LNP's ‘wait and see' policy black holes count for zero

The Age

10 hours ago

To submit a letter to The Age, email [e-mail]. Please include your home address and telephone number below your letter. No attachments. See here for our rules and tips on getting your letter published.
OPPOSITION ENERGY POLICY
Dan Tehan's latest commentary (' Tehan maintains rage over Labor's green agenda that is 'trashing our economy' ', 28/6 ) is a masterclass in political hedging. He attacks Labor's clean energy plan as too costly without offering any serious alternative – and without saying what he would spend, or do instead. Apparently, it's too soon to say what the Coalition's policy will be. But it's not too soon to throw stones.
Tehan is trying to have it both ways: Acknowledging climate change is real, and we must act, but also undermining Australia's existing pathway to net zero – one endorsed by 195 countries and backed by growing investment, jobs and global momentum.
Instead of proposing a credible, costed alternative, Tehan points to nuclear power – a decades-away, taxpayer-funded gamble that voters in proposed host communities clearly rejected. Meanwhile, his own Coalition partners, the Nationals, are openly discussing ditching net zero altogether.
If the Coalition really believes in climate action and affordable energy, it needs to stop hiding behind scare campaigns and internal reviews. Tehan's 'wait and see' approach isn't leadership– it's delay dressed up as strategy. The public deserves more than recycled talking points and policy black holes.
Alan Richardson, Warrnambool
Pace for renewables after Coalition inaction
Has it ever occurred to Dan Tehan (29/6) why the federal government has to move so quickly on rolling out renewable energy? May it have something to do with 20 years of Coalition governments' climate change denial and inaction?
Geoff Wescott, Northcote
Time for action is now
I am surprised that Dan Tehan expects voters to be turned on by his plan to let Labor make all the running on climate for '18 months and two years and then work out what we can do'. There are indications enough that the Australian public knows that real emissions have to come down. We know that more severe climate deterioration can be expected as world average surface temperatures approach and exceed 1.5oC above their values in pre-industrial times.
We are already effectively at this threshold – and emissions, instead of coming down, continue to rise. Human-induced climate change will only ease if, and when, global action is effective in bringing the concentration of heat-trapping greenhouse gases in the atmosphere back down towards levels prevalent in pre-industrial times. The concentration of carbon dioxide in pre-industrial times was 280 parts per million. It is now 420 ppm and rising.
The responsible thing for the Coalition to do would be to work with the government in implementing the most cost-effective ways of reducing emissions, not in 18 months' or two years' time, but now.
John Gare, Kew East
More from the LNP policy wasteland
Angus Taylor believes quotas for women in his party would 'subvert democracy' (27/6). This is what subverts democracy, Angus: Imposing false debts on half a million social security recipients, causing horrific stress and hardship (Robodebt); providing tax breaks and other benefits to wealthy individuals and companies in the hope some crumbs will eventually trickle down to everyone else (supply side economics – a bedrock LNP principle); ignoring the science of climate change for decades resulting in untold personal, financial and environmental damage (climate denialism).
From the same policy wasteland, Dan Tehan, in an accompanying article, suggests the opposition might have some ideas for a climate policy in a few years' time, while railing against the Labor government's commitment to renewables. Meanwhile, the gap between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' is at a 20-year high. Democracy has already been subverted under your watch Angus. Please make way for someone – preferably a woman – with some caring, careful and better crafted policies.
Peter Thomson, Brunswick
THE FORUM
Who is really responsible?
Oh dear, Angus. No quotas for women have worked so well for the Liberals. So who was responsible for failing so spectacularly? The 'men' can't blame quotas (there were none). Nor can they blame the women (as there were too few).
Jenny Bone, Surrey Hills
Merit in quotas
It's worrying that quotas in politics is somehow an undemocratic idea (28/6). The insistence on 'merit' seems like a way of effectively shutting women out of politics. It means that a male-dominated party will be the on-going pattern, to the exclusion of female voices and sensibilities.
Quotas lift opportunity for a fair representation in politics and isn't this the soul of democracy?
The trouble with the 'merit' ideology is that women have to compete with men on men's terms, disadvantaging many women from the outset. Would that we could see the merit in quotas.
Ian Hill, Blackburn South