Parents are complaining about

a "transgender thirteen year old child" winning the running, high jump, javelin and discus events at a school sports day. They are saying it was "not fair".  The issue has been reported in our state newspaper and it will no doubt bring about a lot of discussion. Nothing has been said about how the other students competing against this one feel. Nothing has been said about how the student feels either. 

I am wondering how the student relates to the other students in the school. What sort of relationship do they have? Do they have friends? Is there some good medical reason for a thirteen year old to be "transgender"? How do they cope with what must be a very, very challenging situation? 

I have no idea of course. I do not know the student, their family, their friends or anything else about them. 

At thirteen I was not an "easy" child. There were multiple reasons for that but some of them were simply to do with what all children go through as they transition from childhood to adolescence to adulthood. It is a difficult time. 

My brother, not in the least a "sporty" child was being made to feel a failure because he simply did not want to throw a cricket ball or kick a footy. We lived in an area where these things were considered an essential part of life. It is what you did. He now feigns an interest for the sake of his grandchildren but that is all. When he was forced to participate he was playing with boys. The idea that a girl might be part of the team did not occur to them. The word "transgender" would have meant nothing.

Middle Cat played every sport she could find. She was on the state teams for two of them. She has coached teams and trained teams. She knows the rules and regulations and more. She grew up in a time when girls played sport with girls and boys played with boys apart from a brief time on the school football team in a remote area.  There were not enough boys to make up the minimum requirement for a team and she insisted she could do it. Yes, she could do it but only because almost all the boys were younger and smaller than she was. She was not competing on an "equal" basis and nobody pretended that she was.

There will be students at the school mentioned who are feeling disappointed, very disappointed. Whatever they might be told and whatever they might say they will feel disappointed. The students who came second will "know" they might have come first if the transgender child who could run faster, throw further and jump higher had not gone in front of them. They will wonder what they are being taught about not just gender issues but about so much as well.

I do not know what the answer is. I suppose it depends on how people feel about the "transgender" issue. It would be interesting to hear the honest opinions of all the students concerned.

  

The "hard rubbish collection" is

a thing of the past. For the uninitiated this was a once a year event run by each local council area. It allowed you to put out things you wanted to get rid of and leave them on the verge or the area between the footpaths and the road. 

For a week the area would be littered with all sorts of "rubbish". It was amazing how much of it would disappear. People would put out everything from old fridges and  microwaves to boxes of newspapers, from broken toys to bits of timber, from boxes filled with games to old golf clubs and much, much more. These things would disappear.  People would lay claim to things that other people no longer wanted or needed.

It no longer happens. Councils stopped doing it. It is said they stopped doing it for reasons of safety. Yes, there were some safety issues involved. The council told us they would allow a collection we could book. It can be done once a year. The amount you are permitted to put out is small. In our area it is a cubic metre.  The weight has to be such that it can be lifted by one man.

When we packing up the last house we took the risk and did put good quality things out for collection. Fortunately the council inspectors did not find out. People took away good timber we could not use. They took away some very large plastic boxes with lids. Those were in excellent condition but they were too big for this place. We put out the refrigerator that was too big to go here that we had not been able to give away on Facebook. (I have a smaller one now, courtesy my BIL's employer who no longer needed it.) It disappeared in the space of an hour even though it would not have even been picked up by the council.

There were people who depended on these collection times. They would come looking for furniture, for firewood, for things they could repair and sell. They searched for toys they could use for their own children and a bike they could ride to their place of work. 

All that has gone apart from those who, like us, occasionally sneak things out for others to use. The arguments about safety may seem valid. Who was responsible if things went wrong, if an item harmed someone? There was never any mention in the media of this occurring. There were positive stories.

I met two boys who "rescued" a mattress. They wanted to take it on a train back to where they were squatting in a house several train stops away. The first train would not take them but the driver was sympathetic. "Wait," he told them, "I'll arrange something." He did and a later and much less used train took them and, although  it was an "express" not supposed to stop at their station it made a special stop. There was the mattress to sleep on. It was one of the things that eventually led those two boys to now run their own business in another state. I wonder what the councillors would make of that now. 

For all the issues involved I think those collections should be reconsidered. They encouraged recycling, reusing, repairing and more. That might do more for the environment than we think.   

Our postal service needs to

return to its core business - actually delivering the mail. 

Yes, it could also be said that people need to write more letters. This is not going to happen if the mail is not being delivered in a timely fashion at a reasonable price. It is also not going to happen if business insists on using email and text messages. 

Yesterday I had a text message and an email both telling me the same thing. I needed to respond. I tried looking up the relevant website. There was the big headquarters address but not the address I was looking for so I had to send an email. They need to send me a physical object, a piece of paper. They will need to use the postal service.

As a child I remember, while we lived in the city, the mail was delivered eleven times a week. It came twice a day Monday to Friday and once on Saturday mornings. The postmen (to the best of my knowledge there were no women) rode bicycles and blew a whistle if there was anything dropped into the letterbox all suburban houses were required to have on their front fence.

My paternal grandfather also had mail delivered to his place of business in this way. If there were parcels they were delivered by red vans that went around every working day.

People wrote letters to one another, often by hand. Even some business correspondence  was written by hand. It had to be legible! My paternal great-grandmother wrote to all her eleven surviving children on a regular basis unless she actually saw them at least once a week. My mother wrote to each of us children on a regular basis all the time we were away from home - and we were expected to be equally regular correspondents in return. Brother Cat has kept many of her letters. I tried to but came home to discover she had thrown most of them out. 

Brother Cat also worked as a postman one Christmas period. It was considered an excellent short term job for male university students.

I was offered a job as a "postal delivery person" but it came with the proviso that you had to be able "maintain and repair" the delivery vehicle and you had to be physically able to do the job.  It was not a serious offer, just one being made to everyone looking for work.

Now postmen get around in little electric buggies rather like golf-carts. They deliver the mail once on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays one week and Tuesdays and Thursdays on the other week. There are no Saturday deliveries at all. Parcels still get delivered in vans but sometimes have to be collected from a Post Office. The Post Offices are less in number and most do not open on Saturdays.

Mail takes much longer to reach us now. Those alternate day deliveries are part of the problem but, even taking that into account, there seem to be other delays. It can take more than a week for a letter to go from one side of the city to the other even if you pay for "express" post. Why? Sorting is largely done by machine.

It is one of those things which makes me wonder if we really are "better off" under the recent changes...and I do wish people would read and respond to emails the way they used to read and respond to letters.  

How many new clothes do you buy

in a year? Apparently Downunderites buy an average of fifty-five. In the UK the number is apparently around thirty-three. 

That is what I have been told but I find it hard to believe. Who has the money to buy that many clothes? Is it why some people claim to be poor? Why do three hundred thousand tonnes of clothing end up in landfill in this country every year?

Yes, I threw out some clothing last year. I threw out some underwear that was, in anyone's book, no longer within its use by date. I also passed on a t-shirt. My BIL now uses it as "rag" in his workshop. That was it. One pair of jeans went into a rag recycle bin because they had worn through at the knees and had paint splashes. I am too old a cat for that "worn" look when it reaches that point.

I tend to wear my clothes until they can no longer be worn with any honour or decency. I do not have a wardrobe full of unworn clothing. Even my BIL muttered something about this when we were moving things from one place to another.

Of course I did not need a wardrobe of "work clothes". Working from home meant I just had to look clean most of the time. I do not own a dress. I did not need one. 

We finally gave away the Senior Cat's tweed jacket. It was almost seventy years old. Someone else is actually using it now. I think he would be pleased by that.

So what on earth are other people doing? Why are they "dumping" so much? What are they buying?

The clothes must be cheap I suppose. They will come from chain stores or on-line places and are made in China or Vietnam or India or some other country with cheap labour. The materials they are made from are often artificial and do not wear well. We know all that but people continue to buy them. They are "fashionable".

A friend who likes to make her own clothes was bemoaning how hard it was to get "good cotton fabric" recently. The really good fabric can be very, very expensive. Even I know that. Expensive it might be but she still wears classic clothing she made many years ago. It has not proved to be that expensive over all and it looks good.

Of course it is likely that most of us, including me, cannot do anything like that but a lucky few can.

And sometimes we can be lucky. I was passing a "factory outlet" store one day when a shirt caught my eye. It was a "sample" that had apparently gone no further into production. Perhaps it was just a bit too "classic"? I do not know. I will never know. It was my size and, if I was even more careful for the next few weeks, I could just afford it and the second sample in the different colour. I bought both of them.

They were, dear reader, made from Liberty fabric. That was thirty-seven years ago. I can still wear them and I see no reason to send them to land fill because they are little faded.

The Conclave to appoint a new Pope

is underway. Many of us will wonder what is going on behind those locked doors. I do not envy the men concerned.

Yes, they are simply men. They are simply ordinary human beings like the rest of us, perhaps a little more able or intelligent than some but still people who need to eat and sleep like the rest of us.

It is said that Pope Francis stood in the breakfast queue the morning after his election and asked, "What have you done to me?" It is said he had already sent the two Swiss guards outside his door off to have their own breakfast.  

Those two things marked a change from the start. He could have had his own staff, including his own chef. It is said he continued to try and keep his life, and that of those around him, as simple as possible. We will probably never know how much of it is true. 

I do know the stories of him going out into Rome at night and just mixing with "ordinary" people are likely to be true. A friend of mine saw him out on the streets one night. The local Romans were not mobbing him. He was simply talking with some young people. They were all laughing. Had he told a joke? It is possible.

There is no question that the person chosen to be the next Pope will have a position of influence. That ability to influence may be less than many people believe. There are all the politics of any big organisation involved and, in the Vatican, these are undoubtedly something which prevents change as much as causes it.

I have been thinking of all things of course. There was the election of a President in another country, America, which had caused a tsunami of shock waves around the world. The election in this country was heavily influenced by that result. It means we are now likely to have not just another three years but six or more of the same inept policies. Whether the Opposition would have been much better is something we will never know. Most of us are simply trying to be grateful that we do not live in America and wondering how we are going to get ourselves out of the mess which their President is causing us. Their President will be gone at their next Presidential election.

The new Pope will, unless he chooses to resign as Pope Benedict did, be there for life. Pope Francis must have longed to resign but he apparently believed he had a duty to remain on duty. Perhaps that is the best way to have it if someone is still mentally competent. Those who do not want the power bestowed on them may be those who best required to wield it. 

 

We make films in this country

and although I am not someone who sees many films I do know the industry is an important one. As a family we have been involved in them in various ways.  The Senior Cat appears very briefly in one as does Middle Cat.  I once appeared in a documentary which is probably buried in the bowels of the state's film archives. (I hope it remains buried.)

Middle Cat's sons however appear in earnest in serious films which ended up in theatres. They both did well and managed to learn a lot from their experiences but did not want to pursue careers in theatre. They had time out of school but had to not merely keep their schoolwork up but show they were maintaining their positions at or near the top of the class. They had lines to learn - not merely memorise. They lived in remote locations and put up with all the adults around them getting short tempered. They had to repeat their scenes more than once and often because adults did not get something right. Being a child actor can be much more difficult but how many of us recognise that when we see a child on screen?

I know something about how films are produced and the truly enormous work than can go into making them. There are things I have picked up from the experiences of my nephews, from hearing the Senior Cat talk with people in the industry, from my brief acquaintance with people at National Playwright's Conferences and more. I have been instrumental in finding items to be used on sets. Finding the right locations and dealing with weather related issues are just part of the work involved but very important parts. (These two things are big considerations which make this country popular with the film industry.)

Filming can disrupt a local community for days or even weeks. Some time ago we found this out here when a very small scene for something was filmed in a location not far from where I live. It took several days to film something that will probably be less than a minute on screen. The preparation for it was obviously immense and involved all sorts of permissions.

Just as the publishing industry has been hit by the ease with which books can be copied and put up for everyone to read the film industry is the same. Trying to stop this completely is rather like trying to stop a road train travelling downhill without brakes. 

It is a wonder then that anyone would try to sabotage the brakes but this is what it seems the President of the United States has done. Imposing a 100 % tariff on them is going to hurt Hollywood more than it hurts us.  

Can you remember what you ate

 as a child?

I was asked that question yesterday. The person who asked it is Italian by birth. She has been here for many years but still tends to cook the sort of food she would perhaps have cooked in Italy fifty or more years ago.

I thought about it and told her that I could. I am a bit hazy about my very early childhood but I do remember porridge and vegetables from the garden. I remember the currant buns the baker made especially for the small children of the place we lived in. They seemed big to us but they were actually about a quarter the size of those he sold to older children and adults. If you did not go to school then you knew that on one morning a week you could go pedalling on your "dinky" down to the bakery and he would hand out buns to the seven or so of us who lived in the town.  We were considered spoilt. Perhaps we were but we certainly knew to say "thank you".

When we moved to the city the Senior Cat built up another garden. He had to. We depended on it for food. Grandpa had one too. How they found time to garden is a mystery given one was studying for his university degree and the other was running his tailoring business.

There was a lot of pumpkin in our diet. They were easy to grow and kept well. In summer we had a lot of tomatoes. Mum would bottle them in a "Vacola" outfit and we would have them right through winter. We ate quite a lot of fish. Grandpa knew the fishermen and would get it directly from them. Meat appeared on Sundays and, with any luck, the rest of the roast joint would appear in our sandwiches on Mondays. Eggs came from the hens Grandpa kept or that Nana would bring if they had any to spare. We had whatever fruit was in the garden or, occasionally, oranges Grandpa would bring back from his customers in the hills behind us. Bananas were an occasional "treat" too. They had to be bought.

Very occasionally we would have ice cream as a very special treat. There was only one flavour available - vanilla. There were also "ice blocks". They came in red, orange, green and a virulent blue. On the rare occasions we were permitted to have them Mum used to insist on us having the orange or green sort.

When we moved to the remote bush we had more meat and no fish. There was a forequarter of mutton one week and a hind quarter the next. Like everyone else in the town we depended on a local farmer to kill a couple of sheep and deliver the meat. It was usually tough and the whole process would have a food inspector panicking.  The farmer killed a steer once and everyone had tough beef for a couple of weeks. With it we would have a lot of pumpkin, potatoes and peas that came in packets and had to be reconstituted. Occasionally Mum would make pastry and we would have pasties but that rarely happened. She would mince the meat herself - or my brother would do it under her supervision. I would be set to do something like scrubbing the potatoes. Fruit came in tins unless we went to the shop in the "big" town some thirty-five miles away. You could buy apples there - and very expensive bananas and oranges. Apples were a treat.

It was not until we moved to the then tiny dairying town that we had real milk again. Until then we had gone back to powdered milk which had to be reconstituted each morning using a whisk. It tasted awful but that was the water. Rainwater was only used for drinking and we dared not waste a drop.

 The milk in the dairying town came straight from the cow. Mum would heat it on the stove top because it was not pasteurised. We drank a lot of milk. It was my brother's job to get a gallon can of it each morning from the dairy.  He would ladle it out himself and leave the money on the shelf.

When we moved again we had to go back to the limitations of tinned fruit and of course mutton and pumpkin.

Somehow we survived all this and were actually pretty healthy even if we did spend our pocket money on tubes of Life Saver peppermints and "conversation" squares. 

I knew about "spaghetti" and "baked beans" from tins. I did not know about pasta or curry or stir-fry. Broccoli was unknown to me. Rice came as either rice pudding baked in the oven or steamed rice served up with "mince and tatties". I suspect the rice was intended to fill us up. Grandma just gave us mince and tatties. 

But unlike many other children we had a Yugoslav neighbour for a while. She liked to cook and we children would sometimes get strange sweet cakes or biscuits. Mum never seemed to mind this. It helped to feed us and she could always give another English lesson in return. It gave me an interest in the food of other cultures.

Now I cook quite differently but I still eat a lot of vegetables.  Middle Cat cooks a great deal of food inspired by her Greek-Cypriot MIL. I suspect Brother Cat does a considerable amount of stir-fry. It is fast and save on the number of utensils used. (His partner prefers to clean the car.)

But yes, I remember when chicken was a Christmas Day treat. I remember the cake on Sunday and the weet-bix with Vegemite after school. I remember seemingly endless "stews" made from whatever Mum could find to put together.  We ate it all.

And, at the annual School Fete day we had toffee apples and marshmallow in ice-cream cones and peanut brittle. It was all pretty good stuff. 

 

 

Buttons and

buttonholes or something else?

Any knitter will know the "button and buttonhole" dilemma. Many an otherwise well knit garment has failed at that point. The buttonhole will be too small or too large or will not look as neat as desired even when the instructions have been followed exactly.

It is why some people never add buttons to anything and many more do so only reluctantly. 

Then there are buttons for other things. There are endless variations on what constitutes a button. They can be so small you can barely see them or so large that just one will suffice for an entire garment. They can be made from more materials than we think possible.

The Senior Cat made some buttons for me. Doing so was a slow, fiddly sort of process. He was not good at designing things - or so he said. He certainly could not design buttons. I told him how I wanted them. They were never very big because he would make them from "pen blanks" - pieces of timber intended for turning wooden cases for fountain pens, biros (ballpoint pens) and pencils. But, they were made from lovely timbers. One lot was Huon pine, another was "blackwood" and yet another was olive of special provenance. I added them to things I knitted and kept one set for myself - and used them all.

There were times when buttons came off things, particularly off our school shirts and blouses. Mum would sew them back on fiercely and crossly. As we grew old enough we were expected to do this ourselves. Even the Senior Cat would attempt to sew his own buttons on. Mum thought he should be able to do this because, after all, his father was a tailor.

I remember watching both Grandma and Grandpa sew buttons on. Grandma would do it quickly and neatly. She taught me how to do it and did not expect me to waste endless minutes trying to thread the needle.  Grandpa could do it too and do it skilfully but the reality was that the buttons on the garments he made would often be sewn there by one of the "girls" or women he employed. Why sew them on yourself when you have nearly forty women who could do it for you? 

As very small children we loved the "button box" belonging to Grandma. We were allowed to tip the buttons out and sort them. "Find me the small blue buttons," she would tell us, "I need one for this." We would look for those small blue buttons. She would even discuss the choice of button with us and then it would be sewn on a shirt or some other item. 

It was never quite the same with Mum's mother, "Nana". Yes, she had a button box and we were sometimes allowed to look in it but only under her supervision because, "You might swallow one." Oddly enough none of us ever swallowed a button at Grandma's house.

I thought of all this as I searched for the button box yesterday. When I finally found it there was nothing suitable in it. Today I will call into the charity shop. There are buttons there. I might be lucky. Looking there always reminds me of Grandma. 

   

Voting in Downunder

is often a sociable sort of affair. There are the queues where even people on opposite sides of the political divide will stand and chat amiably enough to one another. The party faithful handing out the "how to vote" leaflets have even been known to support one another. 

Inside the polling station there is no need to show any form of "ID". It is just assumed you are who you say you are.  It does not matter what you look like or how you are dressed.  

You can go privately into the little cardboard cubby and take your time. Nobody can see how you vote. Nobody puts your thumb into indelible ink. On the way out you might buy one of those "election sausages" to support the school or community centre or other venue the polling station is being housed in. People go and vote in their bare feet and swim suits. This election I saw someone in pyjamas and slippers.  

There are people who still do not know who they intend to vote for even when they are standing in the queue. They take all the leaflets handed to them. They will vote on the basis of someone's looks and not on the policies. 

And therein lies a problem. It is all too easy. Political parties do not need to work to get the vote of the vast majority because of the compulsion to vote. (There is no compulsion to actually vote, just take the ballot papers and mark them in some way, but the vast majority of us actually do vote - and rightly so.) We take it all very casually.

Some years ago there was a kerfuffle at the state election because a family or group got together and claimed they had voted multiple times, enough times to influence the outcome of the election. A senior member of the electoral commission  admitted that, with organisation and discipline what they claimed to have done was possible. Did they actually do it or was it just a poor joke? We do not know. Changes have been made since then to prevent that happening again if it happened at all. That has to be a good thing.

But perhaps we really do need some other changes as well.  We need to change our voting system so that would be members of parliament actually do need to work for all the votes they get not just those of the small percentage of "swinging" voters. 

I say this because the local member, now returned, barely put her head above the parapet during the election campaign. She has been barely visible for the past three years but she was returned. She will be barely visible for the next three years. There is no need for her to be visible. It is a "safe" seat for all it was touted to be otherwise.

There should be no "safe" seats for any member. We should have to go to the polls knowing a great deal more than we do. 

There were two leaders interviewed

on the SBS news service last night. One was the current Prime Minister. The other was the man who wants to oust him today.

I listened to them both. The Prime Minister made a statement. It sounded like a statement of fact. In it he was clearly appealing to the many elderly migrants in this country. It amounted to "if you vote for the opponents then you will not be able to travel back to your home countries for more than four weeks a year without losing your pension. No pensioner will be able to leave the country for more than four weeks without losing their pension."

He made this sound as if it was not merely a proposal but an actual fact. It was said with apparent sincerity. Yes, this was what would happen.

In the second interview the same "fact" was put to the leader of the opposition. Was it true. No, it was "absolutely false". There were no such plans. 

I had heard of this "proposal". It came to me from a dedicated supporter of the present government. He was gloating over the damage the proposal was going to do to the Opposition. He was similarly gloating over a number of other untruths being pushed by his party, particularly with respect to health, child care, tax and the cost of nuclear power. He actually knows none of the "facts" he was repeating are true "but this is how you have to do it to win". 

Yes, both sides will lie. Both sides will make statements they know to be false. This is about winning, having power, having control.

The pension claim however is perhaps a step too far. It was put out around here as a rumour. I heard it from a number of people. This seat is one of those "knife-edge" seats.  There are clusters of Italian, Greek and Vietnamese migrants. The older members of their communities do "go home" for extended periods from time to time. Their vote will be enough for a lazy MP to retain her seat. Many of them will already have voted. The pre-poll numbers suggest that a quarter of the electorate have already voted and many of them are elderly. 

It was good to see the Prime Minister shown up as the liar he is last night. The Leader of the Opposition may be no better but this was an issue which had barely been raised in campaigning.  It was a lie designed to inflict maximum harm among vulnerable elderly people.  I wonder how much damage it has done.  

Push polling is occurring

right up until the very last in our current election campaign. If the results of the latest "YouGov" poll are to be believed then the present government will be returned. That may well be the case but the poll is saying that the government will be returned with a landslide majority.

This is not what other polls are suggesting. They are more inclined to say that the government will be returned but will need to depend on others to have the numbers to govern. 

Commonsense suggests two things. The first is that the polls could be wrong - either way. The second is that the polls could be right - either way. 

I know something about writing questions for questionnaires. While at university I participated in some research being done by my supervisor. He came in one Monday morning and announced he had written a questionnaire he wanted to use for research purposes. Would the rest of us please have a look at it? We could bring up any suggestions for changes at a meeting later in the week. He handed out copies to all of us and nothing more was said.

I was living in the same hall of residence as another of his doctoral students and that evening she came looking for me.

"There's something wrong with this Cat," she told me, "But I can't work it out."

She waved the questionnaire at me and I breathed a sigh of relief. I was not the only person who could see what was wrong.

"He's writing the questions from his point of view," I told her. "I don't think he realises it but they are designed to get the results he would like."

She nodded and we worked on changes. We tried to justify each change. It worried me because our supervisor was a man who did not like to be wrong. He might seek advice but if it did not accord with his own views he would almost certainly take exception to it. 

I went into the meeting feeling worried but determined. There was a lot riding on this in terms of funding. Our supervisor's questions sounded good but we knew what he wanted to do and how he wanted to approach the research.

His third and fourth students, both young men, gave us a nod across the table and one of them gave me a discreet thumbs up. He had read what we had given them.

A couple of staff members came in and then the head of the research unit itself. Was I imagining it or did he give me a particularly hard look? Was he giving my fellow student another look?

The preliminaries over our supervisor was about to launch in to a discussion when he was stopped by the head of the research unit. He started to talk about the importance of how questions were framed and how they could influence the outcome of any research. He talked about how to look for alternative ways of asking questions. 

Eventually we went away with new input from everyone and a questionnaire which elicited much more information. It was a valuable lesson for everyone.

For me the relief at having recognised what was going on was enormous because my own research results had shown me something very important. Quite by accident it turned a previous theory upside down. My supervisor had kept insisting I must be doing something wrong.  I was following his instructions except for one thing, the one thing which allowed the subjects to tell me what they actually saw and not what we believed they saw. 

All this was not particularly insightful on my part. It was more of a "how do I make it possible for them to tell me" moment that had worked. What it taught me was how the way you ask a question, any question, can have an influence on the answer you get.  I could justify what I eventually did and it had, and still has, positive learning outcomes. It was not about influencing the way students were thinking but how they were learning to communicate. 

I do not think this can be said about push polling. A day out from an election the "results" are obviously being used to influence voters.  

The selfishness and rudeness of some people

has left me in despair again.

I was out at a meeting yesterday. It was held at the home of a person with a disability that does not allow him to leave his home without a great deal of help and preparation. That meant two other people had to get "access cabs" (vehicles which can carry wheelchairs) to get there. I arrived via tricycle and train and four more people came in cars. Two of them have serious mobility issues and can only "walk" a very short distance. 

The street is narrow and some dwellings have multiple cars, often parked in the street. The people living there know about access issues and are usually pretty good about it.

The neighbours were informed about the meeting. One of them, a lovely woman, allows the man with the serious mobility issue to park in her driveway because he then has a shorter distance to walk. 

When I arrived yesterday the neighbour was out there arguing with a workman of some sort. He had parked right across her driveway and was refusing to move.

"It's not f.... convenient. If you don't f... drive then you don't need it. Any other b.... can walk a few metres extra. I need to get my gear in over there and there are already too many f.... cars parked in this street." 

I heard all this and definitely did not want to get involved. He looked a lot bigger and stronger than I am. I hate confrontations with angry people. 

The neighbour was looking upset too. I could see a car coming down the street. It would probably be B... who would need to use the neighbour's offer of a parking space. Now what was going to happen?

Then I saw another car arrive. It parked further down the street. The two people who were coming to the meeting are both quite profoundly deaf. They use sign language but they are also both excellent at lip reading. I saw their questioning looks so I signed, "B... car... " It was all they needed to understand what had happened. We all looked at each other wondering what to do. 

The workman was getting things out of his van. He went across the road and banged on the door of the house he was to work in. The woman over there said something to him and then he turned around looking even more belligerent than before. He flung everything in to the van again and left in a squeal of tires.

B.... parked. We all went in to the meeting. 

As I was leaving I saw the neighbour and the woman from across the way. 

"Hello Cat," the neighbour said, "Is B... on his way out?" 

"Yes, I am sorry about the earlier trouble."

The woman across the road looked at me and then said, "I rang his boss and told him what was going on. He was quite nice about it but I've found someone else to fix the washing machine."

I would too. There was a place to park slightly further down the street and on the other side of the road.  

Why do people behave like that?

 

 

 

I have Jane Gardam to thank,

at least in part, for a major twist in my life.

She was a guest at our Writers' Week on two occasions. The first time I met her she was alone. On the second occasion her husband, David, was with her.

Writers' Week was actually for writers back then. (Yes, it was a long time ago.) There were sessions for the general public of course but there were also sessions for writers. Jane was talking at one of those, along with the late Judith Wright and others. I was there to help Judith, who was severely deaf by then, follow the question and answer session at the end of panel discussion.  It was Judith who pushed me, literally, into asking a question of my own. 

I cannot remember what the question was now but Jane's answer, the last of the three, brought a burst of laughter.  She came to find me as people started to move around again and asked who I was. I introduced her to Judith thinking she would be much more interested in meeting our renowned poet. No, she wanted to talk to me as well. We had a short but, for me, memorable chat. I mentioned I was considering returning to university because I thought I needed to add some legal knowledge to my other qualifications.
     "Oh, you will know JJ Bray then?" she asked me. No, I did not know "JJ" as he was known when not presiding in court. She promptly introduced me, told him what I wanted to do and why. I did not think he would be at all interested. I was wrong. He was interested, interested enough to see I actually entered the most appropriate law school in the country. 

I have Jane to thank for that.

Fourteen years later Jane was back as a returning guest. We had not had any contact in the intervening years but she saw me and approached me again. She had remembered me and what I had planned to do. On this occasion she had her husband with her. Had I done that legal training? Good. Now here was her husband and would I entertain with some information about growing up in the country here? 

I was more than happy to do that. David proved to be a very pleasant companion on and off over the week and, like Jane, he gave me some very valuable contacts which helped with my work later. I have much for which to thank both of them.

Before you go and vote

could you please at least think about others as well as yourself? It might be too much to ask you to actually research the issues but could you at least think about what might be best for the next generation and the generations after that.

I have a new great-nephew by my "niece"/goddaughter. Yes, I am genuinely delighted but that delight is tinged with a deep concern. I look at the very young passing me in the shopping centre and wonder what the world will be like for them if they reach my age. Perhaps it is something that people have done for centuries but I suspect more thought is given to it now.

Brother Cat and  his then partner (now deceased) and Middle Cat and her partner made the conscious decision to have just two children. Only if the second born had been a twin or more would they have had three or more. Their decision was based on the philosophy of "replace yourselves" and "there are enough people in the world".  

It is not the sort of thing that everyone agrees with. I have a distant cousin who has six children. She might have gone on to have had more - and homeschool them - if she had not been given medical orders to stop bearing children. They are lovely young adults now and they are all contributing to society but I still wonder at having had six children. 

And now young J... has arrived I really do wonder what the world will be like for him. Will he have a world I would recognise? There might be some things the same or more developed. There will be things I do not even recognise. 

What has all this to do with voting? I am thinking of all the people I have had conversations with in the past few weeks. Almost all of them are talking in ways which suggest they are voting for themselves and for their own interests. It does not surprise me. 

Human beings are essentially selfish beings. Yes, there is that mother instinct and that is the one which ensures the survival of the human race. Even that does not exist in all mothers. There are a very few genuinely selfless people who take risks to save the lives of others without any thought of rewards but they are rare. Most of us, even when we believe we are thinking of others, think of ourselves too. 

I cannot help wondering what the election result would be like if all those who voted did so with others in mind. I suspect it would be very different. The candidates would probably be very different too.  

What you wear and how you behave,

especially at a funeral, say a lot about you as an individual.

Many funerals I have attended in the past few years have also been attended by people in a variety of attire. There is no longer a requirement to wear black. Men do not always wear suits and ties. Some people will even attend in jeans and t-shirts.

These are what most of us would call "ordinary people". They are people special to us but they would not want us to "stand on ceremony" for any reason. There was no sea of black for the funerals of either of my parents or for anyone else I have known. On one occasion the funeral announcement actually asked for everyone to wear bright colours. On another people were asked to wear a pair of socks knitted by the person whose funeral it was. We were asked to remove our shoes at the doors of the cathedral in which it was held. Other people, also knitters, wore their own handmade socks. It was a special tribute to a very special person.

But there are other funerals where formality is required. They are the funerals of people like royalty, heads of state and so on. The funeral of Pope Francis was one such occasion. I looked at the reports on the news service and something jarred. In among all those respectful dark suits there was a quite bright blue suit. Yes, President Trump wore a bright blue suit. It was wrong. It was disrespectful. He would have been told what was appropriate. His wife would have known it was wrong. She was respectfully dressed. 

Was it deliberate? I suspect it was. The President made no secret of his boredom. He was caught on camera looking at his watch and looking at his mobile phone too. It was not fitting behaviour at a funeral, particularly during the service.

But President Zelensky was just as disrespectful you say? He was wearing fatigues! As I understand it Zelensky is not a military man. He wears army fatigues but he does not wear a uniform. He has no medals to show. His clothing has been chosen to say, "I am your President. We are at war."

President Zelensky, who is Jewish by birth, wore fatigues as a sign of respect. It might also be what we see him in when he appears on camera but on this occasion I am told he wore them out of respect. He was acknowledging the support Pope Francis had given the Ukrainian people. We did not see him looking at his watch or at the screen of his mobile phone in the middle of the service. 

The dress and behaviour of some people can say a great deal about them.

 

Flying three flags when giving

a press conference as the Prime Minister or as a member of parliament is not appropriate.

We have a flag in this country. I am well aware some people do not like it. They would be happy to see it changed to something they see as "more inclusive" or any number of other political statements. They fiercely oppose the Union Jack in the corner, say the stars of the Southern Cross are confusing and get confused with our cousins across the Tasman pond.  Perhaps they do but I don't think it matters. The flag acknowledges our colonial past and the stars acknowledge the indigenous people here before that. 

It is this government, likely to be returned if the opinion polls are correct, which has started to appear in front of three flags. The "aboriginal" flag often appears in the centre. It is as if this is the most important of the three. I am aware that some people, while they know our national flag, are not even too sure what or who the third flag represents. Told it is there for the Torres Strait Islanders they remain confused. Are the islanders citizens of this country or not?

The Opposition has stated they will revert to showing just one flag except on special occasions. This is as it should be. They have also stated they would reduce the number of "welcome to country" and "acknowledgment country" ceremonies and statements that have sometimes overwhelmed any gathering in the past few years.

It seems however the government is not listening to the increasing demand for these things to, if not stop, at least become much less in number. People are tired of them. They have become so common they are irritating and lacking in any meaning. Does it matter? Do these things help anyone? Are they bringing us closer together?

I was talking to my good friend M... yesterday. He has been busy ensuring the aboriginal community knows how and where to vote. It is something he finds difficult because many of them are, as he puts it, "disengaged".  

Yesterday though he had another concern. He was talking to a candidate standing for the party likely to win another term in office. That candidate told him the government is "giving serious consideration to legislating a Voice to Parliament". The Voice to Parliament was of course the subject of a very expensive referendum, one which failed by a large margin. That the government could even contemplate trying to legislate something like this is disturbing. 

M... saw the Voice proposal as unnecessary and divisive and I have to agree. Trying to impose it on the nation by legislation when it failed would be wrong but it might just succeed. It might succeed because the government could be returned but only with the support of a minor party or "independent" members. Anyone opposing the introduction of such legislation will of course be held to be racist. It is possible however that the opposite is true. It could be seen as divisive.

Flying three flags is not about any sort of cohesiveness or acceptance either. We need to stop and think about what we are really doing. 

 

"Does anyone actually think

about the issues?" I was asked yesterday.

A friend came in and did a small job for me yesterday. He is one of those casual sort of friends. We do not visit one another's homes in the ordinary sort of way. It is more the "stop and chat" in the street or in the shopping centre sort of way. 

I knew his parents, both long deceased. When J... was recovering from knee surgery I gave his wife a small pile of DVDs that the Senior Cat had accumulated. J... is "not a reader". I had him down as a "union" man. 

He was a "union" man for many years but he voted early so as not to have to spend too long standing in a queue on polling day. His knee is still troubling him but when he heard what I needed he said, "I'll be round to do it later on Friday if you are home."

His wife told me, "Please let him do it. He wants to thank you for the DVDs."

It seemed a more than reasonable exchange to me, especially as I was not expecting anything more than the enthusiastic thanks I had already been given. He was taking the old bit out of the troublesome device and about to screw the new piece in when he asked me, "Cat, do you suppose anyone actually thinks about the issues at election time - or do they just vote the same way all the time?" 

It is an interesting question and one which deserves serious consideration. I doubt it is given much consideration at all in this country. People vote because they must vote. Some of these people would never vote if they were not compelled to vote. 

Many of these compelled to vote people are people who do one of two things. Some simply vote a "donkey" vote - that is they mark the candidates with a "1,2,3" down the paper without thinking about it. They do this because they do not know what else to do. Others do it out of sheer exasperation and the belief their vote makes no difference. Others slavishly follow the "how to vote card" or the pieces of paper given them by the party faithful at the doors of their polling place. These voters know their first choice and then just dutifully do as they are told for the rest. It would seem many of them vote the same way for life.

Not so J... He thinks about his vote. He may have been a union man. Union membership was compulsory in his working days but he told me, "I like to know what I am voting for, not just who I am voting for."

I suspect he is a fairly rare voter.  He grinned when I told him, "Well I go in with a piece of paper in my hand reminding me of the order I want to vote in."  I don't need a "how to vote" card because I have made up my own mind.

This is the way I think it should be. If I had my way "how to vote" cards would not be handed out at polling places. If people do not know how they are going to vote when they get there then they are not voting with any thought at all.

I suspect this is what political parties rely on. They know that far too many people will do just as they are told to do. They take the line "My Dad voted for the Calathumpian" party and it was good enough for him. My Mum always did what he told her so...."

I am not sure my parents voted the same way. I know how the Senior Cat voted at the last election because I had to fill out the ballot paper at his direction. He could not see well enough to do it. I actually voted the same way. We had discussed the issues. Whether he always voted in the same way I do not know.  I do know he thought about the issues.  I know one of my siblings is of a very different political persuasion...but will at least think about the issues. Their vote may change from one election to the next. Another will do a donkey vote and resent having to vote at all. The other will think about the issues but vote on personalities rather than policies.

Do we really understand what we are doing? It is clear that, even within my own family, we may need a great deal more education about the political process.

 

Please do not politicise ANZAC day

or anything about it.

I went off to a "Dawn service" this morning. I had promised a very elderly friend I would wheel him around to where it was being held in his nursing home. Yes, it was absolutely worth the effort of doing it. There were only a very few old men there and one woman. She had been in one of the medical units. All the men had seen active service.

I felt like an outsider but only for a moment because I knew all but one of them. They are all people who have lived in and around the district for many years. I was greeted with smiles and various comments. 

A young friend came in just as a staff member and I were making sure everyone was settled in a place where they would be able to see and hear what was going on.  P... is thinking seriously about entering the priesthood. It has been on his mind for several years now. His father, a man I know and like, is a priest. P... knows how hard it is. At present he helps with hospital visits, home visits and simple services in places like the nursing home I was in. 

P... had put a lot of thought into this occasion and I could see he was feeling a little nervous. He had told me earlier, "Cat, I have no idea what they went through. I can think it but I can't know it."

The staff member who was there nearly wrecked everything by insisting on a "welcome to country" - actually an "acknowledgment" before the service began.  She felt it was an "appropriate" way to begin. Nobody said anything but the four who are still very alert were upset by it. 

I admired P... for being able to pull things together after that. He did a very good job. He kept his words short and to the point. He told them he could not possibly know what they had been through but his appreciation of their service was genuine and it showed.

The staff member obviously saw the occasion differently. She wanted to hustle people out to their very late breakfast and get on with her day. Yes, I understand it in a way. There are things that need to be done and this was a disruption to routine but this is that "one day of the year" that means so much to some people. Their numbers are growing less every year.

P... helped one of the other residents into the dining room and we left them to the grey porridge and stewed tea. Outside P... told me, "Thanks for being there Cat. I should not say it but I wish that woman would stop it."

I knew exactly what he meant. There is a time and a place for an acknowledgment just as there is a time and a place for a welcome. They are essentially political statements. This morning's little service was not the right place or the right time. It should have simply focussed on the occasion. 

 

So we are short of "tradies"?

You surprise me. 

I needed something done the other day. It is the sort of thing I cannot do myself. It needed a masonry drill and other items I do not possess. It needed skills I do not possess.

Fortunately my BIL has the necessary tools and skills and he came around to do it. Middle Cat and I told him where the necessary handle needed to go and he had the job done in about ten minutes. 

My BIL is very good at this sort of thing. He is so good the rest of the family tends to rely on him too much. I will ask him to do something only as a last resort but he does have an enormous variety of skills. If he is not certain how to do something then he will look it up or seek advice. He likes to know that sort of thing. When he was at work his boss would come to him to get things done even when they had nothing to do with his actual role. My BIL would get infuriated by these "compliments" but had no choice.

It is choice I have been thinking about. We are being told over and over again that one reason for the present "housing crisis", or shortage of new homes being built,  is because we have a shortage of "tradies" - the sort of people who can build a house, put in the plumbing, paint the walls, tile the roof and wire it all. Why? 

One side of politics is offering "free TAFE" (Technical and Further Education) for people who want to work in these areas. The other side is saying they see a need for more secondary schools where people will get a head start on these skills.

We had these sort of schools once. They were called "technical high schools". You went off to one of these at the end of your primary schooling if you thought you wanted to be something like that. They were unashamedly intended for "less academic" students. Other students went off to high school. In "area" schools we were divided into two groups, the "public examination" stream and the internal examination stream which was much the same as the technical stream.

Then came the idea that everyone needed to be in the same sort of school. Students could not be held back. Everyone needed to have the same opportunity to reach university entrance standard and more. The curriculum changed dramatically. The amount of woodwork, metalwork and domestic science taught was reduced to almost nothing. You don't need these things at school we were told. You can do it later at TAFE colleges. 

Students did not do this. The students who could not cope with the more academic curriculum ended up bored or misbehaving or just miserable at school. The more able students were being held back by the "trouble makers". Students were, and still are, leaving school earlier. There are not as many students taking up apprenticeships. When they do take up an apprenticeship their bosses are finding these students do not have the most basic skills or, as one put it to me, "which end of the hammer to hold". 

The Senior Cat always said it was a mistake to do away with technical high schools. We both knew people who had done extremely well after attending such schools. A former Governor of this state was a student at one. A matron at a hospital was one, a multi-millionaire was one. A person who developed a small but life saving medical device was one. There were more applicants than places for apprenticeships too.

Were "tradies" in short supply? No doubt we thought they were when we could not get one instantly but it seems there were plenty around. A good plumber and a good electrician always seem to have more than enough work to do. The best of them are highly respected in the community. They have not needed to go to university to do their jobs but they have needed to learn their trades.

We keep being told that students should not need to make decisions about what they want to do until much later in their schooling than the end of primary school. That may be true but I still believe there are many students who know they are not going to reach the level of university entrance. They have no desire to go and will never have the desire to go. There are some who will always struggle to read. They have no desire to learn computer programming or set theory or read the classics or know about the past. Nothing will change that and trying to teach them those things is not in their best interest. It would be better for them to be in the metalwork room learning the skills which will lead them to make the equipment for someone else to be a surgeon.

I am wondering now if there isn't a gradual shift back to such things. Is this why one of the major parties is suggesting the need to build more high schools and, in doing so, saying they need to be technically oriented? Would it be holding students back or giving them a hand up into their future? Might we end up with a glut of tradies instead? 

"Election sausages" are

a traditional part of polling day here. All over the country people go to vote and find themselves confronted with the inevitable barbecue run by a school or church or charity. It depends on the location of the polling station.

One of the advantages of voting early is that you can avoid the barbecue. I am not one for a greasy sausage smothered in tomato sauce and wrapped in a slice of cheap white bread. It amazes me how many people do succumb to these culinary delights.

You are supposed to have a good excuse for voting early. You can vote early if you will be outside the electorate where you are enrolled to vote, you are more than eight kilometres from a polling place, travelling or unable to leave your workplace to vote. If you have religious beliefs that prevent you from attending on polling day you can also vote early. Most people are aware of those rules.

There are also other rules which allow you to vote early. They are perhaps even more important. Some of them relate to personal safety. "Silent" electors can vote early. These are people whose names do not appear on the electoral roll you or I would see. There is usually a security issue involved.

You can also vote early if you have a "reasonable" fear for your safety or well being. That can be very helpful for victims of domestic violence and others who are under other forms of social pressure.  

Electoral officials will go into prisons so that people serving a sentence of less than three years can vote. They will go into nursing homes and hospitals so that people do not have to travel to a polling place. And you can vote early if you are seriously ill or infirm or due to give birth or disabled - or caring for someone who is. 

Some people can also get a postal vote. The late Senior Cat had a postal vote for the last three elections he voted in. A good friend witnessed his signature on the first two occasions - it has to be added to the outside of the envelope you seal with the papers inside it.  On the third occasion I had to do it. I had to fill out the papers according to his instructions. He knew exactly what he was doing and he was not prepared to trust the nursing home staff or the electoral staff to do it for him. He voted just as I expected he would vote but I still felt unhappy about him having to tell me or anyone else. 

I have done this for other people too. It always makes me feel a little uncomfortable. I can still fill in a ballot paper clearly. I wonder what will happen when I cannot do this. In many ways I think it would be better to have someone I do not know at all. 

Yesterday I voted early. I had several valid reasons for doing this and the process was not as smooth as it should have been. The person marking names off the roll was obviously nervous. He could not find my name and I had to explain again where to find it. He passed over the ballot papers, one for the House of Representatives and the other for the Senate. I took them from him and went to fill them out. As I did so the official in charge gave me a smile and said, "Take your time."

I filled the papers out, put them in the relevant boxes and was on my way out the door when the official in charge was coming back in the other way. She stopped me and said, "There's someone here who needs some help. He says he knows you and would be happy for you to help if you are willing."

I looked back and there, to the side of the queue, was an old student of mine. He gave me an anxious smile and I gave him a thumb up to let him know I would help.  Soon I was filling out the papers according to his instructions. There were no surprises but he had felt the need to come early more because his brother, a man of radical political persuasion, would not vote the same way. "And I didn't want him doing it for me or getting me one of those b... election sausages."

There were no election sausages to be seen anywhere. It is yet another advantage of being able to vote early.

 

Whatever you may believe or not believe

then we must surely at least acknowledge that Pope Francis had an impact on the world. 

I have a good friend who has spent many years in and around the Vatican. He is not a Roman Catholic but his work has taken him there to the Vatican library. He was still a student at university when he spent a year in Rome, most of it in the library which has become so familiar to him.  

Over the years he has sometimes made quiet remarks about the Popes who have come and gone during that time. He has known six of them. The first was Pope John XXIII. P... was a very young man then. I did not meet him until much later than that. He is a much older man now and he has seen a lot in his lifetime. I trust his judgment of these men.

P... is not a man given to criticism but I sensed he did not care for Pope Benedict at all.  When Pope Francis took up the position I sensed relief and I have heard more small stories about him than about any of the others.

Yes, apparently the morning after he was elected he really did question the two Swiss guard about whether they had eaten breakfast and sent them off to do it. Then, as the newly elected Pope, he went off and lined up with everyone else for his own breakfast and also lined up to pay his bill for staying. "It set the tone for his entire papacy." P... told me, "He never expects to be waited on. He is always thanking people. He smiles at them. You get the impression that he really does care about everyone."

Early in his papacy there are stories about Pope Francis going out into Rome at night. It is said he liked to simply walk around and talk to "ordinary" people.  Of course to him these same "ordinary" people were not ordinary at all. They were the very reason for his being there.  P... said he would sometimes glimpse Pope Francis going from one place to another in the Vatican and see him stop for a moment to chat to someone. "He stopped me and asked a question which showed he was extremely well informed," P... said of him once.

There was an email from P... this morning. "Cat, I have lost a friend. He was a good man. He tried and he kept on trying to the end."

I think I know what P... means. A pope has limited powers. He is not the all powerful leader many believe him to be. He has to work within the limits of a religious organisation which all too often has resented even a suggestion of change. It guards its powers with extreme jealousy. Trying to change that is something that cannot be done overnight. Pope Francis will be criticised for not doing this, not doing that, for being naive about some issues and not firm about others. He made mistakes - and admitted it. Those who know the inner workings of the Vatican well will, if they are honest with themselves, admit life was not always mentally and spiritually comfortable under this man. It should not have been. He saw it as his role to challenge their comfortable sense of self-satisfaction.

P... tells me, "He was basically a very good, honest man who did the best he could do until the end."  

Somewhere I have a letter from Pope John-Paul II's Ambassador or, as they call it, "the Apostolic Nuncio" in Canberra. It is a personal letter and relates closely to Pope John-Paul II. It is one of the few I have kept from what now seems a distant past, one that did not really happen. For all it is a personal letter it is also a very formal one. The language is very formal, very correct. Yes, it is written by a man whose first language was not English but it is more than that. There is a sense of "keeping distance".  

I wonder what a letter from Pope Francis might have been like. If he had actually written one himself to me about the same topic I suspect I might have found out something about his reading habits as a child and, within that, what drove him to be what he became.  It will be interesting to see what is made of his papacy now he has gone and who they choose in his place. 

RIP Francis. You tried to make a difference.  

If you know nothing about

a medical issue then it is probably wiser not to comment on it. To comment on it specifically to make a very nasty remark about someone is something which should not be done at all.

One of the election candidates in this seat has endometriosis. It is a medical condition which can have a very, very serious impact on all aspects of a person's life. It can cause severe pain, fatigue, infertility and depression. It is not something you can "cure", rather something you "manage".

The last time the election candidate was in parliament she joined with a woman on the opposite side of the house to set up a "Parliamentary Friends of Endometriosis Awareness" group. It is one of those activities which show that, behind the scenes in the debating chambers, politicians on opposite sides can and do work together at times. 

The candidate in question happened to mention this and that it had been done in conjunction with a member from an opposing party. It was a very balanced mention, especially at a time when she could have tried to make political mileage out of it. 

Of course someone had to take exception to this and claim she was making a "political" issue out of it. I growled a comment about informing yourself before commenting and padded off to do other things. A number of people "liked" the comment which is I suppose "nice" but it is not why I made it.

I made it because it seems to me that the original commenter was using the situation to make a particularly nasty snide comment about someone they do not wish to see elected. It also seems to me that the same person may or may not be aware of what endometriosis is but they should have informed themselves before making that comment in such a public way. If they have informed themselves and still choose to make that comment then it surely says something far more negative about them than the person they were criticising. 

People with "hidden" disabilities and conditions are often subject to criticisms from others who are unaware of their problems. All too often they will not be believed. Someone I know had a quite serious epileptic seizure in a library recently. I happened to be there at the time. People panicked as they always do. There were demands to call an ambulance, a belief he was "having a stroke" and so on. I knew what was happening. I have seen him like that before. Fortunately one of the librarians knew too. They all know him. The librarian just ordered everyone to leave the area and dealt with the situation. Away from there as people tried to escalate the situation I tried to explain. They did not want to listen. It was all too dramatic and too exciting for that. I wonder what they went home and told their families.  

I went back to the area and, seeing another member of staff, asked if J... wanted someone to sit quietly with him now that the episode was over. I said I knew his partner would come and get him. J...accepted the offer with a weak smile. I just took the book I was using and went on working. His partner turned up about twenty minutes later and with a quiet, "Thanks" they both left. No, I did not do anything special or dramatic. It was just that I happened to be informed about what was going on and what needed to be done. There was no need to make an issue of it.

I wonder how the person who made the snide comment about turning endometriosis into a political issue would have reacted to this if the person who had the seizure had been the candidate? Perhaps I am wrong but my guess is that they would have made a comment about that person not being "suitable" or similar.

Trying to inform the ill-informed about facts rather than opinions is probably a losing strategy. Too often now we are being told "facts" which are actually opinions or which are less than all the facts. Trying to be well informed rather than simply informed is getting increasingly difficult. I just have to hope I get it right. 

Could we have a bit of respect please?

If I have done my sums correctly then we have had twenty-nine Prime Ministers so far in Downunder. Of these I think perhaps thirteen of them could be called "believers". The others have attended church on occasion but perhaps because they were required to do so. 

One former Prime Minister was openly agnostic. I also have serious doubts about the beliefs of those who probably put something like "lapsed Catholic" or "Baptist" or something else on the census form.  It is much easier to believe one who could put "failed monk" in his resume or another who was filmed on multiple occasions at his "charismatic" church. 

The two leaders of the main political groups vying to form government after this election are nominally "Catholic".  I wonder just how strong the beliefs of one of them is. His comments lead me to believe he is a "Christian of convenience" rather than a committed Christian. There are many people like that.  The other man I cannot comment on. I know very little about his beliefs. All that needs to be said is that attending church is apparently not part of the weekly routine of either man. Whether this is important is something others need to make up their minds about.

What bothers me however is the way all this is portrayed. There are likely to be stories in the media if a Prime Minister or Premier attends a synagogue, a mosque, a temple or a place of worship other than a church. Ramadan, Eid, Passover, Divali all get a lengthy mention. Last week we were informed about Songkran and this was followed by mention of a string of other New Year celebrations in other Asian countries. Maundy Thursday barely rated a mention.

We seem to be going out of our way to talk about the religious beliefs of others.  It is good to know about these things but why do we do it when we do not do the same for Christianity? Most people I know will simply shrug and say it is not important. In doing so they do not recognise (or refuse to recognise) that the laws of this country are based on Christian traditions and values.  Tell them this is why arranged marriages without consent are illegal in this country and they will say "but we would have that anyway". No, we would not. Pakistan has recently ruled that a girl can marry as soon as she has had her first menstrual cycle. Their highest court has ruled that this is what Islamic belief tells them. 

With all the emphasis on other religious traditions and beliefs we are being told to "respect" those traditions and beliefs as well. If traditions and beliefs do not affect me or others and do no harm to me or others then perhaps they are best left alone. I would however question why they are so important that I need to be informed about them in greater detail than others need to be informed about Christianity. I may not be a church goer but our society's laws and values are rooted in Christian values and traditions. I try to abide by the commandment to "love one another" and so do many others I know. Respect for that commandment is surely something that matters to everyone. Respect comes through being informed. We need more information. 

I have just been warned off

 trying to visit the United States of America. Yes, seriously. I have been told I am not likely to be welcome there. 

I could get an Electronic System for Travel Authorization or ESTA. It would not be a problem for any other country which uses the system but apparently my name appears on so many documents in America I would be denied entry using an ESTA. I would be denied entry until they had sorted out whether I was some sort of spy or terrorist or something else. It would be funny if it was not so ridiculous.

Apart from the desire to see some good friends there I have no particular desire to go to America so it probably does not matter too much. I am sure there are some lovely places to visit. Some of their national parks look magnificent. There is undoubtedly some very interesting history, especially in some of the museums. I can live without it if I have to. 

All this came up because I am hoping to make a start on arrangements to go somewhere else. I need a holiday. It is something I have not been able to do anything about for far too many years. I have not been out of the state since 2002. Even on that occasion the Senior Cat and Middle Cat were with me. It was a short trip into the next state. We were still adjusting to life without "Mum" and I am not sure how much the trip really helped. 

Middle Cat has been on to me to actually go while I still can. I am all too well aware of what she means. I am a great deal less mobile than I once was. (I got pushed off a bus by a raging teenager in the city. It caused considerable damage and I have never fully recovered from it. Such things do not help when you already have a mobility issue.) Still I know I should try. 

I want to see my new grand-nephew in Singapore. As a "sleeping peacefully" newborn in arms he looks absolutely adorable. I want a cuddle! I want to visit friends in the UK. Some are people I have never physically met but there are still several very old friends who are now getting very old. Already I have lost several close friends - the sort of people I still corresponded with several times a year. I had done this ever since leaving London and not being able to see them again is something I have found hard. Yes, they may have been older but they were (with one or two exceptions) not really that old. I know if I do not go soon they will all be gone. 

I know going back will not be the same. Nothing is ever the same. London will have changed but I know it will still be the same in some ways. When someone posted a map showing the movement of the trains on the Underground or, as I know it, the Tube I could still pick out the relevant stations and know I would be able to get where I needed to go - except I doubt I could safely use it any more. I once knew the system intimately as I visited schools all over the network.  Still, it should be possible to work out efficient travel using it as a guide. 

"Does it really matter if you don't go Cat?" I was asked recently, "Wouldn't it be better to save the money for something you really need?"

It is not the sort of question you should ask me. I do feel guilty spending the money on myself. I know it is why that little nest egg in my English bank account is there but should I save it for the inevitable nursing home if I survive? I seem to have spent my entire life living on less than everyone around me - and working more hours than most people I know. Am I still being selfish? I hope not. I really do need to do something about getting an ESTA and using my passport before it runs out without having been used again.

Election campaign lies

are to be expected. It is part of the political "game" played by the parties. There are all the "he said, she said, they said" words which come out as if they are actual facts when they are actually carefully culled to make it appear as if the opposite is true.

And then there is something else. There was a curious advertisement which appeared on the evening news site I watch. It is the channel which concentrates on the international news rather than the local news so the election material has not been quite as intense. There it was though and it looked wrong.

It looked wrong because it was wrong. It is wrong and I think it is a step too far even for those implacably opposed to anything nuclear. The advertisement is designed in such a way as to give a very strong impression that there is a group inside a major political party which does not support their stance on nuclear power.  The advertisements use the same colour and the statements made in them give the strongest impression that there is strong disagreement within the party concerned.  

Now whatever you might or might not believe about nuclear power it is a debate we need to have. It needs to be an informed debate. It does not need to be the sort of emotionally charged "discussion" which usually takes place. If nuclear medicine could save the life of someone I loved or the life of a much loved child or the life of someone who went on to do great good in the world then I am not about to reject all things nuclear.

The mob producing this advertisement obviously think differently. They also want to try and make sure the party suggesting nuclear might be in the future energy mix never get into power. If you are opposed to all things nuclear then you may feel differently. Look a little closer though. Look at the person who is the "leader" of this group. He apparently has a reputation as a writer of letters to the editor. Those letters are apparently almost always in support of the present government's policies. He writes these and is still pretending to be a member of the opposition's party - a party he has never been a member of. 

He is being funded from other sources. He may be a former builder and have some of his own money behind him but he is definitely not running this campaign without the support of people who have their own commercial interests in seeing that nuclear never becomes a reality. I have no doubt these are people who would support nuclear if they believed there was money in it for them. Yes, follow the money. 

It has taken a while but the media has finally said something. They have said something too late of course. The damage has already been done. Many people will now believe there is a serious rift in the party concerned over their nuclear stance. There are differences of opinion of course - but there are differences of opinion on the other side too.  

It seems the Electoral Commission is powerless to stop this sort of thing. They are already unable to stop even the blatant lies of both major parties. Psychology tells them that trying to prevent this sort of thing is a waste of time. 

It would be good if all political advertising had to cease three months out from an election. Anyone caught advertising should be barred from seeking election or re-election. Anyone attempting to advertise on their behalf should also be penalised.That would still allow for statements of verifiable fact and statements of "intention" or policy. Do that and we might be able to cast our votes in a more informed manner...but it won't happen. 

Why wasn't this in our news?

In a news feed yesterday the ruling I was waiting to see came through almost as soon as it was announced. It is a legal ruling of huge significance for women everywhere.  It was not even mentioned here. 

I listened to the international news service last night and, even with an election coming up, it should have been mentioned. It was not mentioned. I have read this morning's paper. There is still no mention of it. It has not rated as much as a paragraph. 

What happened? The Supreme Court in the United Kingdom issued a ruling that the terms "woman" and "sex" in their Equality Act refer only to biological women and biological sex. It was a unanimous decision in a judgment which runs to more than eighty pages. 

They said the legal definition of a woman does not include transgender women who have gender recognition certificates. This will likely have huge ramifications for access to services intended for women only. 

Whether you think the ruling is right or wrong is entirely up to you but the issue has now been addressed. The judges have said, the definition relates to "the ordinary meaning of those plain and unambiguous words" and it "corresponds with the biological characteristics that make an individual a man or a woman." I have no doubt that somewhere in the judgment recognition is made of the genetic variations which can occur but the words "plain and unambiguous" still appear. The ruling also makes it clear that the privacy, safety and dignity of transgender people is still protected under Equality Act.

Here the case of Tickle v Giggle brought about an opposite ruling in the Federal Court. There the judge ruled that "sex is changeable". The appeal in that case has not yet been heard. We are not required to follow or even consider the rulings of the court of any other country but I have no doubt the matter will come up. 

The case was brought by a group called "For Women Scotland". As I understand it much of the money used to fund the case was donated by JK Rowling of Harry Potter fame. I imagine those individuals and groups which have criticised her stance on this issue will be even more against her now. I have no doubt at all they will now begin a campaign to have the law changed.  That is the way the world works. 

Vegemite is a rite of passage

here in Downunder. It is an essential part of life from early childhood. For anyone reading this who is not familiar with Vegemite then I suppose it is necessary to explain? You have not heard of it? Really?

It is made from brewer's yeast, a by-product of beer making. Salt, various vegetable flavours and vitamins are added to produce a savory spread. It is a cousin to Marmite but Downunderites (naturally) consider Vegemite to be a superior product. 

You need very little of this dark brown spread on your bread, your toast or the after school weet-bix. It is economical and does not require refrigeration.

As a kitten I often went to school with a Vegemite sandwich. It was not because I was particularly fond of Vegemite sandwiches but because this was what my mother could afford to give me. Two slices of bread put together with the merest scraping of butter if we happened to have some and Vegemite. If my memory serves me correctly there were a good many other young ones with the same sort of lunch. We lived in an area where money was very short in many families.

We also had Vegemite on toast at breakfast time and Vegemite on those after school wheat biscuits - the thick breakfast sort that you were really supposed to have with milk and sugar. Those biscuits were relatively cheap too I suppose. We did not always get them but we did not waste a wheat flake when we were given them. The other treat was a boiled egg with "Vegemite toast soldiers". If we had not been well then Grandma would produce this when we were starting to feel better.

Vegemite has continued to appear in every place I have ever lived in. I went off to university on the other side of the world with a jar of the stuff tucked into my luggage. Mum thought I would need it. It was only a tiny jar but it was there. She had no doubt I would find some more somewhere in London. 

I did find it. Harrod's sold it of course. It was there in their Food Hall. I saw it when we went to get fancy biscuits for a special birthday afternoon tea for a fellow student. I remember the late M... holding it up and saying, "Look Cat!"  I looked. I did not buy it there. It was expensive. I went off to a shipping company where the receptionist sat behind a display piled high with Vegemite. It was much cheaper there.

I now have the smallest jar because I do not eat a lot of it any more. It is not because I no longer like it but because I do not eat as much bread or toast. My shopping trolley is not filled with multiple loaves of bread ready to be turned into multiple slices of toast and Vegemite for teenage boys and their after school snack. Their mothers and other carers buy the largest jars available. It is still a relatively cheap snack unless you slather the butter on. 

And all this reminiscing has come about because the Canadian government has suddenly realised that Vegemite contains something not allowed in foodstuffs in Canada. They have banned imports of it and the sale of it. This is so even while they allow Marmite into the country. I have Canadian friends who are frantically trying to find ways around this. They became Vegemite addicts at university in London. I have little doubt they will succeed somehow. 

If they do not succeed then there is always Marmite I suppose...but somehow it is just not the same.