A response to narratives and counter-narratives

ABSTRACT

Existing narratives surrounding the failure of the CPRS in 2009 have particularly centred on the nature of ALP negotiations with other parties. The article discusses reasonably effectively the strong bipartisan nature of many of the votes taken within the Senate, and when dissecting the events leading to the defeat of the CPRS Bill seeks to suggest that the often-bipartisan nature of voting is indicative of the normality of negotiations over the CPRS. However, this requires some unpacking, and does not take into account the reality of the vote on the day and the structure of bipartisanship. It also leaves aside the at-times virulent campaign by leading members within the Australian Labor Party and the reality of parliamentary negotiations. I will consider those issues here.

关于2009年碳减排计划的失败，目前的讲述都集中于工党与其他政党谈判的性质。本文则讨论了参议院诸多投票的两党性质，通过解剖碳减排提案失败的成因，指出投票的两党性质反映了碳减排协商的常态。不过这还需要进一步剖析，而且要考虑当日投票的实况以及两党制的结构。工党内部领导成员时不时的恶意动作以及国会协商的现实，也需纳入视野。

KEYWORDS:

• Australia
• climate change
• carbon pollution trading scheme
• Parliament

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Stewart Jackson

Dr. Stewart Jackson, a Senior Lecturer in Politics, teaches Australian politics while researching Green politics across the Asia-Pacific region. His latest books include Australian Politics in the 21^st Century (2022) and The Australian Greens: From Activism to Australia's Third Party (2016).