The climate debate reveals how confused the philosophical underpinnings of political parties have become, writes Richard Denniss for The Australian Financial Review.
Public debate about the details of climate policy can be like seven-year-olds arguing over who would win a battle between Spiderman and The Incredible Hulk.
The debate is messy because of the combination of old economic concepts, new political slogans, and a complicated Senate. The outcome is a partisan sparring match so confused and conflicted that, dare I say it, Twitter and news headlines simply can’t capture the complexity of what is going on!
There are many ways to change consumer and industry behaviour, including taxes, subsidies, prohibition, campaigns and regulation. All political parties support these tools but disagree on which tool should be used for which problem. The question usually revolves around politics rather than philosophy.
Related documents
Between the Lines Newsletter
The biggest stories and the best analysis from the team at the Australia Institute, delivered to your inbox every fortnight.
You might also like
Koala sanctuary may come with diabolical trade off
Environmentalists rejoiced on the weekend when the NSW Government announced it planned to incorporate 176 thousand hectares of forest into the long-proposed Great Koala National Park.
How the government is setting everyone up to fail on green claims
If a private company ran a scheme that misled consumers, inflated investor confidence, and exposed its clients to legal risk, we would expect the government to shut it down.
Carbon conference more about capturing taxpayer dollars than emissions
A conference claiming to be “Australia’s premier carbon capture and storage (CCS) event”, which began in Melbourne yesterday, is less about climate action and more about subsidies for fossil fuel industries, according to The Australia Institute.