‘Despite Holmes a Court’s rhetoric, the AEC must look into the party status of Climate 200’
Welcome to the column where you provide the content. After ripping into the Coalition at the National Press Club for its record on climate change, government integrity and support for gender equality, Simon Holmes a Court insisted there would be no strings attached to the millions his Climate 200 group is raising to fund independent candidates. Philip’s call:
“Despite Holmes a Court’s rhetoric, the AEC must look into the party status of Climate 200.”
Marilyn concurred:
“Holmes a Court can call them independents if he likes. In fact, they can all call themselves ‘Independent’, however Climate 200 seems like a political party to me. Maybe the AEC needs to respond.”
Mark was miffed:
“This guy represents everything the Left says it detests – inherited wealth, big end of town, private school Toorak-style privilege – but because he’s supporting a campaign designed to ensure the Coalition loses the next election, they are quite happy to hold their noses and endorse him. The fact that working people will lose jobs and struggling families will be hit by increasing power bills matters not. Whatever it takes.”
Lights out, said Brad the Quiet Australian:
“This lot will no doubt be beaming with pride today following announcements from AGL and Origin that some of our largest power stations will shut down as soon as three years from now.
“What leaves me baffled is what will make up for the loss of 7,730MW of always-on generating capacity without replacing it with a suitable equivalent, given that we already know that windmills don’t work when the wind isn’t blowing and solar arrays don’t work when the sun isn’t shining.
“When are our energy ministers going to accept the fact that the meaning of the word ‘intermittent’ means sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. Electricity has been a 24 hour resource up until now for most of us. That will not be possible with this amount of baseload generation lost with the closures of Loy Yang A, Bayswater and Eraring.
“Steggall once entertained the thought of joining the Liberal Party. I say to the NSW branch: please do not let her in. The Liberal Party needs less wokes, not more.”
Banjo’s tune:
“If I were a millio/billionaire with much invested in renewables, I too would take this path, vast wealth at the expense of those that cannot afford it, is not illegal.
Michael asked:
“What makes Holmes a Court think we want to be governed by Sydney and Melbourne rich city dwellers with climate as the key focus?”
Bruce replied:
“Probably because he is a smart guy and sees inaction and politicking over real leadership as destroying our democracy.”
GregM’s summary:
“I watched part of the National Press Club address by ‘renewables investor’ Holmes a Court and I must say it was less than compelling, more like the rich kid shouting the Doctors’ Wives a free lunch. Isn’t he simply creating a political movement based on his business interests?
Climate 200 is nothing more than a single interest disrupter movement that could only appeal to the well-off latte sippers. It offers nothing to ordinary Australians.”
Roberta reckoned:
“Makes Clive look like a saint and saviour.”
Lee’s lesson:
“Just remember. You need rich left leaning progressives to tell you how to vote. You can’t be trusted making your own decisions. They know what’s best.”
The Vale’s slant:
“Concerned head tilts all round. These independent candidates must have a head tilt coach to advise on the perfect angle of tiltage together with just the right amount of concerned expression. It’s a very fine balance.”
Beniah observed:
“Intriguing that the most committed Marxists are those who are already very wealthy and who will escape the restrictions of the laws and controls imposed on the masses by their whim.”
Parangana quoted:
“Quite right, in fact Karl Marx was a university intellectual supported by his family wine estates far away from working class people. Margaret Thatcher said it best: ‘The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money’.”
Boris was suspicious:
“No, of course, there are no directions, they’re just ‘guidelines’, ‘suggestions’, ‘options worth considering’, honest, cross my heart!”
Jim took a dim view:
“Among the candidates Climate 200 is supporting are Zali Steggall in Warringah, Allegra Spender in Wentworth, Kylea Tink in North Sydney, Sophie Scamps in Mackellar, Zoe Daniel in Goldstein, Despi O’Connor in Flinders and Monique Ryan in Josh Frydenberg’s seat of Kooyong. No pre-organisation of narratives or mantra eh? I can readily see a trend in those choices!”
–
Adam Creighton’s cri de coeur on ending mask mandates suggested that masks aren’t “better than nothing”, they’re worse: Non-verbal communication is obliterated, speech is muffled, glasses fog up, kids can’t socialise properly at school and they create a divisive atmosphere of fear. Troy’s fear:
“Time will tell what masks have done to damage the development of children who rely on facial cues to understand language.”
Bruce reckoned:
“Time for an investigation into how much taxpayer money is being spent on several months of mask wearing to supply government workers across the country. A $19 box of 50 doesn’t last long when you are changing them four times a day and having to get two more for your commute. This may end up costing more than unnecessary PCR testing.”
MR wasn’t having it:
“ ‘Face masks combined with other preventive measures, such as getting vaccinated, frequent hand-washing and physical distancing, can help slow the spread of the virus that causes COVID-19.’ This from the Mayo Clinic, which presumably has a better grasp of the medical implications than does an economist. More cherry picking from Adam.”
Mark proposed a deal:
“If Adam and all his antimasker mates here are happy to be operated on by unmasked surgeons then I am sure the surgeons will be happy and more comfortable, but I don’t want an unmasked surgeon. If Adam and his mates want to be comfortable and not wear a useless mask when cutting asbestos then I am ok with that as long as they don’t force me to not wear a mask! Sorry, masks actually do work if used correctly.”
Tibor said:
“In as much as any face covering over one’s nose and mouth will impede the entry of virtually anything from air to mucus to food to a pathogen to a virus, it seems logical, at least, to claim that masks surely must make a difference. And they probably do, except, as Creighton’s article quotes a Bloomberg opinion piece: ‘There’s no avoiding it: The benefits of universal masking have been difficult to quantify.’
“Therefore, the real issue is whether we can claim, when all things are considered, that making mask-wearing mandatory is truly justified?”
Sophie said:
“Mandatory mask wearing cannot in any way be justified because the harms that are social, psychological, economic, and ethical outweigh the dubious benefits, such as a slight reduction in viral transmission, given that the mandate plays only an incremental role in mask wearing. Most people will willingly wear them, others will use common sense (such as being outside at Bunnings) and correctly choose not to wear masks at those times. So, the issue is, how much is this incremental outcome worth? Not much. Stop the mandates, and stop treating adults like children.”
Mr Natural had it all figured out:
“For run of the mill daily activities I prefer my Hannibal Lecter. It guarantees a fast run through the supermarket. But that’s not suitable for after five, when my Zorro combines style with uselessness, which is an improvement on those styleless disposable numbers.”
–
Will Glasgow wrote about China’s new national obsession: the “rabbit mum” hands-off parenting strategy that made US-born freestyle skier Eileen Gu an Ivy league-attending Olympic champion, while debate rages in the US about her decision to compete for China. Trevor said:
“Before Xi Jinping starts bragging about her ability, he should note that she is a product of the America democratic system, not of the Chinese communist system. As to her values, her decision to abandon one and adopt the other says it all. She will fit right in.”
Ann asked:
“A citizen of the world? She seems at this time to be her own person. Not different than many others who are using their ‘saleability’ to earn a lot of money before it all fades away where her education will cut in for the rest of her life.”
KarenB’s hubby said:
“She’s gotta go back to the USA at some point. It’s not going to be easy for her.”
John scoffed:
“She is a US citizen. As China does not recognise dual citizenship, how can she legitimately compete for that country. This whole episode is a sham.”
Simon said:
“There is a small cynical voice within me suggesting that it must be incredibly advantageous financially to become an adored a successful sporting figure in China. Li Na, the now retired Chinese Tennis champion earned and still earns extraordinary wealth via sponsorships and promotions within China. The same goes for the ex-Chinese NBA star (Yao Ming). Getting access to potentially the biggest sponsorships market in the world must have been irresistible to her advisors. And it can’t hurt that she is an attractive model as well as a Gold medal winning Olympian. There’s some irony in how capitalist the nation of China has become.”
Kon’s concern:
“Eileen should grab the gold and get out of Dodge before the CCP decide how they can put her to their best advantage.”
Joan jeered:
“Born in the US, educated in the US, learned to ski in the US … Chooses to represent China at the Olympics. Not my kind of hero.”
Chris was impressed:
“She chose to differentiate herself from the pack of other Chinese and US athletes. Clever.”
Tim tipped:
“The millions she’ll earn will give her access to whatever she needs and a lot more!”
Last word to Gertrude:
“I have no doubt whatsoever that she has been told multiple times that she is not native to her birth country (USA) and that she is an outsider. I have no doubt she has or will be told that she is not Chinese.
“Of course, the idiots saying these things don’t actually realise that what they are saying is she is neither but what they don’t understand is that she is both. I’ve lived this. Leave her alone and accept she has a right to both, she has been bullied for being both and she can enjoy being both.”
–
Each Friday the cream of your views on the news rises and we honour the voices that made the debate great. To boost your chances of being featured, please be pertinent, pithy and preferably make a point. Solid arguments, original ideas, sparkling prose, rapier wit and rhetorical flourishes may count in your favour. Civility is essential. Comments may be edited for length.
Read related topics:Climate Change