National Interest

Now for your feedback on last week's edition of the National Interest, in which we discussed the Northern Territory election with leading political players.

In the process I raised the issue of the Blue Mud Bay decision in the High Court, giving traditional Aboriginal owners control over tidal waters along the coast. I clumsily described this as a 'native title' matter. That prompted a correction from Chips Mackinolty, who points out that the High Court decision arose from an interpretation of the 1976 Northern Territory Aboriginal Land Rights Act:

"It's an important distinction, and the lack of knowledge of a distinction between Land Rights Act in the NT and Native Title led to considerable grief during Alexander Downer's short stint as federal opposition leader in the 1990s. In short, the NT Aboriginal Land Rights Act provides a statutory regime for the recognition of inalienable, communal freehold by Aboriginal Traditional Owners of lands in the Northern Territory alone. It is far more powerful than the limited so-called 'bundle of rights' conferred by the Native Title Act across other lands and waters in the Territory and the rest of Australia."

One of the people I spoke to about the NT election on last week's program was Territory Treasurer Delia Lawrie. Among the issues we discussed was how to get teachers into remote communities - and keep them there.

Ms Lawrie said the government had offered teachers a range of incentives as part of wage negotiations under an EBA - an Enterprise Bargaining Agreement. This prompted Sandy to post a comment in the guestbook:

"Delia Lawrie has just indicated that the current round of EBA negotiations between teachers and the government was agreed to by both parties prior to the election announcement. I don't think so! I am a teacher in a very remote area and no agreement was reached. Negotiations were halted because the election was sprung upon us."

Mark - who I guess is from Alice Springs - also had a comment on the election:

"Almost the entire Alice Springs Branch of the ALP is refusing to assist with this election. They will not letterbox, ring radio or campaign in any way. Among the issues that anger them are uranium mines, the federal intervention [in indigenous affairs], income quarantining, the forced takeover of Aboriginal land, the diversion of federal funds from remote and Aboriginal [areas] to waterfront development, photo ID to buy alcohol and alcohol restrictions. Many comment that the only way they can tell the difference between ALP and CLP is that CLP would repeal the photo ID requirements."

David called the National Interest feedback line to comment on my interview with CLP politician Terry Mills... and other matters:

"Peter, you interviewed the NT opposition leader about the extraordinarily early election call by the Labor government. I think a question that could always be asked in those circumstances is 'will you support a fixed term?', using perhaps New South Wales as a good example of [fixed terms] working well. Also, I didn't like there being Radio National promotions recently in the middle of the National Interest program. A bit like SBS cutting up programs with SBS program promotions."

Thanks for those comments, David. And as for Radio National's addiction to promoting its own wares... I'll pass your comments on to ABC management.

In last week's round-up I discussed the complexities of unit pricing - the idea that supermarkets should be encouraged, or perhaps forced, to provide us with a simple price per kilogram, or price per litre, for the goods on the shelf, so that we can easily compare the value of different brands and different packet sizes.

Robert from Canberra reckons the competition watchdog - the ACCC - should go a step further and ban 'multi-buys' (that's where you get a cheaper price for buying two or more packets of a certain item, rather than just one):

"The benefit of multi-buys to the supermarket chain is obvious, but what does this do for the customer as compared with an ordinary 'special' other than to make it harder for us to work out what the actual price is and to make us buy more than we need? Multi-buys also discriminate against those of us who, for whatever reason, can only purchase one item at a time - in my case because I have to carry everything home on my back as a cyclist."

The tactic of offering multi-buys will certainly complicate unit pricing.

It's obvious enough that if my gourmet muesli costs $5 for a 500 gram pack then I'm paying $10 a kilogram. But if I can buy two packets of said gourmet muesli for $9, then that will result in a cheaper price per kilo. So, will the supermarket provide me with two sets of unit prices? And what happens if I buy three packets? Does the third packet cost $5 or $4.50?

It's all very confusing. And no one seems to have answered my query yet as to how you set a unit price for toilet-paper. Should you calculate the cost per sheet or the cost per roll? Is it worth paying more for pattern prints or is the decisive indication of value to be found in the level of recycled paper that goes into the product, especially for those willing to spend an extra penny for the environment?

Perhaps it's a matter of 'never mind the price, feel the quality'.

To make your comment on the National Interest, just click the 'have your say' button at the top of this page, or if you're more of a verbal type of personal, then our feedback line is at your disposal, 24 hours a day: 1300 936 222.

Presenter

Peter Mares

Producer

James Panichi