Uncle Joe puckers up and blows the first dog whistle of the season

On the 3^rd January 2012 @JoeHockey tweeted that “I warned of this a year ago!!!”

I clicked on the link wondering what financial horror the federal shadow treasurer had uncovered.

The article merely confirmed the bleeding obvious; “Among banks trading in Australia, the major lenders account for 86.7 per cent of the home loan market.
Well, knock me down with a roo’s tail feather!

Now mortgage holders can switch between banks with no financial penalty for doing so, they are still sticking with the big banks.

I wonder why?

Could it possibly be that these aspirational borrowers believe that solid reputations built up over decades or centuries by the banks really matter in periods of global financial uncertainty?

Or did many of them approve of the big banks following the November 2011 example of the Reserve Bank rate cut? After all there was a surge in mortgage lending to first home buyers and investors right after that – mostly within the banking sector.

Were they cheered by the fact that in December all four of the big banks had passed on another rate cut to their borrowers?

Now Uncle Joe likes to blow his dog whistle loudly over Twitter, this time crying out that Teh Big Four are still big!
A few street mutts might even scamper his way. This old mongrel won't be one of them.
I may hail from a long gone time where you actually knew your bank manager and it was the price of our schooners which concerned us all, but for the life of me I can’t see that consumers exercising choice is a problem for the country. Specially those consumers taking out a new mortgage.

Why should they go and pay higher borrowing rates in the non-banking sector just to please Hockey’s notion of how the world should turn?

Running dogs from http://www.halhigdon.com/
Dog cartoon from http://www.webweaver.nu/

In light of the base nature of both the political and corporate classes........

Herewith, a timely reminder to all economic development policy makers and resources industry ‘players’ in 2012.

Excerpt from NSW Parliament Code of Conduct for Members of the Legislative Assembly and the Legislative Council:

2. Bribery

(a) A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which the member has received, is receiving or expects to receive.

(b) A Member must not knowingly or improperly promote any matter, vote on any bill or resolution or ask any question in the Parliament or its Committees in return for any remuneration, fee, payment, reward or benefit in kind, of a private nature, which any of the following persons has received, is receiving or expects to receive:

(i) A member of the Member’s family;

(ii) A business associate of the Member; or

(iii) Any other person or entity from whom the Member expects to receive a financial benefit.

(c) A breach of the prohibition on bribery constitutes a substantial breach of this Code of Conduct.

Excerpt from the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption website:

Corrupt conduct, as defined in the Independent Commission Against Corruption Act 1988, is deliberate or intentional wrongdoing, not negligence or a mistake. It has to involve or affect a NSW public official or public sector organisation.

While it can take many forms, corrupt conduct occurs when:

·     a public official improperly uses, or tries to improperly use, the knowledge, power or resources of their position for personal gain or the advantage of others

·     a public official acts dishonestly or unfairly, or breaches public trust

·     a member of the public influences, or tries to influence, a public official to use his or her position in a way that is dishonest, biased or breaches public trust.

The NSW community expects public officials to perform their duties with honesty and in the best interests of the public. Corrupt conduct by a public official involves a breach of public trust that can lead to inequality, wasted resources or public money and reputational damage…..

The full definition of corruption which applies to the ICAC is detailed in sections 7, 8 and 9 of the ICAC Act.

I note that as yet the Commonwealth Parliament of Australia has not created A Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament nor created the promised Parliamentary Integrity Commissioner. Nevertheless there are avenues open to deal with corrupt conduct within that institution.

A New Year's Honours List conceit

Newspapers typically report that those receiving an honour from Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II are astonished to hear they have been gonged in some way – it came out of the blue and dropped on the doorstep with an unexpected thump which woke the sleeping household.

You’ve gotta love the conceit of that myth.

This is how it really goes for one ‘fictitious’ couple…….

Mr. Far Right and his spouse Hyacinth decide that another honour is needed to boost his profile and his worth on the international freeloader circuit.

Both begin discreet inquiries about what might be on offer for former politicians of his lack of stature.

Both even more discreetly let it be known that he would like one of those honorific titles – say a mere trifle like The Most Noble Order of the Garter, The Most Ancient and Noble Order of the Thistle or The Most Honourable Order of the Bath.

Hyacinth takes the lead in ferreting out suitable sponsors, while the pukka Mr. Far Right pretends to step back as is right and proper.

Once these sponsors (who might expect favours or bonbons in return) take up the cudgel on Mr. Far Right’s behalf, he and Hyacinth begin crafting the required novella which lays out the reasons he should receive a Great Big Gong.

Armed with what is now a mini-version of “War and Peace” the sponsors lay siege to the Royal Household and British Establishment until Her Maj consents to give Mr. Far Right what he wants, or a close consolation prize like the newfangled Order of Merit for which all citizens of Commonwealth countries are eligible for appointment.

The sponsors privately prepare the grasping couple for the inevitable disappointment, by assuring them that if Mr. Far Right fills a dead woman's shoes to even up the OAM numbers it is bound to lead on to further glory in the near future.

Buckingham Palace then formally notifies Mr. Far Right of his consolation prize. Hyacinth brews a new pot of Earl Grey and she and Mr. Far Right hit the phone to the family and one or two close friends – swearing all to absolute secrecy and pretending that he didn’t really want just a little of what his hero, Teh Mighty Ming, wore on his ample chest.
Reflecting that this gong means that she and hubbie will get to have tea with the Queen every so often and that her beloved will have his portrait drawn and hung (no quartering allowed thank you very much), Hyacinth wets her knickers.

The day before the Honours List is formally announced someone close to Mr. Far Right informs select media of the totally unexpected news and indicates a suitable time for photo ops and quotable gems.

Come the day of the announcement, Mr. Far Right (having washed the brown substance off the end of his nose) acts humble and surprised on finding himself in a group which includes his political opposites - Sir David Attenborough who is a passionate lobbyist for an international response to climate change and Nelson Mandela who steadfastly opposed South Africa's apartheid system.
Australia gives a bored yawn as it watches Mr. Far Right on the tellie that night telling the world he is trooly rooly touched.

Pic of Order of Merit found at Buck House website

Queensland genetically modified bananas anyone?

Is Genetically modified becoming something of a dirty term with the Australian general public?

Putting two and two together it is obvious that the Queensland University of Technology tried very hard to avoid both the GMO acronym and again naming its funding source as the Grand Challenges in Global Health (GCGH) Initiative - which was launched as a health initiative by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which is in turn is associated with Monsanto & Co through its shareholdings in that notorious biotech giant.

ABC NEWS 22 December 2011:

Microsoft founder Bill Gates has met Queensland scientists who are trying to develop better bananas for Africa's sub-Saharan region.

The philanthropist has invested $10 million in banana research in recent years through his foundation's global health program.

Successful field trials have been carried out at Innisfail, south of Cairns, in the state's far north.

Professor James Dale, from the Queensland University of Technology, says he was pleased to update Mr Gates and his wife during their visit to Cairns last week…….

Unfortunately for UTS the Office of the Gene Technology Regulator reveals what is was hoping to cover with a little bit of verbal smoke:

* This post is part of North Coast Voices' effort to keep Monsanto's blog monitor (affectionately known as Mr. Monsanto) in long-term employment.