Mick Clifford: Weathering a lot of hot air on climate

Mick Clifford believes the political reaction to this week's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report and calls to delay the rise in carbon tax show that leadership on the world's climate crisis is sorely lacking

Second- and third-level students march during a Fridays For Future Climate Protest in Cork City last month. Photo: Larry Cummins

In January 2019, then-taoiseach Leo Varadkar made a personal admission that was met with no little outrage. 

He said he was trying to reduce the amount of meat he ate in order to cut down on his carbon footprint.  This was, in a relatively minor way, offering some leadership. The science says we need to cut down on meat consumption in order to tackle emissions. 

Instead of being commended, Varadkar was attacked. The then-president of the Irish Cattle and Sheep Farmers’ Association, Patrick Kent, described the comment as “reckless in the extreme”.

“As one of the most important beef exporters in the northern hemisphere it is very unfortunate that our Taoiseach should be calling into question the sustainability of Irish beef production,” he said. “Surely the onus is on Mr Varadkar to protect such a vital industry; his cavalier comments, however, will do nothing but undermine it.”

Then Fianna Fáil agriculture spokesperson, and current minister of the same portfolio, Charlie McConalogue, said Varadkar should be giving leadership to the beef sector, not making such comments. And on it went. 

The most colourful criticism came from Danny Healy-Rae. “It’s ridiculous to think that people should stop eating meat to change or protect the weather,” he said. Healy-Rae, one of the few TDs to have been completely honest and consistent on the climate, had previously noted that “God above decides the weather”. He doesn’t believe the science.

Varadkar repented within 24 hours. “I was specifically asked what I was doing on climate change and I said that I was trying to eat less red meat — not giving it up,” he said. “I had a very nice Hereford steak last night.”

So it went back in the mists of pre-pandemic times. The smart money says that similar comments on meat-eating from a political leader today would receive much the same reaction. Or, to put it bluntly, save the burning planet by all means if you have to, but don’t be interfering with us.

Political reaction to IPCC report

Last Monday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its latest report. The window is closing. Greenhouse-gas emissions need to peak by 2025 or the planet could be facing into irreversible decline in which large tracts will be inhabitable and much of the remainder of the planet subject to constant hostile weather. 

The political response has largely been to observe that said decline will only occur sometime after the next two or three general elections and is therefore irrelevant.

There is a lot going on right now, so on one level it is forgivable that the startling parameters set out by the IPCC report have not caused alarm. Fair enough, but what was spoken about regarding the climate during the week? 

Last Sunday, the Transport Minister and Green party leader Eamon Ryan raised the issue of lifestyle changes to accommodate the new reality. He mentioned shorter showers and less driving. The reaction, for the greater part, has been a form of derision.

In the Dáil, People Before Profit’s Mick Barry accused Ryan of “patronising” people. Really? Ask yourself. Have you consciously spent less time showering in deference to the need to conserve energy? Certainly, until this week, I haven’t. 

As for driving, Ryan was merely echoing suggestions advertised by the International Energy Agency. The stock response to that is that the agency doesn’t live in rural Ireland so that should be the end of the matter.

Elsewhere, reports from the Fine Gael parliamentary party meeting on Wednesday suggest it would be the perfect home for Healy-Rae’s creationist philosophy.

Brendan Griffin, who was once a junior minister for something or other, reportedly told the meeting the Green Party may soon want people to turn off the light when having sex. Michael Ring’s contribution was to say that the Greens will want people to have one shower a week. Michael Creed worried there could be a huge price to pay for Fine Gael supporting Green Party ideology. Get that.

The climate crisis is not an existential threat to the planet. It’s apparently an ideology pursued by a shower who have a problem with showers and are interfering with the rest of us getting on with our lives. 

Griffin, Ring, and Creed all served in government, represented the country, purported to subscribe to the widely accepted scientific verdict that transformative change is urgently required. As my friend Danny might put it, God above, where in the wide earthly world would you get them?

Carbon tax

The other climate-related issue to rear its head this week was a row over the carbon tax. The tax is not a panacea. One of its two designated features is to change behaviour away from using fossil fuels and there are some problems with alternatives, particularly in rural Ireland. 

But it is also a tiny gesture in attempting to move in the direction required if our children and their children are to have any hope of a half-decent existence. Instead, it was used as a political football during the week. There were cries that the scheduled increase due in May — which works out on average at about a cost of €1.50 a month per household — should be delayed. 

Any hike in the cost of living right now will affect those on the lower rungs of the socioeconomic ladder, but instead of specifically addressing that conundrum, the issue is viewed as one on which to hunt down cheap votes.

Sinn Féin leader Mary Lou McDonald described the tax as “crazy”. She lectured Taoiseach Micheál Martin on the madness of insisting the increase go ahead. “It’s the wrong decision at the wrong time,” she said. “Your position is wrong and you have to listen.”

Those comments were made on the day after the IPCC report was published. In terms of leadership, McDonald’s positioning on climate change is probably the most cynical. Not only does she rigidly refrain from issuing hard truths, but she milks the issue shamelessly. 

What's your view on this issue?

You can tell us here

She knows that the public is not yet ready to face up to the reality of what is upon us and therein she sees the possibility of hoovering up a few more votes on the road to power.

Right now, not just here but across the world, climate change is the outstanding issue on which leaders are obliged to act as persuaders for great swathes of the population.

Many among the public are not yet willing to face up to what is at issue. Some are understandably wary that a just transition is not receiving the prominence it should. And more again are simply fearful.

In such a milieu, leadership is desperately needed. And with a few obvious exceptions, it is sorely lacking. History will not be kind to those who have, on this existential issue, abrogated their responsibility.