The former Liberal prime minister Malcolm Turnbull says his party’s decision to dump a net zero emissions target shows it “does not take climate change seriously”, accusing the opposition of “a Trumpian campaign against renewables”.
But while moderate sources are alarmed about the impact on winning back or retaining urban electorates, and climate groups called the backflip a “disaster”, the Liberal decision to scrap its own 2050 target and unwind Labor’s 2035 and renewable energy pledges has been praised by conservative MPs and campaigners.
Turnbull, unseated by rightwing MPs in a 2018 party room coup partly over energy and climate policy, told Guardian Australia: “This is what happens when you outsource your policy development to Sky News and the rightwing media echo chamber.
“The Liberals’ decision to abandon the 2050 net zero target will simply confirm to most Australians that the parliamentary party does not take climate change seriously and wants to join a Trumpian campaign against renewables,” Turnbull said.
“No amount of nuance or qualifying footnotes will change that impression. They have the memory of goldfish and the dining habits of piranhas.”
The move was warmly welcomed by rightwing campaign group Advance, which had pushed the Coalition to ditch net zero, including rallying its members to bombard Liberal MPs with messages. Advance’s director, Matthew Sheahan, emailed supporters to call the shift “a major victory in the fight to take back the country from the activists and elites”.
The Nationals leader, David Littleproud, claimed the Liberal policy “mirrors” his own party’s position and said he was optimistic about upcoming negotiations with Liberal MPs to settle a unified Coalition position.
“We believe in climate change. We believe that we need to do something about it. That we should do our fair share,” he said.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
The Liberal MP Leon Rebello told Guardian Australia the Coalition believed they had social license to abandon the targets. The conservative Queensland MP Garth Hamilton called it a “great win from the backbench”.
Hamilton, who has previously backed Andrew Hastie for the Liberal leadership, foreshadowed that immigration may emerge as the next contentious policy challenge.
“I hope we deal with immigration a lot better,” he said.
Q&A
What is net zero emissions?
Show
Net zero emissions is a target that has been adopted by governments, companies and other organisations to eliminate their contribution to the climate crisis. It is sometimes called “carbon neutrality”.
The climate crisis is caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere, where they trap heat. They have already caused a significant increase in average global temperatures above pre-industrial levels recorded since the mid-20th century.
Countries and others that set net zero emissions targets are pledging to stop their role in worsening this by cutting their climate pollution and balancing out whatever emissions remain by sucking an equivalent amount of CO2 out of the atmosphere.
This could happen through nature projects – tree planting, for example – or using carbon dioxide removal technology.
CO2 removal from the atmosphere is the “net” part in net zero. Scientists say some emissions will be hard to stop and will need to be offset. But they also say net zero targets will be effective only if carbon removal is limited to offset “hard to abate” emissions. Fossil use will still need to be dramatically reduced.
After signing the 2015 Paris agreement, the global community asked the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess what would be necessary to give the world a chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C.
The IPCC found it would require deep cuts in global CO2 emissions: to about 45% below 2010 levels by 2030, and to net zero by about 2050.
The Climate Action Tracker has found more than 145 countries have set or are considering setting net zero emissions targets.
Photograph: Ashley Cooper pics/www.alamy.com
Thank you for your feedback.
Environmental groups were aghast at the change. The Australian Conservation Foundation accused the Liberals of having “given up on climate action, caved to global fossil fuel giants and condemned Australians to” extreme weather events through climate change.
Despite Ley saying the Liberals backed the Paris agreement’s intent to limit global temperature rises, the Climate Council said “walking away from net zero aligns with more than 3C of global heating and would spell disaster for Australia’s climate, economy and household bills”.
The Greens senator Sarah Hanson-Young called Ley’s announcement a “train wreck”.
“This is a bunch of nutters who want to drive Australia’s economy over a cliff and continue to trash our environment,” she told a press conference.
What does net zero emissions actually mean? And is it different to the Paris agreement? – video
The independent MP Zali Steggall called it “reckless and a massive step backwards”; Monique Ryan claimed the decision meant Liberals had “consigned themselves to electoral oblivion”.
skip past newsletter promotion
Sign up to Breaking News Australia
Get the most important news as it breaks
Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
after newsletter promotion
The shift is seen as a major internal victory for rightwing Liberal MPs over the moderate faction. Key moderates such as Tim Wilson, Andrew Bragg, Maria Kovacic and Dave Sharma had raised alarm over the electoral repercussions of dumping the target.
One moderate MP said it would be difficult to sell the policy, calling it a “friendless” position.
Jason Falinski, the former Liberal MP and New South Wales branch president, had warned his party against going “Nationals-lite”. He told Guardian Australia on Thursday: “I look forward to understanding how this wins us more votes.”
Charlotte Mortlock, the founder of Hilma’s Network, a group to recruit Liberal women, was scathing of the decision. She told ABC TV it would make it difficult for the party to win back inner metropolitan seats.
“What I fear is the main takeaway is we are not taking climate change seriously,” she said.
“The Coalition has a chequered history on climate … at the moment there might be movement around net zero and climate change, but you either believe in climate change and want to pursue net zero or you want to abandon it.”
Multiple moderates told Guardian Australia they were broadly accepting of the position, which would “enable us to keep fighting” in metropolitan seats. One MP said moderates had negotiated in the meeting to keep the 2050 target, and while supportive of the position, described the result as “pretty brutal”.
Others raised concerns the break in bipartisan support of net zero, and the Coalition’s promise to wind back Labor’s climate incentives, would impact investor confidence.
Tony Wood, the energy and climate change senior fellow at public policy thinktank Grattan Institute, said business groups had been consistently calling for predictability and clarity around climate policy.
“The idea that Australia would no longer have a clear direction in the long term, but we’re just going to ‘follow everybody else’, is not very helpful for investors,” he said.
“In what’s been proposed so far, I can’t see how it would reduce emissions, I don’t see how it would reduce prices either.”
