Generation One - really??

So let me first acknowledge that I agree with the view that our indigenous fellow Australians continue to suffer life conditions that are below that in many third world countries. The unemployment rate, health issues and general lack of opportunity is something that all Australians should find appalling and unacceptable...Every effort should be made to find sustainable solutions to these issues and all Australians should see such redress as overdue as necessary.

It is also impressive to hear that Twiggy Forrest has had a lifelong interest in the plight of our indigenous Australians and that he wants to do something about the lack of opportunity available to them....Good on him for voicing his concern and trying to get something done...However..........

So we have this GenerationOne launch at the Opera House with the usual political support from both sides and the nauseating appearance of showbiz celebs (Does anyone seriously give a shit that our Russell or our Cate are at the Opera House?...Iwas not going to support this cause but when I saw our Russell there I had to change my mind and give money....really???) and the sprinkle of rich people there supporting the cause....

It is all about the "Average Australian" getting involved....hey I am all for all of us taking this issue to heart but I actually think that our rich folk...especially those who seem more impacted by the issue than others...could lead by example....real example!!

So what actually is everyone supporting...beyond the Rah Rah, the hand wringing and angst filled faces and PR spin.....Twiggy says the initial goal was to find 50,000 jobs for indigenous people...What does this actually mean and what type of jobs?

Is it just that 50,000 low paid, menial jobs will be taken from one level of the poorer end of the socio-economic scale and given to a group even further down (ie bias in job selection) or does it mean that 50,000 jobs will be created where there were no jobs?? Help me understand this second version...Does it mean that businesses that do not need extra people will now hire 50,000 people they did not need???Surely this can't be the case so it must be version 0ne....ie of the current or next batch of 50,000 jobs to be made available (ie businesses need these people) the next 50,000 or so will go to indigeneous people.....yet given for the most part the people that this scheme is trying to help are low skilled therefore the jobs will be low skill jobs.....and some other poor low skilled worker misses out.

The nauseating notes from our latest premier (KK) about committing to hire 2229 indigenous people...what does this mean??How many was she going to hire anyway??are these new jobs?? If so where and if so why??..What is it about KK...Not only would she go to the opening of an envelope...she will send out the invitations asking people come and she will present a speech on the making of the invitation to the event where an envelope was being opened...My first 50 days opening envelopes.....anyway....

I am NOT against a positive bias towards indigenous job selection and it might just be something needed but can someone be honest and explain that this is what is going on.......Can somone also explain how this creates a systemic and sustainable fix to the problems that exist for indigenous Australians.

50,000 jobs is around 0.46% of the total Australian Job market...According to the ABS 2001 data there are (recorded) around 410,000 indigenous Australians so 50,000 out of 410,000 seems an impressive goal...ABS reports the unemployment rate for indigenous people at 14% - 17% so again 50,000 is a reasonable goal to hit....and yet how are jobs created in a sustainable way and hwo do you ensure you create jobs that are not just ones at the bottom of the socio-economic scale..

I can't help but think that a) If the rich folks wants to really help there is a more meaningful approach they could take and b) alot of this Generation One programme is PR Spin, tokenistic and debasing. It offers promise to those that want to address the appalling situation that our indigenous Australians are in but it does so with more style than substance...

So here is an idea...Twiggy has made around $3bn (it goes up and down a bit) over the last few years and Twiggy SAYS that he is personally very troubled by the lack of opportunity for our indigenous Australians...Seems James Packer and Kerry Stokes agree......So given you VERY rich guys care so much why not try this on for size...Twiggy you put in $1b (still leaves you with $2b or more) and James and Kerry you guys put in another few hundred million ( in both cases you will be left with gzillions so you should be ok)...So now we have around $1.5b to invest in sustainable programmes to help indigenous Australians.....

If you assume the $1.5b invested could return around $150m a year FOREVER and assume that it costs around $15K- $20K per year to put someone through an apprenticeship or Uni degree.

This means that for $150m per year you would have 9,000 people undertaking courses at any one time (3,000 in each of year 1,2 , 3) and you would produce 3,000 fully trained and SKILLED indigenous students a year, forever....a sustainable and society changing impact on the lack of opportunity...Also these are skilled roles so the indigenous Australians coudl aspire to jobs higher up the socio-economic scale and have the ability to create a new world of opportunity for their families.

Maybe we should broaden the net further...Twiggy you put up for $1b and your other rich mates scrape together another $1b..Come on Russell, Cate you seem so committed to this surely you can give up 1 or 2 payments from a hollywood move and kick the tin for $20m or so each...So with $2b invested the opportunity programme could fund around 13,500 students...Maybe get the Govt to now match fund this programme and now we have 27,000 students being fully funded in course that will give them REAL job prospects in more than menial pay roles....And this would occur year after year after year.

So all power to Twiggy, his rich mates, Hollywood stars and random politicians for supporting the Generation One programme...but why not stop gnashing your teech about how big the problem is and PUT REAL MONEY to work to fix the issue..

While I am on this rant...So a rich guy (say someonewith $4b) give $10m to a hospital and not only does he get naming rights to the building etc but he is lauded by all as a great philanthropist...Is he really?..On the one hand $10m is alot of money however....$10m being donated by a guy with $4b is like the average Australian giving $700.....(The average Australian has, according to the ABS, a net wealth of $280K..so do the maths $10m eaquals about 1/4 of 1% of the next wealth of someoen with $4b etc etc)......

There are alot of normal Australians who give $700 or more a year to charities close to their heart and no one calls them great philanthropists..Let's not go further into this anlysis by pointing out the obvious which is $700 means ALOT more to a guy with a net wealth of $280,000 than does $10m to a guy with $4b..

So how about this for a plan...Unless you allocate more than 15% of your net wealth to charity (the benchmark for the richest americans and their allocation of wealth to charities) you do not get referred to in any ways as anything more than a normal person doing normal things...if a $billionaire wants to allocate $400m to a foundation or charity then they deserve the accolades....Further how about we REQUIRE our most wealthy to give this amount to charities...Seems they have alot lying around so could afford to kick the tin a tad more..

Full circle now...Twiggy...love the passion...agree with the concern...Nice to invite the rest of us....looking forward to you donating only 1/3 of your massive fortune to help address this issue in a sustainable way....that plus a little help from your friends...