Crispin Hull

The federal government’s policy on digital television is now in tatters. This week the Government was forced to withdraw the auction for national datacasting licences. These licences were an integral part of the Government’s overall policy on digital television. That the auction has been withdrawn is not only a blow up to the Government’s budgetary position but a blow up to its overall broadcasting policy.The policy or was doomed from and the start. This week’s events merely hasten the inevitable: that the Government must revisit its digital television policy and extensively rewrite it.

The original policy allocated the extra spectrum that has become available with digital technology. It would have extended the present triopoly of the commercial networks until 2007. In an the meantime, they would have been required to broadcast a minimum of the 20 hours week of high-definition digital television. The requirement for high-definition digital burns up a lot of the additional spectrum. In particular, it prevents extensive use of multi-channelling of standard definition digital. The three commercial networks and the two public broadcasters were denied the option of producing, say, three or four completely different program streams of standard definition instead of a single high-definition program stream. The commercials were quite happy with that because it is cheaper to produce at one rather than four program streams for about the same amount of audience and about the same amount of advertising revenue.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_leader11may digital”

It was just as well that the treasurer, Peter Costello, was in Washington when the memo from the Federal President of the Liberal Party, Shane Stone, to Prime Minister John Howard came to light. If Mr Costello had been in Australia, it would have been easier for the Liberal Party to have closed ranks and for the Australian public to have been denied an insight into the state of dissension that plagues the ruling party in this country.

Faced with reporters’ questions in Washington, Mr Costello expressed surprise and innocence at the existence and contents of the memo. He even questioned whether it was authentic. He told reporters that they should seek answers from the author of the memo. He did his best to be as the least damaging as possible to his party. But it was apparent that Mr Costello was unaware of when that the memorandum had been written and when it had been delivered to it Mr Howard. If he had been, his reaction would have been differently constructed. As it happened, his display of innocence exposed poor communication and a critical lack of trust within various elements of the party.

It is now apparent that Mr Stone wrote the memorandum shortly after the February 17 Queensland state election and at that it had been delivered to it Mr Howard very shortly thereafter. The gist of that the memorandum was that the Queensland members of the federal parliamentary Liberal Party thought that the Government was mean and out of touch and that Mr Costello was the main offender in that regard. It means that Mr Howard had been aware of the criticism of his deputy, Mr Costello, for more than two months and yet he had it not communicated the source of that criticism or the and nature of it to Mr Costello. Moreover, without this leak Mr Howard might never have told his deputy about the memo.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_leader04may stone leak”

High Court Justice Michael Kirby went about as far as a judicial officer should go in commenting about public affairs when he called for greater funding for public schools in a speech at a graduation ceremony at the University of South Australia last week.

The public should not expect judges to be completely silent outside the courts, however, it is important that judges do not enter debates of major current political controversy. Justice Kirby has never been afraid speak on a wide range of topics. His words are usually chosen carefully and his tone is usually measured. In his role as chair of the Australian Law Reform Commission in the 1980s, Justice Kirby got into the habit of commenting on a wide range of topics. That was a critical part of his job. But now he is a High Court judge. And while no one expects him up to go into a cocoon, it would be more prudent for him to be a little more circumspect about what topics he talks about and what he says on those topics.

Last week, for example, he picked at particularly controversial topic – – the balance between public and private schooling. It has been a policy objective of the current government to set new parameters in this balance. Moreover, these have been roundly opposed by the opposition and key community groups. Whatever it one thinks of the Government’s position and the actions it has taken in the past five years on school funding, it is a matter of concern that a High Court judge should be seen to be taking sides in this debate.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_leader03may kirby”

It was a dribs and drabs Budget. A little for everyone and nothing large to offend anyone. And yes, there is an election in October.

A cynical view of yesterday’s Budget would be that it was a vote-buying one. And there was a certain amount of that. Treasurer and Chief Minister Gary Humphries found his way to dish a few goodies out to a great variety of groups and individuals: cyclists and motorists; public and private school attendees; high culture and petrol heads. A little bit here and a little bit there. Something for everyone.

But several factors soften this cynical view. First, the framing of the Budget and the allocation of the goodies has not been done on an overtly ideological basis, in the way that Mr Humphries’ federal counterparts have engaged in. Secondly, the additional spending (or vote-buying) has not been done in an economically irresponsible way. The Budget remains in surplus. The ACT retains its triple-A credit rating. The economic projections are not hopelessly optimistic. Indeed, the budgetary position now is in far better shape than was projected three budgets ago when it was predicted that the Budget would still be in deficit by $57 million and be some distance from turning the corner to surplus — and at the time that was thought to be optimistic.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_leader02may act budget”

THIRTY years ago, at a meeting of the parliamentary Liberal Party Keven Cairns asked a question of then Prime Minister John Gorton.

Gorton was under pressure from his own party and from an increas� ingly confident Labor Party. Gorton was facing a no-confidence motion as a result of his secretiveness and dis� loyal treatment of potential leader and young bull Malcolm Fraser, who was then Defence Minister.

Even though the Calition had a majority there was no guarantee that it would survive because a critical number of Liberal Party MPs were fed up with Gorton’s leadership.

Cairns’s question was: what would Gorton do if he lost — call an election or resign as Liberal leader and Prime Minister and ask the Governor-General to get the new Liberal leader to form a government?

The difference was crucial, Cairns explained, because he had a large family and no resources. If Gorton opted for a general election, Cairns, sitting in a marginal seat, would be out of Parliament and without an income within six weeks.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_gorton howard”

Car rego cut $58 per car

Free school buses

Extra police for Gungahlin

$12m surplus

Kindergarten class sizes cut

$214 capital works:

> Civic revitalising

> Shops upgrades

> Monaro duplication

> Gungahlin access road
Continue reading “2001_05_may_glance”

This week a committee of the ACT Legislative Assembly rejected government proposals for reform of the defamation laws. The Government had proposed a new defence for publishers. If a publisher could show that it had not acted negligently then it could not be successfully be it sued for defamation.

It would mean that that a publisher would have to show — in the case of the media — that the journalist had given the plaintiff a reasonable opportunity to respond to any allegations and that after the response that the journalist still had an honest areasonable belief in the truth of the allegations.

In short, and defamation or would become like other areas of the law where the plaintiff has to prove the that the defendant was negligent and that the negligence caused damage. This is what plaintiffs have to show if they sue a doctor for a medical mishap or a driver for road injury, for example.

At present, defamation is different. All the onus is upon the publishing defendant. The law presumes that everything published is false until it is proved to be true. And the law presumes that everything published a is damaging. Plaintiffs can sue over any statement that would cause ordinary people in the community to think less of them – which gives them a lot of scope.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_defo axed”

HUMANS love to trade and trading can be one of the most rewarding and insightful part of travel, tourism, holiday or vacation – – call it what you will.

The Trobriand Islands are off the north coast of the eastern tail of Papua New Guinea. I went there very briefly after some engaging tropical diving near Milne Bay — the scene of the first Japanese defeat of World War II.

The Trobriands were just one stop on an island hop back to Port Moresby. At the airport a large number of islanders gathered at the perimeter gate, about 30 metres from where the aircraft had come to a stop. They were displaying beautiful ebony carvings with inlaid pearl. Now I am a sucker for ethno junk, precisely because I it don’t believe that this craft is junk. Usually, it is an expression of culture as well as a way for local people to make money. And the cost per hour of work is good value anyway – – better than the average painting at a gallery in suburban Australia. But if there is nothing else to do, no other employment, why not work for hours for some rare cash to obtain things otherwise unobtainable.

I looked at the carvings and was then attracted by a very odd shaped bundle being held on a coconut string by a young man.
Continue reading “2001_05_may_crabs”

A spat broke out this week over whether the ACT’s Hare-Clark electoral system discriminates against women.

The ACT branch secretary of the ALP, Michael Kerrisk, said, “the Hare-Clark electoral system used here in the ACT, and the one chosen by the Liberal Party, is a brutal one. . . . Increasing at the level of female representation in the Assembly will not be easy. . . . The Hare-Clark electoral system is all about promoting the individual at the expense of the party. And in any system like this, female candidates will often be unsuccessful.”

At present, there are only two female members of the Legislative Assembly out of 17. And we do have a Hare-Clark system. But the latter, of itself, did not cause of the former.

This election, women were pre-selected by each of the major parties to every or winnable seat except one. The winnable seats for the major parties are two each in the two five-member electorates (Brindabella and Ginninderra) and three each in the seven-member electorate (Molonglo). (Only one major party will actually win a third seat in Molonglo, however, it is still winnable by either of them.)

The Liberal Party has pre-selected three women to stand in Molonglo, two women to stand in Ginninderra but only one to stand in Brindabella. That is six women for seven winnable seats.
Continue reading “2001_03_march_women hare clark”