Expansionary Institute

Forum Admin
futurist3000@aol.com

SYDNEY (AFP) Aug 25, 2002


Australia remains defiant on its refusal to ratify the Kyoto Protocol ahead of this week's Earth Summit in Johannesburg and has dismissed criticism it is refusing to face up to its environmental responsibility.

According to the government, well-meaning European nations do not understand the disadvantages Australia would suffer if it ratified the accord on greenhouse gas emissions in a region in which most of its competitors are not bound by it.
Canberra also says green protestors refuse to acknowledge its strong environmental record and argues that criticism is irrelevant because Australia is close to meeting its Kyoto targets, even without ratification.

But Environment Minister David Kemp has signalled Australia will not change its stance at the United Nations World Summit on Sustainable Development.

Under the 1997 Kyoto Protocol, industrialised nations will bring greenhouse emissions, which are believed to be a major contributor to global warming, to 108 percent of 1990 levels by 2008-12.

Kyoto has been ratified by all 15 European Union members and Japan but has fallen well short of the 55 percent of greenhouse gas emitting nations, in particular the United States, required for it to take effect.

Prime Minister John Howard announced in June that he would not ratify Kyoto and has repeatedly rejected previous demands that Australia, with the worlds highest per capita levels of greenhouse gas emissions, honour the treaty.

The pressure intensified this week when a report by Melbourne University academic Peter Christoff commissioned by green groups accused the government of presiding over a vast ecological crisis, singling out its record on greenhouse gas emissions.

"Per capita, Australians generate more greenhouse gases and clear more land than the people of any other wealthy nation," Chrisoff said. "Internationally, Australia is a laggard state."

US President George W. Bush refused to ratify Kyoto last year on the grounds it would cost US jobs, leading Australias domestic critics to accuse Howard of hiding behind the United States skirts.

"The Australian government continues to equivocate, hiding behind the US position, it's time the government saw which way the wind is blowing," Greenpeace campaigner Frances MacGuire said.

"If we fail to ratify the protocol, Australia will lose out both in terms of climate impacts and business opportunities in new carbon markets."

But Kemp said ratifying Kyoto would drive Australian industry offshore as most of the country's regional neighbours were not bound by the agreement, unlike in Europe, where all countries were bound by the same rules.

"We're surrounded by countries that are not within the Kyoto framework and we could seriously disadvantage our industry," he said.

"We could impose heavy costs on our businesses, we could be driving investment offshore at the very time when really what we want to do is to continue a strong and competitive economy while at the same time meeting our international obligations to cut back on greenhouse emissions."

Kemp released figures showing Australia was on track to cut greenhouse gases to 111 percent of 1990 levels but he said shedding the last three percentage points needed to meet the Kyoto target would be too costly for the Australian economy.

His claim was challenged by 254 Australian economists, who signed a declaration calling for the government to immediately ratify the agreement.

"Policy options are available that would slow climate change without harming employment or living standards in Australia, and these may in fact improve productivity in the long term," they said.

But greenhouse gas producers have praised the government for refusing to bow to international pressure and said technology was on the verge of solving the problem of greenhouse gas emissions.

"We believe that within 10 years we can build coal-fired power stations and have zero emissions of greenhouse gases," Minerals Council of Australia policy director Brian Horwood said.

All rights reserved. © 2002 Agence France-Presse. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by Agence France-Presse. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of Agence France-Presse.