Really, this should be a weekly column, but I fear writing about fools that often might do my head in.

The thing is, hardly a day goes by when I don’t see someone (who should know better) making a fool of themselves over climate hysteria. It is getting harder to tolerate knowing that so many fools are in positions of power and influence over our daily lives. It is not as hard working out why they are in these positions as it is deciphering how they got there.

A couple of weeks back, I wrote about the new bullies in the Big End of Town. I was writing about leading banks and super funds who have embraced the pursuit of policies that will, they claim, limit global warming to an increase of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels. They say this aligns their corporate goals with the recommendations of the 2015 Paris Agreement.

The problem I was seeking to highlight was that this 1.5°C limit was abandoned years ago by credible climate scientists, including the IPCC, who many hold up as the only global arbiter in these matters.

Banks and super funds in Australia have made it clear in policy, annual reports, and press releases that they will be directing investment and finance only in the direction of those enterprises and institutions that like them, embrace business strategies that will limit global warming to an increase of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.

The analogy I drew is that this is akin to funding and supporting only those seafarers setting off from Palos de la Frontera in the expectation that by sailing west they will next see land in the East Indies. Meanwhile, there are other highly experienced and capable seafarers on the wharf who are going nowhere because they have no backing. These seafarers know that the fully financed fleet which is about to leave and led by fools, is doomed to fail… The stranded unsupported seafarers listened to or sailed with Columbus!

Let us be very clear. Anyone who subscribes to the idea that we can limit global warming to an increase of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels is totally out of touch. They are ill-informed. They do not understand the science. They are ideologues. They are climate extremists. They are, in fact, the true climate deniers. As soon as you identify someone, a company, an institution, or a politician talking about limiting global warming to an increase of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, you have identified another climate denier. They are climate fools…

Climate fools are the new pandemic, and it is time to look more closely at them.

There was a battle for seats on the board of AGL, Australia’s oldest and largest energy company. It was also the subject of an attempted hostile take-over bid by interests owned by Mike Cannon-Brookes.

The Australian Financial Review writes:

Software billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes is to be congratulated for his persuasive proxy campaign to install four hand-picked directors to the board of his corporate prey, AGL Energy.

Three of his four nominees look set to be elected at AGL’s annual meeting on November 15 – and only his selection of one dud candidate, John Pollaers, will prevent him from electing all four (never forget, Cannon-Brookes originally proposed Pollaers as AGL chairman!).

The Guardian later wrote:

Billionaire Mike Cannon-Brookes has succeeded in shaking up the board of Australia’s biggest electricity producer, with all four of his proposed directors winning support from shareholders at AGL Energy’s annual general meeting.

On RN Breakfast, host Patricia Karvelas interviewed Brynn O’Brien, who is Executive Director of – wait for it – The Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility. One assumes if people want guidance on a good way to go in the corporate world, this outfit would know.

But they don’t.

This is what the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility says about its activities.

‘ACCR’s climate program aims to accelerate Australia’s transition to a low carbon economy in line with the Paris Agreement. We engage with ASX-listed companies on their climate risk disclosure and the need to set emissions reduction targets consistent with the Paris Agreement, and we also push for reviews by ASX-listed companies of their industry associations’ climate policy advocacy.

‘Few major Australian listed companies have made credible commitments, supported by detailed plans, to align their activities with the goals of the Paris Agreement.

‘We target companies whose industry associations engage in adverse climate lobbying, particularly where that lobbying is at odds with the company’s own policies.

‘In order to limit global warming to an increase of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, rapidly decarbonising the global economy is crucial. We challenge ASX-listed companies to set and disclose credible short, medium and long term emissions reduction targets in line with the Paris Agreement.’

With this statement, it is evident that like the banks and super funds, ACCR are clearly not abreast of the facts either on the Paris Agreement or with the stated opinions of the climate science community including the IPCC. The ACCR are maintaining the view that the 1.5°C limit is achievable, is credible and responsible, when it is not. In other words, the ACCR are true climate deniers.

The thing is any fool should know this: one does not need to be in the climate science community, the IPCC, in academia, or in government to know the 1.5°C limit was abandoned years ago. The science community and the IPCC recognised that this target was always likely to be unachievable simply because the cost and dislocation to energy infrastructure and economies worldwide was ‘a bridge too far’.

In the interview with O’Brien on the ABC, Karvelas cited the AGL Chair Patricia McKenzie as saying:

‘Aligning AGL with 1.5°C warming would need all of the company’s coal power generation closed by at least mid-2029 and for all coal plants in the national electricity market to shut two years later.’

McKenzie said this was not possible for replacement capacity cannot be built in time. In effect, McKenzie was simply stating what credible climate scientists and the IPCC recognised years ago.

Karvelas asked O’Brien what her response was to that, to which O’Brien replied, ‘Look, this is a scare campaign.’

It was then that Karvelas pressed O’Brien, saying the AGL Chair maintains they just don’t have the replacement technology. And everyone should know this or at least know renewables cannot provide firming power, more especially when the wind doesn’t blow and the sun is not shining. And the much-touted green hydrogen alternative is still unproven as an affordable and achievable alternative. Amazingly, O’Brien agreed saying, ‘We don’t have the technology at this moment but that is the challenge for AGL…’

So, the Executive Director of the Australasian Centre for Corporate Responsibility not only insists companies like AGL must embrace unachievable targets, but they should carry on not knowing if they can or if they will deliver energy after 2029. O’Brien admits the technology to replace coal-fired energy is not available but believes AGL must close their coal-powered energy now.

O’Brien does this in the name of ‘corporate responsibility’?

Where is the corporate responsibility for stakeholders? O’Brien, representing the ACCR, suggests AGL should terminate current business activity and hope some as yet unproven technology will emerge within the next six years that will secure business activity for AGL into the future. In other words, slit your wrists now and trust a solution will come before you bleed out.

What do you tell the shareholders? What do you tell the employees? What do you tell the communities AGL serves? Is this in the interests of Australia?

This is not corporate responsibility. This is business lunacy.

Were she there in Palos de la Frontera she would be telling the fleet, ‘Sail west and don’t stop until you reach the East Indies. You won’t need charts. It is just a challenge. Don’t listen to Columbus. He is only running a scare campaign!’

If this is corporate responsibility who needs it?

Get 10 issues for just $10

Subscribe to The Spectator Australia today for the next 10 magazine issues, plus full online access, for just $10.

SUBSCRIBE 10 issues for $10 REGISTER 3 articles a month

Already a subscriber? Log in