Howard’s greenhouse sleight of hand

Last week Prime Minister John Howard appeared to have changed the government’s policy on global warming by agreeing to set up a taskforce to examine introducing a carbon trading scheme. However, the government is still intent on serving the interests of the mining and other heavy industries, which will dominate the taskforce.Since the Kyoto conference on climate change ten years ago, the government has refused to introduce a carbon trading scheme. Three years ago a government committee actually produced recommendations for such a scheme. It was endorsed by all major government departments, including that of Prime Minister and Cabinet, and by the Treasurer and the Ministers for Industry and the Environment. However, it was scrapped after a visit to Howard’s office by representatives of the mining, power, aluminium, paper and chemical industries.The recent release of the British Government’s Stern Report and public opinion have forced the government to at least appear to change its policies. The government is still not prepared to sign the Kyoto Protocol, instead it is demanding that the international community adopt a "New Kyoto" protocol, which would preserve Australia’s "competitive advantage in the industries that are so important to us".Last week Ian Campbell, the Minister for the Environment, headed for the Nairobi UN conference, which has been discussing tightening the Kyoto Protocol, particularly regarding emissions trading.Emissions trading schemes are intended to limit the amount of greenhouse gases that can be emitted per annum, within a country or group of countries participating in the scheme. That amount is represented by a certain number of credits, which are granted to corporations whose industries produce greenhouse gases.Those that exceed the limit can purchase unused credits from businesses with a better emission performance, for example those which produce renewable source energy, or from those which effectively capture carbon from the air, for example in forestation. The overall emission limit is intended to be steadily reduced, in order to eventually reduce the amount of atmospheric greenhouse gases. The government’s new taskforce is likely to recommend a scheme which is similar, but which lacks strong penalties for non-complying corporations. The government itself favours granting "long term credits", i.e. allowing companies lots of time to pay for excessive emissions. The focus would be on letting the big polluters off the hook, rather than on reducing atmospheric CO2.The government also wants to use the scheme to fund the introduction and operation of nuclear power stations, an extremely dangerous initiative.Campbell has declared that the Kyoto Protocol should be scrapped because it would not make either China or India "do a single thing" to reduce emissions. The rate of emissions from these nations is certainly critical, because of their size and their rate of growth, which is paralleled by a rapidly rising rate of emissions.However, both India and China are already implementing carbon trading schemes, and their per capita emission rates are a fraction of those of Australia or the US.China has already indicated it is not interested in the government’s "New Kyoto" proposal. UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a blistering criticism of nations that have refused to take a leading role in fighting climate change, he obviously had Australia in mind."China, through its 11th five-year plan, intends to progress greenhouse gas reductions and has put forward an ambitious goal of a reduction of 20 per cent of per unit GDP energy consumption over that of 2005 by 2010", said Greens Senator Christine Milne."China has set its own target. Prime Minister Howard, where is your 2010 target?"The French Prime Minister, Dominique De Villepin, recently suggested that the European Economic Union should impose a tax on industrial products imported from countries that have not signed the Kyoto Protocol. An obviously frightened Howard described this as "a thoroughly silly proposal … totally out of touch with reality".However, he is now facing a rapidly rising level of public concern over global warming, which is likely to wreak havoc in Coalition seats at next year’s elections. Moreover, the dominant mining, energy and heavy industry coalition with which the government is aligned, is being challenged by an alliance of other industrial organisations which fear climate change, and which see themselves profiting from a genuine carbon trading scheme. Who is "out of touch with reality"?