Is Xenophon climate enemy No. 1?

With the federal election just months away, the Climate Institute has released its ‘Pollute-o-meter’, which rates the major election candidates on the effectiveness of their climate change policies. 

As you’d expect the Greens rate at the top, but what’s surprising is how badly Senator Nick Xenophon ranks – 0.5 stars out of five. 

The overall results out of five are:

1)--Greens – 5 stars

2)--Labor – 2.5 stars

3)--Andrew Wilkie – 1.5 stars

4)--Coalition – 1 star

5)--Nick Xenophon – 0.5 star

Equal last -- Democratic Labor Party (Senator John Madigan) – 0 stars

Equal last -- Katter’s Australia Party – 0 stars

The pollute-o-meter ratings are built up from three broad criteria:

1) Commitments to emission reduction targets – Has the party/candidate committed domestically and internationally to sufficient emissions reductions? And how will they help developing countries adapt? This essentially rates the parties in terms of their 2020 and 2050 emission reduction targets, their support for an independent umpire on targets (currently the Climate Change Authority), as well as their support for Australia signing onto Kyoto Mk II and funding to help poor  countries adapt to climate change.

2) Accelerating low carbon investment – Does the party/candidate support policies that provide sufficient long-term certainty to support investment in low emission technologies such as renewable energy and also accelerate energy efficiency improvement. This assesses things like:

-- Whether the party will establish a “long, loud and legal” incentive to reduce carbon emissions eg. price on carbon;

-- Whether they have an unambiguous commitment to maintain the current level of the renewable energy target;

-- Whether they support energy efficiency policies such as minimum regulatory standards and energy efficiency targets with tradeable credits to drive a 30 per cent improvement in energy productivity.

3) How will the parties manage the risks of climate change? This looks at the extent to which the party/candidate proposes measures to plan for and adapt to the consequences of climate change.

The poor rating of the Coalition will probably come as little surprise to many. They need to make an unambiguous commitment to maintain the renewable energy target at current levels. They also need to beef up the credibility of the Direct Action policy.

But Xenophon should be able to lift his rating with more concrete policy commitments that formalise his public rhetoric.  

Xenophon has strongly criticised the 5 per cent emission reduction target by 2020 as inadequate and argued in favour of a 10 per cent reduction. He has also argued strongly in favour of an emissions trading scheme with a design proposed by Frontier Economics. Just this week he wrote in the Australian Financial Review:

“The Coalition’s Direct Action plan – which is clunky and inefficient – could be modified to provide a transition to the Frontier scheme. That would be more in line with the Howard government’s considered market-based approach.”

Xenophon also voted in favour of the currently legislated Renewable Energy Target.

However Xenophon is yet to formalise his public rhetoric into clear and concrete policy commitments. Sometimes he seems guided more by opportunities for media grandstanding than the hard work of legislative compromise. 

For example, if he really wanted action on climate change he should have taken part in the cross-party climate change committee, rather than just sniping from the sidelines. 

In addition Xenophon should have made a greater effort to engage with health research professionals, before jumping on board with Senator Madigan’s junk science campaign against wind farms. He also needs to consult with experts in renewable energy and power system engineering before simplistically writing off wind in favour of geothermal power.

Under a future Coalition government, Xenophon could well hold the balance of power keys to climate policy. He’ll need discipline and good quality advice to do this effectively.