Quadrant Online is one of those internet publications that have tremendous insight into Oz life, current affairs and politics, worth reading for it’s sometimes controversial, but always entertaining columns from a range of qualified and sometimes unqualified scribes. Take Jonathon Holmes for example, a died-in-the-wool lefty progressive television personality. His latest appears to be a soul-searching ‘come to Jesus’ moment:
One of retirement’s great joys, according to many who have returned cue to rack, is the luxury of time to review and reflect upon those years when shoulder was pressed to wheel. That is certainly the situation of Jonathan Holmes, not so long ago Media Watch ‘s chief scold and high priest in the Church of the Authorised Narrative, who now punctuates his golden years with columns for the Fairfax press, the latest of which appears today. It will make him no friends among former colleagues at the ABC, nor with those who proclaim themselves “refugee advocates”, as Holmes has invested some thought in the matter of how Australia might best have coped with those who arrived without invitation and mostly aboard flotillas of infamously leaky boats. His conclusion: the Pacific Solution was the only approach capable of stopping the flood:
Read the whole thing, poor old Jonathon is in quite a quandary.
Another column investigating, or rather mocking the Green agenda is worth a look: The Enigma of the Greens.
Personally, I find the current Green Agenda(s) nauseating, as this snippet shows that ‘welfare state’ is their base:
“Labor, please don’t join the Libs (sic) tax cuts arms race,” came a plaintive tweet from Adam Bandt on budget night. “The welfare state as we know it is at stake.” It was the perfect demonstration of the definitional issues that confuse the Greens. Take that “welfare state”. What the Greens see as a safety net most others regard as a feather bed – a feather bed complete with a turn-down service and complimentary mints left on freshly-plumped pillows every night.
The UN also failed to mention the challenges of ‘carbon trading’ in a ‘market’ lacking genuine independent regulation and tainted by corruption. According to the Morgan Foundation here, for example, the NZ government has put:
“$200 million in the hands of foreign criminals for no environmental benefit…One type of Kyoto carbon credit (the Emission Reduction Unit) was overcome by fraud and corruption in Ukraine and Russia. Virtually all of the credits issued by these countries are ‘hot air’ – they do not represent true emissions reductions.”
No surprise, then, to learn that Australia seems determined to head down the same path. Under the latest CCCCC plan — approved by Shorten and his climate crypt-kickers last Tuesday – “an emitter can buy low-cost international permits to offset its excess.” Perhaps these permits are “currently cheaper than $1 per tonne” for a good reason. Could it be that they are the inevitable outcome of a corrupt system?
Go to Quadrant and check it out, May Issue available now.