Does the Coalition respect Sussan Ley?

Speaker 1 ABC Listen, podcasts, radio, news, music, and more.

Speaker 1 Hi, it's Sam Hawley from ABC News Daily, the podcast that brings you one big story affecting your world each weekday in just 15 minutes.

Speaker 3 And what have we seen from Optus in response to these things? A pattern? It is a game of corporate shirking of responsibility that I personally find has kind of a yuck factor.

Speaker 1 Join Join me for ABC News Daily. Find it on the ABC Listen app.

Speaker 2 Today the Australian people have voted for Australian values.

Speaker 5 Government is always formed in a sensible centre but our Liberal Party reflects a range of views.

Speaker 4 Politics is the brutal game of arithmetic but no one's going to vote for you who don't stare for something.

Speaker 2 We've always been about the planet but we've got to make sure that people have their daily needs met.

Speaker 4 People are starting to see that that there is actually a different way of doing politics.

Speaker 2 Hello and welcome to the party room. I'm Patricia Carlis and I'm joining you from Ngunnawal Country in Parliament House in Canberra.

Speaker 1 And I'm Mel Clark also here on Ngunnawal Country at Parliament House filling in for Fran Kelly and look PK this building that we're in it's in a funny place right now.

Speaker 1 We've just had a really turbulent fortnight of Parliament sitting and today the last day of Parliament sitting until we have the final week at the end of the month. So this is like the Pomoda.

Speaker 2 This is the killing season.

Speaker 1 That's right. But I feel like at the end of this turbulent two weeks, the coffee lines at the cafes are particularly long this morning.

Speaker 1 There's a bit of a sense of anticipation about the killing season.

Speaker 1 But I'm also going to dub it the deal-making season because we know the government wants to strike some deals and deals are going to have to be done. There's a vibe in the air.

Speaker 2 I completely agree. Before we tell you what's coming up on the show, though, I just want to let you know about a listener survey we're running.
I know, sorry, just a bit of a job here.

Speaker 2 We want to know your thoughts about politics now, what you like about the pod, what you wish we could do differently. It'll only take a couple of minutes since in the show notes.
Get onto it.

Speaker 2 Mel, what is happening this week?

Speaker 1 Lots has happened this week.

Speaker 1 We're at quite a different place now at the end of the week than we were at the start of the week.

Speaker 1 I mean, it was over Sunday, Monday that we saw the Nationals abandon net zero and that completely changed. I know.
So much has moved since then.

Speaker 1 But that was the trigger that set the tone or that was the trigger that initiated what has come since, which is enormous pressure on Susan Lee.

Speaker 1 We've seen shifting within the Liberal Party about where they're going to land and greater impetus for them to land somewhere soon. So let's talk about that.

Speaker 1 Tied up with that is some comments from some of those on the Conservative side including Andrew Hastie a leadership aspirant around late-term abortions and we can look at how Susan Lee's handled that too feeding in the government's desire to get environment law reform done this year that's actually starting to play into the leadership and liberal direction question too so we're going to dive into that

Speaker 1 and then we've also got a bit of an examination I think to do of Labor's own position on climate and COP31 and the bid to host that and where that's at.

Speaker 1 So there's quite a bit to get through from the last couple of days.

Speaker 2 Yeah, the week has been absolutely intense. And who better to tease out some of those things than Jason Katsukas, special correspondent at the Saturday Paper? Welcome to the party room.

Speaker 6 Thank you, Piquet. Thanks, Mel.
Great to be with you.

Speaker 2 Special. How did you get that title?

Speaker 1 Well, special correspondent.

Speaker 6 A special person.

Speaker 1 Did you say that, like, hey, I'm a special package?

Speaker 2 Like, I'm just sorry. I just had to, I've been on my mind.

Speaker 6 Well, all credit to Eric Jensen, our editor-in-chief on that one. He came up with that.
And who was I to disagree?

Speaker 1 I kind of like the remit that it gives you. Because you can justify doing just about anything you want because it's a special project.

Speaker 6 Indeed, that's why I'm writing about cricket for this week.

Speaker 1 Oh, well, Jason,

Speaker 2 you are also Greek, so very special. Okay, let's talk about net zero and Susan Lee's leadership.

Speaker 2 So, as Mel just outlined right Sunday, the Nationals officially meet after they have their big, you know, bigger meeting of kind of the rank and file, so to speak.

Speaker 2 And and they officially dump net zero.

Speaker 7 And I'm proud to say that our party room has got to a unanimous position of scrapping net zero commitments by 2050.

Speaker 7 I a little while ago informed the opposition leader Susan Lee of the National Party's decision to scrap net zero by 2050 and to set a policy platform predicated on principles.

Speaker 2 Really starting a spiral in many ways of the next chapter of leadership issues for Susan Lee, questions around the sustainability of the Nats and the Libs staying together. It becomes quite a thing.

Speaker 2 Were the Nats, Jason, trying it on to try and push the Liberals? Is this part of their kind of overall strategy to box in the Liberals into a position?

Speaker 6 Absolutely. I think that's been Matt Canavan's plan right from the beginning on this.
He's really led this debate.

Speaker 6 And I think there are some similarities here to what we saw with The Voice. Nationals came out early, forced the Liberals to really follow the Nationals' position and oppose the yes case.

Speaker 6 Another parallel is this idea, again, something Matt Canavan put to me, that once a bipartisan consensus breaks down on the question of net zero, as it did with The Voice, that public support will also collapse.

Speaker 6 That's what Matt Canavan is betting on. He thinks that once the voters see that the two major parties diverge on net zero, that public support will fall away.

Speaker 1 I think it's really interesting to see how that's playing out in a microcosm within the Liberal Party.

Speaker 1 Because as soon as the Nationals came out and landed that position, got out in front, we saw shifts from both the Conservatives and the moderates in the Liberal Party.

Speaker 1 So the Conservatives, who had been willing to compromise as the party was examining, hardened their position that net zero had to change. And so the Nationals emboldened,

Speaker 1 particularly the senior Conservatives within the party who do have the power and pressure on Susan Lee, it emboldened them to be firmer on net zero needs to be taken care of.

Speaker 1 We need to dump it, we need to significantly change it. We can't just tinker around the edges.
We need a big change here. So it emboldened them to be less compromising.

Speaker 1 On the other hand, we have the moderates doing the flip side.

Speaker 1 So where we've had the Conservatives who were willing to compromise and hardened, we had the moderates who were holding firm, who had really strong language, particularly early on this year, of for credibility with voters to win back urban seats, we must keep our net zero commitment.

Speaker 1 That is a test we must pass. Now for the moderates, it's a, well, where do we find the compromise? How much can we hang on to as we try and land on a position?

Speaker 1 So I think your analysis, Jason, is spot on because what the Nationals are trying to do and the MAC Canavan process is split consensus on this issue and watch things fall apart.

Speaker 1 And I think we're seeing that play out in the Liberal Party, PK.

Speaker 2 Yeah, I mean, I think that's right. And then, of course, to go to the next layer of it, it then puts enormous pressure on the leadership of Susan Lee.

Speaker 2 And it would any leader, right, to be fair, because how to navigate that is difficult. So it brings me, Jason, because I'm very intrigued by the way Susan Lee's playing this, to her fence sitting.

Speaker 2 Like, what's going on there? Is that a helpful strategy for her?

Speaker 2 She's obviously decided that it draws a contrast to Peter Dutton, where she kind of looks consultative, she's listening, she's not leading in a kind of obnoxious,

Speaker 2 you must go my way or the highway.

Speaker 5 I said I wouldn't make captain's calls. I'm doing exactly what I said I would do.
And actually the process has been good. Can I tell you, it's allowed us to come together.

Speaker 5 It's allowed us to talk not just to each other but to industry and experts. Colleagues are talking about their passionate views on this subject as they should and if they talk to journalists.

Speaker 2 It's actually in my assessment

Speaker 2 kind of damaging there.

Speaker 6 I agree. I think Susan Lee is watching the ground underneath her just fall away.
She's thinking how can I save my leadership?

Speaker 6 She's kind of following the Malcolm Turnbull route here where she's trying to sort of pander to the right of the party. And as we know with Malcolm Turnbull that ended in disaster for him.

Speaker 6 It destroyed his leadership twice when he was opposition leader and when he was prime minister. Not once, but twice, yeah.

Speaker 6 And I think Susan is also seeing some of her key supporters, like Melissa McIntosh, the member for Lindsay, express her now opposition to net zero, saying that she's conducted surveys in her electorate and she doesn't believe that people are behind this commitment to net zero.

Speaker 8 I surveyed my community recently on the issues that matter to them and they don't want net zero. 87% are struggling quite significantly under cost of living pressures.

Speaker 8 We're feeling the pressures of immigration. We're feeling the pressures of

Speaker 6 Susan is pandering, I think, to the right of the party. We're also seeing the moderate stage a bit of a fight back in the second half of this week.

Speaker 6 Andrew Bragg, Maria Kovassic, Dave Sharma, they've all been doing the rounds, trying to sort of defend this position or this commitment to net zero.

Speaker 2 And send a warning shot in terms of the consequences for the party. let's go actually to the moderate

Speaker 2 kind of fight back I think it's a good way of describing it because I find it really fascinating too they are fighting back

Speaker 2 but I wonder what they're they're kind of considering as options I'm going to put it out there because why else listen to this podcast if you don't get some good insights I believe that the moderates are actively considering their position if the party locks in behind dumping net zero by 2050.

Speaker 2 I would not be surprised if there are defections to the crossbench to make a point because I think the moderates know they have to die on their feet this time. They've done this too many times.

Speaker 2 They've rolled over too many times that they need to send a statement. Is that

Speaker 2 you kind of getting that vibe as well?

Speaker 6 Well, I certainly wouldn't rule it out. I think

Speaker 6 Andrew Bragg seems to

Speaker 6 be very committed to the Liberal Party, what he sees as the Liberal Party's values.

Speaker 6 But I think there's also a feeling that they have rolled over too many times and they have to take a stand on this. And if not now, when.

Speaker 6 So I certainly think it's possible that you see

Speaker 6 some of those moderate Liberals move to the crossbench, but not necessarily leave the Liberal Party itself. They might leave the party room, but stay members of the Liberal Party.

Speaker 1 Thank you, Barnaby Joyce, for providing the model upon which the likes of Dave Sharma might follow.

Speaker 1 Having been in a seat that has been taken by the Teals in the past,

Speaker 1 he knows very much that sentiment will move against him and others in the Liberal Party in the city areas if they do not have a credible position on tackling climate change.

Speaker 1 And I think Maria Kavasic's intervention this week was really notable, pointing to the fact that as they're having this debate in their party room, they're not hearing the voices of the people who lost their seats because of this very issue.

Speaker 9 And the challenge that we have when we're having these policy discussions, and we have talked about these types of problems, is that the people in the room are the people in the room, but the people that lost their seats and the seats that we we don't represent are not.

Speaker 9 So we have to ensure that we're thinking about those communities as well.

Speaker 1 And that that affects the numbers as they're having this debate and limits the influence of those who have already suffered because of the position that the coalition has headed in.

Speaker 2 Maria Kavasik, I'm glad you mentioned her. She did that interview on afternoon briefing.
I thought it was really interesting.

Speaker 2 The other thing she said about women and about tearing down a woman leader, that women are held to a different standard.

Speaker 2 Angie Bell on the show, she also said she deserves to be given a red hot go and hasn't been, essentially.

Speaker 2 Like this woman has not been given clear air or the right to, and that there is a gendered element to all of this as well.

Speaker 1 I think this is the point where we should look at the media blitz Susan Lee did towards the end of the week, where it was a very defensive

Speaker 1 articulation of what she has been trying to do.

Speaker 1 She went out and did a range of media interviews that was as message to her colleagues as much to the public, which was, when I went into this leadership role, this is the process I said we would undertake.

Speaker 1 I am delivering to you what I said I would deliver and what you all asked for, which was time and space to have these arguments and have these debates.

Speaker 1 I think she's in a position where,

Speaker 1 yes, there's a desire for her to show leadership, but she's also trying to abide by the circumstances that allowed her to get the leadership in the first place, which was this promise of, you'll all get to hear your views and we'll all try and come together.

Speaker 1 So if she shows leadership, she'll frustrate those who said, hey, we only supported you in the leadership so we could have our call.

Speaker 1 But then she's also frustrating those that she's not making a leadership move on because they want to see some leadership. She's kind of damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.

Speaker 6 And there was that,

Speaker 6 I thought, pretty significant line from Andrew Bragg saying that walking away from net zero is not leadership.

Speaker 4 Well, I don't see how we could walk away from the Paris Agreement. I don't see how we can walk away from our commitment to reduce emissions.
I mean, virtually every country is in the Paris Agreement.

Speaker 4 Virtually every country has committed to net zero emissions. I mean, we would be a prior state.

Speaker 6 Sending a direct signal there to Susan Lee. And I think the other thing that struck me about this week is, and last week, the lack of respect for Susan Lee from her party.

Speaker 6 You know, I don't think they're actively trying to undermine her, but they just don't care what she thinks.

Speaker 2 Yes, which is worse, right?

Speaker 1 It's a lack of authority. They don't even care.

Speaker 2 They don't even think, like, oh, oh, the leader might get, like, they don't, it's like it's just, it's not even an issue for them. It's like they've completely parked it.

Speaker 2 Look, all of that kind of is playing out. I want to sort of segue, if we can, to an adjacent thing that sort of is part of their battle, which is Priya's bill.

Speaker 1 Talk to me about that. So, and this is going to come in with the question of authority that Susan Lee does or doesn't have over the party.

Speaker 1 So the government has been moving to get a bill through Parliament that would effectively mean that if a woman has a stillbirth or loses a child at a neonatal stage shortly after birth, that their employer can't cancel their paid parental leave.

Speaker 1 Came after a really horrible case where Priya, the baby in question, her mother had her paid parental leave cancelled when Priya died at the age of 11 days old.

Speaker 1 Really, really awful story and there's a lot of unity and support for this bill.

Speaker 1 Now in the parliamentary debate that took place in the Federation Chamber, which is sort of a third chamber off to the side where you shove a lot of debates when you don't have time for everyone to get their say in the House of Representatives or the Senate, you can just shove debate off into the Federation Chamber.

Speaker 1 So, your remarks are still on the record, but you don't get to stand up in the green room.

Speaker 1 And a number of Conservative coalition MPs raised their concerns that there would be, as they describe it, a loophole that someone who has a late-term abortion might be able to access this, that they would be able to get paid parental leave for choosing to have a late-term abortion and they were insisting the government rule out this, what they describe as a loophole.

Speaker 10 Stillbirth is incredibly painful for people and that's why I support the intent of this bill, Baby Preetrers Bill, but I do call on the government and I note the sensitivity around this, but I do call upon the government to clarify that it does not apply to late-term abortions.

Speaker 10 And that is the question at the heart of my speech.

Speaker 1 Now, this was pretty offensive to most women because it suggests that someone would choose to get pregnant and carry a child to late term and then terminate in order to get access to paid leave.

Speaker 1 Now, the measure doesn't relate to late-term abortions, it relates to stillbirths and neonatal deaths, and the government has been clear about that.

Speaker 1 Now, Susan Lee didn't say anything about this initially after the comments. They were just kind of left to stew.

Speaker 1 It was only when she was later pressed in this sort of media blitz that she did, that she was finally said that the comments were insensitive.

Speaker 11 We supported Priya's bill. It's a really important bill.
We should be supporting women through tragic events where a baby is lost.

Speaker 11 Losing a baby is one of the most difficult things that can ever happen to a mother and to a family. And as a mother and a grandmother, this is very personal.

Speaker 11 So any commentary about this bill applying in other contexts is insensitive.

Speaker 1 A criticism, but a pretty mild criticism.

Speaker 1 And a number of other female Liberal MPs, as you said, Angie Bell was one who's made it very clear that this is not the sort of debate that should be entertained, that it's not relevant, that

Speaker 1 it's also not what the party should be focused on.

Speaker 1 But I think when we come to the question of how this ties into the leadership of the Liberal Party that we're talking about, is that when Conservative members of the Liberal Party tried to raise the issue of abortion ahead of the election campaign earlier in the year, Peter Dutton personally shut that down.

Speaker 2 He ruled with an iron fist.

Speaker 1 He ruled with an iron fist to say, that is not the issue we are going to fight on. I don't want to hear about it.
Don't campaign on it. Focus on the issues at hand.

Speaker 2 And the context, which I think is important, is it was in the wake of the Queensland state election. And sorry, just it's an important

Speaker 2 where Labor introduced this kind of question around the Liberals' commitment to abortion and what they might do.

Speaker 2 And it really muddied the waters and it really, you know, of course they won the elections to the Liberals to be clear, but it did hurt them.

Speaker 1 Yes, yes. So, but when it comes to the leadership now, when Peter Dutton said, we're not talking about this issue, everyone fell into line.

Speaker 1 Susan Lee won, didn't pull out an iron fist, didn't try to contain it, sort of had to be pressed to criticise it, and even now, having criticised it, hasn't seen anyone from that camp resile from that process.

Speaker 1 And I think that tells us a lot about the authority or lack of authority that Susan Lee has, which is a demonstration of how precarious her leadership is. Do you think that's a fair assessment, Jason?

Speaker 6 Oh, absolutely. It's just a...
Why are we even talking about this? The Coalition Party Room had decided they would support this bill,

Speaker 6 and then during the debate, to the surprise of all of us, we had these four male MPs come into the chamber and express this position, which the more you think about it, the more

Speaker 6 appalling it is. You know, this idea that someone would get pregnant in order to have a late-term abortion just to claim this

Speaker 6 compensation.

Speaker 2 So let me put this to you. When James Patterson, who's a senior frontbencher and leading conservative, you know, shadow finance, but you know, really is considered one of the best performers, senator.

Speaker 2 You know, close to people like Hastie, when he was questioned about it, kind of defended, not the position, to be fair to him, but the way that Andrew Hastie had, for instance, raised it.

Speaker 2 He didn't say it was insensitive. Like, what did you make of that?

Speaker 6 Well,

Speaker 6 I guess

Speaker 6 Andrew Hastie and James Patterson have a pretty strong relationship. Going back some years, James Patterson's been clear about that.

Speaker 6 Perhaps he is thinking about that future relationship and not wanting to criticise them too heavily. That's how I took that.

Speaker 1 Can I jump in on that one? Because I think that was a failure by James Patterson to differentiate between the tone of a debate and the substance of a debate.

Speaker 1 And James Patterson was right to say that the tone with which Andrew Hastie raised this when he did in the debate, it was done carefully and delicately. He didn't go in all guns blazing.

Speaker 2 No, no, that's not the way he is often retorted.

Speaker 1 Right, absolutely.

Speaker 1 But nonetheless, regardless of whether you say it with a honeyed voice and kind words,

Speaker 1 the substance of what he is suggesting people might do is offensive.

Speaker 1 And that doesn't, that can't be brushed over by, but you used nice words and you spoke softly, and that doesn't erase the substance of what was being raised by these MPs.

Speaker 2 So it's about her authority, it's the fact that they even want to talk about this when, quite frankly, they should have bigger fish to fry, like hello, inflation, hello, people want interest rate cuts, like just really stick on the messages, people.

Speaker 2 There's all of that. But then there's the question of how it affects Andrew Hastie's future leadership.
Like seriously, if I was the Labour Party, I'd be, well, I know they are, right?

Speaker 2 I'd be like collecting these little snippets. You know, to mount a case, you know,

Speaker 2 you'd certainly paint him as anti-women, wouldn't you?

Speaker 6 Well, not just that. I mean, it's not just these comments on this bill that puts a question mark over his judgment, I think, his political judgment.

Speaker 6 We've seen him express concerns about women in combat roles in the ADF. He opposed gay marriage.
There's this other question about whether or not he's a creationist.

Speaker 6 Does he think the earth is 5,000 years old and that's it?

Speaker 6 So I think, you know, Andrew Hastie, while he looks good, he certainly has come across as a man of principle, especially on the BRS, Ben Robert Smith case. That's right.

Speaker 2 Where he stood up against war crimes, just to be clear for those who haven't followed his career. Yeah, he has

Speaker 2 got a good record on.

Speaker 1 Credibility of integrity through really that circumstance. Absolutely.

Speaker 6 But if you are the Liberal Party looking to try to get back to the centre ground of Australian politics, then a lot of the positions that Andrew Hastie holds are nowhere near the centre.

Speaker 6 And you would think are a liability for the Liberal Party if he were to become leader.

Speaker 1 And I think Jane Hume was one that expressed that when she said this week that there was horror from many women in our party that this intervention was necessary at all when we're talking about a policy that relates to stillborn children.

Speaker 1 Look, while we're talking about this, you know I like talking about environment law reform. It's one of my favourite topics.

Speaker 1 And as it turns out, all of this turmoil in the Liberal Party is starting to feed into the negotiations that are going on around environment law reform.

Speaker 1 So as much as the Liberal Party is looking to sort out their issues and settle on a position on climate by the end of the year, so too is the government trying to get this environment law reform bill through by the end of the year.

Speaker 1 Now, I've been chatting to a lot of people both in the Liberal Party and the Labor Party, and there are both Conservative and moderate Liberals, senior members of the Liberal Party team, who are looking at the likelihood that the Liberal Party is walking away from net zero.

Speaker 1 The question is, how far do they walk away?

Speaker 1 They can see that the party is losing credibility on its environmental credentials and they are wondering if they need to support the government on the EPBC Act reform to try and retain some level of credibility on the issue of the environment.

Speaker 1 And the government is very happy about this. It's playing into their negotiating hand.

Speaker 6 I think this is the way exactly how Murray Watt, the Minister for the Environment, would have wanted this debate to proceed.

Speaker 6 He knows he's got the Greens on one side, he can always try to negotiate with them, but ideally what he's wanted is big business to start putting pressure on Susan Lee to do a deal with Labour, and that's exactly what we're seeing.

Speaker 6 The Business Council, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry, Australian Industry Group, now the Minerals Council are all coming out and saying.

Speaker 1 Which is perhaps the hardest of them all, the Minerals Council, the ones who've long campaigned against a range of environment initiatives, they're now putting pressure on the Coalition too.

Speaker 6 Exactly, and this is,

Speaker 6 yeah, I think,

Speaker 6 leaves Susan Lee very little negotiating room. She's got to, I think, in the end, make a deal.

Speaker 6 If she allows Labor to go and do a deal with the Greens, then that really is, I think, a terminal for her leadership.

Speaker 2 You think that that is, honestly, over the EPBC laws, you think that is a kind of potentially a deal-breaker in terms of the way she frames herself?

Speaker 6 I don't think necessarily this year, but I think it would be a huge blow to her leadership if she doesn't do a deal with Labour on this.

Speaker 2 This is her wicked problem, guys, if she does, because I agree with you, but in terms of her own credibility and her lasting lasting legacy and just her as a sort of political unit that operates and, you know, emanates ideas of who she is, you're right.

Speaker 2 But equally, I mean, if you think about that party room, the Nats, the others, they're going to go ballistic if she does a deal.

Speaker 6 Yes, but

Speaker 2 they will.

Speaker 6 The entire government knows is that Susan Lee is a former Minister for the Environment.

Speaker 6 We've had Graham Samuel come out and say that Susan Lee agreed with what he had proposed and that he's getting angry listening to her try to deny that.

Speaker 6 I think she's in a very difficult position and keeping big business on side on this issue is probably better for Susan Lee than

Speaker 6 just leaving it to Murray Watt to negotiate with the Greens.

Speaker 1 Look, there's also another reason that Labor wants to try and sign a deal here and that is because they too need to work on their environmental credentials because it looks like one of their other big environment policies, which is hosting the COP31 talks, so the big global climate change talks that happen every year.

Speaker 1 They've been aiming to try and host the 2026 talks in Adelaide in conjunction with the Pacific. It really looks like it's not going to happen.

Speaker 1 Now, the Prime Minister has not gone to Bellum in Brazil, where this year's conference is, and which is the last chance saloon for trying to sort out who is going to host. Is it going to be Australia?

Speaker 1 Is it going to be Turkey? The leaders are meeting today and tomorrow. That was the moment for leaders to go if they were going to go.
He's chosen not to go. What do you make of that, PK?

Speaker 1 Is this a sign that he's just actually

Speaker 1 not that committed to hosting the rights? Or is he right to say, actually, my presence there isn't going to be the deciding factor? It's all going to happen behind the scenes.

Speaker 2 Well, I think he's received advice that, you know, it's you only go if the deal is to be done and the deal. is not about to be done.
So why would he go and expose himself?

Speaker 2 Then there's also, which I don't discount it, the amount of overseas time he's had. And they are alert and alarmed about that.
And I'll explain.

Speaker 2 Yes, they know that, you know, the opposition's a S show and all of that, and they probably don't have to worry as much as you would normally.

Speaker 2 Equally, though, things can turn quickly, and the Prime Minister is aware that if you spend all your time hanging around, you know, in all sorts of places, especially on a theme like this, where they want to look like they're committed but not obsessed.

Speaker 2 I know that sounds counterintuitive. Do you agree, Jason? You gave me a smile, like into it, but maybe not obsessively into it.

Speaker 6 I think it's,

Speaker 6 you know, during the voice referendum, we saw Peter Dutton make a lot about the cost, you know, $450 million to have a talk fest. This is an even bigger talk fest with a bigger price tag, $1 billion.

Speaker 6 So you can see that there's not much political return here.

Speaker 1 And I think there is a range of views, I think it's fair to say, in Labor's cabinet about the merits of hosting this event, given what's changed.

Speaker 1 since Labor first floated this idea of co-hosting with the Pacific. Because it's an initiative they started pushing on many years ago.

Speaker 1 Since then, we have a different sense of global commitment. You know, we're seeing major figureheads.
We've seen the US pull out again, obviously, with Trump in the White House.

Speaker 1 We're seeing some business leaders, particularly Silicon Valley,

Speaker 1 show less commitment or at least a desire to slow down the transition.

Speaker 1 Other countries are facing the same questions Australia is facing, which is how do we balance our desire to reduce emissions with also trying to protect our economies and our populations.

Speaker 1 There are some in cabinet who think there's possibly more to lose from hosting global talks than there is to gain because what you will get is a lot of attention on Australia's own targets.

Speaker 1 The government's kind of escaped a lot of scrutiny about what it decided it would aim for for 2035 because the coalition has been in such disarray.

Speaker 1 So they would just be re-inviting new scrutiny of their 2035 targets. They'd get pressured from international groups about Australia's role in exporting coal and gas and what role that plays.

Speaker 1 And is that something they really want to open up a discussion on? For some of them, not so much.

Speaker 6 No, I think that's exactly right. That's what I'm hearing as well.
And you can sort of see how this would play out.

Speaker 6 It's the perfect kind of thing that Australians love to tear down, this idea of a big international conference, even though I think there is

Speaker 6 a lot to be gained for Australia to host the COP31,

Speaker 6 especially building those relationships with the Pacific and showing Australia's commitment to these targets.

Speaker 1 It's clearly really important to those relationships.

Speaker 2 Oh, 100%. But it's the usual conundrum between

Speaker 2 what something means for sort of policy and relationships and how it looks on the ground, the pub test, the voter pub test.

Speaker 1 It's much harder to say to the average person, no, no, no, this big trade show is really important because investors will see what we intend to do and that might encourage them to consider us 10 years down the track to buy our green aluminum.

Speaker 1 Like that sort of argument, it's a very real potential benefit of hosting this argument, but it's pretty hard to explain at the moment when there's just a lot of people standing around talking and Australia potentially facing a bit of criticism to convince voters, hey, this is actually a good idea.

Speaker 2 Do you reckon in the pubs of Australia whether we're going to have the COP conference is kind of scoring high? I suspect not.

Speaker 2 What might be getting mentioned, I say might because I, you know, I don't know how much people have registered, but is the three hours of free free power a day that the government did announce this week.

Speaker 2 Now, you know, Spears was saying yesterday on the pod, you know, you've got to wonder about the timing of the announcement. They really want to juxtapose themselves, don't they?

Speaker 2 Like, draw contrast between a coalition at war again

Speaker 2 over the climate, whereas, you know, yes, there's high energy prices, but you're going to see us take action. Here's one offer.
Like, that was strategic this week, wasn't it?

Speaker 2 Because this issue of energy prices and at the same time dealing with climate change is a sort of like a perennial problem for them.

Speaker 6 And I think there is a lot of concern in the government about energy prices. We've seen this focus on

Speaker 6 industry shutting down the Tomago aluminium smelter,

Speaker 6 the nickel mining

Speaker 6 in Queensland.

Speaker 6 The government stepping in to prop up some of these enterprises and I guess energy relief is another version of that. They're trying to soften this blow with voters.

Speaker 6 But how sustainable is that over the long term? I thought, you know, Ken Henry's observation that the more you subsidise energy prices, the more it's a sign that the policy settings aren't right.

Speaker 6 I think that's quite a potentially a potent line for the coalition to exploit. So, yeah, I think there are some real dangers here for the government.
That's why they're doing this.

Speaker 1 That actually is a really good point because it underlines some of the cleverness in the policy that the government's announced with this free power because it takes advantage of providing providing a comparison to the chaos in the Liberal Party when it comes to energy policy.

Speaker 1 It also shifts the balance of that support to help with rising energy prices away from the government's budget and the budget bottom line and government spending.

Speaker 1 We're going to lose the electricity bill subsidy that we've had in place for a while that finishes in December, but there's still a lot of pain around it.

Speaker 1 This free three hours, this is something that retailers have to figure out how to offer. And they're not allowed to increase their charges outside of those three hours.

Speaker 1 So this is the government saying, here's our new support for you. Just happens that it doesn't cost the government any money.
It costs retailers the money.

Speaker 1 So it's very handy when it comes to making their case around government spending affecting inflation as well, which is the other vulnerability they have at the moment.

Speaker 1 Inflation figures came out this week. Inflation is back up.
The opposition keeps pointing to public spending as being a key factor in that.

Speaker 1 Now, the extent to which that's a factor, we can go back and forth on. That's a whole other podcast.

Speaker 1 But the electricity subsidy was an additional factor of government spending that will come off. And this alternative is one that the retailers are paying, not the government.

Speaker 1 And that's quite handy for them.

Speaker 2 It certainly is. Hey, Jason, before we say goodbye, I have to ask you what you're working on for the Saturday paper.
Give us a little preview. It's fascinating.

Speaker 6 Well, thank you, Patricia, for the boost.

Speaker 6 The piece I'm doing is, what are all the MPs and senators who left the parliament on May 3, well, senators on July 1, what are they doing now?

Speaker 6 And some of them, as we know, like Adam Bant, he's going to take over as CEO of the Australian Conservation Foundation. Others haven't been able to find work.

Speaker 6 So having a look at that and exploring some of the rules around what MPs can and can't do after they leave politics.

Speaker 2 Any other little hints? Okay, I know, Adam, because it's on the public record. Anything you can share?

Speaker 6 Well, Holly Hughes has bought a pub, which I think is probably the most

Speaker 6 interesting of the

Speaker 6 career choices.

Speaker 1 Rural New South Wales.

Speaker 6 Really?

Speaker 2 I missed that.

Speaker 1 This is the kind of special assignment that you get when you're special.

Speaker 1 That's the special assignment. Special.
Special correspondent. That is so good.

Speaker 2 Jason, it's always excellent to hang out with you. Thanks for coming in.

Speaker 6 Patricia, thanks for having me. Really fun discussion.
Thanks, Jason. Thanks, Mel.

Speaker 4 Questions without notice. Are there any questions? Members on my row.
The Prime Minister has the call. Thanks very much Mr Speaker.

Speaker 4 Well then I give the call to the Honourable, the Leader of the Opposition.

Speaker 5 Thank you Mr Speaker. My question is to the Prime Minister.

Speaker 12 Hi party rumours. I live in regional New South Wales right next door to a wind farm and I really like it being there.

Speaker 12 I am so confused about why the Nationals have dumped net zero. On the surface it would seem as though it is to appease their voter base in the regions.

Speaker 12 But there is repeated research that shows that most people in the regions, in fact, 70% of us, are really supportive of renewable energy, even if it is in our backyard.

Speaker 12 This is because most of us in the regions are actually not the parochial climate deniers we are often made out to be, and we can actually see the enormous economic benefits that these projects will inject into our communities.

Speaker 12 Only 17% of people in the regions are actually against this rollout. That's not very many.

Speaker 12 Surely the Nats political advisors have access to this kind of research. Aren't they actually alienating their base with this decision?

Speaker 1 Love the pod, never miss a nip.

Speaker 2 Okay, that is a really interesting question. Yes, some people do love it.
Like, that is absolutely true. Are they alienating their base, though?

Speaker 2 Well, I think there is still a substantial part of their base, if you want to call it that, or just voters in regional areas that are concerned.

Speaker 1 I think there's a couple of things here.

Speaker 1 There are a lot of people who support action to tackle climate change and may well support the rollout of renewables, but the specific details of their local community are a concern.

Speaker 1 And we shouldn't assume that because someone has an issue with high-voltage power lines going through a particular tract of land that they're against taking action on climate change altogether.

Speaker 1 So I think there's a bit of complexity around that and whether or not the Nationals campaigning is nuanced enough to recognise that. I think there's a real question there.

Speaker 1 The other thought that I have in Anne to try to answer your question, Dimity, is that I think there's also a bit of a disconnect between what people believe and what people think other people believe.

Speaker 1 I have seen some polling recently that suggested that

Speaker 1 a clear majority of regional Australians support action on climate change and support the rollout of renewables in regional communities, but they think far less than a majority of their community does.

Speaker 1 So most of them support it, but they think most of their contemporaries and neighbours and local residents don't support it.

Speaker 1 So this is the question of: are people's perceptions of support a bit out of whack?

Speaker 1 Because there are some very loud voices against it, and people are assuming that that represents a greater proportion of the community than it actually does.

Speaker 2 Yeah, I think that's a really good point.

Speaker 2 And the truth is, there is a resistance from some, but then there is another category, which is, you know, people genuinely worried about their local communities, the way that, you know, people get permission to do these things, the consequences.

Speaker 2 Like, that's not... That's okay.
Exactly.

Speaker 1 This is the nuanced process. This is the nuance.
You can be for a big idea and have concerns about how it's implemented.

Speaker 1 You can support something but have questions about where and when and at what cost something takes place.

Speaker 1 So I think there is always nuance in these things and we should remember that and I do think that the proponents or the people who are actually doing the development of these renewable projects are very cognizant of that and that's why we have discussions about things like well can we offer cheaper power prices to regions where electricity resources are being developed.

Speaker 1 That's why they're looking at things like direct financial compensation to properties that host infrastructure infrastructure on their land.

Speaker 1 That's why we have these kind of initiatives in place because we recognise that these debates are complicated and they require nuances.

Speaker 2 Yeah, and one argument, just finally, that I think the nationals have made, Bridget McKenzie was making the other day, is that the regional communities are bearing the brunt. And I think that's right.

Speaker 2 Like I don't think that's untrue that they are. And so that goes to your point about how policy can respond.

Speaker 1 It also comes down to when you vote, when you go into a ballot box,

Speaker 1 pick someone that represents your views.

Speaker 2 Well, keep sending your questions in because we love getting them. We're especially fond of voice notes.
You can send them to thepartyroom at abc.net.au.

Speaker 1 And remember to follow Politics Now on the ABC Listen app. That way you can make sure you hear all the episodes.

Speaker 2 All the episodes. That's it for the party room this week.

Speaker 1 And David Spears will be back with another episode of Insiders on Background on Saturday. He's got a really special episode for the 50th anniversary of the Whitlam dismissal.

Speaker 1 I know that there'll be plenty of talk about this next week, but David Spears has a little treat for you there. Do check that one out on Saturday.

Speaker 2 My favourite thing about the Whitlam dismissal is the fact that even 50 years after we're getting new reveals. Like that's one of the reasons I love journalism.
Like, how is it possible?

Speaker 2 that after so much discussion, so many books, so many documentaries, people are still finding out new stuff.

Speaker 1 And the passions in many people are just as strong today as they were 50 years ago, which I also find amazing. See you, Mel.
See you, Pika.