How silencing climate debate has hurt the economy.

"The Science is settled" is a dangerous phrase when it shuts down critical debate on climate and energy policies.

Chris Uhlman, a respected political commentator and journalist, has made this point in a courageous intervention in this debate.

For too long, voicing concerns about the economic impact of renewable energy policies risked being labelled a "climate denier" and facing cancellation.

Uhlman's bold stance in his column in The Weekend Australian highlights the dangers of shutting down legitimate debate, which has led to poorly considered energy policies that have harmed our economy and hurt family budgets through unnecessary cost of living hikes.

He criticises the rush to renewable energy, warning of potential blackouts and economic instability.

The Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) has already issued a "cry for help" regarding energy reliability, a direct consequence of hasty transitions without comprehensive planning.

This aligns with Family First's stance on the need for a balanced approach to reducing emissions, one that doesn't jeopardize economic stability or increase living costs for ordinary Australians.

The insistence that climate change is solely responsible for extreme weather events is another area where Uhlman challenges the status quo.

Citing data from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and CSIRO, he highlights the lack of clear evidence linking specific weather events to human-induced climate change.

“There is plenty of evidence in the IPCC report demonstrating the climate is changing... but there is no clear evidence of human influence on specific events like cyclones and droughts.”

This supports Family First's call for nuanced discussions that consider natural variability and scientific uncertainty.

Family First has consistently argued against the economic damage caused by hasty net zero policies and climate alarmism.

The party emphasizes the importance of a pragmatic approach to reducing emissions that does not sacrifice economic stability or burden families with higher living costs. The rush to renewable energy, without fully considering its economic impacts, has already led to increased energy prices, affecting the cost of living for ordinary Australians.

Moreover, Uhlman echoes Family First's concern about the authoritarian nature of the climate debate.

The insistence on framing any questioning of renewable energy as climate denial is a tactic that undermines healthy scientific debate and policy-making.

Uhlman picks up on something almost completely ignored by the mainstream media which constantly pushes the “climate emergency” and “global boiling” narrative.

That point is that the IPCC itself says, that while it believes humans are contributing to warming, there is no “climate emergency”.

Uhlman writes:

But here is the good news: we are not facing a climate Armageddon. Again, this is not just my view but one shared by British professor Jim Skea, who was appointed chairman of the IPCC last year.

“The world won’t end if it warms by more than 1.5 degrees,” Skea told German weekly magazine Der Spiegel last year. “It will however be a more dangerous world. Countries will struggle with many problems, there will be social tensions.

“And yet this is not an existential threat to humanity. Even with 1.5 degrees of warming, we will not die out.”

Skea worries the zealots are doing their cause a grave disservice. “If you constantly communicate the message that we are all doomed to extinction, then that paralyses people and prevents them from taking the necessary steps to get a grip on climate change,” he said.

Uhlman says that while human activity likely contributes to climate change, this acknowledgment doesn't mean we should be hurting our economy in response.

At Family First, we advocate for maintaining an open discourse where various perspectives on energy policy, including nuclear, can be discussed without fear of being labelled as climate change deniers.

Uhlman’s intervention is a welcome development after years of stifling conformity in the mainstream media.