Just in time for Christmas the Morrison Government's risible greenhouse gas emission projections up to 2030 have been released

Well the federal parliament closed its doors for the year in early December so there is going to be no questioning of the Morrison Government on the floor of the House of Representatives until 4 February 2020.

It follows that it was time to release some of the government untruths packaged between paper covers or boxed in a PDF - just in time for Christmas.

On the first Tuesday of December the Morrison Government released
Australia’s emissions projections 2019, accompanied by a misleading fanfare from the Minister for Energy and Emissions Reduction & Liberal MP for Hume, Angus Taylor.

In part this emissions fairytale tells us that:

Australia’s 2030 target (26–28 per cent below 2005 levels) 

• Emissions in 2030 are projected to be 511 Mt CO2 -e, 52 Mt CO2 -e lower than the 2018 estimate for 2030 of 563 Mt CO2 -e. 

• To achieve Australia’s 2030 target of 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels, emissions reductions of 395 to 462 Mt CO2 -e between 2021 and 2030 are required. When overachievement of 411 Mt CO2 -e from previous targets is included, Australia will overachieve by 16 Mt CO2 -e (26 per cent reduction) and will require 51 Mt CO2 -e of cumulative emissions reduction between 2021 and 2030 to meet the 28 per cent reduction target. 

• Compared to the 2018 projections, the downward revision in the 2019 projections reflects: 

– the inclusion of the Climate Solutions Fund which will reduce emissions by 103 Mt CO2 -e, particularly in the Land Use Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector;

 – the inclusion of other measures in the Climate Solutions Package including energy efficiency measures in the electricity and direct combustion sectors; 

– stronger renewables deployment – due to increased uptake of small and mid-scale solar photovoltaics (PV) projected by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER) and Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO), and the inclusion of 50 per cent renewable energy targets in Victoria, Queensland and the Northern Territory; and 

– updated forecasts of electricity demand.

Sounds good until you look at the numbers.

In the original Kyoto Agreement Australia's baseline for accounting greenhouse gas emissions was 1990 and total national greenhouse gas emissions for that year were recorded as 610MT CO2-e.

Australia came away unhappy with the conference outcome, so bitched and griped at every turn until the baseline was moved, eventually being extended out to 2005.

In 2005 Australia's total greenhouse gas emissions were 611MT CO2-e if land use is included. The total changes to 522MT CO2-e if land use is excluded. 

The predictions for 2030 in the recent emissions projections are 511MT CO2-e land use included and 521MT CO2-e land use excluded.

There is a 100 point drop in the 2030 projection including land use and a 1 point drop with land use excluded.

It's  still a reduction right? Even if the Morrison Government got there by using an accounting trick?

Well no. Because - even with the carryover 'carbon credits' accounting trick which allows the the Morrison Government to subtract a total of 411MT CO-e from greenhouse gas emissions across selected annual totals - Australia is not meeting the undertakings made to the international community at the U.N. 2015 Paris climate change conference (COP 21).

In fact we have spent the six years between 2013 (when emissions total was 530MT CO2-e) and 2019 (when emissions total was 532MT CO2-e) just treading water, while the days and nights became hotter, our rivers ran dry and our forests burned. 

Next year emissions are expected to rise again to what they were in 2014, 534MT CO2-e.

In Paris Australia agreed to reduce national greenhouse gas emissions by 26-28 per cent by 2030.

That would mean that Australia's emissions target in 2030 should be somewhere between 440MT CO2-e and 450MT CO2-e.

There is a shortfall in meeting those targets.

With land use included the target shortfall in projections is between est. 59MT CO2-e and 71MT CO2-e. With land use excluded the shortfall is between est. 69MT CO2-e and 81MT CO2-e.

That is a lot of mega tonnes. Especially if we were to correct the Morrison Govenment's creative accounting and remove this carryover credits from the equation.

Then the 2030 emissions reduction target shortfall would probably grow by arround est. 80-84 per cent.

Angus Taylor attended the 2-13 December 2019 UN Madrid Climate Change Conference (COP25) armed with his copy of that creative government accounting - probably believing that representatives of other nations would find his spiel believable. Though I rather suspect whenever he was at the other end of the room a number would have had their heads together quietly laughing at him. 

Notes:

Emissions are recorded as totalling 532MT CO2-e In 2018 and 2019. However using Morrison & Co's accounting trick it is reduced to a total of 328MT CO2-e in 2018 and -6MT CO2-e in 2019. See http://www.environment.gov.au/system/files/resources/4aa038fc-b9ee-4694-99d0-c5346afb5bfb/files/aust-emissions-projects-chart-data-2019.xlsx.

All data the Australia's emissions projections 2019 relies on can be found at -
http://www.environment.gov.au/climate-change/publications/emissions-projections-2019.

If readers want emissions totals & projections per year from 1990 to 2030 in a more digestible form, there is currently an interactive graph at -
https://www.theguardian.com/business/grogonomics/2019/dec/10/the-coalition-isnt-being-honest-about-the-climate-crisis-but-neither-is-labor.

Morrison Government's union busting 'Ensuring Integrity Bill' defeated in the Senate

Prime Minister Scott Morrison's pride and joy, the Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Ensuring Integrity) Bill 2019, intended to weaken and perhaps even destroy registered unions in Australia was negatived in Committee of the Whole by the Senate.

The vote was tied at 34-all, with One Nation's two senators along with Senator Jacqui Lambie voting with the Greens and Labor.

It took 147 days for political commonsense to prevail but on 28 November 2019 the Senate politely told the prime minister and his hard right cronies where to go.

Another bill Morrison is reportedly hoping to pass before the parliamentary Christmas break is the Migration Amendment (Repairing Medical Transfers) Bill 2019 which removes provisions for asylum seeker detainee medical transfers to Australia from Manus Island and Nauru ('medevac').

BACKGROUND

Australian Council of Trade Unions (ACTU), media release, 26 November 2019:

In a blow to the Morrison Government’s arguments for the Ensuring Integrity Bill currently before the senate the Federal Court has ruled the union regulator, the Register Organisations Commission (ROC) investigation into the AWU was invalid. 

Justice Bromberg has ruled that the ROC did not have grounds to order an AFP raid on the offices of the AWU and has ordered the return of the documents that were seized on behalf of the regulator in their first act after being established by the Liberal Government in 2017. 

The decision comes as the Morrison Government attempts to pass the Ensuring Integrity Bill in the Senate which would give the ROC the extreme power to determine which unions are deregistered and which officials are disqualified under the dangerous and hypocritical new union-busting law. 

Under the EI Bill the ROC would have the power to begin deregistration proceedings against a union which had made a handful of paperwork mistakes over a period of 10 years. 

Quotes attributable to ACTU President Michele O’Neil: 

“The Morrison government has been telling Senators that the ROC is an impartial body which can administer the extraordinary powers granted under EI. The Federal Court has just found it conducted an illegal raid on a union office. 

“Giving union busters more power to drag unions into courts over minor paperwork breaches, some that would only cost a company an $80 fine, Will cost members and the taxpayer millions in legal fees. This is before accounting for the cost of not being able to campaign for higher wages, better working conditions and safer workplaces. 

“To defend themselves from the ROC’s harrassment the AWU was forced to expending significant resources over two years to get justice. If the Ensuring Integrity Bill passes, all unions could face this harrassment over paperwork breaches. 

“Questions also need to be asked of the ROC who is continuing to waste tax payer’s money to challenge this finding. “This ruling gives the crossbench senators a stark example of how the Morrison government targets unions and will stop at nothing to try and bust unions. Ensuring Integrity will become another tool for union busters and should be rejected. 

“The Federal Court decision is a vindication for the AWU but also a warning for the Senate crossbench who weighing amendments which would give this discredited body even more power.”

BACKGROUND

On 20 October 2017, Mr Chris Enright, the Executive Director of the Registered Organisation Commission (ROC) and a delegate of the Commissioner decided to conduct an investigation.

Judgment in Australian Workers’ Union v Registered Organisations Commissioner (No 9) [2019] FCA 1671 was delivered on 11 October 2019. The judgment concluded that; "the decision to conduct an investigation as to whether ss 285(1), 286(1) and 287(1) of the RO Act had been contravened was affected by jurisdictional error and is invalid."

Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment (Ensuring Integrity) Bill 2019 was introduced by the Morrison Coaltion Government in July 2019 and was currently before the Senate for the second reading debate when the ACTU penned the aforementioned media release.

*Images of ROC document come from the published Federal Court judgment.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Migration Amendment (Repairing Medical Transfers) Bill 2019  is apparently scheduled for a second reading before 5 December 2019.

This bill removes provisions in Schedule 6 of the Home Affairs Legislation Amendment (Miscellaneous Measures) Act 2019. These provisions (commonly referred to as the medical transfer, or medevac, provisions) established a framework for the transfer of transitory persons from regional processing countries to Australia for the purpose of medical treatment or assessment. The Bill also amends the Migration Act to allow for the removal of people brought to Australia under the medical transfer provisions back to a regional processing country once they no longer need to be in Australia.

On 27 November 2019 a nonconforming petition was tabled in the Senate asking for medevac provisions to be saved. It contains 51,299 signatures.

On the same day Professor David Isaacs, Clinical Professor, Paediatrics & Child Health, Fellow, Royal Australasian College of Physicians was joined by doctors in Canberra urging senators to reject the medevac repeal bill. Professor Isaacs carried an open letter signed by 5,040 doctors urging Senator Jacqui Lambie to save medevac.

Tweet of the week

“It's just such high velocity bollocks”@murpharoo says the Prime Minister @ScottMorrisonMP “is trying to pretend… that carbon risk isn't an actual thing,” when he vowed to outlaw "secondary boycotts" against Australian companies in the coal industry. #Insiders #auspol pic.twitter.com/H6JFXxFqX4

— Insiders ABC (@InsidersABC) November 2, 2019

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison brings shame on all of us who arrived in the country from 1778 onwards

And Jenna Price* expresses that shame for us all......

The Canberra Times, 25 October 2019:

It's the only night legendary Australian band the Go-Betweens are playing in Sydney and the audience is keyed up. A woman gives a very moving Acknowledgment of Country - you know, the ones which are more than just the nod to elders past, present and emerging. The ones which talk about rivers and sky, kin and skin. It's Wiradjuri woman Yvonne Weldon, chair of the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, whose ability to hold an audience is epic.

Midway, a bloke in the audience starts heckling. Get a move on, he says, and worse.

"I paused. And then I said, 'This is exactly for you, we are the oldest living cultures of the world'," Weldon remembers.

There was a moment of silence before people started telling him to shush - but in stronger language. Weldon continued. Her aim, she says, was to address a big-mouthed, small-minded person.

Now the Prime Minister is doing his own interrupting, colonising these acknowledgments with his own version. Last Saturday, at a Liberal function at Parliament House, he acknowledged the Ngunnawal people. And then he said: "Can I also acknowledge, as is my habit, anyone who is serving in our defence forces and certainly those who are veterans, and simply say on behalf of a very grateful nation, thank you for your service."

It's his own thing. Six words about the traditional owners and entire sentences about everyone else. He didn't just do it at the Liberal Council. He also did it at the Migration and Settlement Awards and at the Prime Minister's Literary Awards. Morrison has decided to add non-Indigenous people to the acknowledgments without reflecting on what that means and how it diminishes Aboriginal people.

Wurundjeri elder Aunty Joy Murphy-Wandin performs
a Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country
beforea State of Origin game in Melbourne. Picture:
Getty Images

Why does this matter? We know we are on Aboriginal land. We know Australia wasn't blank earth when colonised 200 years ago. Since the arrival of Cook and company, Aboriginal people have been raped and murdered, stolen from their families, had their cultural practices and beliefs erased. They earn less, learn less, die early. There is a lot we can do to redress that, but the very least we could do is to acknowledge that we are on Aboriginal land. It's a couple of minutes out of our respective days and might even encourage a tiny bit of reflection on the part of those of us who are listening. It's not a big ask to be part of a ceremony that has its traditions going back thousands of years (yes, yes, they didn't have exactly this before white people arrived, but Aboriginal people had their own ways of welcoming to country). 

In the aeons before, the Welcome to Country was a sign of peace. And it's this which irks D'harawal scholar Gawaian Bodkin-Andrews, a professor at the University of Technology Sydney (I work there too), the most. Bodkin-Andrews, who has researched Welcome to Country controversies, says the Prime Minister has appropriated an act of peace and embedded war. 
Bodkin-Andrews reminds us that Welcome to Countries (delivered by traditional custodians) are about Aboriginal people sharing their histories and their connections to Country. Acknowledgments (given by Aboriginal people who are not custodians of the land or by non-Aboriginal people) should respect this. 

"It's asking for understanding and demonstrating that our arms are open to you. Military personnel can be agents of war and Morrison's comments are warmongering in a symbol of peace. That is ultimately disrespectful." 

It's also puzzling. Why acknowledge that particular category of Australian?

"It's reflective of his mentality and the party he stands for."

NOTES

* Jenna Price, BA (Communications) (NSWIT), MA (UTS), PhD (Sydney), Senior Lecturer, Journalism Program, University of Technology Sydney.

Cartoon of the Week

The Cathy Wilcox

Intelligence and Security Committee of the Australian Parliament declined to recommend passage of Minister for Home Affairs Dutton's identity matching services bill

The Guardian, 24 October 2019:

Mark Dreyfus, as the most senior Labor member on the committee, also commented on the bill: 

The Intelligence and Security Committee of the Parliament is declining to recommend the passage of the identity matching services bill. 

Instead, Labor and Liberal members of the committee are uniting to recommend that the identity matches services bill be completely redrafted and referred back to the Intelligence and Security Committee for further inquiry when it is reintroduced. 

In taking this step, I congratulate all members of the committee for putting the national interest first and sending a strong message about the value of this committee. 

The identity matching services bill purports to facilitate the exchange of identity information pursuant to the objective of an intergovernmental agreement reached by Coag [in] October 2017. 

But it includes none of the limitations or safeguards anticipated by that agreement. 

The bill includes almost no limitations or safeguards at all. 

As explained in the committee’s report, the identity matching services bill would authorise the Department of Home Affairs to create and maintain facilities for the sharing of facial images and other identity information between government agencies and in some cases, non government agencies entities. 

The bill would also authorised the Department of Home Affairs to develop and maintain to centralised facilities for the provision of what are called identity matching services. 

The first of these two facilities would be called an interoperability hub. 

The Hub would act as a router through which government agencies across Australia could request and transmit information as part of an identity matching service. 

The second would be a federated database of information contained in government identity documents. As discussed in the committee’s report, the potential implications of these two new facilities for the privacy of all Australians are profound. 

Those implications do not appear to have even been considered by the Minister for Home Affairs or by his department. 

While a bill provides for six different identity mentioned services, the service that elicited the most concerned from submitters to the committee’s inquiry is the face of identification service. 

That service would enable authorities across Australia to use huge databases of facial images to determine the identity of an unknown person. 

Using that service, a law enforcement agency could submit a facial image for matching against a database of facial images contained in a in government identification documents, such as a database containing every driver licence photo in Australia. 

In return, the agency would receive a small number of matching or near matching facial images from the database. The agency could then access biographical information associated with those images. 

The potential for such a service to be used for mass or blanket surveillance, such as CCTV being used to identify Australians going about their business in real time was raised by numerous submitters to the inquiry......

Mark Dreyfus: Like my colleagues on the committee, I do not believe that the government is proposing to engage in or to facilitate the mass surveillance of Australians. But I do accept that, given the near complete absence of legislated safeguards in the Identity-Matching Services Bill 2019, those concerns cannot simply be ignored. If there is no intention for the proposed identity-matching services to be used to engage in mass surveillance activities, the government should not object to amending the bill to ensure that those services cannot, as a matter of law, be used in that manner. 

Concerns were also raised about the proposed one-to-many identity-matching service being used to identify people who are engaging in protest activity. This does concern me. It was only this month that the Minister for Home Affairs, the minister responsible for this very bill, called for mandatory prison sentences for people who engage in protest activity; called for the same people to have their welfare payments cancelled; and also called for them to be photographed and publicly shamed. As presently drafted, this bill would not prohibit authorities from using the proposed face-matching services to identify individuals in a crowd who are engaging in lawful protest activity. That would be concerning in the best of times; it is particularly concerning in the light of the authoritarian disposition of the Minister for Home Affairs. 

A raft of other concerns was expressed about the Identity-Matching Services Bill, including in relation to this government’s abysmal record on cybersecurity. 

I do not propose to list all of the concerns here today, but I encourage everyone to read about them in the committee’s report. 

I would like to thank my colleagues on the committee, Labor and Liberal, for their work on this important report. It should not escape anyone watching these proceedings today that, by agreeing to the set of recommendations contained in this report, the Liberal members of the committee have placed the national interest first. For that, I would like to pay tribute to Senators Stoker, Fawcett and Abetz, and the members for Canning, Berowra and Goldstein. I would like to pay particular tribute and extend my thanks to the chair of the Intelligence and Security Committee, the member for Canning. I also thank the committee secretariat for their excellent work, both in this parliament and in the last parliament, which underpins this report.

Text of the Identity-matching Services Bill 2019 can be found here.

Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security, "Advisory report on the Identity-matching Services Bill 2019 and the Australian Passports Amendment (Identity-matching Services) Bill 2019" can be found here.

This is the Singleton Argus article that either the NSW Deputy-Premier or his office alleges is "seditious"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'the offence [sedition] is one if the person urges by force or violence the overthrowing of a government, or interfering with an election, or encouraging other people to use – or groups of people – to use force or violence against other groups' [The Attorney-General, Hon Philip Ruddock MP, Alan Jones Radio Programme, 14 November 2005, quoted in Australian Parliamentary Library, "In Good Faith:Sedition Law in Australia", 23 August 2010]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It appears that NSW Deputy-Premier, Minister for Regional New South Wales, Industry and Trade & Liberal MP for Monaro, John Barilaro, is unhappy with journalists having an opinion about the mining industry, state government agencies or the region in which they live and work......

This statement from the NSW Deputy Premier's office on this week's opinion piece 'There were some arresting remarks made in the article that were as inaccurate as they were seditious.'#RightToKnow

— The Singleton Argus (@SingletonArgus) October 24, 2019

There were two articles published online by The Singleton Argus on 22 October 2019 which dealt with the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption's current review of lobbying activities, access and influence in this state.

The first was a local news article and the second an opinion piece by the same journalist on the same subject.

It was this second piece which is the allegedly "seditious" item that either the Deputy-Premier or his staff apparently decided included content intended to incite violence, public disorder or a public offence:

"Here we go again - the NSW Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) is hearing evidence about mining approvals - what, haven't we learnt our lessons from the Doyles Creek and Mt Penny inquiries all those years ago?

This time ICAC's Operation Eclipse is not investigating actual corrupt conduct by individuals but rather it is seeking' to examine particular aspects of lobbying activities and the corruption risks involved in the lobbying of public authorities and officials.'

At the same time as ICAC is seeking information about the influence of lobbying on government decision making Planning Minister Rob Stokes announced the terms of reference for the review into the operations of the Independent Planning Commission.

Included in the terms of reference is a question about whether the IPC should exist at all.

Scary when one considers that the former ICAC commissioner David Ipp, QC was quoted in the Sydney Morning Herald saying such a move was 'a recipe for corruption'.

The more things change the more they stay the same it would appear when it comes to planning state significant mining projects in NSW.

As an invited witness to this week's Operation Eclipse hearings NSW Minerals Council, chief executive officer Stephen Galilee voiced his strong opinions about the current state of mine approvals in NSW.

He is not happy that Bylong Coal Project was refused, that Dartbrook Underground was only half approved and that United Wambo and Rix's Creek were approved but it took too long so he was still very unhappy.

Mr Galilee is welcome is hold these opinions he works to promote mineral extraction in NSW but his opinions should not over ride due process.

We have seen what happens when mining licences are granted behind closed doors, people made millions often corruptly and the community is treated poorly or not considered at all.

No way should we go back to the bad old days in mine approvals.

We should be planning for our future where we have clean air to breath and new industries for our current mining workforce.

Instead of wasting time and money on the IPC review lets get started with planning for a just transition for our region.

The longer we put off the inevitable transition the harder it will hit our region - want to be part of that Mr Galilee?"

For the life of me I cannot see this as a journalistic call for citizens to man the barricades armed to the teeth and ready to do violence.

Perhaps in the future whichever of the Deputy-Premier's minions crafted that particular email should pause, open a dictionary and a copy of the Crimes Act before choosing his adjectives.

Then when he next rushes to the defence of his minister's 'mates' he won't rashly accuse a journalist of a grave unlawful act.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

'as long as the various sedition offences remain, governments will inevitably be tempted to use them improperly, especially when highly unpopular opinions are expressed' [Sydney Law Review,  (1992) Maher, L.W.,"The Use and Abuse of Sedition"]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

NSW Liberal-Nationals Government to forbid planning agencies to consider potential impacts of climate change

Nature Conservation Council of NSW, media release, 22 October 2019: 

Planning changes deny our biggest challenge – climate change

The Nature Conservation Council condemns the NSW Government’s plans to forbid planning authorities considering the full climate impacts of coal mines and gas projects.

“The government is effectively banning planning bodies from considering the biggest environmental challenge of our age,” NCC Chief Executive Chris Gambian said. 

“The state government has cravenly capitulated to pressure from the Minerals Council, raising serious questions about who controls planning policy in NSW.

“Minister Rob Stokes announced a review into the Independent Planning Commission just days ago and has already undermined it with proposed legislation.

“For the past 12 years NSW has had a planning policy to consider the climate damage of coal produced in this state. 

“It is reckless and irresponsible to gut this policy when dangerous climate change is on our doorstep with fish kills and more extreme heatwaves and bushfires every summer.

“Courts and planning authorities have been trying to deal with climate change because the government has utterly failed. 

“Now the government is tying planning authorities’ hands and undermine the science-based, responsible decision making the people of NSW want.

“No wonder people are marching in the streets for urgent action on climate.” [my yellow highlighting]

Lock the Gate Alliance, 22 October 2019:

Berejiklian back down: NSW Government capitulates to coal lobby

A NSW Government proposal to prevent the Independent Planning Commission from considering downstream climate emissions when assessing mining projects is a terrible mistake that will be remembered by future generations, according to Lock the Gate Alliance. 

It is being reported the government will move to restrict the IPC from considering the effects of "scope 3" greenhouse gas pollution when considering coal mining projects, with new laws to be introduced to parliament this week.

Scope 3 emissions are the greenhouse emissions produced when coal is burned at its final destination. 

Lock the Gate NSW spokesperson Georgina Woods said the legislation would be remembered by future generations as a shameless capitulation to the coal lobby that would harm communities in NSW.

“The government is capitulating to mining industry pressure and winding back laws to address the most important strategic, economic and environmental challenge of our century," she said.

“This is a regressive and fatal mistake that will be remembered for generations.

"New South Wales is right now experiencing a severe and unprecedented bushfire season and one of the worst droughts on record due to climate change. There is so little time left to prevent the problem escalating beyond our control. 

“The public expects all responsible agencies to use the powers available to them to act to avoid harm to our communities and our environment. 

"This is absolutely the wrong move at the wrong time for the Berejiklian Government. A petty political act of vandalism against the urgent needs of their constituents, particularly those on the frontline of global heating in rural Australia.

"Instead of pretending we have no stake in global action on climate change, we need a plan that recognises that the Hunter region will need to adjust to declining coal use worldwide and to prepare our communities for the severe weather extremes that are bearing down on us."

BACKGROUND

The Guardian, 22 October 2019:

The New South Wales government has announced it will introduce legislation to try to stop planning authorities from blocking mine developments based on emissions from coal once it is burned.

The push is a response to the historic Rocky Hill verdict delivered by the NSW Land and Environment court earlier this year and comes just days after the government launched a review of the state’s Independent Planning Commission (IPC).