Representative Government?

The global warming debate is not a scientific debate but a debate about government control and the levying of tax on energy and mining companies by political parties elected to government. A government elected with the help of funding by the very same corporations which may now be subject to taxation for the emission of CO2.

In this political debate, because business has paid for privileged access to government, it exerts influence on the political process. These questionable funding arrangements of political parties brings into question the notion of representative government.

The debate about global warming is not a scientific debate but a political one, there are strong political and economic and even religious influences – although the latter are diminishing.

The recent concerns about global warming voiced by the Pope have changed the churches dogma and in particular, the Catholic Church has adopted a ‘bio-centric view’ rather than their historical ‘Old Testament anthropocentric view’ of the environment.

Politically there are deliberate attempts by vested interests to dissipate confusion about the cause of global warming and to disguise this as a scientific debate rather than a political one.

The energy and mining companies fervently dispute any scientific data warning of an alarming steep rise in temperature caused by a rise of CO2 in the atmosphere and will resist or try to delay the commencement of any government action of CO2 reduction involving those industries.

Scientific research into global warming is discredited as a hoax or statements are made that CO2 is good for the atmosphere because plants love it and/or that there is not enough evidence to say conclusively that the levels of CO2 are at dangerous levels.

Their argument and denial of global warming requires that the rise of sea levels, fish migration, bird and animal migration /extinction, increase of bush fires, drought and unseasonal storms all be dismissed as natural events. This vested interest denial and refusal to accept any of the data or recognition of the increase in disastrous unseasonal events is done so out of fear of loss of corporate revenue.

The same process of discrediting scientific research was used by the tobacco industry during the debate about the harmful effects of smoking and it is difficult for the average person to unravel this deliberate sham without a scientific background or political insider knowledge.

In Australia, the first phase of deception by the political party representing business this electoral term, was complete denial that global warming was taking place; this stance was taken by Tony Abbott’s right wing faction in the Liberal party whilst it was in opposition.

The second phase was implemented whilst in government and was helped by Tony Abbott’s friend from the Institute of Public affairs, a right wing think tank member and professor in geology, Ian Plimer and a selection of shock jocks.

The new tack was recognition of global warming but that it is not caused by the rise in CO 2 but is a natural and cyclical event .

Ian Plimer‘s contribution and conflict of interest to the debate however should be questioned as he is a director respectively of Roy Hill holdings, Queensland Coal Investments, Ivanhoe Australia, CBH, and TNT mines.

As is intended, the general population will be bewildered by the available information as to what to select as a reliable source.
Because of scientific and technological specialisation, they are in need of reliable and expert scientific interpretation of that data.

In today’s society, their main source of information and the construction of public opinion is the media and therefore the population at large is subjected to a varied stream of genuine scientific and also conflicting dubious explanations deliberately lacking in accuracy.

The media, apart from its political bias, provides news as entertainment and thrives on controversy …

The media, apart from its political bias, provides news as entertainment and thrives on controversy – provided by various sources such as scientific research organisations like NASA, CSIRO, political parties and those with strong economic interests like the mining and oil industry.

This makes it difficult for the average citizen to understand and to come to grips with these issues in an unbiased manner especially whilst they being confused and influenced by questionable information which can only be interpreted by the experts.

The successful dissemination of confusion by those who refute global warming, will sway those on small day to day budgets with the threat that a possible rise in electricity prices and job losses will be imminent if polluting companies are levied with a carbon levy.

Political parties and prime ministers are selected and then promoted by mining companies and media moguls like Rupert Murdoch or business figures such as James Packer, either exclusively or collectively. The recent targeted media bias and the consequent changes of government are a good example of this.

Because of the media monopoly in the formation of public opinion and the funding of political parties the electorate was blessed with a Prime Minister, Tony Abbott, who stated global warming was crap and that coal was good for the planet and humanity.

Tony Abbott assured the nation that bush fires, droughts and floods have always been part of the Australian experience and sometimes occur more often than at other times.

The new Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, has hailed Tony Abbott as an excellent prime minister and has assured us and the extreme right of the Liberal party that his (Tony Abbott’s) policies will continue and that coal will be with us for some time to come as his approval of the Queensland Adani mine demonstrates.

The recent secretly contrived Trans Pacific Partnership trade agreement by this government, which was negotiated without any evaluation by the electorate, is another example of how the state, the Australian government is compromised and is representative of corporate powers instead of being representatives of the Australian electorate.

The danger of the ‘not so free trade agreements’ was again demonstrated recently by the blatant attempt by the tobacco giant Philip Morris to sue the Australian government under the Bilateral Investment Treaty with Hong Kong over our government’s plain packaging legislation on the sale of cigarettes in Australia.

The now undisputed slow death these tobacco corporations sell to the world’s human population, does not deter them from blatantly suing governments ie the taxpayers of those countries, under trade agreements for the loss of revenue. Instead their CEOs should be in jail for knowingly misrepresenting and manipulating scientific evidence.

We may assume that Abraham Lincoln had a genuine hope that the governments would become “governments of the people, by the people, for the people”, and he would be devastated to find that over time, “governments have become governments of the corporation, by the corporation, for the corporation”.

*Bob Lubout is a ‘climate refugee’ from Perth WA. He has been living in Penguin on the NW coast of Tasmania with his artist partner Sandra and their two dogs, Tessie and Winston since 2013. Bob’s work history includes owning his own TV/Electronic repair and maintenance business for many years and travelling all over the world servicing and installing analytical mining and industrial X-ray equipment. He went to Curtin University as a ‘mature age student’ where he gained a Bachelor of Education majoring in Sociology and Politics and then onto Murdoch University where he gained a Graduate Diploma of Science and Technology Policy. This led him to a career as a TAFE lecturer, teaching electronics, maths, science and aviation. Bob now enjoys spending his time researching and writing and flying around this beautiful part of the world in a small aircraft.

• Elizabeth Farrelly, SMH: Taking out the trash is a job half done for Malcolm Turnbull