The dubious art of mandate
IT’S about time our politicians stopped using the term “mandate” simply to prop up a political position as did Ivan Dean recently in Talking Point ( Mercury, March 29). The public is sick and tired of this simplistic political diatribe. To suggest that a mere 51.2 per cent public support constitutes a mandate and thus should allow the Liberals to push through legislation on controversial issues like forestry, mandatory penalties, antidiscrimination and the future of water and sewage is nonsense.
These recent events are examples of Parliament working as it was designed. Does Mr Dean now also think that the Liberals 51.2 per cent support also constitutes a mandate to further play with gun laws given that Rene Hidding campaigned on that issue? Can I suggest to Mr Dean that he table a private members bill on gun laws on the basis of that public support and see what sort of a mandate he has then. Instead of complaining that the four “independent” MLCs voted with the four Labor members on particular legislation it would be more interesting if Mr Dean actually detailed why the dreaded four recently chose their course of action?
Is Mr Dean saying that the four independent members are in fact not independent, or that they are only independent when they vote with the Government, or might it just be that the particular legislation was not in the public interest.
Mr Dean says there is a Left-wing majority in the Upper House and as such the Legislative Council may be losing its intended function and becoming less of a house of review, whatever that means to Mr Dean. When the Legislative Council becomes a rubber stamp I will start to worry but I don’t think there will be a mandate for its demise in the short-term. cluded development of a settlement plan and appointment of a state demographer. Hopefully both would have looked well ahead, way beyond the next election, and included assessments of the impact of overpopulation on our environment. So here is a challenge to the Government — how about setting an example for the rest of Australia and make Tasmania better, not bigger.
Power pains
HAVING been a critic of the Basslink cable for years, the present failure only adds to the folly of it. Where is all this wind and solar that was going to droughtproof our state? If another cable shutdown is going to put pressure on our renewable water storages, what are all those wind towers for? And somebody wants to add another cable. We are all still waiting for the cheaper power that this system was promised to give us. Let’s hope those diesel-driven generators are still serviceable.
Bad ideas
THE interconnector cable was a dubious plan when designed, an expensive experiment when installed, and under the best circumstances only allowed access to costly, ecology-destroying coal energy. Less than a month after announcing that Tasmania was withdrawing from the national grid to lower costs and regain control of our energy future, the Government now announces the plan for a second cable.
In a world flooded with bad ideas, this would have to be in the top five. If a cheque for a couple of hundred million dollars is going to be written, it needs to be payable to proven energy production that has a future and makes life easier for the consumer, not harder.
Redemption
EASTER is a time for forgiveness and redemption. Our young cricketers have been complicit in cheating and are being duly punished. However, there comes a time when enough is enough and we must help them on the path to rehabilitation. This incident could trigger reflections on how Australia’s abrasive treatment of refugees on Manus Island and Nauru squares with our sense of justice and fair play. Compared to many of our other problems, Aussie cricket has every opportunity for a resurrection where values such as loyalty, courage, honesty and integrity are placed ahead of the win-at-all costs mentality.
Jesus was brown
AT Easter I wonder how many people wonder what our churches and society look like if we remembered that Jesus was brown? His brown body was hung on the cross and executed by an oppressive regime. What would our attitude be if we could see that unjust imprisonment and execution of Jesus has more in common with the experience of indigenous Australians or asylum seekers than it does with those who hold power in the church and usually represent Christ?