MK: Yes, at the same time in Canberra, Scott Morrison had become PM and was lugging a lump of coal around in the parliament. But while they were doing that, at the NSW level we were able to demonstrate that the Liberals can be really good on this issue in an economically rational way that’s pro-growth, pro-jobs, pro-investment and pro-the-future. Fitz: Which brings us to the target of getting to net zero by 2050. Can you give us a year 10-level explanation before we get to the itty-bitty of the nitty-gritty? MK: Carbon dioxide is like a blanket around the earth, capturing heat, so the more we belch fossil fuel emissions into the atmosphere, the more we disrupt our weather systems, our environment and ecosystems. So under the Paris Agreement of 2015, Australia was one of 195 parties that committed to reducing greenhouse gas emissions by pursuing set targets of emission reductions, updated every five years to get to net zero by 2050 – at which point whatever emissions remain are balanced by removing the same amount from the atmosphere. Fitz: And the Libs were actually pretty good in that? MK: Yes, despite brandishing the lump of coal, to Morrison’s eternal credit, he led the party to a position of embracing net zero – committing to a reduction of 28 per cent below 2005 levels by 2030 – and he did so not as a moderate, but as a conservative. He understood the electoral importance and the community concern about this. Australia is on the front line of climate change, and will be more affected than most countries by it. And by the time Albanese went to the polls in 2022, they had increased the target for emission reductions by 43 per cent by 2030. The electorate clearly supported the increased target.
Fitz: And not long after that – shortly after you’d left politics – the new PM invited you to chair the Climate Change Authority, to give independent advice to the government on what needs to be done. MK: Yes, and as soon as he said to me, “We want you,” I said, “You know, I’m on the blue team?” He said, “That’s why we want you. We don’t want this to be a red team/ blue team issue. We want this to be all our issue.” Climate Change Authority chair Matt Kean (left) with Prime Minister Anthony Albanese, Climate Change Minister Chris Bowen and Treasurer Jim Chalmers at the government’s emissions reduction target announcement on September 18. Credit: Dominic Lorrimer Fitz: So, the Albanese government has just announced it will follow your CCA’s recommendations and set its new target at 62 to 70 per cent reductions by 2035. Was it a long process to crunch those numbers and come up with that target? MK: (Flatly.) Yes. My wife, Wendy, was worried a couple of weeks ago that I was having a heart attack trying to hold the whole thing together. There are so many diverse stakeholders pushing for different things. The business community says it’s got to be “x” and then the green group says it’s going to be “y”. Day after day, I was sitting with the CCA modelling team, changing assumptions, testing assumptions, adding things in, taking things out, to see how far we could go.
Fitz: And yet, you’ve also come under attack from 60 prominent climate scientists, who have penned a letter to the PM saying, “We are dismayed that the target announced by the federal government last week ... fails to meet this promise to deliver the highest possible ambition.” They say we still have one of the dirtiest economies on earth. MK: I fully respect the determination and insights of the climate scientists because targets are one thing, but achieving them is another. Their advocacy is valuable. I would remind them, though, that we are starting from a high-emitting economy. To hit our 2035 target, we have to slash our per-capita emissions by 76-81 per cent (a national target of 75 per cent emissions reduction on 2005 levels would have required a 91 per cent cut in per-capita emissions). To reach our goal over the next decade would make Australia the biggest improver among the nations we have looked at. That’s not the end of the race to net zero, though, but moving from a laggard to joining the leading pack will set us up for a podium finish. Loading Fitz: Ideally, of course, with bipartisan support. But what I genuinely don’t understand is this. Despite Morrison having introduced net zero targets; despite the Berejiklian government and many others having demonstrated the regional economic rewards of renewables; and despite the latest Resolve poll showing only 17 per cent of Australians want to abandon the net zero target, here we are with your LNP basically fighting like cats in a sack, with the likes of Matt Canavan, Barnaby Joyce, Alex Antic and even Andrew Hastie saying it’s time to abandon the whole thing – even while money is pouring into renewable energy projects across our brown and pleasant land? MK: I don’t know, Fitz. I’m looking at the same numbers that you are. Not only do I think there’s an environmental imperative, not only do I think there is an enormous economic opportunity, but politically, the community has already decided on this issue. They’re embracing new technologies, putting solar on their roofs, buying batteries, driving electric cars, living differently. And some politicians are saying, “We don’t want to watch Netflix, so let’s go and build a Blockbuster Video chain again.” It just doesn’t make any sense. As to that Andrew Hastie video this week, describing electric cars as “silent and soulless”, it’s very strange that some politicians want to stop Australians getting access to the latest EV technologies and would prefer us to be all driving around in a 1950s Falcon – it’s just weird.
Fitz: Well, one of the things they’re saying, endlessly repeated, is that committing to net zero is economic suicide. MK: I see the exact opposite – and that’s based on the economic modelling that we’ve done, looking at the impact of Australia getting to net zero under the pathways that we’ve recommended, and it shows a huge net economic benefit to the nation, as capital flows into building infrastructure nationwide, creating jobs all over Australia, building communities and providing cheap energy which will allow us to be very competitive globally in so many different industries Fitz: Are you sure you don’t want a Blockbuster Video for old time’s sake? Loading MK: Today, 84 per cent of the world’s economy has signed up to net zero. So pretty soon, our major trading partners will reduce their demand for our coal, as they go to renewables. And we’ve got to prepare for that future. If we move now, we can reap the benefits of all our natural advantages and be an energy and economic superpower.
Fitz: Mike Cannon-Brookes said to me a couple of years ago that if Australia gets it right, we can be the Saudi Arabia of renewable power in the 21st century. Do you agree? MK: We can be the Saudi Arabia of solar power, and we can be at the forefront of this next industrial revolution, and do so in a way that underwrites a new era of economic prosperity that previous generations of Australians wouldn’t have ever dreamt was possible. Fitz: And yet, the Barnaby boyos keep insisting that fossil fuels are cheaper? MK: No one can say that seriously. Don’t take my word for it – take the Australian Energy Market Operator’s word for it, take the CSIRO’s word for it. They’re the engineers and experts who run our electricity system, and they’ve looked at what the cost of replacing our existing system is. They’ve clearly said, against every other alternative, that renewables are by far the cheapest system for consumers and taxpayers. And the truth is, all the coal-fired power stations are nearing the end, and the cheapest way to replace that infrastructure is with renewables. Kean in 2020 with then-premier Gladys Berejiklian, who tapped him to be environment minister in her Coalition government. Credit: Janie Barrett
Fitz: But this is where I do get the angst. I’ve seen all the studies that prove “renewables are cheaper”, and accept that, but there is no doubt that all of our electricity bills really are rising. Why is that when there are more renewables than ever before? MK: The problem is not that we have too many renewables in the system. The problem is we don’t have enough renewables in the system. We saw huge, eye-wateringly high increases in electricity bills following Russia’s illegal invasion of Ukraine, whereby the war disrupted supply, and the wholesale price of coal went up around 75 per cent and gas 150 per cent, and that flowed through to consumers. So the most important thing we can do is to protect ourselves from global shocks and the cost of coal by moving to renewables faster. Fitz: Do you expect that electricity bills will come down? MK: The AEMO has recently put out a report saying the most important thing to get bills down – and they say bills will come down by up to 20 per cent per annum – is the co-ordinated rollout of renewables between now and 2050. They’re the experts, and they very clearly say an orderly transition to a renewables-based energy system is going to lead to savings for households and businesses. Fitz: Do you believe the LNP will see the logic of all of the above, or not? Who wins? Netflix or Blockbuster?
[SRC] https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-former-liberal-leading-labor-and-the-nation-to-a-renewable-future-20250925-p5mxva.html
