Crispin Hull

The Prime Minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, has tried to fly with the hawks and wing with the doves. Now he has fallen between two stools. And to mix metaphors more, he appears like losing his bread and butter.

Mr Netanyahu squeaked into office two and a half years ago, beating the then Prime Minister, Labour’s Shimon Peres, by just one per cent. Mr Peres, successor to assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, was the architect of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians. That agreement ultimately promised peace based upon withdrawal by Israel from the occupied West bank and Gaza and the creation of a Palestinian state with which Israel could co-exist. The Palestinians, in return, promised and end to terrorism and an end to a de-facto sate of war as encapsulated in a Palestine Liberation Organisation article of faith aimed at the destruction of Israel and a denial of its right to exist.

The Oslo agreement was an extraordinary breakthrough. It required a leap of faith by both sides. Alas, since the election of Mr Netanyahu its spirit has been broken. The main reason for this is that Mr Netanyahu came to office on a promise of never surrendering Jewish settlements of the West Bank. In effect it was a promise, in substance if not form, to repudiate the Oslo agreement. He did this because he saw it his only change of election.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader23dec mid east”

In a move that would undermine the universality of Medicare, the APHA said people should be able to opt out of Medicare and use private insurance to cover all their health needs, with vouchers either used in public hospitals or put towards the cost of private hospital care.

Under the proposal, people would receive a voucher for Medicare services to which they were entitled with the value of the voucher calculated on an age/sex/health formula with, for example, young healthy people receiving less than older people needing more care.

(tm)Every Australian has an entitlement to a Medicare-funded level of public patient care. That entitlement has a dollar value (depending) on your age and your gender and your risk of incurring disease or illness,š APHA executive director Ian Chalmers told ABC Radio.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader23dec health insurance”

Prime Minister John Howard is to be commended for his handling of the republican issue. His actions are especially commendable because he personally does not want a republic yet he is willing for the Australian people to have an unfettered say on the matter.

When he took over the leadership of the Liberal Party from Alexander Downer he inherited a somewhat awkward policy position on the republic. Mr Downer did not want to see then Prime Minister Paul Keating get too much mileage out of the republic issue. He sensed, probably correctly, that some voters might change their vote to Labor on that issue alone. He therefore felt he must open the republican door on behalf of the Liberals while at the same time presenting a different position from Mr Keating so he could capitalise on the anti-Keating feeling in the electorate. The result was a promise to hold a constitutional convention policy and a promise that if a consensus of the convention formed around a model, that model would be put to the people.

The convention was only half elected. Moreover the voluntary postal voting system for the other half probably did not help the republican cause which is more popular among the young who might be less likely to engage in a voluntary postal ballot. Despite that a model did emerge and Mr Howard renewed his promise to put it to the people.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader21dec republic mason”

There are several good reasons why President Bill Clinton should not resign.

This is despite his impeachment on two articles by the House of Representatives at the weekend. Two further articles of impeachment were not approved.

Impeachment is a process provided for in the US Constitution for high office holders, including the President. Impeachment, of itself is not a finding of guilt, rather it is a statement that the President has a case to answer. The case is answered in the Senate, which tries the President. It can only convict on a two-thirds majority vote and the trial is presided over by the Chief Justice.

The Senate trial is likely to be much longer than the process in the House of Representatives. It will involve lawyers, the taking of evidence and cross-examination. The fact that a trial would take weeks, probably months, is one element of a case in favour of a resignation. It would be better that the government of the most powerful country in the world be in the hands of someone undistracted by a trial and the fear of losing office. But that is not a very strong argument. And it would set a dangerous precedent that mere impeachment by a simple majority in the House would give rise to an expectation of resignation. The Constitution, however, provides for a two-part process.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader21dec clinton to stay”

The Leader of the Opposition, Kim Beazley, argued last week that all major parties would have to support the proposition that Australia become a republic for the referendum to be passed.

He said he hoped Mr Howard “”would see his way clear to come out a support a republic”.

“”The Australian public looks sideways at any proposition that is not endorsed by the major political parties so we need him to be there in the trenches supporting it,” he said.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader13dec republic”

The move by the Northern Territory to phase out multi-lingual education in its schools is to be utterly deplored. The Northern Territory Government reasons that education in English is more important for Aboriginal people than education in their own languages. Presumably it thinks it will gain by axing between and 60 and 100 jobs in 21 communities. In fact, the Northern Territory and Australia as a whole will be the poorer culturally and Aboriginal people will be deprived of their heritage.

Doesn’t anyone in the Northern Territory have any knowledge of history. Linguistic, religious and cultural repressions of this kind do not improve people’s economic conditions. People are not made better off (either economically or culturally) because they are forced to use the dominant culture’s language. Indeed, it makes them poorer human beings through feelings of deprivation and repression. Aborigines wanting to deal with others in Australia on a commercial level will obviously use English. English is the language of commerce in Australia and the base language and reference point for most human transactions. Learning English is vital for any Australian. But that should never be to the exclusion of other languages. And certainly not to the exclusion of indigenous languages. These languages should be encouraged, not driven to extinction. Knowledge and use of more than one language helps human development. It does not hinder it. Proficiency in one language helps proficiency in another. Most people in the world speak more than one language.

The Northern Territory Minister for Education, Peter Adamson, said children could still learn their own languages at home. Or if a community felt strongly they could invite elders to come to the school to teach voluntarily.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader11dec abo languages”

This week Green MLA Kerrie Tucker will introduce her plastic bags legislation. This comes at the time the energy-efficiency rating system for existing houses is coming into force with an array of practical difficulties unresolved.

The aim of the plastic-bag legislation is to make supermarkets charge shoppers for plastic bags. At present, of course, shoppers do pay for plastic bags, but the cost is amortised across all grocery items so shoppers feel the bags are free. The aim of the Green legislation is to make shoppers pay for each bag, so they might be discouraged from using them and thus contribute to a better environment.

The aim may be laudable, but the means are not ideal. Indeed, the means smack of radical economic rationalism. That theory hold that the price mechanism is the best way send signals to the market to promote the best allocation of resources. If something is free or subsidised, the rationalists argue, it will be overused. If it is given its correct price according to cost, it will not be overused. The trouble is that the price of a plastic bag is so small that the price mechanism will not work as a significant deterrent.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_leader05dec plastic bags”

The Australian Private Hospitals Association came up with a health-finance plan this week which has a lot more going for it than the Government’s foolish 30 per cent rebate scheme.

The Government has dismissed it, preferring the populist stand that it is committed to Medicare and that its 30 per cent rebate will fix the problem.

The Government’s response is another example of the woolly thinking and ideological blinkers that have dogged health policy in Australia.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_health insure op-ed”

With health-insurance, the Government has provided too much, too soon to the wrong people.

The rebate passed the Parliament on Thursday.

On the Government’s own figures it is an absurd waste of money. It is a tax deduction for the rich, not a boost to health spending in Australia.

During the debate the Government admitted two critical facts:

The scheme would cost $1700 million a year.
Continue reading “1998_12_december_health insurance”