The Nationals spent four hours yesterday in a tense meeting over whether to support a largely inadequate target of net zero emissions by 2050. They reached no agreement. Four hours wasn’t enough time, Deputy Prime Minister Barnaby Joyce said, ignoring the fact the Coalition’s junior partner has been in government for eight years.
Once again, Australia’s climate policy is being held hostage by 21 MPs and senators in the Nationals partyroom who represent a tiny fraction of the country. Any commitment to net zero will come with “tens of billions” extorted by the Nats to the regions. And it’s not even the whole Nationals caucus, either. Its caucus is internally divided on net zero, with the most pro-coal voices in the most pro-coal party continuing to hold the country to ransom.
Here’s a guide to how the partyroom breaks down on that.
The coal fanatics
Queensland LNP Senator Matt Canavan, a former public servant and economist, is the most unequivocally pro-coal voice. He’s adamantly opposed to net zero, calling it “the public policy embodiment of corporate bullshit” and just another “woke obsession”.
Canavan was a key player in Joyce’s return to leadership in June, which was in part driven by a feeling that former deputy prime minister Michael McCormack wasn’t doing enough to push back against the Liberals on climate.
Joining him in the “adamantly opposed” camp is fellow Joyce-backer George Christensen.
The extractors
Most of the Nationals partyroom sits in this group — they’ve been publicly hostile to net zero in the past, but are indicating they may support it at the price of significant concessions to the regions, some of which would involve huge support for emissions-intensive industries.
It’s the exact nature of these concessions which is holding the Coalition back from reaching a consensus on the target. Nationals Senate leader Bridget McKenzie, who hit out at the “vacuousness” of Treasurer Josh Frydenberg over his support for net zero, says she won’t support it unless there is “protection” for the regions.
What might that protection look like? It could come in the form of an immense $250 billion government loan facility for the mining sector, as demanded by Resources Minister Keith Pitt. We’ve already seen one of those handouts to the regions in the form of an inland rail link which will help increase coal exports, and which falls in the electorate of Ken O’Dowd, who also falls in the “anti-net zero except with concessions” camp, along with fellow Queensland MP Llew O’Brien.
Meanwhile, NT Senator Sam McMahon wants nuclear power as a means of reaching net zero.
The backers
We’ve now got a sense of how central the debate over net zero was to the Nationals leadership spill. Soon after losing the leadership, McCormack said he backed Prime Minister Scott Morrison’s stance on net zero.
Darren Chester, a McCormack backer dumped from the ministry by Joyce, is probably the party’s strongest supporter of net zero. Chester recently stopped attending partyroom meetings over tensions with Joyce. He returned to yesterday’s marathon session to plead his case.
Also in favour of net zero is Damian Drum, another Victorian National and McCormack backer and the party’s whip.
The leadership
Joyce has always adamantly opposed net zero, particularly when he was a backbencher. While publicly he’s appeared to ever-so-slightly warm to it, he’s also repeatedly framed the decision as a matter for the partyroom, over which he has no control. But he has hinted that the party doesn’t feel obliged to sort out its position before Morrison lands in Glasgow less than two weeks from now.
“We’re not chained to a script. We have our own party and our own partyroom for a distinct purpose,” Joyce said.
Deputy Leader David Littleproud also takes this view, that whatever the pressure heaped on the Nationals from the media and the Liberals, the party will take as long as it wants to decide.
“We’re pragmatically working through this,” he said.
I hope they suffer at the next elections. However, their red-neck constituents will keep voting for them regardless.
I live in rural Qld and in my electorate the LNP could stand a backwoods ape and win, as long as it had a coalition sticker on it’s body. Many of the people are Trump supporters who fondly remember good old Joh, the bible bashing bastard from Kingaroy. I’m a slightly left of centre person but they consider me a raving communist around here.
Good to hear,stay left of centre mate the alternative? Look at the rabble in the Nationals camp
Geezuz, sounds like Murdoch propaganda network is quite effective out there…what a shame!
Especially since Sky ”News” was slipped into their TV for “free”.
Bet you can have lots of fun with that gerry. Gosh – a real live communist!
Always a shame if they were rational enough to realise that Labor, or perhaps more so the Greens would represent their interests so much better . .. “I’m a farmer, therefore I’m a LNP supporter” without realising they are sh……g in their own nest.
Curious that the electorate of New England that elected one of Australia’s most honest and respected politicians, Tony Windsor will re-Joyce at the next election. There is really no rhyme or reason apart from an absence of another quality candidate and because the electorate sees Joyce as a maverick that sticks it too the city elites in the Liberal Party.
People just do not follow national politics out here and don’t really care about the national interest as a reason to vote against him. Its all about identity as Buckle Bunnies and RM Williams apparel and car seat covers. However I know a few farmers who detest Joyce and the Nationals as they can see nothing he’s done is of any help to them or their families future.
But they have learnt their lesson in New England and won’t be voting independent again any time soon.
Why, that dreadful Windsor fellow took climate change and a FTTP model for the NBN seriously. And worse, he supported that awful Julia ‘ditch the witch’ Gillard. Who knows, if we’d kept him in power we’d probably have a functioning model for both. Disaster!
If the Liberal Party had the courage of their convictions, they would boot the Nationals out of the coalition and run hard against them in every one of their seats as the corrupt bunch of bench-warmers they are. This would pay off immediately in the urban electorates, as well as provoking a set of vicious cat-fights in the National held electorates as, deprived of the benefit of government, the Nationals would have to fight off the PHONs and S&Fs and all the other groupings angling for a share of the votes of those constituencies. At the same time one may be sure that the large corporate sponsors from the resources sector would quickly turn off the tap for their National Party mouthparts since their value as a bunch of irrelevant back benchers would be negligible. Of course this is unlikely to happen because it would require of the Liberal Party that they develop policies…
Good idea BUT the libs would never win government again and of course the nats would be left in the drying mud that they’ve created. The libs are only in bed with the nats for the glory of stuffing Australia and pork barrel long.
Who would the surviving Nats vote for? The ALP? The Greens?
Probably an Aussie version of the ‘Monster raving looney party’.
We should be so lucky!
That party has gained a score of seats of local councils, including Manchester and seem to perform well.
Orders of magnitude better than some of the reprobates on the political catwalk here.
There are good reasons why they should vote for the greens. Unlike every other party they actually have meaningful climate change policies and, something else no other party has, a real affordable housing policy
I’m enough of a realist to know there’s not a chance in the world of the greens getting up. Their campaigning prowess is unfortunately on a par with labor’s, but if more people start voting for them at least the other parties will have to take note.
I was disappointed to see the Grüne vote decline in Germany recently, not least because the other parties are so utterly exhausted and bereft of purpose.
Nice irony that Petra Kelly started the party after her experiences here with the green movement in the 70s.
The Greens’ and Labor’s “campaigning prowess” is somewhat handicapped by hostile media. Try getting any sort of progressive traction in the Lib friendly press.
And don’t wheel out the latest Newscorpse stunt of save the planet. Pass the sickbag.
Joke .What do you get when you scratch a greedy pigs back ? Answer preference votes
The Libs could form a minority government with support of the Nats without having them in the tent. Or PHON, or S&F, whoever took those rural seats. ANd it would deprive the Nats of the things they crave most. Influence. Power. Prestige. Media interest. Ministries. Big White Cars. And above all extra cash. Threatening that would be well worth Morrison’s time. “Off to the cross benches with the lot of you then. Anyone who wants to stay a minister is welcome to defect to the Liberal Party, and must support Net Zero by 2050. No more extra cash. Liberal candidates running in every Nationals seat, and we’ll preference the S&F. No joint senate tickets.
They’d cave in seconds. they are not going to vote with Labor to bring the government down because they’d be voting for their own destruction. And the effect would be long lasting.
Clearly the Libs prefer the expediency of having them inside the tent pissing out, rather than being outside the tent pissing in.
Voting for Labor woold not bring them lasting destrauction. it has never done so in the past – Labor policies have, if anything, helped the farmers.
I have said the same, but Morrispin doesn’t have the guts to try going it alone – he needs their votes
for the numbers even though together they’ve only managed to have a one seat majority. Apart they
would never be in power; and a nicer thing couldn’t happen to two rotten, self-serving parties.
And why would he?
There are as many deniers in the Liberal Party as they are in the Nationals/LNP. The PM is one.
And I doubt the net zero by 2050 would even be a thing for this government if Australia’s climate policies weren’t about to be held up to ridicule by the rest of the world’s developed economies.
Very pleased you are able to express my censured expression. The young who will inherit our mess need leaders not rorters
Damn straight. A true Liberal would want nothing to do with the Nationals or even those who refer to themselves as conservative. It’s time for an electoral demolition of the National Party and here is Qld, the LNP.
Ah, but we live in a world of false liberals…
There are also very few true liberals in the party that calls itself “liberal” to mislead voters.
“it would require of the Liberal Party that they develop policies…”
Which they can’t do, given the current neo-Liberal/neo-Keynesian orthodoxy, which means ANY government – Left or Right – has to go begging to the self-interested private sector to fund government – which is why governments can’t properly fund health age and disability care and tertiary education. . We have a systems problem. See Stephanie Kelton’s best seller: ‘The Deficit Myth’.
Labor of course – beaten at the last election – have abandoned any pretense of increasing funding for these vital pubic service….since no-one wants to pay for them….
Did you mean “develop policies and guts” ?
I beg to differ on one key point. You are continuing to perpetuate the myth that the Nats are holding out for concessions to ‘the regions’. That’s what they say, but I don’t buy that. They are not interested in ordinary residents of regional Australia, or even ordinary farmers. They will extract concessions for the likes of Adani, Reinhardt, Palmer and corporate agribusiness. Wether any of that flows to ordinary people remains to be seen. I would suggest it will not. Regional Australians will be left to pick up the tab on the cost of denial and inaction. Droughts, floods, fires, storms, failing infrastructure, increased burden of desease and shortened lifespans.
Exactly, Frank. Exactly.
Exactly, ‘architecture of influence’ replicating the US Koch Network ‘bill mill’ ALEC, supported by corporate donors to have lobbyists promote preferred policies (or not) to members of Congress.
Described by Sourcewatch as:
‘ALEC’s agenda extends into almost all areas of law. Its bills undermine environmental regulations and deny climate change; support school privatization; undercut health care reform; defund unions and limit their political influence; restrain legislatures’ abilities to raise revenue through taxes; mandate strict election laws that disenfranchise voters; increase incarceration to benefit the private prison industry, among many other issues‘
With the Nats it’s easier as they are inside government and can ‘pressure’ the Libs to support (or not) bills and legislation e.g. delaying climate measures, net zero etc.; often such policy ideas are coincidentally supported by the (Koch linked) IPA.
Corruption comes in many forms – the National Party is one of them
The key thing here that the MSM fails to call out is that the Coalition is a secret Coalition. The Liberal Party forms government with the support of other parties because it is unable to gain a majority of seats in it’s own rite. The liberal Party governs as a minority with 44 seats and is supported in power by two other parties , the Liberal Nationals with 23 seats and the Nationals with 10. The Nationals and Liberals caucus separately, as we are seeing on this issue, and then caucus together in a joint party room. A coalition is by definition a temporary agreement. The coalition do have an agreement however such is their level of secrecy and disdain for our democracy that this agreement is a secret agreement. Sort of like a blind trust..but one that is blind to the people they seek to govern.
The MSM always give legitimacy to the Coalition as if they are a single operating party unit,they are not. This becomes more apparent when an election comes around and Labor will be inevitably asked what they would do if they ended up in a minority government rather asking The Liberals to make a commitment to make their minority government agreement public.
Yep. Coalition Politicians and supporters also continually say that Labor gets into bed with the Greens to win Government, and the MSM never pulls them up on that fallacy. Labor can and does win overnment in its own rite, albeit with the benefit of preferences from the Greens, and Independents. But Labor has never been in Government in any formal Coalition type Government.
Simple, plain fact and yet the lies persist.