Rowing in Tasmania: Does Propaganda & Reiteration Really Work?

On Friday the 7th September, a blog appeared here in response to a puff piece and editorial  printed in Fairfax’s The Examiner. Within 24 hours a committee member at the North Esk Rowing Club, received an email from a high ranked official within Rowing Tasmania, attempting to bring this blogger to heel.

The committee member declined (thank you!). As this blogger and possibly many within the Tasmanian Rowing Community know, this is not the first time Rowing Tasmania have attempted to quickly cull any (public or private) dissent from clubs and / or individuals within the Tasmanian Rowing community.

Yesterday, 5 days after the blog post, The Examiner (Launceston) printed another puff piece, which featured in their online edition only.   

The timing and content of this latest propaganda  published in the online Examiner yesterday, again raises more questions than are answered. Simply reiterating the same mantra does not address any questions raised in Friday’s blog, nor make any of the propaganda truer. So again I ask, where are all these new rowers going to come from? What arrangements have been made in regards to NERC’s pontoon: costs incurred by NERC to date and the fact that this 128tonne pontoon is already running at capacity ?!

Looking at Rowing Tasmania’s own Annual Report (2018), further questions arise. Such as, why are Rowing Tasmania sitting on half a million dollars in investments? Surely $150,000 to $200,000 would be sufficient and why isn’t there a dividend being paid back to the member clubs?

Why are Rowing Tasmania sitting on this money and still borrowing boats from member clubs for state selection, training camps and for Tasmanian teams / crews to compete in at National level?

Why are the University of Tasmania (UTAS) still borrowing equipment from clubs such as NERC for events such as the annual varsity challenge (Vice Chancellor's Challenge) – when obviously UTAS are  flush enough to establish and equip their own new club?

The fact that clubs such as NERC are constantly (and have been for years) been requested to stump up boats and other equipment for Rowing Tasmania’s training camps, selections and crews to compete at National level, has not been lost on NERC members, nor the larger Tasmanian Rowing community. Yet all the while Rowing Tasmania are sitting on $500,000 in investments; and to add insult to injury the Tasmanian State Government continue to fund Rowing Tasmania. 

Unfortunately Rowing Tasmania’s Financial Report, year ending 30^th June 2018, does not provide adequate information on the actual costs of running and maintaining Lake Barrington, however, one must assume, the cost is significant. Why then, does Rowing Tasmania wish to add further burden on the Tasmanian Rowing Community by taking on the Inveresk Rowing Precinct and associated costs of additional premises and administration? Another ploy to leach from the Launceston clubs and rowing fraternity?

All things considered, perhaps it is time for the Tasmanian Government to intervene with:

1.   The immediate re-establishment of the Northern Tasmanian Regatta Association.

2.   A full forensic audit of Rowing Tasmania going back as far as possible – perhaps into the far distant reaches of the 1990's RT restructure?

3.   A full audit of Rowing Tasmanian governance and all business practices, including, but not limited to process of filling employee vacancies and job creation.

4.   In addition a mechanism for confidential submissions from Rowing Clubs and Individuals state wide.

5.  The rowing precinct at Inveresk to be run by a consortium of clubs within the precinct itself – autonomy, not a Rowing Tasmania dictatorship. This is not reinventing the wheel; such an arrangement already exists in the South.

Again, we must ask, with a Launceston Municipal Election looming at the end of this year and Federal Gov. election due early next year – are fingers starting to look a little sticky? ….. whose fingers are they and in which pies..... ?

Lets not forget - Rowing Tasmania are sitting on $500,000 investments and STILL appear to be leaching from the rowing community they are supposed to be supporting and advocating for.   

AND why are The Examiner simply publishing these puff pieces instead of doing some actual investigation of their own? 

Previous Blog: The State of Rowing in Tasmania (Inveresk Rowing Precinct)

Blogs by Concerned Citizen Advocacy Groups (Launceston):

• Basil Filtch.
• Tasmanian Rate Payers.
• Tasmanian Open Letters. 
• Heritage Protection Society (Tasmania)
• Launceston Accountability
• Launceston Concerned Citizens Group

Politics: The Unfolding Train Wreck.

What happens when rats are backed into a corner?

They turn on and attack each other. This is what we have witnessed in Australian politics since 2010 and it is the nation, which is suffering, due to this political instability.

Here are a few examples, chosen because each; as Douglas Adams would say demonstrate, ‘the inter-connectedness of all things’.

Climate Change:  

This should have been so simple, remaining a technical and scientific issue – not a political or religious one. Politicians routinely prove themselves to be completely incapable of addressing it, or in some cases understanding even the basic: causes, mechanisms or long-term consequences. Result, the biggest obstacle, to addressing both climate change AND energy prices to consumers is politics (and politicians).

Consequently carbon pollution has been given no value. All they had to do was give carbon a value and then address any further market failures, which arose – as they arose. This is basic Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS) principle booted in favor of 'Whats In It For Me (WIIFM) principles.

In other words, if from day 1 there had been a price for limiting carbon dioxide (burning coal) then there would have been an incentive long ago for producing energy which didn’t pollute. As an aside – lets remember that nuclear energy also pollutes, as nuclear waste.

As an example had a carbon price been placed on energy, in lets say the 1950’s, we probably would not have had a carbon based energy cycle, but most likely a hydrogen based cycle by now. Why because when you oxidise hydrogen – you get water!

Any carbon-pricing scheme that doesn’t put the final burn on the consumer is absolutely flawed.

We all need to stop thinking of things from a monetary price only, and start thinking and taking individual responsibility for the long-term environmental price. 

In the very least lets see politicians stop pronouncing the word ‘Economic’ as ‘Echo-nomic’. Instead let’s hear them say it as ‘Eco-nomic’. As in: Ecology, Ecological etc. In doing so perhaps they will remember (and subconsciously remind the nation) of the significant true costs AND that one cannot exist long term without the other.

Population Policy: 

Put simply – Australia doesn’t have one. Again the result of political myopia. Why isn't there a Population Policy and when can one be expected?

Health: 

Medicare and pretty much every part of Australia’s Health policy and systems are failing due to short political sightedness - based entirely on a political rotation.

Medicare gaps are increasing sharply, private health insurances do not cover the short fall adequately and what we are now seeing is a system, less like Britain’s NHS and more like the train wreck, which passes for the US system.

This is most certainly NOT in the best interest of any Australian, nor the national economy. It is not possible to have a functional economy without a healthy workforce. The only economically sound and humane national health care policy is one, which is able to provide quality universal healthcare at point of access. Anything less is a national disgrace.

Preventative measures, are of equal importance. Unfortunately, the results of those of the greatest benefit will never be seen immediately, but further down the track in 5, 10 or 15+ years time. Which means, they carry no political currency what so ever.

As an example let’s consider the sugar debate. We know sugar causes diabetes and many co-morbitiies. These result in human suffering and significant costs to national and state healthcare budget(s). Yet still Australia’s federal politicians refuse to introduce measures to combat this - now and into the future. Again, this is a serious issue with a very simple answer and again the game of politics gets in the way.

The simple answer is a sugar tax, on all processed sugars and processed foods containing sugars (including the hidden sugars), with 100% of taxes being put directly into preventative measures such diabetes clinics, vegetable gardens established in every Gov. school nationwide and compulsory healthy cooking curriculums across all schools nation wide. It wouldn’t be hard to work these gardens and cookery components in to other subjects such as science – at early learning, primary and secondary education levels.

Similar programs could also then be established within the border community, such as community gardens and private allotments rented from municipal councils.

Immigration Policy:

Australia needs a more humane policy. No one is suggesting a free for all, but serious questions need to be asked and addressed. What is the true political reason Australia is unwilling to hand those suffering in off shore detention centres, to New Zealand?

Australian politicians, post 911 have used vilification and fear not only as an election tool but also to as an excuse for their cruel and inhumane immigration and ‘border protection’ policies. In reality from the earliest days of recorded history humankind has inflicted acts of terrorism on their fellow man. In fact the greatest weapon of terrorism is not violence, but fear and demoralisation.

Successive Australian Governments have deliberately created an Us v’s Them narrative which is now becoming a flash point within Australian communities and providing terrorists with exactly the result they are aiming to achieve.

The only real long term solution here is to turn the country of origin into less off a shit hole, or war zone than it is. A situation, which is only going to escalate due to forced migration due to the impacts of climate change.

Conclusion:

Australia’s political system (indeed the West Minister System itself,) is always going to be a double-edged sword. A candidate, or party can be as altruistic (and logical) as they like, but if never elected it’s impossible to give it any affect.

Nationally the electorate has become so focused on ‘what’s in it for me’, rather than what’s best for the nation.

Howard on GST is a great example of this. Howard wasn’t going to bring in GST - but then did!

Yes, the GST is an inconvenience (aka pain in the a***) at a business level – but it was also always going to be in the national best interest.

As it was under the old Sale Tax System most people had no idea what, had and didn’t have sales tax on it, let alone what the rate was! In the end the High Court ruled that it was unconstitutional and so it had to go; a point I believe was lost on those voting against the GST at the time. Oh how different the political landscape may have been now had the majority grasped this simple concept and voted for John Hewson’s GST in the first place. 

The major screw up with the GST is all the exemptions. Had the GST been a blanket system across all goods and services, the initial rate would most likely have been 5%. My suspicion is that in the not too distant future it will rise to 15%.

Watching federal politics these days is like watching political Tinder, with the constant swipe left, swipe right. Could we please now have some political stability, cease the nasty games and have some bi-partisan moves to pass some logical, simple legislation / plegolicies which act and work for the nation far into future. Instead of self serving political interest, including the focus on winning the next bloody election and this ridiculous Right v’s Left narrative; a divide and conquer narrative, which again, serves no purpose other than to fuel the Us v’s Them narrative. It doesn’t reflect reality either. Nothing in life is simply black and white, there are and will always be shades between.

Now before anyone gets their knickers in a twist on each of these examples, I do intend to address each individually component individually in later blogs. So unwedgie your undies, make yourself a nice cup of tea, put any religious angles and angles to one side (as religion has no place in politics: S116 Australian Constitution) and have a proper meditate on each of the examples and over all view point given here. 

I'm also including a few links, below for those looking for further information. 

The Paris Agreement on Climate Change.

United Nations: Climate Change.

Major Reports: Climate Change.

Assessing the Impact of Climate Change onMigration and Conflict:

(Document: Research by / for World Bank). 

Climate Change Authority: Australian Government. 

Simon Holmes à Court    (and via Twitter) is a great place to find information links.

 

State of Rowing in Tasmania

"Oarsome Rowing Precinct for Tamar”: Is it best really for the sport?
 
Yesterday The Examiner newspaper ran a puff piece and an online editorial on the Launceston City Council's establishment of a rowing precinct at Inveresk. 

The precinct itself had been on the table since the early 2000s, however, the most recent developments are cause for concern and raise more questions than they answer none of which, this writer has received adequate - or in some cases ANY answers to.

I am also fully aware that in writing this blog Rowing Tasmania may come after me, mine and / or North Esk Rowing Club for placing these questions in the public domain. As may Launceston City Council.  

Perhaps the Tasmanian Minister for Sport & Recreation (Premier) Will Hodgman, Rowing Australia and the City of Launceston could answer them, as no one else seems willing to, or perhaps able to. 

How is this going to function when it comes to the pontoon? When the North Esk Rowing Club (NERC) (including North Esk Dragon Boats) and St Patrick's College already have the pontoon running at capacity?

North Esk Rowing Club have been paying for the insurance and repairs of the NERC for the pontoon since it was originally put in position more than 11 years ago. The pontoon having been supplied by a private benefactor. 

After the 2016 flood, NERC spent more than $50k on pontoon repairs. Post flood repairs, NERC were approached by the Launceston City Council and the private benefactor, to discuss the option of adding a second pontoon. NERC chose to take this option, as the pontoon use had already outgrown the pontoon. At no time were NERC (nor St Patrick's College) informed that the pontoon would be shared between themselves AND the entire rowing precinct.

Given this pontoon already runs at capacity, adding extra clubs and organisations to the existing share arrangements may very well be dangerous. So where are the risk assessment reports etc. from Rowing Tasmania and Launceston City Council? 

Will Rowing Tasmania, who have been given control of the precinct (I'll come back to this at a later date) be reimbursing NERC for their $50k+ or will they remove NERC's half at Rowing Tasmania cost and place at the rear access of the NERC's boat sheds, for NERC's exclusive use?

As to the costs of running Rowing Tasmania's head quarters within this rowing precinct, what is this going to cost the Tasmanian rowing community? 

Seat fees are already $14 per crew member, per race. Then add club membership fees, travel, uniforms and compulsory Rowing Tasmania membership. People are already being priced out of the sport and volunteers are dropping away rapidly. 

For almost 50years North Esk Rowing Club has fostered and supported disabled rowing, teenagers from Govt schools and disadvantaged youngsters wanting to row. These are the people most affected by expensive seat fees. All of which has largely been done without any financial or other support from Rowing Tasmania itself, and I've no knowledge of Rowing Tasmania assisting other clubs in these areas.

Serious questions really need to be addressed. As fees increase and costs force rowers out of the sport and volunteers; including coaches, drop away rapidly... are Rowing Tasmania, Launceston City Council and the Tasmanian Liberal Govt. really working in the best interests of rowing, or primarily in the interests of their own political (and other) agendas? 

When all of these elements are put in context it is simply not going to be sustainable for Launceston to have 3 rowing clubs. Where are the rowers and coaches going to come from, the private schools? It's already known that it is difficult to retain these youngsters once they finish school and the private schools state wide are struggling to find experienced coaches. 

Is it realistic to believe that Scotch Oakburn College and Launceston Church Grammar School are really going to give up the independence of their own boat sheds, boat parks and pontoons / ramps, to move to a site managed by Rowing Tasmania, rather than a consortium of all stake holders with equal rights and votes? If North Esk Rowing Club had been aware of this new dynamic prior to their move, one doubts that such a move would ever have been agreed to and NERC would remain on the original site and conditions of their original 99year+ lease with the Crown.

One last thing before signing off. It is almost impossible for clubs within Tasmania to make Rowing Tasmania accountable or questioned, not due to the Rowing Tasmania 'Incorporated Constitution.' that is a rather simple document... no, the problem is the 11 PAGES of By Laws ! and the day to day functionality of the system / organisational structure itself.

Perhaps it's time rowing clubs around Tasmania re-estanblished the NTRA* and STRA**. There is absolutely no doubt that Rowing Tasmania would fight such a move tooth and nail, but perhaps this will be the only way to save rowing, rowing clubs and provide Tasmanian rowers with affordable racing through locally run regattas.

   

*Northern Tasmanian Rowing Association. (NTRA)

**Southern Tasmanian Rowing Association. (STRA)

PS. 

There is a Launceston City Council election due at the end of this year AND a Federal Election early 2019 - just saying.......

Follow up blog on this issue 11th Sept 2018: 

•  Rowing in Tasmania: Does Propaganda & Reiteration Really Work? 

Blogs by Concerned Citizen Advocacy Groups (Launceston):

• Basil Filtch.
• Tasmanian Rate Payers.
• Tasmanian Open Letters. 
• Heritage Protection Society (Tasmania)
• Launceston Accountability
• Launceston Concerned Citizens Group