The second most appallingly idiotic consequence of the Greens’ decision to block an emissions trading scheme – and let’s face it there is some very strong competition – is that it has managed to turn a debate over what to do about climate change into a debate over whether it is even real or not.
It’s hard to believe, but just a couple of years ago the vast majority of the public overwhelmingly supported action on man-made global warming and a comprehensive carbon pollution reduction scheme was all but inevitable, with strong bi-partisan support led by the top minds of the Labor and Liberal parties.
But then the flat-earth faction of the Coalition revolted and Malcolm Turnbull was assassinated in one of the more disappointing but thoroughly entertaining episodes of Australian politics. (Remember when Kevin Andrews was going to be Opposition Leader? Good times.)
Turnbull having been betrayed by the hard right of his own party, and the Rudd Government now betrayed by the Liberals, the fate of Mother Gaia now lay in the hands of the loose collection of vegetables we affectionately refer to as “Greens”. Finally their chance to save the planet had arrived.
But did they save it? Did those hemp-wearing compost mulchers help the Earth Goddess make it to the next full moon party?
No they did not. Instead they effectively united with the hard right of the Liberal party to plunge a stake through the heart of Mother Earth. A stake upon which no organic tomatoes grew.
The fully mandated and fully modelled carbon pollution reduction scheme, a plan to save the planet that was overwhelmingly endorsed by voters for both major parties at the previous federal election, was killed off by a minor party which claims – and this is like totes ironic – to be pro-environment.
In one of those delightfully succinct appraisals that the British are so good at, the top scientist Lord May of Oxford – an advisor to the UK Government on their proudly up-and-running emissions trading scheme – used the following term to describe the Greens’ move: “Stupid.”
But since that remarkably apt assessment, things have, though it is hard to believe, deteriorated further.
Thanks to the Greens’ naïve, self-serving and elitist obstructionism (due to “an overriding desire to feel good about themselves” according to the ever-observant Lord May) we are now in an environment where the debate has shifted to whether or not man-made climate change is even real.
People whose previous high-watermark of achievement was presetting a VCR in the 1980s (and don’t get me wrong, that was seriously hard) are earnestly espousing their considered position that man-made global warming isn’t happening, as though such things were merely a matter of opinion.
People whose highest qualification is a three-week HTML course at the local TAFE (again, also hard) are throwing up websites preaching whackjob theories about scientists conspiring to take over the world. (More worryingly they say it as if that would be a bad thing.)
In short, it is my firm belief that the sky is green and that Mount Everest is actually a rockpool near Acapulco and any scientist who says otherwise is just lying to get a government grant.
These views are increasingly being given equal weighting in the public debate. And why?
Because once the loony left Greens showed themselves to be intransigent, extreme and unwilling to be reasonable on this most important issue, the loony right suddenly didn’t appear so loony.
Average Australians saw the Greens actively enforce zero action on a situation they had previously deemed catastrophic. Surely this blatant and clumsy politicking over such a vital issue meant they didn’t truly believe in its gravity and were only seeking to empower themselves?
Such self-serving behaviour is perfect fodder for right-wing conspiracy theorists. It is, to use a term even the Greens themselves might understand, their fuel.
And are they right? Do the Greens care more about political posturing and going to bed in their inner-city terraces with smug self-satisfaction than they do about saving the planet?
Well, let’s look at the facts – or rather the one most salient and inescapable fact that roars like a lion this week: If it were not for the Greens, Australia would have a functioning, active and effective emissions trading scheme today.
Let’s just contemplate that again: We would have an emissions trading scheme cutting carbon pollution right now – but the Greens stopped it from happening.
And since that point, the ALP-Greens alliance has been so woeful at advocating the case for climate change and what to do about it that they have actually started turning former believers away in droves. It’s enough to make any self-respecting spin doctor reach for the sick bucket.
So here we are. Not talking about what to do to save the planet, but whether the planet even needs saving at all. You can smell Rome burning.
But as I said, this was only the second most idiotic result of the Greens’ actions.
The even bigger concern is that the Greens-ALP prosecution of and response to the climate change issue has been so excruciatingly inept it has ensured not just a victory for the Coalition at the next election, but a Coalition with both a will and a mandate to tear up any serious plans to reduce carbon emissions.
Sadly for Lord May and anyone else genuinely concerned about climate change the word “stupid” does not even begin to describe the Greens’ role in this. “Tragi-moronic” might be closer to the mark.
Facebook Recommendations
Read all about it
Punch live
Up to the minute Twitter chatter
Government to consider a Greens call for a national anti-corruption body #auspolhttp://t.co/mrkCu9HQ
Recent posts
The latest and greatest
Reports of Ron Paul’s death are greatly exaggerated
Reports of Ron Paul’s political demise have been greatly exaggerated and his tactical genius is…
They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not…
Our Budget blade didn’t cut aid, it’s being paid in spades
Ten million children vaccinated. 2.5 million people with access to safe drinking water. And 30 million…
Nosebleed Section
choice ringside rantings
From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments
Michael S says:
"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone
Change Up! says:
I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]Gentle jabs to the ribs
Real women like men who drink beer
British comedian John Cleese calls them “beer fairies”. It’s a euphemism for… Read more
Most commented