The poor pedestrian is road kill in-waiting the way many motorists and cyclists use the roads and ignore the road rules pertaining to pedestrians.

One of the biggest problems motorists and cyclists have is with pedestrian crossings. It seems that neither of these road users is capable of giving way to pedestrians. These road users ignore traffic lights putting pedestrians’ lives at risk. There have been many times I’ve had to jump back from crossing (with a green walk sign) because a motorist or cyclist has decided to ignore the amber or red traffic lights.

However there is one thing that cyclists do, that motorists can’t (well not voluntarily) and that is to use footpaths. There are a couple of elements to the footpath menace that cyclists pose.

There are many cyclists that seem to think they own the shared footpaths.

They menace and harass pedestrians because they are impatient when there is congestion.  They zoom past pedestrians often without giving a warning bell to alert pedestrians of their presence. They ride two and three abreast and force pedestrians off footpaths since they think they don’t have to share the footpath.  And this is not just the lycra-clad or Johnny-come-lately’s either.

Then there are those that insist on using the footpath when there is a bike path/lane provided.

These cyclists weave in and out of the pedestrian traffic with nary a thought for the safety of the pedestrians. Here too, cyclists will menace and harass pedestrians because they are impatient when there is congestion. Sometimes there is outright aggression as the bike becomes more like a battering ram than a mode of transport. All of this even though there is a bike path/lane provided.

What’s particularly galling about these cyclists is that many people, including responsible cyclists, fought hard to get bike paths and lanes to make it safer for pedestrians, cyclists and motorists. Yet some feel entitled to endanger pedestrians because they don’t want to use the bike path or lane. And again this is not just the lycra-clad or Johnny-come-lately’s either.

Many cities and townships are doing a lot more to make malls and CBDs freer of motor vehicles and bicycles and of course more can still be done. However, there are still many more cities and townships that are yet to put in place bike paths and lanes.

One way of helping to improve pedestrian safety is to make sure that anyone buying a bicycle is given a copy of the road rules as they relate to cycling, and asked to sign a statement to the effect that they have read and understood the rules. Motorists don’t get off the hook either. More should be done to emphasise safety for pedestrians when learning to drive.

In the meantime, down with cars and bicycles; all hail pedestrians.

However, I won’t be discussing that issue in this post. This post will be different.

This Australia Day can be different.

It can be different in many ways, especially with the release of the You Me Unity report recognising First Australians in the constitution. The first most important way that this year’s Australia Day can be different is accepting the basis and premise of the report released by the You Me Unity panel. In accepting this important landmark report (though did we really need a report to tell us that we should recognise First Australians in the constitution?) we can begin to truly celebrate Australia Day as a day for everyone.

Australia Day 2012 can be different by re-starting a very important conversation across Australia about self-determination and recognition of First Australians, not just in the constitution but in the law. This is an important conversation that has regularly been side-tracked. Regularly, First Australians tell us the most important way for white Australia to help is to shut up and listen. We can do that and we can talk openly about an Australia we want that is for everyone.

I’m pretty certain that First Australians are more than happy to have such open conversations. But it begins with us listening first, talking second.

Unfortunately it didn’t take long for the nay-sayers to pop-up to commit to recognising Australia’s original inhabitants pre-invasion in the constitution, preferably the preamble, but nothing else; the ‘yeah-but-nah’ crowd as I like to call them. There seems to be a unison of calls to ignore the apparently more ‘radical’ elements of the You Me Unity panel’s recommendations [PDF]; most notably Recommendation 1, 2 and 4. These recommendations would remove Section 25 [allows for any race to be excluded from having their votes counted (from a State(s)) in federal elections if they're excluded in a State(s)]; remove Section 51 (xxvi) [it allows the Commonwealth of Australia to make laws that are racially discriminatory] and insert a new Section 116A [would deny the Commonwealth of Australia powers to make racially discriminatory laws].

Apparently it’s a problem for the ‘yeah-but-nah’ crowd to see an end to such elements enshrined in our constitution. Frankly it’s embarrassing.

Of course the yeah-but-nah crowd quote concerns about the legal situation and the possible destabilising affect on current programs. Of course they quote concerns about potential for legal claims for damages and compensation. All of which are bunk and needlessly distract the conversation.

Hence this Australia Day can be different by finally advocating for an end to the constitutionally enshrined discriminatory laws that have been imposed on First Australians.

Let us have a different Australia Day in 2012. This year lets recognise First Australians and accept the You Me Unity report.

Help support the national conversation about updating our constitution to recognise Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and culture for the benefit of all Australians. Join You Me Unity today. Or sign up at Facebook.

Already we have the usual tit-for-tat commentary and the nauseating explanations of how the Australian government will end whaling through ‘diplomatic’ means. We have the continued justification of slow diplomacy with the excuse of the action being taken in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), which itself is excruiatingly slow. Of course there has been the yearly ‘activists jump on whaling ship’ event. Indeed as I read somewhere it seems as this has become the yearly sideshow over summer.

But there are still a few things about whaling that really gets me worked up.

1. Whaling is still happening
2. Lame excuses about culture
3. Diplomacy has failed

So let’s go through them

1. Whaling is still happening

Japan is not the only country guilty of continuing to slaughter animals we know to be intelligent; and an essential part of the ocean’s ecosystem. There are others but these countries don’t blatantly and illegally enter Australian territorial waters to slaughter animals protected by our laws.

The Japanese continue to maintain that its whaling program is all in the name of science. If you visit the website you’ll discover that an institute that has been around since 1987 has only produced 12 research papers [updated: this based on reading the Institute's own website]. And the research done, it has been argued (here, here and here), could have been done without slaughtering whales.

I’m not sure what the average Japanese citizen thinks of wasting taxpayer funds on a research institute that doesn’t turn out research, though I reckon they wouldn’t be too happy about it.

Rumours also abound that this year’s whale slaughter is being funded through monies set aside for the reconstruction effort in Japan following last year’s tsunami and earthquake. I ’m pretty sure the Japanese people wouldn’t be happy about this either.

You might like to read this piece – Op-Ed: Japanese media agrees whaling no longer ‘central to daily life’ from Digital Journal, Jan 15 2012

2. Lame excuses about culture

Every time the heat about whaling gets too hot for Japan we’re treated to the usual rubbish about how whaling is inextricably linked to the cultural practices of the Japanese.  While I’ll happily dispute such claims, it also is a load of rubbish.

Around the world Indigenous and First Nations peoples are having to scale back or stop the hunting of particular animals because of their endangered or threatened statuses.  They do this because they understand the simple mathematics of species – hunt them to near extinction and they’ll end up extinct.

If the Japanese were truly interested in protecting their cultural practices they too would cut back on the slaughter so that they could continue their cultural practices well into the future.

3. Diplomacy has failed

Diplomacy on the issue of whaling has failed. Plain and simple.

For more than twenty years Australia has been urging Japan to cease its annual whale hunt in the Southern Ocean sanctuary.  In fact we’re reminded every year about all the diplomacy that is going on to resolve the senseless destruction of whales.

Yet each summer we find yet more excuses from Australian governments about how diplomacy takes time, or that they’re pursuing the matter through relevant international means. Most recently we were treated to the line about how the International Court of Justice (ICJ) will sort out the problems, as Australia formally lodged proceedings against Japan.

And for all the diplomacy we’re still no closer to ending the disgusting and completely unjustified whale slaughter.  Indeed any suggestion that the federal govement does more than writing letters between officials is met with horror; that somehow standing up against incursions into our waters is a problem for Australia.

While the Australian Government wants us to believe that they are doing something, it seems more like it is complicit in the slaughter. The refusal to send naval or customs ships to protect our waters suggests a government unwilling to stand up against the slaughter. Apparently we’re prepared to do nothing as it could ‘escalate’ problems.

We seem to have no problems ‘escalating’ matters with Indonesia each time we sink their illegal fishing boats. When we’re unprepared to sink illegal whaling boats, while sinking Indonesian vessels, the whole ‘we don’t want to escalation anything’ is proven to be garbage.

In my humble it’s time to send naval vessels to the Southern Ocean sanctuary and to begin protecting our waters against the incursions of a rogue state.

Even though Gillard’s Labor Government appears to be taking a hammering in the polls, when you get on the street and talk to people it doesn’t sound like the Liberals are really all that more popular.  And it comes down to the leadership of Abbott, Bishop and Hockey with the likes of Andrew Robb becoming as unreliable and incapable of delivering a coherent and rational argument in the last couple of months.

There has been no effort put into the development of policies. Time and again questions about policies in crucial areas of public concern are answered with a well-worn phrase about them being put out before the next election. However the leader  (even some of loose canons) are deciding policies on-the-go with greater instances of confusion about what does or doesn’t constitute party policy; consider  Joyce and Briggs contradicted each other on the Murray-Darling Basin.

The Nationals in all of this are no-where to be seen. They are now completely at odds with the communities they’re meant to represent, and continue to be plagued with questions about their ongoing relevancy in the future political landscape.  Warren Truss appears to be absent from key coalition debates and fails to have enough influence to make sure the Nationals are capable of maintaining their façade of being a separate party.

Whether this is a function of a dwindling policy base or a deliberate strategy, it appears the lack of alternatives is no longer working for the Australian electorate.

Tony Abbott, having spent the last year saying no, will undoubtedly erode whatever support he once had if he continues to pursue this tact. This single political tactic will only last so long; it’s not the silver bullet Tony Abbott.

If the Coalition to continues to fail to articulate policy alternatives, it will indicate a flailing Opposition and more importantly a failing Opposition.

Victoria Lost?

Ted Baillieu’s Liberal-National coalition has been in power in Victoria for over a year.

After promising a great deal, Ted Baillieu is proving to be an even bigger disappointment than expected. There can be no doubt that Baillieu has upped the stakes on former Prime Minister John Howard’s now infamous ‘core and non-core promises’ statement.

The Victorian Government has spent the past year completely lost in the wilderness. It comes down to a lot of promises but no policies. While some may say this is an harsh assessment since they’ve only be in power for a year, it is the first year of government that the agenda is laid down. There is no agenda and no direction for Victoria.

That is not, however, to say that this government hasn’t done anything; the problem is what they have done is pretty pathetic.

As soon as Baillieu came to power he showed Victoria that the Nationals are the real power behind the scenes as the government allowed cattle back into the sensitive Alpine regions. This was done, we were told, in the name of science. Yet when grilled about the science, the response was to refuse to release details and when they were they were found wanting scientific merit. In fact even the scientist employed to undertake the study of the impact of cattle in the sensitive Alpine regions questioned the basis for the project.

But despite the significant amounts of research that says cattle in the Alpine region destroys the fragile ecosystem, the state government insists cattle don’t do that much harm, and will be letting them back into these regions.

However this is only one aspect of the Baillieu government’s anti-environment agenda. They continue to support a desalination plant that isn’t necessary with stronger conservation requirements for water. And while in opposition Baillieu and co used to lament the waste of taxpayer funds on the desal plant, and yet here we are, a year after they’ve come to power and there is no sign of them ending the wasteful project.

Coupled with repeated efforts to smash the green wedge around Melbourne to allow inappropriate and over development, the Baillieu government is well and truly failing our state’s environment. Then one has to question the economic strategy of the Baillieu government when they’ve implemented such harsh restrictions on the placement of wind farms; that they’ve effectively crippled the industry before it could even get going. There are no plans by the government to see an increase in renewable energy use with the solar plant in Mildura continuing to flounder.

For a conservative government they’ve illustrated a complete lack of regard for future economic growth and opportunities; especially the economic growth that will come from the transition of the Australian economy to one less reliant on carbon-based energy sources. (The recent announcement that NSW and Victoria will create a domestic economic bloc is reminiscent of pre-federation times.)

And while the Baillieu government has illustrated scant regard for the sensitive environments of Victoria, this is only part of the failings.

While promising to get tough on crime, the Baillieu conservative government has done very little to get tough on crime. In fact the only thing that Baillieu has achieved in the area of law and order is making it illegal to swear in public. The release of details around the anti-corruption commission is commendable, but the details reveal a less-than-acceptable independent statutory authority giving the commission significant powers. The details also reveal the commission authorising its ‘officers’ to carry some pretty heavy duty military style weaponry – talk about weaponizing the bureaucracy.

But how can I forget the other triumph of the Baillieu government on law and order – making it illegal to upset the Gaming Minister. Even on a bread-and-butter issue like law and order, the Baillieu Government is shown wanting for direction.

One of the big issues in the last state election was the state of public transport in Melbourne. It is argued by many that the media position taken by Baillieu was a significant factor for his victory last November. Yet it has failed to improve public transport. Over-crowding, delays and reliability remain significant problems for the beleaguered metropolitan rail network. And this is coupled with the lack of connectivity with the bus networks and light rail networks, making for a frustrating experience for commuters.

There is no way I can forget the Government reneging on promises to teachers, nurses and fire fighters about pay and conditions. We have seen an escalation in rhetoric from the government about productivity yet has no plan for achieving ‘increased productivity’ from teachers and nurses; or fire fighters for that matter. However, the government did manage to give the police, who do a dangerous and often thank-less job, a very generous offer on pay and conditions.

Now in the last fortnight Victorians have been slugged with increases in public transport fares without subsequent improvements in frequency and reliability and car registrations have also been increased. This is coming from a government that promised to deliver reductions in the cost of living. And he’s also laid off 3,200 public servants at Christmas time.

The government’s own Ministers seem to lack any real knowledge of the relevant laws and statutes for their portfolios. It is not only embarrassing, but frightening that the government does not know the rules. Victorian voters should very concerned with this government’s complete lack of policy direction; it is having a profound impact on the direction of Victoria.

With the repeated failures of the Ted Baillieu government I think it’s befitting to rename our Premier to Ted Fail-you. It seems to me to be a more accurate description of the Premier and his conservative government.