interesting article,

what do you think of Peter decision to approve the pilp mill

TimC <tim_augustus@yahoo.com.au> wrote:

Since you bring this up, I read an article on Crikey.com.au that I 
wanted to
share with the list but was foiled by it's untimely demise ;-)

 


Mungo: Garrett abandons utopia for results


Mungo MacCallum writes:

You have to feel sorry for Peter Garrett. He's had a pretty rough time 
since
he joined the Labor Party more that three years ago, and it all came to 
a
head last week.

When Garrett, on behalf of the ALP, signed off on the government's 
decision
to approve the Tamar Valley pulp mill, the Greens turned carnivorous. 
From
being a trusted environmental warrior, Garrett had become a sell out and 
a
cipher, the shadow minister who didn't cast a shadow. As everyone had
predicted, the Labor Party had chewed him up and spat him out. From 
being an
idealist and a man of principle, Garrett was now just another 
politician.

Well yes, he was, and this is precisely the point. After spending his 
youth
banging his impressive head against various brick walls in pursuit of 
noble
causes, Garrett has now grown up. In 2003 he became convinced that 
actually
achieving change for the better, imperfect though it might be, was more
useful than spending the rest of his life yearning for an unattainable 
green
utopia. Whether consciously or not he accepted the truth of Gough 
Whitlam's
dictum: the impotent are always pure. He may even have turned it around: 
the
pure are always impotent.

From the start he knew politics would involve compromise, that he would 
no
longer be the free spirit his fans had idolised at Midnight Oil 
concerts. He
would have to balance the interests of the many against the dreams of a 
few.
But he made the choice, and to his great credit he has stuck with it. 

Moreover, he has seen how dire the consequences of uncompromising 
idealism
can be. In 2004 Labor under Mark Latham went down the deep green path in
Tasmania. Seduced by the Greens Leader Bob Brown, Latham was persuaded 
that
a policy of quarantining large areas of forests from loggers would be 
vote
winner both in the state and across the mainland. Garrett embraced the 
move
and campaigned vigorously in the short time remaining before polling 
day. 

The result is now history: not only did Labor lose the seats of Bass and
Braddon in Tasmania, but the party forfeited any chance of picking up
mainland forestry seats like Eden-Monaro and Gippsland. The policy did 
not
lose the election for Labor, although the contrast between Latham 
sneaking
away from timber workers through an underground car park while Howard 
was
cheered by them in a mass rally was one of the enduring images of the
campaign, and one which would have swung many waverers to the government 
in
the final week. But there is no doubt that the net cost was at least 
two,
probably three seats. Those on the left now excoriating Garrett's 
pragmatism
might care to remember this if in 2007 Howard scrapes back by a similar
margin. 

There is no doubt that the man himself feels uncomfortable with the pulp
mill decision, or that he is hurt by the attacks from former friends and
allies. But he has held the line and will continue to do so. And he can 
take
more than marginal comfort from the fact that Labor's primary vote 
continues
to run at 47 percent, while the Greens are at just 7.6. As a result 
there is
every possibility that in two month's time Peter Garrett, Minister for 
the
Environment, will be signing the ratification documents for the Kyoto 
treaty
and preparing to implement a radical and far-reaching program on 
sustainable
energy, pollution control and climate change, while Bob Brown, Greens 
leader
in the senate, will still be leading futile demonstrations against a 
pulp
mill. 

The purists will no doubt dismiss the political rise of Peter Garrett as 
his
30 pieces of silver, the wages of treachery. Those of us more interested 
in
results than rhetoric will applaud it as a hard-earned laurel wreath, a
reward for courage and vision, but above all for common sense. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  _____  

From: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au 
[mailto:powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au]
On Behalf Of ashokachowta@optusnet.com.au
Sent: Tuesday, 23 October 2007 12:55 PM
To: powderworks@yahoogroups.com.au
Subject: [powderworks] Your opinion of Pete's approval of the Pulp Mill

 

I want to know something, what's your opinion on Peter Garrett giving 
the
approval for the Pulp Mill to go ahead, even though he says as long it 
meets
the environmental standards or something like that?, I know he's losing
fans, one fellow what's his money back from 11 Oils albums be bought, 
there
are people including environmentalists in his electorate who are 
planning on
voting him out, the Labor Party are thinking of chnaging his portfolio. 
So
what do you reckon, u think he has sold out or not etc etc?

Personally I'm not jumping to any conclusions, I don't think we've heard 
the
full story of Peter's reasons. All will be revealed when if the Labor 
Party
wins

Oh and another thing and this makes me smirk now when I think about it 
but I
thought one of the reasons that Powderworks was closed might be because 
of
my and others occasional swearing. 

Ashoka Chowta Graphic Designs
Myrtle Bank SA, 5064
Australia 
Mobile: 0404 217 028 
Tele: 8379 8756 

Ashoka Chowta Graphic Designs
Myrtle Bank SA, 5064
Australia 
Mobile: 0404 217 028 
Tele: 8379 8756