I thought I'd check how the new Australian government is doing in "casting off the yoke of watermelonism" (to use JEB's phrase), and I'm afraid the new government, as represented by their environment minister, Greg Hunt, is not as AGW sceptical as we might have been led to believe:
"GREG HUNT, ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: Well I do think it is important that we act, and one of the great tragedies of the previous government's system is that in fact our emissions between 2010 and 2020 go up during the period of the carbon tax from 560 to 637 million tonnes. That's why I'm determined that we take real action to actually reduce emissions. So, do we accept the science? Yes. Do we accept the targets? Yes. Do we think that there is a far better way of both taking pressure off households and reducing emissions? Absolutely."
So they accept IPCC science and the idea of CO2 emission cuts being necessary. They are getting rid of the carbon tax, but are spinning that as helping to reduce emissions.
The new government has taken the symbolic step of abolishing Tim Flannery's "Climate Commission", but there appear to be moves afoot to keep this body going, only with it being funded by public donations instead of the taxpayer. I don't think something like that would happen in the UK - two Green quangos providing employment for Green academics in the UK, the Royal Commission on Environmental Pollution and the Sustainable Development Commission (the latter run for many years by Jonathan Porritt), were killed off by the current UK government, and the public did not step forward to keep them going. It fits in with my perception that Australia is a Greener-leaning country than the UK.