01/02/2017

Most Australians Oppose Government's $1bn Adani Loan For Coal Railway Line

The Guardian

More than half of Liberal voters also oppose plan to loan Indian company $1bn to build a rail line between proposed Carmichael coalmine and Abbot Point
A protest in Melbourne against the proposed Carmichael coalmine, which scientists say should not go ahead if the Great Barrier Reef is to be protected from the impacts of climate change. Photograph: Julian Smith/AAP
Three-quarters of Australians, including most Liberal voters, oppose the government giving a $1bn loan to Adani to build a rail line between its proposed Carmichael coalmine and the Abbot Point shipping terminal.
The government’s Northern Australia Infrastructure Fund (Naif) granted Adani “conditional approval” for a $1bn loan in December last year.
The rail line, if built, would allow Adani to build the country’s biggest coalmine and open up the Galilee Basin to further mines by linking them to an export terminal.
Coral scientists have argued the coal needs to stay in the ground if the Great Barrier Reef is to be protected from the impacts of climate change.
The government has argued there is no definite link between the coal from the Adani mine being burned and climate change, and the resources minister, Matthew Canavan, has said the mine would “be a good thing for the environment”.
But a ReachTel poll of 2,126 people across Australia conducted on 12 January, commissioned by GetUp, found 74.4% of respondents said “no” when asked whether “lending $1bn to an offshore mining company to build a coal rail line is a good use of public money”.
Just 16.2% of respondents thought it was a good use of public money, with 9.5% saying they didn’t know.
The opposition was strong regardless of voting intention, with 53.7% of those who said they would vote Liberal opposing the loan. Just over 80% of “undecided” voters, 85.5% of Labor voters and 89.9% of Greens voters said the loan was a bad use of public money.
A previous survey of people living in the region that would host the mine found two-thirds opposed public money being used to support the mine.
Analysis from Greenpeace has suggested the rail project does not meet the requirements for a loan under the scheme, since it will not be “of public benefit” and it is not clear Adani will be able to repay the loan.
GetUp’s Miriam Lyons said: “A mere 16% of Australians think this is a good way to invest public money. While we see hospitals and schools starved of resources, the government sees fit to hand over a billion bucks to build Adani’s shiny new train.”
Lyons called on Malcolm Turnbull to stop the loan going ahead.
“Prime minister Turnbull’s not even playing for his own team – only 32% of Liberal voters agree with this use of public money,” she said.

Links

Prince Charles May Raise Climate Change During Trump's Visit To Britain

The Guardian

Some in Whitehall are urging the prince to challenge US president’s pledge to abandon 2015 UN climate change deal
Royal sources say Prince Charles will not lecture the US president but has not ruled out tackling him on the issue of climate change. Photograph: Richard Stonehouse/Getty Images
Donald Trump’s state visit to Britain this year was never likely to fit the mould of previous trips undertaken by his predecessors, from Ronald Reagan to Barack Obama. The US president’s rumoured wish to play nine holes on the Queen’s private golf course at Balmoral and the question of how he might explain his 2012 tweet defending the sale of topless pictures of the Duchess of Cambridge made sure of that.
But the tour is now looking even more likely to generate controversy as Prince Charles emerged as a possible challenger to the president’s views on climate change and faith issues.
The Guardian understands from royal sources that the prince will not lecture Trump in relation to their starkly divergent views of what needs to be done to tackle global warming but has not ruled out addressing the topic. This poses a challenge not just for the president, who has threatened to “cancel” the United Nations climate change deal signed in Paris in 2015 and who has described climate change as “created by and for the Chinese in order to make US manufacturing non-competitive”. It is also a conundrum for the British government scrambling to work out how to address Trump’s radical programme and how to make use of a sometimes controversial advocate for climate action.
Charles is being urged by some in Whitehall to use his decades-long experience in environmentalism to challenge Trump’s pledge to abandon the deal, as part of “harmonised” efforts with the UK government to keep the carbon-cutting treaty on track.
But other UK officials are reported to be concerned that the likely meeting between the men has become a “risk factor” for the visit. Another potentially controversial issue that could arise is religion Prince Charles’s history of trying to promote better interfaith relations contrast with Trump’s actions to block travellers from Muslim-majority countries from entering the US.
An anonymous source, described as being close to Trump, said this weekend that the president would not put up with being lectured by the prince, according to the Sunday Times. The source warned against the two men meeting at all.
That appears unlikely. Under the normal choreography of a state visit, Charles is likely to have several opportunities to spend time with Trump. Although details of the visit have yet to be finalised, the Prince of Wales would typically welcome Trump where he is staying, possibly the US ambassador’s residence in Regent’s Park, central London. They would then travel together to Horse Guards Parade from where there is normally a formal procession down the Mall to Buckingham Palace for the leader to be greeted by the Queen. That would be followed by a lunch, attended again by Charles.
A state dinner provides another opportunity for interaction and Charles also invites most leaders to afternoon tea at Clarence House. Whether this will happen with Trump is yet to be decided, and is said to depend on how much time is available. Barack Obama did not take tea on his last state visit, but China’s president, Xi Jinping, did.
In parts of Whitehall Charles is now considered to be “an extremely good asset” in helping to maintain the integrity of the UN climate change treaty. He has been “gently primed” to assist diplomatic efforts on the issue, a senior Whitehall source said and there is “a sympathetic hearing” between Clarence House and the government on climate change, with Charles’s views considered “absolutely in line with government policy”.
“It has taken a lot of work by some of us to get him into that place, but what he is doing now is extremely helpful to us,” the source said.
Last week, while Trump issued executive orders to revive oil pipeline projects and told carmakers that environmental regulation was “out of control”, Charles stepped up his own warnings on the environment. In a foreword to a Ladybird book on climate change published on Thursday and co-written by the prince, he described climate change as “the wolf at the door” and said action “must be urgently scaled up and scaled up now”.
One royal aide said Charles “would find a meeting [with Trump] on this subject [climate change] extremely useful” but also made clear that while the agenda might or might not include climate change, the mode of delivery would not be confrontational or hectoring.
“If anything, he is a helpful and honest broker on so many issues,” said one source. The source explained that Charles is usually in listening mode for the first 30 minutes of meetings with heads of state and only towards the end would consider offering thoughts about how problems that had been raised might be addressed.
Another source close to the prince said it would be difficult for him to be very direct with Trump. “He has to retain political neutrality, which is why he is always walking something of a tightrope on this subject,” the source said.
However, the same source added: “It is fair to say he considers the world to be in great peril because of climate change, system degradation and resource depletion and he feels it is necessary for him to use his position to say something about that.”
Some in Whitehall hope that far from causing Trump to “erupt”, as one anonymous US source suggested at the weekend, the US president may in fact be more engaged by Charles expressing views about the need for urgent action on climate change than a politician, in part because of Trump’s admiration of wealth and British royalty.
Trump reportedly told Theresa May in November that his Scottish mother, Mary MacLeod, was “a big fan of the Queen”.
“Trump is the sort of person who loves the panoply surrounding wealth and royalty,” said a senior government source. “He loves reflecting the glory of the royal family. He is pressing for a state visit so he can go and have a meal in Buckingham Palace and he wants to play golf on the Queen’s golf course.”
Environmental campaigners have also backed Charles’s ability to influence the new US president, in part by rallying other countries including Brazil, China and India to stand by the deal, thereby putting indirect pressure on Trump.
“He has an international outreach and he is respected in the US,” said Nick Molho, executive director of the Aldersgate Group, an alliance of businesses, politicians and campaign groups pushing for a sustainable economy. “He has the benefit of being a step removed from everyday politics and I think that is important. It allows him to have more authority and to be a more engaging figure.”
Charles told the 2015 UN climate change conference in Paris: “The moment has arrived to take those long-awaited steps towards rescuing our planet and our fellow man from impending catastrophe.” He has also previously acknowledged the importance of US policy on climate change. In a 2015 speech he told an audience in Washington DC: “America’s impact is profound and it is my, and many others’, fervent hope that you will continue to inspire others both at home and on the global stage.”
In recent years, Charles has focused his campaigning and convening efforts on the fight against climate change. He runs his own international sustainability unit from Clarence House, which describes itself as a trusted forum for “key actors from governments, the private sector and civil society”.

Links

Donald Trump To Withdraw From Paris Agreement, 'Change Course' On Climate Change, Says Adviser

Fairfax - Nick Miller

London: The man who wrote the Trump administration's environment action plan says the environmental movement is "the greatest threat to freedom and prosperity in the modern world" and said the United States was about to change course on climate policy, including withdrawal from the Paris agreement.
Myron Ebell, who led the Environmental Protection Agency transition for the new administration, said he gave the president three pathways for withdrawing from the 2015 Paris agreement on greenhouse gas emissions, at least one of which could be done "right now".
President Donald Trump has pledged to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement. Photo: Bloomberg
He also said the president had been clear he wanted to abolish the EPA - though it might survive as a channel for pollution clean-up grants to states.
And he hinted at an end to emission standards for US vehicles, through abolishing the EPA's 'endangerment finding', which had given it powers to protect the public from the health threat posed by greenhouse gases.
Mr Ebell worked for Mr Trump's transition team delivering a detailed plan on how the president could deliver on his campaign promises.
Mr Ebell was in London as a guest of the Global Warming Policy Foundation, a British think tank that promotes climate change scepticism. His role on Trump's transition team ended with the inauguration and he said he never met Mr Trump, but had taken his lead from his campaign promises.
"What the Trump transition did was to try to write departmental or agency plans to fulfil and implement every single one of the promises and commitments that Mr Trump made as a candidate," Mr Ebell said.
"There were a number of very clear, black and white promises. He said he will withdraw from the Paris climate agreement, he will defund UN climate programs, at the EPA he will potentially withdraw or repeal all of the Obama administration rules regarding greenhouse gas emissions including the so-called Clean Power Plan.
Mr Ebell said the US would change course on climate policy. Photo: Reuters
"He will undo president Obama's climate action plan… the United States will clearly change course on climate policy and that's the first piece of good news."
Mr Trump's pick for secretary of state Rex Tillerson told senators at his confirmation hearing in January that the risk of climate change did exist, and the US needed a "seat at the table" in international discussions.
Myron Ebell advised Mr Trump during the transition. Photo: AP
But Mr Ebell said the president had given a clear promise to withdraw from the Paris Agreement and "the president would be odds-on favourite to win any disagreement (with Mr Tillerson) over climate policy".
"I don't think there's any doubt that (Mr Trump) thinks global warming is not a crisis. It does not require drastic and immediate reductions in greenhouse gas emissions."
He said there were three ways for the US to withdraw from the Paris Agreement. The first was to announce that president Obama's signature was withdrawn from Paris.
Another would be to announce that it was a treaty, not an agreement, and send it to the Senate for ratification "so it will be dead".
The third would be to withdraw from the framework convention itself – the 1992 international agreement to seek a global consensus on climate change mitigation.
"My personal viewpoint is by far the cleanest is to withdraw from the framework convention," Mr Ebell said. "I would say do it right now."
Mr Ebell said Mr Trump's election was a "rejection by the American people of what they are told by the bi-coastal urban elite (and) the chattering classes".
"The people of America have rejected the 'expert-ariat' and I think for good reason."
Though he conceded there was evidence for man-made climate change he did not believe climate science's consensus that it would have dangerous consequences for the planet.
He was dismissive of renewable energy and said Mr Trump would make the US the planet's biggest producer of oil and gas.
He said Mr Trump would end the capture of government by 'special interests'.
"Our special interest is freedom. The enemies of freedom come in many guises and one of the most insidious and dangerous in the modern world is the regulatory regime that we now suffer under.
"A large part of that is due to the environmental movement which in my view is the greatest threat to freedom and prosperity in the modern world."
Mr Ebell said more than half the EPA's budget already went to state grants for infrastructure and clean-up projects.
"(Mr Trump's) interest is really that the EPA goes back to its core missions … I would expect that in terms of his desire to radically shrink the EPA's bureaucracy you may actually see more money going into state grants."
He said he hoped that the EPA's 'endangerment finding' under the Clean Air Act would be undone, which would lead to the scrapping of greenhouse gas emission rules.

Links