Editorial: Let's lead on climate

So the challenge of climate change is akin to that posed by the threat of nuclear war in the declining years of the 20th century. That's according to Finance Minister Michael Cullen, who drew the comparison as the Government unveiled its policy for tackling climate change on Thursday.

As melodramatic as that might seem, Dr Cullen is right in the sense that both are major issues of their day, though clearly there are numerous world leaders who don't have climate change at the top of their priority lists. Terrorism, and a certain war in the Middle East, are occupying the minds of many of the planet's most powerful people.

The comparison falters a little on another front too. While few would have disputed the genuine threat posed by the possibility of nuclear war – with the world's superpowers training their intercontinental ballistic missiles on key enemy targets, ready to be dispatched in a matter of minutes – climate change is a concept about which there is plainly a lower degree of consensus.

To put it bluntly, there are many who aren't convinced that, short of a dramatic reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, we are barreling down the path to inevitable climatic disaster.

It doesn't take a degree in rocket science to understand the effects a missile armed with a nuclear warhead can have, but exactly how global weather systems work is a more difficult issue to get a conclusive handle on.

That said, though, there is ample evidence on our television screens every day that the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events is on the rise. One doesn't have to reach too far back in the memory banks to grab a handful: unprecedented floods in the south of England; the worst drought in living memory in neighbouring Australia, exacerbating the havoc wrought by bushfires; swarms of tornadoes in Taranaki; Hurricane Katrina; "weather bombs" in the Coromandel. The list goes on.

Even given the fact that there is a high degree of disagreement on the precise causes of such extreme events, sitting by and watching it all happen without any attempt at intervention is plainly an irresponsible course of action.

Within the framework of the current scientific understanding of climate change, we have a responsibility to do what we can to try to arrest it, or at least to temper its devastating effects. If that means reducing greenhouse gas emissions, then so be it.

Cynics will undoubtedly suggest that, as with the Kyoto Protocol, which major powers like the United States and Australia refused to ratify, New Zealand's efforts will have no real impact on the global problem. To allow that to dissuade us from tackling the issue on the home front would be a cop-out. Only if we are addressing it here do we have any right to prevail on others to follow the same course.