The news is reporting that Ross Garnaut has savaged the Government’s White Paper on Climate Change Policy. For instance, from ABC news:

Professor Garnaut says the Rudd government is aiming too low in its unconditional target of a 5 per cent emissions cut by 2020 and the policy announced this week will put the economy at risk.

Hmm, I read what Garnaut wrote in The Age differently:

The review recommended, and I support, the most widely and strongly condemned of the “soft targets”[base ']Äîthe commitment unconditionally to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 5 per cent from 2000 levels by 2020.

And as you read on, it is clear why:

It costs much more to reduce emissions in isolation than in the context of global action. Action in isolation does almost nothing in itself to solve the environmental problem. The purpose of acting at all in the absence of comprehensive global agreement is to keep alive the hopes of eventual effective global agreement. Australian emissions are currently significantly above 1990 levels. 2020 is not far away. Our population grows strongly, because we, for good reasons, have chosen to keep our doors open to people from many lands. Our new citizens need transport, a home with the Australian accompaniments, and access to income from employment, all of which generate greenhouse gas emissions. The white paper’s unconditional target is a challenging one in the absence of an international agreement. To go further would run the risk that Australia’s example of early action would be negative rather than positive in its influence on others.

That seems pretty clear to me and reflects what I said earlier this week.

Now Garnaut goes on to make several other points that I agree with. First, that given the low target, the level of compensation seems very excessive; unpredecendented in fact. Second, the way of dealing with trade-exposed industries murky and may be hard to unwind. Third, that the Government should not cap its conditional commitment levels and leave open room for a high commitment should international winds blow that way.

But we can’t ignore one thing that is a key difference between the Garnaut Review task and the White Paper’s task. The latter has to pass two Houses of Parliament while the former did not. With the Greens taking positions continually that never allow them to support moderate policies, the Government has to put forward a plan that the Coalition (or at least a big part of it) might support. That means industry handouts. Add to that Labor’s desire to soften the job impact and the politics almost necessitate the policy that we see being put forward. We can be grateful, however, that the timetable for its implementation is unchanged and let’s face it, going to international negotiations with a system in place rather than a constant internal fight is the best sort of leadership we can bring. Few other countries have achieved that much.

9:04:59 AM