The Prime Minister’s recent speech at the National Press Club reinforced that his government is all-in on Net Zero, stating emphatically that his vision is to turn Australia into a ‘renewable energy superpower’.

The declaration comes despite the growing debate amongst mainstream Australians on whether Net Zero is in our national interest, along with Australia’s involvement in the Paris Climate Agreement. To date, rank-and-file members of the South Australian Liberals have voted to abandon Net Zero, with the New South Wales National Party and the Northern Territory’s Country Liberal Party doing the same in addition to declaring a want to leave the Paris Climate Agreement.

This is a positive development, as mainstream Australians have again declared they do not support net zero. Recent polling commissioned by the Institute of Public Affairs found 79 per cent of Australians want the government to prioritise affordability or reliability when they are focusing on energy policy, with only 21 per cent stating the government should prioritise Net Zero.

Unfortunately, the government has successfully entrenched Net Zero and the Paris Climate Agreement into Australia’s overall legislative framework. It means that these originally benign international agreements are now potentially protected from future governments that may have a mandate to abandon them.

The legal edifice enshrining Net Zero and the Paris Climate Agreement today represents a spider’s web of laws. Such legislation imposes harsh regulatory mandates and funnels billions of dollars in subsidies, all to recreate Australia’s energy system from one based on reliable and affordable energy to one based on unreliable, expensive, and economically destructive renewables.

The separate pieces of legislation that support Net Zero act as the foundations of its implementation at the federal level.

New IPA research has uncovered the five key federal legislative pillars that support Net Zero. These are: The Climate Change Act 2022, which entrenches the Paris Agreement targets in federal legislation; the Safeguard Mechanism, which mandates large projects to reduce their emissions or purchase carbon credits to continue to operate; the Future Made in Australia Policy, comprised of subsidies and government support for the renewables sector; the New Vehicle Efficiency Standard, which is essential to the process of electrification of Australian life; and the Large-scale Renewable Energy Target, which mandates electricity retailers to purchase credits from the renewables sector to incentivise generation.

The five pillars of Net Zero ensure that regardless of whether a future government is signed up to the Paris Agreement and is committed to the Net Zero target, they cannot be easily reversed, even if mainstream Australian want it to be.

The significant economic and social costs on Australians caused by Net Zero, including higher power bills, lower energy reliability, and the continued decline of Australia’s economic competitiveness, are now embedded into Australia’s legislative framework.

This makes it difficult for future governments to implement the reforms required to reverse this decline and advocate and legislate policies that allow for the restoration of our energy system.

This is especially true when considering the likely gridlock in the Senate if a future government attempts to reverse these pieces of legislation. The work required to properly abandon the policy of Net Zero, and the decline in our living standards that it causes, will therefore be a long hard road, requiring the strongest of commitments.

Abandoning Net Zero and promoting cheap and reliable energy sources such as coal and gas is not as simple as leaving the Paris Climate Agreement. We need strong political leadership which understands this reality.

It’s up to Sussan Ley and the opposition to be clear on their policy, and to be upfront on whether or not they are on the side of mainstream Australians who know instinctively that Net Zero is an attack on their way of life. Australia needs them to provide not just an alternative, but a detailed and well-planned alternative, which doesn’t just remove Net Zero in name, but the legislative pillars on which it rests.

Saxon Davidson is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Public Affairs