The state government's approach on Australia’s energy policy has provoked much debate in recent media. The Australian opinion piece, titled ‘Energy policy has become a racket and the madness must stop’ (November 7, 2016) was written by an Australian economist, Judith Sloan, in response to this debate. Sloan presents a mocking and skeptical tone where she argues that ‘it’s time for the federal government to intervene to stop this madness’. She attacks the Australian state governments by portraying its management techniques which are contrary to her ideals as foolish, uncaring and deceitful. This creates distrust of this section of the government in the audience and further supports her view by using evidence and appeals to hip pocket nerve to gain approval of ‘the Australian taxpayer’. Additionally she uses humour and colloquial language to invite Australians to feel like they are on the same …show more content…
Sloan sets her readers up to agree in the first place by attacking the government which implies its incompetence then appeals to common sense by stating anyone who disagrees lacks intelligence. She firstly attacks the government to help her persuade the Australian taxpayer that she is right. The opposing view is the government thinking that the energy policy is good so if she makes them seem discreditable by saying, for example ‘the French government, has hoovered up more than $500 million in Australian government funding and free carbon permits’, then Sloan is telling her audience that the government is wasteful with their money and is handing it over to other countries. The idiomatic use of ‘hoovered up’ has connotations to taking things avidly or being greedy, this appeals to an Australian's sense of patriotism because they don’t want money going to France because then it won’t benefit the nation. ‘more than $5.5 billion was budgeted to be paid as “compensation and concessional loans to the coal-fired generation sector.”’ Sloan is mocking the government