16/09/2015

Conservatives Worldwide Tackling Climate Change: Will Turnbull?

ABC Opinion - Ben Oquist

Tony Abbott failed to move with global shifts in conservative thinking about climate change. The new Prime Minister has a chance to rectify this, writes Ben Oquist.
Malcolm Turnbull declared that Tony Abbott had failed on economic leadership. Australia's future, Turnbull said last night, is to be a nation that is "agile, that is innovative, that is creative".
Indeed, instead of addressing future economic challenges, Abbott focused on a Queensland coal mine as an economic solution and declared war on the environment movement.
As Australia's unemployment rate crept up this year, so too did the former prime minister's rhetoric. He quickly moved from making unpopular statements about the aesthetics of windmills to overheated statements about the dangerous "inefficiency" of courts enforcing the law.
Instead of pursuing sensible reforms to fill the budget's revenue hole, Abbott ruled out reforming superannuation tax concessions, which will soon cost the budget more than the aged pension. He ruled out reforming the CGT discount and negative gearing, which even the RBA has said needs to be reviewed. And he ruthlessly set about undermining the renewable energy industry, an innovative industry that puts downwards pressure on household energy bills.
Abbott's strategy of blaming environmentalists for his poor economic performance was fighting a losing battle.
This year, the Abbott government cut the popular renewable energy target, intimated that there would be subsidies for the Adani coal mine, attacked the federal court for enforcing environmental laws, held an inquiry into the charitable status of environmental organisations, and proposed to water down the Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act.
As I have written previously, the reason that none of these activities has boosted the economy is simple: more people work at McDonald's than work in coal mining.
Abbott's recent intimation that he wanted to subsidise Adani's Carmichael coal mine simultaneously showed Liberal voters that he couldn't see the mining boom was over and that he didn't mind splashing taxpayers' money around to help his pet projects - the latter of which should be anathema to the supposed party of small government and the free market.
Most polls show that economic management is very important to Liberal party voters. But as the economy slowed, unemployment rose and the budget deficit grew, Abbott was more interested in picking ideological fights with environmentalists than he was with addressing the structural problems impacting on the post-boom economy.
In the 21st century, the idea that what is good for the environment is bad for the economy makes neither economic nor political sense. Conservative leaders around the world figured out long ago that the new economy needed a new politics.
Germany's Angela Merkel drove the G7's commitment to completely decarbonise its economies. The United Kingdom's David Cameron says that climate change is one of the most serious threats Britain faces.
In contrast, Abbott laughed when his minister joked about rising sea levels sinking our smallest neighbours. Abbott's tin ear ensured he marched to his own beat, rather than moving with global shifts in conservative thinking about climate change.
Abbott's approach has also been political poison for his Coalition partners in Nationals seats. At the last NSW state election the Nationals lost the seat of Ballina to the Greens in a campaign described as "a referendum on coal seam gas". Abbott's support for the Shenhua coalmine on the prime agricultural land of the Liverpool Plains has opened the door for the return of Tony Windsor and may mean the end of Barnaby Joyce's parliamentary career.
If Turnbull is to turn both the economy and the polls around, he will have to start supporting the industries that are creating jobs, rather than subsidising the ones that are shedding them. If Turnbull matched the ALP's recent commitment to a 50 per cent renewable energy target by 2030 he could simultaneously give certainty to a new industry, boost investment and jobs, all while appealing to the public. It's good economics and good politics.
Turnbull could scrap the $5 billion northern development fund, designed to shovel taxpayers' money into commercially unviable projects,and replace it with a public transport fund. Of course, to achieve such a shift Turnbull would need to convince his base that efficiently moving people around cities was a productivity issue and not a green issue; a claim that few New Yorkers or Londoners would dispute.
By definition a country and a planet that is tackling climate change is a planet that needs fewer coal mines and fewer coal-fired power stations. While Abbott would never admit it, the owners of our oldest and dirtiest coal fired power stations would happily walk away if someone would take their liabilities; for example, the need to clean up the messes they have made on their mine sites.
Turnbull could do that next week and call it direct action.
Turnbull has a unique opportunity to not just reposition the Liberal party but to redirect economic policy in Australia. The coming months will reveal if the Liberals have decided to dump a bad strategy, or simply dump the bad salesman for the bad strategy.
By letting go of coal, reaching across the aisle for some bipartisanship on renewable energy and superannuation tax concession reform, Turnbull could not only help fix the budget and the economy, he could fix politics too.

Ben Oquist is the executive director of The Australia Institute. Follow him on Twitter @BenOquist.

No comments :

Post a Comment

Lethal Heating is a citizens' initiative