KEY POINTS:
The latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) confirms we're currently gambling with the future of the planet - and the odds aren't looking good. It warns the only way to improve them is urgent and strong action on climate change.
The panel's Fourth Assessment
Synthesis Report contains its most definitive scientific warning yet that further procrastination over climate change is not an option. The call to action couldn't be more black and white.
Yet branches of the New Zealand business sector continue to plead grey. The usual industry players have spent the last few weeks trying to undermine solutions to climate change, including challenging the Government's emissions trading scheme (ETS) and energy strategies.
First, members of the Greenhouse Policy Coalition - a group that represents some of New Zealand's biggest greenhouse polluters - sent a letter to Government pressuring it to delay and weaken the proposed emissions scheme and questioning the feasibility of the 90 per cent renewable electricity target set within the New Zealand Energy Strategy. This despite the fact New Zealand boasts one of the best renewable energy resources in the world.
The coalition also commissioned a report calling for the Government to make alterations to the proposed trading scheme that would mean greater taxpayer subsidies to polluting industries and less chance of actual emission reductions.
Next came a report from the New Zealand Institute, a privately funded think-tank, suggesting that New Zealand should follow not lead in solutions to climate change. The report even suggested New Zealand put its international reputation on the line by backing out of its commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.
Then came the Business Roundtable-sponsored visit by one of the Britain's most notorious climate sceptics - Lord Nigel Lawson. His bizarre brand of fatalism on climate change provided telling reinforcement of the Roundtable's recent efforts to undermine climate policy.
These have included signing the letter pressuring the Government to delay and weaken the Emissions Trading Scheme, arguing that early strong action on climate change is not warranted, calling for New Zealand to pull out of Kyoto and claiming climate change is "a risk not a certainty" despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Lawson's visit left no doubt about the Business Roundtable's agenda. The Business Roundtable, Greenhouse Policy Coalition and New Zealand Institute have it wrong on two main counts. First, they make New Zealand out to be a trail-blazer in the area of emissions trading, and therefore out on a limb.
Yet even the Prime Minister, who has made the environment one of her key issues internationally, admitted that on climate change, "we're still playing catch up". Countries have been trading emissions credits for years as part of the international Kyoto Protocol. An emissions trading scheme is already in place in Europe. Australia has begun work on a scheme that will be introduced in the next few years and even the US is on the path to setting itself mandatory emission reduction limits.
Although a positive step in the right direction, New Zealand's ETS does not in itself represent an adequate response to the problem of climate change. The scheme in its current form is conservative, gradual and extremely generous to trade-exposed emitters such as the agricultural industry.
It won't ensure we meet our existing Kyoto commitments and lacks any overall cap on absolute emissions within New Zealand. Its effectiveness beyond 2012 is reliant on the outcome of international Kyoto negotiations taking place between now and 2009, because it's these negotiations that will help set a global price on carbon.
Vocal sectors of the business community are exaggerating the costs of action on climate change (without ever actually specifying what the costs are). They refuse to acknowledge the benefits of moving to a low-carbon economy.
As the authoritative Stern Review into the economics of climate change points out, taking action now to reduce emissions will cost up to 20 times less than delaying action.
There's no doubting the economic implications of inaction for New Zealand - including insurance and market risks, and increased costs of adaptation. We risk being left behind and losing international credibility, negotiating power, trading partners and political allies if we don't follow through on our rhetoric.
The emissions scheme (assuming it's strengthened both domestically and via international negotiations) and the Energy Strategy represent a once in a lifetime opportunity for New Zealand business to enhance its brand as a clean, green, premium producer and position itself well for the inevitable transition to a low-carbon global economy.
If these policies are implemented to their full extent, New Zealand can be a world leader, with access to the premium end of international markets. Business groups need to accept the reality of legislation to combat climate change and start engaging constructively to make these policies as effective as possible. Anything less puts the economy and climate at risk.
Meanwhile, governments must take heed from the warnings in the latest Intergovernmental Panel report when it meets in Bali to negotiate the Kyoto Protocol's second phase early next month.
The New Zealand Government has a crucial role to play in Bali. Given recent policy announcements, we're in a good position to go in to bat for the climate.
Our international reputation is on the line. Our delegation must push for a global emissions reduction target that keeps warming below two degrees. The panel itself specifies a range of between 25 and 40 per cent reductions below 1990 levels by 2020 for developed countries like New Zealand. This is not a gamble we can afford to lose.
* Susannah Bailey is a Greenpeace climate campaigner.
