That NDIS announcement

has been made. 

As I expected the first thing which happened was an alarmed call to me. "What's this going to mean for K...'s package?"

My answer to that was, "Nobody is going to take K...'s package away. It might be reviewed at some point but even without the NDIS you would have been getting extra help."

The NDIS was designed to provide help for people like K...  She is so severely physically disabled she cannot do anything for herself. She cannot speak. She is fed through a tube because she cannot swallow. She has the intellectual understanding of, at most, a two year old child.  Her parents did an amazing job of caring for her. Her father is no longer alive but her mother, now in her eighties, goes to see her daughter in the "group house" every day. She worries about what will happen to K... when she is no longer there to help.

"I would miss her dreadfully but I wish she would go before me so I would know she was safe," her mother tells me. What a think to have to wish!

The NDIS was supposed to be for people like K. It was not intended to provide football boots and a carer to take a boy with behavioural issues to after school sport. Yes, they are behavioural issues. He is not "autistic". He has some learning issues but they are not severe. He has extra tutorial sessions. They require extra effort on his part, an effort he is not making. He is the only child and life revolves around what he demands. He is a bully at school and has been suspended for his behaviour more than once. He has been "assessed" more than once and each time his "package" has been increased. His mother told me, quite proudly, that he is now getting more than $30,000 a year in funding. He loves the extra attention but is it doing any good? That is highly debatable. It is not what the NDIS was intended to cover. 

The NDIS is doing the job it was intended to do for another child I know. She is now five and this year is being "home-schooled". It is not by choice but because she is physically too frail to go to school. She is a very intelligent child who wants to go to school. Her package includes funding for attending a "gym class" - actually a highly specialised exercise session. The sessions are designed to try and build up enough strength to handle at least a half day at school next year. If she can handle that then she will attend school full time the following year but there will still need to be someone available to give her some help to handle her medical needs.  Her father told me, "We are hoping we can cut back on the funding as she learns to handle more herself. " 

I had her here for a couple of ours recently when her grandmother could not help as she usually does. We did some craft together and at one point I asked, "Do you want me to do it or would you like to try doing it yourself?" Her immediate response was, "I want to do it."  It has taken time and training and an expectation that she will try to do what she can to get to that response. It made me think that the NDIS needs to be about more than funding. It needs to be about an expectation of effort as well. Yes, it is "not fair" this child will have a life long physical issue but her parents are teaching her that this means she will always have to make the effort to cope.

Perhaps this is where we have gone wrong with the NDIS. It should not be about "services" or "money" but about assistance only where assistance is really needed.  For the K..s of this world it should be about dignity and the occasional treat because she can do nothing for herself. For the other two it should be about making them as independent as possible but making sure they are putting the effort in so funding is doing the job it was intended to do. 

Building a house is

something I have observed but never done. To me it looks complicated and expensive. I am sure those who do it welcome anything that makes it less complicated and less expensive.

The first place I called home was a tin shed on the top of a small hill on the edge of a small country town. It was the only accommodation available for my parents. The Senior Cat was teaching in the primary school. My mother filled in for the teachers of both the primary and secondary school if they were away ill. This went on happening until I arrived and Mum had to deal with caring for a baby in a tin shed where there was linoleum placed directly over the ground. Water was pumped via the windmill which, if the wind blew strongly enough, provided a weak and intermittent supply of electricity.

My parents must have been watching the building of the two rows of "Housing Trust" houses down the hill. This was post-war government accommodation. It was intended for the teachers and similar government workers. The houses were the cheapest to build fibro-asbestos houses with their "Metters no.5" wood burning stoves and their "chip heater" hot water in the bathroom. My parents thought it was luxury after the shed.

Now there would be outrage if that sort of new housing was offered to young people. They want something much more substantial and they want air-conditioning to cater for "climate change". They want an instant hot water service and much more.

This is part of the problem with the housing supply of course. People want far more now and they want it from the start. My parents were retired before they built their own home. It was only possible because they saved and commuted some of their superannuation to do it. Prior to that, out in "the country", they were forced to rent the sub-standard accommodation supplied. There was no other accommodation available. On their return to the city they had no choice but to move in to the house my mother's parents had lived in, a house which held many unhappy memories. Yes, they could have stayed there but the Senior Cat was determined Mum should have her "own" home. 

They built a house on a rare vacant block of land not too far from where I now live. It is like many other houses built by the same company. The rooms are not large and it did not come with air-conditioning or landscaping but it did have hot water and electricity. My parents did the rest. Even in retirement they did it gradually. They did it as they could afford it and by deciding their priorities. It is not how things are done now. It is apparently acceptable to go deeper into debt and have it all from the start.

I may be wrong but I suspect it is something which adds greatly to the cost of housing. "Oh, it will be cheaper to do it now while we are building" is something I have heard more than once. Is it? 

Perhaps we need to rethink expectations and rethink priorities. I know I am fortunate I have what I have. It is not perfect but I have something which is actually far better than what my parents started out in. When I said this to a young girl who is about to get married she was shocked. She and her husband to be already have plans for a house with a patio and a pool and "proper air-conditioning" provided by solar panels and more. They are both earning very good money and I give them credit for their determination to save but they still want more. "It's what everyone needs now," I was told. Is it? Would the "housing crisis" be less if people wanted less to start with? 

The NDIS is not working

and it is time for a complete overhaul or an even more drastic complete scrapping.

The National Disability Insurance Scheme started out with the best of intentions. It was meant to be certainty that the basic needs of people with disabilities would be met. It no longer does that.

I know a woman with Down Syndrome. Her sister is her legal guardian and has Power of Attorney over this woman's affairs. The woman herself gets a pension for which she "works" at a centre for people with disabilities. This woman can read and write at a basic level. She lives in a tiny unit which she keeps spotlessly neat and clean. Yes, she is a "success" story but she is still vulnerable and someone, in this case her sister, needs to keep an eye on her affairs. Recently the centre management tried to take over this woman's affairs. She was called in to the office and asked to sign some forms which would have given the centre control over her financial affairs. One of the consequences was to be told she would need to move into a "group" house "because we (management) will be paying all your bills now". This is what alerted her sister to what was going on.

The resultant mess has taken some time to sort out. It has taken her sister many hours to do with some help from me.The centre made all sorts of excuses but the reality is they wanted control because there is money to be made out of having control. I made some inquiries of other people who are "working" there and yes, they have all been asked to effectively sign over their financial affairs so the centre has control. Those who have guardians or interested family or friends now have someone looking into the situation. The centre is running at a loss but those running it are getting and excellent income. 

There is too much of this sort of thing going on. It will always go on but not enough is being done to investigate it. The entire scheme has been seen as a means of making money by some. However much it is denied the fraud element is high.

There are far too many people receiving benefits for things which are not needed. The Down Syndrome woman was paying for a "cleaning service". She does her own cleaning. She is paying rent and the rent is reasonable. Her landlord is happy with her, indeed told me he wished the other tenants were as good as she is. The idea she might move into a group house and share a bedroom left him shaking his head.  "Making money out of that," was his comment.

The matter is now resolved after a fashion. There may or may not be consequences for those in charge of the centre. They will almost certainly argue "mistakes with paper work" and "this is what she said she wanted" and "we have to do what we believe is best for the client" if the matter goes any further. My guess is they will be given a warning and nothing will be done. It is much easier not to do anything.

This is why it is also easier to allow people to go on receiving benefits for services they do not need, perhaps should never have received. Arguing with them and cutting their benefits is just too much effort. It is all being paid for by other people's taxes.

The entire system needs to be rethought. I suspect I could go in and that my friend S... could go in and cut expenditure by half. It would leave some unhappy people who believe they have a "right" to some services but it might leave money for people who need help and are not getting it.  

 

Just 7.6% of students

in their final year of school are studying a foreign language according to a report in today's paper. It also says the most "popular" languages are Japanese, Chinese and Spanish while Indonesian has a very low 3.7% retention rate. This is not like Europe where 96% of students are still studying one or more foreign languages in their final year at school.

I can go a little further and say that many of those who are studying a foreign language here are students who speak that language at home. The vast majority of them will be Chinese.  That is why they are studying Chinese.

Language learning is not seen as important here. We are too far away from Europe for European languages to be seen as important. Migrants from Europe have integrated by learning English. Their children spoke the language of their parents at home and sometimes went to "Greek school" or Italian classes but the language was almost lost by the next generation. They did not see it as necessary.

There are desultory attempts to teach a second language to primary school students in some schools but what is taught depends on a teacher being available, how enthusiastic they are and whether they have the support of the school and the parents. My observations suggest that there is very little language actually taught. I find children cannot even respond to a basic greeting.

Asian languages are very different from Indo-European languages and I have always been of the opinion that teaching them in school is a waste of time unless you are prepared to dedicate many more hours than is usual. The amount a child can learn in the time devoted is simply not worth the time or the effort unless the child is exposed to the language at home. 

I was talking to a friend recently. She was born in Holland and admits "I only speak three languages". Only three? I can speak only one. Oh I can try and make myself understood in more than one, understood at a very simple level. I can read more than one but it is because my job demands it. I am entirely self taught and native speakers of any language other than English would be tearing their hair out at my attempts to say anything. Still I can do that much and I am aware it is far more than most people around me. It has not been easy but it has been essential. 

I think this is where the problem lies. Another language is not essential in this country. If someone does not speak English then the attitude is "well learn English". I myself believe permanent residents of this country should learn English but I look on it as essential for their independence, well being and safety. I am happy for them to retain their first language as well but not for them to expect special consideration if they make no effort to learn English. It is what I would see as being expected of me if I went to live in another country where the first language was not English. 

Right across Asia English is the common language. Business is conducted in English. There is no expectation that you will speak Chinese, Thai, Japanese, Korean, Vietnamese or anything else. If you have taken the trouble to learn some polite phrases that will be well received but speakers of those languages know they are seen as "difficult".  The only problem with all this is that it does mean we are lazy about language learning - and arrogant too.

There is also the intense concentration on science and maths and technology. Students are not even studying English. It shows.

Learning a second language also requires learning another way of thinking. For that reason alone I believe all children should learn at least one other language. If you come from a family where a second language is spoken at home then make it that language if you can but make learning a second language as important as learning the language of mathematics or coding.  We will have better scientists if they can speak another language as well.  

"I have no more earth to cling to"

 are the words of Yosef Wiener. He was a Holocaust survivor. He must have thought he had seen the worst only to lose more members of his family in the equally brutal events of October 7th in Israel. "I am at the end of my strength" he wrote, "I have no more earth to cling to." 

He died without seeing peace between Israel and its neighbours.

I know too many people who lump all Israelis together and blame all of them indiscriminately for what is happening between them and their neighbours. I know people who tell me, "Well, they have no right to be there. They have stolen the land from...."  

I do not agree with the way some Israelis have taken over yet more territory and displaced other people who also have the need of a home and a homeland. It might surprise some people to know there are many Israelis who feel the same way.

It might surprise some people to know that I know Israelis and Palestinians who are friends, whose children and grandchildren are friends. They visit each other. They have shared meals together. They support one another. 

It might surprise some people to know that Hamas and Hezbollah do not have the universal support or approval of people in Gaza and Lebanon. The support and approval of these groups is actually low. These terrorists are feared  not just by Israelis but inside Gaza and Lebanon as well. People forget that Lebanon was a majority Christian country not that long ago. It was a wealthy, stable country too. Islam has done Lebanon no favours. Extreme Islam has done the region no favours. Ultra-orthodoxy has done Israel no favours.

 As someone else recently put it, "Just because you are offended does not make you right". It just leaves old men with no more earth to cling to when they die. 

 

Fly there - if you can

because it is a long journey by road.

Those of you who live Elsewhere will be largely unaware of how big this country is. We take visitors into the "rural" areas close to the city and they think "aren't the farms a long way apart". We think "aren't they close together". For us "a long way apart" can mean hundreds of kilometres not five or six.

The looming fuel shortage is making people who live in those areas very conscious of their isolation. For them, and those of us who once lived there, it is seen as a very real problem. At the best of times you do not simply "hop in the car" to go shopping or get to the doctor or dentist or drop the kids at school. Going somewhere means using fuel and fuel is expensive. Working the farm which will give you the income to buy the fuel also means using the vehicles which use fuel. 

Yesterday morning I was waiting at the pedestrian lights near the library and I watched the cars going along the road which leads to the CBD.  Car after car after car had just one person in it. There they were cosily tucked into their transport. One person was drinking from a takeaway container - his breakfast perhaps? Another was - illegally - on his phone. They were ignoring the fact that at least four different bus routes use sections of that road. They were ignoring the fact there is a train line that, even stopping at five more stops after the local station, takes just thirteen minutes to get into the city.  No, they would be paying for fuel (and all the other expenses) and parking...and they would be using the fuel which we should be keeping for people in rural areas. 

It is unlikely those driving their cars would even think of this. They would be intent on getting home easily when work finished for the day or telling themselves that the walk at the other end was too much. They would be "picking up the kids" and "going to the gym" or any number of other things.

Out in the country all this gets infinitely more difficult and there are even more problems if you are ill. Rural areas do not have all the services the city has. People need to get to the city for consultations with specialists, for treatment. It is an expensive business and it is time consuming. The plane flights from the most distant points of the state are an essential part of the service. Cut the flights out and some people will have no access to essential health services. Cut the flights down and you might still be able to access the services but it will be even more inconvenient (and possibly more expensive) than before. The airlines do not want to provide the services because, even using small planes, they are running at a loss. Yes, you may be ill and feeling dreadful but it is not the role of the airline to see you get to your appointment.  

Food is more expensive out there. The variety in the (much smaller) supermarket is not as great. Quite likely there is nowhere to buy the shoes your child needs for school. That has to wait until you visit the nearest "big" town. When we lived in remote areas my mother would buy things in bulk and they had to last until the next trip back to the city.

The government is trying to tell us that our fuel supplies are adequate, that there is no need for rationing. As someone said to me yesterday, "That's enough for me to believe we are running short and the government should bring rationing in." I hope he is wrong.

I am thankful I can still use pedal power.  

  

There will be a bail hearing today

where an attempt to have this country's most decorated soldier released from custody. It should succeed but it may not. If it does not then we can be even more certain than before that this case is politically motivated.  

Yes, someone who is accused of murder must face court. It is the manner in which the case against that person is handled which is of concern here. Somewhere out there a journalist is probably congratulating themselves on what they have managed to achieve. They have brought down a hero. They have succeeded in having a defamation case thrown out. They have caused endless time and trouble to be devoted to the alleged actions of someone who has faced more life and death situations than the journalist can even dream about.  The journalist no doubt sees themselves as the "hero" now.

The media has gone headlong into reporting all this. There have been claims of "innocence" and "guilt" and all sorts of conspiracy theories flying through the ether and on the air.

There are some things which can be said. The first of these is that the bail hearing should bring about a release from custody. It may not but it should. It should because this person is not a flight risk. If bail is not granted then he could remain incarcerated for years before the matter comes before the court again. The prosecution may argue that the evidence against him is too strong for that. It will be interesting to see which way that goes.

The defence may also try and argue that, if he remains in custody, he needs to be transferred to his home state. That is where it could get very interesting. 

There are politics involved in this case. The manner of this man's arrest was highly political. The media was tipped off. He was arrested outside his home state even though multiple reports suggest he offered to attend a police station on more than one occasion. That the offer was not taken up by the prosecution and that he was not arrested in his home state strongly suggest there are other factors at play here.

When this matter goes to trial the charges do not allow him to elect to be tried by judge alone. It must be a jury trial. When the jury is being chosen only three potential jurors can be dismissed. The questions which can be asked of jurors are also limited. While the jury is supposed to be chosen randomly from the electoral roll there is, simply because of the population mix, a much higher chance of a jury who will not be sympathetic. Add that to the very high media coverage which has already occurred and finding a neutral jury is almost certainly impossible. Both prosecution and defence will be aware of this. 

People have asked why this has not been tried by "court martial". The answer to that is that a court martial does not try criminal cases and the charges are criminal charges. 

I am not a potential juror. I live in another state. I can and will say that a "fair" trial may not be possible here. It may not be possible for a number of reasons. The most important of these is that nobody can remember clearly anything which happened so far back. Unless there is physical evidence and witnesses to that evidence are available then a case can fail. The "but all the other men are saying..." argument fails here.  It fails because people do not remember. They make believe they do. They will not be "lying" as such. They simply will not be telling the truth because their memory is not reality.

Would I grant bail? Yes, I would.