Is the SA government tanking over water?

Every now and again you come across an idea that simply makes good sense; a blinding flash of the obvious, as they say.


Last weekend, trawling through the weekend real estate pages, one such bright idea struck my eye. A land division in the Yorke Peninsula is offering a 100,000 litre rain water tank free with every 900m2 house block sold. They have mains water to the door – so this isn’t simply about providing a water supply where none exists. It’s a great marketing idea that gets a big environmental tick. Great idea! Full marks!

There’s a whole lot like this that can be done in South Australia to reduce our future reliance both on the Murray for water and our generators for power.

The soon to be released revised Greater Adelaide Plan forecasts significant population growth for our city and our State. We’re right to be concerned for the strain that population growth will bring to our water and power resources but, at the same time, we cannot not grow. Our power infrastructure is largely aging and based on old technology, but the debate about nuclear power seems still a long way off. We’re also concerned that land prices have skyrocketed, leaving young families to struggle even more to build their own home; but conventional wisdom says that there’s little that can be done to tinker with the market.

The question then is: can we develop a way of assisting young families and support population growth while minimizing the drain on our water and power resources? The Democratic Labor Party believes we can.

We want to see every new major government land release to include, in the sale price, a 100,000 litre rain water tank plumbed into the house and free solar panels on every roof. Through the Land Management Corporation, the government raises significant revenue in land sales. Forgoing part of that revenue in this way makes good sense – it’s an investment in our future.

We have a once-for-all-time opportunity here. Wouldn’t it be great to see the Buckland Park development, for example, lead the way in protecting our environment and our resources while at the same time helping young families reduce their power and water bills. Buckland Park could become a model for sustainable growth, but we have to act now. Once the blocks are sold and the houses built we’ve missed the opportunity.

There’s an old saying that fads start at the top while solutions come from the bottom. It’s time we stopped placing all of our focus on the Federal argy-bargy over water flows, important as that is, and begin to look closer to home for real, lasting solutions.

The Democratic Labor Party has a proud history of innovation on environmental issues. In 1974 we pushed for kerbside recycling, years before it became a reality. We’re not ‘greenies’ but we do believe in taking care of what we’ve got. Like the Yorke Peninsula deal, we think this makes good sense, but we can’t wait for years for the idea to permeate through the grey marble walls on North Terrace.

What do you think?

On disability, euthanasia and the State Election

In my last blog entry, I began by quoting former US Vice President Hubert Humphrey on the moral test of a good government. I argued that the only true measure of a just society (not just of government) should be how we treat those who “live at the margins”, experiencing poverty, dysfunction, disability, homelessness etc.

This disability question is extremely and personally important to me for a number of reasons. Firstly, I have a young son with Down Syndrome and my wife’s brother lived his whole life with a significant disability. My Upper House running mate, David McCabe’s brother also lives with a disability. I know that Dave would agree with me when I say that the profound and immeasurable privilege of sharing in the lives of these wonderful individuals in all their pains and their joys makes progressing justice and dignity for those with a disability ‘deeply personal’.

Secondly, as some of you will know, I am a long time campaigner against euthanasia and assisted suicide. When I read the literature, it is blindingly obvious to me that the mere legalization of voluntary euthanasia (VE) or Physician Assisted Suicide (PAS) in places such as the Netherlands, Switzerland and some US States, at the very least, becomes the ‘elephant in the room’ for those living with a disability in those places.

As many disability activists have noted, it is not that they feel their lives at imminent risk. It is more about the eventual extension of who qualifies for VE and PAS to more and more groups of persons. It is about doctors, trained to save, who become desensitized to the value of life once they begin down that path. Think about questions of scarce and expensive medical resources and a judgement about who is worthy to receive them and who isn’t. And, closer to home, once society accepts that some lives are of more value than others, it is not difficult to foresee the beginnings of a subtle shift away from principles of equity and justice for the disabled.

This is scary stuff indeed, but it is also the reality in some places and it might be where we’re heading too.

As many of you will recall, SA Greens MLC, Mark Parnell’s recent euthanasia bill was defeated in the Upper House by one vote not two months ago. The closeness of the debate shocked me, especially considering the flaws in the bill and the clear risks associated with it.

I was also shocked, and deeply dismayed by the references in speeches by Mr. Parnell and the Hon Ann Bressington to a talk given by Dr. Paul Collier on the steps of Parliament House on the 28th of October at a rally in favour of this bill organised by the SA Voluntary Euthanasia Society.

As Mr. Parnell mentioned, Dr. Collier was a candidate at the last State Election for Dignity for the Disabled (now Dignity for Disability) and may stand again for the March 2010 election.

Let me say, at this point, that I respect every person’s right to hold and promote their views. I also know something of Dr. Collier’s work and admire his advocacy and passion. The fact that by his appearance at the SAVES rally and by the references to what he is reported to have said (appearing in Parliamentary Hansard), it is obvious to me that he supports a right to choose euthanasia and would, I imagine, therefore support pro-euthanasia legislation. That’s his right.

I do question, however, the fact that, by the wording of the SAVES leaflet for the event, he spoke as a representative of Dignity for Disability. Even if he were to have made it known (and he may have) that what he said that day in favour of euthanasia was his own private view and not necessarily that of Dignity for Disability I would seriously question the right of anyone to formally represent any organisation whilst espousing a view on something so fundamental as life and death, where the organisation had no policy position on the issue and where, in all probability, the membership had not the opportunity to express their views.

As for Dr. Collier’s candidacy at the next election, I would suggest that his public position on such a contentious issue, (particularly for those with a disability, as I have already discussed) has the potential to fracture the organisation and to dissipate support. If the candidates have yet to be chosen, I urge their selection committee to give this matter serious consideration.

Ultimately, if Dr. Collier is a candidate for the Upper House, then I respectfully suggest that South Australians who want a fair go for disability have a clear choice: support for the Democratic Labor Party is representative advocacy that respects life – what we call true human dignity.

Your views are welcome. I would love to hear from people living with a disability and those who represent the various peak bodies.

Note: anyone who wanted to follow up literature supporting my position vis-a-vis disability and euthanasia and assisted suicide would do well to read the online version of the US Disability and Health Journal this month, particularly the article by Diane Coleman.

(Go to: www.disabilityandhealthjnl.com/current) You can also read a summary article at: www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/is_death_better_than_disability.

It ain't over 'till it's over

Once again, with an intrepid band of friends, I sat through the Parliamentary debate on euthanasia on Wednesday Night. Once again, what we witnessed was high drama.

We were all bracing ourselves for Greens MLC, Mark Parnell's bill to pass with the support of the Independent MLC, Ann Bressington.

As the third in her set of amendments was defeated - by a significant margin, Bressington withdrew her remaining raft of changes. Most, I think expected her to change her position and vote against the bill. But as the debate drew to a close, she was nowhere to be seen and it suddenly dawned on me that she intended to abstain from voting. This would have left the house deadlocked at 10 votes to ten which would have left the President to decide using his casting vote (which, as he expressed, would have caused the bill to pass.

However, at the eleventh hour Liberal MLC, (and previous supporter of the bill) David Ridgway rose to his feet and told of the recent death of his mother and how the circumstances had caused him to reconsider. Moments later the bill was 'passed in the negative' (or lost).

How close can you get!

As a number of friends who witnessed this later commented to me, we should have all been elated at this outcome, but most of us felt something decidedly different.

We know too well that this bill will be back in the new parliament after March 2010 and we also know that there's a risk that it will pass at that time if the wrong people are elected. In otherwords: It ain't over yet.

The DLP are committed to making a difference in the Legislative Council for all South Australians. Blocking euthanasia is just one important step.

Interested in helping? Contact State Secretary, David McCabe at dlpforsa@esc.net.au

voluntary euthanasia at the doorstep

Last Wednesday, I spent the evening and the early hours of Thursday (my wedding anniversary) sitting silently in the gallery of the South Australian Legislative Council (Upper House) listening to proceedings. I know, it's not the most exciting way to spend an evening, but the debate that night was incredibly important.

That was the night when the latest attempt at introducing voluntary euthanasia in SA was debated. You know, I've worked against more than ten euthanansia bills over the years - but nothing could have prepared me for what I saw that night. For the first time over all these years, I was genuinely scared.

For the first time I was forced to confront as reality what I already knew in theory: that the Upper House of the SA Parliament was getting closer to the time when it would say 'Yes' to euthanasia. Only one more vote and the SA Upper House would have been the first Australian legislature since 1996 (NT) to give euthanasia the nod.

One more vote! And that vote is closer than you might think! In March 2010 two anti-euthanasia MLCs will retire. Their potential replacements are understood to think differently. There's nothing that the major parties can do now to fix this problem. Family First will see their member returned and, good as that is, it won't fix the problem.

The Democratic Labor Party will run 'Above the Line' candidates for the SA Upper House (as well as Lower House candidates). Make the DLP a priority for your vote and you will be making sure that your vote counts on euthanasia.

We'll be going all out to get our candidate over the line.