Coalition climate and energy policies are always the product of compromise, whereby the aspirations of the remaining climate-conscious MPs are watered down or sacrificed to preserve the internal peace.
Scott Morrison committed to net zero by 2050, but in slogan only, while showering the Nationals with billions of dollars for regional Australia and an extra seat in cabinet.
Peter Dutton retained the 2050 target but offered the mirage of nuclear power to satisfy the sceptics.
The two Liberal leaders might have succeeded in maintaining unity, but neither faced the same threat of internal chaos confronting Sussan Ley as she attempts to land a consensus position before the 2028 election.
It is not hyperbole to suggest that the latest iteration of this debate threatens to tear the Coalition apart. Not only is there a risk that others could join Barnaby Joyce in quitting, but the right wing of Australian politics could fracture entirely over this issue.
Sign up: AU Breaking News email
Ley is attempting to land a net zero position that unites the disparate factions of the Liberal-National Coalition, but she risks the exact opposite – tearing them apart. A new compromise also risks further alienating voters on all sides and destroying any claims of credibility on climate action.
Amid an ongoing review of the Coalition’s commitment to net zero, Liberals are privately canvassing potential compromises.
The mooted options include – but are not limited to – committing to repeal Labor’s net zero by 2050 legislation, removing any firm timeline for decarbonisation, scrapping interim climate targets and offering carve-outs to certain sectors, such as agriculture.
As one Liberal described it, it would be net zero with “caveats” or net zero under the Coalition’s terms and conditions.
This all comes amid Nationals’ own review of net zero – co-led by ardent opponent Matt Canavan – which is widely expected to result in the party abandoning its commitment to the target.
That decision, reportedly expected before Christmas, would seemingly make it impossible for the Coalition to retain net zero even if the Liberals wanted to.
Ley was desperate to reunite the Liberals and Nationals after the parties’ brief post-election split and would want to avoid another breakup over net zero.
But in attempting to appease the Nationals and rightwing Liberals in her own ranks, the opposition leader might fall into the trap of accepting an outcome that is neither credible as a policy or politically popular with progressive or conservative voters.
Let’s start with the credibility question.
As just one example, the Coalition has already stated its opposition to Labor’s 2035 target of cutting emissions between 62% and 70% on 2005 levels.
Officially scrapping the interim target in government would mean breaching the Paris agreement, which makes clear that countries cannot backslide on emissions targets.
The same applies if the next Coalition government were to rescind Australia’s commitment to net zero by 2050.
Coalition sources argue the mooted compromises would allow city-based Liberals to tell voters it was committed to cutting emissions, while leaving regional MPs to assure their constituents it wasn’t actually bound to do anything.
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
But even if such narrowcasting was possible in this modern age of political campaigning (it’s not), the strategy assumes the messages would resonate with the target audiences.
It is likely to do the opposite.
What voter in teal-held Wentworth, Kooyong or Curtin – who so resoundingly rejected Morrison and Dutton’s compromised climate policies – would welcome net zero by 2060?
And what voter who wants net zero dumped entirely would be satisfied if it were to survive in some vague form?
Pauline Hanson’s One Nation, which according to opinion polls is peeling off the Coalition voters at a rapid rate, stands ready to embrace the discontents.
Joyce, who is flirting with a switch to One Nation, signalled those who share his fervent opposition to net zero wouldn’t accept anything less than total abolition.
“I want an authentic removal from net zero, not some tricky sort of little way that you’re sort of out, you’re sort of in and, you know, possibly in the future, maybe get back,” he said.
“It’s not like that.”
As revealed by Guardian Australian, Coalition MPs have been invited to a three-hour meeting in Canberra next Friday to debate net zero amid growing frustration the opposition’s position remains unresolved.
Ley has no choice but to compromise.
The question is how much she’s willing to sacrifice for it.