Can we get warmer?

Late update: This post was published in The West(16/5) with minor changes. Changes for publication can be interesting, so I'll include them below.

===

We can come back better

Gemma Tognini (Opinion, 15/5) makes a very valid point, -- "[It's] it's so cool to be in the sensible middle" (Opinion, 15 May). On the other hand -- we don't want to miss a golden oppportunity. [Oops, neither of us spotted those three p's.]

WA -- all of Australia -- has closed down for the coronavirus. Now it's time to open up again. Will we take the "sensible" option of[,] business as usual?

[From here on was all one para. Which loses some impact but does save a little space in the paper.]

Wouldn't it be nice to recover -- but without "recovering" high levels of pollution? Wouldn't it be nice to recover -- with a far broader basis for a sound economy? Wouldn't it be nice to recover -- and maintain our current compassion for friends, family and neighbours?

No it would not be easy. But it would be nice if we could recover -- to an even better way of life.

Yes, it's so cool to be sensible. We can still be sensible -- while aiming for a place which is even better that the original, rather compromised, "middle".

===

No "real" changes -- which is pleasing. To me that means (a) a well-written letter and (b) I picked the right tone and topic for the paper. Live and learn... that's why I like to check the changes that were made for publication.