I ALWAYS wince a little when I read ordinary people defend the excesses of Scott Morrison, even when I read it in the Herald.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
The bushfires were nearly two years ago, but we still hear his neglect and insensitivity defended. COVID has been with us for a long time, but we somehow are supposed to accept he did his job, and nothing is his fault. Bluster.
The vaccinations that are now getting us out of lockdown and isolation should have been delivered much much sooner. What should have been a race towards freedom was a false start for our PM. More bluster.
Reasoning for nuclear submarines should have been front page news, and an interesting debate in parliament. Instead, we have stories of betrayal, dishonesty and a broken relationship with a respected European friend. No apology, or explanation - just bluster.
From leading scientists to school children, climate change is a primary concern. For Morrison, only re-election seems primary. We've had too much bluster, too much nonsense, and now, with a Glasgow ticket in his pocket, he has yet to organise support from his restless Coalition partners, a mess of his own making. While our leader believes his own bluster, many others are looking for substance. Let's all hope he doesn't embarrass us. Australians want more than bluster from his climate summit speech at the end of this month. I'm not sure he gets that.
Warren Dean, Newcastle East
Time is ticking away
THERE seems to be a common belief that we can lick the climate problem if the world can reach net zero emissions by 2030. Sorry, but it's too late for that. The world's climate has enormous inertia, and our problems with bushfires and wild weather stem from failure to act over 20 years ago. The 2030 goal - which has since been pushed out to 2050 - was never a sensible goal. It was reached only because of compromises with the fossil fuel industry. To have a reasonable outcome, we should have achieved very substantial progress by 2020. We missed that chance, because of political procrastination. Australia was one of the worst in that respect, with a rise in emissions every year since carbon trading was scrapped. If we stick to the 2030 target, things will get worse but still survivable. Forget about a 2050 goal. If we wait until then to finish the job, the world is in very deep trouble.
Prime Minister Scott Morrison was right with his original decision not to go to Glasgow. We should send someone with a better reputation on climate, and someone without the baggage of having dinosaurs as political partners.
Peter Moylan, Glendale
Big players needed at the table
THE leaders of the world's largest producers of CO2 emissions, China and India, will not be attending the upcoming UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow. Yet parts of the press, the greenies and climate change activists are agitating that our PM must attend this conference. China and India, classified as "developing nations", are not required to commit to reducing their emissions and are building coal-fired power stations by the tens.
So how smart are we in Australia when we are setting net zero emissions targets based on phasing out coal-fired power stations with unreliable renewable and thus ending local manufacturing which will then be taken up by China and India? Britain, California and Texas are now realising their folly in relying on renewables which have seen power outages and soaring power bills. The developed world is being outplayed by the Chinese and their developing allies.
John Cooper, Charlestown
Assisted dying bill is conservative
ALEX Greenwich's voluntary assisted dying (VAD) bill will probably be voted into law by the end of 2021. This will make NSW the last state in Australia to adopt a VAD law.
While the existing bill benefits from the experience of VAD laws in other states, it is conservative. Will many terminally ill people die in agony before they receive permission to receive VAD? NSW MPs will conduct a conscience vote on the VAD Bill rather than vote as directed by their parties. But MPs' consciences are unlikely to match those of their constituents. On such an important issue, why not allow voters to have their say via a referendum? It could even allow voters to choose various options for eligibility, waiting period and VAD methods.
What will be the response of churches to VAD? Many churches that initially opposed gay marriage now conduct gay weddings. For people who choose VAD, will churches now conduct VAD farewells or heavenly transitions instead of funerals?
What will be the response to VAD of the palliative care industry such as nursing homes in NSW? While palliative care has improved dramatically, the latest medical procedures are very expensive. At present, terminally ill people who choose these procedures will need to be wealthy.
We should expect the private for-profit palliative care industry to scream moral outrage at the prospect of VAD. But do they simply not want to kill off the geese that lay them golden eggs? On that score, expect the palliative care industry to call for more government funding.
The bill doesn't address a growing problem: how do we treat terminally ill people who no longer have a legal capacity to choose VAD, such as dementia sufferers?
Also, as NSW opens up post-pandemic, many of our elderly, and those with co-morbidity problems, vaccinated or not, will catch COVID-19.
Will these people die miserable, lonely deaths, or will these people receive merciful VAD?
Geoff Black, Caves Beach
Palliative care is better option
I AGREE with Helene Shepherd, (Letters, 18/10), that no one should have to suffer unbearable pain. But palliative care, not VAD, is the better option.
Former NSW Labor deputy premier and chair of Catholic Health Australia John Watkins recently wrote in a Sydney newspaper, pointing to new "quantum advances" in palliative care like intrathecal care and nerve blocking which enable people with life-ending conditions to achieve a quality of life inaccessible last century.
But making modern palliative care available to all who need it would cost an extra $275 million a year, according to the Australian Medical Association.
John Watkins says offering VAD and not modern supportive care creates a society where terminally ill rich people get to extend their lives, achieve some level of closure and peace, and then die without pain, while terminally ill poor people will be increasingly pressured to shuffle off and die quickly "with dignity".
Under the Greenwich VAD bill there is no need for a referral to palliative care, not even the need for a specialist in a person's illness or disease to assess a VAD request.
And with VAD, governments aren't under pressure to expand palliative care.
Peter Dolan, Lambton
SHORT TAKES
THE photo on Monday's front page of Ollie and Benji ('School bags packed', Newcastle Herald 18/10) is terrific. Congratulations to the photographer, Jonathan Carroll.
Geoff Warland, Boolaroo
IN response to Bill Snow, (Short Takes, 14/10), do you realise that Sydneysiders will be able to travel freely to the regions at the end of the month? Get in quick. Only a few more days for you to grab your torch and pitchfork.
Rachel Jenkins, Waterloo
WE are coming out of government detention. Life is going back to what resembles somewhat normality. When will special powers to police be revoked?
Gary Hayward, Cardiff
FREEDOM is about being vaccinated. Freedom is about living your life without fear of catching COVID and dieing. Freedom is knowing you are not going to pass COVID to your family, friend or neighbors who may die. If Steven Busch believes his freedom is being coerced, bullied or held to ransom. I'm all for it. Just get vaccinated and enjoy the freedom.
Phill Payne, Gateshead
I WONDER what Scott Morrison and the Murdoch press' point of view on climate policy would be if Donald Trump won the US election? I wonder what their position will be if Donald Trump, somehow, regains control in the future?
George Horton, Cooranbong
WHY do we seem to be spending more time deciding how to protect the moon and its resources than the very planet we live on? Perhaps if the Nationals lived on the moon it would be better for us all, including ScoMo.
Vic Davies, Tighes Hill
JOHN Cooper, the oceans and atmosphere determine who's in and who's out of the biosphere, (Letters, 14/10). The extremely sober International Energy Agency warns, renewables' take up, must be three times faster, in the next 10 years. Years of (often bickering) inaction, mean, humankind's really made a rod for our backs.
Graeme Tychsen, Toronto
IN reply to Debra Forbes, (Short Takes, 13/10), Annastacia Palaszczuk, could be dreaming about the idea of turning the state of Queensland into the Democratic Republic of Annastacia.
David Davies, Blackalls Park
AT last! Someone has had the guts to introduce mandatory vaccination. A relatively small state, the NT, is showing leadership by legislating if you work with the public, no jab no job. It is to be hoped the other states will follow, although I won't be holding my breath.
Bill Snow, Stockton
LLOYD Davies, (Short Takes, 14/10), wholeheartedly, the deniers say the vax is an experiment, so far it has been "experimented" on almost 7 billion people worldwide. So a few hundred have had bad reactions, but all good for the majority. I also agree with Bill Snow's short take.