How many of us were
influenced by Ivan Illich's small book "Disabling Professions"(1977)?
A great many I would guess. It informed us of a growing curse, a malignancy, within our society in
the same way that Rachel Carson sounded a warning on toxic chemicals in the
environment when "Silent Spring" which was published in 1962.
Books have the power to alert and alarm us but have any of the
lessons really been heeded?
In the foreword to
Ivan’s book the publisher wrote;
“There is a growing awareness that during
the past twenty years or so, the professions have gained a supreme ascendency
over our social aspirations and behaviour by tightly organising and
institutionalizing themselves. At the same time we have become virtually passive
clientele: dependent, cajoled and harassed, economically deprived and
physically and mentally damaged by the very agents whose raison d’être it is to
help.”
As regards health
professionals then probably there has been a small shift away from the blind
faith we used to have in our doctors. Today far more people are aware of the
influence of drug companies on prescribing patterns, and understand some
sections of the medical profession are far too ready to 'medicalize' us all.
The wise recognise that our normal condition should be one of health, a
situation that would not require us to seek medical attention at all. Many also
understand that a return to some of the old remedies for common ailments,
whilst not offering a quick fix can heal gently with no side effects.
But what of men of
the cloth, our Christian clergy?
Our revered clergymen
didn't rate too highly in “Disabling Professions”. But do the views of the
clergy still carry any weight in our society generally? In this shire the
representative of the Anglican Chruch, Revd Laurence, wrote a seriously
convincing letter of support for the RPS Consultancy who were lobbying for the approval of Satterley's development at the Weightman's Farm location. Revd
Laurence claims that 1,200 children will attend the new school, to be completed
within two years of rezoning.
Was he truly serious?
Apparently. He claims
that Anglicans will be descending on the shire in hoards to take up the opportunity
of sending their children to the new church school that will be built. He is a
man of faith and so we can only conclude that this must be his sincerely held
opinion. It would be churlish to consider that any friendships, relationships,
donations or lobbying had influenced him at all.
However, should Revd
Laurence ever read this blog I hope he will make some comment on where the
parents of these children are going to work. An important factor in choosing
where we live is how we can make our living.
The Anglican Church
has set up some excellent counselling services and self-help groups for FIFO
families. Recognising that for many FIFO mothers life is extremely difficult,
and children growing up without the day-to-day guidance of a second parent can
pose problems. Revd Laurence’s church has called upon volunteers within the
Capes Region to support these struggling familes. He is now promoting the
development of housing in a remote location where there is no employment, which
would seem to be encouraging more dependency on FIFO, either that or he is
working with nothing more than mere blind faith that jobs will follow the
families here, something that has not happened over recent years of development.
Justin Welby, The
Anglican Archbishop, has spoken out about the tyranny of providers of financial
services that leave the poor in a wretched state, with houses repossessed after
they have been approved for loans beyond their means to repay. To buy a home in
Margaret River requires a decent income and the majority of jobs are in the service
industries or agricultural, where pay is low. Many people can only obtain split shift employment
that requires excessive transport costs for multiple journeys each day. Nothing favours a young family wishing to purchase.
The individuals
controlling many development corporations are also controlling the finance. We
only have to look at past failures such as Alan Bond to see the pattern being
repeated today. When Alan Bond was allegedly bankrupt he had interests in
property development, mortgage and loan finance, and art works. These three
strands provide beneficial business interactions.
There would be no
benefit in developing blocks of land if nobody could afford to buy them, and so
the finance strand of the empire is essential. Finance for individuals to buy
homes, and finance seminars to show investors how they can grow rich by
investing in property, and how easy it is to obtain finance. The art world is
important for moving money around the globe. Art auctions and private trades
are one important method of laundering money, moving it away from a corporation
and into a family trust, preferably away from Australian regulators. Much of Mr
Bond’s ill gotten gains ended up in Switzerland, Ireland and Croatia.
The couple who front up Juventus Pty Ltd, the corporation developing the land Michael Hale lobbies for, are both active in finance, property development and just by chance they are also art collectors.
When
the Karridale planning for an additional 500 residents was discussed on ABC SW Jenny
MacGregor suggested the Augusta abalone farm would be a possible employer of
those needing work. Since she made that assertion the Augusta Fish Factory has
closed and even a close examination of our local press will reveal no great shortfall
of workers for the abalone farm. Michael Hale is still working on getting more
land at Cowaramup for his proposed resort, another employer Jenny mentioned, but as he has been working on this
since 2003 and to date there are no new jobs it isn't a sure fire bet.
Revd Laurence may be providing support for a development corporation
that will deliver more social problems for his church to address.
Anyone reading Revd
Laurence’s letter of support must question his motivation, was he placing the desire
of the Anglican Church to gain 12-15 hectares of land above the needs of the resident community? Was he influenced
and manipulated by some clever words from an associate or friend? Does he honestly
believe that without well paid secure employment prospects families will flock
to live close to the proposed new school? Or maybe Revd Laurence believes that
the children will travel to the Satterley Anglican school from Busselton and
further afield and the estate will be predominantly secondary/investment
properties that absentee owners will visit for 64 days each year? (CSIRO
research indicates that absentee owners visit their properties on for 64 per
year on average)
For many people the
clergy have become an irrelevance, but if they are going to become involved in
planning issues then we must be vigilant that their influence is well founded
and their interest is solely people, not the corporate needs of the institution
known as the Anglican Church. Over many years the public have heard that the
churches, of all denominations, are far too ready to protect their own by
sacrificing social justice at the altar of collegiality. As a community, we
must resist. Those of us who are Christians, even those of us who are Anglicans, must resist the temptation to suspend our critical faculties merely because the authority figure has been ordained.
Before anyone gives
Revd Laurence’s opinion too much weight they must take note that his first
comment, after saying he wanted 12-15 hectares of land, was that he would
undertake some research to find out what the demand, if any, might be. Good idea. I hope he also examines what jobs, other than the teaching posts he is offering, this area will be developing. The full text of his support letter can be read HERE
Having given the
clergy a bad time what of two other “professions” that have sprung up since
Illich wrote “Disabling Professions”? The lobbyist, and the urban or town
planner? Working together these two professions can destroy localities economically,
socially and environmentally.
The environment has
its own lobby groups now and they do challenge plans regularly, and often have
great success. But what of the other two dimensions of community life, our
economy and our social or cultural values? There appears to be few champions
standing by to defend them.
Planning matters, it
has a huge effect on our lives, but although we are paying a heavy price in
money terms for so called professional planning in WA much of it is not serving
the people. In this shire planning is undertaken by unsuitable people who
produce inappropriate plans, this view has recently been validated by the shire president. But although he
acknowledges this problem he is not prepared to consider any improvement.
Town planning
is essential in towns where there are significant infrastructure considerations. In remote rural environments where there are no deep
sewerage connections, no reticulated water, no street lighting, and where there
should be no need for power lines, the planning only delivers danger. Planning clusters
of houses that will be sold as secondary/investment properties is a recipe for disaster
in a district at high risk of bushfire. When houses are planned as an estate
fires will rapidly spread from one to another.
Lobbyists matter
because they have such power to influence decisions.
At federal and state
government level we regularly see investigations around cash for bribes,
political donations for favours, or cash for influence. But what of lobbying at
the local level? Most inquiries into corruption repeat the warning that even
legal lobbying can be perceived as corrupt if it is undertaken in secret.
Without transparency there can be no trust.
There is no lobbying
register at the shire and so we have no idea if lobbyists are at work. When I
sought the names of the 11 persons the shire claimed to represent the “community
consultation” element of developing a strategic plan for Karridale I was
advised that even under FOI these names would not be divulged. The names would
forever remain a secret, even though these 11 people were reported as
representing me and my neighbours and friends. None of my neighbours or friends
have any idea who the 11 chosen ones were.
The shire has refused
to hold a public community meeting to discuss the strategy for Karridale. The
shire require all discussions to be conducted in secret and remain confidential
between the shire and the unidentified individuals.
Does it matter? Why
should I be told who the shire planning staff meet with?
Let's be clear, I don't
want a list of every person who ever chats to a planning officer about their
property plans. Individuals have every right to discuss planning ideas they
might have for their own property in total confidence. But when a strategy
document determining the future shape of the whole district, a document to
influence and guide the economic, social and environmental dimensions of my
locality then I do feel that transparency and honesty are essential. To achieve
a fair and equitable result there needs to be open meetings, at times and
locations acceptable to the residents. There is a precedent for this. The
planning for Karridale commenced with just such a meeting, and approx 100
people turned up to hear what was being proposed.
They certainly
weren't apathetic. Neither were they fooled when the planning director, CEO,
and councillors colluded in telling them false information about the policy
relating to planning adjacent to the Leeuwin Naturaliste Ridge, the LNRSPP.
An AMRMail reporter,
Janine Beacham, attended that meeting and reported on it. Everyone at the
meeting heard the same presentation. Of course people will remember some
aspects of the material presented and ensuing discussion better than others,
but we could at least talk openly together about a shared knowledge, a shared
experience, a shared set of aspirations.
Today, if you
read the documents supporting the rezoning of Karridale land the report of that 2007 community meeting is denied. The 2013 report states that there were
no notes of the meeting and no record of it. It is as though the shire wishes to expunge it from memory, but it will take more than just
wishing to wipe away all trace of the AMRMail articles because they are out
here, in the public domain, they tell the truth about the meetings.Unfortunately I can't offer you a link, but those lovely people at the AMRMail will let you examine copies of the newspaper if you pop in to their office. (Karridale
speaks up, 21/02/2007, Karridale's
growing pains, 7/03/2007)
Although the Council
Minutes indicated future meetings were scheduled for Karridale, they were subsequently
cancelled. All requests for community meetings were rejected. From the moment
the lie about numbers was exposed the shire and councillors refused to discuss
anything with a group. Only one-on-one meetings were offered, with no potential
for anyone to witness what was said. Everything stayed private, secret, and your
councillors decided that was the best way forward.
Denied access under
FOI we can never know who the shire planners met with, but consider the
following possibilities.
Would you be concerned if the list included Brian Burke? Former Premier of Western Australia who shared out tax payers funds among his mates in a scam that became known as WAInc. Because they had the legal authority to make the decisions they made very little of what they did could actually be considered criminal.
Just imagine that the
same group of people who were known as Canal Rocks Pty Ltd and perpetrated a
fraud on the Busselton Shire in 2006, were now a corporation using some other name and
were developing land in this shire. Would it matter to you? Might it shift your
perception of some of the arguments being used to justify the 'need' for more
housing?
If you knew that one
of those deciding the future of the farming families in the Leeuwin Ward was
Michael Swift, dismissed from his position as CEO of Busselton Shire, and
himself the subject of an inquiry – could that affect your opinion at all?
The WA Inc fraud was
a massive collusion by men in powerful positions of trust and authority. If you
knew that Bond, Burke, Grill, Horgan, et al were all involved in planning
activities here in this shire would it suggest that maybe tighter controls were
needed, more scrutiny?
If you were told that
Michael Hale, who had set up the State Cabinet Office for Brian Burke when he
was Premier of WA, was one of the persons deciding the future development
direction of Karridale, would that matter to you? Might you be curious as to
why the AMRSC planning officer stated that Michael could only be contacted via
the Prevelly Development Trust Pty Ltd located in Redfern, NSW? If you knew
Michael was the man behind the Cowaramup Resort Development, that is currently
seeking the opportunity to acquire land from the shire to expand his development,
but was described as a local Karridale developer, might you be hesitant to
trust this information? If you then read that Michael Hale had lied on oath to
a Royal Commission would wonder why your councillors prefer his vision of the
future for Karridale over the aspirations of local farming families?
If you heard that
Alan Bond’s son Craig was the primary investor in Juventus Pty Ltd, one of the
corporations involved in profit taking from Karridale would you wonder how Alan’s
family got to be so wealthy when dad lost all his money in a spectacular crash
into bankruptcy?
It is because the men
on the rich list wield so much power and have so much political influence we,
the general public, need to be alert to the fact that corruption that can occur
anywhere, and everywhere. When Brian Burke and Julien Grill came for a chat
about development with the Augusta-Margaret River CEO who was he working for?
Our economy is being destroyed
by the corporations developing blocks of land and removing all profits from
this local economy. When Juventus and Nutan take their profits from rezoning
and subdividing Karridale land, that money will not circulate around Karridale, Leeuwin
or Augusta-Margaret River. It will leave WA for NSW, Asia, Switzerland,
Ireland, and many other safe havens.
In the past local
land owners were able to develop land as the need arose, the profit from land
developed this way was returned into this local economy. If a local land owner
sells some land and makes, say $1-2million, then those funds are highly likely
to be used to develop some enterprise in this locality, thus creating jobs
here. Those jobs may require new employees, who will create a demand for
houses. Slower growth in property, but growth in community members, growth in real jobs, and better for our
economy.
When Canal Rocks
developed the Smith's Beach at Busselton, aided by Brian Burke and subsequently
the subject of a CCC inquiry, the project it was worth $300million profit to an
anonymous consortium of 23 persons. We cannot be sure but there is every likelihood
that these were the same persons who were involved in the development of
Yanchep, and many other large developments all way down the coast.
Did these men just
get lucky with the blocks they bought options to buy on?
No, and neither are
they incredibly smart.
They were guided by
people in government, politicians and public servants, who worked with their
lobbyists. People working in agencies such as Landcorp, in government
departments, and sitting on various planning committees; all these people could
help to suggest where the next options should be bought. By working with
lobbyists the politicians and public servants retain an arm’s length relationship,
which currently offers some protection from any suggestion that they are acting
illegally.
The activities of
lobbyists and planners are crippling our economy, destroying our social fabric,
and ultimately placing our fragile environment at risk. They are the new Disabling Professions, stopping communities from flourishing in sustainable ways. Even the environment is at
risk because development corporations can only operate by placing large
clusters of houses together, these clusters pose a huge fire hazard. For the
corporate raiders these disposable houses are a good thing, because the same
people also have corporate interests in the construction industry. Not so good
for the residents, flora and fauna.
