Should we include a climate-change trigger in Australian environmental law?
The public are crying out for it but the politicians won’t touch it. Here’s why. (And some of the reasons to resist are quite valid.)
There is no such thing as a free lunch
Should we include a climate-change trigger in Australian environmental law?
The public are crying out for it but the politicians won’t touch it. Here’s why. (And some of the reasons to resist are quite valid.)
Australia’s newly elected government has promised to introduce a Climate Change Bill. It won’t be available till later this month but we have a fair idea of what it is likely to say. It will not seek to reimpose a carbon price but will use an existing law reduce allowable emissions for the largest polluters. It will enshrine both Australia’s ‘net zero by 2050’ goal and its new Paris ‘nationally determined contribution’ of a 43% reduction in emissions by 2030. It will also restore the CCA’s role of advising Government on future targets; require the climate minister to report annually to Parliament on progress in meeting targets; and paste the new climate targets across into the formal objectives and functions of several government agencies.
Good news, Australia – the environment is back. Our new government has introduced a new super-department covering climate change, energy, the environment and water.