Sussan Ley’s leadership has entered the sort of political peril few opposition leaders survive.Â
But the real story isn’t one leader’s stumble, it’s a once durable political marriage (the Liberal National coalition) turning into a public trial separation.Â
Meanwhile the internal divisions within the senior coalition partner are becoming too big to paper over.Â
Moderates and conservatives are now at war on how to address climate change in a way that has all the hallmarks of a wicked, unsolvable problem.
The Nationals’ decision to dump the 2050 net zero commitment has detonated inside the Coalition at precisely the moment Ley needed strategic calm.Â
Her polling is so poor that her authority was already non-existent.
When your junior partner breaks the Coalition agreement immediately after the May election loss, reconciling a week later, but is now looking to end where it started, that’s not a partnership. It’s a rolling crisis.
And that’s before we even discuss the internal Liberal challenges, on policy and when it comes to personalities.Â
Sussan Ley’s polling is shocking and her authority within the Opposition is non-existentÂ
Conservatives such as Andrew Hastie and Angus Taylor are circling their leader with intent.
A Coalition that can’t agree on the central economic transition of our time isn’t one that can plausibly claim to govern.Â
The internal Liberal disagreements on the same subject are no less problematic. This is no longer about how to address climate change and whether the net zero target is achievable or politically necessary to sign up to.Â
For the opposition, the core issue is that no consensus can be found.
City Liberals (the few who are left after teal sweeps) are already warning that abandoning net zero would be a cyanide capsule in metropolitan seats.Â
The optics are a party that can’t decide whether it wants to win the suburbs or impress a shrinking rump of regional culture warriors. Even a clever policy landing won’t be heard if the soundtrack is open civil war.
And that’s before considering the generational problems that come from opposing the net zero target. Younger voters want the target to stand, it’s that simple.
Liberals can debate how we get there, or if we even get there at all. They also can argue about the methodology of calculating emissions and expected future emissions. They can make the point that the costs of achieving net zero might require slowing the transition down.Â
But they cannot walk away from the target altogether. For younger voters, that’s political suicide.
There’s plenty of real criticisms to be made of Prime Minister Anthony Albanese and Energy Minister Chris Bowen’s net zero policy… Not that the Opposition is coherently making themÂ
None of this absolves the government from the responsibilities of delivering the energy build-out it promises, but it does frame the opposition’s task when holding Labor to account.Â
The Opposition can’t do so if the headlines are all about internal chaos and disagreements.
If the Coalition wants to be competitive, it has to choose a model of politics fit for the 2020s. The old routine of perpetual outrage, media cycle gotchas moments, and policy written on the back of a press release worked when a few mastheads could launder contradictions and voters had more patience for political theatre.
Today, the fragmentation of media and the fatigue of the electorate punish noise and reward coherence. And don’t underestimate Labor’s capacity to spin its way out of trouble and away from explaining details that don’t always add up when examining its approach to net zero.
Ley has what should be an obvious choice. Either she reasserts the primacy of the Liberal brand in the cities by anchoring a credible, costed energy transition that keeps net zero as a target and focuses on the nitty gritty of delivery, daring the Nationals to sulk on the sidelines.Â
Or she hugs the junior coalition partner close and accepts an electoral ceiling that keeps Labor in office.
Opposing a net zero emissions target for 25 years from now is sheer lunacy. By all means criticise the approach Labor takes to try to achieve it.Â
Make clear that it’s more aspirational than realistic, because it is. But why outright oppose it?Â
Doing so is unnecessary and ostracises swathes of voters the Coalition needs to win over to be a viable alternative government.Â
Opposing an emissions goal for 2050 is like opposing the goal of world peace next century. The only thing dumber than the pledge is saying you disagree with it.
Share or comment on this article:
‘Net zero by 2050’ is total BS. But opposing it is like opposing WORLD PEACE: PETER VAN ONSELEN