| Key Points |
|
On a not‑too‑distant summer afternoon in 2035, the bitumen in a quiet Gungahlin cul‑de‑sac is soft enough to take a footprint, the air still and 40‑plus degrees even after 6pm, and the only movement is the shimmer above the roofs of tightly packed townhouses.7
Inside, an evaporative cooler labours uselessly in air that is both scorching and dry, while a young family huddles in the only semi‑bearable room, scrolling their phones to find the nearest public “heat refuge” promised in the ACT’s new climate strategy.7
Outside, the patchy street trees offer almost no shade, and the concrete paths radiate stored heat accumulated over days of a heatwave that climate models say will become far more frequent in Canberra by mid‑century.7
Against this backdrop of lethal heating, the ACT Climate Change Strategy 2026–35 arrives wrapped in the cool language of “overarching frameworks”, “thematic pillars” and “sequenced action plans”.1
It promises a fair and inclusive shift to a net‑zero, climate‑resilient city by 2045, but leaves key decisions about how steeply emissions must fall in the 2030s to future documents and future ministers.1
Community groups and climate advocates say that gap between embodied heat in suburbs like Gungahlin and the paper’s abstract language could be measured in extra ambulance call‑outs, higher power bills, and lives lost in poorly insulated rentals.4
Now, with consultation open until 18 March 2026, Canberrans are being asked whether a framework without firm 2035 targets is enough as the climate crisis accelerates around them.6
The promise of a new framework
The ACT Climate Change Strategy 2026–35 is pitched as an evolution rather than a rewrite, shifting from a single, detailed plan to an overarching framework supported by a series of shorter‑term action plans that can be updated as technology, economics and federal policy change.1
The government argues this model will allow it to respond more nimbly to new risks and opportunities, rather than locking in a fixed list of measures in 2026 that may be out of date by the early 2030s.1
In practice, that means the strategy sets the direction and principles, while detailed commitments – from building standards to public transport timetables and retrofit programs – are pushed into rolling action plans with shorter time horizons.1
Officials frame this as a way to avoid the “set and forget” problem that plagued some earlier climate documents, in which ambitious targets were not always matched by delivery mechanisms or regular public reporting.10
But critics warn that flexibility cuts both ways: a framework can be a vehicle for rapid escalation, or a convenient shell into which future governments pour watered‑down commitments if political winds change.4
Eight themes, one net‑zero horizon
The discussion paper organises the next decade of climate action into eight themes that run from energy and transport through to resilience, housing, nature and the economy, each intended to knit mitigation and adaptation together.1
The themes include energy, transport, buildings and urban form, the natural environment, waste and the circular economy, industry and innovation, community resilience and wellbeing, and government leadership.1
Across these pillars the strategy reaffirms the territory’s long‑standing goal of reaching net zero emissions by 2045, building on interim targets of a 50–60% cut by 2025, 65–75% by 2030 and 90–95% by 2040 against 1990 levels.8
Having already shifted its electricity supply to 100% renewable contracts, the ACT locates the bulk of remaining emissions cuts in phasing out fossil gas, electrifying transport, improving building performance and reshaping urban development to reduce car dependence.10
Electrification is the dominant through‑line: the paper foreshadows a gas‑free future for new suburbs, continued expansion of zero‑emissions public transport, and support for households to replace gas appliances and petrol cars with electric alternatives powered by renewables.10
On the adaptation side, the themes bundle commitments around resilient infrastructure, urban cooling, emergency management and nature‑based solutions such as urban forests and restored waterways that can blunt the worst impacts of extreme heat and storms.1
Electrification and resilient infrastructure
The strategy doubles down on the ACT’s reputation as an early mover on electrification, with a clear signal that gas has no long‑term future in the territory’s homes, businesses or public assets.10
Earlier commitments – including phasing out gas by 2045, delivering all new government buildings and public schools as all‑electric, and transitioning the government’s passenger fleet and bus network to zero emissions – are presented as foundations for the next phase rather than completed work.10
Electrification is framed not just as a climate measure but as a cost‑of‑living and health intervention, with more efficient homes, cleaner air and reduced exposure to volatile fossil fuel prices cited as co‑benefits.1
Resilient infrastructure emerges as the other major pillar, with the paper canvassing upgrades to energy and transport networks, drainage systems and public assets so they can withstand longer heatwaves, more intense storms and increased bushfire risk.1
This includes proposals for more shaded streets, climate‑ready schools and community facilities that can double as refuges during extreme heat and smoke events, acknowledging that even rapid emissions cuts will not prevent dangerous warming already locked in by past pollution.9
The target the ACT is likely to miss
Beneath the aspirational language, the paper contains a blunt admission: the ACT is unlikely to fully achieve its 2025 emissions reduction target of 50–60% below 1990 levels, despite its vaunted status as “the nation’s climate action capital”.8
The government points to population growth, slower‑than‑expected shifts in transport and building emissions, and national policy constraints as reasons the territory is struggling to bend the curve fast enough in the early 2020s.1
That frankness is unusual in Australian climate politics, where missed milestones are more often buried than acknowledged, but it also raises uncomfortable questions about whether the ACT can credibly promise steeper cuts again in the 2030s.11
Under the existing trajectory, the ACT must not only regain lost ground from the 2025 shortfall but accelerate towards its 2030 and 2040 goals, cutting deeply into transport and building emissions that tend to be slow and capital‑intensive to shift.8
Critics say this is precisely why the new strategy should contain binding, sector‑specific targets for 2035 and beyond, rather than leaving the steepness of the emissions descent curve to future action plans and future parliaments.4
Frameworks, hard numbers and the 2035 gap
The timing of the ACT strategy coincides with the federal government adopting a national 2035 target of cutting emissions 62–70% below 2005 levels, a benchmark that highlights how much of Australia’s decarbonisation effort is now expected in the decade after 2030.12
National projections released late last year suggested Australia was on track for only about a 48% cut by 2035 on current settings, well short of that goal, underscoring how quickly policies will need to tighten if the country is to stay inside a 1.5C‑consistent carbon budget.12
Against that backdrop, the ACT’s decision to stop short of spelling out explicit 2035 targets in its core strategy looks to some like a retreat from the transparent, time‑bound goals that once set the territory apart from larger jurisdictions.8
Climate advocates argue that a framework without clear waypoints risks allowing incrementalism to creep back in, especially as the “easy wins” of renewable electricity have already been banked and the remaining cuts require reshaping transport, housing and land‑use patterns.11
Others, including some policy experts, say a framework could still drive deep cuts if it is paired with legally binding carbon budgets, transparent sectoral plans and independent monitoring that forces future governments to explain any backsliding in public.10
For now, the draft paper leans more on the language of “pathways” and “options” than on the hard numbers and enforcement mechanisms that would give those pathways real teeth.1
Voices from the ground
Outside the bureaucracy, patience is wearing thin among parts of Canberra’s climate movement, which has long celebrated the ACT’s leadership but now fears the territory is coasting on past achievements just as the crisis intensifies.4
The Conservation Council ACT Region has described the 2026–35 discussion paper as a “vague”, “hastily put‑together placeholder” that sketches broad principles but ducks crucial decisions about timelines and accountability for cutting emissions this decade and next.4
Housing advocates, renters’ groups and health organisations are also pressing for much stronger commitments on minimum energy performance standards, mandatory upgrades for the worst‑performing rentals and more ambitious urban greening to cut lethal heat in low‑income suburbs.9
They argue that without concrete timelines and funding for measures like deep retrofits, street trees and accessible cooling refuges, the burden of rising temperatures will continue to fall hardest on people in older homes, social housing and outer‑suburban estates with little shade.9
For these groups, the debate is less about the elegance of the framework and more about whether their members will be safer, healthier and less exposed by the time the next mega‑heatwave or smoke‑choked summer rolls through the capital.7
The government’s collective action case
The ACT government, for its part, insists the strategy is grounded in collective action and wellbeing, highlighting co‑benefits such as lower bills, cleaner air, active transport, improved biodiversity and more liveable neighbourhoods as central to the plan.1
Ministers argue that framing climate policy through health, equity and quality of life – rather than only tonnes of carbon – will make it easier to build durable public support for the disruptive changes required in housing, transport and energy systems.1
The paper talks about partnering with communities, businesses and First Nations organisations to co‑design local solutions, from neighbourhood‑scale energy projects to nature‑based adaptation and culturally appropriate emergency responses.1
Yet in the absence of binding interim targets or guaranteed minimum investment levels, those aspirations risk reading as hopeful rather than assured, leaving community groups to fight the same battles budget by budget and project by project.4
The tension between the government’s emphasis on shared wellbeing and advocates’ demand for harder edges – targets, timelines, enforcement and funding – runs through almost every section of the draft strategy.4
Climate leadership at a crossroads
For more than a decade, the ACT has revelled in its image as Australia’s climate pioneer, from legislating ambitious targets to contracting 100% renewable electricity and pledging to phase out gas without buying offsets to meet its goals.10
That leadership has often stood in stark contrast to national policy, where the Safeguard Mechanism, heavy reliance on offsets and a slow‑moving coal and gas sector have left Australia off‑track for both its 2030 and 2035 targets.12
At the same time, the federal government has promoted “Nature Positive” laws and global biodiversity summits while continuing to approve new fossil fuel projects and maintain a pipeline of coal and gas developments that independent analysts say would blow the global 1.5C budget.13
Reports released in the wake of recent disasters such as Cyclone Alfred have described Australia as a “fossil fuel behemoth”, noting that its coal, oil and gas exports are on track to cause several times more climate damage than its domestic emissions.13
In that context, the ACT’s new strategy will be read not just as a local policy document but as a test of whether a self‑declared climate leader can maintain its edge with frameworks and principles rather than firm timelines and enforceable carbon budgets.8
If the territory loosens its grip on clear targets while the rest of the country continues to expand fossil fuel production under a Nature Positive banner, the gap between climate rhetoric and lived reality in suburbs like Gungahlin will only widen.12
Adaptation, accountability and a deadline
Beyond emissions accounting, the 2026–35 strategy will shape how Canberra adapts to a climate already changing faster than many models anticipated, with hotter summers, shifting rainfall and compounding risks from fire, heat and smoke.9
That makes decisions about building standards, rental protections, insurance, planning codes, urban forests and public infrastructure as consequential for residents’ day‑to‑day safety as decisions about the territory’s next megawatt of renewable generation.9
Advocates warn that if the strategy does not lock in stronger adaptation measures by the mid‑2030s – from mandatory cool roofs and higher energy performance to expanded green space in heat‑vulnerable suburbs – the costs will show up in health statistics, lost productivity and widening inequality.9
They argue that a credible plan for the next decade must combine clear emissions trajectories with legally backed adaptation benchmarks, transparent reporting and independent oversight, so that no government can quietly let the framework drift while temperatures climb.11
For now, though, the most tangible line in the sand is not a 2035 carbon budget but a consultation deadline: public submissions on the ACT Climate Change Strategy 2026–35 close on 18 March 2026, a date community groups describe as a final chance for Canberrans to demand a plan with teeth before the shape of the next climate decade is effectively locked in.6
References
- ACT Government – Developing the next ACT Climate Change Strategy 2026–35 discussion paper
- ACT Climate Change Strategy targets and net zero by 2045 commitment
- ACT Climate Change Strategy 2019–25 – 2025 emissions reduction target (50–60% below 1990)
- Conservation Council ACT Region – commentary on 2026–35 climate strategy as “vague placeholder”4
- Fossil Fuel Non‑Proliferation Treaty Initiative – Exporting Harm: Australia’s fossil fuel expansion and climate hypocrisy
- ACT Government – Climate Change Strategy consultation dates (29 January–18 March 2026)
- AdaptNSW – Projected climate change impacts and heatwaves in the ACT region
- ASBEC – Overview of ACT Climate Change Strategy 2019–2025 and interim targets
- AdaptNSW – Climate risks, health and adaptation needs in the ACT
- ACT Greens – Commitments on electrification, gas phase‑out and zero‑emissions fleets
- Climate Action Tracker – Australia’s policies, offsets reliance and decarbonisation pathways
- ABC News – Australia projected to badly miss 2035 climate target of 62–70% cuts
- The Australia Institute – Nature Positive rhetoric and fossil fuel approvals critique
No comments :
Post a Comment