The Liberal Party is heading toward a future that's less than 'net zero'. For three consecutive elections, the 'teal' independents have successfully overshadowed the Liberals, leaving the once-dominant conservative party starving for votes. Their electoral demise has been particularly evident in Australia's inner-metropolitan areas. These regions are often stereotypically described as being populated by the 'elite' but are far more influential and numerous than many realize.
The teals have been making the most of this advantage with a strong campaign message: the National Party is controlling the Liberal Party’s climate and energy policies. Their argument? Voting for Scott Morrison or Peter Dutton essentially means supporting Barnaby Joyce.
While this might need some tweaking now that Joyce is making headlines with his attention-seeking antics outside the National Party’s party room and flirtations with One Nation, the core idea remains strong. The teals have successfully cast doubt on the credibility of the Liberal Party’s energy policy. And as much as the Liberals may deny it, the National Party seems to have considerable influence in shaping their stance on climate.
It’s becoming increasingly likely that the Liberal Party may abandon its previous commitment to achieving net zero emissions by 2050. This shift is largely driven by the Nationals’ public rejection of the policy. Barnaby Joyce, ever the self-proclaimed influencer of this change, proudly took credit for it, stating, 'I’ve played my part. I could be faux humble and say, ‘Oh no, no.’ Definitely, I played my part. Had a big part.' It’s a far cry from the position the Coalition held during nearly a decade in government.
So, what’s the new reason for this shift? Nationals leader David Littleproud claimed that 'lived experience' guided their decision, suggesting that there is a 'cheaper, better, and fairer' way to reduce emissions. Strangely, this 'better way' wasn’t discovered during their years in power, nor have they explained it clearly now.
As for the Liberals, their stance on whether a credible strategy to reduce emissions matters for Australia has become increasingly ambiguous. Despite an official review of their net-zero policy, the situation is so confused that it’s becoming hard to take anything they say seriously. And as Opposition Leader Sussan Ley must recognize, even if the Liberal Party keeps the policy, the events of the past few months have irreparably damaged any belief that net-zero-by-2050 is a firm commitment the party can be trusted with.
The larger question now is: what can voters actually count on from the Liberal Party? What do they stand for? Lower taxes? Aspiration? Free-market solutions? Or perhaps even a more bizarre obsession with policing prime ministerial T-shirts?
Sussan Ley did show some early strength in leadership. She stood up to Littleproud when the Nationals briefly separated from the Liberals in May, and even ousted Jacinta Nampijinpa Price to the backbench after her controversial comments on Indian migrants. But since then, Ley has stumbled, with some unfortunate blunders involving T-shirts and even pushing for the sacking of Australia’s ambassador to the United States, Kevin Rudd.
Her challenge isn’t just about policy gaffes; it’s about the Liberal Party’s record. Since Tony Abbott’s tenure, every Liberal leader has struggled with the climate issue in one way or another. Abbott’s anti-carbon-tax stance helped him secure a victory, but it didn’t serve him well in government, ultimately leading to his downfall at the hands of Malcolm Turnbull.
Turnbull, despite his leadership in signing the Paris Agreement and advancing a National Energy Guarantee (NEG), was ousted in a party-room coup after his energy policy was rejected by the Liberals. Morrison, despite his public embrace of coal and his lackluster response to the devastating 2019-2020 bushfires, eventually signed Australia onto the net-zero pledge just before the Glasgow summit in 2021. Yet, his credibility on climate remained suspect, and the pressure from the Nationals was palpable.
When Peter Dutton took over leadership in 2022, he attempted to navigate the climate issue by proposing a taxpayer-funded nuclear reactor plan—one so impractical that voters easily saw through it. And now, despite the need for credible energy policy, the Liberals seem to be self-sabotaging, not because they’re standing firm on a position, but because they’re unsure of what they stand for at all.
If the Nationals, and the conservative faction within the Liberal Party, succeed in pushing the party away from net-zero emissions, what will remain? Certainly not anything that comes close to 'net zero'. And in the process, the Liberals risk losing any semblance of a coherent policy on energy and climate, something every party needs to govern effectively.
