“Climate should not be considered a priority above others.” Words are strong. And they vividly remind me of the reasons I left PLR in 2020.
The scandal session
On May 2, 2022, the federal parliament received about thirty scientific experts for a meeting on climate issues. The Swiss authors of recent IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) reports were present and offered a summary of their work.
The idea is excellent. What resulted was truly scandalous.
Only a third of elected officials attended this session. In addition to the conflicts of agendas of some parliamentarians, this low participation is explained by a wide refusal to participate expressed by several elected representatives of the Center, the PLR and the UDC.
The vice president of the PLR ”does not agree that it is a small group that decides the order of priorities of elected politicians”. He states that “climate should not be considered a priority above others”.
the cloth is burning
I’m surprised? Actually.
Inside 1989 In 2019, under the impulse of Petra Gössi, the PLR adopted a liberal-radical environmental and climate policy. The message was clear: the party intends to turn around the climate emergency and give itself the means to respond to it.
As a member of this party, I was delighted to finally see the right awakening. That’s why I dived in with pleasure reading this dish towel paper position. Cold shower.
Excerpts: “State prescriptions, even restrictions, on consumption have no place in a liberal society. However, individual responsibility can play an important role in consumption habits. Better information and greater transparency are necessary and desirable. … It is only if individual accountability and incentives do not lead to the desired results that stronger measures, such as product and commodity restrictions, become necessary. »
Welcome to 1989! A time when individual freedom is lived as an untouchable dogma, to the detriment of collective responsibility. An era where we have time to see if people are responsible enough. 1989? 2019? I believe that PLR itself does not know it.
Reading this document opened my eyes to my inadequacy with the party and paved the way for a more responsible political commitment to environmental issues.
What young people experience
On May 11, Julia Steinberger, a professor at the University of Lausanne and co-author of the latest IPCC report, published a beautiful life lesson that perfectly sums up the inadequacy of current policies in the face of the climate emergency.
The article wisely reports what young people are going through today. While many of them shouted the climate emergency in the streets, we found them almost silent, immersed in a feeling of helplessness. “Only politicians or business leaders can make big changes. … Everyone in power has known about this problem for a long time. And yet nothing happens, nothing changes. »
“Teenagers look up to adults,” she tells us. “They see them as responsible people who guide and protect them. And they see politicians as adults of adults. They are therefore disturbed to see politicians who know what is going on but do not act.
Finally, Julia Steinberger tells us about the gap between a world that manages to mobilize to adapt to a pandemic and the war in Ukraine, but which remains unable to understand the gravity of the situation in the face of the climate emergency.
The adults of adults
“Adults of adults. This is a striking expression, which sums up well what a politician should be. Someone who is even more responsible than the average adult, because educated, because committed to deeply analyzing things and moving society on the issues that matter.
However, when two-thirds of hemicycles abandon ship and claim to free themselves from the climate emergency as the basis for all actions, we have the right to ask ourselves who is the adult and who is the adolescent.
The environment as a first filter
As a Green’liberal, I believe that solutions to the climate crisis will come through innovation and entrepreneurship. I believe that any action that does not comply with the donut principle, either because it exceeds the environmental ceiling or because it does not respect the social floor, has no reason to exist.
There is no need to fear that a company will disappear. For every harmful company we must bring to the exit, others will advantageously replace it. Here we closed a coal plant, there we created a hydroelectric dam. Here we are closing the production of thermal vehicles, there we are developing new forms of smooth mobility. Here we prevent a chemical company from dumping toxic products into our waterways, there we create new processes to produce medicines from natural sources.
The solutions are multiple. You still have to grab them vigorously. Some political parties seem not to understand that in “climate emergency” there is the word “emergency”. In the 2023 election, we would do well to remember this.