Climate: the problem that dare not speak its name

So what are the policies for this enormous phenomenon that is being given such scant attention? Alex White in The Guardian points out that the economic costs of inaction far exceed the cost of effective action. He does however find that the ALP policy with an accelerated floating carbon price scheme, is far more effective than the vaguely enunciated Direct Action Plan of the Coalition. The Climate Institute has declared that the electoral policies of both parties leave Australia unprepared for the costly climate impact on health and the economy of two degrees of warming, which we are well on track to exceed.

In terms of star ratings out of five [for policy on climate] the Coalition reaches 1.5 the ALP 2.5 the Greens rate at 5. Katter's Party is left alone with an inglorious score of 0.

But the electioneering is focused on skirmishes, while not mentioning the war. Tony Abbott has declared that his first act, should he become Prime Minister, would be to dismantle thecarbon tax, which he asserts has been a terrible impost, on business and those on low incomes.

Probably in an attempt to out manoeuvre Abbott, just prior to announcing the election date, Rudd declared that he was terminating the carbon tax . He added [in a smaller voice ] that floating carbon price was being brought in earlier that had been planned. This was met with derision and scoffing by Abbott who referred to Rudd being the exaggerator and the fabricator; not the terminator.

Climate change or effective action on climate change did not get a mention.

Without discussing the problem, the proposed solution of pricing carbon was falsely relegated to the status of an 'unnecessary tax'.

Abbott has derided carbon trading as "a so called market in the non delivery of an invisible substance, to no-one." What he may have deemed to be a witty rejoinder, instead conveyed a lack of knowledge of the impact of unpriced CO2, and ignorance of market [that is] economic forces. He seems not to have heard of World Bank calls for carbon pricing and the disastrous economic outcomes of two to four degrees of warming.

There is a huge and accumulating volume of evidence that the earth is continuing to warm at an accelerating rate due to human production of green house emissions. Most of this warming has so far, been absorbed by oceans. Meanwhile Arctic Ice is melting at a ferocious rate.

Rudd urged us to celebrate that the move from the carbon tax to a floating ETS will save families from $380 to $430 a year. This amounts to one dollar a day! But is this of more importance for us and future generations than the global significance of a price on carbon? Should the pricing be judged on its cheapness for now or effectiveness into the future? A recent study reported in the Vancouver Sun indicates that governments need to be planning well into the future for infrastructure that will be impacted upon by a warming world, rising sea levels and more frequent extreme weather events. Meanwhile 2012 was one of the ten warmest years on record globally. The calls from experts [ninety-seven per cent of world scientists] have become more urgent.

Scientific American also reports the unprecedented speed of the changes that the planet has not seen in millions of years, saying 'humans have never seen anything like it'.

But while the ALP and the Greens remain at least plausible players on real action to mitigate and prepare for climate change they are not trumpeting this.

But how can we mitigate a problem, if we are in effect denying and avoiding it by ignoring it?

Abbott's party has justified non action by declaring that Australia is a small player with little power to influence. This is a nihilistic argument that ensures that we continue to contribute to and be the problem rather than to the solution. We also make it harder for ourselves by not building up coping and infrastructures for what is to come.

This is not how problems are solved or how wars are won. As leading environmental economist Mark Jaccard has pointed out that Canada [like Australia] played a small part in the victory of the allies in second world war, Yet no-one would describe this as an unimportant or insignificant. In the most significant threat of our times , how can we leave it to others alone ?