Nostradamus
Furthermore, for a party that has been haemorrhaging membership for some time, despite claims to the contrary, it is something of a matter of concern for the Liberals when they contemplate their talent pool in State Parliament, it’s even shallower than the dismal puddle on the government side. Should Vanessa Goodwin decide to stand at the next election; she should be a shoe-in and front-bench material. I hesitate to offer any caution but if she has any hidden serious problems, common sense dictates that they are well and truly excised before the election. As history demonstrates, if problems remain unaddressed, danger lurks at every turn, especially for the female of the species. There is blatant hypocrisy in the differing expectations accorded male and female politicians but there is no need to travel that road at this moment. I look at the Liberal party at present as having four good wheels and a rather loud exhaust pipe.
ONE OF my more unusual or eccentric interests is in the UFO phenomenon. It dates to my childhood (yes I was a kid) when I was very interested in aircraft and wanted to fly. One day, I saw something that could not be explained in normal meteorological or terrestrial terms. However, I would hate to be called a ufologist or indeed, a flying saucer nut. I take the scientific approach – whatever they are, the correct description is unidentified flying object and I’m a firm believer in wanting to kick the tyres of anything that lands in my backyard. But it made me think about things that are not always as they appear. For example, the U.S. Air Force commissioned the Chance Vought Company to produce an experimental aircraft, the V-173 / XF5U-1, which relied on body lift rather than conventional wings. It became known as the “flying flapjack” or “flying pancake” and apparently on test flights was misidentified as a UFO. Therefore, a UFO became an identified flying object (IFO) – case closed.
What does this have to do with Tasmanian politics? Plenty really, if you stop to think about it in terms of stating the obvious: namely things are not always as they appear and of late, I have been watching what could well be described as a flying pancake. I should also explain that my grandfather who regularly cooked pancakes in a frying pan would toss them in the air and catch them on the way down. It was all good entertainment for us kids but my grandmother did object on the occasion when an odd one stuck to the ceiling.
Currently, the flying pancake of Tasmanian politics appears to be, much to my anguish, Premier Jed Bartlett, who was the subject of discussions with a good friend and member of the Labor Party quite recently. He spoke of the Premier in glowing terms, which was slightly unusual because he tends to be nearly as cynical as me. I have given Jed a fairly good run since writing for Tasmanian Times and regular readers will know that I have a particular fascination for the scenario of three, young, fairly new political leaders engaged in competition against the backdrop of a slowly ticking clock, counting down to the next election in 2010. And I tend to think of that clock being like the one in the belly of the crocodile that pursued Captain Hook in Peter Pan.
Looking back at the past few weeks, I perceive Will Hodgman as getting his act together and making progress in providing a viable alternative at the polls. Despite protestations of unity, there remain nasty schisms within the Liberal party in this state, which reflect those on the federal level but without the same fanfare. Something must be going on because Brendan Blomeley, a former Liberal party staffer and then Clarence City Council alderman, who was employed with Federal hotels, relinquished his position with the CCC and announced that he was spending more time with his family. A laudable decision perhaps but it was not that long ago that he was being hailed as a potential Liberal parliamentary candidate, although it is my opinion that his alleged links to a certain senior Liberal Senator would not exactly add to his electoral appeal.
Furthermore, for a party that has been haemorrhaging membership for some time, despite claims to the contrary, it is something of a matter of concern for the Liberals when they contemplate their talent pool in State Parliament, it’s even shallower than the dismal puddle on the government side. Should Vanessa Goodwin decide to stand at the next election; she should be a shoe-in and front-bench material. I hesitate to offer any caution but if she has any hidden serious problems, common sense dictates that they are well and truly excised before the election. As history demonstrates, if problems remain unaddressed, danger lurks at every turn, especially for the female of the species. There is blatant hypocrisy in the differing expectations accorded male and female politicians but there is no need to travel that road at this moment. I look at the Liberal party at present as having four good wheels and a rather loud exhaust pipe.
The Greens, according to their own propaganda, continue to enjoy growing support in paid-up membership. I have a somewhat old-fashioned view that should the Greens be capable of effectively widening their appeal by being more conciliatory and inclined to negotiate, rather than confront and claim the high moral ground. Were that to be the case, they might tap into the latent green sentiments that are held by most people who are concerned about the environment and conservation and that is the big worry for the ALP. It seems aeons ago that a fellow student on the Big Island to the North presented me with a copy of a paper, written by Colin Howard, who was then a Professor of Law at Melbourne University, which advanced several compelling reasons, based on interests in common, explaining why Greens should have a lot in common with what used to be called the Country Party. The evolution of the Country Party into the National Party and its reputation for being right-wing in many respects has probably cruelled any thought of a working relationship between the Greens and what used to be referred to as the agrarian workers and peasants party. The demise of the National Party is in no small way related to their politicians being alienated from the man on the land and the special needs of farmers.
Of course like any sane person, I get fed up with hearing farmers whinge. If it rains, then it’s never enough and more follow-up rains are needed. If they get their wish, there is always a concern about flooding. Then there is the problem of drought. For some while I studied agricultural economics, more out of curiosity than for any other reason than I take the view that the day I stop learning is the day that I turn my toes up and you can look for my obituary in the Tasmanian Times. For the uninitiated (and I apologize to the well-informed TT readers) the landmass of Australia is almost exactly that of the United States, without including Alaska. Our coastline is longer and without doubt, excluding Antarctica, is the driest continent on earth. In my travels overseas, people have often asked me about the size of the country and why the population is so small. A short and rather easy answer is that we congregate in cities on the coast that one day will become a huge urban conurbation, stretching from Brisbane in the North round the coast to Adelaide. And, as a consequence Western Australia and the Northern Territory will probably unite as one entity.
The soils of Australia are the thinnest in the world, in no small part due to the age of the continent. Even in Tasmania, which has relatively thicker soil in most areas, there are problems with certain elements missing from the land and the result can be seen in human health and the strange way in which some vegetables grow. I know what it’s like to live on a hardscrabble farm and it’s no picnic, especially with the huge areas covered. Some of the early settler’s accounts reflect a hardship that to a certain extent has forged the national character. Tasmania has never had or appears never to have had, the need for a Country Party. Attempts to form such a party have failed and farmers vote usually for the Liberal party or independents and if they practice organic farming, then they probably vote Green. The state’s population is growing towards 500,000 people and this has been welcomed by the Treasurer among others. My personal view is that the strain placed on infrastructure will be increased and we will see what has happened on the Big Island repeated here.
Some of my early views of Melbourne and Adelaide were of relatively small cities with farming communities not too far from the centre. But with the explosion in the population on the mainland, good arable land has gone under tar and cement and of course, housing. As I watch Hobart sprawling in all directions, with increasing outrage at the short-sightedness of local councils, I have been very pleased to note that my views are not of a deranged individual but have recently been endorsed by major town and urban planning groups. As I have stated before, public transport best serves the areas that use it least. In the outer suburbs, the increasing creep of housing certainly means more people but there are no signs of transport and other infrastructure needs being seriously considered. Planning is something of a bad joke and I returned to one drum that I wish to beat yet again. With the expansion on the Eastern shore, it is not only illogical and unfair but downright uneconomic not to have gas piped east of the Bowen Bridge through Lindisfarne, Bellerive, Howrah, Acton and extensions. The same can be said of the fibre-optic cable for fast broadband services to be running from Hobart to Launceston, then Devonport and linking with the mainland.
This brings me back to the theme of things not being what they appear to be. The dog and pony show, sometimes referred to as State Parliament sat in Burnie for a few days this week. In scenes reminiscent of a rather bad farce, the Liberals and Greens asserted that Labor had run out of legislation by the end of the first day, around dinnertime to be precise. Needless to say, when questioned on the radio, it was left to David Llewellyn to disingenuously state that this had been done deliberately to allow the opposition parties to introduce motions of their own. The Premier later claimed that there was plenty in the pipeline. However, the low light of the last couple of weeks has been matters related to Paula Wriedt; withdrawal of her commission as a minister (not sacking as the media would have us believe, and the highlight was the elevation to the ministry of deserving MLCs Allison Ritchie and Lin Thorp.
I have had much to say about the small puddle of talent on the government benches that would evaporate on the first warm day and to some extent, the addition of the two female MLCs adds firepower to the government side for. However, Jed Bartlett now finds himself in the position of only having one active elected member and minister in the electorate of Franklin and three ministers in the Legislative Council. Personally, I have high regard for Ross Butler but suspect that as he was elected on a recount, he will be “oncer.” The problem for me as a political tragic and interested onlooker is not so much the brouhaha about a combined question time, when ministers can all be subjected to scrutiny and the usual standard of parliamentary language, rather it is the fact that our newish Premier is either being stupid or misled. I’m prepared to say on the record that I regard David Bartlett as among the more intelligent of our politicians and in some respects, he has shown courage in being prepared to change his mind when arguments of substance come before him. However, I have always regarded with a deep-seated suspicion and increasing disquiet, the quality and source of advice that he is receiving. And in particular, I refer to the question of increasing the size of State Parliament.
At first, following a commendable initiative by Nick McKim to have the three political leaders sit down and discuss the matter, hopefully in the tri-partisan manner and without any rancour, the Premier has displayed the flying characteristics of the aircraft mentioned in the very first paragraph of this column. The “flying flapjack” was experimental but performed nowhere near expectations. At the time of its construction the Germans, British and even the Italians were experimenting with gas-turbine engines. The flapjack relied on body lift and the prototypes managed a measly 189 mph (and I have yet to discover whether that was wind-assisted) while in the same time-frame, more conventional piston-engined aircraft were performing close to 400 mph. By the time the second more powerful prototype version of the flapjack had been built and before it flew, the whole project was cancelled, because jet engines had become the norm. A noted aviation historian concluded that the whole project was one of the more interesting anecdotes in (aviation) history, which leads me inescapably to return to the burning question of the hour. Is our prototype new Labor Premier destined to be seen in the same light?
I can recall the predictability of the opening paragraphs of certain newspapers that our former esteemed Premier Jim Bacon read during his younger days. Inevitably they would start with the words: “It is surely no coincidence that…” and I would say that it is surely no coincidence that David Bartlett has backed away from the only morally correct position on enlarging the Parliament and that is returning to five 7-member electorates. It is a great shame that we do not have the pages of the Mercury regularly carrying comment by Wayne Crawford. I’ve met Wayne once, possibly talked to him twice but I read everything he’s written for the Mercury. And while I did not always agree with him on a variety of issues, the man made sense: he made us think and while I am of the pessimistic view that we are being continually “dumbed down” by the media, those of us who enjoy thinking respected his column. If you really want to experience what relatives of mine referred to as the “screaming hab-dabs,” try living north of the DMZ and only reading The Examiner and The Advocate. At least with the Mercury, you get a reasonable semblance of news coverage of state affairs and some idea of what is going on in the wider world. Suffice to say that I can’t do without a national newspaper and monopolies notwithstanding, I read the Internet versions of most national and international newspapers.
Last week, on the 22 September Wayne Crawford reiterated what Dr. Richard Herr has been saying about the way Parliament was prostituted (my term not theirs) by a shady deal between the Labor and Liberal parties to cut the House of Assembly to 25 members (More MPs, better checks). What else would we have expected of the disciples of Ray Groom and Michael Field? I know of very few academics and students of political science who believe that an increase is unwarranted. When the numbers were cut, parliamentary salaries were raised by 40%. In the event of an expansion back to 35 members, salaries should be frozen for at least three years or one term, while the government disposes of the unelected and accountable legions of advisers and spin doctors that have polluted the political process for far too long. Wayne’s killer quote, surely one of the best of the week, was that: “In the downsized, executive-dominated Parliament, the Legislative Council provides one of the very few remaining checks on what otherwise would be virtually dictatorial, untrammelled government power.” Right on Brother!
I was absolutely appalled to hear David Bartlett (and I’m inclined to believe calling him Jed was an undeserved honour, let alone Jedi) stating on radio that people had approached him and said: “David, you’re not going to increase the number of politicians surely?” I don’t know how many approached him and said that and it doesn’t say much about their understanding of government if they believe that the current shambles governs effectively. There needs to be more ministers and more ministries as well as a healthy backbench. At least common sense has prevailed and Human Services has been hived off from the Health department and given to Lin Thorp, of whom I expect good things. I know very well where the idea for seven electorates of five members came from and I’m pretty sure of the identity of the architects of this scandalous proposition. It would be a tragedy if the Liberal Party, under a promising leader, made the same mistake twice because 7 x 5 means that those with pretensions to political nous think they will exterminate the Greens. For the moment, joint sittings for question time appear reasonable but not if there is a hidden agenda of unicameralism.
It is extremely unlikely that I would be consulted on political reform but I would like to see Upper House elections synchronized with elections for the Legislative Assembly starting at the next election but leaving MLCs terms at six years so that in 2014, we would have an election for the Legislative Assembly and two years later, half of the Legislative Council up for re-election. I also feel that modified a proportional representation would be appropriate for that House. What I would not like to see is a replication of the system where the current federal government is held to ransom by independents and one in particular, whose ideas are scarcely congruent with any major community group. As I have no particular interest in psephology, which I tend to regard as something akin to examining a chicken’s entrails, I would like to be educated on the options available. (You see, I’m human and fallible and I don’t know it all).
As the sands of time run out, it doesn’t make much difference whether you describe the lack of government action as masterly inactivity or creative procrastination. While I think community consultation on certain matters is most certainly warranted and democratic, I have a strong feeling that reconsidering the question of where to locate a new hospital is something of a canard. To all except those with vested interests, relocation in the port area is not an option. To the mayor of Glenorchy, the showgrounds are not an option: the only logical step is to rebuild within that CBD block that already houses the RHH. Certainly there will be some dislocation of services but the overall cost will be much less than a so-called “greenfield” site. Furthermore, and at the risk of flogging a dead horse, there is no point in building a brand-new hospital and spending all that money if you’re not compared to attract competent staff and pay them national rates. Throughout history in this country, governments relied on churches and charities to establish hospitals and then finally had to shoulder responsibility. Likewise, they relied on nurses being in the mould of Florence Nightingale, doing the job for next to nothing out of concern for patients. (The fact that recent reappraisals of Florence Nightingale suggest other motives will not be canvassed here).
Reluctantly, I must once again mention the railways (thanks Chuffy) and it appears that while there is some talk of who or who may not be involved in buying the system in part or in full, the dismal fact remains that we have yet to see a strategic plan for transport in the state and where rail fits in. Sturgo can carry on all he likes but he has been weighed and found wanting.
Someone accused me of writing too much so I will truncate my concluding remarks. Firstly, I totally agree with Dr. Richard Herr and his criticisms of the way the pulp mill legislation was shot-gunned through Parliament and I share most of his misgivings about the political process, which aligns me firmly with Wayne and possibly Terry Martin. The most important issue on the agenda, even ahead of political reform/parliamentary expansion, is the matter of the current inquiry chaired by Jim Wilkinson on whether we need a commission on ethics in this state. I make no bones about the fact that it is long overdue and it should extend not only to government and the public service but beyond. I would like to see a powerful light shined into dark quarters where those shadowy men of power who pull the strings in this state lurk and slip away when located. It may well be necessary to bring in someone from overseas or interstate if we cannot find incorruptible people in our midst to carry out this important task and at the same time it would be a sad reflection on the state of our state: Tasmania deserves better. Strange though it may seem to some, I can think of one QC in this state who would be an excellent choice but like me he is cursed with the incurable illness of old age.
In conjunction with a number of other writers, mostly from the big island, I am very interested in trying to discover the constituent elements of an Australian identity. It has become a very slippery concept and until comparatively recently, I believed that Tasmanians had more of an idea of what it meant to be a Tasmanian. You can always distinguish between people from various states: for example, Western Australians regard anything or anyone east of their border as totally different even alien; those from New South Wales have a superiority complex; Victorians are learning to live with inferiority, in much the same way as the defensive South Australians, while Queenslanders regard themselves as living in a state like Texas, complete with cowboy hats, Country and Western music and well-planned publicity.
Tasmanians, I felt knew they were Tasmanian but the divisions between either side of the DMZ are well-known. Hobart is the state capital except if you live north of the razor wire and guard posts. Launceston people know that they live in the real capital and have a disturbing habit of pointing out that Melbourne was discovered from those parts and what a fine little village was built there. The North is not an integrated whole and sad to say, North East and North West are kept apart by more than just the Tamar River.
Nowhere has this parochial attitude been made more manifest of late than in the matter of football. The Tasmanian Devils VFL side has folded finishing disastrously last after coaching problems and a virtual boycott by players from the north of the state. An acquaintance, who is well-known in football circles, advised me that the Devils would never be a going concern while powerful Northern identities prevented players from strong clubs travelling south. The scandalous destruction of the Devils was one part of the price to be paid for a new state-wide league starting next year. It’s not rocket science to work out that Launceston fancies itself as the strongest club in the state, although their refusal to play the SFL premiers Glenorchy left a nasty taste in the mouth. And the business of pouring money into Hawthorn to be a part-time AFL side smacks of desperation, because irrespective of the campaign being run by everybody and their dog in Tasmania, the chances of having a Tasmanian-based team in my lifetime are very slender.
Lastly, it would be remiss of me while talking about parochialism to briefly mention some of the comments being made on the Mercury blog about Paula Wriedt. Opinions are unfortunately hardening against the hapless ex-minister, who is on sick leave until Christmas at least. The depth of ignorance and lack of compassion being shown towards Ms. Wriedt must be gut-wrenching for her family and friends. Something that I had hitherto considered impossible in this state has occurred. I have charted negative comments and admittedly, bloggers are self-selected but charity, which was always a defining characteristic of Tasmanians, appears to be totally lacking in this instance. So to such intellectual giants as “Pom of Rokeby” and his ilk, firstly I’m surprised that you have the intelligence to read the big words in newspapers and secondly, that you could stoop to kicking a person when they’re down, especially when so many suffer from the appalling effects of clinical depression. May you receive that which you wish on others!
