Inside This Issue Volume 54 • Number 1 • March 2002 ARTICLES & REGULAR FEATURES 2 Editorial 19 The Blair Files Some high-profile NGOs, that have built solid reputa- It is a given that ‘poverty causes terrorism’. But does it? tions over time, risk ‘brand-name’ damage if they persist Our newest regular contributor ponders the real links with ill-informed or baseless campaigns. Mike Nahan between terrorists and wealth. Tim Blair 3 WWF Says ‘Jump!’, Governments Ask ‘How High?’ 21 What’s A Job? There is a disturbing trend for governments to make The IR system has more to do with the state seeking to environmental policy in the absence of sound science— protect employers from high labour costs than it does as their reaction to WWF’s Great Barrier Reef with the protection of workers’ rights. Ken Phillips campaign demonstrates. Jennifer Marohasy and 22 Strange Times Gary Johns The weird, the wacky and the wonderful from around 6 The Human-Rights Lobby Meets Terrorism the world. Compiled by IPA staff and columnists The inability of the world’s leading human-rights NGOs 23 Letter from London to come to grips with terrorism—both before and after To ny Blair promised ‘joined-up’ government. Instead, September 11—shows just how much they have lost the Britons now suffer bureaucratic inertia born of regula- plot. Adrian Karatnycky and Arch Puddington tory overload. John Nurick 10 The Age and Bias 24 Free_Enterprise.com The Age’s coverage of the recent Green blockade at Internet resources for arriving at a radical conclusion: Marysville highlights, yet again, that paper’s inability to repeal all drug laws now! Stephen Dawson live up to its professed principles on fair and accurate 26 Letter from America reporting. Graeme Gooding The collapse of Enron is not what the anti-capitalist 12 The ‘R’ Files critics claim it is. In fact, the very opposite—capitalism Australia is blessed with abundant natural gas, but the works! Nigel Ashford industry is cursed by inappropriate regulation. The result: 27 The ABC: Unique Unto Itself sub-optimal outcomes all round. Alan Moran Why can’t the ABC be managed like a private-sector organization? Because … well, because … it’s the ABC, 15 Greenhouse and Green Energy: Ten Realities of course! John Styles. Analyses of Australia’s official Greenhouse ‘Success Stories’ reveal more grounds for deep scepticism than 28 Drugs: Surrender Is Not A Winning Strategy they do for back-slapping. Brian J. O’Brien The National Secretary of the Australian Family Association takes issue with John Hyde’s recent Review 17 Education Agenda article on legalizing drugs. Bill Muehlenberg Across the world, governments are providing more and more data on schools, standards and performance. 30 Further Afield Australian governments have similar data—but lack the There’s money in mould, the effects of imprisoning drug inclination to share it with parents. Kevin Donnelly offenders, Florida mammals and development, corruption and currency crises, payments for human organs. 18 The Secular West and the Dangerous Quest for Meaning BOOK REVIEW The opponents of Western success—be they religious or ideological—understand neither its underpinnings 32 The Ultimate Insider nor its broad appeal. But that doesn’t stop them When respected US media insider Bernard Goldberg exploiting one of its strongest virtues—its tolerance. blew the whistle on bias within CBS, all hell broke Andrew McIntyre loose! Don D’Cruz R E V I E W Editor: Mike Nahan. Publisher & Executive Director: Mike Nahan. Production: Chris Ulyatt Consulting Services Pty Ltd. Designed by: Colin Norris, Kingdom Artroom. Printed by: Print Hotline, 47 Milligan Street, Perth WA 6000. Published by: The Institute of Public Affairs Ltd (Incorporated in the ACT) ACN 008 627 727. Level 2, 410 Collins Street, Melbourne Victoria 3000. Phone: (03) 9600 4744. Fax: (03) 9602 4989. E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.ipa.org.au Inside cartoons by Peter Foster [(03) 9813 3160] Unsolicited manuscripts welcomed. However, potential contributors are advised to discuss proposals for articles with the Editor. Views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the IPA. Reproduction: The IPA welcomes reproduction of written material from the Review, but for copyright reasons the Editor’s permission must first be sought. From the Editor MIKE NAHAN Reputations are, increasingly, a crucial Rights Lobby Meets Terrorism’ on page commodity. They influence not only 6 of this issue.) AI now claims, among what we buy, but how we vote, dress, other silly things, that the US is as eat, play and donate. Accordingly, great a violator of human rights as the organizations spend huge resources Hutu in Rwanda and China in Tibet. developing, massaging, and protecting WWF has also lost the plot. Back in their brand names. 1998, the Great Barrier Reef and other Arguably, Amnesty International coral reefs around the world were (AI) and World Wildlife Fund (WWF) being hit with an outbreak of coral have been two of the most successful bleaching. WWF immediately saw it as organizations at the reputation game. a fund-raising opportunity and According to a recent survey, AI is launched a worldwide campaign to save the most recognized and respected the Great Barrier Reef. While the brand in the developed world. WWF is campaign raised huge amounts of also well ranked—much higher than over communist countries. It also money, it ran into a big problem: the any commercial organization. focused on the actions of undemo- bleaching stopped, the coral recovered On the back of these reputations, cratic governments. and the cause turned out not to be AI and WWF—which both started in WWF also played a very con- global warming, as WWF claimed, but 1961—have not only grown to be structive role in its early days. WWF the naturally warming and cooling cycle synonymous with their chosen areas was formed essentially to raise funds of El Niño. The ethical thing would have of concern, but have become mega- for the IUCN and other groups which, been be to reallocate the funds to multinationals. While AI does not in turn, undertook practical con- reefs that are actually under threat publish a consolidated budget, in servation projects, particularly in the (such as many of the reefs in Asia 2000–01, its international head- Third World—over the last 40 years it which suffer from fish bombing) or to quarters had revenues of $60 million, a has funded over 11,000 projects. It has scientific research (say, on the workforce of over 400 and branches in also led a series of valuable high-profile relationship between global warming 56 countries. WWF is even larger. In campaigns, including saving the panda, and water temperature). Instead, WWF, 1999, it had a worldwide revenue of the tiger, the elephant, whales and while maintaining the fiction about $720 million, a workforce of over marine turtles. Although WWF bleaching and global warming, shifted 3,000 and branches in 41 countries. characteristically ‘gilded the lily’ in its its focus to a new supposed demon— AI and WWF have a number of early days, it focused on real problems agriculture. As outlined by Gary Johns things going for them. First, they are in in crucial areas and did so with some and Jennifer Marohasy (‘WWF Says the ‘protecting motherhood’ business scientific backing. Importantly, WWF “Jump!”, Governments Ask “How which, in this aspirational age, is far generally avoided demonizing cor- High?”’, page 3), WWF is now waging easier than selling cars that might porations and capitalism. Indeed, it an effective PR campaign against the crash. Second, they have no pesky generally sought to partner multi- sugarcane industry by claiming that it is shareholders, stockbrokers, journalists national corporations, which now destroying the Great Barrier Reef. or even governments scrutinizing their provide it with a major source of its Once again there is no scientific basis actions. Indeed, they operate in a funding. for their claims. In reality, WWF is rarefied laissez-faire world of which Somewhere along the line, how- destroying people’s livelihood while capitalists can only dream. ever, both organizations (or sections of offering no protection to the reef. They must also be given credit for them at least) have lost the plot. How do groups such as WWF and doing a vital job and doing it well in Adrian Karatnycky and Arch AI maintain such good reputations their early days. AI established a Puddington—from Freedom House, an with such feral behaviour? Well, take a remarkable network of voluntary advocacy centre for democracy and read of the article by Graeme Good- groups around the world to keep an freedom—outline how AI and its ing (‘The Age and Bias’, page 11) about eye on human rights’ violations. AI’s colleagues in Human Rights Watch environmental reporting in the role was particularly valuable during have lost touch both with their roots Melbourne Age—it goes a long way to the Cold War when Western gov- and with reality, and joined the anti- providing an explanation. ernments had little effective leverage American chant. (See ‘The Human- I P A R E V I E W 2 MARCH 2002 WWF Says ‘Jump!’, Governments Ask ‘How High?’ JENNIFER MAROHASY AND GARY JOHNS ‘[We] base our work on sound science.’ WWF Vision Statement 2002 HE World Wide Fund for threatened dugong and green turtle, Environmentalist, labels the ‘Litany’: Nature (WWF) has are suffering from what we do on the that the environment is in poor shape, T mounted a campaign that land’. Imogen Zethoven, WWF Aus- resources are running out, the air and has lead to both the Com- tralia’s Great Barrier Reef campaign water are becoming more polluted, and monwealth and Queensland Gov- manager said that 750 inshore reefs industries must be heavily regulated.