labor divided on nuclear debate, page-26

re: good oil on nuclear wilthing

I'm neither a Garret supporter nor detractor, I'm just tired of the endless cynacism & need or hind-sight analysts to not only be "right" but to constantly crow it from the rooftop, that seems to have become a national characteristic.
So what are you saying in the case of Garret (& all those others that held the same view) . . .
"No, sorry, you chose your position 30 years ago & in this game there is no changing sides. So forget working together contructively to solve the problem, we just want our pound of flesh and bragging rights"
As for Garret in particular, I seem to recall years ago reading that his band often turned their back on greater fame & fortune to follow their beliefs.
Whether those beliefs have been shown, in the fulness of time, to be incorrect doesn't detract from the apparent genuineness (no matter how nieve they now seem) of their commitment and doesn't sit well with the notion that their stances were motivated by the desire for wealth or power. Further, I believe Garret is a lawyer (not stupid) and had his agender been personal advancement, surely he would have sought to capitalise on his fame much earlier than he did ?
Finally, the deplorable thing about all this is as you say "it is just business as usual" . . . . the business of political gamesmanship . . . us & them . . . . not consensus building & problem solving