This is part two in an explainer series about the important issues in the Victorian election. Read part one here.
In news that frankly surprised no one, October polling revealed most Victorians are alive to the grim realities of the environment’s famously inconvenient truths and expect credible action on climate change.
Since then, and against the backdrop of an altogether depressing COP27, the prospect of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees above pre-industrial levels is now almost certainly destined for defeat. Having breached the point of no return, the challenge now, scientists say, is how to plot a course that averts global warming above 2 degrees — a space uninhabited by humanity since before the last ice age.
Little wonder, then, climate action is set to play a leading role on November 26. Welcome, and buckle up for part two of your Crikey cheat-sheet guide on the Victorian election.
So, what’s the state of play in Victoria?
The government’s most recent figures, released in September, show that by 2020 Victorians had cut their emissions by almost 30% below 2005 levels. This, on its face, sounds impressive, particularly when cast against the government’s formal target of between 15-20%. But as ever, appearances can be deceptive.
In the absence of more ambitious targets, the trend is unlikely to meet the 75% reduction by 2030 the Climate Council has repeatedly flagged as necessary to obviate “dangerous and irreversible” changes to the climate.
Beyond this, research commissioned by the Victorian Forest Alliance, published two weeks ago, revealed native logging in the state was responsible for about 3 million tonnes of carbon emissions in 2021. With native logging only set to be phased out by 2030, there exists a serious risk the industry will release a further 14 million tonnes of carbon emissions in that time.
And while we’re here, let’s not omit reference to the criminalisation of protests on native logging sites by the Labor government, as well as its controversial electrical vehicle tax and bizarre decision to greenlight gas extraction some five kilometres from the Twelve Apostles.
What are the major parties promising?
Labor has pledged a 75-80% cut to Victoria’s emissions by 2035 and to achieve net zero emissions the following decade. This, Premier Dan Andrews claims, will be facilitated in part by Labor’s much-vaunted policy: revival of the State Electricity Commission (SEC).
The first thing to note about this policy idea is that former Liberal premier Jeff Kennett — who dismantled the SEC in the 1990s — hates it. In a truly moving interview with the AFR, he lamented Labor’s energy plan as “ridiculous”, “blooding shocking” and, wait for it, “heartbreaking”. As if to prove he does have a softer side — loosely defined — he then accused Andrews of socialism.
The overriding aim of the newly minted SEC, Andrews says, would be to fast-track the state’s transition to renewable energy by upgrading the grid and replacing the state’s largest coal-fired power plant with wind and solar power projects. These projects would eventually generate about 30% of the state’s electricity and, according to some experts, sound the death knell of coal in the state altogether.
Others predict the policy foreshadows a rocky transition to 65% renewables by 2030, mainly because it fails to take into account the increased pressure that will be brought to bear on the grid as households abandon gas for electricity and EVs gain popularity. These concerns, however, are possibly overstated, if the Andrews government’s seeming reticence to embed climate change as a consideration in local council planning schemes is any guide.
In contrast, the Victorian Greens do have a policy to transition one million households off gas. Their renewables target is also far more ambitious than Andrews’, at 100% by 2030, as is their emissions target of 80% in the same year.
Meanwhile, in answer to Labor’s plans, the Liberal opposition has flagged a $1 billion hydrogen strategy, upgrades to transmission infrastructure and support for a 50% cut in emissions by 2030 — something it says it will legislate if elected. It’s also endorsed net-zero emissions by 2050.
But as laudable as the opposition’s promises are, Matthew Guy’s corresponding pledge to “turbocharge” Victoria’s onshore gas production hangs a hefty question mark over the Liberals’ commitment to climate change action. After all, last we checked, gas is a fossil fuel and therefore a key driver of global warming.
What about the teals and independents?
Hoping to capitalise on the success of the teals at the federal election, at least seven independents are running a strong climate platform across Melbourne’s inner east and bayside suburbs this election, with four sponsored by Simon Holmes à Court’s Climate 200.
Unsurprisingly, the climate policies of these candidates are invariably more ambitious than those of the major parties, not including the Greens, and don’t shy away from the threat posed by global warming.
Bottomline: regardless of which major party secures government, their policies underestimate the pace and severity of climate change. That’s hardly news to most Victorians, so keep an eye on the shake-up the Greens and teals could well deliver this election.
Should the environment be a bigger ticket on the election agenda? Let us know your thoughts by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.
Victoria’s conservatives want governemt of the donor, for the patron, by the parliamentary dummy.
One only has to travel around Victoria to see the variety of renewables being built including wind and solar farms already out there. So how much more room there now is for more is something not being considered by the candidates, except, of course posdibly the Libs and that is why they foolishly want increase gas production – then agsin the gas/fossil fuel lot may be making heavy donations “in the hope libs get in, heaven forbid.
Bravo to the Victorian Greens for planning the complete removal of gas from most Victorian homes. Let’s keep track of the excuses, exceptions, obstructions and equivocation is that get thrown up in their path. When they make any progress towards that goal, let’s hear the other major parties plan to remove gas from all power stations!
Vote Green.