Treasurer Kevin Foley should abandon his plan to sell government employee housing in country areas.

Teachers have this week highlighted how the policy will adversely effect recruitment and retention.

Government housing is a vital public asset, especially for university graduates from the city who relocate to the country.

Police officers, nurses and allied health staff are among those who will potentially be disadvantaged.

It is difficult enough now to attract professional people to work in some rural communities without removing a worthwhile incentive.

Housing is one of the most important considerations that anyone has when contemplating a move.

The guarantee of affordable housing in a good area is clearly an enticement that most people value.

The motive to sell appears to be simply a cash grab to prop up the budget's bottom line.

It's a short-term financial fix that potentially creates a long-term staffing problem.

The arguments about giving people a choice and taking into account the commercial rental market don't stack up.

People already have choice and the rental market could change.

Western Australia provides a good illustration of how economic circumstances can radically influence the supply and demand of housing.

Government housing guarantees accommodation for essential workers regardless of economic fluctuations.

Mr Foley can't predict what the commercial market will be like in 20 years and he won't still be in office to accept responsibility for his shortsighted policy.

For the sake of current government employees and the future of regional communities he should reconsider the sell-off.

In 1916 then Prime Minister Billy Hughes was expelled from the Labor Party over his continuing advocacy of wartime conscription.

Mr Hughes carried almost half the parliamentary Labor Party with him in forming a new political entity, while consigning the ALP to a decade in the wilderness.

Malcolm Turnbull is shaping as the Billy Hughes of the new millennium.

He unambiguously staked his leadership on winning Coalition support for a deal with Labor over an emissions trading scheme.

Chaos followed a joint party room meeting on Tuesday night as Mr Turnbull, a former merchant baker, employed creative accounting to claim majority support for his position.

It was said he counted all shadow ministers in support of his recommendation (based on the principle of cabinet solidarity), when the reality was that several were opposed.

He also did not count the votes of Nationals Senators, who were called temporarily to the chamber for a division on the Youth Allowance.

Yesterday, he invited a leadership challenge to assert his authority and won.

However, the 13-vote margin does not include Nationals MPs, meaning that Mr Turnbull cannot claim a mandate to lead the Coalition.

This has shades of another historical drama.

When Harold Holt drowned in 1967, Country Party leader John McEwen refused to serve under the Liberals' heir apparent William McMahon, handing the Coalition leadership and prime ministership to John Gorton.

Nationals leader Warren Truss doesn't have anywhere near as much influence, but the whole issue of an ETS changes the dynamics of the Coalition and presents a new challenge for the Nationals.

In the 2009-10 Budget, the Federal Government committed $560m over five years to establish a network of about 10 best-practice regional cancer centres and associated accommodation facilities.

One of those 10 facilities should be located in Mount Gambier.

Congratulations to Grant District Council for advocating for this to occur.

The government recently advertised for applications and it would be shameful if there wasn't a coordinated effort to establish this much-needed service in Mount Gambier.

The relevant parties include Country Health SA, Mount Gambier Hospital, the Health Advisory Council, Mount Gambier City Council, Grant District Council and SELGA.

Who among them is leading the push?

Ideally, Health Minister John Hill will take up the baton and instruct his department to make this a priority project for South Australia.

In a statement earlier this month, Federal Health Minister Nicola Roxon said: "The regional cancer centres will improve access and support for cancer patients in rural and regional Australia, and help close the gap in cancer outcomes between the city and the country."

What a tremendous innovation by the Commonwealth.

"It is of great concern that for the 30pc of Australians living in rural and remote areas, outcomes are worse than for people living in the city," Ms Roxon said.

"Studies have shown that survival tends to be lower for people living in rural and remote areas compared with people living in metropolitan areas, especially for lung, cervical and prostate cancer."

An opportunity now exists to address these issues in Mount Gambier - if someone is willing to lead the way.

Authorities have got the new fire danger warning system wrong and need to urgently rethink the strategy.

The warning yesterday of "catastrophic" conditions for the Northwest Pastoral and Flinders districts is an early indicator the new system is flawed.

Eleven schools were closed because of predicted "code red" fire conditions.

Temperatures in the Mid North were expected to reach 41 degrees at Port Pirie and 43 at Port Augusta. That's hot for November, but it's not unusual for those areas.

The buildup to summer may or may not have been worse than usual, but each year will present its own challenges depending on the amount of rain in spring and winter.

The initial danger with the new warning system is that we create unnecessary fear and uncertainty, particularly among children.

The weather bureau only issued its warning of catastrophe at 4pm, after schools had closed for the day.

This would have created significant disruption for families and possibly frightened the young ones.

Catastrophe is a word that should not be used lightly.

You could almost argue that people should stop living in places at risk of bushfire altogether if we're going to close down schools when it reaches 40 degrees and tell everyone a disaster is possible.

That's not the message authorities ought to be giving.

An immediate review should set guidelines for the weather bureau based on average temperatures over a week, maximums climbing above 42 degrees and/or northerly winds above 60kmh.

There needs to be some defined criteria that everyone understands.

It is something of a vexed issue whether governments should apologise for wrongs that were committed in the past.

Is a child responsible for the sins of a grandparent?

However, a number of precedents have been set and it's difficult to argue against the potential healing value of such acts.

We have had apologies to the "stolen generations", the orphans who were abused in state care, and now the "forgotten Australians".

The quotes around these terms do not imply doubt of wrongdoing, but illustrate that a degree of lobbying and even marketing has gone into achieving political outcomes.

How far should governments go in apologising for past mistakes?

Terrible abuse has occurred previously in mental institutions; children have been let down by welfare authorities; pensioners have suffered neglect in some aged care facilities.

Do we draw the line at 1950, 1900 or earlier?

Some might say that each case should be treated on its merits, but even this approach is flawed.

Mental patients who were abused decades ago are unlikely to have many advocates, political clout or even public sympathy.

Despite these misgivings, there are positives that can be achieved from recognition and reconciliation.

It was pleasing to see the genuine outpouring of love that followed the heartfelt apologies to the British child migrants.

Many felt overlooked earlier when there was a concentrated focus on Aboriginal children who were removed from their families.

On balance, any healing which comes from these apologies makes them worthwhile.

Telstra cops a lot of criticism, much of it deserved.

However, when it comes to public payphones, a reality check is appropriate.

Rewind a few years to the former Telecom and the Postmaster General, there were payphones dotted at regular intervals.

Mobile phones and the internet didn't exist, milk was delivered by horse-driven carriages and television was black and white.

Fast forward to the modern era and nearly everyone has a mobile phone.

Admittedly there are some people who haven't adopted mobile technology, some who can't afford it and some who are too young to use it.

For these people, public payphones may occasionally be necessary.

Fortunately, many service stations, shopping centres and hotels provide public phones as a commercial service.

When it comes to maintaining payphones on residential streets, the cost needs to be balanced against the need.

Unfortunately, increasing vandalism has escalated the cost in many cases while the demand is diminishing.

It is unreasonable to expect Telstra to provide this service in residential areas where it cannot recover costs and vandalism is rife.

A more realistic view is that Telstra should be required to maintain payphones at post offices and postal agencies, where security is more easily assured.

While there may be a sentimental attachment to having payphones on street corners, like delivering milk to the doorstep, commonsense suggests it is time to move on and face reality.

Telstra is not the villain in this case. If communities want payphones in areas where they aren't viable, it should be a government responsibility.

The wine industry has commendably developed a mostly self-help strategy to tackle the significant challenges it faces.

The Wine Restructuring Action Agenda has urged growers to cut production of grapes and wine by 20pc to solve the industry's over-production problems.

The report was a joint effort of the major industry organisations and confirms a surplus of 100 million cases a year, which is expected to double within two years.

This unfortunate situation is purely a result of market forces and needs an adjustment in the market to rectify itself.

To some extent the problems were predictable up to a decade ago.

Australian grape production grew quickly as exports enjoyed a seemingly endless upward trend.

All bubbles burst eventually.

The South American and eastern European wine industries were relatively undeveloped and have competed increasingly with Australian wine across the price spectrum.

The Australian industry has also expanded outside traditional grape-growing areas such as Coonawarra and the Barossa Valley.

At some point production was going to exceed the demand for supply.

For that reason the industry is right not to seek a government bail-out.

However, there is still a role for governments to assist.

The restructuring agenda seeks government support for growers to exit the industry and that's a reasonable proposition.

It is not sustainable to continue producing grapes at prices below the cost of production.

Rather than see the industry wither on the vine, the government should help growers to diversify and switch to other crops.

Failure to do so will be to the detriment of rural communities.