Yes to Paris, no to targets: Dutton’s climate doublespeak causes confusion in Coalition ranks

In a week where newly inaugurated US President Donald Trump pulled his country, for the second time, out of the Paris accord, attention has turned to the climate credentials of our own political leaders – and particularly the leader of the federal opposition, Peter Dutton, as he campaigns to become Australia’s 32nd prime minister.

Will he follow Trump’s lead and pull Australia out of the Paris Agreement? And if not, will he set emissions targets, both for 2030 and 2035, as is required of signatories to the UN climate deal?

Dutton was asked both of these questions this week. His answers? Well, it’s difficult to say. Let’s take a look.

On Paris, Dutton is already on the record as saying he will not pull Australia out of the agreement. And when the topic came up in an interview with 2GB radio’s Ben Fordham on Thursday morning, he seemed to confirm this stance.

“We’ve signed up to an international agreement, which I think will have continuing relevance for countries in Europe,” he said.

“The future dynamic can change, but we have to act in our country’s best interests. To have European countries, for example, but not exclusively, applying tariffs to our exports would mean a loss of economic activity here, a loss of jobs. So, we have to have a sensible balance.”

Pressed further by Fordham, who asks “aren’t you tying yourself to a loser?,” Dutton holds the line.

“Well Ben, for the reasons that I’ve outlined and the fact that we’ve entered into an international agreement, and I believe that when we do that, we should honour the agreement.

“Ultimately, though, we make decisions that are in our country’s best interests, and we’ve done that in a number of things,” he said.

So does this mean he will be setting emissions reduction targets? The topic came up at a press conference later in the day.

Reporter: You said on 2GB this morning that we should honour the Paris Agreement. When will you release your targets for 2030?

“We’re not having targets, I’ve said this before,” replied Dutton.

“The Government’s got a secret plan in relation to 2035, which has all sorts of assumptions I suspect the Prime Minister doesn’t want you to know about. But I’ll tell you one very significant outcome of the Prime Minister’s hidden 2035 plan: that will be a further increase in electricity and gas prices.

“The Prime Minister is hiding this before the election because he doesn’t want people to know what the 2035 target will mean for electricity prices. I promise you it will mean more price increases. In terms of our target commitments, we’ve committed to net zero by 2050. That’s the commitment that we’ve made and that’s what we will honour.”

But in the spirit of hiding things, both The Australian and the AFR reported last night that the word from Dutton’s office is that the Coalition has plans to set targets if it wins the election.

“The Australian understands the Coalition is planning on setting medium-term emission targets if it wins the election, despite the Opposition Leader on Thursday declaring ‘we’re not having targets’,” the Oz reports. 

And in the Fin: “[Dutton’s] office said that if in government, there would have to be a 2035 target. However, it would most likely be nowhere near as ambitious as Labor is considering, as it pre-dates the scheduled operation of his first nuclear rector.”

So there you go, clear as mud.

Federal Labor, meanwhile, is not being much clearer on the progress of its own 2035 target, which has been delayed again – this time so the Climate Change Authority can factor the Trump effect into its deliberations on where to set the bar for Australia’s interim emissions goal.

“In our case we’ll base our policies unapologetically on what is in Australia’s best interest, and Australia’s best interest is to keeping on going with this transition,” Bowen told a press conference in Queanbeyan on Thursday.

“If that’s the case,” a journalist asked, “why then does the Climate Change Authority need extra time to assess the impact of the Trump administration?”

“They’re quite separate matters … to be honest,” Bowen replied. “The Climate Change Authority is examining what advice to give me and the government.

“Now there are various implications not so much of whether we keep going with this transition or not, but for example as I’ve said before we need to see what happens with the Inflation Reduction Act for example, because that changes the cost of [inaudible] products.

“On the other side of the equation, if a country decides they want less renewable energy investment that opens up other opportunities for Australia.

“Now the Climate Change Authority quite appropriately is taking some time to give advice to government. It is unlawful for us to proceed without that advice and we will follow that legislated proper process at all times.”