Pacific Nations win ICJ Case
The games afoot. Climate change may have consequences of inaction on those countries that are not taking steps to address their emissions.
Its 15 judges found that countries had a legal obligation to protect the climate from greenhouse gas emissions, and that failing to act could make polluting nations liable for reparations to nations harmed by climate change.
Vanuatu reporter Lillyrose Welwel and Hugo Hodge
Importantly for Australia, the judges found that fossil fuel production and consumption, the granting of fossil fuel exploration licences, and fossil fuel subsidies may constitute internationally wrongful acts.
This puts the Australian government in a rather difficult position considering the "rule of law" has been a constant in their justification of actions since Federal labour gained power. The liberal party and national coalition may be in a great deal of trouble, as technically I would argue that government policy is party policy.
If you want to know how Australia is perceived in SE Asia read this for a start, although it is just a single article. Who published it is interesting in itself
Lindsay R. Dodd
The truth is far messier, and often much less flattering. At street level, Australia is not viewed as the benign, multicultural partner it imagines itself to be. It is, more often, seen as aloof, self-important, and sometimes even hypocritical – qualities Asians can perceive when they sense moralising or selective criticism from Canberra. The political posturing that plays well in Canberra is frequently misunderstood – or resented – across Southeast Asia. Worse, it sometimes makes Australia look like the neighbour nobody asked for.
I live in Western Australia, a great state with half competent leadership. We don't have a gas shortfall yet and have been spared most of the problems that have engulfed the eastern states, with the exception of the housing crisis which seems to be a western nation affliction globally. However, our gas supply has already been stretched, and domestic stockpiles are in jeopardy.
I for one agree which much of the rest of the country that sovereign assets should go to our country first with surplus being exported not the other way round. This is not a unique perspective and is the policy of most governments in the world, even before Trump 2 managed to shake up the entire establishment and their conclusions on world affairs.
It appears that guaranteeing domestic supply and I use the phrase loosely now leads to legal complications we were warned about earlier.
The way, I see it, the states approve these projects with Federal oversight mainly in relation to environmental and sovereign ownership. The states make incomes based on tariffs, duties and mineral royalties, the latter of which are negotiated to get projects off the ground. Then there is the state's portion of the GST which is hotly contested by the states.
So, who is liable, and who will pay assuming we lose, other than the taxpayer who had stuff all to do with the decisions that got us in this predicament to start with other than vote in a federal or state election.
Someone better be figuring out how to deal with this in a real damn hurry, or the federal labour party better stop using the "rules-based order", as it won't be long before the country is "out of order".
Don't get me started on "Sovereign citizens". Learned about that on Friday. There is something very wrong in this country and it appears that discontent is growing exponentially.
#enoughsaid