The Prime Minister’s decision regarding Australia’s climate target for 2035 has come under intense scrutiny following revelations that he has not been briefed on critical findings from the recently released Climate Risk Report. According to testimony presented during a Senate Standing Committee on Environment and Communications hearing on Tuesday, the Prime Minister appears to have predetermined this target over six months ago without consulting the scientists responsible for the report.
Representatives from the Australian Climate Service (ACS), the agency tasked with the National Climate Risk Analysis, stated that they were unable to present their findings to the Prime Minister. The absence of this briefing raises significant concerns about the government’s approach to climate policy. The inquiry revealed that Treasury officials had modeled only one figure for the 2035 emissions reduction target, work which reportedly began prior to the last election. This suggests that the current government may have set a climate target without fully evaluating the potential risks posed to Australian society.
During the inquiry, Greens Leader Senator Larissa Waters expressed her alarm over the situation. “Today we found out the Prime Minister hasn’t even met with the scientists who authored the climate doomsday report,” she stated. “1.5 million people are at risk of their homes constantly flooding or falling into the sea in the next 25 years, but the Prime Minister doesn’t want to know about it.”
Senator Waters criticized the government’s focus on projects like the North West Shelf gas project, suggesting that it is easier to approve such initiatives while ignoring the substantial risks outlined in the report. She emphasized the urgency of addressing the potential displacement of millions of Australians and the implications for health, food security, and national security associated with climate change.
The inquiry continued with Treasury officials acknowledging that they had only modeled a single climate target months ago. Senator Waters pointed out that this raises important questions about the adequacy of their assessments. “When they inevitably say they got the balance right, the first question should be how do you know, since Treasury never modeled another scenario,” she added.
Critics argue that anything less than achieving zero emissions by 2035 would lock in the worst-case scenarios highlighted in the Climate Risk Report. Prominent leaders from the business sector, including companies such as Fortescue, Volvo, and Unilever, have called for a target of at least 75% emissions reduction to stimulate the transition to renewable energy sources.
As the Prime Minister prepares to announce Australia’s climate target, the pressure intensifies for him to set a robust target that reflects the urgent climate challenges facing the nation. Failure to do so may define his legacy as one that neglected the pressing realities outlined in the Climate Risk Report. The coming days will be crucial in determining the direction of Australia’s climate policy and its commitment to addressing the risks posed by climate change.
