Miss Saigon played over 4000 performances in London''s West End
Have you booked for Miss Saigon? This outstanding coproduction from Supa Productions and Phoenix Players promises to be the musical theatre event of the year.
Goddard & Howse Small World Journeys, one of the sponsors for the Canberra production of Miss Saigon, has offered one place on a 17-day tour of Vietnam as a prize for seeing the show. For more details visit www.miss-saigon-canberra.com
Miss Saigon closed in London’s West End after a staggering 4263 performances, and has been seen in many parts of the world.
Miss Saigon is a modern adaptation of Puccini’s opera Madame Butterfly and similarly tells the tragic tale of a doomed romance involving an Asian woman abandoned by her American lover. The setting is relocated to the 1970’s Saigon during the Vietnam War and Madame Butterfly’s American Lieutenant and Japanese geisha coupling is replaced by a romance between an American GI and a Vietnamese bar girl.
(See previous article in The Word Arts & Entertainment archives).
WHAT: MISS SAIGON
WHERE: ANU ARTS CENTRE
WHEN: 12TH – 28TH NOVEMBER 2009
TICKETS: 6257 1950 or at www.canberrarep.org.au
Dinner & Show package: Teatro Vivaldi on 6257 2718.
Jenna Roberts and Alexander Marks in Cat on a Hot Tin Roof at the Courtyard Studio
Review by Shanna Provost
If it’s a well-produced classic you’re after, pop along to Free Rain’s production of the Pulitzer-Prize winning Tennessee Williams classic Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.
Accomplished director Jordan Best has drawn a quality ensemble together as the Pollitt family, whose power struggles and dirty linen outdo any contemporary TV soap.
The entire cast is strong, but the standouts include Jenna Roberts – her frustrated but determined and manipulative Maggie (The Cat) is believable and her Southern drawl meticulous (if only a little rushed in some scenes) and Michelle Cooper who plays Mae, Maggie’s nemesis. The power struggle between the two characters is exhilarating.
Also great counterpoints are Liz Bradley’s larger than life Big Mama, who adds the light to this oft-shady drama and Tony Turner’s Big Daddy, the patriarch whose take on life and how it should be played is a wonderful reflection of the pre-feminist ‘fifties era.
One of the strongest scenes is between Big Daddy and his much loved son Brick, played by Alexander Marks.
Set in Mississippi, the dysfunctional Pollitt family is at times tiresome and at others intriguing, and although it is a long play, the tension and interest is held by the strong performances.
Although the supporting cast does a bit of standing around watching the action between the primary characters, Cameron Thomas, Wayne Shepherd and Darren Cullerne put in good performances when it is their turn.
Cathie Clelland’s set design is simple but effective, with the entire play taking place in Brick and Maggie’s bedroom (which is just as well because ‘not much else happens in there’).
Fiona Leach has done an excellent job with costume design, with a pair of ‘y-fronts’ taking centre stage with great effect. Heads up also to the stage crew for their continued behind the scenes commitment.
The great thing about Free Rain Theatre Company is its willingness to provide Canberra with good quality classic plays that everyone should see at least once in their lifetime – and they’ve certainly delivered with Cat on a Hot Tin Roof.
WHAT: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
WHERE: Courtyard Studio, Canberra Theatre
WHEN: till 14 November
TICKETS: $18 – $28
BOOKINGS: 62752700
There has been considerable national data and discourse about the minority role played in Australian management by Australian women. For example the influential “Industry Task Force on Leadership and Management Skills” chaired by David Karpin concluded in 1995 that while change in this area was occurring, it was at a snail’s pace. It is now more than a decade since the Task Force Report was first considered, especially in view of its many forward-looking and well-researched recommendations, which concerned itself primarily with the management issues of the then-private sector. However aspects of the commissioned research of the Task Force have continued to be relevant. For example Task Force research considered a vast array of women in management literature to establish if there were any major problem areas or deficits in performance of women managers compared to men and found “little evidence of substantial differences in terms of dominance, confidence or sense of security, or in terms of capacity to lead, influence or motivate, nor differences in humanitarian approach, understanding or capacity to reduce interpersonal friction” Industry Task Force on Leadership and Management Skills (1995: 1192). This finding suggested that gender is not a crucial issue in leadership, and that for women there was an issue of opportunity rather than performance, when comparing their role to men’s in management situations. The Task Force concluded that women were the major disadvantaged group within Australian management. The report and findings became highly influential in policy debates, and in feminist critiques of the status quo. Since the 1990s government policy concerning gender differences has been broadened to include most aspects of diversity in the work place.
Women in the Australian Public Service Today
The Public Service Act 1999 has a mandatory requirement that agency heads establish work diversity programs, one of the aims of which is to remove employment disadvantage based on gender. Outcomes for women are now impressive, and indicate the success women now have in fulfilling public service management roles – for example the percentage of employees who were women in 2008 approached 60%.
Public Service data also indicate that the proportional representation of men and women varies significantly at the agency level. For example, of agencies of more than 1000 ongoing employees, Bureau of Meteorology had the highest proportion of men (80.1%), followed by Defence (63.5%), Medicare Australia (80.3%) while Human Services (76.7%) had the highest proportion of women (State of the Service 2005-06: 87). Women are still under-represented at senior levels despite significant gains for women at the middle-and lower-levels of management in the Service. There is thus evidence that the scope of the employment of women could be widened, especially in some agencies.
Recent data also indicates that only 49.9% of women have a bachelor’s degree or higher, compared to 54% of men. This can mean that women need additional competency and mentoring arrangements if they are to compete effectively with men in the Service (State of the Service Report 2005-06: 90). The majority of employees now believe that gender is not a barrier in the workplace. The Australian Public Service is thus proving very attractive to women. On the other hand, women managers in the Australian Public Service are reported to be more likely to believe they had witnessed bullying or harassment in the workplace . This issue remains to be resolved.
There has also been a range of initiatives of great benefit to women (often the primary carers of children) adopted in the APS, and these have been designed to be broader and more equitable than satisfying womens needs. Agencies now provide an extensive range of family-friendly options for women and men in the Service. For example:
? Paid maternity leave
? Flexible working hours,
? Opportunities to work from home –available in many agencies and;
? Other less financially generous but available conditions of service including a minimum entitlement to 52 weeks of unpaid parental leave following birth or adoption of a child, one week unpaid paternity leave at the time of the birth of a child, and a maximum of three weeks unpaid leave for a couple when adopting.
? Some agencies have also initiated school holiday programs for their employees together with salary packaging of child care fees, and the provision of childcare centres for the children of staff.
? Job-sharing available in some agencies is still not widely used in the APS, and this possibility needs further development as it would permit carers (who are often women) more time to support family life and therefore resolve work and family conflicts of responsibility.
The Feminisation of the Australian Public Service
The Australian Public Service has achieved significant improvements in the role and participation of women in the Service as reported here:
“Although this is pleasing, agencies need to ensure that they make themselves attractive to a wide range of employees so that the APS can continue to be representative of the community it serves. In time this may mean that the APS may need to recruit more young men” (State of the Service Report 2005-06: 133).
There remains also the continuing challenge for APS policy-makers to develop diversity issues more fully in order to manage the Public Service in an effective and democratic manner, beyond earlier and now often-satisfied concerns of establishing and improving the role of women in public agencies. Many more women in the Service will need to foster and demonstrate outstanding management and leadership skills if their minority role in top management within the Service is to be a matter of the past. This could be achieved by more use of networking, and lobbying opportunities in agencies, by women, and effective use of mentoring, leadership and coaching opportunities both in the Service and also from private sources such as management consultancies available throughout Australia.
It now appears that given the history of encouraging diversity in the APS and the increased success this has meant for women that resourcing the initiative should now increasingly be focused on enhancing and affirming women in top management positions of the APS.
References
Australian Public Service Commission, State of the Service Report 2005-06, [on line] http://www.aspc.gov.au/stateoftheservice/0506/report.pdf [accessed 27 March 2007]
Australian Public Service Commission, State of the Service Report: At a Glance 2007-2008, [on line] stateoftheservice/0708/downloadshtm [accessed 26 August 2009]
Industry Task Force on Leadership and Management Skills 1995, Enterprising Nation, AGPS, Canberra
Service Pensions as identified in World Bank research
There are separate pension schemes for public sector workers (as in the case of Australian Government civil servants and the military) in about half of the world’s countries, including some of the largest developing economies, such as Brazil, China and India. In the higher income OECD countries, spending on pensions for public sector workers makes up one quarter of total pension spending on pensions. In less developed countries, this proportion is usually higher. Yet very little has been written on the design and reform of civil-service pension plans, especially when compared with the voluminous literature on national pension programs (such as that for private sector employees” (Palaceios and Whitehouse 2006, p2).
The rationale of pension funds for the public sector
Civil servants and the military have proved powerful in protecting their interests and consequently many governments (including in Australia) have attempted to remedy the shortcomings of the political process through the promotion of the independence of public servants by:
· Making a career in public service attractive
· Shifting cost of remunerating public servants into the future; and
· Retiring older public servants in a politically and socially acceptable way (Palacios and Whitehouse 2006, p7)
World Bank (2006) data finds that the vast majority of civilian and military service pension schemes throughout the world (and this would include Australia) are consequently of the defined-benefit type and also that the main pension age for men in the civil service and military is 58.6 years of age. Eligibility to receive a pension is usually determined by length of service but this situation could be changing for equity reasons (Palacious and Whitehouse 2006, p17).
In OECD countries indexation of pensions in the public sector (to adjust pensions in due to fluctuations due to fluctuations in the cost of living) tends to be more favourable in the civil service and military schemes than those applied in the private sector. The method chosen for adjustment of civilian and military pensions in the case of OECD countries is usually based on prices. Actual rates for adjustment purposes are on average more than twenty percent lower for private sector workers (Palacios and Whitehouse 2006, pp 17-20). This is of course of immense political and public importance for any community and often overlooked.
Civilian and military pensions are known to have a heavy government financed component, but many of these delivered benefit schemes are funded on a pay as you go or adhoc basis. For example World Bank data of 2006 found that less than one in four public sector pension plans in OECD countries had accumulated any reserves (Palacios and Whitehouse 2006, p 20). Consequently the determination of unfunded liabilities for public sector pensions has become the focus of much controversy and investigation by governments.
There are other areas where public sector pension policy needs urgent attention. It is widely recognised, for example, that given the experience of many countries, present pension systems penalize mobile workers. This is first through the vesting periods. People who leave the civil service before their pension rights are vested (such as women prematurely leaving the workforce for family reasons) often receive nothing from the system. The minimum length of service for a pension benefit, as shown in World Bank data of 2006 for a range of countries, varied enormously from one year or less to twenty-five years (Palacious and Whitehouse 2006, p43). For some countries the portability of pensions from one level of government to another remains to be corrected but this was attended to in the 1970s in Australia.
Commonwealth superannuation
Arrangements were first in 1922 when the Melbourne based Superannuation Board was created which pioneered the first superannuation scheme for government employees. In 1930 the Board moved to Canberra and it changed its name to the Superannuation Board. Due to the emergency of the depression there was much drama and controversy surrounding entitlements. For example pensions were reduced by 20% and the Provident Account scheme was introduced for returned soldiers and public servants who could not meet medical standards. In 1948 the Defence Force Retirement was introduced for the military. The scheme was transferred to the Superannuation Board in 1959. In 1973 the Superannuation Board was renamed the Australian Government Retirement Benefits Office (Comsuper, 2007).
In 1976 the Commonwealth Superannuation Scheme (CSS) was established. In 1990 the Australian Government Retirement Benefits Office shortened its name to the Retirement Benefits Office and at that time the Public Sector Superannuation (PSS) was introduced (Comsuper, 2007). The Superannuation Act 1990 led to the closure of CSS, the opening of PSS to new members and the tightening of invalidity provisions of both PSS and CSS. In addition all new members were required to join PSS, and existing CSS members could choose either the CSS or PSS. In 1991 the Military Superannuation and Benefits Act was established to introduce the Military Superannuation and benefits scheme and the DFRB scheme (the earlier superannuation program for the military) was closed (Comsuper, 2007). In 1994 the Retirement Benefits Office changed its name to Commonwealth Superannuation (ComSuper). ComSuper then administered complex benefit provisions for nine Public Service and Australian Defence superannuation Schemes. In 1994 it is estimated that there were 135 benefit options in the CSS and PSS alone (ComSuper, 2007).
In more recent years superannuation benefits military employees are administered under the banner of the Australian Reward Investment alliance (ARIA). In 2005 the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme Accumulation Scheme, and membership of the PSS was also closed, (membership to CSS having closed earlier). This scheme is an accumulation fund only, based on private sector models, which are successful in a high-risk environment. The scheme also provides opportunities to purchase death, disability cover, and income protection, for example.
Two current issues
Australian authorities have overlooked the possibility of advancing cheap home loans based on eligible members superannuation funds. This proposition has not been given significant time for debate in federal parliament or the media. There is therefore a significant moral and policy deficit in this area that should be rectified.
The resultant lumps sum for a retiree from the Public Sector Superannuation Scheme is reliant on good returns from investment of the funds accumulated – an area of success dependent on risk management and leadership skills possibly beyond most eligible members and fund managers especially in today’s circumstances. The scheme needs much closure scrutiny and monitoring if its effectiveness is to be achieved and any changes found necessary.
The method relied on by the Australian Government to adjust CSS, PSS and military pensions has principally been the prices based CPI index produced by the Australian Bureau of Statistics as required by legislation to determine entitlements after review every six months. This has been found less than adequate by many commentators – especially the principle lobbyist organisation for Australian Government employees – the Superannuated Commonwealth Officers Association.
For example 2006 data clearly demonstrated that the average civilian/military superannuation pension was only $20, 649 pa (importantly SCOA advises the family unit concerned was usually only one pension beneficiary). The 2006 data also showed that if a civilian or military pensioner had commenced on a pension of $20,000 after twenty years, using the current CPI method the resulting pension was $7000 pa less than if it were indexed using a wage based index as used for the age pension. This is a clear case of inequity and social justice concern. In addition SCOA have clear trend data that age and other pensions have grown by nearly 100% from 1990 and 2007 but Commonwealth superannuation pensions have grown by only 60% in the same period – clearly an unacceptable outcome.
Consequently it also appears to be appropriate that the Australian authorities, remedy clearly unsatisfactory equity and social justice concerns (stemming clearly from the data and therefore adjust CSS and PSS and military entitlements choosing (a) the well proven method of adjustments to the old age pension using (male consumption patterns) to estimate CPI changes (as administered by Centrelink) or by choosing the changes to male average weekly earnings whichever is greater.
There is clear professional interview and survey data collected by SCOA over many years supportive of male based adjustments, stemming from the problems women experience in seeking advancement to higher salaries, and in their need to support family life by leaving the workforce, which has the consequence of very low salaries, with the pension entitlements thus being considerably less than male counterparts.
These particular controversies still remain to be addressed by Australia.
References
ARIA 2007, PSSap, ‘Your Quick Guide to the PPSap’ [on line] http://www..PSSap.gov.au/ [accessed 23 October 2007].
Comsuper 2007 ‘A History of Commonwealth Superannuation, [on line] http:// www.comsuper.gov.au/pages/about/history.htm [accessed October 23 2007].
Palacios R and Whitehouse E 2006, Service Pension Schemes Around the World, Social Protection- The World Bank, May.
SCOA 2006. Key Facts about Your Superannuation, newsletter available from SCOA in Canberra, 1 May.
(Dr Annette Barbetti of the Superannuated Commonwealth Officers Association assisted the preparation of this article she is a distinguished and former senior staff member of the Australian Bureau of Statistics.)
The possibility of genuine peace and better understanding of all nations have been a pursuit of the world for generations often without success. Famous idealist, soldiers and statesman have tried hard but the problems of exception management and leadership in so many tragic situations encountered so often — as for example in Northern Ireland until recent years, the conflict in Spain of the Basque separatists, the racial wars we know of in the case of the disintegration of Yugoslavia, the tragedy of the Vietnam war and so many other well known in the countries of the blue diamond in Africa and indeed the release from apartheid of the people of South Africa. There is also the terrible test to major powers and the human race in the struggle for identity and freedom in the Middle East, so well known to Australian military even in the case of Afghanistan, Indonesia and the small micro states more familiar to Australians in the South Pacific.
The use of force
The Australian forces and indeed those of the main powers including associate countries such as Canada and New Zealand, the UK and the major democratic power the US, have been give terms of engagement to use force of arms to resolve conflict (when first implelemented pretty well indefinitely) but little attention has yet been paid to develop an appropriate strategy of peace which indeed which we should not loose sight of in Australia as it is an important democracy. There has been too much emphasis on containment only rather than understanding and rapport with the various aspects of diversity and change and so familiar in the Australian case but often too great a hurdle for the inexperienced or volatile areas of the underdeveloped countries particularly of Africa and the Middle East.
The lack of Australian power but not leadership skills.
Australia simply does not have the capacity or power of the European States, America and a great society such as China. So some of the prospects for change we can offer to others are limited but nevertheless we have gifts as a federal (a diverse) society that should be celebrated and explained to countries that need to change from violence.
Australians are best equipped therefore to help such societies to understand the benefits of resolving conflict primarily through the electoral process and indeed without violence or sabotage of each other – pointing out there has never been a civil war in Australia-and that the Australian forces in this country do not play a political role — this would be a significant change in many conflict ridden countries because the national standing Army for example or indeed guerrilla groups has been the main channel relied on by many vulnerable societies to develop leaders — but Australians can demonstrate such reliance to develop leaders is mistaken and counter productive-our leadership programs ( found in commerce, government, the forces and the trade unions) offer many more chances and encourage diversity and therefore provide the right approach to the functioning of a robust public domain and the wider nature of democratic government — which should be the expectation for all men and women, making possible through living in harmony but in open competition of ideas and leadership skills to secure solutions — particularly in the big picture areas critical to national leadership and also where necessary — to support other societies but this should be only of a temporary nature as armed occupation as undertaken in the Middle East-should only be a temporary means to secure order so peace can follow.
What should be done?
If the implementation of military force looses context i.e. peaceful government then is unattainable, military intervention should be strongly criticised on moral and humanitarian grounds— this now seems to have occurred in many critical aspects of the violence in the Middle East. Many nations need to benefit from a reality check that reconciles the ideals of personal conscience and tolerance (internal peace) and military control — usually through martial law (the big fist) until democratic government can thrive where there was once a battlefield.
This indeed has already happened in the case of South Africa so it is achievable but it needs courage by Government to bring men at arms and civilians, back from the brink, so the immediate questions are one of governance and not loss of life and injustice. A world based series of meetings and initiatives is needed to bring forward the context for peace especially in the Middle East — too many young soldiers for example have died to justify unquestioning commitment to militarism and any misunderstanding particularly of the world’s important religious faiths and the wonderful diversity of the many races. The possibilities for peace need much more exploration and implementation in the decision-making processes of world leaders.
The constitutional crisis in Australia in 1975 has been one of the most written and talked about events in Australian modern history. Many observations have therefore been made to gather the facts of the circumstances and collect the understanding of participants and observers because of the significance in national politics but also because of the precedent like circumstances which could be replicated also in Australian state and territory political situations in cases where an upper house continues to revise policy, legislation and the like.
Prime Minister Whitlam (now an elder statesman) came to power in 1972. His government was innovative very often and tested the then boundaries of a pathway forward. For example the Whitlam government introduced modern no fault legislation making possible divorce when a relationship had broken down. This policy placed responsibility on the judgement of those in a marriage to make their own minds up about the future without having to resort to criteria and evidence that was too tough or exploitive by solicitors or private investigators usually at a very high cost financially. When the enabling legislation for this policy was introduced the reaction of many well intended but opposing approaches in the minds of parliamentarians was so strong that the controversy surrounding the innovation would prevail for quite some years way beyond the Whitlam government.
The Whitlam government innovated in many other areas of significant policy in the 1970s for which so many now are thankful. The provision of funding for states and territories by PM Whitlam meant the timetable for the provision of sewerage services to most in the big cities and towns were a milestone change in policy for Australians. Also the work of PM Whitlam in the creative arts and communications areas- art and media such as films and the dramatic arts were all considered break throughs that no other PM would support because they lacked capacity to make an appropriate judgement or simply lacked the daring to give Australia a way forward to lead these sectors from the doldrums where they did not belong. PM Whitlam also led a funding process to revolutionise the provision of child care (long day care with services of nurses for the very young and teachers for those preparing for kindergarten) and the expansion of preschools so all infants and the young preparing for primary school were catered for.
There were many other innovations at the political level. The debates and conflict of opinions in parliament and within PM Whitlam’s party led to rivalries and disputes, which were difficult for the PM Whitlam to manage. In the cases of some observers and many politicians threats of a challenge arose because of internal confrontations in the governing party or opponents in the parliament from other political organisations. For example the development of the modern Australian Post Office and the Whitlam decision to organise the Australian forces in a democratic but unified command basis because these policies met the criteria of many technical and top political observers led to political pressures because of the PM Whitlam’s break or break through approach to not waste a moment to get the job done for Australia. These progressive factors were often the background to review and often hostility of the Australian Senate in the early 70s-for example PM Whitlam won another election in 1974 to reinforce his role but the outcome politically in the Senate was not crucial to the survival of the PM Whitlam government in 1975. Until 1975 the convention that an upper house reviewed policy and did not reject money bills (the budget) was not under threat but all this altered in 1975 because of very strong opposition by the Queensland Premier Mr Petersen who broke an aspect of the convention concerning the senate by nominating a senator from Queensland who was not an Australia Labor Party member when a colleague of Mr Whitlam in the senate passed away (as far as I can recall given the circumstances were so many years ago). This appointment and the politics at the time (which included the sacking of other colleagues of PM Whitlam) made possible the rejection of the budget in 1975 leading to the situation where government could not continue and so an election was forced with the support of the Governor General (President) of Australia with a negative outcome for the Whitlam government. PM Whitlam lost office.
The 1970s are a long time ago but personal circumstances also played a part because of as you may be aware of my novice involvement in an unexpected dilemma because of internal politics within the then Sydney branch of the Federal Department of Education in 1973 and 1974. These events followed PM Whitlam’s confrontation after a political meeting at Parramatta (western Sydney) which led to many misunderstandings on my part about how to bring about the then dream of modern child care and preschool policies for the community. PM Whitlam was a fierce opponent of nonsense, having a go at my judgement as though he was offering a bribe. I was completely out of my depth of course. Also the situation in the office-which needed major changes-was not helped by me claiming to have the right answers and brave claims of infallibility which did not hold up to scrutiny. The leader of the opposition offered me no sympathy and pressurised the situation in any way desirable for his party but not my privacy. He was very hostile about my request to be left out of things because national politics of this nature was not my cup of tea. Other politicians including Mr Doug Anthony the head of the County Party (now the National Party) let me know they would not let me down. Overseas supporters surprisingly came from the United States-looked just like Mr Carter-but the events were a long time ago. The Americans made it clear that everyone has their day and therefore the claims by the leader of the opposition Mr Fraser for an immediate enquiry and that PM Whitlam should stand down were similarly regarded by me as right over the top. Fraser insisted dire consequences were to follow and that myself and the Whitlam government better accept this but this was not necessarily supported by the Americans-keep in mind please that it was a long time ago and my clarification may not be so pure but I am attempting to inform the reader of what took place.
The environment in the agency in Sydney was so jaded that it would not settle down-at least not settle down with me being there-so I received a minor promotion to work in Canberra where I have spent the majority of my work and political experience which of course continues. I am very thankful despite the continuing nature of personal responsibility that I was able to leave for what was for me one of the worst workplaces I have ever taken part with.
When arriving in Canberra I was free of all this pressure and nonsense but not Mr Whitlam. The conflict between Fraser and Whitlam had not improved it was worse (as we know) than ever. Fraser was busy feathering his own nest and seeking a way to be condemnatory of the Whitlam period and my experiences in Sydney. Mr Whitlam endeavoured to be personally supportive of me getting back on my feet and to function effectively the way I then felt qualified as a mature public servant which is all I felt able to do.
Some wonderful things did happen. I took part in the final negotiations to end the Vietnam War with the Governor General (President) being the chair and US and Russian leaders also taking part, and when approached also helped decide the day for the famous double dissolution-remembrance day-because that day more than any others reminds us to make the right call for democracy to take shape and all benefit. The Governor General and the PM Whitlam made it clear they were very personally supportive but I would have a lot to face up to and better develop my leadership skills to solve what would be imposed and most likely to take place because in a similar situation most would do what was best only for them-in effect the highest bidder-an not act nobly in the circumstances.
When Mr Fraser approached me or indeed Mr Whitlam or the Governor General-as far as I was ever aware-but keep in mind the squabbles were enormous and my memory scrambled at the time and still is. Fraser acted in too aggressive fashion but made clear he was not going to tolerate even as childish what had happened in Parramatta and would follow up even if it meant an unexpected poll-because Labor simply could not put its house in order and this was obvious to his immediate and long term advantage.
When PM Whitlam and the Governor General-spoke to me-obviously suffered from the blues-they tried to give friendly warnings of what might happen. I am not a lawyer nor do I have perfect memory or judgment. For example distinguishing what took place in Sydney in the 70s is an egg I cannot successfully unscramble. However when the Queen and her husband visited Sydney to open the Opera house-at least I think it was at that time but cannot be sure-the head of State-the Queen – signed legal documents-taking the pressure off me-so media coverage of all this sad and over the top event in Sydney need not go to air. Fraser detested this approach.
Pressure like this was not renewed until the dismissal period evolved. On winning public office Fraser renewed the pressure and put all participants including VIPs such as the Governor General and the Head of State on notice to account for them. As you can imagine Stephen Kendal was very scared about what was being attempted and that Fraser lacked the capacity of a balanced call about an event, which should be forgotten about. This additional pressure on the Whitlam government contributed to break and break through mentality when bringing forward policy, as the sands of politics seemed uncontrollable. At this point I became a fun organiser of the Australian American Association and found many friends there as well as a sympathetic Ambassador who genuinely liked me. But as they say everyman has his day. Life is like that.
Fraser kept the pressure up-in my opinion-as if a war was necessary-to repudiate PM Whitlam and those who made possible taking the events in Sydney away from the media for immediate community understanding. The atmosphere at that time was unpleasant. Unpleasant enough to be fearful of being repudiated publicly rather than being given understanding and liberty from nonsense. Consequently as time passed and only when necessary-it was decided to have a full blown-confrontation-about the constitution-especially the constitution oath. So something unusual but supportive of the constitution and those responsible for how it works was devised-to take place blow by blow-much needed-was devised to take place in Saint Christopher’s Cathedral-a catholic place of worship.
Admittedly this was an unusual approach-but clearly justified when Fraser announced-in the place of worship-a royal commission to investigate and recommend the process of justice-he thought required-concerning those who had been supportive of me ducking the issues in Sydney-including the head of state-who had only acted conscientiously. He went right over the top and stating the British High Commission must close and that diplomatic relations severed. I simply could not believe my ears when this all happened All of these things I considered absolute nonsense.
The US and Russia (Carter and Brezhnev were supportive). For example at a highlight of what was said by Fraser-that the Queen must stand aside and be investigated for her role-all commonwealth nations spoke directly to me ridiculing what was said. Mr Carter also made clear that nonsense such as stand down of the head of state and Fraser’s desire of a referendum then to establish a republic was way over the top. Carter made clear that what was done was far from enlightened and would be disruptive of the fundamentals of peace and disarmament throughout the world. Premier Brezhnev endorsed the approach completely. Mr Gordon Brown of the UK was present personally and opposed vigorously what Fraser intended. Leading the process of discussion from the view point of the soverign.
The catholic church-from its stand point-offered the diplomatic and sacred public exposure of the Christian Eucharist-as a sign of trust-common understanding and enlightenment of those seeking a settlement to what had transpired. No one doubts the sincerity or strength of commitment made. For example while speaking to all assembled Carter called the participants of the war between Egypt, Palestine and Israel to put down their arms and in referring to the events in Australia was able to arrange a cease fire voluntarily imposed by each of the parties. The drama of Carter’s intervention was fundamental to acknowledgement of him as a world leader leading to recognition later for a Nobel Peace prize.
For these reasons I believe a different interpretation of the dismissal being brought about by America for its own purposes seems quite misjudged but being then inexperienced and a baby was not part of any wind up talks with the US hierarchy. What followed in Saint Christopher’s is contrary to any stereotyped interpretation. It is often now claimed that the Liberals felt so let down that that in some numbers at least they are hostile and critical of the US role in Canberra.
Rumoured to be India’s most expensive film at between $18 and $25 million, ‘Blue’ has a weak storyline, but makes up for it with some strong action and chase sequences and marine splendour. However, the lavish canvas with sweeping backdrops were inadequately utilised for maximum effect.
Said to be Bollywood’s first underwater thriller, it sees three treasure hunters who not only grapple with sharks, but also their own conscience with most of the drama emanating from the unpredictable friendship between fisherman Aarav (Akshay Kumar), his employee Sagar (Sanjay Dutt) and his brother Sam (Zayed Khan).
Dolphins just loved swimming with the gorgeous leading lady Mona (Lara Dutta, former Miss Universe). There’s also a cameo appearance by the glamorous Katrina Kaif.
While the picture postcard Bahamas is inviting, there are obvious shades of ‘Jaws’ and ‘The Deep’, but the treasure hunt should have been more perilous, the sharks could have been meaner and the danger more palpable instead of a tame ending.
First-time director Anthony D’Souza had an ambitious project, but he got so involved with orchestrating the big-name stars, the equally big sharks and the awesome scenery that he forgot to focus on the basic need for a noteworthy script.
Nevertheless, Pete Zuccarini (‘Pirates of the Caribbean’) has done some amazing cinematography in Bangkok and the Bahamas with eye-catching action above sea level, some stunning biker mayhem, on top of trains, alleyways and countryside.
The music score and design by India’s two Oscar winners – A.R. Rahman and Resul Pookutty – is nothing out of the ordinary.
Out on DVD as well, this film has to be seen on the big screen for major impact.
All that money and talent has gone to waste: instead of a thundering climax, there was a soft whimper. Perhaps, a sequel is on the way?
Media standards for countries boasting of democracy need scrutiny and development on a regular basis. The standards which are appropriate should not be taken for granted because the expected outcome of high standards is freedom of discussion and interpretation throughout the community and in the case of more important events other countries or even worldwide. Freedom of this nature ensures transparency and accountability and is a fundamental requirement if human rights are to be safe in each of the world’s communities. Its unrealistic to believe that without such fundamental rights that individual liberty would result in a mature and sustainable form.
Political and moral progress without freedom of discussion and freedom of information is too restricted without media standards that make it possible for the advantages of democracy to be widespread. This does not mean that freedom of information is always required in an absolute sense because there are privacy concerns protected that modern legalisation makes possible for a variety of reasons to protect without unnecessary disclosure personal details such as individual and family names, or personal information which should be restricted such as addresses and contact details so long as the individuals and families believe would fairly need and prescribed to make this possible. However this can mean when access is granted to materials such a public records many individual words and paragraphs and possibly pages are not given to enquirers to protect individuals who are or have been in authority, as well as restrictions stemming from secrecy provisions (such as military or other intelligence concerns) for very long periods.
The sensitivity and secrecy often surrounding milestone events of importance therefore means that introduction of public discussion which might otherwise be expected in parliament and the media suffers significantly or prevents introduction of resulting restricted material for use in debate or by journalists because information needed to be effective in these ways to challenge or determine outcomes readily therefore is to restricted or not possible. The secrecy and sensitivity even if known off the record of a key issue may scare off or in effect prevent opinion makers and law makers for developing appropriate questions of sufficient warrant, accuracy and sufficient time to resolve an issue and defend the community who are due better service and proper accountability when such matters are apparent and require action to sort out the facts and remedies appropriate for the community.
The purpose of parliament and public accountability therefore can suffer greatly as milestone events which need debate and scrutiny cannot be independently scrutinised because of red tape (often of a temporary but sometimes long term nature) prevents the introduction and maintenance of a public agenda which means the working of democracy is effective or ideally superior and timely for individual communities, other countries and the world. If you have attempted to introduce new issues to parliament or the media you no doubt would have been surprised also of the barriers imposed by red tape and associated legislation which has the effect of raising the risk profile which would stem from an individual seeking to lead discussion of new issues
because the restrictions prevent knowledge of what might best be possible if a balanced call is made or indeed what this maybe without having all the facts.
Restrictions concerning older issues can also make it difficult or not possible to lead discussion referring accurately to past positions (especially if not resolved) or be able to seek supportive advice when appealing or otherwise seeking correction to a decision- this can mean that the restrictions prevent compensation because of the catch 22 nature of restrictions of information believed too sensitive but essential for accountability especially in cases where compensation is expected for an incorrect decision or unjust decision which needs correction. In these circumstances without better knowledge the restrictions have been imposed most likely to make less likely new decisions, which would open doors to further discussion and complaint even if this might be justified if the restrictions did not apply.
Freedom of access to information in the ideal world should not be an aspect of regulation, which is too restrictive, or intended or otherwise detrimental to liberty, which is the foundations stone of democracy, and transparency required for the public and related domains.
The boast about government in Australia is that it is one of the significant democracies and consequently freedom of information to enable freedom of discussion and association are the fundamentals believed necessary and of the greatest importance to protect and maintain individual liberty especially freedom of conscience.
However in practice there are many breeches of these ideals in Australia and other democracies because disclosure of controversial information for example in the case of military or political intelligence may disrupt the environment where the military for example are engaged in daily conflict (as say in the case of Afghanistan) and compromise the reputation and safety of soldiers or others in the field such as police or other investigators. Disclosure in controversial circumstances can lead to public disorder (as in the case for example of race riots) threatening public safety when disclosure of sensitive information has not been provided through planned news feeds making possible disclosure of a controversy without community peace and order being disrupted. Controversies of this nature need to be introduced in the public domain only after careful planning so the effects are not disruptive and counterproductive.
Consequently the media-press, television and film-are expected to be empowered to report events and when controversies occur ensure fair reporting to the community about issues raised in the political arena to make possible the disclosure of the facts and the discussion needed to find solution to current and past controversies. However the realities are that if the issues are too sensitive because of their dramatic nature, or their disclosure may unfairly highlight individuals or groups responsible-the media my be too wary of introducing the circumstances for public dialogue using evidence that might be suggestive of poor leadership or even wrong doing because making the circumstances available may prejudice the outcome of judicial, jury or widespread public opinion and not therefore determine fairly the circumstances and any penalty which should apply by an appropriate fair process.
Public controversies are generally the responsibility of parliament to disclose and resolve. However the introduction of material for the public domain can suffer from significant lead times because the uniqueness of the issues and circumstances can mean conflicting interests within the party system responsible for day to day events in parliament. Party policy may have to be abandoned or severely criticised because new evidence places great pressure on members of parliament and consequently many members of parliament and the executive may be unwilling to be confrontational in public even at question time or when reviews of policy are undertaken in the upper house (the Senate in the case of the Australian federal parliament). Problems of this nature often spill over from parliament into the media which stands back from such circumstances because to act prematurely would endanger their standing in the community if later found to be premature or could lead to a break down in trust with parliamentary leaders (often Ministers) whose news feeds and relations make possible for clients access to the leaders to resolve individual issues of media clients such as industry organisations, companies of all sorts or prominent citizens. Circumstances of this nature occur frequently when a party conference has resolved new policy for the executive but the executive believing its judgement of the political situation means the policy should be modified, or not undertaken does not implement what has been decided.
Also interviewers and journalists responsible for reporting and discussing current events due to these restrictions therefore often have the inside running of public affairs before the problems concerned can be fixed. This gives the media the ability to be choosy as to who is given prominence as a leader or spokesperson. This ability to be selective can work positively with a Minister or other spokesperson to ensure a balanced account of what has to be revealed and the solution required to fix the problem concerned. However it can mean that interviews and other disclosures proceed on a mate’s only selective basis so a story can go to air but without all the sensitivities intrinsic to the problem being given much prominence in an attempt to lead the discussion successively so as not to overwhelm an individual spokesperson. It could also be that that some interviews because of problems of these nature-have questions agreed to before the spokesperson appears on the media concerned. This effort to work cooperatively can mean that the public interest suffers unless there are significant spills in parliament due to a controversy or staff roles in a media organisation are under fire and these are reallocated or indeed individuals dispensed with because the circumstances was insufficiently at arms length to be fair and mature.
These problems are not unique to Australia. They can be found in most contexts of government and media throughout the world. It is disappointing that the relationship between parliament and the media can be so imperfect that the ideals of freedom of discussion and personal interpretation and freedom of association can suffer significantly when the flaws which have been discussed here mean correction is too slow so that the lead time for making changes to the public agenda in parliament suffers greatly or indeed means change is not possible unless rebels in the parliament and media can find common ground and correct the circumstances.
The Marx Brothers movies were great fun and a sensation due to political issues prior to the onset of world war two. If you would like to make suggestions, join the team, be a sponsor or provide donations or goods in kind to support what should be a sell out event then please call – Stephen Kendal of Kingston ACT 0262910764 or mobile 0406377047.
W e need some expertise to plan, select a venue, do some background research on each of the shows, develop technical support to show the films on screen, plan a promotional time table and manage all expenses such as those of distributors for copy right or other intellectual or property rights which need to be paid so what is done is not just enjoyable but viable financially.
If what we get together proves the right way to go there may be scope to negotiate the festival for audiences in other locations-even interstate. Export to New Zealand may be a goer too but of course that is ambitious at this stage.
Freedom of discussion and access to government files and papers are amongst the foundation stones of democracies around the globe. However it is recognised widely that managed news through news feeds intended to assist public safety as when matters of great conflict are made clear is justified on balance so long as the facts are released at a later date when the community is cool and better able to apprehend the nature of the risks stemming from a particular concern. An example of this type of intervention is the use of censorship to steady the political climate back home when members of the forces for are engaged in high-level conflict with enemy forces. The legislature and the national press generally cooperate with the authorities so the staff of the armed forces and the public in general so such military campaigns can proceed without storms in the public domain and within the forces staff engaged in battle. Often due to the controversies of such news full details are not made available for many years to assist the peace process especially of importance in the case of fledgling democracies.
In the case of personal information much modern legislation makes it very difficult to reveal details such as a persons name and personal details such as staff reports, details of a personal nature such as family history and details including family trees. Transparency of this nature should be respected but details such as criminal charges and convictions are a controversial matter. The controversy associated with withholding such police records is sometimes justified when an individual needs a fresh start and needs secrecy of this kind to get a fair go from the public. However criminal charges associated with sexual crimes in Australia and some other countries are required to be notified to the public because of the need to protect children and other people. There are also other examples, which should be considered. For example the details of the natural parents of an adopted child are highly personal information and consequently there is often strongly opposed positions when considering transparency of this nature. Identifying the natural parents for an adoptee could well be the straw that broke the camels back and an unnecessary pressure given the difficulties often faced by those in this situation.
The ideal of absolute transparency in the public domain although often lauded has never been totally achieved. Human beings for example in public administration and those of public affairs are only human beings. This means that due to the sometimes-risky nature and uncertainty faced when making decisions, the performance of managers and legislators is assessed using standards that are unfairly too high to identify present and future performance. Another example also is the dilemma sometimes of personal histories, which could undermine a current success story despite the fact that an individual or firm had put the past behind them. In such circumstances there is not a balanced call about the qualities and performance of an individual or organisation concerned.
However there are exceptions to this generalisation. For example recently through the Internet I was able to locate a copy of the telephone directory of the US State Department. Such a document can be extremely helpful and assist enquirers to direct there questions pertaining to an individual country or region. The phone directory gave no names but extension numbers and virtually no explanation of the function and responsibility of each desk officer. Using that particular document was very unhelpful and the phone book then largely redundant. However when I recently approached the CIA offices in Washington I found very little help to direct a query except through what appeared to be a generic email address-one of several- that could have meant I would have received no reply but luckily I did. These examples of government failure to maintain a highly idealised form of openness may suffice most situations but what of an out of the blue disaster when communication to important areas of the US government is needed. However people in glasshouses should be careful as these examples of restrictions of information because of poor management or insincere commitment to open government also take place in Australia. Also web design and capacities are changed regularly in the case of major public and private organisations around the world so the circumstances identified such as discussed above are often only temporary in nature.
New issues of the regulation of the Internet have arisen and society is only just getting together great ideas to protect this technology. For example parental screening of sites for the benefit of children has been made possible through the use of settings and filters to prevent access to dangerous sites operating outside the law. Sharing wireless services to have access to the internet is also an area of concern as others may be able to listen in with the result all privacy has been lost and important confidential information made available to unauthorised people. A similar approach is used by some governments to preclude some satellite and cable television services into their countries by intervening directly through legislation to prevent extensive foreign competition to locals and also report of what is regarded as unsatisfactory political news.
Freedom of speech is a fundamental freedom but arranging time on a radio station, or debate in a legislature is often way beyond individuals with strongly justified complaints. It is sadly true that when a particular event has been gross, regulators and the media are reluctant to report it believing time will heal all wounds, because it’s a fact of life no one is perfect and some very imperfect and consequently the past is best put aside to rescue the situation. Such dangerous situations occur even in the policing responsibilities of the government because it becomes believed ideal procedures must be abandoned for the sake of the good of all. Absolute freedom to information through the media (including documents) has never been observed fully but the danger of ignoring review and change in this area when needed to support freedom and integrity if access to information is prevented. For example over regulated media and access to documents was an unfortunate feature of the apartheid era in South Africa. In this instance, which is very typical of over regulation, human rights suffered massively by a consistent hardline approach to make democracy in South Africa impossibility. We must all learn from that lesson.
Individuals when identifying poor ethical and performance issues are often attacked and can in some countries suffer imprisonment even if their criticism is based on accurate information and is a balanced call. Victimisation can occur directly to the person identifying the issues concerned to make others account for what has been done. Some countries have adopted (as in the case of Australia) protective legislation for whistle blowing of this kind. However although support like this is welcomed but the political process is far from perfect when wrong doing is made clear and consequently protection on offer to whistleblowers may be insufficient. Whistleblowers may be intending to help the rest of us but when altering the reputation of others but the price can be too high when those vulnerable to the criticism facedown their opponent.
Consequently discussion in Australia in the past few years has been focussing on the possibility of a human rights scheme at the national and state and territory levels to protect basic freedoms such as public discussion and access to public information as there is no equivalent for most jurisdictions through a charter concerning human rights but this situation looks likely to change because of the strong need observed to protect integrity in the public domain as well acknowledge the human rights especially of those facing down wrong doing and poor performance.
Julie and Julia: This adaptation of two best-selling memoirs is an engaging, though overly long, glimpse into the fairly ordinary existence of two women and how their lives changed as a result of their love for food.
Even though the two stories are separated by five decades, the narratives are well intertwined for easy grasp of the plot.
The two lead players – Meryl Streep and Amy Adams – have worked together in ‘Doubt’.
In this film, as the legendary TV chef Julia Child, Meryl Streep is impeccable with her accent and mannerisms. Stanley Tucci is a good choice as her doting diplomat husband.
In the role of Julie Powell, Amy Adams lacks conviction. Instead, she lets her married life be dominated with her obsession.
While Julia was looking for a career, Julie feels creatively stifled and is talked into starting a blog by her husband (Chris Messina). However, she appears restricted when it comes to documenting the trials and tribulations involving the 524 recipes in 52 weeks from Child’s ‘Mastering the Art of French Cooking’ . Perhaps, that’s due to the tiny confines of the apartment kitchen.
On the other hand, Streep appears to get the best scenes and lines. Contemporary New York backdrops are fine, but Julia in Paris are marvellous.
Good support also comes from Jane Lynch as Child’s sister and Linda Emond as the cookbook collaborator.
Writer-director Nora Ephron’s adaptation of – Powell’s ‘Julie & Julia’and Child’s ‘My Life in France’ – make for a delightful film.
Since both the women were happily married, the successful recipe must lie with combining marriage and food.
''The Jersey Boys'' is playing at the Princess Theatre in Melbourne.
The fabulous Jersey Boys
By Rama Gaind
Re-acquaint yourself with Frankie Vallie and The Four Seasons – and you will not regret it!
‘The Jersey Boys’ is an all-singing, all-dancing musical experience which will have you dancing in your seat.
The show wowed Broadway and is now proving to be sensational at Melbourne’s Princess Theatre. The collective appreciation of the packed audience was patently audible during the matinee I attended. That was one afternoon of nostalgia which will not be forgotten in a hurry.
It’s the rags-to-riches tale of a group of singing scallywags (Frankie Valli, Bob Gaudio, Tommy DeVito and Nick Massi) from the wrong side of the New Jersey tracks.
It tells the story of the ‘60s idols Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons whose songs, with their infectious tunes and soulful falsetto vocal, are part of the most people’s memory jukebox.
It also includes darker tales of run-ins with the mob, acrimonious fall-outs and gambling debts.
They went on to become one of the biggest musical acts in the world, selling more than 175 million records in the process. However, they were very nearly destroyed by infighting, disastrous financial decisions and family tragedy.
With such classics as ‘Sherry’, ‘Big Girls Don’t Cry’, ‘Walk Like a Man’, ‘Oh, What A Night’, ‘Let’s Hang On’ and ‘Can’t Take My Eyes Off You’, they wrote their own songs, invented their own sounds and sold 175 million records worldwide – all before they were 30!
Whatever you do, don’t miss out on this opportunity to see not only a fabulously staged musical, but also your chance to remember some marvellous lyrics, music and to sing-a-long to your heart’s content!
Free Rain Theatre Company works its magic on Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
Directed by Jordan Best for Free Rain Theatre Company, Cat on a Hot Tin Roof is one of American playwright Tennessee Williams’s best-known works. It won the Pulitzer Prize for Drama in 1955, has been restaged several times since, and was adapted into an acclaimed 1958 motion picture starring Elizabeth Taylor and Paul Newman
It’s the story of a Southern family in crisis, focusing on the turbulent relationship of a wife and husband, Maggie ‘The Cat’ (Jenna Roberts) and Brick Pollitt (Alexander Marks) and their interaction with Brick’s family over the course of one evening gathering at the family estate in Mississippi, ostensibly to celebrate the birthday of patriarch and tycoon ‘Big Daddy’ Pollitt (Tony Turner). Liz Bradley is Big Mumma, Cameron Thomas is Gooper and Michelle Cooper is May—this is an all-star cast in arguably one of the great American plays.
Maggie, though witty and beautiful, has escaped a childhood of desperate poverty to marry into the wealthy Pollitt family, but finds herself suffering in an unfulfilling marriage. Brick, an aging football hero, has neglected his wife and further infuriates her by ignoring his brother’s attempts to gain control of the family fortune. The recent suicide of Brick’s friend Skipper seems to be the catalyst for his indifference and heavy drinking.
Big Daddy is unaware that he has cancer and will not live to see another birthday; his doctors and his family have conspired to keep this information from him and his wife. His relatives are in attendance and attempt to present themselves in the best possible light, hoping to receive the definitive share of Big Daddy’s enormous wealth. Oy, what a drama!
WHAT: Cat on a Hot Tin Roof
WHERE: Courtyard Studio, Canberra Theatre
WHEN: 30 October – 14 November
TICKETS: $18 – $28
BOOKINGS: 62752700
