A year ago I urged the Liberal National Party to lance the pustule of Paris, proposing at the Queensland LNP Convention, ‘That the Coalition withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord because it damages our economy and our sovereignty while doing nothing for the environment’.
The vote went down after prolonged debate because it was perceived as undermining Prime Minister Turnbull. As the Sydney Morning Herald reported, ‘Two past Queensland LNP presidents strongly urged delegates from across the state to vote against the resolution’. Said past president Con Galtos, ‘Do we want to keep on undermining our Prime Minister?’ Said my friend Bruce McIver, ‘This motion is really about just putting the knife into the federal government.’
Well, not really – just into that boil on its backside. Thereby avoiding the build-up of purulent pressure that finally toppled a sitting Prime Minister.
Having declined medical advice on this necessary surgery, the party now has blood poisoning. Meantime, the policy abscess remains in the body politic – making our pensioners sicker, our businesses weaker and our once-proud sovereignty shaky.
Peter Dutton understood that Paris is about so much more than the price of electricity, and I hope Scott Morrison does too. Certainly Andrew Hastie raised his concerns about its threat to our economic sovereignty – but it is broader than that, since economic sovereignty is the heart of political sovereignty.
Allowing unelected technocrats at the UN to dictate ‘emissions policy’ that will shackle our energy production, our agriculture, our transport industry and the rest is to allow foreigners to put our grandsons out of work and our grandmothers out of pocket. It is an unprecedented subjugation of national interest to globalist demands.
And that, I am convinced, is the whole point. The orchestrated hysteria over ‘climate change’ is far less about global warming and far more about global politics. As social historian John Fonte points out in his book, Sovereignty or Submission, the ideology of ‘global governance’ is now the prevailing intellectual orthodoxy amongst the political elite. Such people sincerely believe that the world, being so complex, is best run by highly trained experts, not by democratic amateurs. They want to see the European Union model writ large across the globe. For such people, ‘global warming’ is a once-in-a-generation opportunity to corral the nations of the world into a frightened huddle before a foe that can only be defeated by a ‘global governance’ response.
Recall the former president of the European Union, Herman von Rompuy, declaring that the 2009 UN Copenhagen Climate Conference would be ‘a big step forward for global governance’. Or the United Nations supremo on global warming from 2010 to 2016, Christiana Figueras, who describes the need for a global ‘revolution’. As the daughter of a former socialist president of Costa Rica, José Figueres Ferrer, who nationalised the banks, she says, ‘I’m very comfortable with the word “revolution”.’
Hers is a central-command economic revolution, as she said prior to the Paris Conference: ‘This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution.’
Down with the capitalist industrial revolution and onwards towards global green socialism!
For as Tony Abbott observed, the climate change movement is ‘socialism masquerading as environmentalism’. Driven by ideology, not science, it seeks to weaken the capitalist West by forcing up energy prices that shut down industry, and distributing its wealth to poor countries as reparation for the alleged harm of the West’s CO2 emissions. And in the process, as any student of socialism understands, shackling the detested individualism of the West – as Vaclav Klaus, dissident against communism and former president of the Czech Republic, wrote, ‘Today’s debate about global warming is essentially a debate about freedom. The environmentalists would like to mastermind each and every possible (and impossible) aspect of our lives.’
Why this shame-faced slouching towards servitude? It must be that people genuinely believe we must go green and globalist if we are to save the earth from dangerous warming.
Yet I reminded the LNP Convention that our Chief Scientist, Alan Finkel, had admitted to a Senate Committee that the effect on future temperature if we shut down the Australian economy tomorrow – every light bulb, every car, every belching bull – would be ‘virtually nothing’.
I wish the Chief Scientist had gone further and pointed out that there is ‘virtually nothing’ by way of hard science to justify this vast campaign of climate catastrophism, almost cult-like in its terrifying of children at school.
He might have referred to Australia’s late great professor of earth science, Bob Carter, who repeatedly reminded us that there is nothing in the last century of climate data that falls outside the range of normal variation. Nothing – as a simple graphing of ancient temperature confirms.
The planet is presently experiencing the mild warming that comes every thousand years or so – the last one in the Middle Ages being warmer than the present. We are also enjoying the warm interglacial period that comes every hundred thousand years or so – and again, the interglacial prior to the last Ice Age was warmer than our own. Even within the present interglacial the earth has been cooling for some eight thousand years – and if past performance is any indicator, we are due for another Ice Age.
No human activity, no political activism, no sacrificing of pensioners to the climate gods had any influence on the earth’s ancient historical cycles (or the vastly higher levels of CO2 in the past) and it is pathologically self-important to think that we are doing so now.
And so we humbly appeal to our new Prime Minister as he considers his new policy positions: please, Mr Morrison, lance this boil! Paris is damaging our economy and our sovereignty, and has poisoned your party, while doing less than ‘virtually nothing’ for the environment.
Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for a quality of argument not found in any other publication. Subscribe – Try a month free