Comments on Justine Ferrari “A curriculum at the crossroads”, 9/10/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/opinion/a-curriculum-at-the-crossroads/story-e6frg6zo-1225936206830
The current national curriculum attempt, while having its merits, has been wrong from the start.
It is an attempt of centralisation by Canberra, or the federal government.
With that in mind, it is difficult to leave enough flexibility to suit different circumstances across the nation.
What it should have been doing is a high level guideline of curriculum rather than a uniform national curriculum.
2010-10-10
Think outside the Murray-Darling Basin!
Comments on Graham Lloyd “Plans must stay true to use of scarce resource”, 9/10/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/plans-must-stay-true-to-use-of-scarce-resource/story-e6frg6xf-1225936209319
Given the reported costs to both farmers due to water cuts and the government due to water buy back, why don't the nation and indeed the Commission think outside the square to be creative and more cost effective and efficient in dealing with the environment?
The thinking should be outside the basin, not just within it!
For example, with those costs in mind, why can't the nation (the government) spend some money in getting water from the northern part of the country into the river system?
Australia is a dry continent. It pays to build water infrastructure to utilise natural rain water from the north. That will last forever and will be a true nation building project.
PS: The article starts with:
"IT is tempting to let the focus stray from the parlous state into which the river system was allowed to slip.
WITH the Murray-Darling Basin charged, birds returning to the wetlands and the rivermouth open to the sea for the first time in half a decade, it is tempting to let the focus stray from the parlous state into which the river system was allowed to slip.
Environmentally, the starting point of yesterday's report by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority that the river mouth remain open at least 90 per cent of the time is a good one.
Consistent flows are needed to preserve the health of the internationally important wetlands such as the Coorong and Lower Murray Lakes and ensure the continued overall health of the system."
Given the reported costs to both farmers due to water cuts and the government due to water buy back, why don't the nation and indeed the Commission think outside the square to be creative and more cost effective and efficient in dealing with the environment?
The thinking should be outside the basin, not just within it!
For example, with those costs in mind, why can't the nation (the government) spend some money in getting water from the northern part of the country into the river system?
Australia is a dry continent. It pays to build water infrastructure to utilise natural rain water from the north. That will last forever and will be a true nation building project.
PS: The article starts with:
"IT is tempting to let the focus stray from the parlous state into which the river system was allowed to slip.
WITH the Murray-Darling Basin charged, birds returning to the wetlands and the rivermouth open to the sea for the first time in half a decade, it is tempting to let the focus stray from the parlous state into which the river system was allowed to slip.
Environmentally, the starting point of yesterday's report by the Murray-Darling Basin Authority that the river mouth remain open at least 90 per cent of the time is a good one.
Consistent flows are needed to preserve the health of the internationally important wetlands such as the Coorong and Lower Murray Lakes and ensure the continued overall health of the system."
G20 and other world and international institutions
Comments on Thom Woodroofe “The G20: More development needed”, 10/10/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/10/the-g20-more-development-needed-2/
The G20 should consolidate on its role in world economic and financial affairs first to make it both effective and efficient to steer the world economy and ensure financial stability.
In that role, the G20 should gradually play a leading role in coordinating the agendas of main international economic and financial institutions like the world trade organisation, IMF and the World Bank.
It is possible and indeed desirable for G20 to play a leading role in negotiating a world climate change agreement. The UN should mandate G20 such a role, perhaps as its effective climate change secretariat.
At this stage, it appears more difficult for the G20 to play the role for world security, given the complexity of security issue. Just imagine, if the five UN security permanent members could not reach agreement on some issues, how could the G20 which include all those five to reach agreement on the same issues?
So, the best strategy for the G20 is to play a role in areas it can be successful and gradually to establish itself to be an effective world body, and then to broaden its agenda and influences, including possibly the reforms of UN governing mechanisms
The G20 should consolidate on its role in world economic and financial affairs first to make it both effective and efficient to steer the world economy and ensure financial stability.
In that role, the G20 should gradually play a leading role in coordinating the agendas of main international economic and financial institutions like the world trade organisation, IMF and the World Bank.
It is possible and indeed desirable for G20 to play a leading role in negotiating a world climate change agreement. The UN should mandate G20 such a role, perhaps as its effective climate change secretariat.
At this stage, it appears more difficult for the G20 to play the role for world security, given the complexity of security issue. Just imagine, if the five UN security permanent members could not reach agreement on some issues, how could the G20 which include all those five to reach agreement on the same issues?
So, the best strategy for the G20 is to play a role in areas it can be successful and gradually to establish itself to be an effective world body, and then to broaden its agenda and influences, including possibly the reforms of UN governing mechanisms
2010-10-08
The US has got too much at hands!
Comments on Donald Emmerson “China’s ‘frown diplomacy’ in Southeast Asia”, 8/10/2010, http://www.eastasiaforum.org/2010/10/08/chinas-frown-diplomacy-in-southeast-asia/
The US has many things to be concerned or worry about, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the middle east, its economy in terms of slow recovery, high unemployment and big deficits.
The book of Obama's Wars reflects part of the problems the US has been having: its military still thinks it is invincible and can win the Afghanistan war to a decent standard, but its political master has to consider its costs in both short and long terms and has to take a different direction.
In that context and with implications for the Southeast Asia region, the following from the post is interesting to note:
"As for the divergence of Southeast Asian and American perspectives on China, suffice it to recall this remark by a high-ranking official in an ASEAN country: ‘Remember,’ he told me, ‘for us in Asia, the US is geopolitical, but China is geographical.’ In other words: Faraway friends are welcome and helpful, but the local landscape is a permanent fact. One has to adapt to it — and to the seascape — to survive."
The US has many things to be concerned or worry about, such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the middle east, its economy in terms of slow recovery, high unemployment and big deficits.
The book of Obama's Wars reflects part of the problems the US has been having: its military still thinks it is invincible and can win the Afghanistan war to a decent standard, but its political master has to consider its costs in both short and long terms and has to take a different direction.
In that context and with implications for the Southeast Asia region, the following from the post is interesting to note:
"As for the divergence of Southeast Asian and American perspectives on China, suffice it to recall this remark by a high-ranking official in an ASEAN country: ‘Remember,’ he told me, ‘for us in Asia, the US is geopolitical, but China is geographical.’ In other words: Faraway friends are welcome and helpful, but the local landscape is a permanent fact. One has to adapt to it — and to the seascape — to survive."
2010-10-01
Is IMF credible in lecturing other governments?
Comments on David Uren “Labor facing storm clouds: International Monetary Fund”, 30/09/2010, http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/labor-facing-storm-clouds-international-monetary-fund/story-fn59niix-1225932014281
I used to have high respect for IMF the fund, but not any more since its appalling responses to the Asia financial crisis in 1997.
It has changed any bit for any better ever since.
It always lectures other governments in the world on this or that, even though it itself cannot do its job properly.
Isn't that enough to ignore what it says?
I used to have high respect for IMF the fund, but not any more since its appalling responses to the Asia financial crisis in 1997.
It has changed any bit for any better ever since.
It always lectures other governments in the world on this or that, even though it itself cannot do its job properly.
Isn't that enough to ignore what it says?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
