Dear Squatters,

Global warming is different to any other political issue of our times.
Not because its advocates are more passionate about their cause --
there are plenty of other issues with equally impassioned advocates –
but for two other reasons.


Firstly, global warming is, literally, an issue of survival. There can
be debate about the precision of the scientific evidence, but all that
does is make it a debate about the level of risk governments are
prepared to take on behalf of their constituents. The very real
prospect of a climatic catastrophe sits so far ahead of any other
issue – including terrorism and financial wellbeing – that global
warming cannot be categorised under G in the filing cabinet of
political issues. It needs its own filing cabinet.


Secondly, global warming is generational, not ideological. Most other
issues of the political agenda are part of the passing parade of
topics that rise and fall in the public consciousness within weeks or
months. Those issues are about "values" or "prosperity" or "security"
and they play to a range of constituencies. Global warming is an issue
that plays to all constituencies, particularly anyone with more than
20 years left to live. It is generational, not ideological.


Those are the reasons why the Howard government, indeed any
government, will have no choice but to talk and act as if this is an
issue of survival. The spectre of a grandfatherly-looking 67-year-old
prime minister urging Australians – 62% of whom are under 45 – to be
cautious over claims about the risk of climate change is absurd.
Politically and logically.