I often wonder what future generations will make of Australia's policies and treatment of asylum seekers.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
Recent attempts by the Federal Government to pass new laws concerning our borders, thankfully failed.
David Crowe, a journalist with the Sydney Morning Herald, summed this up by writing: "Labor deserved to lose its inflammatory attempt to ram a new law through parliament so it could look tough on borders by turning asylum seekers into criminals."
High Court decisions to allow the release of immigration detainees into the community have made the government re-think its current policy, and that, hopefully, can only be seen as a plus.
Many Australians continue to see our treatment of refugees as a national shame and embarrassment, and strongly believe that we can and must do better.
Keith Curry
No fear at all?
Recently i was having a discussion with a group of friends and the topic of climate change was raised.
I was very surprised to hear that the majority of people present indicated no fear at all concerning using fossil fuels to create energy.
The general view was that our Prime Minister had a strong obligation to warn the people of Australia if using fossil fuels to create energy could be harmful.
The fact now that the Labor party are presently approving many new coal and gas mines was raised and again most of the people attending made it clear that the Prime Minister surely would have warned if any harm could result from these actions, particularly in relation to human induced climate change.
With some hesitation i told the gathering that a great many scientists across the world have now been warning, for many years, that burning fossil fuels to create energy is causing great harm to many millions of people in the world and is a proven prime cause of human induced climate change.
I am strongly of the opinion that it is a great pity that many people in Australia are not sufficiency informed by our Federal Government concerning the very real problems that can result from burning fossil fuels to create energy.
Brian Measday
Decades away from nuclear answer
Amanda Vanstone seemingly wants clear headed science to dominate in the debate about nuclear power (Central Western Daily, March 14) but her article is heavy on attack and light on facts and science.
My father was resident engineer on the very first nuclear power plant construction in the UK, and I spent time working as a young engineer on the Hunterston nuclear power station in Scotland, so I have some idea what is involved if Australia were to go down the nuclear path now.
The first question is whether or not Australians actually want to have the option of nuclear power and, if so, how long would it take to get the legislative process, the community consultation and the agreements about sites and disposal of waste in place?
I'm guessing at least five years, probably a lot more.
The second relates to the cost.
Even for the as-yet unproven small reactors, there will be billions of dollars involved.
Which power company (or government) would be willing to make that investment?
And those billions of dollars will mean that the power that is sold into the electricity market will never be as cheap as that now coming from renewable sources.
Thirdly, the construction process.
With no nuclear industry in Australia, aside from the small medical isotope reactor at Lucas Heights, we have no scientific, engineering, or technical expertise available.
It would all have to be imported.
Depending on the problems encountered, a time frame of seven to 20 years.
