Archives: Letters to the Editor

The solution to NDIS is not to move from a government to a privatised corporate service. Privatisation philosophy and practice is a curse on NDIS. Provision by NGOs is appropriate but not if they adopt the philosophy of privatisation i.e. maximise profitability, overpaid CEO’s and senior managers, high fees for board directors and maximum dividends for shareholders

I read with great interest Peter Kent’s recommendations to reclaim the NDIS from the partial wreck it has become. The NDIS is a brilliant concept with amazing potential.

I have fundamental disagreement with Peter’s core proposal of creating a corporate body. The concept of meeting a care goal combined with a profit goal will not work in my opinion. There’s a fundamental clash and the profit seekers will win; greed wins over compassion. I can see this in the current model where the private sector provides the services. The NDIS is saturated with greed merchants. I’ve cared for my wife for the past 10 years under the NDIS model. It’s taken me 8 years to sift through numerous providers to reach a standard where the care of my wife is the core goal. My proposal is to remove the profit incentive and require government to run the services. We need a total change of cultural attitude inside the NDIA. The leadership needs to be changed and focused on care. The employees need to trained to care not worry about career promotion.

It’s interesting and timely that these women and their children have returned home at the very time that a debate about a Human Rights Act is regaining momentum. Any genuine Human Rights Act would have to ensure that all Australians stand equal before the law. There can be no exceptions, no special clauses.

This recent return of the Australian women with their children from Syria offers a good test. Three of these returnees have now been charged with criminal offences. Their alleged offences were established under the Rome Statute which also established the International Criminal Court. This is the same Court with an outstanding arrest warrant for, among others, Benjamin Netanyahu.

So here’s my question, bearing in mind the need for no exceptions in a Human Rights Act: Will the same scrutiny, with or without the media hostility, be applied to those returning from taking an active part in Israel’s wars of extermination in Gaza, the Left Bank and Lebanon?

The seemingly unstoppable rise of the far right in Australian politics is a simply a pale reflection of what is happening around the Western world. As that world passes its zenith and heads unequivocally for its nadir it is time for reflection by those capable of doing so. The ride up the empire’s rise was for many an enjoyable experience with growing living standards, a feeling of exuberance that we Caucasians were the pinnacle of human achievement and a belief, as with every single empire before us that we were “indispensable” and that our empire would last forever.

It’s rapidly increasing fall is not such an enjoyable experience and has brought out our darker side as living standards fall, recognition emerges even amongst the “bewildered herd”, that something is badly amiss and that the mainstream political parties have no answer for it. That is fertile ground for the emergence of putative leaders who produce simple “solutions” that prey upon fears and underlying prejudices that in better times remain below the surface. Trump is the apotheosis of that in the US and Hanson follows that script precisely. Both simply accelerate the civilizational decline!!

This analysis is welcome in recognising the impact of “the devastation of Gaza” on antisemitism. But it fails to recognise that much of what is commonly read as antisemitism can be seen in many cases to be merely an expression of anti-Israel sentiment.
The case of anti-Israel graffiti on a wall illustrates the point. When the graffiti is on a wall in a public place, the graffiti is just anti-Israel graffiti. The same applies when it’s on, say, an Israeli consulate building. When the graffiti is on a building linked to Israel by religion, it becomes problematic.
In terms of motivation (not necessarily law), it could be antisemitic or it could simply be anti-Israel sentiment. The point is that we don’t know. It follows that we shouldn’t assume that this behaviour is necessarily antisemitic in motivation.
It follows further that much of the so-called rise in antisemitism can be seen merely as a rise in anti-Israel sentiment. One hopes that Commissioner Bell is able to discern this crucial difference.

This article enables focus on the systemic failure of the idea that capitalism and private markets produce the best social outcomes. That is due to the focus of capitalism on efficiency covering failures of effectiveness. As capitalism is focused solely upon profitability as the measure of success, the managerialists trained in the business schools, that have proliferated like flies at a barbecue, have taken that to heart and have focused on that to the exclusion of effectiveness.
The obsessive concentration has been on minimising costs and maximising profits. We have thus become highly efficient at doing the wrong thing. Efficiency means doing things right whilst effectiveness means doing the right thing. That may work with the production of consumer goods, although even there it has led to diminished standards of products and services which reduce social return. But it unquestionably leads to widespread failures in the production of public goods and services, as quality is always sacrificed to profitability.
That has meant cutting service standards to maintain profitability. Where there is a direct conflict between profit and quality in a capitalist system it is not hard to figure out which will be the favoured. QED!

How can the claim be made that antisemitism is on the rise in the absence of:
• An agreed definition of antisemitism;
• Actual objective, quantitative data
I found much of the publicly reported evidence to the Antisemitism Royal Commission underwhelming, consisting of:
• A reflection of fear of antisemitism, e.g., not wearing Star of David, increased security at Jewish schools
• Unsupported anecdotal evidence, going back decades in some cases; unfortunately probably reflecting the experiences of any number of minority groups in Australia.
We have already seen criminal elements take advantage of the fear of antisemitism for other purposes.
I am reminded of the recurring debate about crime in the community, where media coverage can often amplify fears of crime, contributing to a moral panic that may not align with actual crime trend data. I suspect the same may be true of antisemitism.

I refer to John Menadue’s article of 4 May advocating for a national Human Rights Act that properly protects basic rights and which is long overdue. We’re often told our Australian system and Parliament are enough, but when we see young Indigenous kids being locked up, or refugees left in limbo for years, I can’t help wondering what human rights they really have in practice.
Right now, it feels like rights depend too much on the government of the day. A national Human Rights Act wouldn’t take power away from Parliament, but it would mean governments have to explain and justify decisions that limit basic rights. At present, rights protections are fragmented and inconsistent, depending on which laws apply and where a person lives. That leaves too much room for serious rights issues to fall through the cracks without effective remedy. As Australians, we should be asking why, after so many inquiries and recommendations, Australia continues to delay establishing a clear national framework for protecting human rights.
In a democracy that prides itself on diversity, equity and inclusion, it’s a reasonable expectation that these values are supported by a formal rights framework that gives them real voice.

I just want to compliment P & A on the contributions of Fred Zhang. His printed background provided is sparse, and a little vague. His contributions are always of a high standard, and his public profile and circulation should be far greater.

Crispin Hull makes good points about any military response. The US is apparently now belatedly seeking UN approval for a method to clean up the mess it has created.
On the financial side US treasury secretary Scott Bessent has been busy, imposing sanctions on some Chinese oil refiners, and on international payment structures relating to those countries such as China dealing with Iran, while US Minister for Defence Pete Hegseth has been busy interdicting oil shipments headed to eastern countries’ refineries which supply Australia with fuel. But here is the illogic. Bessent is now calling on China to help clean up the mess the US has created in the Persian Gulf.
And for good measure he is holding up payments for oil to Iraq, because the US doesn’t like their choice for their president, which only adds to instability in West Asia.

Explicit and/or implicit privatisation of services continues to threaten the sustainability of the NDIS since its establishment i.e. private ownership and control of services. The ideology of privatisation is assumed superiority i.e. more efficient and effective. The reality of privatisation, however, is the drive to maximise profitability and minimise services and increase rewards for owners,shareholders and managers. Privatisation of aged care, employment services and child care has also compromised service provision.

An excellent article in which many issues are analysed accurately and succinctly but there is one sentence of particular concern which necessitates further analysis.
That sentence is….“But the allies, in promising a Jewish homeland, insisted the new colonisers would have to make peace with the inhabitants and respect their rights.”
This is a reference to the short but concise “Balfour Declaration” which included the words “….it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine…”
Every Israeli Prime Minister and Israeli government has consciously ignored these obligations, and done nothing to work towards honouring the requirements of the Declaration, but, in fact implemented laws and carried out actions to prevent this requirement from ever being implemented.
From Ben-Gurion though to Netanyahu, all Israeli governments have worked actively to kill and drive Palestinians out of Palestine.
One is left to wonder what would the situation be today if the Zionists, seeking to remove all Palestinians from Palestine, who are frequently described as eliminationist, maximalist, or supporting transferist ideologies, channelled their energies into working together with the Palestinians so as to achieve the objectives of the Balfour Declaration.

Other than unethical practices such as forced contraception and forced abortion, I can think of only two ways of addressing growing populations in developing countries. First using foreign aid to help educate girls and women, and second women leaving high population countries, and following the birth rate of their adopted country. Are there other solutions?

I get tired of people complaining of overpopulation without having the faintest idea of how a reduction can (ethically) be achieved.

Thank you, George, for that typically compassionate and thoughtful article. I hope our leaders read it.

I agree with almost everything that Jocelyn Chey says, except for one aspect of one sentence; the phrase, “Our urban schools are full of yellow and brown as well as white students…” It glosses over the main reason that multiculturalism is not working as it was intended.

When the High Court ruled in favour of the Catholic church in 1981, it opened the door for taxpayers to subsidise religious education, which meant that any religion (even Scientology) could set up schools to proselytise children. As a result, we are currently subsiding Christian, Jewish, and Muslim schools (among others) to teach children that they are ‘superior’, and that it is better for them to grow up amongst ‘their own kind’ than to mix with ‘others’.

Not only is this the antithesis of the multicultural spirit, it is contrary to the spirit of our constitution, which calls for social cohesion. Indeed, I would say that it is creating a kind of silo-culturalism that leads to division and distrust.

Yes Jocelyn, multiculturalism is a good thing, and yes, a strong public education system can promote it, but our current education system is doing just the opposite.

The Interim Royal Commission report on antisemitism in Australia ignores the “elephant in the room”: Israel’s actions in Gaza and Iran. Israel is committing a live-streamed genocide in Gaza, instigating war against Iran (with US support), and damaging the global economy – including Australia’s – through rising inflation, interest rates, and unemployment. Many Australians including some Jewish Australians are expressing their outrage by peaceful demonstrations and rallies in support of Palestinians. There has also been some non-violent, but unlawful direct action. The Bondi massacre is something which is completely outside and unconnected with these protests.
Peak Jewish Australian bodies support the Israeli government and claim to represent most Jewish Australians, creating a false perception that all Jewish Australians back Israeli policies. Complaints of antisemitism are used to suppress protest against Israel. Australian governments appease the U.S. unreservedly pro-Israel stance, by appointing a pro-Israel antisemitism envoy, and passing anti-democratic laws to curb and even criminalise pro-Palestinian protest.
If the royal commission is to achieve its goal of restoring social cohesion, it should call on the Australian government to condemn Israeli war crimes, impose boycott/divestment/sanctions, rescind the envoy’s appointment, repeal restrictive laws, and join international legal and political action opposing Israel’s crimes.

Greg Barns has missed the main failure of the Interim Report of the Royal Commission on Antisemitism and Social Cohesion – to not engage with the meaning of antisemitism and free speech. The Report is proceeding with its sabotage of free speech. The report refers to a ‘sharp rise in antisemitism incidents’ without defining antisemitism. Yet, the Commission’s definition of antisemitism is critical to the purpose of the Commission. The Interim Report should have revealed what it currently defines as antisemitism. Will the Final Report define antisemitism as criticism of the Government of Israel? Will the Final Report explicitly or implicitly conclude that criticism of Israel’s apartheid system, its ethnic cleansing and genocide of Palestinians, is antisemitism?

Tony has done an excellent job in reflecting the frustration of ordinary Australians with their political class. These are the words of decent, hardworking Australians who feel they have never been listened to and it comes out in both what they say and how they say it. I wish Michelle the best in her campaign as it is becoming clear not just in Australia, but around the so-called democratic world that the established parties have become so removed from the concerns of their citizens that Independents offer to most of them the only option for participation and change!

The pub trivia test for Australian citizenship currently involves a mandatory requirement to answer all five Australian values questions correctly. It should be revised and include the following:

Q: What is the difference between an Australian wedding and an Australian funeral?

A: There is one less drunk at an Australian funeral.

Even Barnaby Rubble from Pauline Hanson’s One Nation (PHON) party might get that one right.

I’ve got four contenders for “Worst Australian PM”.
– Howard – turned us into a small, narrow-minded nation, promoting xenophobia, racism, and survival of the especially well-off fittest.
– Abbot – the liar, naysayer, carbon price eliminating misogynist.
– Morrison – liar extraordinaire, sovereignty abandoning moron, saddled us with wealth degradation and forever dependency by shackling us to the US via AUKUS.

And now I have a 4th …
– Albanese – squandering a massive majority by ignoring the wishes of the people – not reviewing AUKUS; tinkering at the edges of tax reform; sucking up to the deranged US president at every turn; ignoring climate change; pandering to fossil fuel and gambling lobbies; and the icing on the cake – making innocent NDIS clients pay for his financial mismanagement … which can “be a thing” even if Jim Chalmers tells us he’s balancing the books.

As the majority has shown, we see an ethical dimension to how and where Australia raises funds and disperses them. We care about the planet and the miseries of increasing wealth inequality.

I, for one, cannot wait to see the back of Albanese. That day can’t come soon enough.

Geoff Raby notes: “Both the great powers exercise economic coercion for a variety of political ends: to influence and shape the international behaviour of other states”.

However US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent has gone further, openly stating that he fomented mass unrest in Iran. Not content with that, he is now threatening Chinese oil refiners who buy Iranian crude oil and associated Chinese banks. In addition the US Navy is illegally boarding tankers in the Indian Ocean. These actions only worsen the Hormuz issue and back the Iranian position that the US negotiates in bad faith. The US blockade is a hostile act not consistent with a ceasefire. The same applies to the economic threat to China, our major trading partner, and so it is not in China or Australia’s interest. It is a blundering action which could widen the war.

Paul Keating is right about the moral decline of Angus Taylor and the Liberal Party but he is “shy” about the moral decline of the Federal Labor government e.g. expressing “concern” but not naming and shaming the Israel Government’s ethnic cleansing and genocide of the Palestine occupied territories and now Southern Lebanon, establishing a Royal Commission on Antisemitism to support the Zionist agenda of Israel and not exposing Israel’s ongoing violations of Gaza and Lebanon “ceasefires.”

I agree with the arguments put forth in this article by Stewart Sweeney. The agreement to purchase any piece of equipment, military or otherwise, that might not be delivered for at least another 20 years, and even then, might not be delivered at all, and even then, we’ll probably only get the second-hand version, does seem to be rather odd basic business practice.

However, there’s another, more major problem with these submarines. A major berthing port is currently being built near Perth, WA, at the cost of another $8 Billion. Perth is notably the most isolated capital city in the world. The top speed of a nuclear sub is 45kph. Assuming there’s a problem somewhere near Taiwan, for example, it will take, on a good run, and assuming it doesn’t have to dodge around the whale migration seasons, or get stuck in the shallow waters of the Indonesian and Philippine archipelagos, it will take seven and a half days to get there! Really? Is nobody in the ADF capable of working that basic bit of arithmetic out? And then, surprise surprise, most countries, friendly or not, do already happen to have antisubmarine technology. Oops.

When cherished myth meets hard reality, myth loses. Today we are watching two myths collapse on top of each other. The first is the myth of US omnipotence. The second is the myth of Israeli righteousness. And the hard reality? That would be Iran. How foolish were we to send their diplomats home?

The current war in the Persian Gulf has reached an impasse begging for an interlocutor. We were manipulated into taking ourselves out of consideration for such a role, but here’s a question. Even if we hadn’t booted the Iranians out, does anyone think the US or Israel, our two besties, would have turned to us for such a sensitive mission? Or have we tugged the forelock too often? Have we tried too long to be like real people from Europe and North America?

There is another hard reality Australia could look at. It has the three factors of geography, climate change and demographics. We not only need a new Foreign Policy, we need a more representative and courageous government. As Asia emerges, we could find ourselves on the outside looking in.

With the current extremely low taxes on gas exports one could make the case that both the opposition and the prime minister are purposely damaging the Australian economy by refusing to apply a proper and just tax. And for what? I’d like to know where the public interest features in such decisions.

This decision is a blight on our legal system when our citizens can be extradited to the lawless America who invade and kidnap when ever they take the law into their hands.

It is time Australia had a legislated Bill of Rights/Constitutional amendment to protect the position of “I don’t agree with you but I respect your right to express your opinion”.

I have never before commented on a P&I article, but could you tell Peter Varghese that I think his latest article is the best summary of Australia’s international relations challenges and how best to respond that I have read for years.

Further to ‘The unpromised land down under.’

Another case of the settler colonists thinking that the land was theirs to give away, with nary a thought for the traditional owners.
As the author notes: “the land’s original owners were not consulted.”

Terra nullius on two levels? The Kimberley or Palestine.

My understanding is that during the 1930s European Jews wishing to flee Germany could do so if they were able to gain sponsors in Australia.

Wilfred Burchett, in Passport: An Autobiography [1969], describes the efforts he went to, and the personal dangers he faced traveling in and out of Hitler’s Germany, in securing passage for German Jews to Australia; he’d arranged sponsorship via the community in Poowong (Vic).

Amongst the achievements of Mr Wran when he was NSW Premier was upgrading a run down rail system. Before the 1976 election, Mr Wran with shadow transport minister Peter Cox, took well publicised train trips from Gosford and the Blue Mountains and won two marginal seats – and formed government. Then followed completion of the Eastern Suburbs line to Bondi Junction, and ordering a new XPT train (built in NSW and still operating) that in September 1981 set a new Australian speed record of 183 km/h. This record stood until May 1999 when the Queensland electric tilt train on upgraded tracks reached 210km/h. Further achievements were rail electrification to Newcastle (1984) and Wollongong (1986). Three new links were started, Sandy Hollow to Gulgong and East Hills to Glenfield line (completed) and the Maldon Dombarton rail link (yet to be completed).
Road safety was appreciably improved by the Wran Government with random breath testing This was introduced in December 1982 for a three year trial, then after saving “a life a day” it became ongoing.