from Dissent Magazine ![]() Cartoon by Joanne Brooker It's been said that a picture paints a thousand words. When it comes to cartooning, that is especially true. This Month we are featuring a selection of cartoons from Issue 38 of Dissent magazine which reinforce the point being made in the articles they accompany. If you wish to purchase back issues of the magazine, they are available via the magazine's website. Otherwise, we hope you find the featured cartoons thought-provoking. The above Cartoon appeared alongside an Article by Brian Walters which proposed extending the idea of human rights to the natural world. The above cartoon appeared in an article by Ian Mcauley on greater social inclusion The above cartoon appeared alongside an article by Kenneth Davidson which questions how long we can rely on the mining boom to underpin our wealth, how widely is that wealth shared and what are the environmental consequences of such a strategy. The above cartoon appeared alongside an article by Richard Denniss and David Richardson who suggest that competition policy hasn't introduced competition into banking.
![]() I was both impressed and deeply moved by the ABC production 'Devil's Dust' which screened recently. In addition to being an excellent piece of Aussie drama, the factual nature of the story and the recent times in which the events played themselves out made it essential viewing in my opinion. If you missed it, you can still check it out on ABC's iView. Most of us would be very familiar with the key facts: the hazards associated with asbestos, the actions of James Hardie in relation to their asbestos products, and the efforts of Bernie Banton to hold them to account. Familiarity with the people and the events don't make them any less shocking or intolerable now, and shouldn't make it any less shocking in years to come. And the full asbestos story still has many years to play out. The most moving aspect of the issue is the human tragedy, but what sometimes escapes us are: the enormity of the impact, the size of the deception, the extended circle of people this tragedy has enveloped, the seeming randomness with which mesothelioma strikes, and (due to the long period of progression of the disease) the very real risk that it may still touch our lives or the lives of those we know and love. Many experts suggest that we are yet to see the peak of asbestos related disease. It is difficult to blame anyone other than the directors of James Hardie, stretching from the mid 1980's (when they stopped producing the product) all the way back to 1926 when it was widely known how hazardous asbestos is to human health. Equally culpable are companies such as Hancock mining and CSR who operated the mine at Wittenoom until the late 60's. They didn't stop because of the impact it was having on human health, but because it became unprofitable. The Hardie's directors were successfully prosecuted by ASIC for misleading investors with a press release that claimed an asbestos compensation fund was "fully funded" to meet claims against it. On another related matter they couldn't be prosecuted - that through their actions they sought to deny access to compensation for former employees and members of the public who had been maimed by their product. There are few (if any) cases of white collar crime where the adverse effects have been more avoidable, more widespread and more profound. Asbestosis and Mesothelioma are terrible ways to die. If they had acted as they did, under current WH&S legislation former Hardie's directors would likely find themselves facing much more serious penalties. A key part of the problem is that we don't, as a society, accept the idea that 'white collar crime' is a serious offense. White collar criminals are treated differently despite the fact that they can cause much more harm. We don't hold company directors especially accountable for their decisions unless it impacts on shareholder value, and then only sometimes. Directors almost always get their pay rises and their bonuses regardless of what shareholders think. While Boards are not held accountable, they will continue to make decisions that in turn lead to the kind of injustice which was visited upon Bernie Banton and his family, and on the many thousands of others who suffered the same fate as Bernie, but whose names we never learned. Based on the sentences handed down to the Hardie directors, white collar crime pays. And based on the recent court decision to reduce the suspension terms of former James Hardie directors, it pays really well. In spite of their behaviour those directors will be eligible to resume their corporate careers early next year. Their victims are mostly dead or dying. The former Hardie Directors, by their actions or inaction, contributed to people's death, increased the suffering of the terminally ill, and likely further shortened lives which were unfairly cut short by James Hardie. They sought to abandon people in great need by taking the company overseas under opaque and questionable circumstances. That they could soon be returning to any boardroom should be a smear on corporate Australia. But I suspect it will barely cause a ripple. As a nation of shareholders (the owners of these companies), I hope all our memories are very long. I hope we are completely unforgiving. I hope we won't allow our businesses to put profits before lives. I hope we learn and commit to memory the names of all the former Hardie directors (available here). I hope that the moment any one of them seek to gain a directorship or a board position on any Australian company, the voices of angry shareholders will cry out because we know right from wrong. And we expect better. And, I'd even go so far as to say... we owe it to Bernie. ![]() I also hope that when governments start to talk about red tape as if it is a universal evil, we first make them consult widely about changes, not just with the business council. If change then needs to follow, we should insist they do so incrementally, we should demand they are evidence-based changes, and we must keep watch to ensure the changes don't preference the already privileged and further expose the vulnerable. I also hope that we are able to ask government and the regulators to tighten conditions in areas where it is needed. The area of white collar crime might be a good place to start. I was never fortunate enough to meet Bernie Banton, but I know he was a great Australian. I know our country is poorer for having lost him, as are his family and friends. I know that James Hardie, through their action or inaction contributed to Bernie Banton's death, and they know it too. Bernie just wanted an apology, and he should have got it. His wife and family still deserve to hear it sooner rather than later. The conservative mantra that Government needs to be small and just needs to get out of the way would've only served to exacerbate the appalling cost so many innocent people have paid for the actions of James Hardie. Innocent people are still to pay that same price in the decades to come. As things were, Hardie still managed to slip out of the country like a thief in the night. Government intervention was in part responsible for bringing them to account. And without sufficient government oversight, Hardie would still be making and selling asbestos products if they could turn a profit from it. I believe government has a big role to play in ensuring we live in a fair society... James Hardie, CSR and Hancock mining were/are not alone, and Asbestos exposure is not the only issue. What are your thoughts? Added note: next week is National Asbestos Awareness week. For more information about managing the potential hazards that Asbestos poses in the home, click the following link by Mark Enders
![]() I'm not Union member, but I have been and I believe in the Union movement. I'm not from a working class background, but my parents were. I've been called a 'champagne socialist' but I don't drink wine and I don't accept that my actions differ from my words. I've never voted Liberal, and I haven't always voted Labor. If one thing defines me, it's that... I'm a lucky bloke. I had great parents, a first class (middle class) upbringing, a quality education, and enjoyed excellent health (and excellent health care when I needed it). We lived in an area with nice neighbours and plenty of green space, I always had enough to eat and every opportunity to be involved in sporting and cultural groups. I later received a quality university education which cost me a few thousand dollars, I've had the opportunity to work in public health care around Australia for more than 20 years and to meet a range of interesting and diverse people. I've also been fortunate enough to work on occasion with Indigenous people on better health outcomes for their community. In the early 1990s I had the opportunity to work in the US for several years and to see the differences between their health care system and ours. I lived and worked in Chicago, where the Bulls were unbeatable and the Winter weather was unbearable. On the streets, on the buses, on the train, and in the area where I lived I encountered: the working poor, the homeless, violent and dysfunctional neighbourhoods, inequality, and overt racism. For the first time I saw situations where the quality of policing, health care, and education was dependent on where you lived, what job you had, and how much money you made. At the same time I saw a different side of Americans. People who didn't believe they lived in the greatest country on earth, people who expected more (not less) from their government, people who felt there was a better way to run education, health care, law and order, and foreign policy. Great people who knew they'd been promised something better, and felt they deserved a lot better. It made me angry. It made me want to come home, to a place where I honestly believed those injustices didn't exist. At least not at comparable levels. When I came home, I looked at my country as if through fresh eyes. I began to realise that we do have problems, significant problems, with race, with equality, with fairness, with access to education and health, with homelessness, with poverty, with significant numbers of working poor. We weren't a classless society, and we didn't live in a meritocracy. That didn't make me angry, it made me sad and disillusioned. And it made me do.... essentially nothing. In my time overseas I'd managed to slip off the electoral roll, and I was pleased to not have to participate politically in a society which had let me down, or to vote for politicians who were all the same, and who weren't prepared to alter the status quo. And then something really important happened... John Howard was elected PM. I saw in Howard someone who represented the polar opposite of everything I believe in and everything I believed my country stood for. I saw him set about changing the country into a nation built in his image, not mine. I saw things that had disappointed me, start to alarm me. I saw the fabric of my country change... quickly and significantly. And it made me want to do something. I re-enrolled to vote. I was happy to show up on polling day and have my say. I spoke with people about what I believed our nation should be, and what it shouldn't be. A lot of them told me what they thought. And on many things we agreed with each other and disagreed with Howard. I became progressively more politically engaged and better informed. And I voted... mostly for the Greens. And then another big event occurred. The Bligh government was decimated in the recent State elections. I'd seen what Howard had done when he was given control of both houses, and with no Senate in Queensland (which unfortunately was Labor's doing in 1922) I had grave fears for my state. Those initial fears have now been exceeded by the Newman government. So in April this year, I joined the Labor party. I joined because I thought the party needed my skills, my voice, my efforts... my help. I joined at a time when membership was sinking, morale was low, challenging times were ahead, Clive Palmer was trumpeting its demise, the critics were loud and they seemed to be everywhere, but most importantly I joined because... the party's values are my values. When I look back on the things that have made the biggest difference in my life, they have been things which Labor made more accessible for everyone. As physically beautiful as this country is, without all the changes the Labor party have brought this isn't a place I'd like to live. I don't agree with everything the party has done, but being a member means having a voice in the great things I believe the party still has to do. Being involved also feels much better than disengagement, agitation or activism at the edges. I believe there are many things we need to change or improve to make this an even better, fairer, kinder, and more prosperous nation for ALL. I believe Labor is a part of the solution, and I want to play a part. I believe that every Australian has a right to be as fortunate as I've been, and I'd suggest that the Labor party believes the same thing. That's my story. Others have their own, unique 'Labor story'. What's yours? by Mark Enders
A number of things disappointed me about the recent release of the Government's Energy white paper. The most disappointing thing was the poor quality of the protesters who crashed the announcement, and the even poorer quality of their protest song. I believe Dylan, Springsteen, and Billy Bragg were all equally appalled, and we all wonder why they bothered if they didn't have much to say, and weren't willing to spend more than 5 minutes writing the lyrics for their protest song (I don't believe they bothered with a tune). I also felt that some of the criticism of the White paper was warranted. If we're serious about reducing our economy's level of carbon intensity, we shouldn't be exporting fossil fuels in massive and increasing quantities. But among the widespread criticism of the white paper, it would've been easy to miss the praise from some clean energy quarters. Andrew Blakers from ANU published an opinion piece on the website The Conversation on Saturday which offered a positive take on the White paper. An excerpt from his piece is published below. ![]() The 2012 Energy White Paper has much to commend it. In particular, the far greater acknowledgement of the need to shift to clean energy sources is a fundamental shift from previous White Papers. The emphasis on the need for power demand management, rather than simply meeting peak demand though capital expenditure, is also very welcome. The energy landscape is changing rapidly. A fundamental change is the extraordinarily rapid decline in the cost of solar energy. Results from the 2012 Australian Energy Technology Assessment of various energy technologies is included. This was a radical departure from previous Government assessments in that it recognised that solar and wind are on track to be low cost, fully competitive energy generation technologies rather soon. The White Paper notes that “few could have predicted the dramatic reduction in solar PV costs that has occurred over the past few years”. The White Paper could perhaps have emphasised more strongly the large implications of this fact for electricity providers. Rooftop solar generators now produce electricity for less than the retail tariff everywhere in Australia. This could fundamentally change the nature of the electricity business, leading to the establishment of millions of small generators to supplement wind farms and large conventional generators. There is an urgent need to re-think the national electricity market and infrastructure to take account both of the need for demand management and to cope with widely distributed electricity generation. Changes to distribution infrastructure, tariff structures and the business models of utilities will all be required. Local and central storage will also need to be included as the penetration of solar and wind energy rises above the tens of percent range. The urgency for amelioration of greenhouse gas emissions becomes ever clearer. The Renewable Energy Target means that up to one-quarter of Australia’s electricity will come from renewables by 2020. South Australia already generates one quarter of its electricity from the wind, and the ACT Government has a renewable energy target of 90% by 2020. In a country like Australia, a state like Queensland, and an area like the Tropical North, a focus on solar would seem like an obvious move. But Queensland is no longer the smart state. Campbell Newman was right to make that symbolic change when his government came to power. The Newman Government quickly made two significant changes which moved this state further away from the kind of future people like Andrew Blakers see for us all. They moved with lightening speed to clear the way for Uranium mining to resume. And they slashed feed-in tariffs for solar, as well as setting a time line on removing feed in tariffs entirely. I grew up in Queensland when the rest of the country considered us to be socially and economically backwards. And the LNP government seems to have their sights set on taking us back to 'the glorious past'. The LNP's only current (but suspended) visionary member seems to be Clive Palmer (who would've guessed?) who is warning the government against their current trajectory. If the LNP are in no mood to listen to their biggest donor, what are the chance of them listening to academics, or being interested in research, or empirical evidence that we need to move forward not backwards? What are your thoughts? by Mark Enders
![]() click to enlarge Democracy in Australia is in a parlous state. The main problem is a widespread lack of public trust in some of our essential institutions. A recent ANU study has recently published results which give an indication of just how far that level of trust has fallen. The graph on the left shows alarmingly low levels of trust in Federal government (especially troubling given how close the next Federal poll is), in the Media, and in political parties. ![]() Click to enlarge The entire term of the current Federal government has been beset by a seemingly unprecedented series of events, including corruption allegations of two high profile members, a minority government and a rabid opposition, unrelenting negativity, and the passage of a number of contentious bills. It has been a difficult time, and regardless of who forms the next Government, things will likely improve for a number of reasons. It is still a worrying climate to take into the next Federal election, and something we'd all benefit from if we were to see the level of trust improve over the period leading up to the poll. The graph to the right comes from the same ANU study. It illustrates the level of trust people have in their elected representatives, and how much they are representing their constituents interests in contrast to their own. To have elected representatives that very few people feel are representing their interests is effectively a democracy in name only. Of greater concern is the lack of trust we have in the media. Good decisions are based on good information, and information we can trust. The media should be the key source of that information. The decisions we make at the ballot box should be well informed decisions, but in the current climate of uncertainty and low levels of trust in all the alternatives, the election result may turn out to be one no one is happy with. The media has its problems. It is struggling financially, and is continuing to battle with its identity as opinion leader, or information provider. Bias is something we are never free of, as individuals or through the organisations we deal with. The media has always had its biases, and always will. What is important is that those biases are clear to all, that those biases are not too extreme, that people are not intentionally misled, and that opinion is not dressed up as fact. The current media climate (from the blogosphere to the mainstream media) is one that leaves the general population unsure, confused, or worse still - il-informed. We have every reason to be wary of media regulation, but at the same time we do deserve better than what we are currently getting. Something needs to change. And finally political parties. The basis of our democracy. The sides people choose based on their beliefs and their ideology. If we can't trust them, democracy is in real trouble. The interesting thing about the study was that a very high proportion of the population still believe that democracy is the best form of governance. And most people who suspected corruption, or had little or no faith in a particular institution... had no direct experience of actual corruption, or of the institution on which they were passing judgement. The message of the study I believe is that people are disengaged, they are not well informed, they suspect they have been misled, their trust has been damaged, and as a result they suspect the worst. There is a disconnect between public perceptions and the way in which public institutions operate. It is in everyone's best interests that we open dialogues, strengthen relationships, and foster greater understanding. In saying all these things, I am reminded of the ideas in the blog posted several weeks ago by Billy Colless... it's worth revisiting. What are your thoughts? by Mark Enders
![]() It seems we live in changed times, where the average person knows the current cash rate and hangs on the RBA's monthly rate decisions. Have you noticed that the calls for the banks to pass on the entire rate cut (when it comes) are becoming louder and more earnest? The first Tuesday in November is no longer entirely devoted to the form guide, the fashions in the field, and predictions given in the office around what horse you drew in the sweep. It wasn't always this way. While some would suggest we are simply taking a greater interest in finance, Dick Bryan and Mike Rafferty have a different theory. Their article 'The new class politics of financial risk' was published in Dissent magazine in issue 37. An excerpt appears below. The growth of part-time work is part of a larger set of changes facing labour at work. These changes in the world of work include the growth of casual work as a new norm in labour markets, and growing intensity of work, and the general precariousness of all work… Labour and the households they live in are now also at the forefront of another form of risk shifting – the shifting of risks that used to be managed collectively by the state… Workers are now exposed to greater financial risk via higher debt, mortgage stress and fixed costs (utilities, childcare etc) and reliance on superannuation. The state commercialised and privatised many services which were once free or provided at cost, increasing entanglements with financial markets to fund or insure against these exposures to life course events. In the process workers and their households have taken on an additional role of financial subject, or if you excuse the pun have become an asset class. More than just as borrowers, households have been encouraged to think of themselves as small businesses – managing the assets and debts, and the risk exposures through financial (and Labour) markets (the ownership Society)… Capitalism has been changing in very important ways over the last 20 or so years. Many of these changes seem to be piecemeal or one-off changes. Looking back we can now see them as part of a consistent and coherent process, and despite the GFC the process still has strong momentum… It will be the job of organised labour to develop a dialogue with workers in this country and globally about their significance and what might be done. And it may well be that in articulating and representing these new experiences and challenges new ways of organising develop, new needs will be articulated and new sites of organising might be found. If so, it would be entirely consistent with the history of innovation and renewal of organised labour. If you wish to access the entire article, back issues can be purchased from Dissent magazine We have certainly seen a casualisation of the workforce. Work has become less secure over the past 20 years. Mortgage payments have grown as a percentage of discretionary spending. Power bills are affecting people like they never have before. These changes are indisputable. What are your thoughts on the idea that a heavier financial burden is being borne by individuals rather than by the State or the Commonwealth? And what role do you think collectivism will play in changing and even reversing this trend? from Dissent Magazine
by Mark Enders ![]() I for one am all at once disturbed, tired, and disappointed with the quality of debate around migration in general, and around asylum seeker policy in particular. Orderly migration, border security, and the safety of asylum seekers are all important issues, but the system we now have in place seems to be driven by fear, mis-representation, and the current national political climate. It is hard to make the case that we are ticking the boxes for asylum seeker safety (if we keep them off boats by keeping them locked up in isolated locations are we harming them just the same?), meeting our international obligations, promoting ourselves as a generous and compassionate nation, or even acting in a way that we are all proud of. But that's another discussion. I'd rather take a moment to focus on how much immigrants enrich our nation. Most of us are migrants or descended from migrants. Many of our high achievers are immigrants... I'm sure I don't need to provide a list, we all appreciate that it would be a very long one. Migrants have enriched our culture. Just here in Townsville we recently celebrated Greek Fest which was another enjoyable and successful event. Migrants helped us build the Snowy River scheme. Migrant neighbourhoods in places like Sydney and Melbourne offer us rich experiences, and are places we willingly travel to. At the markets in Flinders St on a Sunday, we can taste food from Russia, Thailand, Brazil, and Germany. But rather than rely purely on selected examples of the advantages, or focusing on anecdotal accounts of the benefits, it is perhaps better to rely on more tangible evidence. The Conversation website recently posted an article by Charis Palmer titled 'Census Data tells immigration story: Experts' An excerpt is published below: The latest data from the 2011 Census reveals Australia’s unskilled workforce is on the decline, there’s been a 52.8% jump in people with a postgraduate degree since the 2006 Census, and more Australians are employed in the health care and social assistance industry than ever before. Dr Healy, who is a research fellow in the Centre for Population and Urban Research at Monash University, said all of these trends could be linked back to Australia’s immigration program. “Even in the face of serious economic decline, the Rudd Government broke with the historic pattern of Australian governments (in difficult times) and pushed net overseas migration to extraordinarily high levels,” Dr Healy said. He added that immigrants as a group were more skilled than the general Australian population. “The skill level of the population in general is signficantly due to the selection process for immigration,” Dr Healy said. International migration is likely to be a factor in the jump in people with a postgraduate degree said Nick Parr, associate professor in demography at Macquarie University. “Migrants into Australia have tended to have higher levels of education than the already resident population,” Professor Parr said. The data also showed an increase in workforce participation, particularly among older women. The full article can be accessed by clicking this link Solving the asylum-seeker and migration issues that we are facing is difficult. I don't believe that there is a perfect outcome, but if we change the conversation, maybe we can agree on better policy. To take a step along the path to better outcomes for all, I'd suggest that it is high time that we moved past the emotion and the fear driven debate, and took some time to look at the facts and think in terms of what is best for our nation, combined with what is in the best interests of those who seek to become one of us. What are your thoughts? |
Blog InformationEmail: [email protected]
Other BlogsAustralian Labor Party
Queensland Labor Townsville Blog Antony Green's blog Café Whispers Feeding the Chooks firstblogonthemoon Official LNP NQ blog Only the Depth Varies Pollytics Poll Bludger Readfearn The Failed Estate The Monthly The Stump The Political Sword Media: ABC NQ Magnetic Times Townsville Bulletin Townsville News Online Archives
September 2014
Categories
All
|