Australia’s Liberal and Labor Parties on Climate Change – politics theme for May 2019
Federal Election: Whose climate change plan is better?
Shorten’s climate policy and why we don’t need to fear the Coalition’s ‘big scary numbers’ Guardian, Katharine Murphy, 2 May 2019
Scott Morrison wants voters to think that Bill Shorten is risky and reckless …
What’s the cost of not acting?
what Labor is saying is correct. It’s factual for this reason. Labor has set out the framework of its climate policies: the emissions reduction target, which is 45% (compared to the government’s 26%), and the various policy mechanisms to deliver that result.
But there is a fair bit of fine print missing because Labor wants to consult with stakeholders on final design before attempting to legislate the policy. …..
until we know the proportion of permits and a bunch of other things we don’t yet know – including what the Senate does to the policy if Labor wins – any number produced would be a guess. ….. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/may/02/shortens-climate-policy-and-why-we-dont-need-to-fear-the-coalitions-big-scary-numbers
Climate change costings that don’t count the cost of inaction are worthless, Guardian, Greg Jericho 5 May 19 We must demand better of our political parties – and there is no excuse for the media either,Just seven months ago the United Nations told the world that we have 12 years to limit the climate change catastrophe. It means that to keep global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels we need to cut carbon pollution by 45% by 2030 and down to zero by 2050. Twelve years. Actually scratch that – now it is 11 years.
Now ask yourself how often that has been raised during this election campaign?
At the start of the 2019 federal election campaign Scott Morrison put out a video where he was all dewy-eyed about the future, saying “the next 10 years are important to everybody at every stage of life”.
And yet not once – NOT ONCE – did he mention that the UN has given us 11 years to do something about a global catastrophe.
No, instead it’s all standard of living and nothingness statements that would get shot down by any decent advertising firm 
in the first meeting……..
Tony Abbott and his ilk – your time is done….
We need at a minimum a 45% reduction by 2030 and to get to zero net emission by 2050. So parties need to explain what they are going to do to get there and argue why their way is best.
No comments yet.
1.This month.
The Road to War brings a sharp focus to why it is not in Australia’s best interest to be dragged into a war with China which will almost inevitably go nuclear very quickly. The filmmaker has interviewed some of Australia’s senior foreign policy analysts who have vast experience behind them in analysing what really is going on here as the United States rattles its sabres with China. And sets us up to be its proxy, like the poor Ukranians have been fed into the Meatgrinder. So America can remain the Top Dog. The Road to War reveals how the United States through its spy base at Pine Gap and by stationing six nuclear capable B52 bombers in the Top End (without permission from the traditional owners) is making Australia a prime nuclear target if the current war of words suddenly melts down into full scale war.
The Road to War shows the implicit connection between Carbon emissions (the US military uses a whopping 70% of America’s annual petroleum to move its armies and vast War Machine around the globe to its 800+ military bases..but under a loophole wangled at Kyoto, the US military does not have to report its C02 annual emissions). The Road to War starts screening at selected cities and regional centres in March. See the trailer end for details.
Antinuclear 
Leave a Reply