Ramblings

I have been bogged down on other things, so have not posted here. That will change.

Problems with literature & locale, a post on my personal blog, continues my exploration of aspects of New England's history.

I have been much involved in thinking about certain aspects of our relations with Australia's Aborigines. The posts that resulted were:

• Ken Parish, Legal Eagle & Andrew Bolt on Australia's Aborigines
• Sunday Essay - Bolt, Aboriginal culture & the nature of Aboriginality
• Issues raised by Bolt, Aboriginal culture & the nature of Aboriginality

As so often happens, these posts were strongly influenced by the New England experience.

Publish or perishing Australia's universities is one of a series of posts dealing with aspects of change in higher education that affect New England's universities.  As I noted there, this week's column in the Armidale Express will extends the discussion. I will bring the post up here in due course and then extend the argument with a specifically New England focus.

Bush tucker, local identity & new states

In comments on Australia's geographical diversity, Le Loup wrote:

He is lucky to find anything on Australian Aboriginals. I have searched from a primitive skills & tools point of view & found very little. Early settlement by whites period also lacking info on Aboriginals. Amazing.

Greg also wrote in a comment on the same post:

Very interesting post Jim. Is this a reflection of the deficiency of our education system?

For my part, I have no recollection of learning about my home town (Newcastle) in school other than that Lt John Shortland sailed up the Hunter River in 1797 and discovered coal there. That is it. My own knowledge of the local area is due largely to my own curiosity rather than any formal learning at school. Yet Newcastle is a fascinating town with a story worth telling.

I'm sure that same theme would be repeated elsewhere. That is actually one reason that I have personally been opposed to the national education curriculum. In my view there should be a strong local emphasis on school education in areas such as history, geography and social studies.

It is also hardly surprising therefore that so many people hold "abolish the states" attitudes. They don't perceive any significant regional differences and hence they don't recognise the point for a federal system of government.

Dealing with LL first. In my reply comment I said:

When I was a kid and a boy scout, I was very interested in surviving in the bush. I split matches in half and coated them with wax. I learned about camp fires, cooked damper and johnny cakes, practiced swinging the billy, but was constantly frustrated because I knew nothing about local foods. How could I survive in the bush if I didn't know what was edible?

Things are a bit better today, but there is still an enormous gap.

  The photo shows the start of the bush tucker walk at the Armidale and Region Aboriginal Cultural Centre and Keeping Place.

It's a start, but it's still inadequate.

Looking at the material that LL uses on his blog, A Woodsrunner's Diary, you will see the US focus. That's not a criticism, for LL's focus reflects what is available.

There has been a growing interest in bush issues and bush tucker, partly due to Les Hiddin's popular Bush Tucker series. By the way, it's very hard to get away from New England. If you look at the following video - it's long but enjoyable - you will find that Les's dad came from Armidale! 

The difficulty is that to really know bush tucker or the way the Aborigines lived, you have to know the detail of a particular area, and that's still deficient.

Greg's point raises a different issue. Our education system is deficient and has become increasingly so because of its focus on uniformities and standards, not differences. If you are going to teach maths or science, things that are uniform, then that's okay. However, when you come to history and localities, to the actual pattern of human life, you have to focus on locality and variety.

Think I'm wrong? Well, have a look at this morning's post on my personal blog, Problems with literature & locale. You won't find this stuff in the school curriculum!

Newcastle and Maitland, the Hunter in general, have a particular problem because they have been so over-shadowed by Sydney.

Those of us who continue the fight for self-government for Northern NSW, the broader New England, find it difficult to get to the starting block when our own uniqueness is denied. We have to affirm it, to show it, or we will remain swamped in the presentation of Australian uniformity.    

Belshaw's World - thrown to the wolves in judgement by the media

Note to readers: This post appeared as a column in the Armidale Express on 30 March 2011. I am repeating the columns here with a lag because the Express columns are not on line. You can see all the columns by clicking here for 2009, here for 2010, here for 2011.

I will be in Armidale this Friday to give seminar a paper at the University on social change in the broader new state New England over the period 1950-2000.

The changes that swept the North over the second half of the twentieth century were quite dramatic.

The period breaks into halves. The first was a period of great change, but also a basic historical continuity. Change over the second half was so great that it effectively swept much of the past aside, introducing a major discontinuity into New England’s history. The paper explores the major changes.

Last Saturday was, of course, the election.

I really don’t want to talk about that beyond noting that, like so many others, I felt that the Labor Government had to go and indeed should have gone the election before. Instead, I want to broach an unpopular topic and say why I am pro-politician!

More precisely, I am pro local members independent of party or, for that matter, non-party!

On Saturday, youngest worked as an election official for the NSW Electoral Commission, while my wife worked on a booth. I did as I had done for the last few elections and ferried people around. I did so regardless of their political persuasion.

I don’t know how old I was when I first worked on a booth handing out how to votes at Town hall. Certainly I was still at primary school.

Today, I still regard election day as the peak of our democratic experience, for that is when we all get to judge. Yes, we sometimes make mistakes, but then we do have another chance later. And that’s more than people in Syria or Libya have!

I grew up in a political household. It could hardly be otherwise since my grandfather was member for New England.

I met lots of politicians and listened to the conversations. A bit later, I tried for preselection myself. Later still, I had contact as a senior public servant with ministers and senior back benchers in the Fraser and Hawke Governments. Even today when my focus is on my writing and I am a bit out of direct contact, I still meet ministers or local members at social functions or events.

Over time, I have met some pretty crappy people. Ego driven, win obsessed, blind to arguments on the other side. But I have met some very good people as well.

If Kristina Keneally met me in the street tomorrow she would pass me by. If I said that we had met, she would look vague unless I gave her a very specific context. Then she would not remember me, but would at least be able to place me.

For reasons I won’t bore you with, I ended up going to a bare foot bowls session organised by the Rosebery Branch of the ALP. Rosebery is in Kristina’s electorate.

As an outsider, I clutched my beer and just watched. I couldn’t properly judge her ability, but was very impressed by her warmth.

We country people - for reasons I have outlined before I won’t use the term regional because it has come to mean provincial, second rate - have high expectations of our local members. Among other things, we actually expect them to know what we are talking about!

Generally, they do.

Sydney people don’t have this expectation. In this big and complicated city, you just don’t meet your local member except by accident.

I admit to a bias. I think that country members are just better regardless of party! They get less involved with party games, are more accessible.

But regardless of that, the great majority of local members and especially back benchers actually care.

We are very hard on our politicians, unreasonably so to my mind. We place excessive expectations on them, we burn them out and then we spit them out.

Today, every politician lives in an unreal environment, a gold fish bowl pressure cooker where every move is subject to the white glare of media scrutiny.

It wasn’t always so. Once we cut our local members some slack.

Sir Henry Parkes, the man who founded the NSW public school system, kept on going broke and having to raise personal money by public appeal. Today, can you imagine what would happen if a public appeal was launched to a pay a politician’s debts?

If Sir Henry Parkes was a today politician, he would have been expelled from public life. The fact that we would not then have a public school system is neither here or there. Who needs schools?

Australia's geographical diversity

Note to readers: This post appeared as a column in the Armidale Express on 23 March 2011. I am repeating the columns here with a lag because the Express columns are not on line. You can see all the columns by clicking here for 2009, here for 2010, here for 2011.

In a comment on one of my posts in June 2007, an American set out this challenge.

“Hi, I'm an American. I was surfing the Internet, trying to learn something about Australia's diverse regions from a cultural perspective as opposed to a merely geographical one. All I turned up was information on Aborigines. Where's the Australian Paul Bunyan? Where's the Johnny Appleseed? Where are the pictures of Eskimos contrasted with lumberjacks, miners, farmers and fishermen? You are right. I almost had to conclude that Australia has no regional flavor at all. (Search for "regional flavor" and you will turn up many websites on wine, but none that pay more than lip service to culture.)”

Now this challenge actually hurt. Surely Australia wasn’t as bland as all that?

In fact, Australia does have significant local and regional cultural variations. We are just very bad at recognising them.

Australia has a strong and vibrant core culture that acts as a centre piece for all the different groups making up modern Australia. We fight about elements of this culture, but no one really doubts that it exists.

Advertising agencies are one of the best signs because they focus on those things that will help them sell product. Some may not like the Australia thus presented, but we can all recognise it.

As part of our culture, Australians think of themselves first as Australians. We then go one stage further. We assume that the way we think is just that, simply Australian.

Well, it is and isn’t. Then they assume that the way they think is in fact simply Australian. In reality it's not, for all areas have their own unique style.

Some differences we can recognise. One is Australia's changing ethnic mix.

Australia is still a land of migrants, with each new group adding something to the melting pot. In the beginning, each group stands out because of its different features, adding variety to the visible pattern of Australian life. Then, with time, they have an impact on the core culture itself.

If we take Sydney as an example, different parts of the city have different ethnic and cultural mixes. Leichhardt is Italian, Chinatown is Chinese.

Sydney deliberately tries to play on these differences as part of the city’s presentation of itself as a cosmopolitan city. Local government, too, tries to take advantage of difference.

Melbourne, by contrast, has re-badged itself as a quintessentially European city. Sydney emphasises diversity, Melbourne a unifying theme.

Meantime, Queensland and the Queensland Government sell the story that Queenslanders are somehow different in ways of thinking from the rest of Australia.

We saw this during the floods when the premier and others directly appealed to what they saw as the unique features of Queenslanders. Queenslanders were expected to respond in a certain way because they were Queenslanders.

While some differences are apparent, others are more subtle.

In NSW differing patterns of chain migration - Irish Catholics in the south, Scots Presbyterians in the north - in the early days of European settlement created different social and voting patterns that survive to this day.

Newcastle is traditionally Labor and Union. However, Newcastle was settled by English migrants drawn to the mines and factories. Newcastle has a north English tradition that is very different from the strong Irish and Roman Catholic tradition that held elsewhere in the unions and party.

On the Tablelands, the growth of squatting and the pastoral dynasties created social structures and patterns of life that were completely different from those holding in either the farming or mining communities.

These types of differences fascinate me.

The way Australian history has been taught over the years acts to conceal local or regional variation. We just don’t see it, and consequently we are very bad at either selling it or building on it.

The 2007 criticism of my blogging colleague reflects this. To his outsider’s eye, Australian diversity is purely geographic.

I think that’s a pity.

New England & the O'Farrell Government

Yesterday's post New NSW ministry simply listed the ministers in the new NSW Government. It is too early to know how the ministry might perform. In this post I simply want to list some of the things that I criticised over time in the way the previous government operated since they provide my measuring stick.

Ministers for Bits and Pieces

The previous Government had a bad habit of see problem, give it a ministry. This had little practical effect because the ministries thus created simply sat on top of existing structures and had no real meaning. It also gave some very long barreled and quite confusing ministerial titles.

Power of the Central Coordinating Agencies

The jargon phrase central coordinating agencies is used to describe central agencies, in the old Government Treasury and Premiers & Cabinet, that exercise broad control. These agencies have legitimate functions and can be important if you are trying to bring about change. However, over the last years of the ancien régime centralisation reached the point that those agencies became an almost impenetrable and doctrinaire barrier to real change.

Will this change?

Relations with the Commonwealth

The control exercised by the Commonwealth has become so great in recent years that the real freedom of the states is greatly constrained. That's a reality. One problem with the ancien régime is that it was not prepared to say no, this doesn't make sense, even when ministers and officials were well aware of problems.

I am not talking politics here, although that's an issue. Rather, I am talking about the detail of policy and program at an official as well as ministerial level. Crudely, it was often seen as better to get some money even though those involved knew that overall results might not be good.

Mr O'Farrell's problem here is that if he says no, then it will be presented in party political terms.

Administrative Simplification

Over the long years of the ancien régime it became easier to respond to popular issues, to symptoms, than to either say no or bring about real change. Avoidance of political risk became critical. This affected every aspect of policy.  It also affected the actual operations of government.

Crudely, more time was spent on developing risk management strategies, stakeholder engagement strategies, communications strategies, in ensuring that every box was ticked, than in original thought. The very systems involved in getting things done became so encrusted in barnacles, so inefficient, that many who wanted real change just left.

So how will Mr O'Farrell respond to this? Will it simply be an initial clean-out and then more of the same?

It's not easy. Sydney dominates NSW politics, and Sydney is a sometimes very unpleasant gold fish bowl. This is where Mr Stoner and the Nationals should come in because they have a degree of freedom. The Daily Telegraph or shock jocks may fulminate, but this doesn't necessarily affect opinion in a Kempsey or a Tamworth in quite the same way.

New England Issues

Because New England, Northern NSW, is not recognised as an entity, it tends to get ignored. This is especially important when it comes to cross-links among the regions within New England.

One of the points I have tried to make in my writing is that NSW as an entity has fragmented to the point that the only unity is the formal political structures. This makes policy development very hard.

In the new Government, there are three ministers with regional responsibilities for parts of New England - Don Page, North Coast; Michael Gallacher Hunter; and Kevin Humphries, Western NSW. Can these ministers cooperate? Do they even recognise the need for cooperation?

The appointment of Mr Gallacher has already come under criticism because he is not from the Hunter. I suppose that one point here is that he was Shadow Minister for the Hunter. We shall have to see.

I have written a fair bit on New England policy issues. This writing provides the benchmark against which I shall assess performance.

Conclusion

Anybody who reads this blog on a regular basis would know that I believe that New England cannot really advance without self-government. To that end, we need another referendum. However, that will take time.

For the present, we have to deal with NSW as it is. We have to hope that the new NSW Government can improve performance in a general sense, while also facilitating New England social and economic development.

New NSW ministry

After digging round a bit, I finally found a list of the new NSW ministers in The Australian. This follows. I will comment later.

Free New England

Nigel Morris drew my attention to this graffiti.

Who could disagree?!

NEA blog performance March 2011

The attached graph shows visits (yellow) and page views (yellow plus red) to this blog over March.

The most popular posts in March were:

• Wednesday Forum: Re-imagining Newcastle 189 page views
• Discussion on re-imagining Newcastle continues 189page views
• Results from Wednesday's forum on overcoming division  184 page views
• Wednesday Forum: Overcoming division  177 page views
• Wednesday Forum: improving public transport 166 page views
• Wednesday Forum: Leveraging Newcastle's inclusion in the Lonely Planet global top ten cities  128 page views
• The Poetry of Judith Wright - South of My Days 89 page views
• The Poetry of Judith Wright - Bora Ring 78 page views
• Margaret Olley's New England connection 54 page views
• New England Story - the making of Captain Thunderbolt  47 page views

Excluding search engines, the main referrals to the site came from:

• las.new-england.net.au 40 visits
• belshaw.blogspot.com 24 visits
• newenglandhistory.blogspot.com/ 12 visits
• http://nellibellingen.wordpress.com/category/urunga/ 4 visits

Loss of New England identity

Back tonight from my paper in Armidale and more determined than ever to tell the New England story. I gave part of my reaction in The beauty of Armidale & UNE.

Because of graduation, numbers at the paper were down. But the same issues came up. People didn't know and were interested.
This photo shows the Armidale and Region  Aboriginal Cultural Place and Keeping Centre.

It is part of Armidale's gallery and museum street. Who would know that Armidale had such a street? Park you car, and you can go to multiple museums.

Part of the problem that I am trying to fight is that the people of New England have lost their own sense of self-identity and difference. They have lost their basic history.
I think that's a problem.

Belshaw's World - university now a different world

Note to readers: This post appeared as a column in the Armidale Express on 16 March 2011. I am repeating the columns here with a lag because the Express columns are not on line. You can see all the columns by clicking here for 2009, here for 2010, here for 2011.

Well, we have moved house.

In the end it was a bit of a nightmare. Actually, it was a complete nightmare!

When we moved, eldest daughter was in Copenhagen, while my wife was in New Zealand on business. Youngest helped, but she had university commitments as well. So much of it fell to me.

I don’t want to bore you with it, but I find that I can no longer lug around book boxes quite as easily as I used to. Somehow, they have got heavier! Or have I got older? Really, I am in denial about that one.

Given the move, I don’t feel like writing a serious column this week: in it’s place a meander on some of the things that have involved me since my last column.

Youngest is producing the Ancient History Review at Macquarie University.

As her father, I could wish she put the same effort into her studies! Still, I really don’t have a leg to stand on here. After all, I can remember myself in third year uni!

Second table on the left was our table in the Union. There we gathered between lectures, sometimes to work, more often just to argue. I also spent far more time in the pub, in fact, than my girls do now.

I know that the world has changed since I was at uni. That’s a truism. Still, I have to remember those changes.

I graduated in a world of lots of jobs for graduates, of permanent employment. We also entered the workforce at quite an early age.

My girls live in a very different world.

With twelve years’ schooling, the usual gap year and longer university courses, kids finish studying at a later age. They then enter into a job world where the increase in the number of graduates means that graduates are taking jobs once the preserve of school leavers.

This is a world, too, where jobs or even entire occupational classifications can vanish quickly.

I do wonder about the value of the current focus on sometimes narrow vocational training. Both my girls have opted for broader courses that better reflect their interests, as an increasing number of their cohorts seem to be doing.

I feel that this plus their extra curricular interests will actually help them get that first, critical, full time position.

During the week, there was an interesting discussion on postgraduate education triggered by the remarks of Professor Larkin from Melbourne University.

Professor Larkin argued that there should be fewer PhD students, that they be full time and better paid. Built into his remarks were the apparent implicit assumptions that PhD students were young and that the PhD was training for entry into later stages of a career, especially in academe.

The reality is a little different. The average PhD student is more likely to be in the forties, the number studying part time is now around 50 per cent, while a large number are studying for personal reasons, not to achieve a ticket.

The world of the postgraduate student across all levels has become quite complex.

Debates have been raging about postgraduate qualifications, including the desire of Melbourne University to use the title “doctor” for what are in fact masters level courses.

I have watched these debates with a degree of despair. To my mind, they have little to do with students or the student experience, much to do with university positioning in a competitive world.

I haven’t properly absorbed the latest proposed changes to the Australian qualifications framework. On the surface, they appear to be something of a compromise that will, among other things, add to systemic complexity.

I seem to have settled into an education theme, so will finish on that theme.

While I am very critical of the management of Australia’s universities, I do understand the problems they face. In particular, they live in an unstable world in which actions are dictated by external forces.

During the week I reread Mathew Jordon’s history of UNE as part of my preparation for a seminar paper I have to deliver in Armidale in a few weeks’ time.

I was struck by the way the early College and University retained a consistent strategic focus over a very long period. That was very important, for it took almost forty years for the university to achieve some of the key objectives that emerged in the early days.

Forty years! That’s a very long time. Today, with constant chops and changes to official policy and funding, it’s hard for a university to maintain a consistent strategy over three years, let alone forty!