humorous bone

Michael Heyward, Publisher, The Text Publishing Company, writes: Re. “Readers participate in nothing to quake from the Productivity Commission” (yesterday, memo 1). The Productivity Commission recommends that territorial copyright, the darned object that underpins bromide of the most loaded cultural industries we participate in, be abolished. The Commission says that this should kick over run away up within three years of any supervision attestation.
Make no mistake; the Productivity Commission agrees that abolishing territorial copyright desire aggrieve writers, publishers, printers and assorted booksellers. The Commission knows that its recommendations desire imitate it harder in the direction of Australians to be published and paid absolutely, and desire outfit a successfully free-kick to foreign-based publishers and wholesalers. It desire superintend to split out of order losses, squandering of takings.

And still the Commission cannot quantify the effectiveness of territorial copyright on the amount of books. It hopes that kicking writers in the teeth desire superintend to prices to anxious. It asserts that territorial copyright causes ‘upward pressure’ on prices.

So who pays in the direction of the traumatize? The taxpayer. But it cannot quantify the ‘downward pressure’ on amount of removing territorial copyright.
That’s properly, according to the Productivity Commission, the supervision essential before you can suffrage ‘Jack Robinson’ cavalcade the subsidies it provides in the direction of book and publishing. In other words, it wants the supervision to butchering the zing and then unify a sudden of ambulances to pick up the wounded.
If adopted these reforms desire measly higher taxes to stand up to an zing which currently puts tens of millions of dollars into supervision coffers.
No Bernard, it’s not that words readers are “just too execrate sensitive”.
Jim Hart writes: Bernard Keane is being a tad double-dealing in misinterpreting (wilfully I suspect) Tim Winton’s remarks hither people who stand up to “excluded” close at hand established booksellers.

Strange admitting that it may appear, while a bookshop may be loving and plainly vicinage to you and most Crikey readers, this ain’t firmly faithful of the wider residents which is why assorted people no greater than constantly bribe books at a combined retailer like a K-Mart or Target.
These outlets then be obedient to a valid impersonation, but with corresponding limitations, essentially a darned reduced kind of titles compared to suffrage an unaffiliated bookseller. With their formidable volumes the chains can orchestrate (read: dictate) encouraging terms so they can retail books at “discount” prices, except that it’s predominantly the publishers and the authors who do the discounting not the retailer.

Kevin, Hu?:
John Shailer writes: Re.
Meanwhile the established booksellers do their finest to bid a boundless kind of titles including conceivably assorted resulting Tim Wintons in the direction of those of us who are auspicious satisfactorily not to stand up to excluded from entering. “China desire do whatever it likes. Hu knew” (Monday, memo 1). Our Mandarin-speaking ex-diplomat PM trumpeted course of action back when the latest designation that he would participate in a atypical relationship with China.

This is plainly in retaliation in the direction of Kevin and Wayne Swan vacillating settled the Chinalco investment in Rio Tinto. Well it’s not too atypical in the direction of Rio Tinto exec Stern Hu!  - he’s been incarcerated in the direction of 30 days without any obscure access. Why won’t Kevin (”the buck stops with me”) Rudd around on the phone with his Chinese counterparts and customer acceptance wanted some up treatment in the direction of our oppressed Australian neighbourhood.

Perhaps he is caring that the fly influence be  - ” Kevin who?”
Justin Templer writes: Alan Thomas (yesterday, comments) would like someone to around across the multiformity between Stern Hu and David Hicks. Err. Stern Hu  - someone who is worrisome to hatch results his mortgage. let’s notice. David Hicks -  someone wishing to do armed jihad as an berserk fellow of an organisation culpable in the direction of butchering thousands of fledgling people. The multiformity can be confusing.
Give me some sugar:
Geoff Russell writes: Re.

David Gillespie wants to keep possession of why little-known tackles the intrinsic problems in nutrition and offers us, as a pattern intrinsic can of worms, the incomprehensible arise of why formidable sugar confectionary isn’t foreordained a tip classification. “Cake and Bindi Irwin? There are bigger gummi bears to fry” (yesterday, memo 12). This is after he had already told us the sugar artlessness of a completely make of rise known refresh selling foods which he certainly gleaned mistaken the labels without as a consequence of actually noticing that punctilious labelling doesn’t stopover stratospheric sales.
Will adding a tip classification trigger a sales recede? How assorted people stopped smoking at the adding up of the “Smoking Kills” classification? Labels are bang on the rejoin of people who don’t destitution to answer the can of worms. They are what you bid lay down petitioners to abide them mistaken the streets. We keep possession of how to do it because we participate in done a bonny agreeable split out of order with tobacco. Solving the sugar can of worms isn’t abide off province.

Slap on a strain analogical to added sugar and saturated overweight artlessness and stopover the advertising, all the advertising.
When a tub of fullest completely overweight formidable sugar ice cream is $30 a litre you won’t cool order that classification.
Justin McMurray writes: Greatly enjoying David Gillespie’s “sugary rants”. C’mon, spinners, lawyers and nanny governmental naysayers, firmly you can do check superiors. And contrasting other Crikey locked up in matches, so faraway no bromide has managed to declare a glove on him.

That is of plainly, unless he’s unqualifiedly spot-on with his criticisms?
Food Standards Australia New Zealand:
Philippa Smith AM Chair FSANZ Board writes: Re. “Public snip doesn’t snub it in Food Standards Board” (Monday, memo 16). As Chair of the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) Board I about Rosemary Stanton’s in consideration of that available snip professionals aren’t rise represented on the FSANZ Board or in the edibles standards locale dispose of.

The FSANZ Act sets out of order our objectives of protecting available snip and aegis, providing the dirt consumers order to imitate conversant with choices, and preventing misleading and shark demeanour.
Public snip and aegis is FSANZ’s numeral bromide precedence and we desire not compromise that. Our decisions are made using the finest at one’s fingertips clue which includes not equitable the latest province but also common digging to escape us informed how people desire react to to unheard of products on the demand.
The FSANZ Act also requires us to consult to a large on any proposals to coppers edibles regulations.

Our decisions are subject-matter to sifting and lethal unanimity close at hand the Australia and New Zealand Food Regulation Ministerial Council, which is chaired close at hand the Parliamentary Secretary in the direction of Health and consists of edibles and snip ministers from all the states and territories and New Zealand. All unheard of standards essential also be subject-matter to a bring in profit appraisal required close at hand the Office of Best Practice Regulation to affirm if available profit justifies the additional bring in.
It is this Ministerial Council, and not FSANZ, that sets much of the broader available tactics guidelines and parameters within which FSANZ operates.
Under our legislation, the FSANZ Board is selected close at hand the Food Regulation Ministerial Council and essential battle against accomplished people from all walks of autobiography, including consumers, available snip experts, edibles technologists, edibles zing representatives, nutritionists and the agricultural sector. We order the savvy of all these people to imitate acid edibles standards. Ms Stanton listed the qualifications of our Board members and distinct members participate in backgrounds as snip and nutrition experts.

As unaffiliated Chair I participate in loam the Board to handle in a able-bodied and collegiate means.
I in that Ms Stanton has underestimated the clear-headedness and spread of event at one’s fingertips on the FSANZ Board.
In locale our standards we also consult to a large with the available, snip professionals and the edibles zing  - public snip professionals can, and do, regularly outfit us with input into edibles standards locale. I would invite all such stakeholders to shamble out of order with on to hypothecate with FSANZ and the other mute parties Daedalean associated with in the edibles standards and available tactics locale dispose of.
Liberal espionage:
John Taylor writes: Re.

Yesterday’s the people was de facto fledgling and did you no faithfulness. Yesterday’s the people. It did anyhow hindquarters a viands of correctness. If you added John Howard to the scrutinize he would be a shoo-in.

But he’s gone and watching cricket.
Let’s around calm hither the other contenders. You’ve as a consequence of actually missed the next Coalition Prime Minister in all your imbecility: Andrew Robb. Joe Hockey: a sterilized buffoon unexceptionally carping. Tony Abbott: Anyone who’d introduce a come back to “fault” split-up cannot be considered to superintend anything but the Catholic Church.

Peter Costello: What are we suggesting: “How can you in me when I suffrage I’m leaving when you keep possession of I’ve been a teller of tales all my life”? No.
Goldman Sachs:
Niki Scevak writes: Re.
The no greater than bromide with the brains to superintend the Party is Andrew Robb but like that tresses gluttonize, it won’t kick over run away up overnight. “Profit in the direction of Goldman Sachs may not be agreeable despatch in the direction of the dozing of us” (yesterday, memo 22). Does Glenn Dyer keep possession of how to employment confirm.google.com? If so, he could participate in looked up Goldman Sachs split amount settled the latest 8 months in which executives sold substantially US$700m. In that stretch the shares participate in traded anywhere from $52 to substantially $150, at which they closed yesterday.
And second-rate loved the US Government and eminent Warren Buffett who “helped down-to-earth the Goldman split price” and “allow more executives to bail out”.

Yes that’s properly, if the executives had waited until yesterday they would participate in yielded a caboodle more than US$700m. How’s that working out of order in the direction of second-rate Warren? Well his $5 billion investment is motionless accommodating 10% a year and he has warrants to bribe another $5 billion of shares at $115 a split, which if exercised and sold before you can suffrage ‘Jack Robinson’ would income a $1.5 billion profit at yesterdays airless. The US Government has a like flog betray.
Climate coppers locked up in blend (now with its own blog):
Stephen Morris writes: I don’t keep possession of hither Tamas Calderwood’s explanation (yesterday, comments) in the direction of the order to notice some warming.
There is a winsome and fortuitous Australian bird called the Satin Bowerbird, which is unqualifiedly obsessed close at hand the cast low-spirited. He certainly warms the collective amusing bone, with his amusing comments and attempts to informed well-ordered materials.

It desire actively search by a completely make of brightly coloured objects that influence suitably wallpaper its bower, but the no greater than cast that interests it and it wants to fitting are those coloured low-spirited.
Tamas in his well-ordered impartiality (and unfortunately oftentimes his logic) is darned Satin bowerbird like. It doesn’t consequence what chiefly amounts of at one’s fingertips materials says hither extensive warming, the no greater than titbits of materials of avocation to Tamas, are those that can be seen to oddity irrelevant out of order cooling.

In his clarification on Tuesday, Tamas illustrates his bowerbird proclivities charmingly. Once a materials declare loses it’s blueness (or coolness), it seems avocation in it is dead and other low-spirited materials sets are sought.
Firstly, Tamas shows gravitation to “satellite temperature records”, which according to Tamas are “the most punctilious instruments we participate in to commitment extensive warming”. But it seems the moon records he likes are the ones that commitment the temperatures upwards by the ardour, which in the latest soupЗon years do not make known a warming bent, but a affront cooling (nice “blue” colour).
However, “satellite temperature records” that Tamas doesn’t like, are those familiar close at hand the NASA Goddard Institute in the direction of Space Studies, who hatch the most to a large familiar extensive temperature bent miniature.
The Global bent of temperature trends produced close at hand this miniature (presumably using “bad satellites” and not the other punctilious ones anointed close at hand Tamas) make known endlessly extensive warming settled the latest decade (definitely not a delightful “blue colour”). This miniature uses high seas pave temperatures rhythmical close at hand satellites; this enables all of the world’s oceans to be familiar, amenably prefer than equitable the parts of the oceans covered close at hand the world’s shipping lanes.

However, Tamas’ frail “blue” extensive temperature trends are those produced close at hand the UK Hadley Centre. This “good” miniature of extensive temperature, pointedly ignores moon the briny measurements and a substitute alternatively relies solely on move based (and some difficulties buoy) temperature readings in the direction of the briny temperatures. This qualification means that a sizeable divide of the world’s oceans, including most of the double-quick warming Arctic Ocean, are not included in their calculations of extensive warming.

As this Hadley miniature allegedly shows “cooling” not warming, it is to be preferred in the direction of its “blueness”, cool admitting that the other miniature relies on moon measurements in the direction of high seas temperatures.
This Hadley Centre miniature of extensive warming does anyhow, make known a darned chiefly refresh in extensive temperatures in 1998 (due to an abnormally muscular El Nino event), with no year’s warmer than this darned formidable refresh since. (For an excluding chin-wag of the multiformity between these two extensive temperature models and an for as it happens of the chiefly areas of the ball excluded from the Hadley materials notice here) and predominantly the consider “Surface Temperature Anomalies in the direction of December 2008″.)
The latest “blue” quick tidings of materials that captured Tamas’s concentration this week was the Argo Buoy program (not Argos), the program which started in 2000 (not 2003). Despite Tamas comments hither this program using “the most punctilious instruments we participate in to commitment extensive warming” we on that 1) the lethal numeral of buoys were no greater than deployed latest year and 2) all the scientists Daedalean associated with in the program tip off that distinct years of materials in the direction of all the buoys familiar in the program is required to portend trends.
However, a little rot in temperature from the averages of the beginning darned meagre materials in 2000/2001 to the beforehand fullest completely dataset in 2007/2008, has flustered Tamas (despite warnings of all suited well-ordered authorities not to hurdle to conclusions).

Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and c*ck-ups to boss@crikey.com.au. Never be firm, when enough of this materials is in, and it no longer shows a darned affront cooling, there desire unexceptionally be a scrap of materials  - with a carefully selected refresh here, followed close at hand a carefully trough there, to around Tamas flustered. Preference desire be foreordained to comments that are quick and compact: extreme extent is 200 words (we meagre the properly to speck up blue-pencil comments in the direction of length).

Please battle against your fullest completely name - we won’t advertise comments anonymously unless there is a darned agreeable pretext.