The complex and baffling approach to emissions reduction known as ‘RUDD’ has recently come under fire. RUDD, an acronym so convoluted that nobody can now remember what it once stood for, was initially seen as a bold and progressive means of reducing emissions but has since struggled to find answers to its vigorous opponents. RUDD was originally referred to as “avoided procrastination” but this has gradually become less relevant as RUDD has lost its credibility amongst climate activists and policy-makers and has failed to deliver any concrete Australian action on climate change. RUDD has struggled to convince its critics in a number of areas including its benefits to local people, the permanence of its effects and whether others will follow its lead in taking such action.
In a lithe turn of political spin, RUDD supporters have since rebranded as RUDD+ in the hope that this more balanced, conciliatory version may win over opponents and rescue a political compromise. Opponents remain nonplussed. “I don’t buy this at all; RUDD should get no credit for this. It’s shameless rebranding and vacuous electioneering of the sort more suited to the British Conservative Party than a robust climate change policy”.
Despite intimate involvement with the Kyoto Protocol, it is not clear how RUDD will emerge from the latest political setback. Some commentators think that RUDD is failing to see the wood for the trees and will perhaps abandon the angle on climate change altogether and focus instead on principles of (self) conservation.