Long-lived passion for better urban design takes flight

Bill Chandler’s long-lived passion to improve urban design in Australia was publicly endorsed in Melbourne on Thursday, April 22.

Nearly 50 people meet in the “Melbourne Room” at the city town hall in Swanston St to enthusiastically to support an idea that would see Australia have its own version of Britain’s Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE).

For about a decade Bill has felt Australia should have its version of CABE and in the March edition of the Urban Design Forum, the quarterly magazine of the Victorian based UDF, Bill discussed the value of CABE and how Australia would benefit from something similar.

Bill, a co-founder and honorary editor of Urban Design Forum, was convinced that Australia had both the appropriately skilled and qualified people for a “CABE down-under”, as it has been colloquially described, and an evident need for such a body.

It was only at the March lunch meeting of the UDF that Bill first formally proposed the idea to others involved with the group and in discussions it was agreed a small group should meet to further discuss the idea.

Among those at the lunch and who is a former employee of CABE in Great Britain, Leon Yates, who presently works with the Victoria’s Department of Planning and Community Development, and he was confident other former CABE employees would support Bill’s idea.

Arrangements were made for a meeting on April 22 of just several people at the Urban Initiatives office of UDF co-founder Bruce Echberg, but interest spread and so with the support of Melbourne City Council, the meeting was moved to a town hall.

Bill’s idea was enthusiastically taken up and so what had been little more than just an idea simmering in Bill’s mind had boiled over to become a movement that has spread interstate, attracting interest from all parts of the country.

A 90-minute discussion resulted in the formation of ten-strong initial working group, as it was called, to further consider the idea and determine a clear direction of how to progress “CABEDU”.

That initial working group is: David Rayson, Geoffrey London (State Architect- top right), Laura-Jo Mellan, Emma Appleton, Justin Kelly, Gerry McLoughlin, Bruce Echberg, Leon Yates, Rod Duncan and Bill Chandler.

Also among those at the April 22 meeting was Melbourne City Council’s Director of City Design, Rob Adams (above right).

In an email circulated the day after the event, Bill Chandler said: “Thanks for your contributions yesterday. The feedback is very positive, and already the interest is spreading to those who were not able to be there, including interstaters”.

Many meet at Tatura to hear about sustainability

Nearly 50 people gathered in Tatura’s St Mary’s Hall on April 22 to hear about sustainability from LaTrobe University’s director of the Centre of Sustainable Regional Communities, Professor John Martin.
Prof Martin avoided too much talk about big picture issues and concentrated and matters that people such as those involved with the Tatura Transition group could address.
The April 22 conversation was organized by Tatura Transitions, a relatively small group from the Tatura community that is eager to see the town recognize and prepare itself for the dilemmas it will face through the changes brought on by climate change and peak oil.
Prof Martin, based in Bendigo, was excited by the dialogue created by such meetings as that in Tatura.
He emphasized the importance of doing whatever people can at community level that on the surface may appear of little value, but considered more broadly, it can have a big impact on the town’s resilience.
Those with any questions about what is happening in Tatura should contact Ross Musolino 5824 1038.

Tatura talk about sustainability

The idea of sustainability will be discussed on Thursday night, April 22, in Tatura.
La Trobe University’s director of the Centre of Sustainable Regional Communities, Professor John Martin (right), will be the guest speaker.
His visit has been coordinated by Tatura Transition, a small group of people working towards preparing the town for the dilemmas it will face as climate change begins to bite and the troubles that will arise through peak oil.
Thursday night’s meeting starts at 7:30pm in St Mary’s Hall in Hogan St opposite the Sacred Heart Church and admission is free. Tea, coffee and nibbles will be provided.
Those with questions should contact Mr Ross Musolino 5824 1038.

We should reconsider the Anzac myth

Anzac rhetoric influenced by former Prime Minister John Howard, largely continued by present PM Kevin Rudd, has duped many Australians.

What exists makes me decidedly angry and, I’m sure, the Australia we have now is not what our country’s young men fought and died for on the Gallipoli Peninsula.
Nor, I’m equally sure, are the values of Australia today what was on the minds of the thousands of other soldiers who died, always in other countries.
The so-called Anzac legend is a myth – the values it promotes are misogynistic, encourage militarism, are misleading about what it is that creates a nation and subjugates those things that enhance our lives such as non-violence, empathy, care of others and the building of our communities.
Given huge Federal Government support, both through broader encouragement and more specifically funding of the Department of Veteran Affairs, the walls of Australian life, from primary schools to old age, have been papered with propaganda about the Anzac myth.
Generally, Australians now believe that our nationhood took its shape as our young men fought and died in what was a military disaster, organized by Great Britain, in another country, against a foe whom with we had no quarrel and, which history clearly illustrates, had no impact on world events.
It was a waste of lives, a waste of resources and seriously derailed the building of Australia, effectively ending its emergence as one of the most advanced nations in the world.
Whatever we may think, facts clearly show that we are enthusiasts of war and fight seemingly without any concern for values, morals and concepts held by many Australians.
Those who fought and died on our behalf deserve respect and should be remembered and honoured, but they do not warrant elevation to hero status and should not be examples to emulate, either individually or as a nation.
Writing in “What’s Wrong With Anzac?” Australian historians, Marilyn Lake and Henry Reynolds said: “We think it is time to reclaim our national values and commemorate the role of the Australians involved in campaigns for civil, social and political freedoms and who enshrined them in our national culture.”

Busy week, alarming realities

This week has been wonderfully busy, but within that equally alarming.
On three occasions it become clearly evident that two people, unquestionably highly qualified, entrenched in the decision making echelons of our society and therefore people of undoubted influence, were not aware of peak oil and didn’t understand it complications.
Also, one fellow could not, or would not, advance an opinion and to worsen matters, that same speaker, who in my view should have had a definite opinion, avoided my question about nuclear power.
The first moment arose during a meeting involving members of the Victorian Urban Design Forum, many architectural and design people and several from the Victorian State Government organization, VicUrban.
That meeting held in the new VicUrban offices helped those attending understand something about four major community re-establishment sustainable projects within Melbourne – one at Maribynong, another at central Dandenong, Avondale Heights and the re-development of Harbour Esplanade at Docklands in central Melbourne.
At the end of the presentations, those at the meeting were able to ask questions and one about peak oil, directed at no-one in particular, but which seemed to fall upon VicUrban landscape architect, Mark Haycox, drew a response that seemed to indicate that he was at least confused only to see fellow VicUrban employee, Lynn Sweeney, quickly answer that peak oil was the reason the projects were being pursued.
The following evening, Wednesday, the University of Melbourne presented the free lecture – Unnatural disasters, the fractured science and politics of climate change – featuring Professor Barry Smit (above) from the University of Guelph in Canada.
He opened his presentation with a self-penned song about climate change that he sang to the Beatles tune of “Let it be”.

Arriving early at the lecture theatre, I filled in the time reading David Strahan’s 2007 book The Last Oil Shock that is about what he describes as “the imminent extinction of petroleum man” and in pre-lecture conversation with Prof Smit I asked for his view on peak oil.
He said it was not something he knew enough about and encouraged me to continue my reading.
Following his presentation, he is a truly personable man with extensive knowledge about climate change, questions from the audience brought many including one from me in which I mentioned that American Dr James Hansen, who works for the government and is described by some as “the grandfather of climate change”, has advocated for nuclear power to end our reliance on coal fired power stations and in answer to his thoughts on nuclear power, Prof Smit had no opinion to offer – it was a staggering response our dependence on coal-fired power, a process that Dr Hansen believes is the major contributor to climate change.
Prof Smit, a co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, was at the Melbourne University as part of a speaking tour of Australia and New Zealand in a program organized by the Association for Canadian Studies in Australia and New Zealand.

Talking with strangers

From today, it is my intention to talk everyday with someone, face to face, whom I don't know. I intend to keep that up for a year.
Not entirely sure how it will happen, although somedays it will come about through the normal events of everyday living, on others it will be something I will have to puroseful pursue.
My aim will be to make that contact more than a simple exchange of greetings, rather an actual conversation of some substance, although that might be simple.
Let's, for the sake of the exercise, call it "Talking with strangers".

What's Wrong With Anzac? - A surreal experience

A surreal connection, well, at least for me, seemed to pervade the room as I listened last night to Marilyn Lake (below) and Henry Reynolds (bottom)talk about their new book, What’s Wrong With Anzac?
Just a week or so earlier I had sat in the same room and listened as politics lecturer and social commentator, Waleed Aly, had discussed his latest work published in Quarterly Essay, What’s Right? The Future of Conservatism in Australia.
Both pieces seemed connected, although I feel sure that neither Lake, Reynolds nor Aly would not agree.

Aly’s views on conservatism reflected Australians enthusiasm to go to war in another country to fight for and defend a civilization they knew and loved.
Conservatism is not about an unwillingness to change, rather it sees change as organic and evolving and conservatives will welcome change when it is illustrated to be appropriate.
Lake and Reynolds would probably not disagree with Aly’s thesis, but it seems their concerns are more about the militarization of Australian history.
Some 200 people packed out the main auditorium at Melbourne’s Wheeler Centre (the Centre for Books, Writing and Ideas) to hear Lake and Reynolds discuss what it was the pushed them to assemble their ideas.
Both are noted historians and both argue that Australia’s Anzac obsession distorts our understanding of the past, replacing historical fact with myth.
Last night, Lake questioned the Federal Government’s official sponsorship, particularly when John Howard led the country, of Anzac through the funding of commemoration and education that has been mobilized as a conservative political force.

It is at this point that Aly may become a little restless as the Anzac juggernaut is not truly conservative; rather it is neo-conservative with political aims that pander to nationalism, racism and individualism, rather than the building of communities.
Lake made the point that the Department of Veteran Affairs appears to have a blank cheque in relation to funding when it comes to promoting and educating people about Anzac Day and she wondered what the public reaction would be like if other departments, such as the Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs or the Department of Immigration and Citizenship had the same access to government cash and within that, influence.
The book, What’s Wrong With Anzac is published by the University of New South Wales Press and the ISBN is 978 1 74223 151 8.