Sunday, 31 January 2021

Scott Morrison, aerodynamic populism and the art of never choosing a side.

Extract from The Guardian

Katharine Murphy on politics Australian politics


In an age of polarisation, the prime minister seeks longevity in office by wafting above the fray rather than engaging in confrontation
Scott morrison
Scott Morrison will spend the next year honing his ‘competent in a crisis’ credentials to divert attention from politically polarising issues such as climate change.

Last modified on Sat 30 Jan 2021 13.51 AEDT

Summer breaks are lovely things. We can clear our heads, and reintroduce ourselves to our loved ones – important activities for maintaining the soul.

But a few consecutive weeks out of the fray is particularly valuable for political reporters, because for a period of time, we consume politics in the same way that most of the country does. Professionally, it’s like having a factory reset without losing all your data.

Normally, forming perceptions from a distance isn’t a luxury we are afforded. If one of your occupational requirements is reporting (and preferably breaking) daily news, political journalists have to inhabit the frenzied zone of highly engaged partisans. We have to saturate ourselves in process and minutiae to find new facts and contextualise accurately and fairly.

But most voters don’t consume politics this way. Information comes in fragments – a 10-second grab on the car radio while driving the kids to cricket, the TV news as ambient noise while cooking dinner, a headline floating past on Facebook.

The point of me drawing this contrast is simple. The impressions you form at a distance are different from the impressions you get when your face is pressed up against the glass.

When I’m at work, watching Scott Morrison intently, I see a shape-shifter. During my recent break, the impression I caught was related to this kinetic quality, but slightly different. In the rare moments Morrison managed to punctuate my consciousness, I heard a prime minister who validates everything.

Lest this feel like a distinction without a difference, I’ll step through what I mean by this.

January is typically culture war season. Morrison started the month by changing a word in the national anthem, in part to acknowledge Indigenous Australians (instead of “young” and free, Australia was to be “one” and free).

By the time the country was warming up for the annual discussion about whether or not Australia Day should still fall on 26 January – the opening salvo of a colonial power’s violent dispossession of the first Australians – Morrison cast himself as a non-combatant in the history wars. He was about respecting “all” the stories.

Morrison tries to maximise what he’s for, or sort of for, and limit what he’s against, unless there is currency in picking a side

The prime minister noted Indigenous Australians were the “great overcomers” because they had survived colonisation. Perhaps this was the greatest Australian story. But the convicts had it tough, too, on that grim sea journey to the penal settlement, and how good are the migrants who helped build a nation in the new world? From that bedrock of every child getting a prize, Morrison managed to pole vault over the change the date controversy by noting in general terms that it was impossible to “cancel” the past.

I’ve said before that Morrison has in the past experimented with a copy-cat version of Trumpism.

But the prime minister now seems to be intent on honing his own genre of aerodynamic populism. In an age of polarisation and identity politics, the prime minister seeks longevity in office by wafting, watchfully, above the fray rather than deploying the Trump technique of defining himself through confrontation.

Morrison, at least in this particular iteration, tries to maximise what he’s for, or sort of for, and limit what he’s against, unless there is currency in picking a side.

So what might this “big tent” technique portend about the year ahead? The prime minister enters the new political year trying to preserve what he would regard as optimal operating conditions.

Obviously no prime minister wants to preside over a pandemic and the first recession in 30 years. But Mr Marketing is intent on reinforcing the brand he developed with the help of the premiers in 2020. Let’s call the brand “competent in a crisis”.

Morrison will spend the coming year telling Australians we are not yet out of the crisis, both because it is true, and because politically, it is optimal. If we are still in the crisis, Morrison can keep restive colleagues at bay.

The prime minister can set clear priorities – which will be keeping Australians safe from the virus, and job creation – but also recalibrate, defer or dump any politically contentious reform program that, outside wartime, might be considered an article of faith for a Liberal prime minister presiding over a third-term government. Industrial relations is an obvious case in point.

IR reform invites a noisy conversation about who is winning and who is losing, which messes with aerodynamic populism. Tracking back to our validator in chief, it’s hard to validate everything when you are demonstrably validating one thing (flexibility for employers) at the expense of another (take-home pay).

If Morrison can keep the conversation within the parameters of ongoing crisis management, Morrison will feel confident about the government’s prospects at the next election if he chooses to go to the polls in the second half of this year.

Perhaps he can pull this off. That will certainly be the ambition.

But a couple of significant things are outside the government’s control. The first is the efficacy of the Covid-19 vaccines, and whether or not the vaccination program can be rolled out effectively. If the program doesn’t deliver, or is plagued with problems, Morrison’s competent in a crisis brand takes a direct hit, and the psychology of the country changes.

The second wildcard is the economy. Because Australia has been successful in managing the public health risks, and because of the fiscal support rolled out in 2020, the economy is coming back from last year’s downturn. Perhaps economic recovery will be sustained. But Australia is minus migrants, tourists and international students, and the staggering infection rates in Europe and America through the northern hemisphere winter are a harbinger of the ever-present public health risks.

The other issue that is genuinely difficult for Morrison to manage is climate change. Government people will tell you the pandemic has pushed voter concerns about that issue well down their list of priorities, and here again, Morrison is deploying the validate everything/I’m a non-combatant in the climate wars strategy to try and manage the various cross-currents.

Left to his own devices, Morrison would sign up to net zero by 2050, but on this issue, unlike industrial relations, he can’t outrun the colleagues, because some regional Liberals, and the Nationals, are prisoners of their cynical weaponisation of this issue. Fossil fuels must continue to be good for humanity because some members of the Coalition have spent every election cycle since 2013 telling their constituents nothing needs to change. Reverse engineering that lie isn’t easy.

Another complicating factor is the ongoing, unresolved saga of the Nationals being unhappy with their leader, Michael McCormack, but unable to agree on who should replace him.

While that ennui persists, Nationals with leadership aspirations will feel compelled to play to their base – demanding coal and gas, and blasting banks with the temerity to grapple with carbon risk. Just for the record, Matt Canavan remains my favourite character in this otherwise tedious telenovela – the former Productivity Commission economist who thinks a centre-right government should tax iron ore exports to China, engage in protectionist measures, and taxpayers should subsidise stranded assets.

Metropolitan Liberals will be triggered by the performance art from the Nationals, and Morrison will be reminded that signing up to net zero (as opposed to saying I’m not opposed to it, I just won’t do it) risks blowing up the Coalition.

Aerodynamic populism requires a prime minister to love it all: coal, gas and renewables; Barnaby Joyce and Trent Zimmerman.

But preserving the viability of the planet, and making sure Australians have viable opportunities in the sustainable industries of the future, requires leaders worthy of the name to pick a side.

As Biden hits the accelerator on climate action, Australia remains stuck in policy paralysis.

Extract from ABC News

Analysis

By Insiders host David Speers

Side by side photos of Anthony Albanese and Scott Morrison
Both major political parties are treading nervously on climate policy.(ABC News: Jed Cooper, Matt Roberts)

Joe Biden hit the accelerator on climate action this week. In an all-hands-on-deck approach, the US President declared Wednesday to be "climate day at the White House", as he unveiled plans to freeze oil and gas leases on public land and double offshore wind energy.

He's converting the vast government car fleet to electric vehicles (made in the USA) and plans to host a climate summit of world leaders in April. The climate crisis, he says, is an existential threat.

Play Video. Duration: 1 minute 32 seconds

Joe Biden signs three executive orders to tackle climate change.

Australia, meanwhile, remains stuck in climate policy paralysis, with both major parties treading nervously.

Prime Minister Scott Morrison supports reaching net-zero carbon emissions, but he can't say when this should happen — a rather important part of the equation. He wants more gas in the energy mix, but it's unclear who will pay and whether a big new gas plant is even viable.

And even the idea of funding a new coal-fired power plant won't go away.

Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack, fending off the never-ending agitation from his National Party backbench, still flirts with the idea of taxpayer subsidies for coal. Treasurer Josh Frydenburg says it's not going to happen.

Labor's shift in emphasis

Labor, meanwhile, has been unable to capitalise on any of this Coalition confusion. Nearly two years on from its third consecutive election defeat, the ALP is still trying to work out where to land with its vexed climate policy.

Anthony Albanese made a smart political and strategic decision early last year to commit to the target of achieving net-zero emissions by 2050. He read the room and was helped by the overwhelming support for the 2050 target amongst business groups and the international community.

Mark Butler talks with Anthony Albanese in the House of Representatives

Labor's Mark Butler has been shifted out of the climate portfolio.(ABC News: Matt Roberts)

Far more difficult, and still unresolved, is whether Labor will adopt any mid-term targets or a mechanism to get there.

Albanese's decision to replace Mark Butler from the Labor left with Chris Bowen from the Labor right in the climate portfolio is at the very least a symbolic shift. Butler had promised Labor would adopt "medium-term targets consistent with the terms of the Paris climate agreement".

A more cautious Bowen only says Labor's policy will be "evidence based" and "economically focused". We're told this is about a shift in emphasis, not policy direction.

It's now all about the "jobs" potential of taking climate action, rather than just saving the planet.

How will climate policy deliver jobs?

The proof, though, will be in the pudding. It's one thing to talk about "framing" the debate around jobs, it's another to demonstrate how your policies will deliver those jobs.

Bowen is now tasked with achieving the elusive Labor goal of landing a suitably ambitious and credible climate policy that doesn't spook voters in regional Queensland.

Albanese's instinct is not to rush into announcing these policies. He wants to see how global events play out this year, referencing this year's climate summit in Glasgow in particular.A man with short white hair and glasses wearing a suit and tie speaking at a lecturn

Scott Morrison supports reaching net-zero carbon emissions but can't say when this should happen.(ABC News: Pedro Ribeiro)

Morrison, meanwhile, is signalling he won't be taking any updated 2030 or 2035 targets to the summit. In other words, the Australian Government's approach is to "wait and see", rather than moving too far ahead of the pack.

And there's unlikely to be any pressure from the opposition for the Government to be more ambitious, with Albanese also waiting to see how Glasgow plays out.

The Glasgow summit isn't being held until November, which could well be after the Australian election, depending on when the Prime Minister decides to send voters to the polls.

That doesn't mean nothing will happen in the climate debate before Glasgow; other countries will be making commitments throughout the year, with the Biden Administration likely to be leading the charge.

It's hard to imagine either the Government or opposition will be able to avoid telling the world — or indeed Australian voters — before November what their respective plans are for Australian emissions.

Climate policy may not be just about targets, but nor can targets be ignored.

David Speers is the host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iView.

House-sitting, couch surfing keeping 'almost homeless' older woman off the streets.

Extract from ABC News

By Edwina Seselja and Cathie Schnitzerling

, An unidentifiable woman sits on  park bench looking out over Brisbane's CBD.
Zoe, 58, has been doing everything she can to keep a roof over her head.(ABC Radio Brisbane: Edwina Seselja)

Brisbane mother of two Zoe* has not had stable housing for more than two years but she is not what you might imagine when you think of someone experiencing homelessness.

"I live where I can," the 58-year-old told ABC Radio Brisbane.

"I keep a roof over my head by either house-sitting or couch surfing and staying with friends."

When those options were not available, Zoe turned to a women's homeless shelter where she lived for three months.

At another time, her health landed her in hospital.

"I've been house-sitting permanently for almost two years now," she said.

On census night in 2016, there were an estimated 6,866 women over 50 who were homeless — the figure representing a 31 per cent increase since 2011.

House-sitting has taken Zoe everywhere from Rockhampton in central Queensland to Bega in southern New South Wales and has seen her move 30 times in a 12-month period.

But it was not always that way, and the self-described homebody longs for the day when she can unpack her bags for good.

Just a few years ago, Zoe owned her home, where she raised her now-adult daughters and ran a number of businesses.

"I had a beautiful home," she said.

"And I didn't realise how bad my health was becoming because I had that safety net of a home.

"Then everything literally collapsed out like a trapdoor beneath me and I was bereft."

After moving out of the rental she and her ex-partner shared, Zoe was left at the gates of her storage unit with nowhere to go.

Zoe has a background in design and construction.

She imagined she would get back on her feet as she always had, but her deteriorating health, including neurological conditions, made it all but impossible to find work.A close shot of a woman with her hands together.

Zoe thought she'd be able to find a job and a rental within a couple of weeks.(ABC Radio Brisbane: Edwina Seselja)

"I have chronic, complex illnesses," she said.

"I manage them but I don't have the stability of knowing from one day to the next whether I'm going to be upright, able to be thinking clearly, and I'm getting older.

"Anyone that's over 40 knows how hard it is to get a job, never mind someone who is over 50."

Now Zoe's only income is a disability pension, but she said $944 each fortnight was not enough to get into the rental market.

She said anyone who did not know her would call her a dole bludger.

'The almost homeless'

Journalist Therese Hall completed her masters of research in anthropology on "single older women with no place to call home" and said Zoe's experience was not unique, just invisible.

Ms Hall — a single mother herself — discovered there was a large cohort of older women finding themselves without a secure roof over their heads.

They were women who worked all their lives, married, raised families, ran businesses, owned homes.

In an edition of the Griffith Review titled Getting On, Hall referred to them as "the almost homeless".

These woman make up the fastest growing segment of the homeless population.

"This is a new pathway into homelessness and it's a late entrant," Ms Hall said.

"[These women have] spent most of their lives in conventional housing, renting or paying off a mortgage, so they're completely outside the system.

"Over their working lives, if they've been a single parent with one income, they've come up against gender-based low pay rates, part-time casual work … and they've popped out the other end without an asset, very little super, and with no savings."

Ms Hall said these women were traumatised by the situation they found themselves in.

"They are so used to making do, to being competent, to making ends meet," she said.

"But because of those factors building up against them — and you add in agism, less work as they get older — those strategies don't work anymore.

"They expected to be a doting grandmother or enjoying leisure time. So they are actually quite emotionally traumatised by finding themselves within proximity to homelessness.

"Even if they're not literally on the street they're feeling so vulnerable.

"Often the health problems … follow this proximity to homelessness.

"If they didn't have the health problem before, they get it afterwards."

What about social housing?

Ms Hall said out of the 30 women she interviewed for her thesis, just two — both in their late 60s — where able to enter social housing.

"Most of them, especially the women in their 50s, were not eligible for the aged pension and they're on JobSeeker. They are the ones really slipping through the cracks. 

The Queensland Department of Communities, Housing and Digital Economy said it was building 5,500 social and affordable homes across Queensland between 2017 and 2027 and said there were additional support services available.

"Homelessness can happen to anyone at any time and for a wide range of reasons including domestic and family violence, serious illness or death of the income earner, or long-term disadvantage," the department said in a statement.

Outside of social housing, the department said women could access housing assistance products — bond loans, rental grants, RentConnect, headleasing, and rent subsidies.

"About 70 per cent of customers using this service are women," the department said.

"In the 2019-20 financial year, we provided 21,523 bond loans and 9,524 rental grants to help people secure a rental home in the private rental market.

"Under the Home Assist Secure program, older women aged 60 years and over or anyone living with disability can access safety information and assistance with critical maintenance services for people unable to undertake or pay for maintenance."

Zoe's message to others

Zoe said she wanted to use her lived experience to advocate for women in a similar position and help others avoid falling through the cracks.

Facing an uncertain future, she said she wanted to send a message to younger generations.

"Have your financial back-up plan — and a man is not a plan," Zoe said.

"And know that despite your best laid plans, things can go pear-shaped."

The Queensland Department of Communities, Housing and Digital Economy encourages anyone who was at risk of, or experiencing homelessness, to contact the Homeless Hotline on 1800 474 753.

*Names have been changed to protect this person's identity.

Dizzying pace of Biden's climate action sounds death knell for era of denialism.

Extract from The Guardian

Climate change

Joe Biden speaks about climate change in the State Dining Room of the White House on Wednesday.

Joe Biden speaks about the climate crisis in the State Dining Room of the White House on Wednesday.

Analysis: The new president has framed the challenge of global heating as an opportunity for US jobs, saying: ‘We have to be bold’

Last modified on Sat 30 Jan 2021 18.32 AEDT

For a landmark moment in the global effort to stave off catastrophic climate change, Joe Biden’s “climate day” at the White House was rather low-key. The US president bumped elbows with his newly appointed climate tsar, John Kerry, who he called his “best buddy”, then gave a short speech before perfunctorily signing a small stack of executive orders, donning his mask and striding out without taking any questions.

The vision laid out in the actions signed by Biden on Wednesday, however, was transformative. A pathway for oil and gas drilling to be banned from public lands. A third of America’s land and ocean protected. The government ditching the combustion engine from its entire vehicle fleet, offering up a future where battery-powered trucks deliver America’s mail and electric tanks are operated by the US military.

Biden may eschew the politically contentious framing of the Green New Deal but there was even an echo of the original New Deal with his plan for a civilian climate corps to restore public lands and waterways. “The whole approach is classic Biden; working-class values, putting people to work,” said Tim Profeta, an environmental policy expert at Duke University.

The dizzying list of actions demonstrated the breadth and depth of the climate crisis. Biden’s administration will spur new climate-friendly policies for farmers while also devoting resources to the urban communities, typically low-income people of color, disproportionally blighted by pollution from nearby highways and power plants. In all, 21 federal agencies will be part of a new, overarching climate body. “This isn’t time for small measures,” Biden said. “We need to be bold.”

The first 10 days of Biden’s presidency have represented a startling handbrake turn from Donald Trump’s term, where climate science was routinely disparaged or sidelined and policies to cut planet-heating emissions were jettisoned. A complete rewiring of the economy is now needed to avert what the president calls an “existential threat” to civilization. US emissions dropped by about 10% last year but only because of pandemic shutdowns, and similar cuts will be required each year. “We can’t wait any longer – we see it with our own eyes, we feel it in our bones,” Biden implored.

“It truly is a new day for climate action,” said Carol Browner, former administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President Bill Clinton. “President Joe Biden is taking unprecedented actions and sending an unmistakable message to the world that the United States is back and serious about tackling the climate crisis.”Pipes for the planned Keystone XL oil pipeline lie in the snow in Gascoyne, North Dakota, in 2017. Biden has ditched the project in a highly symbolic move.

Pipes for the planned Keystone XL oil pipeline lie in the snow in Gascoyne, North Dakota, in 2017. Biden has ditched the project in a highly symbolic move. Photograph: Terray Sylvester/Reuters

Biden is yanking every possible governmental lever, it seems, to lower emissions but is also cognizant of attacks from Republicans, and unease among some unions, that ditching projects such as the Keystone XL oil pipeline will kill jobs. Battle lines have already formed – Republicans are trying to prevent any halt to drilling, with Greg Abbott, the Texas governor, vowing to “protect the oil and gas industry from any type of hostile attack launched from Washington DC”.

The counter to this backlash will be framed around jobs. Those who know Biden say the president views the climate crisis as a destabilizing threat to American might and national security but also an opportunity to create employment in a Covid-ravaged economy. “When I think of climate change I think of jobs,” has become a Biden slogan.

The president argues a $2tn clean energy plan will bring millions of new jobs by refashioning the power grid to run on carbon-free sources such as solar and wind within 15 years, building a new generation of energy-efficient homes and electric cars and mopping up pollution from oil and gas wells. “People have been in pain long enough,” said Gina McCarthy, Biden’s new domestic climate adviser, in reference to the pandemic. “We are not going to ask for sacrifice. If we fail to win the heart of middle America, we will lose.”

But emissions won’t get to zero via presidential action alone and Democrats’ hopes of sweeping climate legislation appear remote in a finely balanced Senate where climate denialism is still rife, as demonstrated on Tuesday by the Republican senator Rand Paul promoting a baseless theory that global heating is caused by the Earth’s tilt rather than human activity. Joe Manchin, a key Democratic vote who represents the coal heartland of West Virginia, once shot a climate bill with a rifle in a TV campaign advertisement.

“Congress seems to be the last bastion of climate denialism left in America,” said Todd Stern, the lead US negotiator of the Paris climate agreement.

There will probably be bipartisan agreement in certain areas, such as tax breaks for wind and solar and upgrades to ageing infrastructure that is being increasingly battered by floods, storms and wildfires. Chuck Schumer, the Democratic Senate leader, is confident some climate spending can sneak into overall budget bills. Biden could do more unilaterally if he declared a state of emergency over climate, Schumer has suggested. “Trump used this emergency for a stupid wall, which wasn’t an emergency. But if there ever was an emergency, climate is one,” the New York senator said last week.Biden has shied away from the term Green New Deal, promoted by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, centre, and Senator Ed Markey, right, but has embraced a bold agenda.

Biden has shied away from the term Green New Deal, promoted by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, centre, and Senator Ed Markey, right, but has embraced a bold agenda. Photograph: Shawn Thew/EPA

While obstacles remain in Congress, the overall landscape has shifted since Biden’s time as vice-president. Solar and wind have plummeted in cost, countries are charging ahead, however imperfectly, on cutting emissions, and even supposed climate villains are changing their tune – in just the past week BlackRock, the world’s biggest investment fund manager, threatened to sell shares in the worst corporate polluters, the US Chamber of Commerce said it would support a price on carbon, and General Motors announced it will make only zero-emissions cars from 2035 onwards.

The Trump years may well have been the death rattle of influential denialism. The American public’s concern over the climate crisis is at record levels, with even a majority of Republican voters supporting government intervention in the wake of a year of unprecedented wildfires and hurricanes that cost hundreds of lives and tens of billions of dollars. The question is now whether the US is able to change quickly enough to avert further disaster, rather than if it will change at all.

“We are already spending the money, folks,” Kerry, the former secretary of state who is now Biden’s climate envoy, said of the recent climate-fueled disasters. “It’s cheaper to deal with the crisis of climate than to ignore it. This is life or death, a challenge to the fibre of our society. The stakes on climate change couldn’t be any higher than they are now. Failure is literally not an option.”

Rex Patrick says he won’t support Coalition plan on environmental powers before it responds to ‘scathing’ review.

 Extract from The Guardian

Senator says government still hasn’t addressed concerns crossbenchers raised last year, while conservationists call for action on review’s recommendations

Kangaroos on the NSW south coast
Kangaroos on the NSW south coast. The federal government is yet to release its response to Graeme Samuel’s damning report on the state of the environmental systems meant to protect Australia’s wildlife.

Last modified on Sun 31 Jan 2021 06.02 AEDT

A key independent senator says he will not support a government plan to shift environmental approval powers to the states before the Coalition responds to a “scathing” review of conservation laws.

Rex Patrick said the final report of the review into the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act was damning about the state of systems meant to protect Australia’s wildlife.

“I’m not going to agree to blindly passing pieces of legislation,” Patrick said. “I want to see a plan for how the review recommendations are going to be implemented, including timeframes.”

The Morrison government released the final report from the once-in-a-decade review of the laws on Thursday, three months after receiving it from the review’s chair, the former competition watchdog head Graeme Samuel.

The government is yet to release its response to the report. Samuel included several recommendations that he said should be implemented immediately.

The environment minister, Sussan Ley, has indicated the government will continue to try to pass legislation that would clear the way for the transfer of environmental approval powers to state and territory governments.

A majority of senators signalled they would block the bill last year and Patrick was among a crossbench group that tabled a dissenting report to an inquiry examining the legislation.

Patrick said on Friday that the government still had not addressed key concerns outlined in that dissenting report, which called for documents detailing the agreements between the states and the commonwealth as well as how state authorities would be accredited with the commonwealth to make decisions on its behalf.

He added that Samuel’s final report made clear there were multiple recommendations – including legislated national environmental standards and the creation of an office of compliance to enforce the law – that should be a priority alongside the proposal for environmental deregulation.

“The minister would have to put up a very good case as to why she would take a different approach to that recommended by Samuel,” Patrick said.

Eighteen of the review’s 38 recommendations contained items Samuel deemed to be urgent.

Those include adopting the set of legally-binding national environmental standards written by Samuel and a committee working with the review, the creation of an office for environmental compliance and enforcement, amendments to address inconsistencies within Australia’s environmental laws, reforms to give Indigenous Australians a greater say in environmental decision-making, and immediate changes to national policy on the use of environmental offsets.

Samuel concluded that successive governments had failed for 20 years to properly implement environmental laws and the country’s wildlife was suffering because of it.

Guardian Australia put a series of questions to Ley on Friday. These included whether the government would commit to adopting the recommendations Samuel said required immediate action, whether it would put legislation to parliament for the creation of national standards, when it intended to release its response to the report, and whether it would adopt the same standards as proposed by Samuel in the report.

Ley answered none of these questions.

In a statement, a spokesperson said the report had been released ahead of the statutory deadline and the minister had committed to working through “the detail of the report with stakeholders and has begun that process”.

“In line with the position of all state and territory leaders expressed at national cabinet, the minister will continue to move to a single-touch approval process with bilateral agreements, consistent national standards and assurance functions,” the spokesperson said.

“These will create a necessary framework identified in the report and will, in the first instance, reflect the current EPBC Act. Consistent with Professor Samuel’s report, these will be further developed in the future.”

Nicola Beynon, of the Humane Society International (HSI), said Samuel had recommended a balanced set of standards following a year of consultation with scientists, environment and business groups.

“While HSI has been calling for stronger standards, anything less than the standards Professor Samuel proposes will take environmental protection backwards in this country,” she said.

Suzanne Milthorpe, the environmental laws campaigner at the Wilderness Society, said the organisation had been looking “for a sign, any sign” that the government was serious about addressing the decline of Australia’s plants and animals and was still waiting.

“The Samuel report makes it unequivocally clear that if we don’t change direction, the current decline and deterioration of Australia’s national icons will continue,” she said.

“The Morrison government has had this warning for three months. How much longer will we have to wait for a serious response?”

WWF-Australia’s chief conservation officer, Rachel Lowry, said the government should deal with Samuel’s recommendations as a complete package.

“We’re concerned that if the government gets a win on its streamlining bill in February or March, then we won’t see progress on other essential reforms. A piecemeal approach is risky and a potentially damaging way forward,” she said.

“Their reluctance to strengthen standards and ensure independent enforcement as the first step of reform is worrying.”

Saturday, 30 January 2021

Fortescue’s Forrest opens up about iron ore miner’s ‘green steel’ ambitions.

 Extract from International Mining

Fortescue Metals Group Chairman and founder, Dr Andrew Forrest (pictured), has revealed the iron ore miner has plans to build Australia’s first “green steel” pilot plant this year.

A commercial plant, powered entirely by wind and solar, could be constructed in the next few years he said in the first Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) Boyer Lecture for 2021, entitled: ‘Oil vs Water: Confessions of a Carbon Emitter’.

In a wide-ranging talk, he acknowledge that Fortescue was trialling both known methods of making “zero-carbon-steel” without the use of coal in Australia: replacing coal in the furnace with ‘green hydrogen’ and adding carbon separately to strengthen the steel, and “zap[ping] the ore with renewable electricity”.

On the development of such an industry, Forrest said: “We could look at losing our coal industry as a national disaster – yet, I’ve always believed, out of every setback, is the seed of equal or greater opportunity.

“We produce over 40% of the world’s iron ore. And our potential green energy and hydrogen resources are immeasurable.

“If Australia were to capture just 10% of the world’s steel market, we could generate well over 40,000 jobs – more than what’s required to replace every job in the coal industry.”

Fortescue, through its Fortescue Future Industries company, has been signing agreements to leverage hydro-electric power and geothermal energy to become one of the “world’s largest green energy and product businesses”, Forrest said.

“We’re now undertaking feasibility studies that could lead to some 300 GW of power – more than four times what Australia can produce,” he explained.

Forrest also mentioned some of the decarbonisation work Fortescue is currently working on.

Back in December, Fortescue Chief Operating Officer, Greg Lilleyman, announced the company was working on developing an in-house, non-diesel 240 t haul truck prototype that will test both battery-electric and fuel-cell electric drivetrain technology in the Pilbara of Western Australia.

Seemingly referencing this project, Forrest said: “By the end of the decade, our trucks will run on renewable energy. Imagine that: a fleet of vehicles that produces nothing more than steam as exhaust.”

He also said the company was aiming to develop “green iron ore trains” powered by either renewable electricity or “green ammonia”.

Looking at the company’s shipping operations, he said 2021 would see the company “begin to settle designs” that allow its ships to run on “zero-pollution, green ammonia”.

He added: “And we’re willing to share that knowledge, to help our competitors go green too – including Vale, one of the largest mining companies in the world.”

Andrew Forrest - Oil vs Water — Confessions of a carbon emitter

 Podcast ABC Boyer Lecture

In this first Boyer lecture, leading philanthropist and businessman Andrew Forrest calls for an urgent move to green hydrogen "on a global scale".

Having just returned from visiting nearly 50 countries in four months, Dr Forrest says he's seen a paradigm shift in global thinking. Sovereign leaders, business people, politicians, financiers and technology developers have developed a "genuine thirst" for a rapid shift to green energy.

He argues Australia is perfectly placed to become a world leader in the production of green hydrogen energy. For Dr Forrest, the question is not whether green hydrogen will become the next global energy form, but who will be the first to mass-produce it?

Duration: 28min 45sec
More Information

Dr Andrew Forrest is a leading businessman and active philanthropist. He and wife Nicola co-founded the Minderoo Foundation in 2001, and to date they have supported over 300 initiatives across Australia and internationally with their total philanthropic donations now exceeding A$2 billion.

Andrew recently completed a PhD in Marine Ecology and is passionate about ocean conservation. He is a member of the United Nations Environment Programme Scientific Advisory Committee on the Assessment on Marine Litter and Microplastics.

Dr Forrest was appointed by the Prime Minister and Cabinet of Australia to Chair the Review of Indigenous Training and Employment Programs to end Indigenous disparity through employment.

In 2017, he was appointed an Officer of the Order of Australia for distinguished service to the mining sector, a year later he was inducted into the Australian Prospectors & Miners' Hall of Fame. He is a recipient of the Australian Sports Medal and the Australian Centenary Medal. Andrew was Western Australia's 2017 Australian of the Year for his outstanding contribution to the community.

Transcript

Zali Steggall's climate bill gets broad backing from industry groups and investors.

Extract from The Guardian 

Climate change

Inquiry hears from business, conservationists, scientists and health professionals who urge the government to legislate a net zero target

Independent MP Zali Steggall
Zali Steggall says the chance of her bill moving ahead depends on the government listening to evidence from across industry, science and health.

Last modified on Sat 30 Jan 2021 06.02 AEDT

The Morrison government was urged by major industry groups and investors to give popular draft climate change legislation from the independent MP Zali Steggall a chance at becoming law during a parliamentary inquiry.

Major business representatives gave evidence alongside conservationists, scientists and health professionals that broadly backed the proposed laws, which would legislate a 2050 net zero emissions target for Australia.

Widespread support continues to grow for Steggall’s bill, but will need backing from a reluctant government to allow it to be debated in parliament.

Steggall’s bill would also set out a pathway to reach net zero and establish an independent climate change commission to oversee annual climate risk assessments.

The UK government’s independent Climate Change Committee has also backed the bill in a submission to the inquiry, saying the bill set out a framework similar to its own 2008 Climate Change Act, which had helped “provide clear signals to investors, help build political consensus and navigate political challenges, and encourage an evidence-based approach to climate policy”.

The Committee on the Environment and Energy is conducting an inquiry into the draft bill and held the first of two public hearings on Friday, with a second scheduled for Monday.

Anna Freeman, a policy director at the Clean Energy Council representing Australia’s renewable energy industry, said the proposed laws “provide the prospect of us finally ending the climate policy impasse that’s afflicted Australia for the past decade”.

Unlike more than 100 countries and many of Australia’s major trading partners, the Morrison government has refused to adopt a net zero emissions target by 2050 – saying only it wants to get there as quickly as possible.

At the same time, the government has touted a “gas-led recovery” from the Covid-19 pandemic.

The Australian Industry Group’s climate and energy policy adviser, Tennant Reed, told the inquiry: “Were the parliament to pass this bill it would be a strong contribution, but not the last word, of the long task of building a successful Australian response to climate change.”

Reed said there were other options open to the government to give businesses and investors more certainty, but Steggall’s bill – with some amendments – was “sensible and workable”.

The Business Council of Australia – a group representing mining, retail, manufacturing, banking and energy bosses – has also formally backed Steggall’s legislation.

Both the Planning Institute of Australia and the Property Council of Australia voiced strong backing for the bill during the inquiry, which Steggall said had received about 6,200 submissions.

Simon O’Connor, the chief executive of the Responsible Investment Association Australasia, said policy uncertainty was risking a loss of billions of dollars in investment across multiple sectors.

The association has 350 members, including superannuation funds and investment managers, which collectively manage about $9tn of assets globally.

O’Connor said parliament should consider the bill, which was a “strong step” in creating the certainty for investors that would help unlock billions more in investment.

Conservation groups, including the Australian Conservation Foundation and WWF-Australia, also voiced strong support for the bill. They recalled how climate heating was threatening Australia’s wildlife and habitats through fires, droughts, excess heat, coral bleaching and warming oceans.

Prof Lesley Hughes, representing the Climate Council and the Wentworth Group of Concerned Scientists, said it was a “no brainer” for Australia to take a lead on climate change action.

She said: “The bill is absolutely essential for Australia to be in a leadership position, rather than be an international embarrassment.”

Representatives for doctors and veterinarians that advocate for climate change action also supported the bill, saying livestock, wildlife and humans were already suffering from global heating.

The committee chairman, Liberal National MP Ted O’Brien, questioned several speakers who had said Australian investment in renewables was being held back, and that Australia’s performance in cutting emissions was poor.

He cited information provided by the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources for the inquiry, which showed high levels of investment in renewables and emissions cuts on a per capita basis in Australia.

During the hearing, Steggall and the Labor MP Josh Burns pushed officials from the Department of Industry, Science, Energy and Resources to say if work had been done to project when Australia’s emissions might reach net zero.

Kushla Munro, an acting deputy secretary in the department, said work was “ongoing” and would form part of a long-term greenhouse gas emissions reduction strategy to be submitted to the United Nations’ climate convention ahead of the next major talks in Glasgow scheduled for November.

Rob Sturgiss, a general manager in the department, was asked by the Liberal MP Trent Zimmerman if it was practically possible to prepare a greenhouse gas emissions budget out to 2050.

“I think it’s maybe sensible [to do],” Sturgiss responded.

Steggall told the Guardian the chance of her bill being debated – and therefore a chance at becoming law – depended on the willingness of the Morrison government to listen to evidence coming from across industry, science and health.

She said across many sectors, representatives wanted “a cohesive framework” of policies that would chart a path to net zero by 2050.

“The prime minister has said he won’t let the international community pressure him” she said.

“But I’d hope he would listen to the Australian community. Will he listen to anyone other than the fossil fuel industry?

“Clearly there’s a strong appetite for this debate. You can lead a horse to water but you can’t force it to drink.”

In a statement, a spokesman for the energy and emissions reduction minister, Angus Taylor, said: “When it comes to net zero, we want to get there as soon as possible. It’s a question of ‘how’, not ‘what’.

“But Ms Steggall’s bill is simply a plan for more process and more bureaucracy. It has nothing to offer on the ‘how’.”