What Australian papers are saying today, Aug 2, 2000

AAP General News (Australia)
08-03-2000
What Australian papers are saying today, Aug 2, 2000

SYDNEY, Aug 3 AAP - Yesterday's Reserve Bank decision to raise the official interest
rate was really about balancing risks between emerging inflation and a medium-term slowdown,
says The Australian Financial Review in its editorial today.

The RBA's statement gave considerably more weight to the signs of inflation emerging
rather than to indicators that the economyis slowing at this point, so the rate rise is
"a justifiable attempt by the RBA" to sustain growth in the economy.

No lessons seem to have been learnt from the earlier power failure at Sydney airport,
on July 6, says Sydney's The Daily Telegraph.

An inquiry found the outage resulted from human error during maintenance.

It obviously did not go far enough in addressing issues such as status of equipment,
staff structure and responsibilities, procedures and training, says the paper.

If it had, Tuesday's incident, which involved failure of back-up equipment, is unlikely
to have occurred.

Transport Minister John Anderson ordered yet another inquiry on Tuesday. Instead of
apportioning blame, he should fix the problem, and fix it in time for a safe and secure
Olympics, says The Telegraph.

The Australian says permitting IVF treatment for single mothers is not promoting it
or condoning it. Fertility treatment can be a safe alternative to natural conception through
casual sex.

"While taxpayers help raise the children, many of the single women... are financially strong."

By denying a small number of women a chance to begin a family, "the principle of equality
is jeopardised and the risk of tampering with our anti-discrimination laws great", says
the paper.

Mr Howard is trying to make capital out of the issue, says The Australian, by highlighting
splits between Kim Beazley, Victoria's Steve Bracks, and Catholic-leaning members and
libertarians and by shifting attention from Labor's national conference.

The Sydney Morning Herald says Mr Howard, in seeking to deny single women and lesbians
access to IVF treatment, is sending the message that since they won't or can't find a
man, the women should forget about having kids. Those who end up with fatherless families
are a different category.

Another problem with the move, says the Herald, is that Cabinet is "consistently conservative"

on an issue of social policy important to the religious Right, but inconsistent on State
and Territory rights, as seen in its decisions on mandatory sentencing and euthanasia
legislation in the Northern Territory.

The Federal cabinet's stand on IVF treatment for single women and the Federal Court
decision that prompted it provide the kind of ethical dilemmas that will be typical in
this century, says The Adelaide Advertiser.

It is impossible to disagree with John Howard's position that children have a right
to a mother and father and that the nuclear family is the bedrock of our society, it says.

But nor can it be denied that single-parent families exist for a whole variety of reasons.

There is also the argument that IVF programs were set up for infertile couples, not
for those who "wanted to sidestep nature".

Another consideration is that changing the law will deny women the basic right of childbirth.

"Whether one sides with the court or the Prime Minister, each has reminded us that
these matters will not go away. Somehow they must be resolved."

Brisbane's The Courier-Mail says although by definition it is discriminatory to exclude
lesbians from IVF programs or fertility clinics, society often weighs the rights of individuals
against other needs and condones discrimination.

In this case, the newspaper says, it is certainly reasonable for society to say single
women should not receive any government subsidy if they use the scarce and expensive IVF
and fertility clinic resources.

"The public should not have to pay for their lifestyle decisions, but those decisions
should remain the province of the individual," The Courier-Mail says.

The Herald Sun says the ability to procreate life in a test-tube forces us to view
the rights of children from a dramatically new perspective.

This is not a judgemental debate on how people elect to live their lives.

Society must decide whether the rights of adults should overshadow the rights of as-yet-unborn
children to begin life nurtured by the love of a mother and father.

"We believe Mr Howard has made the right choice," says The Herald Sun.

The Age says children's rights to know their biological parents should not be ignored.

In deciding who should have access to IVF treatment, the proper focus should not be
the rights of parents to conceive, but the rights of the child they wish to raise, it
says.

The experience of adopted children shows they should be allowed to know where they come from.

The Age in the past has argued that because IVF procedures are expensive and of limited
availability, couples most capable of providing stable, caring homes should be given priority.

"What also need to be acknowledged is the right of children to know the identities
of their mother and father."

AAP rs

KEYWORD: EDITORIALS

2000 AAP Information Services Pty Limited (AAP) or its Licensors.