Bob Brown and Tim Flannery may just be making Howard's job of retaining office a little easier. The battleground is becoming clear - mounting a credible campaign on global warming, while reassuring the nation that the cost will not be too great is essential for victory. Brown and the green extremists have played their cards - revealing that they wish to destroy the coal industry in the name of climate change. Rudd has been quick to distance himself, but will he really be able to play the environmentally friendly, do deals with the Greens for preferences and still be able to convince coal miners and their dependant communities that Howard wouldn't be a safer bet?
I've always thought that a major commitment to cleaner coal in the short term, and clean coal (sequestration ) in the long term would be a critical component of a realistic response to climate change. Australia's comparative advantage in coal, with plentiful reserves, and our major coal export market means abandoning coal would be a massive cost to bear.
Rudd now needs to straddle the divide - show that he is business and mining friendly enough to protect coal, but at the same time green enough to win critical Greens preferences (and convince the punters that he won't do deals with the Greens if he wins office in the senate). It will be a hard ask - Rudd already has the difficult issue of keeping Peter Garrett's moral convictions in check, and a nuclear debate at the next Labor convention.
It will be interesting to see this wedge unfold... Howard is a master politician and will be likely to employ coal along side nuclear in his arsenal of wedge politics in the lead up to the 2007 federal election.
No comments:
Post a Comment