| Key Points |
|
The Nationals have reignited Australia’s climate divide by walking away from net zero.
The National Party’s decision to abandon its support for Australia’s 2050 net zero emissions target marks a dramatic rupture in the nation’s climate policy landscape.[1]
It signals a widening gap between regional and urban Australia, and between the Nationals and their Coalition partners, the Liberal Party.
While the Nationals frame its move as protecting rural livelihoods, the longer term costs to Party credibility and climate stability could be immense.
Origins and background
The Nationals first backed net zero in 2021, following months of negotiation with the Morrison government ahead of the Glasgow COP26 summit.[2]
That support came with concessions aimed at shielding regional industries from the perceived costs of decarbonisation.
By 2025, however, internal unease had deepened, culminating in the Party’s October declaration that net zero was no longer compatible with rural Australia’s interests.
Leader David Littleproud framed the reversal as “honesty with our people”, arguing that global targets imposed unrealistic burdens on farmers and miners.
Yet the policy shift places the Nationals sharply at odds with the Liberal Party, which maintains formal support for net zero despite its own internal divisions.
Political and ideological divides
The decision underscores a widening ideological gulf within conservative politics.[3]
Some Nationals, led by former leader Barnaby Joyce, have long portrayed net zero as a city-centric agenda divorced from rural realities.
Others warn the move risks alienating moderate voters and business interests increasingly aligned with renewable energy.
The Nationals’ shift also challenges the Liberal Party’s capacity to present a unified climate policy, particularly ahead of the next federal election.
It creates fresh tensions across the Coalition, with Liberal MPs from metropolitan seats urging a return to pragmatic emissions policy.
Economic implications and regional realities
Central to the Nationals’ argument is the claim that net zero threatens jobs and economic growth in regional Australia.[4]
But economic modelling from the CSIRO and Treasury suggests the opposite.
Transition industries, particularly renewable energy, critical minerals, and regional hydrogen, could create tens of thousands of jobs across rural areas.
Economist Nicki Hutley describes the Nationals’ position as “economically short-sighted", warning that resisting transition will increase costs for households and industries as global carbon markets tighten.
Australia’s major trading partners, including Japan and South Korea, have already embedded net zero into trade and investment criteria, leaving non-aligned exporters at a disadvantage.
Environmental and scientific perspective
Climate scientists have been quick to condemn the Nationals’ decision, citing worsening extreme weather across Australia.[5]
The Bureau of Meteorology confirms that 2023–2025 saw record heatwaves, bushfires, and drought conditions in many regions.
CSIRO and IPCC data show that continued reliance on fossil fuels will deepen climate impacts, particularly in agricultural sectors already under stress.
By rejecting net zero, the Nationals risk aligning with global climate sceptics at a moment when climate accountability is central to trade and diplomacy.
The shift has alarmed Pacific neighbours, who view Australia’s reliability as a regional partner through the lens of its emissions policy.
Public and international response
Public reaction has been mixed but largely critical.[6]
Polling by the Australia Institute found that more than 70 per cent of Australians support a national net zero target, including a majority of rural respondents.
Business leaders, including the National Farmers’ Federation, have called for certainty rather than retreat, arguing that global markets are already moving toward low-carbon production standards.
Internationally, the decision has drawn quiet concern from trading partners and climate allies, particularly the United Kingdom and European Union, who have linked trade access to emissions performance.
Australia’s reputation as a reliable climate actor may suffer renewed damage just as global investment in clean technology accelerates.
Consequences and outlook
The Nationals’ retreat from net zero reflects deep anxieties about change in regional Australia but also exposes a failure of political leadership.[7]
Rather than shaping the transition, the Party risks leaving its constituents unprepared for it.
Abandoning net zero may deliver short term political comfort, but will likely compound long term economic and environmental harm.
As the climate crisis intensifies, policy vacuums become liabilities, not shields.
Australia’s path forward depends on reconciling rural and urban futures within a shared, science based national strategy.
References
- ABC News – Nationals dump net zero target
- The Guardian – Nationals’ split over net zero deepens Coalition divide
- The Conversation – What the Nationals’ net zero reversal means for Australia
- CSIRO – Economic opportunities in regional transition
- Climate Council – Climate impacts of abandoning net zero
- Sydney Morning Herald – Business and farmers react to Nationals’ shift
- Australian Treasury – Emissions modelling and economic forecasts
No comments :
Post a Comment