Opinion 
 Blogs 
 Monkey Wrench 
 Does Turnbull really understand climate change? 

Does Turnbull really understand climate change?

What short memories Greenpeace seem to have regarding the green credentials of our political party leaders.

Last week, the organisation’s national climate campaigner welcomed the elevation of Malcolm Turnbull to Opposition Leader, speculating the ex-merchant banker would “green up’’ the Coalition’s climate change policy. “Of all the leadership contenders within the Liberal Party, I think Malcolm Turnbull seems to understand climate change better than the others,’’ said John Hepburn, one of five Greenpeace activists arrested by NSW police last November after they painted “Coal Kills’’ on the roof of the Munmorah power station north of Sydney.

So John, that would be the same Malcolm Turnbull who told the National Press club last year that clean coal “is the most important building block to a low emissions future’’? He also sang the praises of nuclear power as a “proven, reliable source of baseload power’’ and ‘the single best alternative to fossil fuels’’, while lambasting Labor’s pre-election policy pledge to cut Australia’s greenhouse emissions by 60 per cent by 2050 as “destructive and futile.’’

Also in this speech, Turnbull suggested Australia had the means to make “a massive and material impact on greenhouse emissions by sustainable forestry’’ – a solution that, in his view, required “just money, a shovel, a seedling and good governance.’’

No doubt he speaks from experience. In the early 1990s, Turnbull was a major shareholder and chairman of Axiom Forest Resources, which operated logging interests in the Solomon Islands. One of the company’s subsidiaries, Silvania Forest Products was described by a 1994 AusAid report as having logging practices “among the worst on the world.’’ When questioned by the ABC in 2004 about his involvement, Turnbull claimed Axiom bought the company “to clean up the mess’’ and “sort of reposition them so they became sustainable operations.’’ What was his reaction as a self-described “corporate doctor’’ when he visited the Solomons and saw the damage caused by erosion and runoff? He met government officials but, “I didn’t visit any of the logging operations at all,’’ he told the ABC.

Still, after buying a 16 per cent stake in Axiom for $200,000, Turnbull sold it around a year later for $25 million. Amazing what you can do with “just money’’ and logging licences to harvest 330,000 cubic metres of tropical rainforest a year.

And, just to jog the Greenpeace memory on climate change, in his role as Coalition Environment Minister, Turnbull did approve the $2 billion Tamar Valley pulpmill in Tasmania last year. Greens Senator Christine Milne estimates the mill, if it’s built, will produce more than 10 million tonnes of greenhouse gas a year – roughly equivalent to 2 per cent of Australia’s current total emissions.

Does Turnbull really understand climate change “better than the others’’ in his party? No Greenpeace, not if you read Opposition environment spokesman Greg Hunt’s recent address to the New Zealand National Party, titled “The Global Challenge: Liberalism, Climate Change and the Clean Energy Revolution.’’ It’s pretty good, but you’d expect nothing less from a pollie who won a Fulbright scholarship to Yale University, was associate to the Chief Justice of the Australian Federal Court and director of strategy at the World Economic Forum in Geneva for a couple of years.

If only the Coalition had the courage to embrace generational change – rather than naked ambition – when choosing a new leader.

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size
Page:
1

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
If Mr Turbull was serious about bipartisan change for the better, he should steer well clear of the mud rake.
Posted by james, 22/09/2008 5:27:07 PM
oh wait, hes a lawyer.
Posted by james, 22/09/2008 5:28:48 PM
The author writes of nuclear power as if it is a bad thing? Union leaders, numerous current and former leaders in the Labor Party, as well as the most recently Australian small businesses are coming to realise the potential of nuclear power. No one is saying nuclear can get us there on its own, but its the mix that makes the cake, and nuclear is one of many necessary ingredients if we are to reach our climate reduction goals to an acceptable timeline while maintaining a viable economy.
Posted by Ed, 22/09/2008 9:36:00 PM
Sorry Ed, your union leaders and pollies probably don't understand climate change either. We must go renewable! And that means utilising the energy that can be tapped, like solar, wind, wave. Other countries are doing it, why for crying out loud can't Australia? Why are our pollies so dumb? Or are they scared? Nuclear means nuclear waste, and the waste disposal system is already overflowing and toxic enough without adding something that will take 2 zillion years to degrade.
Posted by salamander, 23/09/2008 9:26:21 PM
Nuclear power is not the answer, nor is it carbon free. It is the most expensive way to boil water ever invented when full costing of lifecycle is included and creates carbon pollution at every step from mining to processing to building the plants, except for the aforementioned kettle stage. It is simply a way irresponsible greed will try to get richer at our children's expense.
Posted by ron, 24/09/2008 5:17:14 PM
Rosslyn, I understand and share your frustrations with naked ambition as a key driver within the Liberal Party, and in politics more generally. The comments that I made, and which you refer to, did not speculate as to Turnbull’s motivations, nor did they express support for his proposals for dealing with climate change. Quite the opposite. Part of what I said, which you quoted, was that “Of all the leadership contenders within the Liberal Party, I think Malcolm Turnbull seems to understand climate change better than the others.” By “leadership contenders” I was referring to Brendan Nelson (who is clearly clueless about the issue) and possibly Peter Costello, who didn’t even mention the word ‘climate change’ during his first ten budgets as Federal Treasurer. Neither of them would be a hard act to follow. As for Greg Hunt, I was not aware that he was considered a leadership contender. From my own discussion with Malcolm Turnbull on climate change, it is clear that he acknowledges and understands the problem, although he clearly does not appreciate the urgency or severity of impacts, and his proposed solutions are stuck in a ‘business as usual’ paradigm designed more to appease the big polluters than to actually solve the problem. However, this does not differentiate Turnbull from most political leaders on both sides of Australian politics. At no point in my interview did I say anything to indicate that the climate policies that Turnbull has been advocating are even remotely sufficient to deal with climate change. The article did not include a number of other comments that I made in the same interview. For example: Journalist: “So would you say that the elevation of Malcolm Turnbull to the leadership of the Liberal Party could be considered to be a small win for the environment?” My approximate reply: “You have to be joking. It was a win for Malcolm Turnbull. It’s just that Brendan Nelson was so incredibly far from having anything useful to say about climate change that it would be almost impossible for any new leader to be any worse.” The fact remains that the Liberal Party is still riddled with climate sceptics, and so long as they continue to advocate business as usual on climate change, there will be little if any effective political pressure on the ALP to improve their policies. The failure both major parties to recognise climate change as anything other than a political football is exactly why, as you pointed out, I and an increasing number of people are turning to civil disobedience to push for real and urgent action. As Al Gore said this week: “If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we've reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants...." Thanks for your comments Rosslyn. You can be assured that I, and Greenpeace don’t have a short memory for the acts of politicians. And we’ll be doing all that we can to make sure that their actions and decisions are clear in the historical record so that future generations can understand how we either solved the climate crisis – or didn’t. John Hepburn Greenpeace Australia Pacific
Posted by John Hepburn, 25/09/2008 12:14:25 PM
Monkey Wrench
Rosslyn Beeby is science and environment reporter with The Canberra Times. She writes about the lighter and darker shades of green issues.
Greg Hunt
Greg Hunt

MOST POPULAR

Yourguide to Your Toyota
Click here to read See Canberra online!
 
University of Canberra - click here
 
 
James Bond Happy Hour at Flint - click now
 
Red Hot Deals at Eurobodalla! click now
 
Ready, Set. Drive!
 
Classifieds
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...