Another truism is "We get the politicians we deserve."
The author is really admitting that politicians are incapable of putting in place structures to efficiently run businesses such as electricity and water supply systems or community welfare activities.
I would love to know what economic contortions favour letting the banks borrow $US (or generate excessive profits) to underwrite Australian housing loans as opposed to our Federal Government borrowing savings within Australia for a similar purpose or to fund valuable infrastructure.
Banks, with government approval, have been following their dopey policies to expand credit by 12-15% per annum compound for over ten years. Is it any wonder we have priced people out of owning their own home and are suffering from a housing bubble and a surge in defaulting loans. The sooner governments tear up the Basle Agreement and again assume the responsibility of regulating the actual money money supply, rather than through the Reserve Bank pushing and pulling on the interest rate string, the better off ordinary citizens in this country will be.
Adam Smith would roll over in his grave if he knew how the economic rationalists have ignored his book on morals and distorted his economic theories.

"Glass bottles destined for reuse need to be many times the thickness of those that are melted down or disposed of in landfill. We discovered that by the time account was taken of the energy and water costs of collecting, transporting and washing the bottles, reuse of bottles was bad for the environment. We dared not release the results of the study for fear of being howled down as environmental vandals."

Craig Emmerson as DG of EPA ( in the Labor government in Queensland) felt constrained to "release the results of the study for fear of being howled down as environmental vandals."
But now following his conversion on the road to Damascus "It's time for an Australian Enlightenment, where once again reason and facts prevail over mysticism and ignorance".
There will be no constraints from above re the release of studies that may cause embarrassment to the government because "reason and facts will prevail".
Please.

Craig Emerson, what an ill-informed rant. If rational thinking and evidence-based science were in the ascendancy within that reverberating hall of his mind, he would not resort to extremist waffle while gilding the lily of “economic rationalism”.

Maybe I would not have the bejasus scared out of me if he had his own personal “Enlightenment”: One which acknowledged population pressure being at least as important an issue as freeing up trade and application of competition policy.

Since his quoted time of 1990, could these sacred cows have produced enough to avoid “plunging an extra 100 million people into poverty”?

In that time, 350 million extra people were added to Africa; 1,200 million to the less-developed world.

Since 1994, Australia has taken minimal action to empower women in regard to their own fertility – the essential step required to lessen the rate of population growth. Action which it signed up to at the United Nations international conference on population and development at Cairo in that year.

Craig Emerson’s diatribe has been economical with the facts. Putative minister for an upcoming portfolio of Mysticism and Superstition, instead of Small Business, might be applicable unless he gets himself up to speed.

It seems to have become the trend in pointless name calling to refer to strong social movements and consensus as 'religion', when in fact our society is more secular than it ever has been before. The difference lies in that society is less trusting of government solve social problem I feel. Probably the same can be said for science - I'm not being anti-science here - far from it - its just that the successes of science do not extend well to solving social problems.

Most of this throwaway article could be replaced with the a statement: 'we need stronger labelling laws so that people can make more informed choices on supposed environmentally friendly products'.

"These deep-green crusaders have declared their opposition to coalmining even if emerging technologies were to reduce its emissions to zero, since coal is regarded as an ugly reminder of an industrial society."

When such technologies actually exist and are proven effective, then perhaps this argument might be valid. But for the moment it remains a fantasy fuelled by the lure of a rich coal economy. Sorry for not trusting in the bland and unscientific assurances that a way, some way, any way, will be found to permanently sequester the emissions, but government track records on assurances of this type are not good. The only proven way to sequester carbon from coal is (so far) leaving it in the ground.

Damn, I said in another post recently that The Australian was a good newspaper. If Emerson's article got a run, I eat my words. This is tendentious pap.

Sounds like it was written by someone in the third year of a BA Politics. I'm a fan of the brilliant Scot, David Hume but it's a big stretch to summon him up in an attack on Green politics.

Yep, there are some dodgy marketing practices going on out there in the name of helping the environment. Ditto ALP policy. I think Emerson's article means well but I don't believe he wrote it.

Kevin Rudd
Prime Minister,
Sir
I’m not saying that I voted for you but who ever I voted for I want my vote back so I can vote against this ideologue escapee from the 80’s. By the way it was an awful decade 3 of my children were born then and I want their birthing fees refunded because they didn’t turn out as well as they should have. Well I mean one is in Rankin and I know he voted for Emerson. Get the rationalists to repossess them that way I won’t to be associated even remotely with his views
Cash please…. Any chance of interest too on their purchase price?

Doesn’t make sense does it? Neither does Mr Emerson’s views. If this is his contribution to Australia as the Minister for Small Business all I can say in conclusion is ………….“NEXT”!