By Sue Smith

On 29th April 1998, former environment minister Robert Hill did in fact sign the Kyoto Protocol. The question now being asked is, ' Should Australia ratify the agreement?'

Signing of the protocol indicates a general support of the treaty, with  the intention of ratifying it in the future; whereas ratification of the protocol makes us obligated and legally bound to comply. Kyoto was created by Scientists and Politicians in 1997 under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change. Of the 171 countries who have signed, 169 have now ratified. It is only the USA and Australia who have not.  There are new talks for implementing Kyoto 'post 2012' - this is referred to as Kyoto2. This essay will consider Australia's position to date and will take into account some of the major arguments for and against Australia not ratifying Kyoto. In conclusion, there is significant evidence that it is in Australia's best interest to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

When Robert Hill signed the  Kyoto Protocol ( Warren, M and Mitchell, S 2007 ) stated that Hill's tough negotiations, and his threat not to sign, landed Australia a generous deal that would allow us to increase greenhouse gas emissions to 108 percent. This was to include the greenhouse gas emissions by land clearing. However, Australia never went on to ratify the agreement.

Kyoto2 is a framework for a new Climate Protocol which is still under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change, but for 2012 and beyond. (APE 2007) states that Kyoto2 aims to be global,  where all countries will be included within its framework, and be more economically efficient. This can be done with open markets and auctions for optimum allocation of resources. Kyoto2 will also address the needs of the poor, and will be designed with minimum accounting and compliance overheads. The main aim is to address the needs and concerns of all countries.

As  a result  of Australia not ratifying  Kyoto (Black, S 2006) states that legally, we are now only entitled to be ' represented '  in any future meetings and conferences. Black argues that we are only considered with a lowly 'observer status',  which is on the same level of non- Government organisations. The Environment Minister at the time of Black's posting (Ian Campbell) stated that it is the formal meetings where Australia and the US were allowed, where business 'really gets done'.  He argues that Australia wants to be in the position to move motions, make statements and move votes, regardless of the accusations by Kyoto signatories that Australia is trying to derail Kyoto. Furthermore, it is believed that Australia is only trying to take part in further discussions so they can continue to spoil things by trying to prevent agreements, by watering them down and finding loopholes.