A bitter internal struggle within the Liberal Party over climate policy threatens to persist, despite upcoming meetings this week. The divide between moderates and conservatives is deep, and the outcome of these discussions may further erode the authority of Sussan Ley.
The party room will convene on Wednesday, primarily debating the use of the term 'net zero'. While there is broad agreement on other substantive matters, the choice of words has become a battleground.
Several Liberals from both factions agree that the 2050 deadline for net zero emissions is likely to go, but some form of commitment to reduce emissions will remain. This includes exploring nuclear power, extending the life of coal plants, and increasing gas supply.
The more controversial question is whether the party will maintain its commitment to net zero over a longer timeframe. Moderates could accept this as a compromise, but it's unclear if this will satisfy everyone.
The call to ditch net zero entirely has gained momentum, with Sarah Henderson joining several conservatives in expressing this view. Moderate Andrew Bragg strongly opposes this, calling it 'absolutely ridiculous'. The balance of numbers is uncertain, but abandoning net zero seems the most likely outcome, according to multiple Liberal sources.
This choice of words is seen as a crucial test by both sides. Conservatives highlight the challenges faced by heavy industry and point to the Albanese government's support for the Tomago aluminium smelter as evidence that the transition is failing. They also draw attention to shifts in climate policy across the political right globally, especially in the US, and from influential activists like Bill Gates, who recently called for a climate 'pivot'.
However, support for climate action remains high in Australia, especially among urban and young voters. Moderates believe that net zero is synonymous with credible climate action in the minds of these voters.
"Ditching net zero sends a message that we're not listening to their concerns," says former MP Keith Wolahan.
Conservatives argue that an emissions reduction pledge without a net zero goal could still be consistent with the 2015 Paris Agreement, which alludes to net zero without explicitly stating it. But this distinction is not convincing to strong supporters of net zero.
"I don't see a middle ground on this; it's an all-or-nothing situation," says a Liberal opposed to net zero.
This raises the possibility of a messy compromise, where conservatives claim net zero has been scrapped, while moderates continue to describe their policy as net zero. This would leave Sussan Ley in an even more precarious position, caught between conservatives who dislike her leadership and moderates who support her but want a stronger stance to win back urban voters.
"It will completely undermine her leadership," says one Liberal.
Some conservatives agree with moderates that ditching net zero could further alienate city voters, where the Liberals have lost significant ground. However, they also acknowledge the strong anti-net zero sentiment within the party base, which may necessitate a shift in position.
"A slightly pro-net-zero stance is not sustainable. Our members are firmly against it, so we'd just be revisiting this issue in a few months. It's better to get it over with," says a senior Liberal.
The events of this week could strengthen the position of Angus Taylor, who, as energy minister, signed Australia up to net zero and is seen as having a more nuanced approach.
