The final version

[NB - this version has had the footnotes and references taken out to get around formatting problems]

A Green New Deal for Victoria -
an integrated response to the triple crunch of recession, climate change, and peak oil.

CONTENTS:

• The Triple Crunch – threats and opportunities
• Key recommendations from this report
• shelter
• the social dimensions of urban form
• energy
• mobility
• water
• food
• waste
• community
• why is this green new deal right for victoria?
• how do we get there?

“To finally spark the creation of a clean energy economy, we will double the production of alternative energy in the next three years. We will modernize more than 75% of federal buildings and improve the energy efficiency of two million American homes, saving consumers and taxpayers billions on our energy bills. In the process, we will put Americans to work in new jobs that pay well and can’t be outsourced – jobs building solar panels and wind turbines; constructing fuel-efficient cars and buildings; and developing the new energy technologies that will lead to even more jobs, more savings, and a cleaner, safer planet in the bargain”.

- Barack Obama, US President, Inauguration Speech, 20 January 2009.

“Let us grow out of this recession in a way that both reduces risks for our planet and sparks off a wave of new investment which will create a more secure, cleaner and more attractive economy for all of us. And in so doing, we shall demonstrate for all, particularly the developing world, that low-carbon growth is not only possible, but that it can also be a productive and efficient route to overcome world poverty.”

- Professor Nicholas Stern, the former World Bank chief economist and author of a UK Treasury-commissioned report on the economics of climate change.

The Triple Crunch – threats and opportunities

Australia, in common with the rest of the global community, is facing a ‘triple crunch’ of recession, accelerating climate change and growing energy costs and insecurity.  These overlapping phenomena threaten to develop into a ‘perfect storm’, the like of which has not been seen since the Great Depression.

As jobs are lost at an increasing rate, decisive and visionary action by the state and federal governments is needed to guide us through this gathering storm and to take advantage of the opportunities that these unprecedented events present to us.

A way forward that is finding support in Europe, the United States, and increasingly Australia is the idea of a transformational policy program aimed at tackling growing unemployment and declining demand on the scale of Franklin D Roosevelt’s ‘New Deal’ of the 1930s. But this modern version understands the pressing environmental issues we face and seeks to rein in rather than worsen our environmental woes whilst also dealing with the recession. This new approach involves policies and novel funding mechanisms to substantially reduce the use of fossil fuels while also driving the creation of new ‘green collar’ jobs. This in turn will help us tackle climate change and cope with the energy shortages likely to be caused by peak oil in coming years.

We now stand at a pivotal moment in history. To prevent catastrophic climate change we must ensure the global temperature remains well below 1.5 degrees centigrade above pre-industrial levels, this requires a climate strategy that keeps greenhouse gases to well below 350 pmm of CO2-equivalent. Time is now rapidly running out. To achieve this target the industrialised countries must cut their carbon emissions by at least 40% by 2020. This epic challenge can only be achieved if emissions start to fall dramatically right now.

At the same time we are facing one of the deepest and most severe recessions the world has known for decades, plunging millions into poverty.

Yet these two crises share common roots. A world addicted to fossil fuel, and driven by an ideological obsession with letting the market rule has led to economic and environmental breakdown.

These three threats are also a major opportunity for our society, and rather than looking for a simple quick fix that creates some jobs and encourages spending, we must not miss this chance to restructure our economy to:

●    build resilience to survive the coming changes of global warming and the end of cheap fuel,
●    a ‘steady state’ economy, where the human economy has ceased to grow, but remains at a healthy, sustainable level.

The steady state economy

John Stuart Mill developed the idea of the steady state economy in the mid-19th century.  He believed that after a period of growth, the economy would reach a stationary state, characterized by constant population and stocks of capital.  Birth rates would equal death rates, and production rates would equal depreciation rates.  His own words eloquently describe the positive nature of such an economic system:  “It is scarcely necessary to remark that a stationary condition of capital and population implies no stationary state of human improvement.  There would be as much scope as ever for all kinds of mental culture, and moral and social progress; as much room for improving the Art of Living and much more likelihood of its being improved, when minds cease to be engrossed by the art of getting on.”

Traditionally, economics taught in our universities has been based on an assumption that continuous growth is the only way to generate a better life for everyone on the planet. It argues that growth will raise living standards, lift people out of poverty whilst the cycle of supply and demand will solve environmental problems and the depletion of world resources.

An increasing number of people now realise that our current economic system, based on relentless growth and high consumption lifestyles, is not sustainable. It is apparent  that the rich nations (also called the global North) have such relatively extravagant lifestyles and, significantly, produce such high levels of waste, that there is simply not enough environmental space for all 6.7 billion people currently on the planet to enjoy the type of lifestyles we have. We must get much smarter and more efficient in our resource use. Our aim must be high quality lifestyles and vital and robust economies, operating within ecological limits.

The bushfires that devastated much of Victoria over the past summer have, and will, lead to considerable changes in how and where we build in fire prone areas. We should ensure that the response to bushfire is fully integrated into a broader response which deals with the recession and builds resilience in the face of climate change.

what is peak oil?

Peak oil is the point in time when the maximum rate of global petroleum extraction is reached, after which the rate of production enters terminal decline.

Some observers believe the high dependence of most modern industrial transport, agricultural and industrial systems on the relative low cost and high availability of fossil-fuel based oil will cause the post-peak production decline and possible severe increases in the price of oil to have negative implications for the global economy.

Key recommendations from this report

• we should move to an 8 star energy rating for new homes and buildings
• we should launch a massive roll out of retrofitting of private and public houses for energy efficiency
• launch a low income retrofit program to drive energy efficiency in homes
• re-structure workplace training towards ‘green collar’ jobs
• commit funds to a massive affordable or public housing program
• create a requirement for full use of passive solar and energy design in new housing
• specify the use of eco cement
• initiate a state-wide summit to launch a new vision of a compact and sustainable Melbourne
• increase the Victorian Energy Efficiency Target to 40%commit to 100% renewable energy for our stationary energy production by 2020
• don’t renew the coal mining lease for the Anglesea coal mine and instead develop an energy transition plan for the Alcoa facilities in Anglesea, Portland and Point Henry
• place a ban on new coal mining or power stations
• specify ‘Australian made’ in building materials and renewables
• work to halt the ‘brain drain’ of people and companies involved with sustainable technology leaving Australia
• drive innovation towards energy efficiency and renewables and away from biotechnology and nanotechnology by shifting current and future research funding
• continue the investment in rail transport to complete the public transport network, especially in new suburbs and rural Victoria
• commit to the high speed rail link between Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra
• bring back tram conductors – a classic ‘green collar’ job
• ensure we build all our public transport infrastructure here in Australia
• abandon plans for the North South pipeline and the mega desalination plant, and invest the $5 billion these will cost into a range of job rich alternatives to meet our water needs
• priortise getting recycled water from the Eastern treatment plant to the Latrobe Valley for use in the Maryvale pulp mill and power stations to allow quality drinking water to be freed up for Melbourne’s domestic needs
• fund a major roll out of rainwater tanks on residential and commercial buildings in Melbourne and regional centres
• keep water in public hands
• introduce water intensity labelling for food produced in the state
• create new legislation to drive down waste and increase jobs – provide a mandate for extended producer responsibility – starting with Container Deposit legislation
• favour local food production, including through the creation of a rebate scheme for water tanks for people in rented housing to water food crops
• ensure all new housing developments have space for future food production
• introduce a Protection of Agricultural Land Bill, which would aim to stop further encroachment on agricultural areas until a full assessment of agriculture in the light of climate change has been carried out
• carry out a thorough review of the existing conservation reserve system to determine whether new areas and biolinks are required to ‘climate proof’ the system
• abandon the current ‘pro growth’ approach to population
• make space for climate refugees through planning for resettlement and advocating for recognition of climate refugees
• adopt new indicators for tracking social and economic well being
• facilitate the ability of workers to enact ‘green EBAs’ (Enterprise Bargaining Agreements)  that can include environmental provisions in work place agreements
• follow the example of the Canadian province of Ontario in introducing a Green Energy and Economy Act to drive green job creation
• introduce a holistic Climate Bill with broad reaching powers that sets an annual carbon budget for the state

Edinburgh Gardens

A green New Deal could include the state government committing to the following measures:

SHELTER

New housing regulations. We build more than 35,000 new homes in Victoria each year. Housing stock is a significant contributor to our greenhouse emissions.

Victoria should act quickly on the promised review of the regulations that govern new domestic housing. New houses are currently required to meet a 5 star energy standard and install either a rain water tank or solar hot water panel. A requirement to have both a panel and a tank, and to meet an 8 star energy rating standard would create thousands of new jobs in Victoria in construction, installation and maintenance and would have substantial benefits for our manufacturing sector. Our approach to new housing must be as holistic as possible, looking at the ‘thermal shell’ of a house, energy efficiency measures that can be built in to new houses, water efficiency and the embodied energy of materials.  Embodied energy is the energy consumed by all of the processes associated with the production of a building, from the mining and processing of natural resources to manufacturing, transport and product delivery.

While the April 2009 decision to adopt uniform national 6 star energy standards for new houses in Australia must be welcomed and acknowledged, this is still short of what is possible and required. At present the average energy rating of housing in Australia is 2.5 stars, while in the USA it is 6.5 and in Western Europe it is 8.

In the 2009/10 state budget, the government announced it’s intention to fast track five major metropolitan developments – at the Amcor site, the Pentridge Prison redevelopment, Werribee, Waurn Ponds and Caulfield. This highlights the need to get the housing regulations right as soon as possible to ensure this future housing stock is built at the highest possible standard.

As part of this, we should make double glazing compulsory. This would have both employment and energy efficiency benefits.

But what about the cost?

In terms of affordability, cost is often cited as a reason to hold back on energy efficiency.  While peak housing industry organisations quote figures such as $10,000 to move basic houses from five to seven-star standard, actual calculations indicate otherwise.  An unpublished study by RMIT’s Lifetime Affordable Housing project found seven stars to be significantly more affordable than five-star homes. The best cost outcome is a 7.2-star standard, which provides a simple payback of seven years. This takes no account of the extra comfort experienced in better homes, the reduction in marginal load on the grid, the fact that the house is cheaper to run than a five or six star variant, nor the higher resale value of the house which are estimated to be around $9,000.

Friends of the Earth will be releasing a report on the possible financial costs of shifting to an 8 star rating in June 2009.

Refurbishing thousands of existing homes each year through the creation of a house retrofit program with full insulation, other efficiency measures and renewable energy, starting with homes that fail to meet the current 5 star rating for new housing. Home owners could opt in to this program.  It could prioritise the most vulnerable households, low income individuals and families living in poor quality houses, who will be paying ever more of their income on heating and cooling their homes as energy prices go up and the effects of climate change become more dramatic.

This must include a commitment to continue upgrading public housing. The current allocation of $2.1 million to retrofit public housing is a worthwhile initiative that will require continued and expanded support in future state budgets.

In the short term this innovation could be driven by an increase in the Victorian Energy Efficiency Target (VEET) from 10 to 40% for emissions reductions in residential housing. The scheme sets a target of 10% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from households by 2010, with energy savings to be achieved through the uptake of energy efficient technology, initially in the residential sector. VEET should include insulation as a key efficiency measure.

This improved efficiency must also include commercial buildings. By 2014 the 8 star energy rating should apply to new build and retrofit of all commercial and public buildings.

This will require the creation of a ‘carbon army’ of high- and lower-skilled workers to implement this vast street-by-street reconstruction, through a comprehensive program of training and re-skilling. Initially this would include greatly expanded funding for free energy and water audits of existing homes. These audits would cover an assessment of short term and easy improvements around energy and water efficiency as well as a more comprehensive assessment of economically viable retrofitting that could be implemented  later on.

This service could be delivered through community organisations with existing skills and networks in this field, such as Moreland Energy Foundation, and co-ordinated through state government. This must include rural areas and regional centres as well, starting with communities where people have already organised themselves in this regard. The Castlemaine 500 project is an outstanding example of this type of community organising.

Low Income Household Refit Program

The NSW Government is helping households most in need to save power and cut their power bills through the Low Income Household Refit Program.

Over the next four years, 220,000 households across NSW will receive a free home energy assessment, have energy saving fittings put in, and get personal advice about how to save power.

The program is being offered to 1,000 homes in Western Sydney as part of a pilot which begins in May 2009. The main program will be rolled out across NSW later in the year.

Every home that signs up will get a free:
·    home visit by a trained assessor to find ways to save power in the home, and
·    a power saver action plan to show other ways to save power and money.

This re-skilling will also require major re-focussing and resources for TAFEs and other centres for work- place training. There are a range of training initiatives such as Global Green Electrician (GGE), that are already carrying out the type of training that will be required. The GGE accredited training course was developed by the Electrical Trades Union (ETU).  The training provides electrical workers with the skills and knowledge to cater for the uptake of renewables and the increased implementation of energy efficiency measures.

Training in best re-use of materials that are currently considered to be waste in the construction industry is also a significant opportunity for training programs in that sector.

Use jobs funds for re-training. The new  Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) Jobs Fund, which is intended to support the development of community and social infrastructure is to be commended. It should have climate change mitigation and adaptation as the cornerstone of its funding criteria.

Transforming the energy performance of all public and commercial buildings through energy efficiency measures and making every suitable building a mini- power station through renewables and co-generation (also called combined heat and power or CHP, whereby  a heat engine or a power station is used to simultaneously generate both electricity and useful heat.).

As with the need to move forward with housing regulations, this is doubly urgent given the May 2009 state budget commitment of $139 million to revitalisation projects in major suburban centres such as Broadmeadows, Footscray, Box Hill and Ringwood.

Urban infill, and an end to sprawl. Anyone who has travelled in Western Europe will know that compact cities can be vibrant, dynamic and wonderful places to live. Melbourne 2030 is a 30 year plan which aims to manage sustainable growth across the metropolitan area.

Many key elements of this plan, for instance encouraging housing density around activity centres, make ecological sense. We must slow further developments on the fringes of Melbourne and low density sprawl in general and instead re-focus our attention on building up around public transport and other social infrastructure in appropriate locations. Further development on the fringes of Melbourne destroys farmland, bushland and coastal amenities and heritage.

Low density disorganised sprawl needs to stop, while still maintaining Melbourne’s quality life-style of parks, gardens, and for families, outdoor space for children. We need to continue to build our open space network and protect all significant areas of remnant vegetation within the metropolitan area. There should also be more funding for jobs in eliminating environmental weeds and in restoration and revegetation of our landscapes and waterways with indigenous plants.

Protecting indigenous grasslands

Native grasslands are among the most heavily cleared and endangered ecosystems in Victoria. However, studies suggest that up to 30,000 hectares of native grasslands, of varying quality, survive on Melbourne’s western fringe.

Despite protection through the Victorian Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act and listing under federal legislation, legal and illegal clearing of grasslands continues through conversion from native pasture to more intensive agriculture, and urban development.

Melbourne@5 million, the State Government plan for the expansion of Melbourne, emphasises the importance of native grasslands, particularly in the Wyndham (Werribee) area, and commits the government to “the creation of two large grassland protected areas”.
There is an immediate opportunity to create new parks on the western fringes of Melbourne which would save the best remaining areas of this grassland.

New suburbs – don’t let fashion over ride common sense. Where new ‘greenfield development’ must occur, we must start by minimising energy use in new housing developments from the moment land is opened up and street planning is laid out. We must plan for future energy use and best possible uptake of passive design options offered by any particular site in terms of minimising energy use and maximising energy savings:

1/ where possible, all house blocks should be orientated length-wise East West – thus the length of the house has the potential to have maximum exposure to the sun – which can be controlled by pergolas, sun shades, use of plantings, etc.

2/ with all the building regulations currently in existence there are hardly any dictating the colour of the roof. We can achieve significant reduction in heat absorption (and transfer into the house) by ensuring roofing materials are either a  light/ bright colour, or painted that way. Many houses being built at present have dark coloured roofs.

3/ we must ensure architects break with the environmental crimes of the past. No architect should be allowed to put fashion statements ahead of sustainability. Training must include compulsory components of passive solar design – such as use of protective eaves, ensuring maximum use of natural light, natural cooling options, warming of concrete slabs by winter sun during the day, and so on. All of these are both common sense and common knowledge, yet it is astounding how many new homes still ignore these basic design principles.

4/ we are building houses now that will last for years. We should therefore plan ahead for a low carbon future. Accordingly, we must  ensure that new housing developments have factored in space to allow for future food production, and water collection and harvesting, even if it is not a feature of the current day-to-day use.

“I speak as an electrician of 50 years experience – most architects are the bane of a trade-persons working life with their airy fairy, arty, impractical, hell to maintain “designs” that slowly kill the planet – anyone who builds or designs a home that needs an air-conditioner should be “struck off” their respective registries”.
- Mike McKeon

By implementing simple measures – such as insulation, orientation, high efficiency cooling and heating, and window shading – the ecological footprint of a home can be cut by a factor of five. When clever design features are included, it is also possible to get much better use of space, meaning you can fit more houses onto the same amount of land without compromising amenity. According to research carried out in Queensland by Lend Lease Delfin, the EPA and GreenMode,  when construction and the physical maintenance of the house are also included in this type of planning, three of these sustainable homes could fit in the footprint of one ‘standard’ house.

Specify the use of ‘eco cement’. Eco-Cement is a new type of cement which incorporates magnesium oxide (magnesia) and wastes to make it more environmentally sustainable. Eco-Cement uses a lower heating temperature during manufacturing, so less fossil fuels are used. Wastes such as fly and bottom ash, slags, etc can be included, without incurring problems such as delayed reactions. Eco-Cement absorbs C02 from the atmosphere to set and harden and can be recycled.

.

THE SOCIAL DIMENSIONS OF URBAN FORM

How much is enough? The Victorian government has an agenda of pushing population growth in order to drive economic development. In the most recent state budget it claims that ‘Victoria’s strong population growth will also help to underpin economic growth’. This is a flawed model.

As outlined in this report there are many other ways to encourage economic activity. As a part of Australia, Victoria has obligations to accept a fair share of asylum seekers. But to pursue a growth-based approach to population simply to drive the economy is short sighted and ultimately destructive.

Make space for the displaced. There can be little doubt that growing numbers of people will be displaced globally by climate change in coming decades and that Australia will eventually recognise the responsibility to accept some of these people as climate refugees.

Additionally, many rural areas have been shedding people for years and it is likely this will continue under climate change scenarios, especially from inland regions. Research needs to be undertaken into how and where these people might be able to be resettled and what services they may require.

How to achieve this vision? The government has clearly failed to sell the idea of a higher density city to the community. We therefore need a rethink about how to achieve this vision.

To initiate this process, the government could convene a state-wide summit similar to the climate summit already hosted by Premier Brumby, to bring together the various elements of society to debate the need for a  more compact and prosperous city and how it could be achieved, without unsustainable population growth. We would need a broad range of interests – not just business, government and NGO representatives, but also food growers, biologists, transport experts and so on.  From this one-off gathering, it would be possible to develop a broad-based committee to develop a fresh vision of a compact and sustainable Melbourne to advise government policy in this regard.

ENERGY

Decarbonising, regionalising and localising energy production through large-scale renewables, micro-generation and using fossil fuels more efficiently.

Transforming stationary energy is the key that unlocks the climate problem. Energy itself is a major source of greenhouse pollution and transforming energy is central to a decarbonised transport sector through electrification and carbon reform in other sectors.

As one example, Aluminium giant Alcoa operates a 160 megawatt (MW) power station and coal mine near Anglesea. The mine lease is due for renewal in 2011. Friends of the Earth is calling on the State government to not renew the coal mine lease and to work with Alcoa to replace the power station with renewable energy and create a just transition for the one hundred workers currently employed by the mine and station. This would be a major boost for the Surf Coast region, and would build on its current focus on nature-based tourism. It would also be a way to keep aluminium production in Victoria, as the substantial subsidies already given to Alcoa could be shifted into driving the creation of new renewable energy in the region.

Similarly, in far western Victoria, the aluminium smelter in Portland and the Point Henry smelter near Geelong could be involved in a rapid transition to using renewable energy. There is already manufacturing capacity at Portland – this could be greatly expanded with continued development of wind energy in the west of the state. These two smelters currently use around 28% of Victoria’s electricity.

We must ban any further coal based development, including the HRL power station proposed for the Latrobe Valley. The HRL plant would offer very little in the way of job opportunities because of its modular nature.

Reforming the La Trobe Valley coal-based energy production is the central task in transforming Victoria’s energy sector. A rapid transition is possible if a commitment is made to compensation, retraining and redployment of the workforce and developing new sustainable industries. Hazelwood and Yallourn power stations are the some of the most polluting in the industrialised world and could be closed almost immediately as investments in renewable energy are made. In the short term term Loy Yang’s fuel could be switched to less polluting gas as renewable energy investments continue to grow.

Ensure protection for all affected workers and communities. Fundamental to the challenge of getting the transition to a low carbon economy right is the need to ensure continued employment for all workers currently in ‘exposed’ high carbon industries such as coal.

Get the targets right. There is huge potential to massively expand renewable energy production across rural Victoria. To drive this we need a renewable energy target that is sufficient to the task. The current Victorian Renewable Energy Target (VRET) aims to ensure renewable energy sources provide 10% of our energy needs by 2016. A commitment to reach 100% of stationary energy production from renewables by 2020 would drive innovation, employment, regional development and investment.

The wind industry globally now employs about 400,000 people. In the US, wind (85,000 people) is now a larger employer than coal (81,000). In Australia coal employs around 30,000 people, while the renewable energy sector only employs about 2,000 people at present. We have the technology to achieve a transition, we just need the political will to drive investment in wind and other renewables. To achieve this we will require set targets for new jobs by each sector (eg wind, photovoltaics) on a year by year basis.

The amount of electricity actually produced by wind power globally in 2008 was 260 Terrawatt-hours, which is about the same as Australia’s total electricity demand.

Wales to go to 100% renewables in energy by 2025

In May 2009, the government of Wales announced that it would work to “radically reduce by 80-90% our use of carbon-based energy, resulting in a similar reduction in our greenhouse gas emissions.

This reflects the latest estimates for action needed to address damaging climate change. It would support our commitment to make annual 3% reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in areas of devolved competence; and our ambitions to make all new buildings zero carbon buildings; and to move to producing as much electricity from renewable sources by 2025 as we consume”

Local energy production. The government can support community action on climate change through setting a fair price for householders and small businesses that feed solar and other renewable energy into the grid. This should be a gross feed-in tariff – ie, one that covers all energy produced, not just what is put into the electricity grid. At present the Victorian government only supports a ‘Net’ tariff, covering the energy actually put through the grid.

In May 2009, the WA government announced the most generous solar feed-in tariffs scheme in Australia – a gross feed-in tariffs scheme which will pay households up to 60 cents a kilowatt hour (kwh) for all the power they generate from their domestic solar systems and not just the excess power they return to the grid. If it can be done in WA it can certainly be done here.

We must specify Australian made. For this recovery to work, we must encourage local production. This can only be guaranteed where the government specifies that any new developments created through efficiency or energy measures are Australian made. We would create thousands of new ‘green collar’ jobs in manufacturing through specifying that the components of this new renewable energy – such as turbines, towers, generators, PV panels, and so on are made in Australia. Another logical area where we could be manufacturing all our needs locally is in the field of public transport – trains, trams and buses. The Latrobe Valley, Ballarat, Portland and Geelong would all be logical places to support this new sustainable manufacturing base.

There is also huge potential in the multi-billion dollar world market for technologies of the future: power generation, materials efficiency, energy efficiency, sustainable mobility, and water and waste management. This can be achieved through direct financial investment, regulation and support for research and development (R&D). In terms of generating green jobs, ideas and technology which could be exported, while reducing greenhouse emissions, this would be a far better use of public R&D funds than the current investment in ‘clean coal’ and bio technology.

We should build on our existing strengths in manufacturing, high technology research, construction and agriculture to develop a sustainable economy.

The well documented brain drain of people and companies involved with sustainable technology leaving Australia must be turned around. We can do this through:

●    building our support for R&D in renewables and other sustainable technology,
●    specifying Australian made materials and products,
●    setting the right policy measures such as a high mandatory renewable energy target to drive local innovation and production.

CETO wave energy

This Perth based company uses patented technology that delivers Zero-Emission Power and Freshwater from the energy of the ocean’s waves. CETO is the only wave energy technology that pumps high pressure seawater ashore making it the most efficient and cost effective way to desalinate freshwater from wave energy.

It is indicative of the type of technology we could be supporting rather than pouring R&D into carbon capture and storage (CCS).

http://www.ceto.com.au/

MOBILITY

Transforming our transport system to be fit for purpose in the coming era of high oil and carbon prices by providing a real public transport choice for everyone. We must stop investing in new freeway infrastructure and instead base our transport policy on the principle that all people in urban areas should be able to live within walking distance of viable public transport.

Development of renewable power needs to continue at such a pace that new light and heavy rail can be run from these sources. We should also commit to a rapid conversion of all our rural and regional train services to rely on non carbon energy sources.

Mercer’s Quality of Living Survey is released annually, comparing 215 cities based on 39 criteria. Melbourne used to be considered one of the world’s most liveable cities but it now  languishes at 17th place, even falling behind Sydney. One of the reasons for this, and the rise of numerous European cities into the top 10, must be the issue of public transport versus car usage.

The state government has been investing in extending our heavy rail network – for instance the commitment to build the Epping line out to South Morang by 2013.  This and the other recent investments are to be welcomed. Commitments outside the Melbourne region included in the 2009 state budget are:

• $27.6 million enhancement of Maryborough rail services which will re-instate 14 weekly train trips starting in 2010 between Maryborough and Ballarat, with connections to Melbourne;
• $22.9 million to improve bus services in Geelong, including a new bus interchange in central Geelong, improved cross-town connections and better links to Deakin University and V/Line train services;
• $8.8 million to upgrade regional stations, including better customer amenities, walkways, drop-off areas, taxi zones and improved bus to train connections.

We must complete the rail transport system, especially to meet the needs of newer fringe suburbs that are currently forced to rely on cars:

• The Upfield service needs to be extended north to Craigieburn,
• Sydenham line should be extended to Sunbury,
• Tullamarine Airport requires a rail link (Sydney and Brisbane airports both have them), provided by extending the Broadmeadows line some 6 kilometres to the airport terminal,
• A rail link to East Doncaster has been promised for years but never built.

Former lord mayor Kevin Chamberlin has recently called for the dual railway line to Flemington Racecourse and Royal Melbourne Showgrounds  to be extended to the new 128-hectare urban development at a former Department of Defence explosives factory site on the Maribyrnong River.  New stations could be situated at Victoria University and Highpoint shopping centre, and the line could be extended to East Keilor.

A key issue in rural areas is to make existing public transport viable for people to actually use, in terms of making the frequency sufficient and connections more effective to make it an option for those who need to commute.

At least as an interim measure, the government should consider how it can support car pooling arrangements for people in the growth corridors, to help them while we catch up with years of neglect in providing effective public transport. The internet makes car pooling and ride sharing more viable than ever before. This can be facilitated at the local government level. The state government can also support car pooling by continuing to expand the number of high occupancy transit lanes on roadways with multiple lanes.

The government should favour car sharing systems that offer an alternative to car ownership. One local example is Go Get. Members have access to a network of new model cars which are parked locally which can be booked at short notice. GoGet CarShare is intended for people who don’t need a car everyday or want to get rid of their second car.

We will need an assessment of where we need to place new heavy rail transport infrastructure to enable the maximum shift of freight off our roads.

We need continued investment in cycling and walking facilities and a commitment to complete the Principal Bicycle Network.

If we are serious about meeting greenhouse gas emissions targets, we must scrap plans to expand Tullamarine airport. At present the international terminal is being expanded, while plans to upgrade the domestic terminal were shelved in late 2008. The domestic expansion will cost from $400 to 600 million. While we accept that many domestic travellers need to go by air because of time constraints, poor land based transport options, and long distances to many locations, an investment in a high speed rail link between Melbourne, Sydney and Canberra (run on renewable energy) would make this commute viable by train for many travellers, thereby alleviating any ‘need’ to expand the domestic terminal at Tullamarine.

There are also plans to expand the airport at Avalon, in order to upgrade it into an international airport. One business proposal attached with this is to facilitate the export of fresh fruit and vegetables to overseas markets. In the 21st century, there is absolutely no justification for this type of idea. It needs to be soundly rejected if planning proposals are put forward.

The project to link Melbourne, Canberra and Sydney by very fast train is at the top of a federal government ‘wish list’ for road and rail projects. It is estimated to cost $59 billion. The proposal heads a priority list of 94 projects selected by the Government’s Infrastructure Australia (IA), which was charged with sifting through 1,000 submissions on possible national infrastructure.

Bring back the Connies! Tram conductors were the quintessential ‘green job’. We should abandon the incredibly expensive ‘MYKI’ ticket system  and bring conductors back onto trams and ensure all railway stations are adequately staffed. There are some benefits of an electronic ticketing system – for instance, the ability to top-up tickets on line. One of the most significant efficiencies with automated ticketing would be on the bus network. If there is an option for a small sized ticketing machine on buses that are compatible with the rest of the system then this would mean that vehicles would spend less time at stops, meaning less congestion, less pollution and greater efficiency.

For further information, see: http://www.tramconductors.net/

Old Growth means good water flow in our rivers. Image: Peter Mcconchie

WATER

Access to water is a basic human right. Yet with the continued privatisation of our water infrastructure, Victoria is likely to face growing challenges to this right in coming years as ability to pay starts to over ride the right to access.

Every Victorian must know the facts about Australia as a water-constrained continent, likely to become even more at risk to both intense droughts and flood events as a result of global warming. More than a decade of drought in southern Victoria, and a good state government awareness campaign, has helped shift our approach to water. Gone are the days of hosing down our driveways and other flagrant mis-use of drinkable water. With the recent shift away from demand management innovation and community education to a focus on mega projects that we have witnessed since the government adopted the idea of the North South pipeline and the desalination plant, we run the risk of losing this more considered and water-concious mind set.

Getting water smart. There is a growing community conversation about water stress and shortages, and how the government should respond to the water crisis. At present the government is committed to building the North – South pipeline and a major desalination plant near Wonthaggi, at a combined cost of around $5 billion. Between them these projects are intended to deliver 225 billion litres or gigalitres (GL) of new water a year (although there have been revelations that the pipe is expected to deliver dramatically less water to Melbourne in its first years than previously predicted by state authorities).

It is clear there are growing community concerns about both these projects.  Neither of them are yet on line and there is enough time to stop them and re-consider other options which will meet our water needs with less greenhouse gas emissions and environmental impacts and far more jobs.

Specific proposals include:

• Cease logging in Melbourne’s catchments (this would yield between 50 and 75 billion litres – or Gigalitres (GL) a year by 2050). This will also have substantial ecological benefits through increased flow into our river systems. Research by the ACF suggests that ending logging in our water catchments will yield substantial flows north of the divide into the Goulburn and hence Murray systems -  an additional 3,800 gigalitres over the course of the century.

• Fast track the upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant to allow production of drinking standard water (this would provide an additional 115 to 150 GL a year by 2012).  In October 2006, the Victorian government announced that a $300 million upgrade of the Eastern Treatment Plant to produce Class A recycled water would begin in 2007 and would be completed in 2012. This is a great development, we need to move forward as quickly as possible with ensuring appropriate re-use of all water from this plant as a matter of urgency.

A significant additional benefit of this would be an end to ocean outfall at Gunnamatta beach.

This water can also be used in industrial uses in Melbourne and the Latrobe Valley. At present, large volumes of high quality drinking water are being diverted from the  Tanjill and Tyers catchments east of Melbourne to be turned into steam by the Latrobe valley power industry. While there are new water efficiency measures being put in place, water use still appears to be over 20 billion litres (20 GL) a year in these plants. The Maryvale pulp mill, also located in the Latrobe Valley uses over 20 GL of quality water per year and could instead use treated sewage from the Eastern treatment plant. This would allow the high quality water from the Tanjil and Tyers to be put into our drinking water supplies. As we transition to a sustainable future, it will be difficult to justify coal fired power at all, or pulp mills drawing feedstock from native forests. Renewable energy uses vastly less water than coal. However, given that these plants do exist at present and use large quantities of good quality water, we should be shifting them to recycled water as a matter of urgency, and the pipeline required to deliver this water could be available for  sustainable manufacturing which will be established in the Latrobe Valley.

The government has committed to increasing water recycling and made various financial commitments to this end in recent years (see list below). In 2008 Premier  Brumby said recycled water was now being used at record levels in Melbourne, proof that if there is political will and financing we can go far further.

• Complete an upgrade of the Western Treatment plant (it is expected that this would yield around 15 GL per annum).
• Set a range of consumer, industry and distribution system efficiencies (estimated yield is 37 GL). Amended requirements for new building stock, such as an extra pipe system for recycled water in all new homes, could reduce need for water by up to 75%.
• Institute stormwater harvesting and substitution for drinking water in domestic and commercial uses, parks, sporting ovals and golf courses, and recharge of aquifers. A very conservative figure of 40GL could be available by 2015. Research from Monash University suggests that up to 200 GL may eventually be able to be captured and re-used in the metropolitan area.

• Rollout of rainwater tanks in 5% of suitable homes per year (this would provide an additional 5.25GL/annum. The Victorian Water Forum says that yields of up to 100GL are achievable). This would require increased rebates to households, and making tanks mandatory on new buildings.

The job yield of such a program would be substantial. According to the Rainwater Industry Development Group, a roll out of tanks on 10% of Victorian households per year would could create up to 550 jobs directly and 1,600 indirect jobs in the state. Similar programs in regional towns and cities would generate similar employment benefits.

Greater use of tanks in urban areas would also help enshrine an approach of mindfulness and care about how we relate to water.

• Set sector-specific water conservation targets for commercial and industrial water users.
• We should develop incentives for the replacing of road and car parks with permeable surfaces and hard gutters and concrete storm drains with swales, vegetated roadside dips and re-naturalised watercourses to slow runoff and allow it to infiltrate or be collected for treatment and re-use.

Key recycled water projects currently under way through state government commitments include:

• The Werribee Irrigation District Water Recycling Scheme that provided almost 11 billion litres of recycled water to irrigators in 2006/07;

• Eastern Irrigation Scheme in Melbourne’s southeast provided over 8 billion litres of recycled water for agriculture in 2006/07;

• South East Water supplied over 2 billion litres of recycled water to agricultural customers on the Mornington Peninsula;

• dual-pipe systems are being installed to provide recycled water directly to new residential developments in a number of Melbourne’s new suburbs.

Melbourne aquifers are at risk because of significant over-use by private users,  possibly well beyond their ability to be able to recharge. Government action is needed to allow complete state control of pumping from groundwater and appropriate pricing mechanisms for water that is used.

Our current sewerage system was invented in water-plentiful Europe.  There could be much more use of liquid human waste at or near source for fertiliser, for example, to drastically cut the water-waste of flushing toilets. We should continue to encourage the use of non-flush urinals in public buildings and composting toilets in appropriate locations, including private homes.

Water: for the public good – not private profit. Water is an essential element of our daily life. There is growing public sentiment opposed to the privatisation of management and ownership of water for profit.   International companies should not be allowed any ownership of water in Victoria, including water trading in rural areas.

To desal or not. Our government is wedded to the idea of a large scale desalination plant that will be built on the Gippsland coast near Wonthaggi. It will be run by a foreign multi national and  use reverse osmosis to create fresh water from salt water. This process involves using pressure to drive seawater through a semi-permeable membrane.

Leaving aside the many and significant environmental and social costs of this project, it must be asked why reverse osmosis technology is being used. Commercial reverse osmosis installations are becoming dominant for desalination around the world primarily because they use less energy than traditional thermal methods – however, reverse osmosis still consumes a significant amount of energy.  In contrast,  another source of desalination could be solar thermal technology. The costs of  concentrating solar power are falling rapidly and  small scale solar desal plants could be established locally, feeding into the water grid, and help clean brackish water that currently turns into pollution as it enters our streams and oceans. Small plants could be built without the massive costs and infrastructure impacts of the Wonthaggi plant.

Desalination of brackish or waste water can be done at about one third of the energy cost associated with desalination of sea water and can often be done “on site”, which avoids the huge energy costs of pumping the water to Melbourne inherent in the Wonthaggi desalination proposal.

We need 21st century thinking that acknowledges there are real ecological constraints on how much water we can use, and new ways to meet our needs rather than a continuation of older ways of generating water supplies that presupposes there will be endless sources of new water when current supplies run short. This type of thinking has unacceptably high environmental costs in the constrained realities of the 21st century. Accordingly, we should rule out plans to build a dam on the Mitchell River, our last large un-dammed river in the state, and the Gellibrand River in the Otways.

FOOD

Food production is clearly very sensitive to climate change impacts. There are also significant greenhouse implications of food production, largely because of our current reliance on high energy input monoculture agriculture and transport of food products over long distances.

Any attempt to deal with medium and long term responses to climate change must include consideration of options to re-localise a significant proportion of our food production, and how to shift to low energy input systems. Organic farming is generally more employment rich than conventional agriculture. It also produces less greenhouse emissions – petrochemical fertiliser use both damages soil and leaches nitrogen into the atmosphere. By some estimates, greenhouse emissions from organics are 15 to 20 percent lower than from conventional farming. Inclusion of the agriculture sector in any future carbon trading regime would provide a powerful market signal to the sector to adopt more sustainable practices.

Encouraging food production in urban and urban fringe areas will reduce greenhouse costs and would build resilience in the face of climate change.

We should allow flexibility to be able to differentiate when it comes to productive use of water to grow local food, instead of enforcing blanket bans on water use simply via water restrictions.  Local, home grown food uses less water than commercial agriculture, requires less energy intensive inputs, and has less carbon emissions, also playing a (small) role in sequestering carbon, building community and providing healthy and  affordable food choices. Local food growers should be able to apply for a permit to use more water than households not growing food if we do go to an enforceable quota system. The Food Growers Alliance has a range of creative ideas on how to maximise efficient use of water in domestic food growing situations. Those who can afford to tend to put in water tanks, but food growers in rental accommodation face problems in this regard. One idea to help people in rental housing would be to provide a rebate, which would possibly be means tested, to allow renters to be able to get watertanks via a co-ordinated application with their landlords.

In the short term, the state government could introduce a Protection of Agricultural Land Bill, which would aim to stop further encroachment of urban or other development on agricultural areas until a full assessment of the likely impacts on agriculture in a climate change context has been completed.

We need increased support for community based urban agriculture by providing designated food growing areas throughout the city and suburban areas.

Water intensity – the next stage in eco-labeling?

Water is a defining feature of so many aspects of environmental thought. In Victoria, only eight percent of water use is domestic.  That means even if every resident of the state cut their in-home water use in half, we would still be extracting 96 percent of the volume of water from the environment that we do today.  Agriculture is responsible for 66 percent of water use in Victoria.  Therefore, it is the sector where smart water management policies can have the greatest effect.

Many farmers are seeking to become more efficient in their production – costs of water and its limited availability as well as concern about being good land stewards being key factors driving this innovation. However, without a form of eco-labeling that gives a sense of the water intensity of various food products, it is impossible for consumers to be able to help drive this innovation, or reward the producers who are working smartest and most efficiently when it comes to water consumption.

Water intensity could be the next stage in eco labelling because it would allow us to take real action on  water stress and reduce our personal water footprints.

Beyond picking the more efficient producers within a particular product range, water intensity labeling would also allow us to consider the categories of food we eat, with a view to reducing consumption of the more intensive products.

In the future, we hope that products will be labeled for their water intensity.  That way, every time we shop we will be able to judge products for their water intensity and compare individual producers’ water use practices.  The label would take into account both the average water intensity of a product and a producer’s individual water use efficiency.  This would encourage farmers to improve their irrigation practices for the water intensive products they are already growing as well as to switch to growing foods that require less water. It would give consumers considerable power to minimise their impacts and support those farmers who are the most efficient.

The state government should also work with the Commonwealth and show leadership through COAG to develop national standards for water intensity labelling for food.

The water intensity of food

In general, processed foods have high water intensities.

The best products to eat for low water intensity are fruits and vegetables.

Grains, legumes, and cereals have higher water intensities than fruits and vegetables, largely because they are usually processed before they arrive on our plates. Among grains, rice has one of the highest water footprints.

Animal products are uniformly more water intensive than plant products. This is because the water footprint of an animal product includes the water content of their feed, servicing, and drinking. Beef products are the worst.

Supporting rural communities. All rural communities in Victoria have been squeezed from a number of directions for years – cut backs in services – such as bank branches – as large businesses cut their costs to maximise profits, relative decline in income, pressure from large food producers to deliver good product for low prices, loss of people to larger cities and towns, and so on. And now, they have weathered more than a decade of drought.

Apart from direct financial support and an increase in services, from both public and private, we must consider how to support people, families and communities living with the morale-breaking realities of seemingless endless drought and longer and more dangerous bushfire seasons. The Rural Women’s Network, co-ordinated through the Department of Planning and Community Development, supports networking between rural women and has a ‘Rural Women in a Changing Climate’ program that aims to allow support between individuals affected by the many changes in their communities.  This worthwhile program deserves to get more profile than it currently has.

Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) programs involve the creation of a direct relationship between producers and consumers. CSAs have been developed as a strategy to connect local farmers with local consumers; develop a regional food supply, and strong local economy; maintain a sense of community; encourage land stewardship; and honour the knowledge and experience of growers and producers working with small to medium size farms. They are an agricultural production/marketing system that shares  the production risks between the farmer and the consumer. Members pay for their food up front, before the season commences, and are then kept involved in the farm’s activities with field days, newsletters and open invitations to visit the farm. CSAs are another way to build connection and understanding between urban and rural people and could be facilitated through support from the state government.

WASTE

Eliminating the extraordinary amounts of waste in the system: wasted energy, wasted money, wasted water and materials, and wasted human potential. A significant problem we currently face is that we do not place adequate prices on the full environmental costs of resources that are used in our day to day lives and we are prepared to let business interests set the parametres for how we manage waste. Along as ‘the market’ rules, we can expect continued waste. Legislation is required to reduce waste. This will benefit those companies who are attempting to be more sustainable, and make their good behaviour more financially viable.

Logical short term reform in this area would include:

• the introduction of comprehensive container deposit legislation, as proposed by Greens MLC Colleen Hartland, expected to create between 300 and 400 jobs in Victoria ,
• mandate a broader extended producer responsibility (EPR) program for consumer products whereby manufacturers are required to sell white goods and other household appliances which can be taken back at the end of their life, and which are designed to allow maximum recovery of materials,
• an increase in land fill levy,
• a mandated target for reduction of waste to landfill (80% reduction is feasible in the short term), and
• introduce a requirement for all packaging material to be recyclable.

Lets ensure there is increased support for the very successful Victorian not-for-profit programs tackling the issue of food waste. One example is SecondBite, which is already making a positive difference by sourcing fresh nutritious food that would otherwise go to waste and redistributing it to people who are homeless, living in disadvantaged circumstances or experiencing food security issues.

We could also encourage re-use of materials through the local council Hard Rubbish collections that are held around Melbourne. At least one council has banned scavenging of items put outside houses during Hard Rubbish collection – yet to allow people to take things for re-use is a common sense approach to giving new life to items that might otherwise go to landfill.

COMMUNITY

The government should continue to stress the economic link between improved health and productivity.  There is a strong correlation between health and sustainable living.  Supporting walking, bike riding, organic food, less processed food, and more fruit and vegetables in turn will help improve individual and hence our collective health. This in turn, should stimulate the economy through reduced demands on the healthcare system, lowered sick days and improved morale and productivity.

OH&S – now Occupational Health, Safety and Environment (OHS&E). The government should facilitate the ability of workers to enact ‘green EBAs’ (Enterprise Bargaining Agreements)  that can include environmental provisions in work place agreements. One simple example would include the option to provide an economic stimulus for the bicycle industry through making purchase of a bicycle for commuting part of an EBA.

Less work is actually a good thing. Who wouldn’t only want to work 20 or 30 hours a week if they could? The less an individual consumes, the less they spend, and the fewer hours they need to work. But of course, we are all locked in our cycles of non-negotiable costs – of rent or mortgage or car payments, and it can be hard to find workplaces that are suitably flexible to allow shorter or more flexible working conditions. Many of us would opt to work slightly less, if we could maintain our lifestyles, but have more time for all the things that really matter.

What we need is a Government and industry-wide policy to share the work. At the moment, the only Government (and industry/union) response to falling demand for work is to increase consumption in the hope it will help to maintain the current level of work. Unions have done a great job of bringing us the nine day fortnight and many other conditions we take for granted. Yet many of our conditions are at risk as business claims it cannot sustain them in the current climate. Re-defining our relationship to our work lives should be a significant element of the green New Deal. In particular, the government could consider what incentives could be created to allow more flexibility, so individual workers could nominate to work a day or 2 a fortnight less, thereby freeing up ‘work space’ for others.

Measuring ‘happiness’. Being in a recession brings out our personal fears about economic security. In response, we need to to what we can do sustain existing jobs and generate new areas of employment. But we should always remember that we live the opposite of Margaret Thatcher’s famous statement that we ‘live in an economy, not a society’. In contrast, most of us know intuitively that there is much more to life than possessions and consumption. As noted by former ALP MP John Langmore, “our happiness depends on such qualities as loving and being loved, security, autonomy, productive work, enjoyable leisure, achievements and harmony. Wellbeing has social, economic, environmental, psychological, physical and spiritual dimensions”.  Yet we still only use economic measures to test the pulse of how well our society is going, confusing simple economic activity with ‘happiness’. At present, our only common measures of societal health – the gross domestic product (GDP ) or gross domestic income (GDI) – are plainly one dimensional, and simply not sufficient to task for the complex realities of the 21st century.

There are many other and better indicators that we could use to gain a sense of how our society and our economy is going. The Brumby Labor Government recognises that a strong economy is underpinned by a “strong and fair society, and by liveable and caring communities”. It would be easy for it to take another tangible step in the direction of having a reporting framework that sends clear messages to the economic drivers and policy makers about how our society is actually going in terms of cohesion,  fairness, and environmental sustainability by adopting another progress indicator as well as GDP.

The Happy Planet Index is one measure that shows the ecological efficiency with which human well-being is delivered.
It is the first index to combine environmental impact with human well-being to measure, country by country, where people live long and happy lives.

By addressing the relative success or failure of countries in supporting good lives for their citizens, whilst respecting the environmental resource limits upon which our lives depend, the HPI has much to teach us. Analysing its results could help us to move towards a world where we can all live good lives without it costing the earth.

Use the right indicators. Despite the fact that GDP and GNI are the main economic indicators we rely on, we are used to seeing a range of informal indicators about how our economy and society is going – and in recent years this has grown to include a number of environmental indicators – for instance, the amount of greenhouse gases produced in the state (as has been shown in The Age newspaper) or how much water is in our dams. However, the key economic indicator continues to be the  GDP, which is set by the annual dollar value of all goods and services produced within a country over successive years. The GDP does not  reflect  improvement in human well-being, or the ability of the environment to continue to deliver services that benefit humans. It does not tell us how well we are managing our farm lands or rivers or forests, there is no inherent feed back loop that signals good or bad land stewardship. As Clifford Cobb, Ted Halstead, and Jonathan Rowe famously asked in 1995, “If the GDP is Up, Why is America Down?”, commenting on the fact that ‘happiness’ is not just about share value. This lesson is doubly important in a time of recession.

The genuine progress indicator (GPI) is another concept in green economics that has been suggested to replace the GDP as a metric of economic growth.

The GPI is an attempt to measure whether a country’s growth, increased production of goods, and expanding services have actually resulted in the improvement of the welfare (or well-being) of the people in the country. GPI advocates claim that it can more reliably measure economic progress, as it distinguishes between worthwhile growth and ‘negative’ growth.

GPI measures factors such as p ersonal consumption levels and income distribution, the costs of underemployment, commuting and overwork,  noise and water pollution, land degradation and loss of forests, net foreign lending and the costs of crime.

“Imagine ecological equivalents to the Dow and NASDAQ, that reported to us everyday – in newspapers, on radio, on the crawl at the bottom of TV screens – data about the various sectors of our ecological system and how they are faring. What are the atmospheric parts per million of carbon dioxide today? Has the extinction rate become inflationary? What is the exchange rate between sea ice and freshwater? What is the national deficit of topsoil?”
-    Sandra Steingraber

.

Community Indicators Victoria

Community Indicators Victoria aims to establish a sustainable Victorian approach to the development and use of local community well-being indicators, with the purpose of improving citizen engagement, community planning and policy making. Community Indicators Victoria has been developed to present and report on the well-being of Victorians using an integrated set of community well-being indicators.

These indicators refer to a broad range of measures designed to identify and communicate economic, social, environmental, democratic and cultural trends and outcomes. The aim of Community Indicators Victoria is to build healthy, just and sustainable communities.

It provides indicator measures for five major domains of community well-being:

·    Social

·    Economic
·    Environmental
·    Democratic
·    Cultural

http://www.communityindicators.net.au/

Who measures what in popular culture

Social, environmental and economic indicators routinely reported in mainstream news media.

Media outlet & indicators they use:

The Age  –   Water levels in storages (p1), exchange rates, oil & gold costs, ASX (business), UV levels, air quality index, dam levels (weather). Recently stopped daily listing of Victorian greenhouse emissions

The Herald Sun  -  ‘Dam watch’, Tattslotto results (p 2)

The Australian  -  UV Sun Smart indicator (weather page)

Australian Financial Review  -  The Days Trading (p 2)
Ch 2 TV News  -  A range of financial indicators
Ch 7 TV News  -  A range of financial indicators
Ch 9 TV News  -  A range of financial indicators
Ch 10 TV News  -  A range of financial indicators
SBS TV News  -  A range of financial indicators

Community outlets:

Hardly any community groups have environmental or social indicators on their websites
Climate Action Centre (Melbourne)  -  Atmospheric CO2    http://www.climateactioncentre.org/

STIMULATING BUSINESS

A recent poll suggests that while Australians appreciate the bonuses they are getting from the federal government, they are not convinced that they are the best way to find our way out of economic recession. Instead they believe that we should be investing in infrastructure.

This years state and federal budgets both include substantial allocations for public infrastructure. This infrastructure will influence the form of Australia for decades to come and, if sustained  in future years, is likely to constitute one of the largest interventions in our economy since the second world war – so we must get it ‘right’ for a carbon constrained and climate change future. That is, we need infrastructure that facilitates a transition to a low carbon future rather than providing a prop to old style, carbon intensive infrastructure like freeways.

We need infrastructure that grows alternative technology creation and uptake – for instance – geothermal power stations, electric plug-in cars, fast rail powered from alternative power generation,  water solar distillation plants [not reverse osmosis chemical and carbon powered desalination], improved rail in metropolitan areas, water harvesting from parking lots, rooftops and roads, and so on.

Small scale business is a major driver of our society. It is often badly hit in times of recession as individual businesses will have less reserves to be able to survive lean times than larger corporations. The government could consider developing a medium sized grants program for small scale business to grow through a ‘green business stimulus’ package.  The first stage in applying for the program would involve having an audit carried out across all areas of the businesses activity – energy and water use, sourcing of products and so on – with at least some financial support to be able to respond to the audit and reduce their running costs and environmental footprint.

There are also many emerging businesses involved in the realm of ‘sustainability’ that are seeking financial support to get established.  Once they gain traction they can employ people in green jobs and grow the market of green products. Again, the government could consider what specific initiatives and support could be offered to the ‘sustainability’ sector.

Supporting the community. There are a vast range of effective and inspirational initiatives that are building cohesion, motivation, and action on the inter-related issues of food production, peak oil, climate change and ecological protection. The state, and many local governments, already provide significant support to many of these through a range of grants programs. These should certainly be maintained and expanded.

Castlemaine 500

Castlemaine 500 was set up in 2006 and intends to help the Mount Alexander community of Central Victoria to achieve a 30% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2010. In the first 12 months around 350 households from Castlemaine, Chewton and Campbell’s Creek signed up to tackle climate change and reduce their household energy bills.

Since it’s inception, Castlemaine 500 has:
·    delivered a behavioural change pilot project to at least 500 households in the Castlemaine area using best practice strategies for reducing energy use in the home,
·    achieved a reduction in energy use and greenhouse gas emissions of between 15% and 30% in participating households,
·    raised community awareness of the relationship between energy use and climate change,
·    built partnerships with the local community,
·    trained a network of “community peers” who have assisted with recruitment, run energy-smart workshops, undertaken home energy assessments & been involved in a Story Based evaluation process,
·    staged a diverse range of community events where participants have interacted and learned from each other about ways of tackling climate change at home,
·    started to transfer our approach to 2 other towns within the Central Victoria Greenhouse Alliance region (Ararat and Kyabram),
·    built the capacity of the local community to lead and develop new initiatives that tackle climate change issues,
·    Started the formation of a local Community Network made up of passionate people and groups. This Network will continue the work started by C500 and take the project in a new direction.

http://www.myhomemyplanet.org.au/castlemaine/index.html

Transition Towns – weaving it all together? The Transition Towns project (now often called Transition Initiatives) is the embodiment of community driven holistic regional planning.

It is a movement that was created by Louise Rooney and popularised by Rob Hopkins. It was founded in Kinsale, Ireland, and was then spread to Totnes, England, by environmentalist Rob Hopkins during 2005 and 2006. The aim of the project is to equip communities for the dual challenges of climate change and peak oil.

The main aim of the project is to raise awareness of sustainable living and build local resilience in the near future. Communities are encouraged to seek out methods for reducing energy usage as well as increasing their own self reliance.

While the focus and aims remain the same, the methods used to achieve these vary from place to place. For example, Totnes has introduced its own local currency, the Totnes pound, which is redeemable in local shops and businesses, helping to reduce the energy miles of products, while also supporting local firms.

Central to the Transition Town movement is the idea that a life without oil could in fact be far more enjoyable and fulfilling than the present ‘oil age’. “By shifting our mind-set we can actually recognise the coming post-cheap oil era as an opportunity rather than a threat, and design the future low carbon age to be thriving, resilient and abundant – somewhere much better to live than our current alienated consumer culture based on greed, war and the myth of perpetual growth.”

An essential aspect of Transition in many places, is the belief that the outer work of transition needs to be matched by inner transition. That is, in order to move down the energy decent pathways effectively we need to rebuild our relations with our selves, with each other, and with the “natural” worlds. That “requires focusing on the heart and soul of transition”.  In Victoria, there are already Transition Town initiatives in Boroondara, Darebin, and Geelong (see side box).

Transition Town Bell

“Transition Bell is the name of a relocalisation project in the Geelong 3215 suburbs (Bell Park, Bell Post Hill, Hamlyn Heights, North Geelong).

Transition Bell is about local food, local fun and vibrant local economies.  It’s about creating a resilient community in the face of climate, energy and economic change.

A Transition Initiative is a community working together to look Peak Oil and Climate Change squarely in the eye and address this BIG question:

“for all those aspects of life that this community needs in order to sustain itself and thrive, how do we significantly increase resilience (to mitigate the effects of Peak Oil) and drastically reduce carbon emissions (to mitigate the effects of Climate Change)?”

The resulting coordinated range of projects across all these areas of life leads to a collectively designed energy descent pathway.

The community also recognises two crucial points:
·    that we used immense amounts of creativity, ingenuity and adaptability on the way up the energy upslope, and that there’s no reason for us not to do the same on the downslope
·    if we collectively plan and act early enough there’s every likelihood that we can create a way of living that’s significantly more connected, more vibrant and more in touch with our environment than the oil-addicted treadmill that we find ourselves on today”.

Driving the laggards towards sustainability. Big business does not always work in the best interests of the environment or employment. Some sectors and, certainly, some individual companies are better or worse than others in terms of their impacts. It can be argued that the current supermarket industry, in particular, is driving food production away from a more sustainable model through its practises, and undermining some of the vitality of local community businesses.

To the extent possible at the state level, we should think about the powerful market forces of the dominant food grocery sector players and ensure that their practices don’t continue to reduce competition. Fewer small growers, fewer manufacturers, and fewer local retail shops = fewer jobs.

Relevant to state government is food security (especially in light of estimated reduced future yields,  season instability, and increased costs of fresh, good quality foods), thus there is some opportunity to favour the smaller, less carbon intensive production methods that, as discussed above, are generally more labor intensive than the larger monoculture production systems. Small scale, diverse agriculture is often more resilient in the face of the changed conditions that are already manifesting as a result of global warming.

State government should commit to support local councils that oppose new ‘greenfield’ shopping mall developments (these are generally focused on one or more of the large supermarkets with ancillary franchise speciality stores) where such a development would negatively impact on the town or city in question. One example is the bitterly fought proposal to build a Coles supermarket in Bright in north east Victoria.  Community concerns in relation to the scale, aesthetic, and function of the proposal were, according to residents group Save Bright  “barely considered” in the VCAT report that gave approval to the development. In another example, VCAT refused to give a Safeway supermarket in Mt Evelyn the right to proceed after the Yarra Ranges Shire Council refused to grant a permit for the development and fought the application alongside the community at VCAT. A large mall development can profoundly change local character and amenity – especially where it pulls the centre of a town or suburb to a new car-dependent location, where many businesses are franchises.  Malls become the modern equivalent of the town square, where people congregate, yet they are private property, sometimes influencing the type of community activity which can actually happen there. Residents groups often feel let down and abandoned by the planning process when it comes to be able to define the character of their local environs. It often seems that those with sufficient funds can find a way through the planning process no matter how unpopular any single development is.

Supermarkets also squeeze out smaller, locally owned stores. Evidence presented to the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s hearing in Canberra into supermarkets in April 2008 cast doubts on the actions of the two major supermarket chains, Coles and Woolworths, suggesting the retailers are charging higher prices for goods, and locking out smaller players.

The right to corporate accountability. Citizens and residents have the right to hold corporations, agencies, and all levels of government accountable for environmental degradation and despoliation that impacts on local communities and their basic human rights.

There are various ways we could ensure this happens – for instance, through binding codes of conduct on corporations at the state or federal level. There are also consultations occurring about a possible Human Rights Charter. This instrument could be framed in such a way that corporations can be held to account.

Citizens and residents have the right to interactive and meaningful consultation and dialogue – as individuals, groups or organisations – with governments, and their agencies, and corporations, on issues which affect their interests.

It would be possible to draw up a code of conduct through this charter process to ensure there is   widespread and representative community input to key development proposals to ensure a high standard of interactive consultation and dialogue.  Such consultation should be based upon freedom of information with the same rights of discovery as exist in the judicial system.  This could be known as the Consultation and Dialogue (CaD) process. There would need to be a requirement that all major environmental applications will be subject to the CaD process.

As noted by many people, from Kevin Rudd to Barack Obama, the current global crisis is, at least in part, a result of greed leading to poor judgement by many in big business. It appears that corporations cannot be relied upon to act in their own (medium to long term) interests, instead allowing themselves to be manipulated to act in the interests of their CEO’s and favoured stockholders.

It seems that, in light of this, the concept of ‘limited liability’ by high ranking officials in corporations needs to be revisited, not only for the bottom line but the triple bottom line.

What about the homeless? When things are tight, it is often the least powerful who are squeezed out of things. Witness the recent ‘incentives’ offered to many in the Australian community by the federal government that excluded people on unemployment schemes.

If we want to encourage people to spend their financial bonus (rather than save it), giving an incentive makes the most sense if it is also provided to all low income people.

Equally, there is the question of how we can use this societal transformation to finally rid ourselves of the curse of homelessness. One option, put forward by a range of groups in the UK, is for us to “build our way” out of recession through committing substantial funds to affordable or public  housing. Given that we are facing a significant downturn in new build of private housing, such a program would help retain skills in that industry. It would preserve construction jobs and apprenticeships, making life better for people who would otherwise lose their jobs in the current economic climate, and also help prevent a loss of key skills that could take years to replace once the private housing market picks up again. We would need to make sure this new housing is spread across Melbourne rather than being clustered in enclaves. This could be a major legacy of this recession – as lasting and meaningful as the Great Ocean Road, which was constructed to provide work for returning soldiers after World War One or the road up Mt Wellington in Hobart,  constructed in the early 1930s as a relief scheme for the unemployed.

What about the land? As noted throughout this report, Victoria faces a grim future from the effects of climate change, unless we take serious action now. It is inevitable that changes will be felt, although early action will greatly reduce future impacts. The Victoria of the 21st century will be a profoundly different place to the state of the 20th century – which is when most of our reserve system – national parks and other conservation reserves – were established. We must consider how the reserve system may need to be changed and expanded in light of the changes that are coming.

To this end, many more people and funds are needed to adequately manage existing reserves, and to fence off streams from cattle grazing, control environmental weeds, plant native trees, shrubs and grasses to contribute to bio-links which will be required to connect existing parks, to re-establish the ability of species and habitats to have the best chance of being able to adapt to climate change.

Landholders need greater assistance to adopt best practice standards for managing their land, such as adopting appropriate grazing management. Management that is more in tune with nature is likely to be more labour intensive – and so will create jobs and generate income that will be largely spent in small towns.

Catchment Management Authorities are in the process of losing jobs because of changed Commonwealth funding – these or equivalent jobs in natural resource management should be maintained and expanded.

WHY IS THIS GREEN ‘NEW DEAL’ RIGHT FOR VICTORIA?

Jobs-based solutions are popular with the community and promote unity. During a recession, the economy is the most tangible problem that many people face. Without leadership, it can be expected that the recession will be bad for both people and environment. ‘Bad’ for people because of job loss, loss of bargaining power for workers and increased insecurity about employment. ‘Bad’ for the environment because of the tendency of unsustainable or ‘plain crazy’ ideas to be put forward in order to “dig our way out of recession”. A common argument used by business interests is for us to remove ‘red tape’ in order to facilitate development during a recession. In real terms this can mean significant loss of environmental or other protections in the planning process.

A green jobs and Just Transition focus means we can both generate jobs and protect the environment. It also means we can avoid a divisive – and unnecessary – argument about whether we look after jobs OR the environment. There is a real and growing community  demand for solutions. Many parts of the community are already well in front of the government. One objective indication of this is the rate of growth in solar. Despite the global financial crisis and the Australian Government means test, solar sales are doubling every few months.

a Just Transition

“A just transition links ecological sustainability with issues of work, equity and social justice. A just transition process recognises the needs of both current and future generations for safe, secure and satisfying jobs. Participants in a just transition seek to build collaborations rather than conflict, and in particular, to avoid a false ‘jobs vs the environment’ conflict. A just transition is needed to ensure that the costs of change do not fall on vulnerable workers and communities.”
- Geoff Evans

Taking a green jobs approach means:

• we will be part of the next industrial revolution,

• we will have a much better chance of having a prosperous future when old carbon intensive power and products are neither economically not socially acceptable. If we are to plan for the future, we must ask “where will Australia be when renewable energy is cheaper than electricity from coal?”.

It allows us to shift from being a  carbon laggard to being a carbon leader. At present, Australia’s per capita emissions are 28.1 tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2-e) per person per year. This is almost double the OECD average, and more than four times the world average. Only five countries are worse than us: Bahrain, Bolivia, Brunei, Kuwait and Qatar. Victoria is Australia’s worst greenhouse performer across a number of emissions indicators.

This is largely a historical accident. Our huge reliance on brown coal made sense in the early 20th century, with what we knew then. It doesn’t in the 21st century.

Leadership by the state. It is ever more apparent that the federal government is not going to set emission reductions targets that are equivalent to what climate science tells us is needed. With this failure to act, we need leadership from the states.

Moves by some states like California and North Carolina in the USA show that state governments can demonstrate leadership in tackling energy and emissions problems outside of national systems and policies. How applicable any lessons from these states (or other international examples) are to Victoria is at least worth consideration, perhaps not so much as to the specifics of the policies, but the mechanisms used to create and implement the policies inside a national framework that is only just waking up the challenge and opportunities we face.

Green Energy and Economy Act

As one example of what is possible, Canada’s most populous province, Ontario, established a Green Energy and Economy Act in May 2009. The legislation outlines an ambitious and globally significant strategy to improve conservation, increase renewable energy generation, and create green jobs.

Significantly, the governing Liberals and opposition New Democrats joined together to pass the legislation. A poll released in late April by the Green Energy Act Alliance (composed of environmental groups, industry associations, farmers and labour groups) found 87% support for the proposed act across Ontario.

Climate change – early action will reduce impacts. As the scientific evidence about the scale of the climate challenge we face grows stronger, so the economic consequences of failing to act and the economic opportunity of taking decisive action have become clearer.

Global justice. Because of our historic over production of greenhouse gases, we have a major carbon debt to the developing world (the global South). The carbon debt is:

“the historical overuse, by an individual or state, of  the carbon dioxide absorption capacity of the world’s oceans, vegetation and soil”.

Until rich nations like Australia respond to the imperatives of climate change through taking meaningful action to substantially reduce our greenhouse emissions, how can we expect emerging economies with low per capita consumption levels like China and India to do so?

Coal dependence or independence. Coal-fired power stations in the Latrobe Valley produce almost 60 per cent of the state’s emissions, yet relatively few jobs. They are also hugely water intensive. The Union of Concerned Scientists says that  “a typical 500-megawatt coal-fired power plant draws about 2.2 billion gallons of water each year … to create steam for turning its turbines. This is enough water to support a city of approximately 250,000 people.” This does use black rather than brown coal as the bench mark, yet gives an indication of the water usage of this industry. The Hazelwood plant in the Latrobe Valley has capacity of 1,600 megawatts. We are well placed to initiate a rapid transition out of coal, into renewables and energy efficiency, with a large job yield and re-development of manufacturing and new opportunities for young people in the Latrobe Valley.

We must immediately halt plans to build a new coal-fired power station in the Latrobe Valley – the HRL station – which will add 2.5 million tonnes of greenhouse pollution each year. In terms of jobs, the HRL proposal would be especially bad – it’s major components will be built overseas and assembled here, meaning even fewer jobs than in a conventional coal fired power station.

Climate proofing Victoria. A starting point in this process must be a thorough assessment of the state’s readiness for climate change.

We will need to assess whether the current protected area system of national parks and other reserves is sufficient in light of the expected impacts of climate change. The government must mandate the delivery of environmental flow to key river systems through legislation.

We will need an assessment of affected human communities as well – a major mapping exercise across Victoria that considers:

●    the likely physical climate change impacts – flooding (including in suburban areas), sea level rise, bushfire risk, and so on.  We will need a revisit of the state government’s sea level rise work, with consideration of the current estimates of possible sea level rise (rather than the IPCC 4th report data that formed the basis of the initial report which has been surpassed by a range of new data). This will show which areas need extra work for protection and where ‘staged retreat’ is required.

●    likely restructuring impacts as we shift to low carbon futures – outlining the demographics of each Local Government area, where and in what sectors they are currently employed, likely job risks and transition opportunities in each area, and funding and training needs and opportunities which will arise as a result of restructure.

Building community resilience. There is considerable information available that suggests that communities with high levels of citizen involvement such as volunteering, are better able to cope with disasters. This has significance for us when planning for the changes likely to come with global warming. The New Deal should consider the role of community organisations in building community spirit and capacity in light of climate change.

We must remember that the power to solve our problems doesn’t just sit with politicians and corporations. It is within ourselves, and only through rising to the challenge of living sustainably will we be able to deal with the converging dilemmas facing us.

Common purpose. A New Deal is an opportunity for the government and community to focus on a common project and rekindle a real sense of purpose for a sustainable vision for the state. Despite some good outcomes on environmental protection by the Bracks and Brumby governments, there is great inconsistency in many areas of policy and priorities of the state government. While we talk about reducing emissions, we build freeways. While responding to water stress we propose projects that will fuel global warming such as the energy intensive desalination plant. A green new deal would allow the creation of a holistic and integrated approach to economic vitality and ecological sustainability.

Climate Bill. The state ALP has committed to introducing a Climate Change Bill. A strong, whole of government Bill would provide much of the framework for delivering a profound shift to a low carbon future. We cannot wait for the federal government to ‘get it right’ through its emissions trading scheme.

The Bill must be to do everything possible to achieve a safe level of climate change for Victoria.

It must commit Victoria to deep emissions reductions within the context of committing to live within a fair share of global emissions.

This would require a commitment to cap the states emissions to a globally equitable level, and living within a state-wide carbon budget.  Concurrent with the crafting of this legislation, the issue of personal carbon allowances should be considered by the state government, which could draw on work initiated in the UK. If it was decided that there needed to be inclusion of provisions to initiate a rationing system, this could be incorporated into the legislation at a later date.

●    the Bill should require the government to report on an annual basis to both parliament and the Victorian community on progress made and plans for the coming year

●    clearly identify what economic activities would trigger action by the Climate Change minister

Powers

the Bill should:

• provide the highest level powers for the climate change minister and enshrine whole of government responses to climate change
• make explicit connections to all key aspects of government intervention and economic activity
• establish reporting mechanisms for reporting on carbon emissions (either through creation of a new department, or through increasing powers of an existing departmental structure)
• require annual reporting on the states emissions to both Cabinet and Parliament on the progress on achieving the mandated targets
• require that all new government spending proposals include an assessment of the greenhouse gas intensity and impacts of the proposal
• a reference group should be created, composed largely of climate scientists, who will provide advice on the existing targets, and whether they need to be strengthened. There should be regular reviews of the targets tasked to this group built into the legislation. An individual reference group should also be appointed in the framing process which should also include representatives of relevant groups who can represent the interests of affected communities. It is likely that there would be some cross-over between these committees

Targets

the legislation should:

●    set emissions reductions of at least 40% by 2020, and 95% by 2050 against 1990 levels.

●    the legislation should include review structures that allow flexibility with regards to the emissions reduction targets. It should have the ability to modify the emissions reduction targets if required, as based on developments in both climate science and the relative rate of national and international action

●    commit Victoria to operating within a carbon budget based on a fair share of global emissions within 5 to 8 years, with mandated annual reductions to achieve this. The actual annual targets will depend on an analysis of where savings can be made. High initial annual cuts should be included so as to maximise savings from the ‘low hanging fruit’ of energy efficiency and commitment to increased funding of public transport, with lower annual reductions in later years

Energy sources

·    legislate for much higher renewable energy and efficiency targets
·    ban further fossil fuel-based electricity generation in Victoria

Adaptation

The Bill should:

·    ensure that all planning decisions and major developments in the state account for the expected impacts of climate change, especially in coastal areas at risk of climate change

·    require all new developments to undertake a climate change assessment risk in the planning process (the threshold for size of project will need to be developed)

·    ensure that all aspects of government action and activity, across all departments, are required to develop plans for adaptation (as well as appropriate mitigation targets to achieve the overall emissions reductions targets). All departments and agencies should be required to report on an annual basis on the extent to which they have achieved the adaptation plan. These reports should be considered by a relevant unit within government, which will provide an analysis to Cabinet and Parliament on achievements made and future action required.

·    include appropriate resourcing for continued adaptation funding in the state budget. It should also require an initial assessment of whether specific revenue streams are required to fund this work (including making a social impacts analysis of any measures that are proposed)

·    ensure that requirements in the Bill are flexible enough to cope with changes in climate science

Social and human rights implications

·    the legislation should consider the social equity dimensions of climate change, and likely  implications on low income and affected communities of all measures proposed in the legislation

HOW DO WE GET THERE?

Knowing where we stand – acknowledging country. The starting point in considering changes to our society has to be recognition that all of Victoria is Aboriginal land. No indigenous group ever ceded their sovereignty or claim to their traditional lands.

So, fundamental to beginning a conversation about transforming our economy must be a negotiated settlement with traditional owner groups about how to move forward. Given the realities of dispossession that has happened over the past two centuries, this must include provision of resources to allow traditional owner communities to be fully involved in this process.

The government has made the historic decision to create the first national park in the state’s history in partnership with traditional owners which will be co-managed – in Barmah Forest on the Murray River. This welcome development could be built on through a commitment to a new era in park management by looking into establishing joint management arrangements on all existing national parks.

Where does the money come from? This report is not  an exhaustive survey of all the funding provisions or sources that could be accessed to fund this New Deal. However, there are obvious ways that funding can be sourced for these projects:

• recession stimulus packages,
• core state  budget,
• income from the federal government carbon pollution reduction scheme (CPRS) and
• the DEEWR Jobs Fund.

We can remove financial support for initiatives of dubious or limited value to the environment, and then shift it to R&D and direct investment in more sustainable options. For instance:

• the 2009/10 budget commitment of $20 million over four years to continue the Biotechnology Strategic Development plan
• the current subsidy that Alcoa gets for cheap energy is estimated at around $125 million a year. Imagine how much development in renewables this amount would buy.

The government could commit to an inquiry into what government programs and subsidies are environmentally damaging. These could then be eliminated, with the money and resources that are freed up allocated into socially equitable and environmentally sustainable ventures, as outlined in this report.

There are substantial challenges: We do not underestimate the difficulty of achieving the political consensus needed to deliver on such a program; or how to quantify and secure the necessary investment; and how to establish evidence-based priorities for action.

The first step is to build a coalition of civic interests in favour of this green New Deal.

The second stage must be a state-wide summit of key sectors to hear the evidence, especially around climate change and peak oil, and draft a plan of action.

Finding a new direction – it’s OK to change our minds. One of the hallmarks of the final years of the government of Jeff Kennett was a community perception that it was unable to adapt its thinking to community perceptions and desires. The current government faces steadfast opposition to its North South pipeline north of the Great Divide, and a growing backlash to the desalination plant, including in Melbourne itself. You would be hard pressed to find a commuter happy with the train service or the wildly expensive MYKI ticketing system.

One sign of a great political  leader is the ability to listen and then allow agendas and programs to respond to new ideas and community wishes. Such an opportunity exists for the state ALP as it responds to the growing crisis of recession, climate change and growing energy costs. Such a transition would allow unsustainable and unpopular projects to be dropped in favour of new ones.

Acknowledging the progress to date. As environmentalists, we are keenly aware of the vast ecological issues we need to face as a community, and the slow rate of action, compared with the size of the problem. It is easy to get caught in despair when we compare action against need. It can often be hard to see when a glass is half full rather than concentrating on the negatives.

So we think it is important to recognise some of the great advances that have happened under the leadership of Steve Bracks and John Brumby – the creation of the Cobboboonee National Park and a new reserve system along the Murray River, a major plan to improve irrigation efficiencies. The government retains its commitment to a fair and inclusive society. But we also need to acknowledge that it has been moving very slowly at actually implementing its election commitments on the environment. We must also judge a government on how it allocates funding and the May 2009 budget was a missed opportunity to deliver a green stimulus package. The biggest environmental commitment was around $1 million for new renewable energy projects  out of a State Budget of $42 billion.

——-
Produced by Cam Walker for Friends of the Earth (FoE) Melbourne, May 2009. With thanks to Declan Allison, Friends of the Earth Northern Ireland, the FoE Melbourne campaigners, Ellen Roberts, Fiona Thiessen, and Laura Russo.

The following people sent extra contributions and information in response to the first draft in April: Anne Young, Brenda Mason, Brigid Walsh, Cara Sandys, Darren McClelland, Darryl Ryan, Dave Finch, Howard Marosi, Jane Morrow, Janet Massey, Jeremy Smith, John Knox, John Mathieson, Jose Ramos, Kate Noble, Katie Patrick, Martin Pritchard, Michael Beasley, Mike McKeon, Monica Richter, Neesh Wray, Peter Cock, Phil Westwood,  Ray Radford, Rex Finch, Robbert Veerman, Sandra Betts, Shaun Murray, Simon Divecha, Steb Fisher, Steve Williams, Sue Ryan, Sue Williams, Valerie Yule. Many thanks to you all, the document is so much better and richer as a result of your efforts.

The original paper uses materials from Friends of the Earth UK, The New Economics Foundation, Watershed Victoria, researcher Simon Birrell, and Enviro Watch report 2008.

This report can be found at: http://greennewdeal.wordpress.com/

http://www.melbourne.foe.org.au/

http://www.foe.org.au/