NEED FOR MORE CHOICE INCREASINGLY RECOGNISED

by Jeremy Lee
An increasing number of voters feel 'disenfranchised' by the voting process. It is seen as an end in itself, remote from any real choices. While many can identify required changes, a growing minority now feel that the mechanism for change no longer exists. A vast volume of legislation, much unwanted, continues to pour out of our parliaments and councils. None of those voting on it can actually read it with any real understanding, because the volume is too great.

The number of laws and regulations is frightening – but obviously our politicians have no concept of any other source of action, for they keep adding to the number. We have yet to read of any party or group that has put forward a list of laws and regulations for repeal. The old scriptural principle was that the number of laws should be kept to a minimum – enough so that the ordinary man or woman could have a "working knowledge" of the laws of their community or nation.

The Old Testament records that the people were assembled annually while the laws were read aloud, and then admonished to observe them. By this procedure nobody could claim ignorance of the law as a defence against wrong doing. It is quite safe to say that nobody could read the current laws of Australia to the people. It would take a lifetime; and under current practice the volume would continue increasing at a faster rate than it could be annunciated. All this is well within the consciousness of an over-regulated and controlled community, continually harassed by the impersonal, anonymous bureaucrats who administer this monstrosity, and who now comprise by far the biggest sector of the workforce in Australia.

Millions are now employed shuffling paper, designing forms, carrying out means tests, adding their own penalties and regulations to original Bills under "enabling legislation", and stashing away bigger and bigger sums for their own future superannuation. They write, in lengthy and convoluted language that is meaningless to everyone, including themselves, the Bills that parliamentarians vote on. These are lined up before every session of parliament, like sausages being processed in a factory. All the politician can do is stamp "Aye" or "Nay" as the sausages fly past. What all this has to do with "the democratic process" is anyone's guess. Leading barristers and lawyers have complained that the volume of law is making their own role impossible. Courts are clogged with cases in which endless debate over meaningless minutiae takes the place of justice.

REFORMS NEEDED IN THE PROCESS ITSELF
Obviously, if this process continues, the whole, lop-sided weight of government, poised like the world on long-suffering Atlas's back, will eventually topple over. There comes a point, and in some areas we have already reached it, when oppressed people find it easier to side-step the law; and the machinery of law, like our beleaguered fire-fighters, can no longer cope with the number of spot-fires. They can increase penalties on those they do catch up with – but even this is no remedy to what is a national problem.

Tony Harris, writing in The Australian Financial Review (3/12/02) gave an example of the growing lack of accountability in the federal parliament, where a question asked by Senator Faulkner, about travel expenses in the 2001 election, had been held by Special Minister of State Eric Abetz for over seven months without reply. Harris suggested a number of measures to start some accountability among parliamentarians. He started with political contributions, pointing out that donations had totalled about $69 million in 2000-01.
As Harris says: "Most political donations.... come with a hook. As the aphorism says, donations beget access, access allows influence, and influence obtains results. Favourable government intervention is why most people make political donations ...."

But successful candidates also receive tax money. For the 2001 election the Federal Government paid out about $39 million. Harris suggested "it would improve democracy if parliaments gave politicians the choice: either accept public money, or private donations, but not both ..."

His second suggestion was to stop political interference with judicial appointments
"These include justices of higher courts, public prosecutors, auditors-general, electoral commissioners, police commissioners and ombudsmen. Increasingly governments have politicized these appointments. .... Senior statutory officers are meant to be independent of government. Their function is vital to the health of Australia's democracy ...."

Harris went on to suggest the introduction of citizen-initiated referendums, binding upon governments if carried. But he concluded that the people were not likely to receive such handsome Christmas presents from their representatives; there are too few Santa Clauses among state and federal government ministers." (Tony Harris is a former NSW auditor-general)

NOT ALL SCENTS COME UP ROSES

WHAT'S THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT JAPAN?

The world seems to have accepted that Japan is one of the world's worst cot cases. Latest news is that the Japanese Government is pump-priming the Japanese economy with a further $88 billion (6 trillion Yen). Of this two thirds will be pumped into the economy, and one third allocated to making up a shortfall in taxation. The Japanese Government has been regularly pumping money into the economy – a dozen times since 1992. More than 136 trillion Yen ($2.4 trillion) has been pumped in over the period. All this has produced a lot of pain, with massive bad debts hitting the banks and continuing bankruptcies.

Many orthodox economists have written the Japanese off. However, a two-page spread in The Australian Financial Review (22/11/02) by a Tokyo-based economic commentator, Eamonn Fingleton, suggests that the Japanese economy is far stronger than most suspect. He pointed to the following facts:
• The Yen has increased by about 17 percent against the $US since 1990.
• The Japanese people have a healthy savings rate, 8.5% of GDP – far higher than the US (or Australia)
• Investment in industry and jobs is about twice the rate of the US.
• Japanese investment in foreign assets has not declined, but has nearly quadrupled in the eleven years to 2000. It is the world's largest capital exporter, in contrast to the US, which lives on capital inflow.
• Japan accounts for almost 22 per cent of the United Nations budget.
• Japan is the world's leading producer of capital equipment – the machinery needed to start new industries. This was a niche once led by firstly, the UK, and then the US. Japan is currently unchallenged in this field.
• What is often described as a 'deflationary spiral' is, in reality an increase in purchasing power for the Japanese people through falling prices – the result of continually-improving production techniques.
• Japan – unlike the short-sighted Americans and Australians – does not borrow abroad, but from its own people. Only 6% of Japan's debt is to foreigners.

Japan's trade surplus during the 90s (when it was supposed to be 'collapsing') was just under $US1 trillion, two and a half times that of the 80s. Fingleton's conclusion, shared by a small number of world analysts, is that Japan is in a far stronger position than is generally supposed, and that the "collapsing" image is fostered in Japan itself, to hide its enormous economic strengths.

BATTLE FOR POWER IN THE WHITE HOUSE

Even the mainstream media is now pointing to the factions within Bush's White House, struggling to shape future events. The Australian Financial Review (22/11/02) said one faction was composed of Vice President Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Secretary of Defence Paul Wolfowitz. This faction is bent on war at all costs.
The second was led by Colin Powell, Secretary of State, and his deputy Richard Armitage. The report, by Peter Hartcher, said: "Interestingly, this group includes the uniformed leadership of the United States .."

This news, which was widely available on the Internet over a year ago, is now coming out in the mainstream media. Every day that war in the Middle East can be postponed or averted, the more such information enters the public domain, making life ever more difficult for the 'manipulators'.

SANTA GETS THE SACK?

by Betty Luks
My interest was sparked by MP Frank Hough's (One Nation, WA) expressed outrage at 'Father Christmas' ("Santa gets the Sack" Neil Baird's e-mail) being outlawed at child-care facilities, shopping centres and schools – because he is now considered 'politically incorrect' within multicultural Australia.

"Scratch its (politically incorrect) surface and you'll find that outlawing Father Christmas and other so-called 'trivial' cultural identities really amounts to an attack on our own cultural heritage as Christian Australians with a predominantly Anglo-Saxon and European heritage," he exclaims. He asks, "Who will be sacrificed next at the altar of the non-Christian new Australian? The Easter Bunny? The Three Wise Men?" "Why not," he asks (with tongue in cheek?), "pile all of God's angels and the tooth fairy onto the pyre and completely rob our children of the symbols of their cultural identity?"

At the outset, let me say we traditionally have a Christmas tree in our home and gather round the Christmas Day meal and share gifts in celebration of the Advent of the Christ Child. But to link the modern 'Father Christmas' with Christian traditions is stretching it a bit. Whilst in the UK a number of years ago I happened to be shown a little book which had been presented to a friend for his loyal services as a chauffeur to certain notables of the City of London. The book stated: "The Lord of Misrule was the original figure now made familiar to us as 'Father Christmas', hero of the new Halloween Festival which was the origin of the carnival." I think the place "Father Christmas" heads for after the modern pageant or carnival takes place says it all. Unlike the Three Wise Men, he doesn't head for the local humble church to offer his gifts of frankincense, myrrh and gold to the Christ Child; his destination is the modern department store (the modern 'temple') and his task is to pull in the Almighty Dollar, the appropriate symbol for the City of London. Is Father Christmas Christian? No! The Money Changers dressed up in 'drag'? Yes!

I should add, I am all for the faery stories and myths and legends of our race, they are a great way of passing on folk history and teaching the young the deep truths and morals of our British-Australian heritage and culture... but please Frank, don't mistake the Lord of Misrule for the Good Tooth Faery!

SOUTH AUSTRALIANS – HAVE YOUR SAY!

At the 2002 South Australian State Election, neither the Liberal nor Labor party were returned with a majority large enough to form government. The Independent Member for Hammond, Hon. Peter Lewis, agreed to support a government, which promoted open and accountable government and improved the democratic operation of Parliament. As a result of the Compact agreed to, the Rann Labor Government was formed.

The Government has approved the establishment of the Constitutional Convention as proposed by Mr. Lewis. The Constitutional Convention of South Australia is now asking South Australians to have their say on the matter of parliamentary reform. A flier put out by the Committee reminds its readers South Australians can make submissions to: The Constitutional Convention, PO Box 464, Adelaide, SA, 5001, or Phone: (08) 8204 1310, or Fax: (08) 8204 1336, or E-mail: convention@agd.sa.gov.au or visit the official Website: www.constitutional .sa.gov.au

Procedure for the Constitutional Convention
A Parliamentary Steering Committee has been appointed to oversee the Constitutional Convention. The Parliamentary Steering Committee has appointed a Panel of Experts, including specialists in constitutional law, prepare a Discussion Paper on Constitutional and Parliamentary reform. This Discussion Paper will be available for public comment for you and your community to have a say and will be discussed at the Constitution Convention.

The Parliamentary Steering Committee has formulated the following questions for the Discussion Paper

Should South Australia have a system of initiative and referendum (Citizen Initiated Referenda) and, if so, what form and how should it operate?

What is the optimum number of parliamentarians in each House of Parliament necessary for responsible government and representative democracy in the Westminster system operating in South Australia?

What should be the role and function of each of the Houses of Parliament?

What measures should be adopted to improve the accountability, transparency and functioning of government?

What should be the role of political parties in the Legislative Council and what should be the method of election to the Legislative Council?

What should be the electoral system (including the fairness test) and method of election to the House Assembly?

Public submissions are also invited on these questions and any other issues of Constitutional and Parliamentary reform. A series of public meetings in country centres and metropolitan Adelaide will be held in February and March next year at which all the issues identified in the Discussion Paper will be discussed and debated. It is planned that the Constitutional Convention will be held in Adelaide in April 2003. The recommendations of the Constitutional Convention will then be put to the Parliament.

LIBERALS HAVE LOST THE PLOT

by Phillip D Butler
The results of the Victorian State election, and the aftermath, continue to highlight just how bankrupt of worthwhile policies are the Liberals. The Bracks' ALP minority government proved this point by winning with a massive landslide. There are those who are critical of the Independents Craig Ingram and Russell Savage (re-elected with huge majorities) for supporting the ALP – however, let me remind them, these two were elected in the first place because the Liberal and National parties had sold out their constituents:

1. Forced amalgamation of local government municipalities by Kennett – even though he used his numbers when in Opposition to block the ALP under Cain from doing the same. In fact, he had promised that no municipality would be amalgamated unless there was a referendum held in each municipality involved. He just sacked all local councils and brought in the "commissars" to run them. At that time, Russell Savage was Mayor of the border-city Mildura and put up a fight against amalgamation. He is a true "conservative" and used his position in the past Parliament to block some of the excesses of the ALP. He is one of the few MLA's to hit out at the 'lurks and perks' which all the political parties greedily grant themselves; Russell Savage has handed his 'lurks and perks' on to charity. Craig Ingram, a former member of the National Party, ran in the first place on a local issue – the degradation of the once mighty Snowy River. He has, along with Savage, stopped some of the ALP excesses in regards to drugs, gun controls, etc.

2. The Liberals ran a totally negative programme for the Upper House – which the ALP now controls – in just blocking legislation from the Lower House – the Victorian people have seen through this. In fact the Liberal and National Party have put in doubt why we even need an Upper House - they couldn't even see through what was being attempted by the socialists - centralise all power without any checks and balances! Why didn't the Liberals and Nationals offer some constructive alternatives and use their numbers for:
(a) Election of the Upper House along the lines of the Federal Senate – proportional representation.
(b) Insist all proposed amendments to the Victorian Constitution must go to a referendum. It was the Liberals who took this protection away from the electors in the first place.
(c) Trust the electors and make it possible for say up to 10% of the people, to demand an Initiative Referendum on any given issue as is now the case in Switzerland and at least 15 states in the USA.

While the Nationals held their previous numbers in the Victorian Lower House – mainly because Peter Ryan decided to opt out of a Coalition – they have lost out heavily in the Upper House. The ALP now have the numbers to re-write the Victorian Constitution, and if Victorians don't take up the fight, we may yet see the demise of the Upper House; a further erosion of the checks and balances so desperately needed as a bulwark against the excesses of out of control power. Not a healthy situation for Australia and our future generations.

LIES, MORE LIES AND STATISTICS

by Antonia Feitz
Once again Australians have been fed political pap. Once again it's been reported that, "Australia's jobless rate has fallen to a two-year low of 6 percent" and that "the fall in unemployment came despite the disappearance of nearly 60,000 full-time jobs". Of course the loss of full-time jobs was offset by "the creation of 76,000 part-time positions" (Australian, 8/11/02). Of course. Now pull the other one.

The fact is that no government authority actually counts the number of unemployed people any more because the figures are too politically embarrassing. Instead the federal government calculates the unemployment rate on 'seasonably adjusted surveys'. What does that actually mean? The statistics are meaningless when as little as one hour's work a week – even unpaid work! – classifies a person as 'employed'. Then there's the scam of hiding unemployment by shifting middle-aged redundant workers on to disability pensions. And then there's the 'work for the dole' programme which also fudges the unemployment figures. If the truth were known Australia probably has an unemployment rate in the twenties. The fact that hundreds of thousands of part-time workers want more hours says a lot. But they don't count.
Even the government doesn't dispute that unemployment rates are very high in the bush.

According to the highly respected economist Dr. Peter Brain, "Based on social security data, the majority of country and provincial regions now have an unemployment rate of between 12 and 25 percent compared to 2-4 percent for the winner Sydney suburbs." (www.abc.net.au/rn/deakin/stories/s291487.htm) What that means is that the heart of the capital cities are rolling in dough while the rest of the country – the outer suburbs and much of regional Australia – are struggling. Really struggling.

Recently Dr. Brain warned that if Australia continues along the economic rationalist path in twenty years just 20 percent of Australians will control 80 percent of the nation's wealth (Sydney Morning Herald, 11/11/02). He said that's a recipe for social and political chaos which will result in a banana republic. Is anybody listening? Does anybody care?

Editor's note
I read recently, 'the global economy is flying on autopilot right into the face of a great mountain'. I think that just about 'sums it up'. But it is not enough to wring our hands, cry 'woe is us', and then give up. Have you wondered what could be done to help restore your community? Have a look at Michael Lane's ideas. Send for the two books by Michael Lane "Human Ecology & Social Credit" and "Charles Ferguson: Herald of Social Credit" and study them! Both books are aimed at helping to Restore Communities. But we do warn you – you will have to start thinking outside the box!
Available from all League book services.
"Charles Ferguson: Herald of Social Credit" $11.50 posted. "Human Ecology & Social Credit" $9.50 posted.

BASIC FUND

Donations have taken the Basic Fund to $6,262.50. That's a long way from the $60,000 target. CD: The scanning, proof reading and correcting of nearly forty years of On Target will have been completed by the time this report reaches you. Phew!!! The next step is putting it into the hands of a professional to set it out on a CD. It has been a painstaking and tedious job. A job well done!!!

Website: The website 'hits' continue to grow at an amazing rate; the figures just keep climbing and climbing, month after month. Be encouraged, the 'word' is getting out. But none of these things could happen if it was not for your support of the Basic Fund. Don't let us falter now, please get behind the appeal and give the League a gift for the Christ-mass.

LETTER TO THE EDITOR

The following letter was sent to: The Editor, The Age, December 3rd, 2002
Dear Sir, So it is now not just a great historian, David Irving, who can be converted into a cultural pariah by the invocation of vague insult terms such as "anti-Semitism" and "Holocaust revisionist", but even those who defend him in an "articulate and forthright" manner -such as Lady Michele Renouf! Peter Fray's report of the craven convulsions of members of the exclusive Reform Club in London (The Age, 3/12) over the nomination of Lady Renouf for membership of its general committee depicts a situation of Gilbertian farce. Mr. Fray presents a detailed and amusing picture of Lady Renouf as an only partly successful adventuress with a variety of talents. If she really did state that Judaism is a repugnant and hateful religion however, then she merits rebuke for an ignorant and untrue judgment on a great sacred tradition. What is also regrettable is Mr. Fray's complete failure to defend Irving by mentioning that, whatever his faults and mistakes, he is a writer of enormous importance who has been subjected over the years to a disgraceful campaign of persecution and repression. Yours sincerely, Nigel Jackson, Belgrave Victoria.

Editor's note
I know there are those who will have difficulty with Nigel Jackson's reference to Judaism's 'great sacred tradition' because of what they understand of highly organised Rabbinic-Talmudic-Judaism's philosophy and politics and push for a New World Order with themselves at the apex of power. Historian Nesta Webster sums up the problem so many Christians have with Judaism: "When therefore we say that we must respect the Jewish religion we cannot, if we know anything about it, mean that we respect that portion of it which is founded on the Rabbinical traditions of the Talmud and the Cabala, but only that ethical law set forth in the Old Testament, to which right-living Jews have faithfully adhered and which is largely in accord with Christian teaching."
Christians need to think very carefully about this matter and the differences between the transcendent Semitic God of Mt. Sinai and the immanent Trinitarian God revealed by Jesus Christ to mankind. The outworking differences are very great.
From religions stem philosophies and from philosophies stem policies – which in turn lead to different concepts and types of a New World Order!

Melbourne Bookshop