Net-zero confidence we are heading in correct direction

The eruption of concern in conservative forces about the wisdom and viability of a net-zero target for 2050 points to a prolonged period of instability in opposition ranks and further proof the climate wars as political currency live on. This is not all bad. Opposition is the right place to stress-test different opinions. And the evidence so far from Australia’s decarbonisation experience is that it is proving difficult and expensive, and any progress being made cutting emissions in Australia is being quickly swallowed up by increasing emissions elsewhere, notably China.

There is a strong argument that ambitious targets provide certainty for the high level of investment that is needed by business to take action. But it also must be noted the loudest voices in support of tough action often have a vested financial interest in that being the case.

A commitment to net zero must not be an end in itself. The right to have a different opinion is a fundamental part of democracy and it is something the Coalition should encourage across the full suite of policy areas. Nowhere is this more important than Australia’s climate change response, as well as the need to strengthen the economy and lift productivity. It is merely stating reality that these things are not always aligned. And that is the point. Rising energy costs are a drain on households and business. The federal budget is being called on to subsidise household electricity bills, support renewable energy projects and assist high-energy-use manufacturing enterprises that are vital to the national interest. Critical manufacturing capacity already has been lost.

One danger in the large majority that the Albanese government has been given as a consequence of Australia’s preferential voting system is that it may feel an overinflated sense of mandate. What must be remembered is the fact, in terms of primary votes, Labor was not a first choice for most voters by a large measure.

Those within the Coalition calling for a reconsideration of the pace and nature of climate action can claim some weighty bedfellows. Former British prime minister Tony Blair has called for a major rethink of net-zero policies, arguing that limiting energy consumption and fossil fuel production is “doomed to fail”. The British Conservative Party has joined Reform UK in opposing net-zero emissions by 2050. US President Donald Trump has withdrawn his country from the Paris Agreement and cancelled a host of government subsidies for renewable energy. Meanwhile, the global use of fossil fuels as well as emissions of carbon dioxide continue to grow.

Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s claim that, in calling for a rethink, Nationals politicians Barnaby Joyce and Michael McCormack were “betraying people in rural and regional Australia” who would “pay the price of drought and flood, which will be more common and severe under climate change” is glib. Mr Joyce correctly argues that Nationals support for net zero by 2050 was based on a range of financial trade-offs including productivity-boosting bush infrastructure, none of which has been delivered. The net-zero pushback is not restricted to the Nationals. Liberal divisions in Western Australia and Queensland are calling for net zero by 2050 to be abandoned. Victorian opposition leader Brad Battin has put the state Coalition’s policy on net zero up for review.

The pushback reflects a growing frustration about the cost, progress and impact of what has been happening on the ground. Under pressure to deliver, the Albanese government is likely to turn to more authoritarian measures to get its way. A bigger conversation about where we are heading and what the costs and impact will be is always welcome.