Dutton’s policy of astonishing weakness risks a Liberal wasteland

The headlines took Liberals by surprise when Peter Dutton decided to go hard on climate change at the end of last week. Federal MPs had flown home from Canberra after an intense fortnight in parliament, mostly fought on migration and the cost of living, and had no hint from the opposition leader that he wanted to change the subject.

So the combative words from the leader, who rubbished the idea of a 2030 target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, threw the Liberals into a fight with no preparation and no plan. When MPs phoned each other to make sense of the new stance, one question emerged: “Was there a party room meeting that we missed?”

Illustration: Simon LetchCredit:

One week later, the Liberals have put a premium on unity so they can avoid the damaging appearance of public dispute about their climate policy. Dutton has a relatively disciplined party room and had public support from frontbenchers who painted his comments as simple confirmation that they opposed the government’s target.

The reality, however, is that Dutton has made a captain’s call. In the spirit of Tony Abbott, who famously said it was better to seek forgiveness than ask permission, the Liberal leader has decided to go to the election without a 2030 target. His stated position is that the goal would be set after the election to replace Labor’s target of 43 per cent.

This is a policy of astonishing weakness. It tells Australians that the Coalition does not know what to do about the 2030 target and can only figure it out if it is elected to government. It asks voters to sign a blank cheque. It promises action on climate down the track, with nuclear power stations helping to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050, but it leaves a vacuum in the policy for the next decade.

That makes it a huge risk as well. There is a boldness in the way Dutton assumes he does not need to level with voters about his near-term target and can win people over to nuclear power.

Dutton seems utterly confident he has a winning argument – and why not, when this week’s Newspoll tells him the Liberal primary vote is up and the race against Labor is now 50:50 in two-party terms. His conservative base wants to believe nuclear power is the answer, so he receives constant feedback to go harder.

But he is not the first opposition leader to respond to stronger polling with bolder policy. Bill Shorten added big ideas to the Labor agenda in 2019 when he gained ground against Scott Morrison, and the party faithful believed the crackdowns on negative gearing, capital gains tax and franking credits helped justify their lead in the polls. Until the Coalition freight train hit the party at the election.

This was the irony of the headline last Saturday when Dutton went public with his climate stance. “Dutton puts a target on ALP’s back,” said the front page of The Weekend Australian. In truth, the opposition leader made himself a target. Yes, the government is accountable for its climate policy, but Dutton became the story.

The teal independents mobilised, in a sure sign they see it as a winner in holding the blue-ribbon seats they have won from the Liberals. MPs such as Monique Ryan in Kooyong, Allegra Spender in Wentworth and Zoe Daniel in Goldstein wanted to talk about it because it takes them back to the policy that worked for them at the last election.

The campaign group that backed the teals, Climate 200, says it received more donations in the days after Dutton revived the climate fight. The group’s convener, Simon Holmes a Court, says it funded 23 campaigns at the last election and aims to support about 30 at the next. “We’re not trying to build a mass teal movement, we are supporting the growing community independents movement,” he says. Some will identify as teal, many will not.

So the essential calculation is whether Dutton has gained ground in key electorates with his new approach on climate. It may work in the Labor electorates he wants to win, such as Gilmore on the NSW South Coast, Dobell and Robertson on the NSW Central Coast, Blair in Queensland and Corangamite in Victoria. Perhaps it helps the Liberals in the West Australian seats they lost to Labor at the last election.

What the policy does not do, however, is win back the voters who fled to the crossbench. It does not win back Goldstein or Kooyong in Melbourne, nor Mackellar, North Sydney, Warringah or Wentworth in Sydney. It will not dislodge Helen Haines in Indi.

And it can make the Liberal campaigns far more difficult in other urban seats – such as Menzies in Melbourne, held by Keith Wolahan for the Liberals but now more marginal under the draft redistribution. The same applies to Deakin, held by Michael Sukkar and a clear target for Labor. Elsewhere in Melbourne, the Liberals lost Aston last year and failed to recover Dunkley earlier this year. They need to recover those seats and win back Chisholm, also, but their climate policy is a potential barrier.

While the calculations in Sydney depend on the NSW redistribution, it is hard to see the climate policy helping to defeat Labor in Reid, in the inner west, or in Bennelong, across the harbour. And what of Macquarie, held by Labor after one of the tightest contests at the last election? Voters in the Blue Mountains are unlikely to rally to Dutton’s new message.

One of the Liberal Party’s proven winners, Bridget Archer, the first MP in two decades to hold the Tasmanian seat of Bass for more than one term, says in public what others will only admit in private about the 2030 stance. “I don’t know what seats we are hoping to win with that position,” she says.

This explains why some Liberals see the climate policy as a sign of Dutton’s two-term strategy to retake power. The Coalition has 55 seats, Labor has 78, and Dutton needs 21 seats to form majority government. If Dutton aspires to winning power at the next election, he needs a more compelling plan to defeat the teals in Sydney and Melbourne and regain city seats at Labor’s expense. There was no sign of that plan this week.

Instead, the new approach to climate looks like a way to cement Dutton’s hold on conservative supporters and protect his position as Liberal leader, while going after Labor in key seats. In other words, to push Albanese into minority government at the coming election in the hope of driving him out of power at the next.

In this scenario, Dutton would force Albanese to rely on the crossbench during the next term of parliament, so the Liberals could blame the teals for keeping the left in office. Dutton would survive six years as leader to have a second attempt at the prime minister’s job in 2028. This is not merely press gallery conjecture. It is a theory within the Liberal Party, although it raises a huge question: how would the Liberals charge to victory in 2028 if they are left with a wasteland in metropolitan Sydney and Melbourne in 2025?

Some Liberals talk of a two-term strategy because everyone can see the mountain ahead of Dutton. We may look back at this week as a point where he lost his footing on the climb.

David Crowe is chief political correspondent.

Cut through the noise of federal politics with news, views and expert analysis. Subscribers can sign up to our weekly Inside Politics newsletter.