This has nothing to do (directly) with PR. But then again, it does, as it deals with a perception ... my perception.
Surely it says something that we’ve signed a LNG deal with China, followed by the provision that is has to pass environmental scrutiny.
Logically (and morally) shouldn’t the environmental studies come before the deal is sealed? It shows how much importance this government places on the environment, and our future. Does this make Peter Garrett superfluous?
It’s also disturbing that all this takes place amid the continuing detention of Australian mining executive Stern Hu.
A report in the Globe and Mail (20 Aug) said: “The LNG deal shows that China’s growing demand for gas, uranium, iron ore and coal – and Australia’s investment needs – will overshadow any short-term political rows.”
Indeed. Doesn't it always?