Marion Scrymgour, who also holds the Education portfolio, yesterday warned parents that failing to send their children to school was illegal and that she would enforce penalties for those who failed to do so.
Ms Scrymgour, one of the most senior Aboriginal politicians in the country, will establish, “subject to negotiations”, two community partnership education boards, to be located in the Walpiri triangle in central Australia and selected communities in East Arnhem Land.
Ms Scrymgour’s plan to tackle what she admits is a crisis in remote education was delivered to Northern Territory parliament this week, with parental responsibility at the core of the Government’s attempts to improve the shocking literacy and numeracy outcomes among Aboriginal children in the Territory.
The community education partnership boards would place “core responsibility” for education on the shoulders of parents, encouraging “community ownership and management” of education and training services.
The boards would also be aimed at ensuring that all four-year-olds had access to 15 hours’ preschooling each week, and would increase enrolment and attendance, and literacy and numeracy competency, Ms Scrymgour said.
One of the things that I have been saying for a very long time is that the very poor attendance record of children in many indigenous communities is a sad example of a kind of reverse discrimination that has seen indigenous parents immune from any legal sanction for failing to ensure that their children attended school. I am happy to offer a tick of approval to Ms Scrymgour for her efforts to reverse that trend in the territory but I am amazed that the Council of Government School Organisations Michael Duffy should make this claim:
“Harping on attendance is to talk about a symptom,” council vice-president Michael Duffy told The Australian. “It’s not the cause of the crisis. The cause of the crisis is that remote education delivery has failed.”
What kind of idiot would suggest that children failing to attend school is “just a symptom” with out actually being in classes(even poorly resourced ones ) any meaningful education is actually impossible . It may not be the ONLY cause of the crisis but it has to be up there in the top three, along with the emphasis on teaching in languages other than English and offering a second rate syllabus.
PARIS – Global warming could take a break in the next decade thanks to a natural shift in ocean circulations, although Earth’s temperature will rise as previously expected over the longer term, according to a study published today in the British journal Nature.
Climate scientists in Germany base the prediction on what they believe is an impending change in the Gulf Stream — the conveyor belt that transports warm surface water from the tropical Atlantic to the northern Atlantic and returns cold water southwards at depth.
The Gulf Stream will temporarily weaken over the next decade, in line with what has happened regularly in the past, the researchers say.
This will lead to slightly cooler temperatures in the North Atlantic and in North America and Europe, and also help the temperatures in the tropical Pacific to remain stable, they suggest.
This time last year we were being served up the standard line on AGW , namely that the planet’s climate was on an inexorable warming trend and that if we failed to take substantial measures to combat the emissions of Co2 then we were all sure to fry. More recently we have begun to see more and more reports suggesting. that our future may be cooler rather than warmer. Like the one that I quote above. while this piece suggest that we may see a period of cooling before a return to the much mooted AGW warming trend I find it rather hard to believe that the soothsayers have any idea at all. When it is impossible to predict with any accuracy what the weather will be like tomorrow I see no reason to accept claims that cooling temperatures mean that “Global warming” is happening as claimed by the likes of Gore and Flannery et al.
Mr Corkhill’s troubles began last summer when the two enforcement officers arrived at his home. They cautioned him before issuing a £110 on-the-spot fine for failure to close the lid of his wheelie bin.
He was told he had six months to pay or he would be taken to court. By January he had still not paid and was sent a summons under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005, which gave powers to town hall officials to hand out fines to rubbish rulebreakers.
Last week Whitehaven magistrates convicted him in his absence of “over-filling the receptacle used to dispose of waste” – a criminal offence.
They added £100 towards prosecution costs on top of the original fine, together with the £15 surcharge designed to help victims of violence.
Mr Corkhill, who takes home £900 a month, added: “I would have been better off throwing my rubbish across the front garden – at least then I would only have received an £80 fine for fly-tipping.
“It’s outrageous what they’ve done to me. We got a leaflet, like everyone else, nine months previously, explaining the new council policy which also made it a fineable offence for putting your bin out any earlier than 7am – a curfew for a bin.
“My wife and I put it in the recycling box and continued as normal. Then this happens. What can I do? If I didn’t pay they said that I could go to prison. They also threatened to clamp my car and send the bailiffs round.
“We recycle everything we can, including plastics, cardboard, tins, glass and paper. We have got a black box that is always full.”
A spokesman for Copeland Council said Mr Corkhill’s recollection of the distance his bin lid was open was wrong and it was “more like seven inches”. He added: “We will continue to crack down on the problem of overflowing bins.”
The Greenies never cease to amaze me with their insistence upon draconian measures that are even too over the top to parody. While I can understand the desire to create clean cites and towns the madness of limits on the amount of rubbish that a household can put out for collection are just stupid if there is no variation depending on the size of a household.
To all sensible people it is the responsibility of the local council to provide a service that meets the needs of it’s residents and it is not their right to try to punish people because those people have exceeded some benchmark dreamed up in a fog of Green religious vigour. Be warned though because it won’t be long before we have such nonsense here in OZ.
With summit participants opting to emphasise calls for a treaty, and with little to show in the way of new thinking, Mr Aird said it was clear the summit had produced a stacked result.
“If you stack the room with republicans, then it’s going to look like Australia wants a republic,” he said. “And I think they’ve done a similar thing here.
“All the old characters were there rehashing all the failed ideas. I was under the impression that the 2020 Summit was looking for new ideas, was looking for things that could contribute to breaking impasses or to moving forward, but it looks like it was more about more of the same. These guys, like Pat Dodson, are stuck in the past. The Dodson rights agenda has had its day.” Mr Dodson could not be contacted yesterday.
The sadly predictable out come of the indigenous issues discussions at Brother Number One”s hard left talkfest the so called “2020 summit” is a good measure of the nature of this whole very hollow event. Now other souls with stronger stomachs will by now have de constructed the various components of this spin-o-rama deluxe. I was far too busy having a lovely weekend away with my beautiful wife, at Rainbow Beach but I did manage to catch the odd snippet on the TV, hard to avoid it when the ABC had dropped most of its regular programming to bring the nation this example the glories of “progressive thought”. I could not help but notice that the green religion and climate change were ever so prominent, it was taken as read that the hugely expensive mitigation efforts were being demanded by the true believers had to be implemented. I noticed while reading the editorial in yesterdays Australian that George Pell has made a good point about the modern faith that rivals his own far more ancient one.
Writing in The Sunday Telegraph yesterday, Dr Pell highlighted what he says are inconvenient facts for the climate change bandwagon. These included the declaration by more than 100 international scientists, some of them members of the UN Intergovernmental panel on climate change that attempting to control climate was “ultimately futile”. In addition, none of the natural changes observed with glaciers, sea levels and species migration is outside the bounds of known variability, including the warming of 0.1c to 0.2c per decades, in the late 20th century. But the 1930s decade was warmer than the 1990s. Most importantly, the global temperature has not increased since 2001.
The Australian accepts that climate change represents a significant policy challenge for government, but encourages further debate. We have always been concerned about the quasi-religious fervour that surrounds climate change and remain wary of attempts to portray it as a moral rather than scientific issue. Dr Pell and Professor Aitkin represent welcome voices of caution. Professor Aitkin argues that despite the political spin, it is difficult to see scientific consensus on global warming, only a pretence at a contrived one. He says if no causal link exists between CO2 and rising temperatures, all the talk about carbon caps and carbon trading is worse than futile because they will reduce not only our own standard of living, but the standard of living of the world’s poorest countries.
So the conclusion that I draw about the weekend just past is that It was a great one for this humble blogger and his wife to spend at one of Queensland’s beautiful beaches but the nation as a whole has been very ill served by Brother Number One’s attempt to focus all considerations of the future through the prism of “Progressive Thought”. In the end it will prove to be rather like trying to conceive a child via cyber sex; it may feel good but dreams of a child is absolutely futile.
In the latest British case, the taxpayer will lose out whatever the end result because the action is likely to be largely funded by legal aid.
The majority of the eight claimants are understood to be living on state benefits and the Legal Services Commission confirmed that Mr Deghayes, Mr el-Banna and Mr al Rawi are already receiving a limited amount of legal aid “in relation to their application to bring a claim”.
The eight men say the British authorities were aware of their plight when they were detained in Afghanistan and Pakistan but still co-operated with the Americans.
Mr Begg, who was arrested by the CIA in Pakistan in 2002, said the case will centre on MI5 and MI6’s “general behaviour and complicity in the abuse of British citizens” and not their treatment at Guantanamo.
Who do they think they are kidding? Looks like vexatious litigation to me.
WASHINGTON: A national drive to halt the death penalty in the US has been defeated in the Supreme Court, with the justices ruling that lethal injections, if properly administered, are a “humane” means of executing a condemned prisoner.
By a surprising 7-2 margin, the court rejected a constitutional attack on the main method of carrying out the death penalty across the US. Its ruling cleared the way for executions to resume after a seven-month delay.
Since October, officials and judges in several states have put executions on hold while awaiting the outcome of the case decided on Wednesday. It involved two Kentucky death row inmates who argued the lethal injection method violated the constitutional ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
The court’s opinion by Chief Justice John Roberts confirmed there was strong support for the death penalty among the judges.
“We begin with the principle … that capital punishment is constitutional. It necessarily follows that there must be a means of carrying it out,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote. “Some risk of pain is inherent in any method of execution – no matter how humane – if only from the prospect of error in following the required procedure.”
When it comes time to send these condemned scumbags to their just deserts there has probably never been a more humane method of execution than lethal injection. It works just like the practice in millions of veterinary practices around the world . The lawyers who brought this case can certainly be respected for their inventive line of argument but the fact that the judge’s vote was 7-2 makes this a resounding vote for the death penalty.
We can argue for ever about the morality of the death penalty but I support it on the whole because there are some crimes that are so horrendous that no other sanction is adequate and because it is far more humane than putting someone in a small box for the rest of their lives.
I am always amused by stories of DIY projects that once finished by their builders are too big to extricate from their construction site. This is the seminal tale of DIY boat and even air plane builders the world over. As a DIY builder myself I can appreciate why you build these sort of projects and I can understand how this can happen. I don’t think this will be a permanent impediment to John Melling”s sailing ambitions but the old questions about getting ships into or out of bottles spring to mind about his dilemma.