The Outsider: Probing Adelaide’s obsessions
This week, The Outsider considers the “bipartisanship” on gay marriage; says “whatever” and “meh”; and pleads with political types to stop calling and asking who the cross-party lovers are.
Because unless it makes money, it’s worthless
Another piece of “economic impact modeling” has been released showing an enormous benefit to the state’s economy from a major event.
This time, the State Government is claiming the Clipsal 500 festival of rocket fuel and scantily clad women has had a net economic benefit of $36.6 million (it’s unclear how much of that benefit came from speed camera revenue).
This comes on top of economic modeling for the Fringe festival ($64.6 million in economic benefit), the Festival of the Arts ($25.3 million), WOMADelaide ($11.1 million in 2012) and the Tour Down Under ($42.2 million in 2012 – sure to be bigger this year).
This means that these four events alone contribute about $180 million – net – to the SA economy, and that’s probably an underestimate (where’s that elusive sarcasm font when you need it?)
There is a plethora of academic work showing that these sorts of economic studies are, to paraphrase, probably bollocks, and yet we keep seeing them, usually summarised only in government media releases, and never given any serious scrutiny (there is skepticism about these studies, even within government, but they make awesome media release fodder).
The Outsider is happy to support the Tour Down Under and all of our arts festivals without the need for questionable economic modeling to justify their existence.
Why not spend the money on something other than self-justifying studies?
We could quote in detail this scholarly dissection of economic impact studies but in the interests of brevity we’ll only reproduce the quote from John Stuart Mill which prefaces its argument:
You might like
Misrepresentation is always beautifully brief; refutation is always tediously long.
Spot the difference
Gay marriage – or “garriage” as Member for Adelaide Rachel Sanderson once put it in a survey – is showing up the ideological cross-overs between the two major parties.
Let’s step out this week’s events for you.
Labor Left backbencher Susan Close has introduced a Bill for the state to recognise gay marriage.
Left faction Premier Jay Weatherill supports it, as does the majority of his colleagues. Some in the Right faction oppose it. This isn’t “news”.
Unlike votes on other crucial pieces of legislation – such as the earth-shattering Upper South East Dryland Salinity and Flood Management (Postponement of Expiry) Amendment Act – Labor members aren’t bound by the party on this one.
No, this deserves a “conscience vote” – which means that a substantial minority of Labor MPs will vote against Close’s legislation.
Opposition to gay marriage has, by the way, been diluted within the Right faction as they continue to hoover in new members who haven’t been reared since birth in the Shoppies union.
On the other side of the chamber, Opposition Leader Steven Marshall and a range of his colleagues also support gay marriage.
But his party, it appears, won’t allow a conscience vote on the Bill – they will probably oppose the legislation as a bloc, because they say that state attempts to legislate on the issue are likely to be vulnerable to High Court challenge.
So, both leaders support the concept behind the Bill – but it will be comprehensively defeated in the House of Assembly.
In the unlikely event that the Bill passes, Weatherill says he would fight any challenge to the legislation in the High Court.
He said this at a press conference standing next to his silent deputy, Attorney-General John Rau, who presumably would carry responsibility for such a defence in the High Court.
Stay informed, daily
Rau, as every political insider knows, opposes gay marriage. Like many on the Liberal side.
The whole affair has brought out the “can’t walk and chew gum at the same time” brigade. It’s a tired argument that, frankly, makes The Outsider want to stick pencils in our eyeballs. Shouldn’t we be focusing on the bigger issues, they say, as if one piece of legislation is going to bring the machinery of government to a shuddering halt.
As for the idea that this issue is causing a split in the Labor Party, what’s new? The Right and the Left have disagreed on myriad issues for decades. That’s why the factions exist.
The Liberals disagree also, on the substance, but possibly not the political strategy.
Next!
Whatever Trevor
Wise heads nodded sagely when the Sunday Mail declared this week in an editorial that the newspaper did not give a flying fig for the Rudd-Gillard leadership tussle.
“Our position on this is: whatever. Wake us up when it’s over. You people have a country to run, so sing out if there is a change as to who’s running it and we’ll take things from there.”
Well put, quite so, very good, nodded sundry media and political types.
So here’s the Sunday Mail’s version of “whatever”, from the very same edition:
- Page 1 pointer – RUDD COULD BEAT ABBOTT
- Page 5 lead – EXPLOSIVE: Poll will ignite leadership stoush
- Page 60 opinion piece – Leadership saga about to take its final twist
- Page 61 opinion piece – Rudd’s second bite for party in its twilight
Yep, the Mail couldn’t give a rat’s tossbag.
Stop calling us
We won’t tell you who the cross-party lovers are – you’ll have to work that out for yourself.
Who do you think we are? A cheap gossipmonger?
If you really need to scratch that itch, we suggest you track down a copy of Franco Zeffirelli’s 1968 film, Romeo and Juliet, starring Olivia Hussey and Leonard Whiting. Much better than the horrible Baz Luhrmann version.
Spoiler alert: it doesn’t have a happy ending.
Want to see more stories from InDaily SA in your Google search results?
- Click here to set InDaily SA as a preferred source.
- Tick the box next to "InDaily SA". That's it.
