In the summit’s host country, Courier Mail opines the G20 to be a serious event that needs to be taken equally seriously. It says in its editorial, “Economics, essayist Thomas Carlyle wrote in the 19th century, is dreary and desolate ... “what we might call the dismal science”. As arcane as its workings may sometimes be and indeed, as dismal as some of the outcomes modern economic thinking has delivered, it is a field that impacts us all, for behind all the data are the ups and downs of real lives.” In this context, it believes the G20’s agenda of economic reforms must lead to results.” Therefore, says the editorial, “It is worth remembering the G20 is more than just another talkfest and photo opportunity. It is an opportunity for real and lasting reform. As some debate swirls as to whether it should remain a meeting of leaders (rather than finance heads), much will hang on what is achieved in Brisbane.” Sydney Morning Herald is deeply concerned about Australia’s lag in its efforts towards controlling climate change. It notes the role of Australia as the host of the G20 and Prime Minster Tony Abott’s efforts to nudge climate change off the agenda with dismay. “Abbott’s approach to climate change at this G20 reeks of political parochialism,” it says in its editorial. “The Prime Minister,” it says, “simply needs the will to put the planet ahead of domestic politics. In the meantime, his government stands embarrassed and outpaced by the momentum towards taking climate change seriously.”
Adelaide’s Advertiser prefers to focus on the economic reforms that Australia’s role in this G20 summit is geared to achieve. “The G20 agenda prepared by Australia as president has a key objective of lifting global growth over five years 2 per cent higher than current estimates,” says its editorial. “That would be worth an extra $2 trillion and create jobs for millions of people.” It also holds the G20’s value in high esteeem. “The G20’s heritage hails from the need for financial stability — being founded as a forum for finance ministers and central bankers after the Asian crisis and being elevated to involve heads of government after the GFC (Global Financial Crisis). Accordingly, a core mission is to build a more resilient world economy. To do this, the G20 agenda seeks ways to strengthen tax systems, crack down on corruption, develop energy markets, bolster financial institutions and liberate trade. “These are worthy goals.” says the paper.
The Independent, on the other hand, dwells on the nature of the summit and its underlying purpose of engagement rather than alienation. To begin with, it asks, “Is it better that the leaders of 20 of the world’s main countries should meet from time to time and talk than that they should stay at home and hurl insults at each other from a distance?”
The main drama at this year’s G20, however, says the Independent, was provided by Vladimir Putin’s interactions with other leaders over Russian aggression in Ukraine. “It was right for world leaders to speak frankly about what the Russians are doing in Ukraine, but humiliating Putin is likely to be counterproductive,” it says.
