Trail blazing trial grazing

A quick mini-rant:
In response to the new Victorian Government's decision to allow cattle back into Alpine National Parks to graze as part of a "scientific trial"*, Libby Rumpff**, of the University of Melbourne's School of Botany, stated:
"The only fact that this trial can discover is that cows eat grass."
That's scientific comedy gold.
* Seems similar to Japanese whaling "scientific trials", which are scientifically determining whether stabbing whales kills them, and whether dead whales are more edible than live whales. The results so far appear inconclusive.
** Notice how I didn't make any scientific comedy gold comments about the word "Rumpff"? That's because I'm a grown-up.

Back to the Future's Past...Today!

OK, OK, OK!!! (the last "OK" was a yell, but sadly my acronym was already in capital letters).
One of my few readers got a little uppity recently, saying something like "Why don't you write on your blog any more?"
I KNOW. Uppity to the max!
The answer is clearly something to do with laziness, but my New Year's Resolution is...oh, I can't be bothered going through that. Anyhoo, here's my latest post-age (Pauly Shore-style) re: things that stick in or about my craw-area.
First, Nicholas D. Kristof recetly wrote about Religion and Women in the context of the recent "Parliament of the World’s Religions" right here in the land Down Under:

“Women are prevented from playing a full and equal role in many faiths, creating an environment in which violations against women are justified,” former President Jimmy Carter noted in a speech last month to the Parliament of the World’s Religions in Australia.
“The belief that women are inferior human beings in the eyes of God,” Mr. Carter continued, “gives excuses to the brutal husband who beats his wife, the soldier who rapes a woman, the employer who has a lower pay scale for women employees, or parents who decide to abort a female embryo.”
Mr. Carter, who sees religion as one of the “basic causes of the violation of women’s rights,” is a member of The Elders, a small council of retired leaders brought together by Nelson Mandela. The Elders are focusing on the role of religion in oppressing women, and they have issued a joint statement calling on religious leaders to “change all discriminatory practices within their own religions and traditions.”

Nice one, Old Un-Sexist Dudes. And for all those thinking "Why should I ever listen to Godless Heathens and/or Jimmy Carter":

"The Elders are neither irreligious nor rabble-rousers. They include Archbishop Desmond Tutu, and they begin their meetings with a moment for silent prayer."

Ahhhh. So they're still a bit MeNtAl.
But at least they're on the right track.
In another article designed to re-disestablish (please don't get on your anti"disestablish"mentarianism high horse) one's faith in this crazy old world of ours and the...what's the best way to put it..."vermin" that populate it: 'Greed culture' killing planet, it appears that the average American consumes more than his or her weight in products each day (and we all know the average American is quite rotund, so we're talking a lot of products here):

"In its annual report, Worldwatch Institute says the cult of consumption and greed could wipe out any gains from government action on climate change or a shift to a clean energy economy."

Nice one, world.
Unsurprisingly, I've got some ideas, at least for our neck of the woods.
I'll get to that another time...

Reduce, reuse, burn sh*t

Some people, like one-time nemesis of this blog Steve Fielding, say that accepting climate change as a fact, and acting on it, will result in a loss of jobs and economic growth. Those people are closed-minded, short-sighted dinosaurs with no imagination, and also they're ugly.
Fact is, the dinosaurs are vastly outnumbered (not counting birds, which are apparently dinosaurs), the rest of the world IS going to accept climate change as fact, and this is going to be an enormous OPPORTUNITY for jobs and growth.
For example, I just read this in the New York Times: China’s Incinerators Loom as a Global Hazard. Apparently, "As China runs out of landfill space, it is racing to build incinerators, a growing source of toxic emissions"...and fun, if you're a five-year old living in Melbourne suburbs in the seventies. Although I don't recall burning mercury and dioxin.
But let's not get into "who burnt what first".
The point is, it seems to me that there's a market in China for coming up with ways to deal with their waste - y'know, stuff like recycling, reusing, and composting it. Rather than setting fire to it.
Whoever gets on that first is gonna GET PAID.
Odds are, it won't be Steve Fielding.
And speaking of odds: Go Saints.

Solar panel for a love machine

It's not all TV and toilet training on this blog - I also rant to make the world a better place.
Just last week I sent a little missive off to the current Minister for the Environment, the incomparable Peter Garrett, in response to a campaign by the Australian Conservation Foundation.
The first part was the ACF's own standard postcard material, supplemented by my own ranting in the last part:

Dear Mr Garrett

I'm very disappointed that the Government has announced new restrictions on the solar panel rebate program - at a time when Australia should be ramping up its efforts to tackle climate change.

The new $100,000 per annum household means test is going to stop thousands of Australian families from going solar, and put a big dent in our growing solar industry.

I'm calling on you to be our solar champion - and increase the means test to $250,000 per annum - the same level as the household energy and water efficiency 'green loans' program.

I also know the biggest decision your Government will make this year will be setting Australia's 2020 target for reducing our greenhouse pollution.

The target will set the scene for Australia's overall effort on climate change - and for our shift to solar, wind and other forms of renewable energy. That's why, in addition to increasing the means test for the solar rebate, I also urge you to commit to a strong greenhouse pollution reduction target of at least 30% by 2020, and ensure a cleaner, safer future for Australia.

Personally, I understand why the Government has made a serious attempt to appear fiscally conservative, but this measure makes the Government appear both cheap and short-sighted. This is an area where 'wealthier' households can lead the way and reduce greehouse emissions, as well as exert downward pressure on solar costs for all (thanks to the consequent economies of scale).

It's really a no-brainer - this is an environmental issue, not a welfare issue - but the Government's supposed credibility on envirionmental issues have been seriously tarnished by this debacle.

I urge you to take this back to cabinet and fight for them to reconsider.

Regards

Riley Jones

Well, I just read yesterday that he may very well have taken my (and possibly other people's) suggestions on board: Garrett signals a reprieve for solar industry.

This ranting thing surely is the stuff from which dreams are made...

What’s good for the goose…

A little while ago, I was involved with www.thinkliar.com, a website dedicated to highlighting the...how should I put this...non-core truths perpetrated by John Winston Howard, with the catchy catchphrase 'Think John Howard. Think Liar.'(1)
Set up in 2003, the website was obviously an unqualified success, with John Howard and his Liberal-National coalition romping it in at the election in 2004, winning both houses of Parliament for the first time in over 20 years. It was a success, that is, assuming the purpose of highlighting the slippery nature of John Howard was to get him re-elected. Which, on further reflection, was not our intention.
Maybe the website was a slow-burner, since Little Johnny lost the 2007 election in spectacular fashion. If the website (and domain name) still existed, I would like to take some credit.
Nonetheless! What I'm saying is, whether or not I was personally responsible, I was glad to see the end of Howard.
And now his successor, Kevin Rudd, seems…pretty good. We’ll see. But now that we have the Labor Party governing at the federal level, it looks like his State Labor counterparts might not be so lucky at the next election.
And this is what I was trying to get at.
Australians generally like having a balance in politics – we don’t want any one person or party having too much power. This is another theory for why, after Howard won both the Senate and House of Representatives in 2004, and abused the power, he convincingly lost the election a little over 3 years later (the other theory being the influence of thinkliar.com).
Now with a Federal Labor Government, I think a lot of people, myself included, won’t be so reliant on having Labor State Governments, and I think their situation is looking more and more precarious. NSW has been a basket-case for a while, now, and that affair with apparent corruption in Wollongong can’t help (though the fact that the Opposition in NSW is a complete rabble may help the ALP for some time). Tasmania has also now joined in with a recent fiasco, which can’t help matters: Shredded note brings down Tasmania's Deputy Premier.
And though the Victorian ALP seems strong, I’m not so sure. Below is some of my recent correspondence sent to John Brumby, Gavin Jennings and Peter Garrett in relation to, primarily, the channel deepening project in Port Philip Bay (sent on 5 February 2008):

Dear sirs
I am writing to give you fair warning of what I think may happen at the next State election.
I have been voting (2) Labor a long time (and was actually quite active in trying to get rid of John Howard), but even I am tempted to vote AGAINST Labor at the next State election.
In doing so, I would be voting for the same reasons I wanted to get rid of the Coalition federally, and Jeff Kennett in Victoria. Both of those Governments became arrogant in office, did not consult with the community, and seemed to be making deals that were not for the benefit of the majority of Australians/Victorians (John Howard also had a problem with being honest with anyone, and in my opinion was pretty ordinary economically, but that's for another day).
These accusations could also be made about the Victorian Government today. There is a hell of a lot of dissatisfaction out there, and even though the election is quite a long way away, there is a possibility that your Government will be voted out for the growing raft of poor environmental decisions it appears to be making.
I urge you (and Mr Garrett) to reconsider these issues of vital importance to our environment - there is still time to make new plans, to hold your heads high and take on board the criticisms of the electorate.
We don't really care how much power the Port of Melbourne thinks it needs, or how much profit Connex wants. We do care about our bay and the Yarra, about traffic congestion, about increasing pollution, about spoiling natural areas like the Gippsland Coast.
To us, the public, it seems there are good alternatives to these problems - start developing Western Port NOW, invest in adequate rail infrastructure (for both passengers and freight) even if it means a trade-off with less investment in roads for a while (I know how much governments love roads), encourage all homes to install water tanks (or even provide them free - I've heard this would be cheaper and better than building the desalination plant), get alternative energy sources up and running straight away.
Some bold initiatives like these would re-invigorate support for your Government. To be honest, off the top of my head, I can't think of anything bold that the Labor Government has done since attaining office.
If, however, these ideas are not feasible, then tell us why. Engage with the public. That is what democracy is all about.
Don't make me vote Liberal. I really don't want to. But for the sake of our democracy, I may have to.
Yours faithfully
Riley Jones

You heard it hear first. And you heard it here second.
Let the betting begin.

PS Yes, the title is saying that John Howard is a goose.

(1) A line based on the classic 'Think Squirrels. Think Nuts.' from The Office (apparently): “What does a squirrel do in the summer? It buries nuts. Why? Cos then in winter time he's got something to eat and he won't die. So, collecting nuts in the summer is worthwhile work. Every task you do at work think, would a squirrel do that? Think squirrels. Think nuts.”
(2) Or at least preferencing…