Abbott’s “Direct Action” climate plan – a gift to big polluters?
Three major loopholes in the Direct Action climate plan The Conversation, Jemma Green Senior Research Fellow at Curtin University 17 January 2014, Under the draft plan, companies will be invited to bid for funding regardless of whether their project is commercially viable without it. Projects that are already viable without government help are naturally in a better position to make a competitive bid in the scheme’s “reverse auction” – by which the government will award funds to projects that promise the biggest emissions cuts for the least money.
Baseline call
The second problem hinges on the fact that emissions reductions cannot be calculated without reference to a previous “baseline” level. But the government has delayed its decision on how emissions baselines will be determined until mid-2015. How these are decided will be of greatest interest to the biggest emitters………
Long deadlines, minor penaltiesYet under the government’s current plan, even a company that is given a favourable historic baseline, and then exceeds it anyway, could be given plenty of leeway…….
What’s more, in cases where a company routinely fails to meet emissions targets, the government says it does not want the policy to be punitive. Therefore companies could well not comply, without suffering significant financial consequences.
The proposal is open for comment until February 21, and the plan faces plenty more scrutiny, particularly when new Senators take their seats in July. Those Senators also control the fate of the previous government’s carbon price, which has already been repealed in the lower house…..http://theconversation.com/three-major-loopholes-in-the-direct-action-climate-plan-21838
Bernie Fraser warns about axing of Climate Change Authority
‘Environment will suffer’ if CCA axed CHERYL JONES THE AUSTRALIAN JANUARY 15, 2014BUSINESS interests could “overwhelm” environmental concerns should the Climate Change Authority be axed without replacing it with an alternative body to provide “independent and balanced” advice, according to chairman Bernie Fraser.
The former Reserve Bank governor said it would be a pity for any government to “eschew expert, independent advice, particularly on a subject so important and so complex as climate change”…(subscribers only)
Abbott removing words “climate”, “clean energy”, “cleantech” from the political dialogue
it’s about time the PM accepts that Australia has a “super-abundance” of wind and solar, just as it has of coal and gas. The only difference being is that wind and solar generation will be cheaper – as the government’s own economic advisor suggests – and cause a lot less pollution.
Abbott won’t let facts derail his anti-renewables campaign REneweconomy. By Giles Parkinson on 13 January 2014 Last week it was quietly announced that the Australian Cleantech Competition would hitherto be known as the Australian Technologies Competititon. It was another subtle reminder of how the new Australian conservative government is going about the re-phrasing of Australia’s energy future. Anything that involves the words climate, clean energy, or cleantech are considered projects or institutions -non-grata.
In the public arena, it’s not just a rephrasing that’s taking place, but a concerted attack on renewables. Continue reading
“Direct Action” – Greg Hunt’s slush fund for the big polluters
Australian environment minister is totally, shamefully negligent with “direct action” policy Guardian Alexander White 12 Jan 14 The Australian government’s “direct action” policy is like giving money to an illegal drug dealer to stop dealing drugs, then having no penalty if he keeps selling them.
Moderate conservative that he is, Australian environment minister Greg Hunt ran on a platform of “lean” government, where private businesses “are the true creators of wealth”, individuals need to take personal responsibility for their actions, and the former Labor government’s carbon price was a “non-delivery of an invisible substance“. It was a surprise then, to learn last week, that Greg Hunt wants to give $3 billion to big polluting companies to reduce their emissions, but have no sanctions for those businesses if they fail to meet the reduction targets.
This is like giving money to an illegal drug dealer to develop innovative ways for him to stop dealing drugs, then having no penalty if he keeps selling them. Worse, the drug dealer could claim government funding for drugs that he supposedly didn’t sell over his “baseline” of sales, but carry on pushing drugs regardless.
You’d expect that a believer in lean government wouldn’t use billions in tax-payer’s money to create an expensive, totally ineffectual regulatory bureaucracy to auction permits to not emit carbon pollution.
The Australian government’s “direct action” policy will allow companies to bid for grants to implement the most efficient carbon reduction programs. Companies will have a “business as usual” baseline from which they agree to reduce their pollution. Several options are canvassed by Greg Hunt, including having multi-year compliance periods, or the ability for companies to “make good” by buying reduction credits from elsewhere.
In reality, the Emissions Reduction Fund is little more than a slush-fund for the big polluters.
What is surprising is that Greg Hunt seems unaffected by the cognitive dissonance of paying someone to not do something — to not emit a tonne of carbon dioxide — when his principle criticism of the carbon price was that it was a “non-delivery of an invisible substance”.
This policy is shamefully negligent.
Not just because it won’t actually reduce Australia’s carbon emissions and will fall vastly short of the inadequate 5% reduction target.But because you can’t measure what you don’t emit. Instead, you just assume how much you would have emitted and compare it to what you did emit. This is, needless to say, utterly subjective, and open to manipulation. Private companies will be given public funds to magically reduce their carbon pollution emissions, with no consequences if they fail to deliver.
As is so often the case with this government, Greg Hunt and prime minister Tony Abbott have a very flimsy moral case to implement their direct action policy, and the federal election does not qualify as a mandate to abolish the carbon price. Abbott may claim that the 2013 election was a “referendum” on the carbon price, but if so, only around 45.5% of voters supported the abolition by voting for the LNP. This falls to a miserable 37.7% in the Senate.
Implicit in their “direct action” policy is that it is a more effective way to reduce carbon emissions than the carbon price. This is a view that could only be held by someone if they didn’t accept the scientific basis forclimate change.
Considering Tony Abbott’s past statements that climate change is “crap” and that the carbon price was “socialism masquerading as environmentalism”, a common sense reading of the policy is that exists solely because of the climate change denialists in the ranks of the Liberal-National party……… This Liberal-National government is shamefully attempting to fleece everyday Australians out of $3 billion, handed out in grants to big polluters for magical, unmeasurable carbon emission reductions. http://www.theguardian.com/environment/southern-crossroads/2014/jan/12/greg-hunt-negligent-direct-action-climate-change-denialist
Practical problems in Tony Abbott’s climate change policy
Labor and the Greens are preparing to exploit the confusion with a Senate inquiry into direct action taking submissions until January 20 before it starts public hearings.
Tony Abbott’s climate change policy problematic January 11, 2014 SMH, Tom Arup, Peter Hannam The federal government’s new green paper reveals many practical problems with its policy to combat climate change.
When Australia’s new senators take their place in July they are likely to deliver Prime Minister Tony Abbott what he has promised for four years – the scrapping of the carbon tax.
But despite that looming victory the government is now finding out its other big climate promise – the development of a ”lasting and stable” alternative – may not be as simple as it had first suggested.
That alternative, called direct action, has had a long gestation period with then-opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt devising its initial outline during the summer of 2009-10…….
Hunt emerged touting a scheme that has since been panned by many economists and environmentalists. Despite the doubters, Hunt is now preparing to implement it.
Direct action has two main elements. Continue reading
Government divided on whether to kill Renewable Energy Target or just mortally weaken it
The renewable energy industry has said preservation of the RET was crucial for the future of billions of dollars’ worth of investment in large-scale renewable energy projects.
The Clean Energy Council said the RET was encouraging households to invest in renewable and efficient energy.
Cabinet rift on RET: Hunt firm amid scrapping calls GRAHAM LLOYD THE AUSTRALIAN JANUARY 11, 2014 THE federal government is badly split on what to do about the mandatory renewable energy target, which has been blamed for rising electricity prices and making manufacturing Australian uncompetitive.
The terms of reference are being finalised for a review, which was expected to look at whether the RET should be reduced in line with falling demand for power……..
Mr Hunt said the review would be completed well before the end of the year.
The RET forces large power users and retailers to source a fixed amount of their energy demand from renewable sources.
Nationals senator Ron Boswell is pushing to have it scrapped…….. Continue reading
Abbott commissions unnecessary research on wind energy and health
Abbott’s fear mongering on wind farms is dangerous and reckless: Greens http://richard-di-natale.greensmps.org.au/content/media-releases/abbott%E2%80%99s-fear-mongering-wind-farms-dangerous-and-reckless-greens 08 Jan 2014 | Richard Di Natale
“This is another cynical attack on renewable energy that will create more fear and anxiety in the community” said Senator Di Natale.
“After trying to dismantle the carbon price, axe the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and attacking the Renewable Energy Target, it’s no surprise that the anti-science Abbott Government has latched onto the discredited anti-wind campaign.
“It is the Prime Ministers actions, not the wind industry’s that will put people’s health at risk. His fear mongering is reckless, dangerous and irresponsible. The truth is that there has already been extensive research into this issue and no credible health body or medical journal in the world supports the idea of wind turbine syndrome.
“There is significant research to indicate that misinformation about wind farms can make people sick. Much like a placebo can lead to genuine health benefits, false claims that something is harmful can lead to real harms.
“By commissioning further unnecessary research, the Abbott Government is simply sending a signal that there could be something to worry about. Every dollar the NHMRC spends on politically-motivated research is a dollar not spent on cancer or diabetes research.
“If the Abbott Government is truly concerned with the health impacts of power generation, a Senate Inquiry found earlier this year that the mining, transportation and combustion of coal contributes to poor air quality which has a greater impact than the road toll. It’s time the Prime Minister got on with implementing those recommendations rather than pursuing his reckless and dangerous campaign against clean energy.”
“Direct Action” – Tony Abbott’s slush fund for polluting industries
“What is clear in the green paper is that there is no requirement for business to reduce carbon pollution,” Mr Burke said. “The policy offers no response for businesses that increase pollution.”
No penalty for carbon polluters GRAHAM LLOYD THE AUSTRALIAN, 7 JAN 14 COMPANIES will not be punished if they fail to meet their carbon emissions targets under the Coalition’s Direct Action plan.
Instead, the government will introduce “flexible compliance arrangements”, some of which are more generous than those argued for by industry.
Federal Environment Minister Greg Hunt told The Australian yesterday the Direct Action scheme, outlined in a green paper now open for comment, was not designed to be punitive. Continue reading
Trans Pacific Partnership’s investor-state dispute settlement mechanism puts democracy in peril
Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement favours foreign investors over citizens’ rights Canberra Times, January 4, 2014 Without debate, increased rights for foreign investors will undermine our way of life, writes Thomas A. Faunce. All the indications from the recent Singapore meeting on the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPPA) are that Australian society is about to undergo a momentous shift in its governance arrangements. The recent Korea-Australia Free Trade Agreement (KAFTA) gives a pointer.
It includes an investor-state dispute settlement mechanism. This provides rights of foreign investors (additional to those of local businesses) to challenge our legislation where it impedes their profits overseas before panels of trade arbitrators. Our government claimed it had ”ensured the inclusion of appropriate carve-outs and safeguards in important areas such as public welfare, health and the environment.”
The Australian government has no mandate to introduce such a significant change in our sovereignty and governance. Though the present author and others raised the issue of such greater rights of foreign investors over local businesses during the preceding electoral campaign it was never the subject of major policy debate or positioning.
The insertion of such foreign investor rights into our governance system is a momentous event in the history of our democracy.According to the central document in our social contract, fundamental alterations in Australia’s governance arrangements require not just legislation but a referendum. Thus, a majority of Australian citizens in a majority of states were needed to support the creation of the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme or the citizenship of Aboriginal Australians.
Yet, as a result of the TPPA, this country risks displacing the authority of citizens who live and support families, friends, local communities and ecosystems in this land, in favour of a system privileging artificial people called corporations.
The multinational corporations to which the KAFTA and the TPPA will be ceding rights to challenge our democratic laws are regarded by the law as ”people”. They can sue in courts to protect their rights. But they lack conscience, empathy, the capacity to develop virtues though consistent application of generally applicable principle, that constitute the richness of our character. Corporations can never marry or have children. They seek to fulfil a monomanical basic craving – to maximise shareholder profit.
Perhaps the big issue in our nation should not be gay marriage, but corporate marriage – using the corporations law to link a broader public purpose.
It is ironic and sad that the privileging of corporate elites over the rights and interests of our citizens implicit in such foreign investor rights was rejected by conservative former prime minister John Howard at the time of the Australia-United States Free Trade Agreement in 2004. It also has been deprecated by Pope Francis as part of his recent apostolic exhortation……
At the same time as foreign investors are gaining these extra rights, our government is preparing to turn more of our social infrastructure over to them. The new era for infrastructure financing involves projects financed by taxpayers and superannuants, that then are sold to private corporations who manage them…..
The deliberate disengagement of Australian citizens from the governance changes being wrought on Australia through the TPPA may mark a turning point in a wider disengagement of citizens from the political process in this country.
♦ Thomas A. Faunce is professor, jointly in the college of law and college of medicine, biology and the environment at the Australian National University. http://www.canberratimes.com.au/comment/trans-pacific-partnership-agreement-favours-foreign-investors-over-citizens-rights-20140103-309nb.html#ixzz2peyYTVFd
Constitutional Preamble is irrelevant: Aborigines need a Treaty!
Forget the Preamble, what Australia needs is a Treaty Woollydays, Derek Barry January 3, 2014 The new Coalition Government has been making noises on a referendum to change the constitution to recognise First Australians. The wording of the change has yet to be announced but Prime Minister Tony Abbott is saying the change would “complete our constitution rather than change it.”
What exactly Abbott means by completion rather than change is not clear from the article but I assume it means the change will have purely ornamental rather than legal force. According to his deputy Julie Bishop, the government wants to have a “deep discussion” with the Australian people before agreeing to the wording but here’s a free tip from me if the changes are purely for show: Forget it.
I say forget it, not because Australian constitutional referendums have a habit of failing, but because there are genuine things constitutional change could do to improve the situation of First Australians. The most profound change would be to turn the preamble into a Treaty, common enough in other settler countries, but the first ever in 225 years of European occupation of Australia. Unlike a flowery but pointless preamble, a treaty would genuinely acknowledge past failures and injustices and show sincere desire for a better future and more just relationship……. Continue reading
Tony Abott’s climate denialist voice – Maurice Newman
“The worst part about Mr Newman’s ignorant comments is that he’s only voicing what we know Tony Abbott thinks about climate change,”
The CSIRO says robust scientific findings include clear evidence for global warming
Tony Abbott’s top business adviser accuses IPCC of ‘dishonesty and deceit’, The Guardian, 31 Dec 13 ‘The scientific delusion, the religion behind the climate crusade, is crumbling,’ Maurice Newman says Tony Abbott’s top business adviser has accused theIntergovernmental Panel on Climate Change of “dishonesty and deceit” as it focuses on “exploiting the masses and extracting more money” in a climate crusade.
Maurice Newman, chairman of the prime minister’s new Business Advisory Council, used an interview with the Australian newspaperto launch a strongly worded attack on the global body that provides advice to governments on the body of scientific findings about climate change.
Newman also argued Australia had fallen “hostage to climate change madness” but he believed the “scientific delusion” was crumbling amid suggestions the global temperature could drop to little ice age levels.
The opposition described Newman as an embarrassment to Australia, saying he was not a scientist and therefore not qualified “to make such outrageous claims”. Continue reading
Olympic Dam uranium mine won’t replace Holden jobs
27 Dec 13 “The stalled Olympic Dam mine expansion is not the answer to job 
creation in South Australia, despite the Prime Minister’s vivid imagination”, according to Greens SA Parliamentary Leader, Mark Parnell MLC
“What the PM should be doing instead is focusing on how best to help South Australian industries create jobs in areas where we have a real competitive and natural advantage. 
If he opened his mind to the possibilities, he would see that SA is a leader in renewable energy and there is great potential for jobs growth in wind power, solar PV and in the emerging area of Solar Thermal, such as that proposed for Port Augusta to replace the existing dirty coal fired power stations. [See:http://bze.org.au/repower-port-augusta]
“That’s why the Prime Minister’s decision to axe the Clean Energy Finance Corporation is bad news for South Australia. It’s also why we should be very worried about his likely decision to water down the Renewable Energy Target. This target is the reason why so many energy companies chose to invest in South Australia over the last few years – because our abundant wind and solar resources give us the edge over other States in the grid.
“Liberal leader, Steven Marshall should be horrified at what his party is doing to South Australia’s future economic opportunities and he should be calling on the PM to change direction. Continue reading
Abbott picks pro nuker as Australia’s next Governor General
Peter Cosgrove to be governor-general DENNIS SHANAHAN THE AUSTRALIAN DECEMBER 26, 2013 GENERAL Peter Cosgrove is set to become the next governor-general of Australia, the formal announcement of the appointment of the popular former chief of the defence force expected late next month…..http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/peter-cosgrove-to-be-governorgeneral/story-fn59niix-1226789821832#
Cosgrove backs nuclear power
Lack of Australian nuclear plant almost immoral: Peter Cosgrove “….. it was “almost immoral” to export uranium to less technologically advanced and stable countries to use in nuclear power plants while refusing to have one in Australia………..We’re a rich and technologically advanced nation sitting in a geologically stable continent, so surely we can expect to build and operate safely a nuclear power station.”
Cosgrove wants nuclear answer to climate change Former Australian Defence Force chief Peter Cosgrove says Australia should adopt nuclear power as its response to climate change……Mr Abbott, however, says he agrees that nuclear power is the only realistic way to reduce carbon emissions while maintaining living standards. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2010-02-26/cosgrove-wants-nuclear-answer-to-climate-change/343990
Tony Abbott’s pretend revival of Olympic Dam uranium expansion plan
Tony Abbott’s push for Olympic Dam revival SID MAHER AND DENNIS SHANAHAN THE AUSTRALIAN DECEMBER 24, 2013 THE Abbott government has turned its sights on reigniting BHP Billiton’s giant Olympic Dam expansion as it seeks to find an economic antidote to Holden’s decision to cease carmarking in Australia from 2017. Federal ministers have held talks with BHP Billiton about ways to assist in the expansion of the South Australian uranium and copper project, including Research and development aid, approval processes and political stability in decision-making. …. (subscribers only) http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/tony-abbotts-push-for-olympic-dam-revival/story-fn59niix-1226789188416#
Tony Abbott getting ready to reneg on the Renewable Energy Target
“If Tony Abbott goes ahead and breaks this election promise, he will severely damage Australia’s efforts at reducing carbon pollution,”
Tony Abbott inclined to drop RET: Mark Butler SID MAHER THE AUSTRALIAN DECEMBER 24, 2013 LABOR has accused Tony Abbott of preparing to break an election promise on the Renewable Energy Target as Nationals senator Ron Boswell called for the scheme to be scrapped completely.
After The Australian reported that senior electricity industry executives had begun talks on the possible shape of a new scheme in anticipation of government changes, Labor’s climate change spokesman Mark Butler said the RET had been a “clear policy success”, driving investment in wind and solar power and creating thousands of clean energy jobs.
But Senator Boswell, who has been one of the most outspoken critics of the scheme, said the RET should be “scrapped altogether…” Continue reading
1 This month
Chernobyl: The Lost Tapes – A good documentary on Chernobyl on SBS available On Demand for the next 3 weeks– https://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/tv-program/chernobyl-the-lost-tapes/235274195556
21 April Webinar: No Nuclear Weapons in Australia
Start: 2026-04-21 18:00:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
End: 2026-04-21 19:30:00 UTC Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney (GMT+10:00)
Event Type: Virtual
A virtual link will be communicated before the event.
Host Contact Info: australia@icanw.org
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 