Tim Costello on climate change

Tim Costello addressed a rally today for the ‘Say Yes’ campaign. I agree with his comment

The poorest, the most vulnerable are already being the most impacted

Exactly – climate change policies around the world (enacted and proposed) will mostly affect the world’s poor. Already climate change policies are diverting resources from helping to feed and shelter the world’s poor (and especially to provide clean drinking water) to fashionable climate change mitigation which harm the poor.
We know that China’s growth will lead to large increases in carbon dioxide emissions – yet Tim Costello would seem to prefer for the Chinese to remain poor.
World Vision Australia is losing the plot – instead of focusing on its core expertise of delivering aid and helping poor people, it instead is diverting its precious resources to climate change advocacy and ‘climate friendly’ policies and those which allow people such as Carbon Cate to offset their CO2 emissions by reducing the standards of living of the world’s poor. In effect – like those environmentalists who argue against GM food – World Vision Australia is now working against the interests of the poor.
It is an exquisite irony. People enjoying the benefits of high standards of living, suffering pangs of guilt, wringing their hands at the circumstances of the poor, and then advocating policies that embed poverty.
A much better approach by World Vision would be to advocate for free trade, reduced corruption and policies which aid in adaptation rather than mitigation. Rich countries can adapt – so we need to follow policies that help the poor to become rich. The exact opposite of what World Vision Australia appears to be be doing.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

28 Responses to Tim Costello on climate change

  1. big dumb fu

    It’s like we’ve stepped trough the mirror into bizzaro world. Instead of taking action and improving things in our control, let us make sacrifice instead to the almighty climate gods. This will be an embarrassing footnote in the historic record, where amongst all our amazing developments we still fell into dark ages hysteria.

  2. Ben

    “World Vision Australia is now working against the interests of the poor.” Excellent point. Tim Costello is too addicted to fame now to turn back, I fear.

  3. Judith Sloan

    It’s not only Tim Costello’s outfit that has lost the plot. I usually donate to the Salvation Army each year. After receiving an absolutely fatuous letter from them, linking the need for funds to climate change, I ceased to be a donor. I wrote to them about this but I never received a reply. Lots of other worthy causes.

  4. Steve

    World Vision needs the poor much more than the poor need World Vision. Without the poor, Tim Costello doesn’t have a job or a soapbox.

  5. Myrddin Seren

    I am pretty sure that some time back, when challenged on World Vision shifting the mission goal posts, WV admitted that the flow of government and grant money for anything with ‘climate’ written on it was so great, they simply were unwilling/unable to ignore the green rivers of gold and hence joined the stampede to implement ‘climate policies’.
    And that’s without any personal predilictions Tim has on the subject.

  6. Sleetmute

    Normally Tim Costello is not too bad at staying out of party politics. It’s not clear what he is doing here. For better or worse, there is bipartisan support for Australia’s abatement target of 5% below 2000 levels. So both sides The present debate is about the mechanism for reaching that tar. So why is the head of World Vision getting involved?

  7. If the left was ever concerned about the poor, it is not any more. High taxes, high minimum wages, inflexible working conditions, excessive environmental hurdles, government controlled health and education services, plus middle class welfare all harm the poor quite substantially.
    New Zealand’s Roger Douglas, of the ACT Party, has been talking about this for quite a while. A former Labour Party minister, he retains a genuine concern for the less fortunate but persuasively argues that the big government/social democratic approach is entirely the opposite of what is needed. Details.

  8. manalive

    It’s a bit rich, isn’t it?
    If Tim could bring himself to forgo say $100,000 of his annual salary and benefits and struggle on a mere $150,000, World Vision each year could provide an additional 40,000 people with clean water for the rest of their lives (annually).
    Commenting in 2000 on the head of Wesley Central Mission earning $160,000 a year, Tim “was shocked and …. dumbstruck….to be on a salary [from an organisation] that is practising and preaching social justice, as the Wesley Mission is, that’s that high, is not living consequentially with your values”.
    Then again, World Vision are not strictly speaking a charity, but charity ‘middlemen’.

  9. Samuel J

    Manalive – don’t forget that Tim enjoys considerable FBT concessions as an employee of a public benevolent institution: $17000 straight off tax free in addition to the tax free threshold and the ability to package meal entertainment benefits to an unlimited extent (used, for example, by some to pay for weddings or overseas holidays).

  10. hc

    “yet Tim Costello would seem to prefer for the Chinese to remain poor.”
    You know that’s a lie so why say it?

  11. You know that’s a lie so why say it?

    How do we know that? If Costello’s priority is China’s carbon dioxide emissions rather than GDP per head, then it is surely true.

  12. Samuel J

    Harry – that statement isn’t a lie. It is an implication of TC’s current direction. Tim by his statements appears to have lexicographic preferences for CO2 reductions over poverty reduction.

  13. “You know that’s a lie so why say it?”
    Because we love to see you stamp your little footsies, Harry.

  14. C.L.

    The poorest, the most vulnerable are already being the most impacted.

    Hear hear, Rev Tim. The warmening faith system is already seriously damaging the poor. Four have been killed by the Rudd/Gillard government so far and the homes of many others were incinerated.
    Rev Tim wants more of the same.

  15. Ben

    Funny how Jesus warned about “cooling” as opposed to “global warming.” I guess Tim’s Bible has been reedited by Greenpeace.

  16. C.L.

    Moral stenchful intellectual immorality and disregard for the genuinely needy…
    Regarding today’s astroturf ‘rallies’:

    “What people are asking for is an ambitious [carbon price], an investment in renewable energy,” said Simon Sheikh, rally organiser and national director of activist group GetUp!

    Earlier this week:
    GetUp! rejects call by Tony Abbott to mount a campaign against the Malaysian solution.

  17. C.L.

    Meant ‘more’, not moral.

  18. C.L.

    In other words, GetUp! and its bourgeois associates back the potential caning and torture of women and children – as well as the impoverishment of the already impoverished.

  19. Samuel J

    Everyone who attended the ‘Say Yes’ rallies should be sent a bill from the ATO. They have said yes to paying the government money.

  20. twostix

    In other words, GetUp! and its bourgeois associates back the potential caning and torture of women and children – as well as the impoverishment of the already impoverished.

    Did you think the left ever cared about the boat people? It’s kind of like the way they really, really cared about the rule of law, free speech, the working class, aboriginals, etc….until they won an election.
    The left care about power, and their team getting it. There’s nothing else. Every policy is devised merely to entrench and gain them more power. Groups are used and discarded as necessary. See the way the gays and feminists are now being sidelined in favor of the more potents battering ram: Muslims. The (once “noble”) working class is now openly sneered at and ridiculed due to the opposition to the tax.
    Fortunately for all of us, once the Australian left do get power they are to stupid and worthless to know what the hell to do with it. Witness the ex-socialist culture warrior Gillard. So full of revolutionary ideas twenty years ago, now in power, reduced to pretending to like AFL, talking like a “bogan” while sending refugee children off like cattle to be caned by Muslims.
    You couldn’t make it up.

  21. .

    Her personality fraud rivals Bush’s “dumb southerner” schtick.
    He’s an plutocrat from Connecticut, and she’s a high priced lawyer.

  22. AndrewL

    Shouldn’t it be Anti-Carbon Cate?
    Is there any reason you can’t advocate mitigation and adaptation?

  23. Viva

    If the left was ever concerned about the poor, it is not any more

    See the way the gays and feminists are now being sidelined in favor of the more potents battering ram: Muslims.

    The left threw the poor under the bus, to be followed later by minorities. Now they figure they can parlay the environment into what they want the most.

    The left care about power, and their team getting it

    What will be the next stalking horse?

  24. Samuel J, which is it – free trade or reduced corruption? It’s the degree and nature of enforcement that gets catallaxians chasing their tails.

  25. Michael Fisk

    Just had a flick through Andrew Elder’s blog. Congratulations Andrew! You are the first person to base an entire blog on Turnbullian Hi-Allanism.

  26. Samuel J

    Andrew – both are important. I’d say that one cannot exist without the other. Institutionalised corruption works against free trade.

  27. Georgia

    Wealth cannot buffer people from changes in ecosystem services.

Comments are closed.