Ahead of the announcement of Australia’s net zero emissions by 2050 target last week, Prime Minister Scott Morrison penned an opinion piece in The Daily Telegraph titled, ‘We must take action on climate change while keeping jobs’.
“Australians want action on climate change. And so do I,” he wrote. “But they also don’t want their electricity bills to skyrocket, the lights to go off, for their jobs to be put at risk or for the way of life in rural and regional communities to be sacrificed.”
Bernadette Hogan and her husband - fourth-generation farmers from the Mallee region in Victoria - know all about rural life. But they believe their "way of life" will be sacrificed if more climate action isn't taken soon enough.
Statements made by the federal government about “protecting the regions” are unfair, she says, because they don’t account for every community member.
Bernadette Hogan is a farmer in Victoria's Mallee region Source: Supplied/Bernadette Hogan
“I find that a little bit of an uncomfortable position. I don't know about that when the Environment Minister has approved the extension of three coal projects in the last few months.”
And Ms Hogan isn't alone in her scepticism of Mr Morrison and his government's recent messaging on climate.
Claim one: 'We will continue to meet and beat our targets'
While unveiling the 2050 target, Mr Morrison said: “Indeed, Australia will beat and meet our 2030 targets”.
It's a claim regularly repeated by Mr Morrison and Emissions Reductions Minister Angus Taylor.
The federal government has committed to reducing its emissions by 26 to 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 as part of the Paris Agreement. The latest projections show the country will have reduced emissions by 30 to 35 per cent at the end of the decade.
But Climate Council CEO Amanda McKenzie says it’s not a statement the government should be taking credit for.
"The federal government is only able to crow about the fact that it can meet its woeful 2030 targets because of the massive rollout of renewable energy driven by state governments and restrictions on land clearing put in place by state governments before they even came to power.”
“The federal government has played no role in this other than to obstruct, delay and obfuscate.”
, with the majority also setting interim targets before 2030 that are more ambitious than the federal target.
Source: SBS News
When asked in a press conference last week about how the federal government was able to update its 2030 target and if it was due to the recent commitment of New South Wales to halve its emissions by 2030, Mr Taylor said it was due to a combination of factors. He said the swift uptake of "renewables, particularly solar", new technologies with better "energy efficiency" and "changes in land use" made it possible.
Separately, Ms McKenzie says, Australia isn't measuring its emissions like other countries.
Australia is the only country in the developed world that uses a “remarkable additional benefit” of including the impact of historical land clearing, she says.
“Most countries have not been permitted to consider it [in their emissions reductions]. Any fair comparison looks past it and focuses on what’s happening elsewhere.”
“Once you cut past these ancient changes to land management, between 2005 and the start of the pandemic Australia’s emissions increased, while most of our allies were getting to work on reducing their impact."
Source: SBS News
“It’s basically cheating when it takes credit for that and says it was the result of federal government policy - it was not.”
“The federal government is investing in new coal and new gas and is actually pulling us back in the opposite direction.”
Angus Taylor at Parliament House in Canberra last month. Source: AAP
“They're using our latest figures, which for Australia, were at the bottom of the pandemic recession. Economic activity went down and, obviously, emissions went down for a time.”
“But they are comparing Australia’s figures with other countries’ [figures] from before the pandemic.”
Claim two: 'Australians' bills will skyrocket’
When the Labor government introduced its carbon tax legislation in 2012, then-Liberal opposition leader Tony Abbott campaigned hard to end it.
He said households would be hundreds of dollars better off without the carbon tax. And it's a message the coalition continues to push today.
Last week, Mr Morrison trumpeted that his plan to reach net zero would not raise bills and Mr Taylor pledged the coalition would not introduce a carbon tax that "punishes the most vulnerable in our community through higher prices for electricity and other essentials".
But Ms Hutley rejects that proposition.
“Governments love to use scare tactics when they’re backing away from a policy, and one of the biggest myths was that imposing a carbon price in Australia, in the past, was going to raise electricity bills,” she says.
“But the funny thing is, we actually did have a carbon price for a number of years, and it didn't increase electricity bills.”
“There's an opportunity for you to be a lot better off by switching to renewables.”
Since beginning a new job as head of the OECD, former coalition finance minister Mathias Cormann - who was fiercely opposed to carbon pricing mechanisms -
Claim three: ‘Australians' jobs will be put at risk’
There have long been calls for the federal government to move faster in making the transition to clean energy, where experts say there are plenty of opportunities for jobs.
But while announcing Australia’s 2050 target, Mr Morrison said the government’s plan "keeps traditional advantages in the regions while supporting the growth of new industries".
Mr Taylor said this could be achieved because "it’s a plan for net zero, not absolute zero", saying offsets would be an important element going forward.
"It’s a plan that will not put industries, regions or jobs at risk. It means we take advantage of those economic opportunities that are emerging now while continuing to serve our traditional markets."
Mr Hare says automation in the mining and gas industries has been leading to ongoing reductions in employment, so the number of jobs in those sectors "is not as optimistic as the government likes to claim”.
“I know this has been a concern for a number of state governments who see the social license for these industries deriving from their employment, but with robotisation and automation, job numbers will decline in these industries anyway.”
While Mr Hare also expects automation to be harnessed by the renewable sector, he says the job opportunities in the renewable sector outweigh those in the fossil fuel industries.
Alongside the “mammoth growth opportunity”, Ms Hutley says, a report which she authored for the Climate Council found political inertia could instead cost New South Wales and Queensland up to 70,000 jobs if G7 nations and others decide to tax emissions-intensive imports from Australia.
“The rest of the world is saying that over time, not tomorrow, or next week, but over the next coming decade, we're going to reduce our demand for fossil fuels.”
“So whatever Australia thinks it can or can't do, the rest of the world is telling us: 'we don't want your dirty energy'.”
While farmers Ms Hogan and her husband are working to adapt their lives and livelihoods to a changing climate, she feels the same "sense of urgency" is missing from the government.
“I think the government's got to realise that we can't go slow - the impacts are already here.”
SBS News contacted Mr Morrison and Mr Taylor for comment.
