Thirty two years ago, on this day, October 28th, 1994,
The federal Environment Minister, John Faulkner, promised yesterday to consider proposals from Australia’s peak environment groups to double green spending and expand conservation programs, but said he must remain “realistic”.
The Peak Conservation Organisation called on the Federal Government yesterday to introduce resource taxes, such as a carbon levy, to fund a doubled commitment to the country’s environment.
In a 60-page submission to Senator Faulkner, the green groups also have sought the removal of tax and subsidy measures, such as the diesel fuel rebate and land clearing subsidies, which they say promote exploitation of the environment.
Anon, 1994. Greens seek more funds. The Canberra Times, 29 October, p.8.
http://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/118294681
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 359ppm. As of 2026, when this post was published, it is 430ppm. This matters because the more carbon dioxide in the air, the more heat gets trapped. The more heat, the more extreme weather events. You can make it more complicated than that if you want, but really, it’s not. Fwiw, I have a tattoo of the Keeling Curve on my left forearm.
The broader context was that green groups had expanded in the late 1980s but had been unable to sustain membership and donations, and were facing near bankruptcy, very tough times.
Inevitably you want to get some money from somewhere, and you get it from the state, but then that comes with both reputational risks, but also you get hooked on it, and before you know it, you’re a handmaiden, um those are the dangers.
What I think we can learn from this – social change, even maintaining an NGO, is really hard.
What happened next – ACF and the other outfits continued, but have been tamed, inevitably. Marxists would tell you this is inevitable.
xxx
On this topic, you might like these other posts on All Our Yesterdays
Xx
References
xx
You can see the chronological list of All Our Yesterdays “on this day” posts here.
What do you think? Does this pass the ‘so what?’ threshold? Have I got facts wrong? Interpretation wrong? Please do comment on this post, unless you are a denialist, obvs.
If you want to get involved, let me know.
If you want to invite me on your podcast, that would boost my ego and probably improve the currently pitiful hit-rate on this site (the two are not-unrelated).
Also on this day:
October 28, 1906 – the birth of the Press Release
October 28, 1968 – Los Angeles Times report on the possibility of an environment conference
October 28, 1994 – UK agriculture and climate change workshop