‘We want to resolve the Neg but it can’t all be one way,’ Victorian energy minister says as Frydenberg stands ground
The commonwealth and the states remain deadlocked ahead of Friday’s
first critical meeting on the national energy guarantee, with Victoria
declaring the energy minister, Josh Frydenberg, “will be confronted with a need to negotiate”.
Ahead of Friday’s meeting of the Coag energy council in Sydney, Frydenberg has signalled he could compromise on the timing of a review of the Neg’s controversial emissions reduction target – but the Victorian energy minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, has declared that concession will not be enough to get the Labor states over the line.
“We want to resolve the Neg but it can’t all be one way,” D’Ambrosio told Guardian Australia. “I would hope there is enough maturity around the Coag energy council table to see the conditions we have put forward are not unreasonable, and that we can move forward.
“We want to continue the conversation and the negotiation. There is opportunity and a way forward, and it is up to Josh Frydenberg to determine which way he wants to move forward”. “He can either negotiate with the states on Friday and resolve this next week after his party room – or he can choose to run a concurrent process of introducing his legislation into the federal parliament, and seek and obtain a negotiated legislated outcome which can then be brought back to the energy council, and this issue resolved once and for all.
“Either way, Frydenberg will be confronted with a need to negotiate. It will either be with the states around the energy council table, or with the federal parliament.”
Next Tuesday Frydenberg will ask his colleagues to approve federal legislation giving effect to the emissions reduction target of 26% by 2030 – but some internal Neg opponents, including the former prime minister Tony Abbott, are digging in their heels.
It looks likely that Friday’s meeting will not deliver the definitive breakthrough Frydenberg wanted but the jurisdictions will continue talking, rather than junk the policy altogether. D’Ambrosio said her state had no intention of walking away from the negotiating table.
At a stakeholder meeting ahead of the Sydney talks, the ACT’s climate change minister, Shane Rattenbury, also declared the commonwealth would need to compromise over the next 24 hours if it wanted to secure a breakthrough on the policy. Rattenbury said he had made “concrete suggestions about ways through”.
Sources at the stakeholder meeting on Thursday afternoon said the major interest groups in attendance, which ranged from the Business Council of Australia to the Australian Council of Social Service, expressed a strong view that governments should strike a deal on the policy rather than torpedo it.
Victoria this week toughened its position in the lead-up to Friday’s meeting, declaring emissions reduction targets can be only allowed to increase over time “and never go backwards”; future targets will need to be set by regulation; the targets will need to be set every three years, three years in advance; and the emissions registry be made fully transparent.
Guardian Australia revealed on Wednesday that Victoria had also suggested that Frydenberg delay a final state sign-off on the Neg until after the federal parliament has legislated the scheme’s emissions target.
Frydenberg branded a number of those demands “nonsensical”. He said they constituted “overreach” but the federal minister signalled he could move on the timing of a review of the emissions reduction target, which is currently proposed for 2024.
The commonwealth has signalled privately it might be prepared to move the review forward to 2023, which would be the third year of the scheme. Rattenbury has proposed having the review once emissions in the electricity market fall by 24%, which on current projections would be very early in the scheme.
He told Frydenberg earlier this week he could consider agreeing to a position where the target is reviewed no later than 2024 “and that the final design of the Neg includes a mechanism to initiate a review immediately should electricity sector emissions reach a 24% reduction on 2005 levels”.
Frydenberg is refusing to countenance allowing the target to be set in regulation rather than legislation, or putting in place a provision ensuring the target cannot be made lower than the current target of 26%.
The states are pushing for the target to be set by regulation rather than legislation to make it easier for future governments to scale up. A number of experts have pointed out that a target of 26% will not allow Australia to meet its commitments under the Paris climate agreement.
But Frydenberg has declared: “Victoria’s position doesn’t make sense. You don’t want to bind parliaments and government like that.”
Asked whether Frydenberg offering to hold the review of the emissions reduction target earlier than planned would be sufficient to get Victoria to drop its other demands, D’Ambrosio replied: “No”.
Ahead of Friday’s meeting of the Coag energy council in Sydney, Frydenberg has signalled he could compromise on the timing of a review of the Neg’s controversial emissions reduction target – but the Victorian energy minister, Lily D’Ambrosio, has declared that concession will not be enough to get the Labor states over the line.
“We want to resolve the Neg but it can’t all be one way,” D’Ambrosio told Guardian Australia. “I would hope there is enough maturity around the Coag energy council table to see the conditions we have put forward are not unreasonable, and that we can move forward.
“We want to continue the conversation and the negotiation. There is opportunity and a way forward, and it is up to Josh Frydenberg to determine which way he wants to move forward”. “He can either negotiate with the states on Friday and resolve this next week after his party room – or he can choose to run a concurrent process of introducing his legislation into the federal parliament, and seek and obtain a negotiated legislated outcome which can then be brought back to the energy council, and this issue resolved once and for all.
“Either way, Frydenberg will be confronted with a need to negotiate. It will either be with the states around the energy council table, or with the federal parliament.”
Next Tuesday Frydenberg will ask his colleagues to approve federal legislation giving effect to the emissions reduction target of 26% by 2030 – but some internal Neg opponents, including the former prime minister Tony Abbott, are digging in their heels.
It looks likely that Friday’s meeting will not deliver the definitive breakthrough Frydenberg wanted but the jurisdictions will continue talking, rather than junk the policy altogether. D’Ambrosio said her state had no intention of walking away from the negotiating table.
At a stakeholder meeting ahead of the Sydney talks, the ACT’s climate change minister, Shane Rattenbury, also declared the commonwealth would need to compromise over the next 24 hours if it wanted to secure a breakthrough on the policy. Rattenbury said he had made “concrete suggestions about ways through”.
Sources at the stakeholder meeting on Thursday afternoon said the major interest groups in attendance, which ranged from the Business Council of Australia to the Australian Council of Social Service, expressed a strong view that governments should strike a deal on the policy rather than torpedo it.
Victoria this week toughened its position in the lead-up to Friday’s meeting, declaring emissions reduction targets can be only allowed to increase over time “and never go backwards”; future targets will need to be set by regulation; the targets will need to be set every three years, three years in advance; and the emissions registry be made fully transparent.
Guardian Australia revealed on Wednesday that Victoria had also suggested that Frydenberg delay a final state sign-off on the Neg until after the federal parliament has legislated the scheme’s emissions target.
Frydenberg branded a number of those demands “nonsensical”. He said they constituted “overreach” but the federal minister signalled he could move on the timing of a review of the emissions reduction target, which is currently proposed for 2024.
The commonwealth has signalled privately it might be prepared to move the review forward to 2023, which would be the third year of the scheme. Rattenbury has proposed having the review once emissions in the electricity market fall by 24%, which on current projections would be very early in the scheme.
He told Frydenberg earlier this week he could consider agreeing to a position where the target is reviewed no later than 2024 “and that the final design of the Neg includes a mechanism to initiate a review immediately should electricity sector emissions reach a 24% reduction on 2005 levels”.
Frydenberg is refusing to countenance allowing the target to be set in regulation rather than legislation, or putting in place a provision ensuring the target cannot be made lower than the current target of 26%.
The states are pushing for the target to be set by regulation rather than legislation to make it easier for future governments to scale up. A number of experts have pointed out that a target of 26% will not allow Australia to meet its commitments under the Paris climate agreement.
But Frydenberg has declared: “Victoria’s position doesn’t make sense. You don’t want to bind parliaments and government like that.”
Asked whether Frydenberg offering to hold the review of the emissions reduction target earlier than planned would be sufficient to get Victoria to drop its other demands, D’Ambrosio replied: “No”.
No comments:
Post a Comment