I once heard someone liken the issue of climate change to that of smoking 30 years ago. The vast majority of evidence demonstrated that smoking caused cancer, but there was some evidence (mostly from research funded by tobacco companies) that this was not the case. This is analogous to the current debate over climate change. The vast majority of research shows that human activity, specifically the emission of greenhouse gases, causes climate change; there are a few theories and some evidence (mostly from research funded by major polluters) that this is not the case. The question that we must now ask ourselves is, do we act now on the evidence that we have, or do we wait, and potentially give the world the environmental equivalent of cancer?

The complexity of the issue necessitates moral, economic and social trade offs which  make climate a politically fraught issue. However, each and every person around the world will be affected by a changing climate, and although we do not all contribute equally to the problem, we will all have to shoulder the burden of both mitigating the problem, and adapting to the unavoidable climate change already underway.

Research over the last 20 or so years has shown that we are currently facing an unavoidable rise in global temperatures of 1-2 degrees Celsius by 2100. The international consensus seems to be that countries should work together to restrain global temperature rises to 2-3 degrees to avoid environmental catastrophe and the economic and social consequences of that. To this end, Australia needs to reduce its carbon emissions by 60-90% of that released in 2000 by 2050.

That is a lot of work to be done in a relatively short period of time. It becomes even shorter when we put that number, 40 years, into perspective. In 2050, I will be younger than my mother is now- to me that really drives home the point that climate change is not some distant problem for future generations to deal with- the problems that it poses are immediate and will only intensify in the future. Climate change is our problem to deal with, or to live with the consequences.

Indeed, there is considerable support within the Australian population for immediate and significant action on climate change. According to research recently conducted by Left Right Think Tank, this is especially true for young Australians. Indeed, the research showed that young Australians wanted substantial action on climate change, which aimed to reduce current emissions and fund research into renewable technology, and most were willing to “pay more” if such action was take. The study showed that many young Australians were dissatisfied with the current policies as they are perceived as not doing enough to combat the problem. Respondents also expressed real fears that there would be too much delay in passing legislation that would have a substantial impact, resulting in irreversible damage to the environment.

Despite this, neither of the major political parties seems capable of summoning the will to really act on climate change. Watching the leaders’ debate on Sunday, I couldn’t help but notice the distinct lack of leadership on this issue. Neither Julia Gillard, nor Tony Abbott where ready or willing to lead in the difficult task of setting a cap on carbon and ensuring that we meet that target. On the contrary, the policies that Labor and the Lib/Nationals have offered are smokescreens for their lack of commitment to real action on climate change. Both have stated that they aim to reduce emissions by 5% by 2020, with a possible rise to 15% if there is international commitment to a climate change agreement.

Under Gillard, the Labor Party has taken a massive step back from the Emissions Trading Scheme proposed under Rudd. Instead, Gillard has proposed a “citizen’s assembly” to encourage community consensus on a cap on carbon. For many this flies in the face of the mandate given to Labor at the last election to act on this issue. Labor’s political stasis was further emphasised during the leaders’ debate when Gillard refused to outline what sort of deadline we are on to take action on the issue before it is too late to meet our target of 5% by 2020.

Just as disappointingly, Tony “Climate-Change-is-Crap” Abbott has put forward a policy that does practically nothing to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases emitted by Australian firms. Instead, the Coalition’s policy aims meet targets through measures such as green infrastructure, planting trees and funding incentives to business and industry to reduce emissions if they should so choose. The problem with this plan is that we will eventually have to put a cap on carbon emissions if we are to meet the targets required to keep climate change to a manageable level. Not dealing with current emissions means that we are not dealing with the problem.

The longer that our government delays the implementation of such a scheme the more extreme the action we will need to take when one is implemented. This shows how shallow the climate change policies of the major parties are; rather than creating a policy that allows us to slowly adjust to changes required to mitigate climate change, both parties are creating a situation in which later governments will need to step up and make even more difficult choices to address the challenges that we will inevitably face.

As such, I would suggest to both leaders that they stand up and show some courage on the issue of climate change. We need our leaders to explain to the Australian people that the cost of mitigating climate change will be less if we pay now, as higher costs in the immediate future will reduce costs in the long run. Indeed, it should also be noted that even with significant curbs on our emissions our economy is projected to continue to grow (and not at dissimilar rates to that if we did not act to mitigate climate change). We need our leaders to explain the extreme costs of not acting, both economic and environmental.

Most importantly, we need leaders with moral courage and the integrity to take action now.