In the week before the election campaign began the IPCC released its latest report that contained warnings that deep, rapid and sustained emissions reductions are needed to prevent temperatures from rising 1.5C or 2C above pre-industrial levels.
And yet, as policy director Greg Jericho notes in his column in Guardian Australia, the issue has been virtually ignored in the election campaign thus far – with most focus being on the “costs” of reducing emissions rather than a focus on the need to do so, or that the cost of renewable energy has fallen so far that “maintaining emission-intensive systems may, in some regions and sectors, be more expensive than transitioning to low emission systems”.
There need to be a focus on the jobs in a low-emissions economy rather than a belief that Australia can keep avoiding the reality of climate change.
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
Eight things you need to know about the Government’s plan to change Australian elections
And eight ideas to improve it
There is no such thing as a safe seat | Fact sheet
A notable trend in Australian politics has been the decline of the share of the vote won by both major parties at federal elections. One effect of this is that there are no longer any safe seats in Australian politics: minor parties and independents win more “safe” seats than they do “marginal” ones. The declining
The election exposed weaknesses in Australian democracy – but the next parliament can fix them
Australia has some very strong democratic institutions – like an independent electoral commission, Saturday voting, full preferential voting and compulsory voting. These ensure that elections are free from corruption; that electorate boundaries are not based on partisan bias; and that most Australians turn out to vote. They are evidence of Australia’s proud history as an