3 days ago
- Politics
- Sydney Morning Herald
Never mind the economy, climate change is bad for the health
Your article (' Pocock springs test on fate of future children ', July 31) quotes Anthony Albanese, saying that rejecting any moratorium on new fossil fuel projects is 'disastrous for the economy'. Try telling that to the Greeks, or to the 33 million victims of the Pakistani floods in March, or to the flood and fire victims of the eastern half of Australia over recent years. Not only were these events 'disastrous for the economy', but at what cost to human health and welfare and to the environment? Bring on the moratorium. We cannot afford not to.
Hugh Barrett, Sanctuary Point
May the noise made by the main parties not drown out the sane and sensible discussion in federal decision-making. Changed thinking and behaviours are needed about the approval and assistance provided to fossil fuel projects. When community and expert concern and worsening outlooks concerning 'global boiling' are being raised time and time again, stronger federal leadership is needed. The public values considerations that go well beyond party-political eyes being focused on getting past the next election and maintaining sources of donations, and the current yet still modest 2030 and 2050 emissions reduction targets.
Sue Dyer, Downer (ACT)
Pocock's bill to force legislators to consider the impact on future generations of new fossil fuel licences will be unpopular with Labor if it threatens new coal and gas, which Labor relies on for revenue and to contain energy prices. It throws up in stark relief whether future generations must be considered against winning the next election. It seems surprising that it needs legislation. I was under the naive assumption that governments should consider all our welfare in any legislation anyway. Or is it only those who can afford lobbyists who are considered? The independents are doing a good job of forcing government to face up to difficult issues.
Gary Barnes, Mosman
Pocock says we have a 'moral duty to young people and future generations'. The burden on the youngest members of our society is not just logistical, it is an overwhelming emotional burden. Today's children and young people with whom I work as an occupational therapist are more anxious (scared, fearful, despondent) than this group have been in the last thirty years – and it is over climate. The rest of the article makes it clear that the federal Labor government is trying to shrink the scale of the task in our eyes. Their attempt to displace the emotional burden they promised to take up when they entered office is hurting our children right now.
Jo Jackson King, Gidgegannup (WA)
