Doctor and activist


Notice: Undefined index: hide_archive_titles in /home/chesterf/public_html/wp-content/themes/modern-business/includes/theme-functions.php on line 233

Category: Accountability

The Queen and I

9 September 2022

I cannot say I ever met the Queen, or that she had a clue who I was, so if you are looking for that, read no further.

I was at the Coronation amazingly enough, as my father went to England to study surgery and I was taken to the parade and was apparently old enough to wave a flag, but not old enough to remember doing so.  (No sums please).

A friend from school, whose father was a parson and who was a very decent fellow went to London for life experience and got a lowly place at a respected PR firm.  It turned out that the PR firm did the PR for the Queen and he was attached to the small unit that did it.  His major boss was promoted to head the whole organisation and the next boss left suddenly and he, at a relatively young age became the Queen’s personal PR agent.

He was there for some years then came back to Australia, as he wanted his kids to grow up as Aussies.  He was much admired for his work there and was naturally quizzed at some length about how things worked.  He said that the Queen was very hard working and always very thoroughly briefed about everyone she was meeting, both their personal background the political or social issues that they were interested in.  He said she was astute, conscientious, kind and decent.  But she was not a Pollyanna. She was realistic about people. If they were silly, she would tacitly acknowledge this as she sought a strategy to deal with the situation.  He was very discrete about specifics and did not mention that he was rushed back to London to deal with the Royal fallout from Diana’s famous TV interview, but he did let one significant issue slip.  He was asked about the Queen’s attitude to Australia becoming a Republic. 

You may recall that a majority of Australians wanted Australia to be a Republic but they were split over whether the President should be a figurehead like a Governor-General or Queen, or whether he/she should have executive powers as in the USA.  John Howard therefore arranged that Electors were asked on 6 November 1999 whether they approved of:

A proposed law: To alter the Constitution to establish the Commonwealth of Australia as a republic with the Queen and Governor-General being replaced by a President appointed by a two-thirds majority of the members of the Commonwealth Parliament.

This naturally split those who wanted a Republic into those who wanted a President appointed by Parliament and those who wanted an elected President.  This carefully crafted split allowed the No vote to win.

The Queen apparently felt that it was inevitable that Australia should become a Republic and that it should stop silly-shallying with it and get on with it as Canada had done.  Naturally she did not say so, and my friend, who has since died would roll over in his grave if he knew that I was taking the role of a gossip columnist in writing this.

But I believe this story to be true, significant and a tribute to the Queen’s realism. 

My view is that we should have a President who is non-executive, and we need major constitutional change as to how Parliament works at the same time.  The latter half may be a hard ask.

But there is no doubt that the Republican debate is coming soon.

Continue Reading

Relevance of Books

8 September 2022

Like a lot of people I do not read as many books as I should, but it seems that they have not lost their relevance.  We are now well past Orwell’s 1984 and have facial recognition software pictures taken when we visit nursing homes and all our conversations and email analysed by algorithms.

Three recent articles came to my attention: 

  1. The Booker Prize, a prestigious prize for novels, which used to be confined to the British Commonwealth but is now open to any writing in English, has satire as its major theme this year.  Below is a NY Times article, reprinted in the SMH.  
  2. The US has been banning books for a while

ww.theguardian.com/us-news/2022/apr/07/book-bans-pen-america-school-districts (add an extra w to make www)

  1. And now China has gaoled the writers of a children’s book about sheep defending themselves from wolves as this is said to be a political analogy for the actions of the Communist Party in Hong Kong.  See link below

Satire dominates in a diverse Booker Prize shortlist

Alexandra Alter The New York Times

A barbed political satire about the fall of an African dictator, told from the perspective of talking animals. A mordantly comic novel about the inescapable horrors of racism in America. A bleak but slyly funny story that explores the trauma of Sri Lanka’s civil wars.

These potent satirical novels are among the six finalists for the Booker Prize, one of the world’s most prestigious literary awards.

This year’s shortlisted novels include authors from five countries and four continents, and encompass a diverse range of prose styles and subject matters, from quiet, introspective literary fiction to fantasy and magical realism.

Several of the novels deploy humour, myth and allegory to tackle painful chapters of history. In Glory, Zimbabwean writer NoViolet Bulawayo obliquely tackles the downfall of autocrat Robert Mugabe, through a narrative featuring a cast of animals — horses, donkeys, dogs, goats, chickens and a crocodile.

The Seven Moons of Maali Almeida, a mythic story by Sri Lankan novelist Shehan Karunatilaka, follows a photographer who wakes up dead in an underworld where he encounters victims of political violence. And in his novel The Trees, Percival Everett lampoons the stain of racism in America with a story about a pair of black detectives who investigate a series of murders that echo the lynching of Emmett Till.

‘‘One of the great powers of language is to make you laugh, even in the middle of terrible things,’’ Neil MacGregor, former director of the British Museum and chair of this year’s judges, said on Tuesday.

Other authors on the shortlist are Irish writer Claire Keegan, for Small Things Like These, about the unmarried women who suffered in Ireland’s Magdalene Laundries; English fantasy writer Alan Garner, for Treacle Walker, a dreamlike story about a boy who has magical visions; and American novelist Elizabeth Strout for Oh William!, about a woman who helps her ex-husband investigate his troubled family history.

Founded in 1969, the Booker Prize is one of the most coveted literary prizes in the world. The winner, who will receive a prize of £50,000 ($A86,000), will be announced on October 17.

www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/07/hong-kong-authors-of-childrens-books-sheep-wolves-convicted-of-sedition

Continue Reading
Continue Reading

Victory of Liz Truss in UK: Style over Substance

7 August 2022

Liz Truss is Britain’s new Prime Minister.  A few things are worthy of comment.  She was elected by the members of the Conservative Party 81,326 votes to 60,399 for Rishi Sunak. 

Prime Ministers used to be elected by their Parliamentary colleagues, which is obviously a lesser number but at least has people doing the job assessing the candidates’ competence.  I am not a huge fan of Presidential systems, but the 141,725 Conservative members who were in the ballot are only 0.002% of the UK population and the Conservative party members are 63% male, 58% over 50 and 80% in the top half of the class demographic spectrum.  So much for government ‘by the people’.

Her defeated rival, Rishi Sunak, had at least been Chancellor of the Exchequer (Treasurer) and had resigned to force Boris Johnson’s resignation.  He was a multi-millionaire in his own right, having worked for Goldman Sachs and being involved in hedge funds.  His wife, Akshata Nurty was one of India’s wealthiest women as an heiress of Infosys and worth 690 million.  Together they were said to be worth 730 million pounds.  He was also dogged by stories that his wife had the money offshore in various trusts and paid minimal tax. (ww.india.com/explainer/rishi-sunaks-net-worth-how-he-entered-uks-super-rich-list-explained-5523793/ )   Some commentators said that his Indian heritage may have been a problem with the Conservative party membership.

It is part of the continuation of mediocre candidates winning in Anglo elections. Trump, Johnson, Morrison, Truss.  Something is clearly wrong with our systems.  My view as often stated is to go to Swiss-style Direct Democracy. Politicians are part-time and keep their previous jobs, which they return to after the maximum two terms. People can collect signatures to force debate on issues or even overturn Federal legislation with quarterly referenda. Political parties exist as here and the Parliament in similar, but the party hierarchies are much less powerful as there is no long-term career as a politician.

Here is a better summary of Liz Truss than I could have written.  It has been in a number of papers and journals:

www.middleeasteye.net/opinion/liz-truss-triumph-style-over-substance

Continue Reading

Want to know about high energy prices?

4 September 2022

It is about market failure.  When public power utilities were privatised a market was set up and power producers could bid into a market to supply at a certain price for each period of time.  But obviously if someone bid in at a low price for part of the market, they would then watch as others bid in higher and made more money.  So the price to all producers was set at the last bid, so the cheap producers made a lot of money.

There were a few problems. The amount of electricity needed varies widely. Coal fired power is not very flexible-it needs a constant load, cannot be stopped and can vary its output only slowly and within a limited range. When renewables came, solar is only in the daytime, and wind varies, so the system had a problem with ‘stability’- the ability to dispatch power when it was needed.

Another problem was rorting, though no one wanted to talk about this.  There were big players who could withhold power so that there was a shortage; the price went up, and then they all cashed in. ‘Imperfect competition’ as economists would call it.  No one wanted to build coal plants and there was not enough storage to let renewable energy last overnight or for dull or windless days. So the Morrison government said that gas was a ‘transition fuel’ and more gas plants would be built.

Meanwhile the Australian gas industry agreed to massive export contracts on the assumption that they could frack Australia as the US had been fracked. But the environmentalists realised the harm this did and resisted.  So our price of gas went up.  So the companies pressured the Albanese government, which is now breaking its election promises and approving fracking. Sorry environment- what is a bit of permanently polluted groundwater and desertification between friends?

Of course years ago, publicly owned utilities run by professional engineers were charged with providing electricity and gas to the public on a non-profit basis. They charged enough to cover their costs with some money for maintenance and future planning.  The price was the average price of generation, not the most expensive component.  The model worked quite well and could again.  The change to a ‘market’ was ideological.

At an international level, the problem is similar, but it all being blamed on Russia, which is only partly true.  Naturally in a globalised world, we are also affected by the European gas market, but less directly, especially if we frack to get out of it; which is a very bad solution, substituting a long-term problem for a short-term one.

Here is an international article:

https://eand.co/this-is-why-your-energy-bills-are-going-through-the-roof-cc99e2a59d12
Continue Reading

Bribing the Governor-General?

4 September 2022

The antics of Scott Morrison were bad enough when he was Prime Minister. Since he left two journos, Simon Benson and Geoff Chambers wrote a book, ‘Plagued- Australia’s 2 Years of Hell’, about how he had 5 ministerial portfolios.

There were quite a lot of questions arising out of this.

It was not illegal, which was presumably obvious.  Who would pass a law saying ‘The Prime Minister shall not secretly give himself Extra Cabinet portfolios’?  It would not occur to anyone that this was possible. 

Also ‘Corruption’ seems to be defined very narrowly in law- someone has to make money, usually personally.  Corrupt process does not seem to count.  When I was in Parliament a whistle-blower, Nola Fraser told me about corruption in SW Sydney Area Health Service.  The first question I asked her was, ‘Do you mean someone was taking money, or do you mean that the processes were corrupt?’  She said, ‘No, its not about money, they are just killing people by pushing complaints sideways. They are supposed to be helping people, but they are doing the opposite’.  So I helped her and we had an inquiry  into SW Sydney AHS. Then ICAC got on the case and had an inquiry that cost more than a million dollars, and said that she had no credibility as she had no evidence of money changing hands.  They wasted a million dollars and trashed her reputation because they used their definition of corruption and did not bother to ask hers.

So probably Morrison is not corrupt either.  The Solicitor-General did not just say briefly that it was legal, he wrote quite a lot saying in essence that was highly undesirable.

One of the journalists, Simon Benson, was the editor of the Daily Telegraph and must have known about this before the election, but chose to reveal it in a book after rather than in a news story before.  In that this would have made a lot of difference to the election and Morrison might have been defeated by even more, it is a decision that frankly bothers me. I knew Simon Benson as the News Ltd journo in the NSW Parliament when I was there. He was a Murdoch man and had nothing but contempt for the cross-bench; an interest in power rather than procedure.

The other aspect is that the Governor-General knew about it and did nothing. In that the 1975 Governor-General was vilified when he sacked Whitlam, it could be argued that Governors- General since will obey their Prime Ministers and not question them. But they are there ‘above politics’ to see that the interest of the Australian people is served, and when the unusual appointments were not announced, the Governor-General should have both known and acted on it. It is strange how little criticism he has had. I wonder if this is because this is being stored up as evidence that we need an elected President rather than a figurehead one when we become a Republic. Those who would  criticise the G-G are mostly Republicans. 

But now The Saturday Paper has a story by Karen Middleton that Morrison gave $18 million to a leadership program that was suggested by the Governor-General, David Hurley. Hurley is an ex-military man.  The military naturally do leadership training and according to two of my nephews who have been in the military do it very well.  Various ex-military types have leadership training as part of elite Management Courses which exist commercially.  But whether leadership should have a large subsidised program seems dubious to me. It sounds like an elite getting even more resources.  Church schools are subsidised and it seems just to be governments paying to increase social inequity. Surely if leaders are going to emerge, they should do so from the rough and tumble of life.  The military, private schools and Management seem more than capable of looking after their own.

So what did Hurley want, how indebted was he to Morrison, and did this have any bearing on his response to Morrison’s dubious activities in personal Kingmaking?          

www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/post/max-opray/2022/08/15/morrisons-secret-resources-portfolio

Continue Reading

Some Thoughts for the Jobs Summit- Arthur Chesterfield-Evans

27 August 2022

Definition of unemployment
Years ago, the ABS definition of unemployment was less than 25 hours a weeks of full time work,
which was considered to be a living wage.
The world’s definition was any regular work, even 1hr per week. The Australian definition was
changed ‘so comparisons could be made’ and unsurprisingly our unemployment rate improved
dramatically. But the figure is actually meaningless as an index of how the population’s work status
is. All gig workers on non-living wages are treated the same as full time permanent workers as the
latter category dwindles mightily.
What no one is saying is that the unemployment rate is very low because all the foreign students
and visa workers, who were getting very exploited in the gig economy, are no longer there. Even
backpackers, willing to work for poor wages as a ‘life experience’ are no longer here.
Employers have had a dream run for about 40 years. What has happened is:

  1. Australia has de-industrialised so that the organised groups of full time workers that were
    unionised and could demand a reasonable share of wages has dwindled hugely as a
    percentage of the workforce, weakening the unions.
  2. The governments, inspired by neo-liberal ideas of free markets, have attacked unions so that
    wages can be lowered. Wages are seen as a cost to the exclusion of their other attributes.
  3. Globalisation has made workers compete across the world, so as long as the goods produced
    are transportable or the service offered can be done remotely, many jobs can be ‘offshored’.
  4. It is easier for employers either to import goods rather than manufacture them here or to
    move services offshore.
  5. Increased labour mobility has helped:
    a. The development of Education as an export commodity has brought many students
    here, who are only allowed to work 20 hrs per week. Since they cannot live on that
    amount of money they are forced to work ‘illegal’ hours, so employers pay cash or
    low wages or both.
    b. The ‘work visas’ from developing countries has allowed tasks such as fruit picking to
    be done at exploitative labour rates as the workers do not know what they are
    entitled to. No effort seems to have been made to inform them, and they have no
    power if they were informed.
  6. The internet has enabled jobs to more casual, as recruitment is quicker and simpler, allowing
    more part-time and short-term work.
  7. ‘Labour Hire’ has meant that the rights of workers can be undermined. Because workers are
    not ‘full time’ but only get what shifts are ‘available’, they can still be ‘with the agency’ in a
    legal sense, but be given no work. If there is a workplace injury, creating a legal obligation
    to the employer in terms of wages and rehabilitation, this can be avoided or minimised. The
    person who they actually did the work for (and who was responsible for their injury) is not
    their employer- the agency may be, but even they can say that they are merely a conduit to
    a workplace who take a commission only for the hours worked.
    In economic terms, workers are now in a perfect market, so the price falls. Higher executives claim
    to be in a ‘world market’, so can take stratospheric salaries and the gap between rich and poor will
    grow. This is very bad for social cohesion, and in the subcultures of management there is a real and
    dangerous loss of contact with the world in which the employees live.

What is needed is:

  1. Government has to recognise and state that in an unregulated market, the power of
    employers will allow the continuation of the increasing inequity of the last 40 years. People
    are unwilling even to state this obvious fact.
  2. The Government needs to recognise, acknowledge and implement the idea that everyone
    should be able to participate in society. Not all jobs will make a profit, and a volunteer
    framework needs to be created for older folk and long term unemployed which gives them
    dignity and the ability to participate in society. But volunteers must not be cynically used to
    replace paid jobs; they should concentrate on doing jobs that are needed but otherwise
    might not be done. A structure of tasks and volunteer coordinators is needed, organised by
    local government and based on models such as the bush regenerators of Hunters Hill.
  3. Award wages for job categories are needed to set norms as a starting point for negotiations.
  4. Collective bargaining with general awards, and employers that want to deviate from them
    have to justify their position with appeals to a Tribunal.
  5. Support for Unions. Many workers cannot negotiate with big businesses any more than ants
    can negotiate with elephants. Bureaucratic Fair Work Commissions are needed to enforce
    rules, but there have to be people at the workplace to observe and advocate. The
    Commission cannot replace workplace membership systems.
  6. Aged Care and Disability industries need rules set with more input from residents,
    complaints mechanisms and enforcement. Self-regulation is frankly no regulation.
  7. A regulator and external enforcement is also needed in the aged and disability residential
    sector. Currently this is driven by real estate- the idea is to get people to sell their houses,
    move into overpriced units and then be ripped off, even in the supposedly not for profit
    sector. Once in there the level of care needed tends to increase, but not to be provided.
  8. A systematic assessment project for overseas qualifications is needed. In my own
    experience there are large numbers of very well qualified Koreans who have nothing
    recognised and work in very menial jobs. This is discrimination and a waste of talent.
  9. The Commonwealth Employment Service should be re-established as a Federal public
    service department. The idea that public servants do not work hard is frankly wrong and
    offensive. The private sector incentives have resulted in cream-skimming. The onerous
    ‘mutual obligations’ are punitive and just waste employers time. Centrelink does not meet
    its mutual obligation to help people. It takes up to 2 hours for them even to answer the
    phone. They are currently set up like a business that strives to minimise its costs by
    deflecting customers’ requests. A whole new philosophy is needed in job placement.
  10. Training is needed, especially in trades. Apprenticeships have been badly neglected as
    education has been seen as a commodity, and university education almost a universal right
    to gain entry to the upper middle class. TAFE, which was a very valuable training venue to
    get skills, a place where aging tradesmen could transfer their skills and a major social ladder
    for people pf all ages to better themselves, and hence a considerable driver of social equity
    has been long neglected. The Government needs to research the skills mix needed,
    subsidise places to fill those needs, and subsidise apprentices, obviously with supervision so
    that here cannot be systematic churn, which has happened with some job subsidy programs.
    This research can be done within the public service, hopefully with some links to academic
    departments that study employment needs.
  11. In terms of future industries, the government has to have policies that favour the change to
    renewable energy. An example of this is that Electric cars should be able to plug into the
    grid and buy and sell electricity on the spot market. This will make them part of the solution
    to the problem of energy storage, rather than exacerbating peak demand. It will also allow
    owners to offset their purchase costs. If there is a change of policy the jobs in this case will
    follow.
Continue Reading
Continue Reading

‘It’s the Monopoly Game Stupid’

13 August 2022
In case you missed it, that is a misquote of Bill Clinton’s 1992 election mantra, ‘It’s the economy,
stupid’. (He beat George W Bush when the US economy turned down).
Other apposite quotes are Stalin’s ‘The only thing I believe in is the power of the human will’ and
Mao Tse Tung’s ‘Power comes out of the barrel of a gun’.
The Stalin and Mao quotes relate to the power of governments, Clinton’s the power of economic
forces. It seems that the economy is more powerful than governments, as it was responsible for the
collapse of the Soviet Union, and the current rise of China is partly because they have a new model
where they set the rules for the economy.
The other variable more powerful than governments is technological innovation as it totally changes
the way we live, but this is not a point I want to discuss now.
The two Wars last century were over access to markets, so at the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944
that set the rules for a post WW2 economic system the object was to eliminate trade barriers so that
countries that were doing well would rise, and those doing poorly would fall, all this happening
gradually and without wars. This has turned the whole world into a market, and because money
crosses borders so easily, big companies can take over smaller ones, and governments, being
restricted by their borders have their powers limited. The ability to move jobs offshore makes
workers compete globally.
As governments’ power has fallen relative to big companies and the best brains in the nation go into
companies rather than into government, many governments do not believe that they can defy big
corporations. The Australian governments following the interests of the mining lobby and the
Murdoch press are just a couple of examples. Another is the tax and (non-)royalty system, and yet
another the drive to privatise public utilities as Capital wanted the returns from performing certain
functions that had previously been done by the public service for no profit. The governments did
not have the courage to say ‘No’, particularly as the companies were generous donors to the
political parties.
As in a Monopoly game, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer unless there is government
intervention, and even this has limits.
As we struggle with rising inflation rates, falling relative wages, house prices supercharged by 40
years of negative gearing and manifestations of rising inequality, we need to look at the root causes
and to what extent they can be modified. Governments need to rattle their cages domestically and
cooperate more internationally. Is Albanese up to it?
www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/08/13/how-tax-bludgers-are-ripping-their-
fellow-australians

Continue Reading

Roll Out the Barilaro

13 August 2022
I sometimes get upset that I missed a good series on TV, but I was recently sorry to miss the Barilaro
Show on the NSW Parliamentary website stream.
It seems that John Barilaro, the Deputy Premier worked to get rid of Gladys Berejeklian, then set up
an entire Trade Commissioner Service for NSW, then someone made its jobs subject to political
appointment rather than public service protocol, then he said that he wanted a job in New York
rather than London, then someone decided that he was the best man for the NY Trade
Commissioners job. So because of the ‘someones’ in the above sentence Barilaro was surprised to
get the job in NY and is a ‘victim’ in this process, so he has ‘mental health issues’ and cannot front
the Parliamentary Inquiry about all this.
Looking at the 3 aspects of this:

  1. Whether we need a NSW Trade Commissioner
  2. How they are selected and
  3. Politicians with mental health issues at critical times
    I am not sure if there should be State-based Trade Commissioners, as there is a danger that the
    Australian States will have a race to the bottom to get foreign investment. I recall NSW competed
    with Qld and Victoria to have a new tobacco factory built. In the Randwick and Botany Sites
    Development Act 1982 it rezoned the tobacco factory in Kensington from industrial to high-rise
    residential, changing its value from about $5 million to $17 Million and handing over the Pagewood
    bus depot site at a peppercorn price to get British Tobacco to stay in Sydney rather than move
    interstate. British-Americal tobacco got a huge windfall, NSW got a new tobacco factory and the
    industry had a good base to lobby against smoke-free legislation for the next 20 years.
    Australia has a Federal Trade Commissioner service and New Zealand has one lot of Trade
    Commissioners who sell their national brand very effectively and consistently.
    As far as the selection of staff is concerned I am also in favour of proper and transparent selection
    processes, which were in place in the NSW Public Service when I started in in it in 1983, but were
    being considerably frayed with political interference when I left in 1994.
    My track record on Mental Health is that I initiated the NSW Mental Health Inquiry (Hansard
    11/12/2001), which was chaired by Dr Brian Pezzutti, was completed in 2003 and noted the
    appalling state of Mental Health in NSW since the large institutions were closed after the Richmond
    Report, and Premier Greiner saved on the alternative by not providing the promised community
    mental health support services. The result of the 2003 inquiry was more money ($320 million) for
    NSW mental health services so that practitioners’ complaints changed from ‘we cannot afford it’ to
    ‘we cannot get trained staff’, which is progress after a fashion. It also triggered a Federal Senate
    Mental Health inquiry in 2007, which resulted in psychologists being put onto Medicare, which
    increased the professional workforce by about 6 times as there are many more psychologists than
    psychiatrists. But perhaps the main effect was some degree of destigmatisation of mental health,
    so now sportspeople and others can time off for mental health problems when they could not
    before.

But before you drop all scepticism about mental health, you should read Rick Morton’s piece in The
Saturday Paper today, which is the source of my potted summary above and traces Barilaro’s
actions. Sometimes being stressed looks particularly like getting comeuppance when you think you
are entitled to something.
www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/news/politics/2022/08/13/front-row-seats-the-barilaro-

Continue Reading