In an otherwise unprepossessing paddock near Yass in New South Wales, Lawrence Trevanion is doing beautiful and technically fascinating things with daffodils.
Where the beauty is concerned you don’t have to take my word for it. Have a look at his website at www.trevaniondaffodils.com.au/
Although too modest to mention it himself, Lawrence has an international reputation as a daffodil breeder. He has twice been a guest speaker at meetings of the American Daffodil Society.
Lawrence’s international reputation is associated with Narcissus bulbocodium, the petticoat or hoop-petticoat daffodil.
Currently his renown is growing due to his work on breeding with the green N. viridiflorus. He reports that “the very fertile N. viriquilla shows that the intersectional jonquilla hybrids are compatible with the intersectional viridiflorus hybrids”.
He is acknowledged in the American Daffodil Society’s Daffseek database as a pioneer breeder with N. elegans, a native of countries in the western Mediterranean. It has an orange corona and is sweetly scented. It grows in ‘bunches’ rather than as a solitary flower, and the leaves and flowers appear at the same time.
N. elegans
The paddock in which Lawrence undertakes what seems to be a labour of love is thickly grassed in a good year, with scattered eucalyptus trees and scrubby groundcover. It has the appearance of an unkempt sheep paddock, with kangaroo trails testament to their presence and their practised peregrinations. There is a small dam, full nearly to the brim when we visit him in late September.
Among the apparent normal grazing order is evidence of Lawrence’s detailed scientific – especially botanical – mind, applied over thousands of hours with patience, understanding and humility to the propagation of daffodils.
He works at the micro – and almost say microscopic – level, using tweezers to effect fertilisation between two selected cultivars.
People have been working at daffodil (or narcissus) hybridisation for well over a hundred years. There are over 30,000 named hybrids in the official register. But, like so much else in the natural world, it’s not a simple matter. The more one digs, the more complex it seems to be.
"It is generally acknowledged that the genus Narcissus presents great taxonomic problems, and there have been numerous attempts at its classification. Some authors have taken a very wide view of the concept of each species (e.g., Webb, 1980), resulting in as few as 26 recognised species, while some (e.g., Fernandes 1969b) have taken a very narrow view which results in the recognition of a great many species (upwards of 60), often involving a complex hierarchy of infraspecific taxa."
"Most of the groups – most frequently referred to as sections – are fairly obvious, for example the Trumpet daffodils, the Tazettas, the Pheasant's eyes, the Hoop Petticoats, the Jonquils, and so on, and these are the basic divisions in the genus recognised here."
"An additional complication to the taxonomy is posed by hybridisation. Most species of Narcissus will hybridise but, significantly, there is great variation in the fertility of the offspring, depending upon the degree of relationship between the parents. - - There has been a great deal of hybridisation in this very popular, garden-worthy genus, resulting in thousands of hybrid cultivars and selections (Kington, 1998), and doubtless this will continue. Although much of this work has been concerned with sophisticated selection for flower form and colour (e.g., pink and red coronas and apricot-coloured perianth segments), there are probably still some interesting lines of research that could be pursued using the many wild species. Taking just one possibility as an example, the autumn-flowering species (Narcissus serotinus, N. elegans and the green-flowered N. viridiflorus) could perhaps be utilised in the production of a race of larger-flowered autumnal narcissi, thus extending the overall flowering season of the garden forms by several months. With the great diversity of characters exhibited by the species and their numerous variants, there are great possibilities in this natural gene pool. However, some of the species are under threat in the wild, and many more will become so with increasing urban and tourist-based development."
[From the chapter by Brian Mathew, in Narcissus and Daffodil - The genus Narcissus, edited by Gordon R. Hanks, Horticulture Research International, Kirton, UK, Taylor & Francis e-library, 2005.]
On our visit Lawrence talks about his work with patience and good-humour, answering our questions with a chuckle, making it clear that more detail can be provided if we’re game.
If only one had listened more carefully at school or followed up on the biology lessons when it came time for genetics. If only one had a chart of the taxonomic hierarchy for Narcissus.
The story of how Lawrence became interested in the breeding and cultivation of daffodils is rich in emotion and deserving of poetry (or a good feature film) rather than mere prose.
As a youth walking through the bush near Bombala he was struck by finding daffodils which had been planted by early settlers a century or more before, the sole remnants of long gone bush houses and gardens. The apparently fragile yellow forms were still prospering where palings, brick footings, out-houses and other human-induced infrastructure had disappeared from view as a town became a village, a village a memory.
It’s as if daffodil bulbs and seed are possessed of more of the resilience needed to mark for future generations the places in which their forebears lived, loved and planted than those generations themselves.
Unperturbed by demographic change
He started collecting and exhibiting daffodils in Western Australia in the 90s. He moved to southern NSW as a scientist who, to use his own expression, “has spent a lifetime trying to avoid a career”.
Facebook confirms that Lawrence is known chiefly as a breeder of miniatures, particularly hoop petticoats. Another admiring visitor to Lawrence’s Elysian Field has posted:
"Row after row of standards, including doubles and splits, greeted us. An extraordinary collection of triandrus and jonquilla/fernandesii hybrids also took my eye, in yellows, whites, pinks, and combinations of each of them, including reverse bicolours."
Lawrence explains to Denny and Alpha
"As a former high school teacher in maths and science with a particular interest in biology, Lawrence was the 'full bottle' on the latest theories of genetic inheritance, breeding strategies and what-to-cross-with-what. The apparent fertility of triploids was due to their producing diploid gametes, he said. He aimed to produce small or miniature offspring which were both tetraploid and interfertile. Looking up from his contemplation of the seedling beds, into the distance, he complained about the local cockatoos and kangaroos."They're pests", he said. "The cockatoos pick the flowers and throw them on the ground, and the roos jump on them.""
Our initial connection with Lawrence and Jane was through the Woden Valley Youth Choir. Jane was for several years President of the WVYC Committee, with Lawrence the ever-present supporter, backroom assistant and (I seem to recall) photographer for special occasions. Since their daughter left the choir our relationship has become yellower, more daffodil. And what a delight that is.
I look forward to visiting the daffodils again next year. Lawrence – with Jane’s support – will describe the seasonal variation to which his variegated flock has been subject. He will crop us a bunch. He will answer the bigger and simple questions with patience, all over again; because I will have forgotten, and he will again seed his explanations with as much science as I can accommodate.
So you want to clearly understand about split infinitives? And I gather that your concern is to more confidently avoid them in written reports you prepare?
My first piece of advice is to always rely on Fowler.
I don’t suppose I will ever be cast away on a desert island. But if I was, and if I could take just one book with me, it would be a Fowler.
We Fowler-philes – I know of at least one other – tend to think of it in those eponymous terms. In fact the book’s title is A Dictionary of Modern English Usage.
HW Fowler was an extraordinary man whose character and work are pleasingly brought to life in The Warden of English by Jenny McMorris. Fowler lived from 1858 to 1933. After twenty years as a secondary school teacher, in 1904 he started work for the Oxford Univ. Press. He was a physical fitness buff who for many years went for a daily run and an ocean swim. He married at 50 and at the age of 56, when war broke out, he wangled his way into the army and demanded to be sent to the front.
The main sources for McMorrris’ biography included the letters Fowler sent to his wife while he was in France during the war. Another was the collection of letters to and from the Oxford Univ. Press during his thirty years of work with it.
Modern English Usage (MEU) is fascinating about the niceties of English and endlessly amusing – including on the subject of split infinitives.
"The English speaking world may be divided into (1) those who neither know nor care what a split infinitive is; (2) those who do not know, but care very much; (3) those who know & condemn; (4) those who know & approve; & (5) those who know & distinguish."
Potential readers of Fowler – who I hope will now include you, Scott – should be aware that one of the reviewers of McMorris’ biography warns that “anyone tempted to dip into MEU itself should be warned that the stamp of Fowler’s heart and mind is faint indeed in the heavily revised 1996 third edition, though it is clear in the 1965 second edition, which remains in print.”
Myself, I have access to “the stamp of Fowler’s heart and mind” through a copy of the first edition, initially published in 1926, and at least one of the second, the 1965 edition. (They can often be found at garage sales and in second hand book stores and should at all costs be preserved and given as gifts to members of the emoji generation.)
My second piece of advice is not to unnecessarily worry about the phenomenon. People split infinitives all the time and, sensibly enough, most listeners and readers are concerned with meaning, not syntax. Recently I was at the doctor’s to get a repeat prescription. Concerned about how urgent it might be, and referring to a particular medicine, the practice manager said to me: “Have you ran out?” Her meaning was perfectly clear.
To know what a split infinitive is, one first needs to be able to identify an infinitive.
You will remember that verbs are ‘action’ or ‘doing’ or ‘occurrence’ words. Words like run, but also think and smile and reconsider and gamble and recognise. Some verbs are finite, others non-finite; some regular, others irregular; some transitive, others intransitive. But these are different stories; let’s pass over them for now.
All verbs have an infinitive part – which is (in modern parlance!) the ‘money word’ preceded by to. So the infinitives of the verbs just listed are to run, to think, tosmile etc.
A split infinitive comes about when, in using the infinitive of a verb, one or more words is placed between the to and the action word. Thus: to regularly run, to immediately think and to charmingly smile are all split infinitives. In all three of these cases the offending word is an adverb, meaning that the phrase remains coherent despite the split infinitive.
If you don’t spot a split infinitive then almost by definition it didn’t do any harm – as long as the author’s intended meaning was conveyed.
If you did spot a split infinitive – as in the first three times the word to is used above in this piece – then there are two questions to ask:
does the splitting of the infinitive damage the meaning or lead to any ambiguity; and
does it result in an inelegant sentence structure, or rhythm, or sound?
It’s often the case that work by an author to undo a split infinitive in a drafted piece results in a sentence that is more elegant, perhaps has more gravitas and style than the one first drafted.
For instance it might have been better for me to have begun this piece as follows:
So you want clearly to understand about split infinitives?
And I gather that your concern is to be more confident at avoiding them in written reports you prepare?
My first piece of advice is this: Always rely on Fowler.
In each of these three cases the split infinitive has been fixed in a different manner: in the first, by reversing the order of the clearly and the to; in the second, by changing some words and the word order; and in the third by recasting the sentence to incorporate a colon.
So spotting the split infinitives in a first draft can be the stimulus or trigger for an author to consider alternative ways of casting the same information. Further consideration of a written draft is a positive thing. Good writing takes time and an author always has the option to consciously retain a split infinitive if doing so creates no stylistic or comprehension problems.
In late July I made a personal submission to the Senate Standing Committee on Community Affairs relating to its Inquiry into the value and affordability of private health insurance and the challenges posed to health consumers by out-of-pocket health care costs.
My submission leaned heavily on materials produced by the NRHA during my time there. It is published in full at https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Senate/Community_Affairs/Privatehealthinsurance/Submissions. (It’s number 220.)
My contribution to the Committee’s considerations made the point that there is little interaction between private and public hospital systems in rural and remote areas, due to the small number of private hospitals in those areas. In general, the more remote the area, the worse the people’s health status and health challenges, and the less likely there is to be a private hospital.
In 2011-12 the rate of private hospital use by people living in Inner regional, Outer regional, Remote and Very remote areas was 77 per cent, 60 per cent, 53 per cent and 39 per cent respectively of the rate for people living in Major cities.
At that time private hospital expenditure per head tailed off rapidly with remoteness: from $346 per person in Major cities in 2011-12, to $313, $235, $158 and $102 per person living in Inner regional, Outer regional, Remote and Very remote areas respectively.
The reverse is true for public hospital usage. In 2006-07 the rate of public hospital admission/separation increased to twice the Major Cities rate in remote areas. Total expenditure on public hospital admissions was 10 per cent and 30 per cent higher for residents of Inner Regional and Outer Regional areas, and roughly twice as high for residents of remote areas.
This is largely because there is no health service alternative in more remote areas, with hospitals having to provide the sort of primary care available in the cities from medical and other practitioners.
Issues relating to out-of-pocket costs are complex and were dealt with in detail in the NRHA submission dated 12 May 2014.
Out-of-pocket health care costs are financial payments made by consumers for accessing health care services and products that are not rebated by Medicare, private health insurance or other means. When last measured national out-of-pocket costs amounted to $24.8 billion, or 19 per cent of all recurrent health expenditure. This is a greater proportion of total health expenditure than in many other developed nations.
It equates to an average contribution (for 23 million Australians) of $1,110 per person per year. If insurance premiums are included, out-of-pocket costs were $36 billion, 27 per cent of health expenditure, or $1,610 per year per person.
These personal payments pose challenges for people in rural and remote areas, including because they have less capacity to pay, with lower and less secure incomes overall than their peers in major cities.
Critically, the bulk of the unavoidable costs associated with accessing health care for people in rural and remote areas (ie travel, accommodation, lost earnings due to the time taken to access services) are not measured and not considered part of the standard set of published out-of-pocket health care costs.
What this means is that the standard numbers grossly understate the disadvantage faced by people in Remote or Very remote areas. The standard figures show that, compared with city people, those in areas classified Very remote pay considerably less per person in out-of-pocket costs. But this is due largely to their inability to access services to which out-of-pocket costs are attached.
So a global health care cost disadvantage faced by people in rural and remote Australia is relatively large by international standards, is worse for them than for urban Australians, and is getting worse.
The potential health effects are serious. Faced with unaffordable costs, patients may decide not to make a health appointment, not to access a medication, and/or to reduce compliance with a medication regime. One of the results is that avoidable hospitalisations are more common among rural people.
The situation could be improved if health insurance companies tailored their product range to better cover the needs of patients in rural areas, including stronger support for unavoidable travel and accommodation.
Effective medical services for people in rural and remote areas can be quite different from those available to people in the major cities. Health insurance products should not relate only to service delivery methods that are the norm in more remote areas.
Hopefully this and other particular rural issues will be canvassed, and improvements sought, by the Senate Committee’s report, due at the end of November.
Important: the opinion Duncan Kerr wrote on dual citizenship in 1989 is reprinted here without alteration.
Duncan Kerr was the member for Denison in the House of Reps. from 1987 to 2010. In January 1989 he wrote a legal opinion for his Parliamentary colleagues about Section 44(i) of the Constitution, in which – inter alia – he discussed joint Australian-British citizenship and the fact that people may be citizens of other countries without their knowledge. Given the current situation affecting a number of Australian Parliamentarians, his discussion makes fascinating reading and, due no doubt to his target audience at the time, it is relatively accessible to those not expert in legal matters.
Duncan Kerr was Minister for Justice between 1993 and 1996 and for a period in 1993 was also Attorney-General. He is now a Judge of the Federal Court of Australia and recently completed a five-year term as President of the Administrative Appeals Tribunal.
photo credit: James Alcock
To help those of us who are not trained in the law to understand the current situation, the opinion Kerr wrote on dual citizenship in 1989 is reprinted here without alteration.
26 November 1992
Duncan Kerr MHR
Federal Member for Denison
Memorandum to ALP Members and Senators
Dual citizenship
In early 1989, at the request of several colleagues, I circulated a legal opinion to all ALP members and senators advising as to the interpretation of section 44 (i) of the Australian Constitution and associated issues.
The recent decision in Phil Cleary’s case has clarified a number of these issues but has left others unanswered – in particular whether the United Kingdom is now to be regarded as a ‘foreign power’.
This question is important because a number of members of the Australian Parliament still retain British citizenship in addition to their Australian citizenship. I also draw attention to the fact that people may even be citizens of other countries without their knowledge.
Because of the currency of these issues I am taking the liberty of recirculating my earlier opinion. The opinion is entirely consistent with the majority judgments in the Cleary case and requires no modification.
I would be happy to discuss the implications of the Cleary Decision with any colleague.
Duncan Kerr MHR
Federal member for Denison
photo credit: Dean Sewell
Opinion (January 1989)
I have been asked to advise as to the proper construction of section 44(i) of the Australian Constitution in the light of recent correspondence sent to a large number of members of the Parliament raising the issues of the eligibility to sit as a member of either the House of Representatives or the Senate.
Section 44(i) provides –
"Any person who -
(i) is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power, or is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of the subject or a citizen of a foreign power:
shall be incapable of being chosen or sitting as a Senator or a member of the House of Representatives."
Section 44(i) can conveniently be broken into two constituent elements; the first applying to a person “who is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience, or adherence to a foreign power”; the second to a person “who is a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power”.
Common to each element, is some relationship with a ‘foreign power’ and before commencing any further analysis it is worth first settling what constitutes a ‘foreign power’.
Foreign power
The term ‘foreign power’, meaning in this context a country not one’s own, is generally non-problematic. The one contentious question is whether the United Kingdom is now to be regarded as a ‘foreign power’.
This question is important because a number of members of the Australian Parliament retain British citizenship in addition to their Australian citizenship.
Before the adoption of the Constitution the Australian colonies, later the states, were not independent nations. Nor did federation affect this position. The British Empire continued to consist of one sovereign State and its colonies and dependencies. In 1901 Australia was still perceived as a British colony.
Indeed the Constitution uses language in section 34(ii) which shows that the framers could not have regarded the United Kingdom as being a ‘foreign power’ within the meaning of Section 44(i). That Section adopted as an interim qualification (until the Parliament otherwise provided) for eligibility to become a member of the House of Representatives and the Senate, inter-alia, citizenship of the United Kingdom.
However, Australia has now emerged as an independent nation with its own distinctive citizenship. Recognising this, recent changes to the Commonwealth Electoral Act (adopted following the recommendations of the 1981 Report by the Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs (The Constitutional Qualifications of Members of Parliament) have substituted Australian citizenship for previous qualifications which had until then permitted a non Australian ‘British subject’ to stand for election to the House of Representatives (now see Commonwealth Electoral Act Section 163(i)(b)).
The question therefore to be resolved is whether the sum of these changes are such as to now compel the term ‘foreign power’ in section 44(i) to be read as including the United Kingdom. Whilst not decisive of the issue the recent High Court decision Nolan v Minister for Immigration 80 ALR 561 suggests that the High Court is unlikely to favour an interpretation of the word ‘foreign’ that does not fully reflect the altered relationship between Australia and the United Kingdom.
Conceding that good arguments can be made to the contrary, my opinion is that the High Court would now regard the United Kingdom as a foreign power within the meaning of section 44(i) of the constitution. Paraphrasing the joint judgement of the High Court in Nolan: “It is not that the meaning of the word [foreign] had altered. That word is and always has been appropriate to describe the status, vis a vis a former colony which has emerged as an independent nation [and the former imperial nation]”.
Acts of allegiance
The first limb of section 44(i) applies to a person who is under any acknowledgement of allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power. What disqualifies is the positive act of acknowledgement of a foreign loyalty whether or not it affects [sic] a change in the person’s status, citizenship or employment. Often however, such acknowledgement of allegiance would be implied by some change in status – for example, serving in the armed forces or public service of a foreign power.
Citizenship or rights of citizenship
The second limb of section 44(i) applies to any person who is “a subject or a citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or a citizen of a foreign power”.
Many Australian citizens hold dual nationality. Some do so knowingly and voluntarily, some knowingly but involuntarily, others unknowingly and involuntarily. The position is complex because there is [sic] no uniform international guidelines for citizenship.
Every sovereign nation claims the right to determine for itself who it will regard as its nationals. Such decisions may be made capriciously. For example some foreign nations do not permit renunciation of their citizenship even if the person seeking to renounce that citizenship has taken other citizenship.
In fact, people will often be citizens of other nations without their knowledge. The complexity is well illustrated by the report of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence (1976) Dual Nationality at p. 2.
"Rules governing nationality generally range from the automatic loss of a former nationality on acquisition of another, to making it impossible to surrender a former nationality. Some countries confer their citizenship on successive generations regardless of the country of birth. A consequence of this latter situation is that many Australians are unknowingly dual nationals and there is no way of determining with certainty who or how many are in this category."
Given the obvious potential for injustice were all Australians who either unknowingly or involuntarily possess dual citizenship to be incapable of serving in the Australian Parliament, such a construction would, doubtless, be avoided by the High Court unless that construction was compelling. In my opinion it is not.
The better view is, it is submitted, that the question of whether a person is a subject or citizen or entitled to the rights or privileges of a subject or citizen of a foreign power is one of fact to be ascertained by asking the question, does the person in question possess in fact any of the attributes which connote entitlement to foreign citizenship or the rights of such. This is a practical question, not one of foreign law to be ascertained by applying citizenship rules of one or another foreign nation to that person’s status.
An illustration of the application of this test can be given by the case of a person who unknowingly possesses dual citizenship. As an unknowing possessor, such a person would have no practical links with another nation and no question of loyalty to, or citizenship of, a ‘foreign power’ could arise. However such a person would come within section 44(i) if upon becoming aware of such a previously unknown right to citizenship, he or she acknowledges that status or takes advantage of it in any way – for example, travelling on that country’s passport.
A second illustration is that the proposed test would permit informal renunciation of unsought dual citizenship where formal legal renunciation is not possible.
This approach has the merit of providing a constitutionally autochthonous test and avoiding the absurd logic that would allow, for example, a decision of a mischievous foreign nation to wreck the functioning of the Parliament by extending that nation’s unsought and unrenounceable citizenship to all members of the Australian Senate and House of Representatives.
Whilst my view conflicts with the opinion of the 1981 Report of the Senate Standing Committee on Constitutional and Legal Affairs The Constitutional Qualifications of a Member of Parliament, it is broadly consistent with the conclusions expressed by Lumb and Ryan The Constitution of the Commonwealth Australia (3rd ed.) (at para. 167) who give as an example of the application of the second limb of Section 44(i), the case “where an Australian naturalized citizen voluntarily retains the privileges or rights attaching to his former citizenship”. [emphasis mine]
It is also is in conformity with the obiter remarks of the High Court (sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns) in Nile v Wood (1988) 76 ALR 91 at p. 96
"it would seem that section 44(i) relates only to a person who has formally or informally acknowledged allegiance, obedience or adherence to a foreign power and who has not withdrawn or revoked that acknowledgement".
Challenges to a member’s capacity to hold office
There are two methods an individual can use to challenge a member’s entitlement to hold office, either pursuant to the Commonwealth Electoral Act or pursuant to the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act. In addition either house itself may exercise its inherent powers to decide any question as to its own membership Bradlaugh v Gossett (1884) 12 QBD 271. Given the background to this opinion I will confine my comments to those circumstances in which a concerned individual can challenge a member’s entitlement to sit.
The right of an individual to challenge under the Commonwealth Electoral Act is strictly limited: see sections 355, 356 and 358. For the purpose of this advice, the most relevant limitations are (1) that a petition challenging an election can only be initiated by another candidate or an elector qualified to vote in the election to be challenged and (2) that such a petition must be filed within 40 days of the return of the writ for the election. Because the 40 days referred to has now expired the provisions of this Act can no longer be availed of during the life of the present Parliament.
I turn now to the provisions of the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act. Surprisingly, given the obvious intention to dispose promptly of potential challenges evidenced by the Commonwealth Electoral Act, there is no time limit prescribed for the bringing of a challenge under the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act. That Act permits any person to sue (for monetary damages) any person who sits in either house “while he was a person declared by the Constitution to be incapable of so sitting”. Implicit in this jurisdiction must be the right of the High Court to determine questions of eligibility under, inter-alia, section 44(i). As a result is possible that an intermeddler can, at any time, commence proceedings in the High Court challenging the capacity of a member to sit. Given the sound policy reasons which apply to restrict the period for challenges to elections generally, it might be thought appropriate to amend the Act to also provide some appropriate limitation periods for actions under the Common Informers (Parliamentary Disqualifications) Act.
Renunciation of foreign citizenship
Assuming that some members may be at least arguably in jeopardy because of Section 44(i), those that are would be well advised, as a matter of caution, to take steps to renounce any foreign citizenship which they may have previously acknowledged before contesting any further election.
Whilst that will not remove the threat of an action being brought under the Common Informers provisions (discussed above) during the life of the present Parliament, it will remove the possibility of any subsequent challenge should the member concerned be later re-elected.
Most, but not all, nations permit renunciation. [See for example Section 19 of the British Nationality Act and Part III and Schedule 5 of the British Nationality (General) Regulations No. 86 of 1982 which permit a citizen of the United Kingdom to make a declaration renouncing that citizenship. A copy of the relevant provisions is annexed.]
One practical consideration however needs to be mentioned. There has been at least one recent incident of a breach of confidence by an embassy in similar circumstances. Given that the act of a member in renouncing a foreign citizenship, were it to become public knowledge, may itself trigger a suit under the common informers procedure, common sense would suggest leaving the matter of renunciation until some time closer to the end of the term of the present Parliament so as to minimise the likelihood of such litigation.
Finally, I should indicate my view that if a foreign nation does not permit renunciation of its citizenship, all that is required of a Member is that he or she clearly and unambiguously revoke any acknowledgement of that other citizenship and take care thereafter never to do anything that could be construed as acknowledging or taking advantage of that other citizenship.
Around my favourite walk to the top of Red Hill and back, I used to have two favourite trees.
One is an elm growing not far from home, reached when the walk is nearly completed. I think of it as ‘Pella’s tree’ and touch it reverently each time I pass. It’s a three-minute walk from the house and was the sanctuary to which Pella retreated when she had fallen out with a parent or sibling and needed some individual sulk time.
It was not until very recently that anyone else knew of the tree and its salving purpose. Pella reports that, notwithstanding the frequency with which she may have sought its low-slung branches and its safe cleavages, no-one ever noticed that she had absented herself from the house. So after a modest amount of time being ignored, uncalled for and unmissed, she would find her way back home and resume normal activities.
The other special tree was first of the two, both in the extent of its favouritism and in the chronology of its being reached. (Only once did I go round the route of the walk in the reverse direction, with the whole world seeming to be topsy-turvy as a result.)
It became a favourite in August 2016. I had retired in June and took to walking the route that month, sometimes in near-dark and always in the cold. Spring and warmer weather seemed miles away. Suddenly, some time in early August, that particular tree provided a burst of bright yellow wattle popped into view and provided much-needed confidence that the winter would end.
This otherwise modest tree was the first to blossom; it therefore was invested with a particular dignity and significance. It was soon followed by cohorts of others that became lit up with the proud, bright yellow confirmation that better days had arrived.
The normal cycle ensued. With the inexorable march of time the yellow battalions were browned off, seed pods took the place of blossom and the eye adjusted for the new bright colours of Autumn.
But every time I arrived at and passed that tree, I remarked its special status. It had been the first on the whole hillside to burst into flower.
On a cold, wet day just last week I found a break in the weather and went outside and around.
That special tree had been chopped down.
The cut was close to the ground: a neat, pale, sloping cut made with some force and expertise. The whole of the tree’s body, which had stood a little taller than me, lay close at hand, the blossoms prematurely browning and wasted.
Its crime? It was Acacia baileyana.
Hanging on the fence near where I leave the bush track is a small notice:
Why do Red Hill regenerators cut wattle trees?
There are two main species of wattle growing on Red Hill – Cootamundra wattle (Acacia baileyana) and silver wattle (Acacia dealbata).
Acacia baileyana is a small tree from 3 to 10 metres high. It is one of those species which retain the fern-like, bipinnate foliage throughout their lives (in most other species, the bipinnate foliage is replaced by flattened stems called phyllodes). The pinnae (the divisions of the pinnate leaves) are up to 30 mm long and silvery-grey in colour. The plant has smooth, greyish brown bark. The bright yellow flower clusters are globular in shape and are produced in the leaf axils in late winter to spring.
Regenerators only cut Cootamundra wattle as it is not local to this region and is a Class 4 pest in the ACT.
Why is Cootamundra wattle a pest?
Fast-growing
Seed has a high survival rate (soil stored seed remains viable for many decades and germinates prolifically after fire)
Excludes light and forms a dense layer of leaf and pod remains on the soil surface. This eliminates many indigenous species, but allows many exotic grasses to flourish
Hybridises with a number of other Acacia species, including silver wattle and black wattle
So remember: beauty can be in the eye of the ecologist.
Notes:
Acacia baileyana is a small tree from 3 to 10 metres high. It is one of those species which retain the fern-like, bipinnate foliage throughout their lives (in most other species, the bipinnate foliage is replaced by flattened stems called phyllodes). The pinnae (the divisions of the pinnate leaves) are up to 30 mm long and silvery-grey in colour. The plant has smooth, greyish brown bark. The bright yellow flower clusters are globular in shape and are produced in the leaf axils in late winter to spring. (Australian Native Plants Society)
Acacia dealbata is a large shrub or medium-sized tree to about 30 metres high. It is one of those species which retain the fern-like, bipinnate foliage throughout their lives. The pinnae are up to 55 mm long and usually bluish-grey in colour. The plant has smooth, greyish green to dark grey bark which becomes fissured with age. The pale to bright yellow flower clusters are globular in shape and are produced terminally or in the leaf axils in late winter to mid-spring. (Australian Native Plants Society)
[1] I am not confident that, without the signpost, the source will be recognised.
To illustrate how ‘reasonable’ they are, rural and remote health advocates are fond of agreeing that one cannot expect a dialysis unit or chemotherapy facility on the corner of the street in every small country town.
With technical advances in miniaturisation, point-of-care testing, IT and artificial intelligence, such a presumption may in fact one day be false.
But the general point is taken: that high cost service facilities paid for by the public purse must be shared across large numbers of users in order to make the unit cost acceptable. The extreme case of having specialised services everywhere is unreasonable.
At the other end of the spectrum is the apparent truth that all people should have equivalent access to basic public services such as education, health and telecommunications. These services should be available as a right. But at what cost and how close to home?
So where is the line drawn between the two extremes?
The question has been given some exposure in Western Australia this week. In a Hearing at Fitzroy Crossing of the Kimberley Aboriginal youth suicide inquest, the WA Government Solicitor, Caroline Thatcher, questioned senior community leader Emily Carter about whether those in remote communities should expect the same level of services as those in more built-up areas. [http://ab.co/2hqkrIC]
“As citizens of this country they should be able to get the same services as people who live in the city or in Broome,” Ms Carter responded.
When Ms Thatcher asked if that was reasonable for those who chose to live remotely, where there were very few economic opportunities, Ms Carter is reported as saying: “You’re trying to take me down a path here that is not mine. It’s not just about jobs, it’s about spiritual wellbeing, and about living on country”.
This report will remind some of us of WA Premier Colin Barnett’s proposal in late 2014 to close between 100 and 150 of the 274 remote communities in WA, saying the State Government could no longer continue to service them. [http://ab.co/2hq69aC]
"The possible closure comes amid Federal Government funding cuts for remote Indigenous communities. The Commonwealth was the major funder of around two thirds of the state's Indigenous settlements - with the state funding the rest -but that responsibility is being transitioned to the states over the next two years. When it was announced in September 2014, the state described the Federal Government's move as "reprehensible"."
The Department of Aboriginal Affairs was quoted in that story as saying that, of the 12,113 Aboriginal people currently living in 274 communities in WA, 1,309 Aboriginal people were in 174 of the smallest. Across 115 of those communities, there were 507 people in total.
Emily Carter and her colleague June Oscar spoke about the work they have led to combat what they describe as “the cycle of trauma”, including by reducing the incidence of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder, at the NRHA/Children’s Healthcare Australasia Caring for Kids Conference in Alice Springs (April 2016). [You can stream their presentation here: http://bit.ly/2w8h9wT]
One of the key words in the reported question from the Government Solicitor is “chose”. Do people who find themselves in a small remote community choose to live there, or do they choose not to leave the place in which they have always lived?
These are real and important questions. What is the relationship between freedom of choice with respect to location and the responsibility of the state? What is a reasonable expectation about access to services deemed to be part of human rights? In a finite world, what are the global responsibilities of the citizens and governments of an affluent nation?
An article by Susan Thomas, John Wakerman and John Humphreys, based on research funded through PHCRIS, grappled with some of these issues. Their study set out to help policy makers and health planners with the issue of the core primary health care services to which all Australians should have access – and their necessary support functions.
The 39 experts from whom they sought a view agreed on a basket of services that consumers in rural and remote communities could expect to access. They are ‘care of the sick and injured’, ‘mental health’, ‘maternal/child health’, ‘allied health’, ‘sexual/reproductive health’, ‘rehabilitation’, ‘oral/dental health’ and ‘public health/illness prevention’.
So far, so good. The next challenge is to fashion the means for delivering these services that are affordable, guarantee safety and cultural sensitivity, and are practicable given their need for professional expertise.
Background: On Wednesday 19 September 2007 I addressed the dinner of the Council of Ambulance Authorities (CAA) conference in Townsville. Much of the content of the address still seems relevant ten years on.
I love a sunburnt country,
A land of sweeping plains,
Of ragged mountain ranges,
Of droughts and flooding rains.
I love her far horizons,
I love her jewel-sea,
Her beauty and her terror
The wide brown land for me!
(second stanza of My Country by Dorothea Mackellar (1885–1968)
It’s not even My Country so I have a nerve to stand here and talk about the importance of rural and remote Australia.
It is therefore particularly appropriate that I begin this address by acknowledging the owners of the country on which we stand.
After 60,000 years of the most ancient continuous civilisation in the world, white man arrived.
For him, the Australian outback was a new frontier.
The pattern of white settlement was determined by the distance a Cobb and Co coach could travel in daylight hours. Staging posts with pubs, stables and residences sprang up every 30 miles or so.
The historian Russell Ward believed that the notion of ‘mateship’ was born among country men and women struggling on this new frontier in the 1880s and 90s. Others have asserted that this new white Australian idealism was merely a projection onto the Bush of values admired by urban intellectuals.
The Pioneer, Frederick McCubbin, 1904; in the National Gallery of Victoria
Whatever the truth about its provenance, the notion of mateship is still associated with the essence of being Australian. Young Australian mates, often with their horses, went off to Palestine and Gallipoli, casting Australian national independence in the furnace of overseas war.
And Australia’s sense of community – its pride in ‘the fair go’ – owes much to the real experience and the perceived value of the egalitarianism, the togetherness and the willingness to share risk that are the hallmarks of this mateship.
Rural and remote parts of the country were the setting for many of the experiences and narratives that set the pattern.
And those same rural and remote areas are now those in which the loss of ‘mateship’ is having its most devastating effects.
As a nation we appear to have lost the conviction that the best way forward is for everyone to look after everyone else. Australia has become more an economy, less a community. Its people are more and more driven by individual aspirations and greed. Some of these elements are in danger of corrupting our universal health system. There is a fear that Medicare will be a safety net for those who cannot afford to buy their own health services.
But back to the chronology of white rural Australia.
In our lifetime there has been a gradual withdrawal of governments from determining the pattern of settlement, and a gradual empowerment of the market.
In the early 1970s Australia had a burst of explicit regional development. Bathurst/Orange and Albury/Wodonga were designated as formal growth centres. There was decentralisation of government offices, some of which still survive today, with the New South Wales Department of Agriculture still headquartered in Orange.
But that miniature dash of government intervention was the exception to prove the rule. There has been sporadic but continuous support for agriculture and agriculturalists — but little or nothing for other aspects of rural and remote settlement.
The market rules – okay’.
For some time after the second war the Government maintained a strong interest in rural areas for political reasons. There was a fear of Communist takeover of Australia. Reds were under the bed. If we didn’t settle inland Australia, Indonesia would.
More recently the fate of regions has been determined by industry and the investment decisions of individuals in Japan, and now India and China. Our resource-rich regions are booming and making Australia an even more affluent nation. But it is impossible to find a house in Tom Price. Health services cannot be sustained in such places because of the difficulty of finding accommodation for health professionals.
80% of the Australian population lives within 30 miles of the sea. Real estate prices have been high and increasing in Sydney for 30 years. People half our age have become real estate millionaires. More recently, the same has happened in Brisbane and Perth.
A small number of regional centres have grown and have bled the surrounding smaller towns. Toowoomba is a town of 100,000 people. There are 57,000 in Wagga Wagga.
Large numbers of smaller towns have continued to shrink. Services have been lost. Pubs have closed – with the pokey licences, as we now understand it, sold to populous areas of the cities.
The Monaro
This is all part of the reality in Australia today: the rich are getting richer and the poor more numerous. The poor in Australia are not getting poorer in absolute terms but the number is increasing and the gap between them and the rich is increasing.
The rate of bulk billing in a country town may not matter to you and me. But for some people the presence or absence of a bulk billing doctor is a difference between the ability to see a doctor and not.
I fear a sunburnt country
With governments laissez faire
When the market shares the wealth around
And citizens don’t care.
Every man’s an island
Compassion’s killed by greed
When economy rules everywhere
It's community we need.
The Productivity Commission has suggested a range of substantial changes to the health workforce[1]. Some of them have been the reality – on trial, as it were – in rural and remote areas for years.
In response to the Productivity Commission Report on Health Workforce, governments agreed (through the Council of Australian Governments):
“to increase governments’ collaborative effort regarding retention of health staff;
to endorse the National Health Workforce Strategic Framework with a biennial review and report to COAG on progress with implementation of the Framework;
that all broad institutional Health Workforce Frameworks should make explicit provision to consider the particular workforce requirements of rural and remote areas, and the particular workforce requirements of groups with special needs including Indigenous Australians, people with mental illness, people with disabilities and those requiring aged care; and
that Senior Officials will undertake further work in relation to the remaining key recommendations of the Productivity Commission and report to COAG in mid-2006 on further action that governments could take in regard to health workforce, having consulted with key stakeholders.”
Only one of these has become a COAG project: the potential national accreditation of health professionals. It is touch and go as to whether changes on this front will be able to be signed off before the election is called.[2]
What has all this to do with rural and remote areas?
The current system is not working. There will never be enough doctors, nurses or allied health professionals, given the exponential increase in demand for their services and the volume and location of international supply. If we think things are difficult now, it is going to get much much worse.
Whereas three years ago 170,000 new workers entered Australia’s workforce in a year, in the whole of the decade 2020 to 2030 it will be 125,000. That represents a change from 170,000 new entrants a year into Australia’s workforce, down to 12,500 a year beginning in 2020.
We therefore must do two things. We must suppress the demand for the services of health professionals. And we must change the way in which supply is provided. For example we must reduce the demand for doctoring and increase the supply of doctoring- type services.
This is what the Productivity Commission and others mean by health workforce redesign. Opponents of such redesign tend to be marshalled by the professional colleges, not just medical colleges but also by others. Nursing organisations do not support greater use of or a broader scope of practice for care assistants. Physiotherapists do not support physiotherapy assistants. Doctors’ organisations do not support physicians’ assistants. And so it goes
The work being done in the paramedic and ambulance officer sector to broaden scope of practice is critical. You can lead the way in workforce redesign and prove that it does work, is popular with patients, and does not threaten other professions.
And rural and remote areas can lead the way in this.
For too long, the politics and policies of rural Australia have been dominated by agriculture. One of the results is that the word ‘rural’ is still co-opted by agriculturalists and their supporters. The political parties speak of rural policy when they mean agricultural policy. The Rural Industries Research and Development Corporation works with the smaller agricultural industries. The Rural Adjustment Scheme deals with support for farmers.
The National Rural Health Alliance has emerged as the most inclusive and comprehensive voice for the non-agricultural aspects of rural affairs in Australia.
The NRHA can speak up for the interests of rural people who are not farmers. It can represent the interests of the significant minority who do not have good access to telecommunications.
And it is an important time for making such representation. A range of key policy issues are going to change the way we do business and experience lifestyles in the next few years.
There is a continued search for new energy sources that will reduce reliance on carbon fuels. Industries based on renewable energies will by definition be predominantly in rural and remote areas. The new sources of energy will be the sun, the sea, biomass, hydrogen, the wind – all of which are found in abundance in rural areas and all of which can be processed or captured more easily in rural areas than in the cities.
There will be major shifts in relative prices, so that energy technologies which are currently not economic or sustainable will become so. This will be much to the benefit of country areas.
However there are some ongoing resource issues that will bear down differentially on rural industries and communities. Australia has a national water crisis. Desalination plants may be located in the cities but the most important water storages and catchment areas will be in country areas. The impact of salinity and reduced water flows is felt in rural areas. In country areas whole towns can be without water supplies. The impact on crops and incomes is easy to understand.
There needs to be an ongoing debate about access to and use of information technology. The communication challenges of very remote areas can be overcome to some extent by high technology, such as satellites. The people who are missing out tend to be those who are not isolated enough to have public support for the establishment of satellite connections, but who do not have access to copper wire. The termination of the CDMA system is concerning some people because the new-generation of telecommunications does not work in some more rural areas.
The results of debate about nuclear fuel will also have a significant impact on rural areas. Uranium is found in rural areas and the debates about the storage of waste will always be focused on non-metropolitan areas.
Loss of species is predominantly a rural issue. National parks. Coalmining. Climate change will result in more adverse events, with the geographical scope of natural disasters increasing with rurality.
We need government leadership on these issues: leadership that is not afraid to use ‘the big levers’ – the tax system, regional development policy, public-private partnerships, transport, education, housing, infrastructure – as well as health services.
It’s going to be a good time for paramedics and ambulance officers, and your organisations, to lead on workforce redesign, to show what can be achieved despite the tyrannies of distance and markets.
I seek a sunburnt country
Where all can have a share
When each of us will cross the street
To someone needing care.
Life chance and opportunity
For each and every Man
And if governments are bold enough
‘Tis certain that we can.
As publicans and posties
We seek your strong support
To reach our side and intervene
When in extremis caught.
Our farmers and our schoolies
Their gratitude won’t hide
If you can bring your broadened skills
Full swiftly to our side.
[1] www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/health-workforce The research report was released on 19 January 2006.
[2] Prime Minister Howard called the Election on 14 October 2007 and the Federal election for the 42nd Parliament of Australia was held on Saturday 24 November 2007.
After 46 years in Australia, many of them in Orange, NSW, Bev Glover has this week returned home to New Zealand. Bev became a close friend to Alpha and myself and we wish her all the best on the next stage of her journey.
Beverley's off to New Zealand
Returning once more to her home;
We'll miss her in so many ways, as you know,
And in this we are not on our own.
The keyboards in Orange will want her fine touch
- Both the ones that are owned and the hired.
For the Male Voice team - that's most of you here
- Another key staffer's re-choired.
She's danced on the ivories since she was eight
She can finger just all of the keys
And though you don't know it, she played cello too -
- Just a keyboard between both her knees.
She came to Australia forty-six years ago
For a while she needed to roam;
In Sydney, Port Stephens and then Central West
With Lesley she made a warm home.
She served in her towns for political reps
In the community and in the pews
Les always behind her to get them the papers
- In those days there wasn't 'Fake News'.
Her church and her music are precious to Bev
And in Orange from nineteen-eight-nine
The Rowland Gregory Orpheus Singers
Took much of their after-work time.
Bev was accompanist, Les in the choir,
Together a close double act.
Her favourite key was always G Flat
For in that mode it's mostly All Blacks.
Apart from her partner there's one other man
For whom Bev has always been true
In tune with each other, from bar to bar,
And Leon, you know that it's you.
Alpha met Bev at the Sydney Town Hall
- The memory both of them chat-on
The men tried to speed up But Bev remained geed-up
She said "It's like cricket: When you're at the wicket
Keep your eyes on your leader She'll declare when she needs-ta;
In the meantime please all watch her baton."
Alpha and Bev became very firm friends
Similar women with similar ends -
Though Sasha and Toby, you all will agree
Were closer companions than Alpha could be!
Alpha has written in elegant prose
Of the Beverley Glover that each of us knows.
She has energy, patience, she's keen to do more
In musical matters she knows the full score.
Her large congregation of this is apprised:
On Sundays she'll keep her church well organ-ised.
Her laugh is infectious, she's full of kind tricks
And only in silence when watching Netflix.
We will share her on Facebook, we will see her on Skype,
And her legacy's plain, she is one of a type.
Let us pick up her mantle, let us go where she's led
Our thanks not piano but forte instead!
For Bev's contributions will always inspire
After thirty-odd years with the Male Voice Choir.
12 May 2017
This is the third part of the collection of pieces that were in the back pockets of my trousers at June 2016. Part One includes an introduction and explanation. As in the first two parts, some contextual background has been added in this third part to help explain the purpose for which each piece was written or selected.
Index
Part One
Introduction
LiT 1 A country childhood
LiT 2 11th Conference recommendations
LiT 3 Duke Tritton, Gary Shearston
LiT 4 A doggerel of a life
LiT 5 Do not go gentle, Dylan Thomas
LiT 6 Each guest at our table
Part Two
LiT 7 For Tony Wade
LiT 8 Funeral blues, W. H. Auden
LiT 9 Heart of our Universe
LiT 10 The Mad Monk and The Ranga
LiT 11 Christmas Party 2012
LiT 12 from Macbeth, William ShakespearePart Three - this post
LiT 13 None of us is innocent
LiT 14 from Richard II, William Shakespeare
LiT 15 Two little boys
LiT 16 "Some chicken; some neck", Winston Churchill
LiT 17 We've had enough of fluoro vests
LiT 18 What's in a name?
Lines in the Trouser 13
None of us is innocent
Context: I prepared this for the staff Christmas party of 2014 but for some reason I didn’t use it. Let me provide background on some of the party guests. One Vision is the wonderful AV company that the NRHA has consistently worked with at its meetings and conferences. Head of One Vision is Frank Meany. Lesley had just had her second child, Georgia, and Millie was just a couple of weeks away from having her third, a boy, and had been temporarily replaced by Alejandra Cares Henriquez. Audrey was away expecting her first child. (The number of staff who were pregnant meant that their other female colleagues began to regard the water in the cooler with some suspicion.) Helen’s husband, Gary, plays the trumpet. Janine used to chair our staff meetings. We were expecting to meet Sue’s husband, Mark, for the first time but as it happened neither of them came because of a fire emergency near their home. So we never did see Mark dancing on the table.
None of us is innocent
None of us is innocent of being slightly strange
And neither are we as we were – for all of us have changed.
But I’m determined, hook or crook, to be a shining light
If it’s my time and I’ve no rhyme it wouldn’t feel quite right.
There’s some of us think just the same, see life with but One Vision,
Forgot to put them on the list but made a late decision.
Frank’s not here but in his place we’re pleased we have a few
-Takes three of them to make one Frank: it’s Lisa, Peter, Huw.
It’s nice to see that Lesley’s back – and looking very well
It seems to suit her, motherhood, as all of us can tell
Instead of half a thousand students, rural sons and daughters
She’s giving lifelong scholarships to Dominic and Georgia.
Wendy’s partied once today – she’s had lunch with her mum
We’re very glad she’s fit us in – delighted she could come
The demographic here tonight is younger than the other
But Wendy still sounds loud and strong from talking with her mother.
Millie’s here with Chris as well (he sadly has a cold)
With Mel and Hannah – plus the boy who’s minus two weeks old
We wish her well and know for us she soulfully will pine
Until she’s harnessed up again by chance or In Design.
Anne-marie is new on staff – I hope this isn’t rude? –
Her name is like a heated bath for gently heating food
Except she has one letter less, I guess we should agree
It makes a lot of difference: a B or not a B.
Millie’s left, well just for now, it isn’t quite the same
And there’s no way that she can say her locum’s proper name
I’ll try my best to pass the test and see what Ale says
Try this for size: it does comprise: Alejandra Cares Henriquez.
Audrey left us with regret to have her lovely daughter
She looks so sweet – and Annie too – much trimmer than she oughter
To keep her here I say quite clear we could have tried no harder
But we’re not cross with Aud or Ross, sweet Annie’s doting farder.
The trumpet in our Helen’s home is voluntary rested
She’s not enough exhalant puff – her caffeine has been tested
She’s puffed so well on other things, been wise and strong and neat
I’ll miss her big, my right hand man, and wish her calm retreat.
Janine’s our Chair, avoid her stare, for she is power crazy
Get in her way she’s apt to say “I’ll tramp you like a daisy”
She’s nearly due long service too, but will not as a right,
(Long service just a little odd for one so short and slight?)
How nice at last to meet Sue’s Mark: his reputation grows
Apparently if he’s here long he’ll take off all his clothes
We’ll keep his glass filled to the top as well as we are able
‘Til comes the chance to Facebook him when dancing on the table.
Lexie’s code for times gone by, with Geri, Audrey, Pen
From day to day we often say “Do you remember when – ?”
But as I said when I began: it wasn’t just a joke
When it comes down in bush and town: there’s nowt more strange than folk.
Lines in the Trouser 14
from Richard II – William Shakespeare
Context: I simply love this speech. (It’s the second piece of which there were two copies trousered away.) The emotional roller coaster of the situation is beautifully expressed. Richard has returned from Ireland to find that many of his former allies and supporters have shipped over to Bolingbroke. (Henry of Bolingbroke became Henry IV, King of England and Lord of Ireland from 1399 to 1413.) Richard sarcastically supposes that even his closest supporters, Bushy, Bagot and Green, might have gone over to Bolingbroke: “I warrant they have made peace with Bolingbroke.” On hearing Scroop say “Peace have they made with him indeed, my lord”, Richard curses them wildly for their apparent villainy, calling them all sorts of names. Scroop corrects the record, asking his King to “uncurse their souls” since “their peace is made With heads, and not with hands.” Richard is mortified at having had no trust in his close friends and turns upon himself. When Aumerle tries once more to cheer him up: “Where is the duke my father with his power?” it is all too late and Richard begins mournfully to deconstruct his status as a King and to focus on the reality that a King is nothing more than a normal human being with the temporary trappings of power and authority. At the very end of this wonderfully-constructed speech, so full of poignant self-pity and realisation, is that fantastically apposite pun: “subjected thus”.
from Richard II
SCENE II. The coast of Wales. A castle in view.
KING RICHARD II
Barkloughly castle call they this at hand? DUKE OF AUMERLE
Yea, my lord. How brooks your grace the air,
After your late tossing on the breaking seas? KING RICHARD II
Needs must I like it well: I weep for joy
To stand upon my kingdom once again.
Dear earth, I do salute thee with my hand,
Though rebels wound thee with their horses’ hoofs:
As a long-parted mother with her child
Plays fondly with her tears and smiles in meeting,
So, weeping, smiling, greet I thee, my earth,
And do thee favours with my royal hands.
Feed not thy sovereign’s foe, my gentle earth,
Nor with thy sweets comfort his ravenous sense;
But let thy spiders, that suck up thy venom,
And heavy-gaited toads lie in their way,
Doing annoyance to the treacherous feet
Which with usurping steps do trample thee:
Yield stinging nettles to mine enemies;
And when they from thy bosom pluck a flower,
Guard it, I pray thee, with a lurking adder
Whose double tongue may with a mortal touch
Throw death upon thy sovereign’s enemies.
Mock not my senseless conjuration, lords:
This earth shall have a feeling and these stones
Prove armed soldiers, ere her native king
Shall falter under foul rebellion’s arms. BISHOP OF CARLISLE
Fear not, my lord: that Power that made you king
Hath power to keep you king in spite of all.
The means that heaven yields must be embraced,
And not neglected; else, if heaven would,
And we will not, heaven’s offer we refuse,
The proffer’d means of succor and redress. DUKE OF AUMERLE
He means, my lord, that we are too remiss;
Whilst Bolingbroke, through our security,
Grows strong and great in substance and in power. KING RICHARD II
Discomfortable cousin! know’st thou not
That when the searching eye of heaven is hid,
Behind the globe, that lights the lower world,
Then thieves and robbers range abroad unseen
In murders and in outrage, boldly here;
But when from under this terrestrial ball
He fires the proud tops of the eastern pines
And darts his light through every guilty hole,
Then murders, treasons and detested sins,
The cloak of night being pluck’d from off their backs,
Stand bare and naked, trembling at themselves?
So when this thief, this traitor, Bolingbroke,
Who all this while hath revell’d in the night
Whilst we were wandering with the antipodes,
Shall see us rising in our throne, the east,
His treasons will sit blushing in his face,
Not able to endure the sight of day,
But self-affrighted tremble at his sin.
Not all the water in the rough rude sea
Can wash the balm off from an anointed king;
The breath of worldly men cannot depose
The deputy elected by the Lord:
For every man that Bolingbroke hath press’d
To lift shrewd steel against our golden crown,
God for his Richard hath in heavenly pay
A glorious angel: then, if angels fight,
Weak men must fall, for heaven still guards the right. Enter EARL OF SALISBURY
Welcome, my lord how far off lies your power? EARL OF SALISBURY
Nor near nor farther off, my gracious lord,
Than this weak arm: discomfort guides my tongue
And bids me speak of nothing but despair.
One day too late, I fear me, noble lord,
Hath clouded all thy happy days on earth:
O, call back yesterday, bid time return,
And thou shalt have twelve thousand fighting men!
To-day, to-day, unhappy day, too late,
O’erthrows thy joys, friends, fortune and thy state:
For all the Welshmen, hearing thou wert dead.
Are gone to Bolingbroke, dispersed and fled. DUKE OF AUMERLE
Comfort, my liege; why looks your grace so pale? KING RICHARD II
But now the blood of twenty thousand men
Did triumph in my face, and they are fled;
And, till so much blood thither come again,
Have I not reason to look pale and dead?
All souls that will be safe fly from my side,
For time hath set a blot upon my pride. DUKE OF AUMERLE
Comfort, my liege; remember who you are. KING RICHARD II DUKE OF AUMERLE
I had forgot myself; am I not king?
Awake, thou coward majesty! thou sleepest.
Is not the king’s name twenty thousand names?
Arm, arm, my name! a puny subject strikes
At thy great glory. Look not to the ground,
Ye favourites of a king: are we not high?
High be our thoughts: I know my uncle York
Hath power enough to serve our turn. But who comes here? Enter SIR STEPHEN SCROOP SIR STEPHEN SCROOP
More health and happiness betide my liege
Than can my care-tuned tongue deliver him! KING RICHARD II
Mine ear is open and my heart prepared;
The worst is worldly loss thou canst unfold.
Say, is my kingdom lost? why, ’twas my care
And what loss is it to be rid of care?
Strives Bolingbroke to be as great as we?
Greater he shall not be; if he serve God,
We’ll serve Him too and be his fellow so:
Revolt our subjects? that we cannot mend;
They break their faith to God as well as us:
Cry woe, destruction, ruin and decay:
The worst is death, and death will have his day. SIR STEPHEN SCROOP
Glad am I that your highness is so arm’d
To bear the tidings of calamity.
Like an unseasonable stormy day,
Which makes the silver rivers drown their shores,
As if the world were all dissolved to tears,
So high above his limits swells the rage
Of Bolingbroke, covering your fearful land
With hard bright steel and hearts harder than steel.
White-beards have arm’d their thin and hairless scalps
Against thy majesty; boys, with women’s voices,
Strive to speak big and clap their female joints
In stiff unwieldy arms against thy crown:
The very beadsmen learn to bend their bows
Of double-fatal yew against thy state;
Yea, distaff-women manage rusty bills
Against thy seat: both young and old rebel,
And all goes worse than I have power to tell. KING RICHARD II
Too well, too well thou tell’st a tale so ill.
Where is the Earl of Wiltshire? where is Bagot?
What is become of Bushy? where is Green?
That they have let the dangerous enemy
Measure our confines with such peaceful steps?
If we prevail, their heads shall pay for it:
I warrant they have made peace with Bolingbroke. SIR STEPHEN SCROOP
Peace have they made with him indeed, my lord. KING RICHARD II
O villains, vipers, damn’d without redemption!
Dogs, easily won to fawn on any man!
Snakes, in my heart-blood warm’d, that sting my heart!
Three Judases, each one thrice worse than Judas!
Would they make peace? terrible hell make war
Upon their spotted souls for this offence! SIR STEPHEN SCROOP
Sweet love, I see, changing his property,
Turns to the sourest and most deadly hate:
Again uncurse their souls; their peace is made
With heads, and not with hands; those whom you curse
Have felt the worst of death’s destroying wound
And lie full low, graved in the hollow ground. DUKE OF AUMERLE
Is Bushy, Green, and the Earl of Wiltshire dead? SIR STEPHEN SCROOP
Ay, all of them at Bristol lost their heads. DUKE OF AUMERLE
Where is the duke my father with his power?
KING RICHARD II
No matter where; of comfort no man speak:
Let’s talk of graves, of worms, and epitaphs;
Make dust our paper and with rainy eyes
Write sorrow on the bosom of the earth.
Let’s choose executors and talk of wills:
And yet not so, for what can we bequeath
Save our deposed bodies to the ground?
Our lands, our lives and all are Bolingbroke’s,
And nothing can we call our own but death
And that small model of the barren earth
Which serves as paste and cover to our bones.
For God’s sake, let us sit upon the ground
And tell sad stories of the death of kings;
How some have been deposed; some slain in war,
Some haunted by the ghosts they have deposed;
Some poison’d by their wives: some sleeping kill’d;
All murder’d: for within the hollow crown
That rounds the mortal temples of a king
Keeps Death his court and there the antic sits,
Scoffing his state and grinning at his pomp,
Allowing him a breath, a little scene,
To monarchize, be fear’d and kill with looks,
Infusing him with self and vain conceit
As if this flesh which walls about our life
Were brass impregnable, and humor’d thus
Comes at the last and with a little pin
Bores through his castle wall, and farewell king!
Cover your heads and mock not flesh and blood
With solemn reverence: throw away respect,
Tradition, form and ceremonious duty,
For you have but mistook me all this while:
I live with bread like you, feel want,
Taste grief, need friends: subjected thus,
How can you say to me, I am a king?
Context: In the last twenty five years Australian Federal politics have seen several successful partnerships which have ultimately ‘ended in tears’. First there was Hawke-Keating, then Rudd-Gillard and more recently Abbott-Turnbull. It is sometimes forgotten that the situation involving Prime Minister John Howard and Treasurer Peter Costello might have gone the same way, but for one reason or another Costello’s challenge never eventuated. As with Bob Hawke, there was said to be some sort of commitment from Howard to hand over peacefully and seamlessly to his Treasurer at an agreed time (reportedly December 2006 – see the piece by Michelle Grattan at http://bit.ly/2sMUpUr). However the deal – if there was one – was never consummated and Peter Costello never challenged. Howard went on as PM to lose the Election of November 2007 and his own seat of Bennelong. Costello confounded expectations by not seeking Liberal Party leadership in Opposition, with that position going to Brendan Nelson and then Malcolm Turnbull. Costello resigned from Parliament in October 2009. Peter Costello’s brother Tim has been a leading advocate for social justice and Australia’s overseas aid program. The song “Two Little Boys” was written by American composer Theodore F Morse and lyricist Edward Madden in 1902 and was made popular by Harry Lauder. Ted Egan sang it to Rolf Harris in Arnhem Land in 1969 – and again over the phone! – and it was No. 1 on the singles chart for six weeks from December 1969. (As Administrator of the Northern Territory Ted Egan gave a Keynote Address at the 8th National Rural Health Conference, held in Alice Springs in 2005.) Apparently it was one of Margaret Thatcher’s favourite songs. Despite that, Hartlepool United fans have sung the song on the terraces since the 1980s. Unfortunately the song has recently done little for the team’s performances: at the end of the 2016-17 season they were relegated from League Division Two to the National League. I suppose I wrote this version some time during 2006.
Two little boys
Two little boys made plenty of noise
Each took a different course
Normally they tried their differences to hide
Travellers both of course.
One little chap then had a mishap
Couldn’t break his leader’s head
Wept for the job but ceased to sob
When his older brother said:
“For the sake of the Lord stop crying
There’s no room in The Lodge for two
Piss off Pete and quit your whining
John-will-do what John will do.
When you stand down you’ll be forgotten
Just as sure as the night time falls
And then we will all remember
Which one of us had the balls.”
Some months passed, Rudd came at last
(A world vision in his sights).
Not very old and a sight to behold:
A backbencher’s name up in lights.
The same little chap, just one more mishap
A half-Nelson grip on his head
Wept for the job but ceased to sob
When his older brother said:
“For the sake of the Lord stop crying
The Party wants you now it’s true
Brendan’s scores are not impressive
And Malcolm says he’ll wait for you.”
“But can’t you see Tim I’m all a-tremble
It’s boards now for me (so it looks):
But thanks to the Party and the media
This should help sell all the books.”
Lines in the Trouser 16
“Some chicken! Some neck” – Winston Churchill
Context: The rhythm of the phrase is surely what makes it so strong and memorable. It’s all in the timing.
Some chicken! Some neck.
The contribution of Canada to the imperial war effort in troops, in ships, in aircraft, in food, and in finance has been magnificent ——- “Hitler and his Nazi gang have sown the wind: let them reap the whirlwind.”
“- – – -When I warned them (the French) that Britain would fight on alone whatever they did, their generals told the Prime Minister and his divided Cabinet, ‘in three weeks England will have her neck wrung like a chicken. Some chicken! Some neck.'”
(Speech to Canadian Parliament, 1942)
Lines in the trouser 17
We’ve had enough of fluoro vests
Context: The Federal Election held on 7 September 2013 was fought out between Kevin Rudd and Tony Abbott. It came after three tumultuous years in which there was a hung parliament, highly partisan parliamentary politics, and leadership struggles within the Labor Party. These last saw the demise of Australia’s first female Prime Minister, Julia Gillard. The public was already demonstrating a ‘pox on both your houses’ attitude to politics and to the leaders of the two major blocs. Towards the end of the campaign the 12th Australian Palliative Care Conference was held in Canberra. Yvonne Luxford was then CEO of Palliative Care Australia (PCA) and the following piece was initially titled ‘For Yvonne – 4 September 2013’. I don’t recall whether Yvonne or PCA was ever actually delivered of the piece or whether it remained in My Back Pocket. Several of the piece’s political sentiments remain appropriate today (June 2017), with the public’s alienation from the main political parties having grown apace.
We’ve had enough of fluoro vests
We’ve had enough of fluoro vests and cooking shows and malls
The prospect of the next ‘debate’ quite frankly just appals.
We want to feel some leadership, some vision – real ideas –
Then we’ll grant a ‘mandate’ to some grouping with few fears.
What care for disability? What funding for our schools?
What promises for dental health? for broadband what new rules?
What place for those without a home who venture to our land?
On taxing times for climate what is ultimately planned?
To Close the Gap’s a target for which we all must thirst
So life can be as long and fair for those who were here first.
To deal with death and dying with somewhat less regret
So care at end of life will be fond business for us yet!
The richest land in all the world, unhurt by GFC
Should share its bounty evenly; that is our earnest plea.
We crave someone of whom we’re proud (in this our nation lags)[2]
A leader fit between the ears – not just between the flags.
Lines in the Trouser 18
What’s in a name?
Context: When writing about Australia’s health sector one frequently has to choose between the terms ‘preventive health’ and ‘preventative health’ – although of course the choice is a straw man, a red herring or a bit of both! Because of course the labelling of policies and programs which prevent illness as being in the field of ‘preventive health’ is extremely daft. It seems that I wrote this piece some time between November 2009 and August 2010. Much of Alan Bennett’s writing and performance falls within my ‘favourites’ category so it is appropriate to have something in this piece of doggerel for which to acknowledge him explicitly. Note: I have amended this piece since its original creation, mainly for happier scansion.
What’s in a name?
When it comes to paper toileting there seem to be two bunches:
One group likes to fold, it’s said, the other merely scrunches.
(I know just what you’re thinking – some of you, if not all:
When we turn to the toilet for humour then the writing for sure’s on the wall.)[3]
So which group are you in? What do you aver?
Is it ‘preventative’ health or ‘preventive’? Which do you prefer?
Or perhaps you’re so smart, see words as an art
And say ‘prophylactic health’ – how inventive!
The difference of course is an extra ‘a-t’;
Just one syllable, two letters more.
So how do you usually say the word? Is the ‘tive’ third or fourth?
Does it only have three feet, or four?
No matter: the word is misleading
It really is very deranged.
The prevention of health is not what we’re after,
That really would be very strange.
So let’s all agree then, instead of the choice
Between preventative health and the shorter
We’ll coin the new term ‘preventing poor health’
And hope experts agree – ‘cos aorta.
[1] With apologies to Theodore Morse and Edward Madden – and the supporters of Hartlepool United.
[2] given political events overseas in 2016-17 perhaps this is no longer a fair reflection of Australia’s position
In 2017, the Winter Solstice in Canberra in the Australian Capital Territory was on Wednesday 21 June at 2:24 pm AEST. I wrote this piece on 21 June 2008.
on the shortest day i lie in the sun
but feel the shade sweep over me
hoping the dark will turn to light
and that chance might four-leaf-clover me
this sun through glass has kept me here
and belief in tasks worth doing
but suppose that jobs are over now
the agendas changed or going
suppose a canker is really inside
not cured by sunshine at all
where will we be – my friends and i
when the long summer evenings call
it’s not in a bottle, not in a pill
and not in these fears of mine:
it’s on the breath and in the soul
where even the sun can’t shine
if contentment comes but once a year
when the shortest day is now over
it might after all be just enough
– and time will grow the clover
"Most of the groups – most frequently referred to as sections – are fairly obvious, for example the Trumpet daffodils, the Tazettas, the Pheasant's eyes, the Hoop Petticoats, the Jonquils, and so on, and these are the basic divisions in the genus recognised here." "An additional complication to the taxonomy is posed by hybridisation. Most species of Narcissus will hybridise but, significantly, there is great variation in the fertility of the offspring, depending upon the degree of relationship between the parents. - - There has been a great deal of hybridisation in this very popular, garden-worthy genus, resulting in thousands of hybrid cultivars and selections (Kington, 1998), and doubtless this will continue. Although much of this work has been concerned with sophisticated selection for flower form and colour (e.g., pink and red coronas and apricot-coloured perianth segments), there are probably still some interesting lines of research that could be pursued using the many wild species. Taking just one possibility as an example, the autumn-flowering species (Narcissus serotinus, N. elegans and the green-flowered N. viridiflorus) could perhaps be utilised in the production of a race of larger-flowered autumnal narcissi, thus extending the overall flowering season of the garden forms by several months. With the great diversity of characters exhibited by the species and their numerous variants, there are great possibilities in this natural gene pool. However, some of the species are under threat in the wild, and many more will become so with increasing urban and tourist-based development." [From the chapter by Brian Mathew, in Narcissus and Daffodil - The genus Narcissus, edited by Gordon R. Hanks, Horticulture Research International, Kirton, UK, Taylor & Francis e-library, 2005.]
Beautiful weed
She's danced on the ivories since she was eight
She can finger just all of the keys
And though you don't know it, she played cello too -
- Just a keyboard between both her knees.
She came to Australia forty-six years ago
For a while she needed to roam;
In Sydney, Port Stephens and then Central West
With Lesley she made a warm home.
She served in her towns for political reps
In the community and in the pews
Les always behind her to get them the papers
- In those days there wasn't 'Fake News'.
Her church and her music are precious to Bev
And in Orange from nineteen-eight-nine
The Rowland Gregory Orpheus Singers
Took much of their after-work time.
Bev was accompanist, Les in the choir,
Together a close double act.
Her favourite key was always G Flat
For in that mode it's mostly All Blacks.
Apart from her partner there's one other man
For whom Bev has always been true
In tune with each other, from bar to bar,
And Leon, you know that it's you.
Alpha met Bev at the Sydney Town Hall
- The memory both of them chat-on
The men tried to speed up But Bev remained geed-up
She said "It's like cricket: When you're at the wicket
Keep your eyes on your leader She'll declare when she needs-ta;
In the meantime please all watch her baton."
Alpha and Bev became very firm friends
Similar women with similar ends -
Though Sasha and Toby, you all will agree
Were closer companions than Alpha could be!
Alpha has written in elegant prose
Of the Beverley Glover that each of us knows.
She has energy, patience, she's keen to do more
In musical matters she knows the full score.
Her large congregation of this is apprised:
On Sundays she'll keep her church well organ-ised.
Her laugh is infectious, she's full of kind tricks
And only in silence when watching Netflix.
We will share her on Facebook, we will see her on Skype,
And her legacy's plain, she is one of a type.
Let us pick up her mantle, let us go where she's led
Our thanks not piano but forte instead!
For Bev's contributions will always inspire
After thirty-odd years with the Male Voice Choir.
12 May 2017
