And Then There Was One

I stayed in the hostel last night to watch the Australian election results roll in. After 11 and a half years in power, Howard's coalition government has been dramatically displaced by the Rudd Labor party. I don't pretend to know anything about Australian domestic politics, but commentary suggests that it was Howard's lack of 'contemporary' policy which lost him the voters, and in particular a couple of larger issues including lack of action over climate change.

As a country so dramatically and obviously affected by climate change in areas such as water shortage and in effects on Australian national institutions such as eucalyptus survival, and damage to the Great Barrier Reef (advice is see it while you can), and for a country with such a reputation for environmental beliefs, I always found it strange that the Australian government had not ratified the Kyoto protocol. And it seems that Australian people (particularly the young)were somewhat confused by this also:

While setting up a new bank account with a local Sydney branch, the lady going through the application noticed my new job title "Climate Change Consultant". She enquired what it entailed, and I politely informed her that I went out to factories and large companies and provided advice to them in how to reduce their carbon emissions (mainly through energy efficiency and good management techniques). She asked me the very frank question "how do you think the Australians stack up against the rest of the world?" I gave her the honest answer of "I haven't got much experience of Australia yet, but I think they are around 5 years behind the Europeans". She went into a long monalogue about her frustration at the governments refusal to ratify Kyoto and take action on climate change - frankly surprising me with her understanding and concern for the issues.

Watching the elections and the commentary on the political mood of a nation, the Australian attitude reminded me of the British popular opinion of two years ago. For all of the faults of Blair's government (mainly with respect to foreign policy), Blair spotted this change of popular opinion some time ago, and begun to initiate change (though you might question how successful it has been). Howard did not, and he paid with his job (and his party paid).

Blair has managed to put in motion some political reforms and has presided over the implementation of a number of emissions 'cap and trade' schemes including the climate change levy and the EU emissions trading scheme. And he was there at the inception of the renewable transport obligation and climate reduction commitment (that the British people will hear much about over the next 5 years or so). Personally I think more investment should have been made into capital grants schemes, and into improvements in planning policy to favour renewable energy schemes. Professionally however, the inception of these trading schemes have meant massive workloads for consultancies such as the one I work for.

So one of Rudd's election promises here in Australia has been the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. Which means that if my experience in climate change and energy consultancy over the last four years are anything to go by - the company I am about to go and work for will experience a massive rise in workload over coming months and years. Which is pretty significant, as it appears to me that it is the only reputable large company in Australia to be undertaking these types of projects.

In order to see the other concequence of the Australian government change on climate change politics cast your eyes on the linked map.

So I wonder. Will Bush heed the story of Howard and pay more attention to 'contemporary' politics? I wonder if Howard's story will be repeated on a larger scale.

Though of course Afghanistan hasn't ratified yet, so why should America.