Pearls and Irritations

John Menadue

  • What the Subtitles Say. Guest blogger Greg from Cottesloe

    Here’s a popular generalisation. Subtitles or dubbing? Americans prefer dubbing of foreign films because it demonstrates that even Shaolin monks can speak English with a Bronx accent if they try hard enough. The fact that the lips keep on moving seconds after the voice stops merely adds to the mystery and allure of these foreigners. The smart set however likes subtitles because they add to the je ne sais quoi of the foreign experience of going to a film festival at the Cinema Paradiso.
    Dubbing or subtitles, they provide both access to foreign films and to foreign news and opinion, albeit that the latter is observed more in the breach on Australian TV.
    But our TV stations, including the ABC and SBS, have found another use for subtitles; helping us understand English that they believe we might find hard to understand in the middle of mainstream English programmes. The subtitles seem to be there to deal with strange accents, speech defects and loud ambient noise.
    Ostensibly this helps migrants, the elderly and the deaf better enjoy their TV – all worthy stuff if it stopped there. But it doesn’t stop there; not only foreigners with thick accents but even our own aborigines get subtitled, have their version of our common language branded as inferior and barely intelligible to the rest of us. On the other hand, regional UK accents seem to be OK for migrants, the elderly and the deaf. Some of these brogues are so thick you could cut them with a knife but they nevertheless escape the sneer of the subtitle. Some are even heard from announcers on the ABC.
    So what’s going on here? Is this an honest attempt to improve communication in a multicultural Australia? If so, let’s see more subtitles to help the migrants and others understand what’s being said by some non – Australian but native speakers of English with a rich syrupy accent. And I for one would strongly prefer to listen really, really closely and directly to what aborigines are saying without the patronising help of subtitles.
    There’s another explanation of course, the idea that subtitles are a quiet assertion of white Anglo superiority. All white and Anglo speakers of English are by definition correct while a dark skin automatically puts you under the neon sign of subtitles.
    Would this idea be news to aborigines and many migrants, I wonder?
    Greg from Cottesloe

     

  • The Greens and Asylum Seekers. How the ‘perfect’ became the enemy of the ‘good’.

    The policy ‘purity’ of the Greens has helped deliver us Nauru and Manus where asylum seekers are suffering. Furthermore, and as the former Secretary of the Department of Immigration told us last year, the Nauru/Manus approach would not work again to deter asylum seekers. That now seems tragically borne out by more tragedies at sea

    In the Senate last year, the Greens voted with the Coalition to defeat Government legislation which would have allowed cooperation between the Malaysian Government, UNHCR and the Australian Government on processing in Malaysia. This legislation was in response to the High Court striking down the Malaysian agreement.  As a result of the combined actions of the High Court and the Greens in the Senate, we saw a three-fold increase in boat arrivals.

    The Greens say that they believe in a regional framework on asylum seekers, as we all do. But they rejected a key building block, the agreement with Malaysia, which would have been a feature of a developing regional framework. As a result of the collapse of the Malaysian Agreement, the Government sided with the Coalition and amongst other changes, agreed to the reopening of Nauru and Manus which many had hoped was dead and buried for ever. The Greens stood aside and preferred to throw rocks

    The Greens must bear a heavy responsibility for what is now happening in Nauru /Manus and at sea. They played to the gallery of some of the NGOs rather than working on an acceptable compromise involving Malaysia. The ‘perfect’ became the enemy of the ‘good’.

    The UNHCR has said that it will not have a bar of Nauru / Manus. In contrast the agreement with Malaysia was described by the Regional Director of UNHCR in Australia to the Australian Parliament on 30 September 2011 in the following terms.

    ‘Many persons of concern to UNHCR stand to benefit from this program (with Malaysia) by having their status regularised. It would mean all refugees in Malaysia would, in addition to their registration and ID documents from UNHCR, be registered with the government’s immigration data base and thus protected from arbitrary arrest and detention. It would also mean that all refugees in Malaysia would have the right to work on a par with legal migrants in the country. This would also entitle them to the same insurance and health schemes as documented for legal migrant workers.’

    For Malaysia this agreement was quite remarkable progress. This is in a country that has a burden of much larger numbers of refugees than we have and is much poorer. But because the Agreement with Malaysia was not enshrined in law it was discounted.

    The Malaysian Agreement is now in abeyance. It would need to be updated and revised, beginning first in the Australian Parliament. And of course, its effectiveness would depend on good implementation. There is no doubt however that if implemented well it would be a significant step forward.

    The asylum seekers languishing in Nauru / Manus are paying a heavy price for the posturing of the Greens with their policy purity.

    John Menadue

  • Sexual abuse in the Catholic Church

    ‘There is nothing on this earth as ugly as the Catholic Church

    And nothing so beautiful’ (Cardinal John Henry Newman)

    A letter to fellow members of St Mary Magdalene’s Parish, Rose Bay

    I have found great beauty in the Catholic Church. Inspired by the Eucharist, I joined the Catholic Church over 30 years ago. That inspiration remains. Despite its failures the Church remains for me the greatest influence for good in the world. I am grateful for its worldwide works of justice, mercy and charity. At the local parish level I have found wise and generous leadership along with a pulsing, lively and loving community of believers. I hold in highest affection the women and particularly the Sisters in the Church who day after day “keep the show on the road”. I will never leave this Church. But I am greatly disturbed by the state of affairs into which we have allowed the Church to drift.

    The problem of Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church

    This abuse is the ultimate in the violation of the human person, the human spirit and the soul. It is an appalling betrayal of trust by priests, religious and some lay people. Many parents were too ashamed to report rapists to the police.

    Sexual abuse is an awful part, but it is only a part of a wider problem – the systemic abuse of clerical power.

    The former president of the Australian Bishops’ Conference, Philip Wilson, said only recently that the abuse crisis is ‘the biggest crisis in the history of the Catholic Church in Australia”.

    This abuse has stemmed from many factors and influences.

    • We have a male Church; a very patriarchal church. Sexual abuse is largely but not entirely a male problem. Blokes get the rank and glory and make most of the mistakes
    • Obligatory celibacy.
    • The mystique of priesthood – ‘Yes Father, No Father’. Adult Christians should behave as adults and recognise both the strengths and weaknesses in each of us.
    • The issue of abuse was made public by the secular media and not the Church. The secular media has done the Church a great service.
    • Both John Paul II and Cardinal Ratzinger (Head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith and later Benedict XVI) ignored the issue. They were silent or defensive. This is an unpalatable fact that we must face. The cardinals and bishops gave loyalty to silent Popes. Criminality was allowed to fester. Our leadership let us down. The Vatican lost touch with the Church of the Faithful.
    • The Vatican was able to do this because it was not really accountable. The Curia lives in a remote thought bubble. It could hardly be said to comprise “servants of the servants of God”. Problems continued because power and control flowed from the top, as in all absolute monarchies.
    • Many of the hopes of Vatican II have been allowed to run into the sand…. synods of dioceses, local bishops’ conferences, global collegiality and much more.
    • The faithful were ignored or remained quiet. Maybe we have got the church today that we deserve. It is certainly not the church that Christ wants. We should remember that the early Catholic Church in Australia was a lay Church. Priests and the hierarchy came later.
    • It would be a mistake to shrug our shoulders and say that these horrific crimes against children can be left to the new Pope. The evidence is that the silence and avoidance under John Paul II was continued under Benedict XVI.
    • Too often the Church passed the problem to the police and lawyers when it was fundamentally a moral and governance issue for the Church itself.

    ‘The problem’ is not a passing issue. The Royal Commission will be with us for at least three years and probably more.

    Expressing sorrow and contrition will be essential, but it will not be sufficient. The apology by Kevin Rudd and the Australian Government and people to the Stolen Generation and indigenous people was genuine and heartfelt. We all felt better about ourselves. But has much changed as a result? Indifference seems to have won the day! Will it win again in this crisis in the Catholic Church?

    Until there is genuine reform, the church will continue in its trauma.

    The whole Church, including the large majority of priests and religious, is tainted by this scandal.

    Many Catholics are discouraged.

    At the local level we are in a sense living in a parallel church that is out of alignment with the hierarchical church.

    What could we do in the parish?

    1. Continue to express sorrow for the damage the church has done to so many people. This should be expressed consistently in Prayers of the Faithful. The prayers should extend to those giving evidence to the Royal Commission that they find the courage to speak fearlessly. There should be regular reports on what the parish is doing about the issue.
    2. Establish a fund to ensure that people who have been damaged are properly advised and referred to professionals in the field. Appoint a lay person – perhaps a parent – to co-ordinate this work.
    3. Elect, not select, members of the parish council and the finance committee.
    4. Appoint a parish group to consult with the Archdiocese on future appointments of the parish priest
    5. Issue a statement by the parish on how we would like to see the church reformed. This would presumably include such matters as the selection of bishops, women in the church and obligatory celibacy. This would be forwarded to other parishes, the archdiocese and the papal nuncio.
    6. Call specifically for annual archdiocesan synods which have a majority of lay people. The Anglican model could be helpful.
    7. Make a submission to the Royal Commission focusing on the issue of accountability, not just within the Catholic Church, but in all organisations dealing with young and vulnerable people.
    8. Cooperate as much as possible with other parishes.
    9. Organise a series of parish/public meetings on abuse. Possible speakers – Bishop Geoffrey Robinson, Christine Kenneally., Danny Gilbert and Frank Sullivan.
    10. Review the extent to which money raised in the parish is paid to the archdiocese. We should be very careful about paying parish money to organisations that are not accountable to us. This leverage should be exercised. Perhaps it is the only real leverage we have.

    Christ will not abandon the Church, but we must be resolute and courageous in the crisis we face. This is unknown territory. There will be risks, but there will be rewards if we can build a reformed Church. It will then be a Church of greater beauty and less ugliness.

    Peace be with you

    John Menadue

    13 February 2013, Ash Wednesday

  • Work rights for asylum seekers. Guest blogger: Bruce Kaye

    Having had direct experience of asylum seeker hosting it has become obvious at the ground level that the ‘no work’ policy introduced in August last year by the Federal Government is creating confusion and misery for the asylum seekers and frustration and despair for those involved in hosting.

    As citizens, my wife and I are happy to continue to provide this hospitality.  These people are in great need.  However it seems to us that the Government’s policy of not allowing these people to work simply makes it impossibly hard for them to live in the community at the end of their six weeks of homestay hospitality.  Not able to work they are driven into poverty, or the black economy. In any case dependence on Government resources is perpetuated instead of wages being earned and taxes paid.

    In order to live in the community they must be able to work.

    The new policy from August last year may look tough in the current political games of one upmanship, but it is inhumane and cruel and it simply will not achieve any effective settlement process for these people.  The longer they are forced into dependency and almost certain poverty by this new policy the harder it will be for them eventually to integrate into our society as contributing citizens.

    From where we are as hosts the new policy makes our contributions seem quite fruitless.  Extending humane personal hospitality to asylum seekers stands out in stark contrast to the cruel policy of the government.  As citizens and hosts that is a stark contradiction that is painfully embarrassing.

    Our experience on the ground shows the post August policy to be counter productive and makes us as Australian citizens feel really quite ashamed of our government.

    Bruce Kaye

  • The asylum seekers that we don’t talk about

    In the last ten years, 65,000 asylum seekers have come to Australia. 47,000 or 72% of those came by air. Only 28% came by boat. In the last five years, we received 47,000 asylum seekers, of whom 28,000 or 62% came by air. Only 38% came by boat. In only one year, in the last ten years, 2011-12, did we have more boat arrivals (7,379) than air arrivals (7,036). Air arrivals are fairly steady at about 5,000 to 7,000 p.a. whilst boat arrivals fluctuate more.

    Yet for years our whole debate is about boats, boats and more boats. As Fran Kelly on the ABC put it recently, ‘boats are coming thick and fast’. The fact is that many more asylum seekers come by air then by boat.

    Why does our public discussion focus overwhelmingly on boat arrivals? I suggest two reasons. The first is that the media is overwhelmingly focussed on the toxic politics of asylum seekers, rather than the facts and the policy implications. It is so easy to play to the latent fear in all of us and in our community about boats arriving on our doorstep. The media has little interest or understanding of the critical issues and features of the world wide flows of asylum seekers and refugees. It is domestic politics from beginning to end.

    The second is that stories about boat arrivals with scruffy looking asylum seekers in yellow vests are much easier to illustrate. Pictures are always available, often old file pictures. But asylum seekers coming by air through our international airports between 6am and 10pm at the rate of about 100  every day of the year are more difficult to locate  and even harder to get pictures about. But they are trickling through all the time with little public or media interest. The lazy media works on the proposition that if there are no easy pictures there cannot be a story.

    How do asylum seekers come to Australia by air? In 2011-12, 40% came on student visas and 35% on visitor or working holiday visas. Some had genuine plans as students and visitors. Many did not. With the help of ‘agents’ they are persuaded to make false claims about their intentions in coming to Australia and are issued with visas. That is how they get into the country. Once here they then apply for refugee status.

    Where do most of these air arrivals seeking asylum come from? In 2011-12, 17% came from China which is always top of the list, 13% from India and 10% from Pakistan. Southern China has a particularly active people-smuggling network.

    How do air and boat arrivals compare in refugee determination? In the last 4 years the final refugee determination rate for air arrivals was 46%. For boat arrivals it was 89%. That is not to say that there are not many deserving asylum seekers amongst air arrivals. But we focus our attention and hostility towards boat arrivals who have double the ‘success rate’ of air arrivals in refugee determination.

    Our politicians and our media have a lot to answer for in the way that public debate is skewed in this country against boat arrivals.

    John Menadue

  • Minister! Let them work.

    There is a growing number of asylum seekers living in the community who are not allowed to work. The new Minister, Brendan O’Connor, could put his stamp on the portfolio by immediately making a decision to allow almost all asylum seekers to work. The present policy of denial of work is cruel, denies the dignity of people and does not deter future asylum seekers.

    The number who are not allowed to work is growing as the government, quite rightly, is releasing from immigration detention and into the community, asylum seekers on bridging visas. There are presently about 7,000 asylum seekers in immigration detention, of whom about 5,000 are adult males. Potentially and hopefully many of these people will be released progressively into the community. In future as more boat people are released into the community so work rights will become more important.

    Official figures are hard to find, but it seems that releases of asylum seekers from detention into the community are running at an average of about 1,000 per month. In some months, it is much higher.

    I am a patron of the Asylum Seekers Centre in Sydney. Currently 46% of our clients have no work rights. That proportion and the total number is increasing rapidly. It is up dramatically over the last 12 months where more and more of our clients come by boat rather than air. Basically, asylum seekers who come by air are allowed to work but those who come by boat are not allowed to work. What a nonsense this is, particularly as boat arrivals have about double the rate of successful refugee determination as those who come by air.

    Asylum seekers living in the community are already placing heavy strains on the NGO’s that are struggling to help. These strains will increase on such organizations as Red Cross and the Asylum Seeker Centres.

    But the burden on the individual is the greatest worry. Most asylum seekers have escaped from terror and violence and many are traumatised. To deny them work rights is likely to worsen their mental state. It makes it harder for others to help them if they are forced into idleness. They are often humiliated within their family.

    In this situation, desperate asylum seekers are likely to feel they have no other choice but to take up work illegally. In this situation they are often exploited. This will give the Scott Morrisons, Alan Jones and the Ray Hadleys of this world another opportunity to demonize ‘illegals and criminals’.

    There is a persistent myth that refusal of work rights and other penalties will deter new asylum seekers and particularly boat people. But there is no evidence whatsoever that this deterrent works. In almost all cases asylum seekers are escaping appalling conditions, from the Taliban for example. Those situations are far worse than anything that we can throw at them.

    Beyond denial of work rights, there are many other hardships and handicaps forced upon asylum seekers. They often have limited accommodation help and some have no access to Medicare. Under the government’s policy of ‘no advantage”, many could be waiting in the community for five years.

    The ‘support’ arrangements for asylum seekers in the community are chaotic and quite arbitrary. Arja Keski-Nummi and I have described them as Kafkaesque. (See article in publish.pearlsandirritations.com) These arrangements are a mass of contradictions wrapped up in confusion. But one thing the Minister could do, and do quickly, would be to cut through this confusion and allow almost all asylum seekers to work. Taxpayers would benefit. Allowing asylum seekers to work in the community would be far cheaper than keeping them locked up in those hellholes of Immigration Detention Centres. Those centres chew up enormous amounts of money as well as very vulnerable people.

    Historically Labor governments have espoused the dignity of labour and the self-esteem personally and in the community that goes with hard work. Where are those values today?

    Asylum seekers are not criminals. They are courageous people who have taken great risks in escaping persecution for the sake of safety for themselves and their children.  Asylum seekers and particularly their children, become great citizens and contributors to this country.

    Minister, please grasp the nettle and let asylum seekers work. Start a breakthrough in this toxic political approach to asylum seekers .Australia can do better than this. We have shown it in the past

    John Menadue

  • Corporate bullies

    Public debate and the development of good policy are being steadily corrupted by the success of powerful lobby groups to quickly close down debate and force retreat by the government. This tactic is assisted by a timid government and a media that has little understanding of policy issues, and is only too prepared to recycle the handouts from powerful groups.

    Last week we saw this bullying in full view. The government floated the suggestion that the concessions handed out to wealthy retirees in tax concessions by Peter Costello in 2007 should be reconsidered. The superannuation lobby went into immediate attack. Pauline Vamos, the CE of the Association of Superannuation Funds in Australia said that for people to have a really comfortable standard of living throughout their retirement, they should have at least $2.5 million as the balance in their superannuation account. Ian McAuley has estimated that this would give the retiree a tax-free pension of about $160,000 p.a. Such a retiree would normally not have a home mortgage and the cost of raising children and their education.  In the face of this nonsense by Pauline Vamos and others, the government quickly retreated and said that it had no intention of taxing any capital sums in superannuation. Tax avoidance won the day, quickly and comprehensively.

    In the SMH last week, Ross Gittins wrote about the ‘four industries that rule Australia’ – superannuation funds, miners, bankers and the gambling industry.  I would have added the health industry.

    In 2009, the miners ran a highly successful and cheap advertising campaign ($22 million) to defeat the Rudd Government’s resources super profits tax. They also helped to get rid of the Prime Minister! The industry saved itself an estimated $66 billion over five years. We have now been left with a wimp of a mining tax.

    In 2011, under pressure from Independent Andrew Wilkie, the government undertook to introduce strong legislation to help addicted gamblers. But the licensed clubs and the gaming industry went to work and won the day.

    Ross Gittins has pointed out that through acquisition the four major banks have increased their market share from 74% to 83%. They make record profits and continually trouser additional savings by not passing on fully to customers the cuts in official interest rates.  They ignore both the treasurer and the shadow treasurer. They have real power.

    Then there is the health lobby – the AMA, private health insurance and the Pharmacy Guild who successfully restrict competition, protect restrictive work practices or secure increased government subsidies. The public debate is about what the government needs to do to buy off the specialists, the pharmacists and the private health funds.

    The lesson is clear; the large and wealthy groups with their lobbying power can derail public debate and secure concessions for themselves at the expense of the public interest. Too often the government runs for cover at the first whiff of grapeshot.

    There is a public register that lobbyists must complete. It is quite inadequate. As a starter, the public needs to know who the lobbyists and corporations are seeing, particularly ministers, parliamentarians and senior members of the public service, together with the nature of those discussions. That information should be updated weekly. It would be a small but important step in making transparent how corruption of good policy is occurring.

    John Menadue

  • The Bad Samaritan. Guest blogger Greg at Cottesloe

     
    You don’t have to be Christian to get it about helping sick or injured strangers but the parable of the kindly Samaritan does have its limits. What happens when the Samaritan notices the packet of smokes and the crumpled betting tickets? Irritation then becomes outrage – could that be a bottle of liquor in his pocket? And how can anyone be reading rubbish like that? “Thank God I stopped to help him. We’ll fix him up in no time. Let’s start with…….” Most people have started to feel uneasy before this point, sensing that simple kindness is changing into a darker something else.
    Unfortunately this sense of moral prudence doesn’t extend to our international behaviour. Outright wars of conquest are banned under the UN Charter but “limited” actions to “help” others squeeze around this barrier. And they are politically attractive; they unite the simple elements of the Right who just like blowing up foreigners with the secular evangelists of the Left who cannot tolerate a world where their ideas do not reign.
    Democracy is mandatory (a whiff of paradox here?) and for that, read Western liberal democracy. Guided democracy or mass democracy need not apply. And even liberal democracy is only acceptable if it delivers the right answer. Putin in Russia and Ahmadinejad in Iran both won elections where there were few restrictions on voting, opposition groups were allowed to rally and the two victory margins were clear but not ridiculous. Yet they remain very much works in progress for our own ayatollahs.
    For a great analysis of this ideology, see  http://www.counterpunch.org/2013/02/01/the-good-intentions-that-pave-the-road-to-war/  by Diana Johnstone.
    For people who are wedded to evidence-based policy, the enthusiasts for “humanitarian intervention” are strangely blind to the scorecard. Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya have hardly worked out well and Syria is supposed to be the next triumph. The idea that people there might prefer security over freedom is repugnant and is hardly discussed.
    Christ is a risky source of quotes to justify human enterprise. If only he had shut up and left off at the Good Samaritan parable. Unfortunately he went on to say other awkward things like “Do unto others…”, “Physician, Heal Thyself” and so on. In this context, does that mean that people here who are so relaxed and comfortable about our Army doing a big resto job in Afghanistan would have no problem with foreign armies coming into Australia to fix up our indigenous policies (and us)? I suspect not.
    Let’s continue to give to the poor and destitute, both personally and nationally. But understand you’re helping them buy their life back, not tossing them in your own shopping trolley.
    Greg at Cottesloe

     

  • Teaching ‘medical English’ in Vietnam. Guest blogger Kerry Goulston

    Vietnamese medical students realise that English is the international language of Medicine.  They can read it well—all have Laptops or i-pads and have easy access to radio and TV- but they know that they have problems in understanding spoken English and in speaking it. It is a language very different from their own but in schools and at university English is taught by other Vietnamese. Few can afford private tuition in spoken English as they are poorly paid.  Young healthcare workers aspiring to gain scholarships overseas to further their studies realise that there is a need to improve their skills to gain acceptance in other countries. This applies to Europe, USA and of course Australia.  Australia has become a favoured country in this respect: it is much closer than the US and Europe, the time zones are similar and many Australian tourists visit Vietnam every year.
    For the last six years, twice a year, groups of Australians  have travelled to Vietnam – mainly Hanoi – to run a  four-day course in “medical” English.  Each course, managed by the education department of  a hospital, is heavily over-subscribed.   Small groups of 8-12 with two Australians teaching pronunciation, grammar,colloquialisms and medical terminology, use role-playing clinical scenarios in an interactive fashion.  Not all the teachers are  doctors — many are from other professions or are lay people.  Inn September 2012 two Australian Vietnam Vets volunteered to join the group – one had recently had a joint replacement and played the patient to the Vietnamese doctor.
    All the Vietnamese healthcare workers participate actively and feedback has been overwhelmingly positive.  Sounds of  laughter  come from each of the three rooms used concurrently – it is amazing that both Australians and Vietnamese share the same sense of humour.
    The four day course is structured so that the Australians each have 2-3 half days off to relax and see the sights.   The Australian  group is disparate  and interact among themselves at dinner and at a 4-star hotel where they all stay.

    They have the opportunity to mix socially with their Vietnamese colleagues and tour the overcrowded hospitals. This month a concurrent  session is being run by Australian nurses for Vietnamese nurses over the four days.
    Each course is fully evaluated  and the results help improve the next visit. Welcoming and closing ceremonies, presided over by the Hospital Director, involve mutual exchange of gifts and short speeches. The  two Australian Vietnam Vets gave an emotional speech thanking the Vietnamese for their warm welcome-saying “once we were enemies and it means a lot to us now to be friends”.
    All the Australians pay their own fares and accommodation. The hospitals and university provide transport, teaching venues and equipment.
    The visits allow mutual friendships to develop and are rewarding for both teachers and participants. It’s an excellent example of helping people without telling them how to run their own lives.
    Kerry Goulston, Professor Emeritus in Medicine, University of Sydney

  • Sport and Markets. Guest blogger: Ian McAuley

    We are all suitably shocked by Justice Minister Jason Clare’s announcement of the findings of the Australian Crime Commission’s investigation into the use of prohibited substances and links to organized crime in sports. I heard his solemn announcement as I was driving home, past our local croquet club, and wondered if any code was exempt.

    Sport in Australia has never been entirely clean. Most people of my age have enough stories from the racetracks to bore our dinner guests for hours. But we also recall an era when league football was an outlet for suburban tribalism, when a player for Collingwood or Port Adelaide actually lived in Collingwood or Port Adelaide, when white-clad cricketers played on green grounds surrounded by white fences, and when the only signs of commercialism were the vendors of Four’n Twenty or Adams Pies.

    Over the years, however, sports have transformed from community activities to market activities. They have become part of the entertainment “industry”. In fact, government regulators, lawyers and insurers have done their best, through liability requirements, to make life hard for those who are old-fashioned enough to think sport is something that comes together through voluntary activity.

    With the financial stakes so elevated, is it any wonder that corruption has been attracted to sport?

    In 1944  the Austrian economic philosopher Karl Polanyi, in his work The Great Transformation, warned that the postwar era could see a change in the relationship between markets and society. Throughout history markets had been contained within society, subject to society’s norms, and often confined to certain physical or temporal domains. The transformation he warned about was the reversal of that order, when we would come to live in a “market society”. That transformation, which gathered pace with the election of the Reagan and Thatcher Governments, is now well advanced.

    Will our politicians see the sport corruption problem in this broad context – a context which would require them to think about the expansion of financial incentives throughout our society?

    Whatever our politicians do, I think the local croquet club will come through clean. The cars parked around their ground are modest. No one has bought advertising space on their white dresses. And no health insurance firm has bought sponsorship rights to interrupt spectators’ enjoyment.

    Ian McAuley

     

     

  • Japanese Amnesia. Guest blogger: Susan Menadue Chun

    In the Washington Post articles http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/japan-must-face-the-past/2013/01/25/7a9b9244-6713-11e2-85f5-a8a9228e55e7_story.html  Jennifer Lind describes how Japanese conservative politicians have been playing a potentially dangerous game in disputes with neighbouring countries. The dispute arises mainly because of Japan’s inability to acknowledge its past aggression.

    The current Japanese hostility to neighbours is in part designed to distract national attention away from the country’s economic woes. Fortunately, Prime Minister Abe did not antagonise the ROK on territory issues as feared on Takeshima Day on 3 February 2013.(Takeshima/Dokdo are the disputed islands between Japan and ROK). Hopefully, it is a sign that Prime Minister Abe is becoming more moderate. He may even decide not to make any more visits to the Yasukuni Shrine which commemorates Japanese war criminals and others.

    The present hostility to neighbours may only cause short-term damage in Japan’s relations with neighbouring countries. However, there is the likelihood of continuing long-term damage as a result of Japan’s reinterpretation of history which is taught in schools under the direction of the Department of Education. After World War II a new and standardised national identity was created through the school curriculum. This curriculum reinterpreted history. As a result, the majority of Japanese adults, including conservative politicians themselves, have not had access to the teaching of a comprehensive view of history. They fail to comprehend why Japan’s neighbouring countries continue to be angered over Japan’s denial of the past on such sensitive issues as comfort women. The modifying of history through textbooks has indeed affected the Japanese public. It has caused a collective amnesia. It is likely to continue as conservative politicians are now proposing to further revise school texts to reflect their nationalistic view of history. The current damage could be made worse and reconciliation with neighbours could become all that much more difficult.

    The problem runs deeper than the current indiscretions of conservative politicians. The problem is endemic as a result of 60 years of Japanese reinterpretation of history.

    Susan Menadue Chun

    Tokyo, Japan

  • New leadership on Asylum seekers

    Yesterday, Crikey published an article by Arja Keski-Nummi and me on the opportunities for the new Minister for Immigration to break the impasse on asylum seekers. You can find it at my website publish.pearlsandirritations.com.

  • Can the media spell ‘policy’?

    A friend of mine, Ian McAuley, has drawn attention to an election study by the ANU’s Institute for Public Policy Trends. It covers elections 1987-2010.

    The study shows conclusively that our media is badly out of touch with what the public wants. For the 2010 federal election campaign, the study asked voters what were the most important considerations in their voting decision. 52% said ‘policy issues’. 25% said ‘parties as a whole’. 15% said ‘party leaders’. 8% said ‘candidates in my electorate’.

    The media and particularly the Canberra Press Gallery keep pushing personalities, leaders and politics when clearly the public wants to hear about policy.

    Policy is harder to understand and explain. It is so much easier for the media to serve us up a diet of politicians and politics.

    I would have hoped that the ABC would do better, but watching or listening to its flagship programs on TV and radio, I get the same diet.  At the moment it is leadership, leadership, leadership.  I turn off more and more.

    We will have a new government after September. We also badly need a new Canberra Press Gallery that can at least spell the word ‘policy’ even if it cannot explain what it means!

    John Menadue

  • Cricket – Junk food and BUPA

    I used to be a grafted-on cricket watcher. But I am being weaned off. One reason is that there is so much cricket on TV that the quality suffers.

    I mostly turn off the audio and although the camera work is superb, I can’t turn off the unhealthy diet of fast-food and beer advertisements that Channel 9 and Foxtel overwhelm me with from first ball to stumps. I thought sport had something to do with encouraging healthy lifestyles. But the endless Kentucky Fried Chicken, Macdonalds, Pizza Hut and Victorian Bitter advertisements do just the reverse.

    But my real irritation is with the BUPA ads that give me pointless information about the heart rate of players and the nonsensical suggestion that by spending money with BUPA I will  be a ‘healthier you’. Advertising by BUPA is subsidised by the Australian taxpayer. The $3.5 billion p.a. tax subsidy that the private health funds receive goes, in theory, to policy holders, but in practice to funds like BUPA. Without that taxpayer subsidy very few would buy BUPA’s products.

    BUPA boasts that it has about a 30% market share of private health insurance. With the industry subsidy totalling $3.5 billion p.a., that represents a subsidy by taxpayers of over $1 billion p.a. for BUPA.

    Like other wasteful private health funds, BUPA pretends that it offers choice, but it sells practically identical products – choice without variety. One reason why we have a relatively good and low cost health scheme is that Medicare is a strong single payer. Private health insurance has  crippled efficient and equitable healthcare in the US because private funds like BUPA do not have the power or willingness to control costs. Advertising campaigns like BUPA’s take us further down the disastrous  US path.

    BUPA  and other health insurance funds floated  ‘Medicare Select’  to the Rudd Government. This  would have encouraged  many people to opt out of Medicare. It would have been goodnight to Medicare. Companies like BUPA favour the wealthiest, they increase the usage of health services, they undermine Medicare’s ability to control costs and quality and their administrative costs are three times those of Medicare. They have not taken pressure off public hospitals. ‘Gap insurance’ provided by companies like BUPA has triggered the largest increase in specialist fees in a quarter of a century.

    As taxpayers and citizens, we should be aware of  the damage that companies like BUPA are wreaking on health services in Australia. Why should taxpayers money be used not only to disrupt my enjoyment of cricket on TV, but also to cause so much damage to health services in this country.

    Together with Ian McAuley I have written many articles on this subject. See www.johnmendue.com and click on ‘health’.

    John Menadue

  • Handle with Care. Guest blogger: Greg from Cottesloe

     
    When I was a kid, the pictures on Saturday afternoons were a highlight of the week. Before the main feature, the cartoons and even the Pathe newsreel would come one of the top favourites, a government warning on the danger of keeping unexploded ammunition in homes. Mortar bombs often featured; unlike bullets and other aimed projectiles, they don’t miss and they wound anyone that’s exposed. These films had names like Not Worth Dying for and started with a picture of a mortar bomb on the mantelpiece, went to pipe smoking Dad accidentally knocking it over, the house going up with a roar, just the thing to put kids in the right frame of mind for the next episode of Gunsmoke.
    Germain Greer has long been an icon on the mantelpiece of the Left and of Feminism but they might need to have a look at those old government films. Her article in last weekend’s AFR tackles Australia’s alleged love of plain speaking and inflicts casualties on all sides. Greer is non denominational; everyone gets a serve regardless of gender, age, education, ethnicity, etc. And this on the One Day of the Year set aside for mass smugness and feeling mightily pleased that we are not anyone else.
    But it’s when we go dipping into the Rozella biscuit tin of history looking for precedents of our general fabulousness that we come up against some problems. Australians seem to have been more collectivist, more taciturn and instinctively aware of the limits on individual expression in the past and this hasn’t travelled so well to the present  A former Malaysian Trade Minister once commented that Australians often told her how much they liked plain speaking but how they seemed to lose their enthusiasm for it quickly enough when they were on the receiving end.
    And then there are the comparisons with the Americans. One of the staple cliches is how quietly spoken and unobtrusive we are as travellers compared with loud and pushy Americans but any time spent flying around Asia these days is going to make that notion questionable at least. A recent online article on doing business with the US advised Australians to be less aggressive and boastful, to “get the tickets off themselves”. If we’ve got the Americans telling us to tone it down, something is amiss in the self image department.
    So let’s keep that mortar bomb on the mantelpiece – even if it’s a bit fat and old – and give it a good toss around every now and then. It might go off but then that’s what it’s designed to do.
     Greg from Cottesloe

  • Federal Election bits and pieces

    There was nothing new in the timing of the next election announced by Julia Gillard. There wasn’t much doubt that it would be some time in August or September. There may be a marginal benefit for the government in the early announcement. It has some major policy issues to outline – Gonski reforms, national disability and how they are to be funded. Having the resources of the bureaucracy in outlining these issues will be a considerable advantage. Furthermore, oppositions have been inclined to make themselves small targets and hide policy until late in the day. That will now be much harder for the Coalition.

    I suspect that one issue in Julia Gillard’s mind is the timing of the interim report by the ICAC in NSW on mining leases and Eddie Obeid. The ICAC evidence is extremely damaging to the ALP although it’s hard to imagine that the ALP vote can fall much further after it was almost wiped out at the last state election. The best way to make a new start in NSW would be for the federal executive to dismiss the NSW ALP state office.

    The Liberal Party has obviously been trying to remake and reposition Tony Abbott. At the moment he doesn’t seem to know if he is coming or going as he struggles with his new image.

    In the lead up to the election, Sportsbet in the SMH and perhaps other papers, carried a full page advertisement of Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard. There was the thought bubble from Tony Abbott ‘I am going to win big on election day’. The thought bubble over Julia Gillard said ‘only if you back me at sportsbet.com.au’. I wonder if Sportsbet had permission from either Tony Abbott or Julia Gillard to use them in this advertisement? If they gave their approval I would be disappointed. I recall many years ago that a major car manufacturer used Arthur Calwell’s face and name to advertise its product. He took his hat around and got some major financial settlements.

    Whoever wins the election, many must hope for a rejuvenation of the Canberra Press Gallery. It is badly out of touch with the Australian community as Julia Gillard’s misogyny speech indicated. In its group-think, it is all about politics and personality. Policy comes a sad last.

    John Menadue

  • Nova Peris and the Captain’s pick

    Julia Gillard’s action in parachuting Nova Peris into the Northern Territory senate seat  is understandable. The ALP machinery is so decrepit and undemocratic that occasional use of power by the  parliamentary leader  is necessary.

    Party members have left the ALP in droves over the years. It is a ramshackle organisation that is so easy to manipulate by faction heavies. With so few party members it is remarkable that there isn’t more branch stacking and manipulation in preselections. Apparently only about 230 party members voted in the preselection for Senator Crossin for the Northern Territory Senate. But there are over 30,000 ALP first preference voters in the subsequent senate election. So a small group of party members foisted Senator Crossin on ALP supporters.

    But Julia Gillard’s intervention is only a bandaid. She had a great opportunity at last  year’s ALP Federal Conference to put her weight behind substantial  reform. The party was considering the report of John Faulkner, Bob Carr and Steve Bracks to start the process of reform of the ALP. Prime Minister Gillard did not provide the leadership necessary. Almost a decade earlier Bob Hawke and Neville Wran also proposed reform of the ALP machinery, but little was done.

    Gough Whitlam showed that with a party machine controlled by factions and state secretaries it is only the parliamentary leader who has the heft to break through the vested interests who are more concerned about retaining power in the machine than in advancing good policy to enthuse its rank and file and win elections.

    If Julia Gillard had used her ‘captain’s pick’ 12 months ago to lead the reform of the ALP, the organisation would be in much better shape today and the parachuting in of Nova Peris would be much less necessary.

    An exercise of the captain’s power at that time would have included the sacking of Sussex Street. If that had been done there would have been a dramatic lift in the party’s standing in NSW, particularly in western Sydney.

    Nova Peris’ selection will help but it is really small beer compared with the wider reforms that are necessary. Only the parliamentary leader can do it.

  • Rio Tinto – Corporate Governance and Asia

    Since 2007 Rio Tinto has written off $US 35 billion in failed investments. It must be a world record. There are probably more write-downs to come with its investments in Mozambique coal and in aluminium in North America.

    Tom Albanese has been sacrificed but the remainder of the Rio Tinto board are apparently unscathed. They have been too lax with shareholders money that they have washed so comprehensively down the drain. The boards of some of our mining companies in the mining boom must think that they are playing with monopoly money. Booming commodity prices and demand lulled them into being careless on major investment decisions. They became very gullible. Not only have they been lax in investment decisions but they have been careless in allowing costs to balloon.

    The board of Rio Tinto oversaw the company’s operations in China when the iron ore price quadrupled. But in the business euphoria, Rio Tinto took its eyes off the ball and left local staff in charge. Four of Rio’s staff in China admitted to bribery in a Chinese court. They are now languishing in Chinese jails for up to 14 years. This sorry performance was described by our former Ambassador in Beijing, Geoff Raby, as a ‘management failure’. He was being polite. It was a debacle. So far it is not clear that any senior executives or board members have been held accountable.

    Sam Walsh was on the board of Rio at the time he headed Rio’s iron ore division, with its substantial trade with China. He is now the CEO of the whole organisation replacing TomAlbanese.

    It is also suggested that the problems in Mozambique related in part to Rio’s management style, including its relations with the Mozambique government. Rio did not appoint Portuguese speaking executives in Mozambique to manage the business.

    Our large mining companies have an excellent record as geologists, explorers and people skilled at digging up and transporting minerals but they are yet to demonstrate business skills particularly in countries that are culturally and linguistically different. I do not know of any major Australian mining company that has a board member or CEO who can fluently speak at least one of the languages of our major customers – China, Japan and Korea. Few would have even a cultural understanding of how business is conducted in these countries.

    These large companies pontificate about sovereign risk when the Australian government attempts to introduce reasonable tax regimes. These companies also tell us that we should all be raising our productivity with upskilling and improved work practices. But they don’t practice wheat they preach.

    The disasters which Rio Tinto has brought upon itself were predictable.

    John Menadue

  • Australian media and President Park Geun-Hye of ROK

    If we want to be serious about our future in the ‘Asian Century’ we will need to start with our media. The election of President Park Geun-Hye in ROK in December last year was a very significant event, but it passed in the Australian media with only the briefest of mentions. (The same could be said of the election of Prime Minister Abe in Japan in the same month.)

    Contrast that with the overwhelming coverage we had last year of the US Republican primary, the US Presidential election and now the inauguration of President Obama. The media coverage of the Chinese National People’s Congress last year also paled into insignificance compared with the morning sickness problems of a British royal. Looking at our media, an outside observer would conclude that Australia is a large island moored off London and New York.

    The new ROK President and her country are important for many reasons. The ROK is a great success story. It is a world leader in the digital economy. It is our fourth largest trading partner and our third largest export market in areas as diverse as minerals, energy, travel and education services. With ROK we have vital shared interests in resolving the tensions on the Korean peninsula. When the North Korean regime collapses there will be large numbers of refugees. We will be called on to cooperate particularly with the ROK. Like us, the ROK sent peacekeepers to Afghanistan, Iraq and Timor. Australian servicemen fought and died in Korea in the 1950s. We are fellow members of the G20.

    Against that background the election of President Park Geun-Hye was very newsworthy. Personally, she has a very interesting and colourful background.

    The election of a woman as President in a traditional patriarchal and Confusion society is a major breakthrough.  As the daughter of former strongman, Park Chung-Hee, she symbolises the ROK’s translation from a ruthless dictatorship to a maturing democracy. As the ‘daughter of a dictator’ she experienced the assassination of her father by his intelligence chief. Her mother was killed by a North Korean assassin.

    But all that significant and colourful history and more raised little interest in the Australian media. It was much easier to recycle UK and US material. Our media exert a stultifying cultural and information grip which is more about our past that our future – in Asia.

    John Menadue