Like it or lump it: conservatives stuck if states back plan

Pro-coal Coalition MPs say they would have no choice but to support an energy policy if it is endorsed by the states.

Pro-coal: Liberal MP Craig Kelly.

Pro-coal Coalition MPs have ­conceded that they would have no choice but to support an energy policy they believe could be ­substantially flawed if it won ­endorsement from the states and territories in August.

Energy Minister Josh Frydenberg was forced to head off unrest in Coalition ranks after seven MPs expressed concern about ­Malcolm Turnbull’s signature ­energy policy.

The pushback from Coalition MPs came amid rising scepticism from Labor over whether emissions reductions in the electricity sector will go far enough. Bill Shorten said the energy guarantee was “in more trouble than the early settlers”.

The Coalition MPs who expressed concern about the energy policy in the joint partyroom meeting were Tony Abbott, Craig Kelly, Eric Abetz, Andrew Gee, Ian Macdonald, Scott Buchholz and George Christensen. North Sydney MP Trent Zimmerman defended the national energy guarantee. The discussion on ­energy policy took up 25 minutes of a 137-minute partyroom meeting, with some Coalition MPs telling The Australian the debate was cut short because it ran into the start of parliament.

Mr Frydenberg moved to quash dissent by saying it was the Abbott government that had signed up to an accumulative ­approach to emissions reductions in the papers submitted under the Paris agreement. He rejected suggestions that efforts to meet the 26 to 28 per cent reduction on 2005 levels by 2030 could be delayed. Some conservative ­Coalition MPs, including Mr Kelly, believed this “hockey stick” approach to emissions reductions was an option under the energy policy.

Mr Frydenberg warned that the “hockey stick” approach could “make matters worse” by increasing the risk of Australia missing its targets or mandating even higher levels of investment in renewable sources in the final years of the 2020s.

Mr Abbott defended himself in the partyroom by shifting responsibility on to bureaucrats who had advised him at the time, suggesting they had determined the methodology for how Australia’s Paris targets were to be met.

Senator Abetz said the emissions reductions entered into under the Paris agreement were aspirational rather than binding commitments.

Citing documents from 2015, Mr Frydenberg said that, under the Paris agreement, Australia would need to reduce its projected emissions by about 900 million tonnes to hit its 26 to 28 per cent targets. He also told the partyroom that the heads of Tomago, BlueScope and BHP’s domestic operations had all told him they wished to convey to Coalition MPs their support for the energy guarantee.

Mr Kelly, chairman of the Coalition’s backbench committee on energy, yesterday acknowledged there was an obligation on Coalition MPs to pass the energy guarantee if it was approved by the Council of Australian Governments’ energy council meeting in August. He said this justified the push by Coalition MPs to raise any design flaws with the policy before it went to COAG for endorsement.

“Once it goes to COAG — assuming COAG agrees — then any other changes you would have to take back to COAG,” Mr Kelly said. “It would be very hard for the Coalition partyroom to do anything other (than support it), because it would simply all be agreed to.”

One of the key concerns raised in the joint partyroom was over a detail released last Friday that would make the 100 biggest users of electricity — those with a peak load of more than 5MW — accountable for the reliability of supply. Some Coalition MPs questioned whether this would force heavy industries to relocate operations offshore, costing jobs and contributing to higher global emissions.

Mr Buchholz, a Queensland MP, raised concerns about high energy bills. Mr Frydenberg said the three major retailers had recently agreed to lower their prices in a vindication of the government’s policies.