Articles worth a read.

Here is an email I sent to Informniac

Sometimes it is better to show how others see your world they can bring a different perspective.

Dear MJ
I read this ARTICLE in our city paper The Age. It is about the changing nature of Melbourne and how success as a city can affect your standard of living. I have another one HERE about the dumbing down of the debate around the election in America. The writer is a very clear and impressive journalist. We unfortunately are continually being sold a pup in these so called democracies we live in.
Woof

2020 Summit

A week ago the Federal Parliament had a summit called 2020. They invited a thousand people from around Australia to attend and discuss the future. If you thought we had a couple of really important issues facing our future as a Planet let alone a country, you wouldn't real know it from the reports coming out. Not to say some ideas put forward, are not good ideas, but they are not novel. One major concern was for Australia to become a republic. Not new, in fact we had a referendum on this only a few years ago. And it was rejected.

Over the last year or two we have been made aware of the growing concern amongst scientists that as a planet we are heading down a dangerous track. Where our norms, in weather which affects so many things, from, Food production, through to sea levels are changing much quicker than we thought they would. We need to approach our responses as if we are on a war footing. We can no longer pretend it is someone/somewhere elses problem. If we have any chance of seeing the next millennium we need to make big changes to the way we live.

See below, for one persons take on the 2020 Summit from Age columnist .

Woof.

The great summit missed the mark on the really important issues.

THE two biggest constraints on Australia's social and economic development between now and 2020 are the dying River Murray (officially solved) and Australia's foreign debt (officially ignored). Neither issue was addressed by the 2020 Summit.

If the summit had been a serious exercise it would have begun with these questions: What are the alternative scenarios for Australia's development, which is the most preferred and what are the barriers for its achievement?

These scenarios might be: low immigration, which would give Australia a better chance to adjust to the environmental issues by muddling through; high immigration, causing major dislocation and requiring high tax levels to replace energy-intensive infrastructure and lifestyles incompatible with a sustainable environment; and, business as usual, justified by our history, which has shown that something always turns up or because global warming will turn out to be a scientific furphy.

Economic scenarios might involve revisiting the protection debate. There are meagre returns from further reductions in protection for manufacturing industry but the finance industry gets fabulous assistance. When push comes to shove, the central banks exist to prop up the financial system when the banks lend to the point of self-destruction in a deregulated financial market. It is happening now. Should the banks be re-regulated? What quid pro quo should the community demand for its largesse? Are financial markets sacred?

The $60 billion Future Fund circulates through the sharemarket, whose prime purpose is to provide liquidity for speculation rather than new capital for new enterprise. Tax concessions to the superannuation industry amounted to $27 billion this year and are rising rapidly. The commissions and fees charged on this financial churning cost billions of dollars. Do wage-earners get real value for money apart from the hope that their retirement coincides with the peak of an asset price bubble rather than the trough?

Are there better ways to allocate the nation's savings to boost real investment and distribute the returns equitably? What about examining the role of the Reserve Bank and central banks in general?

Despite the denigration of Keynesian economics when it serves particular right-wing agendas, the standard central bank response to the first sign of recession is to pump liquidity into the economy. Given the erosion of the power of trade unions, this credit expansion hasn't emerged in the form of wage-push inflation since the early 1980s. This is why the resultant inflation has been expressed through asset price bubbles, which don't show up in inflation as measured. Arguably the social consequences of this inflation are worse — rising wealth differentials and the demise of affordable housing for first-home buyers except on city outskirts.

Given the challenge of global warming and peak oil, debate about tax reform should be focused on what changes are necessary to encourage environment-friendly investment and lifestyles instead of the old debate about the "tax burden", which is completely divorced from what taxes buy.

Measures to stimulate consumption of fossil fuels total more than $4 billion a year. Why should the fringe benefits tax reward those who use their company cars mostly for private use while lesser mortals pay income tax and GST on their public transport fares?

Climate Change Minister Penny Wong squashed a move in the environmental group to recommend that no more coal-fired power stations be built. Why? Already base-load solar photovoltaics and solar thermal and geothermal energy can competitively meeting the full growth in electricity consumption with a $20-$30 a tonne charge on carbon dioxide emissions.

The governance group resurrected the republic debate without touching the central issue of whether the president would be elected or appointed by the parliament. If the president is elected, power will be leached out of the parliament into the president's office, as has occurred in the US, unless there is a constitutional amendment to prevent a hostile Senate blocking supply.

The debate should be about the future of the Westminister system, which is based on the accountability of the executive to the parliament.

The place to begin is the High Court decision in 2005 to approve the Howard government's authority to spend $40 million advertising its WorkChoices legislation. This, even though legislation had not been presented to parliament and was covered by a one-line omnibus appropriation for the Industrial Relations Department of $1.4 billion designed to produce the "outcome" of "higher productivity, higher paid workforces" plus "efficient and effective labour assistance".

The assault on accountability was made possible by the shift from cash accounting, where parliament appropriates money for specific purposes with objective descriptions, to accrual accounting, where appropriations are classified by "outputs", which have become little more than political slogans.

When the budget is brought down in May we will discover whether, thanks to an inept High Court, the rotting door of executive accountability has been kicked completely down or whether the Rudd Government will resist the temptation and restore some credibility to the budget papers.

Kenneth Davidson is a senior columnist.

Back From Holidays

Back from the Easter break.

While I was away Zimbabwe has sunk even further into disarray, If only the world could get rid of Robert Mugabe, he is an evil man who has been allowed by South Africa to get away with the most awful crimes against humanity.

HE MUST GO. NOW.

A guy called Sir Rod Eddington has finished a report on transport needs in Melbourne and has recommended billions of dollars be spent on roads and rail. Read about it here.

Macquarie bank has been criticised for it's methods. I have been saying for years that banks like Macquarie are stealing our Common Wealth, we have been so hoodwinked by bankers and economists that it would be laughable if it wasn't for the fact we will be a poorer society due to their schemes. Read about it here

And lastly a proposal to the state government, is that we have different types of water. Some [Desalinated] would be 6 times the price of Dam water and would be available with out restrictions. You know who will get to use that. The rich.

Woof

Melbournes Water

Here is an article in Todays Age by Kenneth Davidson. Yet again our government is misrepresenting the facts to increase our water costs.
See Below.
Woof

Water policy direct from La La Land

Kenneth Davidson
March 13, 2008

Spurious Government projections point to a privatisation agenda.

THE Brumby Government's water policy is looking less and less sustainable every day. There are a range of options that are all cheaper and environmentally more sustainable than the Government's decision to build a $3.1 billion desalination plant at Wonthaggi, and the $1 billion north-south pipeline designed to divert water from the Goulburn reservoir to Melbourne Water.

The need to generate these additional supplies is based on water projections that are so flawed they border on the ludicrous, or the outright dishonest. The Government predicts a water supply crisis based on running a regression curve through the three drought years of 2004-2006, which shows the reservoirs that supply Melbourne drying up by 2010.

However, on the Government's own say so, the pipeline and the desalination plant will not begin delivering water until 2010 and 2011 respectively; but even if the plant is working by 2010 it wouldn't cover the shortfall projected by the Government.

Neil Rankin is the author of a recent and excellent supply/demand analysis of Melbourne's water until 2016. A science school teacher and member of the Kilcunda Your Water Your Say Action Group, Rankin writes that three years is far too short a period on which to base a long-term strategy, and would not be taken seriously by statisticians or scientific modellers. He might have added that when pap like the Government's predictions are used as the basis of policy to justify spending $4 billion dollars, one might have expected critical review by various government departments. But there hasn't been a word from the experts at Melbourne Water or the Department of Sustainability and Environment, from bureaucrats in the Department of Treasury and Finance, or from the Infrastructure Department. Clearly, the Victorian Government is in the middle of a dense forest in La La Land.

What this army of apologists for the financial engineers who have taken over the infrastructure priorities of this state — and are in the process of taking over the infrastructure priorities of the nation if the appointments to the national Infrastructure Board and the broadband inquiry are any guide — should have done is projected demand based on a 10-year rainfall regression that includes 2007 statistics.

It has taken a schoolteacher and a group of volunteers fighting to save their local environment to point out that the emperor of Spring Street and his retinue of advisers have no clothes on. In short, what this group has put together is a far more scientifically honest. and hence realistic, forecast, with 2007 levels of per capita consumption scaled for population increase and severe climate change. This shows that in 2016 the supply of water will be double the level of consumption.

Even if there was unrestricted consumption and a 25% increase in consumption above current levels, the excess of supply over consumption would still be about 60% in 2016.

The group that has put together these figures has been trying to see Water Minister Tim Holding for three weeks to discuss them. They want to see their analysis subjected to detailed examination and debate. They fear that if they send it to the minister it will be dismissed in a load of spin.

As readers of my recent columns discussing the alternatives to the desal plant and the north-south pipeline will appreciate, a lot of concerned people have been writing to Holding wanting to know why these alternatives have not been examined before the Government commits to what are arguably the worst alternatives available. Some of the ministerial replies have been passed on to me. They suggest the Government is determined to avoid sensible discussion of the alternatives.

The big question is: who prepared the shoddy projections on which the Government is basing its plans? It doesn't appear to be Melbourne Water. If Melbourne Water was involved then there is a complete disjuncture between the forecasts and Melbourne Water's operating and capital budget projections between 2008 and 2012.

The not-so-secret agenda of Labor governments across the country and the corporatised urban water authorities appears to be to find ways to increase the price of water as a prelude to setting up a water market leading to privatisation of water infrastructure.

The peak industry body is the Water Services Association of Australia. It is chaired by Dr Kerry Schott who has impeccable connections with Labor governments. She was appointed managing director of Sydney Water in 2006 from the position of deputy secretary of NSW Treasury. Before that she spent 15 years as an investment banker in the infrastructure area, including roles as managing director at Deutsche Bank and executive vice-president at Bankers Trust Australia.

If the Brumby Government really believed water was going to run out by 2010, rather than using the forecasts as an excuse to set up a couple of dodgy public-private partnerships that won't be ready in time, it would already have instituted a crash program in conservation, water harvesting, recycling, rolling out of rainwater tanks and maintaining draconian water restrictions to meet the crisis.

It isn't. Because it knows its projections don't hold water. It can't be long before voters know this too.

John Howard

John Howard has jumped out of his box. He has done it over seas and in what could only be called friendly company. I have been wondering where he went after he lost the last election and finally it was declared he had lost his seat too.
This is the man who was the miracle PM he had managed to survive for 11 years in the top job. Well when he came down he came crashing down. You would of thought he may of learnt a thing or two after his loss. But no, out he comes with support for his old policies and reasons for not saying SORRY to the Aboriginals. He still thinks signing Kyoto was a mistake.
Why we ever let this man run our country during such important times, I cannot understand. Even his own party is disowning him as fast as they can. He can't understand that either.
I'm sure that if he was to say the things he is saying in America over here, he would be roundly criticised.
Woof

Melbourne Grand Prix

If you say it fast enough it can sound like a male appendage. And that is what it is and always has been. We supposedly won it from Adelaide. Plonked it in a sensitive street-scape, infuriated the local population, including the business owners, who initially thought it was going to be a financial bonanza, only to find themselves locked in and the punters all left their area and partied elsewhere.

All in all it has cost the state of Victoria a bucket load of money. Now running at around 30 plus million a year. The attendances have dropped, but we are not allowed to know by how much cause the organiser can manipulate the figures. They even count all the drivers as attendees.

The main winner is Bernie Eccelstone, he amasses his fortune running the F1 circuit. He appears to be a very greedy man. This now reflects in the way the F1 circuit is run.

The Melbourne grand prix has to renew it's license by the year 2010, and to win a further term it needs to allow night racing. Which of course would further infuriate the local population.

I believe most Melbournians have had enough of this polluting rich mans hobby, and will lobby their government to not sign up for another 10 years. Lets hope so.
Here is an article on this subject.
Woof.

Sorry

13th February 2008. Today the Australian Parliament said SORRY to the STOLEN GENERATIONS. of Aborigines.
Well done, about bloody time. Hopefully now we can build on that appology and start the long road that will bring equality to all Australians.
Woof x
Rudd says Sorry.

Hark Ye Hark Ye Bloggers Unite

A message for all you bloggers who think they can write here is a message from Vi

It is all in a good cause, see below. So give it a go.

Woof

The delightful Sarah Peach has come up with a fab idea.

We are going to publish our own blog book of short stories! She's not doing it all alone, she's recruited myself, Ms Robinson, Ariel and Sarah from He loves me not.

Blogland is such a fantastic place, where we can write down things that have gone on with our lives, and find all these amazing people out there, who, like us, have a story to tell. And the beauty of blogging, is meeting others like ourselves, or even totally different but still connect and we've sort of created our own 'internet families'.

Sometimes I wish I could have my computer in bed with me to read the stories. But I'm afraid, I'd fall asleep drooling all over it, then blowing it up.

So it would be great to read it all in a book!

The only problem is, I'm gonna be reading all the stories before they go in the book! But hey, the rest of you will enjoy it I'm sure!

The title of the book is 'You're not the only one'. (Since you aren't, there are so many of us out there!)

We are inviting you to write a story to go into the book. It's quite broad, it can be from your children, relationships, illness, work, whatever. Or even how blogging has changed your life somehow, making you understand things about yourself that you didn't know before (cause, I reckon blogging is really apart of therapy!) We are looking for humourous, or moving, or inspirational. (or all of the above!)

Here are the guidelines....

• Submit stories that have not been published outside blogland. A piece from your own blog is fine, but nothing published previously in hard copy.



• Maximum words is 1500. The shorter, the better, as there will be more chance of it getting published.



• You must be a blogger and have a live blog. It's open to all countries.



• It must be about something you've been through personally. Amusing or serious, whatever style you like.



• You can submit in your blogname and remain anonymous if you like.



• If you intend to submit, then it would be great if you pimped this on your blog. The more coverage, the more submissions, the more chance of the book to sell.



• All entries are to be sent in to bloggersforcharity@yahoo.co.uk



• All entries must be in by the 29th February 2008.

Oh, and we aren't doing this to make money you know.

All this hard sweat and tears is for a reason. The charity we have chosen is War Child. It's an international charity, since it's going to be an international blog book. We are publishing through http://www.lulu.com/ . There is no upfront fee, but Lulu takes £4.70 per book sold if we make it no longer than 200 pages. We are pricing the book at £9 so £4.30 goes straight to charity.

Because we can't go anymore than 200 pages, not all submissions may be added. But give it your best shot! No bribing will be taken (unless, of course, one of you can magically bring my Chief back from the war to me!)

I'm really excited about this, and I hope you are too. Even if you aren't interested in submitting, it would be great if you could plug us on your blog, and pass the word.

Oh, and if you would like to use the 'war child' logo on my side bar, in your blog (or on a post yourself) please feel free to save it and use it.

In support of War Child, registered with the Charity Commission no. 1071659

Ancient Greeks

I believe that from way back the Ancient Greeks would of have thought about the cycle of nature and how we fit into it. Whether I am correct in that believe or not, it doesn't seem that strange that we put 2 and 2 together and made 4, and when it comes to what you sow you reap. Got the picture?

So it follows that if you start using something that you dig up from the ground you might work out over time, how it got there, and how you might replace it.

Carbon is an amazing element. It effectively absorbs the sunlight and we get to release it either within a few years or as in the case of Oil, Coal, and Gas millions of years later. We have been pulling Carbon out of the ground for at least a hundred years, and long before that, we cut down trees to burn. We must of known early on how these deposits of Carbon had been saved for our use. We may not of known how to replace them exactly as they are found, but we could work out how to save something similar. Trees are an obvious choice, however now we are really wanting to replenish our used energy store, we are going directly to the sorce i.e. solar.

If we had used the principle of what you sow you reap, we should of been finding ways of replenishing our energy use for the last 50 years. I wonder how many other things we are missing out on, just because we can't think out side the consumption box.

Woof.

Port Phillip Bay

Melbourne is situated within a bay Called Port Phillip Bay . It has become a place where Melbournians swim, fish and play water sports. The Yarra river runs into the bay and when Melbourne was being established in the latter part of the 19th century a port was established on the river and fed by ships coming through Port Phillip bay. It has been described as a 19th or twentieth century port, but not suitable for the 21st century and beyond.

There are alternative places that could serve Melbourne and Victoria as a deep-water port. One being Western Port bay which is a deep water bay. Which is literally just around the corner. [See Port Phillip Bay link above] It has towns along the foreshore that could be developed into port cities. In fact a proposal to make Hastings a port was floated back in the 1960s.

As it is, we are just about to embark on a billion dollar dredging exercise, to create a deep water shipping channel for the new generation container ships. Even with a number of environmental impact studies and Federal Government approval, there is a ground swell of opposition.

The Premier [Mr Brumby] supports the recommendations, but I think he is missing the point. That being, that Port Phillip bay is used in a very different way to a century ago. The people of Melbourne don't want their bay side polluted by dredging up a 100 years of toxic waste and sludge. Even the main users of the Port of Melbourne [shipping companies] are not unanimous in their support for the billion dollar dredging.

I think, yet again, it is a case of the experts told them so, so therefore we will do as they say.

There are many ways to skin a cat, and putting a deep water port in a deep water bay may be the best way to go. As long as we insist on using heavy rail to cart the containers to distribution points around Victoria it should work well.

So honk your ships horn if you think we should send a message to Mr Brumby.

Oh and by the way, I have read that our former Federal treasurer Peter Costello, who jumped after the last general election. Has been offered an eight figure annual income to work for the Macquarie bank. I wonder, if his often kind support for their take over plans has anything to do with that. A bit like the former Premier of NSW Bob Carr getting a decent wedge from Mac Bank when he retired from politics.
Woof.