NOSTRADAMUS
It feels as though I haven’t written for the Tasmanian Times for aeons and I don’t really think I’m missed, despite the platitudes of the editor. As writing for this distinguished publication (and no, I’m not being cynical or mocking) constitutes serious business for me, I like to carry out research and make sure that my facts are in order before launching into print, metaphorically speaking. During my last conversation with the editor, I told him that I did not want to write negative articles about Tasmania. I love the place dearly but I have to say that during this year, the lure of Invercargill and the South Island of New Zealand has been unbearable. I have an icon on my computer desktop taken from the Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame. It is a rather famous picture of the Mole, shrouded in an overcoat, outside the Wildwood. And it strikes a very real chord with me. Mole wanted to enter Wildwood because of the mysteries he believed lay there.

The resonance with me is that like Mole, I am restless and I want to get out of the rut. That path is denied me for many reasons but I will willingly and cheerfully accept the role of being honorary Ambassador to New Zealand’s South Island, provided the Kiwi government will pay for my accommodation for six months of the year – a little place outside Invercargill with Wi-Fi would do nicely and from there I would be prepared to build bridges to Tasmania and show this state what can be done if the intent and resolution is present. As I’ve said before, we could learn a lot from the Kiwis but our politicians prefer to go for study trips to the northern hemisphere and places that have nothing in common with Tasmania, except perhaps those cities that have cable cars up mountains and they come home and cast longing eyes on Mount Wellington. And before I go any further, I want to apologize for the length of this particular article but it is part of a greater whole.

Being away for just over a couple of weeks and returning to Tasmania was an eye-opener. I hadn’t realized how badly the state of the state had deteriorated. I certainly didn’t need the Treasurer to tell me, along with the rest of the population, that Tasmania was weathering the economic conditions that have afflicted the Western world slightly better than most Australian states. Surely it has to be true, because he said so and that view is supported by economists. Tell that to the people who’ve lost their jobs; tell it to those who are about to lose their jobs and keep telling it because you never know, a few mugs may believe it. As one politician pointed out last week and for the life of me I can’t remember who it was but it was certainly an opposition member, there are over 6000 Tasmanians who are unemployed. If you add to that those who are underemployed, those who have dropped out of looking for work because there’s nothing much around and then talk to the charitable bodies, the picture is pretty bleak. I have no pretensions to economic knowledge or training. As a social scientist with a strong background in empirical study, I have a very jaundiced view about the use of figures in any particular argument.

At university I was much impressed by the book: “Figures don’t lie, but liars can figure” by somebody named Hough. (I had a copy but can’t find it these days). Then there is the statement: “There are lies, damned lies and statistics” and this is particularly true when it comes to presenting official figures for just about anything. You see, I’ve always taken the view that we live in society and that very notion was kicked out from under us from the late 1980s onwards. Some people don’t like to be reminded of it but a certain former State Premier to the north of this island was known to refer to people as either revenue-earning units or non-revenue earning units. Where was the humanity in that? Then there was the boof-headed corporate vulture who should probably be behind bars but isn’t, who boasted proudly that he only ever employed people with a Masters in business administration (I referred to it at the time as the cult of the MBA). In my view, there are lies, damned liars and lying statisticians but I don’t want to follow that road, as I haven’t finished research. The rest of this article is part of an examination of the changed political and social paradigm in the Western world of which Tasmania is a small corner. So for those who don’t want to read much more, I intend to talk about road rage and violence and matters related.

I don’t want to go all intellectual on readers of Tasmanian Times either but you have to swallow a certain amount of foul-tasting medicine before you learn the lessons of induced sickness. And I’m afraid to say, that Tasmania, like the big Island to the North is exhibiting tendencies and trends in behaviour, which were alien at the turn-of-the-century. It manifests itself in many forms and road rage is one that The Mercury has taken up as a crusade, and rightly so. It was always said that the worst drivers on Tasmanian roads were little old man with hats (I’m not little; I am old but I don’t wear a hat when I drive) and little old ladies but they appear to have passed on as a generation. Then there came the exceptionally dangerous female, liberated on four wheels and driving aggressively just to show that she could keep up with the boys. I shall never forget being cutoff by a female driving a V-8 station wagon, highly polished in maroon who went across three lanes of traffic from right to left on the approach to the Tasman Bridge. She had a sign in the back of the car “Baby on board,” and I hope that was not the case because her driving was fast, irresponsible given the road conditions and of course there were no police about. But for a fairly long while, I drove in wide circles around cars driven by women, especially younger women, with those wretched signs glued to the back window. I would like them to know that those signs do not prevent accidents.

At a time when the state government is obviously still short of cash despite the wonders performed by the Treasurer who walks on water and his departmental head who keeps them on the straight and narrow, the main efforts of our police force are not directed at road safety so much as cashing in on motoring infringements. I read that we have four, yes 4, police vehicles, which are specially painted to be prominent in daylight and cruise the roads as a deterrent to the errant motorist. Four? Which bloody idiot thought of this number? Was it a case of one for each area of the state and one spare? There have been miles of newsprint about the Midland Highway and the need for it to be a dual carriageway each way. This can only be done with federal cash. The biggest deterrent to road accidents is a highly visible police presence and this means putting coppers on motorcycles or lower powered scooters in cities and brightly-painted vehicles on the main roads. I would also like to be confident that the equipment they use is parity calibrated and regularly tested so that nobody can claim that the equipment was in error. Contrary to what people tell you, radar guns and other detection methods are fallible. Secondly, there has to be a certain margin of error because speedometers in cars have a + or – 5kph variability that computerization has not solved, usually because of tyre profile. We need more visible police presence and that costs money. Instead of putting into football teams and the like, government should call on business through its mates in the TCCI to sponsor a greater number of police pursuit vehicles, brightly painted and with all the lights imaginable – including the famous “blues and twos.” Commercial interests in Tasmania in sponsoring these vehicles would have the right to advertising on part of the car and possibly, choice of a highly visible color scheme. At least that would put more police out there acting as a deterrent.

More disturbing is the road rage and I’ve seen more of it in the past few months than I care to dwell on and I have a horrible feeling that it’s connected with the economic situation. And I don’t want to blame economists for the economic situation. Of themselves, economists provide opinions, estimates, and policies, offer a research capacity but in the final analysis, politicians make the decisions. And I don’t like what I see. I am currently working on a major paper looking at some of the background factors that have changed behavior in this state and elsewhere over the past 20 years or so, possibly longer. But it seems to me that road rage is accompanied by more violence on the streets and who can forget that terrible beating dished out to an ABC employee of Gardening Australia and his friend. In The Mercury last week, I read the sad case of a young woman sent to jail. Her crime was violence, something that feminists the world over have always insisted is the problem and province of the male of the system.

Sisters, I have news for you! You would be hard pushed to find a person as sympathetic as myself towards victims of spousal abuse and most of it is by men directed against women but a proportion, possibly as high as 10% is female on male violence. In 1986, I had a friend call on me late at night. He stood in the dim light at our front door with a bandage around his head and although most of it was white, blood had been seeping through. His dear, beautiful, (she had been a model and was stunning) loving wife had gone for him with a carving knife and the result was 26 stitches or more in his scalp. He was lucky and totally bewildered about the attack. I helped him on that dreadful night and I’m in no position to pass judgment on the affair only to note that the woman had a hair trigger temper and was also pretty good at throwing things.

So while I support refuges for women, the same should obtain for men and some of our academics should be researching the figures of violence against men and worrying less about the value of antiques on TV. This is a grossly under-researched area and many men will not come forward because it is a badge of shame to be attacked by a woman, be that person a spouse, girlfriend or total stranger.

That brings us back to the case of the young woman reported in The Mercury. Social scientists for years have depicted the female of the species as the nurturing, caring gender. After all, they get pregnant, carry a child, in some cases breast-feed the infant and spend a great deal of time raising their offspring. It is one of my iron rules or laws that we have our children on loan until they get to school and then gradually they slip through our fingers. I’m not going to argue that men can perform the nurturing and caring role in the same way as women. I have known many male single parents who have struggled to raise children and done a damned fine job of it but they are a very small minority.

Part of the reason for my not writing very much of late is because I have been preoccupied as I mentioned with societal trends. It may well be that readers think I am an old fart and I don’t care but I have been appalled by what I have read in the press of late. And I thought as an example, I would take a random look at the local paper to demonstrate some of my concerns. And by chance, so many of the societal problems that I see facing us were reported in The Mercury of August 28 this year. There should be no question of blaming the newspaper for reporting because this is the sort of news that should never be hidden.

When you get past the glorious plans for the redevelopment of Parliament Square, alongside it on the front page are three stills from a road safety advertisement, which may be shown in Tasmania. The top picture is of a young woman behind the wheel of a car, the middle picture shows a head-on collision and the lowest picture a blood streaked face, presumably of the same young woman involved in an accident. The follow-up article on page 5 suggested that the advertisement might be broadcast as shock treatment. Police Minister Jim Cox described it as being “powerfully graphic” and as I haven’t seen it I will take his word. The only problem I have with such material being broadcast is that today’s youth as a generation is more inured to violence and pictures of violence than any other. My brother and his sons play computer games of increasing sophistication and the emphasis is on violence and killing. The first computer games of any sophistication that I saw were Simplot and similar constructive programs but they were soon replaced by war games, warrior epics and the borderline between fantasy and reality became much thinner. I would like to have the time to research the buying and borrowing habits of kids from 9 to 19 and examine their tastes. I have a feeling I would be horrified, especially with some of the things I have seen that poses games for PlayStations.

On the page before the article about the shock tactic video, which could be viewed courtesy of The Mercury, there was a friendly article entitled: “Finals captains to sink boots into violence.” This was an account of the Collingwood and Geelong captains being involved in an upcoming TV radio and newspaper commercial campaign, “pleading for an end to alcohol-fueled violence on the streets.” Alcohol fueled violence on the streets; fair enough but what about just plain violence fueled by looking the wrong way, meeting someone’s eyes and any other “provocative” act? Part of the national pastime has always been drinking and there have always been fights but lately they have increased in number and violence. Why?

Page 7 provided a small article, which stated that a young woman who attacked the tune age girl with a large kitchen knife had avoided jail. A 19-year-old attacking a 14 year old with a 20 cm serrated knife! Justice Shan Tennent, for whom I usually have a great deal of respect, gave the attacker a four-month suspended sentence. On the same page, there was an article about cracking down on dangerous dogs – fair enough. Several breeds were listed as being particularly dangerous but it is always been my opinion that the owners are dangerous and therefore responsible for their animals. I was at a certain suburb some years ago, on lawful business, when someone turned his or her dog loose on me. It was a wolf like animal with bright blue eyes and it charged towards me and I turned and instead of running walk towards it speaking gently. It came up to me apprehensively, licked my hand and then started to run followed by an irate owner. I later saw the same animal on the road to Hobart and I’m talking about the canine.

Page 9 discusses corporate bullying by Hydro Tasmania — enough said. Two pages on and we find that a “hoon” has lost his license to drive for two years for racing along the Brooker Highway last November. The 22-year-old was racing a friend with speeds up to 120 km/h at 2:30 pm and the pair of cars had swerved in and out of others before one finally crashed. In a sign that some members of the Tasmanian population are beginning to appreciate common sense, police received 17 reports but I have to ask, where were the patrol cars? Does anyone believe that the guilty parties will not drive unlicensed like so many? There must come a time when the most dangerous drivers have their licenses confiscated, then their cars, and somehow have them electronically tagged so that we know where they are and what they’re doing. Yes, this is real police state stuff and it may well be needed. I view with satisfaction the idea that driving lessons should be part of the school curriculum but with the proviso that defensive driving is part of the lesson and that newly licensed drivers are on probation for three years and have to drive cars that do not fall into the category of high-performance. I learned to ride a motorcycle on a 200cc machine and the day after I passed my test I could’ve gone out and bought a 650cc motorcycle. Many did but I was not one of them. They have a name for those sorts of people overseas – they call them “organ donors.”

On the same cheerful page we were treated to a report entitled: “Tassie’s offender shame” and the little piece of journalism, which told us that we had the nation’s, worst record for serial offenders. The report was based on ABS statistics which showed that Tasmanians got into trouble with police on five or more occasions to June 2008 (this was a slightly confusing statement) but the report went on to note that for every 100,000 Tasmanians aged over 10 years, 3065 offenders were caught by police which is well above the national rate of 1800/100,000. Tasmania police’s response was that the high offender rate could be attributed to Tasmania’s “clear-up rate of crime.” And who am I to dispute police interpretation of statistics but the most common offences in Tasmania were public order matters followed by acts intended to cause injury and illicit drug offences.” Who am I to question Assistant Commissioner Brazendale’s assertion “Low rates of victimisation, coupled with high clearance rates equal or higher than the rates we have seen in these statistics.” I’m a great judge of good quality spin so why did we lose the Ashes? What he didn’t say this that the buggers are still out there, keeping on keeping on. A few pages further on, we read of our caring government implementing bans to prevent the young and fair skinned from committing suicide by solarium. Nice one, Lara but the most public case was not white. And it might surprise you to know that Negroes suffer sunburn.

We come then to the pièce de résistance; the article that made this issue of The Mercury self-selecting. I will admit to have been tempted by an earlier edition of week or so before quit showed a young lady (I think) outside the court making strange faces at media photographers. It wasn’t a pleasant story but it was graphic and a friend of mine spoke to the paper and the reporter and I decided that I would not stigmatize the person for her public behavior.

However page 15 stated baldly: “Attacker to serve more time in jail.” In many respects them, I felt it was a sad story all too typical of Tasmanian youth and current standards of behavior. The person concerned was described as a violent young woman who breached a suspended jail term for a life-threatening knife attack; assaulting police and “glassing” a man at a party. As a consequence a 21-year-old female who had spent five months in jail for stabbing her friend’s mother repeatedly in the face and neck, causing ongoing psychological trauma and pain in 2006 would now serve her full 18 months sentence. And there are a couple of points I would like to make. Justice Pierre Slicer is a good and honorable man. I don’t know him and I can’t be accused of carrying favor. Nothing much was reported in The Mercury about psychological reports of the offender; whether there were mitigating circumstances but Justice Slicer Robert pointedly said that she had shown no remorse for her actions or effect on the victims of the assaults. So, ye gods and little fishes, she is to be jailed for 18 months with the prospect of parole after a year. No mention was made of any psychological assessment to be carried out during that time and to me that was appalling.

For those that don’t know, “glassing” is where someone smashes a bottle or glass and then attacks with it and I know what I’m talking about because I’ve been on the receiving end. It was much favored in Scotland and Liverpool in the UK and certain suburbs of Sydney and Melbourne. Being trained in some very basic self-defence techniques, imparted by a former commando, I avoided personal injury. However, my brand new school uniform (I was 17 at the time) was slashed from shoulder to hip diagonally and the next thing my attacker knew, he was being held off the ground against a telegraph pole, by his throat. His face was almost black when I dropped him. I was not exactly popular with my parents because of the damage to my school uniform and quite frankly, they didn’t appear to give a stuff whether I was injured. When I told my commando instructor of what I had done and thanked him, we both mused that if I’d squeezed a little more I’d be facing the court, probably on manslaughter charges. What struck me most in retrospect was that this was a motive-less assault. I did not know the man; he was stone cold sober and about two years older than me.

As the father of daughters I find it most distressing that a 21-year-old can carry out attacks like this and I can only wonder about her upbringing and parental responsibility. That only goes so far because after about 14, a parent never really knows what the kids get up to and sometimes, it’s preferable not to know. However, I did wonder, looking at the reports and noting the lenient sentence whether a young man of 21 would have copped 18 months in prison. It’s something that bears thinking about. I don’t like to see anyone locked up but I don’t like to see this type of violence. This young lady was obviously one of the statistics mentioned in the ABS report. But I was left with the unhappy feeling that not enough is being done. The lack of remorse and the picture was far too reminiscent of Martín Bryant, although, it was not possible to see her eyes. But I had that feeling that they would be a cold pale blue. I would’ve thought that a jail term of five years minimum in such a case would be justified but I’ve long since bothered myself with the operations of the justice system. I don’t know who said one law for one and another law for another – it was once one rule for the rich, one for the poor – the principles are the same. What will happen to this young woman in jail? Will she become more hardened, more vicious and a greater danger to society and herself when released? I can’t profess to know the answers but I would’ve thought psychiatric evaluation is mandatory. Just because she came from show we say a low socioeconomic status suburban background is no excuse.

There was plenty more in that edition of the paper but I will spare readers the agony. It would appear looking back that I am engaged in a vendetta against the female of the species but nothing could be further from the truth. That edition of The Mercury was almost totally focused on matters concerning female behavior. In due course, I can pick another day when men are the subjects of public notoriety. I am and have always been in favour of women’s liberation. When in paid employment, I was famous or notorious for encouraging women to apply for promotion and often help them through some of the hoops in a primarily male domain. Most were grateful but I shall never forget a near-40 woman that worked for me and had reached a certain position. I encouraged her to apply for promotion because she would’ve been an outstanding candidate for a number of positions. She closed the door of my office and said to me quietly: “I won’t do it; I’m satisfied with my job and with what I earn and I would hate to become like you.” To say that I was rocked back in my chair would be the understatement of that particular year.

It was inevitable that more equality would be given to women and there is still a great distance to be traveled before equality becomes real rather than falling short as at present. But I have noticed in overseas journals that the upwardly mobile female is starting to exhibit strange male behaviors. Now I’ve seen plenty running around in business suits, with mobile phones seemingly permanently attached to their ears and I’ve been present when some of the better qualified have been holding the floor at conferences. Unfortunately, I have seen far too many token females promoted beyond their level of competence. The situation is roughly analogous or at least it was to the Negro male in America. I remember the vicious academic arguments when the well-known Hans J. Eysenck# suggested that Negroes were less intelligent than white people. I was convinced in my own mind that if a person of color was educated and had the same opportunities and family support as a white, then there was no reason why they should not be competitive.

Things have changed in America and the UK. There is a thriving black bourgeoisie and many have risen to senior positions in various companies. I think women are on the same track, although I read with some dismay various female politicians and those in business talking about the glass ceiling. In an ideal world, the only basis for a person holding the position would be merit and meeting the requirements of the job. We don’t live in an ideal world. What we are seeing now in Tasmania is not so much that women can climb the greasy pole especially in politics. I fear a credible female Premier is a long way away and I am not suggesting there should be a token leader. That path leads to disaster and the position should rest on merit and performance, along with certain personal characteristics, which would probably mark me out as an old fogey.