The blinding determination of Turnbull and Bishop to see Australia’s Paris commitment through, regardless of the futility and the damage done to our economy reminds me of the folly of Gallipoli or the futility of ‘going over the top‘ on the Western Front in WW1, when in the face of insurmountable odds the Generals were prepared to sacrifice the youth of Australia and the empire for the sake of their own vaulting ambition, pride and ego. This time though, its the entire country ‘going over the top’ to satisfy some vainglorious attempt by Turnbull to etch himself indelibly into the nations history and Bishop, to line herself up for a post political ambassadorship or a post to the cocktail circuit of the U.N.
Meanwhile although there is a way out (see below) Generals Turnbull and Bishop (in Prada camouflage flak jackets with matching handbag and stilettos) call the battlefield play from the safety of their closeted Canberra bunker while luxuriating in their collective wanton and wilful ignorance and totally oblivious to the facts on the ground.
Bishops statement that Australia plays by the rules — “if we sign an agreement we stick to the agreement” rings hollow and overlooks the fact that as with any consumer law, Article 28 of the Paris agreement provides for three year cooling off period and exit clause. We are still in that window.
Article 28 of the Paris agreement enables parties to withdraw from the agreement after sending a withdrawal notification to the depositary, but notice can be given no earlier than three years after the agreement goes into force for the country. Withdrawal is effective one year after the depositary is notified. Alternatively, the Agreement stipulates that withdrawal from the UNFCCC, under which the Paris Agreement was adopted, would also withdraw the state from the Paris Agreement. The conditions for withdrawal from the UNFCCC are the same as for the Paris Agreement. The agreement does not specify provisions for noncompliance.