Organ donation:

Henrie Ellis writes: Re. “Is it time to make organ donation compulsory?” (Yesterday, item 13). Organ and tissue donation needs to be an “opt out” situation and not the present messy, “opt in” scenario we currently have in Australia. Australians Donate, the national co-ordinating body have to expend money and energy convincing Australians to sign up. The lack of political will to confront the conservative moral imperative of “choice” beggars’ description. For years now we have heard the mantra of “choice” preached as some kind of precondition for ‘individual freedom”. Despite the best efforts of Australians Donate, the blame for failure cannot be sheeted home to it. I know of so many people in my rural area who are waiting and hoping for a suitable donor. People near death called to Melbourne, at short notice, after families give consent, only to be shattered by the fact that the organ or tissue transplant is incompatible. The long trek home is the beginning of a new cycle of waiting, hoping and, in most cases, ultimately despair then death. Gordon Brown, the UK Prime Minister, has demonstrated the political determination to do what the lily livered Howard government could never contemplate – presume consent and get on with a solution to a major health problem. Australians Donate has done a magnificent job against insurmountable odds caused by political timidity, and public apathy. Let me congratulate David McCormack for reigniting such an important debate.

Hillary or Mallory?:

Chris Hunter writes: Re. “Hillary or Mallory? We’ll never know” (yesterday, item 5). Re. Ben Sandilands article on who was the first person to climb Everest. Is this not the old story of the facts being made to fit the “crime?” A very cold case indeed. But there is an alternative interpretation, somewhat warmer, as told by the writer Robert Graves. It goes back to the near vertical Welsh rock climb known as “Mallory’s Pipe.” Mallory (when climbing with Graves) had inadvertently left his pipe on the last narrow ledge before the top. Retracing their steps would have taken him a somewhat lengthy climb and as the view was grand and the company good he suddenly leapt up and scaled the rope free down the near seamless cliff via an entirely new, and hitherto unclimbed route, the now famous “pipe.” By using this extreme shortcut he was back in minutes, lit up and soaking in the atmosphere. By all accounts ‘Sandy’ Irvine was not in the same category as Mallory with regards climbing expertise. Mallory was a cat, probably the greatest climber who ever lived. My guess is that one day someone will find that missing photo of his wife; on the summit of Everest, as global warming continues to retract the covering, as is happening throughout the region. Let’s just say that after guiding his somewhat less able climbing partner to the top it was poor exhausted ‘Sandy’ who made the fatal mistake on the decent, thereby taking the brilliant, tweed clothed Mallory with him.

Japanese whalers:

Meika Loofs Samorzewski writes: Re. “Japanese whalers flee from the gaze of Greenpeace” (yesterday, item 3). Thomas Hunter’s report lacked pictures of the whaling hunter vessels, readers may like to see what they look like so over at flickr.com. I’ve put up some photos of these hunter vessels that Japanese Whaling scientists use. Taken in 2003 at the Hobart waterfront, the photos show the hunters having a very military bearing, except, for some reason, the Japanese whaling scientists seem to take the harpoon guns down before they enter port.

US08:

Mark Edmonds writes: Despina Anagnostou (yesterday, comments) asks “how many Americans will vote in this election will still be guided by God?” Presumably, about as many as will vote for Obama because he is black, Clinton because she is a woman, Edwards because he is a self-made millionaire (if money is your thing, of course), etc, etc. I too, like the idea of candidates asking the questions put to them, and hearing what policies they have for the future, but only a fool would separate the candidate’s character from their policies. And let’s face it, in Australia recently, one could barely tell the candidate’s policies apart.

Nuclear power and global warming:

Mark Byrne writes: Michael Angwin (yesterday, comments) points out: “That nuclear power won’t meet all the world’s clean energy needs is not a reason not to employ it to address climate change.” I agree, and yet there are many reasons not to employ nuclear power, including: 1) the risk of nuclear weapons proliferation, a risk increased by Australia’s recent agreement to export uranium to countries in breach of the Non-Proliferation Treaty. 2) The risk that the nuclear grab for power will starve the mechanisms that can make a significant difference within the time-scales necessary to stabilize the climate. Mr Angwin may see his task as maximising Australia’s uranium exports. However, the task for our generation is to avoid climate tipping points. Rather than detail the global warming mitigation problems with Mr Angwin’s 60 nuclear reactors, I would ask a fundamental question. What is the level of global warming, in degrees, that 1), matches with the strategic plans and 2), is acceptable to the members of the Australian Uranium Association? The same should be asked of the Australian Coal Association.

Shipping index:

Nick Ryan writes: Re. “Shipping index predicts decline in global trade” (yesterday, item 20). Your article on the Baltic Dry Index contains rather too many generalisations. The BDI is an amalgam of rates for three different dry cargo ship sizes, set daily by a panel of shipbrokers, as a representation of the current, spot market, using “last-done” rates leavened by the brokers’ outlook. All routes have a weighting, some are daily hire (timecharter) as opposed to ‘per-ton’ rates, thus excluding the effect of fuel prices – and most important : the index is based on chartering costs, not the other way round. There are other (shipping) sectors to be considered before declaring the BDI the arbiter of all – start with the FFA (paper, both dry and wet) which many consider to be the tail wagging the (physical market) dog and perhaps also have a look at gas, crude/clean product tankers and the container market. They have all behaved differently in the last year. Cape sizes, by the way, have to sail around CGH. Yes, I am in the shipping industry and those that know would be surprised I wasn’t cheering the correction you describe…

Monkey business:

Greg Samuelson writes: Re. “Crikey for the defence: Why a bastard isn’t a bad thing” (yesterday, item 17). Oh, enough already of this monkey business about Harbhajan Singh’s supposedly racist remarks to Andrew Symonds during the Sydney Test Match. As anyone who has read Darwin’s The Origin of Species could tell you, minus the tail and some alleged advances in intelligence, we are all freakin’ monkeys!

Geoff Driscoll writes: I’m reasonably happy about the content in general, but must confess I’m almost apoplectic with rage at the media lynching of Ponting for bugger all reason and with Crikey joining in the party with a couple of unsupported tirades of personal abuse. You don’t have to like cricket, but if you’re attacking an individual you should be able to support your claims with something better than your opinion that somebody is arrogant. This is not a minor matter for me. It’s actually the sort of thing that could determine whether I renew my subscription or not. After all, if all I wanted was coverage that just jumped on the latest media bandwagon, I wouldn’t be paying for Crikey.

Clarification:

Melissa Sweet writes: Jane Halton, secretary of the Department of Health and Ageing, has firmly dismissed rumours she is job-hunting. “I am very happy to stay in the role,” she told me yesterday. Unfortunately her call came too late for her comments to be included in the story.

Send your comments, corrections, clarifications and c*ck-ups to boss@crikey.com.au. Preference will be given to comments that are short and succinct: maximum length is 200 words (we reserve the right to edit comments for length). Please include your full name – we won’t publish comments anonymously unless there is a very good reason.