Twenty eight years ago, on this day, July 8th, 1997 Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer [who had been toppled as opposition leader at the peak of the carbon tax imbroglio of 94-5] explains the facts of life…
The Government’s position was explained in a speech given by the Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, in the lead up to the Kyoto Conference in 1997, in which he stated:
A significant proportion of the Australian economy is currently geared toward the production of emission intensive products. As a result, the abatement costs in Australia are likely to be larger than in other countries that have lower reliance on emission intensive outputs. 84
After discussing the importance of emission intensive industries in the Australian economy and Australia’s linkages with rapidly developing economies in Asia, the Minister said the “only target that Australia could agree to at Kyoto would be one that allowed reasonable growth in our greenhouse emissions”.
A. Downer Australia and Climate Change, Address by The Hon Alexander Downer, MP, Minister for Foreign Affairs, to the ‘Global Emissions Agreements and Australian Business Seminar’, Melbourne, 7 July 1997 (Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra: 1997).
The amount of carbon dioxide in the air was 364ppm. As of 2025, 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 – and this may be hard to believe for Australian readers – the Liberal Party had gone to the 1990 Federal election with an emissions reduction target that was MORE ambitious than that of the Australian Labor Party, then in government. But then they decided they’d been “betrayed” by the green establishment (specifically the Australian Conservation Foundation) and anyway, their mining mates and manufacturing mates thought it was all another green hoax, so they flipped to soft and hard denialism.
The specific context was the Howard Government was trying to gain international support for the idea that Australia was a special case that deserved special treatment ahead of the Kyoto Conference, to be held in December of 1997.
What I think we can learn from this is that the Liberals are at least honest about not giving a rat’s arse about future generations. Labor feel compelled to lie.
What happened next – Australia got an exceptionally generous deal at Kyoto. And still refused to ratify.
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.
Also on this day:
July 7, 1970 – an Australian banker goes “Full Extinction Rebellion”, 50 years early…
July 7, 1988 – foolish “Jumping the greenhouse gun” editorial in Nature.
July 7, 2008 – Liberals start back-tracking on climate promises.