Yesterday, federal climate change minister Greg Combet announced that former Australian of the Year Professor Tim Flannery would head up a newly established independent Climate Commission, to provide "an authoritative, independent source of information" on climate change for the Australian community.

The following is the transcript of the press conference with Professor Flannery, following the announcement in Canberra, in which the Professor tells journalists:

– The Commission will not be dealing with issues of belief, but issues of risk management, probabilities and the basics of what the science says about climate change;

– The Commission will be leading a discussion on how the issue of climate change may be addressed, ranging from adaptation through to a price on carbon;

– The Commission's role is not only to put a point of view but to listen to what people in communities have to say and to try and have a proper dialogue;

– That his role will be to make sure that the Commission remains true to the science and objective and engaged;

– That the Commission is aware that the big challenge, globally, is that we have to reign in global emissions to avoid climate dangerous change.

– That locally, it will be very challenging to even effect a 5 per cent reduction below 2000 levels.

– The Commission has a role in asking the scientists who are on the Commission for an explanation and an analysis of what the recent spate of natural disasters mean in terms of climate science.

PROFESSOR FLANNERY:  I’m delighted to take up this challenge. I think it’s a very important and timely one and I think we’ve got a very good group of people together gathered in the Commission to do the job. I hope you’ll understand that we’re only half way through our first meeting, so I can’t say terribly much about the details of our work-plan or, or the business of the Commission.

But we are looking forward, over the next two years, to making sure that we can communicate clearly that the, the basis of climate science to really foster a greater understanding in the Australian community of where the international negotiations are, in terms of addressing the climate problem. And also to lead a discussion around the various options that we have in terms of addressing the issue. That’s our key job, that’s what we hope to do and I look forward very much to, to engaging...

JOURNALIST: What sort of resources have you got behind you?

PROF FLANNERY: I think the budget is in the press release. I think over the next two years it’s in the order of $5 million. 

JOURNALIST: Your mission is not just to communicate the science but also to talk about mechanisms, policy proposals, is that right?

PROF FLANNERY: Well, I don’t think it’s our role to comment on policy, but we’ll certainly be leading a discussion on how this issue may be addressed. And that may range from adaptation issues through to a price on carbon. But it’s a big job there, I think, to just get a broader understanding in the community of the options that are before us.

GREG COMBET: The resources, by the way, are $5.6 million dollars over four years. 

PROF FLANNERY: [In background] Thank you, minister, for that. 

COMBET: And with the secretariat support of the Department of Climate Change.

JOURNALIST: Professor, how will you win over people who don’t believe is real?

PROF FLANNERY: Well, I’m a scientist and I don’t believe anything – we are great sceptics. What we do is act on the balance of probabilities and certainly develop models that help us understand what may happen in future. So, the Commission is not going to be dealing with the issues of belief, we’re going to be dealing with issues of risk management, probabilities and the basics of what the science is, is telling us.

JOURNALIST: So do you communicate that to the general public? Will it be like an advertising campaign, or will it be community engagement or…

PROF FLANNERY: Well, we’re only part way through our first meeting and we haven’t yet developed the work program, but I think I can say we’ll probably have some range of community consultations in the regions. I wish the Commission’d fit into my tinny and I could take it around, but I don’t think that’s going to be the case. But we certainly hope to get out and, and engage with people. Not only to put a point of view but to listen to what people, what they think in the communities and to try and have a proper dialogue.

JOURNALIST: Professor, it seems that this is a bit of an educational role to build up a bit of consensus to what’s actually happening. Some might say you are a bit of a divisive character on, on this issue. Do you think you’re the right person to, to, to take charge of that, that process and, and build that sort of consensus?

PROF FLANNERY: I’m not sure that I’m the right person to answer that question, to be honest
with you, but I’ll do my best in the position to, to make sure that we, we, we remain true to the science and objective and, yeah, and engaged.
 
JOURNALIST: Professor, will this be your only, your only job during this period? And secondly, your personal view on the Government’s target on minus five percent unconditional. Do you think that needs to be higher?
 
PROF FLANNERY: In terms of my jobs, I’ve got a lot of, a lot of different jobs. I serve with the Siemens Sustainability Advisory Board, for example, internationally and on the Prince of Monaco’s Foundation, so I’ll continue doing that. And of course I’m at Macquarie University. But I’m confident I’ll be able to rise to the challenge of doing what’s required for the Commission over the next two years. In terms of targets and so forth, I don’t think this is really an appropriate time for me to be commenting on such things.

But we know that globally we’ve got a big challenge, you know, that we have to reign in global emissions to avoid dangerous change. The science is telling us that 450 parts per million is where we need to aim by mid-century, and no-one is under, underplaying the size of that challenge. And you’ve seen the recent figures the Australian government has produced, just how challenging even a 5 per cent reduction below 2000 levels is going to be.

JOURNALIST: Will you be selling the recent spate, will you be using the recent spate of
natural disasters to sell the climate change message?

PROF FLANNERY: Well, I’m not going to be selling the climate change message. I’m going to be trying to communicate what science, climate science has to tell us about, about what may happen in future and what sort of changes we can expect if we don’t reduce emissions. In terms of these, these recent spate of disasters, I think the Commission has a role in asking our scientists, who are on the Commission, to give us an explanation and an analysis of what they actually mean in terms of climate science. And I’ll be turning to our advisory group and the scientists on the Commission for some information.

JOURNALIST: Do you agree with Garnaut that Australia and the US and Canada are dragging the international negotiations?

PROF FLANNERY: Well, there’s been some work done in the area of how much work, how, how high the ambitions are and what extent people are, for example, putting on a shadow climate price. The Climate Institute’s recently published a paper in that area and it’s clear that some countries are doing quite a lot and others doing not as much. I think that the Climate Institute’s paper, and again I have to defer to our economists for a full analysis on this, but just to give you my understanding of it at the moment, China’s shadow carbon price is something in the range of $8.50, Australia’s is in the range of $2.50. So, you know, we’ll, we’ll be asking for more work and more clarity in that area as we go forward.

JOURNALIST: How should we judge if the Commission is a success? I mean, what’s your success benchmark?

PROF FLANNERY: Geez, that’s a question we’ve been asking ourselves this morning, ‘How do
we measure success in a complex, multi-factor environment where there’s a whole lot of things going on we’re just one element in it?’ We are bending our minds at the moment to doing that and what I can say is that there is a determination on our part to measure our own success. None of us want to waste our time. We all want to see that we’re, we’re making a difference, but we’re yet to really devise the metrics within the system…

JOURNALIST: [inaudible] I think the broader question is success, would you be successful if the Australian people agree with the facts and figures and the information that you’re putting forward and accept that? Is that success?

PROF FLANNERY: Well, how would we measure that? ‘Cause there’s so many factors being
involved there. You know, what, what we need to be able to measure is our impact and what we do, and it’s not an easy, easy proposition as it is many, many factors at play here and we have to devise a proper methodology to allow us to try and measure our impact and make sure that we’re, we’re doing the best job that we can.

JOURNALIST: Professor, what’s your personal view on the, the link between climate change
and the recent natural disasters?
 
PROF FLANNERY: Personal view? I don’t really have a personal view on them. I need
to listen to the science. But the one thing I can say, as a scientist, is that I’ve been involved now for 20 years with this and, and twenty years ago climate scientists were predicting that the frequency of extreme weather events would increase. Now, whether this latest spate actually is statistically significant or not’s something we need to revert back to the scientists on. But we can say…

JOURNALIST: Minister, is the creation of this Commission an acknowledgement of, that people have stopped listening to the government on, on climate change after it said climate change was the ‘greatest moral challenge’ and then dumped the ETS?
 
COMBET: No, is the short answer, obviously. But is does reflect a commitment that the prime minister made in the lead-up to the last election that we recognise that many people the community want to have access to independent, authoritative, properly qualified advice and information about the climate science in particular. What is going on internationally and some of the economic issues that is, as Professor Flannery said, what are some of the responses? What are some of the challenges? And how best to understand them?

So this is a recognition that there is a substantial communications and engagement challenge in this important public policy area and a genuine effort by the government to establish an independent Commission, headed by eminent Australians, including Professor Flannery to lead that engagement task with the community.

JOURNALIST: Professor Flannery, what do you think of the government’s plan to cut some
climate-related programs, like ‘cash for clunkers’ and solar schemes, in order pay for the damage from the floods?

PROF FLANNERY: Look, I don’t really want to comment on, on government policy, but from a
personal perspective, could I just say that I’m happy to pay my levy. I think it’s, you know, it’s going for sorely needed infrastructure in Queensland roads and so forth. And we’ve historically, as Australians, helped each other out in situations like that. So, personally, I’m quite happy, but that’s my personal view, nothing less.

JOURNALIST: In the past you’ve commented on, on government policy though. Is it your position now with the Commission that’s stopping you from publicly, publicly…

PROF FLANNERY: Well, you’re asking me now as Chief Commissioner to comment (on) policy – I just don’t think that’s our role. I think our role is, as I laid out, is to discuss science, discuss where we are internationally, in terms of addressing the issue and, and to discussing options and leading a discussion on options.