Friday, July 19, 2013

This Palace of Versailles is the wheel deal


TRAVEL ... with David Bray

The Palace of Versailles is one of the world’s busiest tourist attractions. Thousands of people from around the world infest the place every day and we were separated early in our visit from a son and his wife and next saw them back in Paris.

Another year and another son and his lady took a sensible approach and hired bicycles for a pleasant picnic ride around the area. Now, and for a couple of years at least, those who go there by train can do it in superb style. Take the RER (rapid transport) C line and you will find its carriages have been spectacularly refurbished to look like small versions of rooms of the royal chateau, lavishly done out in colours of the palace that was once the centre of political power in France .
Ornate paintings and golden sculptures line the aisles and even the ceilings are intricately designed. There’s a mock library in one of the carriages. The refurbishments are designed to evoke memories of seven different areas of the royal chateau and its grounds, including the Hall of Mirrors, the Gallery of Battles and Marie-Antoinette's estate.
The changes, the result of a deal between officials at the palace and rail operator SNCF, involved layering the interior walls of the train with a high-tech plastic film. SNCF is reported to have plans for five more trains to be decorated in the same film decoration technique by the end of this year.
The decoration is said to last about two years. Versailles was the centre of political power in France from 1682, when King Louis XIV moved from Paris, until the royal family was forced to return to the capital in October 1789 during the French Revolution.

GETTING THERE

The RER Line C5 train runs from central Paris directly to the Versailles-Rive Gauche station, from which it's a 10-minute walk, or a shorter shuttle bus ride, to the Château de Versailles. Catch the RER Line C5 train in Paris at the Javel, Champ de Mars-Tour Eiffel, Pont de l’Alma, Invalides, Musée d'Orsay, St-Michel-Notre Dame, or Gare d’Austerlitz RER stations, and make sure you’re on a train going to “Versailles R.G.” The RER makes it easy for you: all RER trains have a four-letter code, and all trains going to Versailles start with the letter “V”. Trains run about every 15 minutes, and the trip takes just over 30 minutes. Remember to keep your RER ticket until you are outside your arrival station – you will need your ticket to exit the station.

Wednesday, July 10, 2013

Community Noticeboard

Activities for Seniors
The Metropolitan Senior Citizens’ Centre in Church Street Fortitude Valley is a dynamic organisation that provides a variety of activities for people over the age of 50 living in the local community. The centre is extending its current Activities for Seniors program and would like to hear from people about what activities they would like to access regularly within the centre. Contact the centre co-ordinator Terina Edwards on 3252 2731 or drop her an email to: coordinator@metroseniors.com.au
Puppy raisers needed
Guide Dogs Queensland (GDQ) is looking for volunteers to raise its puppies in their homes for 12 months. Foster parents  teach pups basic obedience and good manners. All equipment, vet care and food is supplied. Volunteers need to only work part time or not at all, have a secure yard and a driver’s licence. To apply go to www.guidedogsqld.com.au or call 3261 7555.
Heart talks
Heart, stroke and blood vessel disease is the major public health problem in Australia, causing more then 32 per cent  of all deaths annually.  The Heart Foundation has a network of local volunteer speakers available to visit your club, community group or organisation to speak about general heart health focusing on the benefits of lifestyle change and practical information on how to go about it. To invite a volunteer speaker to your organisation – or to volunteer as a speaker for the Heart Foundation to help raise awareness of heart health throughout the community – please contact Margaret Richards at the Heart Foundation on (07) 3872 2507.
New Farm National Seniors
The monthly general meeting of the New Farm Branch of National Seniors will be at the Merthyr Uniting Church in Merthyr Road from 9.30am on Wednesday 3 July and will feature music by 4b2plus Barbershop Group. The branch will also be organising a dinner for members, and anyone interested in National Seniors who may not be able to attend day-time meetings, at the New Farm Bowls Club in Brunswick Street at 6pm on Friday 19 July. The branch will celebrate Christmas in July on Wednesday 24 July at Eves on the River starting at midday. For information about these events ring Tony Townsend on 3315 2523 or go to www.nsanewfarmbranch.com.
Creative glass on show
The Creative Glass Guild’s annual exhibition takes place at the Mount Coot-tha Botanical Gardens auditorium on Saturday and Sunday July 6 and 7 from 9am to 4pm. Admission is $5 with under 12s  free. On display will be leadlights, mosaics, fused and slumped glass, jewellery, stained glass panels, Tiffany lampshades and lamp worked beads. Talk to a glass artist, sign up for a class or just go  along for a look and a cuppa. For more information about the guild, go to its website at www.creativeglassguild.com
Helpers needed
Vinnies need volunteers for their Valley and Newstead stores. If you can help out, please give them a ring at the Valley store on 3252 9856.
Got a drug problem?
Many recovering addicts have found that it is possible to live without the use of drugs with the help of Narcotics Anonymous (NA). If you are still using and can’t stop, we can help. Narcotics Anonymous is a non-profit fellowship of men and women for whom drugs had become a major problem. We are recovering addicts who meet regulary to help one another stay clean. The Narcotics Anonymous message is “that an addict, any addict, can stop using drugs, lose the desire to use and find a new way to live”. For information about meeting times and locations call our 24 hour help line on 3391 5045 or visit our website at www.na.org.au
Free concert at St John’s
The next free “Last Thursday in the Month” concert at St John’s Anglican Cathedral 373 Ann Street in the city is on Thursday 25 July at 1.15 pm. The Eltham East Primary School Choir (named outstanding choir at the 2013 Dandenong Festival for Youth and the Arts) will provide a program of choral music that explores music across the ages, cultures and continents. Further information: www.stjohnscathedral.com.au or 3835 2222.
Quiet time needed?
Looking for some peace and quiet? Take an hour out of your busy schedule for quiet group meditation. Sessions begin with a small amount of skills/spiritual input but are mostly in silence. We meet at 6 pm on Wednesdays at Merthyr Road Uniting Church. Everyone welcome. No fee. Contact Atholl on 0410 565 081 for more information.
Computer training
Brisbane Seniors OnLine (BSOL) provides affordable computer training for over 50s in the Brisbane area and is seeking new learners who would like to receive one-on-one lessons in their own homes or in our city training centre. By arrangement, we can also provide training in other venues such as community centres or public libraries. BSOL teaches both Windows and Apple Mac. New volunteer mentors are always welcome. The cost to learners is $40 a year plus a one-off $20 joining fee. For this, learners receive approximately 12 one-hour lessons and ongoing support for the balance of the membership year. Membership is free to mentors. Contact BSOL on 3210 6983 or at www.bsol.asn.au
Centre’s wishlist
The New Farm Neighbourhood Centre requires a constant supply of goods and equipment to help it support people in the inner-city. The newfarmneighbourhood.org website includes a link to the centre’s wishlist of donations. Items the centre requires include bus tickets, supermarket vouchers, blankets, mobile-phone top ups, and instant meals. The NFNC is also seeking donations of time by people with administrative, fundraising, and graphic design skills. For further information ring the NFNC on 3358 5600.
• Send your not-for-profit listing to
editor@theindependent.com.au!

Still pretty damn crazy after all these tears


FROM MY CORNER
With Ann Brunswick
 
Ihad been visiting my former editor at his “retreat” almost weekly since he was sent there for “evaluation” after this newspaper suspended publication some months ago.

Sure, I wasn’t on the payroll anymore – not that Iever got paid much – but I’d always found the silly old bugger to be quite sweet in his own eccentric way so I never minded the trip across town to say hello. Besides, Ithought my regular visits seems to cheer him up no end.

For quite some time it was not a pretty sight. No, Idon’t mean the asylum – er, the retreat – itself. It was grand in its own way, with a lovely gothic main building set in beautifully manicured lawns and so forth. The staff all had lovely uniforms and even the strait-jackets were colour co-ordinated.

No, it was my former boss. It was sad to see him sitting outside on a bench, a blanket over his legs, his left eye occasionally twitching and this strange “Hmmm. Hhmmm. Hmmm” coming from between trembling lips. Behaviour, I’ve suddenly realised, not all that dissimilar to the facial tics and twitches that Inspector Dreyfus used to display in those Pink Panther movies years ago.

But over time and a handful of visits, he came to a certain calmness that I took as some form of closure to his years spent as a media mogul wannabe. This had been helped in part by the doctor in charge pleading with me never to mention the 11 long years that he had spent running The Independent into the ground.

That was until the other month, when Imade the mistake during one of our weekend visits of mentioning, just as an aside, that City News – my boss’s major competitor in all those years of publishing – had closed down.

“Closed down, you say,” he said. No sooner had those words been uttered then I detected what I thought was a small twitch of the left eye.

“Yes. Ceased publishing last Thursday.”

“Hmmm. Hmmm Mmm. Mmmmmmmm.”

“Obviously it wasn’t making enough money,” I added as I watched his lips purse and repurse.

We were silent again for a while and then he said simply:“Ithink I’ll start the paper up again.See how I go.”

The left eye all of a sudden looked like it was short-circuiting.

“But, boss,” I protested. “You were bloody hopeless at running a business all those years, so why should you be any better now?”

For readers who might be shocked by the bluntness of that comment, part of the charm of our relationship was my ability to be brutally frank with my employer when ever that was required, which was often. Relatively harmless he might be but he is also a right royal twit.

“You’re right, of course, but with City News out of the way, who knows? The ad revenue might start to pour in.” Twitch. Twitch. Lip tremble.

As opposed to the trickle of ads when he used to do the job himself was a thought I kept to myself. This bloke couldn’t sell a book of heavily discounted brothel vouchers to Craig Thomson, so Itried a different tack.

“Can’t we look at the closure of City News another way,” I suggested, keeping a wary watch on eye and mouth movement.

“Instead of a potential opening, the closure of City News could be, well, an omen. And a bad one at that?”

Another twitch. A staccato of lip purses. The gentle, soft hum of a series of “Mmmm. Hmmmm. Hmmmms.

“Boss, you always said the City News had all these pretty young things with really big...

“Sales targets to fill?”

“Well, yes, that too. But you see my point, don’t you?”

A full 12-second eye twitch was followed by the loudest sequence of Hmmms Hhhhmm Hmmmmms I’d heard from him since he was first admitted.

“No bugger it,” he shouted, flinging aside his security blanket and jumping to his feet.

“Let’s give this another shot,”he declared, both eyes now twitching in perfect harmony and his lips almost a blur of uncontrolled movement as a trumpet blast of Hhhmmmms escaped from between them.

“What have we got to lose, eh?” he shouted.

Your sanity, for one, Ithought. Or what was still left of it.

• Got something you’ve got to get off your chest and would like Brisbane’s favourite columnist to investigate on your behalf? Email Ann Brunswick at

ann@theindependent.com.au


Despicable monsters, et al

FILMS

With Tim Milfull

Despicable Me 2 (PG); Monsters University (G)
Director: Pierre Coffin and Chris Renaud; Dan Scanlon
Stars: Steve Carell and Kristen Wiig; Billy Crystal and John Goodman
Rating: 4/5; 3.5/5
90-minutes; 100-minutes, now screening.
 
 
 
It’s hard to believe that the Monsters franchise began in 2001, rejigging Billy Crystal’s career as a voice actor and adding another string to John Goodman’s already considerable bow.

Given its success, it’s surprising the sequel took so long to get off the ground; then again, Pixar has been busy pumping out hit after annual hit for the last decade. Technically, the new film is actually a prequel plunging us into the backstory of two beloved monsters: Crystal’s fingernails-on-the-blackboard screecher Mike Wazowski and Goodman’s gravelly-baritone, James P Sullivan. As university students, these two are sworn enemies: the former a shameless geek; the latter a muscle-bound jock. Monsters University is undoubtedly fun and a pleasure to take in, invariably stomping through safe territory.

But where the monsters and their campus surrounds are cast in soft focus warm colours and textures, the Despicable Me 2 world of former supervillian Gru (Steve Carell) and his myriad minions is offered in stark edges, clear-cut colours and a tone that suggests cynical, often black humour that would never quite fit in a Pixar universe – well, perhaps in the neighbourhood of The Incredibles, but only just.

In their latest outing Gru and his despicable ensemble are dragooned out of suburban anonymity – and an underground jam factory of world-dominating proportions – to flush out another supervillain hiding undercover in a mall. While I enjoyed Gru’s outing, there’s no denying I relish the release of the 2014 instalment Minions – for all of Gru’s malicious posturing, it’s really the minions who get things done!

 

 Fleshing out a character

The Look of Love (MA15+)
Director: Michael Winterbottom
Stars: Steve Coogan, Imogen Poots
Rating: 3/5
101-minutes, now screening

In The Look of Love, British director Michael Winterbottom continues his eclectic film trajectory – and a long-running collaboration with actor Steve Coogan – in this biopic about a man who could variously be described as a sultan of sleaze, or as Paul Raymond referred to himself – the King of Soho.

Mostly avoiding Raymond’s early life, Winterbottom and Coogan concentrate on his meteoric rise in the adult entertainment industry after finding a way – quite hilariously revealed here – to circumvent 1950s British legislation that prohibited nude dancing on stage. Raymond subsequently parlayed this success into building one of Britain’s most successful live entertainment industries alongside an astonishing collection of inner-London real estate.

Rather than focus exclusively on Raymond’s predilection for naked flesh – don’t get me wrong, there are acres of the stuff – the biopic concentrates more on his personal relationships: from the shrieking failures of relationships with fellow impresario Jean (Anna Friel), and sex symbol-cum-writer Fiona Richmond (Tamsin Egerton), to his long-suffering, but hopelessly self-absorbed daughter Debbie (Imogen Poots). Lurking on the edges of Raymond’s radar are his sneering legitimate son Howard, an unfortunate Irish bastard, and perhaps one the sleaziest of characters ever depicted onscreen – “soft” pornographer, Tony Power (played to glorious effect by The Thick of It’s Chris Addison).

While Coogan’s Raymond comes across as a charming louche with a flair for pragmatic rationalisation, I can’t help feeling that even with his unfortunate daughter’s tragic end, there still could have been a more honest depiction of the sleazier side of Raymond’s life – particularly considering that the Kray twins were among his regular clientele.


 
A very timely expose

We Steal Secrets: The Story of Wikileaks (M)
Director: Alex Gibney
Stars: Julian Assange, Adrian Lamo, Bradley Manning
Rating: 5/5
130-minutes, from 4 July

There’s a nice irony in the 4 July Australian release of Alex Gibney’s new documentary We Steal Secrets, given the convoluted strands of its narrative and the confluence of recent international intrigue involving Barack Obama’s defence of his new global surveillance measures, the whistleblowing of Edward Snowdon, the trial of Corporal Bradley Manning and Julian Assange’s continuing exile in London’s Ecuadorian Embassy.

One might be tempted to suggest that the film’s producers couldn’t have timed it better. But in an era where private information has rarely been more public, there are fewer and fewer surprises.

Using the careful, methodical approach that has brought him admiration for his past work – including Mea Maxima Culpa: Silence in the House of God, Freakonomics and Taxi to the Dark Side – Gibney meticulously unpacks the history of Wikileaks, and the man (well, men really – there are few women involved outside those caught up in Assange’s peccadilloes) behind this world-changing organisation. While, Assange has understandably become the public face of Wikileaks, several other important figures are profiled in detail, including whistleblower Bradley Manning and his duplicitous accuser, former geek/hacker, Adrian Lamo – whose portrayal undertakes some fascinating turns in the film – and the baby-faced and impressively articulate Wikileaks spokesman, James Ball.

Like Gibney’s earlier work, We Steal Secrets is an important and utterly engrossing film, exposing the secrets of an organisation whose ideologically pure motives for freedom of information are tinged by the pragmatic reality of its availability, particularly in terms of the threat to innocent civilians. Given Gibney’s long-running success in the field of documentary, it’s hard not to get a little excited about what intimate dirty laundry he will air in his next film Lance Armstrong: The Road Back, which will hopefully expose the disgraced cyclist as a preening hypocrite.

 

A frog offering from France? Makes sense

WINE

With David Bray

 
Don’t forget the French. There is plenty of  wine coming into this country from new and old French sources. Apart from the Aussie dollar making it more affordable – up to about 15 per cent of sales  – it gives us a reason to remind ourselves how our tastes have over the years been affected by the wines, sparkling and still, of France.

Recently there has been a welcome batch of new ones. Among them there’s a cheeky beret-wearing amphibian who is doing better than nicely selling wine modeled on the style that have made Australian wine so successful here and overseas.

Arrogant Frog’s creator, Paul  Nas of the Languedoc-Roussillon region in southern France, tells us: “About 10 years ago, when new-world wines started to kick us out of the market, Bordeaux producers believed they should be the leaders – in their arrogance they thought they should be king of the world and didn’t do anything to change.

“It needed to be reinvented and as a producer from Languedoc most Bordeaux producers wouldn’t even bother to talk to you, so we were the ones to do it.

“As soon as we launched the brand, people were saying, at last a French producer that doesn't take themselves too seriously, and they can produce very good wine and very affordably.

“The style I make is very much inspired by the new world – fruit-driven, juicy wines with texture and smooth tannins, no aggressivity, and sealed with a screwcap,” he says.

“The concept isn’t far from what you have in Australia, but with a French touch, and the packaging and the right price are part of the appeal.”

The Frog is to be found on quite a range of styles, of which Woolworths has brought in three, Ribet Red Cabernet Merlot, Ribet Sauvignon Blanc and Croak Rotie Shiraz 2011.

• Ribet Red 2011,  55 per cent Cabernet Sauvignon,45 per cent Merlot, is easy drinking style with  good berry fruit (“cherry, raspberry, strawberry”), ripe cassis and plum, herbal and vanilla hints, chocolate tannins.

• Ribet Sauvignon Blanc 2011  is a classic French style white with aromas of gooseberry and passionfruit and rounds off with a crisp and clean finish.

• Frog Croak Rotie Shiraz (2011) is ripe, juicy and mouth-filling with gentle hints of earthy savoury characters – an approachable red wine with a smooth and luscious finish.

***

And now, let’s welcome a couple of fine Champagne houses.

Actually, it’s welcome back to  Alfred Gratien, a label well-known and expected here until a few years back, when it just went missing. Back again now, and looking good in expert hands.

Champagne Alfred Gratien has been produced  from  cellars in Epernay since 1864. Grapes are from the best areas in Champagne, mainly from Grand and Premier Cru vineyards. Only the first pressing is used. Chef de Cave Nicolas Jaeger separately vinifies each grape variety and cru for a minimum of six months in small neutral oak barrels without the use of malolactic fermentation. Reserve wines are stored in large oak barrels.

Olivier Duparc, director commercial and marketing for Alfred Gratien, who was in Brisbane to show the wines, tells us only two Champagne houses  still use  these traditional practices for all of their Cuvées –  the House of Krug and Alfred Gratien.

Tasted at Fifth Element Bar, South Bank, were Alfred Gratien Brut Non Vintage , Brut Rosé Non Vintage (Brut Millésimé 1999 and Gratien Cuvée Paradis Brut. Retail prices range from late $70s to well into the $100s. Lovely wines, all four, and especially the last one. M Duparc says Alfred Gratien cuvees are to be found on some of the finest wine lists of the world including Tour D’Argent, Restaurant Guy Savoy, Hotel Le Bristol Paris, L’Atelier de Joël Robuchon,  and the  Hong Kong Jockey Club.

***

And so to Champagne Duperrey and there’s a link to Australian history here. The fizz is named  in honour of the 19th century French explorer Louis Isadore Duperrey who mapped much of the southern Australian coastline, including Tasmania.

Importers, again Woolworths, say the range, comprising non-vintage, non-vintage rosé, and vintage champagne styles, was developed especially for the Australian palate. Champagne Duperrey offers freshness, volume, richness, fruit complexity and vivacity.

• NV Champagne Duperrey Premier Cru Brut ($44.99), based on chardonnay and pinot noir, is derived from select parcels of premier cru and grand cru vineyards from the Vallée de la Marne. It is aged on yeast lees for at least three years and offer “white flower, dried apricot, hazelnut, brioche aromas, plenty of mid-palate creaminess and richness, fresh acidity and underlying yeasty complexity”.

• NV Duperrey Rosé Champagne ($44.99) is a blend of pinot noir, chardonnay and pinot meunier and based predominantly on premier cru vineyards.. . . “arguably the best value champagne rosé in the Australian market ... lovely salmon pink colour, light strawberry/ red cherry/ yeasty aromas, plenty of fruit complexity, richness and crunchy long acidity”.

• 2005 Duperrey Vintage Champagne ($59.99) e chardonnay pinot noir blend showing intense lemon curd/ white peach/ pear/ honey aromas, fresh creamy lemon curd/ biscuity/ yeasty flavours, light chalky texture and crisp refreshing acidity.

The range is supported by a local sparkler, Dumont Prestige Cuvée Australia ($21.99) a chardonnay, pinot noir, pinot meunier blend  from southern Australia made at Taltarni and Clover Hill by traditional methods – 'classic sparkling style with fresh lemon curd/ grapefruit/ biscuity aromas, creamy richness and lemony acidity”.


The dumping we had to have

POLITICS
With Mungo MacCallum

In the old days, the Sydney Morning Herald would have begun its editorial on the events of last week with the phrase: “It was a sad but wise decision...”

None but the most viciously partisan will rejoice in the dumping of Julia Gillard, but none but the politically purblind will deny that it was the dumping that Labor had to have. The alternative was a defeat which would cripple the party for the best (or worst) part of a generation, and to avert this disaster to the institution she headed, the queen had to be sacrificed.

Gillard did her best in what were quite literally unprecedented circumstances and achieved some important results – at least, history will recognise their importance. But they were not the results the electorate wanted. In the end, her best was simply not good enough.

It could be argued that she never really had a chance: from the moment she achieved greatness – or rather, had it thrust upon her – she was carrying three crippling handicaps, none of which she ever entirely surmounted. The first was the very manner of her ascension. Leadership changes are supposed to gradual, visible processes with the challenger stalking the incumbent, manoeuvring, feinting, and calling trial runs for months before the final strike. This was the way Paul Keating pursued Bob Hawke, or, for that matter, the way Kevin Rudd pursued Julia Gillard. But the 2010 coup was a stab in the back, the supposedly loyal deputy grabbing the job in the wake of a midnight assassination by her mafia. It was never going to be accepted by a large slice of the party and the electorate.

And with it came other baggage. The second problem was that Gillard arrived without an agenda of her own. She had not expected to need one. So for the first period of her always fraught leadership she was reduced to mopping up Rudd’s program and reacting to Tony Abbott’s brutal aggression. And thirdly, she was not equipped for the job; in the fullness of time she might have developed the vision and the political skills required, but in 2010 the Peter Principle still applied: she had been promoted above her abilities.

And, like so many of her predecessors, in the end she did not know when it was time to leave. Six months ago it became clear that she could not win; all the public polling was showing that the swing against her government was locked in. Her supporters grasped at the odd rogue result, but the they looked a little like climate change deniers who only accept the aberrations, never the overwhelming evidence. The party’s private polling was even more damning: Gillard herself was the problem – the majority had rejected her.

But there was a chance of redemption: a return to Rudd would put Labor back in the fight. This was the point at which she could have agreed to a smooth and gracious transition; instead, she called an election, or at least named the date. And the party stuck with her – a fair few out of genuine loyalty, but far more from a reluctance to go back to Rudd either because they did not like his personality, his style, or his perceived treachery or because they just did not want to admit that they had been wrong in 2010. It took them until it was nearly too late to realise that their stance was not just punishing Rudd: it was punishing their own followers, their party and all that it stood for, and, finally, themselves.

And because the crisis came at the last minute, the consequences were more dramatic than they need have been. Obviously Gillard’s hard core supporters would still have resigned from the ministry, but perhaps they would not have retired from parliament – Craig Emerson in particular was a competent administrator who will be missed. On the other side of the coin Martin Ferguson and Simon Crean might have stayed for another term.

It appears that Stephen Smith and, the biggest loss of all, Greg Combet, may have been planning to go anyway, but the fact that they were caught up in the rush compounds the impression of blood revolution rather than orderly transition. And, let’s face it, bloody revolution was what we got. In the end there was no other choice.

So what now? The logic says that Rudd should do what just about the commentators and the public want, and just get on with it – call the election as soon as practicable, while the honeymoon is still unsullied by post coitum tristesse. But he has made clear he has not plans to do so; rather than pre-empt Gillard’s date of September 14, he plans to stretch things out beyond it, claiming the need to settle a few policy questions first.

This sounds plausible, but I suspect that there are at least two other reasons for the delay. The first is simple ego: Rudd reckons he can beat Abbott whenever and wherever, so the question of a honeymoon is irrelevant. But more worryingly, Rudd has form as a prevaricator: the fact that he squibbed calling a double dissolution at the beginning of 2010 was where all the trouble started, Had he done so he would almost certainly have won it, passed his emissions trading scheme at a joint sitting, and become untouchable. To be fair, it was one of the few times he took advice: Gillard, Wayne Swan, Mark Arbib and Sam Dastyari talked him out of it, and shortly afterwards shafted him more comprehensively.

Rudd is only the fourth of our 27 Prime Ministers to get a second chance. Before him, Alfred Deakin, Andrew Fisher and Robert Menzies grabbed their opportunities and did great things. Rudd’s course should be clear: certainly it is a time for a bit more consultation, a bit more method, a bit more Mr Nice Guy. But it is not a time for timidity or retreat. Think of the old school motto: distinction by merit. Rudd is doing it in reverse. He has already been awarded a rare distinction: now he must use it to gain the merit.

In the old days, the Sydney Morning Herald would have begun its editorial on the events of last week with the phrase: “It was a sad but wise decision...”

None but the most viciously partisan will rejoice in the dumping of Julia Gillard, but none but the politically purblind will deny that it was the dumping that Labor had to have. The alternative was a defeat which would cripple the party for the best (or worst) part of a generation, and to avert this disaster to the institution she headed, the queen had to be sacrificed.

Gillard did her best in what were quite literally unprecedented circumstances and achieved some important results – at least, history will recognise their importance. But they were not the results the electorate wanted. In the end, her best was simply not good enough.

It could be argued that she never really had a chance: from the moment she achieved greatness – or rather, had it thrust upon her – she was carrying three crippling handicaps, none of which she ever entirely surmounted. The first was the very manner of her ascension. Leadership changes are supposed to gradual, visible processes with the challenger stalking the incumbent, manoeuvring, feinting, and calling trial runs for months before the final strike. This was the way Paul Keating pursued Bob Hawke, or, for that matter, the way Kevin Rudd pursued Julia Gillard. But the 2010 coup was a stab in the back, the supposedly loyal deputy grabbing the job in the wake of a midnight assassination by her mafia. It was never going to be accepted by a large slice of the party and the electorate.

And with it came other baggage. The second problem was that Gillard arrived without an agenda of her own. She had not expected to need one. So for the first period of her always fraught leadership she was reduced to mopping up Rudd’s program and reacting to Tony Abbott’s brutal aggression. And thirdly, she was not equipped for the job; in the fullness of time she might have developed the vision and the political skills required, but in 2010 the Peter Principle still applied: she had been promoted above her abilities.

And, like so many of her predecessors, in the end she did not know when it was time to leave. Six months ago it became clear that she could not win; all the public polling was showing that the swing against her government was locked in. Her supporters grasped at the odd rogue result, but the they looked a little like climate change deniers who only accept the aberrations, never the overwhelming evidence. The party’s private polling was even more damning: Gillard herself was the problem – the majority had rejected her.

But there was a chance of redemption: a return to Rudd would put Labor back in the fight. This was the point at which she could have agreed to a smooth and gracious transition; instead, she called an election, or at least named the date. And the party stuck with her – a fair few out of genuine loyalty, but far more from a reluctance to go back to Rudd either because they did not like his personality, his style, or his perceived treachery or because they just did not want to admit that they had been wrong in 2010. It took them until it was nearly too late to realise that their stance was not just punishing Rudd: it was punishing their own followers, their party and all that it stood for, and, finally, themselves.

And because the crisis came at the last minute, the consequences were more dramatic than they need have been. Obviously Gillard’s hard core supporters would still have resigned from the ministry, but perhaps they would not have retired from parliament – Craig Emerson in particular was a competent administrator who will be missed. On the other side of the coin Martin Ferguson and Simon Crean might have stayed for another term.

It appears that Stephen Smith and, the biggest loss of all, Greg Combet, may have been planning to go anyway, but the fact that they were caught up in the rush compounds the impression of blood revolution rather than orderly transition. And, let’s face it, bloody revolution was what we got. In the end there was no other choice.

So what now? The logic says that Rudd should do what just about the commentators and the public want, and just get on with it – call the election as soon as practicable, while the honeymoon is still unsullied by post coitum tristesse. But he has made clear he has not plans to do so; rather than pre-empt Gillard’s date of September 14, he plans to stretch things out beyond it, claiming the need to settle a few policy questions first.

This sounds plausible, but I suspect that there are at least two other reasons for the delay. The first is simple ego: Rudd reckons he can beat Abbott whenever and wherever, so the question of a honeymoon is irrelevant. But more worryingly, Rudd has form as a prevaricator: the fact that he squibbed calling a double dissolution at the beginning of 2010 was where all the trouble started, Had he done so he would almost certainly have won it, passed his emissions trading scheme at a joint sitting, and become untouchable. To be fair, it was one of the few times he took advice: Gillard, Wayne Swan, Mark Arbib and Sam Dastyari talked him out of it, and shortly afterwards shafted him more comprehensively.

Rudd is only the fourth of our 27 Prime Ministers to get a second chance. Before him, Alfred Deakin, Andrew Fisher and Robert Menzies grabbed their opportunities and did great things. Rudd’s course should be clear: certainly it is a time for a bit more consultation, a bit more method, a bit more Mr Nice Guy. But it is not a time for timidity or retreat. Think of the old school motto: distinction by merit. Rudd is doing it in reverse. He has already been awarded a rare distinction: now he must use it to gain the merit.


Cheat claims remain unanswered

OURSAY




Top: LNP campaign posters from the 2012 city council election and, above the official council City Council cleat as used recently on plans for a makeover for the Brunswick Street Mall.  

Imagine you’re a politician and someone repeatedly calls you a cheat. You’d be indignant, right? Your reputation impugned, you’d want to put the record straight and prove your accuser wrong?
The Independent over many issues has hammered away at Lord Mayor Graham Quirk, saying he and his Team Quirk candidates cheated before and during the last council poll by using a Brisbane City Council “cleat” that must not be used for political purposes. We accused the LNP of cynical and sneaky politics, using what most people would recognise as the council’s intellectual property – its pattern of blue and yellow blocks used on the left-hand edge of official council documents and publications.
Graham Quirk thought he could offer a blunt “no” to our claims that Team Quirk used the council’s cleat to cash in on the council’s good name and grab a sneaky and underhand advantage over their opponents who did not adopt such tactics.
Our crucial follow-questions have been repeatedly ignored. And we know why. The use of the copycat cleat is indefensible. And we ask the basic question again: How can Lord Mayor Quirk expect ratepayers to obey both the letter and the spirit of council rules and bylaws when he won’t do the same himself? We’ll keep hammering away at this issue until the Team Quirk cleat cheats come clean and apologise.

We’re sticking with our copycat cleat campaign for one simple reason:
Silence means Team Quirk wants to cheat again
It’s now clear that Lord Mayor Graham Quirk and his team of spin doctors have decided not to try to defend the indefensible.

Their ongoing silence in response to our attempts to make them come clean on the use of their copycat council cleat speaks volumes. It confirms what we already know: that they cheated before and during the last council poll. They cynically copied the council’s design for no other reason than to link their campaign with council’s good name and give it an authenticity it did not deserve.

Have a look at the images at right. Does any sensible, reasonable person think that Team Quirk chose those colours and blocks because they liked the look of them? Yet they think that by avoiding the issue, The Independent will give up and move on. But we won’t. The issue here is too important. What we want is simple: they can’t defend what they did so we want them to be honest enough to admit they got it wrong. Were too clever by half.

And just as importantly, we want them to state categorically that they will never use the copycat cleat again. But as our heading above suggests, Team Quirk will probably be tempted to try the con on again –to deliberately break council rules – for one simple reason: it wins votes even though it’s the wrong thing to do. Which is why they copied the council cleat in the first place.


The questions that have now remained unanswered for over a year
Email sent on 13 April 2012:

Preface: In a letter to Chairman of Council Councillor Krista Adams on 28 October last year, the council’s CEO Colin Jensen said in response to a question as to whether the council’s cleat could be used in political material: “No. MC026 Marketing, Communications and Advertising Policy states that Council’s logo and cleat are used to indicate council program association and activity. These design elements as set out in council’s Visual Style Guide must not be used on material that is of a political nature.”

We therefore ask:

1. Was the CEO’s take on council policy correct then?
Answer: Yes

2. Does that policy still apply, or have the rules changed?
Answer: This policy still applies. It has not changed.


3. If so, when?
Answer: N/A

4. If the rules have not changed, why are you and some of your LNP candidates using the council cleat, or a design so similar to  it that any reasonable person could think they are one and the same, in political advertising material?
Answer: LNP political advertising material does not use the Council cleat or the Council logo.

Our follow-up questions later that month have been ignored over and over again.

We again sent slightly amended versions to him earlier this month, only to be greeted with ongoing silence. Here’s what we asked:

1. Please explain fully to our readers how the blue and yellow block design Team Quirk used down the left-hand-side of  political material before and during the recent council poll - leaflets, newspaper advertisements, business cards, billboards, roadside election signs and even the back of a campaign car - differed from the official City Council cleat, a design that you accept cannot be used for political purposes?

2. Please explain why you believe these differences were sufficient that any reasonable person could not have possibly mistaken one for the other.

3. For those who have formed the view that you and your colleagues deliberately bent council rules to your own advantage - namely to create the impression that Team Quirk LNP candidates had some form of official council backing - please explain why they are wrong.



Above: Vicki Howard must have thought her 2012 campaign car was a City Council bus!



Mall makeover plan outlined

NEWS
 
Lord Mayor Graham Quirk has unveiled plans for a $4 million overhaul of the Brunswick Street Mall which he says will boost the daytime economy of Fortitude Valley.

“I’ve been working closely with local traders for the past two years and my commitment to the upgrade of the Brunswick Street Mall will be a positive for the future of the Valley and its day- time businesses,” Cr Quirk said. “This the first of a broader economic strategy we are investing in, led by the local traders, to see Fortitude Valley as the creative industry and entertainment hub of Brisbane.”

 But council opposition leader MiltonDick cast doubts on the level of local input to date, calling  on the Lord Mayor to work with local businesses on the design to ensure “it doesn’t turn into King George Square mark two”.

“It’s a hard task to get the balance right with a design that supports existing night-time trade while encouraging increased day-time business trade and I hope the Lord Mayor’s design gets this right.”

Cr Quirk said the much-needed facelift would  turn Brunswick Street Mall into a key creative and entertainment location. Concept plans included the installation of a large wire roof structure covering the central section of the mall, which could support lighting and public art and provide shelter and shading. Small retail and art pods, similar to those found in Queen Street Mall, were also among the concept plans.

Cr Quirk said some detailed design would take place during the next financial year with construction expected to start in mid-2014. The project was expected to be completed about a year later. 

Councillor Dick said the upgrade was long overdue with funding promised last budget but not spent. “Council has a responsibility to ensure that the final design doesn’t turn Brunswick Mall into another concrete jungle and that shade and trees are incorporated into a design that gives enough space for improved business and entertainment opportunities.

“A key component of the design should be taking into account improved safety, lit up safe spaces and better access to public toilets.”

He also called on the Lord Mayor to work with affected businesses to minimise the impact on trading while construction took place.

 

Top and above:How the new Brunswick Street Mall could look in a few years’ time.

 OUR SAY

 A flawed premise?
 
At the heart of Lord Mayor Graham Quirk’s rhetoric surrounding his $4 million Brunswick Street Mall makeover is the assumption that a revamped mall will somehow magically boost the flagging day economy of the whole Fortitude Valley area.

That, somehow, some fancy shade structures and retail hubs are going to attract the numbers of people that nearby retail outlets badly need as paying customers to stay afloat in tough times

That, somehow, instead of the central Valley area being just a place for people to walk through on their way to somewhere else, a sparkling new mall will bring people to the area to spend quality time – and money.

Did the multi-million dollar redevelopment of the nearby Chinatown Mall achieve that admirable result? This newspaper doesn’t claim to know the answer to that – maybe someone in government can enlighten us with some figures – but our suspicion is that it made little difference to the cashflow of the businesses – eateries and others – that border the mall or are based nearby.

In previous editorials, this newspaper has also made the point that if the Brunswick Street Mall is to be redeveloped, then it must be done properly. Something is wrong under the surface there and millions of dollars could be wasted if that is not investigated and addressed.

So while the Lord Mayor’s media statement is full of fancy words and great promise, what the new design will actually bring to the precinct remains in doubt. Apart, of course, from having a smooth concrete surface what will be much more user-friendly to those fancy cleaning machines that the Lord Mayor and now local councillor Vicki Howard played with in a few media stunts before the last council poll, right in the faces of local business people being hurt very very badly by the closure of the Walton’s walkway.

And let’s get back to those local traders. The Independent will conduct a new survey of their responses to this mall makeover announcement in our next issue, but we have in the past  carried their concerns about how construction will affect their livelihoods. Clearly, as with the Chinatown mall makeover, people are going to avoid the area while the dust and the noise of work goes on.

And if the council says the work will take 12 months, then simple logic suggests it will probably take more. The Chinatown Mall went many, many months over schedule. And what if they find, as they did under the Chinatown Mall, problems with utilities infrastructure that could blow out the project, both in time and cost. Records of what lay under the surface in that mall were inadequate.

The Independent believes that traders will be awaiting the construction phase with understandable trepidation. And the final insult to their financial injury will be if we are left with a mall that fails to achieve Cr Quick’s lofty ambitions.