MOST WOULD agree that the Greens have much better policies on global warming than the two major parties. But now it seems voters have another choice: The Climate Change Coalition (CCC).

Or at least that is what its leaders would like you to believe.

Headed by ex-broadcaster Patrice Newell and celebrity scientist Dr Karl Kruszelnicki, the CCC certainly has a point when they argue that climate change is "the most urgent and important issue in human history".

But CCC's strategy for dealing with the problem takes us in the wrong direction. Firstly, Patrice Newell asserts that it must be fought on a non-political, cross-class basis: "While we might be divided by ideology, religion, geography, history, class or self interest, we must come together to ensure the survival of our planet…

"The CCC will work with any group, organisation, or individual to form alliances and encourage political creativity. Whatever our differences on other issues, whether we're left wing or right wing or middle of the road, is irrelevant."

Thus, she sees the CCC's role, if elected, as a negotiator between the different parties: "We want to help-as go-betweens, brokers, diplomats, marriage-guidance counsellors."

In practice, this means finding a business-friendly solution to the problem. So Newell argues: "To treat the corporate world as intractably evil is as unhelpful as it's absurd. Much can be done with business on side, next to nothing without it."

Some of the CCC's policies are constructive and some of their candidates have green credentials. But their overall approach is just plain wrong.

Carbon economy

Climate change is partly an issue about the sustainability of capitalist production. The carbon economy is central to global capitalism. The corporate giants that run it have made it clear that they will not wind down an industry that reaps billions in profit.

But CCC is totally confused about this. For example, Dr Karl has struggled to deal with the issue of "clean coal".

Clean coal-in which carbon emissions are literally stored underground-is hugely expensive experimental technology and is at least 20 years away, at best.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to work out that Howard is using the issue to bolster the coal industry. But Dr Karl first argued that clean coal was a "furphy"-then, after being ridiculed in the media, backflipped and said it was a "short term" solution.

The CCC's approach of adapting to suit business interests can mean only one thing in the long run: no serious change.

Climate change is also a class issue. It is the world's poor who will bear the brunt of catastrophic climate events.

Even in richer countries, the rich and powerful will do everything they can to force working people to pick up the bill-through higher energy prices, taxes on fuel, etc.

The answers don't lie in fiddling with individual consumption habits-it lies in phasing out the production of emissions from fossil fuels burning.

Finally, the CCC argues that climate change "transcends all other issues-from water to national security."

The result of this approach is a peculiar form of popular frontism-everyone, no matter who you are, drop what you're doing and work with us. This leads to them posing as the conservative alternative to the Greens: "A great many conservatives won't ever vote for the Greens because of concerns about policies on social issues� perceptions of 'extremism' �seem to have given the Greens a 'glass ceiling'."

This is a rotten form of politics. The implication is that we need to compromise on things like war, racism, privatisation, etc in order to achieve progress on climate change.

This is reflected in the CCC's preference arrangements: a deal in Queensland with Pauline Hanson and preference flows, in most states, to Family First ahead of Labor and the Greens.

The CCC's treatment of climate change as a lowest-common denominator single issue is a mistake. Tackling global warming means building a radical movement that targets the system and connects up with the struggles of other movements for change.

Their election campaign as the party of climate change might seem like a useful way of educating the public-but don't be conned. To take a stand over global warming, you should vote 1 Greens and 2 Labor on November 24-and, more importantly, get involved in the day-to-day struggles for real social change afterwards.

By Sarah Thorne