Coalition Climate Policy Fractures as Nationals Abandon Net Zero Target
This piece is freely available to read. Become a paid subscriber today and help keep Mencari News financially afloat so that we can continue to pay our writers for their insight and expertise.
Today’s Article is brought to you by Empower your podcasting vision with a suite of creative solutions at your fingertips.
The federal Coalition faces its most significant internal rift in years as the Nationals confirmed abandonment of Australia’s net zero by 2050 emissions target, triggering warnings from senior Liberals that the policy shift amounts to holding “a gun to our head” and could cost crucial urban seats at the next election.
Nationals leader David Littleproud defended his party’s climate policy review on Tuesday, arguing Australia can meet Paris Agreement obligations without committing to net zero emissions while accusing the Labor government of pursuing a “$9 trillion” plan that threatens Medicare and disability services funding.
The policy rupture comes as the Liberal Party prepares for a critical party room meeting to determine its own climate stance, with Deputy Opposition Senate Leader Anne Ruston privately telling colleagues the Nationals position represents electoral suicide in metropolitan battlegrounds where the Coalition desperately needs gains.
Hours before the Liberal deliberations, New South Wales Opposition Leader Mark Speakman issued a statement affirming the NSW Parliamentary Liberal Party “has supported and continues to support a target of net zero emissions by 2050,” highlighting the widening gap between state and federal conservative politics on climate action.
The clash threatens to unravel the Coalition partnership rebuilt just six months ago after the Nationals imposed four conditions before re-entering the alliance following the federal election defeat, with climate policy explicitly reserved for independent determination by each party.
Truth matters. Quality journalism costs.
Your subscription to Mencari directly funds the investigative reporting our democracy needs. For less than a coffee per week, you enable our journalists to uncover stories that powerful interests would rather keep hidden. There is no corporate influence involved. No compromises. Just honest journalism when we need it most.
Not ready to be paid subscribe, but appreciate the newsletter ? Grab us a beer or snag the exclusive ad spot at the top of next week's newsletter.
Nationals Climate Review Details Emerge
The controversy erupted after Senators Ross Cadell and Matt Canavan presented their Federal Nationals Review on Climate Policy to NSW Nationals colleagues Monday, recommending the state branch adopt the federal position abandoning net zero targets while maintaining membership in the Paris Agreement.
According to sources present at the NSW Nationals meeting, the Cadell-Canavan presentation was immediately countered by pollsters from the Blueprint Institute, an organization linked to Liberal strategist Michael Photios, who warned that dumping net zero “would be electoral suicide and would lead to the loss of a number of seats” at the NSW state election scheduled in 15 months.
NSW Nationals leader Dougald Saunders has declined to make an immediate decision on adopting the federal position, sources said, reflecting internal uncertainty about the electoral consequences of the policy shift.
Littleproud defended the approach in a Sky News Politics Now interview Tuesday, distinguishing between the Paris Agreement framework and net zero mechanics.
“The Paris Agreement was something we entered into before net zero,” Littleproud said from Dalby, Queensland. “We entered into Paris in 2015. Net zero came about in 2021. Paris is simply an agreement internationally that we’re all going to do our bit globally to reduce emissions. Net zero is the mechanics on which to achieve it.”
The Nationals leader insisted his party’s position does not represent climate denial or abandonment of emissions reduction commitments.
“We’re not running away from reducing emissions,” Littleproud said. “This Neanderthal debate that Labor, Chris Bowen says, well, we don’t believe in climate change, that’s the only intellectual rigour he can bring to this debate.”
Liberal Party Tensions Surface
The Nationals policy has created acute discomfort within Liberal ranks, particularly among MPs representing metropolitan and coastal constituencies where polling shows strong support for climate action.
Anne Ruston, Shadow Minister for Health and Aged Care and Deputy Leader of the Opposition in the Senate, told a Liberal leadership meeting the Nationals policy amounts to “a gun to our head,” according to multiple sources present, reflecting concerns the position could devastate the Coalition’s prospects in urban battlegrounds.
Ruston’s South Australian seat and her role representing numerous metropolitan constituencies in the Senate make her particularly sensitive to voter sentiment on climate policy in city centers where the Coalition lost ground heavily at the last election.
When asked directly about Ruston’s characterization, Littleproud rejected the suggestion his party was imposing conditions on Liberal colleagues.
“Let me make this clear: this doesn’t hurt anybody in the city,” Littleproud said. “We want to have a mature conversation. And this is where the plurality of politics needs to remove itself and we need to enter into a policy debate.”
Littleproud emphasized the Coalition partnership agreement explicitly provided for independent policy development on climate.
“There was an agreed position after the election that when Susan Ley made the decision to abandon all policies, obviously there were four that we held out of, and until the Liberal Party agreed to our terms, we wouldn’t re-enter the coalition,” Littleproud said. “They accepted our terms from their party meeting. We entered the coalition, but it was made very clear from that juncture, the net zero policy and climate and energy policy would be determined by each individual party in a respectful way.”
However, when pressed on whether disagreement would dissolve the Coalition, Littleproud did not provide assurances.
“Andrew, what would have been a gun to the Liberal Party’s head was take a position of just saying no and not having a considered mature approach about living up to reducing emissions in this country,” Littleproud said.
State Liberal Leaders Break Ranks
The NSW Liberal statement from Mark Speakman represents the clearest public rejection of the Nationals federal position, with state Liberal leaders increasingly concerned about being associated with climate policy positions that alienate urban voters.
Western Australia’s Liberal leader has similarly indicated support for climate action, according to government sources, though no formal statement has been issued.
The divergence between state and federal Liberal positions on climate policy mirrors tensions that plagued the Coalition during the Morrison government, when moderate Liberals pushed unsuccessfully for more ambitious emissions targets.
Former Prime Ministers Scott Morrison, Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott all maintained varying commitments to emissions reduction during their tenures, though implementation and ambition levels differed substantially.
Pat Gorman, Assistant Minister to the Prime Minister, told Sky News the climate debate was becoming “overly politicised by some in the Liberal Party” while noting Liberal leaders in NSW and Western Australia continue supporting climate action.
“I think this is the sensible path forward and it’s the path that so many of our partners in the world are taking because they see the opportunities that we see to back Australian jobs,” Gorman said.
Economic and Emissions Arguments
Central to the Nationals’ case against net zero is an economic argument focused on cost and comparative burden.
Littleproud repeatedly referenced what he called Labor’s “$9 trillion net zero plan,” claiming the government’s emissions reduction pathway threatens funding for Medicare and the National Disability Insurance Scheme.
“That puts Medicare, that puts the NDIS at risk,” Littleproud said. “We’re saying we can live up to our international expectations. We’re 1.1% of global emissions. And if we peg ourselves, we don’t need to streak ahead.”
The Nationals leader argued Australia’s 2035 emissions reduction target requires disproportionate effort compared to other developed nations.
“The targets that this government has set by 2035 means that we have to reduce our emissions by 4.8% every year,” Littleproud said. “The OECD is only going to reduce their emissions by 1.7%. So why are we streaking ahead when we can do our fair share, we can live up to international commitments, but we can have a cheaper, better fare away than Labor’s $9 trillion net zero plan?”
The government disputes these cost projections and argues Australia’s pathway aligns with international commitments under the Paris Agreement, which calls for carbon neutrality in the second half of the century.
Paris Agreement Legal Framework
The debate has exposed confusion about the Paris Agreement’s legal requirements and relationship to net zero commitments.
The Paris Agreement, adopted in 2015, explicitly aims “to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century” — language widely interpreted as requiring carbon neutrality or net zero emissions.
However, the agreement is not binding in terms of enforcement mechanisms, and individual countries determine their own contributions through Nationally Determined Contributions that are updated periodically.
Littleproud argued this structure allows Australia to participate in emissions reduction without committing to the 2050 net zero timeline most developed nations have adopted.
“The Paris Agreement isn’t a binding agreement,” Littleproud said. “It’s an agreement that says that the world is committed to trying to decarbonise, that there’s aspirations that they’re trying to achieve, but the reality is the mechanics in which the world tried to agree on was a net zero by 2050. That’s the mechanics that it was signed up to, that we believe there’s an alternative way.”
Legal experts note that while Paris Agreement obligations are nationally determined rather than internationally enforced, the agreement’s Article 4.1 language on achieving balance between emissions and removals has been interpreted by most signatories as requiring net zero emissions.
Political Calculations and Electoral Risks
The Coalition’s internal climate policy battle reflects broader strategic calculations about electoral positioning, with the Nationals prioritizing regional constituency concerns while Liberals weigh metropolitan voter sentiment.
Littleproud rejected suggestions regional and urban Australians represent different constituencies with conflicting interests.
“Whether you’re in the city or you’re in regional Australia, let me say we’re not a different class of citizen out here,” Littleproud said. “We have the same aspirations, same challenges as people that live in capital cities.”
However, polling consistently shows stronger support for ambitious climate action in metropolitan areas, particularly among younger voters who shifted heavily away from the Coalition at the last federal election.
The Liberal Party faces the challenge of developing a climate position that satisfies both its regional coalition partner and urban voters essential to forming government.
The party room meeting outcome remained unclear at press time, with senior Liberals indicating no predetermined position had been reached.
International Context and Investment Implications
The climate policy debate occurs against a backdrop of significant international investment in decarbonization technologies and growing diplomatic focus on emissions reduction.
Government ministers have emphasized the economic opportunities associated with climate action, pointing to major Australian business leaders investing in emissions reduction.
Gorman referenced mining magnate Andrew Forrest’s presence at COP30 in Brazil, noting “they’re making billions of dollars of investment into decarbonising the iron ore industry, a pretty carbon intense industry.”
“There’s a lot of opportunity and money on the table from investors,” Gorman said. “I think it’s about two trillion dollars is around the figure that’s used in terms of global investment in low and zero carbon technologies. I want to get as much of that money to Australia as we can.”
The Coalition has not detailed how abandoning net zero targets while remaining in the Paris Agreement would affect Australia’s ability to attract climate-focused investment or maintain diplomatic relationships with partners who have committed to 2050 net zero targets.
The United States, United Kingdom, European Union, Japan, South Korea, Canada and New Zealand have all adopted net zero by 2050 or earlier targets, raising questions about Australia’s diplomatic positioning under a Coalition government implementing the Nationals’ preferred approach.
Government Response and Political Attack Lines
Labor ministers quickly seized on the Coalition’s internal divisions, arguing the debate demonstrates Opposition Leader Sussan Ley’s inability to manage her party room.
Gorman suggested the climate policy chaos reflected broader Coalition dysfunction on the issue.
“I think what we’ve seen is that this is becoming overly politicised by some in the Liberal Party,” Gorman said, while noting bipartisan climate action had existed under previous Coalition Prime Ministers including Scott Morrison, Malcolm Turnbull and Tony Abbott.
The government is expected to use the Coalition’s climate policy turmoil as evidence of internal disarray and lack of credible alternative policy development.
Climate Change and Energy Minister Chris Bowen has not yet issued a formal statement on the Nationals policy, though Littleproud preemptively criticized what he characterized as Bowen’s approach to climate debate.
Timeline and Next Steps
The Liberal Party room meeting to determine the party’s climate position is scheduled imminently, with the outcome likely to determine whether the Coalition can present a unified policy platform or whether fundamental disagreement persists.
If Liberals adopt a position similar to the Nationals abandoning net zero, the Coalition would present a united front but face significant electoral challenges in metropolitan constituencies.
If Liberals maintain commitment to net zero by 2050, the Coalition would enter the next election campaign with fundamentally different climate policies between coalition partners, creating messaging and credibility challenges.
A compromise position attempting to bridge the gap appears difficult given the binary nature of net zero commitment.
Littleproud indicated the Nationals would engage “constructively” with whatever Liberal policy emerges to seek “a consensus position,” though he provided no details on potential compromise formulations.
“We’ll sit down and look at their policy and run the ruler over that compared to ours and work constructively, hopefully, to a consensus position,” Littleproud said.
The Coalition’s ability to resolve the climate policy divide will serve as an early test of the reconstructed partnership’s durability and Ley’s leadership capacity to manage internal party dynamics.
Sustaining Mencari Requires Your Support
Independent journalism costs money. Help us continue delivering in-depth investigations and unfiltered commentary on the world's real stories. Your financial contribution enables thorough investigative work and thoughtful analysis, all supported by a dedicated community committed to accuracy and transparency.
Subscribe today to unlock our full archive of investigative reporting and fearless analysis. Subscribing to independent media outlets represents more than just information consumption—it embodies a commitment to factual reporting.
As well as knowing you’re keeping Mencari (Australia) alive, you’ll also get:
Get breaking news AS IT HAPPENS - Gain instant access to our real-time coverage and analysis when major stories break, keeping you ahead of the curve
Unlock our COMPLETE content library - Enjoy unlimited access to every newsletter, podcast episode, and exclusive archive—all seamlessly available in your favorite podcast apps.
Join the conversation that matters - Be part of our vibrant community with full commenting privileges on all content, directly supporting The Evening Post (Australia)
Catch up on some of Mencari’s recent stories:
It only takes a minute to help us investigate fearlessly and expose lies and wrongdoing to hold power accountable. Thanks!