Prefer to listen instead of read? Listen to the audio version of this article on Spotify.
We’ll just get straight to the point. You asked us for an analysis of what Labor‘s much-hyped Climate Change Bill was really about – what it does and does not achieve. Now that the Bill has passed through the House of Representatives, here’s our rundown of what it looks like.
UPDATE: The Climate Change Bill was passed by the Senate on 8 September 2022, without a climate trigger added to the legislation.
What’s in the Climate Change Bill?
First, a short summary of what’s in the Climate Change Bill. There are four key components:
- It puts two emissions reductions targets into national law:
- 43% reduction below 2005 levels, to be achieved by 2030
- ‘Net zero’ to be achieved by 2050
- Re-introducing the role of the Climate Change Authority (CCA). The independent government agency will give annual progress updates and advice on achieving those reduction targets. It will also advise the government on where to set the interim reduction target for 2035.
- All advice from the CCA must be made publicly available, as will the government’s response. If the government chooses not to follow CCA’s advice, they’ll have to publicly explain why
- The Climate Change Minister must also give an annual, public update on progress towards the reduction targets. Right now, that’s Chris Bowen.
- The reduction targets will also become part of the objectives and responsibilities of other government agencies and programs, including: Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA), Clean Energy Finance Corporation (CEFC) and Infrastructure Australia.
I’ve been reading Australia’s Climate Change Bill & *personal view* I’m heartened. The targets aren’t enough to meet the Paris Agreement yet but it lays the foundation for ramping up action. Well done @Bowenchris, Labor, Greens & Independents for working together. Let’s do more!
— Jess Panegyres (@Jess_Panegyres) August 8, 2022
The Climate Change Bill Is: A Symbol, An Accountability Tool & A Wedge
In our assessment, the Climate Change Bill is performing two key roles: it’s both an act of symbolism, and a tool for accountability.
First, the Bill is a symbolic move. While describing something as ‘symbolic’ is often interpreted as criticism, symbols are really useful tools for any large, powerful organisation (like a government) to communicate what is important to them and represent shifts in focus. In this case, the Climate Change Bill is a symbolic gesture by Labor to show that they have indeed heard the public on the urgent issue of climate change. They are telling us: yes, the message has been received.
The Greens’ support of the Bill can also be interpreted as their way of signalling to the public the role they intend to play in the new government. Initially, there was an internal discussion about whether the party should support the Bill more-or-less as is, or oppose it in the hopes of proposing more impactful, practical legislation. By ultimately deciding to vote for the largely symbolic Climate Change Bill, the Greens are telling us that they want to work with the Labor government on important progress – however small and imperfect those steps may be at first.
Secondly, the Climate Change Bill does provide some accountability by defining who is ultimately responsible. It brings clarity to the role of the CCA, and sets the expectation for the Climate Change Minister, the government and the public that the advice provided must be taken seriously and shared transparently.
When they start rolling out the stuff that will actually cause emissions reductions to happen – plans, funding arrangements and other legislation – this underlying framework of accountability will help. The Treasurer is required to stand up in front of the nation at least once a year to address the status, progress and plans for Australia’s economy; now, we’ll have the same on Climate Change. That’s a great thing.
Whether or not it was intentional, the Climate Change Bill has also become a very effective wedge against the Coalition. The Liberal Party was reportedly split on what stance they should take on this Bill, and climate action more broadly. In the end, Opposition Leader Peter Dutton made the final call to vote against it – not unexpected. But a growing segment of Liberal party MPs, members, supporters and voters are unhappy with the decision.
Tasmanian MP Bridget Archer crossed the floor to vote with the Labor Party in support of the Bill. The big business sector – an important part of the Liberal voter base – wanted the party to support it, too. The Young Liberal Party called out the main party for failing to act on climate, citing it as one of the main reasons they lost the election (a spot-on assessment). In the background, Coalition partners the National party are still playing loudly into the metro-regional divide on climate and every other major issue. The Climate Change Bill has put a spotlight on the lack of unity on this issue on the right side of politics.
I spent last night reviewing the draft Climate Change Bill. We need Parliament, including Peter Dutton & the Coalition, to come together & create the strongest possible climate laws. I’ll be moving some sensible amendments but it’s time to take the politics out of climate action pic.twitter.com/8yJlqXEyRe
— Dr Sophie Scamps MP (@SophieScamps) July 28, 2022
The Climate Change Bill Is Not: A Plan, Ambitious, or Legally Binding
The Bill does have holes in it though, which are clear when we analyse what it’s not.
First things first: this Bill does not contain a plan outlining how we will actually reduce emissions to hit the targets. If we are to evaluate this on its merits alone, it fundamentally does not reduce emissions. It’s like committing to save $10,000 by the end of the year, and even asking a friend to hold you accountable, but never actually doing the math on where the money will be cut or generated from.
The Greens did try to get some specifics included, most notably a ban on all new coal and gas projects, but Labor was not willing to negotiate on this point. We’ve said it before, and we will say it again: it is not possible to achieve net zero without banning future coal and gas projects. The government will have to hit the big, red STOP button at some point, very soon.
While Labor does have some policies that will achieve some level of emissions reductions, they don’t go far enough to achieve net zero. In fact, even legislating the 43% reduction target is an unambitious step backwards – it’s lower than the 45% target target Labor proposed in 2015. It is also lower than the 50% target that IPCC scientists say is the only way to limit global heating to 1.5ºC.
It’s also important to understand that this Climate Change Bill isn’t really legally binding in the way you might expect. It doesn’t say what will happen if we miss the 2030 and 2050 targets. Under this Bill, the government is free to ignore advice of the CCA so long as it publicly explains the reasons why. Those reasons don’t have to be good, logical or popular, they just have to be published.
The only consequence it hints at is the one that already exists, and looms larger everyday: an unlivable planet. That consequence has not proved scary enough for any Australian government to stop the burning of fossil fuels.
Like any legislation, it can also be amended and changed if the political body decides that’s best. It does not protect against a future Coalition government replacing it with something even weaker, or removing powers from the CCA and other involved agencies as they’ve done before.
And lastly, this Bill is not Zali Steggall’s unsuccessful 2020 Climate Change Bill – which, in our opinion, was better.
What happens next?
The Climate Change Bill will be debated in the Senate in September. The Greens have agreed to provide their support in the upper house too. They may use this as an opportunity to introduce a potentially important amendment: the inclusion of a climate trigger.
The climate trigger requires any new project that might jeopardize our chance of hitting those emissions targets to be individually assessed before approval. As huge emitters, new coal and gas projects would have to be reviewed, and it would be almost impossible for the Environment Minister to approve them without contradicting the Climate Change Bill. Labor seemed open to this amendment, but that’s no guarantee it will make the final cut.
In addition to the Greens, to pass the Bill needs at least one other Senator to support it – this is expected to be independent David Pocock. He is keen to negotiate with Labor, and has a lot of power to make demands in exchange for his support. So far, it seems likely he will ask the government to promise to end the controversial forestry carbon credits scheme.
Comments are closed.