Coalition meltdown casts doubt on Dutton’s nuclear plan

Peter Dutton’s elevation to the Liberal Party leadership introduced a nuclear twist to the climate wars that have roiled Australian politics for the past two decades.

His signature proposal to augment renewable energy with “latest generation” nuclear power plants has guaranteed climate and energy policy will,yet again,be a key issue at the next federal election.

Dutton has framedhis nuclear push as a sensible,nation-building project in contrast to Labor’s renewables-only approach,which he claims is already inflicting “national economic self-harm”. So far,the nuclear policy has lacked firm detail.

But as theHerald’s Paul Sakkalhas revealed,Dutton’s nascent nuclear plans have already run into damaging internal opposition.

Sakkal reports the Liberal and National parties are at odds over the selection of six sites for proposed nuclear facilities,delaying the release of the Coalition’s policy blueprint. Nationals leader David Littleproud has told the party he will not allow the Liberals to dictate the placement of facilities,several of which are likely to be in electorates held by the junior Coalition partner.

In August,Littleproud welcomedthe prospect of a nuclear power plant in his own central Queensland electorate of Maranoa. Now he is emphasising the need to do “the legwork” before policy details are announced.

These are not the first signs of butterflies within the Coalition over the nuclear policy;last month,Tasmania MP Bridget Archer,a leading Liberal Party moderate,warned against plans that used nuclear energy to diminish the role of renewables.

Nuclear power generation is unlawful in Australia but opinion polls show many voters could be amenable to a change.

A Resolve Political Monitor survey,conducted for theHerald in February,found 36 per cent supported the use of nuclear power,23 per cent opposed it and 27 per cent were open to the government investigating its use. The survey found 15 per cent were undecided.

But the ructions within the Coalition over Dutton’s energy policy show that when detailed proposals are canvassed,such as specific reactor sites,nuclear politics becomes more poisonous.

Dutton is yet to outline how the economics of nuclear power stacks up for Australia. Many industry experts believe the nuclear option would be unnecessarily expensive compared to the cost of harnessing the nation’s vast renewable energy resources of wind and sun. It would also take several decades to develop any meaningful nuclear power generation capacity.

The latest Coalition rift shows Dutton’s nuclear plans face a more fundamental hurdle:toxic local politics.

National Party MPs are well known for their scepticism of renewable energy. So if Dutton can’t convince them about the merits of his nuclear plans,how will he win over most voters?

These internal divisions over Dutton’s nuclear power policy raise broader questions about his political judgment.

Rather than being a well-planned,economically viable energy plan,Dutton’s nuclear power policy seems driven by an ideological opposition to renewables.

There is a broader risk. Two decades of political combat over climate policy has rattled investor confidence and slowed Australia’s transition to a low-carbon economy. The Coalition’s nuclear push threatens further confusion;investors must now contemplate the possibility of yet another major energy policy change under a prime minister Dutton.

The internal rift over nuclear policy should give Dutton pause for thought. It seems even National Party MPs don’t want nuclear power plants in their backyard and many more Australians are likely to have the same reaction.

Unless Dutton can quickly win broad voter support for his nuclear power generation plans,he should ditch them. The climate wars have already done enough damage.

The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge,champion and inform your own.Sign up here.