Australia Government Fails to Pass Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme
The anticipated decision of Australia’s government on new carbon-trading laws is not a good one. After much debating and political unrest, the package of 11 bills has been rejected with a 41 to 33 vote. At least seven opposing senators’ votes were needed to pass the new set of laws, but only 2 cast their lot in favor of it.
Many were also wondering if Labor Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, would hold a snap election if the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme did not pass. The answer: the opposing Liberal Party will have another chance to vote when parliament resumes in February. According to Deputy Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, the reason they are postponing the vote for 2 months is:
“We believe that over the Christmas period there is time for the calmer heads in the Liberal Party to consider this question, to consider acting in the national interest. The prime minister, on a number of occasions, has said it’s his intention to have the parliament go full term. The prime minister has also said that he is determined to see this legislation pass the parliament.”

photo by David Iliff (source: wikimedia commons)
Unfortunately, new Liberal Party leader, Tony Abbott, doesn’t agree with that, and was quick to say so as he took up the position on December 1st. Unlike his predecessor, Malcolm Turnbull, who offered bipartisan support for the bills, Abbott sees it as nothing more than an energy taxation scheme. “This isn’t about climate change; it’s about the mechanism for dealing with it. It’s about stopping a great, big, new tax,” he said.
If you are wondering what this Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme would include:
- A modeled carbon price range of $20 (AUD) to $40 (AUD) per carbon tonne.
- $4.8 billion (AUD) of assistance (in the form of free permits) for the most polluting electricity generators.
- Financial assistance to compensate low and middle income families from increased costs.
- A price camp on emissions, starting at $40 (AUD) per tonne of CO2.
- Reforestation can count as carbon credit, but deforestation and forest degradation do not count as a liability.
And that’s to name only a few points included in the legislation. Many viewed the plan as flawed, though its defeat still ended up a disappointment—at least to Erwin Jackson, research and policy director at the Sydney-based Climate Institute. He says “the scheme wasn’t perfect, but it did provide a springboard for Australia to reap the benefits that will come from being ready for a low carbon future. As of today, we’re stuck in a quagmire”.
However, Donna Green, a climate policy expert at the University of New South Wales, has a more optimistic approach:
“The way politics have changed in the past 24 hours means anything is possible. What seems like bad news might be good news. Labor might decide to take an alternative strategy and implement something that would promote the growth of the low-carbon industry in Australia—and start to entice back some of our best scientists and engineers who’ve given up on trying to get their ideas out here. To me that has to be a carbon tax.”
A number of countries, including the US, have been keeping a close eye on this set of bills and all the debating that has come along with it. Now that it has been voted a failure (for the time being), it may have an impact on which direction other countries will attempt to go with their own carbon tax/cap-and-trade schemes. While it certainly is an important decision, I think the whole world will be focused on Copenhagen for the next 2 weeks and the results of that meeting are going to be what makes or breaks any further climate change efforts.
By Heidi Marshall
Tags: australia, Australian government, Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme, carbon tax, legislation, Liberal Party
2 Comments
You can also log in to post a comment.


What democratic societies should learn lessen from Australia election 2010:
1. What voters crying for reforms not just parliament, but for all department?
Voter’s pains did not link to high income Politicians and Bureaucracy.
The Australia historical hung parliament demonstrated the big gap of inequality society between the small educated elite groups who get highest pay by talk feast used mouth work controlling live essential resources of the country in every social platforms against the biggest less educated groups who get lowest pay by hands work squeezed by discriminative policies that sucking live blood from individual poor/less wealth off?
Voters’ voices do not hear?
Voters’ pains do not ease?
Voters’ cries do not care?
Voter is crying for department reforms over 70 years that resulting a 2010 Hung Parliament?
An iceberg example of voter’s crying:
“……it seem to me there was an unfair to treat me when the merit of “Claim for Disability Support Pension or Sickness Allowance” form in detail clearly defy 15 hours classify the cut off point for acceptance, when comparing to my early assessment completed in June this year that it has the merit less than 8 hours (0-7) work capacity due to my long term medical impairment since an injury occurred in 2005”…….
It was disappointing where the push of Parliament reform that mainly to brink good news to all MPs by the individual MPs during this year historical hung parliament in 70 years, and the reform did not including all Government Departments where it would directly brink good actions to all voters/or people?
Ma kee wai
(Member of Inventor Association Queensland since 1993)
What are time bombs of Australia democratic society?
The Australia historical hung parliament demonstrated the big gap of inequality society between the small educated elite groups who get highest pay by talk feast used mouth work controlling live essential resources of the country in every social platforms against the biggest less educated groups who get lowest pay by hands work squeezed by discriminative policies that sucking live blood from poor/less wealth off?
Voters’ voices do not hear?
Voters’ pains do not ease?
Voters’ cries do not care?
1. Poverty will not be phase out if no fairer resources to share;
2. Illness will not be reducing if no preventive measurement in real action;
3. Agriculture will not be revitalize if urbanization continuing its path;
4. Housing affordability will not be reach for young generation if government continues cashing from young generation debt by eating out the whole cake of education export revenue without plough back;
5. Manufacture industry will shrink smaller and smaller if no new elements there to power up to survive;
6. Employability will not in the sustainable mode for so long as manufacture and agriculture not going to boost.
Ma kee wai
(Member of Inventor Association Queensland since 1993)