Larvatus Prodeo

To recap, in recent days we’ve had Garrett first of all saying as reported by the ABC

The Federal Opposition says it is willing to commit to a new international greenhouse gas emissions target, even if big polluters like China and the United States do not sign up.

He was really just arguing for a commitment to the Kyoto process and attacking Howard for not signing. He did include the US and I’m not sure that was smart. We blogged about it here.

Howard attacked, saying that Labor was irresponsible and their approach would cost jobs.

Rudd and Garrett decided that Garrett would issue a “clarifying statement” saying that the developing countries must make commitments for Labor to sign, which sounded like a backflip, but Garrett said it was what he meant all along. Howard saw this as a capitulation. Just about everyone is thoroughly confused and last night on PM John Connor from the Climate Institute declared the two parties to be as one on the issue of developing countries, the one difference being on signing Kyoto.

This raises the question as to whether or not we have policy differentiation. I’d suggest we do, but in the context of the international scene both are inadequate.

Continue reading ‘Where are we with Kyoto, Bali and all that?’

Lenore Taylor in the Weekend AFR reported that Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull had taken a submission to cabinet suggesting that Australia ratify the Kyoto Protocol immediately.

Government sources have told the Weekend AFR that Mr Turnbull argued the government would gain kudos and lose nothing by ratifying the international climate change agreement.

But cabinet decided such a backflip would not look credible to voters given the vehemence with which Prime Minister Howard had argued against Kyoto for a decade, even though it was looking for ways to redefine the coalition’s image in the electorate.

It is understood that Mr Turnbull was not the sole voice for ratification at the meeting, held about six weeks ago, but that a clear majority of cabinet did not think changing the government’s stance was a viable political position to take.

Turnbull is not denying the story, so it’s probably true.

Continue reading ‘Climate change issue comes alive - almost!’

In Guy Pearse’s book High & Dry he suggests that Howard’s climate change policies are a complete fraud. He suggests that the purpose of the policies is to appear to be doing something when the real effect will be to allow the polluters a free ride as long as possible, to maintain the Australian coal industry and to hold a place for nuclear. To this end he has lied, dissembled and mislead parliament. Renewables are not really a part of his agenda. Pearse tells us:

Meanwhile, according to the IEA, the renewable share of electricity in Australia has fallen from 18.5 per cent in 1970 to 8.3 per cent in 2001 – roughly where it remains today.

Of course most of this is hydro.

Pearse makes a very good case to support his views in a closely argued 400 plus pages. The question now is whether Howard has finally got it or whether we have here more of the same.

Continue reading ‘Howard’s clean energy plan hits the fan’