Lib Factions to Split over Net Zero?

Net Zero is destroying our economy, and one half of the Liberal Party knows it.

The Libs should now split along faction lines, so members against Net Zero can form a strong position in standing for lower energy costs, a stronger economy and higher standard of living.
Now is the time to break a few eggs and start building a new platform for 2028. By then, Australians doing it tough will be crying out for a change, and they need to be ready.

The Libs were just trounced in an election that should have been an easy win. The party known for responsible economic management should have been an obvious choice for Australians in the face of rising costs of living, an energy crisis, runaway Net Zero costs, mass immigration and the resulting housing crisis.

However, they picked a charmless right faction leader to be the face of a mostly left faction policy platform, then ran a confused and unconvincing campaign. Voters were left scratching their heads.

Externalize the Split

To have any chance of success in 2028, the Libs need to stop trying to compromise, stop pretending they are a united party, as Net Zero is just too strong a wedge.

They can’t frame themselves as the economically responsible option while supporting the wilful destruction of our economy in pursuit of vanity points on the world stage, trying at such great expense to reduce our minuscule 1% of global CO2 emissions. This is a luxury agenda we can no longer afford.

You don’t even need to be a ‘climate denier’ to agree this is the right action for Australia, as we have shown in our article here, this can be purely on economic grounds, knowing the reality of how little this rush job can actually achieve.

By positioning themselves too close to Labor on this and other issues, the Libs have deserted their demographic of business-minded voters wanting a prosperous country. Those favouring Labor’s policies won’t vote for Labor-Lite, so if the Libs keep aiming for some mythical centre, the centre will keep drifting further left, they need to take a stand, firmly, at least a little to the right of the current centre.

The Libs know all this of course, but are trapped by their own past. Scott Morrison initially signed Australia up for Net Zero in 2021, and so the party doesn’t want to seem weak by reversing its position now. A lot has changed since then though, and if the party can’t adapt to changing circumstances, then it can’t hope to win in 2028.

A split now is the smart move, it would allow the new party to make a clean break to help put the country back on track. When it starts to gain traction, more of the ‘old’ Liberals will follow, as will many of the minor-right and independents who have felt politically homeless from this centre-right power vacuum.

Give Australians an Informed Choice on Net Zero

Bi-partisan support on an issue is usually a good thing, but there is a danger that an issue so potentially damaging to our economy and standard of living for generations to come is being given a free pass. An issue this impactful deserves more balanced scrutiny, and a more honest weighing up of the tradeoffs.

With both Labor and Libs on the same side of Net Zero, we’re left with only muffled voices of internal dissent along with the Nats and minor ‘Freedom’ parties left asking questions. The resulting myopic discourse on the topic is feeling a bit cult-ish — what if we’re wrong? The warning signs are increasing that Australia cannot afford to stay the course on this issue.

The government refuses to define Net Zero costs: if they could set a budget and work within that, it might avoid the coming backlash and give them a way out — “sorry everyone, costs have gone up so we can only get 57% of the way to Net Zero by 2050”, but as it stands, costs are rising constantly, without any appetite to rein them in.

Net Zero Costs are Out of Control

"I won't be signing a blank cheque on behalf of Australians… Blank cheque commitments you always end up paying for, and you always end up paying in higher taxes" — Scott Morrison, 2021

We are now seeing the results of just such a Blank Cheque scenario playing out.

When Net Zero was first agreed, the costs seemed frightening, but something a prosperous country could afford. Much has changed since then though, with Net Zero costs skyrocketing, and certainty of Australia’s prosperity now very much in question.

The government has been signalling to the market that it will pay any cost for Net Zero, and the market has of course responded with “Sure. How much have you got?”. It doesn’t take an economics degree to understand this, anyone engaging a tradie or contractor knows you don’t let on that you’re in a hurry, or that cost is no issue.

News of rising Net Zero costs are now a frequent occurrence, e.g.:

• Electricity bills to rise by up to 9 per cent from July

• Rio Tinto exposes truth about expensive renewable energy

• Massive increase in net zero spending making Australians poorer

• Transmission cost blowout threat to power bills, AEMO warns

• Rising power prices push businesses to the brink as coal shutdown plan questioned

• $1.5 billion blowout for Australia's largest energy transmission project

• The federal government’s net zero budget blowout

• …and on, and on

Until we signal to the market a willingness to at least ease off on our aggressive approach to Net Zero, there is no reason to believe these costs won’t continue to rise, it just doesn’t make sense for any supplier to hold back.

Keep in mind that the renewable assets we build now will all need replacing before the Net Zero 2050 date: solar panels and wind turbines have a 20-25 year lifespan, and batteries just 8-10 years. So we’re not just trying to build all this in a screaming hurry, but it then all needs to be constantly replaced. Renewables indeed.

Finally, energy is a major input cost for all products and services, so expensive energy makes everything else more expensive too. So we need to course-correct, and sharpish.

Meet the Resistance

Andrew Hastie MP has recently broken ranks on this issue:

“I think the question of net zero, that’s a straitjacket that I’m already getting out of”

Senator Antic prides himself on being “based”, which of course means dealing with the reality before us in preference to an ideological pipe dream:

Dan Tehan hasn’t publicly denounced Net Zero, but it seems clear that he puts Australia’s interests ahead of ideology:

Thankfully the NSW Nats have recently placed a flag in the sand on this issue, voting against Net Zero targets.

Matt Canavan has been championing this issue before it was popular, with his constituents clearly seeing the Net Zero farce in full effect, as wind turbines and transmission lines impinge on their landscape, and with farmers being told their cows are also an emissions problem, all comfortably far from the cities pushing the targets.

Queensland Premier David Crisafulli has been putting the needs of his state and its constituents ahead of the Net Zero agenda, cancelling multiple renewable projects and repealing the state’s own renewable energy targets.

…and we know plenty more Libs share these opinions, but don’t yet feel they’re in a strong enough position to speak out. We’ll add more here as they find their voice.

New Liberals? Reform? Prosperity?

But surely splitting off a new party is hopeless, how long will it take to gain traction?

We can take heart from the rapid rise and rise of Reform UK. We could see similar results here if a strong group of leaders steps up at the right time, offering sensible and realistic solutions in the face of a collapsing economy and living standards.

If these Libs do choose to break away, we would encourage them to use the name Prosperity for the new party. Struggling voters in the 2028 election will gladly tick that box on the name alone. Taking a leaf out of Reform UK’s great communications:
If you want prosperity, vote Prosperity

15/6/2025