Prime Minister Anthony Albanese of Australia is under intense pressure. These rules require him to announce a national climate target for 2035 that goes beyond the recommendations of the independent Climate Change Authority. Albanese underscored the importance of establishing realistic benchmarks during the Pacific Islands Forum. He emphasized difficulty in untangling competing international priorities, especially the East/West bidding war with Turkey to host COP31, the next international climate conference.
As Australia prepares to announce its emissions target, the Prime Minister reaffirmed that any commitment must be realistic and aligned with energy reliability. Albanese is due to attend the UN General Assembly in New York, so Australia’s target is likely to be announced before he leaves. His administration passed a law that requires him to avoid committing to a set number. Before he can do that, he needs to get some counsel from the CCA.
Achievability at the Forefront
In his remarks at the Pacific Islands Forum, Albanese highlighted the necessity of establishing climate targets that are ambitious but feasible.
“It’s not a matter of just plucking figures out of the air. We want to make a decision that is achievable as well and that takes into account the need for energy reliability, of course, and transition of a target that is achievable,” – Anthony Albanese.
The Prime Minister’s focus on achievability reflects a broader concern among stakeholders about setting targets that could potentially destabilize Australia’s energy market or economic standing. Projections say Australia is on track to reduce emissions by 51 percent by 2035. This forecast is only valid if we don’t increase our level of ambition.
Notwithstanding this rosy projection, business groups have continued to fight against any targets above 70 percent. The Business Council of Australia, an industry group, gloomily predicted that such ambitious targets would threaten hundreds of billions of dollars in export revenues. A target in the 50s or 60s would better align Australia’s goals with those of various business interests and would be considered more sustainable.
International Context and Comparisons
Moving beyond a domestic framework, these actions are occurring amid increasing international pressure. Canada has announced a 2035 emissions reduction target of 45 to 50 percent below 1990 levels. By contrast, New Zealand is now seeking to adopt a much more ambitious target of 51 to 55 percent reductions. With two-thirds of countries yet to submit targets for 2035, there’s still time to catch up. This places Australia in a fortunate position as it works its way through its commitments.
Under Chair Matt Kean, the CCA has been having raucous discussions. They’re trying to get them to commit to establishing a specific target bottom line—perhaps 65 to 75 percent. That said, there are hopes that the final guidance may go below this range. Albanese has suggested that, until they are officially received, he is not in a position to commit to any decisions on the CCA’s recommendations.
“When we receive it, we will then have a cabinet meeting and make a decision. It is impossible at the moment to comment on hypotheticals,” – Anthony Albanese.
This uncertainty further highlights the difficult balancing act required when determining Australia’s climate targets in light of changing international circumstances and domestic pressures.
Balancing Domestic and International Expectations
As Albanese has rightly pointed out, more ambition is needed if Australia wants to be taken seriously in the eyes of its Pacific allies. He affectionately referred to this increased ambition the “price of admission.” This is a welcome recognition of the imperative to engage meaningfully with our North American neighbors on climate policy.
Even the most ambitious targets are under immense pressure from the above-listed constituencies. Civil society, including environmental justice organizations and business associations, are all calling for fast, clear, and ambitious climate policy. Like Australia approaching their climate decision point, the government is under huge pressure. It needs to use this opportunity to thread the needle between energy reliability and economic stability.
