I have mentioned in this blog before that I am an Australian– at least a naturalised one – born overseas and immigrated here 20 yearsago.  When I’m travelling I alwaysstick up for my country and even during the Howard era I tried to feel goodabout my adopted homeland.  When“Kevin 07” was elected and made his FIRST act in office the ratification of theKyoto Protocol… a sadly overdue and (for Oz as we gained an embarrassinglylarge allowance of greenhouse gas emissions) not very tough act of globalcompliance we were all delighted. They were penguin parades on Penguin Parade in Victoria!

This month we’ve seen the publication of Kevin08’s GreenPaper on how his government will deliver its current stated emissions reductionof a 60 per cent decrease on 2000 emissions levels by 2050.  This Green Paper (still a discussiondocument under the Westminster system) was to be entitled ETS for EmissionTrading Scheme – the method recommended by Garnaut and accepted by the RuddGovernment.  At the last minute thetitle was change to CPR (not cardio-pulmonary resuscitation) but CarbonPollution Reduction…. well OK so it got the shock jocks attention. Sadly, this Green Paper (http://www.climatechange.gov.au/greenpaper/index.html) is bad where Garnaut’s  (http://www.garnautreview.org.au/domino/Web_Notes/Garnaut/garnautweb.nsf) report is good – they are both VERY LONG – over 550 pages each –just thinkwhat that does to greenhouse emissions as many many people download them andprint them full size – sigh!  Thegovernment’s paper fails because it does not demonstrate the political resolvethat is required to design and implement an effective ETS (well CPR if youinsist).  The paper emphasises thepreferred 'softly softly' approach to the scheme's introduction. This includesindicative calculations in the Green Paper based on $20 per tonne of CO2, —half the current EU permit price — a price cap and special exclusions.Unfortunately this sends a poor message to industry: "no worries — youdon't have to change – or at least not yet."

The Aussie government target (60% reduction in emission by2050) and, worse, its broadcast view that bad greenhouse behaviour will be notbe strongly taxed but will be subsidised are both inconsistent with what thelatest climate science suggests will be required to avoid dangerous warming. We(people and penguins) require larger and faster global reductions not slower,weaker ones. The emissions target also fails any test of international equity:Australians have the highest per capita emissions in the world. Aussies shoulddo more not less than –say- Europeans.  Right now our government is playing the piano while the iceberg crashes into the ship of state!

Worse still the Kevin08 team appears to have accepted theclamouring industry demand for compensation for the introduction of an ETS/CPR.Compensation is naturally perceived widely to mean righting a wrong orimposition placed upon some party. So this CPR Green Paper sends another bad message "We don't reallyhave the right to require you to change- so we’ll compensate you for your troublean losses".  Wrong againKevin!

Overall the clever title just ends up boomeranging – we doneed CPR – for our CPR proposals.