There is a house being built

on land behind the group of units in which I now live. I was aware of it mostly because there were "fence" problems and the owner of the land in question was not being cooperative. 

It now turns out there may have been very good reasons for him not to be cooperative. He has been actively avoiding anything happening on "his" land until the footings were dug out and the foundations laid. That has now occurred and he, smilingly, came up with an offer to pay his half of the fencing costs. 

What he had not done was deal with the issue of a drainage pipe which flows from the units and the surrounding properties on to his land. Apparently it is "not his problem" because "it isn't there". It is apparently not on the paperwork at the local council and they are responsible for allowing building works to go ahead. 

The neighbour who came in to see me about all this told me the council has informed him the council says their records only go back to 1970. That seems very unlikely but this is what they are claiming. The units were built in 1966. As far as they are concerned the pipe does not exist. Really?

The water supply company also says "not our problem" because "our responsibility stops at the street". This is despite the fact that the pipe would have been put in by them when water was connected to all the surrounding properties.

It is a drainage pipe and the building works are lower than this unit so I am assuming water flows in that direction. Yes, it will flow on to the property. The pipe must direct the flow of the water from the neighbouring rooftops? I am no physicist and I am no engineer but it just seems to me you would want to avoid this sort of situation. It would be wise to get some advice? It would be wise to cooperate with your neighbours to be on this matter?

No, the owner has had the builder block the pipe with concrete. It was filled in when they laid the foundations. It was filled in against advice from a much more knowledgeable plumber.  Where will the water flow now? According to the owner of the land it is not his problem. The manager of the units is trying to do something about the situation. We have had no rain for weeks now but I suspect we might have a problem when it does and the water has nowhere to go. It might also mean the land beneath the new building dries out and damages the foundations. 

It is a potential muddy mess.  

  

If we want children to read

then they must be taught to read. I would have thought this was obvious but apparently it is not. It seems some parents believe the process can now be left entirely up to "day care" and "kindy" (kindergarten) and "pre-school" or wherever else they put their precious little ones to be "educated". Parents no longer have "time" to do anything like this.

I know I was lucky. My parents were teachers. I might have driven my mother to distraction but she did put the words for everyday items on them, on the 'fridge and elsewhere. If I wanted a word I could ask for it. It would be written on a piece of paper in her excellent "infant school" printing and it was there. All I had to do was learn it. 

I knew my letters early because the Senior Cat read me my bedtime stories as soon as I started to take an interest in the pictures in books. I cannot remember that but one of my earliest memories is sitting on his lap in front of the wood burning stove. He has his left arm around me. His left hand is holding the book and his right hand is pointing to each word as he reads it to me. I cannot have been more than eighteen months old. And yes, I do actually remember that. I can feel and smell the memory of it as well. They say you need words to remember and I must have had those words. It isn't the clearer, sharper memories of later but it is there. I have similar memories of other happenings. 

I didn't "just pick it (reading) up" of course. My parents contributed to the process. When my brother came along I was there to help. He was another early reader. My sisters were not as fast. My parents had more to do and the Senior Cat was doing a university degree part time. That alone tells me that parents need to be involved. 

Most parents would not be able to do what my parents did. They are not trained teachers. Quite possibly their children would not be as interested in learning to read but it does not mean that nothing should be done. Every so often there will be another news item about the importance of reading to children when they are young. It is one of those things that "everybody knows" is important but is still largely taken for granted. It does not always get done.

It does not always get done because parents are now "time poor". If both parents are working full time then there is very little time left for parenting. Your child(ren) will be brought up by the staff at day care in whatever form it takes. The lucky children will be those who are left with caring and able grandparents who take them off to "story-telling" at the library and have the time to satisfy the curiosity of the child who wants to know what something "says".  It is not just that of course. It is the individual interactions which matter, the playing with words. I heard a child saying "beat" the other day. Her grandparent responded, "heat" and the child said "cheat". It was a game between two. It was fun. 

All forms of day care have a place but none of them are quite the same as individual adult time devoted to words when it comes to learning to read. That is only a start of course. There is much more to it than that but it still matters and there are too many children missing out on it. 

 

 

 

The "Thriving Kids" program

outlined by the government is supposed to reduce the cost of the NDIS scheme. Whether it will or not is yet to be seen.

I was talking to a young mother yesterday who was worried her three year old son "might be autistic". He was running around and around the park adjacent to the library pretending to be a pilot. 

"He just keeps going like that all day. At kindy (kindergarten) they keep telling me he has to learn to settle down and listen to instructions and do what he is told. They are worried because he can't count properly past ten and he doesn't know how to read anything. He can read his name but he can't write it and they say..." 

"Does he sleep at night?" I asked. It felt exhausting just watching him.

"Oh yes, that's not a problem."

"Do you read to him?"

"Yes, it's why we come here on Wednesdays. It isn't a kindy day so we come to the toy library and I always get some books for him. He will listen to a story...I mean he will wriggle around but if you ask him then he has been listening. He can tell it back to you."

I listened to all of this as he turned a perfect somersault in the grass to "land". He was talking away using words like "landing gear" and "flaps" and "throttle". It all sounded perfectly normal to me. He seemed to me to be a healthy and active little boy with imagination and the apparently excess energy of childhood. 

But apparently there are "problems" at kindergarten level. He does not fit into the required groove or hole. He is a round peg that can turn around and around and the hole is square. It does not want him to roll around. Someone has suggested he "might be autistic" because he does not fit neatly into the expectations and requirements of the kindergarten. He is not learning the way they require children to learn. 

Of course I do not know the child at all. There may be other problems, problems the mother did not want to mention. Still it seems to me that having a very active and healthy child with an active and healthy imagination should not be seen as a "might be autistic" problem. The idea of putting him on some sort of medication "to calm him down a bit" was worrying the mother. It would worry me too. 

Is this how we treat three year old children who do not fit into the requirements being laid down?  

  

 

  

So interest rates are up again?

And the government is blaming everyone but themselves? Why am I not surprised?

I spent most of my time yesterday morning going to and from the bank. To get there requires pedalling to the station, catching a train changing to another train and then pedalling again at the other end. (Yes of course you do the same in reverse to go home again.) I arrived at the bank during the shopping centre's "quiet hour" - the one which is supposed to cater for people with "sensory needs".  It was not particularly quiet.

I had to actually go to the bank because all attempts to do what needed to be done could not be done on line. Please allow me to explain how much of this is a government induced problem which causes a rise or two in the cost of living.

First, it should not have been necessary to go that far in order to actually go to a bank. There should be a bank nearby. There were once four banks in the immediate vicinity. Now there are none. There were four ATM's outside the shopping centre. Now there is one. There is another inside run by a private company that charges people each time they use it.  All this has been done in the name of things like "electronic banking", "efficiency", "time saving", "reduced costs"... I could go on. Has any of this actually made life easier? No, it has reduced human interaction.

It has also increased the possibilities for fraud, greatly increased those possibilities. Oh and don't think about using the ATM unless there are plenty of people around or you might find yourself being held up by a teenage gangster looking for a bit extra to spend at the fast food places across the main road.

So, "reverification" of my bank details are necessary because now I could be anyone at all. After the failed attempts to do it in other ways and a now angry email from the bank I gave in and decided to go. The one thing I was refusing to do was "make an appointment".  Thus I made the trip by trike and train. Two trains? Yes, our public transport system tends to go in and out of the city, not across the suburbs. There is one "connector" bus service which does a loop but I cannot take the trike on the buses and it would involve even more time and buses. The entire system is designed to encourage the use of cars.

Oh yes, cars? Most people have access to one. They can drive. They have a licence to drive. It has "photo ID". You can use it to prove your identity. I do not have a licence to drive of course. I have a "proof of age" card. It also has photo ID. It is issued by the same people who issue the driver's licence cards. To get a proof of age card you have to provide a hundred points of ID which means at least two things like your passport, your birth certificate, your Medicare card and (wait for it) your licence to drive.  It is supposed to be an alternative to the licence to drive when you need to provide ID...except sometimes. The bank will not take that form of ID on line. 

So there I am, sans "appointment". I tell the service officer at the "welcome" desk why I am there. He starts to say I should have an appointment and I tell him, politely, that I am not going to make one because I happen to know that they have appointments available right then. (I looked that up before I left.) His shoulders sag. Is this going to be a difficult customer? He looks my details up. There is a flag on them saying I have already put in a complaint. The complaint was polite. It was reasonable. If they accept my suggestion it will, I hope, make a change to bank policy and life a little easier for all of us without a licence to drive. 

"Plenty of time," the nice female officer tells me. She groans when I tell her what the problem is...and agrees with me that reverification of details is largely due to fraud caused by the lack of face to face transactions. The idea that my proof of age card is not adequate for reverification purposes on line is something which causes her to sigh in frustration and mutter imprecations about inefficiency and more. I was on my way home when she actually phoned me to say that the bank has now accepted my proof of age card as ID...but it still cannot be done online. 

I hope my new passport turns up soon. I might need it as ID.  

I am reeling at the stupidity of

some people. I have just lost my temper. Anyone who knows me will also know it takes a lot for me to actually lose my temper. I can get angry but this is something different.

There is a fire in a conservation park south of here. I know the area. It is very difficult terrain. There are a lot of eucalypts there and a lot of other growth. It is pretty dry right now. There has not been a lot of rain recently.  The wind is changeable. There is no rain in sight. The roads in and out are narrow and winding. It is the very worst sort of fire to have to fight. 

The police are asking people to "stay away". The last thing the fire fighters need are thrill seekers - sight seers - people "going to have a look" or "to see if they can help".  No you can't help. Stay the hell out of there. Stay away. Let the people who are risking their lives to put the fire out get on with the job without hindrance. 

If you were told to get out then I hope you got out. Don't rely on those firefighters to come and rescue you.

I know something about bushfires (wildfires). I have been too close to one for comfort. Let me explain.

There was a fire when the Senior Cat had a school in a rural area. The school, like most area schools, had an agricultural stream. There were sheep and some small areas of crop and the like. The Senior Cat and the teacher in charge of the agricultural stream were responsible for the safety of that as well as the safety of the school. It was a weekend. The children were not at school which was a good thing because the school was needed for other purposes. It was the command centre. 

I do not know too much about the details of the fire. What I do know are some things which will stick in my mind forever. We herded the sheep into the back garden of the school house. They were bleating fear. My brother was set the task of hand pumping the water into the overhead tank (which is how we had any water pressure at all) and he also had to control the hose which was there to make sure that any sparks which landed did not start a major fire. 

I was sent over to the school's domestic science kitchen where food was prepared for the men fighting the fire. The town's only shop had sent up all the available bread along with other supplies. I spent the night and most of the following day making sandwiches as the men came in to the kitchen in relays.  They would lie on the floor in the room next day and "get some kip" before going back out on to the front lines having had an hour or so's break. They were filthy dirty and red eyed. Some of them had minor burns and blisters. They were exhausted but they had to go back. There were simply not enough men to do the job which needed to be done without them. The school's generator had to be kept running so there was power at the school. 

Eventually everything was under control. The area around the school was a mess but it was not as bad as it might have been. Everyone was exhausted and I mean exhausted. They were not just "very tired". There was still a lot of cleaning up to do, spots to be watched and roads to be cleared. 

Compared with what they are now fighting I suppose it was a "small" fire but it did not feel small. The terrain was not as difficult but other issues made it awkward. The cause of the fire was thought to be a dry lightning strike. Nobody lost their home but some people lost sheds and many of them lost sheep or had to go out and shoot the injured sheep. Contrary to the belief of many farmers do not like doing that.  

It was talked of quietly for weeks. I remember the vague feeling of trying to be as grown up as the women working in the kitchen but it was hard. I knew where my parents were but they did not know where their fathers, husbands and sons were or if they were safe. I was the only teenager in the room and it was one of those times when I definitely kept my head down and my mouth shut. I suppose it was a "growing up" moment but it is a memory which still disturbs me. 

So, when some fool thinks it would be "interesting" to go and look I let him know how selfish he would be. The last thing they need is someone getting in the way and putting their lives further at risk. Please just let the men out there get on with the job and let the back up women get on with theirs too.  

  

The political devotee who knocked

on my door yesterday was a nice young girl but very immature and very misguided.

I will assume she was eighteen but she looked younger than that. She stood there and told me that she was campaigning for the candidate of her choice and wanted to talk to me about it. 

I do not normally engage in conversation with any political candidates or their representatives but I had already heard her talking to one of my neighbours. What she was telling them was complete nonsense. The party in question was going to do this, do that, do something else. It sounded wonderful but it was completely impossible. I am sure the candidate does not believe it. It would not be in their party's political manifesto.

We talked about the "free" solar panels. No, I was not to worry about that. Everyone was going to get those. I first pointed to the roof and said, "We cannot put them up here." (There are good safety reasons for this. The place would need a new roof.) I explained why. 

Her response was, "But we could help you do that." Really? I very much doubt it.

I asked her where the money was coming from. "The government of course." And where does government money come from? That caused a slight hesitation and then, "Well some of it is our taxes but most of it comes from business."  Really?

Climate change? Her views on that were, as I expected, in keeping with the worst case scenario. No, greening the planet was not the answer. Trees are nice but you don't need them in the way you need housing.

And why do we need so much housing? Because everyone has the right to their own free standing home. Really? I tried to tell her that this is not how most people live but she still felt it was the right thing to try and achieve. After all, or so she informed me, we need to bring in at least another hundred thousand people a year over and above the (increased) numbers we are already bringing in.  Those people also have a "right" to live as they choose. They do not need to integrate because we are "multicultural". She genuinely could not see that as likely to cause any problems.

We stopped about there. We did not cover the "stolen" land issue or the other issues of concern regarding "indigenous culture" and "first nations" people. I could be almost certain of her thinking on those issues.

Or is she thinking at all? I am sure she regards herself as politically well informed. In reality she has very little idea of how complex many of these issues are. I doubt she would believe anyone if they tried to tell her. I suppose it makes her the perfect political devotee of her chosen party.  

 

"Is it all right not to like someone?"

a strange child asked me yesterday. He was standing there glaring at someone who had just walked off quickly.

"You don't have to like everyone," I responded. We were outside the shopping centre. The place where I park my trike is also used by people to tie up their dogs. The child, a boy of about nine, was standing there next to a dog of indeterminate breed but determinedly friendly nature.

Dog and I said hello to one another and the child said, "I like you because you talk to my dog."

"I like talking to dogs. They talk back to you."

"Yes they do but that man doesn't like dogs. He was rude about Ben and rude to me. He said dogs like Ben should be put down and put down means killed. He said they were no use for anything but Ben is useful"

I was soon told about the way Ben kept this child's grandfather company after the death of the child's grandmother. Apparently, "They go everywhere together except inside places like this where you aren't allowed."

This child was, rightly, upset. The dog was securely tied to the railing and doing no harm to anyone. He was not barking or making a nuisance of himself. The child claimed he had not said anything to the man who made the comments and I believe him. He was one of those "nice" children you instantly feel warm towards. His relationship with the dog was excellent.

I like dogs I suppose. I tend to talk to them when I see them. If they are tied up where my trike is tied up then we might have a conversation of sorts. There are dogs I know quite well. I know some better than I know their owners. I am sure there are people who think I am odd because I talk to dogs. I talk to cats too. It just seems to be the right thing to do. We have no idea how much they understand but I suspect it is more than we recognise. 

So is it all right not to like some people? I considered this as the milk I had just bought was in danger of curdling before I managed to get it into the fridge. The child wanted an answer to this question.

"Yes," I told him, "It is perfectly all right not to like someone. You don't have to like everyone. It needn't stop you being polite and I am sure you were. There are people I don't like either but I know the people I like usually like animals."

The child nodded and then said, "I won't tell Grandpa what happened then."

A tail thumped in agreement.   

Yes we are giving another $50m

in aid to Afghanistan through the United Nations...and yes, a lot of it will be wasted.  We still need to do it.

There has been a backlash here in Downunder because the government has provided another $50m of aid to Afghanistan. The backlash comes at a time when the interest rate set by the Reserve Bank is likely to rise next Tuesday, food costs have gone up, power costs have gone through the roof and more. People are saying we should spend that money here.

There is also an increasingly strong anti-Muslim sentiment in this country. It has been simmering under the surface for a long time and in the last few weeks it has begun to bubble a little more. Providing aid to Afghanistan has never been popular but it is even less popular now. Many people here believe we have done our bit by trying to rid them of the Taliban. That failed so there has been what is seen as a "flood" of refugees from there instead. 

In all honesty they do not mix well. Their culture and way of life was very different even in relatively peaceful times. It is much more difficult now. They find integration difficult even while many of those who come are more than willing to try.

Afghanistan's exports amounted to less than US $2bn last year and most of it came from agriculture, mining and small enterprises or cottage industries like carpet making. There is not enough being done to feed the population of around forty-four million of whom almost half are children under the age of fourteen. We also need to recognise that men eat first, then boys. Women and girls get what is left. 

Women and girls are very definitely second class citizens in Afghanistan. It has been that way for centuries. The situation improved slightly under the previous government but when the Taliban took over again, despite what they claimed they would do, things went into a downward spiral. The Taliban's version of "strict Sharia law" now means that access to everything is being reduced for women and girls. That includes access to all forms of health care because women cannot be treated by men and the number of women who were previously trained and are still able to work is decreasing. Girls are growing up into a society where medical help will be almost non-existent. They are growing up without schooling. Yes, some go to school in the early years but there are increasing reports of some girls getting no schooling at all. Why bother to send a female child to school if they can work?

If none of this matters to you then I suppose you will believe that the money will be completely wasted. On the other hand it is just possible that the money might help one girl get an education - and then make a difference for all.  Is that worth doing?  

I took a risk yesterday

and, after searching in a social media site, made contact with someone I last saw over twenty years ago.

This may not seem very unusual to most people but, for me, it was. It is not the sort of thing I usually do at all. I have never been the sort of person who can "just call on" someone else. I have never understood the sort of social life where people contact other people on impulse and suggest going somewhere. No, I make arrangements to do it in advance. Most of my friends are the same. I think it is a generational thing. 

I grew up in a family where visitors came by prior arrangement. We went to them by prior arrangement. It did not happen often. It is also highly unlikely other people were very different. The means of communication was different back in the last century. There were no mobile phones and no computers. If you wanted to communicate with someone you did so by letter, by phone or face to face. There were telegrams and eventually that wonder we called "the fax". 

Not so long ago I was talking to someone who said much the same thing. He was talking about how social arrangements for Saturday nights were made at school during the week. If someone did not turn up at the appointed place at the appointed time there was no way of getting in touch. I tried to explain this to an eight year old the other day and he could not understand it at all. He has a mobile phone. It can do no more than make and receive calls to a limited range of people but it is still instant communication. 

But is communication really any easier now? The demise of the phone book has left us without the means to simply look a number up. There is no equivalent for mobile phones. Accessing the electoral roll is no longer possible without good cause. (You can tell them who you are looking for and why and they will confirm or deny or, in very rare instances, give you an address.)

It is why I went to social media. The name I was looking for is not a "Mary Brown" or "John Smith" sort of name. It is unusual. I found four people with that name on social media. Three of them live in other countries so I thought the fourth was likely. I wrote the message and pressed send. If nothing happened then at least I had tried.

Yes, I was lucky. It was the right person. They professed to be delighted to hear from me, had "often wondered" etc. The information I needed was quickly supplied (although I wondered if they would even have it) and there was the "we must meet". I wonder if we will. If they do contact me again to make arrangements will I want to go? Would we have maintained contact if we lived closer? I doubt it but it did set me wondering about the ways and means of contacting people now...and then.  

 

354 days of 40'C

and above in this city since January 1st, 1888?

There is a letter from someone in our state newspaper telling us this. (The writer apparently has been working on this statistic for some time and says, "Yes, get a life" as he comments.)  He goes, "That's 0.7% of 50,405 days at the time of counting. In twenty-nine years the temperature never reached 40'C. In 1908 there was a "heatwave" with the temperature going over the 40'C mark for six days and then four days. 

My great-grandparents had not air conditioning. They had no electricity. They tried to keep things cool with wet towels but my great-grandmother still had to cook on a wood burning stove.  Yes, food had to be cooked because so much would spoil in the heat. 

My grandparents did not have much more. There was no air conditioning. My paternal grandmother never had more than one tiny electric fan. She would turn it on for an hour after she had done the housework and given my grandfather a cooked lunch. 

When the Senior Cat as a child all my grandmother had was a "cool safe" with a block of ice and a drip tray to collect the water as it melted. She could keep milk and butter there overnight but not much more. They eventually had a tiny refrigerator but there was a limit to what could be safely kept even in that. She shopped most days in summer and walked to the shops in the heat to do so. 

We have been grumbling about the heat for the last few days and I am not looking forward to the size of my electricity bill but I cannot work in extreme heat. (The computer, rightly, complains. It sulks in the heat.) There has been increased talk about "global warming" and how the temperatures are caused by that. I find it odd that some years back we were being told we were heading for another "ice age". Do the climate experts really know? 

 

Our electricity system is failing

and the power network people have sent messages out to say that next Tuesday we will be without power altogether. It is a "planned outage".  They apparently have to do some work on the system.

It will take more than some repairs to deal with the issue. I live in a city in one of the driest and hottest places on earth. I am watching in despair as successive governments make decisions which contribute to both these things. They are cutting down trees for a golf course that most people will never use in an area which already needs far more trees. They keep telling us "solar, solar, solar" and that "look, this big battery solves the problem when the sun goes down". They are cramming more and more low level housing on increasingly small plots of land, building houses with black roof tiles and no eaves. Street trees are further apart to make way for cars. 

Yes, we are told to worship "renewable" energy, sport and single dwellings which we reach by cars, preferably electric cars. We actually pay considerably more for electricity than the neighbouring states although, so we are told, more of our electricity is produced by those wonderful "renewables". Something has gone very wrong here. 

The last couple of days have been brutally warm for city dwellers. My electricity bill is going to be far too high. I have tried to use air conditioning system responsibly. I do not leave it on all night or even all day. I know other people who do. There is good ceiling insulation here but not everyone has that. New homes must have it but how many are putting in the expensive batting we had in the last house I lived in? I don't imagine many people can afford it. We would not have been able to afford it but for getting the remainder from a much larger installation at a reduced price.

Cold can kill just as readily as extreme heat. Extreme cold can be very dangerous indeed. We recognise that but people forget extreme heat. The workmen arrived to start replacing the old and rusty guttering yesterday. They knocked on everyone's doors to let them know and my first words were, "If you need more water don't hesitate to come and ask." The youngish man standing there looked startled but I meant it. They needed it. They can ask again today.

We need to rethink this "renewable" idea. It isn't going to save the planet. It is actually contributing to the problem. We have lost far too much valuable farm land and valuable green cover to the renewable gods. We contribute less to those nasty emissions in a year than China does in a day but they keep telling us that we can save the planet by going down the "renewable" path.  I don't think it is going to happen. It is not yet 9am and I am already a hot and unhappy cat.  

  

"It is too dangerous to go out"

was the message relayed to me yesterday.  It had taken fifteen days to reach me - from Iran.

While the rest of the world has been focussed on what is happening in places like Gaza, Syria, Ukraine and Sudan there has been a major uprising in Iran as well. Much has been made of the truly appalling behaviour of the ICE agents in Minnesota, of the weather, of this... and that... and more elsewhere. There has been very little coming out of Iran. 

Oh yes, riots. We have been told there have been some riots. There have been a few short clips on the news. Oooh...some people died. There is the late Shah's son talking about it. People want an end to the rule of the "supreme" leader. They are tired of being told how to dress and how to behave and how to think. Yes, all very sad. It's wrong but...

Really? Is that all? Have you any idea what is really going on there. Do you care? Do you actually care? 

I wrote recently about someone who was there to do something to help. He was able to leave...but only with difficulty.

The other message came from someone who lives there. She is a retired teacher of English who still tutors students on an individual basis.  From time to time G... has helped with communication issues. I have never met her in person but I suspect I would like her if I did. I sense she has an excellent sense of humour. It matters in a country like that. 

Right now though there is little to laugh about. Two of her students have been badly injured. Others live in fear of their lives. The regime may be claiming they are not imposing the death penalty on protestors but the very fact they are learning English is danger enough. The death toll is believed to be far greater than our news services are reporting.

It is curious that our news services are making so little of what is going on there. It is not simply the difficulty of getting news out - when has that ever stopped them making claims?  It is not simply because those involved fear for their lives. There are  people willing to take those risks. 

Are we being cowards? I suspect we are. The person who told me it is too dangerous to go out is relying on others to do her shopping and help her when she needs it. She has such poor eyesight she cannot even see what is going on but she has been listening for years and knows what is going on. We are closing our eyes and our ears. It is easier that way - and it may come back to bite us.  

"Saluting the flag"

was something we did every Friday at school assembly. We recited the lines about who we were, loving our country and so on as we stood there in neat, straight lines. Sometimes we were made to repeat it because it did not sound as if we meant what we were saying. 

I am not sure I ever meant what I was saying. It was just one of those school rituals which had to be endured. It was marginally better than "PE" or "nature studies" but that was about all. I often wonder what other children made of it all. I suspect most of them just accepted it as something that we did.

What new migrants made of it all is an even greater mystery. We had a few in my early years at primary school, even one or two who did not speak English. They soon learned. We taught them out in the school yard.  

There was only one flag back then. It was the same flag for everyone. We were taught how to draw it and how it had come into existence and how it was important. There were "flag monitors" who raised and lowered the flag each day. They knew how to do it "properly" too. It was attached and detached correctly, folded with precision in the correct manner.

We were taught about explorers in this state, of the importance of the wool industry and rust resistant wheat. More than one father was a "wharfie" who loaded the wheat bags on to the ships which queued in the port.

Today is our national holiday. Children no longer "salute the flag". We have two flags, sometimes three. Many children are now told they belong to another ethnic grouping even while they are legally citizens of this country. Some people say it is a day of mourning. They might be an increasing minority but they get a major share of the day's news and a recent $1.48m grant from the government to investigate if the date should be changed.

The wool industry has declined dramatically. Wheat is being genetically modified. The grain there is goes to silos and wheat bags have all but disappeared. The "wharfies" still exist but they drive cranes to load containers on to ships in the outer harbour. Their sons search for employment in other places.

Today is now forecast to be 45'C - up from the previous forecast of 40'C. We will be told this is "climate change".  Yes, things have changed - but are they all for the better?  

So we didn't go to Afghanistan or

Vietnam or anywhere else there was a war on?

I can understand the furious European response to President Trump's suggestion they did not pull their weight in those wars because it is much the same as that of those in Downunder.  We did go to war and we lost service people in them. And yes, it does matter to us and to our European allies. It matters a lot.

My first real confrontation with war was in my teens. The Senior Cat was appointed to sort out the problems in an "area" school which was based in the middle of a "soldier settlement". These soldier settlements were a government project designed to give returned servicemen employment on the land. The problems associated with them were many. 

On the Sunday after school started for the year I happened to answer the house phone. There was a terrified voice at the other end. The words still haunt me. ".... my father is trying to kill my mother".  This child's father was chasing his wife across the paddock (field) with a hot poker. The father thought his wife was the enemy. He had, like so many of the men over there, been so traumatised by the war that he was having yet another episode of mental illness. The Senior Cat had been told about these incidents. He had been told what to do. The farmer was stopped before any physical harm was done and taken to the city for treatment but it was an experience I have never forgotten. Yes, frightening but not nearly as frightening for me as it must have been for that family. They considered themselves among the "lucky" ones - they came back alive.

ANZAC day came not too much later in the year. The school stopped for the day. Everyone went to the service. As Guides and Scouts we wore our uniforms - something city children did not do but there was a special dispensation for us. We were expected to participate. I saw grown men weeping for the first time in my life. It was another salutary experience for us. If they went and played "two up" while getting drunk in the local "club" it was understandable on that day.

In my last year at my last school one of the former students was killed in Vietnam. That one of our own was old enough to go to war and be killed did not seem real.  I did not know the boy as I was new to the school but the others had known him well, mostly as a footballer. It was a long time before the days returned to normal and his name was mentioned as a student rather than a soldier. I was careful not to talk about him at all for fear of being seen as "interfering". 

I went on later to university in  London. I met a young man who was by then working as a civil servant. We developed a relationship and were planning a trip back here for Christmas to tell my parents we hoped to marry. He was going to join me in Singapore after he had completed a task in Vietnam. It never happened because he was knifed on a street corner as he waited for a colleague to buy something. He was still seen as "the enemy" even though the war had finished some years before. My life has been very different because of what happened there but Mr Trump would no doubt simply shrug and say, "Too bad. There are plenty of other men out there." No, there aren't. I have never felt the same way about any other unrelated male. Almost two years ago his mother left me her wedding ring. It is in a bank deposit box in England. She felt I was her last contact with her son.  

A former neighbour served in Afghanistan. He won't talk about it but one day the Last Post was sounding on some program on the radio as we were talking outside a business and he grabbed me so hard that I was bruised. I said nothing because there was nothing I could say that would comfort rather than embarrass him. 

The US President has absolutely no idea about these things. The idea that the rest of the world has simply stood behind American service men and women is wrong. That is in no way intended to denigrate their role. It is in no way intended to suggest that the role they played was not important but to suggest that others held back and let them do all the work is wrong. Perhaps I should not criticise the President of another country, a country which is supposed to be a close ally, but I am conscious of the fact that he avoided the draft - college and something to do with his foot, a spur on the heel or something? I know Americans who went to war and then went to college...and some who never got to college because they went to war.

Someone posted a comment this morning that the late Queen Elizabeth II saw more active service than the whole Trump family combined. That is correct. You need to apologise Mr Trump.  

  

I have re-verified my "details"

and I am not about to do it again...and again.

The bank wants me to "reverify" my details. This is now a "legal requirement" which is more about trying to stop money laundering than it is about the safety of small accounts like mine. I accept it needs to be done but doing it once should be enough. I should not need to do it three times. 

I have my everyday working account. This is the one my debit card is attached to. I have my savings account which, for reasons best known to three government departments and myself is where I get my miniscule allowance. I also have an account which has almost nothing in it but is there for a very specific purpose. The money in it does not belong to me. The bank is fully aware of the purpose of that account.

Now I have had three separate requests to "reverify" my accounts. Simple? No. I fall at the first hurdle. I do not have a driver's licence. My passport is being renewed and I cannot use the old one for this purpose. Medicare card? You are supposed to be able to use that but, for some reason, the system will not accept mine. Birth certificate? How does that help? It does not give them my current address or the address to which my mail is sent? Why cannot I simply say, "I live here. You send my mail here. Now look it up on the electoral roll. I am not a "silent" voter." (Silent voters do not appear on the public electoral roll.) 

Banks probably do not have access to the electoral roll now. Once upon a not too distant time everyone had access to it. There would be a copy in the local library. Now it is "protected" information. You have to have good reason to want to consult it, indeed you will hand the information you have over to someone else to do it for you. Only MPs have that information available for personal use outside the offices of the Electoral Commission. 

The idea that this is somehow about keeping our personal information "safe" is something I find hard to understand. It seems there is a demand for more and more personal information every time we interact with any service at all. Our GP had to provide two different forms of ID this week just so she could sign off on a form for me. It used to be that just her provider number and signature were enough but not any more.

I am not sure where all this information goes or how it is used or even if it is used. It seems unlikely but government departments seem to be in love with it. If they can dream up something new to ask they will. 

I reverified my details once. I provided the old passport number before I sent it off to be renewed. It is out of date but all the other information is up to date. It is all the bank needs - until I get my new passport...or they decide to accept my "proof of age" card. It would be easier to really be a cat.  

Children have a right to read for

pleasure - or do they? 

In an article in this morning's paper there is a claim from a Professor Helen Adam of Edith Cowan University that "white children are getting inflated perspectives of themselves and what is considered normal" because of the books that are available. Apparently children are being "miseducated" and white children are getting a view of their "centrality".

Adam sees children as passive consumers of literature. She claims children do not question, that they simply accept. She is telling us that children need to become "thoughtful" readers and question what is being presented to them and how it is being presented. 

Colleen Harkin from the Institute of Public Affairs has hit back saying it is "radical ideological judgment, not an educational one". I imagine the argument will go on for some time.

But perhaps it is time to remind myself of that long ago incident in the library when the child looked up at me and said,"I'm sick of AIDS and death and divorce. I just want a good adventure story." It was a comment I hope I never forget. 

They were topics in children's literature which were popular at the time. Now we have "diversity" and "inclusion", "transgender" issues and "refugee" issues and more. Publishers are calling for books about those issues.  This is, I am told by the local booksellers, "what children need to read about". Perhaps it is but is it what they want to read about?

I do not doubt there will be more books published on these issues. Some of them may be outstanding but will they be enjoyed the same way that Harry Potter has been enjoyed? Do we want children to develop a reading habit because they enjoy reading or do we try to convince them that reading is there to change their view of the world to the only one that is claimed to be socially acceptable?   

You cannot legislate "anti-hate"

even when you have "anti-hate legislation".  You can make it illegal for people to do certain things publicly but it is not going to change how they privately feel or what they might privately say.

There was a very good example of that yesterday. Middle Cat and I had been to see our GP so I could get the necessary paper work for a "parking permit" signed off. This is the permit which will allow whoever happens to be driving me somewhere to park in a disability spot or for twice the length of time in another spot. I have avoided getting one of these because I was (and still am) of the view that other people need these permits more than I do. When I am out with Middle Cat we use her permit. (Yes, she does need one - some days more than others - but she uses it only when she needs it.) Both of us are very conscious of it being a privilege to have a permit and aware of the need not to abuse it.

Later in the morning I went to the Motor Vehicles Department and passed the paperwork to the very pleasant person on the other side of the counter. I was aware of someone standing at the next booth but took no notice. I paid for the permit and went out to unlock my wheels. There was someone standing there.

"You don't need an f.... permit!" he told me, "It's the same thing all the time. You all expect to get something for nothing when you don't need it." 

Fortunately for me the MVD is just across the road from the shopping centre and someone I know well had just parked their car to go in and renew their licence. He guessed what was going on and intervened politely but firmly causing the other man to stride off muttering angrily.

"I know you are quite capable of fighting your own battles Cat but that riled me. I hope you didn't mind."

No, I didn't mind in the least. I hate confrontation. 

"He will go on thinking the same thing though. Nothing will change him," he said.

I agree. Nothing is going to change that man's view. He possibly has some other prejudices and it is unlikely they will change. It is because of people like him I do not believe the newly passed "anti-hate legislation" will really work. It may make matters worse. It will send views like that off the radar. People will think but not say those things publicly. They will teach their children and their grandchildren to think the very things the legislation is trying to prevent. Trying to teach attitude change in schools will not work either. It has been tried. It might modify some attitudes - or at least appear to but out of that environment it is not going to work as it is intended to work. 

We are trying to do something in this country that simply will not work. We are trying to be all things to all people. We are telling people we are "multicultural" and that they can keep all their beliefs and prejudices associated with a very diverse range of cultures while still living in a cohesive society. It is an approach which sounds very accepting and welcoming and non-divisive but is actually the reverse of that. 

If we were all the same it would be very dull and very boring and no we do not want that but we have gone too far in the other direction. Something needs to change but anti-hate legislation won't help. 

Applying for a new passport

is something I resent having to do. My old one has twelve months to go but you need at least six months before it expires if you are planning on leaving the country.  Even if you are not planning on leaving the country it is wise to get this done...or is it? What if you need it in a hurry?

I will soon find out because I spent half of yesterday attempting to download the relevant form. It should not be that difficult surely to just download the form? But it was...I had to "prove I was human" so many times I almost felt like saying, "No, look really I am a cat... I can just put myself into someone's carry on luggage. Give me a drink of water on the flight and I won't need to be fed. I will curl up and sleep for the entire journey wherever I am going."

But no... I supplied my full name. I supplied my date of birth. I supplied the name of one parent. I supplied my sex (or lack thereof). I supplied my old passport number...and I kept being asked to verify what seemed like all of these things and more... 

I have a mail box at the post office. The reason for that is that it is a great deal more secure than the street letter box. They would not allow me to use the much more secure address for delivery.  No, they want the street address which means the post person has to come and knock on the door. It is just as well I know her. She is really very nice. We always wave to one another when we are out and about.

I eventually filled everything in and was told that all I have to now do is supply my old passport.. and get a new photograph. (You know the sort - the one that makes you look too ill to travel.) I will endeavour to do that at the post office tomorrow...and pay the exorbitant fee. I will then wait...no doubt to be told that I have to supply something else or that they think I really am a cat.   

"But he can't be President again!"

An American acquaintance was trying to explain this to one of the locals yesterday. He was getting quite frustrated as he did so. 

"Our Constitution doesn't allow it. You can only get elected twice."

That was about as far as he could explain. He asked me but I am no expert on the constitutional law of the United States of America. We looked it up instead. The internet has its uses!

There it was - section 122 of their constitution does not allow someone to be President more than twice. 

"So that's eight years?"

"No, ten," I said.

"But Presidential terms are four years..."

"Yes, but if the president prior to that dies in office then the vice-president takes over and if that is a term of two years or less then they can run for two more terms."

The American looked at me and gave a sort of grimace. We began to wonder if the incumbent could find a way around that. Do you have to die in office or could you swap places with the vice-president? If you are no longer the president then could you run again?

There are generally considered to be good reasons to limit someone's term in office if they have certain powers. The constitution here in Downunder has no such limitations but our Prime Minister is not elected. S/he is there because he is chosen by the party which is in power. Strictly speaking the person chosen would not even need to be a member of parliament but of course that would not work so one of their own is chosen. On one side this is done through a complex set of internal "rules" and on the other there is some lobbying, jostling and eventually a vote. 

I have known other organisations where the same people have held office for many years. It has rarely been a good thing. They can come to believe they own the position and the organisation. Other people come to believe someone else will do all the work. I helped to set up a group and was the first leader of it but flatly refused to go on doing all the work. Turns are now taken.  I am the "go to" person for another group but the staff member at the library is responsible for most of what goes on. I can live with that because they know there is at least one other person they can call on. I made sure of that. 

"Political laziness allows communism to flourish," the American said at one point in the discussion, "You don't need to think. You just do what your Supreme Leader tells you." 

It's an interesting thought - and perhaps a dangerous idea.     

There is too much "paperwork" involved

in "volunteering", or perhaps in anything at all. There seems to be a constant demand for "information" and "feedback" and "reviews" and "evaluations" and "assessments" and "appraisals" and more. 

I get "requests" for this sort of thing all the time. The requests are really demands. I know other people are asked to provide the same sort of information about me. 

I send messages back saying, "I do not actually 'know' this person. I have never met them. I am never likely to meet them. I am simply doing something I was asked to do."  Messages will be sent back to me, "The form has to be completed for our records." There will be polite requests and apologetic requests and, sometimes, impatient or even downright rude demands.  Filling out those forms can mean the difference between funding and defunding a project or future projects. That all this really has nothing to do with me at all is beside the point. The paper work needs to be completed.

I spent most of yesterday doing paper work. People seem to have come back to work after the Christmas and New Year break and realised that "things-have-not-been-done". There is apparently vital information that has "not been supplied". There is a need for my full name, my date of birth, my preferred title, my address, my email, my phone numbers(s), my tax file number, my academic qualifications and more.  That is just a start of course. After that comes all the paperwork about the actual work, where it originated, who else is on the team, why it needs to be done, which department, where those involved are going and why and is it really necessary. 

Most of this is absolutely none of my business. I am there to provide words and symbols on request. Yes, I need to understand who is going off to do something and what it is they are going to do. I am all too well aware that they might be going somewhere dangerous but I don't need to know all the ins and outs of a project. I can assess that without all the paperwork. I am not going to help someone blow up a structure that is needed to provide people with water to stay alive. 

There was a questionnaire which ran to almost five full pages yesterday. I could not answer most of it. There was a demand to "evaluate" a project I was only peripherally involved in.  There were other requests to evaluate the performance of people who had volunteered their services. I assume they had also been asked to evaluate mine.

I was ready to throw the key board across the room when I came on a last request, "Cat, could you add a couple of words to this? We want to thank T... for what he did. I'll just write it in the card on your behalf." That was some paper work I was more than happy to do.  

The NDIS is not working

as it was intended to work. The cost has blown out far beyond what was intended or is needed. 

Saying that will not be popular with everyone. It will certainly not be popular with many recipients.  Add in the "out in the community" and "like everyone else" arguments and "disability" is costing the community far more than it should.

The worst part about all of this is the very real problem that there are still some people who genuinely need help who are not getting it. They are simply unable to access help they need in order to live with dignity and even, in some cases, to live safely.

There is still a belief that all people with disabilities should live "out in the community like everyone else" and that they should do this in much the same way as everyone else. We have also discovered that, however well intentioned, this does not always work as well as it should.

H... stopped me in the shopping centre yesterday. H...is in her late 80's.  Her daughter, K..., is in a "group house. K... is profoundly physically and intellectually disabled. K... can do nothing for herself.  She cannot speak. If she recognises you and appears to feel comfortable with you she will smile. There are things she can indicate "yes" and "no" to by her expression but that is the limit of her ability to communicate. Her intellectual ability is perhaps that of a two year old, if that. K... knows me and I always try to include her in the conversation if she happens to be there. It is less often now her mother cannot manage to get her in and out of an adapted vehicle alone. 

H... has been a wonderful mother. She has dealt with all the NDIS paperwork (of which there is a vast amount for someone like K... ) and she visits her daughter everyday. She will help with K...'s feeding which now takes place through a PEG tube because K... cannot swallow safely. There are times when K... would not get fed without her there because not all the "carers" are trained to deal with this. H...will sometimes be called back in to help.  

H... worries about all this though. What will happen to K...when I die?  How will K... survive? Will people care? How will she dressed and fed? 

I have no doubt at all that K... is well cared for now because H... is there and watching. I know H... feels the same way, indeed is very aware of it. She still has to fight for everything K... is getting. The funding "runs out" from time to time and H... tries to supplement it from her own limited funds. She pays for K...'s clothing - something that needs to be replaced frequently because K...dribbles constantly - indeed makes most of it so it is easy to dress K...

As we were talking we were watching a child having a melt down because his grandfather would not allow him to have an ice-cream at the local "Wendy's" place.  I know this child too. He is "on the spectrum". His parents have negotiated quite a large NDIS package for him. His mother told me about it and how much they have been able to get. NDIS is paying for things that would normally come out of the family budget. He is the only child and she has "given up work to care for him". Yes, he has some problems but his grandparents tell me he is "spoilt" and "usually gets what he wants". He is very articulate but is very disruptive in school and at home. He is one of the children whose NDIS package will be affected by the upcoming changes.

His grandfather told me, "And a good thing too. They don't need all this. They need lessons in how to handle him...if it isn't too late."

They do. His mother arrived and wanted to get him the ice-cream to keep him quiet. I don't know what happened because H... and I moved on. I did think about it all though. K... needs all the help she can get and yet H...has to constantly justify it all. It's exhausting even though it was what the NDIS was intended for. The other child does not need his "Little Athletics"  and "soccer" fees paid for by NDIS funds - but they are.  

 We need to rethink the NDIS and who it is intended to help and why. We can say everyone is equally important but do they have equal needs?

Section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act

makes it unlawful  "to do an act that is reasonably likely to “offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone because of their race or ethnicity."

This is followed by section 18D " contains exemptions which protect freedom of speech. These ensure that artistic works, scientific debate and fair comment on matters of public interest are exempt from section 18C, providing they are said or done reasonably and in good faith".

I have taken the words in quotes from the Human Rights Commission site. Those sections of the Racial Discrimination Act (1975) are generally considered to be controversial.  They were the cause of a great deal of controversy when they were written and may cause even more controversy now.

Do they matter? Are they a brake on our "freedom of speech"? There is no "right" to "freedom of speech" under the law in this country. Rights come with responsibilities. (I wonder how many times I have had write that?) When people breach responsibilities they risk taking away rights from all of us. I am not saying anything new here.

So does the proposed "hate speech" legislation being put before parliament actually do anything new? Is it simply a way of increasing control over what we can or cannot say? Is there any point in it or should we be doing more to ensure that sections 18C and 18D get applied as intended? 

Will the proposed legislation prevent citizens of this country from being subjected to a fatwa such as that imposed on Salman Rushdie following the publication of "The Satanic Verses"? Will it stop the sort of cartoon like depictions of a prophet which appeared in a Scandinavian newspaper and provoked protest marches around the world? Will it stop anything like the Charlie Hebdo attack in 2015.

At one point the government tried to replace the words "offend, insult, humiliate or intimidate” someone because of their race or ethnicity" with "harass or intimidate". They did not succeed at the time because it was considered to be "too broad". The current proposal goes further than that. It is a response to a tragedy but is it the right response?  How do you get a balance between "freedom of expression", religion and artistic expression and care of the individual? The last week or so has made it very clear that the "hurt" of one person who has made controversial statements is apparently worthy of more consideration than that of a group. Has this been the right decision? It is still a matter of hot debate.

The debate will continue but cartoonist Johannes Leak did an excellent job of showing up the government's intentions in this morning's cartoon,

 

The White Pages are no more.

They have come to a "quiet end" according to the little item in this morning's paper. The company responsible seems to think that it is still possible to get a residential number by calling Directory Assistance.

They have missed the point completely. The white pages were far more than "just phone numbers". They were the address book for many, a very large address book for the entire state.

I can still remember the first phone number I ever had to use. It is the number which was held by my paternal grandparents. The phone itself, a black Bakelite phone of pre-war vintage. By no means everyone had a house phone even when I was born but Grandpa had one because he was a man of business. Grandma almost never used the phone. She was not one for "just chatting". I was taught to recite the number very early in my life. If anything went wrong and I was alone then I was to ask people to call that number if there was no policeman around. I never had to do that but I did need to call my grandparents occasionally. I wonder how many children now know the numbers for their grandparents' mobile phones?

We had a phone too. Teachers were expected to have them but they were not used by parents to contact teachers except in extreme emergencies. In one remote place the school phone was in the classroom. It rarely rang. I remember one occasion when the "post master", who also owned the tiny general store, phoned to say there was a fire on a property and the "four big boys" were needed to help. Someone came to get them a little later. The rest of us thought they were "lucky to get out of school"! 

It was expensive, very expensive, to make long distance calls at that time. They were limited to three minutes and they had to be booked in advance. I suspect the Senior Cat, the bank manager and the policeman were the only people who made more than one a year and they made them only rarely. There was also something called a "party line", a line shared by more than one house. These lines had their drawbacks. Anyone could listen in on a conversation. If you did not want others to know your business you kept your mouth shut until you could have a genuinely private conversation. On the other hand they had their uses. It often meant people knew where someone else was and "Oh, so and so is at...." could save wasted journeys and allow bales of hay to be picked up or children to be taken care of in emergencies. On one occasion the doctor was called to an accident because someone had seen his car somewhere and it was a "fairly simple" matter of waving him down on his way back! 

No, there was no real need for a phone book if you had to go through the tiny local switchboard but the phone book for everywhere else was guarded. It sat on shelves out of reach. The old books were used  for toiletry purposes but the new ones were vital because they had addresses as well as names and phone numbers. People still wrote letters.

Now it is not possible to find an address in that way. It is not possible to tell if someone may have moved or whether you might be talking to the right person. If you want a number from Directory Assistance it is assumed you already know the address. There can be no vague, "I'd recognise the house and it is somewhere along...."

As it is also much more difficult to access the Electoral Roll now the demise of the White Pages is going to make it much harder to find people. Does it matter? It might. We will not be able to search for old friends and casual acquaintances. If we do not want some others to know where we live it may be a little easier to keep it from then. It has the potential to make some people even more isolated.

Somehow though it has not stopped those calls nobody seems to want.... those "marketing" calls. 

Writing legislation is not

simple or straightforward. It is almost certainly the most difficult form of writing there is. The legal profession is in love with legislation. It keeps them in business. The more complex the legislation the better. It will allow them interpret, misinterpret and attempt to reinterpret. The placement of a comma matters. The use of one word rather than another matters. Barristers send their staff hurtling down rabbit holes to find examples of interpretation in past cases. Judge's associates are sent off to find even more examples in the vast network of cases that have been decided.

Nothing is simple in law. "Murder" might appear to be quite a simple concept to a lay man. You killed someone? Then you are a murderer. It is far from so in the world of the law and the courts. You take something which does not belong to you? Then it is theft isn't it - or is it? Again it can become very complicated.

They are apparently simple ideas which can become very complex. Now we have legislation in front of our federal parliament which is attempting to deal with a much more complex idea, the idea of "hate speech". Perhaps it sounds simple to some but is it?

What is "serious vilification" and who can commit it? Is it possible to bring in a law which effectively changes the way people think and then prevents them from telling others?  The proposed law will hit a roadblock in the Senate - and rightly so. It is not going to prevent the harm it is intended to prevent but it will almost certainly prevent free discussion of issues which are causing social harm.

The proposed legislation has exceptions for "religious texts" and discussion of them. It fails at that point. There is a vast difference between the commandment to "love one another" and a commandment to "love those who believe as you are told to believe". People with far more expertise than me are already expressing concern that the proposed legislation is a form of back door blasphemy law. They are suggesting it will not be possible to say you believe certain wrong doers should be deported while protecting those who have done this wrong. 

We already have a range of laws which can and should cover these things. This is a knee-jerk reaction designed to placate, to look as if something is being done and, much more worryingly, to bring in restraints on speaking about issues which do need to be discussed.  We will not be better off under such laws. There is a potential for far more harm than good here. 

"Why do you write letters to the paper?"

is not something I usually get asked.

I live in a village within a city. It has one of the oldest churches. It stands on the hill behind me. Behind that is the large house which belonged to one of the first settlers and, to one side, a large fee paying school. There is a row of, now empty, shops a little further down the hill. They lead to another fee paying school. The "institute" building is still in use. There is a small "gallery" behind it. There is a well known pub from which music can be heard, especially at weekends. Move further down still and there is one of the oldest primary schools. Our shopping centre, the memorial park and the library and the railway station are all close to hand. It's a community. I know people there. They know me. I suppose I stand out even though I am not the only person who rides a tricycle. 

No, I am "the person who writes letters to the paper". I am apparently that even though I am by no means the sort of regular correspondent that many are. I am however the person who can be bailed up in the shopping centre, the post office and the library. I can be verbally assaulted for my apparent views in these places. There will be other letters heavily criticising my apparent beliefs.  It is part of making your views public. You need to accept other points of view.

These people are generally not aware of this blog. They have never "met" the Cathedral Cats and they are not aware of many other things about me. They do not need to know but they are curious about why I write letters to the editor.

"Do you expect to change things?" I have been asked.

No, I don't but I have been known to try and show people there might be another way to think about something. It is possible, even likely, I do not agree with that viewpoint myself but it will be one of which I am aware. Newspapers are not known for "balanced" coverage in themselves. It is one reason why columnists and letters to the editor exist. 

"Do you see it as a social responsibility?" I was asked yesterday. The answer to that is "No." It is not my place to tell people what they must think. All I can do is offer an idea or an opinion and it is up to other people to do the thinking, to accept or not accept. 

I am not going to change the world by writing letters. I can try of course but I know International Literacy Year did not change the world. It might have given literacy a nudge but that is all. Yes, I wonder what would happen if it was held now that access to the internet is so widespread.

So now I wonder at all those people who withdrew from this year's Writers' Week in apparent "solidarity" with someone who is a published author, someone who has actual books out there. All of you had the chance, as did she, to get your message across. You wasted it. I don't want to waste my own chances like that. I'll go on writing letters to the paper and hoping I give just one person something to think about.  Is that enough?  

 

"Tell them I'm safe"

the message said.

I had been vaguely aware that one of the aid workers had a colleague who was in Iran. His colleague is Iranian by birth but left the country as a babe in arms. Like many other people this man was curious about the country of his birth and had gone on holiday to the place of his birth. He had sent a message to the office he works in to say it was "interesting". There were some photos. It all looked like a holiday experience he was enjoying. Then there was silence.

It is very clear that there is massive civil unrest in Iran right now. His colleagues were concerned, very concerned. Somehow he managed to get to Kuwait and was waiting for a flight back to where he now lives. The message was sent from the airport. It was good to know. He will be late back from his holiday but his employers are apparently just relieved he is safe.

There were no marches in the street demanding his safe return of course. Only a very few people even knew where he was. Most people will just shrug and say things like "he was silly to go in the first place".  But one of the people who was informed of his safety said something interesting to me.  "Why aren't all those people who are so keen to march for Palestine every weekend out there protesting about what is going on in Iran? It's just as bad.Why aren't they marching against what Russia is doing to Ukraine? "

There is a very active and often very well organised protest movement in this country. They like to see themselves as the guardians of "human rights". They are also remarkably silent right now. There have been no rallies, no marches, no protests on the steps of parliament house. I heard someone I know very well being asked about this. Protesting is something he does often. It is almost a way of life for him. He simply shrugged and said, "None of our business." Really? 

His questioner looked at him and asked, "Why do some people matter more than others?" 

It's a good question.   

 

 

 

  

The Writers' Week controversy

has now expanded - and not just writers but musicians are withdrawing from the Festival. The chair of the entire Festival has resigned too. Three other board members have gone with her.  I am not sure where this leaves the Festival.  

What is perhaps interesting is that this furore has been developing for some time. It is not the sudden thing that the media first led us to believe. It is quite possible the media was unaware of what was going on. If this is the case then I cannot help wondering what has happened to their spy network - were their spies afraid to speak out?

Apparently someone else resigned half way through his tenure on the board because he was concerned about the invitation given to the person who has been "disinvited". His concern related to the fact that this person succeeded in ensuring someone else, with much less radical views, was not able to attend. Perhaps he had in mind that the same person had also withdrawn herself from another festival event in another state. The reason? That festival had made it clear that the sort of controversial statements she is in the habit of making were not acceptable. They were simply asking people to be "respectful". 

That resignation happened months ago. It should have rung alarm bells because it appears to have made clear the concern about the bias and the lack of balance in programming. One former board member is the wife of a prominent politician. Another person who has "withdrawn" her attendance is a presenter on the ABC - and well known for her far left views.

In all this the rest of us, the readers, the music lovers, the visitors to other events and the like are the losers. What should be a vibrant, lively, thought provoking series of events is in danger of being lost forever. Can Writers' Week survive, indeed can the festival as a whole survive? No doubt the next few weeks will tell us which way things are going. 

Now I wonder if this controversy will be raised at the upcoming Royal Commission. The terms of that mention "social cohesion". Is that a term for "multiculturalism" or something else? There isn't too much social cohesion right now. 

 

A very tolerant woman

 

is still having an influence on my life and that of the next generation and the next.

That picture above is one we recently found. It is of my paternal great-grandmother. She was, to put it mildly, a remarkable woman.  (We are not sure which year the photograph was taken but the baby would be one of the Senior Cat's generation.)

Great-grandma migrated from Caithness. She married another Scot from Caithness. She was a tough, hardworking crofter's daughter. She was also an extraordinarily tolerant woman. She would be considered a very tolerant woman now but for someone brought up in a strict Presbyterian family her tolerance was exceptional.

My great-grandmother married a man who was first a sailor but also became a self-taught marine cartographer and ship's pilot. The maps he and a fellow self-taught cartographer were still in use until computers took over. They were essential to his other work guiding the ships in and out of the inner harbour. Great-grandpa knew the river and those who lived, worked and visited it well. Back then there were people from all over the world. The crews came from everywhere. They were often composed of young men and some of them were homesick. Great-grandpa would sometimes take them home for a meal.

Somehow my great-grandmother's reputation grew. Eventually there was apparently a steady stream of young men who would arrive, often unannounced, looking for help and advice. My great-grandmother became the unofficial but highly efficient person who would now be considered to be a social worker. She handed out meals but expected wood to be chopped or some other small task to be done in return. She taught the young sailors to sew their own buttons on (and expected her own children to do the same). She no doubt listened to their tales about the girls they had left behind and much more. Alcohol was not allowed in the house and she demanded respect for all women present. 

I heard these things from the Senior Cat's aunts and uncles and from his own generation as well. It mattered. It mattered because people like my paternal grandfather carried the tradition on. His tailoring business was situated in the port area. He made uniforms for sea captains and repaired others. Like his mother he came to know some of the young sailors. He would sometimes phone my grandmother to say a young sailor needed a meal, some help. She would add extra potatoes to a meal and make the young man welcome.

Not all these young sailors spoke much English. They came from all sorts of backgrounds. They were far from always Christians, indeed it is likely most of them were not. My great-grandmother and her children after her made them welcome because that is what she believed was the right thing to do. The Senior Cat's generation carried that tradition on and my generation has done the same. The next generation has grown up in a more diverse world but the same has been expected of them.

It influences us today. I don't eat much meat but will occasionally buy some chicken for a friend who comes to lunch. As I was looking someone else I know asked me about some pork. I looked at her puzzled for a moment and then said, "I don't know. I don't eat pork." 

She looked startled and said, "I'm sorry - are you Jewish or something?"

No, I am not but I was suddenly aware of the fact that our family does not eat pork. There is a reason for it too. Great-grandma never knew when she was going to have to feed a stranger who might not be able to eat pork. We have carried that tradition on because she taught us you never knew who might come needing a meal - and they need to be made welcome.   

Dr Abdel-Fatteh has been removed

from the Writers' Week program and there are protests about her removal. Many other "authors" have now withdrawn from the event in protest.  

For those of you in Upover and Elsewhere I may need to explain that Dr Abdel-Fattah is an academic who has called for the "end of Israel" and said that "if you are Zionist you have no claim or right to cultural safety" and anyone who supports Israel "should be shamed into discomfort and silence".  Yes, she is controversial and that is almost certainly why she was invited in the first place.

I am not going to into the rights or wrongs of her removal. Instead note how I put those quotation marks around the word "authors". For me our "Writers' Week" is no longer a week about writers or writing. It is not there for writers or anyone interested in the craft of writing. Instead it has become an event which has allowed the organisers to indulge in the business of controversy and activism. It has gone from being about books to about politics and issues. 

I can hear you asking, "Does that matter? Isn't it important to hear from people who write about those things?" Well, hold it right/write there. Have these people actual written those books? How many of the most controversial or the most "important" people have actually written the books they are there to talk about? The answer is that too many of them have not. They have been written by others, "ghost" writers. Where they have been written by themselves there has often been a great deal of input by others. 

It seems that Writers' Week is no longer about writing. My first experience of Writers' Week was in my teens. I was in my what would now be called a "gap year" I suppose. I was still at school but I was marking time, waiting to be old enough to go to teacher training college. On that famous occasion Judith Wright appeared unannounced at school, demanded to see the headmistress and informed her rather than asked her that I would not be at school for the following week. I would be attending Writers' Week with her, one of the best known poets in the country.  She claimed she needed me because her increasing deafness made it hard for her to follow discussions which followed the sessions. It was as exhilarating as terrifying for a young would-be writer. 

Looking back on those weeks now (I went to more in the following years) I realise how much I was able to learn simply by being there and listening. Yes, I met a great many writers. Many of them were household names but of course I discovered they were also "just people". They had their doubts, their concerns, their fears about whether they were providing readers with that "something" which all writers search for. 

Most sessions were open to members of the public but they were still primarily for writers. There were sessions on "plot" and "character" and "sources". Yes, of course politics were mentioned but they were not the focus. There were occasional fiery exchanges. 

There were a tiny number of authors who thought they were superior to everyone else. (Judith introduced me to the Nobel Laureate Patrick White as "This is Cat, and be polite to her, she writes too." He was not a pleasant man.) Most writers respected each other and supported the young ones coming up. They went out into schools and talked to students and gave interviews for television. (Outside broadcasting was expensive back then so it often meant going to the studios.)

Now it has become a commercial event. There is a tent which is turned into a temporary bookshop on the grounds where the sessions are held out of doors. Those invited to participate and speak are largely controversial figures, the more controversial the better it seems. I have ceased to go. The local library "live-streams" some of it but the numbers who watch there are decreasing. There is something missing now. I think it may be the writers.   

One of the Microaid workers

was stopped by ICE agents yesterday. He was on his way to work in one of those cities in the USA where ICE agents have been sent in apparently quite large numbers.

K... is an American citizen. His parents are American citizens. His grandparents were American citizens. His great-grandparents were American citizens. His great-great grandparents migrated to America to escape persecution in Morocco too many years ago to even think about. 

K... was stopped because he apparently "looks foreign". I am not sure what that means. I have never seen a photograph of him. We have only corresponded by email. I know very little about him apart from the fact he speaks several useful languages like English, European and Latin-American Spanish and at least two Arabic dialects. He is one of those people I can call on for help if there is a translation issue. He has done some aid work himself - at his own expense. He's not in a relationship and I have the sense of a quiet, self-contained person who prefers his own company.

The only reason I know about the "stop" is because he was very late to work and late sending me a small piece of information. He arrived in an apparently dishevelled state having been assaulted and knocked to the ground. It took some time to produce the documentation which showed how far back his American citizenship went.

His boss at work sent me a message telling me what had happened. His colleagues are, rightly, furious. I am feeling angry and upset for him too. There is too much of this going on. Don't tell me, "Well at least he didn't get shot and killed." That is not the point. There should be no shootings and no killings and there should be no assaults. 

I know people who have risked their lives to help others. They don't make a song and dance about it. I suspect most of their colleagues have no idea what they have done. They do not want them to know. It is not why they go to help.  They don't need to be harassed and assaulted by anyone. ICE agents may have a job to do but that is not the way to do it - not at any time, not ever.    

So, what else to save Downunder?

I was asked by email to follow up on yesterday's post. My answer is that I have no idea what else the columnist in question might want to deal with but I would hope he might want to investigate a couple of things.

The first of these things is our National Disability Insurance Scheme (NDIS). This is something which started with the best of intentions and is now way out of control. It is costing far too much and it is not meeting the needs of those it was intended to help while others who do not need help are getting it. It is sometimes being spent on items which are not essential to daily living. "Providers" are all too often over charging. 

The second thing to investigate would be the Research Council and the funding of so much politicised research in this country. I am sure the recipients of the indigenous aspects of our space research and the investigation into the potential for changing the date of our national holiday and the failure of the Voice are happy but there are much more important issues which have received no funding.  

I would also ban the payment to anyone for "welcome to country" ceremonies and remove the "acknowledgment" statements from the beginning of meetings. The first are a modern, money making invention. The second have lost any meaning they might have once had through their overuse. It has become a meaningless gabble at the beginning of too many meetings. 

The third thing I would do is remove one tier of government. We do not need local government, state government and federal government for a nation of less than thirty million people.  We could combine local and state government and work towards regional responsibilities while handing back some responsibilities like education completely.  

And the fourth thing I would do in order to ensure all these things could continue to remain in place is change or electoral system so that there was no compulsory preferential voting. We can retain the compulsion to attend the ballot box but please stop the iniquitous "if you don't get your first choice then you must vote for someone else even if you don't want them to represent you". 

It is a start. I can think of more.