Hidden climate report could help Malcolm find the middle

The Climate Change Authority report that some suspected was buried by the Australian government to save it from policy embarrassment during the election campaign, could now make it easier for prime minister Malcolm Turnbull to find the middle ground in a minority government, or one ruling with a razor-thin majority.

r1569531_23618830

The CCA report had been expected to be released in late June, but was delayed until after the election, to the obvious relief of the government. So, too, was a report on options for the electricity sector, which had been due for release in April or May, and which leaked reports suggest strongly supported some form of mandatory carbon price.

Those reports by the CCA, despite its board being stacked by Turnbull government appointees following the resignation of former chairman Bernie Fraser and other directors, would not have suited the Coalition election platform.

They were expected to reaffirm the position that Australia was trailing the world in emission reductions, needed to do more, and would need to adopt a carbon price. And, they would likely note, this would not be anywhere near as expensive as many suggest.

That, of course, would not have helped the Coalition election platform, which was to continue with its much criticised Direct Action program, and to lambast any proposals by Labor and the Greens for an economy-wide carbon price and higher renewable energy targets.

But if prime minister Turnbull is to survive as head of a government with a razor-thin majority, or as head of a minority government, he may have no choice but to shake the shackles of the Far Right and to shift towards the centre.

As Mark Kenny writes in Fairfax Media, “taking his government further to the centre is about the only clear mandate he (Turnbull) is left with.” It is obvious to most – particularly in light of the ferocious response of the Far Right to the election result – that he has no choice.

Even former leader John Howard recognised this on Tuesday, noting that Liberals represented not just conservatives, but “small l” liberals. It was a deliberate intervention to warn the “del-cons” as they like to be known, to back off.

It was hoped in policy circles that Turnbull might have used the planned review of climate and clean energy policies in 2017 to start to shift towards a more realistic policy – one that not only accepted the science but also recognised the massive opportunities in leading a shift to a clean energy economy.

The CCA reports are now likely to be released in a few weeks, once the dust has settled on the election result. Their findings, rather than being ignored as they were in the past (when pushing for a minimum 45 per cent emissions reduction target by 2030 and rejecting calls for a cut to the renewable energy target), could be welcomed by the government and used to engage business on formulating a new policy.

Indeed, they could lay the foundations of a much-needed bipartisan approach to climate policy. Labor’s policy for an emissions price based loosely round a “baseline and credit” scheme is seen as similar to that which would naturally evolve from Direct Action, and its so-called Safeguard mechanism.

It’s just that the Coalition couldn’t allow itself to say so ahead of the election. But it could seize upon the CCA report, which is likely to recommend a similar path (seeing it has the architect of Direct Action as one of its new board members) to start to change its conversation about climate policies.

To add to the delicious intrigue, Nick Xenophon, whose party will hold one and possibly two lower house seats, and whose support will be crucial in the Senate, is also a supporter of the baseline and credit scheme.

As we suggested on Monday, the very prospect of a move to the centre has caused panic in the Far Right, pro-Abbott faction, prompting calls for Turnbull’s resignation and an immediate meeting of the Liberal Party MPs, even though it is not entirely clear who is in and who is out.

Far Right faction leader Corey Bernardi – anonymous during the campaign – has put Turnbull “on notice” in repeated media appearances since voting finished.

Senator Eric Abetz, another Far Right fiction leader demoted by Turnbull, has chastised his leader for not playing the carbon tax scare campaign hard enough.

Interestingly, former Tasmania premier Robin Gray called on Abetz to step aside. “I’ve often said to people every time he goes on television he loses us 1000 votes,” he told the Examiner newspaper.

But there could be more to come. Peta Credlin, Abbott’s chief of staff, warned on the Bolt Report on Monday that “If they think that I’ve tried to settle scores, well they ain’t seen anything yet.”

But the polling, both at the election itself and by private pollsters during the campaign, points to a major shift in public thinking. Yes Pauline Hanson and her running mate, the head of climate denier propaganda website Galileo Movement, got elected, but the overall majority favour more ambitious climate and clean energy policies.



Even among Coalition supporters, the mood has shifted, which should have been obvious the day that the Liberal Party chose to dump Tony Abbott.

Business now understands the importance of a meaningful policy, and of the opportunities that could be missed without government support. And unlike 2010, when the Far Right took hold of the climate debate and scared Kevin Rudd away from his own carbon pricing plan, technology costs have fallen dramatically.

It’s not a matter of if, but when, Australia effects its own energy transition. And business is just salivating over the opportunities behind solar, battery storage and electric vehicles. Or at least they should be.

Comments

20 responses to “Hidden climate report could help Malcolm find the middle”

  1. john Avatar
    john

    Frankly i feel that no the Liberals will not move toward a sensible plan but fall back on a hard right attitude.
    Malcolm is now a lame duck leader.
    The poor bugger is between a rock and a hard place he will have to cobble together a few supporters to insure he has supply and in doing so has to ensure he can survive.
    Now once he gets those assurances the hard right will put up the proposition that either he goes their way or he can go outside.
    So his ability to placate the hard right and the few to support him outside his party is the rock and hard place to get through.
    If there is a falter in the coming years he will be tossed aside without a thought.
    I will extremely surprised if this parliament lasts 3 years.

    1. david_fta Avatar
      david_fta

      I wonder if a small minority of moderate (ie not big ‘C’) Liberals will join Malcolm in a split. They could form a new Party (the Democratic Liberal Party ?) and cross the floor of the House for the next several decades.

      1. riley222 Avatar
        riley222

        I’ve had thoughts along the same lines. Forget about getting any sense out of the mainstream Liberal party on renewables or climate change for the foreseeable future.
        They’re in such a bind that the only way Mal is going to move in that direction is for him to start his own party.
        Once he is no longer leader of the Libs, coming soon, he should be free to do his own thing. I don’t think Mal will call his party The DLP however, could cause a few problems.
        What a hopeless bunch at each others throats the Libs are, and they want us to believe they’re capable of running the country. Simply, a house divided cannot rule, proved to all with the Rudd/Gillard era.

      2. Chris Fraser Avatar
        Chris Fraser

        Good idea. At least the name idea has been tried before. The other people polled well just out of sheer voter confusion.

  2. John McKeon Avatar
    John McKeon

    “Senator Eric Abetz, another Far Right fiction leader demoted by Turnbull …”

    FICTION ~ FACTION: same difference I guess …

  3. Geoff Avatar
    Geoff

    Through out all of this, at the end of the day, he F’d up big time. And I think we as the public have been let down hugely, especially with our expectations that the old Malcolm was going to come back. How wrong we were. Shame really, if the old Malcolm did come back, then I can guarantee that we’ll be in a better situation than what we are now. Brexit, and now this. If trump wins in November then i fear the world will be heading into a dark place for years to come. Hows the weather on Mars looking?

  4. howardpatr Avatar
    howardpatr

    The Chief Scientist played a role in keeping this report under covers until now.

    THE guy, from Queensland, who thinks he will join Hanson in the Senate wants a RC into climate science, to root out the corruption in the CSIRO and the UN, will get a lot of support within the LNP.

    1. Cooma Doug Avatar
      Cooma Doug

      Deniers dont seek a royal commission. One would have to be really stupid to seek it.

      1. JIm Avatar
        JIm

        Unless a RC into how they should get a life

      2. david_fta Avatar
        david_fta

        “Deniers dont seek a royal commission.”

        In the cases of Hanson & Roberts, yes they do. Because they Deny the science, Hanson & Roberts hold that the world’s meteorological bureaux and science researchers everywhere are in cahoots with the Global Islamic/Jewish/Multinational/Commie/Greenie/Druggie/Poofter/Atheist Conspiracy.

        I’ll leave it for others to comment on stupidity.

        1. Cooma Doug Avatar
          Cooma Doug

          An idiot in the senate could seek a royal commission into the government policies that insist the world is round and not flat. They would feel supported in their belief by the refusal to have such an investigation.
          We need a system where imbeciles can be voted out of the senate every general election as well as voted in.
          We should have a way of doing so.

          1. david_fta Avatar
            david_fta

            Instead of a Royal Commission, Hansen and Roberts should be obliged to pass a course in atmospheric physics. Only if they pass the course do they get their RC …

            … and if they still insist on the RC, and it finds human–caused climate change to be real, then the cost of the RC comes out of their Parliamentary pensions.

    2. stalga Avatar
      stalga

      The reappearance of Hansen is a backfire for the far-right. The LNP expected to get those votes.

      Think for a moment of two of Bolt’s pet topics, 18c and “I’ve investigated Climate science and it’s crap”. Same ssues, cultivating fear and mistrust. However, most reasonable people always accepted 18c and have long moved on, same with Climate science.

      Devious people such as Bolt and co know they will further isolate themselves if they line up with her in any way. She is the ugy reality staring the far-right in the face, the product of their dreadful games and a stumbling block for everyone.

      Credlin! I read that last night, that was UGLY! She will never get it

      1. Murray Nicholas Avatar
        Murray Nicholas

        I skimmed the Bolt column this morning in my coffee shop. He was making the case that Turnbull’s recent Ifta (?) dinner gave comfort to Muslims (he seemed to consider that a pejorative term because a couple of senior Imams and Muftis were saying some pretty divisive and obnoxious things) and was the basis for the re-emergence of Hanson. He did not appear to suggest said re-emergence was a bad thing since Turnbull had clearly been very stupid to be associated with those people.
        I’m not sure that he’s lining up with Hanson, but he’s definitely not taking the vitriolic approach towards her that he took towards Turnbull.

        1. stalga Avatar
          stalga

          He’s just maintaining the dog-whistle. Bolt wants a demographic pre-occupied with the race debate. It’s disgusting.

  5. Mark Diesendorf Avatar
    Mark Diesendorf

    We need policies to simultaneously phase out fossil fuels while growing renewable energy and energy efficiency. To implement the phase-out, it’s difficult enough to design and operate an effective cap-and-trade ETS, as witness the European scheme. A baseline-and-credit scheme might create the appearance of action, but would be even less likely to be effective than cap-and-trade. So it would be a waste of time pushing for it.
    A carbon tax, gradually ramped up, could be very effective, but it seems that neither the COALition nor Labor nor the Greens will consider it. Alternatively, emission limits on power stations, gradually tightened, could work. Another alternative is the ANU scheme, in which closure of coal-fired power stations is funded by those that don’t initially close .

    1. Chris Fraser Avatar
      Chris Fraser

      I often think that the EU Clean Development Mechanism was spoiled by the inclusion of greenhouse gases such as refrigerants that could have been destroyed much more cheaply than the going price for a greenhouse unit from combusted fossil fuel. That is, they failed the additionality test.

  6. Ben Rose Avatar

    A baseline and credit scheme will only work if government decides which technologies get credits and which do not. If gas got credits, the system could go over to ‘all gas’ and it would still be > 60% of the emissions of existing coal / gas systems so little would be achieved.

    Storage technologies – CST molten salt with biomass co-firing, battery and pumped hydro – are essential for future renewable electricity grids. They need more help than wind and rooftop PV, which need less subsidy as their price declines.

    Straight market schemes on their own, without a lot of other rules and regulation will be useless. But I see Labor’s policy is to intervene using some of the money raised in the scheme to help brown coal generators close and to buy renewables with PPA’s.

    They also need to ban any more coal (unless it is installed with CCS) and ‘base load’ gas. However, a good fleet of OCGT gas turbines will be needed as balancing power for the renewables.

  7. Murray Nicholas Avatar
    Murray Nicholas

    There’s a pretty strong message sent through this election – Australian voters don’t like the major parties and, in the majority at present, particularly the conservative right wing. If politicians continue to push the same old agenda they’ll become increasingly irrelevant.
    They should not simply yield to populism however. If they still strongly believe in the validity of their ideology then they must do a much better job of presenting a reasoned, fact-based case for it.
    When it comes to climate science, the reasoned, fact-based case says it’s time to move to renewables as fast as we can. Time to stop supporting fossil-based fuel and to redirect all that “innovation” investment towards the products, services and jobs (ngrowth) of the economy of the future.

  8. Steve Fuller Avatar
    Steve Fuller

    Pauline Hanson’s One Nation’s policies on climate and renewable energy contains a section that indicates a willingness to explore a significant role for renewables.

    Affordable Energy and Climate Science – Solution 13 “Support renewable energy that does not impact on the environment and encourage research in the ability to store energy at affordable cost to households and businesses.”

    With the right advice and support PHON could develop into a RE champion!

Get up to 3 quotes from pre-vetted solar (and battery) installers.