Whose voice?

THE piece on Voices for Fremantle was interesting, as far as it went.

I say that because from the article, there’s still a lot that’s unclear about who the group represents, what it stands for, and how its policies and aims were identified.

Who wrote it? Who is this that is “thinking allowed”?

Was it a Freo Herald endorsement piece? Are Voices for Fremantle and Freo Herald on the same page?

It might explain the Herald’s general lack of scrutiny of this group, which has enjoyed puff pieces since it started.

David Weber
North Fremantle

Crisis? Yes.

I AGREE with Chrissie Maus 100 per cent about “people feel unheard” and the lack of leadership (but not that the three-tier political system is broken).

V4FREO is a clear sign that the political parties aren’t really listening and certainly do not take leadership to tackle, let alone solve the most pressing existential threats to all of us.

Ranked in order:

1: Avoiding a climate catastrophe: After decades of (Coalition) politicians and Newscorp denying, doubting any climate change, let alone a crisis, after the unprecedented bushfires, floods in short succession, temperature increases in the sea killing coral, heat waves (30 Celsius!) and bushfires in Siberia, melting glaciers all over the world, only the Nationals and Newscorp are still in denial. 

Spreading lies should be criminal whether it’s about the Holocaust or climate!

While there is some tinkering at the edges by all levels of the governments, emissions are still allowed to exponentially increase, new coal and gas is approved or given permission to run for 70 years.

So instead of cutting emissions real fast, they are substantially worsening the climate crisis, the more devastating the catastrophe will be and the longer it will take to get out of it if at all.
I have been called hysteric because I have been concerned for 50 years (now alarmed) together with 99 per cent of scientists! 

To make matters worse, pollution is still free, there are even tax incentives for the totally oversized fossil cars, utes and diesel. 

But political parties seem to be in bed with fossil corporations.

This would be so easy to curb with a progressive carbon tax  and a range of policies, requiring leadership, like switching fast to renewables and a circular economy that creates jobs!

2: Cancelling AUKUS: $368 billion is a huge amount and in all probability 100 per cent waste (decades of no defence, uncertainty, obsolete by the time of delivery, binding us to an undemocratic US). 

I am all for defence! One per cent of this huge amount would buy Australia drones (built here): under/on water, land and air: true defence now that nobody can switch off or not deliver, and that doesn’t bind us to a very questionable US.

Australia should be independent!  

AUKUS denies us this.

Why do all levels of government take the opposite “lead” of what is in Australia’s best interest, just like with the climate?

In conclusion: Most politicians and governments are not listening and or not taking leadership.

Can you imagine all tiers of government pursuing net zero by 2030; not with pledges but substantial actions (that if done properly will stimulate the economy, create jobs, pay for itself), cancelling AUKUS, building more regenerative social housing, deliver health care, child care, etc….?

That would be leadership based on best science and in the interest of all citizens and communities.

The political class is so used to its marriage with mining and the ‘criminal’ Murdoch gang, still working against facts and the common good.

It is but morally corrupt.

No wonder we are so cynical about them.

We need politicians who listen and lead based on facts in the interest of all.

Name provided