PM relies on Labor as Libs revolt over net-zero

SCOTT Morrison requires Labor to support his net-zero ambitions after his own Party members threatened to block his Greens-inspired policy direction. 

The prime minister appears to have gone all in with the Left’s climate project, ignoring protests from centre-Right Party colleagues. 

“That’s all this net-zero is about. It is lining the pockets of rent-seekers.”
Gerard Rennick
Federal Liberal National Senator

With gushing media support – and frowns from those within his own Party who question the accuracy of the Left’s computer climate models – the prime minister is planning a tax-payer funded $1b low-emissions technology fund.

According to The Australian newspaper, Coalition backbenchers Matt Canavan and Gerard Rennick have threatened to cross the floor over the issue – leaving the future of Mr Morrison’s plans in the hands of Labor leader Anthony Albanese.

CAMPAIGN

Liberal National senator Matt Canavan said he was against the PM’s fund because it was part of a backflip to commit to net-zero by 2050.

Senator Canavan said he would campaign against net-zero targets at next year’s federal election.

 “It’s going to be a no from me,” he said.

Meanwhile Senator Rennick accused the Coalition of betraying its supporters.

“We’re supposed to be the Party of private enterprise,” he said. “Why are we subsidising rent-seekers?

 “That’s all this net-zero is about. It’s lining the pockets of rent-seekers.”

With One Nation and independent federal senator Rex Patrick also “highly unlikely” to support the PM’s plans, Mr Morrison will need to call for Labor’s help.

“We believe  climate change  will ultimately be solved by ‘can do’ capitalism, not  ‘don’t do’ governments seeking to control people’s lives and telling them what to do with interventionist regulations and taxes that just force up your cost of living and force businesses to close,” Mr Morrison said in Melbourne last week.PC

9 thoughts on “PM relies on Labor as Libs revolt over net-zero

  1. As we are now in the “woke” time and the PM is following ideals of the last! It is now time for a total upheaval! Enter a coalition of so called minor parties. One Nation, Australia United, Australian Democrats, And so many more who will fracture LNP, Labor/Greens and leave these crooks out on a Limb to be cut off! Next election is the prime time to commence this and bring into play those who are wanting to save this country from the UN and European Union and being over run by Islamic and Chinese Invaders! Tall order but desperately needed!

  2. What is going on in Canberra, everything is the PMs fault, but actually isn’t. State Governments cannot be controlled from Canberra according constitutional laws.

    But many if not most of the negativity directed at the Federal Government and the PM are State Governments and Premiers lack of governance and even petty politics targeting the Federal Election due in 2022.

    Scott Morrison continues to cop flack for daring to go on holidays in 2019 when seasonal bushfires became a serious problem, but the Deputy PM and Cabinet Ministers were available if needed. The responsibility for fighting bushfires in NSW for example is State Government and State Emergency Services including Rural Fire Service. If they need assistance the State Government asks for Federal assistance, and they did, and ADF personnel and assets were deployed while PM Morrison was on leave.

    There are too many examples of relentless negativity directed at the PM, and as with PM Tony Abbott mostly based on deceptive reporting. Mud slinging, as pointed out years ago every time mud is thrown a little mud sticks, over time the target is covered in mud and many voters cannot see or remember past the mud. Union controlled Labor and their Greens comrades with donations from the Union Movement are mud slingers.

  3. Sub dividing the stupidity coming out of Australian politicians is missing the point completely. Green policies, transrights, covid medical tyranny, compulsory vaccines (don’t even ty to argue they are not compulsory) etc., etc. are all part of one political ideology – Marxism. Divide and conquer that it what it is all about. Anyone that supports these things is a traitor to Australia. Oppressive Tolerance, from the Frankfurt School, break society up into little pieces, call any opposition intolerant, then Build Back Better in the glorious image of Marx’s broken and diseased ideas. I used to think Turnbull was useless because he was a policy free zone but Morrison is a lot worse. He has lots of policies, all the wrong ones, all anti-Australian, all lies.

    10
  4. So the net zero emissions “aspirational goal” is now a “Plan” targeting 2050, fair enough, a Five Year Plan for business purposes is flexible and subject to change and variation as time progresses and unforeseen circumstances arise.

    Much different to, say, the Paris Agreement signed and later ratified to achieve a specified reduction target by 2030.

    1. The problem is that the PM is giving legitimacy to junk science. So called climate change is underpinned by computer modelling, of which not one prior prediction has come even remotely close to reality. Oceans haven’t risen, there’s more ice on the poles than ever and polar bears aren’t facing extinction. Yet the PM is committing billions to a computer model that said all these events would occur by 2013. I’m afraid he’s been captured by the vested interest lobby.

      1. Agree, 100%. There is no actual evidence of anthropogenic caused climate change beyond, as you say, junk science computer modelling. Even the darlings of climate alarmism like Michael Mann have been proven over and over again to be either very bad scientists or actual frauds. Mann’s hockey stick has been debunked numerous times yet is still used to ‘prove’ climate change. But then Morrison is taking climate advice by such luminaries as Bill Gates and Greta the Climate Goblin, both of whom have zero education or qualifications to advise about anything.

      2. Please consider the politics, most recent the formation for defence purposes of AUKUS and the UK PM and US President both supporting the climate hoax positions including net zero emissions, and even the non-government organisation World Economic Forum – Build Back Better (from COVID) and New Green Deal, Marxism politics based. Unfortunately the UN is rotten with globalist left comrades but they and their fellow travellers have had since WW2 to implement the inevitability of gradualness to achieve their objectives and to capture the minds of the young and the old woke people.

        Climate change is natural long term Earth Cycles and weather is short term events.

        Prime Minister Abbott was a sceptic, he said that IPCC climate modelling data is “crap” and he was right. But back to relentless negativity he became a target for the hoaxers-globalists and was replaced by their Australian mates. PM Scott Morrison is now their target because he and the government he leads is not cooperating with them. Remember 2019 when the PM announced that Australia would not contribute to the “Green Fund”, the latest demand from member nations is $1.3 trillion a year combined contribution, for redistribution to developing nations to enable them to deal with the climate change hoax.

        Think about it, and what Each Way Albo and recycled Rudd, Gillard and Rudd MPs would do given the opportunity to return to government in Canberra.

    2. Good comment.

      Yes, the Prime Minister has not changed the Federal Government’s position that I first became aware of through media reports (yes I realise how unreliable the mostly left leaning media can be), an “aspirational goal” to achieve net zero emissions (not zero emissions) by 2050 based on research and development of new technology, if possible, and no carbon or other taxes. That was reported during his G7 Meeting at which Australia was a guest. And following that meeting when he met with the UK PM for discussions on a Free Trade Agreement and our PM refused to allow net zero emissions to be in the terms and conditions discussed.

      I have been responsible for many five year business plans, they become less reliable as the forward years are reached and financial year budgets are adjusted accordingly, and even they are often inaccurate despite the many hours of executive time spent on them.

      An aspirational goal reliant on development of new technology could not possibly predict what will happen over the almost 30 years to 2050. However government funding within reason for research and development purposes has been provided for suitable applications in the past so why not in the future?

      But keep the crony capitalists in check, explain to “Twiggy” Forest for example that a fuel tax is for on-road maintenance purposes so off-road users can apply for a refund. It is not a subsidy, that fuel is an expense incurred in earning taxable profits and should be deductible along with other approved expense deductions. Apparently Mr Forest wants all liquid fuel taxed and no refund and the monies used to fund his Hydrogen future research and development expenses. Just like investors in unreliable, so called renewable, intermittent supply, energy from wind and solar and the hidden or rarely mentioned other costs for back up and feeder transmission lines to the main electricity grid. And we consumers pay along with higher cost of living and operating businesses.

      R&D part funding for approved projects aside, free enterprise means consumers pick winners and losers, governments should not interfere, they are elected representatives for all of us and they should act only in the best interests of all Australians.

  5. I was not aware that the Federal Government committed Australia to net zero emissions.

    My understanding is that no commitment was made but an “aspirational goal” based on research and development of new technologies, if possible, would be encouraged.

    The only commitment is the existing Paris Agreement signed in New York during April 2016 following the Paris Conference that ended in December 2015 targeting 2030 to achieve the agreed emissions target. There was no change at the FLOP26 Conference.

    And, one example, no commitment to an Electric Vehicle transition target, but based on a “Future Fuels” policy commitment to fund refuelling infrastructure for EV, Hybrids and Hydrogen Fuel Cell Vehicles. And there are a number of very good reasons for supporting a voluntary transition based on free enterprise, free market principles, what the left call capitalism. Consumers pick the winners or losers based on free choice. However I do not agree with taxpayer incentive subsidies on these new vehicles.

Comments are closed.