Growing anti-environmentalism and the Queensland election.

14 February 2012.

It is alarming to hear, as Brian Williams reported in the Courier Mail last weekend,  that conservative Queensland politicians are backtracking on the slow but steady environmental progress that has been made over recent years. They spruik the myth that the public wants less government involvement in environmental issues. As we enter the second decade of the 21^st century, nothing could be further from the truth.

By the year 2050 the world’s population will increase from 7 to 10 billion, and average consumption rates per head grow by a factor of 5. When combined, these trends mean that our environmental impact in the near future will be ten times what it is today. Our present situation is serious enough, but it will seem like nothing compared to what is coming.

In addition, we have to deal with the “ticking time bomb” legacies from our past decades of environmental laissez-faire: biodiversity reserves now no longer able to maintain themselves against the onslaught of weeds and feral animals that we have unleashed on them, oceans full of plastic and food chains full of toxins.   

At the same time public demands for cleaner, safer and healthier water, air, food, cities and industries are rising exponentially. So does the expectation on government to provide effective regulation and policing of environmental standards . Tolerance for environmental “accidents” has already shrunk to zero-even when the polluter is made to pay.     

Further, the coming years will also see extraordinary technological innovations, like electric cars, smart grids, decentralised power systems, green chemistry, genetic engineering, climate engineering.  All of which will require radical new environmental policies from governments.

In an era when our environmental health is under assault on all fronts, people want to see bold and visionary environmental projects and policies. Protect the whole Coral Sea, not just little patches. Create nationwide wildlife corridors,protect whole river catchments, zone complete mountain ranges.

  An important political side effect of this coming tsunami of rapidly accelerating impacts and expectations is that no-one will be immune to it. Whether you are a mining billionaire or a city worker, and whether it is a CSG well, a coal train, the loss of a much loved patch of bush, pollution of a beach or river or impassable congestion on a suburban road, there will be some inescapable impact in your back yard. You will want government action. 

Of course a return to the nineteenth century and its environmental values has electoral appeal. Everyone dreams of the freedom of great wide open spaces, where “the deer and the buffalo roam”; of a great ‘eternal frontier’ (to borrow Tim Flannery’s book tile) where mighty physical work creates great wealth and prosperity, unfettered by government regulation.

That world passed away two centuries ago. In the 21^st century the freedom to fish is utterly depended on the effective management of great marine reserves, policed by well-resourced rangers. The freedom to watch wildlife is utterly dependent on the existence of intensively managed and regulated biodiversity reserves. The enjoyment of clean air and water, and the prosperity resulting from a stable climate and manageable sea-level rise, can result only from the stringent, carrot-and-stick, government policies.

In the 21^st century enhancing our environments is one area where we the public will demand a lot more from our governments. There is no way that can be achieved by cutting funding and resourcing.

Climate News 10 January 2012.

1. Naomi Klein on the real Climate Revolution

There is an outstanding essay, entitled “Capitalism vs. the Climate” by Naomi Klein that appeared in the 28 November 2011 issue of The Nation (see http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=0,0) and which was posted on 20^th December on The Green Pages (http://www.thegreenpages.com.au/news/page/8/). While she focuses on the almost bizarre political scene in the U.S.A. today where politicians hardly dare to mention “climate”,  much of what she says obviously applies to Australia.

Klein argues that acting on climate change really is part of a revolutionary world change- exactly as right-wing politicians fear, but which many climate activists prefer to deny.  The quote below sets the scene for her excellent account.

“[The success of climate denialists in the U.S.A.]..means that the climate movement needs to have one hell of a comeback. For this to happen, the left is going to have to learn from the right. Denialists gained traction by making climate about economics: action will destroy capitalism, they have claimed, killing jobs and sending prices soaring. But at a time when a growing number of people agree with the protesters at Occupy Wall Street, many of whom argue that capitalism-as-usual is itself the cause of lost jobs and debt slavery, there is a unique opportunity to seize the economic terrain from the right. This would require making a persuasive case that the real solutions to the climate crisis are also our best hope of building a much more enlightened economic system—one that closes deep inequalities, strengthens and transforms the public sphere, generates plentiful, dignified work and radically reins in corporate power. It would also require a shift away from the notion that climate action is just one issue on a laundry list of worthy causes vying for progressive attention. Just as climate denialism has become a core identity issue on the right, utterly entwined with defending current systems of power and wealth, the scientific reality of climate change must, for progressives, occupy a central place in a coherent narrative about the perils of unrestrained greed and the need for real alternatives”.

“Building such a transformative movement may not be as hard as it first appears. Indeed, if you ask the Heartlanders, climate change makes some kind of left-wing revolution virtually inevitable, which is precisely why they are so determined to deny its reality. Perhaps we should listen to their theories more closely—they might just understand something the left still doesn’t get”.

Don’t miss this outstanding piece  (http://www.thenation.com/article/164497/capitalism-vs-climate?page=0,0).

2. Methane releases and the end of the world.

Further to yesterday’s email reference to methane releases in Siberia  (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/vast-methane-plumes-seen-in-arctic-ocean-as-sea-ice-retreats-6276278.html) a new entry titled 'Much ado about methane' has been posted to RealClimate.org. at : http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=10412, arguing that CO2 is still the real problem.(Thanks to John Ransley for this information).

3. A.F.P. spying on green activists

The Sydney Morning Herald on 7^th January 2012 carried the story that the Resources and Energy Minister, Martin Ferguson, has secretly pushed for increased surveillance by federal police intelligence officers of environmental activists who have been protesting peacefully at coal-fired power stations and coal export facilities. Read more at   http://www.smh.com.au/environment/afp-spies-targeting-green-activists-20120106-1pogq.html.

Climate News 9 January 2012.

Happy New Year to all our readers.

In case you  missed them, here are some gems that were published over the Christmas – New Year break.

George Monbiot’s piece in The Guardian is an excellent example of why Bob Katter’s “citizen’s right to do whatever you like in your own backyard” is no freedom at all (6 January 2012):http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2012/jan/06/why-libertarians-must-deny-climage-change

Ben Pobjie wrote a most entertaining satirical piece reviewing 2011 on the ABC’s The Drum on 30 December 2011, entitled: “2011 was a bad year, 2012 will be much worse”: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/3751692.html

Paul Sheehan, a generally conservative writer, wonders (SMH 9 January 2011) why imminent global water shortages, most of which result from the demands of energy production, attract so much less attention than the debt crisis: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/energy-use-sucking-up-a-precious-resource-20120108-1pq0i.html

Lenore Taylor, in the SMH on 24 December 2011, exposed the “faux protesters” created by Tony Abbott to oppose climate action. See: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/year-of-the-faux-protester-20111223-1p8d4.html

Ian Plimer’s latest attempt to confuse the public even further about climate science received two blunt rebuttals. The Australian ran a piece on 31 December 2011 by geologist Mike Sandiford, Professor of Geology at the University of Melbourne ( http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/opinion/cherry-picking-contrarian-geologists-tend-to-obscure-scientific-truth/story-e6frgd0x-1226233605954) and Emeritus Professor Ian Lowe also responded in The Conversation on 20 December 2011 (https://theconversation.edu.au/plimers-climate-change-book-for-kids-underestimates-science-education-4803).

If you are concerned about the possibility of methane releases irreversibly tipping the world’s climate (see Wikipedia : “The Clathrate Gun Hypothesis”), you might have noted with alarm the following news from Siberia, reported on December 14^th. http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/vast-methane-plumes-seen-in-arctic-ocean-as-sea-ice-retreats-6276278.html. (Reference courtesy of Phil Higson)

Richard Branson’s  latest book Screw Business As Usual offers a much more cheerful scenario of rising corporate social and environmental responsibility . See the extract at: http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/45493461/ns/today-books/t/screw-business-usual-bransons-plan-planet/#.Twpup3paeNU.

Climate news 11 November 2011.

1. On Tuesday November 8 2011 the Australian Senate passed new legislation that will price carbon emissions. It was a profound moment for Australia. The country came of age that day.

A very good account of what is actually being put in place was published in The Conversation, entitled “ Explainer: Australia’s carbon price mechanism in six dot points”, available at http://theconversation.edu.au/explainer-australias-carbon-price-mechanism-in-six-dot-points-4230.

2.        On Wednesday 9 November the IEA reported that the world is headed for irreversible climate change in five years.

The International Energy Agency warned that if fossil fuel infrastructure is not rapidly changed, the world will 'lose for ever' the chance to avoid dangerous climate change.

See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/nov/09/fossil-fuel-infrastructure-climate-change?newsfeed=true

3. On Saturday November 5^th, the U.S. Department of Energy warned that greenhouse emissions are now exceeding worst case scenario.

The Department said that the global output of carbon dioxide jumped by the biggest amount on record has calculated, a sign of how feeble the world's efforts are at slowing man-made global warming.

The new figures for last year mean that levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts four years ago.

''The more we talk about the need to control emissions, the more they are growing,'' the co-director of the joint program on the science and policy of global change at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), John Reilly, said.

The world pumped about 512 million tonnes more of carbon into the air last year than it did in 2009, an increase of 6 per cent. That amount of extra pollution eclipses the individual emissions of all but three countries - China, the US and India, the world's top producers of greenhouse gases.

Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/environment/climate-change/greenhouse-emissions-exceed-worst-case-scenario-20111104-1mzzh.html#ixzz1dM06SGE7

4. On November 6^th., former Liberal leader Malcolm Turnbull compared climate change sceptics with people who refuse to admit smoking causes lung cancer.
   
   "They're like the guy who gets told by his doctor to stop smoking, lose weight and decides not to do that," he said.

"He met a mate down the pub who said his Uncle Ernie had lived 'til 95 but he smoked a packet every day. It's ridiculous."

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/national/theyre-like-smokers-malcolm-turnbull-turns-on-climate-change-sceptics/story-e6frfkvr-1226186900638#ixzz1dLzPgusa

Climate news, 26 September 2011.

Two good articles appeared recently.

Mike Carlton questions why Indian billionaires don’t seem to be listening to the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Abbott, and his predictions of the catastrophe that will result from the carbon tax. Tongue in cheek, Mike Carlton suggests that perhaps they are investing so massively in Australian coal resources and infrastructure out of pure ignorance ( Sydney Morning Herald on 24 September 2011, see http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/more-heat-than-light-from-the-hard-hats-20110923-1kp96.html).

In a similar vein, Kenneth Davidson points out that a carbon tax is just a first step on the path to sustainability. The whole world is now embarked on this path , and it will make many Australian fossil-fuel enterprises redundant long before they have completed their expected life cycles. See The Age newspaper on 26 September 2011 : http://www.theage.com.au/opinion/politics/on-climate-change-its-allout-war-20110925-1krlh.html.

Climate news, 4 September 2011.

On Friday and Saturday (3 and 4 September 2011) the Sydney Morning Herald has run opinion pieces by Robert Manne. Manne argues that the actions of the editor of The Australian newspaper are a threat to Australian democracy, particularly because of the way he has used his powerful editorial position to bias the paper’s coverage of climate issues and action.

This is an important read.

The two articles are:

The truth is out there . One newspaper's unrelenting campaign against the facts of climate change defies all reason. Robert Manne. September 3, 2011.

Source: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/the-truth-is-out-there-20110902-1jq1z.html

And:

A pressing case for standing up to Rupert Murdoch's bullying. The shameless actions of News Ltd are a threat to our democracy. Robert Manne. September 2, 2011.Source: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/a-pressing-case-for-standing-up-to-rupert-murdochs-bullying-20110901-1jo2i.html#ixzz1WxX0WNDM

Climate news from Queensland, 26 August 2011.

Which way Australia? Climate issues divide the world’s nations into rogues, champions and victims.

Richard Cassels.

The world is dividing itself into three climate camps: the rogues, the champions and the victims. In the developed countries electorates divide themselves into two camps, let’s call them the “Planetarians” and the “Jobbists”. The former take a planetary and long-term view of their own global responsibilities, while the latter focus on short term and local economic profit and survival.

Today Australia’s minority government teeters on the edge of electoral survival. The loss of just one seat can undo the Government’s majority. The Government is committed to a highly effective program to price carbon, initially with a tax and subsequently using a market-based mechanism. The Opposition offers a “Direct Action” plan, based on granting government subsidies as incentives for polluters to reduce emissions. Their policy has been unanimously slated as inefficient and costly by economists and as ineffective by climate scientists. The Opposition’s real commitment to climate action is questionable. It seems from market surveys and opinion polls that a poorly-informed Australian public prefer the Opposition’s approach because it avoids the word “tax”. The will to take long-term action in the wider interest of humanity –present and future- and of the planet seems lacking. Australia could well become a climate-rogue state.

Rolling back the carbon price?

Matt Grundhoff of the Australia Institute outlined the huge costs to the community of business uncertainty if the Coalition wins the next election and fulfills its pledge to “roll back” the carbon tax. He shows that it would be 2016 before this could have any effect at the earliest, and more like 2018, which is only 2 years from the 2020 deadline for reaching Australia’s emissions reduction target. https://www.tai.org.au/index.php?q=node%2F19&pubid=900&act=display. The Opposition has responded by saying that if the Government lost the next election, it would be “honour-bound” to abandon its position on carbon pricing.

The U.S. heads for climate rogue status?

While Australia genuinely faces the prospect of tipping into the “Climate Rogues” camp, at least things are not as bad as in the U.S.A., from where Raymond Bradley in the Guardian on 3 August reported that  “ The Republican party in the United States is now in thrall to the extreme right wing, which is in turn financed and coached by those with the financial muscle to promote their narrow ideological agendas. To obtain the backing of these groups, you have to toe the line, and speak the words their dogma requires: global warming is not happening, perhaps even a hoax; whatever warming has occurred is just a natural oscillation; even if humans had something to do with it, it's not a big deal and we can adapt to it. And besides, we can't afford to control greenhouse gases, as such action will result in massive job losses”.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/aug/03/global-warming-republicans

The problem of boom blindness in Queensland.

Richard Dennis of the Australia Institute argued in the Courier Mail on 23 August that millions of Queenslanders bear the brunt of the mining boom without receiving any gain.  See: http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/feel-pain-but-no-gain-from-boom/story-fn6ck620-1226119930523

What progress on the Sustainability Revolution?

We nearly had a second GFC in the last few weeks. Have we learned any lessons from the first one? Have we changed the financial system so that private debt (like the banks) stays private and public funds stay public? Have we changed from the quick-and-dirty path to wealth, “more growth”, and found an alternative path? Have we moved from acceptance of “a little more planet- fracking / environmental degradation is OK, surely?” to a zero-tolerance of any kind of pollution in our industrial processes? Have we started to celebrate declining populations? Have we cleaned up and permanently prevented another Pacific-gyre waste mass? Have we become proactive about heading off climate refugee crises like the present one in Somalia? The answer to all these questions is clearly no, or perhaps, not very much.  

George Monbiot , in the Guardian on 22^nd August addressed the nonsense that our future depends on growth and hopes that this reality may be dawning in the U.K., at least among Labour politicians like Ed Milliband. He puts his hopes on the presence of Prof Tim Jackson's book, Prosperity Without Growth in Milliband’s reading list. See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/22/economic-growth-environment

Cloud Atlas coming to a nation near you?

What’s the alternative to the Sustainability Revolution?  The alternative is a dog-eat-dog world, one where Chinese-type pollution is the norm, where aquifers and soils are degraded, where states fail, millions starve, where oceans are acid and polluted, where coral reefs are dead and large wild animals are found only in zoos and where almost everyone is desensitised to the physical world that surrounds them.

It is time we spent more energies on communicating the horrendous alternatives to environmnetal action, instead of struggling to sell the positive. If you haven’t read David Mitchell’s Cloud Atlas yet, do so now to glimpse the future we are currently creating.   

Climate News from Queensland, 12 August 2011.

The markets have gone crazy. Have we finally reached the turning point-when everyone finally gets it? That the economy and ecology are interconnected and you can’t go on living off capital-natural or financial- forever? Let’s be optimistic and believe that sense will prevail.

Meanwhile there is some good stuff to read.

Pragmatic climate sales strategy.

An article on “Climate Pragmatism” argued that the best way to sell climate change is not to mention climate change. Specifically the authors recommended that the best selling points for climate action are that it will (1) stimulate energy innovation so that even more of the world’s population can have access to affordable energy, (2) cut the toxic by-products of fossil fuel use, such as the mercury emissions, the particulates, the arsenic and the other conventional poisons created by burning coal, and (3) improve community and economic resilience to extreme weather events.

Source is the excellent e-news “A.B.C. Carbon Express”, that featured the article “Fighting Climate Change by Not Focusing on Climate Change”,  by Bryan Walsh in Time Science (26 July 2011) (see http://abccarbon.com/let%E2%80%99s-not-talk-about-the-war-%E2%80%93-or-climate-change/).

Australian children champion climate.

The Australian newspaper, usually the bastion of short-term-profit-taking fundamentalism, reported on August 10 that Australian children were clashing with their parents on climate change. Usually much better educated on environmental matters than their parents, they are fighting the battle for more sustainable ways of living (source: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/breaking-news/kids-and-parents-clash-on-climate-change/story-fn3dxity-1226112055224).

Attacking the myths supporting inaction.

Encouraged by the Opposition, many of the Australian public now take refuge from the prospect of climate action by officially burying their heads in the sand. It’s called “direct action”. In particular they find justification in repeating the myths that Australia’s role in global climate change is insignificant; that other countries aren’t acting; that climate change may not be that bad.

Andrew Hewett, Executive Director of Oxfam Australia, has now written a passionate and articulate rebuttal of these myths in the Canberra Times [possibly reaching the residential community that least needs to be persuaded of it!]. He describes these myths as false, misleading and stymieing productive public conversation. It is a fine read-see       http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news/opinion/editorial/general/exploding-myths-about-australias-carbon-role/2253930.aspx).

Four Degrees of Global warming: our current destiny.

A conference in Melbourne recently brought together many of Europe and Australia’s finest scientific and economic minds to explore what a world with four degrees of warming will be like. Four degrees is where our current course of inaction is taking us. For Brisbane people, get ready for a climate like Cairns, more floods and more intense cyclones. For our food producing areas, it’s more droughts. For Melbourne, you get a climate like the southern Flinders Ranges. For Perth and S.W. Australia- sell up while you can, there won’t be any water in your dams. You can hear the presentations and see the slides at: http://www.fourdegrees2011.com.au/presentations/

HSBC assesses climate risk as a “multiplier” of resource risks and “natural capital” depletion.

A new report by HSBC highlights the rising stress in resource availability, high commodity prices and, of course, soaring debt levels. It says these stresses are likely to be multiplied in coming years by the climate factor and need to be taken into account by investment managers and business strategists, particularly as the world seems less capable of limiting global warming to the targeted 2°C. “This is not a distant threat but a present reality,” the bank says.

The report also compares the relative abilities of different countries to adapt to climate change. Australia ranked in the mid-table, in terms of climate change exposure and its vulnerability to changing temperatures, water availability and extreme events. Saudi Arabia, India, South Africa and Turkey were considered most vulnerable; Russia, Canada and the US the least vulnerable. Access to water was given a higher rating than temperature and events.

However, Australia was considered to be one of the most impact sensitive, meaning the potential impact on deaths and the cost to GDP of weather events, and the number of people otherwise affected by homelessness and physical injury. Australia’s score was impacted most by its exposure to the cost of damage, which was the second highest after China, slightly ahead of India and Russia, and well above that of other nations.

On the plus side, Australia’s wealth and strong governance meant that it was deemed to rank highest among the G20 in terms of adaptive potential and adaptive capacity – essentially, the ability to climate proof itself. The combined assessment of GDP per capita and the debt-to-GDP ratio put Australia marginally ahead of the  UK, with the US, Germany, Japan, South Korea and France trailing further behind. India (by some distance), Indonesia, Brazil, Argentina and Italy were considered to have the least financial potential to adapt.

Source: http://www.climatespectator.com.au/commentary/climate-whos-most-risk

More unbelievable news about the Coal Seam Gas industry.

The Courier Mail reported on 10 August that the Senate inquiry into CSG discovered a “gold-rush mentality” in which the state and federal governments would earn $1 billion a year in taxes and royalties from just one of the three approved CSG export projects, while the companies were making up to $4 million a year from each well.

It was also told that none of the companies had yet found a way to deal with the millions of tonnes of waste salt produced each year other than to bury it, which one senator said was like vandalism.

“How can you approve the industry without knowing what’s happening to the salt?” Senator Bill Heffernan asked Federal Government bureaucrats.

Source: http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/farm-gates-no-barrier-for-coal-seam-gas-companies/story-e6freon6-1226111920240.

Australia prices carbon!

3 August 2011.

The Australian Federal Government is now releasing its carbon pricing legislation in stages. Some of this is now available for public comment , see http://www.climatechange.gov.au/government/submissions.aspx. Barring unforeseen events, the legislation is likely pass into law this year. The carbon price has been set at $23 a ton- a politically acceptable level. It may not be perfect, but it is is a very encouraging step forward. All Australian households are now receiving information about the “tax” and what it will mean to them. This is undoubtedly badly needed following a campaign of misrepresentation and scaremongering by the Opposition, predictable vested interests and radio announcers whose ratings depend of fomenting discontent. The Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Tony Abbott, has vowed to repeal the legislation if he wins power at the next election. He has run a powerful campaign to persuade the Australian people to blame all their ills and worries on the “carbon tax” and as a result, would win an election if one were called today. Australian society’s existing fracture lines have all been ruthlessly exploited. However media attention is now starting to turn to what veteran journalist Laurie Oakes calls Mr. Abbott’s “magic pudding economics”, see http://www.couriermail.com.au/ipad/glimmer-of-hope-from-mood-shift/story-fn6ck620-1226104519649. High-profile political commentator Annabel Crabb also exposed M.Abbott’s complete lack of credible climate policy at: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-07-22/crabb-freed-from-facts-abbott-goes-ballooning/2806640. So there is now a reasonable chance that a critical voting public will see through the Abbott scare campaign and have time to get used to a carbon price in time for the next Federal election. Alternatively they may decide to go and live in a fantasy land (perhaps retiring to an imaginary cottage labeled “Dunthinkin” in an imaginary “Hide Away Bay”) where action of emissions or economic transformation is seen as not necessary, and thus condemn us all to at least four degrees of global warming.  In this context the Four Degrees Conference held in Melbourne from 12-14 July 2011 is significant. The conference explored what Australia will be like if we reach four degrees of warming, which is the current trajectory. The presentations can be seen and heard at http://www.fourdegrees2011.com.au/. In a nutshell four degrees of warming is hellish. You would not wish it on your worst enemy. And it’s coming sooner than you think.
 

Carbon price for Australia.

Dennis Atkins (Courier Mail 19 April 2011) says that the Labor Governmnet is in a deep hole over its carbon price. He needs to  take a more critical look at what is actually happening. 

 Richard Cassels, 4 April 2011.

Richard Cassels, 4 March 2011.

On Thursday 24 Feb. 2011 the Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard, announced a “price on carbon pollution” to start in 2012. It is intended to evolve into a “cap and trade” emissions trading scheme within 3-5 years. The announcement was of a “framework agreement”, and leaves most of the detail still to be worked out in the next 6 months.

Mining madness.

24 November 2011.

 The Courier Mail article “Retail labour crisis” (C-M 23 November 2011) is the latest to highlight the madness of the mining boom in Australia.

Predictably business will demand that taxpayers fund more infrastructure, approve more immigration, and relax even further our already compromised environmental standards.

There is an alternative. Slow down. Develop a plan for long-term* economic prosperity. Systematically   raise environmental standards. Ensure that regional communities have adequate social and physical infrastructure. Invest the tax income in a sovereign wealth fund. Put annual caps on all resource extraction, so that governments are no longer at the mercy of anyone with a proposal that complies with current legislation. Ensure that extractive industries do not prevent the growth of renewable industries like agriculture, tourism and fisheries.

With the exception of coal, the world’s demand for our resources is not going to decline any time soon. Let’s not allow ourselves to be sucked into a frenzy of boom, bubble and bust. Let’s be mature enough to plan for long-term wealth and sustainable communities.

• *‘Long term’ means at least 90 years, which is roughly the life expectancy of an Australian child born today. Ideally it should be 200 years- the 7 generation time span said to be required for decision making by the Iroquois Federacy in the nineteenth century.

25 November 2010.

The Apology we want.