The "treaty" in a neighbouring state

has, if media reports are correct, now resulted in a situation where any law must also be approved by the members of an unrepresentative minority group before it can become law. 

The "treaty" between "indigenous" members of the community and everyone else has resulted in a situation which is potentially very, very dangerous. It is, if correctly reported, the way apartheid once worked in South Africa.

Why on earth would anyone give so much power to such a small group? Don't misunderstand me here. I still believe there is far too big a gap between the lives of some indigenous people and the rest of the population. I also believe there is a rich and diverse cultural heritage there that we will be the poorer for losing. Those things matter.

What does not matter is the alleged disadvantage of many urban "indigenous" people. I put "indigenous" in inverted commas here because I do not believe that having a single great-grandparent who was "aboriginal" disadvantages you. It is much more likely that, unless you claim to be "indigenous" nobody will even recognise you as such. They will walk past you in the street and not see it. Yes, it might be important to you. You are welcome to feel it is an important part of your heritage. It is. It is not however so important in every day life that you should feel or are disadvantaged by it. It is much more likely you are disadvantaged by other life choices, those of your own as well as your parents.

And yes, it is some of your own direct ancestors who have contributed to the very disadvantages you now claim to have. The blame for all these things cannot be placed at the door of other people. That you should now be able to choose how the rest of the community will be governed, under which laws the community will operate seems wrong to me. I know the "that's not the intention" and "that's not the way it will work" arguments but put a test case to the courts and it is very likely it is the way it will work. The courts will look at what the legislation says.

In this state there is a "voice". It was brought into being by the government after the people of this state voted against a similar voice at federal level. It was a deliberate attempt to go against the wishes of the electorate. The government did not go so far as to try and bring in a "treaty" or give similar powers to the "voice".  It was not democratic however. Only "indigenous" people could vote to be part of it. 

It has already shown signs of failure. The vote to be part of it was voluntary. Only ten percent of those who were eligible bothered to vote. There are forty six members of the "voice" and some were "elected" with no votes at all. (They are females and just being on the ballot paper was sufficient.) Others received just fifteen votes, a few just twenty-three. There was plenty of publicity about the vote, about the opportunity to stand for election. It was a very expensive exercise and perhaps done with the best of intentions. It simply did not work. 

Indigenous people I know were mostly opposed to the entire idea. They do not see such things as necessary or likely to work. One or two might grab the idea of being able to dictate to the rest of us but most  would see it as ridiculous.  

My friend M... refused to be part of the process. He does not believe it is right or necessary. I have yet to talk to him about the law in the neighbouring state. It will be interesting to hear what he has to say.  

  

There is a bike ride which

is a rite of passage for the young around here. It involves putting your bike on the train at the local station and then going to the end of the line. 

The line ends up in the hills behind me. You exit the station and then you do the hair raising ride down the hill. The road is steep and winds around. It is often busy. 

The ride is a thrill. It requires skills you cannot develop anywhere else. It is something which can occupy several hours of your time on any weekend - and right through the school holidays. If you are in your teens and your parents are not supervising your every activity during the day then you might even be able to do the ride twice in a day. 

I have never done the ride. I would not even consider it. I do not have the skills or the right sort of bike. It is not designed for tricycles at any point.

Middle Cat and the Black Cat did the ride once. Our parents did not want them to do it but agreed they could do it just the once. Once was enough. They found out what it was like. 

They also did the ride more than fifty years ago. They did it when the ride was not nearly as popular as it is now. It was not nearly so common to see dozens of young riders coming down the hill at terrifying speeds. Yes, you can break the speed limit coming down the hill - and they know it.

Now, if the weather is good, any weekend and daylight train into the hills is likely to be crowded with bikes. They are going "up to do the ride". It is almost exclusively the male of the species who participates in this activity. I have seen a female just once. 

I have also talked with them occasionally. We may not have said a lot but they will sometimes make a remark like "cool bike" of my tricycle. My response will be something like, "Thanks. Runs on banana power". That will usually produce a similar silly sort of response. I cannot say I feel comfortable crammed in with them and I avoid it if I can. The driver is usually happy to have me in the first carriage although the rear carriage is the "bike" one. They will tell me to come to the first carriage along with any wheelchair, gopher, pusher or pram.  Yes, I prefer that.

All that said I cannot help wondering about the woman who attempted to film the young who were "abusing" her in the rear carriage. I know any group of young can behave in ways they would not behave on their own or even in pairs. I know they can show off and even do harm. I have also discovered the best policy is to ignore that sort of behaviour, ignore it for my own safety. 

If I need to exit the train and they are trying to crowd on before I am off then the "hey guys more room for you if I can get out of the way" usually works wonders. They might even say "sorry".  

I know there will be renewed calls to try and stop them using the train to get to the start of the ride, perhaps to stop them doing the ride. I do not think that would be right. It would cause more trouble.  Let's face reality. Most of them will grow up to be law-abiding citizens if they can let off steam now.    

An address to the nation

or an encouragement to do the opposite? That is the question.

Our Prime Minister is not well liked. This is not simply because he is a politician and the "leader" of the party currently in power. He is not liked within the party itself. Their internal rules would make it very difficult to replace him so we are stuck with someone who is not liked and, from all accounts, not competent. 

I do not say that simply because I do not like or trust the man but because the evidence is there. He is not a leader. He dithers. He does not make bold decisions.

There he is with a huge majority in the House of Reps. He could do almost anything with it...and the threat of a double dissolution. He has done nothing of note. 

We seem to be stuck with "Net Zero". He is so captured by the increasingly unrepresentative trade union movement and their demands that we are not increasing manufacturing. We are increasing red tape and form filling. He seems terrified of investigating the unsustainable National Disability Insurance Scheme. Don't talk to him about anti-Semitism but do mention Islamophobia because of the votes not supporting concerns about that will lose. Allow a Human Rights Commission to deny rights to almost half the population. Encourage the leading medical body to deregister doctors who express concerns about potentially harmful practices after anonymous complaints are made by lay people.

Stand in front of three flags instead of one national flag for announcements of national importance while you tell us we do not have a fuel shortage - yet. Oh and don't forget to remind us that we won't have a fuel shortage because we are going to "net Zero" and show the world how it is done.

Yes, the Prime Minister may have meant well last night but he has just made the problem worse. Like it or not "oil" is not a dirty word. It is an essential part of human existence in the  21stC. We need it. Without it we are going nowhere. It is time to recognise that.