Public safety or invasion of privacy?

Being asked to provide your name, address, phone number and a photograph of yourself (or have it taken) before you enter a premises is now a thing? Keeping that information for six years is now a thing?

Apparently this is what some local councils are now demanding. Apart from a quick visit to the front counter (which is under security surveillance anyway) you need to do all this to attend a council meeting as an observer or visit any other part of the building where non-staff do not usually go. 

When did behaviour get so bad that this has become necessary for staff safety? Have standards of behaviour really dropped that far? Are staff really in danger?

There have been a few eruptions in our local council recently. An argument broke out when our very political mayor and some of her supporters wanted to give money to the "Yes" side of the Voice to Parliament. They managed to push it through but then had to reverse the decision when the local community made it plain that this was not what the council could do with money intended for local services. 

I do not attend council meetings as an observer but I know someone who does. He goes along, sits there, takes notes if the matter concerns him and then approaches his local ward member to discuss the matter. He is polite but undoubtedly an irritation because more than once something has had to change when J... has analysed the problem.  All the same it is the way things can work for the good. 

J... would probably hand over his details if he thought it was necessary for good governance.  Is it necessary?  I have not asked him but I suspect he would think the demand was unnecessary. Councils in this country are supposed to be about local government and local issues.  

There was even a hint in the report that there might be a demand to provide the same information to use the local library. I can think of many users of our local library who would object to that or be frightened away by it. There are regulars there. They go every day. They spend hours there. They read the papers or do the jigsaw puzzle at the central table. They get themselves a drink of water, use the bathrooms, doze in one of the more comfortable chairs, listen to an audio book and more. The staff know them. I know them and other regular users know them.  Asking them to sign in each day would be something they would simply not be able or willing to do. They are the lonely people, often "homeless" during the day because their place of residence shuts them out until evening.

Are these people a bother? Do we really need to keep tabs on them at all times...and on everyone else as well? 

The library and many others areas (like the shopping centre) are under constant surveillance. It is discreet. Most people go about their daily business without thinking or even knowing about it. If something does go wrong then it will be caught on camera unless you are out of range. When someone does do the wrong thing you can be almost certain they know where those cameras are and avoid them.

I refuse to believe that making people sign in everywhere is going to help. It did not stop the spread of Covid during the worst of the pandemic.  Is it going to stop people expressing their frustration with a council using ratepayer funds for political purposes? If that is what is behind it then we need new members on the council.  I want the "daylight homeless" to be able to go on using the library and other such places in peace.  

Commenting on "multiculturalism"

is apparently not allowed - unless you wish to say how wonderful it is.

Our state newspaper has online pages where you can sometimes comment on stories but there are some topics which are very definitely "off limits". There are the obvious things such as sexist or racist comments that are likely to be offensive. Comments that are defamatory or deemed to be harassment will also be filtered out.

That's fine with me. I don't spend much time there either. It is not often I comment even if I do happen to look. What I do find unnerving however is the apparent inability of the "moderators" to take on anything which might be remotely seen as critical of "multiculturalism".  This is apparently absolutely off limits.

We are supposed to be the "most successful multicultural country" on the planet. What this means I am not sure. I am not even sure what it means to be "multicultural".

I have absolutely no difficulty with people from other countries bringing in the variety of food we now enjoy or bringing in their festivals for everyone to see and perhaps participate in. Such things can only enrich our lives.

I do have a problem when people come here and don't learn the language. I am concerned for them because it reduces their capacity to participate fully in society. It also reduces their capacity to earn and thus their capacity for things like home ownership. Those things can make them resentful. 

Is it wrong to have a problem with that? If I migrated to France or Italy, Japan, Peru or Saudi Arabia then I would expect to try and learn the language even at my age. I would perhaps manage French of a sort, Italian of a sort, or Spanish of a sort. I would struggle greatly with Japanese or Arabic. I would still try.

I also have a problem when people come here and try to tell me my way of life is wrong and that I have to adapt to theirs. I have a problem when they want to introduce their own laws into this country rather than abide by the laws we have here. Recently the husband of a Muslim friend was "concerned" for me because I was not wearing a head covering. I am not Muslim. I do not wear the hijab his wife wears. He should not be "concerned". This came from a man who is actually very moderate in most things but it is indicative of a problem with "multiculturalism" that he even felt he could say this. 

I know people who believe they have the right to bring in Sharia law into what is seen as their community - and others who support them and say they have a "right" to this under our multicultural system.  It seems that questioning this is racist and anti-Muslim. Really? 

There is already a legal system in this country. It is generally regarded as a fair and just system. Yes, it has some flaws. All legal systems have flaws but ours does try to treat all citizens as equals. When you migrated here then you should have accepted that.

"Multiculturalism" should not allow people to go back "home" to fight for the country you were born and then return. It should not allow you to bring in your prejudices and your arguments with other migrants and then expect everyone else to abide by your views on those things.

"Home" is either here or there. It's a tough decision to have to make but it is one which needs to be made. The rest of us should be permitted to question policies which do not encourage that.

 

 

 

137 offences

and still out wandering the streets?

In the last couple of days there has been some discussion in the local media about youth crime rates. Apparently there really is an offender out on bail who has appeared in court for one hundred and thirty seven offences. No doubt they will be back in court shortly. They will be given another slap on the wrist. They will be given another "chance".

I have been inside a Youth Court. I went in with a young boy who was a victim of a particularly vicious act. He was injured badly enough that he ended up in hospital. His "crime" in the eyes of the perpetrator was that the boy did not hand over his new-to-him bike. It had been a birthday present from his single mother, a widow who was trying to keep her family together. The young boy, just nine at the time, had been immensely proud of that bike.

"My mum worked really hard to get me that and he just took it away!" I can hear him saying that now. He sat between me and his mother in tears. The bike had been damaged beyond repair for the sheer "fun" of it.

The perpetrator just went on smiling and jigging around. He did not look in the least bit concerned. He knew that the court could do nothing to him. At ten years of age he already had a record. 

The victim did get another bike eventually. A local shopkeeper wanted to give it to him outright but, after negotiations with the boy's mother gave him a simple after school "job" in order to "earn" it. His mother did not want the boy to believe he could simply get given something for nothing. The last I heard of that boy he was entering university to train as a doctor. 

I doubt the perpetrator of the crime is. He may be in prison. I hope not but it would not surprise me.  All the court could do was try and get him to say "sorry" and "I won't do it again"...but of course he did do wrong again. The next time he was in court was for trying to set alight to a new kitchen in a neighbour's house. I heard about it from the mother of the victim. The perpetrator lived not far from them and the news of his new offence had spread rapidly.

People wanted that boy punished. The court was powerless to do anything except reprimand him. 

I wonder if there would really have been anything very unreasonable about making a ten year old work to pay for a bicycle he had stolen and damaged beyond repair? It was the victim who worked for it. 

The idea that children under the age of twelve are too young to be seen as offenders offends me. There is still a push to raise that age to fourteen or even fifteen. That is offensive too. I am not suggesting they should have their criminal records follow them into adult life because some of them do grow up. They go on to be good citizens.  It is just that there really is a need for them to face the consequences of their actions in a more realistic way.

There are too many repeat offenders like the perpetrator of the bike crime. They need to be punished not encouraged. They need to be punished before they can commit something like those one hundred and thirty seven crimes.  

Criticism of Pope Francis

has been flowing freely in our local on-line comments.

A great deal of it has, if the writers are honest, come from people who do not attend church and claim to have no religious beliefs. Other criticisms come from people who like to claim they are religious, perhaps Catholic, and like to say he is "wrong" and goes against "the word of God" in some of his statements.

It seems he is not supposed to be any sort of "activist". He is not supposed to be any sort of "reformer". He is not supposed to be "political".

Jesus was an activist and a reformer. He was political, very political. He spoke up and gathered crowds around him. The Romans regarded him as a dangerous radical. What you believe about Jesus apart from that is your affair. Right or wrong? That is up to you too.

There are stories about Pope Francis which suggest he is simply another human being. He is not perfect and would never consider himself to be perfect. It is said that the morning after he had been elected as the next Pope he found two Swiss guardsmen outside his bedroom door. He is alleged to have sent them off to breakfast and then lined up along with everyone else for his own breakfast. It is said he waited his turn in the queue to pay for his stay. He allegedly asked, "What have you done to me?" He did not want the job - and that may have made him the best person for it.

Unlike his predecessor he is said to have gone on living a simple life. He does not have his own cook or a bevy of servants looking after him. It is also well known that his "minders" have been concerned about his past habit of going out into the night in Rome and mixing with the general population, of talking not just to people but with people. Children went to him naturally.

Yes, he is political. He is perhaps even a radical in some things. He has views which are not always acceptable to old style conservative Catholics. He would like to have done much more but, contrary to opinion, he does not have the power many believe he has. There is a bureaucracy there which he has had to fight. Too many of those who work in the Vatican are used to having their own way and their own well paid positions.

I know someone who has worked there. It will surprise some people to know he is not a Catholic but he does know a great deal about the workings of the Vatican. He says the present Pope is respected, even by many of those who disagree with him. 

We need to think beyond Christianity or any form of religion and look at an old, sick man. We may not share his beliefs. We may not agree with him but does he deserve some of those vile comments? I think not. He is clearly more tolerant of them than they are of him when he says,

“Every religion is a way to arrive at God…Sikh, Muslim, Hindu, Christian—they are different paths." 

And I know agnostics and atheists who respect him as a person rather than as a pope for that.

"Free doctor visits"

have just been promised in the election campaign which is not yet official but which has definitely started. 

"Everyone will be bulk billed!" the Prime Minister has promised. "You will all be bulk billed from November as long as you vote for us." The Opposition has just, it is claimed, matched that promise. 

Oooh goody, goody. I don't often see my doctor but I won't have to pay for it?  I am aware she is overworked so I do my best not to worry her about the fact I have a "cold".  I know I do not need antibiotics for it. When I do see her it is because it is something I cannot do for myself. I can take advantage of all her years of training without having to pay for it?

I know I am fortunate enough to be able to work out some things for myself. I can save my GP time by asking a question or describing a problem with some accuracy. Not everyone can. They need to see their GP for longer and more often. So I will not be taking up too much of her time. It won't matter if I do not have to pay anything.

Being a GP is not a job I would enjoy. Their role is a very different one from the one they played in my kittenhood. It was a GP who delivered me in a small rural hospital. He had one nurse in attendance - who just happened to be my godmother as well. Now there are specialists for such roles. The same GP would have done some surgery, especially things like appendectomies and tonsillectomies. There are specialists for those things now. Medical practice has changed.

But the idea that we do not need to "pay" to see the doctor is nonsense because of course our taxes will go towards the cost. It is not just that which matters. We need to consider the years of training that go into being a GP - or any other sort of medical professional. The cost is huge. It is not just financial. It is the time it takes. It is the commitment to hours at study and at work. Your friends, if you have any, go home at the end of the day and play tennis or watch the telly. You do paperwork and write up case notes from the notes you made but did not have time to do during the working day.  You take the responsibility for what can be life and death decisions and much more. 

I think we should be paying doctors directly where we can. If we believe we are getting something for "free" then we won't feel the same way about what they do. 

If you want to save the country

Prime Minister of Downunder then there are some things you need to do.

(1) We have three levels of government, local, state/territory and federal. What is more only one state/territory has a single chamber. The others have two. All this for the population of an entire country which does not have as many people as California. Laws differ, regulations differ. There are clashes - and not just between the football teams. Let's just reduce it to two levels, larger local and federal.  That alone would save time and money. We would get more done.

(2) We have the most complex tax system in the world. Again this happens at local, state and federal level. Let's have just one simplified tax system across the country.

(3) We have a "net zero" fantasy that does not take into account the geography of the country or where people live. Forget "net zero" and look at things like, dare I say it, nuclear power. Put some money into researching fusion as well as fission? Change the building code so that all housing includes natural as well as artificial air conditioning? Plant more of the right sort of trees and vegetation perhaps?

(4) There is an education system which, apart from being a little different in each state, is more concerned with social issues than the basics. Let's get back to making sure children can read and write and do basic maths. Make sure they all have a library card and use it. Give them time to read and stop the iniquitous practice of trying to make sure they are doing something under adult supervision for most of their "free time".

(5) There are too many people going to university and not enough people training to be practical. Bring back the technical high schools and hands on training in basic skills before they get their apprenticeships. Encourage them to believe in those worthwhile skills.

(6) The cost of living has gone through the roof but you keep wasting taxpayer money on "subsidies". Forget those and get all of us to accept our standard of living is too high. Encourage people to take up activities that allow them to live within their means.

(7) Accept that parenting is hard work and more needs to be done so that one parent can stay at home longer with the children. Teach them that good parenting is not about the number of activities children are (competitively) involved in but about time spent and example given. 

Oh - well that's a start...and none of it will happen.

 

The red tape issue

has struck again. This time it has just about stifled someone who thought they had finally managed to get the local council to admit there was a problem.

A woman who lives a couple of streets away from the old house has been battling with the council over the noise level from her neighbour's air conditioning unit. This was illegally placed on the outside of their house - just outside her bedroom window. It emits a decibel level more than twice the allowed level and they keep it on all night. What is more the installation does not meet the required safety standards. It is potentially dangerous.

S... tried negotiating with the neighbours directly. It had no effect. She put all the necessary information to the council. They told her there was nothing wrong. If the noise bothered her she could go and sleep in another room. That was not the sort of response an intelligent and very able woman wanted to hear. She went to the Ombudsman's  Office. Their response was less than satisfactory. S...did more research. She found the legislation and took more measurements. Her neighbour is refusing to do anything. The council has now admitted there is a problem but says there is nothing they can do about it. Why?

S... has a small lap pool. It is surrounded by a fence which more than meets the legal standards but a council inspector also insisted that she had to have a certain type of gate onto the street and the gate had to meet certain requirements or the pool would have to be filled in. S... met the requirement for the gate even filling in the 5cm gap so that "nobody could climb through". (Yes, 5cm - not 50cm.) The council finally gave it all an "okay" but told her she was "lucky" they did not fine her. 

S... told me all this in a resigned sort of way. How was it, she asked me, that she had to go through all that but the neighbours who are blatantly breaking the law do not have to do the right thing? We went on through some other issues of red tape holding things back. There are much bigger issues which affect the entire population of course. If ever a country was almost unable to move because of red tape then ours has to be it.

I have moved in to the smaller living quarters. There is a step here. It  goes up to the tiny porch. I park the trike on the porch. There is nowhere else safe to put it. The policeman next door has permission to use the parking space I would use if I had a car. He has no problems with where I park my trike.He actually thinks it is where I should park it.

Yesterday someone else who lives in the same group as I do asked me if I had permission to park my trike on the porch. Did I also have permission to put in the small, moveable ramp? It was clear she was ready to argue with me. 

"If it was a wheelchair what would you say?" I asked her. 

She huffed and told me, "You would still need permission". Then she strode off. I am waiting for the complaint to come from the managers of the units. When it comes I will fight them. 

Who is responsible for the war

in Ukraine? 

If we listen to "the most powerful man in the free world" it seems that the President of Ukraine is.  It is not the President of Russia. Apparently it is all President Zelensky's fault. He started it and he has had three years to sort out the mess.

Really? Yes, apparently Zelensky chose to annoy Putin with his moves closer to the rest of Europe and his moves to start negotiating potential membership of NATO. EU membership was there too. It was what the people of Ukraine wanted. They wanted to move further away from Russia. They were, rightly, worried by Putin's move on Crimea.

Putin, and many of his closest supporters, wanted a return to the old Soviet state. Ukraine looked like easy pickings. He had taken Crimea with not more than a whimper from Ukraine and the rest of the world. He seems to have believed he could take the rest the same way. All it would take was another land grab in the east of the country and a demand for mineral wealth to be handed over. Ukraine would then be happy to rejoin the Soviet motherland. That was his thinking. He did not expect there to be such fierce opposition. 

It is important to him to win. He has gambled billions of dollars and countless lives on winning. He has always said that this is not a war he is waging. It is simply a "special military operation".  There are still people in Russia who believe this. Even those who do not are not going to protest too loudly - not unless they want to fall from a hotel window or end up in a penal colony.  Inside the Kremlin and around him he has many loyal supporters. Their lives depend on supporting him and his closest aides. 

Putin has plans to go on from there and move on to retake the Baltic states by economic force if not military force. He needs the money. He needs the strategic capability. It is all a huge gamble but one he believes he will win, especially with the help and support of the President of the United States. He sees Trump as an ally. Despite statements to the contrary it is unlikely he sees Trump as a friend. At best it is a "friendship" of convenience. Putin is closer to Kim and Xi. 

If anyone seriously believes that Zelensky started the war that has caused so much death and destruction in his country then please explain this to me.  

We have just wasted $2bn

on attempting to save a failing steelworks in this state - or we will have if the money is actually forthcoming.

I am wondering if the money to "save" the steelworks will actually come at all.  Yes, I understand that a town whose survival depends on the survival of the steelworks may believe that the enormous sum of money is a right and proper expense...but is it?

I remember the place. I remember it very clearly. It was the place that marked the point between what we considered civilisation and elsewhere. Going back to the city you could see it ahead of you for some distance. It was the place where they built ships. It was a thriving place. It seemed very busy to small kittens who lived in a place where there were just seventeen houses. It was where we always stopped for petrol. Mum saw to the buying of milkshakes and handed out the sandwiches she had made for us to eat on the journey. The milkshakes were a huge treat. We kittens looked forward to them. We looked forward to the journey becoming more interesting as places became much closer together. 

Going the other way was always much more depressing. We would know we were going onto an unsealed road and mile upon mile of scrubby saltbush, spindly gums, ti-tree, the occasional wattle or quandong tree.  The tiny "towns" were much further apart. You hoped not to get a flat tyre or windscreen broken by a stone flung up by the rare passing car. The cars themselves were an event. People hooted and waved.  "That was X...." we might say if we knew them. Yes, it was that remote and that sparsely populated.

And the steelworks town was there like a beacon. It was a "union" town of course. Perhaps that is why it failed in the end. It simply became too expensive. There were ever increasing demands for higher wages and "better conditions" that simply could not compete with the much cheaper labour in Asia.  The steel that was being made was good but there was also a downturn in the ship building industry. Higher wages had something to do with that too but that was not the only problem. The place is in the wrong place. It is almost at the top of the wrong side of the gulf. It is on the southern side of the smallest continent or the largest island on the planet. It is out of the way. Transporting steel from there is expensive...much more expensive than transporting it from Asian ports to Asian destinations. 

We need steel here of course. It is an essential part of any modern economy but the cost of producing it here has become too high. There was talk of "green hydrogen" to power it but that has apparently been put on hold. It is hardly surprising. Like the steelworks themselves it is not an economic proposition. The proposal was made more with votes from the climate change crowd in mind. 

When the news broke yesterday I heard one of my new neighbours saying to someone else, "Perhaps they could revive the place by getting them to build the components for nuclear power plants." Perhaps they could. 

So our children do not know

their "civics". I am not surprised if they know very little about the way we are governed. They do not get taught that. They do get taught about "issues" of course - "climate change", "racism", "gender", "equal opportunities", "discrimination" and more all seem to be "taught".

Do students at school know where to find the manifestos of the various political parties? Do they understand they need to mark every box on a ballot paper? Do they understand the consequences of doing that? Do they know the names of their current federal and state MPs as well as that of the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition? Do they know their local council and the name of the Mayor?

I could go on. My educated guess is that they know very little about these things. They will know something. They will know what their teachers want them to know, nothing more. 

Many years ago now the Senior Cat was asked to be part of a three person team interviewing young people for Rotary scholarships. I am not sure how this came about as he was not a member of Rotary but he agreed to do the job. He went about it in his usual thorough and thoughtful manner. There was apparently some sort of meeting where standard questions to be asked of all candidates were discussed. The Senior Cat suggested this one, "How are we governed?" 

He was looking for an answer which included local, state and federal forms of government as well as something about the right to vote and the compulsion to attend the ballot box. Rightly it was the chosen candidate who could actually answer that question. He went on to become a member of parliament. The Senior Cat's purpose in asking the question was two fold of course. He wanted to know if the candidate really did know something about the way we are governed and the importance of it. He also wanted them to be confident they could answer questions about the way we are governed in their host country. 

It shocked him to discover that city students knew very little about the way they were governed.  Rural students, the very students who might be expected to know less, knew more. When we thought about it though the answer was obvious. As a kitten in rural schools I knew my local state member of parliament. He might have had children at the school but even if he did not then he would be in and out of the school. He (and yes it was always "he" at the time) would likely be on "the school committee". He came to "sports day" and "speech night" and you saw him out and about even when he had to travel long distances. 

We knew the local council people too. Someone's father would be on it - or even be the Mayor. 

Our federal member might be a bit more distant but the Senior Cat and the staff made sure we knew who it was. I can remember them twice visiting schools I attended.  

I have no idea what goes on in rural schools now but I doubt they get taught as much about the practice and procedures of government as we did. There would not be as much time for that. Other issues would take precedence.

And then there are things like our legal system. Do students know how the courts function? Do they know the purpose of acts of parliament? What do they know about various tribunals or the function of something like the Equal Opportunity Commission or the Environmental Protection Agency?

Perhaps it would be good to teach current students more - if it could be done in a non-partisan manner. Of course some of what we came across was partisan but even the small minority of adults who voted for an alternative knew the local member and saw to it that their children did too. 

Here an educated adult I was talking to yesterday could not recall the name of our local MP. How can we expect children and young people to do that if adults cannot? How can we expect them to vote in an informed way - especially when there is compulsory attendance at the ballot box?

The "interest rate cut"

may do more harm than good. Does that sound ridiculous?

I am not an economist. I work on the simple basis of "if I don't have the money to pay for it then I cannot afford to buy it". So far I have managed to get through life without a "credit" card. There may come a time when I "need" one but while I can do without one I will. I do have a second debit card which works like a credit card but I can put a limited amount of money in that account to pay a bill and that is all I need to do.

But other people have mortgages. They owe more money than I can dream about. For them an interest rate cut must seem wonderful. I am left wondering if it really is. It could be. If you went on paying off your home loan at the same rate as before then yes you might really benefit. If you simply think of it as a few extra dollars coming in and use it to pay the bills then the same benefit will not be there but the pressure might be off at least a little.  Perhaps both things are beneficial, particularly the first.

But the temptation will be there for some to simply use the money for the things they are being told they are missing out on. The meal out, other entertainment, buying a coffee on the way to work and more will all add up. Inflation becomes an issue again and you suddenly find there is an interest rate increase...and another. You end up being worse off than before.

I was not surprised there was an interest rate cut but I am wondering if it is really a good thing. Our Reserve Bank has been "restructured" by the government. It has been split in two. It has allowed the government to influence the decisions which are made because it now has people there who have helped the current government make the policies they are trying to implement. Yes, the old Governor "got it wrong" on interest rates - or so they would have us believe.  We like to forget he was trying to help a government keep an economy together through a pandemic which had major global economic consequences. It may never be possible to work out if his approach was right or wrong even while people say they would do things differently now.

Yes, perhaps they would but I wonder what the consequences of doing something differently would be. If I was struggling to pay that mortgage it would be tempting to pay less.  If I thought I could save money in the future would I continue to pay as much as before? That would be tempting too and I might just do it. 

But right now I am just wondering if a politically motivated interest rate cut might not fuel inflation.

 

"Stronger Communities"?

I must be living somewhere else. I had this rather odd idea that the grants given under the "Stronger Communities" fund were supposed to benefit local communities and everyone in it who participated in, or wanted to participate in, an activity run in that community.

These grants were limited to $150,000 for each of the one hundred and fifty one federal electorates in the country. They were used to buy things like air conditioning for club buildings, kitchen upgrades for the same places, for bike paths and skate parks, for storage spaces for equipment and more.

They were never intended to be for cultural signs, for social media sites, for turning facilities into gender neutral spaces or activities across a number of electorates for non-citizens. They were never intended to fund overtly political activities even if they did fund activities which favoured the incumbent party. They were intended to benefit everyone in the community. They were not intended to benefit culturally specific groups. That skate park the adults loathe can be loved by all skateboarding kids regardless of religion or race.

Now it seems that all this has changed. It has changed without consultation. 

"Payback for not voting yes to that Voice to Parliament Cat!" I was told yesterday. One of the regular library users who runs a small community sports club program for kids at risk told me. It looks like his request for a small grant to cover some essential costs will not be met. 

His cynicism may be justified. I do not know but I am well aware that there never seem to be funds for some very worthwhile activities. Recently I had a conversation with the secretary to one of the senators in our federal parliament.  I pointed out to this person that, while money is spent on sport for young people, money for other activities is much harder to come by. Sport is seen as being "good" for you. It is seen as making you "fit" and "healthy" and "a team player" and many other things. We keep hearing how important it is for children to "do a sport" or even more than one sport. 

While we also hear that reading is important much more time is devoted to sport. Then try adding something like woodwork or art, pottery, origami, embroidery, paper architecture or knitting to the mix and a majority of people seem to shrug. "Kids don't want to do that sort of thing any more." 

Really? Have they really been given the chance to do any of these things - really do them? They all take time to learn but they can be crafts for life. They can be done when the sports field is not in use and when there is no sport to be watched on television.  They are activities that can again be done without reference to race or religion. But it seems that those "Stronger Communities" grants are now looking at race and religion - and that is not the way to build stronger communities. 

I feel so sorry for the ABC

or do I? Apparently there are now only four in every ten Downunderites who watch our "national broadcaster". 

I am not one of those four in ten who watch on a regular basis...but I watch almost no television.  Perhaps I would watch more  ABC if I watched more television. I don't know. It is equally possible I would not.

There was a time when, as a family, we did watch the early news service. If one of our teachers, J..., was appearing with his guitar and doing a "filler" we might watch that too. He genuinely wanted to know how he had come across. That was years ago. It was in the early days of television in this country. It was all black and white and almost no outside broadcasting. The serious reporters did things like Four Corners and the political stories. Journalists covered everything else, including the sport. There was a man who appeared for the weather and he, in a collar and tie, looked serious too. There was no "weather girl" in a fancy dress. 

I don't know when it all changed. My late cousin was a camera man for the ABC. He was considered to be good enough to do "outside" work but he did not last in the job. He went on to manage some of the biggest bands in the country and he knew enough about how television worked to make it work for them. In one of my last conversations with him before he died he told me, "You won't recognise television five years from now, perhaps even in three." 

It was not just that ways of doing things were changing rapidly, that outside broadcasting was increasingly common but something else. It was not that the technology had improved to the point where people had never heard of "test patterns" let alone seen one but something else.

The nature of television had changed. The people at the top were changing. Political activists were jostling for positions because they knew that television was where the opportunity to influence was going to be. Programs like Four Corners became intensely political. Journalists were supposed not to be biased but it soon became obvious that some of them did have at least leanings towards one party or another.

Now they do not even bother to try and hide their bias. Some will even use their role at the national broadcaster to try and leap into politics. One of them succeeded - for one term - straight from a major current affairs program. Others use it to pursue those they dislike or disagree with even when the courts have decided otherwise. Their coverage of issues and events is openly one-sided and not always in keeping with majority public opinion.

When I was a mere kitten there was a radio program for children called "the Argonauts".  It would not be tolerated now but we enjoyed it. My brother and I were "Argonauts". We participated in it by writing in and having our letters read on air. There were nature segments, art segments, writing segments and more. It was a very well produced educational program. I do not remember it being of any particular political persuasion, indeed am sure it was not. Now such a program would be televised and it would be used for the purposes of teaching children about climate change, racism and transgender issues. Television for adults has gone much the same way. 

I am not sure this is a good thing. It is surely not "progress" - or is it? I doubt it. 

The ABC costs taxpayers a great deal but it seems to me that it no longer does the job it is supposed to do as set out in the charter which governs it.

 

Just what is going on?

As I said to our local MP the other day - the first time I had met her in all the time since she has been elected - "There must be an election coming up."

There are two things that make this very, very clear. The first is that we are back to that old chestnut - Medicare or Mediscare. A carefully edited clip of the Opposition Leader appears to suggest he wants to dismantle the national health system. It is a clip which is many years old but it has been resurrected by the government for the purpose of trying to suggest something which is not true. 

In this instance it does not matter whether you like or loathe the Opposition Leader. It is simply a matter of "he never said that".  It is nothing more than a carefully crafted advertisement which is designed to be misleading. We will no doubt have plenty more of that in the next weeks and months. There are some "cashed up" Teal, Green and Independent candidates who are going to try and scare us all into voting for them instead of the major parties. If they really believe their particular brand of climate change politics then they need to be sent back to climate school. Not even the major parties looking for an election win are that negative about our climate future when they are talking in relation to their opponents.

The other thing of interest right now is the issue of the two "nurses" who have allegedly threatened to kill Jewish patients...indeed say they have already murdered some. I say "allegedly" because I have not seen the unredacted footage which the NSW police claim they had so much difficulty getting hold of. It is puzzling how it was apparently all over the media but the NSW police could not see it, could not get in touch with the young "influencer" who posted it.  There are some conspiracy theories floating around as to why this was so and why these two "nurses" are not in prison awaiting their day in court. I have no idea what is really going on because I am not privy to the actions of others but I would question whether it was really so difficult to make contact with someone who apparently has a world-wide audience. Of course they would need to get any footage directly from him for the purposes of an evidential chain but that should not have been difficult. 

What is more puzzling is the lack of action. As I write this these two have not yet been charged with anything and, if the media reports are correct, then they surely can be charged with hate crimes? There the suggestions that the interest of the present government in maintaining the Muslim vote may have something going for it. I do find it rather odd though that two Muslim friends have separately told me how appalled they were by what was said and by the lack of action on the part of the authorities. Perhaps something will happen in the next few days...or will it, as the conspiracy theorists have it, all be pushed under the closest prayer mat? It is hard on my hijab wearing friends. 

We need mathematicians

- of course we do! There was an article in yesterday's paper about the importance of maths and the teaching of maths. It said something about how we all use maths in our every day lives. Yes, that is true too. It may not be much but it is there from paying someone, receiving payment, measuring out a cup of something or looking at the amount of water in the jug before making a cup of tea, putting out utensils to use and much more.

But what the article did not say was anything about language and that bothers me. Without language there could be no maths. If you do not know the words "one" or "two" or "addition" or "putting things together" or many more words besides then how you can understand these things. You need these words (or their equivalent in another language, including sign language) in order to understand the idea of "oneness" or "more" or many other things.  

Learning those words cannot be done in isolation. If I am simply told "one" then it is meaningless unless I experience "one". I need to experience the idea of "one" in many different ways before I can begin to understand "one".  

For me this is where things like nonsense games, nursery rhymes, counting out rituals and much more are so important. It is why stories are so important. It is why reading to and with a child is so important. Why do we think even an interactive computer game can do this? It cannot do it. It cannot do it in the way that an a parent or "responsible" person can do it. An older person alert to a failure to understand can correct and reinforce the idea of "one". What is more many, perhaps most, older people will do it without even being aware that they are actually "teaching" the young learner.

I am no mathematician but I can usually handle the processes needed in everyday life. In the past few weeks moving has meant I have needed to do more than usual. It has been a relief to discover I can still estimate with a good degree of accuracy. It has been an even bigger relief to discover that the bookshelves fitted in as I thought they would.  I measured and I multiplied. I took into account the amount required to accommodate the skirting boards. This was all practical, everyday mathematics. I did it without thinking of it as "maths".

At the other end of my mathematical knowledge I can still do some basic statistics. If faced with some of the more commonly used tests I can read the results. I can understand - and question - the results in a psychological paper or the claims being made in something else like a news report. That is perhaps more "advanced" mathematics but it is still only very low level work when compared with the calculations which send people into space and bring them back again. I am lost when it comes to what children now do in school - even if I believe that the sort of maths I did has more practical applications. It makes me wonder if there needs to be more "practical mathematics" taught.

But none of it can be done without language. Numbers and words need each other.

 

President Trump is more interested

in ending the war in Ukraine than he is in the right outcome it seems.

The best possible outcome of course would be for the borders of Ukraine to return to what they were before the annexation of Crimea. That is unlikely but, at very least, Russia should be required to retreat to the borders prior to the "special military operation".  Anything less than that would, quite simply, be wrong. It would allow the aggressor to win.

It is likely the aggressor will win. Russia will gain territory. They will not pay reparations for the physical damage they have done and they can never pay damages for the psychological, emotional, educational and other damage. They have almost certainly succeeded in delaying the NATO decision. President Zelensky will be ousted, perhaps by some pro Russian leader who will want to return Ukraine into Russian hands. 

Yes, I have a pessimistic view of what might happen. I hope it does not. If NATO is more willing than it currently appears to be then all this might not happen. Much will depend on what Ukraine has to offer the rest of the world and how much they want it. I do know I would not like to live there. 

I gave away some things yesterday. I gave them to a family from Ukraine. They are struggling financially and emotionally. The mother quite literally wept as I handed over some clothes and other items. She has not seen or heard from her husband since well before Christmas and fears that he may not even be alive. Her eldest child, a boy of eleven, is trying to be the "man of the family". It is a heavy burden for a child.  They want to "go home" even while they are deeply appreciative of the opportunity to live here. 

I can understand their "homesickness". It is a very, very difficult emotional and social issue to handle. Everything seems strange to them. It is why they cling to each other. They have not made a choice to migrate. Their life here is temporary and they will go back but not to the same country. Ukraine will never be the same country again. This family will likely not even go back to the same part of their country because the area is under Russian control.

I fear for what President Trump and President Putin are planning. They both seem to believe that Ukraine should just surrender territory and much more. Will Putin be satisfied with just that? Of course not. It will be just a start. He still dreams of returning to what he sees as the glory days of the  USSR, not simply Russia. There are many who dream along with him.

It should never have been allowed to get this far.  

Sam Kerr is not guilty?

I did not follow the story with any great interest. I really am not interested in high paid sports people, especially anyone who abuses their position or comments on matters not related to whatever game they play. But, this story was impossible to miss.

I will also be quite blunt here and say that I believe Kerr has played the race card - and won. She has played the sex card - and won. She has played the lesbian card - and won.  What is more she chose to go out and drink alcohol, drink it to excess and become drunk. Why should she be relieved of any responsibility for the decision to do that and the consequences?

I think there is a much bigger problem here than people have been daring to say. You see Kerr is a sportsperson, the captain of a team. She has an even bigger responsibility to the other members of her team because she is supposed to be a leader. She is there not just to lead but to set an example. How can she do that if she behaves so badly? Yes, it was bad behaviour. It was unacceptable. It was wrong. An apology is not enough here. 

Kerr is also supposed to be, like it or not, a role model for young ones. She is supposed to be a role model for those who might like to take up the sport or might be encouraged to take up the sport. She might even have been held up as a role model for those who want to take up another sport.  It might not be what she wants but it goes with the territory. It is part of her job.

I suspect the jury was afraid to find her guilty, afraid of the backlash it would cause. The verdict makes it very clear that playing the race and/or the sex card can tilt the verdict card.  

Something can be done and it needs to be done. Kerr must lose the captaincy of the team. She must no longer be seen as the leader of it because she is not a leader.  

The "e-safety Commissioner" has

too much power and she has been abusing that power. At the Administrative Appeals Tribunal there has been a decision that the scheme the Commissioner was using of "informal take down orders" and then claiming they could not be used was being used as a way to avoid scrutiny.

I know more than one person who has been a victim of such orders. I will freely admit that I do not like what some of them have had to say. Although I do not like what they have to say it was said in ways that could not be said to cause harm to others.  Should they have a right to say it? Of course they should. 

About half way through last year I had a letter in the state newspaper. A complete stranger did his homework, found me and phoned me. He was clearly hostile and ready to abuse me. I said quietly, "You are absolutely entitled to your opinion." He spluttered and muttered something and hung up. I wonder what would have happened if I had tried to convince him he was wrong? He could have rushed off to the e-safety Commissioner if the matter had been solely online. There he could have had my opinion taken down without any chance of review. All it would have taken would have been one person at the Commission who disagreed with what I had said.  (All I had said in fact was that we need to discuss the option of nuclear power in a calm and reasoned way.)

Do we really need to have an e-safety Commissioner for this sort of thing? The Commissioner was strongly supportive of the social media ban for the young of course. Many people have supported that ban without really thinking about what the implications are - or what the potential complications are.  Do they also support the Commissioner's over reach of her powers? Perhaps they do - or would until they found themselves the target of it.    

So ADHD can now

cost a $1000 or more to "diagnose"? It seems you can also get extra time in exams, more time for revision and other "help" if you are officially diagnosed as "ADHD". You can also have more breaks to "burn off energy" and help you "regulate" your emotions.

I can remember teaching a child who would undoubtedly now be diagnosed as having ADHD. I handled him in the classroom with no extra assistance. He was sitting at the back of the classroom when I arrived. I sat him at the front. If he did not finish the tasks I set him - and I knew he could - he stayed in until he had finished them. I reminded him of his responsibilities to himself and others with nothing more than a direct look if he started to stare out the window. I made sure he was asked direct questions so he would be actively participating in class activities. It took some weeks but by the end of the first term of teaching him he was getting better marks and he really was focussing more on the work he was given to do.  Yes, it was work but even the other children in the class noticed the change in him. They were more willing to include him in a team. His mother told me he no longer "hated" school. He might not be fond of school but he was not complaining about it as much as he once had. The results were not perfect. He still lost concentration at times and had to be brought back from wherever his mind had taken him. Nevertheless I think the approach worked.

No, that approach will not work for all children but it worked for him and I expect it would work for many others. When I did this the usual arrangement for the classroom was "four straight rows facing the blackboard". There was an equally usual expectation that, for the most part, students were expected to listen to the person teaching them. I tried to encourage the children to raise their hands and ask questions if they did not understand something or wanted to know something more. Some children were reluctant to do that and I had to be aware of it and try to follow up.  They were expected to concentrate on the task in hand. 

No, it was not easy. Work, and school is the child's form of work, is not easy. It is not supposed to be easy...or is it? 

I may be wrong but I think the epidemic (and there is no other suitable word) of children being diagnosed with ADHD may actually have more to do with the way children are now learning and being expected to learn. If very young children are using screen based devices (and many of them are) then they are learning to learn in a very different way from the child who is playing in other ways. Screen time will not teach you to play in the mud or build with wooden bricks. It will not teach you dig holes or pretend to cook.

Young children are often naturally restless. They have shorter attention spans. Screen based activities often reinforce that very behaviour.  There is the instant "reward" when you hit the right button. The joy of discovering you were right is not reinforced by human interaction but interaction with a something else entirely.  Like it or not the style of reinforcement is different. The human element is missing. The emotion is not there.

I know there are people who will argue with this but I do wonder about it all. Do we need to rethink learning styles before we simply say someone has ADHD? Do we also perhaps need to think that most of us have ADHD at some point in our day or week? 

When air conditioning is

"green" and a school has to close because the "green" air conditioning is not working then we have a problem. It is just one of many problems associated with the mad rush to "net zero" with a stream of absurd policies which simply do not work.

I do not deny the climate is changing. Climate has changed throughout history as we know it. Whether humans are solely responsible is something I very much doubt but they certainly contribute towards the problems. 

The Senior Cat was once appointed, along with Mum, to a two teacher school in a very remote part of this state. We four kittens tagged along behind because nothing else could be done about it. We spent two years there. At first we had no electricity and no running water.  There was certainly no air conditioning, not even in cars. Mum cooked on a wood burning stove and heated the washing water in a copper. Temperatures often rose well above 100'F and everyone just carried on.

Now those conditions would be considered completely unacceptable. I wonder what they would do about air conditioning? Would they  have solar panels on the roof? Would such things work with a 32v power plant?

We had similar situations in other places. We just got on with the day and drank a lot of rainwater - often cooled in hessian cooler bags on hanging from the back verandah. (Woe betide the person who let the bag empty and did not refill it.)

Here in the city people expect to have air conditioning. I actually have it here in the unit and we had it at the house. 

We also had a "natural" air conditioning system that worked very well. We grew "glory" vines along the western side of the house. In late spring every year the Senior Cat would place poles along the side of the house and train the vines to climb to the roof. (They did not require much work.) We would then have a natural green canopy along the side. It reduced the internal temperature of the house (along with excellent roof insulation) by at least ten degrees centigrade. Often we had not need to turn on the air conditioning. Add a patch of lawn at the front and heavy curtains and people often commented on how cool the house was on a hot day.

More people could do that sort of thing. It really did not take that much time but of course it is simply to flick a switch. Perhaps that is where the real problem lies?

"There must be an election coming up"

I said as my local state member smiled at me. I managed a smile in return - just.

I have had almost nothing to do with her. That she knew me is something I am not sure whether to be  pleased or sorry about. This is the first time in many years that I have not known my local members - both state and federal - well enough to feel comfortable with them. Yes, before you ask, they have come from both sides of the political spectrum. I have not always agreed with them, indeed one I had major issues with. (He jumped to the other side so they could form government and got a ministerial post in return. His electorate was furious with him and he did not even manage to reach two figures at the next election.)

Yesterday though it was obvious there is an election coming up. This is the federal election. It is almost certain the local federal member will get re-elected because the boundaries have changed strongly in her favour. It means she can get away with doing very little for some parts of the electorate. She knows they are a lost cause which is probably why she left the state MP to stand there on her behalf. 

The state MP was keen to involve me in something so I said, quite honestly, "No, I am still working." I may be officially "retired" but I still do some work in that field and there is other work isn't there? Writing is work!  It is as good an excuse as any and at least it means that I don't need to say outright, "I don't vote for you because I don't like the way the country is heading under your party." Mind you I have arguments with the other major mob as well. 

I could never join a political party and be loyal to it. I would always want to argue in favour of something they could never agree to do. It just is something I would find impossible not to do.

But there is an election coming up and the shopping centre will soon be filled with all those people who happily hand out flyers and exhort their fellow citizens to vote for their particular candidates. They will door knock (although nobody ever knocked on our door when I lived down the hill) and they will say they are confident that "this time"... but do those minor parties really believe that? Some of them of course are there to push votes to one or the other major party. They can do that only because of our iniquitous compulsory preferential voting system. (Preferences if you must - but never compulsory.)

I took my leave of my local MP as soon as I could - and I refused her offer of a "nice shopping bag" emblazoned with the name of our current federal MP. She did not try to persuade me. Perhaps she does realise I am unlikely to vote for her fellow MP?  

Doing the shopping,

the everyday shopping does not excite me. If I am really honest going shopping for anything other than books or hobby related supplies does not excite me.

I know my way around what I consider to be the best of the three supermarkets within reach and I can, if necessary, find things in the other two. Perhaps I am a "lazy" shopper in that I do not look closely at the catalogues and pick up the "specials".  Oh I will pick up a "two for one" if I know I am going to use it but...

All this is not because I have money to waste but because I have discovered it simply isn't worth the effort if you are mobility impaired cat without a car. I doubt it is worth the effort even if you are agile and have a car. 

Some years ago the Senior Cat and I bought a bulk lot of toilet paper. It was half price. It was not going to go stale. We had the room to store it. This was before the run on the item which made it so very expensive during Covid19 lockdowns.  It was a good buy. That sort of thing, if you have room for it, does make sense because it would have cost more if the money had been left in the bank.

I can understand people buying items like that in bulk. Those with large families must welcome it.  No doubt they really are welcoming the news that a large US based chain is going to open its doors to all and sundry- and do home deliveries as well.

But, much as I dislike going to the supermarket, do I really want to go down the "buy in bulk and have it delivered" route? Of course not. I do not need bulk buys now I am on my own. I can still spend wisely by looking at sizes and making decisions on how much I will use by a "best before" or "use by" date. If I plan ahead I do not need to back track in the supermarket I like. There might be something different which will catch my eye. I can read the packet there and make a decision.

And there is something about the local shopping centre. I may not stop for more than it takes to say, "How are you?" but I can stop and do that and keep an eye on some of the human beings who matter to me. I may not know them well but, particularly if they are very old, they should matter to me. It is not the shopping that matters at all.  

Turning Gaza into the Riviera

of the Middle East? What on earth will the man think of next? Doesn't he realise that they do not allow women to wear bikinis in Gaza?

I thought of Lebanon, once a playground for the wealthy. That's gone. The Middle East has places where those wanting to soak up the sun in a bikini can go of course but I do not see Gaza that way.

How do I see Gaza? I do not know. Were every building in the country flattened tomorrow and rebuilt to a high standard within a week with money gifted from the wicked western countries I believe there would still be problems there.  

What do they have in the way of industry or agriculture not to simply support themselves but to export? How can they possibly hope to be self sufficient? The idea that they might be rid of Israel and take over the land occupied by Israelis must seem very appealing when they see a country that appears to be so wealthy taking over land they see as theirs, or have been led to believe is theirs.  

Israel has had massive financial support from Jews around the world, particularly those in the United States. Gaza has never had that level of support from Arab nations. It almost certainly never will. This is not the way Muslim charity works. 

I wonder what will happen next. I wonder if the lies Hamas feeds the population will ever be shown to be that. It is more likely the Gazans themselves will go on believing what they have been told because by now they cannot afford to believe anything else. 

As regular readers of this blog know I am in the process of moving house in a particularly difficult sort of way. I have reached the point where I need to move some major items but there are not enough to justify calling in a pantechnicon. It is likely that I would not even be able to do that. I want a couple of strong, reliable men and a large van. I would like it at a reasonable price. So far the solution eludes me. There will be one but it is going to take more research.  

I look on the situation in Gaza as being similar. It needs more research and even then the solution will not turn out to be the Riviera of the Middle East.  

Moving house trials

are still with me. Why is it so difficult to find someone prepared to move a small amount of furniture? It would be easier to move an entire house!

More on the woes of this tomorrow. 

The steelworks at the top

of Spencer Gulf have been struggling for years. They are what has kept the town there alive for years too - but barely so.

We used to travel through it several times a year when we lived in a tiny rural community another couple of hundred kilometres to the west. It was the first "big" town we would come to on our way back to the city. It was where the sealed road began.

You could see it for some distance ahead because the country is flat and rusty brown. The town was big enough to have more than one primary school and a high school. In the intervening years it has grown in size but the steel works, perhaps always under stress, have not grown with time. 

There has been more than one attempt to "save" them but, even without our appalling record of industrial relations and overly high employment costs, the location is wrong. The government keeps trying because if the works fail then the town fails. It is one of the biggest towns in the state so the economic consequences will be huge.

Fling into this state of affairs an attempt to run the works on "green" energy and we could fail. This failure is so close to certain that we really do need to rethink the entire "green" energy strategy. It is all very well to suggest we can be "leaders" in saving the planet but the reality may be that we are losers instead.  

Someone I know who currently lives there is moving out. She no longer feels safe and is relieved her work is taking her to another part of the country. Parts of the town are, according to her, "lawless".

I wonder if the town will survive. I wonder why there has been no attempt to do two things. Why have they not diversified? Is it because of the union stranglehold on the works themselves? Is it really the case that there are no other possibilities there?  And why do we insist on trying to be "green" with things like unproven "hydrogen" technology when we could be doing it differently? It seems I do not understand anything at all.  

It is the unpredictable nature of

President Trump which is perhaps the thing which should concern us the most.

Downunder,we are told, is in a good position because we import far more from the United States than we send there. This is hardly surprising of course. Our entire population is less than that of California.

There are also the "drug" and "immigrant" questions. We do not share borders with the United States. Undoubtedly there is some drug and illegal migrant trade between us but it would perhaps be minimal compared with those who have adjacent borders. We have our own drug and illegal migrant problems to deal with. Our coastline is vast and, despite the best efforts of those responsible, drugs and vessels do slip through. There are many other people who simply arrive by air and then stay on after their visas expire.

I wonder what would happen if we tried to hold Indonesia responsible for our illegal drug imports or the illegal migrants who come by boat? I doubt we would get very far. It would almost certainly result in huge harm to our ability to trade with the Asian countries successive governments have kept telling us are our best trading partners.

Increases in tariffs will not help anyone of course. They will simply raise prices and add to inflation. Even if the Reserve Bank does cut the interest rate (as seems likely) it is not going to have any effect on the cost of living. On the surface of course it seems that it should but the government's continued "subsidies" are making sure that the rate of inflation is being kept artificially low. After all, they want to win the election which must be held before the end of May. 

Yes, migration can assist an economy. It is often said this country was built on migration and there is some truth in that. But migration has to be controlled. It has to largely be confined to people who are willing to work and who will not bring in with them the beliefs and practices which have caused so many problems elsewhere. That will not prevent us bringing in refugees, people who genuinely need shelter. We can still offer a home to some of those most in need and we should - but we might need to make more effort to ensure they actually integrate because that is the only way we can be a cohesive society.

All this bothers me. I do not like the bully-boy tactics being employed by the President of the United States or the inflationary attempts to buy votes by our own government.  Somewhere along the line we need to work harder, spend less and save more for the future. We also need to do more to help others. 

Buying a washing machine

should be simple but is proving complex.

I need another washing machine. The trusty machine the Senior Cat and I have used for the past twenty or so years will not fit into the available space in the new abode. It will also need to be a front loader, not a top loader.

Yes, I can possibly buy something more "energy" and "water" efficient but in actual fact the old one rates highly on both accounts. We have had no problems with it apart from a broken "paddle" at one point. Middle Cat's brother replaced it at a minimum cost.

Now I am looking at washing machines, at reviews of machines, at energy efficiency, at water usage, at capacity and more. I have discovered some washing machines have something called "steam" and others will dry your clothes as well. I doubt there is any small machine which will do this but it all adds to the confusion.

I remember my mother doing the washing by hand when I was a very young kitten. She thought she was doing well because she had a "mangle". This was not for ironing the clothes, simply for removing some of the water before they were hung on the line.

From there she graduated to a "spinner" which did much the same thing. Then there was the "twin tub". We went back to heating water in a "copper" and the mangle when we moved to the bush. All our school clothes and the Senior Cat's shirts were "drip-dry" terylene which did not get ironed. If Mum did any ironing it was done by heating flat irons on the stove top. At one point we went back to 240v power only to return to 32v power in yet another location.  Washing facilities went from one thing to another at the same time.  For Mum the return to the city and 240v power and a washing machine you did not need to boil a copper of water for was luxury indeed. 

Now I am "spoilt for choice" or, perhaps more accurately, confused by it. I simply want something which washes the clothes efficiently and spins the water out so I can hang things up to dry. Why does it have to be so complicated? 

$70m a week for the

NDIS in this state alone tells me that there are people receiving it who should not be receiving it. There are others who should be receiving it or receiving more of it and are receiving nothing or an inadequate amount for essential care.

I had an appointment for a shingles vaccine yesterday. It was part one of a two part jab you get over a certain age and I am grateful to live in a country where such things are considered important.

In the waiting room I sat almost next to a young Asian man who was the "carer" for another young man of about the same age.This other young man was severely autistic. He was rocking backwards and forwards and sometimes shouting nonsense. Other patients had moved away. 

The doctor they were seeing is the one we usually see. She would do a good job of handling him but it would be difficult and time consuming. She was already running late and keeping the autistic patient waiting was just going to make matters worse. 

One of the clinic nurses came quietly up to me and asked if I really needed to see the doctor. I told her "No, I just need the first Shingrix jab. You could do it I am sure."

"Thanks."

We went off and a quick call to the doctor to say, "Cat's here for her jab and is happy for me to do it if you are."

The response was "Go ahead."

It is a clinic requirement that you then wait five minutes before leaving so I resumed my seat and heard the carer on the phone, "No, I am supposed to be off duty in five minutes but I cannot just leave him. Someone has to be with him at all times." 

There was apparently nobody who could take over so this young carer was going to have to work without pay until he could eventually return the other young man to his place of care.  He finished the call and looked at me in a frustrated sort of way.  I said sympathetically, "Does this happen often?" 

He nodded. On his reckoning he can put in between seven and ten unpaid hours a week. He is a student. He needs this job. It is a job not many people are prepared to do. We talked about it for a few minutes and he told me that there were other people he knew doing similar work who are being paid almost nothing and often doing unpaid overtime.

I am actually aware that this does happen. I know several severely and profoundly disabled people who genuinely need all the assistance they are getting and probably need even more. I also know that this state has the highest rate of "autism" diagnoses. Some of them will be as severe as the young man I observed. He really does need one on one care. There is an entire range of "autism" beyond that. Some of those people need extensive help but others can function with no assistance at all. They are often just people with delightful personality quirks who would once have been considered a little eccentric.

On my way back here I called in at the shopping centre and was almost knocked over by a child running around. Someone tried to stop him only to be told by his "responsible adult" that he was "autistic" and "has ADHD" so could not help running around. While this was being said the child in question was making faces at the man who had tried to stop him.  There was a knowing grin on his face.

"We're getting funding because he is so hard to manage," I heard his responsible adult say.

Perhaps he is autistic but he came across much more strongly as a child not properly under control. If this is where the NDIS money is going I hope his parents are getting some parenting lessons.