Turnbull "supports" climate action, rejects resources tax

Today The Age published my letter responding to Malcolm Turnbull's remarks on emissions trading at Saturday's Deakin lecture on the politics of climate change. My response referred to Clive Hamilton's excellent opinion piece on the Resources Super Profits Tax and the newspaper's strong editorial on Australia's quest for oil in deep water in the context of the Gulf of Mexico disaster. As usual, here's the letter as published, followed by the version I submitted:

CLIVE Hamilton (Comment, 14/6) rightly identifies the mining industry as the self-interested common enemy of the resources tax and the emissions trading scheme.

Unfortunately, Malcolm Turnbull (''Calls to get ETS back on agenda'', The Age, 14/6) fails to acknowledge the common element of climate in these two vital initiatives.

I was at Saturday's Deakin lecture on the politics of climate change, where Turnbull spoke. Skirting his own party's climate denialist position, Turnbull attacked the ''political cowardice'' of the Prime Minister in failing to go to a double-dissolution election over the ETS, while decrying a resources tax he said nobody could understand.

In a later Twitter exchange with me, he claimed: ''rspt has nothing to do with climate - its [sic] just a big new tax to raise additional revenues.''

While the Rudd government is indeed guilty of cowardice for not taking science-based action on climate, or even proposing it, the resources tax would be a small down payment to address the damage wrought by the mining industry.

Mining can have a direct and catastrophic effect on the physical environment, as well as contributing strongly to carbon emissions and global warming. How Turnbull can ''support'' climate action but reject the resources tax is beyond me.

Now the very similar version submitted:

Clive Hamilton (Comment & Debate, 14/6) rightly identifies the mining industry as the self-interested common enemy of both the resources tax and the emissions trading scheme.

Unfortunately, Malcolm Turnbull (News, 14/6) fails to acknowledge the common element of climate in these two vital initiatives as he calls to get a flawed ETS back on the agenda.

I was at Saturday's Deakin lecture on the politics of climate change where he made the comments reported in your newspaper. Skirting the climate denialist position of his own party, Turnbull attacked the “political cowardice” of the prime minister in failing to go to a double-dissolution election over the ETS, while decrying a resources tax he said nobody could understand.

In a later Twitter exchange with me, he claimed: “rspt has nothing to do with climate – its (sic) just a big new tax to raise additional revenues”.

While the Rudd government is indeed guilty of cowardice for not taking science-based action on climate, or even proposing it, the resources tax would be a small down-payment to address the damage wrought by the mining industry.

As shown by your excellent editorial on Australia’s continuing quest for for oil in the face of the disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, mining can have a direct and catastrophic effect on the physical environment, as well as contributing strongly to carbon emissions and global warming.

How Turnbull can “support” climate action but reject the resources tax is beyond me.

Comments welcome.

Earth Hour more than a token

Last week's edition of The Sunday Age carried Stephen Cauchi's story, "Melbourne's Earth Hour enthusiasm dims". The story notes the lower engagement with the event by Melbourne residents, and Clive Hamilton's fear that the event risks tokenism.

While this may well be true for some, it certainly isn't the case for many climate advocates for whom the event is part of sustained local campaigns - including that being run by Darebin Climate Action Now to draw attention to the climate impacts sanctioned by local federal member for Batman, Martin Ferguson, who is also resources and energy minister in the Rudd Labor Government.

Today The Sunday Age published my response to the Cauchi piece:

I CAN'T agree with Clive Hamilton that Earth Hour is tokenistic. The small crowd gathered outside Martin Ferguson's office in High Street, Preston, wasn't there to tick a box and then go home to resume carbon-intensive lifestyles. Instead, they highlighted the connection between Ferguson as their federal member for Batman and his role as the Rudd government's energy and resources minister, in which he ceaselessly promotes the fossil fuels that scientists say must be phased out if we are to avoid dangerous warming.

Ferguson is, in essence, our local member for global damage. Climate risk - unlike coal - can never truly be exported. Wherever the stuff is burnt, its carbon emissions accumulate in the only atmosphere we have and we all share the impacts while the coal companies keep the profits.

Calling for Ferguson to turn away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy didn't feel at all tokenistic.

The letter can also be read on The Sunday Age letters page (scroll down to "More than a token").

For those interested in how longer letters get edited, here's the version submitted:

Perhaps the response to Earth Hour was somewhat muted this year. That is understandable given the fiasco of the Copenhagen climate talks and the essentially political, unscientific climate debate in Australia, where the two major parties both advocate climate inaction despite the apparent differences in their rhetoric.

However, I can't agree with Clive Hamilton that Earth Hour is tokenistic. The small crowd gathered outside Martin Ferguson's office in High Street Preston wasn't there to tick a box and then go home to resume carbon-intensive lifestyles. Instead they highlighted the connection between Ferguson as their local federal member for Batman and his role as the Rudd Government's energy and resources minister, in which he ceaselessly promotes the fossil fuels that scientists say must be phased out if we are to avoid dangerous warming.

Ferguson is, in essence, our local member for global damage. Climate risk - unlike coal - can never truly be exported. Wherever the stuff is burnt, its carbon emissions accumulate in the only atmosphere we have, and we all share the impacts while the coal companies keep the profits. Climate risk is a very dangerous boomerang for Australia, the world's largest exporter of coal and among the countries most vulnerable to climate change.

Calling for Ferguson to turn away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy didn't feel at all tokenistic, and I thank Darebin Climate Action Now for organising this important local event - part of a sustained campaign that will follow Ferguson all the way to the ballot box.

See Earth Hour "with" Martin Ferguson for details and a short video about DarebinCAN's Earth Hour event.

Comments welcome.

Higgins not so great for Libs, ALP

Update: This post has been updated to reflect final AEC figures.

On Sunday, Josh Gordon at The Age saw the federal by-election results as good for Tony Abbott, but, looking at Higgins, the Liberal primary vote increased from last time by only 0.82% (with an increase in 2CP of about 2%). With Labor not running, this could even be explained by a small migration of right-wing Labor voters to the Liberals.

In Bradfield, the Liberals did worse, with swing in the primary vote against them of 3.4%, albeit with an increase of less than 1% in the 2CP.

In addition, there was a poor turn-out in both by-elections. In Higgins 75.32% cf 93.7% (AEC 2009, 2007), and in Bradfield 74.24% cf 94.03% (AEC 2009, 2007).

In the absence of Labor, a substantial proportion of both electorates (32.54% primary in Higgins, and 25.9% primary in Bradfield) were quite willing to vote Green. How many might still be comfortable to do so even given a Labor candidate on the ballot?

This unknown surely can't be making Lindsay Tanner more comfortable in Melbourne. It seems there's plenty of scope for Rudd to lose quite a slab of ALP votes to the Greens, so it's far from a poor result for the most climate progressive party, and particularly for Clive Hamilton. It's also noteworthy that the climate sceptic candidate did very poorly in Higgins.

Chin up, Greens! Well done!