A federal Labor frontbencher will call on his party to match the Morrison governments carbon emissions reduction target.
Resources spokesman Joel Fitzgibbon wants Labor to lower its target to the higher end of the coalitions, according to an advance copy of his speech to be delivered in Sydney on Wednesday.
This would see Labor aim for a 28 percent reduction of 2005 levels by 2030.
The opposition went to the federal election this year with a 45 percent carbon emissions reduction target, while the Liberals set a 26-28 percent reduction goal.
Fitzgibbon will tell the Sydney Institute the government would be forced to act if the two parties were in agreement on a carbon reduction goal.
“The Prime Minister has largely avoided scrutiny and accountability on this subject because all the focus has been on Labors more ambitious targets,” Fitzgibbon will say.
If there was policy certainty, investment confidence in the energy sector would return and power prices would drop.
“Labor needs to reach a sensible settlement on climate change. How many times are we going to let it kill us? Indeed, how many Leaders do we want to lose to it,” Fitzgibbon will say.
A less ambitious target would allow Labor to be “more ambitious on the road to 2050.”
But Labors climate change spokesman Mark Butler slapped down the proposal, telling media outlets it would breach Australias Paris climate change agreements.
He said the governments targets were dreamed up by former prime minister Tony Abbott and if adopted worldwide would lead to global warming of three degrees.
Opposition Leader Anthony Albanese also weighed in, saying he was proud Labor had consistently supported strong action on climate change based on science.
“That action will not only protect our environment but is also good for our economy,” he tweeted.
Energy Minister Angus Taylor told reporters in Sydney: “Labor went to the last election with a 45 per cent emission reduction target which was going to slash jobs, slash wages and slash the economy.
“The are clearly now recognising the error of their ways, but theyre in chaos. There are different poiRead More – Source