Letters
Letters to
the editor
The infants in charge
Some might applaud Labor’s tactics in allowing debate on Barnaby Joyce’s private member’s bill (Karen Barlow, “Sideshow Barnaby”, August 30–September 5). After all, they say never interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake. However, it is another symptom of Australia’s infantile approach to this existential crisis. At least Ali France made a pertinent point: “By endorsing Labor’s plan in May, Aussies have made a very clear statement to the world that Australia is the place to do business … That is why this bill … is so bizarre. It goes against the will of the people, and it is anti-business.” On the positive side, The New York Times reports that the economics of the energy transition now has a momentum of its own. It is now cheaper and faster to build clean energy than fossil fuel capacity such as gas. In the words of the billionaire behind climate-focused investment firm Galvanize, “When the cost curves cross, all of a sudden people start adopting things really fast.” Let’s hope our 2035 targets reflect genuine ambition, not just hot air.
– Fiona Colin, Malvern East, Vic
Labor must deliver
With record global temperatures and marine heatwaves killing coral on two coasts, Karen Barlow’s exposé of Labor’s wasted time on Barnaby Joyce’s sham anti-net zero bill was infuriating. And made worse by The Saturday Paper’s revelation that none of the 33 climate-related private member’s bills in the past decade were even debated. Meanwhile, emissions go nowhere while coal and gas projects still get the green light. The Liberals are becoming unelectable, but Labor is also at risk. It must deliver real climate action – or lose seats to climate independents.
– Sue Rechter, Talbot, Vic
Disturbing influence
While not new, David Pocock’s revelation of the depth of presence that lobbyists have established in the operation and decision-making of our elected parliamentarians was quite disturbing (“The lobbyists who control Canberra”, August 30–September 5). Of course, it can’t be claimed without proof that they influence the decisions made by the current Labor government, but the regulatory direction, even Labor’s inaction on crucial matters, seems to uncannily mirror what big business would wish for itself. Naturally, the question becomes, if lobbying wasn’t paying off, why bother with it in the first place? Which raises the supplementary question; how do we stop it? The Coalition was equally obliging to rent seekers. The only way to clear the temple steps is to elect independent members to parliament.
– John Mosig, Kew, Vic
Lobbying reform essential
The Labor government was elected on a platform of integrity in politics. According to the prime minister, his government earns the electorate’s trust by implementing its election promises. However, as David Pocock writes, the government’s failure to implement lobbying reform exposes the outsized and shadowy influence on shaping government policy of lobbyists representing powerful private interests, such as the gambling and fossil fuel industries. The PM must make good on his promise and implement lobbying reform in the public interest, instead of continuing to line the pockets of industries that cause massive social and environmental harm.
– Angela Smith, Clifton Hill, Vic
Wishful thinking
From his reading of Albert Camus, Stan Grant (“Silent resistance”, August 30–September 5) correctly states that Camus was an atheist, but then, contrary to the evidence, suspects he did believe in God. Although Camus wrote his postgraduate thesis on the development of early Christianity, he rejected religion as the way to understand meaning in one’s life and favoured living for the present. Grant’s wishful thinking is negated by Camus’ own reference to religion as “philosophical suicide”.
– Peter Nash, Fairlight, NSW
Thoughtful concepts
Thank you, Stan Grant, for your wonderful insight into Albert Camus’ novel The Rebel, and its striking relevance to assessing the state of today’s world. Articles like this are the reason I read newspapers – to come across writers who make you think again, and possibly, anew.
– Chris Stevens, North Perth, WA
Letters are welcome: [email protected]
Please include your full name and address and a daytime telephone number.
Letters may be edited for length and content, and may be published in print and online. Letters should not exceed 150 words.
This article was first published in the print edition of The Saturday Paper on September 6, 2025.
For almost a decade, The Saturday Paper has published Australia’s leading writers and thinkers. We have pursued stories that are ignored elsewhere, covering them with sensitivity and depth. We have done this on refugee policy, on government integrity, on robo-debt, on aged care, on climate change, on the pandemic.
All our journalism is fiercely independent. It relies on the support of readers. By subscribing to The Saturday Paper, you are ensuring that we can continue to produce essential, issue-defining coverage, to dig out stories that take time, to doggedly hold to account politicians and the political class.
There are very few titles that have the freedom and the space to produce journalism like this. In a country with a concentration of media ownership unlike anything else in the world, it is vitally important. Your subscription helps make it possible.
