You’d expect me to be happy that Gary Gray has been made the minister responsible for climate change, but what was the PM thinking?
I’m happy because Gary Gray is a fully-fledged climate skeptic, and there should be more of us in positions of influence.
According to Business Spectator, in 1999 he said “the evidence linking human activity to climate change was ‘‘pop science’”. Now he is quoted as saying on Lateline that “he now believes that human activity is leading to global warming”.
Pity the interviewer wasn’t across her brief. This doesn’t make him a non-skeptic. If someone tells you that human activity isn’t contributing to global warming they are a nutter, not a skeptic.
All the skeptics that you should pay attention to agree that increased CO2 emissions warm the world. The question is to what degree, and what the benefits, as well as the costs, are.
The question he should have been asked is whether he thinks that temperature will rise by 4 to 6 degrees in the next century, as Christine Milne does.
The Lateline answer was a non-answer and proves that he is a politician and knows how to dodge a bullet, not that he is a supporter of the previous minister’s position.
It won’t take the Greens long to ping him on this, which will lead to further questions about the PM’s judgement.
Gillard has staked so much of her career on the carbon tax, to the degree that she has sacrificed any claim that she ever had to being honest.
So why appoint a minister to handle this area who is intellectually opposed to the scientific view underlying that position, and in so doing, undermine the perception that she is committed to that position, unless she intends to undermine that position in an attempt to crawl back into favour somewhere?
In effect, Gray’s appointment doubles up on her dishonesty. Not a smart position when she is entering an election campaign with the majority of Australians closing their ears to her on the basis that they don’t believe a word she says.