phill Parsons
RUDD may project himself on the world stage as a great actor but his climate policies are failing the reality test.
Already South Africa, a leader of the developing world in the negotiation for a second agreement on greenhouse gas reductions has expressed disappointment with the low target of 5% reductions especially given that in Bali Rudd intimated that the 25 to 40% reduction target was the developed world’s responsible action to reducing climate instability.
If Rudd has set in train a series of low targets by the US, Japan, Russia and Canada resulting in Europe remaining at a 20% target instead of opting for 30% his government will have to take the blame for the developing world [China, India, Brazil, South Africa] not adopting a target or setting their target even lower.
David Milliband, Britain’s Minister responsible for climate policies has described South Africa’s Environment Minister Marthinus van Schalkwyk as a spokesperson for the developing world.
So from stepping out on Kyoto through his Bali declaration Rudd has gone to stepping in it globally and nationally.
It may just be possible to rescue the government from its fate and us from suffering the effects of a policy condemned by the developing world but the Rudd government will have to work hard to get a high target adopted in Copenhagen in 2009 or it will stand condemned by its own people and other countries as climate instability unfolds to wreak havoc on the world.
Whilst 15% is still not enough ensuring that other countries adopt the unspecifies higher targets the Austrlaian government will also save its domestic bacon. Having brought to the stage a few actors on this major issue those of us old enough to remmeber will cast their eyes abck to the few who appeared as Austrlaia commitment to the US attmepted subjegation of Vietnam dragged in Australia.
That grew to see the Labor Party transformed from a fossil under Calwell to a modern political machine winning government in 1972. Whilst the environmental movement may not be able to transform to government in a decade all the 8 year olds will be voting in their first election then and the ranks of the cohort of voters who experienced WW2 will be very thin indeed.
Rudd has failed to condsider this carefully, burdening the Austrlaian polity with an issue that will divide it and will cost it in the desperate measures a country facing increasing climate instability on the downhill run to a permanent state of endangerment will face
Kenneth Davidson, a senior columnist in The Age, who comments on the econmy puts it simply “ The economy won’t matter if the Earth dies”
“The tragedy is that because of the Rudd Government’s amorality or ignorance, Australia is likely to continue to be a follower rather than a leader in the restructuring process that must occur if world is to avoid catastrophic climate change. It looks like another replay of the old story — a toxic combination of market and government failure to capitalise on Australia’s combination of intellectual capital and individual genius for inventiveness, leading to our best ideas being exploited overseas. It should be obvious — it is easier to restructure in a recession because the collapse in private spending means there is no necessity for higher interest rates and taxes to “make way” for new investment.
Further, the spectre of climate change provides a clear direction for industry policy. Given the importance of climate change, every policy, especially regulation, taxation and transport, should be examined through the prism of climate change and ranked inversely against its contribution to greenhouse gas emissions.”
Its not ignorance as the government has the advice. Garnaut, the CSIRO, The Bureau of Meteorology, leading cliamtologists throughout the world. Indeed, it is immoral to not have at least a 25% target as a minimum after years of benefitting from carbon pollution.
What society condemns it choildern to a dismal future As Rudd and Turnbull vie with each other to do using their position as party leaders. Anyone who is a member of either old party and wishes to avoid the consequences of climate catastrophe has no choice but to sit on their hands until its time to vote and then vote informal.
They may believe in other things that their party stands for and they may abhor the Greens, but if they cannot vote for them then they should not join in the destruction of their own planet by killer coals carbon terrortists.
It can be nothing but terrorism thatn to destroy rural livelihoods including forestry. To destroy the Great Barrier Reef and its assosciated tourism, to make many species extinct and to threaten the other with the same fate, to put Austrlaianslives on the line in unecessary awars and to burden the economy with costs to address sea level changes and other burdens as an attempt is made to limit the instability in the climate that precurses catastrophe.
Paul Kelly of the Austrlaian describes the Rudd governments failed carbon pollution reduction scheme and its asssociated emissions treading thus;
“John Howard, where are you now? This is a deft policy in which Kevin Rudd is Howard. Put precisely, Rudd is a green Howard. He has made climate change into a magic pudding. It is a work of political genius that would make Howard proud.
This is a huge fiscal churn: pricing carbon from just the top 1000 companies is a classic top-end revenue base with the proceeds distributed to households with a bias to the poor and families, where low-income families are over-compensated at 120 per cent, petrol is quarantined from price damage, new funds are created to assist small business and big businesses at risk win healthy protection money.”
And for those of us who suffered Howards’ ‘greeness’ we all remember the Tasmanian Community Forest Agreement with Lennon where the unchangeable RFA was changed and some unwanted forest saved whilst the destruction to the carbon store, provider of natural services and home tom many plants and animals continued to be given away, stolen from Tasmanians for the profit of shareholders in a company we now see has strings in both the old parties and pulss them at will.
What is the problem with a high target? The 5% target equates in per capita terms to a 27 % reduction, 15 % cent – Rudd’s option if the world concludes a tougher global deal – equates to a 34 % per capita reduction and adopting the 25% target that Rudd flagged in Bali defers the economy’s growth for a few months in 2020.
Ross Garnaut, tasked by all states, then under Labor, and Rudd in opposition recommended a 25% target if there was a tougher global deal. Proffessor Garnaut, authoir of the governments own Climate Cahnge Review, thinks Rudd has made an error in not setting a high goal and in giving too much to industry by way of compensation.
Its not very clever politics either. The Australian polled reaction to the targets. 5300 or so people voted and you can only vote once from one computer. 19% agreed the government got it right, 24% agreed with the killer coal industry and its mates in the CFMEU and said the target was too high.
57% declared the target too low. That’s either a lot of commited individuals with a big phone tree or many understand what is at stake. Earlier, when only 1200 had voted, those who opted for the Rudd government target being too low were at 54%.
Kevin 07’s popularity can take a hit as Australians recognized they were cleverly gulled by a politician on the make, Indeed, it is unlikely that he will still be there in 2020 when the next round is negotiated with climate instability much clearer and the science on the outcome more definite.
By that time the methane leaking from the arctic and the additional carbon dioxide from killer coal and its associated carbon terrorist industries, industries that have warped the process to avoid their moral responsibility, will be facing a world where climate instability, the precursor to a catastrophe, will be following the immutable laws of physics and chemistry.
The DLP survives in the Victorian Upper House, a few committed conservatives managing to convince some believers they have something to offer.
The ALP, through its current chief agent and his team, has put in jeopardy the Labor’s popularity. The party may morph this way and that, like that other not so old party, the Liberals, seeking to remain relevant but saddled with 10 years of opprobrium from a GHG reduction target that is too low, a compensation scheme tilted at certain sectors but not others leaving emissions reductions of about 18% for sectors not compensated and not targeting the homeowners to support them to reduce their energy consumption and thus their costs.
The Minister for Changing the Climate, Penny Wong, has said compensation will last whist the low carbon economy is built so be prepared for industry handouts to continue for a long time rather then emissions trading funding the construction of that economy.
Further, you will see special actions to limit changes to a low carbon economy as the government changes programs like the solar rebate scheme reducing its value to shore up killer coal and balance any draw on the budget their over generous compensation scheme has created.
One has to ask why the dirtiest brown coal fired power stations in Victoria will receive $550M per annum for 5 years. This would build a lot of alternative power supplies to create that low carbon economy Wong speaks of but there is no requirement for the companies receiving it to spend a zot on such a conversion.
And it is not the only failure of government to plan for a low carbon economy, roads still planned to link this and that whilst cycleways and public transport get left behind. Cities are allowed to expand at their fringes with Melbourne now about to reach beyond Geelong and Torquay set to become a commuter suburb with no public transport link.
The Greens message remains constant, peoples experience showing more and more at each and every election that the message and the policies are the solution to the reality that the sum of all human activity faces.
In the drier state of SA the Greens are polling 13%, almost double since the last election and the SA government has been proactive on carbon reduction and water supply strategies. It’s not just doing something, parties and politicians have to show an understanding of and a commitment tom real change that provides for peoples needs in the long term, not just for the moment.
As rural businesses face a tougher time as the climate goes drier; as the tourism businesses suffer and the tourists have worse and worse experiences trying to refresh themselves to address another year of climate reality; as the failure to adequately stimulate the green economy dawns on the queues of unemployed union members; and every time children express their concerns about the future, either at home or with their feet, voters will be reminded of the old parties, the ones that failed them when leadership was needed and left us all with a much less stable climate heading for danger.
