Is everyone with any authority still playing Pass The Parcel with the health and safety of communities on NSW coastal floodplains? Will the Northern Rivers see effective state planning legislation amendments before the next big flood? Will local governments across the region stiffen their spines & act?

The Echo, 11 May 2023:

Development site at 60 Tringa Street, Tweed Heads, on Cobaki Creek.

Both the Tweed District Residents Association (TDRA) and Kingscliff Ratepayers and Progress Association (KRPA) have recently called for a moratorium on existing legacy or zombie development approvals (DAs) on floodplains. The state government continues to say that councils have the ability to deal with these problematic DAs, but the evidence seems to say otherwise.

The failure of current legislation to stop legacy DAs is of particular concern to the TDRA which has been seeking stop work orders on the recent activity by MAAS Group Holdings at Tweed on Cobaki Creek. MAAS bought the property, with a 27-year-old legacy development approval on it, last year for $20M+ and have started clearing the sensitive site. The Tweed Council have asked MAAS to ‘cease work’, but MAAS have declined leaving both Council and locals frustrated with their inability to stop the work and have the site reassessed in relation to flood and environmental impacts of the DA.

NSW Premier

Responding to The Echo NSW Premier Chris Minns, who spoke to community representatives on the issue of legacy developments in the lead-up to the NSW election said, ‘My office will be working closely with the planning minister as the government works on new rules to stop new developments on dangerous floodplains – having been on the ground in the region over the past couple of years, I know how important it is to get this addressed.’

The Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) told The Echo that, ‘The government is committed to drafting new rules and streamlining planning processes to stop new developments on dangerous floodplains’ yet they have thrown responsibility back to councils saying they already have the legal power to look at legacy developments.

‘Councils already have legal power under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act to take action against existing zombie developments, and DPE tightened planning rules in 2020 to clamp down on new ones,’ a DPE spokesperson said.

‘Councils also have powers to investigate and take enforcement action if they are concerned whether physical commencement has occurred, or if any part of the development does not comply with the relevant consent….

Action needed now

Peter Newton from KRPA responded to the DPE’s statement saying ‘it’s disappointing that the department has thrown this on Council’s shoulders given that it is obvious the legislation is not strong enough for Council to actually prevent legacy developments from proceeding, such as Cobaki, where the Council “cease” orders have been disregarded. The legislation is not working and needs the state government to step in and commit to reform.’

Tweed Council’s General Manager, Troy Green also highlighted the current failures in Council’s powers to take action on these types of DAs.

‘There has been no change in Council or state policy concerning floodplain development post the 2022 floods. The NSW State Government Flood Inquiry made various recommendations concerning floodplain development from which there have been no subsequent directions from the government,’ Mr Green told The Echo…...

Read the full article here.

It's the state and territory governments more than the federal government which are going to decide renters ability to attain & retain housing in the near future

 

In Australia there is evidence to suggest that by 2022 there were est. 640,000 Australian households whose housing needs were not being met. 

These households are either experiencing homelessness, in overcrowded homes or spending over 30% of their income on rent.

This unmet housing need is projected to increase to 940,000 households in 2041.

In a November 2022 the Community Housing Industry Association released a report noting the unmet need in states/territories/regions by number and percentage of all households. 

CHIA, Nov 2022, “Quantifying Australia’s unmet housing need: A national snapshot”, p.2

On 29 June 2022 The Guardian reported:

The public housing waiting list across all jurisdictions rose by more than 8,000 households last year, from 155,141 to 163,508. Most of the increase was among households considered “in greatest need”. While for the last nine years social housing stock remained static at est. 4.2% of all housing stock.

The National Cabinet meeting last Friday, 28 April 2023, ended with these joint announcements by the Prime Minister and state & territories leaders, according to ABC News:

• National cabinet has endorsed $2.2b in measures to strengthen Medicare

• The announcements include expanding the nursing workforce to improve access to primary care and incentives for doctors to stay open for longer hours

• Housing ministers will develop a proposal outlining ways to strengthen renters rights, which will be dealt with by national cabinet later in the year

• Work will be undertaken to improve the migration system through increased visa processing capacity and expanding pathways to permanent residency for skilled workers. [my yellow highlighting]

What is clear is that although there may be the intention that a guiding statement on renters rights will eventually be produced by the National Cabinet, it will be left to individual states and territories to decide how and to what degree renters rights will be strengthened.

As for the built-to-rent component of any national plan to increase housing stock, Master Builders Australia sent out a media release immediately after this National Cabinet meeting welcoming a national approach to reforms to address the housing crisis which stated in part:

Master Builders Australia CEO Denita Wawn said the decision to tackle infrastructure investment, planning reforms to increase housing supply and affordability alongside sustainable growth across states and territories is an important signal for the industry.

“Industry will work closely with the Planning Ministers and National Cabinet to ensure all options are on the table and there are no unintended consequences of other reforms that may dampen this effort,” said Ms Wawn.

The Commonwealth Government also announced a series of other measures to boost investment for increasing housing supply including: increasing the depreciation rate [from 2% to 4%] for eligible new build-to-rent projects, and reducing the withholding tax rate for eligible fund payments for managed investment trusts to foreign residents on income from newly constructed residential build-to-rent properties.

However, Master Builders Australia went on to make an ambit claim for further reform:

“More needs to be done to speed up the delivery of new housing in the medium and high-density part of the market over the short term. Government efforts to expand the stock of build-to-rent will provide welcome support.

“The challenge will be to make sure that we put downward pressure on building and construction costs to increase output.

“Builders continue to face regulatory burdens and prolonged delays in approvals for building applications, occupation certificates and land titles. Additionally, land shortages in the wrong places, high developer charges and inflexible planning laws are restricting opportunities to meet demand, speed up project timelines, and minimise costs to both builders and their clients,” Ms Wawn said.

Master Builders’ Delivering the housing needs for all Australians recommends policies around housing supply, workforce, supply chain risk and cost pressures, simplifying regulatory settings that support investment in housing and business productivity.

The Property Council of Australia is also in favour of what it classes on its website News & Research page as the emerging build-to-rent sector.

It sees this sector as having the potential to deliver 150,000 new build-to-rent homes into the rental market in the next 10 years (by 2043) and says of a report it commissioned from Ernst Young and published on 4 April 2023:

.. estimates that the current size of the build-to-rent sector in Australia is $16.87 billion (this equates to roughly 0.2 per cent of the total value of the residential housing sector), with the expectation that this value will continue to grow in the coming years. If it reached just 3 per cent of the residential market, it could be worth $290 billion.

In comparison, the build-to-rent sector comprises of 5.4 per cent of the total value of the residential sector in the UK and 12 per cent in the US.

The Housing Industry Association also issued a media release on 28 April 2023 welcoming the National Cabinet’s agreement today to support a range of reforms to address housing supply, stating:

HIA’s Deputy Managing Director – Industry and Policy, Jocelyn Martin said the decision to tackle planning reforms to increase housing supply and affordability ultimately leads to more affordable rental accommodation and provides the capacity to deliver social housing without impacting housing supply more broadly.

On the part of federal and state governments there appears to be an aversion to their having direct ownership of any project building social housing and, on the part of finance and construction industries – along with property developers and investors – there appears to be a similar aversion to such a direct supply of social housing by the first two tiers of government.

Perhaps the smell of desperation in the air – with 243 construction businesses put into insolvency by the Australian Securities & Investment Commission (ASIC) in March 2023 alone, joining an unspecified number of other construction, registered property investment and/or property development corporations within the January to March 1,879 businesses-strong insolvency list – has the National Cabinet seeking to resuscitate more than one bird with its housing funding commitments. 

Note: Searchable ASIC list can be found at

https://publishednotices.asic.gov.au/browsesearch-notices/

All these government and non-government actors appear to be suggesting that: after relaxing planning laws; increasing investment opportunities along with potential profits for all classes of investors; and the possibility for individuals, partnerships & corporations to access grants & other benefits in the proposed $10 billion Housing Australia Future Fund; then market forces will inevitably push rental costs down once housing supply increases even though the most optimistic rendition of proposed supply is unlikely to fully meet the nation's unmet secure residential housing need.

My admittedly jaded personal response to the idea that residential rents will significantly reduce over the next 10 years……

via GIPHY

I'm hoping that time will prove me wrong.

The 60 day script for medication treating chronic stable medical conditions was first recommended in August 2018 - it finally arrives in September 2023

 

RACGP: 60-day dispensing a win for Aussie patients

Royal Australian College of GPs

The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has warmly welcomed the federal Government’s decision to put patients first and make medicines cheaper and easier to access.

It comes following the Minister for Health and Aged Care Mark Butler’s announcement today doubling the amount of medicine a pharmacy can dispense to a patient to up to 60 days’ worth for more than 320 medicines on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme. This effectively halves the dispensing fees for these medicines.

Currently, patients are limited to a 28- or 30-day supply, forcing them to take more trips to the pharmacy for medications for stable conditions. The changes, which will come into effect on 1 September, will save patients up to $180 a year on medications for chronic conditions including heart disease and hypertension.

RACGP President Dr Nicole Higgins said it was a momentous day.

“This is a win for patients,” she said.

“Cost of living pressures are placing tremendous strain on households across Australia, so there has never been a more important time to save patients money and time. Patients with a range of chronic conditions including heart disease will be able to save up to $180 a year and that will make a huge difference for so many households.

“This announcement shows the tide is finally turning. In 2018, the Pharmacy Benefits Advisory Committee recommended increasing the maximum dispensed quantities of common medications from one to two months’ supply. This change has been recommended because it is in the best interests of patients, and I am pleased that the Government has heeded the expert advice.”

Dr Higgins urged the nation’s leaders to remain steadfast.

“Beware of scare campaigns,” she said.

“A recent Westpac report found that pharmacies are reaping record profits, with the total consumer spending in pharmacies rising from $92.5 million in July 2019 to more than $123 million in January this year. Also, despite what you hear from the Pharmacy Guild, there is no evidence of a shortage of the medications that are included in today’s announcement. Some pharmacy owners may be concerned that they will lose retail sales; however, at the end of the day cheaper access to lifesaving medications must come before retail sales, it’s as simple as that.”

The RACGP President said that the was plenty more to be done.

“My aim is for today’s announcement to be just the beginning,” she said.

“Let’s go even further and extend the length of prescriptions for patients with stable chronic conditions. The RACGP also supports further investigation of the benefits to patients in changing the $1 discount rule. It effectively stops pharmacies from discounting medicines that cost more than the current co-payment of $30 by more than $1. When you consider that in New Zealand the patient contribution is as little as $5 for most items, you have to ask whether we can do better here.

“I’m also focussed on reforming the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme prescribing system to reduce administration time and free up GPs to do what they do best – care for patients. Right now, the system is too cumbersome and time-consuming. If it was streamlined, GPs would be able to spend more time with patients rather than admin work. As a GP myself in Mackay, that sounds like a winning combination to me.

“It’s also vital that the Government overhauls Australia’s anti-competitive pharmacy ownership and location laws, which inflate costs for patients. The rules appear to be focussed on protecting pharmacy owners rather than increasing patient access to cheaper medicines.

“Today is a great day for Australian patients. The tide is turning, and patient well-being is front and centre – right where it should be. Mark my words, this is just the beginning.”

A recent poll of more than 1,000 GPs who answered the question: “Do you think your patients would benefit from doubling dispensing times to 60 days?” found a staggering 85% said “yes”.

~ ENDS

List of medications possibly being considered for inclusion in 60 day script scheme can be found at:

https://m.pbs.gov.au/industry/listing/elements/pbac-meetings/pbac-outcomes/2022-12/Increased-Dispensing-Quantities-List-of-Medicines.pdf

 

BACKGROUND

AUGUST 2018 PBAC OUTCOMES – OTHER MATTERS, excerpt:

The PBAC considered a list of PBS medicines taken from the Pharmaceutical Benefits Schedule that are indicated for the treatment of chronic conditions. Based on an assessment of clinical safety and ongoing cost-effectiveness, the PBAC recommended that 143 medicines (348 PBS items) were acceptable for listing with increased maximum dispensed quantities (approximately 60 days or two months’ supply per dispensing). The list of medicines accepted by the PBAC as suitable for additional PBS items with increased dispensing quantities (Proposal 2) is available on the PBS website.

COVID-19 NSW STATE OF PLAY 2023: Counting Dead People - Part 3 "Will we choose to prevent Covid deaths?"

 

https://youtu.be/QHW1y-FpyII

The Jon Snow Project

In Northern NSW by the week ending 11 February 2023 — in a published NSW Respiratory Surveillance Report which includes basic death demographics —  211 people had been newly confirmed (via PCR or RAT) as having contracted COVID-19, 11 people were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infections and 4 people were reported to have died from COVID-19.

Statewide in New South Wales in that week ending 11 February 2023:

• a total of 5,587 people were diagnosed with COVID-19;

• 180 people were hospitalised with confirmed infections;

• 61 people were reported as having died from COVID-19; and

• all COVID-19 deaths were individuals aged between 50 and 90+ years of age.

NOTE: In the last 4 weeks up to 16 February 2023 — based on PCR test results only with all RAT results excluded — there were 135 confirmed COVID-19 cases recorded in Tweed Shire, 54 cases in Ballina Shire, 38 in Clarence Valley, 24 in Byron Shire, 22 in Lismore City, 11 in Richmond Valley and 3 in Kyogle Shire.

In Northern NSW by the week ending 18 February 2023 — in the most recently published NSW Respiratory Surveillance Report which includes basic death demographics —  189 people had been newly confirmed (via PCR or RAT) as having contracted COVID-19, 13 people were admitted to hospital with COVID-19 infections and 2 people were reported to have died from COVID-19.

Statewide in New South Wales in that week ending 18 February 2023:

• a total of 5,777 people were diagnosed with COVID-19;

• 201 people were hospitalised with confirmed infections;

• 46 people were reported as having died from COVID-19; and

• 2 COVID-19 deaths were children aged between 0-9 years, 1 was an adult between 40-49 years of age and the remaining 43 deaths were of individuals aged between 50 and 90+ years of age.

Lismore City and Tweed Shire among 15 regional councils making regional housing a key election issue in 2023

Western Advocate, 16 February 2023, p.3:

An alliance representing 15 regional cities from across the state - including Bathurst - is calling for bipartisan support for measures to increase housing stock amidst a regional rental crisis and skills shortage.

Regional Cities NSW (RCNSW) says the lack of available housing in regional towns across NSW is a "risk to regional growth" and are calling for both the Liberal party and Labor party to commit to doing more to address the housing shortage.

"Regional living is well and truly on the agenda, however the lack of available housing is impacting people's ability to move to the regions," said Dubbo Regional Council mayor Matthew Dickerson, chair of RCNSW.

"Housing availability has been severely impacted by numerous natural disasters across our state as well as major infrastructure projects requiring temporary accommodation."

As well as Dubbo, RCNSW represents Albury, Queenbeyan, Coffs Harbour, Griffith, Goulburn, Maitland, Bathurst, Broken Hill, Wagga Wagga, Orange, Armidale, Lismore, Tweed Heads and Tamworth.

The alliance aims to grow regional cities in NSW through increased investment that will build "productive, liveable and connected regions". One of the main challenges impeding growth, says RCNSW, is a shortage of suitable housing.

"Housing availability and affordability are major issues for regional cities resulting from recent population increases," said Cr Dickerson.

"Other critical areas requiring the support of the state government include having a supply of skilled workers to match demand, building road and rail connectivity between Sydney and regional cities and building the strength of the Port of Newcastle."

According to data from the Australian Bureau of Statistics, between 2011 and 2022, regional NSW's population grew by 224,5001 - the equivalent to creating a new regional city the size of Bathurst every two years……

[my yellow highlighting]

BACKGROUND

On 14 February 2023 Regional Cities NSW (RCNSW) announced regional housing as a key election issue in the forthcoming 25 March state election.

The Regional Cities New South Wales Members are;

• Tamworth Regional Council;

• Albury City Council;

• Queanbeyan-Palerang Council;

• Coffs Harbour City Council;

• Griffith City Council;

• Maitland City Council;

• Bathurst Regional Council;

• Wagga Wagga City Council;

• Orange City Council;

• Armidale Regional Council;

• Dubbo Regional Council;

• Lismore City Council;

• Broken Hill City Council;

• Goulburn Mulwaree Council; and

• Tweed Shire Council.

On 28 March 2011 the O'Farrell Coalition Government came to power in New South Wales.

It was followed in April 2014 by the Baird Coalition Government, then in January 2017 by the Berejiklian Coalition Government and lastly, in October 2021 by the current Perrottet Coalition Government.

If anything an already dire social housing situation has been made worse since Dominic Perrottet & Co have held the reigns of state government.

Yahoo! News, 4 January 2023:

The waiting list of people needing social housing in NSW has increased for the first time since 2016, with about 1000 more people in line for a home.

As of June 2022, there were 51,031 approved for social housing and waiting for a property to become available, compared to 49,928 the year before.

The number has steadily decreased since 2016 when the figure hit 59,907. Before this it had varied between about 55,000 and 60,000 since 2012. [my yellow highlighting]

In March 2022 the mainstream media was reporting that a surge in regional rental prices – in part driven by tree changes during coronavirus lockdowns – as well as stagnant wage growth had created a housing affordability crisis which was exacerbated by a fall in rental housing stock in Northern NSW due to widespread flooding.

Rental stress is experienced by more than 60 per cent of renters living in the regional NSW electorates – of Page, Cowper and Lyne – along the northern NSW coast. Source: Everybody's Home. IMAGE: news.com.au, 21 March 2022

The following month The Guardian reported on 16 April 2022:

The New South Wales government has sold off $3bn worth of social housing during its decade in power, while failing to meet its own targets for new properties.

New figures released through parliament this week show that since it was first elected in 2011, the Coalition has sold off 4,205 social housing properties across the state.

The sales have added about $3.5bn to the government’s coffers over the same period.

But while the government said all of those funds were used to prove “more, and better” social housing stock, data for new social housing constructions reveal the government has fallen well behind its own targets for new dwellings.

In 2016, the Coalition pledged to build 23,000 new social housing dwellings in the next decade as part of its Future Directions housing strategy. It committed to funding new social housing construction through the $22bn Communities Plus program.

But eight years on, with more than 50,000 people on the social housing wait list in the state, the Communities Plus program has achieved only 10% of that goal.

[my yellow highlighting]

Cartoons of the Week

 

Jon Kudelka

Peter Broelman

New planning regime announcement by Perrottet Government "smacks of disrespect and contempt for the third tier of democratically elected government, and the communities they represent"

IMAGE: Planning Institute of Australia

NSW Minister for Planning and Public Spaces, Liberal MLA for Pittwater, wannabee premier & pinup boy of the developer set, Rob Stokes (left), was recently boasting that to facilitate urban development "Last financial year we cleared 336 rezoning proposals through the system".

Not content with that rate of urbanisation Stokes has now released a suite of new changes to environmental assessment and planning rules, including the Environmental Planning and Assessment (Statement of Expectations) Order which reserves the right for the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces to intervene where councils are not upholding their responsibilities - as perceived by the minister of the day, lobbyists for the building industry and property developers themselves.

Understandably, some aspects of these changes were not well received at the coal face.

Local Government NSW (LGNSW), media release, 16 December 2021:

Councils furious at ‘disrespectful’ planning announcement

A punishing new planning regime for NSW councils has been described as a follow-up gut punch to councils before the NSW cabinet reshuffle expected this week.

The regime – announced to developers by NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes yesterday – includes a new planning guarantee requiring councils to refund planning application fees if they do not meet timelines arbitrarily imposed by the State Government.

“This announcement is a second gut punch, following hard on the heels of the lowest rate peg setting in 20 years – a rate so low that councils are already being forced to consider cuts to services, infrastructure and jobs,” Local Government NSW (LGNSW) President Darriea Turley said.

“It was dropped at a developers’ lunch 10 days before Christmas, and before the councils elected at the 4 December elections have even been declared by the NSW Electoral Commission, let alone had a chance to meet.

“The Minister is no doubt rushing to lock in what he sees as his legacy before he is moved out of the portfolio in the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle, but this announcement smacks of disrespect and contempt for the third tier of democratically elected government, and the communities they represent.”

A media release issued by Minister Stokes foreshadowed:

• one-size-fits-all maximum timeframes for assessments and determinations by councils

• A new planning guarantee requiring councils to refund planning application fees if they do not meet government-imposed time frames

• Ministerial intervention powers if the Government believes councils are not upholding their responsibilities.

Cr Turley said it was particularly rich for the Minister to be claiming he was simply asking councils to meet the same standard of timeliness and certainty on rezoning and development applications as the NSW Government.

“It is not uncommon for the Department of Planning, Industry and Environment to take more than a year to assess planning proposals by councils,” she said.

“Where is the recognition that the development industry often submits partially complete or wildly speculative proposals well outside the approved strategic plans for the area, slowing the process?

“Where is the recognition that councils are already grappling with a plethora of other changes pushed through by this Minister – changes that are impacting their systems and processes, and placing additional strain on an already-strained workforce?

“These include having to recalibrate their systems to integrate with the Planning Portal; amending, developing and updating their land use plans; preparing new plans and implementation strategies for housing and employment; changing the names and definition in their polices and plans; increasing their planning and development reporting – all with significant shortages of planning staff.

“Planning is a critical function jointly delivered by local and state governments, and communities deserve a co-designed system.

“Local government has always committed to working with the Minister for Planning to provide a genuinely collaborative system that delivers the best outcome for the people of NSW.

“We are profoundly disappointed the outgoing Minister has decided to leave our sector on such a negative note”.

"There is no country in the world which does climate change delay quite like Australia" and Prime Minister 'Scotty From Marketing' Morrison will double down on his refusal to act as the federal election draws closer

 

The Guardian, 13 November 2021:

The Australian prime minister, Scott Morrison, and the emissions reduction minister,  Angus Taylor. Photograph: Darren England/AAP

In April this year, Australia’s prime minister, Scott Morrison, said that “we will not achieve net zero in the cafes, dinner parties and wine bars of our inner cities”. This explains why he turned to the salt-of-the-Earth hard-workin’ rural folk at McKinsey – one of the biggest billion-dollar multinational consulting agencies on the planet – to produce the Australian government’s long-awaited modelling explaining the pathway to “net zero by 2050”.

In some parallel universe, the task may have gone to Australia’s chief science agency, the CSIRO (a former employer of mine). But it was revealed at Senate estimates a few weeks back that despite the CSIRO applying for the tender, the government rejected them and paid McKinsey $6m to model the changes Australian society must go through to decarbonise within 30 years. This choice makes sense in the context of recent leaks to the New York Times that revealed McKinsey has advised 43 of the 100 biggest corporate polluters, including “BP, Exxon Mobil, Gazprom and Saudi Aramco”. 1,100 of its employees signed an open letter pleading the consultancy reveal the carbon impacts of its clients.

We’ll never know exactly what the Australian government asked of the agency, but we finally know what got spat out the other end: an extremely weird document blatantly designed to protect the interests of Australia’s fossil fuel industries while creating the illusion of ambitious climate action. It was delayed until the final Friday of Cop26 to avoid embarrassment during the global deliberations, so we knew it’d be bad. But it’s worse than expected……

.... of the various pathways modelled in this document, Australia’s government picked the one that doesn’t even reach net zero by 2050. Their preferred scenario, “The Plan”, hits 2050 with a whopping 94 megatonnes of emissions remaining, or 215 if you exclude questionable offsets. They reached the point of 85% reduction in emissions, and very simply gave up. This ignored 15% is breezily labelled “further technology breakthroughs” in the document. It’s both amusingly honest and stunningly irresponsible.

As RenewEconomy’s Michael Mazengarb pointed out on Twitter, they also modelled a scenario in which emissions reductions go all the way to zero, albeit also reliant on offsets. That has a near-zero impact on economic growth, but it’s explicitly dismissed because this scenario also results in worse outcomes for the coal and gas mining industries.

Coal and gas sent overseas is responsible for roughly three times Australia’s annual domestic emissions. If the 72 coal projects and 44 oil and gas projects in Australia are realised, this will become six times Australia’s domestic emissions. They won’t all be realised, but you get an idea of their wide-eyed fantasies of growth. It’s this massive engine of planetary warming that the net zero plan ring-fences. Snarling at threats to fossil fuel companies feels like the only imperative this document takes seriously.

There is a reserved concession to the possibility that the coal export industry may shrink, with one graphic showing future coal exports dropping by 50%, by 2050. But in the same chart, gas exports increase by 13%. Both are laughable, considering the International Energy Agency’s “net zero by 2050” global scenario sees the total global consumption of both coal and gas drop to near-zero by 2050.

Part of why this discrepancy exists is that the IEA’s net zero scenario is limiting warming to 1.5C, but the government is targeting 2C, which allows for worse emissions into the future at the cost of more severe and catastrophic impacts of warming, particularly in the Global South. In fact 1.5C is not mentioned a single time in the hundreds of pages of the report. Like the 85%, it just breezily gives up part-way there.

Fundamentally, what McKinsey has laid out for us is that if you take the laziest, slowest and most bad-faith approach to climate action, it’s very cheap and not immediately disruptive. Take credit for technological advancements that occur in other countries, continue extracting and emitting in the interim, and slap it all with a counterfeit climate action label to avoid scrutiny. Being a tech free rider while worsening the problem you claim to be solving is a wonderfully tempting climate philosophy.

Of course, McKinsey’s modelling buries an important caveat in the guts of the PDF: the physical consequences of climate change are not included in their modelling. That means they count the benefits of falling back to slower action and worse emissions, and ignore the consequences.

In reality, we cannot ignore the consequences. Climate change is a physical problem in which the accumulation of greenhouse gases heats our habitat and hurts us, very badly. A tower of greasy tricks deployed to protect the fossil fuel industry changes nothing about the laws of atmospheric physics, and the pain we experience when governments don’t act fast enough…..

Truly, though, there is no country in the world that does climate delay quite like Australia. The hammy nationalism, the role of fantasy and trickery in its climate and energy rhetoric, and the total absence of shame in defending its role as a key cause of significant physical damage to Earth. It’s only going to escalate as the next federal election inches closer. Better strap in: it’s going to get even weirder. [my yellow highlighting]

Read the full article here.