SILIENCE, broken by the sound of magpies in the trees, the curious murmurs of bystanders and the heavy breathing of the 30 something motionless bodies sprawled around me on the hot pavement of Garema Place under a late October Australian sun.

It’s been around two minutes since the whistle went off — signaling the start of the flash mob. One minute to go and I can almost feel the heat radiating off those at my feet, and their various itches and nose twitches.

Some crouching, others doubled over, sprawled across the concrete. Michael, one of the Red Cross volunteers and organisers of the flash mob, told me earlier, before the event, of a couple in another capital city who decided to freeze for the three minutes in the grips of their last kiss.

But for me, it is those who in whatever pose they decided to take on, who leave a shadow behind, who leave a lasting impression.

Their shadow, a chilling reminder of what the symbol of the nuclear warhead actually means and what is indeed the fate of those who encounter it on the wrong end of its descent.

Today, in front of me is a cardboard cut-out of a nuclear warhead, reflecting back the sunshine at me, in my camera lens, as the sound of baby magpies being kicked out of their nests draws an end to the eerie three minutes of silence.

On 6 August 1945, the first nuclear warhead was dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, beginning the end of the Second World War. No baby birds or the curious giggles of bystanders broke the silence that fell on Hiroshima and the world that day. Only the echoing horror, followed three days later, by the second bombs detonation over Nagasaki.

For many, all that was left was a shadow of their ashes on the wall behind them.

Today the Red Cross, through the flash mob, hopes to raise awareness of the dangers of nuclear weapons, hopefully leading to worldwide nuclear disarmament.

David Boston, the official organiser of the Canberra flashmob and a member of the Red Cross’s Young Humanitarians described his and the other flash mob members’ personal and local aims: “We are all young A.C.T humanitarians who have put in their time for the Red Cross and we would like to raise awareness and get the message out that the Australian Red Cross is having a campaign to ban the use of nuclear weapons.”

On a national level he said he would like to see “a national debate on this issue, just broader awareness nationally about nuclear weapons and the devastating consequences they have for the human race”.

He would like to see “a greater awareness of the danger of nuclear weaponry as well as the eventual faltering and ending of WMD construction”.

According to Tim Wright, the Australian director of the International Campaign to abolish nuclear weapons, as published in the Australian Red Cross’s International Humanitarian Law Magazine, issue 2, 2011, there are at least 20,000 nuclear warheads in world.

Alex Ford a non- Red Cross member of the flash mob, who decided to take part at the last minute after hearing about it through friends on the social media networking site Facebook, said, “I want to live in a world that is safer for myself and for the future of humanity, and I dislike violence. But power will not be given up without a fight. The statistics can be found throughout history.”

He did not think this flashmob had been a success.

“More people need to get involved, for people to actually take notice,” he said.

The International Court of Justice has said, “The threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law.“

For this generation, it only takes a brief recollection of the 2009 North Korean underground nuclear tests to send a shiver down your spine, with the sunshine on your face and your shadow forever following behind you.

The event has created its own culture. Large groups of people greet each other like its tradition to meet here; same time, same place, year after year. Dogs are waiting in anticipation for a Sunday morning walk they can sense is fast approaching. Tails are wagging, laughter is contagious and the dynamic of the occasion is apparent to even the most recent arrivals. Groups of people are seeking refuge from the early morning sun in the shade of large trees scattered outside the gymnasium. There are fitness enthusiasts and teenage girls who look like they were on their way to the mall but found themselves standing outside Lake Ginninderra College instead. And of course, everywhere you look there are smiling faces, their owners wearing red.

Red was the favourite colour of Ben Donohoe before a brain tumour prematurely ended the nine year-old’s life in 2005. Liverpool was also Ben’s favourite football team which is why their signature red and white can be seen in every direction.

“Our beautiful Ben loved his soccer and he dreamt of one day challenging his hero Harry Kewell and playing in the number seven for Liverpool,” Ben’s mother Robyn explains. Groups of teenagers can be seen wearing red polo shirts and singlets with a white number seven on the back, laughing and joking with each other.

Breaking up the sea of red, bright pink and purple shirts can also be seen scattered throughout the crowd. These shirts also have photographs on them, similar to the red shirts worn by the Donohoe family which show a smiling photo of Ben. Clearly visible on the pink and purple polos are photos of other young children, a girl and another boy called Ben, who also lost their battles with cancer.

Waiting for the start of the Ben Donohoe Run and Walk for Fun, it is overwhelming how many people are participating. The crowd is enormous and varied, from people dressed in canary yellow gridiron uniforms to young boys wearing head to toe lycra, covering their faces and leaving very little to the imagination. Ronald McDonald interviews competitors while the crowd politely laughs and in every direction, people seem to know each other. The community atmosphere is never more apparent than when the Donohoe family stand on a platform just ahead of the 6.3km starting line. The family stay there as the race begins, waving at passing competitors and looking out on the event they have created.

“As a family trying to come to terms with the loss of our beautiful son and brother we gain a great deal of comfort knowing that we provide an opportunity for other families to enjoy and appreciate what they have,” Robyn says. “To see children laughing and parents enjoying family time is lovely to watch.”

The Donohoes are one of those families that just about everyone seems to know. Perhaps this is why the fun run is arguably the most successful event of its kind in Canberra.

“Each year the story of Ben is told, and the family celebrate how beautiful and caring he was,” says Madeleine Hinder, a long time friend of the Donohoe family and an event volunteer. “For anyone who knows the family, or even if you don’t, you can see how strong they are, how full of love their family is, and you get the sense that Ben never left them – his memory lives on forever.”

Even though there are over 2,500 people participating, the atmosphere outside Lake Ginninderra College feels like family. “This event is so successful because it really allows people to be as involved as they want to be,” says Madeleine. “People are encouraged to give what they can, be it donate, volunteer, walk or run. Friends and family of the Donohoes are touched by the family’s spirit and that prompts people like me to assist in any way I can.”

The Ben Donohoe Run and Walk for Fun is in its seventh year and is showing no sign of slowing down. This year, 1800 pre-registered before the event and over 800 people are believed to have registered on the day. “We work tirelessly on Ben’s fun run,” says Robyn. “Ben had an enormous potential to make a difference in this world and he made a difference to my life by being my son. This is Ben’s way of continuing to make a difference to the lives of others.”

Proceeds from the fun run will be donated to the ACT Eden Monaro Cancer Support Group and the Make-A-Wish Foundation at the annual Hawaiian Ball on Saturday 19 November.

I fidgeted with impatient anticipation.

“There it is,” my father said, pointing off to the left at last. “That is Mount Panorama!”

It’s hard to pinpoint the specific year I first became aware of the Bathurst 1000. It had always been an annual household television event while growing up. Watching everyday road cars racing each other all day round and round a mountain fascinated me from a young age.

I do know it was that first trip to the mountain when I declared to my parents,
“I’m going to drive in this race one day!”

Whether they took me seriously or brushed it off as an adolescent pipedream, they reminded me of those impressive words one night in October 1992. They confessed how proud they were of my hard work to make that dream come true. The next morning I was driving in the Bathurst 1000, Australia’s Great Race.

Mount Panorama not only holds a special place in the minds of motor racing fans but also an incredible awareness in people with just a passing interest in motorsport. For all but a few weeks a year it’s simply a scenic public road where anyone can navigate the iconic landmark — at a brisk 60 kmh!

The idea of Mount Panorama began in the 1930s when Bathurst Mayor, Alderman Martin Griffin had a vision to build a scenic drive to attract tourists. After securing funding from the State Government, work began to carve out a road on what was known as Bald Hill. He purposely designed the road wider than normal secretly housing a desire that his scenic drive would also be used for motorsport.

Mount Panorama was declared open on March 17, 1938. It only took until Easter that year for the first race meeting to be held — 20 000 spectators turned up!

The now famous annual Bathurst endurance event began as a 500-mile race for road-going production cars at Victoria’s Phillip Island circuit in November 1960. The race moved to Mount Panorama for the October long weekend in 1963. It was extended to 1000 kilometres in 1973. Conveniently located between the football and cricket seasons, the race has featured various categories of cars over its 52-year history cementing its place in Australian culture.

1998 Bathurst 1000 winner and current BOC V8 Supercar driver Jason Bright told me how much the race meant to him while growing up.

“I was a big Peter Brock fan and went there from when I was nine years old and camped with my father up the top of the mountain each year,” he said.

VIP Pet Food V8 Supercar driver Steve Owen informed me he’s been a fan of the race also since he was a kid.

“Bathurst is the motorsport equivalent of the Melbourne Cup, its the other race that stops a nation and glues both motorsport fans and any sports fans alike to the TV all day,” he said.

These days the Bathurst 1000 is no longer a one-off race. It’s a round of the V8 Supercars series and only championship teams can compete.

“Over the years the race has changed from an endurance event where the cars needed to be driven sympathetically to make the 1000kms, to now driving them as hard as you can,” Steve Owen said.

The Holden versus Ford V8 Supercar series has evolved into a multi-million dollar sport and taken the Bathurst 1000 with it. The latest economic impact study shows it pumps $53 million into the local community. Mount Panorama now boasts world-class facilities. Spectator numbers for this year’s race week were close to 200 000. Official OzTAM combined capital city TV ratings for this year peaked at 1,212,000 viewers. It’s big business for race organisers, sponsors, media partners and advertisers.

Long gone are the various classes and makes, the privateers and once-a-year drivers. For many that’s what gave the race its soul, as it felt accessible to anyone.

It was accessible for me, from 1992 to 1994 and will always be a personal life achievement — from a 12 year-old spectator to that first lap in a Group A Touring Car (pictured). I have felt the blind high-speed plummet off Skyline into the Esses followed by the sudden drop of the famous Dipper and the undulations of Con-rod Straight and how unstable the car becomes at close to 300kmh.

I’ll never forget how extreme my heart pounded while I sat perfectly still on the grid just seconds out from the start of Australia’s Great Race. As a privateer, with limited budget, I had no chance of winning but I was in the enviable position of sharing the mountain with legends.

I was the ultimate spectator.

Whether we buy them to stay fit, reduce our carbon foot print or just to look good, bicycles are an ever growing trend in Australia. Whilst it can still be considered a niche market, people are once again looking at bicycles as an alternative mode of transport in our dense urban environments.

Before I walked into Steve Callahan’s and Benny Tyrell’s workshops I couldn’t help but envision an orphanage for bicycles, as if this is where all our unwanted bicycles went after they were tired and we were done with them. Dozens of re-painted frames hanging from the ceiling waiting to be rebuilt, parts and tools laying out across a tired looking work bench and another dozen completed road bikes eagerly lined up, waiting for their new owners to collect them for their new, exciting lives on Canberra roads and bike paths. As it turned out, my imagination wasn’t far from the truth.

Steve’s workshop concept stemmed from a new-found interest in track bikes after he was in a car accident eight years ago. As his knack for building and servicing bikes progressed, Steve started Callahan Bicycles, which he hopes will one day turn into a small local shopfront and maybe a reason to retire from his day job as a public servant.

Steve bases the popularity of bicycles on a number of factors, with environmental sustainability and personal image playing major roles for young newcomers.

“Younger people haven’t been put off the car dream really, but there is defiantly a subculture that regards the bicycle as a better means of transport,” he said. “Better for style, better for showing off your clothes, better for short trips around town when you live in a dense urban environment and better for the environment where the kids have good environmental ideas and credentials…In Australia, because our natural environment is so beautiful and our cities are so clean it’s easy to get lazy about the environment. So maybe the climate message that were getting is a big part of the psychology of younger folk turning to bicycles, and that’s not a bad thing.”

Benny Tyrell, owner of ‘Benny Chop’s Hand Built Death Traps’ builds and personalises road bikes and cruisers.

“My bikes are a bit more aggressive – very street,” he says. “But I try to make bikes that suit their owners personality. I hardly ever build bikes for clean, fresh, lovely looking people.“

Tyrell mostly makes fixed gear bikes for his clientele, as he feels they are the best bikes for the urban environment that he and most of his clients are accustomed to.

“Years back everyone I knew rode BMX, but we all like riding to the pub and realized a race bike which is fixed gear, gets you there in the half the time,” he said. “So it pretty much grew from there. I like fixed gear bikes because it feels like it’s a part of your soul, If the bike stops, its because you stopped, if you want to go faster, you have to peddle faster…other people prefer to go faster by flicking a switch and changing gears which takes the same amount of energy going fast as it does going slow. It just feels more right with a fixed gear…out of all of the fads; this one is probably the best one, considering where the environment and our current economy is going.”

Like Steve and Benny, so many other bike enthusiasts are recognising the cycling industry as a booming one. Reasons behind its popularity may be due the changes of our climate and living conditions or for some people, the idea that bikes just make you look good.

Regardless of the reasons and whether this is a fad or a long-term commitment to a new healthier lifestyle, cycling has been and always will be in it for the long run.

What is the current brewing climate in Australia?

The recent sale of Foster’s Brewing to South African British Company SABMiller, has drawn the Australian beer market into focus. Following the Foster’s sale almost 90 per cent of the Australian beer market is now owned by overseas interests. This makes Cooper’s Brewery Australia’s largest Australian-owned brewer, with less than a four per cent market share. A June 2011 Industry Report on beer and malt manufacturing in Australia has shown an industry revenue of $5.02bn and a profit of $948.9m in 2011, with 2.3 per cent expected growth over five years from now until 2016. A double-digit increase in cider and low-carbohydrate beer has driven industry revenue over the 2006-11 reporting period, but beer consumption overall is in decline. While the sale of premium beer is growing, with a market share tipped to increase from two to six per cent over the coming years, the decrease in sales of flagship beers is the cause of overall decline as consumers tastes and drinking habits change.

Why is beer consumption in decline?

It might surprise Australian drinkers to know that we are only moderate consumers of alcohol by global standards, falling behind Canada, the United Kingdom, New Zealand and the United States. According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS), this year beer consumption in Australia fell to a 62 year low, from 4.62 litres per capita to 4.56. The decline of beer consumption in Australia can be traced back to the 1970s when drink-driving laws changed. According to a Department of Health and Ageing report, per capita consumption of alcohol peaked at over 6.4 litres in the mid-1970s and has declined gradually ever since. During the past decade alone, beer consumption in Australia has fallen by close to 13 per cent. Greater health awareness, as well as public education campaigns, random breath testing and increasing competition from other beverages have all played a part.

While there are a range of reasons behind the decline of beer consumption, changing tastes is thought to be an integral factor where the decline of beer is almost mirrored by an increase in wine consumption. According to editor of Australian Brews News, Matt Kirkegaard, the heaviest consumers of alcohol per capita, those within the 18 to 25 year age bracket, are increasingly moving away from beer and switching to products like wine, cider and ready-to-drink spirits (RTDs). “After growing up drinking soft drinks and fruit juices, these sweeter beverages are more appealing to those with younger taste buds, who do not like the bitterness traditionally in beer”, Kirkegaard says. “Most recently, beer consumption has fallen as consumers place a greater value on quality over quantity, with many drinkers moving towards gourmet products where beer is not perceived to fit within that niche.” As a result, consumers are drinking progressively less mainstream beer as tastes and preferences become more educated. An estimated 90 per cent of overall beer consumed is considered to be commercial, with only nine per cent of the market classified as imported and craft beer. While premium or craft beers continue to gain popularity, consumers are unable to drink as much of these products because of their high alcohol content and strong flavour. Because of this, while consumers are drinking more of these products as a substitute for commercial beers they are unable to drink as much, so the beer market overall continues to decline.

How significant is advertising and marketing to overall beer consumption?

According to publisher and advertising director at Beer and Brewer magazine, David Lipman, advertising and marketing plays a key role in commercial beer sales. Where mainstream beer advertising still presents to a very stereotypical market, the question is then raised about whether or not these advertisements still represent the typical drinker in 2011 and whether there are enough of these consumers to continue to drive sales. According to Kirkegaard, even if the images of mateship presented in mainstream beer advertising are less relevant than they might have once been, there is an element of the market that still wants to see beer as the man’s drink that you have with your mates. “All marketing plays to stereotypes and beer advertising is no different,” says Kirkegaard. “There is a belief that there is nothing more Australian than having a drink with your mates at the local pub. So even though drinking is in decline and the traditional market is changing, consumers probably do still want to be seen very much in that mould which is why beer advertisements continue to be successful.”

Are brewers doing enough to market beer products in a crowded market?

The largest brewers in Australia have been criticised for ‘chasing the market’, imitating best-selling international brands such as Corona, with beers like XXXX’s Summer Bright and Foster’s Great Northern. By producing beers with similar packaging and flavour profiles, the big brewers are crowding the market and are not attracting new drinkers. Kirkegaard suggests that while wine and spirits have an increasingly sophisticated perception, beer appears to still be very much stuck in the 1970s. This is an issue which is difficult for brewers to change, because tinkering with people’s perception of a product can drive existing customers away. According to Kirkegaard, brewers are increasingly enthusiastic to promote beer to women to combat this problem, as statistics show that only 25 per cent of females select beer as their drink of choice. Yet there is a risk in taking a pre-existing beer and trying to make it more female friendly after spending tens of millions of dollars and decades portraying beer as a manly drink. Kirkegaard likens the dilemma to a Holden Barina. “A bloke wouldn’t be caught dead driving it because it’s a chick’s car”, he says. “Brewers would end up killing their male market and not attracting female drinkers”.

As culture changes, can marketing be held accountable for a decline in consumption?

Effective marketing should portray to consumers how they want to be seen, so even if the traditional beer drinker has changed, marketing should not be held accountable for a decline in consumption. “If you go back 30 years”, says Kirkegaard, “Coffee was instant, cheese was cheddar, beer was lager and wine was in a cask. All of those have changed except for beer which is still very much seen the way it was 30 years ago and that really counts with the rise of the gourmet.” Beer has been very slow to respond to change in food and dining culture and is still a lightly flavoured, bland product that is not embraced by diners because it does not elevate a dining experience. “Perceptions are so broad that beer is that blokey thing you drink when watching the football or standing around poking sausages at the barbeque, it’s not something that you have in more upmarket, upscale and elegant occasions,” says Kirkegaard. “As a result, marketing decisions are not necessarily killing sales or driving people away from beer, but are making it hard for beer to reposition itself in a way that makes new drinkers come to it.”

What is the Bag Ban?
On 7 December 2010, Environment, Water and Climate Change Minister Simon Corbell announced that the ACT Legislative Assembly had passed legislation to ban the use of plastic shopping bags. The reasons behind the band were simple – to reduce environmental damage.

Corbell said in a press release at the time, “This is an important step forward in reducing the amount of plastic bags that are entering the waste stream, and waste that does not break down for many hundreds of years.”

For the past four months, the ACT has been going through the “transition” phase of the ban. During these months retailers have been allowed to supply plastic bags but have had to have an alternative bag that is permitted under the legislation to offer to customers. They have also been required to display a small sign alerting customers to the change (see picture).

However, from 1 November retailers will not be allowed to supply lightweight plastic bags and face a fine of up to $550 if they do. Bags that are not banned include paper bags, “green” reusable bags, heavy duty bags (such as those used in clothing stores) and barrier bags (those used for fruit and vegetables).

How will the ban effect businesses?
Geoff Whitfield, the owner of two Subway franchises in the ACT, says the ban on bags will effect him financially. He says the cost of supplying an alternative bag is a hit financially to small business owners like himself.

“Basically they’ve imposed an extra cost which is a substantial hit to my bottom line, which is not a very big bottom line and I’m not getting compensated,” he said.

Kate Carnell from the Australian Food and Grocery Council agrees that the new legislation will hurt small business owners the most.

“I think we often forget that the Subway franchisee, the IGA, even down to the Muffin Break, they are franchises but the people alone are just mum and dads. . . . It will be them who have to foot the bill,” she said.

Carnell says that not only will supplying an alternative plastic bag cost small business owners, but the changes in people’s shopping habits will also effect them financially.

“The dilemma here is that it effects the smaller guys probably significantly more than the bigger guys, the smaller corner stores where you pop in for your bread and your milk but then you buy a few other items while you are there and they rely on those few extra items… the great dilemma for them is if people don’t have a bag they won’t buy as much,” she said.

What help is available to small businesses?
Whitfield says he did raise the issue directly with Simon Corbell on the first Twitter Community Cabinet but he did not get back to him for two months. He said he eventually received a letter and a visit from a departmental.

“I did get someone from his department come around and talk to me so they were trying to help out, but there was not really anything they could do,” he said. “Basically this is the law, you’re stuck with it.”

He said that despite the cost to small business owners, there was no compensation available. Under the legislation he is allowed to charge for the supply of other bags but fears it may impact his business if he does.

“If other Subway owners don’t do it I’ll be judged as different from them,” he said.

How much will the ban help the environment?
Whilst the ban has been put in place for the benefit of the environment, Carnell says she questions how much the ban will really assist as the reusable “green” bags are not recyclable in Australia.

“The energy impact of recycling them, you know you have to ship them to China, is quite high so when you look at the overall carbon impact of the plastic bags we are used to getting in the supermarket versus the reusable green ones… the carbon footprint is not significantly better for the environment,” she said.

She acknowledges that plastic bags have left lasting damage on the environment, but says the government could have taken a better approach.

“Those plastic bags into the water ways are an issue so maybe what the government should have done is put more money into encouraging the technology around biodegradable plastic bags,” she said.

How will the ban affect manufactures?
Carnell says that a ban on lightweight plastic bags will actually be positive news for some of the members of the Australian Food and Grocery Council. She says that most people use the plastic shopping bags for bin liners or to wrap food scraps in and the ban on them will only drive up the sale of plastic bags such as bin liners.

“What seems to happen is that it causes an increase in the sales of the heavier duty plastic bags that you buy in the supermarket, which again has more of an impact on the environment… for some of our members who make the bin liners, their sales go up,” she said.

The future of the ban
Despite the criticism from people such as Carnell who in in the industry and small business owners such as Whitfield, the bag ban is going ahead.

Carnell says she would have liked more debate on the practical aspect of the ban

“it’s not a simple equation that banning plastic bags is just good for the environment… it’s not a well thought out policy,” she said.

As for Whitfield, he is now forced to either make the decision to charge customers for a bag or to foot the bill himself.

“In my mind it’s been put in without regard to the costs to the small business owner,” he said.

So Dr Ross Lamplugh, chairman of the Ochre Health Group and former Bourke doctor, has decided the need is great enough to justify giving $20,000 to whoever successfully refers a doctor to the outback posting.

“This vacancy is a key one for us so we thought we should try something different,” Dr Lamplugh said (10 October 2011). The reward is being offered as an alternative to paid advertising.

Is this approach different?

Dr Lamplugh said he had been saving this idea for a while and thought it was unique, but in 2009 the Australian Medical Association offered $3,000 to anyone who successfully nominated an overseas doctor to work in Australia for at least 12 months.

At the time, AMA’s Western Australian president, Gary Geelhoed, admitted to the ABC that it was essentially a “spotters’ fee”. (26 November 2009) “Basically it’s a win-win situation if we can get more doctors,” Dr Geelhoed said.

Is the offering of a nominee reward likely to become the standard measure for rural GP recruitment?

This seems doubful, although Dr Lamplugh insists that $20,000 is a “reasonably cheap” amount to recruit a good-quality procedural rural GP.

The major recruiter for rural doctors is the Rural Doctors Network, a government agency which advertises positions for free but cannot afford to offer the individual rewards that private recruiters can.

More than two-thirds of Australia’s health financing in 2009 came from government funding, and it is the main contributor to programs that may encourage doctors to smaller towns.

Is the ‘rural doctor drought’ really bad enough to necessitate the reward and the $400,000 salary for the successful doctor?

The Australian Government Department of Health and Ageing released the independent Review of the Rural Medical Workforce Distribution Programs and Policies earlier this year (17 August 2011), which actually suggested that the proportion of rural GPs was on the rise.

But the report was slammed by the Rural Doctors Association of Australia (RDAA) in a media release (7 September 2011) that claimed there are discrepancies in the way rural towns are classified, leading to a distortion of the figures.

Regardless of how desperate rural towns are, the Bourke salary is actually not significantly higher than what a similarly senior doctor in the city would be given, according to the President of the RDAA, Dr Paul Mara.

“When you consider that doctors in emergency medicine specialities in major hospitals are now paid $350,000 a year, we’re going to need to pay that much money to get someone to get out to Bourke and some of these other places,” Dr Mara said (7 October 2011).

Isn’t there a shortage in cities, too?

Despite extended media coverage of the apparent doctor shortage, Australia’s doctor numbers per head is on par with many top economies.

Australia ranks 6th amongst the G-20 nations for the number of physicians per 100,000 people, ahead of the UK, USA and Canada, according to data from the World Health Organisation (WHO).

It is the geographical distribution of these doctors that is the actual issue. Rural towns on average have only 1 doctor for every 1,000 patients, while Australian cities enjoy three times that many.

Yet even rural towns are fives times over the WHO minimum recommendation of 20 doctors per 100,000 people.

Can’t the government give better funding and incentives for rural doctors?

It already does. In 2009, 8.5% of Australia’s GDP was spent on the government financing of health, according to the WHO, ranking Australia ninth in the list of G-20 nations for proportionate health spending.

Included in this funding are ongoing programs such as HECS reimbursements for new medicine graduates who do stints in rural areas and relocation allowances to encourage doctors to make the shift to country towns.

But this money does not change the towns that need these doctors.

Why don’t huge incentives for potential rural GPS fix the problem?

“They don’t work,” said Dr Mara. “What we’re looking at, for example, is not to say that individual doctors in the bush should be getting paid considerably more.”

But Dr Mara maintains that in conjunction with better support and facilities, monetary incentives could work.

“It’s just that there should be more money put in so that, for capacity, there could be more doctors in those towns,” he said.

Dr Ross Lamplugh agrees that it is the rural towns that need to be pitched to potential doctors.

“The key is to … figure out what is the key attraction of the particular location you are recruiting to,” he said (10 October 2011).

Examples supplied by Dr Lamplugh include a town’s good surfing or fishing. These are both attributes that are hoped will entice an urban GP somewhere to make the tree change.

Many Australians are unclear about what exactly is a carbon tax despite increasing awareness of the tax since the Government’ revived the proposal early this year.. The Complete Guide to Climate Change defines it as “a specific tax levied on each unit of carbon dioxide or carbon dioxide equivalent of other greenhouse gases, emitted into the atmosphere.” And how do we get carbon emissions? Well they are generated by the burning of fossil fuels, the main three being coal, oil and natural gas. Within the Government’s proposal, this means ‘polluters’ will pay a set cost of $23 per tonne of carbon produced.

Who else is doing it?

Or should I say who else has done it? The first country to introduce a price on carbon was Finland in 1990. This developed into a general carbon tax by 1997. Starting at €18.05 per tonne of carbon dioxide, the cost eventually rose to €20 per tonne by 2010. Sweden entered the game in 1991 at US$150 per tonne of carbon, in which industries pay fifty percent of the nation’s tax. The tax exempts renewable resources and taxes on electricity were separate for non-industrial consumers. Britain introduced a climate change levy for its industry, commerce and public sectors in 2001. The levy was divided at 0.15 pence per KWH (kilowatt-hour) for gas, 0.07 pence per KWH for petroleum, 0.44 pence per KWH for electricity and 0.12pence per KWH for any other commodity. Quebec in Canada put a tax on hydrocarbons petroleum, natural gas and coal. A tax of US$0.8 per litre of gasoline and US$0.938 per litre of diesel fuel, only applies to energy and oil companies. British Columbia, which introduced a carbon tax at US$10 per tonne in 2008, plans to increase its carbon tax each year until it reaches US$30 by 2012.

Do any international guidelines exist and under what body?

The Kyoto Protocol is an international agreement which was adopted in Kyoto, Japan on 11 December 1997, under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). However, it did not come into effect until 16 February 2005, when it had been ratified by a sufficient number of countries. The United States of America is not a member of the countries who have ratified the protocol. The protocol’s main objective is to limit or reduce greenhouse gas emissions by its industrialised ratified countries. Three market-based mechanisms were introduced as a means of assisting countries to meet their national targets: Emissions Trading, The Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) and Joint Implementation (JI). It is under Emissions Trading in which a carbon tax comes into play in order to give carbon a price value to trade with among other countries. This agreement was formed as a ‘first-step’ in response to climate change, but will require more substantial international support for its legacy to survive. The protocol’s “First Commitment Period” ends in 2012.

Is a carbon tax the only answer?
Carbon dioxide, particularly through the consumption of fossil fuels, is considerably the largest and most recognised greenhouse gas emission in the world.
The CSIRO’s energy economist, Paul Graham, outlines an alternative market-based method, “cap and trade”, “In a “cap and trade” scheme the amount of emissions is known with more certainty because the cap is set by the government of the day, however the carbon price is set by the market and would fluctuate similar to other financial markets”.

On the other hand, many preventative methods exist to reduce the production of carbon emissions. Ranging from production changes, such as adopting renewable energy sources, to land care approaches, such as reducing deforestation, numerous non-market based methods exist that can effectively reduce the effects of carbon emissions.

Australian National University climate change researcher Dr David Stern believes carbon pricing should be done together with environmental technology policies and other measures, “A strong policy to develop alternative energy sources that might be competitive with fossil fuels like coal and gas, even without a carbon price would reduce the necessary carbon price and
might even be able to replace it,” he said.

What’s to come for Australian industries?
It is inevitable that an implementation of an economic policy will cause structural change in an economic system. Economists suggest that some sectors, such as fossil fuel industries may decline, whilst others such as renewable energy industries may expand. Certain industries may even relocate to other countries where mitigation policies are not so tight. Preferably, the revenue from a carbon tax would be invested into such industries to find new ways to reduce emissions and therefore stimulate growth. However, this all depends on factors such as an increase in the prices of goods, strength of industrial markets and not to mention the intensity of the carbon tax itself. The Australian Government, for example, has implemented industrial assistance schemes, such as the Clean Technology program, to promote alternative paths for economic growth with production industries.

Paul Graham focuses on the rate of growth within industries, “the economy grows at a slightly reduced rate when a carbon price is introduced, when growth in new industries does not totally offset the reduced growth of other industries”.

Where did it all begin?
English economist Arthur Pigou (1877 –1959) formulated the theory of negative externalities; negative effects or outcomes of a good’s production which results in market failure. Pigou proposed that by taxing the goods which resulted in such negative externalities, the ‘costs’ associated with the production are internalised. Thus by putting a tax on fossil fuels, the source that generates carbon dioxide, its producers have to economically compensate the damaging costs. This is known as Pigovian tax and became the basis in which the carbon tax was formulated.

Ask Canberrans what Floriade means to them and you will probably be barraged with frustrations such as not being able to find a park in Civic or waiting in never-ending lines for just about everything from your morning coffee through to late night movie sessions.

But what does Floriade really mean for Canberra, a town that has notoriously struggled to cement its place as a tourist destination among Australia’s postcard-white sandy beaches and bustling cities?

Floriade: A History

Floriade started in 1988 to commemorate Australia’s Bicentenary and Canberra’s 75th birthday. Each year, the flower show has a theme and this year it’s: ‘A Feast for the Senses.’ More than a million bulbs are planted each year, and for 2011 the designs span some 9,000 square metres.

The introduction of Nightfest in 2008 signalled the expansion of the traditional festival and an attempt by the ACT Government to capture a wider age demographic as well as provide a greater range of entertainment to encourage visitors to return for future festivals.

The move paid off and Nightfest’s first year was Floriade’s most successful to date, bringing more than $25 million in direct expenditure. an increase of almost 25 per cent on 2007. In 2010 this figure had grown to almost $30 million.

Crunching the Numbers

Last year Floriade attracted 460,000 visitors. Even assuming every one of the ACT’s population went, it would still mean there were 100,000 interstate tourists over the course of Floriade – or an influx of over 25 per cent of the population.

In fact, according to a press release from the office of Andrew Barr MLA in November 2010, more than 130,000 interstate visitors that year came to Canberra or extended their visit because of Floriade. Initially, I assumed that these would be day visitors, hardly from “interstate”, but from local areas such as Queanbeyan, Yass or Cooma. However, two thirds of tourists stayed for at least one night and the average stay was 2.5 nights.

With numbers like this, it is hard to argue that Floriade is bad for the ACT economy. ACT Chamber of Commerce Chief Executive Christopher Peters agrees that Floriade not only has short term benefits for the economy but positive long-term effects.

“The major benefit is the showcasing of Canberra, something many people don’t associate with Canberra,” he said. “Floriade opens new eyes to Canberra as our national capital.”

Floriade attendance continues to grow each year. Since 2007, with the exception of 2009, (which is no surprise given the national downturn on tourism thanks to the global financial crisis,) each year has been bigger than the year before and 2010 closed with record attendance and expenditure.

Lost Opportunities

While raw numbers suggest that Canberra reaps great benefit from Floriade, should a benchmark really be placed on economic growth? Local businesses, particularly retail and hospitality, experience huge sales increases and for retailers around town, Floriade is as big as stocktake sales.

Mr Peters believes businesses take the sales boost for granted and are not maximising profit opportunities. After all, there is a big clue as to a common interest that businesses could play on.

“I think many businesses assume that Floriade will be a benefit to their business and don’t actively peruse business opportunity, and I think that’s one of the greatest things we can do for Canberra,” he said.

Rather than just being reactive to the extra customers that do come through their doors, Mr Peters encouraged businesses to learn from overseas examples to proactively draw in the crowds.

“Until you get to the Floriade site, really Canberra itself isn’t part of the Floriade experience,” he said. “In some international flower shows . . . you find that the rest of the business community also piggy-backs on to the Floriade type event.”

Some businesses, hotels in particular, are most effective at utilising Floriade as a selling point, offering package deals and using witty marketing such as the Novotel Canberra’s ‘Floriade 3 in fun’ package.

If other businesses were to build on this tool alongside the ACT government and really get involved by playing on the annual theme, the region could be tied together, giving the town a festive feel that larger cities such as Sydney could never achieve.

What Now?

After the first Floriade in 1988, I doubt organisers would have ever thought that 24 years later the ACT Government would still be using the event as the major drawcard for ACT tourism. Each year organisers are becoming more creative and continue to draw record crowds.

The most obvious question to ask is: how much longer can Floriade continue to grow? Common sense says that it will ultimately reach its peak and begin to decline. The answer is simple: opportunity, opportunity, opportunity.

As Mr Peters said, it is about using Floriade to showcase Canberra, its unique history, wealth of culture and beautiful surrounds. Floriade is successful because it stands on its own two feet and shows Australia there is more to the region than preconceived notions of obnoxious politicians, the stuffy Parliament House and the source of taxes.