Category: Australia

Categories
Australia Cultural responses United States of America

June 4 , 1989, 1992, 1996 – from frantic concern to contempt for everyone’s future…

So, a slightly different take on “All Our Yesterdays” – I will look at three events that occurred on June 4, but, as per the title, across seven years.  These nicely summarise the arc of concern, hedging to effective resistance to action.

First up – in the first flush of newfound concern about The Environment, a “get together” when such satellite link-ups were relatively rare (but  by no means unheard of).

Anon, 1989. Environment focus of global TV show. Canberra Times, 4 June p. 3.

SYDNEY: Australians play a part in a television program on the environment to be seen live in almost 100 countries today. Our Common Future, based in New York, will bring celebrities and world leaders together to spearhead the push towards environmental awareness.

The New York Times was lukewarm at best –

The oddest, most incoherent global television broadcast since the 1989 Academy Awards took place on Saturday afternoon. ”Our Common Future,” a five-hour program relayed to about 100 countries, was intended to create awareness of environmental problems and to urge global cooperation. For five hours, broadcast live from Avery Fisher Hall with material from the Soviet Union, England, Australia, Poland, Norway and Brazil, the program mixed musical performances with pro-environmental statements, a format akin to Live Aid, with which it shared a producer (Hal Uplinger) and director (Tony Verna).

Unlike Live Aid, the program was not a benefit, and it was less a live concert than a staged event; the audience was largely an invited one, and many of the performances were on tape. It was also considerably lower in star power than Live Aid, with Sting, Stevie Wonder, Elton John, Diana Ross, Joni Mitchell, R.E.M. and Kenny Loggins as its best-known names – although an African tawny eagle stole the show when it flew from the stage to roost on the second balcony. 

And three years later, after a global treaty was “negotiated”, we have this – 

“Australian signs the UNFCCC Roz Kelly (Minister for the Arts, Sport, the Environment and Territories), Australia signs UNCED climate change convention, media release, 4 June 1992.

Australia’s new Prime Minister, Paul Keating couldn’t be arsed to go (almost all other world leaders attended). Meanwhile, the Liberal National Party were already throwing shade –

“The opposition’s delegate to UNCED in 1992, for example, had criticized the Labor Government’s willingness to give away Australia’s sovereign rights and had emphasized the debilitative economic costs of reducing greenhouse gas emissions”.48

CPD, Senate, 4 June 1992, p. 3350.Matt McDonald, 2005 Fair Weather Friend

And, sure enough, once they were in charge again, this – 

Australian industry has applauded the Federal Cabinet’s decision yesterday to oppose a targets and timetables approach to international climate change negotiations, made on the eve of World Environment Day today.

The Howard Government’s position effectively reaffirms that taken by the Keating government and its minister for the Environment, Senator John Faulkner.

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Mr Alexander Downer, the Minister for the Environment, Senator Robert Hill, and the Minister for Resources and Energy, Senator Warwick Parer, said in a joint statement: “Australia will insist that the outcome of current international negotiations on climate change safeguards Australia’s particular economic and trade interests.”

Mr John Hannagan, chairman of the Australian Aluminium Council’s major policy group, said industry welcomed this statement, “reinforcing its no-regrets position as its negotiating stand at the forthcoming Geneva talks”.

Callick, R. 1996. Coalition backs industry on climate change. The Australian Financial Review, 5 June, p.2.

Why this matters. 

These things follow a pattern – excited/exuberant “we can fix this,” (1989) then some sort of legislation (usually quite weak – 1992), then the pushback even from that…

What happened next?

We went through more waves of excitement, legislation, pushback. On a couple of occasions (2006-2009, 2018-2021). It is connected to what I call “the emotaycle.”

Categories
Australia

June 3, 1989 – Liberal Party to outflank Labor on #climate?!

On this day, June 3 1989 the Australian Liberal Party’s environment spokesman told reporters about their ambitious environmental policies for the upcoming Federal election.

THE Federal Opposition is preparing a separate “climate policy” bringing together all issues relating to world climate change.

The document, compiled by a climate policy task force, is expected to be released within a fortnight after endorsement by shadow cabinet.

The Opposition Environment spokesman, Senator Chris Puplick, said yesterday: “The policy will take in the greenhouse effect, the ozone layer, industrial pollution, recycling, tree-planting and climate research.

“At the moment these issues are scattered over a number of policies and it’s an attempt to integrate them and find out where there might be any gaps. Obviously, it will also update things in the light of new standards being set and new technology being introduced.”

Senator Puplick criticised the proposal by the Federal Environment Minister, Senator Graham Richardson, for a referendum to increase the Commonwealth’s powers to override the States on environmental issues.

“I think it is just a bit of very silly kite-flying in the sense that firstly you would have enormous problems in actually drawing up a piece of legislation to amend the Constitution,” he said.

Jones, B. 1989. Libs endorse ‘Climate Policy’. Sun Herald, 4 June, p.5.

The context was that ozone hole/the greenhouse effect had exploded onto the scene the year before. The European elections – and the Tasmanian state elections – of May 1989 had made politicians think that votes were to be had in the green… It did not last very long, of course.

Why this matters. 

We need to remember that there was a brief moment of “competitive consensus” way back at the beginning of the climate issue, but it did not last. The pressures pulling apart “right-wing” parties are still there – the need for votes, and the need also to protect continued capital accumulation in the same vein…

What happened next?

The incumbent Australian Labor Party squeaked home at the March 1990 Federal Election, thanks to small-g green voters (the Green Party did not exist yet) preferencing them over the Liberals, despite the Liberal Party’s more ambitious targets.
Puplick’s career was toast, and the Liberals decided they had been stitched up by the Australian Conservation Foundation (the largest green group), leading to decades of suspicion and animosity.

(For an account, see Paul Kelly’s “The End of Certainty”)

See also (and thanks to the person who tweeted it! this I wrote for The Conversation.

Categories
Australia Cultural responses United States of America

May 30, 1990 – Midnight Oil do a gig outside Exxon’s HQ in New York

On this day, May 30, 1990, Australian band “Midnight Oil” held an impromptu concert in New York, outside Exxon’s HQ. You can see the footage here

Exxon were villain du jour because of a certain carelessness the previous spring in Alaska.

We didn’t know then, but Exxon already had a solid ten years of climate knowledge under its belt – they knew that their product would wreck the planet, but why, erm, rock the boat?

You might also like this song, by “Max Q”

Why this matters. 

Culturally, we can resist.  Economically, persistently, strategically? Not so easy.

What happened next?

Midnight Oil kept burning.  They stopped while Peter Garrett, lead singer tried to change the system from within.  Have since resumed.


Exxon?  Oh, Exxon kept up their boundless love and generosity for future generations by, you know, funding denialist outfits, getting IPCC chairs sacked – the usual.

Categories
Australia

May 27, 1996 – Not just a river in Egypt – denial in #Australia, organised, ramifying…

On this day, May 1996, a climate denialist professor gave a speech to fellow climate denialists in Australia.

Climate denial outfits like the IPA and Tasman Institute had been inviting various (US) climate denialists to Australia for speaking tours (this was a repertoire that would continue).  They’d started in the early 1990s and, of course, kept going.

“On 27 May 1996, Prof Patrick Michaels delivered a lively and entertaining presentation, outlining empirical difficulties with the Enhanced Greenhouse Global Warming Hypothesis. Through Tasman, Prof. Michaels also published an article on greenhouse issues in the Australian Financial Review of 30 May 1996. The article was subsequently cited by Deputy Prime Minister Tim Fisher”.

Tasman Institute 1996 Annual Review

Why this matters. 

You can see in that quote the sequence – get someone over on a speaking tour. Lean on your mates in the media (with whom you are in a symbiotic relationship anyway) to get an opinion piece in a prestigious newspaper.  THEN get one of your parliamentary goons (in this case Deputy Prime Minister – how cool is that?) to mention it in parliament.

All the way along, you’re creating more “credibility” and heft for your views, which are aimed at creating doubt, delay, uncertainty, so your friends can keep raking in the big bucks.

What happened next?

The denial campaigns continued.  Australia extorted an extremely sweet deal at the Kyoto COP in December 1997, and still didn’t ratify it.

And the carbon dioxide? Oh, it accumulated…

Categories
Australia

May 26, 1994 – Australian #climate stance “will become increasingly devoid of substance” says Liberal politician. Oh yes

On this day, May 26, 1994, the Australian Liberal Party’s spokesperson on foreign affairs offered an (unintentionally prophetic) warning about future climate diplomacy.

“The concern of industry groups that Australia might similarly be forced into a consensus on climate change was echoed yesterday by the Opposition spokesman on foreign affairs, Mr Andrew Peacock. He said there was a danger Australia’s stance that it would not implement measures that would damage its trade competitiveness unless other greenhouse gas producers did likewise could become increasingly devoid of substance.” Gill, P. 1994 Industry voices greenhouse fears. Australian Financial Review, 27 May,

The context was that Australia had ratified the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in December 1992 (Prime Minister Paul Keating loathed greenies, but I think just couldn’t be bothered NOT to ratify).  It was by May 1994 clear that there would be a global meeting soon at which rich countries would be expected to announce not just stabilisation of emissions targets, but actual cuts.  Australia did not want this (who would they sell all their coal to, how would they power a currently coal-based energy system?).

Industry was already mobilising by May 1994, and telling their natural allies, the Liberal Party, what they wanted…

[The other context is that the Liberals felt that they’d had the 1990 Federal election stolen from them by nefarious greenies. Their leader at the time? Why, Andrew Peacock.]

Why this matters. 

Let’s think always in terms of ideas, interests and ideology, rather than the goodness or badness of specific individuals (I know, it’s hard, I fail at that most of the time, but let us at least make the effort…)

What happened next?

Labor Environment Minister tried to introduce a carbon tax, and was defeated by a very clever, determined campaign..

A Liberal-National Government took charge in Australia from March 1996, hardened the existing opposition to emissions cuts and generally played as much of a blocking role as it could. The emissions climbe and climbed and the opportunity to do anything meaningful about climate change was squandered. So it goes.

Categories
Australia Denial

May 25, 2011 – Aussie #climate scientist smeared rather than engaged. Plus ca change…

On this day, May 25, 2011 noted climate scientist and deep thinker Alan Jones [that is irony – the man is a particularly shocking “shock jock”] tried to undermine a climate scientist on his radio show.


The context was that the minority Labor government of Julia Gillard was trying to get a carbon price (“a carbon tax” according to its opponents) through Parliament. There was an extremely virulent agitation against this.

Jones had David Karoly, Professor of Meteorology at the University of Melbourne and a contributor to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on his show.

Jones: Are you being paid for being on the Government’s Climate Commission Science Advisory Panel?…

Karoly: No, my salary is not being paid by that.

Jones: Are you in any, and in receipt of any, benefits or funds or anything at all from the…

Karoly: I am receiving a travel allowance to cover the costs of going to meetings of the Science Advisory Panel and I am receiving a small retainer which is substantially less than your daily salary.

Jones: So you’re paid by the Government and then you give an opinion on the science of climate change. Have you ever heard about he who pays the piper calls the tune?’ (Cited in Barry 2011b) (Ward, 2015: 235)

Why this matters. 

This is a classic technique, to say that if someone gets any money at all from Them, then they and their work can be dismissed without any discussion of its merits, shortcomings, implications.

It’s a lazy (but necessary for the thick) shortcut to “winning.”

What happened next?

The Gillard legislation got up, and was then repealed by the next Prime Minister, Tony “Wrecking Ball” Abbott.

Gillard lost a leadership challenge in 2013, was replaced by Kevin Rudd.

Jones finished as a radio presenter in 2020. His Sky News Australia contract was not renewed.

Karoly retired in 2021.

Categories
Australia Ignored Warnings Uncategorized

May 23, 1980 – Aussie senator alerts colleagues to #climate threat. Shoulder shrugs all round. #auspol

On this day, 23 May 1980, Don Jessop,  a Liberal senator from the great state of South Australia raised the alarm about climate change from carbon dioxide build-up in the Australian senate.

 Senator JESSOP (South Australia) – “I also welcome the Antarctic Treaty (Environment Protection) Bill 1980 and will make a few brief remarks about it. “ “The first article, entitled ‘World ecology is endangered’, is from the Melbourne Age of 16 April, and deals with an examination by a panel of internationally recognised scientists. They told the United States Congress: . . that the world could face an ecological disaster unless the amount of carbon dioxide pumped into the atmosphere is controlled. The second article is older, having been written on 28 February 1977. It is entitled ‘Heating Up: Global Race for Antarctic’s Riches’, [From U.S. News & World Report] and I wish to have only highlights of that article incorporated in Hansard.

Leave was granted.

Here’s the wikipedia picture of Jessop

DonJessop1968.jpg

Why this matters. 

We knew. The people who get elected to look after the future, who are paid to look after the future – they knew.

What happened next?

Jessop, who had raised the climate issue as early as 1973, was dropped by his own side-

Grattan, M. 1987 SA Libs demote Hill, drop Jessop. The Age, 9 June. p 3 Senator Jessop “is known for his independence and willingness to be outspoken”

Categories
Australia Carbon Capture and Storage Coal

May 22, 2007 – “Clean coal” power station by 2014, honest…

On this day, May 22nd 2007, the Canberra Times reported on an announcement by two big coal miners that they were going to build a “carbon capture and storage” plant by 2014. Oh yes.

Dobbin, M. 2007. BP, Rio in clean coal power bid; Project based on Canberra research. Canberra Times, 22 May.

BP and Rio Tinto announced joint plans yesterday for a $2billion coal- fired power station at Kwinana in Western Australia that would be the first in Australia to capture and store its greenhouse gas emissions deep underground. The so-called clean coal station which could be completed within seven years would produce enough power to supply 500,000 houses.

Why this matters

When we hear the latest promises, we should

a) remember the old ones

b) think about hype cycles

What happened next

It. didn’t. happen. Because the taxpayer wasn’t willing to stump up….

Anon. 2007. CO2 trading no solution. Canberra Times, 27 May. L AST week’s announcement that BP and Rio Tinto have teamed up to look at building a ”clean” coal power station in Western Australia is great news. There’s only one catch. The project won’t go ahead if it depends on the key proposal to encourage clean energy contained in a report due to be handed to the Prime Minister on Thursday. This need not pose an insuperable barrier. But it suggests the Government will have to do more than simply rely on setting up a market for trading greenhouse gas emissions, which the report, from a joint business/public service task group, is expected to recommend. The idea is to issue a limited number of permits to release greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), which the Government says contributes to global warming. These permits will then be traded in a government-run market designed to create a price which is supposed to increase the cost of emitting high levels of greenhouse gases when products such as electricity are made. According to a spokesman for Rio Tinto, Ian Head, ”An emissions-trading scheme alone will not be enough to encourage the clean coal project in Western Australia to go ahead”

Categories
Australia

May 20, 1977 – Australian Prime Minister says “coal, not solar” is the future

On this day, May 20, 45 years ago, Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Fraser said coal (which Australia had fucktonne of) was the future, not solar (because, you know, Australia is not sunny, and has no scientists who could figure out how to harness that. Obvs).

An article in the Canberra Times begins thus

“Energy research funds would go largely to studies of coal use rather than solar energy the Prime Minister, Mr Fraser, said in Hobart yesterday.”

Davidson, G. 1977. Top priority to coal. Canberra Times, 21 May, p.9.

Climate Citizen: 1977 Canberra Alternative Energy Festival while Prime Minister Fraser spruiks coal over solar for energy research

But on the same day, at the same time, environmental activists were holding an alternative energy fair.

Another article on the same page contains the following-

“Demonstrators rode bicycles and walked, peacefully, carrying placards, to Civic from the lawns of Parliament House, where, organisers said, more than 500 demonstrators had set up tents as part of an ‘alternative energy festival’. They went to the Department of Natural Resources, in Hobart Place, where they put up placards and chanted. About 70 of them invaded the department’s office in the AMP building, putting up stickers. They were ushered out by policemen. They then went to the department’s office in Tasman House to talk to the Secretary, Mr James Scully. Policemen stopped them in the foyer. Then they went to the Civic shopping area. An organiser, Mr John Holmes, said the protest was aimed simply at getting media exposure on the uranium-use issue.”

Veteran activist “Takvera” has a simply wonderful blog post I urge you to read, here.

Categories
Australia

May 16, 2005 – Anthony Albanese says critical action on #climate being delayed by 20 years… #auspol

On May 16th, 2005, the Australian Senate inquiry into the 2004 Energy White Paper came out.

The 2004 Energy White Paper had – even by the spectacularly low standards of the Howard Government – been a blank cheque for the fossil fuel industry (they’d basically been invited to write it) and a kick in the teeth for the then-nascent renewables lobby.

So, the Senate inquiry

has concluded the Energy White Paper will delay critical action on climate change for another twenty years.

The Senate Inquiry report shines a light on John Howard’s failure to act on climate change. The report says the Energy White Paper:

• Is a blueprint for delay in reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions and will be directly responsible for the high cost to future generations of Australians – environmentally and economically.

• Fails to accept climate change has already begun and therefore action to reduce emissions must be taken immediately.

• Lacks an effective plan to cut greenhouse pollution, a long term target to boost renewable energy or a long term plan to control the spiralling pollution from the energy or transport sectors.

Where does all this come from? From the website of an obscure Australian politician called Anthony Albanese, who, by the time some of you read this will either

a) be Prime Minister of Australia

or

b) have lost the unlosable election and be hiding in a caravan park in rural New South Wales.


Why this matters?

States still sometimes have the capacity to tell the truth about what the government is (not) doing. If you keep your eyes open, you can get a pretty adequate picture of what is going on. In the UK, for example, the National Audit Office still tells you more or less how things are failing.

What happened next

Howard’s end came in late 2007. Labour under Kevin Rudd comprehensively bollocksed its climate response. Gillard tidied up the mess as best she could. Then the wrecking ball known as Tony Abbott swept that thin legislation away. Prime Minister Turnbull did feck all, Scott Morrison has continued the rot…