The UK and Israel: saline or not?

Today’s ‘Positive and Optimistic Sunday’. David Cameron (pictured) [1] has been the UK’s Prime Minister since last May. A few days ago the UK Jewish News published the first exclusive interview Cameron, as PM, has given to a Jewish media outlet. Here’s the full interview [2] and a précis [3].

Regarding Iran’s (delusional) protest that the 2012 Olympic Games emblem spells the word ‘Zion’) [4, 5], Cameron said: 'It's completely paranoid. If the Iranians don't want to come, don't come, we won't miss you.’ He added that athletes unwilling to compete against Israelis wouldn’t be welcome at the Games.

He said it was ‘absolutely appalling" that IDF soldier Gilad Shalit has been captive by Hamas for nearly five years…[and]…He should be released unconditionally’.

Asked whether Britain would recognize a unilaterally-proclaimed Palestinian state if there was no other solution by September, he replied with a resounding ‘No’.

And so on.

I’m old enough to know that politicians aren’t above the odd bit of lying. Or at least the odd bit of truth bending. Indeed as a breed they’re partial to it. When it suits them to do it. Which usually depends on whose company they’re in at the time. So perhaps Cameron’s Jewish News interview should be taken with a grain of salt [6]. But at this time in history when Israel’s increasingly isolated and beleaguered, she and her supporters must grasp at every straw, including this one, and declare: How positive and optimistic is that.

It's myopic Frits

Would you stop bank robberies by closing down banks? And would you stop public transport fare evasion by shutting down all public transport? Of course you wouldn’t. For doing so is punishing the victim. But punishing the victim doesn’t bother Frederick (‘Frits’) Bolkestein (pictured) [1]. Bolkestein, now 77 years old, is a retired Dutch politician. He was a member of the Dutch Parliament 1977-98, in 1990-8 he was the leader of the right-wing People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) [2], and in 1999-2004 he was a Member of the European Commission. He’s known for his outspoken, right-wing views. Last week, Bolkestein was quoted in a Dutch magazine saying Jews (i.e. Jews who look like Jews) have no future in the Netherlands, so they should emigrate to the US or Israel [3]. Why? For their own safety due to the anti-Semitism of Dutch Moroccans. He added that the many Arab television channels in the Netherlands contribute to the spread of anti-Semitism. And he has no confidence in proposed measures to combat anti-Semitism. A classic case of punishing the victim, Mr Bolkestein. Which is all too easy to do if the victim’s a Jew, eh Frits. Your stance’s short-sighted appeasement. And if Holland enforces it, she’ll regret it. Big time.

P.S. Current Dutch politician (and VVD defector [4]) Geert Wilders, visiting Israel last week, responded that ‘Jews shouldn’t emigrate, anti-Semitic Moroccans should’.

You get what you give, Mary

Mary Delahunty (pictured) [1]. She’s a 59-year-old former TV journalist who in 1998 became a Labor Party MP in Victoria’s lower house. From 1999 until her 2006 parliamentary retirement she was a Minister. I thought her a mature and sensible person. Until I read a recent Age op-ed piece she penned [2]. Titled ‘So ungenerous we can’t say thanks to departing politicians’, it’s subheaded ‘Whatever we think of their policies, we should be grateful for their service’. She writes: ‘they are volunteer public figures’. True. But they’re well paid for their service. And their retirement benefits are top notch. She asks: ‘why the scorn when they…confide that their stint is over?’ It’s because politicians’ attitude and behaviour to their political opponents, and moreso to their constituents, is secretive, patronising, elitist and thus disgraceful. Recent examples? The Age revealed the Victorian government authorised a secret deal for the police to make available secret files on anti-desalination protesters to the private consortium building the desalination plant [3]. The government continues to cite commercial-in-confidence for refusing to release figures in its contract with the said consortium [4]. And Victorian premier Brumby refused to disclose the cost of a tram rental agreement because Victorians don’t need to know [5]. Thus opposition leader Baillieu called Victoria ‘a state of secrecy’ [6]. So don’t whinge about the public’s lack of gratitude to politicians, Ms Delahunty. The moment they start acting decently, the public will reciprocate in kind. Until then, they can expect to get what they give.

A Zero Carbon Plan for Australia: Boy, what a no-brainer

Governments are stupid. Lacking balance. Lacking perspective. Lacking concern for their constituent populations. That’s politics for you: The art of compromise. The art of pandering to sectional interests. The art of granting rewards for favours bestowed; for donations given. And the art of maximising the probability of re-election; of retaining power. So I’m not surprised that – in this age of imminent or current Peak Oil, and in this age of rampant global warming – my nation’s government has decided to direct the future of Australia’s motor manufacturing industry to improving the efficiency of infernal combustion engines, rather than to innovative technology; especially zero emission technology, e.g electric, hydrogen fuel cell [1]? And it has the temerity to call its handouts the Green Car Innovation Fund [2]. What greenwash [3]. And hogwash. Talk about a dinosaur mentality. But unlike our government, some of our leading scientists are creative, innovative, and unafraid to aim high. The University of Melbourne’s Energy Research Institute [4] has just published a Zero Carbon Plan for Australia [5]. It’s a 10-year roadmap for 100% (yes, 100%!) renewable energy, at a cost of A$8 per household per week, using technology that’s available today. Should we implement it? Boy, what a no-brainer. Will we implement it? Don’t answer that – it’s a rhetorical question. Ho hum.

Malcolm Fraser - shouldn't be seen or heard

In the 1950s when I was a nipper, my parents told me that ‘children should be seen and not heard’. Over fifty years later that’s anachronistic. But I think an adaption of that saying, i.e. ‘previous prime ministers should not be seen or heard’, still applies. Two years ago I wrote of it here. In that post I wrote: ‘…Malcolm Fraser, that Hamas praiser, bleeding-heartedly yabbering on about why Australia’s Middle East policy should be even-handed’. But Fraser (pictured), whose 80th birthday’s next month, and who exited parliament in 1983 (yes, 27 years ago) still yabbers on. Last week he publicly called for expulsion of Israeli diplomats from Australia because Israel forged Australian passports. The Australian Federal Police’s still investigating the matter. But Fraser, ever omniscient, said the diplomats should be ejected before the AFP reports. Why? Because in his venerable view, only a nation state could have produced such high quality forgeries. What horse shit. And what a contrast to the view of current Liberal Party leader Tony Abbott who said: ‘We can never forget that Israel is a country under existential threat in a way Australians find difficult to understand’. The late mother of one of Sweetheart Vivienne’s friends had a saying: ‘If you weren’t there, you don’t know’. This applies to you, Mr Fraser. If you’re listening – which I doubt. And, adjunctively, shame on the media for giving this pathetic has been (or never was) coverage.

Earth Hour 2010: A warm and fuzzy failure

Earth Hour 2010 – that’s EH10, if you must – was last night. Earth Hour started in Sydney in 2007. The idea’s to turn off all lights for an hour from 8:30 p.m. I didn’t turn mine off: First, on a practical level, my electricity’s solar, so turning off lights hardly lowers CO2 emissions. Second, on a symbolic level, my house can’t be seen from any public road or any neighbour’s house, so no-one but me (and Sergey and Larry via Google Earth) would know if I turned off my lights or not. And third, on an ideological level, my opinion hasn’t changed since I wrote this a year ago. Meanwhile the 15th UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen, i.e. (forgive me) COP15, generated massive media hype but no real progress towards changing this graph. So apart from its feel-good effect – which though warm and fuzzy is of no practical import apart from swelling the coffers of its organiser WWF – on a bottom-line basis EH09 failed abjectly. EH10 will too. For though actions (and inactions) of individuals can do much to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions and thus global warming and climate change, the necessary massive changes can only occur by the unified policies of all governments world-wide. But politicians need to be popular – because those in democracies want to be re-elected, and those in totalitarian regimes want not to be overthrown. So despite EH10 the CO2 graph will continue to rise – likely more steeply. Ho hum.

farmdoc's blog post number 681

Last Sunday night Sweetheart Vivienne and I watched, the 2-part Australian Story titled ‘Something in the Water’. Originally screened on ABC TV last month, it can be streamed from here [1, 2]. It’s about water pollution in north east Tasmania [3]. I found it riveting – partly due to the focus and persistence of Drs Bleaney and Scammell. But much more so due to the nay saying – no, antipathy – by politicians and bureaucrats who have clearly lost sight of the fact that their only raison d'être is to serve the Tasmanian public interest. I should’ve known better. I learnt the lesson years ago that politicians and bureaucrats march to a different drum. From 1996 when the first F1 Grand Prix [F1GP] was held in a subjugated Albert Park, it’s been obvious to the proverbial drover’s dog that the event in that location’s a triple-bottom-line disaster. And it always would be. Years ago Save Albert Park advocated a purpose-built state-of-the-art permanent venue. Our proposal fell on deaf political, bureaucratic and media ears. In fact it was met with scorn. Until now [4]. Why the change? I don’t know; but 2010’s an election year. Of course now even a permanent venue’s anachronistic – because in this peak oil era, motor sport’s immoral and antisocial. In any event (pun intended) judging by this Herald-Sun item [5], you can’t rely on Premier Brumby or F1GP boss Walker (pictured) to make wise decisions in the public interest. I don’t.

farmdoc's blog post number 611

Today I write of secrets. I don’t like them.

So it’s no secret that I love my darling sister Sue. Today’s her birthday. Exactly a year ago, on her 2008 birthday, I wrote this. A year later I wouldn’t change a word of what I wrote then. Except that today I love her even more. I wish you a wonderful day today, Sue, and then a whole year of wonderful days until your 2010 birthday.

As much as I love Sue, I loathe politicians. Especially those that keep secret what they should divulge. Sure there are state secrets, in the interest of public security. But all other state information should be available to the public – in the public interest. I’m a citizen and I pay tax. Politicians who control the spending of public money must account for it. And be accountable for spending it. For example, in 2000, then Victorian premier Bracks set a A$40M annual cap on government ‘major events’ spending. But the cap’s notional and unenforceable, so the government’s unaccountable in relation to it. The Age reported yesterday that in the nine years since 2000, the cap’s more than doubled. It’s now A$80M plus. And still the government refuses to reveal to the public – the money’s owner – how much money the government spends, and what the financial return is on that money for each event. Why? Current Victorian premier Brumby (pictured) said: ‘This is a very competitive business, and we don’t give away our trade secrets’. Trouble is, the state opposition, for all its current sanctimony, is unlikely to be less secretive if it wins next year’s election. Ho hum.

farmdoc's blog post number 416

I’ve previously written of my distaste for the age of celebrity we live in. And I’ve also written about the ordeal of miners Brant Webb (photo, left) and Todd Russell (right). Here in Tasmania, this island with a population of only half a million people, parochialism reigns. And so Webb and Russell are celebrities. (A celebrity being a widely known person.) In some circles they’ve been afforded folk hero status. Maybe they deserve it, maybe not. I think fate placed them in an horrific situation which they dealt with courageously and tenaciously, but the real heroes were their rescuers who voluntarily assumed potential mortal risk. Anyway last Friday Webb announced his candidacy for the Australian Labor Party in the Tasmanian State seat of Bass, at the State election next March. Thus he joins a growing list of celebrity political candidates – mainly sports stars and media personalities – of whom most (I think) have been elected. Webb has no political background, and no stated vision for Tasmania or even Bass. He doesn’t live in Bass. And, based on my meetings with him, he’s not a man of notable intellect. So as a candidate his only asset’s his celebrity status. Here is the official spin. I think he’ll be elected. So much so, I have a 2-cent bet riding on it. In our problem-ridden Nation and State, we need to elect the best people. Not just the best known.

farmdoc's blog post number 241

Today’s is the 241st Farmdoc’s Blog post. I’ve little doubt that in the past 240 posts, the group of people I’ve mentioned most is politicians. And largely those mentions haven’t been complimentary. Indeed I’ve had little positive to say about politicians. I think that in the main they’re a rum lot. And that goes for the local, state and federal species. They’re all tarred with the same brush. And it’s a pity there aren’t any feathers handy. I don’t think I’m alone in my assessment of them. I’ve previously written that in surveys of occupational prestige, politicians rate lowly scores. That’s been so for many years. And it’s still so. Recently Reader’s Digest published the results of its ‘Australia’s Most Trusted Professions 2008’ survey. You can see the top 40 here. Politicians came second last – even lower than sex workers and car salesmen. Overseas politicians would likely rate similarly. Including George W Bush. The man has his limitations, and they’re major. But he’s probably doing his best, limited though it may be. So I felt sorry for W when that Iraqi journalist hurled his shoes at him. The journo was arrested. How ironic. He should thank Bush that Iraq is now a democracy. Had Saddam Hussein been the target, the shoe thrower would have been hauled out the back and summarily executed. For sure.

farmdoc's blog post number 167

Of the previous 166 Farmdoc’s Blog posts, the eight [1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8] about politicians demonstrate that they aren’t my favourite people. One of Tasmania’s 12 senators is the ALP’s Kerry O’Brien (no, not the TV personality) who sends newsletters (scintillatingly titled Senate News) on glossy, non-recycled paper to his constituents of whom I’m, of course. one. I’ve just received the August 2008 issue – a folded A3 sheet, giving four A4 sized pages. On the back page is an article about ‘Preventing Falls for Older Farmers’ which I eagerly read. On the centrefold two pages is a lengthy item titled ‘What is the Government’s Green paper on Climate Change all about?’ Climate change has been called by Sir David King, until 2007 the UK’s Chief Scientific Advisor, ‘the most severe problem we are facing today’. I agree with Sir David, and I expect you do too. So what, let’s wonder, is page 1 of Senator O’Brien’s August Senate News devoted to. That is, what does he think is more important than climate change. Folks, his lead article is ‘An AFL team for Tasmania?’ With our nation’s myriad social, environmental and economic problems, the Senator’s focus is on football. And he’s referred the issue to a Senate Committee. Oh joy. Oh rapture. Do we get the politicians we deserve? You betcha.

farmdoc's blog post number 23

Why don’t they just go away, these people? They’ve had their day. And that day is gone. Long gone. Last week saw Paul Keating bleating about why the NSW electricity system should be privatised. And Malcolm Fraser, that Hamas praiser, bleeding-heartedly yabbering on about why Australia’s Middle East policy should be even-handed. Then frequently there’s a squawk from Hawke. Nary a week goes by without some ex-politician being quoted saying something or other. And what they say is mostly forgettable. Don’t get me wrong; I think public debate is important and the opportunities for it should be maximised. But these has-beens, whom the public elected way back when but would not elect if they stood for office now, should be allowed a public voice no louder than that of any other citizen. I don’t know why some politicians cannot assume a low, or zero, public profile after they leave parliament. Most do, so why not all? Perhaps for these few it is a power thing, or a need to be needed. Or maybe the media chase them. John Howard, for all of his shortcomings, and there are plenty, has disappeared from public view. Good on him for that. But these others? All I can say is that I wish they’d disappear. And soon. And for good.