Not feeling the best at the moment with a touch of the flu coming on. Mood certainly hasn’t been enhanced by some of the crap being espoused in the Carbon Cate debate as well.
If you’ve missed it, a coalition of environmental groups and unions are running a television advertising campaign in support of the Government’s carbon price policy. The campaign uses a range of people from all walks of life who give their take on the policy and ask the public to support it, among them is actress Cate Blanchett and Mr Bonny Doon himself, Michael Caton.
It was only launched afternoon but strangly we woke up to all sorts of scary headlines in News Ltd papers yesterday morning before the first ad was even run.
Firstly, if another brain dead talking head on the news reports that ‘Gillard’ or the Government is being criticised for using celebrities to ‘sell’ its policy, I’m going to punch the nearest wall. Neither the PM or the Government have anything to do with the campaign so please stop giving that impression. It's coming across as quite a deliberate tactic.
The campaign is organised and financed by the Climate Institute which includes Greenpeace, the Australian Conservation Foundation and the Climate Change Institute. Hardly surprising or groundbreaking that those groups might be in support of a carbon price policy.
Secondly, the hypocrisy involved in the scare campaign against the TV campaign is breathtaking. Because apparently Blanchett and Caton are the wrong kind of famous person. Apparently, they’re out of touch with the common people and shouldn’t be expressing their opinions because they’re rich.
Okay. So billionaire mining magnates are the right kind of rich and are entitled to have their say on an important issue. Because when they rallied against the super profits mining tax last year and spent millions on an advertising campaign to convince people it would be the end of the world, well, that was OK. That was all right.
One of the main hecklers whose views have been given undue prominence is Barnaby Joyce. His statements were splashed all over the front page and on the headline pieces saying that Blanchett was being ‘self-indulgent’ and that she shouldn’t be misusing her celebrity.
Right. So once again, some successful and well-off people are not allowed to express a view, but others like mining magnates and retail giants are. And all of this before Joyce admitted he actually hadn’t seen any of the ads when he made those statements.
The other person quoted liberally in the Sunday papers was Terri Kelleher of the Australian Families Association. Because of course, an Association that is vaguely famous for its campaigns against homosexuality and abortion must be a predominant source of wisdom on all things environmental.
Yes, I’m being drool. I admit there is a connection in that the carbon price policy will impact on families as the big polluters will probably choose to pass on their extra costs to consumers. But Ms Kellher and the Families Association haven’t spoken for me and my family on their previous campaigns and they certainly don’t here either.
In my view, doing something about climate change is the right thing for my children and my family. Because I certainly don’t think my grandkids in 2050 will be saying “thanks Grandad, it was great that you made sure you saved a couple of hundred bucks a year while allowing the poles to melt and the oceans to rise”.
Yes, I’m portraying quite demonstrably my thoughts and opinions on climate change. But please don’t take this as a strident argument about that or the carbon price policy. I’m not across the policy’s detail enough and haven’t formed a strong view either in support or defence.
But this post isn’t about climate change or the carbon price policy. It’s about the hypocrisy in opponents choosing to play the man, or in the case, the woman, rather than the ball.
Last time I checked, this is a free country. Everyone and anyone can have an opinion. And if they feel strongly enough to spend a million dollars on sharing it, then so be it.
EDM.