Climate change sceptics feeling the heat

The Australian

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

FIRST, a simple illustration of how the politics of climate change has changed the dynamics of national politics.

Here’s Industry Minister Ian Macfarlane speaking on the Sunday program two months ago: “I am a sceptic of the connection between emissions and climate change”.

Now listen to Macfarlane fronting the 7.30 Report on Monday night: “Well, let’s get a few things on the table to start with, Kerry. Firstly, in terms of climate change, I agree that climate change is happening and that global warming is happening. I also agree that CO2 emissions and greenhouse gas emissions are too high and have to be lowered… there is a link between human habitation and global warming’’.

You’d have to think the timing of Macfarlane’s public volte-face had something to do with the release of Sir Nicholas Stern’s apocalyptic report warning global warming has reached crisis stage and could cost trillions of dollars to address (Fix global warming now, or pay later).

As the British government, which commissioned the Stern report, flags lobbying Australia to sign up to a global carbon trading market, John Howard remains defiant, defending the government’s green credentials and advocating the pursuit of a nuclear power option in Australia (PM defiant despite global warming alarm).

Labor, holding a steady two-party-preferred lead in Newspoll, sniffs an issue set to surge during the election year.

Here’s Kim Beazley arriving at parliament this morning: “John Howard is totally backward-looking on this. He doesn’t believe it. He looks at the glass being half empty whenever the issue is raised with him. Now that he understands that his road is a road not only to potential disaster for this country, but political disaster for himself, he’s starting to try and use the language. But he doesn’t know how to. He doesn’t know what to do. He’s too backward-looking to be able to handle it”.

Is this, to borrow a horrible cliche, the tipping point? Have the global warming sceptics lost the political argument? Is the government’s U-turn on climate change convincing?