May 2005 Archives

Any Swans supporters dismayed by the attacks on the club from the AFL paparazzi may be interested in this.

How nice it is to see J.W. Howard having a few problems with his back bench. Even better to see that a least a few 'Liberals' are really that; liberal, rather than just hard nosed ideologues.

John's back bench problems aside, another event that he and the rest of us should be focussing on is the record current account deficit reported today. Coming in at over 7% of GDP, it dwarfs the event that prompted Paul Keating to warn Australia it was at risk of becoming a Banana Republic.

This time, we're in the big league of indebted former Soviet Eastern Block countries.

The problem's simple; as a nation, we're spending more than we earn. If only the solution was that easy to define.

We really are in a difficult situation. Australians have lots of debt. Many have borrowed heavily to pay inflated prices for housing. Many others have increased their commitments by borrowing against rising home values to buy consumer goods. On the whole, the country is very sensitive to interest rate increases. Only small increases will cause lots of pain. Slightly larger increases could cause a real estate fire sale as heavily indebted home owners bail because they can't meet the mortgage repayments.

The government has just given a huge tax break to the wealthy. More money in the economy to buy imported products. The Reserve Bank may feel they need to raise interest rates to try to control the deficit. Apart from the direct pain that will cause the locals, it may also increase the value of the dollar as it attracts investment cash from overseas. Higher dollar equals cheaper imports equals more current account woes equals ..... a spiral.

The country is walking an economic tight rope and no one seems to notice. Let's hope that our foreign creditors don't notice, either.

Just before leaving work, I had a quick flick round the net, as you do; landed at Flute's, to see he's be "hit by a 'meme'." Huh? Meme?

Oh, ok. It's a chain letter of sorts, answer the questions, then pass them on to another lot of victims. What's this? My site's on the list?

Bugger!

Flutey, how could you? It's about music!

Time to tell you all a dirty little secret .... I'm not into music that much. Not these days, anyway. Was big into live music during my youth, but now I rarely buy a CD, and don't download at all. Too many other things going on in my life to partake in the latter, and I hope by ignoring free music on the web it will delay my daughters' interest in the subject. It's worked so far, and just as well. Our home computers are the one's Noah used, slow and small hard drives. Certainly couldn't accommodate the 1.3 GByte that Rowen boasts.

So, here goes:

1. Total volume of music on my pc: None

2. Songs playing right now: None. Kids in bed and I'm enjoying the quiet.

3. Last album purchased: ABBA Gold. (Yes, really!) Was inspired by the ABBA TV special(s), and realised the error of my yoof when I bagged the group. Buying the CD was penance.

4. Seven songs I've listened to a lot lately, from several genres: Another secret here, I mostly listen to the albums I have when I travel for work. Reasons? Well, the distances are longish, the hire cars my employer supplies have CD players and I'm usually by myself so can have it loud.

To answer this I'll pick some tracks off some of my favourite disks:

a. Ironic by Alanis Morrissette
b. Would I Lie to You by The Eurythmics
c. Beds are Burning by Midnight Oil
d. Wish You Were Here by Pink Floyd
e. Rocky Mountain Way by Joe Walsh
f. EMI by The Sex Pistols
g. The Name of the Game by ABBA

And that's it! Don't judge me too harshly, young people of the web generation. I am in my 50th year.

Now to finger five other victims. Come on down .....

Tim Lambert
Ken Parish You'll have to come out of retirement ...
Chris Sheil Ditto
The Lad Representation from the other side of the sphere ...
Graham

What are the consequences of the new industrial laws announced today by John Howard?

In a booming economy, those who are employed in sound businesses and those who have skills in high demand, not much. The labour and skills shortages will insulate them from change.

For employees in industries that are struggling, the picture isn't so good. They can expect management to pressure them to give up award conditions. Long service? The company can't afford it. Penalties for overtime? We can't afford time and a half .... you'll have to accept time and a quarter. What, you don't like it? Well, we can move the factory to China and cut our costs even further.

The government knows there'll be losers. There won't be any meaningful assurances from the government countering this.

The effects of changes to unfair dismissal laws will be mixed. It will encourage businesses to hire. I know of small business proprioters who won't hire after losing out to former employees who knew how to manipulate the current unfair dismissal regime. On the other hand, the small business 'nazi' operator will have the ideal means to cover up harassment, unsafe work practises and exploitation.

The government's strategy is typical of conservative thinking. Where the former Labor government worked on the consultative model to bring in change and productivity improvements and allow all parties to reap the benefits, the conservative's method is to make it easier to reduce labour costs as an alternative to gaining productivity improvements. The consultative model takes more effort, but the effects are longer lasting. Expect a lot more manufacturing to move offshore in coming years, after cost cutting doesn't result in improved productivity.

The real effect of the new laws won't be felt until the next economic downturn. In the event of a recession, with profit margins squeezed and unemployment rising, all employees will face the possibility of eroded work conditions without being able to do much about it.

Update: Flute and Surfdom have more to say on this.

Thanks for all those hilarious childhood / adolescent nights with the family gathered around the black and white TV.

And the movies, 'The Club,' 'Don's Party' and, my favourite, 'Travelling North.'

Apart from this blog, I have another interest that takes up a lot of my time during winter. I'm a Sydney Swans AFL supporter who also runs an AFL tipping comp.

The comic strip above is one that I use to promote the comp on my tipping blog. It was cut out of the Sydney Morning Herald in the early 90s, and has lived on our fridge for over 12 years.

Anyone who has followed the Swans since their inception in Sydney knows that the early 90s were a bad time for the club. They lost over 20 games in a row, and the club nearly folded. The financial and on field success the club enjoys today was a result of measures put in place by the AFL during that time.

The strip is displayed with the kind permission of its creator, James Kemsley. Ginger Meggs is an iconic Australian comic strip that's been around in one form or another for decades. However, if you look in today's SMH, you won't find it.

James informed me by email that he's been told by the Herald that Meggs will only be published on the weekend. It was the only indigenous strip displayed in weekday paper. The four that remain are all foreign.

If you, like myself, think this is a poor decision by the Fairfax press, I urge you to voice your disapproval by emailing the Herald, or phoning them on 02 9282 1569.

My fellow porker, Mark, is excited (see the post below) that he's got tickets to the sixth Star Wars Movie. You have to be dedicated to watch the movie in a foreign language after reading the script beforehand.

Well, to those who are only slightly older (ignore the polite coughs from those in the know), are equally excited at the prospect of a new series of Dr Who.

It started in 1963, and I can clearly remember the watching the early series in black & white TV. Although not a true series fanatic, I've watched most of permutations over the years.

The Darlek cry of "Exterminate" and "Resistance is Useless!" still reverberate. The later is commonly used when convincing my kids that I really am serious.

The first show is tomorrow night at 7.30, which unfortunately clashes with an engagement with friends to attend the 'local' to watch the Warratah's Super Twelve Semi Final. Thank heavens for video recorders!

It's not a movie, it's an event. The dialogue will be attrocious in parts (actually, I'm certain of this - see below), so will the acting, and I expect some of the special effects to be dodgy, despite being hyper-digitised. I know all of these things, but none of them could stop the goosebumps rushing up my spine as I walked out of the cinema having pre-bought my tickets for Episode 3 about five minutes ago.

For my generation (especially the males), Star Wars is something special, not as movies but as something else entirely which is practically impossible to explain. It's a cultural reference point, which I've frankly not been happy sharing with a younger generation and thankfully it's coming to a close.

I've collected action figures, comic books, novels, posters, stickers, scripts, I can pretty much quote Return of the Jedi verbatim, I've been kicked out of the bed because I quoted Han Solo from The Empire Strikes Back

she: I love you
me: I know

to my girlfriend of the time and she'd never seen the film. Ouch. Needless to say that one didn't last; there aren't many events in my life that I can't link, associate in some way to Star Wars. It's not that bad really.

I'm not much of a geek, really I'm not. Even though tonight (in less than three hours - can anticapate the thumping of my heart as that 20th Century Fox drumroll begins, as those eternal notes of John Williams genius reach my ears, as those big yellow letters slam themselves onto the screen) I'll be seeing the film dubbed into Czech. Call me lame, but two days ago, discovering this was my only option if I wanted to see the film tonight, I downloaded the script so I'd know exactly what was going on. I'm off home now to re-read it, if only I had those soundtracks with me to play through my i-River... oh well, I'll make do.

May the Force be with you

At the Sty we believe the best form of price control is unbridled competition. When companies earn obscene profits, there's usually some impediment that prevents competition from gaining a foothold. Examples that come to mind are the banks, computer software and telecommunications.

This post supplements two previous posts from the Sty on the subject of Telstra and competition. (It's also a bit long!)

With the full privatisation of Telstra almost inevitable, it was interesting to hear the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission's (ACCC) Graeme Samuel talk about competition and Telstra this morning on Radio National.

The presenter Richard Aedy started with this ....

Richard Aedy: Whether or not T3 actually goes ahead, and there are one or two reasons why it might not, (though we're not going to talk about that today, that's another program) Telstra occupies a unique position. It owns the copper network that runs into pretty much every home in the country, making it the de facto gatekeeper to the internet.

It's one reason why Australia lags behind much of the developed world when it comes to broadband takeup. Telstra, being a service company that also control the infrastructure, has no reason to be nice and give competitors unbridled access to its network.

One year ago today the Pigs was born. From an idiosyncratic, haphazard, and inconsistent publication it has ... well, remained much the same.

Thanks to co-contributor Mark who has added another dimension to and generally raised the standard of the site.

Thanks to those who've contributed comments over the year, particularly the small band of regulars whose presence, more than anything else, has kept me at the keyboard. Whether it's to agree, dissent or point out errors, your contributions are appreciated. Feedback is what can make blogging an enjoyable and rewarding experience.

This particular Porcine Aviator, having a keen interest in technology and issues thereof, has over the years bored many people with the observation that copyright's dead. Killed by the digital revolution. In my opinion, those who are trying desperately to prop it up are probably doomed to fail.

One of the nicer things in life is finding someone who agrees with your unfashionable ideas. Even better if it's printed in the mainstream media.

In today's SMH IT Section, Graeme Philipson says much the same thing.

The concept of copyright was developed to protect printers in 17th-century England, and was greatly strengthened by the film and music industries and wealthy publishing companies in the US over the past 50 years. But digital technology, and the ease with which all media can now be stored, copied and propagated, has rendered these antiquated and anachronistic laws increasingly unenforceable.

Very true. And for every new technology adopted to prevent the copying of content, there's a pimply smart-arse tech-head who will devise a way to get round it, usually within days of the technology being released.

A couple of Australian academics have written a paper arguing that torture is a 'morally defensible' interrogation method. This subject was taken up on various blogging luminaries' sites, so the Sty's comments will be limited to this ....

There is never any justification for torture.

It's becoming an increasingly old fashioned sentiment, but reducing ourselves to the level of the people we are opposing in the 'war' on terror demeans our stand against tyranny. I means we become no better than those we oppose, and gives them an excuse to perform similar abuses.

The academics in question have every right to raise the subject, and fair minded people have every right to reject it.

I received an email at work this morning, in German, with a link to the German publication "Der Spiegel." A colleague translated the subject, which was something about life after redundancy. Very odd. I clicked on the link and, unsurprisingly, up came the German language article. Pity I couldn't understand a word of it.

I deleted the email and thought nothing more of it.

I'm surprised to find out that these emails are sent by a variant of the Sober worm. The links it sends are invariably for right wing publications. My link was benign compared to ones other people are reported to have received.

Heavens! What sad person thought this up?

What's next? Worms that email the original thoughts of President Bush? The wit of Donald Rumsfeld? The wisdom of Joh Bjelke-Petersen?

Surfing around the other day I came across this site about Agent Orange (for those as uninformed as I) and came across a couple of interesting facts. The first is:

"In dense terrain particularly, the use of herbicides to destroy covering vegetation was to protect American and allied troops from ambush or other undetected movement of the enemy."

Which I think is a much more plausible excuse for war than procuring oil or deposing dictators or weapons of mass destruction. Don't like fighting in jungles? Let's go the desert! Heaps easier to blow things up, and better for the environment - gotta have that green vote. The second is:

"No. Title 38 of the United States Code prohibits veterans from suing the government for injuries suffered while in the military."

Total rubbish if you ask me. There should definitely be a workers union for the military, the occupational health and safety standards are abysmal. I also go the tote that all deaths in war should be able to be prosecuted in regular law courts. Unreasonable? Yes, of course, oink oink flap flap you say. Anyone read 'His Dark Materials', by Phillip Pullman? The concept of someone doing penance their whole life for a crime they'll commit towards the end of it is fantastic.

My work colleague is correct. The movie "Starship Troopers" bears little resemblance to Robert Heinlein's book, which is the narrative of man who joined up for 'Federal Service' to find himself in the Mechanised Infantry (MI).

Unlike the movie, there's no sex or graphic violence. Although women are in service, they're not in the MI, and there's certainly no mixed showering as was depicted in one memorable scene.

In Heinlein's fictitious society, the only way to gain a voting franchise (gain 'citizenship') is to enlist for 'Federal Service' for minimum term of two years. 'Federal Service' can be anything the government wants you to do, but in the book it seems that most volunteers do some sort of military service. Only a small percentage of the population enlist, and many fewer complete the obligation that ultimately allows them to vote.

Society is run by an authoritarian government where corporal and capital punishment is allowed, crime is almost unheard of, and the disenfranchised 'non-citizen' population is affluent and content under the rule of the ex Federal Service elite. This situation comes about after global wars destroyed most world governments, and the military veterans found themselves in control. Rather than cede power to a democracy with universal suffrage, they decided that only people like themselves possessed the necessary skills and should be eligible to vote.

Apparently Starship Troopers was written after the US government banned atmospheric atomic weapons testing. Heinlein vehemently disagreed with this move and wrote the book soon after. I suppose it was written to convey his social theories describing how things would be run and how well off we'd be if only 'no nonsense,' clear thinking, ex military types were in charge.

Although Heinlein goes to a lot of effort to justify the philosophy of his social model, I can't help thinking that it's flawed.
Regardless of the ruling classes' life experiences, power concentrated in the hands of a few will eventually corrupt. No differently to many corrupt military regimes both past and present.

In summary, it's not a bad book, but the movie was more entertaining.

No news this for most readers, but I always find it interesting what news from Oz actually makes headlines with the beeb. Evidently:

much of the country (Australia) is in the grip of an unyielding drought, with an increasing number of farmers receiving emergency government aid.

When I last flew into Sydney, what impressed me most about the view from the air was not the colour of the roof tiles (someone said it was impressive - go figure) or the colour of the trees (that was the time before) but instead the number of swimming pools there are.

Frankly, it's ridiculous. No wonder the rest of the country thinks us Sydney-siders are arrogant pricks. (generalization). From the same article:

Supply levels at dams supplying Sydney have never been lower.

My solution? (I always have a solution). Make rain collection tanks compulsory, everywhere. Okay, so unless they're the super-editions the water's no good for drinking, but there're a lot of other things we use water for regularly.

Too expensive? Is that the cry I hear? Yeah, that's right, figures... go vote for Howard again why don't ya? Might as well.

In a post a few days ago, I referred to the movie "Starship Troopers" when theorising (read 'dreaming') about alternatives to voting for political representation.

A colleague who read the post sent me the following email:

Dear Mr Flying Pig,

Not just a comic book movie.

"If you have seen Paul Verhoeven's movie Starship Troopers, you have seen merely Heinlein's story with almost all the philosophy carefully removed."

"Starship Troopers was originally to have been one of Heinlein's juvenile books, but the violence made it unfit for that duty. Instead, it is the book that earned Heinlein the mislabel "fascist." Understandable. Heinlein uses Troopers as a vehicle for his autocratic ideals. Daring stuff for the standards of 1959 (when Troopers first saw print) and still so today. "

Starship Troopers
by Robert A. Heinlein
Ace (New York): 1959.
Paperback: 208 pages.
ISBN: 0-441-78358-9

Found this interesting reading:
"The Nature of "Federal Service" in Robert A. Heinlein's Starship Troopers", by James Gifford
http://www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah/ftp/fedrlsvc.pdf

He's lent me the book. I'll let you know how I find it.

In late after a school P & F meeting and a couple of beers at the nearby local.

Missed the budget telecast. Listened to the outline on the 10.00pm ABC radio news as I made tomorrow's school lunches.

Then onto the net. Checked the SMH website and my favourite blogs.

Seems that the wealthier classes have done well out of the proceedings. If you're earn lower than the top 20%, you get bugger all. Those above do OK.

Hardly surprising, really. The US government's done it. We're sure to follow.

I should mention here that although I'm well short of those on $120k per year who gain the most out of the tax changes, I am comfortably in the zone that will benefit. Despite this, I'm very uncomfortable with this government's economic philosophy.

It's typical that this snivelling government chose to re-jig the tax rates so only the wealthy received any real benefit. They could have easily reset the rates so everyone gained a real increase, but chose not to. Of course, people at the upper ends wouldn't have done quite so well, but they would have coped.

It's typical that this snivelling government chose to tighten the requirement for single parents to receive benefits once their kids reach a certain age, while allowing wealthy supported unemployed women to still collect the Part A (or is it B?) non-means tested Family payment.

Why are they doing the huge handouts now? It's not an election year. Do they really think the economy is going to grow at present rates indefinitely? Where's the provision for the period after the inevitable economic downturn? Where's the extra funding for education and infrastructure? The savings for looking after the rapidly ageing population?

On the face of it, this is a budget with no thought for the future. It's a budget that's a response to the whinging of the moneyed upper class. It's a budget that the county my well regret in coming years.

If Costello thinks that this budget will smooth the way to his gaining the Lodge, he's got another think coming!

Sheik Taj Sheik Taj el-Din al Hilaly makes a statement to try to gain the release of the Australian hostage in Iraq, Douglas Wood ....

"We value your jihad and your efforts and we call upon you to do something for the sake of our community and all Australian society, which does not support (Prime Minister John) Howard's pro-American policies," he said.

"You know the Australian forces in Iraq are protected by American forces and don't do anything - it's all politics.

"We implore you to release him in the name of God, for the sake of the Islamic community in Australia ... and for the sake of the family of Douglas Wood."

.... only to find that his statements are criticised because they appear to give support to Wood's captor's cause.

Wood's prospects are grim, to say the least. I'm amazed that someone has to find something to bitch about when the prime aim is to try to get Wood released.

His former translator, Keysar Trad, was today critical of the use of the word jihad.

"I think one of the main reasons that he would have used this term is to win favour with the people holding Mr Wood captive, to show them that he understands their plight and what they're doing," Mr Trad told ABC radio.

"If this is what they think they're doing, then he's not disputing that with them but he believes that they're wrong in holding Mr Wood captive.

"Now he has used language that's not consistent with our expectations as Australians and I think he could have stopped at the first part of his statement without going this far and the message would have been just as clear."

The Mufti's views are clear and succinctly stated. A lot of Australian's would agree with the political points he makes. He's backing up his words by putting himself at risk by going to Iraq to negotiate directly with the Sunni powerbrokers. We can only wish him luck.

Where? Said mum when she called and I said where I was. Capital of Slovakia. No, not Czechoslovakia dad, they split up, had a divorce, yep like you and mum, but more peaceful. Velvet they called it.

Anyway, Victory Day here was celebrated with marching and military displays, wish I had time to post photos of the baton twirlers. Ah, twirlers... then a bit of low key tradional Slovak music. Army present - kids crawling all over tanks and troop transports, handling rifles taking home showbags full of who knows what.

Not much of a celebration really, mainly just old folks, families and the odd tourist (that'd be me). Pretty much an open day for the military.

More stuff closer to my usual idealism (I call it realism) perhaps its surrealism (cant find all the punctuation on this damn keyboard!) can be found nicely put with Niall I thought Id just go straight reporting today.

Back to the teahouse, got a drawing board set up there.

And to end my snarky theme tonight, Tim Blair, that most rabid of RWDB bloggers, (one I link but rarely read) paid out a $250 prize to Antony Lowenstein, who's serious and definitely leftish blog scored more hits than Blair's friend Shelley Horton's 'gossip and pap' blog.

Congratulations to Antony. If he hasn't already decided, may I suggest he 'disperses' the money to a suitably ideologically incorrect (in Blair's eyes) cause.

Another muddled tome from Miranda Divine, commenting on a widely reported incident where a bus driver, sick of racist taunts from his school children passengers, drove his cargo to the local bus depot rather than complete the route.

Commenting on the public's reaction to the incident ....

But sympathy for one bus driver does not mean there aren't serious problems with Sydney's school buses. And, regardless of what Transport Minister John Watkins and the rest of the tut tut brigade say, it's not the children's fault.

Miranda thinks that the appalling behaviour is due to overcrowding and unreliable services.

The drama is a symptom of a wider problem. On two mornings last week I know of, four school buses drove straight past a group of 10-year-old boys waiting at a North Shore bus stop, leaving them stranded and potentially in danger.

Bollocks, Miranda! The kids racially abused the driver, it's got nothing to do with an unreliable service in another part of the city!

Oh, and, in addition, it's also the drivers fault! He's obviously too thin skinned.

But Gomes [the driver] should never have been placed in such a position. For some people driving a bus full of noisy children is stressful. For others it is fine. Why subject the child-averse driver to a school run?

Child averse?

Chilean-born Gomes told Baonza that children on the 748 disobeyed his instruction not to sit on a step at the back of the bus, which posed a danger. They began singing, mimicking his accent and racially taunting him, beginning with "wog", moving through to "Scottish pig" and "Jamaican" when he didn't bite.

No person should have to put up with this sort of stuff. Vetting drivers to find someone who's immune to this type of behaviour, as Miranda suggests, is not the answer. It just covers up the problem of kids who think racial vilification is acceptable.

Teaching kids some manners would be a good start. Knowing how publicity adverse private schools can be, I'm sure that Mater Maria Catholic College will be implementing something along these lines in the near future.

Seems as though the IVF funding question's too hard and has been shoved off to a committee. Obviously too much pain for too little gain.

Maybe never to return? Hope so, but can't see the Mad Monk giving up so easily.

Tony Blair's election victory completed the trifecta with him being the last of the main protagonists of the Iraqi war to regain office. It wasn't much of a choice for the UK voters. The economy's going well under the Labour administration, and the Tory opposition was always vocal in its support for the UK's involvement in Iraq, not to mention all the bad memories from when they were last in government. Is it any wonder that around half the population didn't bother to vote?

The UK population's disengagement from politics shown in this election, and similar disinterest displayed in many other western countries, begs the question whether it would be possible to have fair and effective government without the downside of the political process. Wouldn't it be nice if we could have government without career politicians, political parties, and tedious election campaigns?

Yes, I'm dreaming, but I promise I'll wake up soon.

There was a concept described in the comic book movie "Star Ship Troopers" where, to gain 'citizenship' and thereby, the right to vote, you had to join and do time in the military forces. Obligations were met to gain the privilege of having a say in the way the place is run. Yes, our world is not threatened by giant ant like aliens, and I'm not suggesting that we should be encouraging the population into uniform, but perhaps there's something in the thought that we could encourage ordinary people to take on the obligation to actually be the government, rather than just vote for a bunch of professionals to do the job for us.

Imagine the population could be encouraged to register in a government ballot to select members of parliament. If your number comes up, you must spend a fixed term as a member of parliament. The ballot would happen every year, and the proportion of those whose terms have completed would leave to be replaced by the new members. If the parliamentary term is for three years, then one third of the members leave every year. Parliamentarians would only ever server one term.

There'd be no election campaigns, parties or professional pollies. The ballot, being random, would ensure that the proportions of views and attitudes within the parliament would be proportional to the general population .... well, proportional to those who were willing to participate, that is. Having a fresh influx every year would make it difficult for 'parties' to form. Decisions wouldn't be made with the constant thought that the law makers need to be re-elected at some stage in the future. Every vote on the floor of the parliament would, in effect, be a conscience vote. The speaker would be an outsider, voted in or out by a two thirds majority of the parliament, and have the necessary powers to control the Parliament.

The downside, of course, is that the depth of experience in government would be low, creating the risk of poor decisions. As much as we hate the idea that current politicians always have their eyes on the opinion polls, it does keep them in check. Perhaps the whole thing would turn out to be an unworkable rabble. It is a figment of my warped imagination, after all!

Maybe a better solution is a hybrid government. The professionals in the lower house, and the senate being populated by members selected as described above. A proper house of review ........

Remember the title of the blog!

Any thoughts on the way the political process could be improved to increase the interest and participation of ordinary voter?

It's been an important 12 months for the Coalition of the willing. Howard, Bush and Blair, all up for re-election, in the face of having supposedly lied to their populaces, of having supposedly gone to war against the wishes of the majority, all three get re-elected comfortably.

Frankly, I'm amazed, disgusted and then again, not at all surprised. I want to say democracy is dead, if it ever existed; I want to say freedom is an illusion; i want to say that nothing will change if we don't stop whingeing and don't starting doing, that sitting around holding highbrow conversations and debating with our peers is useless, that the power is with the people, as it always has been, and that if nothing's being done to change them, to open their eyes, if we don't stop thinking about ourselves then we might as well be lying on our backs in the grass and spitting into the air; this is what I want to say, but what's the point when nobody's listening?

As quickly as I sort things out in my head the situation changes. Just as well I've strong toes. A busy five days in Taiwan-China relations:

First off the cap an official KMT Beijing agreement released by the heads of both governments, typical political fodder, but some encouraging language for progress such as:

"Cross-strait ties are now at a crucial point in historical development; the two sides should not fall into a vicious circle of confrontation but instead enter a virtuous circle of cooperation, seek together opportunities for the peaceful and steady development of cross-strait ties, trust and help each other, and create a new situation of peaceful win-win, so as to bring about brilliant and splendid prospects for the Chinese nation."

Okay, so it's a little pretty, but these words on paper were followed up quickly by both sides of the strait. The Taiwanese President, Chen Shui-bian, on Sunday urged the Chinese government to open talks with his administration, while the Taiwanese opposition leader is touring China. (and being treated like the head of state - Beijing's strategy has been to court opposition politicians). Then, yesterday, China began a series of goodwill gestures to Taiwan, including a couple of giant pandas and the lifting of a ban on tourists.

Encouraging stuff, slightly debunking my warmongering paranoia yesterday, oh well, maybe I can pick up some work as a reverse soothsayer.

Now most people will nod their heads at the statement 'history repeats itself', except perhaps Split Enz, and I must admit that at times I find this phenomenon fascinating (at others, such as federal elections, frustrating). I've been keeping half an eye on Japan and China since the textbook row and what interests me most is their relationship with India.

Japan, it seems, is a long term investor, with maritime interests in the area and naval maneuvers by India caused China a bit of concern. Then, recently, China and India signed a border deal regarding their Himalayan Border

This last point, especially, feels very European to me. I look at China's tension with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan, see them closing off old disputes in the western border and think that this is the motions of a country preparing for something. It reminds me of Hitler's non-aggression pact with Stalin. If push came to shove, I doubt China would be so stupid as to open two fronts.

There's been a lot in press lately about In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF). The government's threatened to limit the number of IVF cycles that will be funded through Medicare. You'd think that these measures would only be enacted because they save a lot of money. You'd be wrong .... the predicted savings are in the range of $7 - $15 million. When compared to a health budget running into the billions, it's nothing.

So why are they doing it? Perhaps the reason can be fathomed from a comment on a spray The Flute wrote on the same subject ...

Yes Mr. Flute, I am very uncomfortable with IVF being funded at all, let alone 3 cycles. The whole program of IVF is creepy and contemptuous of life. It is like a conveyor belt of humans, most of whom are consigned to the trash heap, or now tested upon at the whim of speculative scientists.

“The various techniques of artificial reproduction, which would seem to be at the service of life and which are frequently used with this intention, actually open the door to new threats against life. Apart from the fact that they are morally unacceptable, since they separate procreation from the fully human context of the conjugal act, 14 these techniques have a high rate of failure: not just failure in relation to fertilisation but with regard to the subsequent development of the embryo, which is exposed to the risk of death, generally within a very short space of time. Furthermore, the number of embryos produced is often greater than that needed for implantation in the woman’s womb, and these so-called “spare embryos� are then destroyed or used for research which, under the pretext of scientific or medical progress, in fact reduces human life to the level of simple “biological material� to be freely disposed of.�
Evangelium Vitae, Pope John Paul II, 1995.

The quote comes from the conservative, and I'm assuming Catholic, commentator Marcel White. His blog is titled 'Pro Life, Melbourne.'

Of course, Marcel is welcome to his opinion, but at age 20 (from his blog's bio), he better hope that when he eventually decides to have a family, everything works for him and Mrs White. There's a significant chance it won't. This is something I know a lot about.

My three children are the product of IVF. We reluctantly took this path because we couldn't conceive in the "fully human context of the conjugal act" to quote JP2's screed. The reasons why the natural way didn't work for us are unclear; any health problems we had in this area were minor and didn't prevent many other similarly effected couples from conceiving.

Thankfully, the procedure worked for us without having to go through many cycles that is all too common when playing IVF roulette. At the first try we produced twin girls. Seven years later, much to the surprise of the doctors, my son was born, a product of a frozen embryo conceived from our original egg collection.

How Marcel and his ilk figure that using science to help childless couples conceive is "creepy and contemptuous of life" is beyond me.

I suspect it's no coincidence that, as our Federal Health Minister comes from the conservative Catholic sphere, that this area of health funding is being targeted. First it was a move against the funding of abortions, now cuts to IVF procedures.

It's heartening to hear opposition to the move being voiced from within the government. It's hard to see the proposal going ahead under the current political climate.