Analysis
Posted
Suddenly we're back to where we were 12 months ago.
Labor has adopted an ambitious climate target, which the Government attacks as reckless and uncosted. It's Groundhog Day in the endless and tiresome climate wars.Will this latest battle have a different ending to the one fought last May?
It's too early to tell, but there's no doubt some circumstances have changed over the last 12 months.
Public opinion on climate change has clearly shifted in the wake of the "Black Summer" bushfires.
Numerous polls confirm this.
The most comprehensive was released on Tuesday by the ANU's Social Research Centre, which interviewed more than 3,200 Australians.
Almost 50 per cent (49.7) now rank environment issues as either the most or second most important problem facing the nation.
For now, there's not much love for coal
The most statistically significant shift came on the question of new coal mines — 45.3 per cent supported new coal mines in June. That number has now fallen to just 37 per cent.Interestingly, the biggest drop, of more than 14 per cent, was amongst Coalition voters.
Public opinion may shift back again, but for now there's not much love for coal.
The international and corporate pressure for climate action is growing too. Around 80 countries have so far adopted the target of net-zero emissions by 2050.
Britain's Tory Prime Minister Boris Johnson is leading the charge and wants the rest of the world to sign up at the Glasgow climate summit he will host in November.
All Australian states and territories are on board.
The Business Council of Australia backs the target, as do some of Australia's biggest companies from BHP to Telstra, Wesfarmers and AGL.
And let's not forget the scientists.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has firmly stated net-zero emissions by 2050 will be required if we're to have a 50 per cent chance of avoiding temperatures rising above 1.5 degrees.
This move is not without its risks
Given the gathering scientific, corporate and international momentum behind the 2050 target, and the growing pressure on Anthony Albanese to come up with at least some policy positions, it's unsurprising the Labor leader has now formally committed to supporting the net-zero plan.But this move is not without its risks.
As the review into Labor's election defeat helpfully pointed out, "Labor's ambiguous language on Adani, combined with some anti-coal rhetoric, devastated its support in the coal mining communities of regional Queensland and the Hunter Valley".
Right now, Albanese is sounding a little ambiguous. He wants to protect coal mining jobs and revenues but can't yet explain what a net-zero target might mean for Australia's biggest export sector.
Nor do we know what this target might mean for the transport and agriculture sectors. This ambition will require an enormous transformation over the coming decades.
The Opposition leader knows he will have to provide these details before the next election.
The election review didn't offer many solutions on how Labor should win back those lost voters, beyond a vague suggestion to "respect the role of workers in fossil-fuel industries" and a need to talk up "job opportunities in emissions-reducing industries".
Expect to hear a lot of talk about clean energy jobs and a future of renewables-driven manufacturing.
The internal pressure is fierce
As for the Prime Minister, his task is no easier. The external pressure for him to jump on board the 2050 target is nothing compared to the internal pressure for him to resist.While a small number of moderate Liberals back the target, a bigger number do not. At least not without details of what different emissions trajectories might cost.
Then there's the Nationals. Both the rebellious and not-so-rebellious factions of the Nationals agree this net-zero idea is crazy.
Nationals Leader and Deputy Prime Minister Michael McCormack fears pursuing such a target would "send factories and industries offshore".
Nationals Senator Matt Canavan, now a blunt weapon firing hourly missives from the backbench, is more direct.
"Net zero emissions = net zero jobs," he tweeted. There appears to be no specific modelling behind this bleak Canavan prediction, in case you're wondering.
On Tuesday the Prime Minister hardened his language on the target.
"Currently no one can tell me that going down that path won't cost jobs, won't put up your electricity prices, and won't impact negatively on jobs in the economies of rural and regional Australia," he declared.
The reference to rural and regional jobs was a rather obvious nod to pressure he's facing from the minor Coalition partner.
There is a simple reason that Labor won't cost its net zero emissions policy because net zero emissions = net zero jobs!
We know how these battles are fought
Scott Morrison's position isn't entirely due to the need to mollify the Nats, though.There's also the small matter of having devoted an entire election campaign to railing against Labor's "reckless, uncosted, wrecking ball of a policy".
To adopt a net-zero target now, without any costings, would be quite the post-election shift.
Whatever work the Government is conducting behind the scenes on its new "technology roadmap", expect a deluge of studies now from academics and experts on what the net-zero by 2050 target would cost, compared to the cost of less ambitious action.
If history repeats, both sides of this debate will be armed with modelling to suit its argument.
We know how these battles are fought. We don't know how this latest one will end.
David Speers is the host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iView.
No comments:
Post a Comment