Albanese government’s 2035 target range is aimed at multiple audiences

The Albanese government is hoping it can successfully juggle multiple audiences with its 2035 emissions reduction target^[1].

With a specific number, no single set of stakeholders could have been fully satisfied without alienating another. In opting for a range, and a big one at that – a 62%-70% cut in emissions from 2005 levels – the government, taking a pragmatic course, has given itself maximum wriggle room. This is also reasonable, considering a future of economic uncertainty and rapidly changing technology.

Business can focus on the 62%; those wanting more ambition can hope the 70% might be reached. Prime Minister Anthony Albanese declared, “we think we’ve got the sweet spot”. They haven’t of course – because there is no “sweet spot”. In policy terms, dealing with climate change is one of those “wicked problems”. Often, it is a choice between least-worst courses, or a stab in the dark, given the long timelines.

The government’s unveiling of its 2035 target has been a highly choreographed exercise.

A decision, certain to be controversial, was stalled until after the election. The Climate Change Authority – which earlier had announced it was consulting on a target between 65%-75% – did not formally hand its advice in until Friday, advice the government followed precisely.

On Monday the government released its National Climate Risk Assessment^[2], that painted a dire and dramatic picture of the dangers presented by the changing weather. Thursday’s target announcement was backed up by a package of measures, worth more than $8 billion, to support the energy transition, and accompanied by Treasury modelling documenting the advantages of an orderly path forward.

The 2035 target should go down quite well with most voters. It sounds like a credible commitment to action, which people want. This week’s Newspoll^[3] found 25% of people thought Australia should stick to its current action on climate change, while 37% believed Australia should increase it.

The government legislated its 2030 target (for a 43% reduction in emissions) with much fanfare. But it has already accepted it mightn’t be able to put the 2035 target into law. That would require support in the Senate from either the Greens or the opposition, and both have denounced it.

The Greens will try to use what they describe as a “capitulation to coal and gas corporations” to lever off some votes from Labor, especially in inner city areas.

With her party in an existential battle over the future of its commitment to net zero by 2050, Sussan Ley has navigated the opposition’s reaction to the government’s 2035 target by arguing it won’t reach the 2030 one. While the government insists that target is still achievable, some experts are very sceptical. Ley also said there was nothing in the announcement “that demonstrates to Australians how much it will cost”.

Whatever 2035 target the government produced, the opposition was always set to reject it, so it was just a matter of preparing the attack lines. But

References

1. ^{^} 2035 emissions reduction target (www.dcceew.gov.au)
2. ^{^} National Climate Risk Assessment (www.acs.gov.au)
3. ^{^} Newspoll (www.theaustralian.com.au)