by David Penberthy
Just to be absolutely clear, smashing convicted paedophile and child rapist Dennis Ferguson over the head with a medicine ball is not the ideal way to respond to his presence in a city gymnasium.
That said, Ferguson’s presence in a city gymnasium is not an ideal situation either.
Especially when he just sits there, dressed in a business suit, not even exercising at all, but outside at the pool where he can gaze at dozens of primary school kids who are learning to swim. Especially when he times his visits to coincide with the swimming lessons, either the primary school kids in the mornings, or the high school students when he visits in the afternoon.
Dave Jnr says:- I am not a lawyer either, but I do not think this would play out the way you feel it should. Management are hamstrung because they are not able to identify Ferguson for anything he has done, only for his reputation. And although there is a prima facie argument saying he isn’t there to swim, to single him out is to invite discrimination charges. Ferguson is backed by legal aid in a way that others are not .. simply because his case is charged.
s11G of the Summary Offences Act 1988 (NSW) : A person who is a convicted child sexual offender, and who loiters, without reasonable excuse, In or near, a school, or a public place regularly frequented by children and in which children are present at the time of the loitering, Is guilty of an offence.
There is nothing ambiguous about that. It would seem that the swimming pool management have a moral, if not legal, obligation to notify the police whenever this cretin makes an appearance. Perving on children is hardly a reasonable excuse. I’m not legally qualified but it would also be interesting to know whether the management of the pool might be liable under civil law if Ferguson eventually does molest someone and they failed in their duty of care to prevent it from happening by allowing a known child sex offender to remain on their premises?
We can’t castrate him or kill him, and he is persistent in his threat to the community. This is not an insoluble problem, but I don’t think that ALP government is capable of solving it .. it is too close to home. - ed.
===
Campaign countdown: Yeah but, no but, Swan explains
by Leo Shanahan
Listening to Wayne Swan’s press conference to update us on the state of the economy yesterday it was as if Little Britain’s Vicky Pollard had been asked to explain our finances.
(Dramatic recreation)
“Journalist: Treasurer how is it that you have lost $7.5 billion on concessions from the mining tax but you say it’s only $1.5.”
“Treasurer: Yea but, no, but yea, but no but. That wasn’t even there before da mining tax cause so we didn’t lose da $7.5 billion. Anyway commodities are worth more now. Anyway shut up!”
Listening to it you were conscious of the fact the words were English, but as it progressed it became apparent those words had no necessary connection to one another. It was a kind of absurdist, avant-garde approach to answering questions which could see our treasurer hailed at the forefront of the “Aussie new wave” of economic analysis. - Swan was only treasurer because he wouldn’t upset the apple cart. The ALP are that bereft of talent. He isn’t on top of his portfolio, but one gathers he isn’t on top of what he had for breakfast either .. he always appears as if he wants to find the correct way of answering a question before blurting out what is merely on his mind ala Homer Simpson.
As for that terrific show, Hawke and Keating, the thing for me is that I care nothing for either. Hawke was collegiate and Keating focused, but neither benefited Australia, both were ego driven and both loved power without service. - ed
===
Foul language gone Wilde
by Catherine Warnock
Oscar Wilde, the famous 19th century Irish poet once said: “The expletive is the refuge of the semi-literate”. In other words; swearing is for dumb heads.
Well, all I can say is, if the ‘refuge’ was an actual place, it would be packed to the rafters—considering the number of foul-mouthed ‘dumb heads’ around these days. And yes, okay, I might be among their number too at times, I admit. (Before anyone starts calling me a hypocrite because they’ve heard me say naughty words). Yes, we 21st century folk certainly say lots of words that would’ve made our Victorian ancestors’ hair curl.
As a kid, while I soon became aware of most swear words (mainly thanks to the neighbourhood kids who were clearly more world-wise than me) I would never dare use them. And, even though my Dad, an ex-army pugilist and a Scotsman to boot (apparently a very bad combo for swear-ability) was always pretty careful not to swear around us kids or in public, I still, in fact, heard my first F Bomb from his own lips. - Swearing, as with any behavior, serves a purpose or people won’t do it. Sometimes people are raised to swear in their family. Others learn it from others. But those that use it have benefits for doing so. Some view it as stress relief. Some use it to make themselves visible to others, and to separate themselves from others. Maybe everyone does it, but it doesn’t have to be regular, and it shouldn’t be done. I have seen detectives employing the filthiest of language having sprayed themselves with smells like tobacco, but their purpose was to make other swearers comfortable in their presence .. because the worst criminals in our society are comfortable among swears. - ed.
===
We might save more in super if we knew where it went
by David Carter
Not since Paul Keating introduced compulsory superannuation contributions in the early 1990s has there been such an important opportunity to change the way Australians think about saving for their retirement.
This urgent need for change is magnified when Australians are asked how much they actually know about their superannuation. A recent survey by Suncorp Life found 49 per cent of us don’t understand our super, and 30 per cent of us don’t believe our super is even our own money. Annual changes to the superannuation system are also a constant and frustrating occurrence. That’s why it’s vital for the Government to get it right this time.
The results of the much-anticipated Cooper Review announced last week urge a range of sweeping reforms to superannuation, and herald an exciting new era for the industry. The question is whether the Government is prepared to do what’s needed to simplify the system, and restore Australian’s confidence in superannuation. - People thinking about their super because of Keating reminds me that Keating gave management of substantial super funds to unions. Those management fees are a substantial source of income to those useless bodies. People did not need to know how Costello organized their superannuation because his hand wasn’t in the till. - ed.
No comments:
Post a Comment