Backers breathe life into climate body
September 23, 2013 - 11:50PM
The axed Climate Commission is to be relaunched with private funds in a bid to keep information about global warming prominent in the public arena, former head Tim Flannery said.
The decision to create the Australian Climate Council, as the group will be known, was spurred by "a groundswell of support" from across the country, Dr Flannery said.
"We've developed a real reputation for independence and authority in this area, and we just want to continue with that job," he said, before a formal launch planned for Tuesday in Sydney.
"We haven't seen any plans from the government to provide an alternative" to the commission, he said.
The Abbott government made closing the Climate Commission one of its first acts last week. The Coalition also plans to repeal other climate change policies of the Rudd and Gillard governments, such as the carbon price, the Climate Change Authority and the $10 billion Clean Energy Finance Corporation.
The Coalition instead plans a $2.55 billion Direct Action scheme to pay polluters to cut greenhouse gases to meet the bipartisan goal of reducing emissions by at least 5 per cent on 2000 levels by 2020.
Most, if not all, of the six commissioners, will sign up as directors of the new council, with climate scientist Will Steffen and ex-BP head for Australia Gerry Hueston among them. "We'll all be working pro bono at least initially," Dr Flannery said.
The commission's budget was about $5.4 million over four years, a figure that will be considerably smaller in the private revamp, he said. "We've already had some people step up and we've got every chance that this will work," Dr Flannery said, declining to say how much had been raised and from whom ahead of the launch of a drive for donations.
Among those supporting the reboot was retired admiral Chris Barrie. "Frankly, I think the work they have done is fantastic," he said.
"The commission's work was invaluable in taking very complex information and presenting it in ways easily digestible by the community."
bloody good, i'll throw in a few bob, m'self 
FN: "Why don't you just ignore what you don't like seeing?
They had accounts suspended this morning and that's all said to a person who said they were having trouble accessing."
Because FN I like facts, and not unsupported comments, and whilst your post was correct in that the Twitter account was suspended, it came after this earlier comment of yours:
"It seems their sites are being banned."
"banned"?, That is totally wrong, as what happened was a mild/accidental/non malicious equivalent of a DOS attack.
The facts: "The twitter account @climatecouncil had such a rush of followers it was automatically suspended"
@monman12 wrote:FN: "Why don't you just ignore what you don't like seeing?
They had accounts suspended this morning and that's all said to a person who said they were having trouble accessing."
Because FN I like facts, and not unsupported comments, and whilst your post was correct in that the Twitter account was suspended, it came after this earlier comment of yours:
"It seems their sites are being banned."
"banned"?, That is totally wrong, as what happened was a mild/accidental/non malicious equivalent of a DOS attack.
The facts@: "The twitter account @climatecouncil had such a rush of followers it was automatically suspended"
Now you could please explain what is definitive about "seems"?
