The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and Significant Problem
Climate change has been a significant problem since the recent past. Rapid increase of population, complex lifestyle which had been changed overtime and introducing new and advanced technological aspects could be considered as few reasons to this significant problem. According to the fifth assessment report of The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), human activities have played a major role in the causes for climate change. The report further provides evidence explaining that the sea level has risen over the past few decades and it states that the half amount of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emission from the maximum amount has already reached by 2011.
Reports which states about climate change provides clear reasoning as to why that the governments should introduce and implement certain policies to prevent climate change and environmental pollution from escalating to a state where it could get worse and could have done a serious damage to the planet and ultimately it could lead to the destruction of human beings. Thus, taking preventing measures to minimize the pollution counts as a significant responsibility of a government. Through this essay the author is especially discussing about the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme Bill which was housed in 2009. This bill covers many areas which can be identified in relation to carbon emission.
Therefore, many authorities and institutes could be liable with the policies that brings forward with the implication of the bill. Consistent with the parliamentary webpage of Australian government this bill gives effect to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, “the bill gives effect to Australia’s obligations under the UN Framework Convention on global climate change and therefore the Kyoto Protocol by outlining: entities and emissions covered by the scheme; liable entities’ obligation to surrender emission units comparable to their emissions; limits on the quantity of emissions units which will be used; the character and allocation of Australian emissions units; mechanisms to contain costs; linking to other emissions trading schemes; assistance in reference to emissions-intensive trade-exposed activities and coal-fired electricity generators; voluntary inclusion of reforestation activities under the scheme; the Australian National Registry of Emissions Units; and monitoring and enforcement.
Also contains a regulation making power”. It is essential to respond to the climate change specially under the Kyoto protocol as it is clearly mentioned in the webpage as to why the government is obliged to take actions regarding the emission. According to the United Nations “The Kyoto Protocol legally binds developed country Parties to emission reduction targets. The Protocol’s first commitment period started in 2008 and ended in 2012”. This bill was out ruled twice within the parliament mainly due to few reasons. These reasons might be identified as political, economical and social aspects that might affect the process of implication of policies.
This essay discusses those aspects in relation to the bill. This essay outlines these aspects by taking following examples into consideration. The political aspect covers by examining the Political wars between parties and interest groups. Economical aspect would be discussed through the Economical concerns that could be occurred because of the implication of the bill and finally, Social Concerns and the reaction of the society is explained to depicts the social aspect. First factor to discuss through this essay is the political wars between parties and interest groups which had occurred during the housing of the bill and this would be clearly covering one of the significant aspects or the reasons to the failure of this bill in 2009. Different parties and interest groups have their own political agendas and expectations which came out and played in the process of policy making. This could change or shapes the whole process accordingly.
The role played by the Liberal party opposition leader, Tony Abbott, by strongly opposed the initiative has impacted on the bill since the beginning. As it is mentioned earlier his actions in order to abolish carbon pricing bill might be considered as a political move. As Alexander White wrote to ‘The Guarding’ pointing out Tony Abbott had a political motivation as to why he was against the bill, because he was about to be leading the Liberal party after Malcolm Turnbull, and his position as a leader in the party was mainly based and determined around his campaign and opposition against to the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme in 2009.
‘The Guardian’ stated that “There are no doubt several competing reasons for Tony Abbott’s desires to abolish the carbon price. Obviously, there is a political imperative for him to pursue this course”. With mentioning this as a main factor, White points out few other reasons as well. White states that Tony Abbott is not convinced of a climate change and the effect which could be occurred to the society or the economy any time sooner due to the Carbon pollution or Abbott could be someone who does not believe in climate change at all. In order to prove the above point the article brings out the attitude Abbott had over the issue of climate change. “Mr Abbott himself famously said in an interview that climate change is ‘crap’, and his ministry and senior member of his political party are avowed climate change science deniers”.
As another point White mentioned that how mining industry and carbon intensive corporations have impacted on the decision of Abbott because those companies and industries are recognized as heavy donors to the Liberal party. Hence it is evident that the entire party is somewhat affected and under the influence of those investors. With having coalition government under the leadership of Labor party leader Kevin Rudd, it was difficult to get the political support to win the bill from the Liberal party due to those individual and party-political agendas. When considering industry groups, businesses, and other financial organizations it is notable that some Industry groups did not align with the initiative bill and demanded changes to the scheme and later on they supported to the amended bill.
But on the other hand, some groups and organizations supported the bill from the beginning. “Throughout the legislation drafting process, comments from business and industry groups have been primarily negative, although progressively less so. Generally financial, insurance and investment organizations are in favor of the scheme, Renewable energy groups are strongly in favor of the proposed scheme. Many carbon intensive industry groups are also generally supportive of the scheme and its timetable”.
However, industry groups, businesses and other financial organizations supported the bill at the time it was housed for the second time. The following table will give a comprehensive idea as in how several industry groups, businesses and other financial organizations had voted for the bill and it will give a clear understanding how their personal agendas have influenced on the final result of the voting. Almost all the industries, organizations have led by their ulterior motives where they wanted more benefits and favoritism from the bill to their own betterment.
Cite this Essay
To export a reference to this article please select a referencing style below