Letters to the Editor

September 28, 2007
Issue 

Climate change

You might be surprised that Clive Hamilton's book Scorcher: The Dirty Politics of Climate Change is actually an update of The Dirty Politics of Climate Change from 2001.

For all the revelations he gives about Australia's appalling greenhouse gas emissions (which, given the fragility of Australia's ecology, are even worse than they appear on paper), he overlooks some important facts.

The power of the greenhouse mafia in Australia is not something established under Howard or even Keating. The 1980 Lonie Report — upon which transport planning in Victoria is based and that recommended huge public transport cuts and vast, utterly wasteful, investment in roads — was written by exactly the same types of organisations as Guy Pearse has shown have written Australia's environment and energy policies under Howard.

Neither Pearse (in High and Dry) nor Hamilton mention the Lonie Report. This report, along with the 1981 ONA report that your reviewer Kamala Emanuel (GLW #712) mentions, is proof that Australia's inability to respond to climate change relates to political problems far more deep-rooted than either Pearse or Hamilton admits. They are so deep-rooted that only a complete destruction of the present system to seize the wealth of the corporate polluters has any chance of reducing Australia's greenhouse gas emissions.

Some writers have said Australia is well on its way to becoming "the outstanding global polluter". They are right, and we need a revolution to transfer every last cent of the corporate polluters' profits to public transit and renewable energy to ensure Australia becomes what its ecology dictates it should be — the first country in the world to attain zero emissions.

Julien Peter Benney

Carlton, Vic [Abridged]

Palestine

In his letter in GLW #724, Vic Alhadeff argues, "why not find a joint Palestinian-Israeli humanitarian project to support". According to his view, does that mean Jews in Germany circa 1940 should have found some joint humanitarian project with their oppressors? Would any normal human being accept doing deals with those who have stolen your land and brutally murdered thousands of your people?

Perhaps Alhadeff should let us know whether or not he believes in the UN Human Rights Declaration — that would be a great place to start.

"Hamas is bent on the destruction of Israel", he claims. As usual, he completely leap-frogs over the only real question that matters which is: Does Israel accept that reasonable civilised nations should adhere to international law?

Why does he not openly and publicly say that Israel is a racist country that legally discriminates against those that are not Jewish? Israeli politicians have been very open in what they think of a Palestinian state, i.e., there will be no state that can actually be called a state, non-contiguous "bantustans" are not a state but separate ghettos.

Hamas offered Israel a ceasefire years ago, but Israel refused because its rulers do not want peace.

I'd like Alhadeff to show a map of Israel and its final borders. Is it not surprising that Israel has yet to set its final borders?

Contrary to Alhadeff, resistance is not "terrorism" — unless you believe that resisting the Nazis on the streets of Paris or Berlin was terrorism?

Well done GLW for your great reporting.

Bart Ahluwalia

Penrith, NSW [Abridged]

Double standards

Imagine this. Some left-wing party — let's call it the Australian Workers Party — creates a raft of workplace legislation called "Boss Choices". It allows the workers at any company that employs more than 25 people to elect or sack their boss for "operational reasons".

As part of Boss Choices, a new task force, the Australian Corporate Executive Officer Inquisition Commission (ACEO-IC), is set up with sweeping powers to secretly interrogate high ranking managers, CEOs and board members. It is rumoured the ACEO-IC will eventually cover all corporations, however initially it covers only the big mining corporations BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto (although it has powers to interrogate any bank connected to these companies so that in effect it also covers the big four Australian banks).

Managers and CEOs who are inquisitioned by the ACEO-IC do not have the right to silence and must answer any question asked of them, including obscure questions about their personal lives. They may not discuss the content of the meeting with anyone (including their spouse or partner), and may be imprisoned for up to six months or fined for refusing to answer questions.

CEOs may also be fined up to two thirds of their annual income if it is found they have reduced wages, cut meal breaks or safety conditions or refused to pay overtime.

How would the corporate media portray the ACEO-IC? Surely it would be described as a despicable, repressive Stalinist secret police unit; an assault on freedom and democracy; a vile creation of the insidious Workers Party.

So why is it that both the Liberal and Labor parties, and the mainstream media, support the Australian Building and Construction Commission (ABCC) — a veritable Gestapo that subjects unionised building workers to precisely these extreme measures?

Zane Alcorn

East Brunswick, Vic [Abridged]

David Rojas

David Rojas, the delegate leading the strike against AWAs at Esselte, in Sydney's southwest, returned to work on September 27. All workers except Rojas returned to work on September 10, after 14 weeks of picketing the company against AWAs. A court case decided there was no reason to keep Rojas out of work.

Rachel Evans

Parramatta, NSW

Nuclear power

The left and eco-socialists are caught in the same bind the broader Green movement is in — no real plan that can cheaply and practically be implemented to do away with the largest single source of human-made carbon: coal. Only nuclear can do this. But the movement is so fixated on renewable energy that real carbon free base load power from atomic plants is ignored or opposed, usually on totally false arguments about costs and a series of fake "would of/could of" arguments about spent nuclear fuel.

Regardless of how much efficiency is engineered into society, all systems of advancing human civilisation, especially one based on socialist property relations, will require an electrical grid. A grid capable of bringing the worlds poor out of misery. A grid capable of supplying high-energy refining of hydrogen, desalinating sea water and other products necessary for a world with billions more added to it. Solar and wind in fact do not constitute a reliable way of developing such a grid.

We need this debate and we need it now. Unlike nuclear energy, coal is killing is people now, not "maybe" or "possibly in the future", but right now. See China, see India. It's real and this is one of the main motivations for nuclear energy today and why so many formally anti-nuclear activists, like myself, have "changed sides". GLW ought to change too.

David Walters

Via email

ALP

Now that the policies of the ALP are so similar to those of the Liberal Party, this has led to some confusion as to what the initial "ALP" stands for. For over a century any educated Australian knew they meant Australian Labor Party but now that they have come to mean "Another Liberal Party" this needs to be made clear to every voter. If this is not done soon it could leave the party open to a charge of misleading advertising, or at least misrepresentation any time the initials ALP are used.

Given that we now have, in effect, two Liberal parties this leaves the Greens as the only viable alternative for voters who want a real change in the upcoming election.

And there are other implications. Currently Kevin Rudd has the title "Leader of the Opposition". This seems a little unfair given that most of his policies are in no way opposed to those of the government's. Therefore, isn't it time for Bob Brown, as leader of the Greens, to be given this title?

If Kevin Rudd becomes prime minister after the election and the two main parties decide to amalgamate (and why not?) then Peter Costello could become his deputy, making for a more united and harmonious government.

Ross Edmonds

Jesmond, NSW

You need Green Left, and we need you!

Green Left is funded by contributions from readers and supporters. Help us reach our funding target.

Make a One-off Donation or choose from one of our Monthly Donation options.

Become a supporter to get the digital edition for $5 per month or the print edition for $10 per month. One-time payment options are available.

You can also call 1800 634 206 to make a donation or to become a supporter. Thank you.