News from the Secretary, August 2007
Initiative on public transport and climate change
During August we have been involved in an initiative to publicise the importance of public transport as a health and climate change issue.
In Australia the largest contributor to transport greenhouse emissions is the private car in cities and government can help ease this growth with better public transport. At the same time the use of the private car carries significant responsibility for the epidemic of obesity and other life-style diseases, while its pollutants increase the burden of heart and respiratory disease in the 70% of the Australian public who live in urban communities. The article “Public Transport, Health and Climate Change—a DEA initiative” on the web site develops this topic.
We wrote to all Members, Senators and Ministers in Federal Parliament seeking their recognition that public transport is a climate change and health issue. We pointed out that greenhouse gases from transport are expected to grow (according to the Federal Government’s own Bureau of Transport and Resource Economics) by 68% between 2000 and 2020. This means it is the area of greenhouse emissions least under control in Australia. The initial response is encouraging. There are the usual responses thanking us and referring the matter to the Minister of Transport and others, in other words it probably wasn’t read. However there was a letter from Kevin Rudd, the content of which is encouraging for it indicates that he has got the message and has contacted the relevant shadows in Environment, Health, Health Promotion and Transport. We find that these mail-outs of briefings often unearth one or two gold nuggets that lead to us having an impact..
The letter to all parliamentarians coincided with the Policy document “A Public Transport and Green City Manifesto for the Federal Election”, now on the DEA web site under Policy. The document was written by Gary Glazebrook and Peter Newman, member of the Scientific Advisory Committee DEA. A link to the manifesto was given in the letter to parliamentarians. Some members who have responded to the letter indicated that they have used this link and have read the manifesto.
The Tasmanian Pulp Mill
Doctors for the Environment Australia has been active on this issue. We believe we must remain focused in our activities and our priority at the moment is health and climate change, so what justification is there for devoting some of our time to this issue? In fact it is a climate change issue and a big one. Harvesting native forest timber causes greenhouse emissions. This is dismissed by government while at the same time millions of dollars are promised to promote sustainable forest practices in Asia. In assessing the pulp mill issue, it is difficult to believe statements from any of the proponents; there is a complete breakdown in confidence in process and assessment. I have seen Mr Lennon stating that the new mill will not increase the use of native forest. Listen to the statement on Bush telegraph http://www.abc.net.au/rural/telegraph/content/2006/s2023629.htm by Dr Beadle who is a professional forest scientist based in Hobart. His 35 years’ experience includes managing the Sustainable Management Programme in the Cooperative Research Centre for Sustainable Production Forestry for seven years. His conclusion is that existing supplies of timber will not be sufficient for the mill.
So what actions have we taken on this issue? Three letters have been sent to Malcolm Turnbull over the past few months and a call made to his office. These have detailed our health and climate change concerns over the mill. A personal letter has been sent to each of the Legislative Councilors in Tasmania. As it turns out insufficient numbers voted against the Bill. We have raised the issue with each Federal Member we have seen, the most recent being Nicola Roxon, Shadow Health. Nick Towle, Member of DEA Committee, for Tasmania has recruited our Tasmanian members to write letters. Finally we have made a submission to the Chief Scientist who has been asked by Minister Turnbull to assess the responses to the government’s position under the EPBC Act.
On the other side of the political equation, we have made representations to Peter Garrett
It is depressing to find that both major parties are working on the basis of political expediency. In all our submissions we have focused upon the health aspects—the release of particulates and dioxins and the greenhouse aspects of the proposal.
Meetings with Shadow Ministers
The three shadow Ministers with responsibility for health are Nicola Roxon, Shadow Minister for Health, Senator Jan McLucas, Shadow Minister for Aging, and Senator Kate Lundy who includes health promotion in her shadow portfolio. We have now met with the first two. It is not our policy to quote. However it is pertinent to indicate the topic of our representations. Our information is that at present climate change and environmental health issues are dealt with by four members of staff in the Commonwealth Department of Health. One topic pursued was the need for an effective Departmental section to coordinate with outside experts to establish policy and implement it. This section would deal with planning of emergency service for storm, flood, fire and heat stroke, public heath issues of planning community services and housing for the elderly in climate change, increased surveillance in infectious diseases and planning and provision for environmental refugees.