Great article by Lenore Taylor who seems to be one of few journalists keeping an eye on the safeguards aspect of Direct Action. What will the baselines for emitters be and will the baselines reduce over time forcing emitters to make reductions or purchase credits? Also did you know that companies can purchase overseas off-sets? Quote: But hidden in the mountain of detail rushed through parliament on Thursday night are some largely unnoticed provisions that suggest the emissions reduction fund might not have to do the job on its own, depending on yet another climate policy argument that the Coalition has effectively deferred. The legislation requires Hunt to develop “safeguards” to make sure businesses not seeking money from the fund don’t increase their emissions and undo all the reductions the government is buying. He will set baselines that emitters are not allowed to exceed. But the government’s white paper says that “in the unlikely event of baselines being exceeded” he could allow the offending companies to make up for it by “purchasing credits created by other accredited emissions reduction projects”. And an amendment passed on Thursday at the behest of Senator Xenophon said that in this situation, the companies could also buy permits from overseas – despite all the government’s rhetoric about how offshore permits are akin to sinking money into dodgy deals in Kazakhstan. The white paper also says that companies that promise a certain quantity of reductions in return for money from the $2.5bn emissions reduction fund, but then don’t manage to live up to their promises, could buy credits from companies that reduce emissions by more than they had envisaged. Hunt fobs off questions about how this is obviously a potential basis for a type of emissions trading scheme by saying the government will get “zero revenue” from its policy. But the scenarios are all about businesses buying permits from other businesses, so the government would never expect to get money, and it would still be a carbon market. It could also amount to nothing at all if Hunt sets the “baselines’ to allow Australian industry to continue with business as usual. And this is an internal fight he is yet to have. Guardian Australia understands that when cabinet originally considered the detail of Direct Action there were some around the table not keen on having “safeguards” at all. In the end the issue was put off, the fine print to be decided later.
Posted on: Mon, 03 Nov 2014 21:50:12 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015