Australia is often labelled a "laggard" on climate change, or worse. When international climate negotiations come up, we are sometimes alleged to be a "blocker".
"Australia has an absolutely terrible international reputation on climate action and that's been laid out in report after report after report," says Lesley Hughes, a climate scientist at Macquarie University and a councillor at the Climate Council.
But over time, Australia's international reputation on climate change has been mixed, with ups and downs along the road.
One thing is for sure: Australia goes to Glasgow with a lot of baggage.
Australia's first target was actually to increase its emissions
At COP3 in 1997, the world met in Kyoto to sign the first global climate agreement: The Kyoto Protocol.
|
COP26 is our best chance to stop global warming 
|
But Australia infamously promised to increase its emissions by 8 per cent.
The European Union's environmental policy spokesman Peter Jorgensen said Australia's lobbying on climate change at the time was "wrong and immoral … a disgrace".
Howard Bamsey was Australia's ambassador to the United Nations at the time. He says other countries didn't think it was fair, but maintains the target was reasonable.
"One of the senior British officials afterwards told me that there had been a bit of an argument within the European group about whether we should be told that wasn't good enough," he says.
A world-leading Emissions Trading System… and its destruction
When Kevin Rudd became Prime Minister in 2007, Australia's reputation pivoted.
At COP13 in Bali that year, Australia reportedly received a standing ovation when it was announced Rudd would ratify the Kyoto agreement — something previous Coalition governments had declined to do.
Then in 2011, prime minister Julia Gillard established a world-leading Emissions Trading System (ETS) — a whole-of economy market mechanism that aimed to drive down emissions.
|
The carbon tax has come back to haunt the government 
|
The carbon price was short-lived. When the Coalition came back to power under prime minister Tony Abbott, the ETS was among the first climate policies it reversed.
"Australia had defaulted back to its base level," Mr Merzian says.
Mr Bamsey is more ambivalent about the impact of these pivots.
"There's an understanding that for Australia, the politics of climate change have been almost uniquely difficult," he says.
"People shrug their shoulders when there's another turn for the worse on Australia's side."
The lump of coal
Few can forget the picture of Prime Minister Scott Morrison wielding a lump of coal in parliament.
"This is coal. Don't be afraid. Don't be scared. It won't hurt you."
Scott Morrison brought a lump of coal into Question Time in 2017.
But the science tells us otherwise. The burning of coal is responsible for about half of all the greenhouse gases humans have put in the atmosphere — the greenhouse gases that are now contributing to extreme weather around the world including bushfires, extreme heat and floods.
Bill Hare, chief executive of Climate Analytics, a think tank that has worked with UN bodies on climate change, says foreign leaders are in disbelief when they see the footage.
"It at least subliminally plays a role in the way in which Australia is seen," he says.
Mr Merzian says the performance "cemented Australia's position as the lobbyist for the coal industry in international diplomacy".
Pulling out of the Green Climate Fund on talkback radio
Up to 2018, Australia had maintained a reputation as a leader on one crucial aspect of international climate diplomacy: climate finance.
Climate finance is basically cash that flows from rich countries to poor countries to help them adapt to climate change, and also develop without growing their emissions.
Without it, there is no hope of global agreements on climate change, and no way the developing world can afford to make the required changes.
The key mechanism for governments to provide that cash is through the United Nations' Green Climate Fund (GCF).
Australia helped set up the GCF, and Australian diplomat Howard Bamsey led it from 2017 to 2018.
But shortly after becoming Prime Minister, Scott Morrison went on Alan Jones's show and announced Australia would stop contributing to the fund.
"[We are not] bound to go and tip money into that big climate fund, we're not going to do that either. So I'm not going to spend money on global climate conferences and all that sort of nonsense," he said.
By ceasing contributions, Australia also lost its seat on the Fund's board.
Mr Bamsey says Pacific Island nations were particularly hurt by that move.
"Australia's investment in the fund had reaped very large rewards for the Pacific and with Australia's departure from the board … the Pacific lost that champion," he says.
Mr Merzian is scathing about the move. "Now Australia is the only developed country in the world not part of the UN's Green Climate Fund. And the Pacific in particular are asking Australia, 'Why not?'"
 |
| Scott Morrison pictured at the Pacific Islands Forum in Tuvalu in 2019.(Twitter: Pacific Islands Forum) |
Australia's technical reliability is well regarded
Emissions Reduction Minister Angus Taylor often points out Australia is a world leader when it comes to emissions transparency."There is no country that has provided quarterly emissions updates by sector, by gas, over an extended period of time as Australia has, and that transparency will continue," he said when announcing the net zero by 2050 target.
Mr Bamsey agrees this is an area where Australia has maintained a strong international reputation.
He says it started with Australia being a key architect of aspects of the Paris Agreement, and continues with our delegations being reliable.
"You can ask Australia a question about something and you'll get a sound and well-thought-through response, and everybody knows that," Mr Bamsey says.
|
|
The politics of climate change have been "uniquely difficult" in
Australia, an expert says. (AAP: Dean Lewins) |
Perhaps most important for our reputation is what we are currently doing, and what we are promising to do in the next decade.
And by that measure, rankings often put us near the bottom of the developed world.
Our 2030 targets are considered by scientists to be vastly inadequate and much worse than those of Canada, New Zealand, the EU, the US and UK.
At the same time, while the US and the EU have pledged to cut methane emissions, and the UK is drumming up support to "consign coal to history", Australia remains the world's biggest coal exporter and second-biggest LNG exporter, has embarked on a "gas-led recovery" and has so far declined to sign up to either pledge.
Bill Hare says the world is unimpressed with Australia on this count.
"What they see in Australia is not a single finger has been lifted to do anything to reduce emissions," he says.
"It's simply letting history unfold at the rate at which it unfolds, which is too slow."
Links
- COP26 this year is our best chance to stop global warming
- Scott Morrison's plan for net zero leaves 'plenty' of room for 'miracles'
- What must Australia actually do to reach net zero by 2050?
- The weather gets choppy with Joyce and Morrison's climate contradictions
- Pacific Island climate groups demand world leaders halt support for fossil fuel
- Scott Morrison's net zero by 2050 plan leaves 'plenty' of space for 'miracles'
- Scott Morrison to attend COP26 climate change conference in Glasgow, no decision on net zero
No comments :
Post a Comment