Thirty one years ago, on this day, June 16th, 1994, Australian business interests were looking for people who could help them out in avoiding any significant climate commitments.
BUSINESS groups have called on the Federal Government to form strategic alliances with other countries to maximise its negotiating position in future climate change negotiations. The suggestion at yesterday’s [June 16] round table follows widespread concern in the business community that Australia might be forced into a greenhouse response which is not in its interests. While the form of any alliance on greenhouse gas has not been spelt out, it could be modelled on the Cairns Group of 14 agricultural exporters which played a key role in the Uruguay Round of world trade talks. It is understood the Cairns Group model has been informally discussed by industry representatives concerned that Australia will have little influence in the negotiations. A paper prepared for yesterday’s round table by the Australian Coal Association and the Australian Mining Industry Council says it is “high time we stopped mouthing undefinable expressions” and pursued more precision in a so-called “burden-sharing agreement”.
Gill, P. 1994. Call to form strategic alliances. Australian Financial Review, 17 June.
And
“Canberra has been remarkably close-mouthed about how Australia is to reduce emissions. The Prime Minister, the Environment Minister and the Resources Minister met yesterday with the NGOs and State Government ministers to exchange views on this and related matters.”
Moran, 1994, 17 June.
And
The Federal Government has assured business groups that Australia won’t be financially penalised in meeting its international obligations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
“We have got to set an example on greenhouse gases but there has always been a caveat in our negotiations that it won’t be at an economic cost to Australia,” the Minister for Resources, Mr Beddall, told The Australian Financial Review.
The Prime Minister, Mr Keating, had earlier yesterday given similar reassurances at a high-level forum on the environment in Canberra.
Mr Keating told the meeting of more than 100 business and environmental representatives that the Government was aware of the “economic implications” of adhering to international guidelines on greenhouse gas emission.
The meeting thrust the greenhouse issue onto the economic agenda, with 10 business groups demanding the Government adopt measures that reflected Australian industry’s greater use of energy before agreeing to further international targets on greenhouse gas emissions.
Environmental groups mounted a strong counter-attack at the meeting by accusing the Government of failing to match the effort of other countries in responding to the United Nations Climate Change Convention.
Dwyer, M. 1994. Greenhouse ‘won’t put us in the red’. The Australian Financial Review, 17 June, p.3.
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was roughly zzzppm. As of 2025 it is 430ppm, but check here for daily measures.
The broader context was that Australia had ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in late 1992, along with a surprising number of other nations. The treaty was now international law, and the first Conference of the Parties was to be held in Berlin next March. Australia was already in an awkward position – it had promised (with caveats) steep domestic emissions cuts which were not in fact happening. Meanwhile, its coal exports were raising eyebrows….
The specific context was that Environment Minister John Faukner had already floated the idea of a carbon tax, and business was nervous.
What I think we can learn from this
The solutions – or some of them – were staring us in the face. The rich didn’t like those solutions, so they kicked the can down the road. And down the road. And here we are in 2025.
What happened next Faukner’s carbon tax proposal met fierce, fierce opposition and came to a grisly end in February 1995. The Berlin COP happened and Australia signed on to turn up at the 3rd meeting with a plan to reduce its emissions. But by then it was no longer Keating in charge – John Howard became Prime Minister in March 1996, and had other ideas…
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.
References
Xxx
Also on this day:
June 16, 1971 – “Ecology Action” formed in Sydney. – All Our Yesterdays