by Mat Churchill

As a reporter it's my job to provide a balanced view of the issues that are relevant to our readers.

But for the next few paragraphs I'll leave my press hat at the door to voice my opinion on why our world is going down the toilet.

The way I see it, many of our elected leaders are actually followers of the people. And they don't follow closely. Public opinion is often years ahead of what our 'leaders' believe is the right thing to do, or should I say the right thing to do to win votes.

Change is inevitable in life, so why are we so afraid to change when it comes to sustainability? Is it because we've had it so good for so long by doing the the wrong thing?

I'm not particularly smart but even I can see that the ability to attract tourists to a dead reef, or to a national park that is now a mine site might be a tough sell for Tourism Australia (some might say it's hard enough for them now).

My main frustration is the much heard political line about climate change, "Yes climate change is a global issue, but to act before the rest of the world would be irresponsible," (or words to that effect).

Isn't doing just that, called leadership?

Everybody who has taken the time to look to the future must have realised that the hard decisions that need to be made are being swept under the carpet and ignored.

The transition from coal energy to renewable energy is one of those decisions. Yes it may cost thousands of jobs in the short term, but these jobs will be replaced by a more vibrant industry within a generation.

As with the six million dollar man, 'we have the technology', It's already available in so many forms. The industry just needs some help to make it mainstream.

Our country relies on resources for our economy. That's a fact. But why must we continue to encroach on what little natural wilderness is left? We've recently written an article on the dozens of Australian species that are at risk of extinction in the next 10 to 20 years. What are they worth? $1 billion? $500 million? Less?

I think the question is what is the price of a vote? A Northern Quoll, a Common Brushtail Possum (not so common anymore), a Tasmanian Tiger (even less common these days)?

Tasmania's biggest timber company, Gunns, has been known as an environmental nemesis for decades but have always had strong support from State and Federal Government.

Their practices included clear-felling large tracks of centuries old growth for low-value wood chips. Once cleared, they'd firebomb the area from helicopters to ensure nothing survived.

After planting their plantation seedlings, the company would then spread carrots laced with 1080 poisoning to kill any animals that might eat the seedlings. Aside from doing a great job at this, the 1080 would get into the waterways and continue to wreak havoc there.

But a breakthrough has been made.

Last week Gunns announced they will no longer log the last remnants of old growth forest in Australia. Gunns will now harvest plantation timber only, and will work towards creating a sustainable business that people and investors are happy to support rather than protest against. 

Great news, worth celebrating. 

The thing that strikes me is that our elected 'leaders' would have continued to hand Gunns virtually free native forest resources if the company itself hadn't decided to change its practices.

That's the problem. Our governments aren't leading at all. It's up to business and individuals to change our practices if anything is going to change.

Put that on a larger scale. Perhaps Australia should make similar commitment to that which Gunns has made.

Firstly, protect our environment (and therefore our future economy) by taking action now. We live in an area that relies on tourism. There's not a place in Australia that needs a healthy environment more than us.

Secondly, protect our biodiversity. As much as we might not like to admit it, humans are part of nature.

Thirdly, fund clean energy technology. Try creating a new industry rather than propping up an outdated one.

I know there's a hundred more but I've got a deadline to meet.

Business and government is littered with 'leaders' who live by Gordon Gecko's Wall Street philosophy of "Greed is good."

At what point does the environment become more important than someone's pay packet? I don't think a large number of our leaders would understand the question, let along know the answer. 

Somebody famous once said, "We will only understand the fact that we can't eat cash, when the last mouthful of food has been eaten."