Wanderings · of · a · Postgrad

Well, the four years are almost up, it's time to see how I think the government it going, and general thoughts on the opposition.

Areas the Government has been performing well


Transport policy
I can only be happy with Labor's performance here. Tram extensions (with an overall goal of creating an inner city network), new trams, train line extensions (seaford and... the other one), finally electrifying and resleepering the train lines, upgrading and buying new trains, buying new buses, upgrading the obahn interchanges... I can go on.

On top of that is the upgrades to the Sturt highway, the northern expressway, the plans to make the South road superway... all focused on freight, which is where a majority of new road infrastructure should always be spent. I give Labor a real good thumbs up for this one.

Water policy

I know there are a lot of people who would disagree with me, but they are doing the best they can- in addition to the desalination plant, they have been doing their best to get the other states to be less dickish about allowing water to get here.




Areas the government has been alright in


Health
They've been doing all right. It's really difficult to measure government performance in this area because the lines of responsibility is far too blurred nowadays. IMO the responsibility for health should be pushed down to the states completely (except for medicare), but that won't happen- more likely the opposite will happen, with a referendum giving the power to the federation. Blegh.

With that said, the government has had to make tough decisions regarding the closure of wards and centralising health services. If those super clinics ever get built it would help reduce the strain on the hospitals.



Areas the government has dropped the ball

Education
They have been doing rather poorly with this. The creation of super schools is pretty meh and views education far too much in an 'economic delivery of services' manner. While the government has been resisting national curricula, it hasn't made much progress in what it has control over. Oh well. To be fair, this is another aspect the states have only partial control over, since funding rules are dictated by the federal government.


The Opposition

They're not doing too bad after a long period of being inept. However, they could be doing much better. They are unable to push a single message properly, it contradicts itself... it's just not a very well run machine. Their increase in the polls has more to do with the whole Rann affair thing than anything else- surely they could have capitalised on it by releasing a couple of policies while he's off balance?


Ugh.


This will be an interesting election.

It's Australia day again, and I suppose now is a nice time to write something about Australia- nationalism, where Australia is today and where it's going. Hmm...

Australia Today

Economically, Australia is doing well- the economy dodged the crisis, and was the only industrialised economy to not go into recession. The economy hasn't been in recession since 1993, something I'm quite proud of. I suppose the main reason is because Australia has shown that there can be an economy that has a reasonably large welfare state, regulate the economy (to a certain degree), and be economically successful- more so than economies which are "freer". I suppose that counts as national pride.

Politically, Australia has a lot to boast about- 110 years of continual liberal democracy, and South Australia has 160 years of continual democracy, making it one of the oldest continual liberal democracy in the world. SA was the second place in the world to give women the vote (after NZ, it was in the 1890s), and that's pretty awesome. A bad mark is the delay in giving the Aboriginies the vote, it took until the 1980s until that happened. Shameful. My main bitched about our political system is the foreign head of state, and the calcified nature of the party system. However I am reluctant to abolish their power to the extent the US system has. It's a conundrum I still struggle with.

When it comes to national pride, I suffer from what Americans would describe as 'liberal guilt'. I love Australia and everything in it, but I am also consistently aware of its many faults- a history of attempted genocide, increasing inequality, difficulties in making our health system truly universal (though that's a spoiled complaint... other countries have it much worse), the continued politicisation of our education system, and so forth. That a portion of our population continues to live in third world standards should be cause for us to hang our heads in shame.

Nationalism and America

I am aware that I'm seeing this through the rose tinted lenses of American TV, but I have a certain jealousy that America has so many symbols of their nationhood. The flag (and its history), the anthem, 'America the Brave', the statues of great Presidents (there are no PMs who are universally loved... though I'd imagine there would be few Americans who hate Lincoln... right??)... I can go on. I have seen an exponential growth in the number of Australian flags flown around this time of the year, and I am uncertain as to what I feel about it. I'm partly worried Australia doesn't have these symbols, that Australia as a nation lacks solid foundations as to what it is, but I'm also incredibly afraid of jingoism and parochialism. It's difficult to have it both ways.

Australia Day

Australia day is really a time to be introspective, and really understand what Australia is doing, where it is going. Most people use the day to relax and have  BBQ, and I suppose that's somewhat symbolic in itself. We have never had a great war, we never had to fight for our independence, never really had to struggle for our very existence. This encourages a certain relaxed nature, but it also breeds complacency. I'm Australian, but I'm not really all that proud. I suppose I'm happy with this, it means that I'll never believe that this great nation of ours will ever be perfect.

Oh dear heavens, I had fun on Sunday.

I went on a bus trip with the brewing club I am a member of (to be precise, the Amateur Winemakers and Brewers Club of Adelaide), and it was awesome. We started at Beard and Brau, a new and upcoming micro, where we had a very detailed tour and some tastings. Their Red Tail was good, their Golden Paw was fantastic, and their Bon Chiens*... totally glorious. At $5/330mL (a bit over 11oz for you American folk) it's not cheap but it's worth every cent. I got a 12 pack of the Golden Paw, a 6 pack of the Bon Chiens and one of their shirts, and it looks quite fetching on me.


Next was Vigara winery which had some nice wines, some too sweet, others too overpowering. I really liked their rose, which Mel bought a couple bottles of. I didn't like their late harvest chardonnay, which Mel bought a few bottles of. I'll be trying to get a few glasses of the former off her at some point.

We then had lunch, which was a BBQ that was included as part of the cost of the bus. I brought a keg of my blonde ale which, despite being shaken up (and thus somewhat cloudy) got some good reviews from the other people there. Well, it did win the club blonde ale comp just last month... It was served from a keg through Jono's portable keg setup, so it was a team effort- me with the beer and him with the means to get it into people's glasses. Nice.


Last was Dominic Versace, which prides itself on having wine that is made with no artificial fertillisers. I remember thinking everything was great, however I was very drunk by that point. I also remember the wine being really expensive- $28/bottle expensive. Ouch.

After that was the drop off back at Civic park and the ride home with Ramona. I then watched DS9 with Mel and tried a longie of her very first brew! We both agreed that it was somewhat heavy on the coffee- however it was a very good beer, especially considering it was her first one! I remember my first beer, it was undrinkable.


Good times.


* For those who followed this asterisk, it's a Saison, which is a style of beer brewed in the farmhouses of France. In order to get the beer right you reallly need to use a yeast blend, which has hundreds of different yeast strains all working together to greate flavours that can only be described as 'barnyard'. Awesome.

I've just discovered audiosurf, a little late, but oh well. If anyone else uses the game, please add me, peas_and_corn

If you haven't played the game, essentially it's a puzzle game where you create colour matche of tiles, but the speed of the track and placement of the tiles is determined by songs in your music directory.






The game costs US$10, which considering the exchange rates nowadays, is even more of a bargain than usual.

It's... heaps of fun.

OK, for the final flavour to try is the kebab flavour. I was originally worried that this flavour would be too similar to the BBQ one, however I was wrong. This one has a distinct pepper and garlic flavour which is what I imagine is what they were going for with the kebeb thing (yiros in SA, FYI- influenced by the Greek population, in the way that the Germans in Hahndorf influenced what the eastern states call 'devon ham' to be called 'fritz'. But I digress). It's kinda tangy, so they probably used some of the flavourings used in light and tangy chips to make that effect. What it really lacks is anything that hints there are more ingredients to kebabs than the meat and sauce- there's tomato and lettuce in there too, guys! This admittedly would ve *very* hard to pull off, but this detracts from the flavour overall.

It's an interesting flavour, and there's something there to keep me interested for a whole bag. The peppery/garlicky tastes don't really become tiring which is nice. It's somewhat different and I credit them for that, however it is just that little bit lower than the salad flavour, giving it a 4/5. 

For all you chip lovers out there, the final flavour will be reviewed later, but I'd like to discuss an article by Abbott about the ETS. It's certainly an interesting read, with so much in it that I can't help myself but to give a nice commentary on it.

WORK this out: the government is proposing a new tax to cascade through the entire economy and it's the opposition that has to explain itself. Sure, the emissions trading scheme is presented as an act of environmental righteousness. Even so, it's more than slightly odd that the overwhelming focus of debate so far has been on differences of opinion inside the Liberal Party rather than on the practical difficulties of the biggest economic upheaval since the GST.

Well, a lot of people have been wondering about that as well. In fact, I have read just as many articles about the attention paid by the media on the Liberal party's internal woes and the distraction that they cause that I have read about the internal problems themselves. In an interesting journalistic circle jerk the examples of journalists writing about what other journalists are writing about the Liberal party's divisions and then in turn writing about how all this writing is taking the focus off the government but not actually writing anything negative about the govenrment at all... it's quite amusing.

He has a good point, though- why is the opposition the side being forced to explain itself all the time? It's partly because it's more interesting- "Backbench revolt against Turnbull" is a slightly better headline than "PM Needs to answer for inconsistent economic modelling". Sure I'd probably click on the second link any day of the week, but I doubt many other people would. The other reason is because the opposition isn't doing a very good job at forcing the focus back onto the government. This is clearly an attempt to do so, and I really hope that it works. The key to a good government is a good opposition and when the opposition finds it impossible to get the focus on what they perceive as the problems with the ETS, then it's hardly surprising that the focus isn't on the bill but rather the men quibbling about it.

By supporting negotiations based on a better deal for Australian workers and consumers, the opposition should be better able to point out the flaws in the government's ETS while maintaining its own environmental credentials. If the government accepts amendments to protect farmers from the need to buy permits, to exempt the emissions produced by coalmining, and to reduce the rise in electricity prices, it will be Malcolm Turnbull's bill as much as Kevin Rudd's. If, on the other hand, the government fails to accept improvements that it doesn't own, the opposition could vote against the bill, keep the Coalition intact and prepare to fight an election against the Rudd government's jobs-destroying stealth tax on everything.

I can see where he's coming from here. The opposition needs to promote its amendments (to reinforce its "environmental credentials", what credentials??) as being for the good of all. The push for the exemptions for farmers and miners are part of a two-pronged assault. The first is one that shores up the support for the National Party and hopefully (from their perspective, I think the coalition should be disbanded, but that's just me) shore up the strength of the ties between these two parties, in their uncomfortable partnership. The second is to pull on the argument that Rudd used at the previous election: the mining boom sustained us all during the Howard times. If the Australian public have believed that the mining boom was solely responsible for the economic boom, then arguing that the ETS would destroy the mining sector (even if it's just the huge coal sector) is a very good argument to make. Many people not involved with the mining sector appreciate that the runoff effect caused by a hypothetical collapse of coal mining would mean that their jobs will be under threat as well. This would bode well for Queensland (the state they were flogged in 2007) and WA (the state that's the closest to being blue in the whole country).

The only problem with such a stance is the potential counterattack- the Liberal party is once again in bed with the mining corporations and are not writing their own policies. Additionally, there is a slight change in how people perceive coal, after decades of green lobbying. Many people have been convinced that nuclear energy and especially uranium exports are the future (ironically this started under Howard). The government can also pull out their "We were elected to bring in the ETS they are stopping us from governing waah waah waah" trump card. Both parties pull this one out all the time and it gives me the shits because there's a difference between governing and passing legislation.

The opposition's amendments are responsible because lower economic costs reduce the need for compensation. In fact, one of the reasons the government wants a big increase in electricity prices is to generate more revenue for distribution to Labor's favoured constituencies.

They're doing a what now?? Here I was thinking that any tax on electricity is a state matter, seeing that they run the electricity networks (yeah, private contracts bla bla bla but it's still a state issue). Also, I don't understand this link between ETS-driven increases in electricity prices and increased tax revenue. If someone can explain that one, it'll be good.

Either way, there's the potential for a win here provided the Liberal Party stays united and refuses to be satisfied with a few token concessions. Turnbull will effectively have redrafted the legislation from opposition or he will have been able to demonstrate that his environmental credentials don't come at the cost of Australian jobs. The government will have had to concede that its original legislation was badly flawed or it will have given the opposition a clear issue on which to fight.

While I made fun of this sort of speculation earlier, it's easy to read between the lines in this particular paragraph. Essentially Abbott has argued that unless Turnbull pushes through these changes to the legislation, they will be considered little more than 'token concessions'. These are large changes to demand and the likelihood of Turnbull negotiating all of them in looks to be nigh on impossible. If that happens, would that be grounds for Abbott to slyly undermine him further? Raising expectations in the party room as to what Turnbull could negotiate (after a long period of merely convincing the backbenchers to support even negotiating) could be seen as yet another nail in the coffin when he fails to meet such lofty expectations. I could be projecting, though.

Lastly, I would like to ask: Why is Abbott writing this? According to The Australian, he is the opposition spokesman on families, housing, community services and indigenous affairs. Why is he writing on the environment? I can think of a few answers. Firstly is that he's highly visible- a high profile member of Howard's cabinet, and quite visible publicly. Second is that he's very good at making an argument, this isn't the first time he's written on issues for the Australian (the last was on the intervention, which was actually in his portfolio). Thirdly is the general observation that he has been tempering his views a little, trying to look a little less extreme in the eyes of the Australian public. Gone is the image of a right wing christian fanatic, in is the caring conservative who only wants to look out for Australian jobs.

Overall I agree with the idea that the Liberal party needs to stand up and become a real opposition. Whether they actually achieve any of their goals and amendments, only time will tell.

Ahh, yes. The common Australian joke that we eat both animals on our coat of arms encased in a chip. To be honest I expected a glorified BBQ flavour, and well... that's what I got. They're all right I guess, it's not like they are copying the BBQ flavour directly, in fact I would  prefer that this flavour replaces BBQ, because it's got a bit more going for it. It tastes like they were attempting to squeeze a bit of a BBQ sauce flavour in there. It wasn't successful mind you, but their attempts added in a certain little 'extra' to make them interesting.

Overall my opinions on this flavour is the same as the popcorn flavour- it's nice, and has some good flavours in it, but there's nothing here that really makes it unique or standout. Drop this flavour into the packs marked BBQ and gie this special edition name the flick. 3/5.

I'll pass on the cliched comment about the only female finalist suggesting a salad, and go onto the review.

I'll begin by saying that I'm having these chips with some blonde ale that I brewed, maybe that'll have an impact? Smells... kinda like lettuce. Tastes like spicy ham. Sort of. This one has cream powder in it too, however it's probably not as much and it's probably drowned out by the yeast powder, yeast extract and garlic powder. Come to think of it, yeah I do get a bit of a garlicky flavour off of it.

I actually really like this flavour, despite how awful it sounds. What's good about it is that it really doesn't taste anything like any of the traditional flavours- it really stands out and really has a character all of its own.

I'll give it a 4.5, this one's the best so far. Up next: Australian Barbecue.

For those not in the know, Smiths in Australia had a competition for people to submit a new chip flavour for them to sell. There are four finalists, and I have bought a packet of each. The first I will be reviewing is Steve's Buttered Popcorn.

On opening the pack, the chips just smell like standard salted chips, nothing special. Tasting it, there is a slight 'popcornness' in the flavour that is quite interesting. There is a kinda buttery flavour going on, which I will attribute to the addition of 'cream powder', whatever that is. The butteryness seems to be just as much in the texture as in the flavour, the chips are kinda 'greasy' without actually being greasy. It's kinda strange.

Overall I give the chips a 3/5. They're interesting, and they try some new things. However, they just feel like Salted: Advanced!! rather than a new flavour. Oh well.

Coming up next: Caesar Salad.

In Australian politics, mudslinging is common, especially during question time. Take the following short video shows-



Abbott got into trouble for describing Gillard's face when talking about the school's stimulus package as a "shit eating grin". Of course she can yell insults as much as she wants- it's her job as deputy leader- such as the now well known description of Christopher Pyne as a 'poodle', among other insults. But hey, why have consistent standards? Yeah, he said a naughty word, but there has been a bit of a problem where Gillard has been seen to should be exempt from being called names. You're in the mud Julia, you're gonna get dirty.

I'm interested to see how this affects Abbott's obvious long term leadership goals. He's been tempering his behaviour recently to look more like a human, and less like this person-



Which might cause problems with votes.

OK, we all go to shops, and all of us have acted like dicks to the staff and other people in general. So, here's a list of things you should and shouldn't do at stores, from a person who works in one's perspective. This is mainly referring to supermarkets, but you can transfer some to other types of stores. This is a top 10, crazy stuff.

1- Be nice to the staff. Yeah, I know it's our job to be nice to you, but if you smile and say 'please', when it turns out that the carton of stuff you want is at the bottom of a pallet the person is more likely to dig it out. Seriously, I've done it myself- gone to large lengths to help someone who is genuinely understanding that everything can't be full all of the time because we're not perfect, and I've said "we've run out" to complete dicks because I couldn't be bothered. The staff are people, treat them like people please.

2- Departments exist. The person at checkout doesn't care about the quality of the meat, and the person pushing that big trolley of fruit most likely doesn't know where the oil is. That's because stores (especially big stores, which qualifies as a store that does $400k+ a week) have casual staff that don't leave their department. I don't know where anything is in my store.

3- Look for it first. It's annoying when someone walks into a store and asks where something is, without bothering to look for it. Especially when it's either something easy to find like milk, or it's next to them.

4- You are not funny. If you think of a joke relating to something the person is doing, don't say it. It's a lazy joke the person has heard before and is not funny. Once you've worked in a department for about 3 months you have heard them all.

5- You are not interesting. When you are asked "how are you?" the answer is "good" (or perhaps "I'm good thankyou, and how are you?"). We don't care about an appointment you have or how busy your day has been, and we're sure that you don't care about how our days have been as well.

6- We are trying to do our jobs. This essentially means don't make our jobs harder. If someone is creating a display, perhaps you could just take some of that stuff from the aisle shelf? Customers who take something a good 0.5 seconds after I put it in a display are annoying. If you must grab stuff from where a display is being made, the staff would generally prefer it if you just took it from that carton they are filling from. Also, don't joke "looks like I'm ruining your display" (or variations thereof). See: you are not funny.

7- Get out of everyone's way. All stores have thoroughfares, and customers love just stopping dead in the middle of them and chatting. Get out of the way, people want to shop, staff want to do their jobs, and you're ignoring everyone because you're acting like a dick. If you want to chat to a friend, move to one side so people can do what they want to do. Don't block an aisle. I cannot stress this enough.

8- Your time is not valuable- you are shopping. This one's important. People are constantly in a flurry because they're being held up. The staff's time is valuable, because they have X hours to do Y amount of work. You just have to get home in time for dinner. waah waah waah. This goes back to the 'be polite' thing, if a staff member is in your way, the odds are that they really have to be where they are to get their job done.

9- Get out of our way. A flat top can have a couple hundred kilos of stock on it, a roll cage can have up to 500 kilos of stock (that's 1100lb in the old money). If you walk in our way, there is a possibility that we won't be able to stop in time. Hitting people with roll cages is annoying because we have to stop working. Oh yeah, and the whole 'injury' thing.

10- It's not about you. If something's out of stock, it's not a personal slight against you. If all the checkouts are busy, maybe it's just because it's a busy time of the day- be patient, the person at the checkout isn't the person who cut REM by $1000 last month. Calm down, you are shopping, there is nothing serious, amazingly important and crucial about the fact that the store has happened to run out of oregano. The odds are the person whose fault the stock isn't in is is not in the store- and when automatic ordering comes in, it will be nobody's fault, only a computer program's fault.


I think that these requests are simple and easily fulfilled. Ultimately just try to remember that when you're shopping, that behaving like a human to all other people will make it a lot more certain that other people will do the same courtesy for you.

State politics. I frequently describe it as a 'mug's game', and I stand by that description. States have the responsibility to take care of a great range of tasks, but rarely with total control. The federal government tries to exert control over just about every facet of state power, and when it goes wrong, it's obviously the state's fault. While I'm not saying the 'blame game' issue is one that is solved with a "The federation did it all" argument, but my main point is that the federation complicates matters far more than it should. There is far less attention, praise for things done right, less money and prestige for going into state politics. Only rare politicians such as Jeff Kennett transcend this problem.

In South Australia we have a problem- and that is that there is a government which clearly feels like it has to answer to nobody. Take the Attourney-General who was sued for defamation. The overall cost was $500k, and hey, why not have the taxpayer foot the bill? Take also the fact that the state government has spent more money on propaganda information campaigns than they have on regional hospitals. Hmm.

The government has a lot to answer for- the size of the deficit (yes, countercyclical spending, but debt still needs to be analysed as to whether the money is spent wisely), the state of the schools, hospitals (especially emergency room times), public transport changes that will get here before 2018, and sheer incompetence. The opposition should be having a field day.

*cough*

Umm... where are they?

Since replacing MHS with... umm... that woman, the Coalition has been largely invisible. The news piece that discussed the above points shocked me because members of the opposition got their face on the news twice! Woah, that's pretty amazing stuff. However, their attacks ahve been largely ad-hoc, and don't put any real pressure on the government. They are assured of a 2010 eleciton win, and most likely a 2014 election win after it if the coalition stays as inept as they currently are. While this is nice in a way- they have public transport and road/rail infrastructure plans that extend to 2018- the lack of a real opposition means that they can run riot and do whatever they want with no real oversight that will force them to concede anything and change their behaviour.

Sure, the opposition has about $15.30 in their bank account. This means that they will have problems getting their message out when it comes to the election. But it costs no money to get their shit together, work on a strategy for taking the government on, and getting their faces on the TV. Hell, if one independent who has no party machinery behind him can essentially get his own policies through the state legislative (and please Xenophon, return to state politics, you're embarrassing South Australia in Federal politics), then surely the Liberals should be able to get a soundbyte on the news.

Power Rangers Turbo is one of the worst seasons of Power Rangers, and is certainly the worst in what is known as the "Zordon Era". The story involved the Rangers, who in the Turbo film stop Divatox from marrying Maligore, since her intentions were to rule the universe with his powers bla bla bla. The series involves Divatox attacking the Earth and the Rangers because... umm... well, that's difficult to pin down. Oh well. Anyways, I'm going to change my usual format for these posts and go for a 'what's bad/what's good' format. Here we go...

What's Bad

Continuity

There are a number of problems with the continuity that are annoying. In the finale of Zeo, you see Zedd and Rita, after defeating the Machine Empire, ready to go forth and take on the Earth. Then... nothing. They are reduced to a one scene cameo where Rita tells Divatox to just run away after hearing she was going to take on the Rangers. Second is the lack of a decent explanation of why they left their Zeo powers so readily. Third is what happened to Bulk and Skull in France and how they reunited with Lt Stone.

Explanations

The gap between Zeo and Turbo is a highly controversial one due to Scorpion Rain. Back a long time ago, Australian fans claimed that Saban was airing a short film that spanned the gap between Zeo and Turbo, which was a 'final battle' of sorts between Zedd and the rangers. This was a hoax, however it took a long time for it to be realised. Fans actually began making a film to fit the synopsis they came up with, but were found out before the film was finished. Embedding is disabled for the video, but click to see what it would have looked like.

The video is quasi-canon. It wasn't recognised by Saban, and apparently it's contradicted by episodes. However, the person who wrote Scorpion Rain went on to write Forever Red, the famous 10-Red Ranger teamup episode. This episode assumes that the events of Scorpion Rain did happen. Work that one out. On the second plot hole, fans have argued that with the loss of Pyramidas and the Warrior Wheel, the rangers were less powerful, and in addition they needed the Turbo keys to get where they needed to go in the film.

Divatox

Divatox is one of the key reasons why the show annoys me. She is attacking the Earth because... well, it's hard to tell. Originally it's because she wants vengeance for the Rangers killing some monster she wanted to marry in the Turbo Movie. This isn't very much to hang a series off, so in episode 13 they set up a message from the Blue Senturion, which was supposed to go to Dimitria, telling of how in the future the United Alliance of Evil will invade the universe. Since she doesn't want to 'share', she will try to avoid these events from happening by trying to stop the Rangers, who will be the "only force in the universe who can stop the UAE". That's just stupid.

OK, why does she want to stop the UAE? She knows that she would be a part of it. Additionally, she initially is a fucking pirate. Her ambitions swing constantly from just destroying the rangers to taking over the Earth constantly. Later on in the series she is the 'Queen of Evil' somehow, despite her quite clearly being on the lower part of the pecking order. Yeah, I like the fact that so early in Turbo you have a link to the plot of In Space, but her character is clearly poorly written.

Justin

Justin is a child. I thought that I would be happy when Rocky left the show, but I wasn't since he was replaced with Justin. For some reason the show's producers thought that having a child would increase its appeal to young audiences. It didn't. He's just annoying and too many stories are based around him, to the detriment of better and hotter characters such as Cassie. Besides, if age was an issue, why cast people who are clearly 30 years old as replacement Rangers and try to convince the audience they are going to high school? (yeah I know the original Teenagers With Attitude were hardly convincing, but this is stretching too far). Having a child play in a series where the Rangers drive giant cars... bad timing.

Dimitria

Firstly, Zordon leaves, in an incredibly unconvincing piece of plot. He is replaced by a person who answers everything with a question. It's fucking annoying, and there are just scenes where the Rangers just ignore her because she is of no actual help. This changes for the mid-season cast change, but I really hate it.

Alpha 6

Alpha 5 left to go to Eltar with Zordon, and he was replaced with Alpha 6. He's very annoying. He's supposed to have a 'street talking New Yorker' voice, and while it's somewhat true to the cliche, the writers forgot that the cliche also includes the fact that EVERYBODY HATES THEM. The writers fixed this for In Space, by having Alpha being broken for a while and having a different, better to handle voice box put in.

Bulk and Skull

How do they mess up characters who grew from punks to being 3-D, great characters? Well, the writers turn them into monkeys. For half the season they are monkeys trying to tell the rest of the world they are monkeys and help them turn back. This is followed by two episodes of them being invisible. It gets better after the cast change, with their ongoing 'trying to keep a job' story.

What's Good

The Mid Season Cast Change

Changing the cast mid-season was a great idea. Tommy was getting annoying, and the writing for these characters, who had been in the show for a while, was getting a little tired. Sure the new Red Ranger (TJ) had the personality of a box, but the other rangers made up for it. There were a number of changes that improved the show- Dimitria began speaking in sentences, the morphing sequence became less shit, the writing improved... it was like a new show. I personally divide the season into pre- and post- "Passing the Torch".

The Rescuezords

While the Turbozords are a bit meh (due to their lack of weapons), and the Turbo Megazord is all right, I really like the Rescuezords. They look great, they have a great finishing move... just awesome.

Episodes 26 onwards

OK, these episodes, despite the ongoing issues with plot are quite good. A few of them, such as "The Curve Ball", could have easily slotted into an MMPR episode, and there were some really good fights, monsters, the ongoing story with Divatox's Zords (they should have taken down one of the Megazords and had more episodes, though)... great stuff. If the whole season would have been like this, I probably wouldn't have had as much of an issue with the show's problems.

Overall

Turbo seems like a show that suffered form internal division. The Sentai series it takes from- Carranger- was very lighthearted, and the writers wanted to follow suit and make Turbo silly as well. Other writers didn't agree and wanted another season like Zeo, which would have been far better. The show just feels half baked, with basic stuff such as 'why is she attacking?' not properly answered in a way that's interesting. The season got better, and I'm guessing it's because the backlash against the season gave the serious people more leverage and got the show onto better footing.

In comparison with the other Zordon era series, it's at the bottom. It's not irredeemable, it just has a lot of elements, especially in the first 15-20 episodes, that just annoy me a little while watching it. I suppose that's the gift the writers of this season has given to the fandom.

I have decided to skip my thoughts on MMPR3 and go straight to Power Rangers Zeo. This season reflects changes made in the show to help improve flagging toy sales and ratings. The decided to finally change the suits to match the Sentai season it takes its footage from (Sentai actually resetting every season). This time it was taking its footage from Ohranger. So what is the story? Well, it's your usual one- Machine Empire needs to invade the Earth to enlarge its empire. However, what was created was one of the best PR seasons ever (it's why it's my avatar).

Rangers

Tommy (Red): The leader of the group again, Tommy solves problems the way they should in PR- by punching them. Once again he breaks a PR rule by showing his PR identity to his long lost half brother.
Adam (Green): I was happy when Adam was promoted to 2IC. He always tries as hard as he can to back his leader and make the plans work. His selflessness shows greatly when he has a guest appearance in In Space, risking killing himself to help a fellow ranger.
Rocky (Blue): Demoted in this season, he just annoys me. He just strikes me as arrogant.
Tanya (Yellow): Her back story makes no sense. Aisha goes into the past to get her Zeo crystal and meets Tanya. Aisha stays to stop an epidemic, sending Tanya to now to be a ranger. Apparently (due to Master Vile's time warp) this means that Aisha never existed in this time line and Tanya's family would manifest into 'now' out of thin air. That's the sort of shit that goes on in DC. In a later episode, suddenly her parents have been gone 'for years' looking for an artefact? This is dumb.
Kat (Pink): The little character development she got was achieving her goal of dating Tommy (which she set when he was still dating Kimberley). I guess Tommy likes the pink.
Trey (Gold 1 & 3): I didn't buy the whole 'three people in one' thing, but it kinda makes sense. The gold ranger powers, without a morpher to regulate them, need three 'people' to make sure they don't overwhelm. He was only really there to hand over the powers and give Pyramidas and the Warrior Wheel to Jason (the 'Who is the Gold Ranger Mystery' arc was pretty good though).
Jason (Gold 2): It was great seeing Jason as the Gold Ranger. Resolving issues left over from his leaving was a great move by the writers.

Other Characters

Billy: As tech support guy, he was great. His sendoff to go to Eltar and satisfy his exosexuality was really touching.
Auric the Conqueror: He's an interesting fellow. Not wholly useful though.
Bulk and Skull: These guys got so much character development. Their leaving the Junior Police Patrol midway through the season to work for Lt Stone's Detective Agency was just a brilliant move. They got some really great moments, such as Skull's piano playing, Bulk's dance with the police chief's daughter, and Skull spending the day with a supermodel as her bodyguard. Their part in the "King for a Day" episode was awesome.

Villains

For me, the villains made it for me. The interesting times with Mondo's death, and the fights with Rita were all brilliant.

King Mondo: The king of the machine empire, he is an arrogant leader, always cock-sure of himself. His plans are actually normally quite good, relying on divide and conquer techniques. His destruction was really interesting, though he should have stayed destroyed instead of being rebuilt.
Queen Machina: She is the wife of King Mondo.
Prince Sprocket: He's a little annoying, but I guess that's the point. He's the brat with too much power, and loving it. His fights with his brother late in the season were just fantastic.
Klank and Orbus: I love the Scottish accent on Klank. "Around and around and awaaaay you goooo". Orbus was a great method of making the monsters bigger- it's certainly a lot better than Lost Galaxy's 'potion' method. Ugh.
Louie Kaboom: A monster made by Rita which, due to circumstances, ended up running the machine empire for a while. I really like him, and there were too few stories with him as the leader. It makes me wish that Rita's return was earlier so we could have had more of the villain VS villain stuff going on.
Prince Gasket and Archerina: A prince who has been disgraced by marrying Archerina returning soon after Mondo's destruction to take over from Louie Kaboom. The fights with Sprocket were great stuff, especially when they both had simultaneous plans to try to outdo each other. Gasket came up with the most messed up plan for the season- kidnap Tommy and brainwash him into thinking he's the leader of the Machine Empire and ordering him to kill the other rangers one by one in an interdimensional fighting arena. Oh yes.
Cogs: These are great foot soldiers. They're tough and have fireball launching eyes. The rangers have a genuine difficulty fighting them, which was nice form the putties which were little more than a time wasting tactic.
Rita and Co: I'm putting them all together because you all know my opinions on the characters. Forced to flee when the Machine Empire turned up, they return mid-season in an RV because the Empire had become "an intergalactic joke". Their fights with Mondo, actually helping the rangers a few times (since they didn't want Mondo to win), creating the purse monster... all fantastic. If it weren't for these guys returning the show would have been much less, as they made the plots more complex.

Weapons

Zeonizers: The only time morphers had a different name, they're all right.
Power Weapons: I'm a bit 'meh' about them. Only three of them are really featured, Tommy's sword, Rocky's 'power hatchets' (which suck, they're weird blade things that run down his forearms) and Kat's shield.
Defender Wheel: This is quite good. It's a suitably flashy weapon to use as a finishing move. It ignores the whole 'team working together' thing, but oh well.
Jet Cycles: They're nice motorbikes. They're not as good as the Shark Cycles, but they were awesome.
Zeo Laser Pistols: Standard sidearm, they don't use them enough. Seriously, if you are hopelessly outnumbered by cogs, wouldn't you shoot a few?
Zeo Cannon: It's all right, but a bit bulky to take seriously.
Golden Power Staff: This thing looks pretty cool. It can also fire balls of golden energy, which is also nice.

Zords

Without good zords, a PR season will never work.

Zeozords: I don't like them. Why are two of them immobile, requiring to be towed by two other zords? Why are the ones dependent on others belonging to women? (Ok to be fair their are the most powerful individual zords for this set...) Why are they clearly not suited to fighting on their own? Why are they so ugly?
Zeo Megazord: It's a lot better than them individually, but the aesthetics really don't sell for me. The Sphinx for a chestplate just looks in the way and annoying. I did get used to it though, and I don't hate it- it's just not a really top notch Megazord.
Red Battlezord: Making this one run by telepathy was a dumb idea, Billy. However, it did give us two times when they were out of control due to lack of mental discipline. The problem is that the zord can be reprogrammed so that Adam (and later Alpha 5 with a remote, ugh) could run it, so why the drama about it? Overall it looks pretty cool, especially since its fighting style is all hand to hand combat rather than just energy weapons.
Zeo Mega Battlezord: This one really only happens for its end move. It's all right, though a little 'thick', since the battlezord is essentially piggybacking onto the Zeo Megazord,
Pyramidas: The pictures don't give it justice. It sounds dumb, but it was executed beautifully. The pyramid shaped zord is crazily powerful and looks badass.
Zeo Ultrazord: This thing is fucking awesome. It's huge and imposing, and deserves the prefix 'ultra'. It's a pity that the Zeozords are little more than batteries for this behemoth of a zord.
Super Zeozords: I like these over the Zeozords. They reflect the shapes of each ranger, and they can fight on their own. While I'm not all that thrilled about the underwater abilities of the blue one, these are pretty cool zords.
Super Zeo Megazord: A bit of a mouthful, this is a cool megazord. It looks nice, its 'combining animation' is cool, and its finishing move... totally awesome. Combining its two sabres to make a beam of energy that cuts monsters in half? Brilliant.
Warrior Wheel: How many zords do they need? Well, a lot. I don't like the warrior wheel very much, mainly because its finishing move isn't very good. However, seeing the two megazords, red battlezord and warrior wheel stand together was pretty cool (as well as the quite empty cockpits as the five rangers were divided among the three cockpits (warrior wheel is piloted probably by remote).

Music

Ron Wasserman wrote the music, which was yet again awesome. The PR Zeo theme is one of the best ever (this is the extended version):



The Small Things

There are a lot of things that can make a season work. Here they are:

Ranger Suits: They're all right. When I was a kid I was turned off of Zeo because of the Zeozords and the ranger suits. Yeah, the visor shapes referred to their ranger number, but I wasn't convinced. I got used to them, but they aren't as good as the Zyuranger suits.
Morphing Sequence: "Zeo ranger one, Pink" I'm neutral on it. I don't think it's especially good, but not especially bad. The actual animation was nice, with the wireframe expanding on the morphing animation that was in MMPR.
Overall Look: It was a good looking series, with some nice sets and costumes. Not brilliant, but good.

Overall

One of my favourite PR seasons. The first half is standard MOTW PR stuff, and suddenly we're hit with the Gold Ranger saga, the return of Rita, the destruction of Mondo, the rule of Louie Kaboom, the reign of Gasket, the kidnapping of Tommy, the fight for the Gold Ranger powers... and it goes on. There were some stinkers in there (such as the one where a spell made Tommy and Tanya couldn't stop singing? ugh) but they were balanced out by the fantastic episodes (Where in the world is Zeo Ranger 5?/King for a Day 1&2). It's a season that's enjoyable all the way through, which is why I'm pretty positive about it all the way through.

Of course, this only sets things up for the agonising shit sandwich that calls itself...

POWER RANGERS: TURBO.

Woah, an actual post about politics.

Just as in the United States, there is an ongoing debate about the state of healthcare and how the public hospitals could be better suited to deal with people's ailments. The nature of the debate, though, is quite different. This goes all the way back to the heady days of 2007, during the federal election. I was a Ruddite then and despite certain quibbles I have, still am. The campaign was going well- Rudd was ahead in the polls, the momentum was in Labor's advantage and the Liberals were busy turning up late to press conferences. And then Rudd said the words that I really hoped he wouldn't say.

"The Buck Stops With Me"

He made the promise that if, by mid-2009, the states don't "fix" the public health system, the federal government would take over the running of all public hospitals, with a referendum if the states decide to get in the way (which they inevitably would). Well, it's past mid-2009, and the pressure is on. What will Rudd do? Well, the most important course of action is to write a report (note:big file). The report outlines 123 recommendations of reforms to make to the public health system. Some highlights (and these are cherry picked, there are more that are interesting) include-

• We recommend that all Australians should have universal access to preventive and restorative
  dental care, and dentures, regardless of people’s ability to pay. This should occur through the
  establishment of the ‘Denticare Australia’ scheme. Under the ‘Denticare Australia’ scheme,
  people will be able to select between private or public dental health plans. ‘Denticare Australia’
  would meet the costs in both cases. The additional costs of Denticare could be funded by an
  increase in the Medicare Levy of 0.75 per cent of taxable income.

Fuck. yes.

• We recommend the establishment of an independent National Health Promotion and Prevention
  Agency. This agency would be responsible for national leadership on the Healthy Australia
  2020 goals, as well as building the evidence base, capacity and infrastructure that is required
  so that prevention becomes the platform of healthy communities and is integrated into all aspects
  of our health care system.

I'm not too sure about this one. Those who critique this recommendation point out that the biggest challenge in the future is health problems that effect the elderly, which aren't as easy to reduce through preventive medicine. I personally don't think it needs its own agency, why can't it just be tackled by Medicare?

• We recommend that health literacy is included as a core element of the National Curriculum
  and that it is incorporated in national skills assessment. This should apply across primary and
  secondary schools.

While this is already a part of South Australia's curriculum, it most likely isn't nation wide, and the implementation here isn't as good as it could be. However, this is a job for the education department, not the health department.

• We recommend that universal child and family health services provide a schedule of core
  contacts to allow for engagement with parents, advice and support, and periodic health
  monitoring (with contacts weighted towards the first three years of life), including:
  • the initial contact would be universally offered as a home visit within the first two weeks
  following the birth. The schedule would include the core services of monitoring of child
  health, development and wellbeing; early identification of family risk and need; responding
  to identified needs; health promotion and disease prevention (for example, support for
  breastfeeding); and support for parenting;
  • where the universal child and family health services identify a health or developmental issue
  or support need, the service will provide or identify a pathway for targeted care, such as an
  enhanced schedule of contacts and referral to allied health and specialist services; and
  • where a child requires more intensive care for a disability or developmental concerns, a care
  coordinator, associated with a primary health care service, would be available to coordinate
  the range of services these families often need.

This certainly looks good on paper. I'm not a parent so I'm just guessing here, but it certainly seems like a good idea.

• We recommend development and adoption of National Access Targets for timeliness of care.
  For example:
  • a national access target for people requiring an acute mental health intervention
  (measured in hours);
  • a national access target for patients requiring urgent primary health care
  (measured in hours or days);
  • national access targets for people attending emergency departments (measured in
  minutes to hours);
  • a national access target for patients requiring coronary artery surgery or cancer treatment
  (measured in weeks/days); and
  • a national access target for patients requiring other planned surgery or procedures
  (measured in months).
  These National Access Targets should be developed incorporating clinical, economic and
  community perspectives through vehicles like citizen juries and may evolve into National Access
  Guarantees subject to ensuring there is no distortion in allocation of health resources.

This is one of the biggest issues the media are great at picking at. "___, age ___, (normally young or old) dies while waiting ___ hours at ___ Hospital." Waiting times are becoming an issue, though the news are always saying they're drastically low- I remember the period that they are referring to as "the fantastic health time" when a big deal was being made about long waiting lists. The offering of financial rewards to hospitals that meet these targets is a good one, as long as it doesn't mean that hospitals that don't won't be stripped of funding, making the problem worse.

• We recommend that the Commonwealth Department of Health and Ageing take a lead in the
  inter-sectoral collaboration that will be required at the national level to redress the impacts of the
  social determinants of health to close the gap for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.
• We recommend an investment strategy for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people’s health
  that is proportionate to health need, the cost of service delivery, and the achievement of desired
  outcomes. This requires a substantial increase on current expenditure.

The problem of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander health is a constant embarrassment for Australia. The past is riddles with failures and some pretty messed up policies. While closing life expectancy gaps take a long time, the current gap is just inexcusable. Connected to this is the provision of health services to rural areas-

• Care for people in remote and rural locations necessarily involves bringing care to the person or
  the person to the care. To achieve this, we recommend:
  • networks of primary health care services, including Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander
  Community Controlled Services, within naturally defined regions;
  • expansion of specialist outreach services – for example, medical specialists, midwives, allied
  health, pharmacy and dental/oral health services;
  • telehealth services including practitioner-to-practitioner consultations, practitioner-to-specialist
  consultations, teleradiology and other specialties and services;
  • referral and advice networks for remote and rural practitioners that support and improve
  the quality of care, such as maternity care, chronic and complex disease care planning and
  review, chronic wound management, and palliative care; and
  • ‘on-call’ 24-hour telephone and internet consultations and advice, and retrieval services for
  urgent consultations staffed by remote medical practitioners.
  Further, we recommend that funding mechanisms be developed to support all these elements.

The delivery of health services in Australia is challenging due to the number of people living in rural and isolated communities. It's expensive and rarely is of the standard that can be achieved in urban areas due to sheer weight of numbers. This approach will help address this, though I'm not too sure of how successful it will be, unless a lot of cash is injected into it.

•  
• Health and aged care spending is forecast to rise to 12.4 per cent of gross domestic product in
  2032–33. We believe that:
  • major reforms are needed to improve the outcomes from this spending and national
  productivity and to contain the upward pressure on health care costs; and
  • improved health outcomes are vital in promoting a healthy economy through greater
  productivity and higher labour force participation; and
  30
  A Healthier Future For All Australians Final Report JUNE 2009
  RECOMMENDATIONS
  • evidence-based investment in strengthened primary health care services and prevention
  and health promotion to keep people healthy is required to help to contain future growth
  in spending.
• The Commonwealth Government would assume full responsibility for the policy and public
  funding of primary health care services. This includes all existing community health, public
  dental services, family and child health services, and alcohol and drug treatment services that
  are currently funded by state, territory and local governments.

This is the biggie. Rudd promised it, the report recommends it, Rudd is wavering on it, I don't like it (though I am open to be convinced otherwise). Rudd has wavered, talking about only taking over outpatient care and emergency services. This partial takeover is just stupid and compounds the problem that already exists in public health- that is, the blurring of responsibility in governance. The states run the hospitals, the councils run community health (a lot of the vaccinations, for example), the federal governments meddle with funding models, the states pervert the funding models, the federal government runs the PBS and medicare... it's a jumble. Now they're going to take hospitals and have part of it run by the federal government and the rest by the states?? That's just dumb.

My biggest issue with a federal takeover of hospitals- partial or full- is that there is no evidence that the federal government, given current funding modelling, will run the public hospitals any better than the states. Shortly before the 2007 election, the Howard government decided that they would take over the administration of one hospital in Tasmania. Despite it being an open and running hospital, it took them several months to ensure that the hospital would have staff. This was mainly due to their insistence they sign AWAs. However, the takeover was generally regarded as a failure since the federal government didn't do any better a job at managing the hospital than the state government did.

I'll be keeping my eye on what transpires.