Raphael ThysAnthony Albanese’s government has rebuffed calls to release an Office of National Intelligence (ONI) report on national security threats to Australia posed by climate change.
The Australian government is refusing to release its secret report on how the climate crisis will fuel national security threats and is also refusing to say when it was completed.
The government insists the date, too, is classified. The approach has sparked claims of a “cult of secrecy in Canberra”.
Anthony Albanese ordered the Office of National Intelligence (ONI) last year to investigate national security threats posed by global heating, in line with an election promise.
Former ADF chief calls for release of secret report into security threat posed by climate crisis
Read more
When it notified the United Nations of Australia’s stronger 2030 emissions reduction target, the government trumpeted its commitment to “an urgent climate risk assessment of the implications of climate change for national security”.
So far, however, the government has rebuffed calls to release the assessment – or even a sanitised public version, as it did with the defence strategic review.
In a new response to Senate questions on notice, the prime minister confirmed the ONI’s climate assessment was finalised “within the last 12 months”. But Albanese added: “The specific timing of the assessment board is classified.”
Five other questions from the Greens’ defence spokesperson, David Shoebridge, were answered with an identical response: “The content and judgments of the assessment are classified.”
Shoebridge also asked the direct question: “Will the government make a declassified version of the assessment public? If not, why not?”
Albanese responded that the report “contains classified material” but the government continued to consider the issue.
“Along with the government’s climate statement, tabled in parliament on 1 December 2022, there is already considerable material available in the public domain discussing national security threats from climate change,” he said.
A single page of that 80-page climate statement was devoted to national security, saying global heating would “increasingly exacerbate risks” as “geopolitical tensions mount about how to respond”.
The same statement mentioned the ONI’s work in future tense, saying it “will inform how the government considers climate risk”.
Shoebridge said it was “bizarre that the government won’t even reveal the date the climate risk assessment was completed”.
“When you can’t even get the date of a high-profile, publicly acknowledged report then you know that something’s gone wrong with the cult of secrecy in Canberra,” the NSW senator said.
Sign up to Morning Mail
Free daily newsletter
Our Australian morning briefing breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it matters
Enter your email address
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
The intergenerational report says climate is a ‘profound’ risk to Australia. But the full picture may be even worse
Read more
Shoebridge said transparency was less of a risk to national security than “not dealing with the threat of climate change in the first place”.
The independent ACT senator, David Pocock, said providing a declassified version of reports, including a climate risk assessment, was “not an unreasonable ask” and that some of our closest allies, including the US, had already done so.
“This is something I will continue to pursue.”
Both Pocock and Shoebridge proposed Senate motions to order the government to produce key documents, but the major parties combined to defeat them on 10 August.
Albanese has described the climate crisis as “a direct threat to global security” but has also defended the secrecy.
“We make no apologies for not releasing national security advice, which, appropriately, goes to the national security committee,” he told parliament this month.
“That is a position that we have had for a long period of time, and that will remain the position.”
In 2021, the US intelligence community released a report that warned: “Intensifying physical effects will exacerbate geopolitical flashpoints, particularly after 2030, and key countries and regions will face increasing risks of instability and need for humanitarian assistance.”
I hope you appreciated this article. Before you move on, I was hoping you would consider taking the step of supporting the Guardian’s journalism.
From Elon Musk to Rupert Murdoch, a small number of billionaire owners have a powerful hold on so much of the information that reaches the public about what’s happening in the world. The Guardian is different. We have no billionaire owner or shareholders to consider. Our journalism is produced to serve the public interest – not profit motives.
And we avoid the trap that befalls much US media – the tendency, born of a desire to please all sides, to engage in false equivalence in the name of neutrality. While fairness guides everything we do, we know there is a right and a wrong position in the fight against racism and for reproductive justice. When we report on issues like the climate crisis, we’re not afraid to name who is responsible. And as a global news organization, we’re able to provide a fresh, outsider perspective on US politics – one so often missing from the insular American media bubble.
Around the world, readers can access the Guardian’s paywall-free journalism because of our unique reader-supported model. That’s because of people like you. Our readers keep us independent, beholden to no outside influence and accessible to everyone – whether they can afford to pay for news, or not.
If you can, please consider supporting us just once from $1, or better yet, support us every month with a little more. Thank you.