In a conversation with a policy analyst I know and respect today, I joked that trying to unravel the cacophony of energy policy in Australia requires the use of the mother-of-all-whiteboards.
What a complete, unadulterated shambles.
The Climate Spectator’s bewilderment was palpable in Tristan Edis’ very well detailed summary of how contradictory and messy things have become today, so I won’t repeat what he said but I share his frustration. Quite simply, their is an astounding lack of attention to detail or an understanding of the consequences (intended or unintended) that are laid out before us now when it comes to energy policy. While the rest of the world is dramatically stepping up their actions, our Government is erratically taking us backwards in time; I feel compelled to put them in touch with my friend who has a DeLorian.
The biggest news of the year for me however, and news that I can’t help thinking sums up the shambolic nature of energy and climate policy here was a single story run by the SMH’s Peter Hannam.
Hannam highlighted that just quietly, on Saturday the 31st of May a somewhat profound deadline passed. You see, when the Carbon Price legislation was developed a seemingly innocuous clause was included in the Clean Energy Act 0f 2011 which required the Carbon Price to be shifted from the default target of 5% to an emissions cap. In simple terms, the legislation says that in the event that no cap is set by Government, the target defaults to a formula .
And guess what our Government didn’t bother to do?
You guessed it, they didn’t set a cap by the 31st of May.
According to the Greens Christine Milne, this clause was inserted for exactly this reason; to insure against a lack of attention to detail and define a default position and it turns out that in today’s terms, this default position effectively lifts the 5% target by more than three times, to 18%. That’s right, Australia is now running under legislation that requires us to reduce emissions by 18%, not 5% by 2020.
Now clearly, Prime Minister Abbott didn’t intend for this happen. I’d hazard a guess that the majority of his Ministry didn’t intend for this to happen. I’d even go so far as to say that they were all (obviously) completely unaware that the trigger even existed until they read the paper over their morning coffee. I can almost picture the jaw dropping, coffee spurting reaction.
What this seemingly innocuous but actually quite profound situation exemplifies in the most stark terms is that they have no bloody idea.
Where it leaves the Government is in a very complex situation. You can imagine that had they been paying attention, they would have tried to find a way to tweak or at least deal with the issue, to avoid their anti-climate change stance being eroded by this new target coming into force by default. However, that would have required them to engage in debate on a policy that they had committed to throwing out on a blood oath; but have so far failed to do. Letting it engage by default makes them look clumsy at best and incapable at worst.
However, by letting this one slip they now have a double whammy to deal with on the issue of the Carbon Price.
The Government has said this will be one of the first issues they will debate in the senate when they return with stronger numbers in July this year. However, they have an eminently colorful character to deal with in Clive Palmer, and of course, the Greens, Labor and a few independents. Clive is the wildcard here because its just possible that despite the fact that philosophically and financially he doesn’t want a Carbon Price, he want’s Tony Abbott to have power even less. By voting against the repeal of the Carbon Price, he could force the Government to a double dissolution which in the current climate would undoubtedly cost the Government some power through lost seats.
The very last thing the Government wants now is to go back to the poll’s – the timing could not possibly get any worse and I wouldn’t mind betting that Clive would be willing to pay a hefty Carbon Price just for the pleasure of seeing Tony Abbott squirm.
If the Government doesn’t get its repeal through it essentially has to either water down or substantially change its repeal plans, or call a double dissolution. Either way, it’s in a pickle.
The fact that the target has suddenly jumped to 18% just add’s a whole new dimension to this issue. By accident and incredibly ironically, one of the worlds most anti-climate and anti-renewables Governments should be enacting policies that help it meet the target it is required by law to implement.
Incredible.
Post expires at 5:34pm on Wednesday June 3rd, 2015