Climate Change Leadership Forum report number: 11

Future direction and structure of the Climate Change Leadership Forum

Briefing for the Climate Change Leadership Forum

Prepared by the Emissions Trading Group
Date: 16 June 2008

Executive Summary:

Prior to the Climate Change Leadership Forum meeting on 28 May 2008 a questionnaire was distributed to the Forum requesting their comments and feedback on a range of issues, such as:

  • Effectiveness of meetings;
  • Private sector involvement in the Climate Change Leadership Forum;
  • The future role for the Climate Change Leadership Forum;
  • If the Forum is to continue then in what capacity?

The following paper summarises the feedback received from the Forum.

1. Should the number of government briefings being produced for the Leadership Forum be minimised to allow greater time for discussion and questions?

Government briefings are important and necessary as they provide a broad and deeper understanding of the issues than many industry representatives, which only see issues from the perspective of their sector.  

Conversely the time given to officials briefings in the past has caused the meetings to feel as if they are controlled by officials. The Forum should be member led, especially at this stage of the legislative process. The brief information items offering updates on the various TAG groups mean that the agenda does not become cluttered with government briefings however the Forum is still kept informed, and are able to ask questions if necessary.

One member noted that perhaps, given the government briefings are important, the meeting be extended to accommodate the time constraints.

2. Should key private sector individuals/industry representatives be invited to Climate Change Leadership Forum meetings as a way of facilitating their involvement and active participation, rather than excluding such representatives?

Most respondents noted that the Forum should be inclusive and seek the involvement and active participation of key private sector and industry representatives. Given the role and purpose of the Forum is to “facilitate communication between the government and the broader community – it is therefore important that key voices are heard, particularly if their views are otherwise not going to be heard.  However, through the Select Committee process most private sector/industry issues have been raised, and any changes to the proposed legislation have been in the interests of the business and the private sector.

Members noted that the Forum’s Chatham House rules were at times restrictive of members discussing and seeking feedback from colleagues in various sectors. By loosening these rules key private sector and industry representatives currently not represented on the Forum could feed comments and views into the Forum through those of their colleagues that are members of the Forum.  

3. If yes, then who, and in what way should we involve them?

If there is a specific aspect of the ETS that would benefit from having broader range of participants or key protagonists involved, then it would be good to focus on designing sessions that could get to the heart of an issue with the key people present. Representatives could also be invited to Cluster Group meetings.

To maintain control during meetings, individuals should be invited by the chair to report on particular issues, additionally, individuals should have to table a report outlining their views and be kept to a time limit so as not to dominate a meeting.   

Conversely, given the size of the Forum currently, bringing in further participants could be unwieldy. Forum members could talk with key individuals one-on-one and then feed their views back into the Forum.

4. How can the Forum encourage private sector actors that represent those with business opportunities to more actively participate? (e.g. the renewable energy sector)

Participation will be encouraged by tangible evidence that the Forum has been influencing the political or regulatory process in a positive way.  Invite key players to attend, or contribute to Forum meetings, and/or cluster group meetings.

Members commented that at previous meetings it would have been beneficial to have a greater number of business and community leaders who could see the business opportunities and the positives of the purposed ETS.

5. How can the Forum encourage private sector actors (who will not receive free allocation of units, but will be significantly affected through taxes and higher costs for themselves, their workers and their customers) to more actively participate?

Invite private sector actors to attend. Agenda items at meetings could be specifically aimed at addressing this aspect and their interests. The key people in the sectors need to be approached and invited to attend.

6. Do you see a role for the Climate Change Leadership Forum beyond the Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill being enacted?

The majority of those that responded to this question outlined the benefits of the Forum to date, and were in favour of the Forum continuing in some capacity. 

Respondents outlined that the benefit of the Forum is that there is no requirement to come to a common agreement on issues, or be a public statement forum. Its value lies in airing the concerns members have, from their various perspectives and hearing others to canvass options for resolving issues without being set to positions or particular views.

Most respondents noted that if the Forum was to continue it would to have a clear purpose. The present purpose would need to be redefined, and its mandate re-specified, as, in its present form the forum would not work. Membership, size, mode of operation etc would need to be reconsidered if the mandate of the Leadership Forum changed.

Conversely, one member noted that the Forum has essentially completed its task and does not have an obvious role beyond the passage of the Bill. Therefore deliberations should come to close. 

7. If so, then in what capacity, and for how long?

Passing the Climate Change (Emissions Trading and Renewable Preference) Bill is not the only issue for the ETS; therefore the Forum has a role to play in the future. Consultation could narrow down to a more specialist group, focused on implementation issues.

Possible future roles for the forum include:

  • Advise on ETS implementation issues. However this is what the TAGs are doing;
  • One off ex-post review of progress with implementation of the ETS in a year (or until other monitoring and assessment processes are in place);
  • Extension of the existing mandate if the timetable for the ETS legislation is extended.
  • A wider climate change policy advice role. With the main focus being international negotiations; however, there is already well established stakeholder consultation channels for this.
  • Business opportunities arising from the ETS (and climate change more generally) could be picked up by GIAB. If the Forum were to focus on this then it would require a different mix of people and a different mode of operation.
  • Advisory capacity to Ministers Climate Change, Finance and the Prime Minister;
  • A wider climate change advisory role, with a focus on mitigation, adaptation and business opportunties