Peter Dutton, the leader of Australia’s opposition, recently claimed that Australian taxpayers might have to spend “tens of billions” to co-host the next Conference of the Parties (COP) with the Pacific nations. This international climate change meeting has become a focal point in the debate over Australia’s climate policy.
In response, Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen stated that Dutton’s figures were fabricated. But beyond the cost argument, questions arise about whether COP is still effective and if Australia, a major coal exporter, should even be a host.
Critics argue that the COP process is outdated. An open letter from prominent climate figures, including former UN secretary-general Ban Ki-moon, called for significant changes, suggesting only countries committed to moving away from fossil fuels should host these discussions. Despite 29 COP meetings, global emissions continue to rise. The last three host nations—Egypt, UAE, and Azerbaijan—are heavily dependent on fossil fuels, showing a trend that benefits fossil fuel interests.
However, COPs have achieved meaningful milestones, such as the Paris Agreement at COP21 and the establishment of a loss and damage fund at COP28, recognizing the plight of developing countries facing the climate crisis. The Climate Council views COP as a valuable platform for showcasing progress on climate action globally.
Currently, Australia and Turkey are in the running to host COP31. While Australia has received backing from several countries, its climate record raises concerns. Since being elected in 2022, the Labor Party has approved numerous new fossil fuel projects, despite calls from organizations like the International Energy Agency for a halt to such developments. The government’s emissions reduction target is 43% by 2030, but experts recommend a cut of 75% to align with climate goals.
Public interest in climate issues seems to be waning, with recent surveys indicating that climate action has dropped in priority for voters. This raises the question of whether hosting COP could rekindle public motivation, similar to the 350,000 people who marched for climate action in 2019.
Should Australia host COP31, the expectation would be to set ambitious emissions targets. The UK has already committed to an 81% cut by 2035. Additionally, it’s crucial to include Indigenous voices in climate discussions, especially as Australia co-hosts with Pacific nations that see climate change as an existential threat.
Polly Hemming from The Australia Institute highlighted that Dutton’s comments could damage Australia’s relationship with Pacific nations and affect collaboration on climate matters. Advocates stress that hosting COP offers an opportunity for Australia to lead the way in transitioning to cleaner energy while strengthening ties with its Pacific neighbors.
Critically, the financial implications of hosting COP are not as daunting as suggested. The Climate Council notes that the infrastructure needed for COP is low-cost compared to large sporting events. Previous hosting costs range from $100 million to $250 million, significantly less than Dutton claimed. Moreover, hosting COP could generate substantial economic benefits. For example, estimates reveal COP31 could bring up to $210 million to Australia with 30,000 attendees.
In light of these factors, the decision on whether Australia hosts COP31 will be debated in June. The outcome will depend on both political winds and the government’s climate strategies leading up to the next federal election.
For further insights, you can learn more from the Climate Council on the economic and environmental impacts of hosting COP31.
Check out this related article: Renewables vs. Extinction: Why Major Political Parties Must Prioritize Our Planet’s Future
Source linkauspol,climate change,COP31,ENVIRONMENT,Peter Dutton
