Does federal Labor have the courage for change?
Refreshing to read Ken Henry's assessment (' Nature is critical to productivity ', 25/6) that productivity is enhanced by good environmental laws. For too long has the reverse been considered by some leaders, saying environmentally harmful investment projects will create jobs in order to justify such projects. Uncertainty about environmental laws has deterred domestic and overseas investors. As Henry says, processing of raw materials that Australia has in abundance, would create many jobs. Value added manufacturing would add to this. Instead we are destroying our environment.
Enacting these reforms would take bold leadership, yet this is what voters are wanting. Writers to this paper have been bemoaning the small, albeit necessary, changes to policy by the federal Labor government. Environmental law reform is best tackled in the first year of this second term, so the resultant improvements in productivity can flow through. Will the federal government have the courage?
Jan Marshall, Brighton
Nature is fundamental to progress
Well said that man. Actually, Ken Henry could have gone further; nature is fundamental to productivity. Cleaning up the wreckage of a fire or flood, or burying livestock in a drought may count as economic activities in assessing the GDP, but they're a negative on the productivity scale. That's without counting the human cost. The unproductive anxiety levels generated by a deteriorating environment and the accompanying social disruption are beyond measure. Labor have the parliamentary mandate, now let's see if they have the vision and the courage to do what has to be done. Driving the lobbyists from the steps of Parliament would be a good first step.
John Mosig, Kew
Myopic thinking puts business first
Ken Henry highlights the urgent need for environmental law reform, as proposed by Professor Graeme Samuel. Strict, enforceable regulation of environmental protection could, as he suggests, provide an investment climate within clear limits which enable business development to proceed efficiently, when and where it can, without damaging the environment. Introducing this legislation inspires determined resistance from businesses large and small, who put their immediate interests ahead of the environment that underpins their businesses longer term. This myopia leaves us sliding towards environmental, and economic, collapse.
Chris Young, Surrey Hills
Watt should take note of 'briefing note'
Environment Minister Murray Watt could hardly get a more incisive briefing note for his task of reforming the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act than Ken Henry's succinct account. Two of Henry's observations were particularly telling. One was that only 5 per cent of the nation's workforce is employed by the industries responsible for ″the extinction of more than 100 species and the loss of more than half the continent's forests″. The megaphones used by mining, forestry, fishing and agriculture sectors give a completely disproportionate view of this fact. His second remark was that the future viability of these industries depends on care of nature, an irony that seems lost on their protagonists.
Watt's swift approval of the extension of Woodside's carbon-polluting North West Shelf project, admittedly conditional, does not instil confidence in his commitment to robust legislative reform. I and many others would be happy to be proved wrong on this score.
Tom Knowles, Parkville
THE FORUM
Your taxes at work
Your correspondent (Letters, 25/6) offers a good solution to the abuse of superannuation tax concessions. The idea that those receiving four times as much or more than the median wage in passive income should pay minimal tax is indefensible, not least because it means those on low incomes and paying full tax are subsidising those with plenty of money in the kitty. No wonder many young hard-working people are angered and feel enslaved.
At present, superannuation returns are strong – a 10 per cent return on $3 million yields $300,000 – while the median wage is about $70,000. Some years may have lower returns, but even one as low as 2.5 per cent (a rare event) earns a healthy $75,000. If superannuation returns are occasionally low, that is generally a flow on from wider economic conditions that cause genuine hardship and threaten employment for others: the impact on them is far greater.
The occasional low super return is no justification for year-in, year-out tax minimisation that exploits others including workers and consumers (noting that GST can work as a broad-brush catch-up source of tax revenue) upon which the economy is ultimately dependent.
Emma Borghesi, Rye
Hard choices needed
Columnist Sean Kelly makes some interesting points (Comment, 23/6) about Treasurer Jim Chalmers' statement that much-needed tax reform requires not only courage but also consensus. True enough, but consensus will only occur once the electorate can recognise that it's a matter of the government having the maturity to make the hard choices while there's still an opportunity to choose.
Chalmers' three goals of productivity, resilience and sustainability are not just wishful thinking: they should be explicit components of all decision-making, with measurable results. The recent election gave Labor a mandate it must not squander.
Jenifer Nicholls, Windsor
Delivering fairness
Surely if Jim Chalmers is serious about tax reform then he must take account of our current pensions and benefit arrangements. Single people under 55 who receive JobSeeker receive $781 a fortnight while a single age pensioner receives $1149 a fortnight. Everyone accepts that single people on JobSeeker live in poverty. We should have a tax and social security system built primarily on need. It must provide for a living income. The current tax threshold of $18,200 is a joke. Ken Henry in his review recommended then that it should be a minimum of $25,000 annually. Every adult should receive this as a minimum payment.
John Rome, Mt Lawley, WA
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
26 minutes ago
- ABC News
Dean Winter says it would be 'helpful' if the Greens 'engaged in discussion'
Labor leader Dean Winter responds to claims it was a mutual decision for the Greens to not attend crossbench negotiations
ABC News
2 hours ago
- ABC News
Dean Winter hopeful he will become Tasmanian premier, despite stalled negotiations with the Greens
Labor leader Dean Winter is still hopeful his bid to become Tasmania's premier will be successful, despite the Greens saying they cannot support a Labor government "at this stage" due to a lack of policy compromises. A motion of no confidence in Premier Jeremy Rockliff's government, and confidence in a Labor minority government, will be moved when state parliament resumes on Tuesday, August 19. Labor won 10 seats at last month's state election, meaning it needs the support of the five Greens MPs and three other crossbenchers to be successful. Mr Winter said conversations with the crossbench MPs had been "mostly really positive", including at a meeting on Tuesday, that he claimed the Greens chose not to attend. "They had accepted to come along to the meeting and then decided instead of participating they would go out and make a media statement instead," he said. Greens leader Rosalie Woodruff said on Tuesday that Labor's lack of compromise on policy positions meant she could not support Mr Winter becoming premier "at this stage", following a second meeting in two days with the Labor leader. Mr Winter defended his bargaining position, arguing this term of state parliament needed to work differently if it was to last the full four years after three consecutive early elections. "If it's about horse trading at the start where we're giving away policy and we're asking them to compromise as well then it's not going to last very long," he said. "This is much more serious than one or two policies early, it has to be about a lasting parliament. Mr Winter has indicated he is open to discussing policy compromise once Labor has formed government — including on measures to protect the environment, which he said was "really important to me". He committed to a "policy framework" that would see ideas from all members of parliament considered in detail. Mr Winter also said all ideas to improve the state's budget position would be considered as part of the party's budget roundtable process, including ideas to generate additional revenue by increasing current taxes or imposing new ones. But he has refused to agree to the Greens' demand that he provide concessions up front. "I'd like to sit down and discuss where we can find common ground and there are areas around housing, around budget repair, around integrity where we can work together," Mr Winter said. "But what Rosalie has effectively said, she's issued an ultimatum, unless we do X, Y and Z then it's a no, and I don't think issuing ultimatums is the way to work together and no-one else on the crossbench has done the ultimatum approach either. "The conversations have been really positive with the independents and the Shooters, Fishers and Farmers, that's the kind of engagement I want to have. A Greens spokesperson said the decision to not attend Tuesday's meeting with Labor and crossbench MPs was also agreed to by Mr Winter. "It was jointly acknowledged that the conversation between Labor and the Greens had not progressed far enough," the spokesperson said. "It's hardly good faith for Mr Winter to claim otherwise. "The Greens' door is still open. We hope Labor comes back to the table to negotiate tangible outcomes for the people of Tasmania."
The Advertiser
3 hours ago
- The Advertiser
Our govt made a choice to be anti-Israel. And it's basically sunk a two-state solution
How much would you pay to see a video of the final discussions Labor had about recognising a Palestinian state? The expression a mozza comes to mind. You could sell more tickets than you might initially imagine. One of the problems we face right across the policy spectrum is the overly optimistic, indeed almost childish belief that there is "a solution". It's as though we actually believe it is a perfect world and the only problem is we have somehow simply got the pieces of the jigsaw in the wrong place. Oh, if it were that simple. The brutal reality is that the world, delightful as it may be in so many respects, is in fact Mother Nature writ large. That means it's ugly. Bambi gets eaten by the lion. The weaker birds are kicked out of the nest. The stronger groups of whatever, plants, animals and people takeover the weaker. Floods, famine, volcanic eruptions and wars kill people. Including children. There is no silver bullet. There is no magic wand. We hate to see suffering, so we keep altruistically fiddling with the jigsaw pieces. This is particularly so where the welfare of children is concerned. None of us want to see human suffering, especially that of children. Under the cover of that vein of unrealistic optimism, Labor says it sees Arab and Muslim states (including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt) calling in July for Hamas to disarm and give up power in Gaza as an historic catalyst for peace. In reality, it looks like Labor is just seizing an opportunity to push ahead with a pre-existing agenda. (Someone should write a book about Qatar's role with Hamas generally and with Israel.) If you think there's a snowflake's chance in hell that Hamas will actually do that, as opposed to possibly making appearances of doing it, good luck to you. Buy-now, pay-later schemes rarely work out to be fair. Similarly, saying recognition now, but you bad guys will have to play nice later just seems, well, stupid. Is this a comedy or a tragedy? Who knows. As a piece of theatre, the former but in real life, the latter. Plenty of Australians like me may not vote Labor but presumably we can all recognise that rather than Labor members being completely stupid (OK there are always some exceptions to most things) they just have a different philosophical approach. But the rubric of a different philosophical approach can't explain away what looks to be a knee-jerk, jingoistic, me-too, pipe dream. Labor hasn't handled the whole issue since 2023 well at all. They were way too slow to recognise the flourishing anti-Semitism and consequently to do something effective about it. Our government should have stood up strongly against anti-Semitism very early on. It failed to do so. They have failed over the nearly two years since October 7, 2023 to effectively stand with Israel against Hamas and Palestinians for those horrendous atrocities. Like it or not, Labor is seen as anti-Israel. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert does not support Benjamin Netanyahu at all. He does, however, support and, more than most, has put in the hard yards on finding a two-state solution. He nonetheless says our move to recognise first, get the delivery of essentials later is "a populist, symbolic act that will not advance a two-state solution." He's a voice of experience in the Middle East, unlike the cavalcade of outsiders rushing in to appear relevant. For my part, he's made the right assessment. Labor will not get the same response internationally as the UK and France have for making this call. That's quite simply because, rightly or wrongly, any words of support for Israel since October 2023 from our government have seemed as muted as they could possibly be and in direct contrast to that for Palestinians. Rightly or wrongly, it appears our government made a clear choice to be anti-Israel. In contrast, the UK and France have been more conciliatory. Hence, their "distancing" from what Israel would like is much more significant. READ MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Have you heard our government condemning Hamas and indeed Palestinians at all, let alone with any commitment, for having weapons storage and firing facilities under and next to schools and hospitals? It's a war crime to use innocent people as protection for your military stashes. By doing it, you choose to put innocent people at risk. Have you heard, have we been told, how much we've given to UNWRA after the role so many of their employees were playing both in the October 2023 massacre and elsewhere was established? In any event, there'll be another wasteful Talk Fest at the UN. Politicians from all over the world will fly there and back feeling as if they've contributed something. But nothing positive will have happened. The down side is a message goes to Hamas that brutal terrorism over decades will be rewarded. It tells Palestinians in Gaza that Hamas is an effective advocate on their behalf. If that's not a big mistake, what is? Put all that aside and agree to disagree on what I think is a stupid decision. Can we make it work? In my view, no. To recognise a state, you need a defined area of land. Good luck with that. Sure, there are ideas about what might work. In the past, at the last minute, these ideas have fallen apart. Does anyone think Israel will just walk away and say OK to what a bunch of other people suggest? Will the Palestinians accept what the international community proposes? Start dreaming. Then we need a category of people. Who will we regard as Palestinian? That, when it gets down to the nitty gritty will not be easy. However, if you want an elected government, either to start with or to move towards, you need to face that question. You can't have a state without a government, so you are absolutely stuck with working out who will and will not be entitled to vote. Oh, and we need a way to ensure that terrorist groups like Hamas are kept out. They might agree publicly to go. Might. Sounds great. But you can call for terrorist groups to disarm and leave. You can beat your chest until it's black and blue. My guess is a quick reality check will tell you it's not going to happen. Whatever the public declaration, whatever show is put on for the media, terrorists do not generally just pack up their tents and move away. Or if they do, it is only to return with different tents. You would have to be completely stupid to imagine that Hamas don't already have people groomed up to look like disconnected outsiders but who are in fact trained operatives ready to infiltrate any new state. No amount of luck will help you there. Adding to all of this is the people themselves. A number of Palestinians in Gaza remain supportive of Hamas. Some behaviour in the streets following the events of October was not that of a people looking for peace with Israel. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine that Hamas could operate in Gaza as it has without the support of the people. Recognition of a state will only boost support for Hamas. Make them stronger. Children who may have been taught all their lives that Jews are infidels who need to be killed are not going to unthink that atrocious thought overnight. Imagine telling them at school that the adults have had a chat with some people in other countries and now all bets on driving Israelis off the planet are off? Let's see how that goes. How much would you pay to see a video of the final discussions Labor had about recognising a Palestinian state? The expression a mozza comes to mind. You could sell more tickets than you might initially imagine. One of the problems we face right across the policy spectrum is the overly optimistic, indeed almost childish belief that there is "a solution". It's as though we actually believe it is a perfect world and the only problem is we have somehow simply got the pieces of the jigsaw in the wrong place. Oh, if it were that simple. The brutal reality is that the world, delightful as it may be in so many respects, is in fact Mother Nature writ large. That means it's ugly. Bambi gets eaten by the lion. The weaker birds are kicked out of the nest. The stronger groups of whatever, plants, animals and people takeover the weaker. Floods, famine, volcanic eruptions and wars kill people. Including children. There is no silver bullet. There is no magic wand. We hate to see suffering, so we keep altruistically fiddling with the jigsaw pieces. This is particularly so where the welfare of children is concerned. None of us want to see human suffering, especially that of children. Under the cover of that vein of unrealistic optimism, Labor says it sees Arab and Muslim states (including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt) calling in July for Hamas to disarm and give up power in Gaza as an historic catalyst for peace. In reality, it looks like Labor is just seizing an opportunity to push ahead with a pre-existing agenda. (Someone should write a book about Qatar's role with Hamas generally and with Israel.) If you think there's a snowflake's chance in hell that Hamas will actually do that, as opposed to possibly making appearances of doing it, good luck to you. Buy-now, pay-later schemes rarely work out to be fair. Similarly, saying recognition now, but you bad guys will have to play nice later just seems, well, stupid. Is this a comedy or a tragedy? Who knows. As a piece of theatre, the former but in real life, the latter. Plenty of Australians like me may not vote Labor but presumably we can all recognise that rather than Labor members being completely stupid (OK there are always some exceptions to most things) they just have a different philosophical approach. But the rubric of a different philosophical approach can't explain away what looks to be a knee-jerk, jingoistic, me-too, pipe dream. Labor hasn't handled the whole issue since 2023 well at all. They were way too slow to recognise the flourishing anti-Semitism and consequently to do something effective about it. Our government should have stood up strongly against anti-Semitism very early on. It failed to do so. They have failed over the nearly two years since October 7, 2023 to effectively stand with Israel against Hamas and Palestinians for those horrendous atrocities. Like it or not, Labor is seen as anti-Israel. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert does not support Benjamin Netanyahu at all. He does, however, support and, more than most, has put in the hard yards on finding a two-state solution. He nonetheless says our move to recognise first, get the delivery of essentials later is "a populist, symbolic act that will not advance a two-state solution." He's a voice of experience in the Middle East, unlike the cavalcade of outsiders rushing in to appear relevant. For my part, he's made the right assessment. Labor will not get the same response internationally as the UK and France have for making this call. That's quite simply because, rightly or wrongly, any words of support for Israel since October 2023 from our government have seemed as muted as they could possibly be and in direct contrast to that for Palestinians. Rightly or wrongly, it appears our government made a clear choice to be anti-Israel. In contrast, the UK and France have been more conciliatory. Hence, their "distancing" from what Israel would like is much more significant. READ MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Have you heard our government condemning Hamas and indeed Palestinians at all, let alone with any commitment, for having weapons storage and firing facilities under and next to schools and hospitals? It's a war crime to use innocent people as protection for your military stashes. By doing it, you choose to put innocent people at risk. Have you heard, have we been told, how much we've given to UNWRA after the role so many of their employees were playing both in the October 2023 massacre and elsewhere was established? In any event, there'll be another wasteful Talk Fest at the UN. Politicians from all over the world will fly there and back feeling as if they've contributed something. But nothing positive will have happened. The down side is a message goes to Hamas that brutal terrorism over decades will be rewarded. It tells Palestinians in Gaza that Hamas is an effective advocate on their behalf. If that's not a big mistake, what is? Put all that aside and agree to disagree on what I think is a stupid decision. Can we make it work? In my view, no. To recognise a state, you need a defined area of land. Good luck with that. Sure, there are ideas about what might work. In the past, at the last minute, these ideas have fallen apart. Does anyone think Israel will just walk away and say OK to what a bunch of other people suggest? Will the Palestinians accept what the international community proposes? Start dreaming. Then we need a category of people. Who will we regard as Palestinian? That, when it gets down to the nitty gritty will not be easy. However, if you want an elected government, either to start with or to move towards, you need to face that question. You can't have a state without a government, so you are absolutely stuck with working out who will and will not be entitled to vote. Oh, and we need a way to ensure that terrorist groups like Hamas are kept out. They might agree publicly to go. Might. Sounds great. But you can call for terrorist groups to disarm and leave. You can beat your chest until it's black and blue. My guess is a quick reality check will tell you it's not going to happen. Whatever the public declaration, whatever show is put on for the media, terrorists do not generally just pack up their tents and move away. Or if they do, it is only to return with different tents. You would have to be completely stupid to imagine that Hamas don't already have people groomed up to look like disconnected outsiders but who are in fact trained operatives ready to infiltrate any new state. No amount of luck will help you there. Adding to all of this is the people themselves. A number of Palestinians in Gaza remain supportive of Hamas. Some behaviour in the streets following the events of October was not that of a people looking for peace with Israel. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine that Hamas could operate in Gaza as it has without the support of the people. Recognition of a state will only boost support for Hamas. Make them stronger. Children who may have been taught all their lives that Jews are infidels who need to be killed are not going to unthink that atrocious thought overnight. Imagine telling them at school that the adults have had a chat with some people in other countries and now all bets on driving Israelis off the planet are off? Let's see how that goes. How much would you pay to see a video of the final discussions Labor had about recognising a Palestinian state? The expression a mozza comes to mind. You could sell more tickets than you might initially imagine. One of the problems we face right across the policy spectrum is the overly optimistic, indeed almost childish belief that there is "a solution". It's as though we actually believe it is a perfect world and the only problem is we have somehow simply got the pieces of the jigsaw in the wrong place. Oh, if it were that simple. The brutal reality is that the world, delightful as it may be in so many respects, is in fact Mother Nature writ large. That means it's ugly. Bambi gets eaten by the lion. The weaker birds are kicked out of the nest. The stronger groups of whatever, plants, animals and people takeover the weaker. Floods, famine, volcanic eruptions and wars kill people. Including children. There is no silver bullet. There is no magic wand. We hate to see suffering, so we keep altruistically fiddling with the jigsaw pieces. This is particularly so where the welfare of children is concerned. None of us want to see human suffering, especially that of children. Under the cover of that vein of unrealistic optimism, Labor says it sees Arab and Muslim states (including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt) calling in July for Hamas to disarm and give up power in Gaza as an historic catalyst for peace. In reality, it looks like Labor is just seizing an opportunity to push ahead with a pre-existing agenda. (Someone should write a book about Qatar's role with Hamas generally and with Israel.) If you think there's a snowflake's chance in hell that Hamas will actually do that, as opposed to possibly making appearances of doing it, good luck to you. Buy-now, pay-later schemes rarely work out to be fair. Similarly, saying recognition now, but you bad guys will have to play nice later just seems, well, stupid. Is this a comedy or a tragedy? Who knows. As a piece of theatre, the former but in real life, the latter. Plenty of Australians like me may not vote Labor but presumably we can all recognise that rather than Labor members being completely stupid (OK there are always some exceptions to most things) they just have a different philosophical approach. But the rubric of a different philosophical approach can't explain away what looks to be a knee-jerk, jingoistic, me-too, pipe dream. Labor hasn't handled the whole issue since 2023 well at all. They were way too slow to recognise the flourishing anti-Semitism and consequently to do something effective about it. Our government should have stood up strongly against anti-Semitism very early on. It failed to do so. They have failed over the nearly two years since October 7, 2023 to effectively stand with Israel against Hamas and Palestinians for those horrendous atrocities. Like it or not, Labor is seen as anti-Israel. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert does not support Benjamin Netanyahu at all. He does, however, support and, more than most, has put in the hard yards on finding a two-state solution. He nonetheless says our move to recognise first, get the delivery of essentials later is "a populist, symbolic act that will not advance a two-state solution." He's a voice of experience in the Middle East, unlike the cavalcade of outsiders rushing in to appear relevant. For my part, he's made the right assessment. Labor will not get the same response internationally as the UK and France have for making this call. That's quite simply because, rightly or wrongly, any words of support for Israel since October 2023 from our government have seemed as muted as they could possibly be and in direct contrast to that for Palestinians. Rightly or wrongly, it appears our government made a clear choice to be anti-Israel. In contrast, the UK and France have been more conciliatory. Hence, their "distancing" from what Israel would like is much more significant. READ MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Have you heard our government condemning Hamas and indeed Palestinians at all, let alone with any commitment, for having weapons storage and firing facilities under and next to schools and hospitals? It's a war crime to use innocent people as protection for your military stashes. By doing it, you choose to put innocent people at risk. Have you heard, have we been told, how much we've given to UNWRA after the role so many of their employees were playing both in the October 2023 massacre and elsewhere was established? In any event, there'll be another wasteful Talk Fest at the UN. Politicians from all over the world will fly there and back feeling as if they've contributed something. But nothing positive will have happened. The down side is a message goes to Hamas that brutal terrorism over decades will be rewarded. It tells Palestinians in Gaza that Hamas is an effective advocate on their behalf. If that's not a big mistake, what is? Put all that aside and agree to disagree on what I think is a stupid decision. Can we make it work? In my view, no. To recognise a state, you need a defined area of land. Good luck with that. Sure, there are ideas about what might work. In the past, at the last minute, these ideas have fallen apart. Does anyone think Israel will just walk away and say OK to what a bunch of other people suggest? Will the Palestinians accept what the international community proposes? Start dreaming. Then we need a category of people. Who will we regard as Palestinian? That, when it gets down to the nitty gritty will not be easy. However, if you want an elected government, either to start with or to move towards, you need to face that question. You can't have a state without a government, so you are absolutely stuck with working out who will and will not be entitled to vote. Oh, and we need a way to ensure that terrorist groups like Hamas are kept out. They might agree publicly to go. Might. Sounds great. But you can call for terrorist groups to disarm and leave. You can beat your chest until it's black and blue. My guess is a quick reality check will tell you it's not going to happen. Whatever the public declaration, whatever show is put on for the media, terrorists do not generally just pack up their tents and move away. Or if they do, it is only to return with different tents. You would have to be completely stupid to imagine that Hamas don't already have people groomed up to look like disconnected outsiders but who are in fact trained operatives ready to infiltrate any new state. No amount of luck will help you there. Adding to all of this is the people themselves. A number of Palestinians in Gaza remain supportive of Hamas. Some behaviour in the streets following the events of October was not that of a people looking for peace with Israel. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine that Hamas could operate in Gaza as it has without the support of the people. Recognition of a state will only boost support for Hamas. Make them stronger. Children who may have been taught all their lives that Jews are infidels who need to be killed are not going to unthink that atrocious thought overnight. Imagine telling them at school that the adults have had a chat with some people in other countries and now all bets on driving Israelis off the planet are off? Let's see how that goes. How much would you pay to see a video of the final discussions Labor had about recognising a Palestinian state? The expression a mozza comes to mind. You could sell more tickets than you might initially imagine. One of the problems we face right across the policy spectrum is the overly optimistic, indeed almost childish belief that there is "a solution". It's as though we actually believe it is a perfect world and the only problem is we have somehow simply got the pieces of the jigsaw in the wrong place. Oh, if it were that simple. The brutal reality is that the world, delightful as it may be in so many respects, is in fact Mother Nature writ large. That means it's ugly. Bambi gets eaten by the lion. The weaker birds are kicked out of the nest. The stronger groups of whatever, plants, animals and people takeover the weaker. Floods, famine, volcanic eruptions and wars kill people. Including children. There is no silver bullet. There is no magic wand. We hate to see suffering, so we keep altruistically fiddling with the jigsaw pieces. This is particularly so where the welfare of children is concerned. None of us want to see human suffering, especially that of children. Under the cover of that vein of unrealistic optimism, Labor says it sees Arab and Muslim states (including Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Egypt) calling in July for Hamas to disarm and give up power in Gaza as an historic catalyst for peace. In reality, it looks like Labor is just seizing an opportunity to push ahead with a pre-existing agenda. (Someone should write a book about Qatar's role with Hamas generally and with Israel.) If you think there's a snowflake's chance in hell that Hamas will actually do that, as opposed to possibly making appearances of doing it, good luck to you. Buy-now, pay-later schemes rarely work out to be fair. Similarly, saying recognition now, but you bad guys will have to play nice later just seems, well, stupid. Is this a comedy or a tragedy? Who knows. As a piece of theatre, the former but in real life, the latter. Plenty of Australians like me may not vote Labor but presumably we can all recognise that rather than Labor members being completely stupid (OK there are always some exceptions to most things) they just have a different philosophical approach. But the rubric of a different philosophical approach can't explain away what looks to be a knee-jerk, jingoistic, me-too, pipe dream. Labor hasn't handled the whole issue since 2023 well at all. They were way too slow to recognise the flourishing anti-Semitism and consequently to do something effective about it. Our government should have stood up strongly against anti-Semitism very early on. It failed to do so. They have failed over the nearly two years since October 7, 2023 to effectively stand with Israel against Hamas and Palestinians for those horrendous atrocities. Like it or not, Labor is seen as anti-Israel. It doesn't have to be one or the other. Former Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert does not support Benjamin Netanyahu at all. He does, however, support and, more than most, has put in the hard yards on finding a two-state solution. He nonetheless says our move to recognise first, get the delivery of essentials later is "a populist, symbolic act that will not advance a two-state solution." He's a voice of experience in the Middle East, unlike the cavalcade of outsiders rushing in to appear relevant. For my part, he's made the right assessment. Labor will not get the same response internationally as the UK and France have for making this call. That's quite simply because, rightly or wrongly, any words of support for Israel since October 2023 from our government have seemed as muted as they could possibly be and in direct contrast to that for Palestinians. Rightly or wrongly, it appears our government made a clear choice to be anti-Israel. In contrast, the UK and France have been more conciliatory. Hence, their "distancing" from what Israel would like is much more significant. READ MORE AMANDA VANSTONE: Have you heard our government condemning Hamas and indeed Palestinians at all, let alone with any commitment, for having weapons storage and firing facilities under and next to schools and hospitals? It's a war crime to use innocent people as protection for your military stashes. By doing it, you choose to put innocent people at risk. Have you heard, have we been told, how much we've given to UNWRA after the role so many of their employees were playing both in the October 2023 massacre and elsewhere was established? In any event, there'll be another wasteful Talk Fest at the UN. Politicians from all over the world will fly there and back feeling as if they've contributed something. But nothing positive will have happened. The down side is a message goes to Hamas that brutal terrorism over decades will be rewarded. It tells Palestinians in Gaza that Hamas is an effective advocate on their behalf. If that's not a big mistake, what is? Put all that aside and agree to disagree on what I think is a stupid decision. Can we make it work? In my view, no. To recognise a state, you need a defined area of land. Good luck with that. Sure, there are ideas about what might work. In the past, at the last minute, these ideas have fallen apart. Does anyone think Israel will just walk away and say OK to what a bunch of other people suggest? Will the Palestinians accept what the international community proposes? Start dreaming. Then we need a category of people. Who will we regard as Palestinian? That, when it gets down to the nitty gritty will not be easy. However, if you want an elected government, either to start with or to move towards, you need to face that question. You can't have a state without a government, so you are absolutely stuck with working out who will and will not be entitled to vote. Oh, and we need a way to ensure that terrorist groups like Hamas are kept out. They might agree publicly to go. Might. Sounds great. But you can call for terrorist groups to disarm and leave. You can beat your chest until it's black and blue. My guess is a quick reality check will tell you it's not going to happen. Whatever the public declaration, whatever show is put on for the media, terrorists do not generally just pack up their tents and move away. Or if they do, it is only to return with different tents. You would have to be completely stupid to imagine that Hamas don't already have people groomed up to look like disconnected outsiders but who are in fact trained operatives ready to infiltrate any new state. No amount of luck will help you there. Adding to all of this is the people themselves. A number of Palestinians in Gaza remain supportive of Hamas. Some behaviour in the streets following the events of October was not that of a people looking for peace with Israel. It is extraordinarily difficult to imagine that Hamas could operate in Gaza as it has without the support of the people. Recognition of a state will only boost support for Hamas. Make them stronger. Children who may have been taught all their lives that Jews are infidels who need to be killed are not going to unthink that atrocious thought overnight. Imagine telling them at school that the adults have had a chat with some people in other countries and now all bets on driving Israelis off the planet are off? Let's see how that goes.
