In some ways you have to feel sorry for Opposition Leader Sussan Ley. Elected after a rout at the last election, Ley has attempted to unite a Coalition of political parties that seem hell bent on tearing themselves apart.
Ley has been in the job about 6 months and from the outside looking in, at best you would have to say it has been character building. LNP Frontbenchers ‘freelancing’ in areas of responsibility that are nothing to do with them, high profile Coalition MPs publicly lobbying for policy change or jockeying for position in future oppositions are less than edifying behaviour and promote an image that the opposition can’t manage themselves – let alone government.
If you cast your mind back a bit, there was a similar display of bloodletting and poor behaviour when the ALP’s Kevin Rudd won the 2007 election. In both the 2007 and 2025 election, the leader of the Coalition lost their own seat and the recriminations started.
Australia’s election system is different to most other large democratic countries as we have preferential voting and an expectation that one party (or group of parties in the case of the Coalition) will win absolute power in the House of Representatives. The conventional wisdom is that winning an election is attracting the voters in the centre of the political spectrum that your policies will be better for them than ‘the other mob’. The centralist voter is quite adept at changing their vote next time around if it is demonstrated in your period in power that the reality is different to the promise.
So Ley, who seems to have some understanding why former Opposition Leader Peter Dutton lost the last election, attempted a process of rebuilding. Her first step was to publicly claim that all policies were up for review. She announced there would be a detailed review of the election loss and seemed to connect the dots that some of the Coalition’s policies were not what the centralist voter in Australia was looking for. There was to be a process of rebuilding policy that apparently would appeal to most Australians, they would win the next election and the Australia would again experience the halcyon days of an effective and capable Coalition government.
This wasn’t good enough for some. A number of opposition MPs with a media profile were either gullible enough to be convinced by the marketing of firms with interests in the production of fossil fuels or even worse, did they jump on the fossil fuel bandwagon to roll the current opposition leadership that they only installed months earlier. After a high stakes game of political brinkmanship, these politicians convinced enough of their colleagues to consider (and then approve) a policy of not actively working towards a position where Australia ditches any aspiration for Australia to be in a position of emitting no net emissions by 2050.
At this point it is important to define the difference between net and absolute. The difference is that positive emissions in some processes (taking more carbon out of the air than the process generates) in some production processes will offset the necessary carbon emissions that are required by other processes will lead to no net emissions. It does not mean a complete ban on creating carbon emissions – which would be an absolute ban on emissions.
The facts are that in a lot of cases, using renewables is better economically than the use of fossil fuels, regardless of the subsidies that have been and are currently offered. Those with vehicles that have some form of electric power will tell you the fuel cost incurred using the electric part of the drive system in the vehicle is considerably less that the cost of the fossil fuels. Those with solar panels will tell you in is wonderful to turn your air conditioning on all day at home on a fine hot day – knowing that you are not paying the power company anything for the privilege (or at most a couple of cents an hour). Public authorities are installing solar panels and batteries on a wide range of equipment from road signs to level crossings so they don’t have to either come by every few days and top up the generator with fuel or arrange for a source of power to be connected to the device.
Despite the claims of some who should know better that ‘everyone is moving away from net zero’, South Korea has announced it will be closing all 40 of its coal fired power stations by 2040. Apart from the demonstration of the inaccuracy of the claims by those in the opposition, it would have to be a concern to the large (predominately foreign owned) coal mining companies that operate in Australia who supply coal to the South Korean power industry. South Korea joins Singapore and others that are further away from Australia.
So after claiming the win on ‘no net zero’ and how it will immediately improve the standing of the Coalition’s poling, the obvious question is did it work. Short answer is no. Despite the Murdoch controlled ‘news.com.au’ website calling it a shock result – was it really?
The ALP won the last two elections promising emissions reductions and outlined a plan for doing so rather than the glib words with no evidence of any action provided by both Morrison and Dutton the Coalition leaders at the respective times. As Coalition MPs and Senators have been promoting on social media and anywhere else they can get a word in edgeways that they will remove the aspiration to achieve net zero by 2050. The polls didn’t move. Will this cause a rethink of what the centralist Australian really wants?
Short answer is probably not – they are already moving onto inflated and demonstrably false claims about immigration. In other words, the beatings will continue until morale improves.
Dear reader, we need your support
Independent sites such as The AIMN provide a platform for public interest journalists. From its humble beginning in January 2013, The AIMN has grown into one of the most trusted and popular independent media organisations.
One of the reasons we have succeeded has been due to the support we receive from our readers through their financial contributions.
With increasing costs to maintain The AIMN, we need this continued support.
Your donation – large or small – to help with the running costs of this site will be greatly appreciated.
You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969
Don’t give a toss about Sussssan Ley!
@ Heather – totally agree.
Fortunately – or unfortunately – there is no-one with enough brain power to take over effectively when she goes, as she will soon I believe.
The boys in the back-room of the Liberal Party don’t give a toss about Sussan: she is seat warmer.
It is patently obvious that Hastie is being groomed for leadership. You can see it in his demeanour, the way other Liberals are showing him deference, the cut of his cloth (literally, he obviously has a good and expensive tailor – no dodgy Albo T-shirts for him) and the fact that he won’t pledge loyalty to Sussan.
Already he has hopped on the migration bus which, it seems the Conservatives want to make the next big issue for Australia but they need to be careful aligning with one-trick-Pauline.
The question is timing for dumping Suss, will it be before the year’s end or early 2026; I’m thinking the latter. Suss will be asked to vacate the leadership demurely and if the Libs can get back into office, it will be a nice ambassadorship for Sussan.