Labor’s emissions targets claims still don’t add up

This furphy of the Green-Left that everyone else in the world is going green and somehow Australia is the fossil fuel pariah of the world is just rubbish. It’s time we call it out, writes Peta Credlin.

As the world’s finance markets wake up to the reality of coronavirus, for many of us, the economic infection headed our way will be worse than any physical symptoms we might get.

That’s because at around a two per cent mortality rate, and while it is still early days, more are dying from seasonal influenza than this new virus. But as we can already see from comments by Prime Minister Scott Morrison and his Treasurer last week, the budget impacts from coronavirus are real, with the Coalition’s long promised return to surplus looking more and more shaky as we head towards the end of the financial year.

I don’t envy Josh Frydenberg here at all. He’s worked hard to get the budget back towards balance, which simply means we don’t spend more as a country than what we earn, as well as start to pay off some of our $571 billion in debt.

He’s a smart man, so he had already anticipated things like bushfires, that while he didn’t know for certain would happen, he would have prudently put money aside in case they did. But then, along came this new virus that has meant millions needed to spent to keep Australians safe, and then millions more lost in tax payments that haven’t been made as coronavirus hits tourism operators, airlines, universities, companies that export fresh food to China, and our mining sector because a shutdown China isn’t running its factories, and it’s those factories that sustain our resource wealth.

Our budget is in tougher territory, and the impact of coronavirus looks like it’s going to get worse before it gets better. Picture: AAP/Mick Tsikas

All of this explains why running a strong economy matters so that we can weather global ups and downs. The Howard Government’s legacy of no net debt and surplus budgets meant we got through the GFC back in 2008 better than most. Now, unlike then, our budget is in tougher territory, and the impact of coronavirus on China, and now everywhere else, looks like it’s going to get worse before it gets better with many experts now predicting recessions across the globe.

These economic headwinds all come at a time when the parliament fought tooth and nail last week about a global emissions target for 30 years’ time; or ten elections away.

The Prime Minister declared he would never sign up to anything where he didn’t know the cost it would have on jobs and the Australian economy. Anthony Albanese said that cost of action was less important than the cost of inaction, but then couldn’t put a number on it either. He also claimed Australia would be left behind if we didn’t sign up, and that everyone else in the world was on-board.

This furphy that everyone else is going green and somehow Australia is the fossil fuel pariah of the world is just rubbish. We’ve heard it when it comes to coal-fired power. Can’t build it here, we’re told. Yet to our north, they’re building coal-fired power stations as fast as we’re importing wind turbines from China.

Treasurer Josh Frydenberg has a tough job ahead of him. Picture: AAP/Lukas Coch

Anthony Albanese claimed last week that 73 other countries are already committed to net zero emissions by 2050. So what could be wrong, then, with Australia signing up too, especially with Penny Wong’s claim that we’re already committed to it under the Paris Agreement?

All the non-binding Paris agreement actually stipulates is that signatories should aim to move towards net zero emissions sometime within the second half of this century. But even that statement typifies the green-left’s clever way of getting people to sign up to vague aspirations which it then distorts into binding commitments.

The opposition leader’s claim is not exactly a lie: 73 countries might indeed have signed up to net zero emissions; but it’s certainly misleading to conclude that achieving net zero emissions is no big deal just because that’s what “almost everyone” is aiming for.

Many of the 73 countries that have signed up are relatively small. But a close look shows that the 73 “net zero” adherents aren’t even a majority of the world’s 193 countries, let alone a majority of the world’s population or GDP.

The countries that haven’t yet signed up to net zero emissions produce 73 per cent of the world’s wealth (or GDP), have 72 per cent of the world’s population, and produce 77 per cent of the world’s emissions.

Of the G20 developed countries, those that have not signed onto net zero emissions have 62 per cent of total GDP, 54 per cent of population and 64 per cent of emissions. So much for the claim that everyone is on board – or even the claim that all developed countries are on board.

Of the G20 developed countries, those that have not signed onto net zero emissions have 62 per cent of total GDP. Picture: AAP/Lukas Coch

What’s more, only four countries – that’s right, just four – Switzerland, Norway, Suriname and the Marshall Islands – have submitted their future plans to get emissions down to the United Nations (along with a demand for hundreds of millions of aid dollars to do it too).

Of the countries that have committed to net zero, many have qualified their headline commitment in the fine print, like New Zealand, that’s explicitly excluded agriculture from its commitment, even though it makes up almost 50 per cent of its total emissions.

Let’s face it, why would any country rush to commit to a net zero target that wins cheap applause for today’s leaders while inflicting economic and lifestyle pain on future generations?

In practice, achieving net zero emissions means the end of fossil fuel power: no coal; no oil; no gas. All cars will have to be electric and all electricity will have to be provided by wind, solar, hydro or nuclear (only in Australia, nuclear power remains illegal). It means the end of affordable air travel (meaning tourism is in trouble). And it means the end of eating meat because the main contribution to agricultural emissions are methane producing farm animals.

When it comes to actually reducing emissions, as opposed to making grand announcements without a plan to back them up, Australia is one of the very few countries that can be taken seriously. Since 2005, our emissions are down 13 per cent. Over the same period Canada’s are down just 2 per cent and New Zealand’s are up – yes up – 4 per cent, although you’d never guess that from the climate rock star status accorded to Kiwi PM Jacinda Ardern.

On the subject of climate, our only fault is being relentlessly practical, instead of adopting empty green promises.

Originally published as Labor’s emissions targets claims still don’t add up