evidence many older Australians are at risk of harm from taking too many inappropriate medicines – and there is a growing push to promote “de-prescribing”, which means taking people off drugs they don’t need.
Compared to the new transparency regime in the US, Australia has fallen way behind. Under new rules some payments to some individual doctors will have to be disclosed from this August, but there are too many loopholes.
As a result of horse trading about the new rules – between the doctors, the drug companies and public authorities – any funding of meals costing less that A$120 will not have to be disclosed. And if doctors who have received payments don’t want their names disclosed in August, they won’t be.
Also, all of the roughly 25,000 events, including breakfasts, lunches and dinners which doctors and other health professionals regularly attend annually, will from now on remain totally secret – until there is regulatory reform.
Consumer groups are angry that citizens remain in the dark, and many doctors are horrified by the wining and dining of their colleagues, with some cutting their ties: refusing to see the attractive sales reps and seeking “education” elsewhere.
As others have pointed out, disclosure on its own is not a panacea, and it’s legitimate to ask why doctors should receive any free gifts or meals at all.
Already there’s been one legislative attempt to enforce more independence between doctors and drug companies in Australia, and it is likely more will emerge in the future.
Until then, it might be wise to inquire whether your doctor still takes the free meals – and perhaps seek your care elsewhere if the answer is yes.
Ray Moynihan is Senior Research Fellow, Bond University. This article was first published in The Conversation on 23 June 2016.
The Turnbull Government and the Shorten Opposition have focussed on domestic issues in the election campaign. This is understandable but in the longer term the Government elected on the 2nd of July will need to address the greatly changed world of 2016. (more…)
This cartoon by David Pope was published in The Canberra Times.
I posted this cartoon on social media today, with links to your blog article. The cartoon was, in part, inspired by your posts. Too often, a good thousand words is worth more than any picture. Thank you for them. David Pope.
See link to David Pope’s gallery http://www.
Warren Buffett described private health insurance in the US as the ‘tapeworm in the US health system’.
This is a current question with Shorten claiming that the Liberals are trying to privatise it and Turnbull calling this a Labor lie. What is the truth? The answer is in the history of Medicare funding. Medibank was set up by the Whitlam government and the bulk billing frees were set at 85% of the AMA ‘Most Common Fee’. The 15% was a discount but saved doctors a lot of costs and all their bad debts. They got slightly less, but the clerical and hassles saved by simply sending the paperwork, and later the computer message to the Medicare computer was felt to be a good deal. (more…)
‘The quality of a student’s education should not be limited by where the student lives, the income of his or her family, the school he or she attends or his or her personal circumstances’.
This is the statement of moral purpose set out in the preamble to current legislation, the Australian Education Act 2013, where it underpins the funding arrangements put in place by the previous Labor government, based on the 2011 Gonski Review.
Bill Shorten has made clear that it is a principle that he and his party support (as do the Greens).
Do Malcolm Turnbull and the Coalition support it – or not? It’s a simple question and it would be good to hear it asked and answered publicly before the imminent Federal election. (more…)
In the link below, NFAW analyses the party policies that are being presented at this election which are of interest and concern to women.
http://www.nfaw.org/what-are-they-saying-to-women-election-2016/
In this article from the Financial Times, Simon Schama (BBC’s ‘A History of Britain’) provides an historical and relevant background as to why the UK should remain as part of Europe. He highlights the narrow mindedness and divisiveness of those who favour leaving the EU. His comments also have relevance for Australia in the divisive and short-sighted debate that we have seen on refugees. See link to article :
https://next.ft.com/content/7c7f2dbe-3474-11e6-bda0-04585c31b153
The Minister for Health, Sussan Ley, advises that, as Member for Farrer, she represents some of Australia’s most remote and disadvantaged communities and therefore understands that access to health services, as well as people’s priorities, can differ significantly to those in our capital cities. (more…)
My life to date has been unduly constrained by the enforcement of standardised practices, stereotypes and official policies designed to uphold the primary care of people with Friedreich’s Ataxia. I was diagnosed with onset at 14; now I’m 54. (more…)
Each time we go for a blood test to investigate or keep track of an illness, or have a tissue sample from a Pap test or suspicious mole sent off for analysis, the wheels of the pathology industry are put to work.
Pathology in Australia is big business. One company draws an annual revenue of almost A$4 billion. And a proportion comes from the public purse, via Medicare rebates.
The industry features a handful of very large corporations – including giants Sonic and Primary Health Care – that typically use multiple brands, giving a misleading sense of competition.
Other large groups operate on a commercial basis but have a religious and thus notionally not-for-profit orientation, such as the St John of God group in Western Australia.
There are also a shrinking number of smaller independent operators trying to occupy market niches or leverage personal relationships.
The industry doesn’t speak with one voice; different providers have competing interests. The key private sector industry body is Pathology Australia. But it doesn’t representPrimary Health Care or religious entities. (more…)
Andrew Robb’s response to concerns that Australia’s recent spate of free trade agreements were being negotiated in secret was to claim that trade negotiations have always been conducted that way. That comment contains a splinter of truth but a plank of misinformation.
Once, not lately, trade ministers routinely informed Parliament on Australia’s aims, progress, and problems in important trade negotiations.
More importantly, trade negotiations were much narrower in scope, solely concerned with the tariffs and quotas affecting trade in physical goods. The international trade agenda expanded in the WTO Uruguay Round. The ambit of Australia’s FTAs is wider still and commonly includes commitments on our foreign investment policy, investor state dispute resolution (ISDS), labour mobility and intellectual property law. Their broad scope now goes to the heart of national policy, law, governance and culture, and carries far reaching legal and societal implications.
FTAs also carry major foreign relations implications; the close economic intermeshing is only sustainable when the other party has a similar economic, foreign, and strategic policy mindset. In contrast the WTO is based, (was based?) around the most favoured nation concept, which goes a fair way to neutralising bilateral relations as a determinant of trade flows because business can readily shift between competitive national sources of supply.
Contradicting Robb’s view on secrecy being normal, DFAT lists 710 “stakeholders” consulted while negotiating the China FTA. They include the Deer Industry Association and the Nursing and Midwifery Board of the Northern Territory. The Australian Parliament isn’t amongst them, hence nor is the Australian public more generally. That’s unacceptable: the ambit of these agreements is such that we are all stakeholders. Before any negotiations commence Parliament should be informed and debate Australia’s agreement objectives and the likely requests that will be made us by the other country.
The opportunity to be more open with the Australian public is still there in the current negotiations with India and Europe and the imminent revisiting of the agreement with China. The FTA with China is a rubbery document, lacking true reciprocity. The meagre provisions on services trade are set for review in the next two years. Also scheduled for consideration is an “investment specific State to State dispute settlement” mechanism. What does that mean and when would it come into play? It would seem to give the Chinese government further additional leverage in any commercial disputes with Australia, something it has in spades by proxy, as most Chinese enterprises remain state owned or state controlled.
Because FTAs are legally complex they are good at hiding their secrets. The ISDS provisions are inherently vexatious, those in the TPP getting most attention. Blandishments aside, ISDS will constrain parliament’s public policy latitude by imposing a potential compensation cost. Mr Robb argues that the FTA agreements include carve outs for health and environment and thereby protect Australia. Do they? TPP wording refers to “legitimate” public policy, opening a field day for lawyers.
Australian Governments of late seem only to listen to the din of money as though that equates with national interest. Allowing a firm closely connected to the Chinese military to run Darwin, our northernmost port, beggars belief. On another tack Japan, Korea and China have all attached great importance to self-sufficiency in food production. For China overseas land investment is currently seen as a means to achieving it. The AFR recently noted that Chinese who buy land in Australia are feted for “a pioneering effort from national heroes” and gain “face”: the individual is delivering a national benefit. From our perspective it’s essential that Chinese rural investment be integrated with Australia’s rural industry and local community, not separate, apart, commercially excised. This implies the importance both of investment scrutiny and joint ventures.
Australia’s past experience with Japan is cited as reason to be relaxed about current Chinese investment. Lost in history is that over decades successive Australian governments adopted policies to guide Japanese investment to suit Australia’s agenda: initially limiting Japan to minority holdings in iron ore and other mineral resources; later advocating joint ventures in thermal coal; actively encouraging investment in the automotive sector; and stipulating that only Australian residents could buy urban housing.
Foreign relations with China will become ever more complex. A recent paid China Daily insert in the AFR included an article by one, Guo Yanjun. This described President Xi Jinping as “opening a new era for China’s ‘great power diplomacy’ and his diplomatic concepts, which are fundamentally beyond the constraints of the Western international relations theory, are based on China’s cultural tradition of pursuing peace and cooperation with neighbouring countries. To put these concepts into practice, Xi has proposed a kind, sincere, reciprocal and tolerant foreign policy towards neighbouring countries…” Effectively that’s an assertion of Chinese unilateralism, hence for us menace rather than reassurance. Where does China’s approach to the South China Sea fit with that?
Contrary to Australians’ market oriented, Productivity Commission, economic rationalist, presumptions, the rest of the world doesn’t view trade and investment solely through this prism. Other countries weigh national interest broadly, judgements on foreign relations and security meshing with trade policy and economic development strategies. The Darwin decision shows we don’t. The inclusion of David Irvine on FIRB is a sensible step, but the process of meshing trade, foreign and security policy needs to be thorough. The incoming Australian government must improve the coordination of trade, foreign and security policies and ensure all perspectives are clearly articulated to cabinet and its advisory committees for consideration, not decided internally within one agency. That now mandates the separation of the trade and foreign affairs functions, currently within DFAT, back into separate portfolios. Trade should be represented on the Security Committee of Cabinet.
Greg Wood was formerly Deputy Secretary in Prime Minister & Cabinet, and High Commissioner in Canada. He also headed the Americas and Europe Division in the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade. He has had a long involvement in international trade policy and trade negotiations.
Labor’s broadband plan includes few surprises and fulfils Opposition Leader Bill Shorten’s commitment to responsibly increase the construction of fibre to the premises (FTTP). At the same time, it would ensure the completion of the National Broadband Network (NBN) is not delayed further.
It shifts the focus back to providing Australia with broadband infrastructure that would slowly arrest the country’s slide in the global broadband rankings. Importantly, this would help business compete in the global digital economy.
Under Labor’s broadband plan, NBN Co would connect an additional two million premises to the NBN with FTTP rather than the technically inferior fibre to the node (FTTN). Existing contracts for hybrid fibre-coaxial (HFC) remediation, upgrades and new construction would continue under Labor. (more…)
This was a question asked of me by the Australian Institute of International Affairs. My answer is ‘No’ for the following reasons. (more…)
That Asian-Australians are making a substantial contribution to the Australian economy is a fact that can no longer be contested. This contribution is of enormous significance, especially as Australia seeks to become integrated into the regional economy.
The issues of how this contribution might be mapped and enhanced are examined in a report released by the Australian Council of Learned Academies (ACOLA). The report provides a discussion of the business opportunities that Asian Australians have, as well as the challenges they face. It also provides a discussion of how Australia, and its major institutions, might address these challenges. The report was released by Australia’s Chief Scientist on May 26. (more…)
It occurred to me watching Money Monster that George Clooney is Hollywood’s Malcolm Turnbull. Think about it. Both are rich and famous. Both are smart, good-looking and smooth-talking. Both exude confidence and charm. Like Malcolm, George has no difficulty persuading us that in any unforeseen emergency he’s the one who can save us from chaos or disaster, even a budget deficit or a dreaded hung parliament. But Clooney is something more. He’s one of that rare species – the old-style Hollywood leading man. A generation ago we had Cary, Gregory, Charlton, Spencer, Burt and the rest, all in their prime. Now we’ve got George. And we’re lucky to have him. (more…)
For more than 60 years, since opinion polling became important in shaping election strategies, there has been for the Australian Labor Party one awkward but stubborn consistency.
Rightly or wrongly the Australian Electorate, with very isolated and brief exceptions, has always preferred and trusted the non Labor side of politics, the Liberal-National Party Coalition, as managers of the National economy.
Incredibly, the present Government, which came to power on the strength of a supposed debt and deficit calamity retains that favoured regard on economic issues despite the fact that it has, in just three years added more than 100 billion to the National debt and trebled the deficit – the two things they claimed were threatening Australia’s future. (more…)