The Right to Know

I guess I am easily bemused but what precisely is wrong with people knowing what the price of petrol is in their general area, how retailers of groceries in the area compare on price or how the local schools are performing against some agreed criteria?

Sure, it is not the government fixing things. The government wont be fixing the price of petrol at a more reasonable level - let's say at less than $1.00 a litre. Nor will it be going through all of the items on the supermarket shelf fixing prices.

I am becoming very tired of people telling me that I shouldn't have the chance to compare prices across Coles and Woolies - they are our only options here - or to compare unit prices on articles - without a using a calculator or TWOMDs brilliant mental arithmetic (her way of warding off Alzheimers). I am not suggesting that we are desperately poor, but the habits of a lifetime of trying to get the best value for money are still strong and unit pricing will make that much, much easier.

For us fuel is an important purchase. I know it says something about our carbon footprint but we use a lot of things with motors - ute, tractor, quad bike, ride-on mower, generator, chain saw and various pumps - and they all need to be fed. Our fuel bill is significant. Add to that the fact that the most competitive retailers are over 100 kms away and you should appreciate that it would be very useful for us to know where the best price is on a particular day. Infuriating to check prices on the trip in to find that they have changed on the way out.

I was prepared to ignore the various scoffings and sundry other criticisms of some on the fuel and grocery schemes but the education issue has brought a wider range of paternalistic comment into the open.

I appreciate that it is critical to the success of any scheme to measure the performance of schools that the measurement system properly take account of a wide range of factors and that appropriate balances be achieved. This is a matter for the governments and system adminstrators. My issue is to do with the principle.

As a parent I went to considerable effort to avoid any involvement in the School Councils of the schools that my children attended. My strong preference was to trust the system to deliver a quality education to my children letting me know how the kids were going from time to time. I am embarrassed to admit that I was successful in this avoidance while they were at primary school.

Things changed in high school. Against my better judgement I was convinced to go to a meeting to be involved in an action planning exercise. We received a lot of information, had a strong debate and came to some pretty reasonable conclusions. Then the representative of the Department thanked us for our time and, basically, said that while our approach was interesting it was not what was going to happen. The experts had a different idea of where the school would go over the next 5 to 10 years. Along with others from that meeting, I spent the next 7 years on the School Council.

Once our community had information and the opportunity to discuss it, we were able to make decisions about the direction that our school should take. We were also in a position to make the rest of the community aware and to use that grunt to take on the Department of Education. We succeeded, but not without the promise of bringing 200 4WDs complete with pig dogs to town for a chat.

It would have been an option, of course, for some parents to simply send their children to another school. Perhaps not so comfortable for the children who would have had to travel some distance or to board but it was an option that was taken up by some parents in the area.

The point of this little yarn, in case it is not clear, is that without information we would have had no chance. No chance to move to change the school and no chance to make a decision to send our kids elsewhere.

The experts may also have been right. The though never crossed my mind at the time but it is possible. But they could not convince the parents. They could not provide information or analysis that was compelling for a reasonably competent community.

Of course, even the provision of full and accurate information about the outcomes that schools achieve will be of limited value. It will provide us with 'league tables' and might inspire some to get stuck into their local school and try to improve their outcomes. If the money was to go to those on the top of the table then the poorer schools will slowly become worse and worse. And if you are in a place where there are very limited options and your local school is on the poor end of the table then you are in deep trouble.

The trick is to use the 'league tables' to focus on the bottom schools with money and other resources so that they don't stay at the bottom of the pile while providing enough incentive to the 'top' schools to do their best to stay there.

Julia Gillard seems to be singing that song strongly at the moment. If she is serious then she has a winner and perhaps there will be an education revolution.

And about time!

How to Bugger It Up

The analysis of the major scare that the Northern Territory Labor Government had last week has focused almost entirely on what went wrong with the election. But some, perhaps most, of the reasons for its smack in the mouth, started a long time ago. If they are to get their act together then they need to make a few changes. So I thought that I would get back into my blog and provide a bit of advice.

A large majority is something that feels good on election night. Everyone is happy. After a while though the groups start to form up, positions are allocated, noses go out of joint and aggravation grows. So it did with NT Labor. We had members crossing the floor and no resultant penalty. A Minister resigns on principle and the reaction is not much more than a shrug of the shoulders. A popular Chief Minister became isolated from the troops and was eventually removed. The new CM was someone who had been around but who was not as well known as some may have thought. That large majority allows for indulgence.

The larger problem with the Labor Government, however, is on the policy front. Every government, over time, gathers baggage. It is not the job of government, contrary to the apparent view of some of the media minders around, to make people happy all of the time.
The decision making, governing job, necessarily means that some people are going to be unhappy with some decisions. Of course, people are not silly. They know that it wont always go their way. They balance things out over time but the unhappiness can build up.

Up here, with mobile polling, we have election week or two rather than election day. Time on the booths here, and with not too many in a smaller community that turn out to work on the booths, means that you spend a long time in the sun. The great thing is that you get to meet all of your neighbours from around the community and you have time to chat. My survey of the people who passed through the booths I worked on was not in any way scientific. It was just talking to people who wanted to talk about what had crept up their noses and was causing them to think about how they might vote.

The calling of the election a year early was an issue along with the lousy strategy of having a go a Terry Mills. A nice bloke. OK he is useless and hopeless but kicking him wasn't necessary. The other issues varied:

• Local government reform. Had to happen but badly handled and arrogant. The government seemed to be hiding something and could never get its story about the need for reform sorted out;
• The Daly. We need a proper plan to protect the river - and the fishing - but at the same time to give certainty to the farmers. They have had time to come up with a proper plan and make a decision. Probably just holding off until after the election;
• Animal welfare. It has been on the agenda for a long time and they keep saying they will do something. Had a review but nothing has eventuated. They have had time;
• Litchfield Park. It needs a proper maintenance schedule. Not good enough that sites are not opened for months after the Wet. They have had time to sort it and don't seem to care. All the money is in the bloody Waterfront;
• Gamba. Great grass. Should be banned. It is time that a proper plan was put in place.
• Mimosa pigra. Government doesn't seem to care that it is getting out of control again.

I talked to a lot of people and very few mentioned law and order or the economy and the only people who talked about Impex were those who wanted to find out what it was or to laugh about calling an election about putting a gas plant in the harbour.

So, what should they do about the situation?

First, make decisions based on the evidence and after consulting with interested stakeholders. Don't delay and don't duck the tough ones. Take a line from the pool fencing decision. Unpopular with a lot of people and a strong anti line taken by the media but, 6 years down the track, it is part of the furniture and, based on the average number of deaths in the previous 10 years, there are now at least 14 children alive who would not have been around.

Secondly, get the process right. Talk to people. Explain, consult and negotiate. Don't duck the tough meetings and don't let public servants duck them either. For instance, local government reform had the potential to be a winner but forcing people was just stupid. At the cost of a little more time and more attention to meeting the needs of people, rather than the government, there could have been a lot of positive outcomes.

Thirdly, be a Labor Government. If the public had wanted a tough on crime, lock 'em up, government they would have put the other mob in. Certainly, they want the problem of anti-social behaviour fixed but not by following the policies promoted by the red neck letter writers to the NT News. Labor Governments should care about people. They should have the courage to look at problems holistically and maybe even the intelligence to find innovative solutions to difficult social problems.

And finally, don't be continually conned on the big projects. We all know we need them and they should never be ignored but they are not going to make people vote for Labor. You see we all know that the other mob can do that stuff too. They are not what sets Labor apart from the CLP.

How about not trying to steal the clothes from the CLP for a while and, instead, try to pinch some of the clothes from the Greens? Not all of them, just enough to let people know that you actually do care about the environment and that you aren't just reacting to an election cycle.

That will do for now. Get on with it and I will provide some more advice later.