The Cancun silence. We certainly cannot be accusing Minister for Climate Change and Energy Efficiency Greg Combet of making a big deal about next week’s Cancun Conference on climate change. When I looked at the website of our man in charge of this important issue, I could not find a reference to it. The closest I have come to a Combet view on this successor to last year’s Copenhagen gathering was a fleeting reference Julia Gillard made when answering a question at the end of the recent APEC gathering.

The Prime Minister was asked whether, after her meeting with Mexican President Felipe Calderón, she was any more optimistic that something real can be achieved at Cancun to combat climate change? “Having talked to President Calderon,” she answered, “his discussions with me are built on earlier streams of advice to me, including through Minister Combet. The focus in Cancun will very likely be on fast-track financing, that is getting assistance to developing countries, to deal with climate change matters and focus will very much be on forests, on the loss of forests and the impact that that has on the climate, on carbon generally. So they are likely to be the things where we will see developments in Cancun.”

I think we can take it from that answer that Australia will not be trying to duplicate Kevin Rudd’s role at Copenhagen of championing the cause of real action being taken.

Political truth telling becomes a sacking offence. It was just an informal gathering with constituents in his Hiroshima electorate; one of those occasions when a member of parliament relaxes a little, gossips with friends and tells a few truths about his job.

“Being the justice minister is easy,” Minoru Yanagida joked, “as I only have to remember two phrases, either of which I can use in the Diet whenever I am stuck for an answer.

“I refrain from making comments on a specific issue.

“We’re dealing with the matter based on laws and evidence.”

Clearly the Japanese sense of humour is a limited thing because this jovial bit of honesty created a major political storm when it ended up being quoted in the mainstream media.

The Asahi newspaper thundered in an editorial that his comments underlined the “deplorable state” of Japanese politics. “His controversial quip was tantamount to a confession that he had sought refuge in these convenient phrases because he, unexpectedly appointed to the Cabinet post, does not have the ability to offer sensible answers to questions,” the paper said.

According to the Japan Times report, the Liberal Democratic Party threatened to submit a nonbinding censure motion against Yanagida in the opposition-controlled Upper House and a no-confidence motion in the Lower House if he didn’t resign. The top opposition force also threatened to boycott Diet deliberations if he remained.

Prime Minister Naoto Kan was certainly not amused. He demanded and received the resignation of his Justice Minister.

Pathetic nastiness. The grubby nature of the present team of Labor Party election campaign strategists was clearly on display with the airing this week of that television advertisement slyly trying to imply that the present Victorian Liberal Party Leader Ted Baillieu had years ago somehow misused his position as an MP to profit from the sale of some government assets by a real estate business he was associated with.

Not only was it a cheap shot at  reputable man but the attempt at smearing does not even serve any good purpose. If anything this pathetic attempt at negative campaigning will have turned far more people off Labor than it will have influenced to vote against the Baillieu-led Liberals. (Baillieu has issued a writ in the Supreme Court following the ALP ad.)

Not far behind in the smearing stakes was the attempt by federal Labor to besmirch Malcolm Turnbull with the glib taunt to “put his mouth where his money is” because his family has a shareholding in a company that has something to do with the internet and thus might benefit from the national broadband network. I regret to say that the Prime Minister Julia Gillard stooped low enough to engage in this childish taunting.

It is no wonder that so few people who actually have made something for themselves in the real world ever bother to participate in political life.

A revolt by the voters. That the people in countries whose governments are forced to impose austerity measures to satisfy international financial institutions might finally jack up and say “no” does  not seem to occur to economists.

They nonchalantly impose hardship on the innocent mob without an apparent concern for what it is actually like to be consigned to the rubbish-heap of long-term unemployment. But perhaps things will change if the people of Ireland when given the chance to throw out a government at an election early next year elect politicians who favour letting Irish banks go broke taking the silly bankers of Europe down with them.