UPDATE Spencer v. Commonwealth of Australia, Friday 12 December

Please see Jessie Davies report on Peter’s final oral submission yesterday in The Land online….


There is also extraordinary irony in the front page article in today’s Sydney Morning Herald by Marcus Priest (from Lima) with the heading “Bishop seeks special deal on emissions”. The article deals with the negotiations now under way in climate change conference in Lima, Peru.

The article explains that Australia is pushing to have “land clearing changes”, that is another “Australia Clause” included in the Kyoto 2 (2013-2020) agreement.

Otherwise “Australia is threatening that it will not ratify Kyoto 2 if it does not get its way on targets.”

This is a carbon copy of the tactics adopted by the then Howard Government in the lead up to the 1997 Kyoto Protocol agreement. Australia’s “success” in getting the “Australia Clause” in the Kyoto Protocol led directly to the Howard Government “engineering” the much more restrictive 2003 NSW Native Vegetation Legislation and similar legislation in Queensland.

It is this legislation and the resulting theft of the stored carbon in the resulting trees by the Commonwealth (enabling Australia to meet its Kyoto commitments) that is at the root of Peter Spencer’s case against the Commonwealth and NSW.