In the front half of 2019, radio shock jock and Sky News commentator Alan Jones — aided by former prime ministerial chief of staff Peta Credlin — went on a bizarre tirade about climate change. In this rant, Jones used a bowl of rice to make a point regarding the supposed insignificance of Australia's carbon emissions on a global scale. Key to his argument is the fact that Australia produces less than two per cent of the world's carbon emissions.
Jones' segment was roundly mocked for his strange analogising, but his attitude — that Australia is too small to make a difference on carbon emissions — is shared by many. It puts him in good company with, for example, Emissions Reduction Minister Angus 'Fantastic, Great Move' Taylor and a minor political player called Scott Morrison (you may have heard of him).
Like all good misleading claims, there is a grain of truth to be found here: it is true that if Australia were the only country in the world to reduce its carbon emissions, there would be no chance of slowing anthropogenic climate change.
This line of thinking has been countered by many — including satirist Charlie Pickering in a masterful parody of Jones' own hot take — who observe that around 40 per cent of the world's carbon emissions are produced by countries with similar outputs to Australia. Collectively these countries can make a significant difference if each reduces their carbon emissions. Additionally, Australia is notoriously one of the largest emitters of carbon per capita in the world, a number made much worse when taking into account our coal exports.
That said, while Australia can definitely make a difference as part of a collective effort, our real ability to effect change actually lies elsewhere.
Australia quite proudly punches above its weight in many arenas, yet we are failing to take a leadership role in debating climate change. Despite the bluster and jingoism of many conservative pundits on our ability to compete internationally in other fields, Australia's capacity to influence global climate policy is frequently downplayed by the current government and their journalistic allies.
Even worse than supposed irrelevance, however, is Australia's active scuttling of international efforts to tackle climate change. The clearest case in point comes from the COP25 conference last year, where Australia was one of the few hold-outs on coming to an agreement for a new global carbon market. Though we were not alone, Australia was credited as one of the strongest and most significant opponents to the scheme.
"The right thing to do is the right thing to do, regardless of who else is doing it. As a wealthy nation — with a high potential for uptake of renewable energy — we are in a position to lead by example."
Furthermore, Australia continued to argue for its use of carry-over credits in reaching Paris Agreement targets (despite such a move being labelled 'cheating' by Laurence Tubiana, one of the architects of the agreement). Our evasion of the tepid Paris Agreement targets is especially disheartening, given a general consensus that the targets are nowhere near ambitious enough to curb the worst effects of climate change.
It is basic diplomacy to know that the fewer allies one has, the harder it becomes to hold out. If Australia began batting for the team of climate action, we would weaken the position of staunch advocates for the status quo. Moreover, given Australia's status as a relatively wealthy country (with much of that wealth generated from a fossil fuel-powered mining boom) our voice lends weight to the argument that fossil fuels are not the future.
I am not alone in this thought; strange bedfellows Kevin Rudd and Julie Bishop have stressed the need for Australia to become global leaders in the fight against climate change. In particular, the backdrop of the ongoing fire catastrophe provides the perfect leverage for us to put pressure on our allies for significant, tangible action. Economically, ecologically and emotionally Australia cannot continue to endure tragedies of this scale on an increasingly regular basis.
In a recent interview regarding the link between climate change and our bushfires, Prime Minister Scott Morrison said that the 'suggestion there's any one emissions reduction policy or climate policy that has contributed directly to any of these fire events is just ridiculous'. Predictably, in light of his current popularity, this comment has gone down like a lead balloon. He isn't, however, technically wrong.
There is no one single climate policy that has led us to this point. Rather, there have been decades of successive policy failures by many governments across the globe. Australia has been one of those that has failed to act and, in doing so, has emboldened others who refuse to make substantiative commitments.
Real climate action is needed and needed urgently. The right thing to do is the right thing to do, regardless of who else is doing it. As a wealthy nation — with a high potential for uptake of renewable energy — we are in a position to lead by example. Subsequently, Australia can no longer afford to point our finger at others, like school children, and stubbornly demand they take the jump before we do.
Tim Hutton is a teacher, masters student and freelance writer based in Brisbane. He writes on politics, education, media, societal issues, and the intersection of all of the above.