Australia's New Government: What It Means From an Environmental Standpoint

On Saturday September 7, 2013, it was announced that Tony Abbott, a member of Australia's Liberal Party, would be the 28th Prime Minister.  The victory by the Liberals marked a new era in Australian politics. Since 2007, the government has been under control by the Labor Party where there were three changes in power within the party.  Kevin Rudd was the first PM of this era; in 2010, Julia Gillard ousted her fellow Laborer only to hold this office until the same gentleman that she replaced, Kevin Rudd, also ousted her in 2012.  This victory by the Liberals was not only a change in power at the federal level, but it now gives the Liberal Party the chance to implement values and initiatives in Australia that are vastly different than those held by the Labor Party. 

This election has raised many concerns throughout the international environmental community, particularly those in the fields of climate and biodiversity.  Before I can go any further, I believe that it is important to briefly discuss the term "liberal", referring to the Liberal Party, and this party's platform.  

In America, "liberal", referring to American politics, usually correlates to the Democratic Party.  The media portrays Democrats as liberals and even Democratic politicians refer to themselves as liberals.  However, in international politics, the term liberal actually means the exact opposite of what we attribute the word to in America and carries more "conservative" weight to it.  Ironically, the Australian Liberal Party's platform is almost idea-for-idea the same as the American Republican Party.  Taken from their website, the Liberal Party believes in a limited government; they have a large belief in private sector initiatives; and they believe "simply...in the individual freedom and free enterprise." Other phrases that stick out are "bureaucratic red tape", "burdensome taxes" and (I am not sure if they took this from the Romney campaign or if the Romney campaign borrowed this from the Liberal Party) "businesses and individuals - not government - are the true creators of wealth and employment."₁  There are clearly many similarities between the Australian Liberal Party and the American Republican Party.  This needed to be clarified in order for you, the reader, to grasp and understand the conceptual differences in terminology as it relates to international politics versus American politics.  

In the days since the election, soon-to-be Prime Minister Abbott has made it clear to the world that he is planning to completely change Australia's position on a number of issues.  Speaking with people that are Australian and/or are living in the country at the moment, Australia is currently facing a deficit crisis.  Through research, I have come across information that leads me to believe that Abbott plans to erase part of or all of this deficit through dramatic domestic and foreign spending cuts to programs that many in the nation would deem as essential to everyday life and for the wellness of the nation.  

From an environmental perspective, this is worrisome.  Australia has some of the most pristine and delicate landscape and seascape in the world.  In fact, Australia has 16 sites throughout the nation that are UNESCO Natural (environmental/cultural) World Heritage Sites.₂  Early plans by the Liberal Party seem to disregard many of these natural and national treasures in an attempt to "boost the economy" or "stimulate the private sector".  One of the first initiatives that Tony Abbott plans to tackle is the full repeal of the carbon tax that is currently in place.₃ This carbon tax, which only came into effect 14 months ago, was implemented by the Labor Party.₄  In just a short period of time, it has already had remarkable effects on Australian carbon emissions.  ABC Australia reports that "emissions from electricity have fallen by about seven percent, coal use for electricity is down by about 17 percent and renewable energy generation is up by 25 percent" as a result of the carbon tax.  This scheme has Australia on track to meet their Renewable Energy Target, which aims to have 20% of electricity coming from renewable energy by 2020.  Abbott and the Liberal Party are relying on a Direct Action program to replace the already successful carbon tax program.  Many leading Australian economists have already expressed skepticism about this program and its effectiveness.  This plan is already believed to not meet the standards required to support the widely popular and already-in-place plan of reducing emissions 20% of 2000 levels by 2020.  In fact, it seems as if Abbott has already conceded this fight as he has publically stated that his plan can meet the 5% reduction that they have targeted, much less than the publically supported and bipartisan supported 20%.  There are also estimates that under this plan, emissions will actually increase 9% rather than decrease.₁₀  

Instead of the carbon tax, this Direct Action plan gives taxpayer dollars to the polluting companies as an incentive to reduce their emissions.  This is exactly like subsidy programs in the United States.  The catch: these companies have no requirement to actually reduce their emissions, as there is no limit on pollution.  

In addition to this dramatic move by Abbott and the Liberal Party, he also plans to reduce spending on climate change action via greenhouse gas emission reductions.  Abbott has budgeted $3.2 billion AUD (Australian Dollars) to his Direct Action initiative.  He also stated that he would not spend a dime more, even if it were required to meet his 5% emissions reduction target.

Abbott is not taking his first major policy task lightly; he knows that this is an uphill battle with many obstacles.  In the current government, it would be foolish for him to take up this task as soon as he is sworn in.  The Green Party and the Labor Party, who make up the majority of the Senate, have both stated that they will defend the carbon tax at all costs.  Any attempt by Abbott to take the repeal bill to them will result in a failure.  However, should he wait until the new Senate convenes in July 2014, he may have a better chance of repealing the tax, although it is not known what the party make-up of the new Senate will be.₅  

Another obstacle that Abbott faces is the inevitable ratification of the second phase of the international carbon emissions treaty, the Kyoto Protocol.  This commitment, which was one of the last achievements of Prime Minister Rudd's tenure, calls for an international reduction of greenhouse gasses of 5%-25% by 2020 and a 2-degree warming limit in global temperatures.  

In many classes I have taken on natural resources and environmental policy, I have been repeatedly taught about the "resource curse."  This term refers to nations that are increasingly dependent on their abundant natural resources to drive their economies.  In Saudi Arabia it is oil; in Russia it is natural gas; in Australia, it is coal.  However, these nations actually have less economic growth than they all project, resulting in economic hardships for the country and its peoples.  The Australian Liberal Party has many ties to the mining and fossil fuel industry, which should come as no surprise given their less-than-appealing climate action goals and seemingly anti-environmental and pro-coal policies.  It should then be expected that the Liberal Party would support and implement policies that benefit these industries.  Abbott's ties to the industry may also explain his effort to repeal the Minerals Resource Rent Tax.₆  This policy taxes all profits that are made on the extraction of non-renewable resources.₇  

Perhaps the most notable and important ecological (marine) formation on Earth, the Great Barrier Reef, is in the crosshairs of Tony Abbott.  He has voiced support for the expansion of the nations largest coal seaport at Abbot Point.  This expansion calls for the dredging and depositing of over 3 million cubic meters of materials INSIDE of the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park.  At risk are turtles, dolphins, thousands of other species and, of course, the single most important marine formation on earth--The Reef.  Not only is this essential factor of marine biodiversity at risk, but lest not forget that the Great Barrier Reef is arguably Australia's largest tourist attraction brining in over $6 billion AUD each year.₈  

All of this frightening information isn't to say that the Liberal Party is the party of the bad guys and that when they ousted the Labor Party all went to Hell.  No. The Labor Party itself was no poster child for the environment either.  They too had their fair share of policies that I would deem disgraceful and irresponsible, as it relates to the environment.  As George Monbiot of The Guardian put it, "Labor’s failure to protect the natural world ensures that Abbott’s philistinism is harder to contest."₉  Constant failures on part of the national leaders to protect an essential part of the Australian economy and the Australian way of life - the environment - creates this notion in society that this - environmental degradation - may be the new norm necessary to advance Australia economically.  It is a scheme by the higher-up's--they have pulled the carpet over the eyes of the people.  Essentially, they have been able to get away with egregious acts of implementing harmful environmental policies that are aimed at benefiting special interests and removing the "green tape" (environmental regulations) that Tony Abbott claims are harming the nation.  

The social and environmental programs that have been implemented and adopted by past administrations - the Kyoto Protocol and the Carbon Tax - seem to exemplify the Australian ethos of the peoples' deep and passionate relationship with the environment.  Australians are passionate about their environment and take pride in its natural beauty, whether it is the Great Barrier Reef, the Desert's or the beautiful beaches that line the island-nation-continent.  It is for this reason that it makes sense to have a carbon tax to reduce emissions and promote renewable energy in an attempt to clean up the air and reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions that are degrading the environment.  It is for this reason that it makes sense that Australians treasure the protection of the Great Barrier Reef and the nation's abundant marine life.  It is for this reason that it does not make sense that Tony Abbott has been chosen to lead a nation that is rich in environmental and natural beauty.  

1) http://www.liberal.org.au/our-beliefs
2) http://whc.unesco.org/en/statesparties/AU/
3) http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2013/09/09/3844360.htm
4) http://www.alp.org.au/asustainableenvironment
5) http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2013/09/09/3844360.htm
6) http://www.liberal.org.au/latest-news/2013/05/06/failed-mining-tax-should-be-scrapped-not-expanded
7) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minerals_Resource_Rent_Tax
8) http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2044585,00.html
9) http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/05/abbott-climate-change-election
10) http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2013/09/09/3844360.htm