|
October 21, 2006
Clive Hamilton was right.
The current policy of taxpayer handouts to farmers confronting a lack of rain in semi-desert regions should be questioned. Part of that questioning is do away with the conservative mythology about our national character (Australianness) being forged in the battle of man against Nature and, although the climate (drought) sometimes defeats us, real Aussies doing it tough will find the courage to rise again, stronger than before, to continuing the taming of nature to make deserts bloom. If we do then we can begin to look at what is going on on the land.
If the dry conditions turn out to be the rule and not the exception (ie., the drought is an early sign of global warming on this interpretation), then drought relief needs to be tied to ensuring agricultural sustainability. When drought affected land becomes arid land or desert, then non-viable farmers should be eased off the marginal land (structural reform); or if they continue to stay on the land, then they should be doing remedial environmental work for getting the dole. Mutual obligation applies here.
Why keep farmers on a drip feed of drought relief when the land is a dustbowl? Doesn't that deepen their misery and intensify the land degradation? Aren't many arid parts of Australia not suitable to intensify farming. Why continue the subsidy of cheap water prices for irrigators when a water shortage is looming due to climate change.
This shows that what is needed is a blueprint for tackling climate change that goes beyond the current spruiking of nuclear power as clean and green. Climate change is also about water.
|
I've never read so much unAustralian rubbish!
What next? Sportsmen aren't gods? Steve Irwin wasn't the greatest environmentalist the world has seen? Everyone to put on an Australian Army uniform is not an ANZAC hero?
It's sedition, that's what it is!