16 November 2025: The coalition does something good...?

A couple good things happened today but Australia's political climate still sucks.

Things to discuss today:

1. COALITION'S NEW ENERGY PLAN

2. NICK DAMETTO WINS!!!

3. MELBOURNE TUNNEL

COALITION ENERGY PLAN

After only just finally scraping together a majority to ditch net zero, the Coalition has thrown out a new climate and energy plan. The big slogan is “affordable and reliable energy.”

What does that actually mean?

First, in addition to getting rid of net zero (which was the idea that Australia would “balance” all emissions by 2050), they’ve decided they won’t set any fixed numerical targets anymore.

Good. That’s basic common sense.

Those kinds of targets did nothing except make life harder. They forced companies to abandon cheap, reliable energy and switch to more expensive options before they were ready. That meant higher power bills, higher business costs, and higher prices in every supermarket aisle - all while Australia’s contribution to global emissions remained basically irrelevant on the world stage.

But here’s the catch.

Their new plan still says Australia should keep reducing emissions every year, staying “in step” with other countries and remaining aligned with the Paris Agreement framework. In plain English: they still want emissions to fall every year, just without putting a number on it.

This is dumb for a few reasons:

• Our population is growing fast.

• If total emissions must keep falling while the population rises, the emissions per person and per business have to fall even faster.

• That keeps the door open for more restrictions on heavy industry, resources, and agriculture.

And by keeping everything vague, they create uncertainty. Businesses don’t know what rules they’ll be under in five or ten years. When rules are fuzzy and can tighten at any moment:

1. Big projects get delayed.

2. Jobs get put on hold.

3. Energy supply becomes less secure because investment slows down.

If emissions reductions happen naturally through better technology and market forces, fine. But deliberately wrecking the economy to chase “line on a graph” targets is insane.

The Coalition’s problem is they’re still trying to make everyone happy, the base that wants economic prosperity and the lunatics who hate Australia. That never works. At some point, they need to get off the fence. If they won’t pick the genuinely conservative, pro-growth, pro-energy side, people will understandably start looking toward One Nation as a more honest option.

To be fair, this is a step in the right direction. At least they’ve removed hard quotas and new climate taxes. And it does look like some of the better MPs (people like Andrew Hastie and Matt Canavan,) are finally dragging the party in a more sensible direction.

One big positive in the plan is removing “emissions reduction” from the official objectives of the energy market. That means the Australian Energy Market Operator and the regulator no longer treat cutting carbon as part of their formal mission.

GOOD!

These agencies have been drifting into ideology for years. Their job should be simple: keep prices as low as possible, keep the lights on, and make sure the grid doesn’t collapse. That’s it. As libertarians, we accept that some regulation is necessary where true competition is hard, like the power grid. But regulators should not be setting climate goals. That’s socialism.

Ultimately, for a Liberal Party that seems terrified of moving too far economically right, this is actually a very strong move.

But the best part of the entire plan is nuclear.

They want to lift the federal ban on nuclear power and recognise uranium as a critical mineral. This is by far the most important thing they’ve proposed.

Most people know nothing about nuclear, so let’s spell it out very simply:

1. It’s incredibly reliable. Nuclear plants run almost 24/7. They don’t depend on the wind blowing or the sun shining. That means steady, predictable power.

2. It’s low-emission without destroying the economy. If you genuinely care about emissions, nuclear cuts them massively but doesn’t force everyone into blackouts and expensive power bills.

3. It’s cheaper over the long term. Yes, building a plant is expensive up front. But once it’s running, nuclear fuel is cheap and plants last decades. Over time, the power ends up very competitive.

4. We already have the fuel. Australia has some of the world’s biggest uranium reserves. We dig it up and sell it overseas, then refuse to use it ourselves. That’s insane.

Now, the usual objections come in, so let’s deal with them.

Pushback 1: “Nuclear is too dangerous.” Modern nuclear has an extremely low accident rate. More people die from coal pollution every year than have ever died from nuclear accidents. Strong safety rules and good design make it one of the safest energy sources we have.

Pushback 2: “What about the waste?” Nuclear waste is small in volume and highly controlled. It doesn’t get dumped in rivers. It’s stored, tracked and contained. Compared to billions of tonnes of CO₂ and coal ash, nuclear waste is a very manageable problem.

Pushback 3: “It takes too long to build.” Everything takes too long to build in Australia because of regulation and bureaucracy. That’s not a nuclear problem, it’s a government problem. If we can build tunnels, bridges and stadiums, we can build nuclear if we actually want to.

So overall, this new plan is a decent step forward. I have no idea why it’s being fronted by Sussan Ley. It’s obviously not her idea, and honestly she should just step aside as leader. She doesn’t represent the energy or the direction this policy hints at.

And yet, here’s the depressing part: none of this matters right now. Labor is still in power, and at this rate they’re on track to win another majority. So these policies won’t actually be implemented any time soon. Instead, we stay stuck on the current path:

• endless net-zero obsession

• out-of-control government spending

• a housing crisis they created and can’t fix

All while the radical woke left celebrates spending a billion dollars to host a climate conference and turning classrooms into politics lessons. Hooray for socialism!

CONSERVATIVE WIN: NICK DAMETTO

Now for something more positive.

The recent by-election in Townsville has delivered a good change. Former state MP Nick Dametto has declared victory as mayor. Dametto was previously a member and deputy leader of Katter’s Australian Party, but he resigned to run as an independent.

His campaign focused on making Townsville “open for business” and cutting red tape.

This is exactly what Australia needs. It’s like someone finally found a fire extinguisher in a burning building, while Albanese is in the corner pouring petrol on the flames.

Dametto has two main priorities.

1. Cutting red tape for business

The idea here is simple: if you want the free market to work, you have to stop strangling it.

He’s talking about removing unnecessary council barriers, fast-tracking approvals, and actually backing small business instead of treating them like the enemy.

Why does this work? In very simple terms:

1. Faster approvals = faster investment. If it doesn’t take two years to get a permit, people build sooner.

2. Lower compliance costs = more money for wages and growth. Less time on paperwork means more resources for hiring and expansion.

3. More businesses = more competition. That usually means better service and lower prices for locals.

4. More local jobs = less reliance on welfare. A strong private sector reduces dependence on government handouts.

2. Revitalising The Strand and foreshore precincts

Dametto also wants to improve Townsville’s Strand and foreshore areas. This is the kind of infrastructure spending that actually makes sense.

When you improve public spaces (paths, lighting, amenities, safety, appearance) you create an environment where the private sector can thrive. Cafes, restaurants, hotels and tourism operators do better without the government micromanaging them.

More of this, please.

MELBOURNE TUNNEL

Finally, there’s the Metro Tunnel in Melbourne, a big Victorian infrastructure project that will run trains through new tunnels and five new stations.

I don't really care. It will probably make commutes faster for some people and cost a mountain of money, as usual.

The main point is opportunity cost. Every dollar poured into mega-projects is a dollar that can’t be used elsewhere - on cutting taxes, fixing hospitals, or addressing housing properly. And given Labor’s addiction to big, flashy, taxpayer-funded projects, it fits a very familiar pattern.

Albanese and his state counterparts never miss a chance to blow billions while pretending there’s no money left to ease the cost-of-living crisis they helped create.

Bye