Ironically, while political leaders "promise" security and calm, they all too readily seek to create and exploit uncertainty, seeking to capitalize on the downside of events as they unfold, or otherwise create concern about what events may unfold.

For example, Abbott makes speeches to the Parliament detailing the "threats", but at the same time enjoining us to get on with our live "as usual". Yet we may need to give up certain "individual freedoms" for the sake of the national good.

Obviously, the current campaign against IS in Iraq and Syria is easily translated to "fear" about people and possible events here in Australia. This is certainly not to say that there are not people and possible events about which we shouldn't be concerned. We need to be. But, we shouldn't stand back and allow and accept exaggerated assessments and responses.

The fatal shooting this week in Melbourne of a young "terror suspect", who had apparently made "threats" against our PM, begs the question of why the police didn't shoot to wound, rather than to kill. It also demands an independent review of what actually happened and of the police response.

It is an absolute insult to the Australian community, and an abrogation of responsibility, to allow "the police" to investigate themselves in this incident.

Yet, the politics of fear will "allow" the significance of this event to be exaggerated, and the police response to be "excused".

More importantly, this sort of event, and response, is very divisive in the Muslim community, a community that is already quite "factionalised", and lacks definitive leadership.

The Abbott Government desperately needs the support and co-operation of "Muslim community", essentially to "rat out" the malcontents and genuine threats.

The Melbourne incident, and response, stresses this essential support.

Yet, to succeed, Abbott needs this community to be on side.

To broaden the discussion, it seems that our political leaders move, all too hastily, to exploit "fear" wherever they can to consolidate their short-term standing. As a victim of a, most effective, GST scare campaign, I obviously have a view about all this. But, you can broaden the discussion to most areas of public policy.

Abbott elevated "fear" to an unprecedented level, with his campaigns against the carbon and mining taxes.

Given that Gillard provided no detail to support her policy reversal to suddenly "put a price on carbon", Abbott was left with the unbelievable political opportunity to run a "fear campaign", day in, and day out.

The fear/negative campaign against this decision had considerable domestic effect, given the vacuum created by Gillard, failing to spell out the significance of the science, and failing to emphasise the urgency of our needed response.

It was certainly fundamental in getting Abbott elected.

Yet, this week, we find ourselves on the back foot at the UN summit on climate change.

The world is moving on. Policies developed by the Abbott Government for domestic consumption, tag us as a laggards in terms of this global movement.

When large, fossil fuel investments are increasingly seen as "risky", it is inevitable that asset owners work to manage this risk, and either hedge or, otherwise, reduce these risks.

My greatest fear is that we are getting all this wrong. We should be demanding better.