The CPRS has fundamental flaws that need to be addressed. A mechanism to ensure that the efforts of individuals and state governments to reduce emissions result in lower emissions, not extra permits for other polluters, needs to be introduced. Similarly, the decision to insulate the petrol price from the introduction of a carbon price needs

While it may not have been the government’s intention, it looks like the most potent symbol associated with the CPRS might be the Senate uniting to vote it down. The likely delay in implementing an effective scheme is a source of much regret for people who have called for urgent action for many years. But

Dr Bill de Maria discusses the new whistleblowing proposals; David Ingles laments the exclusion of people on NewStart from either of the stimulus packages and explains the great superannuation tax concession rort; Reconciliation Australia looks at reconciliation a year after the Rudd apology; Tully Fletcher examines the current state of legal aid; Richard Denniss enumerates

A Human Rights Act for Australia. Executive excess. Policy on the run; is policy underdone? Food security

The CPRS in its current form is deeply flawed. If the government wants to see the legislation passed, it is going to have to amend its proposal. In order to take advantage of every additional emissions reduction and allow every concerned citizen to make a direct contribution, the government needs to convert its ‘cap and

It is often said that there is nothing more powerful than an idea whose time has come. But it seems that in the case of Minister Wong’s version of emissions trading, the so called Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (CPRS), there is nothing more pitiful than an idea whose time never actually came. The targets are

The CPRS is looking more and more like a hotted up second hand car. It sounded good in the advertisement, had all the fancy bits added on and looked really shiny and ready to go. Unfortunately the closer you look at it, the less reliable it gets. It might not be as fancy, but an

The unfortunate reality is that, having waited a decade for a government to express a willingness to do something about climate change, we are now faced with a choice between a policy that locks us into failure by dictating that emissions in Australia cannot fall by more than five per cent and abandoning the CPRS

Burying bad news in the media. The impact of climate change on new businesses. Cooperatives. The Government’s new human rights consultation.

Hugh Saddler and Helen King examine the difficulties implicit in applying emissions trading to agriculture; Josh Fear reclaims your time from the telemarketers and examines the superannuation industry in Australia; David Richardson explains how accelerated depreciation would help the renewable energy industry; Richard Denniss looks at a new top tax rate; John Langmore asks whether

An economical truth. The bogus economic case for telemarketing. Bee lines. Over a barrel.

Ministerial responsibility. A major flaw in the ETS. Thinking long term.

Government assistance to industry. New anti-SLAPP legislation in the ACT. ACMA’s recent decision on subliminal advertising. The need for wellbeing in a climate-changed Australia.

Why we care more about the financial crisis than climate change. The 50 per cent discount on capital gains. Whether there has been an exodus from public schools to private ones.

Richard Denniss explains how an emissions trading scheme works; Josh Fear looks at financial choices; Gemma Edgar explores the possibility of a national compact between the government and NGOs and David Richardson writes about the problems of hidden unemployment.

Not only can current jobs be adapted to green jobs, Australian engineers who now go to Europe, California or China might be lured home. Eventually, every job needs to be a green job: every industry will need to readjust to the reality of climate change and play their part in cutting Australia’s emissions. At best,

Incoming Executive Director Richard Denniss shares his strategic vision for the Institute.

Clive Hamilton left the Australia Institute at the end of February to devote himself to writing. Here he pens his last comment for the newsletter.

Ross Garnaut, who will report in June to the Rudd Government on its emissions trading system, is a former trade economist now spending a lot of time thinking about how to prevent powerful industries undermining the Government’s plans. He has come up with a radical solution. Let’s have one target, a carbon budget aimed at

The science is becoming more alarming by the month, and so are the impacts of global warming itself. The demand for decisive action can only intensify over the next three years; it will require far-sighted policies to bring about a wholesale transformation of the nation’s energy economy, a structural change on a par with that

Comments this week by Federal Environment Minister Malcolm Turnbull suggest that the Government is beginning to realise the incompatibility between endless growth in the aviation sector and the prevention of dangerous climate change. Even if Australia adopts a lower target of 60% reductions by 2050, as the Labor Party has proposed, aviation could still gobble

The Prime Minister, various ministers and the fossil fuel lobby have for years claimed that cutting emissions would be economically ruinous, cause massive job losses and destroy our international competitiveness. None of these claims is backed by credible evidence and can easily be shown to be false.

Turbulence ahead by Andrew Macintosh and Christian Downie Universities and fossil fuel capture by Christian Downie Silencing dissent: The Federal Government strikes by James Arvanitakis Grassroots campaign against sexualisation of children by Julie Gale See Paris and Die? by Steve Biddulph Academic economists call for Kyoto ratification by Clive Hamilton Insuring against catastrophic change by

Who wants a nuclear power plant by Andrew Macintosh Burning up the landscape by Christian Downie Defending dissent by Sarah Maddison Mobile phones and consumer kids by Christian Downie What’s wrong with a SLAPP? by Brian Walters Muffins beat Affluenza The National Greenhouse Accounts and land clearing by Andrew Macintosh Woodchips or water? Legal protection

The Government dismissed the Institute’s report, claiming we don’t understand the Kyoto accounting rules and didn’t make adjustments for differences in methods. These claims are false (and are addressed in a paper available on the Institute’s website). Even if they were correct, the fact remains that NCAS is a black box: its data are not

The Government needs to overcome its ideological prejudice against all things environmental. Its conservative voter base will, if it hasn’t already. They realise that the effects of climate change will be felt in their lifetime and that material prosperity must go hand-in-hand with sound environmental stewardship.

Back in 1999, the Government overhauled the original Commonwealth environment laws that were introduced by the Whitlam Labor government. The old laws needed updating and the Government obliged, creating the loftily titled Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. While an improvement on the original laws, the EPBC Act has proven to be a failure, largely

Sex and Children: A volatile mix by Emma Rush Playing politics with national security by Andrew Wilkie Religion and global warming by Kate Mannix Howard’s morality play by Andrew Macintosh Howard’s politics of the past by Clive Hamilton The changing climate of business by Molly Harriss Olson Dramatic changes to Land Rights law by Sean

The recent rush of activity around climate change has led some to suggest that the Federal Government has finally got the message on the perils of global warming, but history indicates such optimism is misplaced. The Government’s announcements of the past month are just more of the window-dressing and stalling tactics that we have had