Julia Gillard gave a speech today about Labor’s climate policy, including a proposal to gather a ‘Citizen’s Assembly’ of 150 people who will examine the evidence of climate change and the case for action, and a Climate Change Commission to provide independent advice on climate science and international progress.

Feel free to use these quotes in your stories. Any further comments will be posted here. If you would like to speak to an expert, please don’t hesitate to contact us on (08) 7120 8666 or by email.

———–

Dr Barrie Pittock is a former leader of the CSIRO Climate Impacts Group and author of the book ‘Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions’ (CSIRO, 2009).

“The government’s proposals are positive steps but small compared with the urgency of the problem. Greenhouse gas emissions have to be reduced quickly and globally to reduce the risk of damaging climate change and Australia as a rich country must play its part. Renewable energy from the sun, wind, tides and geothermal energy must be part of the solution and are plentiful in Australia. Renewable energy can provide jobs and income, especially in remote areas. Such economic benefits will help pay for any support they get. Therefore I do welcome the proposal to fund the connection of Australia’s potential renewable energy supplies to Australian homes. A national electrical grid to do this is at least as important as a national broadband network and needs all the support it can get. Asking fossil fuel suppliers to pay for their pollution would help even more, but the present proposal is a start.”

———–

Dr Helen McGregor is an AINSE Research Fellow in the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Wollongong

“As a climate scientist it is frustrating that a more concrete policy to deal with human-induced climate change has not been put forward. The evidence of human-induced climate change is clear and has been extensively evaluated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the Garnaut Climate Change Review, various reports from the CSIRO - need I continue? It is essential that the community better understand climate change issues, and the Gillard attempt to do this should be applauded, however the clock is ticking on reducing carbon emissions - climate change will not halt for individuals, communities, Citizens’ Assembly, or Governments.”

———–

Professor Tony McMichael is Director of the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health at The Australian National University College of Medicine, Biology and Environment.

“The work of the proposed expert Commission and the agenda of the lay Assembly should explicitly address the social and human impacts of climate change. The ‘science of climate change’ now goes way beyond the study of the climate system and its likely future changes. The primary question remains: ‘Are human actions causing the climate to change?’. The immediate, equally important, second question is: ‘If so, then what are the consequences, now and in future?’

Unless that second question is addressed, both by Commission and Assembly, then the case for action cannot be assessed.

Most assessment of climate change impacts to date has been confined to economic consequences and to changes in non-human biophysical systems (glaciers, rivers, coral reefs, animals, plants, crops and physical infrastructure). Beyond those very important concerns is the even bigger question for we humans: ‘How will these and other changes affect human wellbeing, health and survival, and how will they affect social and geopolitical stability?’

There is an increasingly large body of research evidence addressing these impacts. Any national consensus on climate change must be fully informed about the full spectrum of risks that we face, in Australia and globally.”
———–

Professor John Quiggin is an Australian Research Council Federation Fellow in the school of economics at the University of Queensland.

“This non-policy represents a failure of leadership. The best that can be said for it is that the delay generated by this process is only supposed to last for 12 months, and that 150 randomly selected Australians could scarcely do a worse job on this vital issues than our political leaders have done.”
———–

Professor Andrew Blakers is Director of the Centre for Sustainable Energy Systems at Australian National University.

“In the absence of a carbon price it is essential that solar energy be strongly encouraged, so that the solar alternative is available as soon as possible. Support is required at every level, including research & development, manufacturing, market support and education. In particular, funding for the Australian Solar Institute should be increased and support should be provided for local manufacturing. A 10 per cent by 2020 solar target, supported by a universal feed in tariff, would provide a powerful incentive for technical development and deployment.”
———–

Professor Peter Newman is Director of the Curtin University Sustainable Policy Institute.

“I support the establishment of new avenues of dialogue on climate change which could help break the current deadlock on this area of policy.
Prime Minister Gillard’s proposed citizens assembly on climate change and a new Climate Change Commission could help end the quagmire Australian politics has found itself in over climate change. We have to raise the sights of those who tried to kill the debate on climate change with a community and expert-based approach that can set out precisely how to reduce carbon emissions effectively.

There are ways to do this which have not been included in either the carbon price approach of Labor’s Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS) or the ‘direct action’ approach of the Coalition. One method which may be effective is government support for low carbon businesses.

There is also the prospect of allocating carbon credits to zero carbon urban developments in cities and regions through the Carbon Trust. This kind of initiative would facilitate a reduction in carbon emissions using a market mechanism, but at the end-user section of the economy, rather than the front-end, as was proposed for the CPRS. However, whatever approach is decided upon, it will require both community and expert discussion and support. This is the only way I can see that we can break the current political deadlock on this issue.”

———–

Professor Warwick McKibbin is Director of the Research School of Economics at the Australian National University. He is also a Board Member of the Reserve Bank of Australia.

“The Labor party’s climate approach is extremely disappointing. The science and expert input has made a strong case for action for more than a decade. A majority of Australians already want to take action on climate change. What would be required to come out of a Citizens Assembly to convince the government to take action? An absolute majority - a majority in key electorates? This appears to be another 2020 summit style delay to make it appear that action is being taken when the purpose is purely delay for political advantage. Australian’s deserves better than this. If the Hawke and Keating governments had taken the approach of a Citizens Assembly to consider the major economic reforms of the 1980’s, Australia would have be a third world economy floundering in the wake of the global financial crisis. The floating of the dollar, tariff reductions and labour market reform would not have been understood nor supported by a Citizens Assembly. What is proposed is not leadership - it is abdicating responsible action.

The Labor approach also appears to be based on the “fact” that the CPRS is the best policy that would be implemented once enough genuine Australians are convinced. There is far more debate about the policy approach which I believe is seriously flawed, than about the science of climate change. It is the policy approach that should be debated not the science.

It is hard to decide which of the Coalition or Labor policies on climate change are worse. It is appalling to see the politics of asylum seekers, applied to climate change policy.”
—————–

Dr Frank Jotzo is Fellow at the ANU Crawford School of Economics and Government and Deputy Director of the ANU Climate Change Institute.

“More channels for scientific advice and citizen involvement are useful, but this proposal could simply mean more procrastination. We know the science of climate change, we know that carbon pricing is the economically best way of cutting emissions, we know that other countries are acting. Further delay will make climate action more expensive for Australia, and the 2020 target will get out of reach. Business has been on board with carbon pricing for some time. Australia is falling behind internationally, for example China has strong carbon policies and might soon introduce emissions trading.

Some measures on renewable energy and energy efficiency are justified, but without a carbon price we will end up with a hodgepodge of expensive subsidies and cumbersome regulations.

There is a viable solution to start carbon pricing quickly: emissions trading with fixed price permits. This gives some certainty for business, and allows to gear up the policy later, transitioning to emissions trading with market prices at any time. Government needs to make a start, and it is likely that just like with the GST and the accompanying income tax cuts, it will prove uncontroversial once it is in place.”