Ranting for the good of the public (transport)

Getting back to me naively thinking I can make a difference, and following on from my recent post regarding my correspondence with members of Her Majesty's Commonwealth Ministry, I also wrote a little while ago to various Powers-That-Be regarding public transport in my fair home town of Melbourne, again as a result of an environmental campaign (this time by the petulantly-named organisation "PT4ME2").

The e-mail I sent out is reproduced below, but it was the responses I got that were more interesting, I regret to say:

Dear sirs/mesdames

I am sending this e-mail as a result of the campaign by PT4ME2, and agree with, and impress upon you, all of the below points. I say this even though I live close to the city and quite close to a railway station - other Victorians should also have easy and cheap access to public transport. I personally use public transport and cycle as much as I can, largely because I have two very young children, and want them to enjoy an Australia like the one I grew up in - not a congested, polluted, cesspool (i.e., covered in filthy water from rising, globally-warmed seas).

However, even if you're a global warming cynic, you can't deny that there are more cars on the roads every day, and everyone seems to be getting a lot angrier out there.

Whenever I look at maps of Melbourne, there are two glaring gaps in the rail network: the huge nothingness between the Hurtsbridge and Lilydale lines (where Doncaster and many other Eastern suburbs are) and the pitifully short Glen Waverley line. Rectifying these seem to me two easy fixes to the transport and pollution woes of Melbourne, and (if we allow ourselves to be a little cynical for a few seconds) sure vote-winners. Further changes would bring even larger rewards.

Here's that stuff I agree with, and thanks for reading/contemplating:

Melbourne is growing and more people need transport. With concern about climate change and rising petrol prices, Melbourne's growth is not sustainable without more and better public transport.

Victorians want more people catching public transport, cycling and walking; fewer trucks on our roads, more freight on rail; and fewer kilometres travelled by car and truck.

Public transport should: be fast, frequent, reliable, affordable and safe; grow as Melbourne grows; be available to all Melbournians; and be managed as an integrated, co-ordinated network.

This means bringing forward existing public transport projects, committing to new projects and accelerating programs to move freight off our roads and onto rail.

It also means rejecting new toll roads and road tunnels because they promote dependence on cars and increase greenhouse gas emissions.

The first, very quick, response I got was from Bruce Atkinson, member of the State's Opposition and the Deputy President of the Victorian Parliament's Upper House, the Legislative Council:

I acknowledge and thank you for your email regarding 'Better Public Transport'.
I strongly support improved public transport and I am keen to establish a broader, more visionary, more contemporary response to the needs of the community.
In that context, I am concerned that the recent Eddington Report did little to evaluate and advocate for the needs of mid to outer suburbs.
I am also concerned about the lack of connectivity in our public transport system planning, including the failure to address north-south routes, as well as areas such as Doncaster and Rowville that are not adequately serviced.
I will continue to advocate the need for improved public transport services to the current Government and to work with my colleagues to develop policies for the Liberal Party that are more responsive to community needs.
Yours sincerely,
Bruce Atkinson
MLC Deputy President, Legislative Council
Member for Eastern Metropolitan Region

Not a bad response, really. Less impressive was the response from Lynne Kosky, Victoria's Minister for Public Transport and The Arts:

Thank you for forwarding your email to the Minister for Public Transport and The Arts, this acknowledgment of receipt.

That is the response, word-for-word. I don't even know what it means!!!

But I was the most impressed with what appeared to be a personally written response from the Federal Minister for Finance, Lindsay Tanner:

Dear Riley

Thanks for your email. I apologise for the delay in responding.

Although public transport is a State issue, the Federal Labor Government recognises the importance of public transport – especially in the face of climate change. Our National Platform outlines our commitment to working with State and Territory governments on issues of rail transport and urban public transport.

Last year I made a submission to the Eddington Review urging the State government to reject plans for another tunnel or road in the city, and to invest in public transport. I have attached my submission for your information.

Yours sincerely

Lindsay Tanner
Minister for Finance and Deregulation
Federal Member for Melbourne

www.lindsaytanner.com

The submission (which can be found here) was unequivocally in favour of boosting investment in public transport for Melbourne, and reducing our reliance on roads. Mr Tanner - a Tip of the Hat to you, sir.

PS As a literal post-script, I also got a letter in the post about a month-and-half later from the Department of Transport on behalf of the Minister for Public Transport. This letter assured me that "The Government is expanding public transport in Victoria", and released "Meeting Our Transport Challenges" to assist with this (albeit, in May 2006...)

Nothing like a response from a Government Bureaucracy to reassure you in case you had any delusions that you had a voice in a democracy...

Solar panel for a love machine

It's not all TV and toilet training on this blog - I also rant to make the world a better place.
Just last week I sent a little missive off to the current Minister for the Environment, the incomparable Peter Garrett, in response to a campaign by the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The first part was the ACF's own standard postcard material, supplemented by my own ranting in the last part:

Dear Mr Garrett

I'm very disappointed that the Government has announced new restrictions on the solar panel rebate program - at a time when Australia should be ramping up its efforts to tackle climate change.

The new $100,000 per annum household means test is going to stop thousands of Australian families from going solar, and put a big dent in our growing solar industry.

I'm calling on you to be our solar champion - and increase the means test to $250,000 per annum - the same level as the household energy and water efficiency 'green loans' program.

I also know the biggest decision your Government will make this year will be setting Australia's 2020 target for reducing our greenhouse pollution.

The target will set the scene for Australia's overall effort on climate change - and for our shift to solar, wind and other forms of renewable energy. That's why, in addition to increasing the means test for the solar rebate, I also urge you to commit to a strong greenhouse pollution reduction target of at least 30% by 2020, and ensure a cleaner, safer future for Australia.

Personally, I understand why the Government has made a serious attempt to appear fiscally conservative, but this measure makes the Government appear both cheap and short-sighted. This is an area where 'wealthier' households can lead the way and reduce greehouse emissions, as well as exert downward pressure on solar costs for all (thanks to the consequent economies of scale).

It's really a no-brainer - this is an environmental issue, not a welfare issue - but the Government's supposed credibility on envirionmental issues have been seriously tarnished by this debacle.

I urge you to take this back to cabinet and fight for them to reconsider.

Regards

Riley Jones

Well, I just read yesterday that he may very well have taken my (and possibly other people's) suggestions on board: Garrett signals a reprieve for solar industry.

This ranting thing surely is the stuff from which dreams are made...

Wash your fucking hands!!!!

Yes, it is past beer o'clock (though always Rant O'Clock) - hence the excitingly pacy nature of the heading of today's instalment.
But I just read this article - Hep A outbreak linked to cafe - and, in particular, the last line: "Hepatitis A is found in faeces of the infected person and can be spread by direct contact with food, beverages or crockery."
Jesus Christ!
Just wash your fucking hands. It's not hard, people.
You filthy, filthy people*.
* Obviously, I'm not referring to the people who read this blog, who are fastidious in their cleanliness. Some would say psychotically so. And they take it as a compliment.

Guilty! I mean...Not Guilty!

A quick mini-rant about the death penalty, inspired by this recent article in The Age: Ross cleared of murder nearly 90 years ago.
Seems there was once a guy who was charged of committing a (pretty horrible) crime, the prosecution used some trumped up evidence in his trial, and he was sentenced to death...and then hanged for it.
Turns out - he was clearly innocent.
The Victorian Government has now taken the brave step of posthumously pardoning him, which removes the stain from his character, but, obviously, not the noose from his neck.
However unlikely such a turn of events may be these days (pause for sarcastic effect), this case highlights how final, but also how flawed, the death penalty can be.
Problem is, how do we know that the persons responsible for enforcing the law (e.g., the police, the prosecutor's office, even the judiciary) are doing their job correctly? Or even competently?
We don't.
I agree that the people who commit some crimes may be deserving of death. But in light of the fact that the community is rarely likely to be 100% certain of the guilt, or extent of the guilt, of any one person (quite apart from the fact that a Government should probably not be responsible for killing its own citizens), we should keep the death penalty off the table.
Anyway - that's what lynch mobs and vigilante justice are for.

The force is strong with this one…

Does anyone else think that "Barack Obama" could be a kick-arse Jedi name? If you disagree, add “Kenobi” to the end of it…
If this nomination process goes all the way to the Democratic Convention, Hilary and Barack should sort it out with a lightsaber duel (Hilary would have to be banned from zapping Barack with her electricity fingers).

Obama-rama

To quote Professor Farnsworth (at least in part): "Good news, everybody! Hilary Clinton has received some very bad news!"
Yes, last week, John Edwards, the working-people's millionaire, officially endorsed Barack Obama in the Democratic primary race. I was somewhat impressed by Edwards when he was campaigning for someone else to win the nomination (a certain John Edwards), even though the rest of the US appeared not to be.
An Edwards presidency was not to be, but his hold-out and eventual endorsement now raises the tantalising possibility of...an Obama/Edwards ticket - now that would be exciting (in the same way that, I don't know, combining red and white wine in the same glass is exciting)!
It's expected that the democratic nomination will be all but wrapped up by tomorrow, so when you read this blog, Mr Obama, consider this advice: like Clinton, Edwards is white and also aspires to to have an affinity with the working class, but he's got something that Clinton doesn't have: a penis!(1)
And if there's something American voters like, it's penises.
John Edwards could be that penis.
As for Mr and Mrs Clinton (I'm not really sure which is which any more), they put up a good (and dirty) fight, and Hilary would have been an equally historic president, but they should really now just accept defeat graciously, and instead focus their energies on the next stage of their dynastic succession: Chelsea!
By the time she's ready to assume the position, it's possible that America's penis-fixation may have waned enough that they will be prepared to vote for her vajayjay...
We can dare to dream.

(1) Note: Clinton may have a penis.

We the (male) people

Just after I change the name of my blog, a surprising twist of anti-rantiness in this post: Congratulations to America (a "Tip of the Hat", if you will)!
I've been keeping a close eye on the Democratic primaries (thanks very much to my friends Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert) and it looks like, although all of the black people have obviously been voting for Obama and all of the women have been voting for Hillary, in the primaries held in Indiana last week, WHITE MEN have finally shown that they might still have some influence in a presidential election.
God Bless/Damn America.
Whilst anti-ranting, congrats also to Cadel Evans, Australia's favourite cyclist (and anyone who's driven in Melburne knows how much we love cyclists), who recently wore a "Free Tibet" T-shirt during the Liege-Bastogne-Liege one-day classic.
If he receives any discrimination over this, I will have only one response: BOYCOTT! That's right: I won't watch the Olympics telecast on television.
They will rue the day.
PS I believe China's human rights record is also an acceptabvle reason for boycotting.
PPS Go Cadel, Tour de France '08. I WILL watch that.
PPPS I should point out that Jon and Stephen are my TV friends, not real friends.