July 11, 2024 • 37 mins
If you are not willing to be arrested in the fight against climate change, are you willing to support those climate activists who are?
That was the topic of discussion at the 2024 Margaret Henry Memorial Lecture with ethicist, writer and activist Dr Leslie Cannold from the Cranala Centre for Ethical Leadership, and Rising Tide Activist and Renewable Energy Engineer, Jasmine Stuart.
In this special episode of Law Matters, Catherine Henry brings to you the lecture that took place at Newcastle City Hall.
You’ll hear about:
- Why Rising Tide is targeting the coal port in Newcastle’s harbour as a vehicle to bring worldwide action to the climate crisis
- Why Dr Leslie Cannold is proposing that the older generations “sponsor” a young climate activist
- The strategy behind what is seen as radical activism and why climate activists feel this is their only option.
Disclaimer
While this podcast is aimed to be informative, it is not intended to be a substitute for legal advice. You should see a solicitor for complete advice that relates directly to your situation.
For more information:
If you have a legal issue and want to talk to the team, you can find out more at Catherine Henry Lawyers, or by calling 1800 874 949.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
(00:01):
Are you willing to fight for thegenerations that will come after us?
Although this is a law podcast, we are bigbelievers in social justice right across
the board.
So this month on Law Matters, we'rebringing you something a little different.
I'm Catherine Henry from Catherine HenryLawyers and I believe strongly in working
hard to create a better world and to usethe vehicle of the law to that end.
(00:27):
It's something I learnt from my mother,Margaret Henry.
She was an activist who was fierce in herpursuit of social justice.
She supported many causes, leading myfather to refer to her as Causes
Incorporated.
After she died in 2015, a memorial lecturewas organized by members of the community
who were activists like her.
And this lecture has taken place mostyears with a bit of a break during COVID.
(00:52):
This year, the Margaret Henry MemorialLecture was on the theme of climate change
and environmental activism.
Amongst the issues my mother
cared passionately about was theenvironment.
And I know she'd be really proud of thework that young activists, especially here
in the Hunter, have been doing in thefight against climate change.
And because this is something so dear tome, I wanted to share a little of the
(01:15):
lecture with you on this podcast.
Held this year, as in most years atNewcastle City Hall, the focus of the
lecture was on supporting young climateactivists.
The guest lecturer was ethicist, writerand activist Dr.
Leslie Cannold.
from the Cranlana Centre for EthicalLeadership in Victoria.
And Leslie's recent writing has been onenvironmental activism.
(01:37):
You'll hear from her in a moment, butwe'll hear first from Rising Tide activist
and renewable energy engineer, JasmineStuart.
Jasmine spoke first at the lecture and shebegan the night by highlighting Rising
Tides role in local climate activism,including how she came to be arrested last
year alongside her father.
(01:57):
and also her 96 year old grandfather, allthree generations supporting this vitally
important cause.
Thank you, Felicity.
My name is Jasmine.
Like I'm sure Margaret Henry was, I'm avery proud Nova -Castrian.
(02:18):
I was born here and I've lived here myentire life.
And no matter where I'm living, I thinkI'm always going to see Newcastle as my
home.
However, here in Newcastle, we also have aclaim to fame that I'm not so proud of,
and that is that we are home to thelargest coal port in the world.
(02:40):
1 % of entire global emissions passthrough our harbour, nearly as much as
Australia's total domestic emissions.
Not bad for a town of a few hundredthousand people, right?
So for a while, when my sister was firstinvolved in Rising Tide, I hesitated to be
(03:00):
one of the radical activists.
Instead, I partially accepted thenarrative that
you know, we have to be realistic aboutour situation and we have to consider the
economic cost.
But at some point I realised that I'vetried attending protests.
I've made changes in my own life, votedfor the parties with the best climate
(03:25):
policies.
I've studied and campaigned within thesystem.
And yet here I was listening to more andmore dire warnings about the climate
collapse and what my future was going tolook like.
and witnessing more and more once in alifetime natural disasters.
I also realised that prioritising short-term gain and profit over the survival of
(03:49):
humanity is truly one of the most radicalacts that I can imagine.
And so in April last year, I was arrestedfor stopping a coal train along with 50
other people, including my father, who'sin the audience.
And so I want to tell you why.
You all came here tonight to hear Dr.
(04:10):
Leslie Cannold speak about doing more tohelp and support young climate activists.
So I don't think I need to spend too muchtime convincing you that the climate
crisis is real and that it's catastrophic.
What I will say is that I have been alivefor 23 years and I have experienced every
single one of the 22 hottest years onrecord.
(04:33):
When we talk about the climate crisis, wearen't talking about an abstract issue for
future generations.
We are talking about real people who arealive now, losing their lives from heat
waves, natural disasters, starvation.
And it's already happening, particularlyin developing nations.
(04:53):
We don't have time for baby steps orinternational talk fests like the COP
conferences, where politicians convincethemselves that they're doing enough.
I know I'm fed up with governments sayingthat they're taking action on climate
change and then approving massive newfossil fuel expansions.
To quote United Nations Secretary GeneralAntonio Guterres, we need disruption to
(05:20):
end the destruction.
We need a mass movement of ordinary peoplecoming together to say enough is enough
and to shake our leaders awake and creategenuine rapid change.
Well, you might have heard of
climate tipping points, which is where wecross certain climate thresholds and
trigger massive and irreversible changesthat can spiral out of our control.
(05:44):
The only way I believe to counteract theseis through social tipping points.
Social tipping points are non -linear,transformative changes in our society,
which also can't be reversed.
History shows us that if we build a socialmovement that has enough power,
scale and diversity, it will createunstoppable energy, a whirlwind of change
(06:09):
which can amplify itself.
Social tipping points make radicaltransformative change, which might seem
unachievable now, not only possible, butinevitable.
And so that's where we come in again herein Newcastle with the world's largest coal
port in our backyard.
To create a social tipping point,
(06:32):
We need a landmark struggle.
We need a focal point for the climatemovement to come together.
Newcastle Coal Port is a target of notjust national, but global significance.
So if we can claim wins here by firststopping new coal and gas projects and
then ending coal exports, we can createwaves which inspire other victories around
(06:57):
the world.
The action that I took last year,
in deliberately breaking the law tohighlight the injustice of the climate
crisis is part of a long tradition ofnonviolent civil disobedience.
So many of the rights that we take forgranted now, for example, civil rights,
(07:17):
women's suffrage, the 40 -hour work week,all of these were won through nonviolent
disruptive social movements.
In their time, these movements werecriticised as disruptive.
and radical, extreme, or not the right wayto create change, or not the right way to
protest.
Yet now, we look back to these people withadmiration and respect as the ones who are
(07:42):
on the right side of history.
When enough people engage in peacefulcivil disobedience together, when the
police can't stop us all, it becomes apolitical problem instead.
And so politicians are forced to finallylisten
to our demands and engage with us.
I've been involved in variousenvironmental groups throughout my life,
(08:05):
but I truly believe that Rising Tide hasall the ingredients to actually win our
campaign.
If we build a mass movement of ordinarypeople by learning from these historical
movements and using mass movementdynamics, transformative change becomes
possible.
Engaging in this act of civil disobediencewas probably the most empowering thing
(08:27):
that I've ever done.
And the reason it felt that way ratherthan scary or oppressive was the fact that
it was colourful.
It was targeted directly at the coalindustry, not disrupting ordinary people
going about their day.
And most importantly, that we weresupported by over a hundred people
cheering us on from the other side of thefence.
(08:49):
And so through our diversity, we showedthat we are community members who are
working together to stand up
to the injustices when not just a bunch ofradicals.
So on that note, I just wanted to lend myperspective on the theme of tonight's
lecture.
As a young climate activist, something I'mquite used to hearing from older
(09:10):
generations is that you're so inspiring,your generation is gonna fix things.
And I absolutely know that this is comingfrom a good place.
They wanna show it support orencouragement.
But what I feel...
when I hear this is not necessarilyencouragement, but a sense of burden.
(09:31):
It might be the reality of the situationwe're in now, but it shouldn't be up to my
generation.
And I'm angry that the people that weelect to solve these challenges aren't
doing enough.
We don't have time to wait until mygeneration's in positions of power.
And I feel a sense of responsibility to doeverything in my power to fix a mess that
(09:53):
I didn't create.
So what I want to know is whether you'lljoin me in sharing that responsibility.
Will you be one of the ones that standbeside me on the train or cheer me on from
the other side of the fence?
So to the young people and everyone in theroom, I say get active, get empowered.
It truly is the best way to counteract ourfear.
(10:14):
As climate scientist Lesley Hughes told usat a Rising Tide event last year, hope is
a strategy, not just an emotion.
And to the older people in the room, Iwant to ask
that when you talk to young activists oryoung people in general, you don't just
tell them that they're inspiring, tellthem what they inspired you to do.
(10:35):
Say to them that you're doing great workand how can I use my position and life
experience to join you?
Because I can guarantee that you cancontribute in some way.
And this is a fight for all of us.
And so having your skills and yourpresence in our movement is the only way
that we're gonna win this fight.
So now it's my honor to introduce Dr.
(10:58):
Leslie Cannold.
Leslie is an Associate Professor of Ethicsand Impact at Cranlana Center for Ethical
Leadership.
She's a writer, ethicist, educator, andadvocate with a master of bioethics and a
PhD in social research.
And in 2022, she published an article forCrikey Magazine titled, Saving the Planet.
(11:20):
My generation must do more to supportyoung climate activists, which is the
theme for tonight's lecture.
So over to you, Leslie.
Thank you.
That was going to be a really hard act tofollow.
So indeed, my topic today is that I'mgoing to talk, I'm going to raise the
(11:42):
question and make the argument essentiallythat if we aren't willing to go to jail in
defense of our principles, we shouldsupport activists who are.
So I'm going to start by telling you aboutmy own experience.
Two years ago, right after the seeminglyendless cycle of lockdowns in Melbourne
ended, I did it.
I put my name on a radical climateactivist mailing list so I could attend
(12:05):
all the coming rallies in the city thatdidn't conflict with my new role at the
Conlana Center for Ethical Leadership.
The question really though is what took meso long.
In fact, I'd arrived at the same point ofanxiety, disgust, indignation and
exasperation in January of 2019.
when bushfires raged across the country,disrupting my husband's and my precious
(12:28):
escape from our Elwood apartment to take athree -day holiday break.
In fact, like much of the country, wespent it out running the catastrophic
Black Summer bushfires, one of the mostintense and catastrophic fire seasons this
country has ever experienced.
It burned an estimated 24 .3 millionhectares, over 3 ,000 buildings, the vast
(12:49):
majority of which were homes, and killedat least 34 people directly.
and 400 more from the toxic effects ofbushfire smoke.
So the Black Summer bushfires didn'temerge from nowhere, nor were they due to
the natural variability of weatherpatterns in a country known for its cycles
of fire, drought, and flood.
Instead, thanks to a new field of climatescience research called extreme event
(13:13):
attribution, we now know the hottest anddriest conditions on record seen in
Australia in 2019, drought, temperaturerecords, and heat waves.
increased fuel loads, fuel dryness, fireweather, and the lightning strikes that
increase both the number and intensity ofdevastating bushfires.
This includes the one that had begunactually six months earlier in 2019 in
(13:38):
Queensland, before peaking during thesummer months when Australians were out
and about with friends and family tryingto have a holiday.
Indeed, I remember talking to my husbandin the kitchen after we'd returned from
this less than relaxing holiday andsaying,
we can't stay on the sidelines anymore.
From now on, if there's a climate protestwe can attend, we must attend it." He'd
(14:00):
agreed.
But then COVID hit, and our attention washijacked by the more imminent threat to
life and limb and the more immediate moralobligation to stay off the street and
indoors to stop the virus spreading.
But since 2022, when most of us emergedfully vaccinated to start life on the
outside again,
The time has come to refocus on the crisisfacing the planet and the rightness of the
(14:25):
claim made by three generations of youth,including my own 20 -somethings, that the
future is not ours to ruin.
Yet my generation and the considerablylarger one preceding mine, that of the
Baby Boomers, continues to ruin it inthree distinct ways.
(14:45):
Firstly,
through the strategy seen on the politicalright of denialism, the manufacture of
doubt and the seemingly endlesspoliticization of the climate issue.
Secondly, by refusing to meaningfullyregulate the internet in ways that prevent
climate lies racing halfway around theworld before the truth about the dire
state of the planet has time to get itsboots on.
(15:08):
And thirdly, by passing laws that areunduly harsh to civil disobedience.
and to brave citizens taking hugeindividual risks to raise the profile of
their ethical concerns about the adequacyof government action.
So I want to discuss each of these in turnbefore ending with a discussion of what
each one of us here can do and perhapseven organize to do collectively to compel
(15:31):
the government of the day to actdiligently, urgently and efficiently to
play our part in solving the collectiveaction problem of climate change.
So let's start with playing on fear andmanufacturing doubt.
It feels critical to me to not allow thegenerations leading the institutions
empowered to take urgent action on climateoff the hook.
(15:57):
I say this because as a member of one ofthose generations, I'm Gen X.
I remember the warnings issued byscientists during the 1980s that if we
acted to halt dangerous global heating atthe time,
the action required would have relativelylittle impact on our lives and be
relatively inexpensive.
Do people remember that?
(16:18):
Yeah, I do too.
However, if we waited, they told us, andas the last tragic history of the last 50
years reveals, we would, extremelydisruptive interventions would be required
that would cost a bomb.
In fact, in researching and writing thisspeech, I came to realize that the
warnings I remember in the 1980s when Iwas in my 20s,
(16:40):
were far from the first.
In 1965, the year of my birth, PresidentLyndon Johnson actually delivered a
special message to Congress in which hestated, this generation has altered the
composition of the atmosphere on a globalscale through a steady increase in carbon
dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.
(17:03):
Why didn't we listen?
Indeed,
Why does it seem possible that literallyalmost 60 years later, we are still
expected by the opposition leader, PeterDutton, to become the see and hear no evil
monkeys again?
Why else would he revive the climate warsby abandoning Australia's legislated
(17:23):
interim climate targets and on advice fromTony Abbott, revive the climate wars by
seeking to replace the use of cheaperrenewables, a resource we have in ample
supply,
and to retool the grid in ways alreadywell underway with nuclear power about
which we know and have nothing and that isnot just more expensive and banned in many
(17:45):
parts of our country.
Mostly because we're scared and uncertain.
Emotions that savvy opponents of climateaction like the fossil and now nuclear
lobbies know freezes humans in our tracks.
Lacking strong and consistent leadershipthat can engender the trust and hope that
can lead us to dig deep to achieve acollective goal of lowering our carbon
(18:07):
footprint, fear and uncertainty achievethe precise opposite.
They achieve despair, frustration, and asearch for a magic bullet
that essentially makes the cost andinconvenience of transforming our economy
go away, especially at a time when thecost of living crisis is hitting many
Australians hard.
Certainly the all is lost and might aswell give up now vibe was what Dutton was
(18:32):
retelling at his initial press conference.
Acting to meet the target would destroythe economy, he said, and there's no sense
of signing up to targets you don't haveany prospect of achieving.
Hopefully,
this unexpected change of tact is a loserfor the coalition.
Certainly business industry groups whohave already made their plans based on our
(18:54):
legislative targets and want certainty,not more polarizing hijinks, were
extremely critical, as were labor andliberal premiers in whose states the new
nuclear facilities would need to belocated.
But at the very least, Dutton's move madeon advice from the coalition's last
polarizing prince, Tony Abbott,
(19:14):
condemns us to one more electoral cycle ofbackwards and unproductive conversations
about the climate.
This includes having to explain whywhatever fortune some coalition might make
from nuclear, it is neither a realistic oraffordable option for the average
Australian, rather than what we should betalking about, namely the climate
(19:36):
shortcomings of the current government,including the Labour government's failure
to make the hard choices required for usto meet our interim targets
including its back to the future gasstrategy.
But there is another reason that dangerousglobal heating is a hard problem to solve,
not just in Australia, but around theglobe.
(19:57):
The problem is that global heating is acollective action problem, a social
dilemma in which all parties would bebetter off cooperating to stabilize
temperatures at 1 .5 degrees, but any oneparty would benefit from squibbing the
hard work required to do their part.
Indeed, squibbing one's part of thecollective effort and instead free riding
(20:18):
on the benefits of stabilized temperaturesachieved by the hard work of others was
what many in the previous governmentconsistently urged us to do.
Arguing, for instance, that we were such asmall nation, our efforts to reduce
emissions wouldn't make a difference tothe overall project of stabilizing global
temperatures.
And so why should we even try?
(20:40):
In game theoretical language, when I'm
I'm calling squibbing is called defecting,and it is an accepted risk in collective
action problems.
Indeed, it's the key reason they are sohard to solve.
Because the problem with one statedefecting, as the coalition is now urging
us to do by backing out of our 2030targets, is that it puts those who are
(21:01):
pulling for the team feel like fools andchumps.
I mean, imagine how Australians wouldfeel.
having made the sacrifices to ensure ourown compliance with emission targets, only
to discover that the Americans or theGermans were continuing to live the high
life and free riding on the stabilizedglobal temperatures of the future that are
(21:22):
sacrificed, but not theirs made possible.
We'd be, to put it mildly, extremelycheesed off, which is why defecting is
such a problem.
It makes those doing the right thing feellike losers.
It undermines morale and goodwill, fellowfeeling and trust, and can provide the
(21:43):
self -serving cynical and suspiciousmomentum that could cause the world's
fragile effort to cooperate to solve themonstrous problem of climate change to
collapse.
Because in the same way that selflessnessand courage are contagious, selfishness
and cowardice can be contagious too.
(22:05):
So the second problem, regulating arounddisinformation.
It's important to realize that while it isnot the entire problem, the refusal of
successive Australian governments toproperly regulate disinformation and
misinformation on online forums is part ofthe reason we remain stuck in
(22:26):
unproductive, repetitive, and circulardiscussions about a lot of things,
including the climate.
It is no longer the case that social mediacompanies like Facebook and X can't
recognize and limit the spread of climatedisinformation.
They can.
But what the last few years has taught usis that polarization and outrage are good
(22:49):
for business.
And so without regulatory mandates likethose imposed by the European Union, they
won't.
AI has only accelerated this amplificationof fake news about the climate.
and the environment of suspicion anddistrust that allows it to be swallowed
whole.
It's also accelerating the production ofdeep fakes and other false content that
(23:12):
both misinforms populations about what isactually happening in our real and fragile
social and physical world and deceivesthem about the constructive options
available to them to do something aboutit.
Finally, and this is the ultimate goal inmy view, what is going on in cyberspace
right now
undermines the trust we have in oneanother and in institutions required to
(23:36):
mount an effective collective response toclimate change, including the institution
of Australian democracy itself.
And without that trust, those institutionswill collapse.
Because this is a talk about the climate,I won't get on my democracy hobby horse
here.
Other than to say that Australians need toappreciate the scant allegiance, rich and
(23:58):
powerful people the world over.
think Gina Reinhart and the Koch brothershave to a form of governance that dilutes
their power to run the economy and theworld as they see fit.
And that's what democracies do, or atleast that's what they are designed to do
and achieve it when they're functioningproperly, which right now most of them
(24:21):
aren't.
They are designed to break up concentratedeconomic and political power and
distribute it more fairly amongst thepopulation.
Instead, increasing an already dangerouslypolarized electorate through exacerbating
divides on hot button issues likemigration and climate change appears to be
precisely what Dutton and Abbott arewanting to achieve.
(24:44):
This is despite what the 2024 EdelmanTrust Barometer tells us are growing
numbers of Australians who are onto them,though also wrongly attributing
unconscionable attacks, theseunconscionable tactics to both sides.
For instance,
Up to 59 % of Australians believe bothpolitical and business leaders as well as
(25:05):
journalists are, quote, purposefullytrying to mislead them by saying things
they know are false or grossexaggerations.
Such distrust both drives and is evidenceof the polarization that disconnects
Australians from each other and underminesAustralian democracy.
For example, in the 2023 Edelman TrustBarometer, less than one in four, so
(25:29):
25 % or less, Australians were willing tolive in the same neighborhood or work with
those who strongly disagreed with theirpoint of view.
They weren't even willing to help thatperson if they were in need.
Third problem.
(25:49):
So this is about young climate defendersand slap laws.
93 % of young people surveyed byFoundations for Tomorrow said that the
government needs to be doing more onclimate change.
These findings parallel the UNDP'sPeople's Climate Vote, the largest ever
survey of public opinion on climatechange.
It revealed that nearly 70 % of under 18sare most likely to believe compared to
(26:14):
other adults that climate change is aglobal emergency.
In 2021, a global study of 10 ,000 youthfrom 10 countries found that over 50 % of
young people felt sad, anxious, angry,powerless, helpless, and guilty about
climate change, while 45 % said theirfeelings negatively affected their daily
(26:37):
lives.
Yet, according to a report co -authored bythe Human Rights Law Center, Greenpeace,
and the Environmental Defender's Office atthe end of 2021,
State and federal governments in Australiahave introduced a suite of regulatory
measures designed to restrict the climateactivism disproportionately undertaken by
(26:59):
young Australians.
Climate defenders are routinely receivingdisproportionate and excessive penalties
and bail conditions which restrict theirfreedom of association.
Corporations have continued theirhistorical practice of deploying
Australia's legal system against climateactivists through the use of strategic
lawsuits against public participation,called SLAP, which are designed to censor,
(27:25):
intimidate, and silence critics of theirclimate inaction, greenwashing, and
vandalism.
And it is climate vandalism.
The climate enables life as we know it topersist on the only home humans have,
Mother Earth.
It does not belong to those of us alivetoday, but is held in trust by us for
(27:47):
future generations.
We, the current generation, and also thoserecently departed, those of Lyndon
Johnson's era, have the ignominiousdistinction of being the first generation
to violate the sacred duty.
to hand on the planet in at least the samecondition in which past generations handed
(28:08):
it to us.
When we perpetrate and fail to do all inour power to remediate the damage done and
still being done to the climate on ourwatch, we are literally thieving the
future from our young.
Using suppressive legal tactics to chillor punish the protests of our young
(28:28):
against the unjust situation in which theyfind themselves.
Facing a planet of frequent or constantunbearable heat, high intensity bushfires
and catastrophic flooding, if notextinction, should send a chill up the
spine, not just of climate defenders, butof democracy defenders.
(28:48):
For what are these passionate, mostlyyoung people and their institutional
supporters attempting to do, but tomarshal the freedoms to which they are
entitled as citizens of a democracy?
to call attention to a crisis for almost60 years, if we begin counting from the US
president's speech, their electedrepresentatives have chosen to either
(29:09):
ignore or to address in ways woefullyinsufficient to the nature of the crisis.
The ability of citizens to ensure theirrepresentatives hear their concerns by
means of nonviolent protest is ademocratic entitlement.
a means by which to alert politicalleaders, particularly those that refuse to
(29:30):
address the flaws in our electoral fundingsystem that puts them in league with the
powerful economic interests that fundtheir campaigns and give them well -paid
positions when they leave office, thatthey are shirking their obligation not to
serve themselves, they do that prettywell, but to serve the public interest.
Because what could be more in the publicinterest
(29:52):
than ensuring the continued livability ofour shared home on planet Earth.
The willingness of our youth to make thekinds of protests that can't be ignored is
critical at this juncture.
When, as is often the case, these publicprotests violate the law in order to call
attention to the injustice of climatevandalism, locking on to logging machines
(30:14):
or cars that block the Sydney Harbor.
This is law breaking with a purpose.
The purpose is to highlight the injusticeby breaking the law in the light of day so
everyone can see it and to accept thepunishment, even if it's jail, while
hoping the injustice of being jailed fordoing what is right.
(30:35):
In this case, refusing to take the theftof protesting, refusing to take the theft
of the planet.
I don't know what I was trying to saythere.
Lying down something.
We'll rally others to the cause of climatedefense.
We'll forget that sentence.
This is civil disobedience, a sacred partof all healthy democracies.
(30:57):
But when civil disobedience are forced bytheir own government to navigate even
steeper punishments in the hope ofchilling their dissent, so do nothing
politicians won't be exposed and thosethieving humanities future can continue on
their merry way, the rest of thecommunity, that is us, needs to step up
and say,
(31:18):
No.
This is particularly the case when ourfragmented and corrupted media ecosystem
makes it even more difficult for civildisobedience to work as it should, as a
moral corrective to an unresponsivepolitical system.
The way it's supposed to work is that bymaking their public, their protests public
(31:40):
and their arrests seen by the public too,these passionate and committed citizens
have the chance to persuade us, the restof the citizenry.
that the policy or law they are protestingand breaking is so cruel, so unjust or
just plain wrong, that it should berepealed, while at the same time showing
(32:02):
fealty to the right of the government tomake laws and the general obligation of
citizens to accept them.
Which brings us to the question of what weare collectively and individually to do in
the face of this moral outrage.
the moral outrage of our longstandingrefusal to solve the collective action
problem that is climate change, the moraloutrage of making it even harder for the
(32:26):
generations left to suffer the ravages ofthe planets we elders have so callously
left them to protest the continuation ofpolicies that could lead literally to
their extinction.
The following are my initial thoughts onwhat older Australians, younger
generations who are at the vanguard of theenvironmental movement.
fighting for the policy action that willdeliver them and their children a livable
(32:50):
planet.
One, support the Climate Change AmendmentDuty of Care and Intergenerational Equity
Bill 2023.
This bill imposes a statutory duty ondecision makers to consider the likely
impact of decisions that could harm theclimate on the health and wellbeing of
current and future children as theparamount consideration.
(33:14):
and B, not to make a decision that couldharm the climate if the decision poses a
material risk of harm to the health andwellbeing of current and future children
in Australia.
If you Google climate change amendmentduty of care and intergenerational equity
bill, you can find a petition where youcan sign to show your support.
Let's hope it goes somewhere.
(33:37):
Secondly, I believe we should find aneffective way to sponsor a radical
activist.
in the same way some of us used to sponsorindigent children overseas.
The kind of radical activist that we hadup here on the podium that undertakes acts
of civil disobedience as a means to drawattention to the need for urgent climate
(33:58):
action in the face of 60 years of inactionand the terribly hard political and
economic choices that as the expertswarned us, we now have to make.
A radical activist doing what I believein, but don't want to do.
which is a risk, which is risk gettingarrested and spending time and money in
court and in jail.
(34:20):
By sponsoring, I mean drawing materialsupport and public attention to the civil
dissenter to ensure they have thefinancial means to get bail and mount a
defense designed to draw further attentionto the justice of their cause.
Also, and this is just as important, toensure that their acts of civil
disobedience are seen in our fracturedmedia environment by as broad an audience
(34:45):
as possible.
so that those acts have the chance toinspire more Australians to agree that
their cause is just and to join them.
Because again, this is how civildisobedience is meant to work.
Sponsors could follow and make public thejourney of a particular activist, and
should she get caught on the wrong side ofthe law, swarm in to provide the support
(35:08):
required, as well as ensuring her struggleis visible and thereby achieves the
purpose of civil disobedience, which is todraw attention and ultimately overturn
unjust policies and laws.
If a law under which she is being held isalso unjust, sponsors must draw attention
to this too.
I'm envisioning a pairing agency for thispurpose, nothing too complicated, but
(35:31):
perhaps a mustering of names of thosewilling to support and the support they
are able to provide with connections intothe Human Rights Law Center, Greenpeace,
Extinction Rebellion, and of course,Rising Tide.
To my mind, this is the least we eldersand indeed anyone who supports urgent
climate action now can do.
(35:51):
to show our admiration and support for thebrave, most young people taking the risks
required to get it through to our leaders'heads that any action destructive to the
climate can, and from this moment forward,no longer be allowed.
Because I want them to know that we're notall indifferent to the mess we've left
them, but that many of us care deeply andare doing what we can to take
(36:15):
accountability now.
Thank you.
(36:35):
I hope enjoyed this special episode of LawMatters with Catherine Henry Lawyers.
I hope you find something within thesepodcasts to take away and apply in your
life.
You can read more in the notes about pastepisodes and you can also find out more by
checking out the Facebook page for theMargaret Henry Memorial Association.
I'd like to say a big thank you to Dr.
Leslie Cannold and Jasmine Stuart speakingon the night and also to well -known
(36:59):
Hunter journalist and actor FelicityBiggins who did her usual great job of
emceeing the event.
Next month, we'll be back in our usualformat for another episode of Law Matters.
This podcast was produced by Pod and PenProductions.
Are you willing to fight for thegenerations that will come after us?
Although this is a law podcast, we are bigbelievers in social justice right across
the board.
So this month on Law Matters, we'rebringing you something a little different.
I'm Catherine Henry from Catherine HenryLawyers and I believe strongly in working
hard to create a better world and to usethe vehicle of the law to that end.
(00:27):
It's something I learnt from my mother,Margaret Henry.
She was an activist who was fierce in herpursuit of social justice.
She supported many causes, leading myfather to refer to her as Causes
Incorporated.
After she died in 2015, a memorial lecturewas organized by members of the community
who were activists like her.
And this lecture has taken place mostyears with a bit of a break during COVID.
(00:52):
This year, the Margaret Henry MemorialLecture was on the theme of climate change
and environmental activism.
Amongst the issues my mother
cared passionately about was theenvironment.
And I know she'd be really proud of thework that young activists, especially here
in the Hunter, have been doing in thefight against climate change.
And because this is something so dear tome, I wanted to share a little of the
(01:15):
lecture with you on this podcast.
Held this year, as in most years atNewcastle City Hall, the focus of the
lecture was on supporting young climateactivists.
The guest lecturer was ethicist, writerand activist Dr.
Leslie Cannold.
from the Cranlana Centre for EthicalLeadership in Victoria.
And Leslie's recent writing has been onenvironmental activism.
(01:37):
You'll hear from her in a moment, butwe'll hear first from Rising Tide activist
and renewable energy engineer, JasmineStuart.
Jasmine spoke first at the lecture and shebegan the night by highlighting Rising
Tides role in local climate activism,including how she came to be arrested last
year alongside her father.
(01:57):
and also her 96 year old grandfather, allthree generations supporting this vitally
important cause.
Thank you, Felicity.
My name is Jasmine.
Like I'm sure Margaret Henry was, I'm avery proud Nova -Castrian.
(02:18):
I was born here and I've lived here myentire life.
And no matter where I'm living, I thinkI'm always going to see Newcastle as my
home.
However, here in Newcastle, we also have aclaim to fame that I'm not so proud of,
and that is that we are home to thelargest coal port in the world.
(02:40):
1 % of entire global emissions passthrough our harbour, nearly as much as
Australia's total domestic emissions.
Not bad for a town of a few hundredthousand people, right?
So for a while, when my sister was firstinvolved in Rising Tide, I hesitated to be
(03:00):
one of the radical activists.
Instead, I partially accepted thenarrative that
you know, we have to be realistic aboutour situation and we have to consider the
economic cost.
But at some point I realised that I'vetried attending protests.
I've made changes in my own life, votedfor the parties with the best climate
(03:25):
policies.
I've studied and campaigned within thesystem.
And yet here I was listening to more andmore dire warnings about the climate
collapse and what my future was going tolook like.
and witnessing more and more once in alifetime natural disasters.
I also realised that prioritising short-term gain and profit over the survival of
(03:49):
humanity is truly one of the most radicalacts that I can imagine.
And so in April last year, I was arrestedfor stopping a coal train along with 50
other people, including my father, who'sin the audience.
And so I want to tell you why.
You all came here tonight to hear Dr.
(04:10):
Leslie Cannold speak about doing more tohelp and support young climate activists.
So I don't think I need to spend too muchtime convincing you that the climate
crisis is real and that it's catastrophic.
What I will say is that I have been alivefor 23 years and I have experienced every
single one of the 22 hottest years onrecord.
(04:33):
When we talk about the climate crisis, wearen't talking about an abstract issue for
future generations.
We are talking about real people who arealive now, losing their lives from heat
waves, natural disasters, starvation.
And it's already happening, particularlyin developing nations.
(04:53):
We don't have time for baby steps orinternational talk fests like the COP
conferences, where politicians convincethemselves that they're doing enough.
I know I'm fed up with governments sayingthat they're taking action on climate
change and then approving massive newfossil fuel expansions.
To quote United Nations Secretary GeneralAntonio Guterres, we need disruption to
(05:20):
end the destruction.
We need a mass movement of ordinary peoplecoming together to say enough is enough
and to shake our leaders awake and creategenuine rapid change.
Well, you might have heard of
climate tipping points, which is where wecross certain climate thresholds and
trigger massive and irreversible changesthat can spiral out of our control.
(05:44):
The only way I believe to counteract theseis through social tipping points.
Social tipping points are non -linear,transformative changes in our society,
which also can't be reversed.
History shows us that if we build a socialmovement that has enough power,
scale and diversity, it will createunstoppable energy, a whirlwind of change
(06:09):
which can amplify itself.
Social tipping points make radicaltransformative change, which might seem
unachievable now, not only possible, butinevitable.
And so that's where we come in again herein Newcastle with the world's largest coal
port in our backyard.
To create a social tipping point,
(06:32):
We need a landmark struggle.
We need a focal point for the climatemovement to come together.
Newcastle Coal Port is a target of notjust national, but global significance.
So if we can claim wins here by firststopping new coal and gas projects and
then ending coal exports, we can createwaves which inspire other victories around
(06:57):
the world.
The action that I took last year,
in deliberately breaking the law tohighlight the injustice of the climate
crisis is part of a long tradition ofnonviolent civil disobedience.
So many of the rights that we take forgranted now, for example, civil rights,
(07:17):
women's suffrage, the 40 -hour work week,all of these were won through nonviolent
disruptive social movements.
In their time, these movements werecriticised as disruptive.
and radical, extreme, or not the right wayto create change, or not the right way to
protest.
Yet now, we look back to these people withadmiration and respect as the ones who are
(07:42):
on the right side of history.
When enough people engage in peacefulcivil disobedience together, when the
police can't stop us all, it becomes apolitical problem instead.
And so politicians are forced to finallylisten
to our demands and engage with us.
I've been involved in variousenvironmental groups throughout my life,
(08:05):
but I truly believe that Rising Tide hasall the ingredients to actually win our
campaign.
If we build a mass movement of ordinarypeople by learning from these historical
movements and using mass movementdynamics, transformative change becomes
possible.
Engaging in this act of civil disobediencewas probably the most empowering thing
(08:27):
that I've ever done.
And the reason it felt that way ratherthan scary or oppressive was the fact that
it was colourful.
It was targeted directly at the coalindustry, not disrupting ordinary people
going about their day.
And most importantly, that we weresupported by over a hundred people
cheering us on from the other side of thefence.
(08:49):
And so through our diversity, we showedthat we are community members who are
working together to stand up
to the injustices when not just a bunch ofradicals.
So on that note, I just wanted to lend myperspective on the theme of tonight's
lecture.
As a young climate activist, something I'mquite used to hearing from older
(09:10):
generations is that you're so inspiring,your generation is gonna fix things.
And I absolutely know that this is comingfrom a good place.
They wanna show it support orencouragement.
But what I feel...
when I hear this is not necessarilyencouragement, but a sense of burden.
(09:31):
It might be the reality of the situationwe're in now, but it shouldn't be up to my
generation.
And I'm angry that the people that weelect to solve these challenges aren't
doing enough.
We don't have time to wait until mygeneration's in positions of power.
And I feel a sense of responsibility to doeverything in my power to fix a mess that
(09:53):
I didn't create.
So what I want to know is whether you'lljoin me in sharing that responsibility.
Will you be one of the ones that standbeside me on the train or cheer me on from
the other side of the fence?
So to the young people and everyone in theroom, I say get active, get empowered.
It truly is the best way to counteract ourfear.
(10:14):
As climate scientist Lesley Hughes told usat a Rising Tide event last year, hope is
a strategy, not just an emotion.
And to the older people in the room, Iwant to ask
that when you talk to young activists oryoung people in general, you don't just
tell them that they're inspiring, tellthem what they inspired you to do.
(10:35):
Say to them that you're doing great workand how can I use my position and life
experience to join you?
Because I can guarantee that you cancontribute in some way.
And this is a fight for all of us.
And so having your skills and yourpresence in our movement is the only way
that we're gonna win this fight.
So now it's my honor to introduce Dr.
(10:58):
Leslie Cannold.
Leslie is an Associate Professor of Ethicsand Impact at Cranlana Center for Ethical
Leadership.
She's a writer, ethicist, educator, andadvocate with a master of bioethics and a
PhD in social research.
And in 2022, she published an article forCrikey Magazine titled, Saving the Planet.
(11:20):
My generation must do more to supportyoung climate activists, which is the
theme for tonight's lecture.
So over to you, Leslie.
Thank you.
That was going to be a really hard act tofollow.
So indeed, my topic today is that I'mgoing to talk, I'm going to raise the
(11:42):
question and make the argument essentiallythat if we aren't willing to go to jail in
defense of our principles, we shouldsupport activists who are.
So I'm going to start by telling you aboutmy own experience.
Two years ago, right after the seeminglyendless cycle of lockdowns in Melbourne
ended, I did it.
I put my name on a radical climateactivist mailing list so I could attend
(12:05):
all the coming rallies in the city thatdidn't conflict with my new role at the
Conlana Center for Ethical Leadership.
The question really though is what took meso long.
In fact, I'd arrived at the same point ofanxiety, disgust, indignation and
exasperation in January of 2019.
when bushfires raged across the country,disrupting my husband's and my precious
(12:28):
escape from our Elwood apartment to take athree -day holiday break.
In fact, like much of the country, wespent it out running the catastrophic
Black Summer bushfires, one of the mostintense and catastrophic fire seasons this
country has ever experienced.
It burned an estimated 24 .3 millionhectares, over 3 ,000 buildings, the vast
(12:49):
majority of which were homes, and killedat least 34 people directly.
and 400 more from the toxic effects ofbushfire smoke.
So the Black Summer bushfires didn'temerge from nowhere, nor were they due to
the natural variability of weatherpatterns in a country known for its cycles
of fire, drought, and flood.
Instead, thanks to a new field of climatescience research called extreme event
(13:13):
attribution, we now know the hottest anddriest conditions on record seen in
Australia in 2019, drought, temperaturerecords, and heat waves.
increased fuel loads, fuel dryness, fireweather, and the lightning strikes that
increase both the number and intensity ofdevastating bushfires.
This includes the one that had begunactually six months earlier in 2019 in
(13:38):
Queensland, before peaking during thesummer months when Australians were out
and about with friends and family tryingto have a holiday.
Indeed, I remember talking to my husbandin the kitchen after we'd returned from
this less than relaxing holiday andsaying,
we can't stay on the sidelines anymore.
From now on, if there's a climate protestwe can attend, we must attend it." He'd
(14:00):
agreed.
But then COVID hit, and our attention washijacked by the more imminent threat to
life and limb and the more immediate moralobligation to stay off the street and
indoors to stop the virus spreading.
But since 2022, when most of us emergedfully vaccinated to start life on the
outside again,
The time has come to refocus on the crisisfacing the planet and the rightness of the
(14:25):
claim made by three generations of youth,including my own 20 -somethings, that the
future is not ours to ruin.
Yet my generation and the considerablylarger one preceding mine, that of the
Baby Boomers, continues to ruin it inthree distinct ways.
(14:45):
Firstly,
through the strategy seen on the politicalright of denialism, the manufacture of
doubt and the seemingly endlesspoliticization of the climate issue.
Secondly, by refusing to meaningfullyregulate the internet in ways that prevent
climate lies racing halfway around theworld before the truth about the dire
state of the planet has time to get itsboots on.
(15:08):
And thirdly, by passing laws that areunduly harsh to civil disobedience.
and to brave citizens taking hugeindividual risks to raise the profile of
their ethical concerns about the adequacyof government action.
So I want to discuss each of these in turnbefore ending with a discussion of what
each one of us here can do and perhapseven organize to do collectively to compel
(15:31):
the government of the day to actdiligently, urgently and efficiently to
play our part in solving the collectiveaction problem of climate change.
So let's start with playing on fear andmanufacturing doubt.
It feels critical to me to not allow thegenerations leading the institutions
empowered to take urgent action on climateoff the hook.
(15:57):
I say this because as a member of one ofthose generations, I'm Gen X.
I remember the warnings issued byscientists during the 1980s that if we
acted to halt dangerous global heating atthe time,
the action required would have relativelylittle impact on our lives and be
relatively inexpensive.
Do people remember that?
(16:18):
Yeah, I do too.
However, if we waited, they told us, andas the last tragic history of the last 50
years reveals, we would, extremelydisruptive interventions would be required
that would cost a bomb.
In fact, in researching and writing thisspeech, I came to realize that the
warnings I remember in the 1980s when Iwas in my 20s,
(16:40):
were far from the first.
In 1965, the year of my birth, PresidentLyndon Johnson actually delivered a
special message to Congress in which hestated, this generation has altered the
composition of the atmosphere on a globalscale through a steady increase in carbon
dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.
(17:03):
Why didn't we listen?
Indeed,
Why does it seem possible that literallyalmost 60 years later, we are still
expected by the opposition leader, PeterDutton, to become the see and hear no evil
monkeys again?
Why else would he revive the climate warsby abandoning Australia's legislated
(17:23):
interim climate targets and on advice fromTony Abbott, revive the climate wars by
seeking to replace the use of cheaperrenewables, a resource we have in ample
supply,
and to retool the grid in ways alreadywell underway with nuclear power about
which we know and have nothing and that isnot just more expensive and banned in many
(17:45):
parts of our country.
Mostly because we're scared and uncertain.
Emotions that savvy opponents of climateaction like the fossil and now nuclear
lobbies know freezes humans in our tracks.
Lacking strong and consistent leadershipthat can engender the trust and hope that
can lead us to dig deep to achieve acollective goal of lowering our carbon
(18:07):
footprint, fear and uncertainty achievethe precise opposite.
They achieve despair, frustration, and asearch for a magic bullet
that essentially makes the cost andinconvenience of transforming our economy
go away, especially at a time when thecost of living crisis is hitting many
Australians hard.
Certainly the all is lost and might aswell give up now vibe was what Dutton was
(18:32):
retelling at his initial press conference.
Acting to meet the target would destroythe economy, he said, and there's no sense
of signing up to targets you don't haveany prospect of achieving.
Hopefully,
this unexpected change of tact is a loserfor the coalition.
Certainly business industry groups whohave already made their plans based on our
(18:54):
legislative targets and want certainty,not more polarizing hijinks, were
extremely critical, as were labor andliberal premiers in whose states the new
nuclear facilities would need to belocated.
But at the very least, Dutton's move madeon advice from the coalition's last
polarizing prince, Tony Abbott,
(19:14):
condemns us to one more electoral cycle ofbackwards and unproductive conversations
about the climate.
This includes having to explain whywhatever fortune some coalition might make
from nuclear, it is neither a realistic oraffordable option for the average
Australian, rather than what we should betalking about, namely the climate
(19:36):
shortcomings of the current government,including the Labour government's failure
to make the hard choices required for usto meet our interim targets
including its back to the future gasstrategy.
But there is another reason that dangerousglobal heating is a hard problem to solve,
not just in Australia, but around theglobe.
(19:57):
The problem is that global heating is acollective action problem, a social
dilemma in which all parties would bebetter off cooperating to stabilize
temperatures at 1 .5 degrees, but any oneparty would benefit from squibbing the
hard work required to do their part.
Indeed, squibbing one's part of thecollective effort and instead free riding
(20:18):
on the benefits of stabilized temperaturesachieved by the hard work of others was
what many in the previous governmentconsistently urged us to do.
Arguing, for instance, that we were such asmall nation, our efforts to reduce
emissions wouldn't make a difference tothe overall project of stabilizing global
temperatures.
And so why should we even try?
(20:40):
In game theoretical language, when I'm
I'm calling squibbing is called defecting,and it is an accepted risk in collective
action problems.
Indeed, it's the key reason they are sohard to solve.
Because the problem with one statedefecting, as the coalition is now urging
us to do by backing out of our 2030targets, is that it puts those who are
(21:01):
pulling for the team feel like fools andchumps.
I mean, imagine how Australians wouldfeel.
having made the sacrifices to ensure ourown compliance with emission targets, only
to discover that the Americans or theGermans were continuing to live the high
life and free riding on the stabilizedglobal temperatures of the future that are
(21:22):
sacrificed, but not theirs made possible.
We'd be, to put it mildly, extremelycheesed off, which is why defecting is
such a problem.
It makes those doing the right thing feellike losers.
It undermines morale and goodwill, fellowfeeling and trust, and can provide the
(21:43):
self -serving cynical and suspiciousmomentum that could cause the world's
fragile effort to cooperate to solve themonstrous problem of climate change to
collapse.
Because in the same way that selflessnessand courage are contagious, selfishness
and cowardice can be contagious too.
(22:05):
So the second problem, regulating arounddisinformation.
It's important to realize that while it isnot the entire problem, the refusal of
successive Australian governments toproperly regulate disinformation and
misinformation on online forums is part ofthe reason we remain stuck in
(22:26):
unproductive, repetitive, and circulardiscussions about a lot of things,
including the climate.
It is no longer the case that social mediacompanies like Facebook and X can't
recognize and limit the spread of climatedisinformation.
They can.
But what the last few years has taught usis that polarization and outrage are good
(22:49):
for business.
And so without regulatory mandates likethose imposed by the European Union, they
won't.
AI has only accelerated this amplificationof fake news about the climate.
and the environment of suspicion anddistrust that allows it to be swallowed
whole.
It's also accelerating the production ofdeep fakes and other false content that
(23:12):
both misinforms populations about what isactually happening in our real and fragile
social and physical world and deceivesthem about the constructive options
available to them to do something aboutit.
Finally, and this is the ultimate goal inmy view, what is going on in cyberspace
right now
undermines the trust we have in oneanother and in institutions required to
(23:36):
mount an effective collective response toclimate change, including the institution
of Australian democracy itself.
And without that trust, those institutionswill collapse.
Because this is a talk about the climate,I won't get on my democracy hobby horse
here.
Other than to say that Australians need toappreciate the scant allegiance, rich and
(23:58):
powerful people the world over.
think Gina Reinhart and the Koch brothershave to a form of governance that dilutes
their power to run the economy and theworld as they see fit.
And that's what democracies do, or atleast that's what they are designed to do
and achieve it when they're functioningproperly, which right now most of them
(24:21):
aren't.
They are designed to break up concentratedeconomic and political power and
distribute it more fairly amongst thepopulation.
Instead, increasing an already dangerouslypolarized electorate through exacerbating
divides on hot button issues likemigration and climate change appears to be
precisely what Dutton and Abbott arewanting to achieve.
(24:44):
This is despite what the 2024 EdelmanTrust Barometer tells us are growing
numbers of Australians who are onto them,though also wrongly attributing
unconscionable attacks, theseunconscionable tactics to both sides.
For instance,
Up to 59 % of Australians believe bothpolitical and business leaders as well as
(25:05):
journalists are, quote, purposefullytrying to mislead them by saying things
they know are false or grossexaggerations.
Such distrust both drives and is evidenceof the polarization that disconnects
Australians from each other and underminesAustralian democracy.
For example, in the 2023 Edelman TrustBarometer, less than one in four, so
(25:29):
25 % or less, Australians were willing tolive in the same neighborhood or work with
those who strongly disagreed with theirpoint of view.
They weren't even willing to help thatperson if they were in need.
Third problem.
(25:49):
So this is about young climate defendersand slap laws.
93 % of young people surveyed byFoundations for Tomorrow said that the
government needs to be doing more onclimate change.
These findings parallel the UNDP'sPeople's Climate Vote, the largest ever
survey of public opinion on climatechange.
It revealed that nearly 70 % of under 18sare most likely to believe compared to
(26:14):
other adults that climate change is aglobal emergency.
In 2021, a global study of 10 ,000 youthfrom 10 countries found that over 50 % of
young people felt sad, anxious, angry,powerless, helpless, and guilty about
climate change, while 45 % said theirfeelings negatively affected their daily
(26:37):
lives.
Yet, according to a report co -authored bythe Human Rights Law Center, Greenpeace,
and the Environmental Defender's Office atthe end of 2021,
State and federal governments in Australiahave introduced a suite of regulatory
measures designed to restrict the climateactivism disproportionately undertaken by
(26:59):
young Australians.
Climate defenders are routinely receivingdisproportionate and excessive penalties
and bail conditions which restrict theirfreedom of association.
Corporations have continued theirhistorical practice of deploying
Australia's legal system against climateactivists through the use of strategic
lawsuits against public participation,called SLAP, which are designed to censor,
(27:25):
intimidate, and silence critics of theirclimate inaction, greenwashing, and
vandalism.
And it is climate vandalism.
The climate enables life as we know it topersist on the only home humans have,
Mother Earth.
It does not belong to those of us alivetoday, but is held in trust by us for
(27:47):
future generations.
We, the current generation, and also thoserecently departed, those of Lyndon
Johnson's era, have the ignominiousdistinction of being the first generation
to violate the sacred duty.
to hand on the planet in at least the samecondition in which past generations handed
(28:08):
it to us.
When we perpetrate and fail to do all inour power to remediate the damage done and
still being done to the climate on ourwatch, we are literally thieving the
future from our young.
Using suppressive legal tactics to chillor punish the protests of our young
(28:28):
against the unjust situation in which theyfind themselves.
Facing a planet of frequent or constantunbearable heat, high intensity bushfires
and catastrophic flooding, if notextinction, should send a chill up the
spine, not just of climate defenders, butof democracy defenders.
(28:48):
For what are these passionate, mostlyyoung people and their institutional
supporters attempting to do, but tomarshal the freedoms to which they are
entitled as citizens of a democracy?
to call attention to a crisis for almost60 years, if we begin counting from the US
president's speech, their electedrepresentatives have chosen to either
(29:09):
ignore or to address in ways woefullyinsufficient to the nature of the crisis.
The ability of citizens to ensure theirrepresentatives hear their concerns by
means of nonviolent protest is ademocratic entitlement.
a means by which to alert politicalleaders, particularly those that refuse to
(29:30):
address the flaws in our electoral fundingsystem that puts them in league with the
powerful economic interests that fundtheir campaigns and give them well -paid
positions when they leave office, thatthey are shirking their obligation not to
serve themselves, they do that prettywell, but to serve the public interest.
Because what could be more in the publicinterest
(29:52):
than ensuring the continued livability ofour shared home on planet Earth.
The willingness of our youth to make thekinds of protests that can't be ignored is
critical at this juncture.
When, as is often the case, these publicprotests violate the law in order to call
attention to the injustice of climatevandalism, locking on to logging machines
(30:14):
or cars that block the Sydney Harbor.
This is law breaking with a purpose.
The purpose is to highlight the injusticeby breaking the law in the light of day so
everyone can see it and to accept thepunishment, even if it's jail, while
hoping the injustice of being jailed fordoing what is right.
(30:35):
In this case, refusing to take the theftof protesting, refusing to take the theft
of the planet.
I don't know what I was trying to saythere.
Lying down something.
We'll rally others to the cause of climatedefense.
We'll forget that sentence.
This is civil disobedience, a sacred partof all healthy democracies.
(30:57):
But when civil disobedience are forced bytheir own government to navigate even
steeper punishments in the hope ofchilling their dissent, so do nothing
politicians won't be exposed and thosethieving humanities future can continue on
their merry way, the rest of thecommunity, that is us, needs to step up
and say,
(31:18):
No.
This is particularly the case when ourfragmented and corrupted media ecosystem
makes it even more difficult for civildisobedience to work as it should, as a
moral corrective to an unresponsivepolitical system.
The way it's supposed to work is that bymaking their public, their protests public
(31:40):
and their arrests seen by the public too,these passionate and committed citizens
have the chance to persuade us, the restof the citizenry.
that the policy or law they are protestingand breaking is so cruel, so unjust or
just plain wrong, that it should berepealed, while at the same time showing
(32:02):
fealty to the right of the government tomake laws and the general obligation of
citizens to accept them.
Which brings us to the question of what weare collectively and individually to do in
the face of this moral outrage.
the moral outrage of our longstandingrefusal to solve the collective action
problem that is climate change, the moraloutrage of making it even harder for the
(32:26):
generations left to suffer the ravages ofthe planets we elders have so callously
left them to protest the continuation ofpolicies that could lead literally to
their extinction.
The following are my initial thoughts onwhat older Australians, younger
generations who are at the vanguard of theenvironmental movement.
fighting for the policy action that willdeliver them and their children a livable
(32:50):
planet.
One, support the Climate Change AmendmentDuty of Care and Intergenerational Equity
Bill 2023.
This bill imposes a statutory duty ondecision makers to consider the likely
impact of decisions that could harm theclimate on the health and wellbeing of
current and future children as theparamount consideration.
(33:14):
and B, not to make a decision that couldharm the climate if the decision poses a
material risk of harm to the health andwellbeing of current and future children
in Australia.
If you Google climate change amendmentduty of care and intergenerational equity
bill, you can find a petition where youcan sign to show your support.
Let's hope it goes somewhere.
(33:37):
Secondly, I believe we should find aneffective way to sponsor a radical
activist.
in the same way some of us used to sponsorindigent children overseas.
The kind of radical activist that we hadup here on the podium that undertakes acts
of civil disobedience as a means to drawattention to the need for urgent climate
(33:58):
action in the face of 60 years of inactionand the terribly hard political and
economic choices that as the expertswarned us, we now have to make.
A radical activist doing what I believein, but don't want to do.
which is a risk, which is risk gettingarrested and spending time and money in
court and in jail.
(34:20):
By sponsoring, I mean drawing materialsupport and public attention to the civil
dissenter to ensure they have thefinancial means to get bail and mount a
defense designed to draw further attentionto the justice of their cause.
Also, and this is just as important, toensure that their acts of civil
disobedience are seen in our fracturedmedia environment by as broad an audience
(34:45):
as possible.
so that those acts have the chance toinspire more Australians to agree that
their cause is just and to join them.
Because again, this is how civildisobedience is meant to work.
Sponsors could follow and make public thejourney of a particular activist, and
should she get caught on the wrong side ofthe law, swarm in to provide the support
(35:08):
required, as well as ensuring her struggleis visible and thereby achieves the
purpose of civil disobedience, which is todraw attention and ultimately overturn
unjust policies and laws.
If a law under which she is being held isalso unjust, sponsors must draw attention
to this too.
I'm envisioning a pairing agency for thispurpose, nothing too complicated, but
(35:31):
perhaps a mustering of names of thosewilling to support and the support they
are able to provide with connections intothe Human Rights Law Center, Greenpeace,
Extinction Rebellion, and of course,Rising Tide.
To my mind, this is the least we eldersand indeed anyone who supports urgent
climate action now can do.
(35:51):
to show our admiration and support for thebrave, most young people taking the risks
required to get it through to our leaders'heads that any action destructive to the
climate can, and from this moment forward,no longer be allowed.
Because I want them to know that we're notall indifferent to the mess we've left
them, but that many of us care deeply andare doing what we can to take
(36:15):
accountability now.
Thank you.
(36:35):
I hope enjoyed this special episode of LawMatters with Catherine Henry Lawyers.
I hope you find something within thesepodcasts to take away and apply in your
life.
You can read more in the notes about pastepisodes and you can also find out more by
checking out the Facebook page for theMargaret Henry Memorial Association.
I'd like to say a big thank you to Dr.
Leslie Cannold and Jasmine Stuart speakingon the night and also to well -known
(36:59):
Hunter journalist and actor FelicityBiggins who did her usual great job of
emceeing the event.
Next month, we'll be back in our usualformat for another episode of Law Matters.
This podcast was produced by Pod and PenProductions.
Popular Podcasts
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!