The decision brings the party closer to the Nationals, which ditched its support for the target earlier this month amid internal turmoil over the Coalition's policy.

Majority of Liberals wanted net zero gone
The shadow ministry met for about three hours on Thursday morning to set the path forward, a day after Liberal MPs and senators converged on Canberra for a mammoth net-zero-themed party room meeting.

Each of the 49 members present on Wednesday was offered five minutes to speak on the topic, and while there was no formal vote, Liberals all agreed that there were more people opposed to the target than in favour.

See - this is a serious problem: As a result of the party’s shoddy stance on climate, despite the electorate making it crystal clear they want this, they’re listening internally the few members who were elected - and not all the members who failed to be elected.

How can the party look at the success of the Teal movement, which is essentially ‘Liberals who care about climate’, and not see the picture being painted? Surely you should look at all the seats you didn’t win and ask “why?”

  • 18107 ( 18107@aussie.zone ) English
    17·
    1 year ago

    The government has claimed that reaching net zero is impossible.

    Meanwhile, South Australia is on track to reach net zero early, and other states are accelerating their uptake of renewable technologies.

    This government is not compatible with reality.

      • 18107 ( 18107@aussie.zone ) English
        8·
        1 year ago

        For this specific case it means net zero carbon emissions into the atmosphere. Plastic isn’t carbon in the atmosphere, so it isn’t included in these figures.

        Net zero is just the first step anyway. Once we reach net zero, we still need to work really hard to get to actual zero, then we still need to find a way to be significantly carbon negative if we want to try to slow the worsening rate of climate related disasters.

        Hopefully, somewhere in that process, oil products will become non-viable.

          • 18107 ( 18107@aussie.zone ) English
            2·
            11 months ago

            That’s a much better way of phrasing it.

            The current “net zero” targets fall a long way short of necessary, but I wasn’t sure of a term for the correct target.

        • MonkderVierte ( MonkderVierte@lemmy.zip ) 
          3·
          11 months ago

          Plastic isn’t carbon in the atmosphere, so it isn’t included in these figures.

          Sure is. Either by fire or by sun. Not yet, but in the same way that wood is only temporary bound CO2. With the difference that plastic is made from oil, not from already circulating C.

          Edit: i should read the rest first, before answering, my bad.

  • spiffmeister ( spiffmeister@aussie.zone ) 
    12·
    1 year ago

    How can the party look at the success of the Teal movement, which is essentially ‘Liberals who care about climate’, and not see the picture being painted? Surely you should look at all the seats you didn’t win and ask “why?”

    Because the party is more and more filled with right wingers as the moderates lose power.

  • Instigate ( Instigate@aussie.zone ) 
    11·
    11 months ago

    I was so happy to hear about this! The Libs are digging their electoral grave deeper and deeper. I had an inkling that, because most of their seats lost at the last election were moderates, the remaining voices would all swing conservative and pull the party even further to the right. With this kind of rhetoric the Coalition isn’t going to be a viable option for government for at least another couple of election cycles.

    I just really, really hope that votes for them move towards independents and other parties as opposed to bolstering Labor’s current lead.

    • zurohki ( zurohki@aussie.zone ) English
      10·
      11 months ago

      The really stupid thing is that they aren’t getting into government in the next election and probably not in the one after, so the energy transition is going to be mostly done by then. The elderly coal plants that the LNP wants to pour money into are going to be gone.

      Coal power stations wear out, and we haven’t built any new ones in 20 years or so. Many of them were built in the 80s and nobody’s looking to fund new ones.

    • Nath ( Nath@aussie.zone ) OP
      6·
      11 months ago

      I mean, we mostly already have. What I think they should be doing is looking at this simple fact and asking themselves what they can do to make themselves more attractive to the electorate. I don’t think they’re doing that, and that’s a pity. I happen to want multiple viable choices for government. By taking themselves so far off the table as a choice they’re limiting everyone’s options.