The New York summit is critical. Over the past five years, getting world leaders to engage in climate change negotiations has been nigh on impossible. This time it took a personal plea from UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon to get 125 heads of state to go to New York. And even then the top leaders of China and India are not among the attendees, though US President Barack Obama will be there. The problem has been that the disastrous Copenhagen negotiations of 2009, at which efforts to sign a comprehensive global climate treaty fell in a spectacular heap, have long cast a shadow over international diplomacy. Then prime minister Kevin Rudd jetted off to Copenhagen having talked up the prospect of a new deal being signed to save the planet. But he misread the mood, found himself too far out in front of the world's superpowers, and got badly burnt. Now, as in Copenhagen, Australia risks finding itself out of step. But this time it is shaping up to be a laggard.

The global discussions on climate change are in a more positive place than they have been for many years, the result of recent stronger, though imperfect, efforts by China and the US to rein in their greenhouse gas emissions. It would be foolish to believe this guarantees the elusive new global climate deal will be signed off at a meeting in Paris next year, where it is due to be finalised. But China and the US have re-engaged. Meanwhile, Australia is swimming against the tide. For example, the World Bank on Tuesday released a statement signed by 73 countries and about 1000 businesses and investors, in support of pricing carbon. China, Indonesia and Britain were among the signatories. However, the Abbott government has made Australia the first country to repeal a national carbon price. And its replacement policy to cut emissions, the ill-formed Direct Action, languishes in the Senate with little political support.

It leaves Foreign Minister Julie Bishop, who is representing Australia in New York, coming to the talks with no comprehensive plan to cut Australia's emissions under her belt. Nor does she bear any increased ambition to slash Australia's emissions deeper than the meagre targets presently promised. Instead she is lamely offering an Asia-Pacific rainforest conference the government wants to hold in November. It's a nice idea in itself, but little more than a diversion. All this points to a government that sees climate change as an annoying diplomatic distraction, akin to a minor trade dispute, rather than a central tenet of foreign and environment policy. Loading It is a position that belies the seriousness of the problem.