2035: Labor's battle over crucial emissions reduction target
Anthony Albanese has a big decision on his hands: to name Labor’s 2035 emissions reduction target. Can he resist the pressure to name an unrealistic figure?
All eyes were on Nationals rogue Barnaby Joyce at the start of this week as he worked to roll back the opposition’s support for net zero emissions by 2050, but the real energy debate was happening within the Labor Party, behind closed doors.
Arriving much sooner than 2050 is the interim 2035 emissions target, which is due to be decided by the government within weeks.
The impending decision has sparked debate behind closed doors within Labor – with environmentalist MPs worried the teal independents, which have ripped through the Liberal’s former inner-city strongholds, will now turn their attention to Anthony Albanese’s party.
A loud and vocal section on the left of the party is pushing for an ambitious climate target – with members on Labor’s right scared that could result in public backlash and damage to the economy.
Labor’s current target for 2030 is a 43 per cent emissions reduction on 2005 levels and Labor has legislated the goal of reaching net zero by 2050.
Several state Labor governments have been first movers on 2035 targets with NSW setting a target of 70 per cent.
The 70 per cent target adopted by NSW is seen by those on the left of federal Labor as the minimum target the Prime Minister could choose.
One Labor MP – a higher target agitator – told The Saturday Telegraph the government needed to send a clear signal on climate change or risk being “next on Climate 200’s menu”.
“We have to get environment and climate right,” the MP said.
Caught between the environmentalists on the left and those on the right worried about the economic ramifications of higher targets – MPs stress the 2035 goal Mr Albanese chooses must strike the right “balance.”
Labor MPs on the right are worried that going too hard too fast with a 2035 target will damage the economy as well as much of their traditional ALP blue collar working base.
“Elements of the right and elements of the government say let’s find the balance – clearly we need to do more to protect the environment from climate change, but we don’t want to be sacrificing jobs,” they said.
Several Labor figures confirmed there is jostling going on behind closed-doors over what target will be agreed to. “There are branches in inner cities who want to do more – that’s reflected in what (their MPs) say,” one Labor source said.
Another Labor MP from the right said the point of protecting – and creating – local jobs had been raised in debate over where the target will land.
“(Energy Minister Chris) Bowen said it’s got to be ambitious but achievable,” they said.
“It’s no use being ambitious if it’s not achievable – (the point has been made the target needs to) protect and create local jobs.”
Labor already came close to losing Josh Wilson’s West Australian seat of Fremantle and David Smith’s ACT seat of Bean in the federal election, thanks to fierce campaigns by teal MPs.
Mr Wilson, a member of the left has long been an advocate for climate change action, he’s been joined by newcomers like Bennelong MP Jerome Laxale.
Sources said there are likely more of the new incoming class that will want to see Labor do more.
The Clean Energy Summit held in Sydney this week prompted four Labor MPs – Mr Laxale, Macarthur MP Mike Freelander, Senator Michelle Ananda-Rajah and Chisholm MP Carina Carland – to call for the government to be as ambitious as practically possible on the target
Wentworth teal MP Allegra Spender would not be drawn on whether Labor’s inner-city seats are the next to be in the grassroot Climate 200 movement’s sights.
However, Ms Spender, who stood alongside fellow independents and climate groups in Canberra earlier this week calling for a 75 per cent cut by 2035, claimed inaction on climate change could be electorally damaging for Labor.
“In the community I represent and many other inner-city communities, there is disappointment that Labor hasn’t been ambitious enough on climate and they’ve been too scared of the Coalition (attacking them) … if Labor is not ambitious enough, further disappointing those communities will be damaging,” she said. Labor figures pushing for higher targets are in competition with industry – with the economically-vital mining industry expressing concerns over Labor raising targets again.
NSW Minerals Council chief executive Stephen Galilee is one vocal opposition, issuing a warning over setting ever-increasing thresholds to meet.
“While Australia contributes just over one per cent of global emissions and around four per cent of global coal production, we are doing our bit compared to the rest of the world, with NSW emissions on track for an almost 50 per cent reduction by 2030, and our mining emissions falling faster than the state average,” Mr Galilee said.
“Setting ever higher emissions reductions targets risks damaging our economy while contributing virtually nothing to global emissions reductions efforts.”
The group within Labor set to mount a major push for massive targets is LEAN – the Labor Environmental Action Network – which before the election called for a target of 70 per cent or more.
LEAN, which has the largest membership base within Labor, declined to comment when contacted for this article, but their figure falls within a 65 per cent to 75 per cent range previously mooted by the Climate Change Authority.
That authority – chaired by former NSW Liberal Treasurer Matt Kean – will make a recommendation on the 2035 target to Mr Bowen, who will then take it to cabinet.
The 2035 target is due to be handed down by September, with Mr Albanese wanting the figure in hand before he faces any further international summits.
Mr Albanese has already expressed desires for Australia to bid for Adelaide to co-host the UN COP31 climate-change summit next year.
The internal push within the Labor left to drag the emissions reduction target higher comes amid a midweek slap by the UN climate change executive secretary Simon Stiell – who claimed that fruit and veg could be a “once-a-year-treat” if climate change was not tackled quick enough.
That was on his way to demanding Australia not settle for a “bog-standard” emissions target.
“Mega-droughts (will make) fresh fruit and veg a once-a-year treat. In total, the country could face a $6.8 trillion GDP loss by 2050,” Mr Stiell said on Monday at a Sydney Smart Energy Council event.
High-profile figures within the Nationals are already taking advantage of the moment – with former deputy prime minister Mr Joyce standing out the front of Parliament House this week, flanked by a contingent of Coalition colleagues, announcing he would introduce his private member’s Bill to repeal the commitment to hit net zero emissions by 2050.
Many within Labor were gleeful over Mr Joyce’s announcement, which heaped pressure on Liberal leader Sussan Ley and Nationals leader David Littleproud.
While the Coalition figures out their true north on energy and emissions, it is s unlikely to mount a serious threat in that key policy area to Labor.
But those in Labor celebrating their opponents being at odds – again – need to keep hubris in mind; the same topic could hit them just as hard within weeks.
The question is, can the Prime Minister set a target that keeps everyone happy?
11 minutes of hell: How the horror Bondi attack unfolded
