At last, Scott Morrison got his deal. Three days before the prime minister is set to leave for Glasgow, after the fourth meeting of the Nationals party room in a week, his deputy Barnaby Joyce confirmed the junior Coalition partner would support “a process going forward that would go towards the 2050 emissions target” of net zero.
Even Joyce’s confirmation of the Coalition’s shift was cautious and grudging, the coda to a week of very public hand-wringing over the deal, which in turn came after months of senior Nats declaring they would never in hell support net zero.
Joyce refused to make his own position on net zero clear, but reportedly spoke against it at the Nationals party room meeting yesterday. When Morrison goes to Glasgow this week, armed with confirmation that Australia will do the bare minimum to save face on climate in front of its allies, he’ll leave behind an acting prime minister that doesn’t support the government’s intent on climate.
An inevitable deal
That the government had to move toward net zero was always inevitable. It became so when Joe Biden re-entered the Paris accord within hours of his inauguration in January. And it became more so when Morrison dropped a reference to reaching net zero “preferably” by 2050 into his National Press Club address at the start of the year.
Since then, the lurch toward the target has been carefully stage-managed. Every incremental shift in Morrison’s language over the past few months has been reported as a sign that the climate wars are coming to an end.
Similarly, the Nationals’ very performative angst over net zero has a clear message. Despite the party’s capture by fossil-fuel interests, it also holds key electorates in central and north Queensland where the ties to coal are so deep that words like net zero are seen as an existential threat. Just ask Bill Shorten.
By appearing to drag their feet, with Joyce slowly shifting his tone since becoming leader, and people like Matt Canavan posting pictures of the steaks you’ll apparently no longer be allowed to eat, the Nationals are showing those voters they’ve got their back, while slowly acquiescing to the inevitable. For all their public reservations about net zero, and thinly veiled threats from people like George Christensen to cross the floor, the Nationals were never seriously going to really blow up the Coalition, the one thing that gives this party representing a minority of Australians such disproportionate power.
Australia kept in the dark
Beneath the headline of a “deal,” so much of the fine print about what was actually agreed to remains hidden. This morning, Liberal Senator Zed Seselja told Senate Estimates Energy Minister Angus Taylor would use a public interest immunity claim to block an order to produce the government’s modelling on net zero.
Then there are the concessions the government made to get the Nationals on side. It’s long been reported the junior Coalition partner were expecting billions in handouts to fund pet projects in the regions as the cost of their agreement. Yesterday, Joyce refused to name the price of any deal.
“I don’t have to, mate,” he told media.
But Joyce has already “booked in” an extension of inland rail to the port of Gladstone, a pet project that will open up a surge in coal exports. Past thought bubbles include exemptions for farmers and methane emissions. In the last few weeks, Resources Minister Keith Pitt called for a $250 billion government loan facility for the mining sector as his price. Any deal could pave the way for Pitt to return to cabinet. Asked repeatedly in Estimates this morning about the price of the deal with the Nationals, Seselja dug in.
“I don’t accept the premise of your question,” he said.
On top of all that, there’s the question of what the deal actually means. Joyce talks about a goal, while Morrison is framing it as a Nationally Determined Contribution, a promise made to the international community.
Left behind by the world
It’s a sign of how broken our climate debate is in Australia that by the time the Morrison government had finally reached an uneasy peace on net zero, many allies had moved on to more ambitious targets. While the Coalition nearly tore itself apart over 2050, 2030 is what really matters.
Joyce confirmed last week that the 2030 targets wouldn’t improve beyond a 26-28% reduction of 2005 emissions levels. The United Kingdom, United States, European Union and Canada have all adopted greater medium-term targets. The Brits have locked in a 78% of 1990 levels by 2035. Biden wants a target of 50-52% of 2005 levels by 2030.
The Morrison government will likely claim Australia is meeting and beating the current 2030 targets without officially embracing a further commitment. That’s thanks in part to the states, which have all embraced greater climate ambition. Yesterday, NSW Treasurer Matt Kean told ABC’s Insiders the government could reach a medium-term commitment of 35% just by averaging commitments made by the states.
State governments have quietly embraced reality. But acting with more urgency is still politically impossible in Canberra.
Honestly, what is the point of Morrison being PM? What ambitions does he have beyond literally having the job? Should we just promote him to Governor-General so he has a fancy title but no power, because that seems to be what he truly wants.
Otherwise, this is all beyond pathetic. Selling the future short because actually committing to something is politically unviable.
I believe that Long Bay would be a more appropriate location for the climate criminals. Failing that an open cage in the middle of the Simpson Desert
With water sufficient for only 10% of the inmates – let them market decide who has a drink.
And maintain that ratio as they expire.
Do the government have to legally disclose ANYTHING about what they do, to the public? What exactly are the rules? Are they laws, or conventions?
I just can’t remember any other Oz government that has so persistently refused to be forthcoming with perfectly reasonable stuff when asked.
The government decides what is legal, within the constraints of the constitution which has nothing much to say about telling the public anything. The implied right to political communication that the High Court rather controversally discovered lurking under the constitution some time ago might, arguably, have as a corollary a right to know what the government is actually doing (with appropriate safeguards for national security etc.). After all, what use is a right to communicate if you do not have access to things that should be communicated? But I would not bet on it.
Of course it is obvious that voters cannot make proper use of their votes if they don’t know enough to make an informed choice, so keeping such things secret is an assault on one of the basic necessities for our system of government to be healthy. But who cares about that? The parties who run this country are only concerned with their own interests, whatever it takes, not some fancy theory of constitutional propriety and good faith.
Nothing to see here that’s what the present government promotes , miss information works in the government’s favor as they say treat them like mushrooms, maybe the voters may wake up to what a government can get away with when it is allowed to do so, one can only hope so.
Our Constitution is rubbish. The folk who dreamt that one up were bereft of imagination and beholden to Queen Victoria.
I was not saying anything about its merits, but it’s the only federal constitution we’ve got, so not much point commenting about some other one.
The almost total lack of any rights in it makes it quite unusual. I’m not sure whether those responsible for its drafting did not think about rights, were hostile to rights, or had such a sunny opinion of the reliably honourable quality of Australian politicians that they honestly believed it was redundant to include any rights because our representatives always do the decent thing anyway.
Still more remarkable is the clear lack of any great enthusiasm for some constitutional rights among the Australian public.
Give that the government serves us, the Australian public, the costs of which are borne by us, Australian taxpayers, it is completely unreasonable for them to be hiding anything from us. Who they think they are? Despotic dictators?
That’s a description of the relationship between public and government that might be credible in some circumstances, but in our colonial regime it is somewhat modified: the government exists to serve itself and its colonial masters by exploiting the Australian public and taking Australian resources, the costs of which are borne by us, Australian taxpayers, and it is natural for them to choose what to hide from us and what lies to tell us.
After their unexpected win at the last election, I predicted that the coalition then would set about plundering the country. And that is what they are doing and will continue to do unless prevented by a loss at the next election.
A good, old fashioned word – plunder – replete with historic meaning so applicable to the actions of this crew of pirates.
The problem with the zero emissions modelling is that we have almost certainly been lied about it. Hiding this is now a matter not of “public interest” but of the self interest of Morrison and his little gang of incompetents.
Vote Morrison – get Joyce
Vote Morrison – the country gets screwed
Vote Morrison? Get ……!
Sorry Matt Kean, but 35% buy 2030 is clearly inadequate. To meet the 2 deg C limit of Paris our share is 50% by 2030 and net zero by 2045. 1.5 degrees requires 74% by 2030 and net zero by 2035. As for Kean’s 50% reduction target for NSW by 2030, I’ll believe it when I see it. The 8 coal and gas projects his government has approved since 2018 will raise the states emissions by 12% due to the fugitive emissions. Electricity maybe, but mining, agriculture, land clearing and forestry, transport, cement, industry? Really?
Yes its a massive con! No doubt the majority of the ignorant voters will fall for it!
And what is Labor suggesting besides more coal and gas?
In NSW I have no idea, is there even a Labor party there anymore? You wouldn’t know.
In NSW both parties decimated by corrupt conduct (just follow the ICAC hearings of recent, or check the inmates at Silverwater!)
In quintessential Labor style, missing without fail every political opportunity that pops up as they drift along, they’ve failed again to seize the moment and produce specific 2030 emission reduction targets to shame the LNP. What a moment it would have been to do it! They have no idea of how to get into the MSM news, except by way of deliberately over-reported ‘scandals’, which Labor are happy to supply.
As I’ve said here before, there’s keeping your powder dry and there’s stupid. The election is at most six months away. If labor was planning policies which were actually nation building and meaningfully different to the NLP (deliberate acronym), they would be shouting them from the roof tops by now. In the absence of that, I can only assume they’re too scared of announcing because they might get wedged.
A Labor government would be marginally better than an LNP government but not by much. Albo is dull as ditchwater.
I agree, but I’m concerned Albo is making the same mistakes Shorten made.
Wedged whilst having those same policies stolen.
Howard did the same with Hanson – expelled her from the party but beholden to her ideas and followers.
And even those figures are optimistic… I think no matter what we do now barring extreme measures which we know won’t happen, we will or I should say our children and grandchildren will experience two or more degrees warming. Of course the current pollies will be dead or in their dotage and obviously couldn’t care less about their own offspring.
I need to set the record straight here because until recently I was actually working for the NSW public service in the energy, climate change and sustainability branch.
Matt Kean’s energy policy (Electricity Infrastructure Roadmap) is absolutely the real deal and will get us to 50% by 2030 almost on its own. I can confidently say that because it’s fully legislated and I’ve seen the modelling. Every single piece of the framework to get us there is either in place or in the final stages of design. I’ve had the privilege of working with some very, very smart and passionate people on implementing this policy and I have no doubt it’s the best energy policy the country has ever seen.
I can’t really speak to the detail of the Net Zero Plan (as I’m an energy specialist) and you’re probably right about some of the sectors that are poorly dealt with, but it is most definitely a serious policy.
Re: coal and gas projects – NSW’s easily manipulated planning system and the tired senior bureaucrats and overpaid commissioners that make the decisions are to blame, but that’s a whole ‘nother rant.
“Cutting emissions” is now Too Little Too Late. We are set to exceed 2°C, the boundary for extremely dangerous global heating. Former target of <1.5°C has already been breached over the continents. A global ~2°C temperature rise is only masked by the reflective albedo of transient sulphur aerosols.
ADAPTATION needs to be our aim; no effective action has occurred, here or globally, despite us already being past 1.6ºC. It is too late. Instead, in one of its more long-standing evasions, our ruling clique promotes the delusion that we can change within business as usual, plus a technological Magic Pudding that does not yet exist. After all, a covid19 vaccine turned up, promoted as a Nirvana even though relying on it alone requires the deliberate sacrifice of the unvaccinated, while ignoring rapidly declining vaccine efficacy for the rest.
It is clear that we do not comprehend the scale of the changes required. Not surprising given the massive corporate media funding of denial.
Yes. And by refusing to commit to a real target for 2030 this government is saying, in effect, that there’s no need to do anything whatsoever for the next 25 years. None of those shysters will be around then, but no doubt the LNP itself won’t have changed at all, and they’ll think – if still in government – that they can secure their version of ‘net zero’ in the last few years before 2050, more or less by default because the state governments, private enterprise and individual citizens will have been forced by alarming environmental conditions to do something, anything. Meanwhile Australia can go on burning and exporting more coal.