I wasn’t invited, so I watched online, and I had to wait until it was almost over to see the best bit of the ABC’s Q and A in Hobart – a really feisty, really old man telling our po-faced Premier exactly what he thought of her, and her slavish commitment to the mythical ‘value-adding’ temple of pulp in the Tamar Valley.
Mr Cundall faced Miss Lara square on, reminding her of the mill’s corrupt approval process. ‘There is no more fanatical supporter of that dirty, stinking pulp mill than you in this state’, he thundered. I hope his breath was a bit funky, because she surely would have copped a nose full.
The Premier’s response was exactly as we have come to expect – disingenuous stupidity, delivered robotically, in the hope that it will look like measured consideration. ‘In hindsight, the process could have been different’, she said, complacently, ‘but there was no corruption.’
From this point on, the debate was unremarkable – Giddings spruiked the wonders of the Tasmanian economy, Abetz bashed the Greens, and Milne made some modestly sensible suggestions. Two moments were worthy of attention, however.
Regardless of her motivation in saying so, married-into-the-Liberal machine forestry lawyer, Melanie Kerrison, noted that the Statement of Principles agreement ‘smells a bit dead already, doesn’t it?’ Good call, Mel. It’s reeking like a dead rat stuck behind the kitchen wall (don’t ask!).
A few breaths later, Ms Kerrison proclaimed herself a 5th generation Tamar Valley resident, and proud protector of her homeland. ‘If the pulp mill does pollute, I want it shut down tomorrow’, she declared. So, follow the party line, and assume that the mill will become reality, but spoil the sentiment with an ill-considered remark countenancing its closure. Abetz would have been seething. Let’s hope that gaffe earns young Melanie nothing more than a slap on the wrist, as a concession to her media inexperience.
And, summing up, Garry Bailey displayed perfect understanding of Tasmania’s dilemma when he announced that ‘no-one – Greens, Liberal, or Labor – has a strategy for where Tasmania needs to go next’. You could almost forgive him for rabbitting on about Tasmania’s ‘robust’ media earlier in the evening – he might be strangely delusional about the quality of his daily publication, but at least he acknowledges that Tassie is being flushed down the shitter in ever-larger lumps by a pack of so-called leaders whose only talent is pulling the chain.
But, forestry wasn’t the entire agenda of the program. Apart from Mr Cundall’s passionate outburst, the only genuine moment in the proceedings was the work of audience member, Stephen Menadue – a man with a gambling problem. Mr Menadue described the losses – of family, of children and of liberty – he had suffered because of his addiction to poker machines. He is now abstinent, and on two occasions when that abstinence faltered, he applied the basic premise of pre-commitment gambling to himself. He took a certain amount from the venue’s ATM, knowing he could take no more that day – ‘I walked out without spending all my money, for the first time in my life’, he said.
Mr Menadue’s question to the panel – ‘Is Tasmania too addicted to its enormous gambling revenue to trial the pre-commitment system?’
The panel responses to this question were telling – a brief, but informative insight into the personalities, and sensitivities of some of the individual members.
Peter Cundall was, as you would expect, supportive of any effort to reduce the misery caused by problem gambling. You only need to spend a short time working in community services to see the impact of poker machine gambling on addicted individuals and their families.
And, even a basic understanding of human responses will tell you that poker machines extract the maximum response by employing a random-variable reward schedule. A phenomenon discovered by eminent psychologist, Fred Skinner, and elevated to an art form by gaming machine manufacturers. Chuck in a battery of flashing lights, quirky, cartoonish themes, and an endless supply of free food and drink, and you get a glitzy room full of glassy-eyed punters, some of them connected to the gaudy boxes, with cords running from their ‘loyalty cards’ into a slot on the machine – sort of a lifeline in reverse, sucking money from the faithful.
And, the machine always wins.
Ms Kerrison, and Mr Abetz wheeled out the standard Liberal response to the gambling issue – harm minimisation is okay, but neither is in favour of ‘Big Brother’ solutions, or the ‘nanny state’. If individuals wish to gamble away their livelihood, and their pride, and their freedom, they should be able to do so, largely unfettered by government interference.
Abetz quoted a single, random statistic from a trial of pre-commitment technology in Nova Scotia in support of his position, and even suggested that lack of food on the table could equally be the fault of poor business decisions, or gambling on the horses, or the roulette wheel. Mr Abetz is so far out of touch with the practical reality of gambling in the Australian community, he may as well be living in mid-20th century Germany.
But, hang on, isn’t that where he came from – the body has grown older, in a different place, but the psyche obviously hasn’t outgrown its genesis.
Ms Kerrison sought some solace in the fact that she acts for people who have suffered robberies perpetrated by problem gamblers. So? If she understands her clients’ pain, she should have more motivation to support measures addressing problem gambling. Another unfortunate slip of the tongue, Melanie. I hope hubby and his cronies stepped out for a beer when you dropped that one. Ms Kerrison was clearly under pressure – you could see the hamster wheel spinning furiously just behind her eyes, as she tried desperately to come up with the ‘correct’ (Liberal) answer to each question.
But the star of this show was the inimitable Miss Giddings, and her endless, mindless platitudes. She tried really hard to talk the gaming industry into trialling pre-commitment technology, but they just weren’t interested.
Of course she wants to support the poor, addicted masses, but people need to have freedom of choice. And, what about those sad old people whose only entertainment is a trip to the pokie parlour? Don’t they deserve some small measure of enjoyment? At this point, an audience member commented that such a situation was a poor indictment of society – she was blithely ignored by the girl who governs us.
The man who asked the question about problem gambling shook his head in disbelief. He spoke again, and reminded the Premier that forty per cent of poker machine profits are made out of problem gamblers. Children are suffering from this blight on society, and he wanted a chance to put his side of the story to someone who really wanted to hear it.
Clearly this person was not Miss Giddings. As he spoke, her face was a mask of bland indifference, overlain with an almost imperceptible sheen of distaste at the prospect of engaging with a person struggling to survive somewhere way below her own social station. I have known women like Miss Giddings – young women born into relatively privileged circumstances, but indoctrinated from birth in the theories of socialism. Well-educated and full of overblown ideas, but with no down-and-dirty first-hand knowledge of the members of society they purport to represent – of their lives, and their aspirations for themselves and their families.
Like her self-interested male counterparts, the Premier thinks that courting big business and promising ‘jobs’ to the lesser classes will entirely fulfil her obligations. Unlike the blokes, however, Miss Giddings appears to believe the drivel she serves up. Meaningless pap, served with a smirk, as though it was manna from heaven – part of our regular diet, as citizens of good old Tassie.
Pic: From HERE
Anne Cadwallader
July 31, 2011 at 09:55
“a mask of bland indifference, overlain with an almost imperceptible sheen of distaste at the prospect of engaging with a person struggling to survive somewhere way below her own social station.”
Lara Giddings description of the week award goes to this one !
arghhh !]
Ed Barnes
July 31, 2011 at 11:40
Peter Cundall made an important point that the (in Giddings words) “rigorous” Federal assessment of the pulp mill had only considered the effects of the mill on federal waters, i.e. beyond 5km off the coast of Tasmania, and that it had neglected effluent effects on state waters. Giddings’ response was that effects on state waters had been assessed. Of course that would be under the fast-tracked shortcut state assessment.
Pete Godfrey
July 31, 2011 at 12:03
I find it interesting that the Liberal party now seem to be split into fragments.
Here was Erich Abetz touting the let the market decide, no big brother stuff and on the other hand we have young Will Hodgeman advocating socialist activities like compulsory aquisition of the Triabunna Chip Mill.
It won’t be long until the Liberal party collapse under the weight of their disparate policies.
As for Lala well yep the description does fit, I am sure she thinks that channelling Mr Lennon is a great way to run the state.
Pity Peter Cundall is not younger and interested in entering the circus of parliament.
Hopefully a golden age of politics will happen sometime soon and people with brains and a heart will enter the hallowed halls of shame.
Lara’s idea of asking the industry if they wanted to try cutting their profits was a masterstroke. Of course they would love to lower the $660,000 a day they remove from the people of Tasmania.
Unfortunately the shareholders would not agree with such a decision. Bummer eh.
Simon Warriner
July 31, 2011 at 12:06
Perhaps, Bronwyn, you are being a tad unfair to our party politicans. After all, they have already pledged allegiance to another entity before they took on the priviledge of representing us. After failing to understand the impossibility of serving two masters the probability of them understanding the problems possed by conflicts of interest and other ethical dilemas as they meander through government is low.
This ignorance has metastacised, cancer like throughout the body politic and the end result is before us.
Can the cancer be cured? I do not know, but huge doses of chemo in the form of independant representatives is a medicine that will do no further harm. If the patient lives long enough for the treatment to have an effect, and is willing to endure the pain there might be hope.
Doug Nichols
July 31, 2011 at 13:39
Simon Warriner, #4, this is a pedantic and somewhat off-topic point, but a person in your position, pursuing, as you are, such a worthwhile agenda, really ought to spell “independent” correctly. I feel it would help your cause, if only just a little.
John Biggs
July 31, 2011 at 14:16
A brilliant summary of Q&A, the best yet and there have been some excellent ones. I like your writing style Bronwyn; keep ’em rolling!
Penguinite
July 31, 2011 at 14:39
Simon, there’s no chemo for this cancer. For a hard-nosed view of politics in the modern era, listen to Mark Hanna from 100+ years ago:
‘There are two things that are important in politics. The first is money and I can’t remember what the second one is.’
A wealthy industrialist, Hanna […] believed that government existed primarily to help business. He once told the Ohio attorney general, who sued to dissolve Standard Oil, to drop the suit. ‘Come on,’ Hanna pronounced, ‘you’ve been in politics long enough to know that no man in public life owes the public anything.’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Hanna
Robin Halton
July 31, 2011 at 17:25
I watched the program too! Regarding the Pulp Mill there is no doubt among the panel Peter Cundell was the star of the night, the Premier Lara Gidding acting like a little spoilt girl and Melanie Kerrison as the idiot of the night, sorry Melanie but you cant shut down a new $2B Pulp Mill if it fails to meet the standards!
People that know me, know full well that I am a strong supporter of forestry in Tasmania.
Pete also said that “This mill is the cause of all of the trouble going on in the forests at the moment” He is right as the Tamar pulp mill has landed a lot of well meaning people in scolding hot water unnecessarily. The indifferences are costing this state too.
I applaud the continuation of logging and regeneration practices in native forest however the Tamar Valley Pulp Mill said to use plantation wood only is too large for most peoples liking! In this day and age air and estuarine pollution would not be toleranced by the public which is fair enough, we are not living in 1960’s Burnie.
It will be interesting to see if Gunns get their $20M-$30M for surrendering their sawmilling rights before they “get out of” Tasmania!
In my book the name Gunns stinks and I cannot see a Pulp Mill being constructed in the Tamar Valley despite how many new jobs it would create!
It will be good to see the back of the Tamar Valley Pulp Mill debate, but when as it is still continues to plague a stable, resilient and foward thinking governent here in Tasmania.
hugoagogo
July 31, 2011 at 18:57
#5, Doug, stop being padentic
Doug Nichols
July 31, 2011 at 21:04
Re #9, I half apologise. At least I admitted it was pedantic! Besides, I was only trying to help. Read comment #8 of:
http://oldtt.pixelkey.biz/index.php?/weblog/article/meeting-to-push-for-independent-mps-for-tasmania/show_comments
Garry Stannus
July 31, 2011 at 22:23
Gees. Bronwyn, you pack a punch …
“you could see the hamster wheel spinning furiously just behind her eyes”
I’m trying to see out, but the lights in front are pretty bright, and I know something has just been said, alright? But I still don’t know what’s happening, do I, Mr Jones?
dylandylandylandylandylandylandylandylandylandylan
Because something is happening here
But you don’t know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?
You have many contacts
Among the lumberjacks
To get you facts
When someone attacks your imagination
But nobody has any respect
Anyway they already expect you
To just give a check
To tax-deductible charity organizations
You’ve been with the professors
And they’ve all liked your looks
With great lawyers you have
Discussed lepers and crooks
You’ve been through all of
F. Scott Fitzgerald’s books
You’re very well read
It’s well known
Because something is happening here
But you don’t know what it is
Do you, Mister Jones?
Thank you Bronwyn. Your pen is mightier than the herd.
phill Parsons
August 1, 2011 at 00:16
If you watch Simon de Little’s Dejavu Back to the Future on TT you will se similar promises made by the proponents of Wesley Vale including the if it pollutes close it like Kerrison made.
Now let us think of a big polluter in tasmania who has been caught out and had to close down./////////////. Okay lets widen the circle to the national jurisdiction////////////////.
It’s just crap to get it built and fix or fudge problems later, just so long as the money rolls in.
Neil Smith
August 1, 2011 at 00:46
I’ll join the chorus. Great commentary Bronwyn. Please keep this up. Not since the heyday of Peter Henning has TT seen such quality writing.
abs
August 1, 2011 at 02:32
i think it went over his head, hugo
Doug Nichols
August 1, 2011 at 12:55
Re #15, On the contrery.
hugoagogo
August 1, 2011 at 14:56
In #9 I was clearly trolling for a rise from someone so blinded by pedantry they’d hook up on the bristling irony instead.
There’s been a few looks, but I’m quite relieved to say no actual takes.
Bronwyn’s hamster wheel device reminds me of the funniest cartoon strip I ever saw; in which Posh Spice (directed by a crew of budgerigars on the bridge in her skull looking out the eyes) leaves Becks (directed by a crew of mice similarly positioned) in charge of their child for ten minutes.
Garry Stannus
August 1, 2011 at 19:16
#17 and I thought you’d caught a mild bout of dyxlesia…
Peter
August 1, 2011 at 19:21
Love your wit and writing style, Bronwyn. More please!
john hayward
August 1, 2011 at 19:59
Q&A was inspiring- the Labs, the Libs, the Murdoch press, and Sam’s missus all closing ranks to confront their common enemy – the public interest.
John Hayward
Simon Warriner
August 1, 2011 at 23:28
re 7, Penguinite, they said a similar thing about syphillus once. As for Mark Hanna, and I should bow to his opinion because?
Re 14 Mark Hanna,another one, I hope. Is this your name, or, per chance, a piss take that Penguinite might appreciate?.
Re 17, Thanks for the chuckle
Simon Warriner