12/05/2017

Climate Change Is The Elephant In The Budget Room

Eureka Street - Francine Crimmins*

When Scott Morrison announced the 2017-18 Budget this week there was one phrase he didn't dare to utter in his meticulously written and rehearsed speech. It's just two short words, climate change, but when used together they conjure a public debate even our minister for the environment gets tongued tied over.
Morrison's omission of climate change in the federal budget has set a tone of ignorance to improving energy policy in a meaningful way. Dr Paul Burke, a fellow at the Crawford School of Public Policy at the Australian National University, thinks 'It shows that climate change isn't a number one priority if it's not mentioned at all in a budget speech.'
The only mention of energy security was in the wider context of pressures on the cost of living for Australians. Morrison said the Prime Minister's energy security plan will provide 'reliable and affordable energy for all Australians' and that $3 billion was already being invested in new emissions technologies.
When it comes to new funding to assist in reducing emissions — nothing to see here. Funding for the environment budget was cut 14 per cent since the Coalition formed government in 2014. Under this budget, it is predicted the cut could be up to 27 per cent by 2020.
New energy related measures in this budget include a focus on increasing gas production, taking out the most funding with $86.3 million. This sum will cover $19.6 million to increase gas market transparency and over $30 million for discovery of new potential gas stores.
On the renewable energy front, $6.2 million is going to support the Solar Communities program which supports food rescue charities and other community groups to install solar to reduce their emissions and save on energy costs. There's also $110 million being set aside for Turnbull's Snowy Hydro 2.0 and a hefty investment into a solar thermal project in Port Augusta.
In addition, the National Landcare Program will receive $5 million to support a community led project into threatened species. The Great Barrier Reef will also receive $1 billion after the worst coral bleaching season in history was reported late last year.
Despite this, it's clear an overwhelming focus in environmental funding is on exploration and harvesting of gas for Australia's future in energy. It is short sighted to place money into environmental conservation projects, such as the reef fund, without first actively attempting to treat the cause of the coral bleaching — our fossil fuel emissions.
"This lack of commitment to energy in public policy, and now national budgeting, ignores overwhelming scientific evidence that not reducing to net zero emissions by the end of the century will cause climate change levels to become extremely dangerous."
Environmental organisations on Twitter were not oblivious to the omission in the Treasurer's address. Friends of the Earth Australia tweeted: 'Like many, we're disappointed to see so little funding for the environment and no mention of climate change in the budget speech.'
The lack of attention given to climate change in this budget comes after Minister for the Environment Josh Frydenberg admitted Australia wouldn't meet its Paris commitment of zero emissions by 2020. Instead, he predicts 2050 is a more realistic target. The Energy Reduction Fund, the government's climate policy, has no new funding under this budget.
This lack of commitment to energy in public policy, and now national budgeting, ignores overwhelming scientific evidence that not reducing to net zero emissions by the end of the century will cause climate change levels to become extremely dangerous. Countries at The Paris COP21 agreed on a limit of keeping global warming below 1.5 degrees by 2020. This decision was reached as a way to limit warming before it reaches a catastrophic level of 2 degrees. This promise appears to be abandoned by the Turnbull government in the most recent budget.
Australia's budget not only is a betrayal of the future of Australia's health, biodiversity and economic security, but also negligent of an international agreement which was set up to ensure a fair approach to climate for nations.

*Francine Crimmins is studying a double degree of Journalism and Creative Intelligence & Innovation at the University of Technology Sydney.

Links

No comments:

Post a Comment