My dilemmaBy phill PARSONSAdams, the Labor member for Lyons is of the view that his natural consistency are the rednecks and timber workers of the electorate. As such, he has denied his leader and his Labor faith and sided with Howard in a shallow attempt to retain his job at the cost to Tasmania of its old growth and high conservation value ancient forests and also its tourist and natural assets beyond value but valued at about $3,333.33 per hectare by his own party's Leader. [Or at $2,461,538.65 per old growth forest job] What is a forest conservationist of 43 years and a campaigner of 31 years to do when faced with the dilemma of voting for forests, where should my preferences go? Howard’s offer on the forests has saved me from departing from a lifetime of voting for the candidates of progressive parties. He has failed Tasmania, failed its forests and so failed Australians by sacrificing their heritage to the woodchip mill in an offer based not on science, or on building a strong and job rich timber industry, but solely on giving himself another 3 years in power. Latham has not offered forest conservationists any security about reserves but his offer far outweighs Howard’s in meeting the forest conservation agenda. Tasmanian Forest Minister Bryan Green has exposed Howard’s reserve offer as a lie, the money devalues Tasmania’s assets. So here is Adams feeling deserted by his leader, afraid his natural constituency will desert him and with the possibility that he will be returned on Green preferences. This man has been an unrepentant redneck attacking conservation and conservationists at every possibility and they may not vote for him. He has threatened his leader and/or to white ant the policy offered to the voters. The election could be close. Adams could hold the balance of power. A loose canon on the floor of the parliament. The Greens may not hold the balance of power in the Senate and thus be able to offer a guarantee for the protection of the Tasmanian forests in particular and the Australian environment in general. But without a Latham government the conservation value of Tasmania’s forests will be degraded further, destroying their heritage value, their natural capital and as a tourist asset. In such a degraded state they will not bring a compensation package of $820 million again. If Tasmania has destroyed its ancient forests for profit, when the old growth runs out in 2012 and the industry has to restructure anyway who will make such an offer again. Both electoral suicide and fiscal responsibility will flash before the leaders of the old parties if Latham is rejected this time. My choice is to vote Green, the only party to be trusted with the environment, and to preference Labor for its foresighted policy to protect forests and grow jobs. I find that I have no choice but to preference Adams, much as it hurts and may even backfire later, because he is the Labor candidate. I hope they transmogrify this white ant and give me another choice next time. phill Parsons has his heart on his sleeve here. Some will not be able to resist a kick but, in his view, too much is at stake to not express his opinion. Manly is entirely without old growth forest but does have some heathland on North Head. Once, a beautiful stand of coast Banksia’s graced Shelley Beach, magnificently tall, but now dust. The Norfolk Island pines that grace the foreshores were threatened by pollution but now show the nesting crowns of recovery. One can only hope that the degraded environment that confronts the Doctors' wives is shocking enough to get them to act on our green icons.
RAPID RESPONSE EMAIL: What do you think? Monday, October 4, 2004 |