How does someone get to be the leader of a political party in a developed western country, where the basics of the science around natural systems has been reasonably understood for all of his life and where for the past 30 years forests, how they work and their conservation have been a major element in Tasmanian politics, and be so ignorant about nature.

Perhaps it was the lack of it in the curricula of a young Rene’s education.

Either Hidding fails to understand the function of a conservation reserve, such as a national park, in holding the elements of nature as they function, complete with their reactions to changes in environmental conditions on a global scale, or he has dreamed up some silly version of logging national parks to make them neat little representations of the emptiness of suburbia, neat rows of sameness, free of blemish, a true Zonnerveld.

For his edification; death and decay are part of a cycle renewing life everywhere it exists, the dream of a suburban heaven of life everlasting doomed to entropy, yes even for the botox enhanced.

All is artifice and oh so nice

For visitors to our fair isle offended by nature in process; one wonders why they have chosen to not visit movieworld or dreamland, where all is artifice and oh so nice, nothing need be answered, no question struggled with, the plastic paying for plastic experience, and come to the isle of the shrinking natural experience.

Hidding opines that people intervene in National Parks creating access and managing so what would a little cosmetics matter. Indeed his mentors, the lord of the forests destruction, are expert in such matters, cosmetically altering the whole Tasmanian landscape by filling it with the tree version of the suburban tract, the plantation.

And what are the consequences of these short rotation industrial crops replacing natural forests. In these locations the animals dependent on the old and dead trees and the rotting logs will not have their habitats and niches, Nowhere to feed, nowhere to reproduce, no hollows to shelter in, the exact opposite of the family havens Hidding would proudly defend as natural for the human.

So what does it say for the nature documentary, filling the program space on free to air and even having its own Discovery channel. Has the obsession with tight shorts, balls of various sizes and dumbing down created a generation that doesn’t understand nature in an age when the knowledge about the elements within, the working of the whole and the structure of life itself has never been greater.

Imitating a leader of the opposition

I don’t think so. Instead, because they are a pale reflection of each other, bib and bub [sorry May Gibbs, to rank the ugliness of politics with 2 innocents] have only the silliest of issues to attempt to differentiate themselves. Did Hiddings foolish filter fail?

Hidding will recover from this abhorrent aberrance, lost in the noise of life and politics, he will go on imitating a leader of the opposition, possibly growing into the role as his opponent appears to have done until his particular bell is rung, and he comes out all steam and bluster from the back of the hall.

One hopes that the lesson taken from this is that we are dependent on nature’s good and its bad and we must suffer its ugly, whether caused by us [bushfires, landslips or sea level rises] or by the planetary processes, [ice ages, seismic sea waves or cyclones] and begin to act as those dependents.

phill Parsons was foolish enough to think that the ten days of foolery would end the time of fools for at least a day, only to find the supply apparently never ending. Whilst aware of the power of the Sir Humphries of the unstated permanent government, the worst of their capacities shown with the running of numero tres, it is fortunate that the structure is there to offer sound advice to the foolish from time to time lest Ministers appear as fools more often.