An open letter to the Premier, the Hon. David Bartlett

Nostradamus

Dear Premier,

As you may be aware, the distinguished Australian academic Robert Manne wrote an open letter to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd following the Labor victory of 2007. In a sense that inspired me to put a few words to you through the Tasmanian Times.

The endorsement of the former Premier Paul Lennon is recorded for posterity on the TT’s website: “The award-winning Tasmanian Times website? “F … in’ useless.” Paul Lennon’s response to Richard Guilliatt’s question in The Age, March 12 2005.

However, the Tasmanian Times offers a Forum for the computer literate to comment on current affairs and opens an avenue denied by the mainstream press. It provides a lively exchange of ideas and naturally enough, some malicious comment. To a certain extent, I have been trumped by another writer of an open letter in the current issue but I hope that some of the things I shall say will be interpreted as constructive rather than overly critical. In fact I hope that the Tasmanian Times is regarded with more favour by your government.
Firstly, my congratulations on getting the job – you present as a new young face for Tasmanian Labor. The first opinion poll taken since you replaced Mr. Lennon looks good but it remains to be seen whether that translates into favourable attitudes towards the ALP. We are some 20 months out from an election, which provides you with time to rebuild the party’s image and standing in the community. However, you should bear in mind the recent work of Professor Ian McAllister of Australian National University, who has managed to prove (what to many people is the bleeding obvious) namely that people make up their mind about voting intentions well before an election – 18 months out is frequently cited. The fall of both Paul Keating and John Howard were evident in that time frame, when the stench of political death was in the air.

From the beginning, you have emphasized the fact that you want Tasmania to be clever, kinder and connected. These are laudable objectives but they cannot be achieved by spin doctors and a myriad of advisers. Words need to be matched with actions and not just sound bites, photo opportunities or even the welcome return of community consultation however poorly they may be attended. Politics is all about perception but after a while, the electorate expects matters of substance to be dealt with appropriately by their representatives not by faceless persons behind closed doors.

If I may, I would like to pass comment on a few minor incidents that have aroused a degree of public interest. You promised promotion on the basis of merit in the public service and I assume that would be the case for ancillary staff whose appointments live outside the state public service. Only the most mean-spirited would deny you the right to choose your personal staff. Indeed it would be a cold day in hell if the leader could not select persons in whom he has confidence but was it really necessary to keep Daniel Leesong in your office at the same pay right as he enjoyed under the Lemon?

Secondly, there appears really little doubt to me as a fairly interested observer of the state political scene that the elevation of Graeme Sturges to the Ministry had the hallmarks of paying off one’s debts. However, for Mr. Sturges to rapidly appoint the former deputy premier Bryan Green to head the Tasmanian Road Safety Council was in my book, rather hasty. Like it or not, the situation portended a resumption of this man’s career before his actions were judged by the electors of Braddon. It does not matter how delighted Fran Bladel and other jubilant members of Left both inside and out of Parliament reacted to the second hung jury and the decision by the DPP not to continue with the case, with full TV coverage. There is a saying: “the louder he protested his honour, the faster we counted our spoons.” It is not as though Mr. Green displayed any great talent as a minister – in a relative sense he may have done so but the level of competence of comparators makes for uninspiring reading. His appointment was a disappointment and the timing, completely unacceptable.

You probably have about four who are up to the task and there are several members who are all well past their use-by date. Surely, Jim Cox who genuinely deserves the title of the Honourable should step down now and allow Steve Reissig to put some runs on the board before the next election. And there are others who should be actively encouraged to step aside including David Llewellyn and possibly the well-meaning, endearing Brenton Best, neither of whom can be adjudged as contributors. By my reckoning and it could be generous, about three of the others are pulling their weight: the remainder are either not up to the job through ineptitude, having personal agendas or being burned out. I would even argue that some failed to catch fire in the first place! Lisa Singh presents as a hungry lioness on the backbench, waiting for her moment. In the Legislative Council there is talent which needs to be employed more gainfully. It is a great shame that Terry Martin cannot be lured back into the fold as he is a man of principle. The same cannot be said for Doug Parkinson who appears to enjoy head-kicking but falls readily into the category of total waste of space.

Then again, your room for manoeuvre is not great, hamstrung by the factional wheeling and dealing. The State public service does not impress and it is only too obvious that a number of departments run their ministers, rather than the other way round. Health and Human Services has been the tail that wagged the dog for far too long. It is over-bureaucratised and run by various cliques. In an ideal situation the portfolio would be divided and under different ministers. The workload is far too heavy for any one minister to carry but you are the inheritor of the Toy Town Parliament of 25 members in the Legislative Assembly and when I look behind you I wince at the distinct lack of talent some of which was highlighted during Estimates week. Just as one example, I cite the fact that Paula Wriedt was not singing from the same song-sheet as you when talking about that all-important pipeline expected to be connected to that pulp mill. Her performance and chances for re-election must be of concern if you consider that she is up to the job.

Therefore, I wish you well in your attempts to expand the Parliament but it must be met by a reduction in the number of advisers, spin doctors and ancillary staff that normally accompany downsizing of the executive. In a sense, this might be your best opportunity to bring in fresh blood, not hacks and has-beens. The list of delegates to the state conference does not inspire confidence. Too many old and tired faces will be present, the likes of which will go through the same motions as they have been doing for the past two decades. I could quote Shakespeare and in particular Julius Caesar’s injunction about having men around him “who are sleek and such as sleep of night,” but there are too many with hungry looks on their faces. You have the chance to bring a more modern notion of social democracy into the Tasmanian ALP but as I know little of your support base, who can but guess the chances of a prospective clear-out?

As a parent, I take some solace in the fact that you have retained the education portfolio, recognizing its importance for the future. That was driven home rather forcefully on ABC radio on 23 July when discussion took place about retention rates at high schools. To our shame, we ranked ahead of the Northern Territory but behind all the other states and naturally enough, Canberra. The days are long gone when a young man could leave school at the age of 15 and get a job on the factory floor, perhaps become an apprentice and then move on to skill training of some description.

In my view, no child should leave school before Year 10 but there is little point in spending two extra years in the education system unless the subjects taught are relevant to the individual and useful in terms of finding employment including life skills. That means school leavers should be literate, numerate and have computer skills. Having said that, computer skills do not necessarily guarantee a job but they are necessary in the 21st century. Much criticism has been levelled at the ill-fated Early Learning System and to a certain extent; it is valid to say that it was a brave failure, especially when the reading and writing skills of Tasmanian schoolchildren are compared with those on the big island.

For many years, the Education Department bureaucracy is and has been a laboratory for social engineers: teaching deconstructionism at high school is a poor substitute for learning facts, let alone building up a basic knowledge of how the world and society function. Some education experts believe that a whole new approach to reading and writing is called for and having seen at first-hand, the literacy of our young, I’m inclined to agree. Thus, the onus on taking action on the anarchistic dreamers in the sclerotic bureaucracy lies in your hands. You have a dream of being the “education Premier” and it is up to you to make it so.

In a lot of respects estimates midweek was a cock up even by modest standards. One can feel a certain amount of sympathy for Graeme Sturges. Not only is the future of the state’s railway seemingly dangling by a thread yet again but Mr. Sturges discovered through the hearings that there was no corporate or strategic plan for railways in this state. The media could and should have made much more of this as an issue and it was basically left to the Greens to make the running. Rusting rails and clapped-out rolling stock lying idle stand in mute testimony to 10 years of Labor government, which favoured road over rail despite protestations to the contrary – actions speak louder than words.

It must be patently obvious that the high price of fuel for motor vehicles and trucks will not be reversed to any marked degree. There are some analysts who have predicted the barrel of all dropped below $100 inside 18 months but the facts have to be faced: the extant oil supply is finite and while there are other opportunities for exploitation of shale and brown coal, neither will do much to bring the price of fuel down: so too for various biofuels. The saviour for the whole country should be liquid petroleum gas (LPG) at least in the short term but government will still rely on excise so relief for those on the roads would be marginal. A better prospect is compressed natural gas (CNG) but on this, Martin Ferguson and the Federal government appeared to have closed minds. I put it to you as Premier that you should raise this question with the Prime Minister when next you meet. This country already exports energy and forces its citizens to pay world parity prices for those products. This is not good enough: the first duty of any government is to its people not vested interests or the export market.

That there will be a contraction in the number of people and companies working in forestry and the associated trucking industry comes as no surprise and we have Senator Eric Abetz to thank for an illuminating report. It must be the only occasion on which he has made a positive contribution to Tasmanian politics, although I stand to be corrected. The loss of jobs in the next few years comes at a time when the economy is slowing down and while unemployment is said to be at an all time low, it will not be long before what are prosaically known as the dole queues grow longer. And that Mr. Premier is of great concern as many of those laid off will be too old to retrain. Ideally, this is an area that should be explored not only by government but by the University of Tasmania but they have too many post-modernist onanists in key departments to be of any great use. However, they are very competent in charting the decline of our industries and skill base.

In my last article I commented fairly extensively on railways in the state and propose to take it no further at present. However, I would like to see an unequivocal government commitment to the use of rail for freight purposes and feasibility studies on passenger usage. To talk, as some have done of providing state-wide passenger services, is beyond the Tasmanian government. It is very hard to put railways through houses and Eastern Shore dreamers have little hope of a viable rail service. The Sorell to Richmond Railway is unfortunately history and so too, the Bellerive line. The grim phalanx of housing expanding in Sorell and Kingston would appear to militate against the prospect of light rail in any form. As it is now, some of these areas have reason to complain about the lack of Metro bus services. No doubt the same can be said north of the DMZ. The Launceston sprawl and growth in the coastal towns is perhaps more amenable to passenger rail. This must be a combined Federal/State initiative.

I must confess to finding some of the revelations during the Estimates committee meetings to be somewhat disturbing. The current Chief of Police holds his position by virtue of appointment and there was no public advertisement for the position. He is not widely liked or respected and there is just occasionally a hint in what he says that he believes that the Police are the law; not merely upholders of the law and this is a very dangerous trend as we have seen in the larger states. It has been said blandly that there is no corruption in the state. That being the case, I urge you to back the formation of an ICAC with full investigative powers and the capacity to probe certain matters which are the subject of police inquiry. An ethics committee does not cut the mustard! It is a fact, not Tasmanian folklore, that shadowy figures lurk in the background and have major impacts on decision-making. This is all done without them being accountable in any way, shape or form. It is also totally unacceptable.

Unless the Commissioner of Police is thinking of using mounted officers as a possible special tactical unit to deal with forestry protesters, then the only useful function would be that horse manure makes excellent fertilizer for roses around Parliament House. Why is a special tactical unit needed to deal with legitimate protesters in forests? No doubt the green police will be welcomed by Mr. John Gay and his pet weasel, Barry Chipman of the front group Tasmanian Timber Communities but it seems a highly selective target. Would it be used against trade union pickets? This coming at a time when the special operations group and the antiterrorism squad have been wound back. A thorough review of functions is long overdue, especially when it comes to using the police force as another arm of Treasury. It has been proven time and time again in any country that you care to examine that speeding and bad behaviour on the roads is best contained and controlled by a highly visible police presence. Why is it then that they are not operating in this state? When you consider the economic and social cost to the community of road accidents, to say nothing of the effects on survivors, it would be a big step forward to solicit sponsorship by the larger employers or the employer’s groups. What would be wrong with having high-speed pursuit cars or more modestly powered vehicles for the urban areas sponsored by Harvey Norman, K&D/Mitre 10, Hungry Jacks or heaven help us, McDonald’s or KFC?

Of the Gunns pulp mill in the Tamar Valley, my views are adequately represented by the majority against and their eloquence is far greater than mine. I have never understood this quaint Tasmanian obsession with pulp mills. The two “big reds” Robin Gray and more recently Paul Lennon reminded me of the fabled (extinct) oozelem bird which apparently chased itself round in circles until it finally vanished up its own fundamentals. All we got from Gray and Lennon was a great deal of squawking about the absolute need for a pulp mill “pulp mill, pulp mill, awk, awk, awk.” The basic problem I have is that wood chips as an end product do not constitute value adding and I am highly suspicious about pollution in the already badly affected Tamar Valley. Far better perhaps, in terms of acceptability would be the veneer mill at Hampshire. It could well be that the forestry rationalization would be far more favourable for the latter.

And while on the subject of environmental projects, I find myself totally opposed to the development at Ralph’s Bay. I have seen canal estates on the mainland and if the global warming pundits are half right, Ross River fever will find its way into the south of the state. Apart from that, is the very real prospect of climactic change (as distinct from global warming) which will bring with it high tides, strong winds and variations that bring to mind the biblical quotation that the wise man built his house on rock, while the foolish man built his on sand. Ergo, Ralph’s Bay is a disaster in the making.

Lastly I come to a subject that I find personally very distressing. That is the matter of homelessness. Estimates have been given that Tasmania has around 2500 people in need of housing. Any reputable social scientist would point out that a certain number of people choose to live rough and vagrants will always be with us. There is a need for cheaper public housing, something your government has seen to address but in conjunction with the housing industry. It has been stated many times that young people are less likely to own their own homes than any time previously.

The housing industry argues the solution is to release more land but reputable national experts have stated that is not the way to go. Rather, we need to look at infill, higher density housing and all within reach of public transport. Imagine, if you will, the effects of the economic downturn, the continuing rise in petrol prices, interest rates that are being driven higher by the price of our exports while impoverishing the man in the street. Or shall we say a young couple with children living in Sorell and trying to make ends meet with two jobs and one having to travel to the city each day. This is one area where there appears to be a degree of consensus. People do not want to be pushed out beyond the already existing urban fringes. Furthermore, some of the developments taking place in the south of the state are eating into arable land, which may become more necessary sooner than later.

There are far more eloquent advocates for the homeless than I could ever hope to be, namely, Bishop Chris Jones of the Anglican Church/Anglicare, various representatives of St. Vincent de Paul, the Salvation Army, The City Mission, Lifeline and so on. It beggars belief that there does not appear to be a place for a homeless man to have a shower, a meal and a decent night’s sleep in all of our major cities and towns. While there are shelters for beaten women, and rightly so, there is probably a need for overnight facilities for women who are homeless. Every year, I make a point of reading Charles Dickens’ Christmas Carol or watching one of the films based on the story. Before his conversion, Scrooge asked of two charity workers: “Are there no prisons, no poorhouses?” Unfortunately too many of our population appeared to slip through the floorboards of society. At least in jail, a person is fed and housed. The breakthrough enabling unused food to be passed on to organizations that feed the hungry is most welcome but man does not live by bread alone. According to the hierarchy of needs, a roof over his head, warmth and a place to lie down are as important.

The once-great Australian Labor Party grew out all of the needs of the recognition of workers’ rights. Non-workers have rights and the ALP, which has always prided itself on social justice issues, needs to take stock of itself. It has become too comfortable, too much part of the system; overly bureaucratic and regrettably, its politicians have become insulated from the suffering of the poor, the sick and the homeless.

Premier Bartlett, you have an opportunity to turn the situation and the state around. It may well be that you will face the electors with two young leaders of opposition parties vying for power. You have stated that you will take ideas from anywhere, and that is a very great point in your favour because there are many precedents. Your start may have been seen as slightly unusual, the road a little rocky and the shadows as ever, treacherous. But the Light on the Hill, so beloved of the Labor Party needs tending with care: I wish you well in your journey – let Tasmania be kind, clever and connected.

Nostradamus