Gordon Campbell on the Sydney siege, and DHB budget cuts
Gordon Campbell on the Sydney siege, and DHB budget cuts
by Gordon Campbell
Whenever the authorities bring a siege situation to an end, there will be criticism if – as has happened in Sydney – any hostages are seriously hurt, or killed. The rationale for the Police decision to storm the café in Sydney will emerge later today. In the Sydney Morning Herald this morning, columnist Peter Hartcher raises a different point – that the initial public response had been noticeably different to the agitated reactions of politicians and the media.
When I chanced to walk through Martin Place a little after 11am on Monday, I saw the police clustered closely around the Lindt Cafe. I saw the police cordon as I stood among some hundreds of onlookers.
The
police evidently had the situation in hand. The crowd was
curious, but might as well have been watching a busker for
all the tension in the air. Some onlookers snapped photos.
Some left as others arrived. The scene was perfectly
calm. It was only when I turned on the TV an hour or so
later that I realised the magnitude of our dimwittedness. We
were supposed to be terrified. "We don't yet know the motivation of the
perpetrator," he said, then freely speculated that he was
politically motivated. It was "very disturbing". And if the
family and friends of the hostages in the café were not
already worried enough, Abbott announced that "I can think
of almost nothing more distressing, more terrifying, than to
be caught up in such a situation."
In fact, Hartcher noted with interest, the further away the politicians were from Martin Place, the more alarmed the politicians were.
Victoria's Daniel Andrews declared that it was a
"terrifying incident". He gravely assured Victorians that
the gunman in Martin Place posed no known threat to the
people of Victoria. Queensland's Premier Campbell Newman
ordered "all available police out there" to "protect
Queenslanders".
Obviously, a hostage situation in the centre of Sydney is a big news story. Given that by definition, hostages are taken over a period of time, that media air-time has to be filled by something. The temptation to hype up the drama is almost irresistible. Yet the urge should be resisted, if only because there’s such a repulsive aspect to the vicarious excitement that’s palpably evident on the airwaves. Arguably, this kind of saturation coverage and hyper-emotionalism perfectly serves the needs of the people who carry out this kind of action. And it should be kept in mind that the terrorists are not the only ones with a hunger for publicity, and ratings.
With that in mind, did RNZ really have to devote virtually its entire Morning Report show to the siege outcome – on a morning where there has been a Cabinet leak that hundreds of millions of dollars are going to be cut next year from our public health system? It says quite a lot about current media priorities that RNZ would never consider that subject worthy of a similar level of semi-exclusive attention as the Sydney siege.
Ideally, there should be a consensus among media organisations that there is a need for restraint in how siege situations are covered, if only to minimise the oxygen of publicity that makes such events more likely to occur in future. And as mentioned, the terrorists are not the only ones who are pining for the spotlight. As Hartcher says:
Terrorism is a tool of the weak against the
strong. It is designed to turn the enemy's strength against
itself. One man showed how to get extraordinary attention
and inflict serious disruption using only a gun and a Muslim
prayer banner. Successful terrorism is so rare in
Australia that the overreaction is perhaps
understandable…Abbott said on Monday evening that the
incident had been "profoundly shocking". He added: "I think
I can also commend the people of Sydney for the calmness
with which they have reacted". With no help from the
politicians.
And with no help from John Key. According to Key, the Sydney incident shows that ISIS is running an outreach campaign in this part of the world. Does Key really have any evidence that this individual – who has a long track record of disturbed behaviour - was responding to promptings from ISIS? The symbiotic relationship between terrorists seeking publicity and politicians seeking to rationalise their surveillance legislation deserves to be met with a lot of scepticism.
Health cuts
looming
As RNZ did find time to mention this
morning, District Health Boards (already under fierce cost
–cutting pressure) may have to cut a further $200 million
from their budgets next year, according
to leaked Cabinet committee papers.
The DHBs need an extra $440 million in 2015/16 but the Treasury recommended giving them just $250m, while the Ministry of Health proposed $320m. The Treasury warned that under either option, DHBs would face considerable financial pressure, and cost efficiencies would be needed.
This will be a hammer blow to the quality of services currently on offer from the DHBs. So much for the previous rhetoric that front line services will not suffer in the government’s manic pursuit of a budget surplus, come what may. Incredibly, the deteriorating state of our public health system rated barely a mention during this year’s election campaign. Yet the signs of planned cuts in health spending were evident, barely a month before Election Day.
Also in August, the Association of Salaried Medical Specialists released a damning report on the health system. The ASMS report showed our high and growing dependence on foreign doctors and specialists – who, it seems, are leaving New Zealand at an accelerating rate, after experiencing the excessive workloads here, and the relatively poor wages and conditions. There is further analysis of the ASMS report – with one of these specialists giving his reasons for leaving New Zealand – in this story here.
ENDS