RETIREMENT

Is there such a thing as ‘retirement’?  Is ‘ceasing to work’ a good life thing?  Do I turn off my ‘lifetime of work’ brain?  How much bad golf can I endure?  Will my new 24 / 7 family life spring up communication unknowns?  Am I too old to contribute?  How long can I both physically and mentally do stuff?  What if I become a burden?  Can I nurse my wife if need be? Will the dog outlive me?

All valid questions as we prepare for a certain and miserable death with years of imagined physical and mental hardships all endured before the final second.  Oh woe is me!

But, and fortunately before death, there is life and even more life.  Life comes first!!  Every moment is precious.  Death is just the microsecond finale of life lived.

There are several great sayings, ‘live for the moment’, ‘planning stops remorse’ and ‘fill every hour with sixty minutes worth of distance run’. 

So, simple, create a staged contingency plan whilst enjoying every moment of actual breathing by doing stuff.  Don’t turn off the work brain as it won’t anyway, get golf lessons, be nice to the dog and stand up straight whilst taking a deep breath and go forth.    Good moments disappear unless we savour them. 

Retire or stop work? Not a chance.

Being able to contribute through ‘work’ is life affirming and stops us becoming age invisible.  Buy a car without tinted windows as it’s not a cocoon or a coffin.   Enjoy the world.

We will all just fall of the perch at sometime hopefully a long way away and in perfect health. 

Not dead yet

Does that term conjure up images of a ‘really focused future’?  It should!

Many of us [I am 71] are looking to continue our bad habits of a lifetime in a place of style and comfort surrounded by our ’toys’.  Some of which we may even remember using.  Not the McMansion but efficient utilisation of space and clever design with low overheads.  Simple.

Retirement is a dirty word especially given a future life that is full of challenges yet to be fulfilled.  Indeed, this ‘place’ is not about tennis, skiing or golf or anything other than walking into a self felt nirvana whilst being surrounded by the ‘stuff’ of a lifetime including toys with which we can remember, fondle and dream.  Simple!

So, we need a double plus garage to take the brace of Ferraris [or Ferrari feel a-likes], a library to gather dust, a one-level bathroom with steam room to sooth the aches, a second room come office with fold down bed for those horrible visitors who won’t go home, an open fire to warm the bum, a bloody big TV to watch golf, a usable kitchen with a big dining table for the aforementioned freeloaders, multiple places to hang ‘art’, a security system God couldn’t get past and a small outdoor area where the live-in pooch can deposit their DNA.  Simple!

Boundary build with no waste space to mow or weed except the controlled DNA patch, 14m * 12m, prefab everything, erected to lockup with built-ins in a heartbeat, interiors and surface finish within weeks. Simple!

An internal focus of space and delight from which to leap into a future.  Build anywhere!  Simple!

Life is for living and it starts with human architecture.  Architecture which feeds the soul.

Here is a five point plan for our elected Government from the ramblings of a disaffected cook:

It’s neither Liberal nor Labour, it’s Australian and it’s all about people, our people.
There is nothing new about these 5 points but the pontificators and those with a brain mouth disconnect will rattle on at length not knowing when to stop droning and make it happen.
1. VISION .. To borrow and misinterpret part of a well known proverb - ‘without a vision the people perish’ - is about having something to focus on which in turn provides a road-map for all future action. There can be no considered action unless that road-map is clear and that can only happen if we have a vision.
Australia needs a vision which defines us both to ourselves and the world.
Then, the interpretation of that vision is critical otherwise it becomes rhetoric and feeds the shouty dross.
For example, offer and pay the top 50 graduates each year across all disciplines to transparently work together for Australia for a year in an R&D focus to develop our future where we lead the world. This is a ‘vision’ we can all associate with. Think back to the euphoria when we won the America’s cup and you will agree that a singular focus ‘vision’ is life enhancing.
2. EDUCATION.. There is no future without education. This is a simple fact of life and no matter how people argue to spend money on their favourite agenda, it matters squat because, I repeat, there is no future without education.
Every single person must have access to education from kindergarten right through tertiary without being forced to stop eating to pay for it. This is the educational safety net available to all and does not preclude some choosing to pay for private schools on top of the government educational allowance which everyone gets. All people, all walks of life, all abilities, all disabilities - everyone.
3. LIVING WAGE.. A fantastic emotional two word visionary statement as it embodies a myriad of heartfelt concepts. Concepts which people can hang onto. We are a country which makes sure all people are looked after and no one is left to suffer through stupid poverty. At least that’s the theory.
This is not a hard concept to understand as all it means is that if someone is working say 35 hours a week they must be able to make enough to sustain their family and take responsibility for their health and well being without expecting all Australians to prop up their lifestyle including child care. Not in luxury but with warmth, food, a roof, paid appropriate support services and in the knowledge that they are safe. Good word, safe.
The same goes for the pension in that it must also be a basic living wage as must the dole albeit the dole would require work for support as would the pension in a way in that there are many many capable people itching to add value to our country, somewhere?
We live in a 24/7 world with each hour of each day of equal value without religious overtones demanding some days are more special than others. If some people want to make a day special then it’s up to them as individuals and not for Australia to legislate.
Paying penalties is abhorrent as it fails to look at the real issue which is the living wage and it costs jobs. Lots of jobs.
There are many bright people out there who can deal with this actuarial problem and can come up with a number without the attendant crap.
4. HEALTH .. Same story. The safety net allowing all peoples free access to medical care. Once again, safe. Australia has almost got this one licked unlike some other first world countries.
5. HOUSING .. This is the hardest of all because we have a culture grown up around the 1/4 acre block and we are seen as failures unless we have the McMansion plopped fence to fence. This is rubbish and destructive and forces people onto lonely street plummeting towards the working poor. We all want style and comfort in a place we love. Admirable concepts but it should not be driven by size but by architecture, vision and culture.
It is both right and proper in our capitalist democracy that those who can afford it will opt for the McMansion and they will enjoy life. Good.
It is also right and proper that those on the living wage have access to appropriate mid-level housing with style and aplomb in which they also feel safe. Good.
Thirdly, it our duty and responsibility to provide for those whom have fallen through the cracks and are suffering through a lack of warmth, comfort and inclusion. Safe. There’s that word again.
Words but words which can be turned into action through fantastic architecture building housing in which people can leap towards their personal vision and in which there is a culture of inclusion, warmth and safety. Places good enough that the McMansion people would like to move in.
Quite separately, but whilst remaining inclusive, accommodation for those Australia needs to support and make safe. Not ghetto town or disenfranchised sleeping pods but basic accommodation providing a roof, warmth and safety. Break the cycle of homelessness. I could rattle on about the provision of dedicated support services but really with a vision, access to education, a living wage, a health care net and a ‘retreat’ it will take care of itself.
How about offering the top graduates across architecture, mathematics, humanities, psychology, social science et alia the chance to join a team to develop this concept within 12 months to start building in a year. WOW.
So, how do WE pay for this modern marvel?
Don’t waste money on minutia or the unimportant – not one cent. Create an absolute focus without rhetoric or ego driven drivel. This is not hard but requires a desire to create something special for our country. How about an extra billion dollar investment linked to our totally appropriate future fund to be time allocated and controlled by the likes of Keating, Kennett and Costello. Bipartisan with strength of purpose. As I said, WOW

'T' PLATES

TOURIST PLATES

We drive from St Kilda to Fitzroy between 9am and 1am 5 days a week and we watch with some trepidation what happens to traffic, drivers and pedestrians.

 

The national endemic is ignoring red lights by all participants which creates constant ‘mind’ chaos because no one is sure what anyone else will do.  For example, the disaffected personally powerless dropkick deliberately walks across traffic fingering anyone who dares to complain.  Not a good look.

Everyone has a ‘whoops’ moment being caught clipping a red light but this is vastly different from the dross who accelerate through an intersection in the full knowledge it’s red.

Enter the tourist into this mind chaos.  Strange car, strange city, perhaps driving on the other side of the road and in a constant state of panic.  We as locals are used to it and expect others to also be used to it with little quarter given.  Yet, any tourist wants a positive experience and I speak from personal experience having driven all over Europe.

The trouble is that we don’t know who the tourists are so we have no chance to cut some slack or even smile.  These people are not dross, they are tourists enjoying our space but in a constant state of panic.

The solution is simple.

Magnetic ‘T’ plates the same as ‘P’ plates identifying the driver as a tourist who may make mistakes and whom we have a duty to both understand and support.  

Nice people in a nice city doing nice things being supported by nice locals.

Couldn’t be easier really.

Premier Andrews supports the destruction of the ‘people’s’ golf course at Sandringham.

Blatant gender discrimination, disregard for heritage, spurious reasoning and little concern for the ‘people’s golf course at Sandringham underpin Premier Andrews supporting the destruction of ‘our’ public golf course.

At its most outrageous, he agrees that shortening the course would attract more women - you have to be kidding!  I would hope that a golfer is a golfer and gender irrelevant.  Premier, do you have ‘girls’ seats in parliament so they perhaps hear better being the weaker gender and unable to match it with the men? 

What a fantastic city Melbourne really is with great public spaces and a culture that was developed with everyone being able to play sport.

Tennis at every corner, cricket at every suburban oval, footy everywhere and golf - the worlds most popular game available to all through a range of suburban traditional courses. 

Courses that were not manicured like the Americans are prone to do, nor world beating in complexity like the Asians but natural courses that the whole fandangle could rock up and challenge.

Enter Sandringham.  True to its name, a sand-belt public course next to Royal Melbourne [where God played] and Victoria [where his disciples supplicated on] but available for a game for a few dollars and no membership and, just a few metres away, an extensive driving range where professionals congregated, lessons could be had and commiserations could be heard over a post hit beer.  Pretty good really. 

Melbourne, golf, public space, life and the average person.

Now, this history is at risk.  Instead of preserving this people’s course Andrews has decided to support the selling off of great sections, to change the historic layout, to incorporate yet another driving range and to turn it into a fun park that ‘women and children’ could enjoy even implying that the current golf course was too hard for women.  This is really sad.

Sandringham golf course is something to be treasured as a national icon for all to enjoy.  A proper suburban un-manicured 18 hole challenge that is part of the history and culture of Melbourne.

Don’t screw up this non-elitist public space because it can never be replaced.

In good faith,

Jon Langevad

I am biased having first experienced golf at Sandringham some 50+ years ago and still try to defeat self humiliation on a semi regular basis.

Justice Heydon

There are several things which define us as people and as an advanced society.  Of prime importance is the ability to stay a course of conviction through and by focussing on key points of change. On the contrary one of the things which define a low intelligence is swapping a focus on key change points for an attack on the person in the misguided belief that this is a rational behaviour in line with our adversarial Westminster system but is instead based on a desire to win at all costs.

Events over the last few days have shown quite clearly that the unions and the labour party have gravitated to the second group whilst Justice Heydon has exhibited the strength of character demanded of a High Court Justice by staying his course of conviction.

Union officials and labour politicians are devolved to absurdity in their criticism of Justice Heydon saying quite openly that he is guilty of bias seemingly just because his commission uncovered unlawful acts in the union.  David Oliver on Lateline disgraced himself and his union members by accusing a high court justice of what is essentially an unlawful act totally abhorrent to his former role as a Justice and current role as commissioner.

Both the unions and labour politicians have disgraced themselves and made Australia a laughing stock by personally attacking Justice Heydon over him finding against them and recommending several of their number for police intervention. 

They are bordering on personal defamation against a lawful commissioner and in my opinion should be firstly prosecuted and secondly removed of any political power by resigning their posts.  They are not attacking the issues but the commissioner.  This defines low intelligence and a misguided belief that attacking the person is a valid course of debate whereas attacking the issue is the only fair game in a democratic and respectful society.

The farce with a sad end that is Fitzroy Street St Kilda.

AN OPEN LETTER TO PORT PHILLIP CITY COUNCIL

Concerning Fitzroy Street ...

In my opinion the Councillors for the City of Port Phillip, PTV and Vic Roads should have to personally reimburse the 18 or 20 businesses which have turned up their toes and given up in Fitzroy Street.  If it had been that just one or two failed then one could possibly blame the operators but being there are so many who have gone broke it would seem that there is more to it than just an incompetent operator or two.  From top end to plebeian, they have all failed to meet their owners expectations lost money and had to just close.

Who’s to blame?  The overriding answer is simple – people are in public authority positions of power wherein they can make decisions about which they have little expertise, historic perspective or strategic view.  This describes the Port Phillip City Council, senior city management, PTV and Vic Roads.  As far as the council are concerned, a bunch of people elected on some criteria far removed from what should be essential skills. There are many examples proving this point such as at least 18 years of no action on the Port Melbourne foreshore despite having an acceptable urban design framework for the whole period.  Examples such as the stupidity surrounding the original design for the triangle site which thankfully, due to public force, was eventually withdrawn but still cost us millions of wasted dollars.  Another example is the cost of car-parking.  A 10 year old reading ‘statistics for dummies’ could analyse usage [read tourists], rates against time and costs and see that there is a correlation between high costs of parking and empty spaces.  Drop the costs and people will come and nett profit for the council would remain as is.  Simple but too hard for some people to digest.

A fourth example is Fitzroy Street and its destruction as a must-go-to destination for both Melbournian’s and tourists.  This is a direct result of a weak council failing to recognise what Fitzroy Street was all about and acquiescing to minority groups and statutory authorities by allowing these groups to create urban havoc all without a feel for the area, its history and its future.

When there are 18 vacant shops in one smallish street, with past tenants ranging from high end restaurants to boutique businesses - just closing down - there can be no escape from the fact that there are major issues with the street itself.  Traders across all levels walking away from millions of dollars says quite clearly that the street is the problem and not the traders.

Given the inescapable fact that the street is the issue then what’s happened?  Once again the answer is simple Fitzroy Street has become a throughway but in fact it should all be about recognising that not every street in every suburb needs to transformed into a super fast tram route with channelled traffic and dedicated bike lanes.  This is because some roads deserve to be slow and visual so the strolling rubberneckers can see, taste and enjoy.  Not every street needs a few more tons of concrete to create unneeded and unwanted super fast throughways for cars, trams and bikes.

St Kilda is ‘Melbourne quirk’ and that’s what people expect and want to see and be a part of whilst being kept safe away from the disaffected. 

Changes to Fitzroy Street have destroyed its character which in turn means that it has lost the ability to attract both tourists and normal Melbournians.  It does however attract the bottom end of society and the drug affected.  With the ‘ice’ epidemic it has now become seedy and dangerous.   Take the Gatwick Hotel for example – it is a dangerous place.

The solution is unfortunately not simple.

Firstly, and in the immediate short term, the disaffected have to be removed.  CCTV is but one of the critical tools to make that happen.  Councillor Touzeau said, whilst recently voting against the installation of CCTV,  ‘everyone has the responsibility to make the sort of world we want to live in’.  This is just plain stupid and far removed from the real world.  Especially so given the Council created the problem in the first place. 

Secondly, Fitzroy Street needs to be made a ‘slow’ destination street by creating a streetscape for both pedestrians and destination visitors through creative parking.  There is no need for a somewhat dangerous bike lane and there is no need for any tram super-stops other than at the beach end [already installed] and St Kilda station end [already installed].  The middle bit needs rethinking.

There is need to remove the dangerous and little used bike path and replace it with 60 degree free parking because car parking correlates to visitors.   Then add lots of mature trees breaking down the long visuals, large quirky sculptures and more non-food retail.  Then add public seating in the middle of the road under the canopy of shade trees where people can just sit and watch the slow trams and the streetscape; after mandatory facia regeneration. 

We need the development of a ‘tourist’ precinct where wandering becomes an art form instead of a dice with dropkicks.

I personally remember the days when we ventured to dinner at Tolarno’s [since closed as Mirkas - once again] wandered around after dinner and absorbed some of the quirkiness of the street before returning to our dormitory suburbs. Successive councils have destroyed this ambience.

This council has to make a decision.

Are they going to recreate Fitzroy Street by removing the disaffected, recognising that Fitzroy Street is not a speedway for trams, cars and bicycles and spend some of our money creating a streetscape which will attract tourists and locals alike seeking a quirky but safe immersion experience.

This is a no-brainer – YES.

And with a properly designed triangle site and Acland Street precinct we have a chance at creating a world class tourist area.  Let’s not wait another 20 years.

Say thirty million dollars over 3 years is absolutely nothing in terms of the financial return and the benefits to all Melbourne.

IMMIGRATION

There is blanket media coverage about illegal immigrants and whether Australia should accept these people fleeing their own country into our rather minuscule democratic fold.  People with personal agendas rabbit on about human rights, our moral and ethical responsibilities and the benefit these migrants would bring to our country.  The arguments are soulful and heartfelt with each soapbox itinerant speaking from the emotion gland imploring us to allow all and sundry to resettle here.

Everyone has a right to a peaceful and fulfilling life without fear of persecution and without having to plan some form of escape or sedition against their Government to get it.  Some of the refugees were in fear of their lives whilst some sort a better societal or financial future for their family.  Others just wanted to go somewhere else.  All of these motives are valid and understandable and they are entitled to pursue same.

However, this does not entitle them to automatic entry to another country just because they want to go there.  There are reasons people want to come to Australia and that’s because many generations of Australians, including our many immigrants, have built a set of values which define both us and our country.  We have paid for and developed an infrastructure and democratic way of life which everyone wants.

And therein is the issue.  As long as there are people bent on applying force of will through mayhem there will be disaffected people attempting to dissociate. It is neither right nor proper that well managed countries should bear the economic and social result of someone else’s fleeing population. 

But, doing nothing is also not an option.

Most of the people fleeing violence have been subject to administrations guilty of gross ‘war / human rights’ crimes and international penalties for those crimes are defined as are remedies.  If we just accept refugees and do nothing then aren't we just supporting despots and ignoring our own values?

There are reasons people want to come to Australia and that is because it’s safe, despot free and provides hope and sustenance for its relatively small population. This is not a fluke of nature but is as a result of umpteen years of forethought and controlled immigration.  Taking people into our country who respect our values and way of life and want to contribute to that way of life as Australians is crucial.  Likewise, any person disaffected by our values needs to leave to some other place more in tune with their own beliefs.

This is why we need places removed from preferred destination countries where refugees can flee and be safe and protected under a UN umbrella until the despots have been deposed – by the free world.  It’s not about resettling into another country with different values but about protecting the vulnerable from immediate harm. A ‘refuge’.

The world has a set of values and conduct which defines humanity.  This needs to be applied.  These values are not religious or political or country specific or anything else other than a bunch of things which enable all people to feel joy on a daily basis and know they have a chance at a future.

This is not rocket science nor is it even remotely difficult to understand and applies to everyone whether you are rich, poor, in jail, on a cruising yacht or just seeking a better life.  This is a basic human right.

For example, America was brilliant during the early 19c as people flocked to that melting pot because they wanted to shirk their past and become American – a collective of hope and future.  They wanted to be known as American.  Now in Australia we have the opposite in that people want to live in Australia but retain their past identities with all the values associated with that past.  Our national identity is waning.  People want the address but not the values.  One ‘refugee’ who had mysteriously lost his identity papers after managing to pay thousands for his illegal trip said that he would ‘accept’ any country as long as it was Muslim yet Australia seemed acceptable.  Maybe I am missing something.

Not good enough.

On the contrary, we had a close encounter of the migrant kind yesterday in the supermarket.  A woman decided she did not need to queue and barged in front of another woman already unloading her trolley onto the belt. She said something like, ‘I only have a couple of things’.  The second woman turned on her and said, ‘it would help if you said please’ then ‘I'm Australian not a wog’ in a heavy European accent implying the level of misbehaviour by the pusher-in was associated with ethnicity.   It turned out the upset woman was a Maltese immigrant now proud to be Australian and wanted to disassociate herself from the pusher-in.  This sort of person we need – immigrants sticking up for themselves and proud to be Australian but still cherishing their bloodlines.  The pusher-in got a hell of a shock.  Good.

This is a world problem and needs a world solution.  As the only world authority is the UN it is behoven on that collective organisation [our collective organisation] to set and manage a solution.

Greece needs money and the world needs space for genuine refugees.  Refugees who may need years to return to their homeland.  If Greece leased / sold a couple of their islands to the UN on which ‘the world’ developed a community specifically for asylum seekers with ultra quick processing it would instantly solve every countries problem in dealing with illegal immigrants.  This would not be a detention centre or an immigration centre but a refuge in the true sense of the word where family’s felt safe and kids went to school and people were given the opportunity to contribute remembering a refuge by definition is not a permanent state but exists as a state at a point in time to relieve stress and anxiety.  A refuge against what should be a common enemy.

If each country in the UN contributed ‘x’ dollars in line with their population to this UN initiative it could happen overnight.  A place where genuine refugees could once again experience joy. 

A community of possibly several million people all with similar desires to survive and live a happy life looked after by the rest of the world.  A place where respect for everyone, their background and their beliefs was a given as the foremost consideration. On the contrary, a demonstrated lack of respect as a God given right would be grounds for instant removal back to point of origin remembering that most of the people fleeing are doing so because of this one issue in that power crazy despots are shoring up their own gold palaces whilst their people starve or people are killing others because they believe in a slightly different God or are so disaffected and stupid as to create mayhem based on a part phrase from some religious text.  Just imagine some deity looking down on all this – he/she would think us worse than the lowest life form because we choose to act in abhorrent ways.

The primary aim is not resettlement in another country but as a refuge for people who have suffered what can only be described as ‘war’ crimes.  This is a good thing.

Greece wins in the short medium term by surviving, refugees win by knowing they have a place to go which is run by ‘the world’ where they can take refuge against crimes and each and every country protects their sovereign borders without political crap just by supporting the UN to take over the problem. 
Wahoo!! 

I am concerned about Montsalvat, the way it’s managed and its future.

Montsalvat - Australia is extremely lucky to have Montsalvat.  Make no mistake, this ‘artist’s colony’ built through the vision of Justus Jörgensen early last century has survived to this day and is a place people go to marvel at just how a French Gothic village could be created on a hillside in Eltham.  Not just a French low-line thatched affair but grand architecture inclusive of a great Baronial hall, a beautiful chapel, a delightful pool and some of the best ‘balanced’ architecture one could hope to see.  We are still lucky enough to have residing at the property the man who helped build this icon with his father, Mr Sigmund Jörgensen as patriarch, arts advisor, multi-hat-restaurateur and board member.

It is approaching 50 years ago, when I first stepped onto the property marvelling at the community feel by just wandering aimlessly around dodging killer geese and surly peacocks and stopping to watch artists at work perhaps to buy their wares. 

In my mind, Montsalvat must be both protected as a national icon and cherished by celebrating its history and making sure it continues in the manner visioned by Justus Jörgensen all those years ago.  In this way a zillion new people over the next 80 years can go and gawk and admire and experience a slice of living history without Walt Disney like exuberance. 

Ethos discomfort - But now, Montsalvat seems to be in some degree of ‘ethos-discomfort’.  Whilst the buildings remain and are most certainly worth a visit or ten, I am concerned that the current board and management do not understand the meaning behind Montsalvat and are failing to manage critical business aspects and heritage responsibilities.

As the saying goes, there is no free lunch!  To preserve Montsalvat requires vision and money and focus and clear strategies all leading to informed decisions by a coherent and transparent board.  Decisions which ensure working capital for infrastructure maintenance and development.

Board and management have failed - As I watch events unfold, monitor blog and change sites, read publicly available documents, watch everything and listen to all and sundry it seems to be increasingly clear that the current board and management are failing in their primary duty to make sure Montsalvat is protected, cherished and financially sound.  Unfortunately, there are many board and management decisions seemingly incongruous to these three very basic visions leading to profit diminishing year on year thereby curtailing infrastructure repairs let alone being able to take advantage of any ongoing strategic initiatives. 

Directors are required to make informed and independent judgments on decisions put to them [AWA Ltd v Daniels (t/as Deloitte Haskins & Sells) (1992) 7 ACSR 759] and are required to place themselves in a position to guide the company and monitor its management but Montsalvat seems to have a board riven with infighting whilst making questionable [even ultra vires] decisions in possible breach of the Corporations Act [2001] S180 etal. All board decisions seem to be treated as confidential subject to secrecy provisions inserted within the constitution. The result being the ‘self elected’ board only answers to itself with no members other than the actual board members - so there are no checks and balances.

Just a cursory look at the 2013 financial reports indicates problems like consultant’s fees, employment expenses and professional fees amounting to around 87% of gross profit, non current liabilities increased by $103,000 and the loss of a $600,000 revenue stream through gifting the popular albeit badly managed restaurant to a third party by tender for a fraction of its worth as that revenue stream. As directors have a lawful duty to be informed of the companies actual financial affairs [Statewide Tobacco Services Ltd v Morley (1990) 2 ACSR 405], how can this happen?

Just three examples:

Deliberate sacrifice of a major revenue stream - Money was and is critical to the survival of Montsalvat but revenue streams are limited.  A few years ago we worked with Mr Sigmund Jörgensen to reinvigorate the restaurant establishing a vision, mission, strategic directions, strategic objectives, change plans, spatial changes, and cuisine changes all financially documented with timelines.  We estimated a nett profit to Montsalvat from the restaurant of some $3,000 to $4,000 per week and, based on later published turnover of up to $14,000 per week, they should have easily achieved that profit and more - providing it was properly managed.  Unfortunately, management did not take any of our advice apart from some spatial changes [since destroyed] resulting in losses roughly equivalent to profits foregone in as much as $300,000 per annum was lost to forecast.  That’s a lot of maintenance and marketing money just gone.  Management must have actually budgeted for wages etal  near 90% of gross profit and a cost of sales well above industry norms to screw this up.  Much worse, instead of fixing the problems, as a board and senior management should, and given they had all the information we gave them, decided instead of actually managing the restaurant to profit, to lease the space out for a fraction of its worth as a revenue stream for Montsalvat.  How can that be acceptable?  These are not the actions of a competent board and/or management given that under the Corporations Act each and every director must exercise their power and discharge their duties with the degree of care and diligence that any reasonable person would exercise.

Wasted marketing opportunities - Mr Jörgensen had just written a book on Montsalvat launching it a couple of weeks ago at Montsalvat itself.  This major event should have been embraced by board and management, but no.  Sigmund had to do his own marketing, beg entertainment, seek his own speakers and believe it or not the entry doors remained locked until after the advertised start time leaving guests outside in the dust for no reason. I was there, being extremely underwhelmed by the board and management in their conduct towards the launch and Mr Jörgensen but far far worse, their ambivalence if not rejection of the huge marketing opportunity this launch could have provided for the future benefit of the property they purport to direct and manage.  It is shameful as this conduct seems to be driven by board dysfunction and infighting to the detriment of Montsalvat.

Destruction of heritage - An example which really strikes at the heart of Montsalvat.  When Justus Jörgensen designed and built Montsalvat he designed a beautiful pool gated from the outside world and surrounded by artist accommodation and galleries.  This pool is an integral part of the ethos of Montsalvat as are the pools at Ripponlea and Mooramong.  Indeed we were at the National Trust property, Mooramong, a little while ago enjoying afternoon tea around the unfenced pool and have enjoyed many a visit to Ripponlea around their also unfenced pool which they use for functions and receptions. These heritage pools are unfenced for heritage reasons with no requirements by council or anyone to fence same.  Yet the board and management at Montsalvat decided to erect a glass fence [which they can’t afford to pay for] around their heritage pool.  This they are doing against significant objections [change.org] and no lawful imperative or need [no council requirement].  It is public information that the Board even lied to protect their decision to erect the fence by stating there was indeed a lawful requirement.  Heritage aesthetics are ignored and a vital part of Montsalvat’s ethos is being ripped away by a board who just doesn’t understand Montsalvat.

There are many more such examples - Montsalvat has lost its direction.

Three things need to happen starting right now to ensure Montsalvat’s protection and survival:

Stop - The current riven and dysfunctional board along with senior management must resign forthwith apart from Mr Jörgensen who, pursuant to Montsalvat’s constitution as a family member, must remain. 

Assess - An independent administrator / chair / chief executive needs to be appointed for a period of 12 months to instigate a totally independent assessment of all finances and decisions for the last 5 years.

Plan -  Develop a proper strategic plan.  During this time the board needs to be rebuilt with appropriate people after which senior management need to be appointed. 

As I said, I am very concerned about Montsalvat and its future.

Jon Langevad MBA

CHOICES AND OPTIONS

There is a war going on.

Not as you might suspect with guns, tanks and bombs but much more subtly with words and actions validated from those words.

Business is all about convincing people to move away from someone else and buy stuff from you.  Simple.  This happens quite lawfully by offering greater choice and options whilst convincing the hapless customer the someone else has less choice and fewer options.

The better our choices and options, the better our life.  “Perhaps the children would enjoy St Moritz this Christmas?” or “Which golf course to play today?” or even, “Do we have lamb or beef for dinner?”. 

The corollary to that is we remove choice and options when penalising people for doing something unlawful.  The more serious matters end up in goal whilst our courts preside over a multitude of ‘offences’ handing out orders which invariably enhance the winners options and choices whilst doing the opposite to the bad guy.

It seems clear that the good side is enhancement whilst the bad is restriction.

Now, for business, the trick seems to be to use language to make sure you retain and enhance your choices and options but at the same time using those same words to remove your client’s options and choices and their ability to go somewhere else for their widgets.  The law steps in when this becomes unconscionable and unlawfully disadvantaging.

The repository for all these ‘words’ is in ‘standard form terms and conditions’ which business trot out to ensure they remain top dog and it seems irrelevant to business whether or not those terms are lawful or conscionable because they rightly assume that people will also assume without reading them that ‘the words’ are indeed lawful  and must be complied with.  Now days they are eminently transparent in plain English and serve almost entirely to remove customer’s choices and options whilst enhancing their own.  This does not mean they are lawful and customers are treated as the bad guys.

Perhaps we should all have our own private booklet of terms and conditions which purport to allow us to enhance our choices and options.  One paragraph could read, “I am allowed to speed on the roads and can’t be booked”.  It’s in writing and must be obeyed!  Perhaps Judge Dredd would not see the point.

The war continues between say banks and legislation.  Banks want to gather in all the power for all the reasons discussed above whilst the law tries to protect people from the more unconscionable terms .  For example the banks deem themselves the sole purveyor of good and evil and demand the ability to remove a clients financial instruments [choices and options] at their sole discretion whilst at the same time denying customers of the same rights. 

The code of banking practice and the legislated national credit code prohibit this behaviour by ensuring the banks go through a process allowing customers options and choices before the banks can deem a client redundant and to be shed.  Yet those terms keep popping up and the courts keep ruling against them.

These days a term can be ruled by the courts as unconscionable whether or not anyone has been affected the same as actions by the banks using those terms can also be ruled as unconscionable.

Yet the game goes on.

Bad people try and take an unconscionable advantage by trying to mislead the public that their glossy booklets are actually lawful and must be obeyed.  Notice that few banks will put anything in writing and they will not want their conversations to be recorded.  Could it be that they know their actions to try and curtail customers options and choices to be unlawful?

This is war.

Opera [house] in Melbourne ..

I wish to thank the Sydney Opera House Trust from a Melbournian’s perspective for their decision to downgrade and make Bennelong restaurant more 'accessible'. 

That pesky Frenchman created a beautiful multi-hat restaurant called Bennelong within our national icon.  A first class affair befitting its status.  Guillaume Brahimi, being  that pesky Frenchman, sought to create something special in the space as has Ducasse who leads the restaurant Jules Verne within Paris’s Eiffel tower.  Little compromise in either ‘wonders of the world’.

However, Australians it seems, according to the opera house trust, want an ‘accessible’ venue similar to the dozens of cafes and restaurants in the immediate vicinity. 

The Utzon hating Ryan Committee of yesteryear seems reborn – ‘don’t bother to create something really special because us Australian’s just want pub tucker – no need for that smancy stuff – just give us another café/bar’.

Nothing special or world leading, just average so us average people can go there and feel, well, average.

As Sydney does not seem to appreciate how to deal with ‘first class’ I wonder if we could shift the opera house to Melbourne where we would indeed laud the brilliance of Utzon and create a world class experience decidedly away from average.

This is not a slight on the successful van Haandels and we wish them well but my question remains, ‘Do we want yet another café / bar and importantly, do we want it in our one-off wonder of the world?’

My thanks, as a Melbournian, to the trust for downgrading Sydney.

Mr Tony Jones and the producers of Q&A …

I have said for some time that Q&A should be required viewing for anyone over 15.  However, it seems that the power of the 'lowest common denominator' talk show is starting to take over from intelligence.  Tony, on Lateline I thought you were a trifle arrogant and self serving but you positively shined on Q&A.  No joke.  As a host and moderator you were great.  But now it seems that your personal biases and perhaps Q&A's producers are letting the side down. 

You have an opportunity to delve into and debate real issues of national strategic importance yet you succumb to drivel such as the $1k Prime Minister Abbot repaid.  Unfortunately, it took an international guest to tell you the story was and is unimportant.

Tony, you and Australia are better than this.

It is up to you to steer the discussion away from minutia and curb most of your guests predication to talk forever, but in a manner showing respect and one which befits a moderator in Australia’s most important ‘discussion’ show [as distinct from talk].

Tony, please remove your personal labour predilection and indeed the labour parties mandate to focus on simple minded issues AND remove both parties desire to air 5 second cheap shots.  Last Monday you were rude to MP Hunt accusing him of ‘political diatribe’ yet when Ms Ellis and Ms Benjamin rattled on about very little and without focusing on the point you said nothing.  Why?  It also was indeed obvious that Mr Sheridan had lost it with both you and Ms Ellis because she was virtually out of control and you did nothing.  His was the voice of reason where, as moderator, you should have stopped Ms Ellis.

Indeed, Mr Shorten was also the voice of reason a couple of weeks ago.  He had to put you in your place when you tried to involve his mother in law.  I have a lot of respect for Mr Shorten and his ability to focus on important issues without distraction on minutia.

Mr Jones I am a liberal voter who worries about Prime Minister Abbot as our representative on the world stage but as a country we must support both him to move into his ‘statesman’ role and his /our government to succeed.  It IS NOT your role to either try to create news or to give voice to stupidity or to create sedition through unrest and biased coverage.

It IS your role to bring Q&A back to THE pre-eminent ‘discussion’ show focusing on matters of national importance rather than ‘talk show’ minutia.   Sure, address the current issues but leave the unimportant to commercial channels. 

You decide the questions which will be asked and answered - so please let’s raise the bar.

Good discussions,

Jon Langevad.

Gender Politics

Federal Government – Question time and the gender ‘card’..

It is only fools and idiots who attack the person rather than the behaviour.

Men and women are not equal!  And, thank God for that.

Women think differently and do some things better - and that is a good thing.

Men think differently and do some things better - and that is a good thing.

The world would be a sad place without both sides of thought.

I have run project teams all over the world and have always attempted to maintain a 50/50 gender split.

One is like water and the other sand.  Individually strong in some respects but also easily moved aside.  You can easily move water aside and kick sand into the air but, mix them up in the right proportions and ‘they’ become a strong and resilient force.  Yet sand and water together remain separate, identifiable and unique - not homogenous but working together to become that force.  A partnership

Apart from remaining unique the second criteria is respect where that respect is a God given right for everyone.  Without necessarily agreeing, respect each other and respect each other’s opinions.  It’s actually quite easy and cathartic to assume you will like and respect someone before you meet them!

Perhaps our political leaders need to learn to enjoy our differences and the inherent strength of working together.

Jon Langevad

CHANGE OF GOVERNMENT

We all from time to time focus on minutia rather than the big picture because it’s easy and allows our addled brains a respite against life’s major challenges.  Golf is the perfect ‘escape’ as it requires absolute concentration on hitting a very small white ball and blocks out all other issues affecting our lives.  The golf driving range is positively therapeutic.

This is a necessity for us mere mortals but I question as to whether or not it is appropriate for our Government to continually focus on relatively small issues rather than platform our country into a strategic future as a world player.

Our leaders should be galvanising our country towards a common ‘world’ future yet what we see is continual bickering over minutia through somewhat cringe-worthy  behaviour as demonstrated every day in Parliament and picked up by the media in sound and video ‘bites’.

There is no doubt that the current Federal Government has lost people’s confidence through a litany of economic, financial and human mistakes.  Mistakes which should not have happened at this level with so many smart people ready, willing and able to analyse, plan and action an almost mistake proof Government.

Our country will engender a change in Government in September because we have lost faith; and for good reason.

But, to what?

Where are the people we can rally behind to drive our country.  People such as Hawke or Fraser who were/are statesman and did indeed represent  Australia with charisma and leadership.  Orators of some skill able to garner opinion and turn it into something positive.  The skill-sets of Obama, Thatcher, Clinton and Blair are awe inspiring and as world leaders are able to create change by unifying their nations.

No one in their right mind would agree with everything they did but there is no doubt they delivered for their respective countries.  Hawke, when we won The America’s cup was fantastic, because he almost single handed expressed what we were all feeling – a slightly larrikin pride in our country as Australians.  He had the ability to galvanise all political persuasions on the big issues, such as whipping those pesky Americans, and he did it with grace and humour.  Read some of Menzie's speeches to see similar statesman humour and listen to the power of Obama when he speaks.

We will elect a new lot in September and we will expect better Government yet I wonder whether or not we will get the leadership our country really needs.

The bickering minutia set is on all sides of politics with everyone playing the media game of the 5 second destructive sound bite.  The Prime Minister with her misogynist attacks was perfect for a 5 second destruction as was Abbot’s Julia the liar campaign.  Unfortunately both were rubbish and did and have tarnished both ‘leaders’ with a 10 year old bully mentality of low intellect.

Politicians try to excuse this behaviour by saying that parliament debate is vigorous .  Vigorous is hitting a white ball, debate is supposed to be intelligent, intellectual and demanding of logic and clear thinking.  Now think of question time.

We are better than this.

Mr Abbot will be our next prime Minister leading our country into a strategic future.

The question is, ‘Can he remove himself from the minutia set and rise above dysfunctional behaviours and become the leader and statesman we all want and need’?

At the risk of trivialising this issue watch Rowan Atkinson move from bumbling idiot to ‘becoming’ Johnny English the secret agent in seconds.  A transformation with obvious links to Mr Abbot.

Goodwill in life and business

One of the most misunderstood concepts in business concerns our perceptions of ‘Goodwill’.

Perhaps good will means that one thinks good things about someone else and we ‘will’ our positive thoughts and actions so that others get warm and fuzzy - just from our mere brain waves.  Nice!

On the other hand, perhaps it’s how we view ourselves through someone else’s eyes?  Perhaps we have spent years being nice to someone so that they in turn think good things about us?  In this case we have spent time and effort doing whatever it takes to make others think nice things of us.  Good!

For example, families and friends take real work to remain family and friends and dare I say the development of mutual goodwill is a key ingredient.  The bonus is when all of a sudden those obviously recalcitrant family dropkicks respond with equally magnanimous gestures, we have indeed developed goodwill and the world is a joy and we bathe in those esoteric warm and fuzzy self gratifications.

This is also the case in business.

We spend time and effort and money convincing others that they should spend their discretionary dollar with us and not that horrible bloke down the street.  In effect, we are developing goodwill.

In rather blunt terms - in business and in life goodwill can be defined as that ….

“Intangible benefit of reputation relative to that benefit being of value to another party.”

When this applies to a business the ‘goodwill’ component is the value of the reputation of the business.  This may result in increased revenue and may even result in long term benefit.  We hope!!

On the contrary, an empty premise has no goodwill from clients but may have a measure of ‘value’ based on its location, neighbours, etc.  However, a premise in distress has negative goodwill because its reputation has been sullied.  Logical, really.

When selling a business, goodwill is not an accounting sum associated with excess earnings.  Whilst accountants will want to put a quantifiable figure on goodwill, there is far more involved.

For a business sale, there can never be guarantees of future income streams because there are a myriad of factors outside of the control of the seller to even be able to logically or legally guarantee. Therefore, excess earnings as a determinant of business value is a nonsense.  It is merely one factor of many.

When buying a business, of far greater value is the way in which customers view their relationship towards the premise, its reputation and indeed their willingness to continue that relationship without having to rebuild a reputation from scratch or far worse, from a negative.  Bloggers as real and vitriolic customers have changed the face of goodwill in business – for the better!!

In essence, goodwill boils down to the willingness of people to continue a relationship with the new owner.  The business may have great excess earnings but has just blotted its copybook by poisoning the neighbours.  On paper it’s worth dollars but in reality worth squat because of the salmonella cookies.

When buying a business the only consideration is, ‘can I be successful ‘.  To do that the value of committed clients is crucial and has a dollar value.  That value cannot be logically calculated albeit bloggers have made that much easier by their transparent and public opinions.

But then, every blogger may love a certain business but it still doesn’t work for whatever reason.  May I say that the value of the goodwill is still strong and doesn’t change but the overall business value is mitigated by a straight revenue valuation.

So, goodwill is esoteric, unknowable and incalculable yet it has value because it means customers will come and try the new person in the new business.  A head start on bankruptcy.